Water pollution

Forums › Off topic › Water pollution

larknz

183 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 47

Lifetime subscriber

Topic # 226350 3-Jan-2018 19:26

The current hysteria on the beaches in Auckland highlights the fact that urban areas have just as much, if not more, of a problem with pollution as rural areas. It's easy to blame farmers for polluting rivers, whereas the facts show that urban rivers are far more polluted than rural rivers. It just goes to show that while it is easy to blame farmers for water pollution, this is something that we all have to take responsibility for.

1 | 2

Murray River
4316 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1270

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1928618 3-Jan-2018 19:33

One person supports this post

Got any links for people that don't live in Auckland?

larknz

183 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 47

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1928622 3-Jan-2018 19:37

Try this

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11968589

I don't live in Auckland, but it is been well reported in the media.

blakamin

Murray River
4316 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1270

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1928624 3-Jan-2018 19:42

One person supports this post

larknz: Try this

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11968589

I don't live in Auckland, but it is been well reported in the media.

But you started the topic, and I (and others) might not watch/read NZ media...

When you start a topic, it's normally polite to include a link so everyone knows what you're on about... Not having a go /Just Sayin. Thanks for the link.

Pretty crappy that only 14 beaches are useable!

It doesn't seem that urban rivers are the main problem, it's stormwater and a lack of council doing anything meaningful about it.

BuzzLightyear

248 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 48

Reply # 1928625 3-Jan-2018 19:46

One person supports this post

Agree. Doesn’t matter whether urban or rural. Pollution is pollution and no one can keep their head in the sand and ignore whether the cause is leaking septic tanks or aging storm water infrastructure. Also, can’t keep our head in the sand about unsustainable growth in dairy.

larknz

183 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 47

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1928630 3-Jan-2018 19:54

I agree that rampant dairy growth is not sustainable, but there has been a lot of commentary about how the pollution from dairy farms is ruining rivers while the urban problems are ignored.

blackjack17

787 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 190

Reply # 1928632 3-Jan-2018 20:07

One person supports this post

One of the issues however is urban pollution tends to be confined to a relatively small area. Rural pollution, while not as intense is spread over a much greater area. So while most of the streams in Auckland are of quite poor water quality there are a small number of streams effected, whereas there are a greater number of rural streams impacted.

In the past as rural activities were relatively low intensity the effect on streams and waterways was low (despite many of the practices being worse for the environment than what is carried out now). As agricultural practices have intensified the impact has become greater. (just as cities have got bigger the impact has also become greater)

You can't simply say urban areas are worse so we shouldn't have to take any of the responsibility. Both are at fault and both have to take actions.

blakamin

Murray River
4316 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1270

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1928633 3-Jan-2018 20:09

larknz: I agree that rampant dairy growth is not sustainable, but there has been a lot of commentary about how the pollution from dairy farms is ruining rivers while the urban problems are ignored.

The difference is probably the fact that 1 dairy farmer can ruin a river, but it takes a city of non-farmers to ruin a harbour.

Aredwood

3267 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1280

Subscriber

Reply # 1928637 3-Jan-2018 20:18

One person supports this post

All of those combined sewage and stormwater pipes are in the former Auckland city council area. Due to historical underinvestment. But according to the council, cycleways are more important than fixing the sewage system.

As for dairy farming. Since the majority of NZ dairy production is exported, it is important to compare the emissions intensity of NZ dairy production to overseas dairy production. And in most cases, the NZ dairy system has a lower emissions intensity. So if those who are campaigning for a reduction in dairy cattle numbers get their way. Total worldwide emissions will most likely increase. As less efficient overseas farms will increase their production to fill the gap left by lower NZ dairy production.

larknz

183 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 47

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1928639 3-Jan-2018 20:33

3 people support this post

The difference is that farmers are starting to spend the money to clean up their act, whereas the town's are procrastinating because it is too hard and is going to cost too much

blackjack17

787 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 190

Reply # 1928645 3-Jan-2018 20:55

One person supports this post

Aredwood: All of those combined sewage and stormwater pipes are in the former Auckland city council area. Due to historical underinvestment. But according to the council, cycleways are more important than fixing the sewage system.

As for dairy farming. Since the majority of NZ dairy production is exported, it is important to compare the emissions intensity of NZ dairy production to overseas dairy production. And in most cases, the NZ dairy system has a lower emissions intensity. So if those who are campaigning for a reduction in dairy cattle numbers get their way. Total worldwide emissions will most likely increase. As less efficient overseas farms will increase their production to fill the gap left by lower NZ dairy production.

You have few different arguments in there.

Plans are in place for the central interceptor , cycle ways have nothing to do with. Should a dairy farmer spend nothing on promoting land biodiversity until they have controlled their runoff?

What stats have you got to back up the lower emissions? My understanding was the higher the quality of supplements lead to lower emissions. A pure grass diet can actually lead to higher emissions.

We are doing lots of research into cool things methanogens and enzymes to reduce methane.

Just because we have efficient farms in NZ doesn't mean that we don't have a ceiling on the number of cows we can milk (as we currently do).

Funnily enough higher intensity dairy farms can actually lead to better environmental outcomes. It allows practices such as feed pads and standoff pads. It makes it easier to invest in better effluent management.

blackjack17

787 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 190

Reply # 1928646 3-Jan-2018 20:56

larknz: The difference is that farmers are starting to spend the money to clean up their act, whereas the town's are procrastinating because it is too hard and is going to cost too much

https://www.watercare.co.nz/About-us/Projects-around-Auckland/Central-Interceptor

blakamin

Murray River
4316 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1270

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1928661 3-Jan-2018 21:09

One person supports this post

larknz: The difference is that farmers are starting to spend the money to clean up their act, whereas the town's are procrastinating because it is too hard and is going to cost too much

Starting to think you're a farmer...

larknz

183 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 47

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1928663 3-Jan-2018 21:14

No, I'm a Canterbury townie, but I do have a bit of interaction with the farming community. I just feel that there is an urban / rural divide, whereas water pollution is something that we all have to take responsibility for.

Geektastic

12149 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3965

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1928712 3-Jan-2018 22:02

larknz: No, I'm a Canterbury townie, but I do have a bit of interaction with the farming community. I just feel that there is an urban / rural divide, whereas water pollution is something that we all have to take responsibility for.

No we don't.

Those responsible for managing the services that are polluting are 100% responsible. What penalties will they suffer for permitting the pollution?

As I have said before elsewhere, the sooner water and sewerage are removed from councils and vested in organisations whose only responsibility and skill set is water and sewerage the better. It's time to think differently in respect of this - we have outgrown what worked before and now a completely different, more national approach is needed.

A more national approach should also include ways to shift water from areas with surplus to areas with deficit and to store winter water for summer use.

larknz

183 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 47

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1928820 4-Jan-2018 08:01

Town dwellers do have a duty tu use water responsibly.
What about the person who washes their car in the street and all the detergent goes into the gutter which flows into the nearest waterway and what about the person who waters their garden during the middle of the day for hours on end with most of the water flowing down the drain?

1 | 2