Gorse

The thorny problem of gorse control

/in ,

By Jeanette Fitzsimons 

Most of New Zealand’s pastoral hill country is badly infested with gorse. Brought by early settlers from the British Isles to make living fences for stock, in our climate it quickly spread everywhere. A small plant left alone can be a large bush in a year and a few of them can cover a paddock in five years. 

It’s not a problem in a market garden or home garden or a cultivated field, where it is simply removed like any other weed. It is manageable in an orchard where the shading helps limit its growth. But in a field of grass it goes rampant.  

In an area you are wanting to regenerate with native forest it is positively helpful, adding nitrogen to the soil, shelter and mulch for emerging seedlings, and eventually being shaded out by the growing trees. That’s what we are doing on the 80% of our land that is too steep to farm sustainably. But having given up production on 80%, we want to grow some food on the rest. 

Experts differ on whether the seed lasts in the ground for 50 years or 200 but I do know that we won’t be rid of it in my lifetime or my children’s. And fire causes it to germinate vigorously.  

I have been given lots of advice over the years on what to do about gorse, most of it totally useless. The only useful suggestion was “if you want to be organic, don’t buy land with gorse on it”. Which does rather call into question our goal of New Zealand being totally organic by 2020!  

Some methods we have used include:

1. Chainsaw and fire 

Chainsawing down old man gorse gives wonderful firewood and the rest can be stacked and burned – preferably when there is no seed on it. The stumps will regrow – but if you need firewood it is quite a good way to initially clear the land (and maybe follow up with Interceptor, a herbicide based on pine oil).  

2. Big machinery 

A digger or bulldozer costs, but can rip bushes out by the roots and pile them for burning. It leaves a bit of a moonscape but doesn’t leave roots to grow back so you only have to deal with seedlings. 

3. Chemicals 

We had tried every non-toxic chemical on stumps before we came to Pakaraka Farm – salt, diesel, caustic soda – nothing worked. And you don’t want them in your soil anyway.  

Recently we have tried Interceptor – it’s restricted if your farm is certified organic but permission can be given – to spray on regrowing stumps. Saturate the green shoots when they are about 100–150 mm long and the shoots die. (It kills everything so be careful.) If you can remember to revisit the stumps at the right time, put another application on young shoots each time they reappear and after 3–4 applications the root gives up.  

On new land with bad gorse I would recommend cut-and-burn if it is big, then spot-spray a commercial herbicide once on sprouting roots and seedlings to get a really good kill. We agonised over which chemical and opted for metsulphuron which isn’t on any of the lists of things to ban, and doesn’t have a withholding period, but of course still doesn’t comply with organic standards. We took the animals out for about three weeks. This will delay your certification process by a year but give you an easier starting point and you can try to control the seedlings that emerge with grubbing. 

 4. Animals and other living predators 

Yes, goats will eat gorse – when they have eaten everything else in sight (especially all your young trees) and are half starved. Sheep will also nibble the shoots but don’t do much damage. I’ve seen quite effective gorse control on an organic farm in South Otago by electric fencing goats intensively when snow is on the ground. You have to be prepared to sacrifice about 10% of them, and not use does in kid. You will still get seedlings germinating. 

There are various weevils, mites and other insects being tried by regional councils. They do weaken the gorse but don’t kill it, and sometimes they actually encourage seed spread. 

 5. Peasant technology – the grubber 

Most of our gorse control has been done by old-fashioned hard work – grubbing. You need to get the thick part at the top of the root out, but the thin long tail won’t regrow. Keep an eye on your wwoofers, as chopping the plants off at ground level makes them twice as vigorous next year. If you do this every year without fail to all the seedlings you will make real progress. When the plants are small and the ground wet it is possible to pull them up by the whole root, which is immensely satisfying. 

 6. Advanced peasant technology – the Extractigator 

Where this article has been heading is to introduce a new tool which makes grubbing much easier. It’s Canadian, made in strong steel and comes in two sizes which are identical except for the length of the handle, and therefore the weight you have to carry around. We have bought two so two people can work together, the stronger person taking the heavier one and tackling the larger bushes.  

With the jaws, grasp the gorse stem just where it comes out of the ground. Then you lever against a plate on the ground and with luck the whole plant pops out. We find you need wet ground – no point in tackling it in a drought. (Other soils may be different.)  

Provided the plant has a single stem that allows you to grip it before it branches, you can lever out quite large bushes. The jaws will grab a stem up to 50 mm through, though it isn’t guaranteed to come out without breaking. Sprawling bushes with several stems that run horizontally along the ground are much harder and you need to take a grubber with you and grub around them to get purchase with the jaws.  

After a while you get the feel of whether it is going to pull or break. Give it time to let go. It takes a bit of practice and I still need more of that. But I think it is a worthwhile improvement on standard peasant technology.  

It also works well to remove other weeds such as woolly nightshade, barberry, privet and broom. 

You can see it in use and New Zealand prices at www.extractigator.co.nz. 

 

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Gorse_25.jpg.webp
Gorse (Ulex europaeus) is a perennial problem for pastoral farmers up and down the country. Photo: jopelka/iStock 

 

As well as being a farmer, Jeanette Fitzsimons was the co-leader of the Green Party and patron of Soil & Health. Sadly, she passed away in March 2020.

Jenny Lux Soil and Health Assn

Organic regenerative farming needed to reduce climate change, not GE

/in , ,

New Zealand doesn’t need a loosening of GE regulation to combat climate change, it needs significant investment in organic, regenerative agriculture, says the Soil & Health Association.

Parliament recently passed the Organic Products and Production Act, with cross-party support. This should be a springboard to revolutionise our farming and exports, but making it easier to release GMOs into the environment will jeopardise that.

“By being GE-free, we’re far from ‘missing out.’ Being GE-free gives us a point of difference in the world market,” says Jenny Lux, Chair of Soil & Health.

“We already have an advantage in being an island nation in the South Pacific, and need to be really careful about any uncontrolled releases of GMOs into the outdoors. Our products are attractive to overseas buyers because they’re seen as clean, safe, natural and uncontaminated. Once we release GMOs there’s no containing them. We need to continue to safeguard our environment and our brand.”

Obvious agricultural solutions to lower greenhouse gas emissions, such as reducing or eliminating synthetic nitrogen fertilisers, have not been implemented at scale. Now there’s a renewed focus on gene technologies, which are attractive to corporates and researchers because they can be patented and commercialised.

But GE has not yet lived up to the hope or the hype. The $25 million dollar New Zealand GE ryegrass trials have not yet yielded more dry matter than traditionally bred rye grasses. These would be grown in monocultures, or with only one or two other species, which is not good for long term soil health.

“It’s already been demonstrated that diverse, mixed species pastures reduce ruminant methane emissions, and are more resilient to climate extremes,” says Jenny Lux.  “Organic regenerative farming methods are free for all farmers to adopt, and unsurprisingly, they’re not under any patents.”

Soil & Health urges all NZ political parties not to loosen regulations on GE in NZ, and instead to direct attention and funding towards expanding organic farming here. Organic regenerative farming sequesters more carbon in the soil, and uses fewer costly inputs, empowering farmers. “We need research centres dedicated to organic, regenerative agriculture and farmer extension programmes to build that knowledge in rural communities,” says Jenny Lux.

Soil & Health joins call for immediate action on farming emissions

/in , ,

The Soil & Health Association is joining other environmental groups calling for immediate action to tackle farming emissions. 

Consultation on the government’s draft Emissions Reduction Plan closes today and environmental groups are united in calling for stronger action.

“It’s unacceptable that agriculture, our largest emitting sector, is the least developed and most poorly explained aspect of the Emissions Reduction Plan,” says Jenny Lux, organic farmer and deputy chair of the Soil & Health Association. 

“Too much emphasis is put on finding new technologies. Let’s use the tools we already have. More can be done, and sooner, by supporting a faster transition to regenerative organic farming.

“The Emissions Reduction Plan needs to identify a pathway to transform agriculture, with clear direction and support for immediately available solutions like organics.

“Pricing farm emissions is the key government policy right now, and for this reason agriculture must enter the Emissions Trading Scheme from 2022.

“Limits on synthetic nitrogen and imported feed are also needed as signals that we need to change our farming systems.

“Ultimately the New Zealand Government must adopt a target for increasing regenerative organic production. 

“Organics have global recognition as a low-emission and environmentally friendly farming system. International markets are moving quickly to increase organic production to reduce emissions and because global consumers are voting with their wallets.”

Our submission on the Emissions Reduction Plan is available to read here:
https://soilandhealth.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Emissions-Reduction-Plan-submission-Soil-and-Health-November-2021.pdf

Bayer Fails to Overturn European Ban on Bee-Harming Pesticides

/in , , ,

The European Union’s highest court has rejected Bayer’s bid to overturn a European law which heavily restricted the use of bee-harming pesticides. In 2013 the European Union banned neonicotinoid, or ‘neonic’ use on bee-attractive crops. In 2018 the ban was extended to use on all outdoor crops, including annual arable crops, cereals and horticultural crops.

The General Court decision, released Thursday, is welcomed by the Soil & Health Association. This decision follows a prior bid by Bayer and Syngenta which had also failed to overturn the law.

The regulation relates to the ‘neonic’ insecticides clothianidin, thiamethoxam or imidacloprid; and applies to foliar sprays, soil treatments or seed treatments traditionally used in the growing period following winter.

Bayer’s appeal primarily argued that the European Union had not applied the precautionary principle properly and should have instead, engaged in a comprehensive risk assessment.

The precautionary principle is used when science has identified that an activity produces potentially dangerous effects, but where uncertainty remains about the extent of the risk.

The General Court of the European Union rejected Bayer’s argument, stating that an ‘exhaustive risk assessment cannot be required in a situation where the precautionary principle is applied, which equates to a situation in which there is scientific uncertainty’.

The Soil and Health spokesperson for pesticides, Jodie Bruning stated ‘This is an important finding. When we have technologies such as pesticides, interacting with environmental or human health, the decisions we take must very often be precautionary. Harm that results in death, or the dying out of a species often occurs as a result of multiple indirect effects. For honeybees, pesticides and environmental stressors interact. Over time this harm adds up to reduce resilience, causing honeybee deaths. 

‘The precautionary principle is important, because there is very rarely a single ‘smoking gun’ which can be traced and then blamed, for bee die-offs or colony collapse. We know that these insecticides last a long time in soil and water. We know they harm baby bee development, and impair flight as well as navigation. We can see that neonics reduce the capacity for bees to protect themselves from pathogenic viruses and the varroa mite.’

‘Recent testing shows we have concerningly high levels of neonics in New Zealand soils. We don’t have scientists paid long-term to research the health effects of neonics, so we don’t have scientists who can inform policy. Our farmers are buying unlabelled seeds, even for flowering clover. Farmers and orchardists do not know that the treatments they use are banned for outdoor use in the European Union.’

‘Because our scientists lack a mandate to research both human and environmental health effects, and the New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority relies on industry data to make safety claims, we have no authoritative expertise here. We are completely out of touch with best European practice.’

‘While the precautionary principle is only weakly applied in New Zealand, yet it has become a very important tool used by the European Union to protect environmental and human health.’

Concerns remain on improved Organic Products Bill 

/in , , ,

Concerns for the future of New Zealand’s domestic organic industry have dampened enthusiasm for the Organic Products Bill which returned from Select Committee with some significant and useful changes, says the Soil & Health Association.

“We represent the thousands of people buying, growing and selling organic products,” says Soil & Health’s general manager Pete Huggins.

“This bill will be a huge step forward for organics in New Zealand and it’s vital we get it right. Consumers, producers and retailers all want a robust system of organic verification that drives confidence and growth in organics.

“We don’t think the verification regime being imposed by MPI is the correct one. This was not the scheme we were consulted on and isn’t our preferred option. It poses risks around cost increases that the domestic industry will struggle to bear. We think MPI have misunderstood what is required here, and are failing to listen to feedback.

“We know the whole organic sector is committed to working with the government to make this Bill the best it can be. At the moment our main concern is to nurture and enhance the domestic industry under this new regime. It would be a tragedy if the incoming regulation hampered efforts to grow food more sustainably.

“Organics is booming internationally, and our export sector should thrive under this new system. But we need to see assurances that the domestic industry will be supported and not undermined through increased cost and bureaucracy.

“The Select Commitee has already improved the bill significantly and we look forward to engaging with the government further.”

Climate advice means government should support transition to organic, regenerative farming

/in , , , ,

Today’s Climate Commission advice shows we need a transition from synthetic fertilisers and other harmful practices towards organic and regenerative agriculture, said Soil & Health Association spokesperson Jenny Lux today.

“Organic regenerative farming is a huge opportunity for New Zealand, both economically and environmentally. Early movers have shown that we can make that shift rapidly. With government help the transition to producing high quality, high value food within planetary limits is achievable for most NZ farms.

“We’d like to see funding and other support for farmers to start shifting to lower emissions agriculture now.

“The Climate Commission says we can tackle agricultural emissions with the technology we already have. This includes organic and regenerative practices like phasing out synthetic fertilisers, reducing tillage, and intensifying cover cropping to build soil health and promote biodiversity.

“Healthy agricultural soils sequester carbon. The government could drive this change with a policy to support farmers with technical knowledge and the costs of transition.

“Money in this year’s budget would be good.”

Green Party organics policy adds vital ingredient to national debate on the environment

/in , , , ,

“It’s encouraging to see the Green Party reinforce their commitment to organic agriculture from their position in government,” says Jenny Lux, spokesperson for the Soil & Health Association, New Zealand’s largest organic membership organisation.

“We’d like to see all political parties exploring the opportunities regenerative organic agriculture offers in terms of environmental protection, healthy food, and resilient communities.

“We think the Green Party’s policy of creating a New Zealand sustainable food certification could finally help us meet our ‘100% Pure’ aspiration as a nation.

“However, a national accreditation would only work if it was based on measuring outcomes and met the standards for regenerative organic agriculture already recognised worldwide

“We also welcome the policy of capital investment and other support for growers wanting to transition to regenerative organic. The setup costs are often a major barrier to changing farming systems.

“Organics already earns export dollars at the same time as contributing to our Zero Carbon Act goals. Providing government funding for the organic industry and boosting funding for organic research and development is key to the future of this booming sector.

“At a time when people – consumers and growers alike – are increasingly concerned about health and environmental protection, it makes sense to be investing this way.”

Let’s go organic, Jacinda!

/in , , ,

26 September 2019

The Soil & Health Association is calling on the government to make good Jacinda Ardern’s statement to the United Nations that New Zealand is ‘determined to show that we can be the most sustainable food producers in the world’.

‘Tomorrow school children will lead the School Strike for Climate and we need to give them hope for their future’ said Marion Wood, Chair of Soil & Health. ‘Healthy, living soil is potentially the most important carbon sink our planet has. So we have to take action now to sequester the excess carbon from the air into soil and biomass. Organic and regenerative production methods, which maximise the build up of soil organic matter, are key to sequestering atmospheric carbon and keeping global warming within 1.5ºC.’

The Soil & Health Association points out that New Zealand has followed an intensive, industrial model of farming. This has resulted in a 16% increase in emissions between 1990 and 2015, largely due to an 88.5% increase in the national dairy herd and an approximately 500% increase in nitrogen-containing fertiliser.

As a result we are now reaching critical environmental limits, both in greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss. Yet we have within our grasp a globally recognised system that can enable us to move towards carbon neutrality and provide resilience in the face of extreme weather conditions like drought – certified organic farming.

And all over the world consumers are demanding more evidence of ethical production and environmental effects of farming, so there is a ready market for certified organic produce that is genuinely 100% pure.

‘Let’s march tomorrow in support of our children’, says Marion Wood. ‘And then let’s take action to make Aotearoa the most sustainable organic regenerative farming system in the world. Let’s give our children hope’

Marion Wood
National Council, Soil & Health Association
022 032 7122

Law change can support organic dairy and revitalise waterways

/in , ,

Soil & Health want Fonterra to collect all certified and in transition to organic Fonterra milk and to pay a premium for it, irrespective of locality.

“We want to see the Government better commit to organic dairy production and therefore more sustainable farming practices,” says Soil & Health National Council member and former Green Party MP, Steffan Browning.

“We consider that a shift towards organic farming practices is needed to protect and enhance our environment and our economy.”

The Ministry for Primary Industries is undertaking a comprehensive review of the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act which includes looking at incentives or disincentives for the dairy industry to transition to higher-value dairy production and processing that global consumers seek for a premium, and more sustainable environmental practices on and off-farm.

Milking Shorthorn calf with Jersey mum in background. Photo: Laura Beck

Soil & Health has submitted to the MPI review.

There is growing public concern about the environmental impacts from intensive dairy farming, especially in relation to water quality and human health. Certified organic dairy farming however prohibits the use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, has lower stock numbers, more biodiversity, higher animal health outcomes, grass-fed cows with no GE feed or palm kernel supplements, and is generally less intensive than conventional dairy farming.

Consumers worldwide are demanding safe, healthy and more environmentally friendly food, and are prepared to pay

for high quality, GE-free, organic dairy products. The 2018 OANZ Organic Market report found that the global organic dairy market is currently estimated to be worth about US$17b. By 2022 the sector is projected to be worth US$25b, the value of organic milk powder being an important contributor.

To meet the demand, Soil & Health says that government intervention is required to incentivize more organic dairy farming.

“Overall there has been limited encouragement for new organic transitions,” says Browning.

“To help farmers make the transition to organics, we would like to see the legislation require that Fonterra collect all certified organic and in transition to certified organic milk and pay a premium above the annual farm gate price for it, irrespective of location or availability of processing capacity.”

ENDS

 

Media contact

Steffan Browning

Soil & Health National Councillor

021804223

A win for clean, green, GE-free New Zealand

/in ,

The Soil & Health Association is celebrating the decision by Federated Farmers to abandon its appeal against the right of councils to control the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their territories. Federated Farmers filed its latest appeal earlier this year in the Court of Appeal, after its appeals to the Environment Court and High Court had been dismissed.

“We congratulate Federated Farmers on this pragmatic and sensible decision,” said Soil & Health Chair Graham Clarke.

“Both the High Court and Environment Court have ruled that regional councils have jurisdiction under the Resource Management Act (RMA) to regulate the use of GMOs through regional policy statements or plans. The recent RMA amendments further entrench the legal rights of councils to do so. Challenging these decisions would only have cost us, the other parties involved and Federated Farmers themselves a lot of unnecessary time and money.”

Federated Farmers had argued that the Environmental Protection Authority had sole responsibility for the regulation of GMOs under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO).

The decision to withdraw its appeal comes after recent amendments were made to the RMA, which confirmed the High Court ruling, leading Federated Farmers to believe that they “are likely to have materially reduced the prospects of the appeal being prosecuted successfully.”

The RMA changes, which passed in April this year via the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill, included a controversial section which allows the Minister for the Environment to bypass parliament and make fundamental changes to the law if it is deemed that council plans duplicate or deal with the same subject matter as central Government laws. This would have allowed the Minister to strip councils of their ability to create GE-free food producing zones.

The National Government at the time needed the Maori Party votes to pass the changes. However, the Maori Party stated in December last year that it would not support changes to the RMA if they extended to allowing the Minister to overrule planning provisions controlling the use of GMOs.

Before the final reading of the Bill, an exemption was introduced under section 360D specifically for GE crops, effectively preventing the minister from permitting GMO crops in regions that had elected to remain GMO free or impose controls on the use of GMOs.

“We are so grateful to Maori Party for their determination to ensure that appropriate clauses in the RMA were included to protect regions from uncontrolled GMO use. Had they not stood firm against the changes, then we might not have had this decision from Federated Farmers to withdraw their appeal,” says Soil & Health National Council member Marion Thomson.

“The RMA amendment further confirms the ability of all local councils to determine GMO policies in their regions. Local communities can now have confidence that their values and concerns about the use of GMOs in their regions can be considered when drafting policy statements and plans.” says Thomson.

The economic sustainability of a wide range of agricultural export activities reliant on GMO-free status is also protected by this ruling. The global non-GMO food market is currently valued at US$250 billion, and trends show this is only going to grow. New Zealand producers benefit from access to this huge non-GMO market.

Soil & Health has found no economic, health or environmental case for GMOs. There are huge uncertainties around the adverse effects of GMOs on natural resources and ecosystems. The risks are large and consequences irreversible. If GMOs were to be released into the environment, they would be very difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate in circumstances where they adversely affected the environment. There is also potential for serious economic loss to regions marketing their products and tourism under New Zealand’s ‘clean green’ brand, if GMO land use were permitted.

Background:

Significant gaps exist in the law around GMOs in New Zealand. In the HSNO Act there are inadequate liability provisions (e.g. ‘polluter pays’) for any unintended or unforseen adverse impacts resulting from the outdoor release of an approved GE crop or animal, meaning those causing harm may not be held liable. There is no mandatory requirement for the EPA to take a precautionary approach to the outdoor use of GMOs.

Due to these gaps in the law, a number of councils around New Zealand have been moving to protect their primary producers and communities by introducing precautionary or prohibitive policies.

The Northland Regional Council is one such council which, after receiving hundreds of submissions from Northland ratepayers, district councils, Northland Conservation Board, iwi authorities, hapū and community groups, chose to adopt a precautionary approach around the outdoor release of GMOs in the proposed Northland Regional Policy Statement.

Federated Farmers of New Zealand lodged an appeal with the Environment Court in 2015 opposing these precautionary GMO provisions in the Northland Regional Policy statement. Principal Environment Court Judge L. Newhook however found that there is jurisdiction under the Resource Management Act for regional councils to make provision for the outdoor use of GMOs through regional policy statements and plans. Since comprehensively losing the appeal (which it initiated) on all points of law, Federated Farmers filed a second appeal against the Environment Court’s decision with the High Court.

Soil & Health, GE Free Northland, Taitokerau mana whenua, Far North District Council and several other groups and individuals joined the appeal in the High Court as section 274 (interested) parties pursuant to the RMA, in support of respondents Northland Regional Council and Whangarei District Council. Soil & Health was represented by Dr. Royden Somerville QC and Robert Makgill.

Dr Somerville argued that Environment Court Judge L. Newhook was correct in his decision that the RMA and HSNO Act hold complementary and not overlapping roles. The two Acts offer different purposes and functional responses to the regulation of GMOs in New Zealand. Thus, regional planning documents can control the use of GMOs as part of promoting sustainable management under the RMA, taking account of regional needs. This argument has been confirmed by High Court Judge Mary Peters.

Contact: Graham Clarke
Chair, Soil & Health Association
027 226 3103