New Zealand Dairy Farming: Milking Our Environment for All Its Worth

Abstract

Over the past two decades there have been major increases in dairy production in New Zealand. This increase in intensity has required increased use of external inputs, in particular fertilizer, feed, and water. Intensified dairy farming thus incurs considerable environmental externalities: impacts that are not paid for directly by the dairy farmer. These externalities are left for the wider New Zealand populace to deal with, both economically and environmentally. This is counter-intuitive given the dairy industry itself relies on a 'clean green' image to maximize returns. This is the first nationwide assessment of some of the environmental costs of the recent increase of dairy intensification in New Zealand. Significant costs arise from nitrate contamination of drinking water, nutrient pollution to lakes, soil compaction, and greenhouse gas emissions. At the higher end, the estimated cost of some environmental externalities surpasses the 2012 dairy export revenue of NZ$11.6 billion and almost reaches the combined export revenue and dairy's contribution to Gross Domestic Product in 2010 of NZ$5 billion. For the dairy industry to accurately report on its profitability and maintain its sustainable marketing label, these external costs should be reported. This assessment is in fact extremely conservative as many impacts have not been valued, thus, the total negative external impact of intensified dairying is probably grossly underestimated.

How good is the evidence to support investment in soil protection?

“…In grassland, particularly in winter when the soil is wet, inappropriate animal stocking creates a compaction hazard. The more intensive the grazing, the higher the potential costs arising from soil compaction: for example, soil compaction costs in intensive dairy production in New Zealand are estimated at between NZD 75 million and NZD 611 million each year (Foote et al, 2015). Some of the highest surface loadings can arise from apparently peripheral activities, such as the movement of road vehicles in fields during delivery of materials and collection of produce, where the combination of load and high pressure tyres creates high sub-surface pressures (Spandl et al, 2010).…”

Rescaling Knowledge and Governance and Enrolling the Future in New Zealand: A Co-Production Analysis of Canterbury’s Water Management Reforms to Regulate Diffuse Pollution

“…In this context, water quality has become a highly-charged political issue in New Zealand, in Canterbury especially. The agricultural industry, in particular the dairy sector, is routinely criticized as the cause of degraded water quality (see Foote et al, 2015). Over half New Zealand's land area is dedicated to pastoral and arable farming (Howard-Williams, 2010) and one-third is public conservation estate (DOC, 2015).…”

“…excessive fertilizer, deforestation, grazing on erosive slopes) is converging with the more recent effects of water abstraction and nutrient losses from intensified land use (PCE, 2012). There is widespread concern that New Zealand's '100% Pure' brand that underpins both tourism and agriculture is under threat (Foote et al, 2015;LAWF, 2010;PCE, 2012). Clearly, not addressing water quality could have high ecological, social, cultural, economic and political costs.…”

Interactive multiple‐stressor effects of the antibiotic monensin, cattle effluent and light on stream periphyton

“…fine sediment, nutrients, flow reduction, increased light, faecal bacteria, chemicals; Wilcock, 1986;Cooper & Thomsen, 1988;Quinn et al, 1997;Allan, 2004), with threats associated with intensive farming often severely impacting waterways (Wilcock et al, 1999). Declining freshwater ecosystem health is a serious concern in New Zealand, where intensive farming, especially dairying, is a dominant agricultural land use (MacLeod & Moller, 2006;Foote, Joy & Death, 2015).…”