IrrigationNZ News Winter 2023

REGULAR FEATURES

4 FROM THE CHAIR / Keri Johnston

5 FROM THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE / Vanessa Winning

6 OUT & ABOUT

8 VIEW FROM HERE / Mark Patterson, NZ First Candidate, Taieri

11 VIEW FROM THERE / Sumith Choy, General Manager India, Rubicon Water

30 TECHNICAL / Investigating the public water strategies of India, Ireland, California, and Argentina

33 TECHNICAL / Submissions and consultations update

40 Seasonal climate outlook

DID YOU KNOW?

EDITOR Ella Stokes / 027 208 6371 / estokes@irrigationnz.co.nz ADVERTISING, ADMIN & SUBSCRIPTIONS admin@irrigationnz.co.nz

PUBLISHED BY Irrigation New Zealand / PO Box 8014, Wellington 6143 DESIGN Rosie Fenton DISTRIBUTION New Zealand Post PRINTING Caxton COVER PHOTO Courtesy of Nannobubble Agritech ISSN 2230-5181

Please email estokes@irrigationnz.co.nz if the delivery address/information where this magazine has been received is incorrect or needs updated.

IrrigationNZ News is published by Irrigation New Zealand Inc (IrrigationNZ) four times a year. The circulation includes all IrrigationNZ members. The opinions expressed in IrrigationNZ News do not necessarily reflect the views of IrrigationNZ. The information contained in this publication is general in nature with every effort being made to ensure its complete accuracy. No responsibility can be accepted for any errors or copyright breach that may occur beyond the control of the editor or IrrigationNZ. Permission must be sought from the Editor prior to reproduction of any material contained in this publication.

www.irrigationnz.co.nz

Keri Johnston Chair of IrrigationNZ

Halfway through the year – impact and gratitude

Nau mai, haere mai to the winter edition of IrrigationNZ News. As hard as it may be to believe, we are nearly halfway through 2023 already.

This column is about gratitude. In recent months, IrrigationNZ has had its attention on some big pieces of regulation that have the potential to impact our sector. The first was the Resource Management Act (RMA) reforms. The IrrigationNZ team is grateful for Anderson Lloyd’s invaluable support in our work on this.

We claimed eight spots in front of the Environment Select Committee – IrrigationNZ plus seven irrigation schemes. The Environment Select Committee now sifts through over 2,500 written submissions and supplementary documents. We felt it crucial to convey our key concerns and balanced perspectives through verbal submissions, as they may be challenging to fully express in writing alone. To our members who presented their viewpoints so eloquently, thoughtfully, and on point – thank you.

Last month a site visit to mid-Canterbury irrigation schemes and growers was held for officials from the Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries. Providing this opportunity

was a team effort, and the feedback from those who attended was positive. Key information about irrigation, reliable water, and how they relate to on-farm practices, resilience, and opportunities was taken away from the day. It was a fantastic opportunity for us to share our stories and was very well organised. We thank those who organised and took part.

I am proud of seeing people in our sector work together. The occasions above are just two of many when IrrigationNZ, our members, and our partners have come together, and shown strength in unity, with a focus on solutions. I am grateful that our sector operates with integrity, courage, and respect.

The final thank you is to all of you for your support of IrrigationNZ and the mahi that we do to ensure that the importance of irrigation to our communities and country is recognised. Happy reading!

Ngā mihi nui, Keri

Vanessa Winning Chief Executive IrrigationNZ

Change is a certainty – it can be hard to prepare for it

Winter is most certainly upon us and so is preparation for the upcoming election. We have had record levels of inflation, spiralling costs impacting farming and growing, and more uncertainty than I can recall. Not only are we contending with war in Europe, the impact of a pandemic, and an uncertain financial climate, we are also facing an uncertain political climate and international marketplace.

No matter what happens next season we will be facing a new government – either one that is more left-of-centre or one that is more right-of-centre than the government we have had for the past six years. While people say change is a certainty, it’s very hard to prepare for. It creates fear and mistrust – especially where there is a vacuum of communication and a lack of policies being discussed.

We are gearing up for this election by writing a manifesto to explain to all the parties what we are needing for the irrigation sector. This will be published in our next edition, which will also include political party farming policies from each of the main parties that are expected to get a seat in parliament. We want you to be as informed as you can be.

One thing we should all remember is that change is inevitable, and with change can come both challenge and opportunity. There are many challenges across the sectors, including using fertiliser and water more efficiently, keeping impacts low and growing profitably in a high-cost time, and getting ahead of consumer demands, including

those buying our products overseas. Signals are not always clear, and distance makes it hard to really understand what consumers are wanting to see in their products.

Recent trade agreements show a desire for a move toward more sustainability, improvements in greenhouse gas levels, and higher animal welfare standards, and we are trying to compete at the top end of the value chain. This comes at the same time as new regulations are implemented locally. Sometimes those local implementations are not going to achieve the outcomes consumers want. Getting closer to the end buyer is a good way to understand the required direction, and then it’s important to be part of the local solution (policy) making body. We find this with a lot of the work we do in Wellington – the intentions and the outcomes we mainly can agree upon, but the proposed method and frameworks to get there don’t

always appear practical or logical to us, and most often don’t work in a farm systems approach. It’s our job to educate and to find practical options that farmers and growers can implement.

Given all this local and international change, and the surrounding confusion and uncertainty, it’s important that you stay in touch with us and your other representative bodies and keep up-to-date on their latest activity. Do your own investigations and talk to people you trust. Get involved with your neighbours and if you are part of a scheme or other type of collective, use it. These groups are well-resourced and connected and can help you navigate uncertainty and put you in touch with others. We are lucky to have many cooperative organisations and structures that are there to give a hand.

Let’s be prepared for the opportunities that change can bring.

IrrigationNZ: Out & About

Ashburton Field Trip

In early May Vanessa Winning helped to facilitate a field trip around Canterbury irrigation schemes for representatives from the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), the Ministry for the Environment, (MfE), Te Waihanga/NZ Infrastructure Commission, and other irrigation industry leaders.

Vanessa made a special mention to thank Rebecca Whillans, Ashburton Lyndhurst Irrigation General Manager for organising the day, “There was excellent interaction and engagement and I have no doubt everyone walked away having learnt something after a very well organised day.”

“I am truly grateful to the two incredible farming families, the Bierema and Polanen families, for hosting us and taking us through the importance of irrigation at the right time of the plant growing cycle. Visiting an arable farm and a dairy farm showed the symbiotic relationship between animals and growing a variety of crops. These important relationships across the seasons showcased the importance of efficient water use, and having the ability to use less water when you’re guaranteed to have it just in time. The more resilience and reliability; the less wastage. Hopefully this opens more conversations about the need for water availability and security as the climate changes, which will enable plant growth for all types of farming.”

We acknowledge MPI, MfE, and Te Waihanga for supporting their team members to attend and gather feedback to share in Wellington. Thank you, Stephen Cunningham (MPI), for championing the cause. We thank Rebecca Whillans for bringing it all together in order to demonstrate the environmental and economic importance of the collectives at MHV Water, BCI, and ALIL, all of the mighty Rangitata Diversion Race Management Ltd, which powers communities, food development and electricity – from seeds sown in the 1940s.

At the MHV Water Carew water storage ponds.

From left: Melanie Brooks (MHV Water CEO), Stephen Cunningham (Director Industry and Stakeholder Relations MPI), Mackenzie Nicol (Water Policy Manager MPI), Jenny Cameron (Chief Transformation Officer – Fit for a Better World MPI), Keri Johnston (IrrigationNZ Chair), Vanessa Winning (IrrigationNZ CE), and Colin Glass (Dairy Holdings CEO).

South Island Agricultural Field Days 2023

Julie Melhopt and Stephen McNally attended the South Island Agricultural Field Days (SIAFD) in wintery conditions! It was great to connect with some of our member organisations and discuss their views of rural economic activity, training needs, and the adoption of standards. The next SIAFD is scheduled for 26–28 March 2025.

Mark Patterson New Zealand First Candidate Taieri

What are the plans for building on success?

The sound you are hearing in the background is the creaking joints of politicians limbering up for their triennial lap around the provinces espousing farming as the “backbone of the economy”.

Of course, with the primary sector contributing an incredible 82 percent of New Zealand’s merchandise exports, this has arguably never been truer. We are the only First World agrarian economy. The real question is what these politicians’ plans are to build on this success. When the country is running a staggering $34 billion current account deficit, it’s not a ‘nice to have’, it’s an imperative.

So far, international ratings agencies have shrugged off this woeful statistic, but it is only a matter of time until they do not. These things tend not to matter until they do. A credit downgrade would see an even further rise in interest rates, a collapse in the NZ dollar, and subsequent turbocharging of inflation; a toxic combination with which we cannot continue to flirt.

If COVID has taught us anything, it is that we cannot money print our way to prosperity, we must earn it. During my time in parliament I was always struck by the amount of time we spent on allocating government spending and the inadequate focus on how we were actually going to grow the nation’s wealth. While a return to government fiscal prudence is now a necessity, we also must guard against an austerity path that precludes us from investing in long-term wealth creation.

We must play to our strengths, and we are indeed fortunate our strengths lie in food production. With the global population set

to reach 10 billion by 2050, requiring an estimated 70 percent more food, we should be absolutely in the box seat.

To take advantage of this position we need to think much more strategically around water. New Zealand is rich in water, an increasingly scarce global commodity. We must urgently address Wellington’s aversion to irrigation and water storage, and see water security for what it is — our key strategic economic advantage. The challenges posed by climate change, and the resilience of our rural communities and national economy should see this issue near the very top of the political agenda.

We also need to throw in the mixed issues around food security. Who would have ever thought in New Zealand we would be having a food security crisis? Empty supermarket shelves and steep food inflation are crippling family budgets. The aftermath of Cyclone Gabrielle has laid bare the resilience level of our food supply chains and the danger of our fresh produce growing areas being too geographically concentrated. The case for a national food strategy is getting stronger, and having more regions with reliable water supply should be a fundamental tenet.

While I fully accept that I’m guilty as charged of being another wannabe politician vying for your votes, I can assure you I implicitly understand the importance of irrigation. What could a dryland sheep and beef farmer from Lawrence know about irrigation anyway?

My family farm, Springbrook, is near Southbridge, by the shores of Lake Ellesmere in Canterbury. My grandfather was an irrigation pioneer and I believe his was the

very first well drilled by McMillan Drilling, back in the early 1950s. It is extraordinary to consider that this was only a handful of years after he was ploughing with a team of Clydesdales. They must have been exciting times full of possibility and promise. It’s no coincidence New Zealand boasted the second-highest standard of living in the world back then.

The first decade and a half of my farming career was spent at Springbrook. Those early summers were spent wading through crops, and shifting around a trailer full of Bisley hand shift pipes. The pump was driven by an old Nuffield tractor. No one was more excited by summer rain than I! This system evolved over time into the traveling guns, and then to rotorainers and, mercifully, an underground mainline.

Now this property is farmed by the Barnett family, multi-generational friends, and neighbours. It boasts two large centre pivot irrigators. The precision and timing of the water allocation allow the growth of a diverse range of high yielding arable, processed vegetable, and specialist seed crops, and integrates the finishing of prime lambs by the thousands. All are controlled by the click of a button. If my grandfather were to return today, he would consider this level of farming barely distinguishable from magic.

My first foray into farming on my own account was at Ngapara in North Otago. This was in the mid-2000s, about the time when stage two of the North Otago Irrigation Company (NOIC) irrigation scheme was being planned out. Anyone who doubts the public value of irrigation investment should go to Oamaru. Twenty-five years ago, it

was a dying town. Today it is thriving and completely unrecognisable.

This would not have happened if it wasn’t for the foresight of the Waitaki District Council, who, contentiously at the time, under wrote the scheme to the tune of $10 million. This was a huge sum for them at the time, but a sum that has subsequently enabled the creation of hundreds of millions of extra dollars in increased productivity from its hinterland. Highly fertile soils are no longer restricted in their production by the regular summer dry that used to cripple their economy.

One of the misconceptions held by opponents of co-investment in irrigation schemes and water storage, either by local or central government, is that it is a public subsidy to farmers and growers. Although it seems counterintuitive, it is farmers who are often last to benefit. For us, it is a generational investment, akin to buying extra land, which is often expensive at the time but with long-term paybacks. The people and businesses who benefit immediately are in the service industries and towns, due to the huge and sustained lift in economic activity. The government does just fine via the tax take, as well.

Previous governments have recognised this, and fortunately, New Zealand has a multitude of irrigation schemes. Many were constructed by the old Ministry of Works and championed by visionary farming leaders. These schemes have contributed massively to our prosperity over time.

As a country, we seem to have lost all ability to construct infrastructure in any sort of time frame to any sort of budget. It has

come to the point where any government infrastructure announcement is now greeted with a cynical “Yeah right”. The next government must urgently address the regulatory settings and blockages to getting seemingly anything done. While some of this is regulatory, some of it is intent, and we need stronger ministers willing to push things through.

While it is tempting to look nostalgically to the past, it is undeniable we are on a different playing field, not only fiscally but environmentally. It is a given that to gain the confidence of the wider public to invest in further water storage we need to make the case that it can be done sustainably. The days of large irrigation schemes and mass conversion to dairy are over. In many areas we have reached ecological limits. Our social license and international customers give no room for error.

Tomorrow’s water storage schemes are likely to be more niche and bespoke, enabling high-value horticulture development, crop diversification, and finishing areas to build resilience on dry stock farms. Where possible they must combine renewable energy generation and recreational features. This must all comply with strict nutrient-leaching limitations. We know how to do this, and it will be a prerequisite.

We also need to fortify access to river schemes. Environmental groups are whipping up a frenzy around water quantity. It is imperative these rivers and their ecosystems are protected, but it can’t be to an arbitrary level; it must be scientifically based. The key to doing this is a much more permissible and standardised regulatory regime which allows

for on-farm water storage ponds — storing in times of plenty to supplement in times of shortage. The roadblocks to doing this in some regions are unconscionable.

The bigger controllable issue around water quantity is around the march of the pine trees, both plantation and wilding. There cannot continue to be a disconnect between one set of public policy and another.

Given the obvious economic benefits around water storage and security there is a strong case to use the tax and depreciation schedule to enable. Watch this space.

New Zealand First as a political party fully understands all these dynamics. During my term in Government we staunchly held the line over Labour’s water tax and fought hard to have funding available for water storage within the Provincial Growth Fund. You can be assured that should we form part of the next Government we will continue to prioritise and champion the irrigation cause. The future prosperity of our country depends on it.

Mark Patterson is a sheep and beef farmer from Lawrence. He is a former New Zealand First MP and was the Primary Production spokesperson from 2017-2020. He is currently President of Otago Federated Farmers and is again standing as a candidate for New Zealand First in the upcoming election in the Taieri electorate.

Sumith Choy General Manager India Rubicon Water

From control engineer to developing a market for irrigation innovation in India

I was born and raised in a state called Kerala, in the southern part of India. Being close to the equator, it’s a very tropical part of the world where it’s often dry for six months and then it rains for six months.

My mother’s side of the family came from an agrarian background. That’s where my interest in agriculture started. I strongly recall witnessing non mechanised irrigation practices in my early years. Bulls would be leveraged for preparing the land for sowing and growing. The primary crop in this region was paddy, so it was closely timed for the monsoon season, with most farms being rain-fed agriculture as there were no irrigation canals or piped networks. I fondly remember being a kid playing through those paddy fields in water that was knee-deep. Due to my father’s job we would soon travel to various cities, where I began to gain exposure to technology. By the age of 16 I had a fascination with electronics, soldering components, and PCBs (now-banned chemical compounds), which ultimately triggered my interest in engineering.

To enrol in engineering we had to write an entrance exam to qualify. Luckily, I cleared the exam and was accepted into Technology in Applied Electronics and Instrumentation Engineering at the University of Calicut. That’s how I became accustomed to instrumentation (measuring), which leads to control systems and control engineering (acting upon measurements).

Once I completed my degree at Calicut I thought there was a need to specialise, so

I applied at the University of Melbourne, at the time one of the top 50 universities in the world.

I was selected and offered a scholarship. It was at the time of the global financial crisis in the early 2000s, so I thought that I’d better acquire more skills. This made it quite an easy decision to pack my things and make the trip down under.

When I began at the University of Melbourne, I didn’t have a topic to research. I met with various professors, and a lot of them were into abstract research where a direct link to any real-world application was probably a bit far off. Within my first six months at the university I met with Iven Mareels, who was the Head of Engineering at the time. He quickly pointed me to the research that Rubicon Water was doing. It was quite an interesting research topic because it was all about leveraging analytics to perform measurements, rather than using actual sensors. You could estimate the value of your water level by having measurements from both an upstream and a downstream location. From this, we developed the theory and then tested it within an irrigation district in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. It was fairly accurate, precise down to approximately one millimetre.

I wasn’t working at Rubicon at this time. In the research of fault tolerance in control systems, there was a whole science of mathematical modelling and controller design, which was still not used at Rubicon. When I joined Rubicon in 2006 they had had lots of breakthrough innovations, but didn’t

Indian farmer on tail end system with automated technology.

yet have a mechanism allowing a canal to run autonomously.

I brought that knowledge with me to Rubicon, developing the concept of what’s now known as Total Channel Control (TCC). I started to apply that knowledge to systems in NSW – and it worked. Previously the district operators had to wake up regularly to manually intervene with the system.

I implemented software and control algorithms on one pool at a time. By the end of 2007 that software was mature, and we had the entire network operating autonomously. The distribution efficiency due to the Total Channel Control system improved from around 70 percent to more than 90 percent.

The technology was applied to the other major Australian irrigation districts, now responsible for delivering water to approximately 16,000 irrigators in Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin.

I am now leading the business in deploying some of the largest automation systems throughout the Indian market. It has been a long journey from developing and deploying the early TCC solutions to implementing them in some of the most diverse and complex systems on the globe. I had to build a control team at Rubicon, becoming the first control engineering manager. We expanded

the knowledge and leveraged bright brains who could expand TCC to bigger, better technologies. For almost a decade I was a control engineer deploying solutions in Australia, the USA, China, and New Zealand.

The technology was proven successful in multiple arrangements and across different geographies that presented unique challenges. Once the product had matured, I was looking for the next challenge – India. Initially, I was a bit hesitant because I had never held a business development position in my life – all I could do was talk about technology and its benefits.

I knew I had to understand the market first, so I travelled around and met people. I started exploring and understanding the Indian market in 2016 and quickly understood that there was an immense opportunity for technological advancement. In India water is supplied on a rotation basis, meaning there are restrictions on availability, ultimately determining the ability to grow certain crops. This constrains economic potential and creates scarcity by design – creating a bottleneck that restricts farmers from thriving and prevents them from growing high-value crops.

We found that in Karnataka they were progressive and keen on addressing this problem. We began working with the district

known as KBJNL in 2017, and in 2019, through a competitive tendering process, we were selected to implement TCC for an area of 450,000 hectares that is serviced by approximately 1,500km of open channel.

We partnered with a fantastic local company to manufacture our technology in India and assist in the implementation of the project.

The project, the largest international project in the history of Rubicon Water, is now nearing completion. We are taking progressive steps rather than completely switching the paradigm from supply to demand. We are addressing the issues now and will then slowly transfer to the fully automated system capabilities.

Change management is a long process. I think we’re probably still at the beginning of that process. It will involve everyone –local politicians will also have to be part of it. Somehow this journey must be started somewhere by somebody, so we have conducted numerous farmer training sessions to showcase the benefits and begin to build trust. We are empowering the people, farmers, and operators on the ground by ensuring they understand the capabilities of the system and the benefits that it’s delivering so that they can keep adapting and improving.

Automated canal in Karnataka, India.

The broader states of India are now looking at what we’re implementing. We are now in the middle of deploying a lift irrigation automation project which is supplying water to higher elevations of the Narayanpur system. Automation is required to improve the supply efficiency of this system because with piped irrigation networks there are energy requirements which we need to optimise, along with pumping costs.

I have learnt a lot from my journey so far and one thing I’ve learnt is that there are many different approaches that can be taken to address the water scarcity issue in irrigation. You can create a scenario of surplus or you can optimise the existing resources. And what I’ve seen is that creating a scenario of surplus is always an easier solution, but it can be quite cost prohibitive. A common example of this in India is interconnecting or interlinking rivers to connect a surplus basin to a deficit basin. Unlike in Australia, New Zealand, or the US, the irrigated area in India is roughly 65 million hectares. When you create a scenario of surplus it simplifies the water distribution problem

quite remarkably. But if you must optimise the existing resources across a large area, it becomes a very complex problem.

I do not think knowledge of how it can be easily done is sitting anywhere. What we need to do is to make sure that water is accessible. Irrigation authorities from different parts of the world, water commissions, and water institutes need to align and create a technology benchmark for adoption and technological advancement in order to combat the

Pivotal.

Sumith Choy presenting at the Australia India Chamber of Commerce (AICC) 75th Anniversary of Independence for India Celebrations.

increasing pressures of water scarcity. There’s huge scope for government bodies, industries, and non-government organisations to team up and develop guidelines on what is possible for surface irrigation and how to use it to secure water availability.

Anderson Lloyd is the trusted legal advisor for major players in New Zealand’s irrigation sector, with a proven ability to deliver results. We have advised on numerous existing and proposed schemes in the North and South Islands and act for individual farmers and agribusinesses.

Our specialist team advises on all aspects associated with large-scale irrigation schemes including banking, capital raising, commercial contract, resource management and construction matters.

David Goodman, Partner

p: 03 335 1235

m: 027 787 8785

david.goodman@al.nz

Sarah Eveleigh, Partner

p: 03 335 1217

m: 027 204 1479

sarah.eveleigh@al.nz

Nanobubble Irrigation –innovative water use efficiency

After a career as a professional rugby player, and with a background in agriculture, Leon Power and his wife Lauren Oehme are exploring a new way to make water go further.

The New Plymouth pair are the owners of Nanobubble Agritech, which they founded in 2020.

Nanobubble technology is an invention for transferring gas to water, with the key benefit being the ability to supersaturate water so that it can hold levels of gas up to six times greater than previously attainable. Leon explained, “We use nanobubble technology to add extremely high amounts of oxygen gas to farmers’ irrigation water, and this does two main things: it increases crop yield, and it can increase water use efficiency.”

Leon completed a Bachelor of Agricultural Science at Massey University before pursuing a rugby career which saw him play in New Zealand for Taranaki and in Australia for the Brumbies. When playing in Australia in 2018 Leon was also working part-time with an engineering company selling nanobubble technology for wastewater and hydroponic applications. And then COVID hit. “Unfortunately, the opportunities we had in the pipeline were put on hold.”

In 2019–2020 Leon earned a Masters of Business Administration from BeuthHoschule University of Berlin. He wrote his MBA thesis on the use of nanobubbles in anaerobic digestion.

Leon and Lauren made the move back to New Zealand in 2020 and began the journey of setting up their own business. “We started our business trying to see if we could prove that the benefits of higher yield and better plant/root health that were being seen in hydroponic markets were transferable to large-scale soil based growing.”

In the first year they started at Massey University conducting trials on pasture and apples via a Masters in Horticulture student,

funded by Callaghan Innovation. Over the past three years they have completed 17 installations or trial sites in Australia and New Zealand on both horticulture, viticulture, vegetable, pastoral, and cropping systems.

The system can be retrofitted to existing irrigation infrastructure, past your bore or water source, utilising your existing pumping systems, and adding the oxygen to the irrigation water that goes out to the farm or orchard.

“However, it also depends on your existing irrigation sprinkler/emitter system. For example, it works best with drip irrigation or low throw sprinklers, but not with K-line, roto-rainers or hard hose types. This is because when we use sprinklers and the droplets fly through the air, a large proportion of the extremely high amounts of oxygen gas that we are forcing the water to hold is lost to the atmosphere, and so a lot of the benefit goes with it.”

“We’ve had to make several technological advances around efficiency of systems, especially in larger water flows such as irrigation where existing nanobubble technology performs quite poorly. We’ve also had to make cost reductions, because outdoor farming has much lower margins per hectare than indoor hydroponic markets.”

He said the two wet La Niña seasons in Australia and New Zealand have provided challenges. Higher rainfall has resulted in a significantly lower use of irrigation, making it harder to reflect on the results of the addition of nanobubbles.

Even so, they have had some very good results. “The results we’ve had so far are absolutely game changing. As an example, in our first trial retrofitting a section of the pivot on ryegrass at Massey University, we achieved 96 percent more dry matter over a five cut summer irrigation period. However, this was under a controlled setting, keeping

Entrepreneurs Lauren and Leon.

all the rainfall off. But we’ve been averaging around the +25–30 percent on pasture onfarm, with rainfall making up nearly half of evapotranspiration, and we’ve conducted over eight pastoral sites now. In orchard systems the results are a lot lower, more like +5–15 percent improvements in yield. But we still think that where we can get a longer irrigation season, and preferably using drip irrigation, there is huge potential and the technology can provide good return on investment.”

“Furthermore, where there are underlying issues around soil compaction and/or poor soil health due to low oxygen environments (such as the presence of phytophthora), nanobubbles can provide a solution to improve the growing environment and plant productivity without the introduction of chemicals.“

Leon said they were pleased to recently receive Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures (SFFF) funding. This helps offset a portion of the costs of getting first on-farm installations out on arable and pastoral farms. It also assists collection/analysis of data around yield, environmental benefits of water use, and nutrient leaching, an area in which he thinks they will be able to see some improvements.

“As a result of this co-contribution, it’s made it easier to get our first pivot on a dairy

We have made huge progress in terms of the technology and manufacturing side – all our systems are made here in New Zealand – as well as crop results. We’ve consistently had increases in yield on pasture over several sites and soil types, as well as some strong results in some orchard installations including apples, oranges and a little on kiwifruit, while others overseas have also reported good results on cherries and avocados.

farm in Ashburton over the later part of this irrigation season, and we hope to get a few more next year.”

As with any new technology, Leon said there are challenges to the system. “In arable/ pastoral systems, to get around the long throw sprinkler issue we use our system in conjunction with mobile drip irrigation, which is essentially a whole lot of drip irrigation being towed by a pivot. The benefit is that this keeps the oxygen in the water and it is applied directly to the root zone. It has further benefits of higher water use efficiency due to less wind, plant surface and soil evaporative losses.”

He said some farms were better suited

for this system than others. On farms with stock, grazing management/paddock selection must be used to keep stock from being in the paddock at the same time as the pivots. “This is our biggest challenge regarding using it on a dairy farm where the cows are walking back and forth to the cowshed on races that pivots are passing over. We’re currently targeting those with ring raced systems or races on the outside of pivots. But ultimately, with the increase in production we’re hoping to find ways to get around this.”

As for the cost, Leon noted that as with any irrigation infrastructure there was a cost. “We are offering the option of long-term leasing, which will hopefully increase uptake

Leon fits the system on an arable farm.

and de-risk the technology for farmers. This is especially useful while we are still learning what true benefits we can expect to see on-farm. This will take multiple seasons and many installations over a variety of regions and farming systems, as no two operations are ever the same.”

He said some of their biggest achievements had been not only the trial results but also the advancements with manufacturing. “We have made huge progress in terms of the technology and manufacturing side – all our systems are made here in New Zealand – as well as crop results. We’ve consistently had increases in yield on pasture over several sites and soil types, as well as some strong results in some orchard installations including apples, oranges and a little on kiwifruit, while others overseas have also reported good results on cherries and avocados.”

He said they were still working on improving the way the technology works, as well as developing the understanding on why they get better response in some crops or set-ups than others.

“A return to dryer El Niño summers with more irrigation use would be helpful for us, as most of our orchard trial sites haven’t had the opportunity to get much irrigation or data back over the last two seasons.”

Nanobubble Agritech currently have drop in, retrofittable systems, and would like to enlarge their reliable history of installation data This would enable farmers and growers to see that putting in a Nanobubble Agritech system is going to get them roughly X more production or benefit per ha, at X cost per year, equating to X more income.

“Ultimately, we’d like to see every irrigator in the world incorporating our technology. The environmental and productivity impact that this more efficient use of water would have on the world’s resources would be unbelievable.”

We want the same as everyone that is trying to bring through new technology in farming – to provide a tool that enables farmers to grow more efficiently, with less negative environmental impact. If we can do this it brings down the cost of food, and hopefully leads to a happier, healthier population.

THE PROCESS OF NANNOBUBBLE IRRIGATION

Photo of soils after 4.5 months irrigation on pasture at Massey University Dairy No. 1 farm from 2021 trials. Soil on the right getting same irrigation but with increased oxygen via nanobubble treated water. As with hydroponic nanobubble installations, we often see an improvement in root health and size, as well as decrease in soil compaction.

Chris Coughlan Partner, Rural Coach

Succession – having the conversations that matter

Succession planning can be tough for farmers. For some it’s so tough they choose either to ignore it altogether or tell themselves they will deal with it “closer to the time”.

But when is “the time”? Deciding this requires contemplating what life will be like off the farm, and reconciling possibly significant differences of opinion about the best way to pass on assets.

This can lead to anxiety, stress, and the temptation to put dealing with succession back in the too-hard basket, essentially kicking the can down the road. Frustration can be felt by those sitting in the wings as they contemplate not only the potential loss of a key family member, but also what that will mean for the farm and for them.

There is no doubt that it’s always better to be calm and in control when making

decisions. Having the issue forced due to ill health or death, when time is not a luxury you can afford, may mean that options have become limited.

The greater the delay, the more difficult the succession planning process will become. Today there are plenty of ways you can access help and make the process run smoothly –front-footing it and having conversations early is key.

It’s never too late to start this process, but the earlier you start, the easier it is.

Succession in the past appeared pretty simple; the son or sons took over the running of the farm … eventually.

Equity in value was generally not considered, and fairness was more a matter of

good luck than good management. But as I work with more and more families and have the privilege of hearing their stories, it is clear that this wasn’t always easy for those involved. Often uncomfortable feelings remain just below the surface as people reflect on past generations and their decisions. The conversations that mattered either weren’t had or did not include all interested parties.

Farming families today are confronted by a scope and pace of change that is greater than ever before. The environment, impacts of technology, shifting trade dynamics, climate change, rapidly changing public attitudes, and complications of COVID on labour markets are all factors demanding a planned and strategic approach by farming families and agribusiness alike.

Succession planning is no different –determining what is next for the farm, parents, farm assets, and the next generation also requires a strategic approach.

I’m happy to say that the, “If I leave this place, it will be feet first”, school of thought is less of a barrier to successive generations than it once was. Current farm owners are far more likely to view their next stage as an opportunity to have some freedom and do something different, possibly off-farm.

Some see that next stage as a reward for their many years of hard work. Lifestyles today offer plenty of active and passive leisure pursuits – particularly as we get older. Of course, there are some who remain unsure of what to do in their next stage of life, and some who may feel they have few options.

The challenge – how to exit?

The average age of farmers creeps higher, and they look over their shoulders at the younger generations waiting for their chance. The opportunity to get succession planning right is more available than it has ever been. Professional support exists, and its cost is negligible relative to the value of the assets being discussed, but so many farmers still find asking for help a challenging step.

When thinking about succession, there are three common objectives:

1. Financial and emotional security for the parents

2. A flexible and resilient plan for the succeeding child

3. Fairness to the non-succeeding children (Blackman, IR. 2011)

A robust succession plan needs to start with the end goal in mind, and it requires flexibility, openness, and a willingness to

communicate. It is often the intangibles, for example the sense of legacy, that will play a critical factor – as does family harmony and unity.

While there are many parts to this jigsaw, at the core of this process is the families and people involved. Every family is different and they bring various skills and challenges to the succession table. Starting the conversations that matter early is pivotal, and can make a big difference later on.

All families have their own dynamics and power hierarchies, which can sometimes create roadblocks for those trying to selfmanage the process.

Succession is not an event, it’s a process, and one that can be significantly eased by involving your team of professionals. For some families the process can take years. Seeking independent facilitation will make for a coordinated approach and smooth conversations, and it will provide relevant information to aid in a robust process and good decision-making.

Assumptions, and differing ideas about fairness and equality can cause a power of grief when it comes to succession.

While a farm is an asset, and possibly benefits from intergenerational investment (like irrigation or the purchase of a new farm), it will also likely carry debt and still need to provide for Mum and Dad as they look to exit. The clarity of knowing what is financially available and what is possible removes any assumptions for all involved, and creates another foundation piece toward successful succession.

Conversations help to align expectations and clarify areas of tension. The part that personal values play in achieving this alignment is critical. What do you as owners of the farm value? What do your children and their partners value? Understanding this establishes common ground, builds trust, and opens the door to setting a clear and agreed pathway, and sometimes exciting new horizons.

With the right team alongside you there are many more opportunities than challenges. A good business with a good foundation for succession can lead to amazing next generation stories, leveraging on the foresight of past generations and a smooth transition.

Equally, a family that is clear about what’s possible and chooses to explore the sales process is also advantaged by working together on a transition to new beginnings.

Every farm succession journey is different and what makes them unique is the people –not the farm, nor the farm assets. If you focus on getting the people part right, what’s needed regarding asset management will become abundantly clear. Most importantly, families will be united in a common vision for the future, and everyone will look for ward to getting together for your next Christmas lunch!

Rural Coach specialises in the independent facilitation and development of succession pathways for farmers, business owners, successors, and families.

www.ruralcoach.co.nz

A decade of Agribusiness in Schools

Water quality and security an important part of the curriculum

Recently the nationwide Agribusiness in Schools programme celebrated its ten-year anniversary. It is now available in almost 120 schools and over 8000 students have completed the course.

Melanie Simmons has been the Agribusiness Advisor for Agribusiness in Schools since 2018, and she said it has been exciting to see the programme evolve.

“A big achievement is probably the fact that it is an established subject and being taught in 116 schools across New Zealand, but probably the biggest achievement is that the primary sector is starting to see young graduates from the programme entering the workforce and providing the sector with wellqualified and capable young people.”

The initiative first began in 2013 when the Minister for Primary Industries (Hon. Nathan Guy) set ambitious targets to double primary sector exports by 2025. An estimated 50,000 workers would be required, half of them requiring tertiary or level four qualifications.

An Agribusiness Advisory Board was established and the Government’s level of

AGRIBUSINESS IN SCHOOLS KEY DEVELOPMENTS

2015

At the beginning of 2015 the centre was opened at St Paul’s Collegiate. The programme continued to be developed and eight other lead schools come on board.

2016

More lead schools come on board. Teaching and learning resources are further developed.

support was gauged. St Paul’s Collegiate in Hamilton and Gallagher committed to building the Agribusiness Centre of Excellence, with over ten other business partners coming on board. By the end of 2014, 47 students had been involved with the pilot agribusiness course.

Melanie said the curriculum is based around a focus on futureproofing, innova-

PARTICIPATING STUDENTS

PARTICIPATING SCHOOLS

2017

Stage one of the Agribusiness in Schools initiative was completed. Agribusiness achievement standards were registered in the NZQA framework, with 11 lead schools, and 308 students having trialled the delivery.

56

97

2018

The achievement standards are implemented, with 56 schools and 2,423 students enrolled.

2020

St Paul’s Collegiate School holds an annual agribusiness innovation challenge called the Crocodile Pit. Winners and runners-up get to showcase their innovations at Fieldays. Bobble Trough, an invention that uses copper ions to clean water troughs, went on to win the Fieldays 2019 Young Innovator of the Year award. (Photo: Stephen Barker)

107

2021

Numbers climb with 97 schools and 3,055 students involved. The Ministry of Education (MOE) designates agricultural and horticultural science and agribusiness school subjects of national importance.

116

2022+

The Agribusiness in Schools brand was rolled out and a teachers association was established for the subject.

Modules continue to be updated, and further staff have been employed to support the programme.

tion, adding value, and sustainability. The idea is to be looking at what is influencing the industry now and what is coming – and what that means for the industry now and into the future.

“As we know, in order for the industry to remain competitive and ahead of the game, they need innovative, solutions-focused people who have a good understanding of what New Zealand’s role is in the global market, and how we can maintain or increase our market edge. The programme helps teach that to stay ahead you need to be constantly forward-thinking. Sustainable resource use and future proofing of those resources – including water – are woven through most of the achievement standards, and because they are internally assessed schools can apply contexts to best meet their students’ needs.”

online from IrrigationNZ and DairyNZ (they will send paper copies/class sets too), and LEARNZ and the Ministry for Primary Industries have some stuff too, so there was no shortage for teachers and students to access.”

capability within the sector, or even the scope of the sector, then they are unlikely to opt for careers in that sector.”

The other major issue is the lack of appropriately trained teachers. Both agribusiness and agricultural and horticultural science currently have a major shortfall in teachers capable of teaching the subjects. This is not set to remedy itself anytime soon with little to no agri-trained teachers coming through the teacher training programmes.

Traditionally, there has been a lack of understanding of career pathways in the primary sector and it hasn’t been viewed as a highly-skilled qualification. One of the aims of the Agribusiness in Schools initiative is to break that perception, because if students aren’t being introduced to the scope of career capability within the sector, or even the scope of the sector, then they are unlikely to opt for careers in that sector.

Water security and quality have been a major focus in the Agricultural and Horticultural Science Environmental Issues standard at Level 3 and NZQA Agricultural and Horticultural Science Scholarship exam for the last two years. Melanie said there is currently no agribusiness scholarship exam (something they are working on) meaning agribusiness students wanting to sit scholarships tend to sit the Agricultural and Horticultural Science Scholarship exam, so there are teaching and learning programmes around those contexts.

“There are a lot of resources available

Melanie said there is an ongoing challenge the primary industry faces – perception. The public perception of the industry tends to be limited in that when they think of agribusiness they think of on-farm, on-boat, or on-orchard and often don’t understand the complexity and breadth of the primary sector and the careers within it.

“Traditionally, there has been a lack of understanding of career pathways in the primary sector and it hasn’t been viewed as a highly-skilled qualification. One of the aims of the Agribusiness in Schools initiative is to break that perception, because if students aren’t being introduced to the scope of career

“One of the beauties of the programme is its multidisciplinary, cross-curricular approach (like the industry itself, the programme incorporates aspects of science, commerce, technology, and maths) which means that teachers can adapt the programme to suit their learners’ needs and to be current and applicable to real-life. The programme is designed to be flexible, to move with what is happening in the industry, and because of the focus on futureproofing, innovation, and value add, it can’t help but evolve and stay current.”

Furthermore, the programme lends itself to real-life, experiential learning. Field trips to agribusinesses or getting guest speakers into the classroom ensure students are being exposed to what is actually happening in the primary sector, what agribusinesses are doing at the time, where innovation and disruption are affecting them, and how they intend to future proof around that, Melanie said.

Students care for bees, harvest honey, and create their own branding.

For best results… look for the tick!

Designing or upgrading your irrigation or effluent system?

Using an accredited company means your irrigation infrastructure and practice will be efficient, targeted and sustainable.

IRRIGATION DESIGN ACCREDITATION

With more emphasis on irrigation efficiency than ever before, choosing an accredited Irrigation Design company is an easy way to ensure that the irrigation system you install today meets both regulatory and industry performance benchmarks. Accredited Irrigation Design companies have industry trained professionals and excellent product knowledge to ensure that every drop counts.

FARM DAIRY EFFLUENT DESIGN ACCREDITATION

Dairy farm effluent was once considered a waste product, now a reliable source of nutrient that enables dairy farmers to reduce their overall nutrient costs. Farm Dairy Effluent Design accredited companies have the expertise to design and build a dairy effluent system that meets the expectations of regional rules throughout New Zealand.

WATER MEASUREMENT ACCREDITATION

Councils are aiming for national consistency in water metering, measurement and the reporting of water use data. Engaging ‘blue tick’ accredited companies will help ensure work is in line with manufacturers’ specifications, meets industry best practice, and ensures accuracy in the reporting of data back to councils for future decision making.

IrrigationNZ are proud to support our Accredited companies, leading the industry in irrigation design, and product service and delivery.

Find a full list of accredited companies at www.irrigationaccreditation.co.nz

More action needed to protect our environment

Peter Scott Chair, Environment Canterbury

I’ve heard from some farmers and irrigators that they are concerned about the speed and scope of further changes at a time when they are already being asked to do more to manage on-farm practices like winter grazing, managing wetlands and stock exclusion from waterways.

Canterbury/Waitaha is in its current state largely as a legacy of past practices. Market forces have incentivised more intensive farming, and the Resource Management Act has permitted it. Decisions made in the past have got us to where we are now.

Legacy environmental issues take time to change, and intensive agriculture is already managed through our audited Farm Environment Plan process.

But this is not just a rural issue. While many focus on our rural communities and farming practices, the actions of our town and city-dwellers have also affected our environment. Regulation alone will not reverse everything that has happened, but we need to get the regulation right and do our best to improve things for future generations.

We all need to do more – and faster, to turn the tide of environmental degradation in some parts of our region, and protect our water, land, air and remaining biodiversity.

The changes we make today will have an impact in the future, and the more improvements we make, the faster we can see the results our environment and our community demands.

While these changes may seem onerous and unachievable, we need to reach – and in some areas, go well beyond – good management practices to reduce our effect on freshwater.

We are working in partnership with mana whenua on a Regional Policy Statement and targeted changes to the land and water regional plan to reflect the national legislative direction in the NPSFM 2020 that puts the needs of our environment and community first, applying the principles of Te Mana o te Wai.

We will be engaging with the community and catchment groups as we put together this important piece of work.

Support is available – our Farmers’ Hub is the best place to get clear information on what you need to do on your farm, or you can contact one of our land management advisors for a chat.

I’m sharing this as I want you to get involved and also be able to make informed decisions for yourselves, your businesses and your communities’ futures. Lastly, I’d like to acknowledge the changes already made and the hard work you’ve all done to improve our freshwater, but the fact is we just aren’t moving quickly enough.

If anyone would like to chat to me further then please email governance@ecan.govt.nz

As you will be aware, in the coming months we will be working with farmers to help them meet new national regulations

Reduce environmental risks while winter grazing

Winter grazing is well underway, and all that planning, planting and growing over the previous 18 months or so will hopefully have you well set up to feed your stock over the cold months.

While your planning will all be done, there’s still a lot you can do with your day-to-day winter grazing management to ensure environmental risks are kept to a minimum.

Flights show signs of good preparation

Anna Veltman

Our land management advisor for North Canterbury Anna Veltman shares her top tips for maintaining soil quality and protecting waterways while you graze over winter.

Maintain buffers from waterways: Make sure a buffer of grass or crops of at least five metres is maintained from all rivers, lakes, wetlands and drains while you graze. High-risk areas may need an even wider buffer.

Manage critical source areas: Make sure your team know of any critical source areas (CSAs) in your winter grazing paddocks, and put up temporary fencing as soon as possible so your team know not to graze these areas. If you have crops planted in these areas, do not graze, harvest, or cultivate them over winter.

Place your feeders and troughs carefully: The more feeders and troughs you have, the easier it will be to manage grazing to limit pugging and avoid impacting waterways. Paddock gateways can be potential CSAs so look for ways to avoid excessive pugging by installing hard surfaces and mitigate any run-off.

Graze strategically: Graze towards a waterway or other CSA, starting at the far end of the paddock and working towards it, so more vegetation is maintained between stock and risk areas for longer. Make sure to back fence stock off the land that has already been grazed to minimise pugging and damage to your soil.

Plan for bad weather: Have a Plan B in place for bad weather mitigation, such as a run-off paddock in case it’s needed.

Document your tactics: All the environmental risks you have identified should be documented in your winter grazing management plan. It’s useful to take photos and to keep notes on how you carried out your plan, as well as any changes you made.

Plant a catch crop: Sow a cool-weather tolerant follow-up crop, such as oats or rye, as soon as possible after grazing. This can soak up nutrients that would otherwise be leached if the paddock is left fallow.

For more information on winter grazing, visit ecan.govt.nz/winter-grazing, or call us at 0800 324 636 and ask to talk to one of our land management advisors like Anna.

We held pre-grazing flights over the Waimakariri and Ashburton regions in early May to observe how good management practices were being implemented ahead of the winter grazing season.

Results were largely pleasing – with no locations of serious concern observed. Our team saw good buffer setbacks, especially in foothill areas, and evidence that most farmers had selected paddocks carefully to avoid winter grazing in areas with more critical source areas.

We also observed that many people planned to winter graze on all-grass systems, which will need careful management.

We will undertake another flight in each of the same two regions over winter to observe winter grazing in practice.

Reducing fertiliser use pays for itself

It’s the responsibility of all farmers who have grazed pasture to ensure fertiliser use is below the legal limit.

With fertiliser costs significantly up on previous years, using your synthetic fertilisers more efficiently is a no-brainer. It’s better for your soil, your environment, and your bottom line.

The use of synthetic nitrogen fertilisers on land is linked to lowered water quality in rivers, streams, and groundwater.

You’ve probably heard about nitrate in waterways – and in drinking water supplies – as it becomes a greater source of concern, especially for rural communities.

That’s one of the reasons why the use of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser is now limited to 190 kg per hectare, per year.

This limit applies to all pastoral land – not just for dairy cattle. It does not apply to grazing on the stubble of an arable crop after harvesting.

Canterbury dairy farmers are required to report their annual synthetic nitrogen fertiliser use to us. This report should cover the 1 July–30 June year, and is due by 31 July.

An updated version of the National Online Reporting Tool will be published on our website at ecan.govt.nz/ncap when available. You can also use the MyBallance and HawkEye programmes to submit data.

For more information visit ecan.govt.nz/ncap, or email us at ncap@ecan.govt.nz.

Making room for rivers

The scale of destruction across the eastern North Island in a single storm has been difficult to take in.

This was a truly devastating event impacting multiple regions. We are not immune in Canterbury; our own experiences in the floods of 2021 were bad enough, but we were fortunate that in our case no lives were lost.

These are events that ought to make us think about how we are living with our rivers. Silt-filled paddocks, ruined crops, buried homes, public infrastructure destroyed and tragically, the lives that were lost, all indicate that we need to start thinking about our future relationship with our awa in 21st-century Aotearoa. This is a warning shot for New Zealand – loud and clear.

Flood risk management

Effective flood risk management is a multi-stringed bow which includes engineered structures, bed level management, vegetation, ponding / storage areas, wetlands, land-use planning, weather forecasting, river flow predictions, emergency management, insurance and more.

As our climate continues to alter, existing flood protection measures are going to be tested and design capacities exceeded in future deluges. Engineers refer to this as the residual risk – the risk that remains even with a flood protection scheme in place. Events of the magnitude of Cyclone Gabrielle will recur and likely more frequently.

We need to prepare for these storms and accommodate these events. To do this effectively needs a long-term perspective. We need a multi-generational view – if we keep doing things the way we’ve always done in our river corridors, we are manufacturing future disasters for our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren to deal with.

Changing the way we live with our rivers

In many locations, more space is needed for our rivers. We know that rivers are more than just conduits for water – they also convey (literally) millions of tonnes of sediment, provide unique habitat and biodiversity values, mahinga kai, recreation, the list goes on.

This can all be factored into the space our rivers need to function, without causing the disruption and loss we’ve seen across the eastern North Island in Cyclone Gabrielle. We need an approach that recognises the dynamism of our rivers and their catchments, because treating rivers in isolation from what comes down from their catchments and expecting no change in future river planform is unrealistic.

It is an unrealistic expectation to think that the rivers be let loose and given free rein, but as a community, we now need to take the long-term view and begin a conversation about giving our rivers more room. My view is that this will require funding to compensate those who give back land to the river that’s been taken by society over time. Together we can begin to change the way we live with our rivers, so that people and communities don’t have to die with our rivers again.

Taking action together to shape a thriving and resilient Canterbury, now and for future generations. Toitū te marae o Tāne, toitū te marae o Tangaroa, toitū te iwi. ecan.govt.nz

Featured image: Recent flood damage on the North Branch Ashburton River. Top left image: Shaun McCracken is our flood protection recovery manager for rivers and works closely with affected rural communities and stakeholders.

Shaun McCracken

A passion for renewable energy – on and off the farm

Karin Stark lives on a cotton and wheat farm in Narromine, New South Wales (NSW). This gives her a first-hand perspective on the energy challenges faced by farmers. Energy is one of the fastest-growing costs for farmers. Karin’s focus is on helping them to significantly reduce those costs, and emissions, by facilitating the adoption of on-farm renewables.

Karin is the director of Farm Renewables Consulting, an Australianowned business based in Central West NSW. Their work with government, community groups, and private industry is based on the premise that shared stories and lived experiences are some of the best ways to create meaningful change.

Karin has a background in environmental management and the design, delivery, and evaluation of community-based social marketing. Being a passionate advocate in this area, she founded and convenes the annual National Renewables in Agriculture Conference and Expo.

We caught up with Karin to hear more about her take on renewable energy.

Located 25 minutes from Narromine in the centre of NSW sits Australia’s biggest solar/diesel hybrid pumping system. The property, which is owned and operated by fourth generation farmer Jon Elder and his partner Karin Stark, is used for irrigated farming of cotton and wheat. Karin runs the National Renewables in Agriculture Conference, which will next be held 21 June in Dubbo, NSW.

“Water is extracted from groundwater predominantly to irrigate cotton over the summer months. We use flood irrigation through channels around the farm. We also grow wheat, barley, safflower, and lupins over the winter months, which rely on rainfall. Our average rainfall is 500mm a year.”

In 2018 the farm engaged a solar pumping solutions company to replace one of the three on-farm diesel-powered bores with a solar/diesel hybrid pumping bore – the largest of its kind in Australia.

The company installed a 250 kilowatt (kW) electric motor with a 500 kW CAT diesel-powered generator, a 500 kW solar array approximately one hectare in area, plus associated inverters, variable speed drives, and control systems.

According to Karin, prior to the installation of their solar/diesel microgrid, the farm’s biggest contributor to operating costs was energy. The farm used around 400,000 litres (L) of diesel annually to drive

Karin Stark and her daughter Noa.

the diesel-powered bore and lift pumps that are needed to extract large volumes of water from depths of up to 90m.

Karin said the system made strong financial sense due to the return of investment period being just five years, and the system saving $180,000 worth of diesel in its first year. The solar/diesel pump generated significant interest locally and interstate. “Diesel use in Australian agriculture makes up approximately 80 percent of energy used on-farm and about eight percent of agriculture emissions. This new system was lauded as a step change in irrigated agriculture due to reducing costs and emissions, and building resilience for farming businesses.“

Despite these early signs of success, Karin said the project has not been all smooth sailing. The solar/diesel pump has encountered issues with the blending of solar and diesel power sources and with the sizing of the diesel-powered generator. The large generator isn’t working hard enough, thus causing damage to the engine itself. This process is sometimes referred to as glazing.

“A solution to these issues, likely to include a battery, is still being worked through. Early adopters help to highlight issues in emerging technology and help decrease the level of risk taken by others on projects, so there have been benefits in the process.”

One of the first steps in transitioning energy to renewables is understanding where your biggest energy users are and ensuring equipment is operating as efficiently as possible. An equally important preliminary step is investigating which options for renewables are suitable for you. Consider constraints on your local grid, which can impact whether excess energy can be exported, and an income secured.

Karin said when farmers are looking to replace diesel and electricity on their property with renewables, it’s a smart idea to find others who have installed something similar and ask for their feedback and learnings regarding the process. “Always try to find businesses who have successfully worked on other systems on farms and who understand how to design a smart, efficient system. This may incorporate changes to farm operations to make the most of the renewable energy resource.”

There is no doubt renewable energy is something Karin is very passionate about and she says there is an urgent need to phase out a high carbon way of living. “The use of fossil fuels is driving climate change, and renewable energy provides a fantastic solution for our energy needs. In farming we need clean, cheap energy to stay competitive. To demonstrate we are decarbonising as a sector in order to meet consumer desires and continue to trade internationally. We can combine energy generation and farming on a big scale so land is kept in production, the farmer earns a secondary income, and low carbon energy is fed into the grid.”

The National Renewables in Agriculture Conference and Expo 2023 (renewablesinagconference.com.au) in Australia is an opportunity to hear directly from farmers who have installed renewables, including feedback about what the benefits have been and what they have learnt.

In Australia banks are often willing to lend with a discounted interest rate if a project is seen as a green option, building sustainability on-farm. There are other business-focused grants available for assisting with the costs of renewables on farms that can be found by contacting relevant government departments.

Solar panels covering approximately one hectare.

*As a rule of thumb, standard large-scale solar farms (singleaxis tracking) utilise an average of around 2 hectares per 1 MW (dc)1 of installed solar capacity. In practical terms, a 100 MWdc2 solar farm would require access to approximately 200 hectares of land. (The land area needed for every megawatt of installed capacity is expected to decline as solar modules become more efficient.) The Australian Energy Market Operator has estimated that up to 50 GW3 of ‘variable renewable energy’ (wind and solar power) capacity will need to be installed between 2020 and 2040 to replace Australia’s retiring coal-fired power stations.4

How much land is needed for solar farms?

Total land area used for agriculture

Total land required to replace coal-fired power stations with solar

In the unlikely event that all of this new variable renewable energy were to be in the form of large-scale solar, then the total land required to support this solar generation would be up to 120,000 hectares.5 That’s the equivalent of less than 0.016 percent of Australia’s total land area, or 0.027 per cent of Australia’s total land currently used for agricultural production.6 By contrast, Australian agriculture currently accounts for 58 percent of Australian land use. The impacts of the relatively small percentage of cleared rural land required to support new solar power projects in Australia can be further minimised by pursuing integrated land uses with other sectors.

NEW ZEALAND

In New Zealand we are starting to see innovative funding for transitions to renewable energy systems, although we still have a way to go to apply this sort of change across the agriculture sector. The EECA Technology demonstration fund supports the early adoption of proven technology or an innovative process improvement opportunity that has yet to be widely deployed in New Zealand, but they don’t yet go as far as subsiding solar panels.

In late April 2023 the Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment opened consultation on proposals to improve renewable electricity generation and the electricity transmission consent process. The consultation package states it’s “to help Aotearoa New Zealand meet its emissions reduction targets”. The package of national direction instruments proposes to provide more enabling policy direction for renewable electricity infrastructure development, particularly wind and solar generation and transmission projects. The proposals cover ways to enable small and community-scale renewable electricity generation. These projects often face disproportionate consenting requirements and costs relative to their adverse effects. New technologies, such as grid-connected battery storage, will also be covered. Consultation closed on 1 June 2023. Information can be found at www.mbie.govt.nz/have-your-say/renewable-electricity

IrrigationNZ’s submission can be found at www.irrigationnz.co.nz/News/SubmissionsNational

Replacing all of Australia’s coal-fired power stations due to retire by 2040 with solar farms would require less than 0.016 per cent of Australia’s total land area.*

1. Direct current (dc). 2. Megawatts dc. 3. 50 gigawatts of power in alternating current (AC). 4. Australian Energy Market Operator, (2020) Integrated System Plan 2020. https://aemo.com.au/en/energy-systems/major-publications/integratedsystem-plan-isp/2020-integrated-system-plan-isp.

5. Assumes 2.4 ha will be required for 1 MW AC power 6. Land used for agriculture estimates sourced from ABARES, (2020) Snapshot of Australian Agriculture 2020. https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/publications/insights/ snapshot-of-australian-agriculture2020#agricultural-production-is-growing.

Irrigation scheme cost survey – update to 2022 figures

In 2012 IrrigationNZ conducted a survey on the cost of surface water irrigation schemes in Canterbury and reported the cost of delivering water to the farm gate as an annualised cost for each scheme, standardised as cost in NZ dollars per hectare per year ($/ha/year) and NZ dollars per cubic metre ($/m3) of water supplied (Survey of Costs of Surface Water Irrigation Schemes in Canterbury, 2012). irrigationnz.co.nz/KnowledgeResources/ Schemes/CostSurvey

In 2014 and 2016 the dataset was expanded to include Otago, Canterbury, Marlborough, and Northland irrigation schemes. The reports excluded any costs incurred inside the farm boundary and adjusted the cost for schemes that delivered water under pressure to reflect the relationship to schemes that deliver at zero pressure (i.e. open channel). The cost of all schemes was standardised to a supply reliability of 95 percent.

In 2023 IrrigationNZ updated the core information through a new survey of the original contributing schemes, drawing on end-of-financial-year 2022 data. The survey aimed to obtain a representative sample of the schemes rather than going back to all the original schemes that contributed in 2016. The survey was well supported, and 17 updated data points were obtained against the original 30 data points (allows 57 percent 2022 updated data).

The purpose of the 2023 report was to determine if there had been any substantive

changes in the reported values of $/ha/year and $/m3 of water supplied, to inform scheme operators about where their current valuations and operating costs sit in relation to others in the industry.

Since 2016 many schemes have undergone significant capital and operational system redevelopment. Where this has resulted in changes in share pricing, annual and variable charges, and additional charges for environmental plans, this data has been considered and included in the cost analysis where appropriate.

In 2016 it was reported that the average cost of water supplied by irrigation schemes was $780/ha/year and $0.14/m3. However, following a minor calculation correction1, it was shown that these should have been $790/ha/year and $0.14/m3

The range of costs shown in 2016 and obtained for 2022 is significant and reflects the widely varying methods used by schemes to charge for water and value their shares. This range is not incorrect as it reflects the historical ownership and investment in schemes that allow different approaches to be adopted to the benefit of the shareholders or to reflect the investment being made by schemes to optimise and update their assets and operating systems.

To provide indexing of 2022 data against 2016 data, a subset of the original survey data has been analysed with a corrected spreadsheet to show changes in just the contributors from the 2023 survey. The subset of 2016 shows some differences

from the whole dataset as some of the wider outliers, both high and low, were not averaged into the reported values. Many schemes have had major infrastructure upgrades in the last six years.

For comparative purposes, the subset of 17 scheme data points is:

• 2016 – $870/ha/year and $0.15/m3

• 2022 – $1,180/ha/year and $0.21/m3

This reflects a 34 percent and 40 percent shift, respectively.

Looking at the period from 2016 to 2022 the NZ general inflation index change is a 16.7 percent increase2

Hence, it can be inferred that the changes of 34 percent and 40 percent in $/ha/year and $/m3 of water supplied, respectively, are influenced by factors beyond inflation. After subtracting the underlying 16.7 percent inflation adjustment from the calculated change, the overall changes would be 17 percent and 23 percent in $/ha/year and $/m3, respectively.

When updating the data to 2022, various ongoing factors influencing water supply costs were indicated, such as the age of the scheme, the cost involved in its development or purchase, the infrastructure requirements, and differences in operational expenses.

The percentage changes set out above are calculated between the mean 2022 subset (green solid line) and the 2016 mean subset (blue solid line)

Although the 2016 study by IrrigationNZ has been updated to

1. The 2016 data and spreadsheet calculations required some minor corrections due to incorrect rounding and averaging of outliers used at the time.

2. Source: Inflation calculator – Reserve Bank of New Zealand – Te Pūtea Matua (rbnz.govt.nz)

2022, it only serves as a relatively basic cost comparison of the development and operational costs for irrigation schemes. The 2016 report was particularly relevant at the time due to a rapid increase in infrastructure development and government funding. However, there has been limited new infrastructure development since then, except for the Te Tai Tokerau Water scheme in Northland, which has considerably different numbers due to its purpose and smaller size.

IrrigationNZ responded to an external request for information in 2023 on the costs of water in the agrisector by providing an analysis of on-farm infrastructure and water supply costs.

“The capital outlay for pivot irrigators or vineyard drip systems typically ranges from $4,000 to $5,000 per hectare, while other precision control systems, such as fixed grids, can cost as much as $15,000 to $20,000 per hectare. Operating costs for on-farm pumping and labour can range from $2,000 to $6,000 per hectare depending on the scale and topography.

Getting water supply to the farm gate can also be expensive, with shareholding schemes charging both capital and operating costs, resulting in an initial outlay of $5,000 to $10,000 per hectare, and in some smaller-scale schemes, up to $25,000 to $40,000 per hectare (such as Tai Tokerau), followed by annual charges of $700 to $1,500 per hectare for the required level of supply reliability.”

For the full version of the Irrigation Scheme Cost Survey please go to www.irrigationnz.co.nz/KnowledgeResources/Schemes/CostSurvey *Note: Access to the full document is members only.

Stephen McNally Principal Technical Advisor IrrigationNZ

Investigating the public water strategies of India, Ireland, California, and Argentina

Water is an essential resource for agriculture and food production worldwide, and countries or regions with large populations and agricultural economies face immediate challenges in managing their water resources effectively. I have been examining the public water strategies in place over the last decades in India, Ireland, California, and Argentina, with a focus on their approaches to supporting food production. These countries have similarities and differences when compared to New Zealand farming systems and water resources availability. Examining their strategies can suggest implications of these strategies for New Zealand farmers and policymakers.

India just tipped over the mark in April 2023 to become the world’s most populous country1 ahead of China. It has a large agricultural sector that employs around half of the population. The country faces significant challenges in managing its water resources due to its rapidly growing population and uneven distribution of rainfall. The government of India has implemented a range of policies and programmes to address these challenges, which aim to promote integrated water resources management, increase irrigation efficiency, and improve water quality. The government also encourages the adoption of modern irrigation technologies and provides subsidies for the construction of water harvesting structures. The Indian government has made substantial investments

in water infrastructure and management, including investing in research institutions that conduct research on water management practices for agriculture.

India has a long history of water storage infrastructure, with ancient irrigation systems still in use today. However, despite these efforts, water scarcity remains a major issue for farmers in many parts of the country and the country faces ongoing challenges in managing its water resources due to population growth and climate change. The government of India has implemented a range of policies and programmes to address these challenges, including the construction of large-scale dams and canals to store and distribute water. The government also encourages the use of groundwater recharge structures and the adoption of modern irrigation technologies to improve water use efficiency. However, the construction of large dams has been controversial, with concerns about the displacement of local communities and the environmental impacts of dam construction.

Ireland is a small island nation with a strong agricultural economy. The country has abundant rainfall, but its high-intensity rainfall patterns can lead to soil erosion and waterlogging. The government of Ireland has implemented a range of policies and programmes to support sustainable water management in agriculture. These programmes have provided funding and technical support to farmers who adopt sustainable agricultural practices, such as reducing fertiliser use and improving soil

quality. The government has also introduced a range of regulations to protect water quality, in particular, regulating the use of nitrogen fertilisers.

Ireland has a relatively small population and abundant rainfall, which means that the country has traditionally relied on natural water storage systems such as rivers and lakes. However, in recent years the government has invested in the construction of small-scale water storage infrastructure, such as farm dams and reservoirs, to support sustainable agriculture.

The Irish government has historically provided considerable funding for agriculture research and development, including research on water management. For example, the Irish run a research programme on sustainable agriculture and natural resources, which includes research on water use efficiency in agriculture.

California is a wealthy state in the United States with a large agricultural sector that is a major contributor to the state’s economy. The state is in a semi-arid region and faces broad challenges in managing its water resources due to drought and increasing demand for water from urban areas. The government of California has implemented a range of policies and programmes to support sustainable water management in agriculture, including the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

An active California Water Plan is in place, with a 2023 update set to advance a state-wide vision, including a watershed resilience planning framework with strategies

1. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2022). news.un.org/en/story/2023/04/1135967

and toolkits, and indicators and metrics to track progress, sustainability, and resilience. These programmes aim to reduce water use in agriculture, increase water use efficiency, and promote the use of recycled water for irrigation.

California has a long history of water storage infrastructure, with large-scale dams and canals built in the early 20th century to support agricultural development. However, the state faces significant challenges in managing its water resources due to climate change and increasing demand from urban areas. The government of California has implemented a range of construction programmes for new water storage infrastructure. The state government also encourages the use of water-efficient irrigation technologies and the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices to reduce water demand.

The state of California has invested sizable resources in water management and infrastructure, and the California Department of Water Resources conducts research on water management practices and technologies for agriculture.

Argentina is a large country in the southern hemisphere with a diverse agricultural sector that is a major contributor to the country’s economy. Argentina has a diverse range of natural water storage systems, including rivers, lakes, and wetlands.

The country faces large challenges in managing its water resources due to the uneven distribution of rainfall and the overexploitation of groundwater resources. The government of Argentina has implemented a

range of policies and programmes to support sustainable water management in agriculture, including the National Water Plan and the National Agroecology Plan which encourage a new relationship between farming, food, and nature. These programmes aim to reduce water use in agriculture, promote the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices, and protect water resources from pollution by placing water at the core of economic and social development.

The Argentine government has made important investments in water infrastructure and management, including the construction of large-scale irrigation systems including storage components, and the development of water management plans for different regions of the country. The government also invested in research institutions that conduct research on water management practices for agriculture.

Overall, the level of government spending on water strategy and research for agriculture varies across the above-mentioned countries and New Zealand. However, in all these countries water management and agriculture are recognised as important priorities and receive extensive government support.

The World Bank and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) play an important role in influencing policy approaches to water management in many regions of the world. Both organisations provide technical and financial assistance to governments and other stakeholders to support the development of sustainable water management strategies.

Foreword by Saroj Kumar Jha, Global Director, Water Global Practice, World Bank Group, World Bank, in “What the Future Has in Store: A New Paradigm for Water Storage.” World Bank, Washington, DC. 2023:

“It is often said that climate change expresses itself through water. The inevitability of hydrological climate extremes is placing increasing pressure on all water practitioners to manage differently, and nowhere is that more necessary than in storage. Freshwater storage is at the heart of adapting to climate change, most obviously by saving water for drier times and reducing the impact of floods. Many populations are experiencing increasing levels of climate-based turmoil, and for them, any relief that comes with recovery is tempered by anxiety about the future. It is safe to say that going forward, the most stable, durable societies will, in many cases, be anchored in more resilient approaches to water storage.”

In recent years there has been a growing recognition of the importance of freshwater management in New Zealand, particularly in relation to water quality. The Government has launched several initiatives to improve freshwater management, including

The California Aqueduct, 273 miles long, delivers water to Los Angeles.

the establishment of a new freshwater regulatory system and the development of a National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management. These initiatives are designed to improve the management of freshwater resources and protect water quality for future generations.

However, while water policies in New Zealand are primarily driven by a mix of environmental protections, there is less recognition of the role of water in the productive economy. The Government of New Zealand is recognising that even with a perception of abundant rainfall, water is a finite resource and its management is crucial to the environment. It also recognises the importance of water to the productive economy, including agriculture, hydroelectricity, and tourism.

There have been policy examples in New Zealand that supported the development of water storage infrastructure for agriculture. One example was the Government’s Irrigation Acceleration Fund, which provided funding to support the development of irrigation schemes, including water storage infrastructure, to increase the productivity and sustainability of agricultural production.

In addition, the previous Government operated the Provincial Growth Fund, which included funding for water storage infrastructure projects that were proposed to support regional economic growth. For example, the fund supported investigations of the development of a multi-use water storage facility in several regions, which could have provided water for irrigation and reduced the risk of drought for farmers.

The process of investigating water storage infrastructure in Wairarapa, Northland, and Hawke’s Bay had been driven by private sector stakeholders along with local government and other community and iwi groups. These regions

have identified the need for water storage infrastructure to support agricultural production and have worked to develop projects that are economically viable, environmentally sustainable, and meet a range of community needs for reliable water. The scheme proposals, while primarily to provide water for irrigation, could also help to reduce flood risk and improve water quality. Only the Northland project has proceeded to construction at this point. With the lack of clear central policies, local regulatory barriers have impeded the outcomes in other regions.

By working collaboratively with stakeholders and investing in key areas, the Government can help to ensure that water remains a valuable and productive resource for generations to come. There are some improvements that could be adopted by the New Zealand Government to fill in gaps and strengthen its national water strategy, ensuring that water is managed sustainably for the benefit of all New Zealanders.

The Government could work to develop a more coordinated approach to water management across all levels of government. This could involve the development of a national water strategy that outlines clear goals and objectives for water management, and the development of more consistent policies and regulations across all regions of the country about water storage.

The New Zealand Government provides funding for water strategy and research for

agriculture through a range of programmes and initiatives, such as the older Sustainable Farming Fund, the new Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures (SFFF), and to research institutions such as AgResearch and Landcare Research to conduct research on water management practices for agriculture. The Government could increase its investment in water storage infrastructure to support sustainable agricultural production and reduce the impact of droughts in regions that are experiencing water shortages.

Sustainable water management in agriculture requires a multifaceted approach that involves a range of policies and programmes, including regulations, subsidies, technical support, and education. The adoption of sustainable agricultural practices can significantly reduce water use and improve water quality, and there is a need to incentivise farmers to adopt these practices.

The water strategies of India, Ireland, California, and Argentina provide valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities of sustainable water management in agriculture. While the strategies adopted by these places differ in their approaches, they have the common goal of promoting the sustainable use of water resources to support food production. New Zealand farmers and policymakers can learn from these strategies to develop their own approaches to sustainable water management in agriculture, considering their unique characteristics.

(Photo: Progressive Earthmoving)

Stephen McNally Principal Technical Advisor IrrigationNZ

Submissions and consultations update

SEVERE WEATHER EMERGENCY RECOVERY LEGISLATION BILL

IrrigationNZ submitted that we are in general support of this Bill and its purpose following the devastating effects of Cyclone Gabrielle across many agricultural and horticultural districts of New Zealand.

We note that the purpose covers the area of concern we have discussed with regional councils. This relates to issues that could directly affect our members regarding activities such as the administration of water take consents under the Resource Management Act (RMA) regulations. We are aware of hundreds of water take consent holders whose infrastructure for taking water, including the water meters, has been damaged extensively. The ability to meet obligations of water take reporting would in many cases be impossible and implausible in the current emergency recovery situation. Allowing a council and consent holder to temporarily act differently without breaching regulations in this situation is a sensible and pragmatic response.

IrrigationNZ is also aware of situations where emergency access is required to farm and orchard land and business premises via earthworks or stream crossing culverts, which under non-emergency circumstances may require a consent to be applied for and granted. It is better to allow a landowner to act in a timely manner and replace or relocate infrastructure such as culverts. Retrospective reviews of the need for a more formal activity consent process may still be needed when time allows.

IrrigationNZ understood some parties were concerned that this Bill gives too great a power to individuals to act as opposed to specifically allowing government agencies

and councils to do things differently during the emergency recovery period. IrrigationNZ is comfortable that even if, for example, a water user needs to act differently regarding data reporting or emergency works, it’s appropriate to empower the individual in this situation to avoid them being in breach of a regulation. Being in breach of a regulation may impact the conditions of any bank lending that applies to the operation, and this could lead to unintended consequences for business stability. People will still need to be accountable after the event for anything they do, so still need to be aware of their prior obligations to operate within existing laws and regulations.

NATURAL AND BUILT ENVIRONMENTS BILL

In its February submission IrrigationNZ endorsed the argument for RMA reform and acknowledged that this overdue transformation generates an unavoidable element of unpredictability. Nonetheless, IrrigationNZ urged the Select Committee to prioritise the creation of certainty within the Bill itself as much as possible because certainty permits irrigation schemes and water users to make plans and investments for the future. This includes the ability to facilitate changes in land use, prevent the consequences of drought and flooding, and ensure the sustainable welfare of the land, water, and the living organisms they support, such as native flora and fauna, human life, and food supply.

From the Select Committee website there has been little to no update on progress assessing the multiple public and institutional submissions, but a formal update report is due on 27 June 2023.

CONSULTATION DOCUMENT ON THE PROPOSED NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARD

This National Organic Standard applies to products from primary production and processing, including food, beverages, plant, and animal products. This includes products sold or used as an ingredient in a product to be sold for human or animal consumption where labelling, advertising material, or commercial documents claim the product, its production, or its ingredients as ‘organic’.

This Standard specifies the minimum requirements for the production, handling, processing, and labelling of organic products.

As this Standard refers to irrigation practices in the production of organic produce, IrrigationNZ will be making a submission, essentially to help ensure consistency with the work done in other food and fibre production sectors, to avoid dual or duplicate standards being established.

Guy Finny Associate Director – Infrastructure & Capital Projects

John Marker National Partner – Infrastructure & Capital Projects Deloitte New Zealand

Enhancing the resilience of our critical infrastructure

In previous technical updates by Stephen McNally, the Principal Technical Advisor for IrrigationNZ, we have reported on our engagement with key stakeholders such as the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission/ Te Waihanga, irrigation scheme asset owners, and asset management experts. This engagement has largely arisen from the need to address the governance challenges posed to irrigation scheme owners by climate change risks, as highlighted in New Zealand’s first National [Climate Change] Adaptation Plan1 released in August 2022.

Chapter 8 of this plan, titled Infrastructure, outlines a series of actions aimed at enhancing the resilience of infrastructure services critical to New Zealand’s economy and communities in the face of climate change. The importance of resilient infrastructure cannot be overstated, as it supports adaptation in communities and businesses while safeguarding the well-being of future generations.

To this end, IrrigationNZ is collaborating closely with government agencies to determine where irrigation infrastructure fits in the regulatory priorities and potential implications of proposed legislation such as the Natural and Built Environment Bill, the National Planning Framework, and the existing Civil Defence Emergency Management Act.

This guest article from Deloitte provides a valuable international and local perspective on the roles irrigation scheme asset owners will need to consider in the future. IrrigationNZ will be further exploring how expert knowledge of a framework that considers risk holistically through an all-hazards lens can be brought to our members.

Our society is reliant on the uninterrupted delivery of critical infrastructure services in an operating environment that has become increasingly complex and hazardous. There have been significant international examples of compromised critical infrastructure. In late 2022 Australian telecommunications provider Optus suffered a major data breach resulting from a cyber-attack. On the other side of the world, critical European gas infrastructure also suffered significant damage in apparent acts of sabotage. In recent times there have been significant domestic examples around rail and roading infrastructure as well as cyber related incidents.

The increasingly complex and hazardous world these organisations have had to navigate since the start of COVID-19 is now being recognised as part of a progression to a new normal. In response, regulators, boards, and management are evolving practices, including application of an ‘all-hazards’ approach to security and resilience. Australia has recently leveraged the all-hazards concept in codifying new risk management measures as part of a nation building exercise to improve the overall resilience of its critical infrastructure.

New Zealand is not immune from these global trends. Critical infrastructure providers here, including those in New Zealand’s irrigation sector, should be turning their eyes to the horizon and ensuring they are aligned with global best practice.

ESCALATING THREAT ENVIRONMENT

Critical infrastructure provides the essential services that underpin our society and economy. This includes energy, transport, communications, health, financial, data, education, defence, food production, and water (including irrigation).

Critical infrastructure organisations are expected to deliver their essential services no matter what challenges they face. Rapidly changing domestic and global factors are seriously testing business practices as the world migrates to a more complex, post-pandemic operating environment. In recent years critical infrastructure organisations have had to contend with cyber-attacks, supply chain disruption, a pandemic, and increasing geopolitical tensions. Climate change is also factoring more frequently and acutely in the creation of many highly disruptive physical and human hazards.

On top of this is the fact that critical infrastructure organisations are themselves becoming increasingly more complex and interdependent. Physical assets increasingly have digital interfaces, and the delivery and maintenance of these assets are reliant on multi-layered global supply chains.

BEST PRACTICE IS EVOLVING TO REFLECT THE NEW NORMAL

The ability to anticipate, prepare, and adaptively respond to disruption and change is crucial to the continued effectiveness of our critical infrastructure. In the current environment, governments, boards, management, and service

1. environment.govt.nz/publications/aotearoa-new-zealands-firstnational-adaptation-plan

providers are all increasingly aware of the need to evolve practices to ensure they are still fit for purpose. A service failure can have significant adverse economic, commercial, and reputational impacts –exposing organisations to potential litigation risk if they fail to take reasonable steps to understand and mitigate hazards that are becoming more foreseeable.

Given the stakes, governments are also taking steps to enhance capabilities and embed resilience requirements into legislation.

The policy rationale for intervention is driven by the fact that interference or damage to critical infrastructure assets can cause widespread disruption throughout society. While the failure of an asset can be extremely damaging to the reputation and financial viability of its owner or owners, the costs to society of an entity failing to mitigate hazards to a critical infrastructure asset can be orders of magnitude larger. To address this potential mismatch in incentives, governments are establishing critical infrastructure programmes and agencies – such as the United Kingdom’s Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure and the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency in the United States – with the objectives of introducing and enforcing requirements to improve the maturity of critical infrastructure entities in identifying and responding to risk.

Of note, the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency in the United States has a dedicated plan for their Dams Sector, which includes agricultural irrigation.

In Australia, regulations recently issued under the Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 have created an obligation for responsible entities to create and maintain a critical infrastructure risk management programme. Relevant entities are required to identify, and as far as is reasonably practicable, take steps to minimise or eliminate material risks

on an ‘all-hazards’ basis. Boards are required to attest to the currency of the risk management programme, and while there are penalties for non-compliance, it is the implications for fiduciary duties that is really driving directors to take notice and support change.

THE ALL-HAZARDS LENS

A key feature of the Australian legislation is the requirement to consider risk more holistically by applying an all-hazards lens at an asset level. This is a significant change from traditional risk management approaches that apply a more enterprise level lens. An asset level focus requires organisations to understand, identify, and manage hazards to their critical assets – including physical and natural hazards, supply chain hazards, personnel hazards, cyber and info hazards – that at the end of the day have the greatest potential to impact delivery of their essential services.

This approach not only deepens the organisation’s risk knowledge base, but also helps break down silos between different functions –creating a single source of truth of the organisation’s resilience maturity.

Deloitte’s Critical Infrastructure practice has been active on both sides of the Tasman, helping critical infrastructure entities deploy this approach to uplifting resilience.

CHANGE IS ON THE WAY FOR NEW ZEALAND

The Government, through its response to the infrastructure strategy, has stated that it supports in full the Infrastructure Commission’s proposal to increase the resilience of critical infrastructure. New Zealand’s regulatory framework for critical infrastructure is currently contained in the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act, which outlines requirements for identified lifeline utilities to ensure they can function during

and after an emergency.

In the short term, proposed changes to the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act will see the concept of critical infrastructure explicitly embedded in legalisation.

The infrastructure sector, including owners of significant irrigation assets, should be paying particular attention to potential changes anticipated to occur over the medium term – the Government has tasked officials with considering whether more fundamental changes are required to guarantee critical infrastructure resilience. The Government has cited emerging risks such as climate change and a more complex geostrategic and economic environment as drivers for this work.

Based on international examples, it is likely we will see change through a work programme that will weigh up the benefits and costs of the following potential reforms:

• Establishment of a critical infrastructure centre of excellence in government to develop guidance and best practice for New Zealand’s critical infrastructure.

• Introduction of requirements for specific critical infrastructure entities to prepare and implement risk management plans on an all-hazards basis.

• Introduction of enhanced information sharing obligations with government.

• Introduction of enhanced governance obligations, including requirements for board attestation regarding critical infrastructure resilience.

The Government has signalled that it expects to begin consultation with the sector in 2023.

Related to this, under the National Adaptation Plan 2022, Te Waihanga/New Zealand Infrastructure Commission is responsible for scoping a resilience standard or code for infrastructure.

GETTING AHEAD OF THE CURVE

Ahead of these policy processes, critical infrastructure entities will benefit from building a deep understanding of their organisation’s approach to resilience and its effectiveness in the current landscape. This will not only help organisations better align themselves with international best practice, but it will also enable them to articulate and constructively engage with policy makers around regulatory reforms on the horizon for our critical infrastructure.

This article is adapted from one originally published in the New Zealand Infrastructure Review (Volume 3, Number 1, 2023).

Technology for efficient irrigation management

KROHNE Electromagnetic Flowmeters

High precision flow meters for irrigation, water supply and process control applications

Steel Screen Filters

The first choice for high volume filtration of bore water and river takes

Galileo CLOUD

The most advanced Cloud-based controller for horticultural irrigation & fertigation

A.R.I. Combination Air Valves

Protect pipelines & equipment from entrapped air to increase efficiency & reduce pumping costs

To find your local dealer contact Water Supply Products: Auckland: 09-916 0094 Christchurch: 03-348 1293 info@watersupply.co.nz www.watersupply.co.nz

Amiad

Advertise in the

IrrigationNZ News is a quarterly magazine published by IrrigationNZ, a membership-funded national industry body that promotes excellence in irrigation. The magazine is dedicated to topical information and expert advice on all issues associated with irrigation and freshwater management. IrrigationNZ News aims to:

• Provide news and information on the challenges and opportunities facing water users across all sectors and throughout New Zealand.

• Add value for individual irrigators’, scheme and irrigation industry businesses.

• Improve the general level of knowledge of good management practice by encouraging a culture of continuous improvement to contribute to positive economic, socio-cultural and environmental outcomes.

• Highlighting the value of irrigation to the wider economy and community of New Zealand.

OUR READERS

Advertising in IrrigationNZ News is a direct link to those who irrigate across all sectors – arable, meat & wool, dairy, horticulture, viticulture and other – as well as industry, consultants, engineers, scientists, politicians, central and local government, education sector and students.

AVAILABLE IN BOTH PRINT & ONLINE

Printed copies of IrrigationNZ News are delivered to IrrigationNZ members, government officials, plus consent holders in the Canterbury region. IrrigationNZ share and promote the online issue through our social channels and in our regular e-newsletter, NewsSplash. Enhance your marketing by including clickable links in the digital format, so readers can head to your site or store, directly from your advert.

Advertise right here in the IrrigationNZ News to connect with your target audience.

Take advantage of our annual advertising packages to receive a 5% discount.

Further opportunities such as advertorials, promotional inserts, sponsorship and online promotions are also available.

Contact IrrigationNZ News editor, Ella Stokes, to discuss:

Phone 027 208 6371

Email estokes@irrigationnz.co.nz

Adoption of Good Practice Fish Screening Project Summary Report

SUSTAINABLE FARMING FUND (SFF) 405972

Project Summary

Water intake structures are used throughout New Zealand to supply water used for irrigation, generation of hydro-electricity, domestic water supply, and industrial needs. If surface water intake structures are not properly screened, and/ or have screens that are not correctly designed and/or maintained, they can unintentionally damage or remove fish from rivers through impingement and entrainment. The fundamental purpose of a fish screen facility is to ensure safe passage for all fishes around the facility within or back to the source waterway.

Until 2019 there had been limited research addressing the New Zealand-specific knowledge gaps identified in the ‘Fish screening: good practice guidelines for Canterbury’ (NIWA, Jamieson et al. 2007, and hereafter called the NIWA 2007 Guidelines). Difficulties remained for abstractors, designers, installers, and operators in understanding and seeking to meet the criteria or relevant local planning legislation requirements.

In 2019 the Ministry for Primary Industries, through its Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures programme, co-funded a research project titled Adoption of Good Practice Fish Screening. The project was administered by Irrigation New Zealand on behalf of the New Zealand Fish Screen Working Group. It aimed to fill key knowledge gaps identified in the NIWA 2007 Guidelines and to support good practice by developing guidance and demonstrating examples of fish screen facilities that are considered effective in achieving the overall outcome of protecting fish and fisheries.

1. All key reports and project outcomes mentioned in this report can be found on the IrrigationNZ fish screens webpage irrigationnz.co.nz/KnowledgeResources/FishScreens

Key Project Deliverables

• Reviewing regional water intake issues and requirements in New Zealand.

• Laboratory trials to fill knowledge gaps and confirm design criteria that protect fishes from impingement, entrainment, and damage.

• Field trials to assess the effectiveness of fish screen designs compared to the seven key criteria in the NIWA 2007 Guidelines and those adopted into the Canterbury Land and Water Plan Schedule 2.

• Production of an online Fish Screen Facility Guidance Tool

• Developing a national policy and practice guidance document.

• Workshopping example sites through the Fish Screen Facility Guidance Tool to provide demonstration examples that would be considered effective.

• Production of a guidance document “Toward National Guidance for Fish Screen Facilities to Ensure Safe Passage for Freshwater Fishes” to supplement the NIWA 2007 Guidelines.

• Training for designers, abstractors, manufacturers, regulators, and consultants working with fish screens.

Progress Highlights

The NIWA 2007 Guidelines provided seven design criteria for effective and efficient fish screening. This project has confirmed the NIWA 2007 seven criteria were key for successful fish screening facility design that prevents entrainment and impingement of fish. Additionally it found design and connection of a suitable bypass, the correct fitting, maintenance, and operation of screens, and consideration of upstream fish passage needs were often overlooked and needed consideration, i.e. an eighth criterion. A balanced design approach for water intakes is needed that gives consideration to all criteria (Table 1) and considers each site solution as a package. The project provides improved explanations of the criteria.

Mark Webb, Fish and Game NZ, preparing a fish screening facility for fish trials.

Table 1: Key criteria required for an efficient and effective water intake and fish screen.

Factor Description

Intake location The water intake is located to minimise exposure of fish to the screen and minimises the length of stream channel affected while providing the best possible conditions for the other criteria.

Throughscreen velocity

Sweep velocity

Fish bypass at water intake

The water velocity through the fish screen is slow enough to allow fish to escape entrainment or impingement

The water velocity past the fish screen is sufficient to sweep fish past the intake promptly and into the bypass

A suitable bypass (where needed) is provided so that fish are taken away from the intake and back into the active waterway

Conclusions

Fish bypass design for connectivity

Gap openings in intake structure

Operations and maintenance

There is connectivity between any constructed bypass and somewhere safe, usually the mainstem of the waterway

Screening material and other joins/edges have openings small enough to exclude fish, and a smooth surface to prevent any damage to fish

The water intake needs be kept operating to a consistent standard with appropriate operation and maintenance, this includes consideration of debris management

There is no simple recipe for an effective fish screen facility that applies across all situations. The physical conditions (e.g. gradient and flow) and biological conditions (i.e. fish species and life stages present) at every intake are different. The NIWA 2007 Guidelines together with the new guidance document can help identify issues and considerations, and provide good reference information for designers, infrastructure owners, and regulators. However, because each case is different, it is not straightforward to go from that fundamental knowledge to a practical solution.

Upstream fish passage

EITHER the water intake and fish screen does not impede upstream passage of migratory fish species during all flows and does not increase the risk of predation OR the bypass outlet impedes fish passage into the bypass and keeps fish in the natural waterway but fish moving downstream through the bypass are not harmed while returning to the waterway

The project identified areas that require New Zealandspecific knowledge, ideally through additional research, to lead to better outcomes in fish screen facility design and management:

• Improving knowledge of water velocities near screens and the effects of turbulence on fish survival to improve fish screen facility designs.

• Understanding fish behaviour at bypasses to improve the overall effectiveness of these facilities.

• Establishing better links within the regulatory processes, including meeting the needs of mana whenua, to improve certainty.

• Promoting innovation and problem-solving in the design and planning processes to allow additional refinement of the Fish Screen Facility Guidance Tool.

There are usually several fish screen facility designs that could satisfy the key criteria at a site. Selecting from these alternative designs must take into consideration site-specific characteristics, including existing infrastructure, biological considerations, hydraulic functioning, geographical constraints, and client preferences. All fish screen facility designs require engineering and biological input, including assessment of site-specific fishery information.

The Fish Screen Facility Guidance Tool provides a method to document and support selection of applicant/consultant preferred designs that could then be developed for a conceptual design. Designs that are likely to meet all key criteria have been workshopped for a variety of different intake locations to provide some examples.

For further information on the fish screen project, including access to key reports, the Fish Screen Facility Guidance Tool and the latest guidance document, visit www.irrigationnz.co.nz/KnowledgeResources/FishScreens

Shortfin elver swimming along the screen edge during lab trials – NIWA Dec 2020.

Seasonal climate outlook June–August 2023

OUTLOOK SUMMARY

ENSO-neutral conditions persisted during May, but oceanic and atmospheric indicators trended closer to El Niño thresholds. El Niño will continue to develop during winter with the potential for a strong event developing by spring.

Despite a trend toward El Niño, warmer than average sea temperatures remain present in the western Pacific. This is expected to continue to fuel moisturerich disturbances in the Aotearoa New Zealand region through at least June, some of which will bring heavy rainfall, snow, and strong winds.

Higher than normal air pressure is forecast to develop in the Tasman Sea during July and/or August, leading to more southwesterly quarter winds than normal and periods of below normal rainfall, particularly in the north and east of both islands.

For the winter season, rainfall is most likely to be near normal in the west of the North Island and north and west of the South Island. In the east of both islands, rainfall is about equally likely to be near normal or above normal, with June looking particularly wet. In the north of the North Island, rainfall is about equally likely to be near normal or below normal.

Winter temperatures are most likely to be above average in the west of the North Island and north and west of the South Island. Temperatures are about equally likely to be near average or above average in all other regions. Marine heatwave conditions persisting in New Zealand’s coastal waters will likely prevent a sharply colder than average winter, although more frequent southerly-quarter winds may cause winter 2023 to be colder than recent winters.

Coastal sea surface temperatures (SSTs) ranged from 0.4˚C to 1.5˚C above average during May. The warmer than average seas will likely have an upward influence on air temperatures, particularly around the start of winter.

Soil moisture levels are most likely to be near normal in the west of the North Island and north and east of the South Island and about equally likely to be near normal or above normal in all other regions.

River flows are most likely to be near normal in the north and west of the North Island and north of the South Island. River flows are about equally likely to be near normal or above normal in all other regions.

REGIONAL PREDICTIONS

Probabilities (or percent chances) are assigned in three categories: above average, near average, and below average. In the absence of any forecast

guidance there would be an equal likelihood (33 percent chance) of the outcome being in any one of the three categories. Forecast information from local and global guidance models is used to indicate the deviation from equal chance expected for the coming three-month period.

Northland, Auckland, Waikato, Bay of Plenty

• Temperatures are about equally likely to be above average (45 percent chance) or near average (40 percent chance).

• Rainfall totals are about equally likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) or below normal (35 percent chance). July and August may feature higher than normal air pressure, leading to spells of drier than normal weather.

• Soil moisture levels are about equally likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) or above normal (35 percent chance) while river flows are most likely to be near normal (40 percent chance).

Central North Island, Taranaki, Whanganui, Manawatu, Wellington

• Temperatures are about equally likely to be above average (45 percent chance) or near average (40 percent chance). Marine heatwave conditions remain present in coastal waters. The warmer than average seas will likely have an upward influence on air temperatures, particularly around the start of winter.

• Rainfall totals are most likely to be near normal (45 percent chance). Early-to-mid June looks particularly unsettled, with periods of heavy rain and high elevation snow possible.

• Soil moisture levels and river flows are most likely to be near normal (45 percent chance).

Gisborne, Hawke’s Bay, Wairarapa

• Temperatures are about equally likely to be above average (45 percent chance) or near average (40 percent chance).

• Rainfall totals are about equally likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) or above normal (35 percent chance). Early-to-mid June looks particularly unsettled, with periods of heavy rain possible. July and/or August may feature more southwesterly-quarter winds, leading to spells of drier than normal weather.

• Soil moisture levels and river flows are about equally likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) or above normal (35 percent chance).

Tasman, Nelson, Marlborough, Buller

• Temperatures are most likely to be above average (55 percent chance). Marine heatwave conditions remain present in coastal waters. The warmer than average seas will likely have an upward influence on air temperatures, particularly around the start of winter.

• Rainfall totals are most likely to be near normal (45 percent chance). Early-to-mid June looks particularly unsettled, with periods of heavy rain. July and August may feature more southwesterly-quarter winds, leading to spells of drier than normal weather.

• Soil moisture levels and river flows are most likely to be near normal (45 percent chance).

West Coast, Southern Alps and foothills, inland Otago, Southland

• Temperatures are most likely to be above average (55 percent chance). Marine heatwave conditions remain present in coastal waters. The warmer than average seas will likely have an upward influence on air temperatures, particularly around the start of winter.

• Rainfall totals are about equally likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) or above normal (35 percent chance). July and/or August may feature more westerly winds, leading to spells of wetter than normal weather.

• Soil moisture levels and river flows are about equally likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) or above normal (35-40 percent chance).

Coastal Canterbury and the nearby plains, east Otago

• Temperatures are about equally likely to be above average (45 percent chance) or near average (40 percent chance). Marine heatwave conditions remain present in coastal waters. The warmer than average seas will likely have an upward influence on air temperatures, particularly around the start of winter.

• Rainfall totals are about equally likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) or above normal (35 percent chance). Early-to-mid June looks particularly unsettled, with periods of heavy rain and high elevation snow possible. July and/or August may feature more southwesterly-quarter winds, leading to spells of drier than normal weather.

• Soil moisture levels are most likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) while river flows are equally likely to be near normal (40 percent chance) or above normal (40 percent chance).

Irrigation is feeding the world

Food grows where water flows.

Irrigated agriculture accounts for 20% of the total cultivated land but contributes 40% of the total food produced worldwide.

As of 2020 of land is irrigated worldwide

349 million hectares

WORLD MEAT PRODUCTION

337 million tonnes of meat were produced in 2020, 45% more than in 2000, with chicken meat representing more than half the increase.

an increase of 20% over the past 20 years (289 million hectares in 2000).

+45%

2020

337 MILLION TONNES

Irrigation has been used for at least 4,000 years. Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Mongolia were some the ancient civilizations which used irrigation.

China (75 million hectares) and India (73 million hectares) have the largest equipped area for irrigation, far ahead of the United States of America (27 million hectares).

CHINA

75 million hectares

2000

233 MILLION TONNES

Egypt is the country with the highest portion of its productive land equipped for irrigation (98.9% in 2020).

INDIA

73 million hectares

more hectares of land in order to produce the amount of food we do now.

million

If we didn’t use irrigation, the UN estimates we would need 500

COULD YOU BE WISER WITH YOUR WATER?

WaterForce has the knowledge and technology that just might help you find those efficiency gains.

With more than 30 years of industry knowledge and technical expertise, our technicians have the experience it takes to identify the smallest of problems to avoid major breakdowns during the dry summer months.

maintenance. We supply only genuine parts and service, providing you with the peace of mind of knowing that your systems will continue to run in optimum condition, maximising their lifespan.

WaterForce has the toolkit and the expertise to help you find good efficiencies in water use.

Our technicians will tailor a seasonal servicing package to suit your business and equipment; from a 50-point warrant of fitness check through to comprehensive mechanical servicing, lubrication, electrical and structural

Talk to our team today about the latest water-saving technologies, and how we can help future-proof your business against the uncertainties of water.