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.”

Kiwis exposed to health risks from weedkiller

/in ,

The Soil & Health Association has welcomed Bayer’s announcement of US$10 billion in payouts to tens of thousands of claimants in the US who allege exposure to Roundup herbicide caused their cancer.

“But here in New Zealand, we have an untenable situation where glyphosate-based herbicides are sprayed broadly in urban environments, and on human food and animal feed crops,” said Soil & Health Association spokesperson Jodie Bruning.

In 2018 Soil & Health applauded Christchurch City Council for its decision to stop glyphosate use in public spaces, but now the Association is concerned that the Council is considering a possible reversal of that decision for budgetary reasons, and may choose to rely on the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for a glyphosate safety tick.

However, an Official Information Act request revealed that the EPA has never conducted a risk assessment of glyphosate, nor the more toxic formulations used in New Zealand.

“For the most commonly used herbicide in New Zealand, this is really quite astonishing. We have no idea how it persists in our own environment. As a result, much of the scientific data cited by the public in presentations to councils has simply never been considered by our hazardous chemicals regulator,” Jodie Bruning said.

Soil & Health is concerned with uncontrollable public exposure and the risk farmers, council applicators and contractors face.

“The public cannot avoid urban sprays. We don’t know how long glyphosate lasts, because there is no testing in the streets where our kids walk to school.

“The lack of EPA stewardship leaves regional and local councils divided. On one hand, they defer to the EPA’s claim that glyphosate is ‘considered safe’ when managed appropriately. On the other hand, they are hearing from a well-informed public about all the data the EPA has never considered, because it continues to rely on reauthorisations containing data selected and supplied by the chemical industry.

“It’s time this biased approach to chemical regulation was put to bed, and the EPA realised that weak regulations only serve the industry that they’re supposed to be regulating.

While calling for the use of glyphosate to be banned from public places, Soil & Health acknowledges the difficulty for farmers shifting away from using glyphosate to prepare paddocks prior to planting.

“Certified organic farmers successfully farm without glyphosate, and Soil & Health calls for more funding into research, education and farmer extension to expand the use of safe, herbicide-free organic methods of farming,” said Bruning.

The organic community mourns Jeanette Fitzsimons

/in ,

6 March 2020

The Soil & Health Association expresses deep condolences to the family
and friends of Jeanette Fitzsimons. Among Jeanette’s many roles, she was
a patron of Soil & Health for several years.

“Jeanette gave wise counsel and was a champion for the organic cause,”
said Marion Wood, chair of Soil & Health. “She lived her values by
farming organically with her husband Harry Parke.”

Over the years Jeanette and Harry hosted hundreds volunteers on the farm
through the WWOOF scheme, including Organic NZ editor Philippa Jamieson.

Ever practical, Jeanette also wrote articles for Organic NZ including
one on gorse control, and letters to the editor.

Soil & Health and the Organic NZ team are thinking of Harry and family
at this sad time.

Media contact: Philippa Jamieson, editor, Organic NZ, 027 547 3929

Omissions on Emissions: Polluting chemicals left out of government’s freshwater policy

/in ,

30 October 2019

The Soil and Health Association and Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility claim that environmental chemicals and heavy metals have been left outside the scope of the freshwater policy process.

The claim is made in a hard-hitting paper in response to the Ministry for the Environment Action for healthy waterways discussion document. The two organisations have secured support from a wide range of NGOs and private organisations.

‘If National Environment Standards (NES) are to ensure freshwater is safe and healthy, then pollution from ongoing industrial, agricultural and urban diffuse chemical emissions must be monitored and controlled at a national level’ states Jodie Bruning, Soil and Health spokesperson. ‘Yet relevant experts in chemical toxicology, endocrinology and environmental chemistry do not appear to have been consulted and this is a major concern. ‘Recent studies show we have chemical mixtures in our rivers. Many of these chemicals are banned in Europe and the OECD has drawn attention to our degraded environment, and our threatened freshwater species. They state that diffuse pollution is an international problem. This problem is not going away – the UN has stated ‘Urgent action is needed to tackle chemical pollution as global production is set to double by 2030’’.

Photo: iStock/KiraVolkov

The groups contend it is unscientific to pretend that New Zealand’s pollution problem is limited to nutrients, sediment and bacteria, and that such a position only advantages polluting activities. The paper refers to substantial scientific literature showing that chemical mixtures, at levels considered by regulators to be unsafe, are increasingly shown to be harmful to human and environmental health. The paper recommends a suite of practical measures to adopt standards based on best international practice.

‘The OECD advises monitoring of diffuse chemicals to be the first step in understanding diffuse pollution.’ said Jodie Bruning. ‘The National Environment Standards can pivot to not only incorporate single attribute standards, but include tests that screen for multiple chemicals from one water sample, and ensure these tests are transparently published and accessible to civil society.’

‘Many national environmental limits for chemicals are already in place, but rely on older approvals. With chemical production doubling and knowledge on harm from hormone hacking exposures increasing, the NZ Environmental Protection Agency already struggles to regulate toxic chemicals adequately. New Zealand’s hazardous substances legislation is outdated, chemical reassessments are few and far between and they lean heavily on chemical industry data.’

‘We recommend Aotearoa New Zealand adopts European standards and guidelines to manage and control toxic chemicals and protect our freshwater and food as they are more advanced at protecting public and environmental health. Farmers can be supported in this transition which also includes corresponding benefits that mitigate greenhouse gases.

‘The reforms suggested in the paper are science-based and recommended at an international level. Our current freshwater processes cannot protect freshwater for food-gathering, nor can we assure visiting tourists that our rivers are safe and healthy, nor can we protect our water sources for irrigation and food production.

The National Environment Standards for freshwater are only part way through – civil society looks forward to the next iteration.’ said Ms Bruning.

For further information please see the below link:

www.psgr.org.nz/fw

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

GE-free Tasmania a shining example for NZ

/in ,

09 August 2019

The Soil & Health Association congratulates the Tasmanian government for extending its ban on genetically engineered organisms for another 10 years, until 2029.
“Tasmanian producers see clear benefits of being GE-free, enjoying a good reputation and access to markets,” said Jodie Bruning, Councillor for Soil & Health.

“We urge the New Zealand government to also implement a ban on the outdoor use of GE, to strengthen our clean and green brand.”

“People here and worldwide are demanding safe, healthy, ethical, GE-free and organic food. We can produce this and benefit economically, environmentally and, socially.”
GE-free organic production will help build healthy soils, and clean up waterways, and it is part of the solution to climate change, according to Soil & Health.

Many local authorities and primary producers around Aotearoa New Zealand recognise the benefits of a GE-free status, and several councils have either outdoor GE bans or precautionary policies.

New Zealand and Tasmania both have the advantage of sea borders which can help us remain GE-free in the environment.

The GE ban in Tasmania has been widely supported, including by primary producers such as orchardists, pastoral farmers and beekeepers.

[ENDS]

MEDIA CONTACT:

Jodie Bruning
National Council, Soil & Health Association
027 505 0808
jodie@organicnz.org.nz

Jodie Bruning
Jodie Bruning

Worried about ‘free-range’ chickens? Choose organic!

/in , , ,

“The only way to ensure that the chickens you are eating are genuinely free range is to choose organic,” says Marion Wood, co-chair of the Soil & Health Association. “And what better time to start than during Organic Week which is right now.”

She points out that there is no enforceable industry standard for free-range farming. Farms are regularly audited by the Ministry of Primary Industries for food safety standards, but these standards do not relate to auditing free-range farming practices.

“What this means is that the scope of a ‘free-range’ label on your chickens is actually very wide. People think of happy chickens wandering in a field, but the reality is that the label ‘free range’ can be used by farms that confine their hens to small spaces or subject them to overcrowding. In 2014, it came to light that a farmer had been selling cage eggs as ‘free range’ for over two years – something that slipped under the radar because there was no authority checking such claims.”

But if you choose certified organic chickens, says Soil & Health, you know that the hens are looked after and their quality of life guaranteed because the farms are audited every year.

To get BioGro certification, farms must not have more than 10 hens per square metre in fixed housing or 16 per square metre in mobile sheds. Hens must have unrestricted access to outside runs and access to fresh grass or a forage crop containing a diversity of species.  Other organic standards are similar.

Marion Wood suggests everyone makes the change in Organic Week.

“Organic food is grown naturally without the routine use of synthetic pesticides or fertilisers. Certified organic chickens are healthy chickens with a good quality of life – something that the label ‘free-range’ alone doesn’t guarantee.”

 

ENDS

 

Contact: Marion Wood, 022 032 7122

Photo: iStock/Fotokon

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

Where’s our food from? Better labelling a step forward

/in ,

The blindfold will finally be lifted when it comes to buying food, but the Soil & Health Association says consumers need even greater transparency.

Soil & Health welcomes the passing into law of the Consumers’ Right to Know (Country of Origin of Food) Bill. The Bill, which requires food to carry country of origin labelling, passed with near unanimous support last night in Parliament. While footwear and clothing must be identified where they’re from, until now country of origin of food labelling has only been voluntary in New Zealand.

The Bill was a first introduced in 2016 by former MP, and now Soil & Health National Council member, Steffan Browning, as a Green Party Member’s bill.

“Transparent food labelling is fundamental in allowing people to make informed choices. Mandatory country of origin labelling is a step towards allowing consumers to do this,” says Steffan Browning.

The Bill however only applies to single ingredient foods such as fresh fruit, meat, fish and vegetables and Soil & Health says foods of multiple origins should be labelled too. This requirement could be brought in later through the setting of Fair Trading Act regulations.

“The Bill is a building block to more comprehensive food labelling requirements,” says Browning.

Soil & Health is also concerned that several single origin foods have been excluded from the Bill, including flour, oils, nuts and seeds.

“We particularly want flours and grains included, as most of the soy and maize products from the US are genetically modified. It’s absolutely necessary we have GE food labelling, but in that absence of enforcement we should at the very least be able to choose what country maize and soy products are from,” says Browning.

There has been widespread support for country of origin labelling. A survey conducted last year by Consumer NZ and Horticulture NZ found that 71% of Kiwis want mandatory country of origin labelling and 65% said they looked for country of origin labelling when they were shopping.

“There are many reasons why consumers want to know which country their food comes from. Some want to avoid GE food, food with pesticide residues, or food coming from countries with poor labour conditions or environmental and animal welfare standards,” says Browning.

Soil & Health has been campaigning for mandatory country of origin labelling for over a decade, since the government opted out of joining Australia in mandating country of origin labelling under the Food Standards Code on the grounds it would be an impediment to trade.

[ENDS]

Media contact:

Steffan Browning

021804223

EPA must reassess glyphosate and neonics

/in

Wednesday 17 October 2018

PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

The Soil & Health Association is calling for an enquiry into the independence of New Zealand’s Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), following the EPA’s announcement of priority chemical reassessments for possible bans or new controls.

“While Soil & Health welcomes the reassessment list, there is a glaring omission of two notable harmful chemicals. We want them added to the list, and we want an inquiry into the processes and decision-making that has led to this,” says Soil & Health co-chair Bailey Peryman.

The chemicals that should be on the list for reassessment are:

  1. glyphosate, a probable carcinogen and the most commonly used herbicide in New Zealand and worldwide, and
  2. neonicotinoid insecticides, which are known to be toxic to bees.

Both are heavily used in New Zealand, meaning most people have some exposure to them.

“The EPA must add them to the list and urgently conduct robust independent reassessments of them.”

“To give the community trust in the regulatory system, Soil & Health calls on the EPA to adopt a precautionary and proactive approach around glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup, instead of its apparent economics-first approach that favours the agrichemical industry over the environment and people’s health.”

“For true environmental protection, the EPA should follow the EU Commission recommendations, which are to minimise glyphosate use in public places such as parks, playgrounds and gardens, and to scrutinise its use as a pre-harvest spray on a number of crops.”

“Christchurch City Council has shown that a transition to glyphosate-free public spaces is possible, and in New Zealand and internationally, organic farmers successfully manage crops without the need for glyphosate herbicides or the bee-killing neonicotinoids, improving environmental, worker, and food safety outcomes.”

“Consumers’ interest in food grown free from synthetic pesticides is rapidly growing both here in Aotearoa and internationally.”

 

Media contact:

Bailey Peryman

021 122 7638

 

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

 

In March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) issued a report labelling glyphosate a “probable carcinogen”. Europe has since come out strongly against the use of both glyphosate and neonicotinoids. Recently in a landmark court case in the US, Monsanto was found to be misleading consumers about the safety of its flagship product, Roundup – the primary ingredient of which is glyphosate.

Following the IARC finding, the NZ EPA and the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), contrary to a Ministry of Health recommendation not to, did a poor review of that finding, essentially using flawed science guidelines and data provided by industry. Some industry-supplied glyphosate research has been shown to be ghost-written by Monsanto.

“In Australia, following a Four Corners TV showing of the Poison Papers last week, exposing how Monsanto influences regulators, the Federal Opposition there is calling for an inquiry into the funding and independence of its APVMA (Agricultural Products Veterinary Medicines Authority), the equivalent of New Zealand’s MPI agrichemical products arm and our EPA.”

New Zealand regulators need to be investigated for the same reasons, according to Soil & Health.

Using its new Flexible Reassessment Categorisation Screening Tool (FRCaST), theoretically based on risk to people and the environment, the EPA said it would prioritise 40 chemicals from an initial list of more than 700, most of them used in agriculture although some are also used around the home. However, questions of the effectiveness of the screening tool FRCaST also need to be asked.

“The two international regulatory bodies chosen by the NZ EPA to peer review FRCaST were the National Industrial Chemicals Notifications and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS) in Australia and Health Canada (HC) / Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) which also saw limitations in the EPA approach and sought for New Zealand to have greater alignment with Australia and Canada, neither great examples of the precautionary approach.”

“The NZ EPA has generally used the US EPA and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for risk assessment guidance. They all have been heavily influenced by the agrichemical industry. EFSA, following significant criticism, has since been actively improving its independence and transparency, reducing their exposure to industry.”

Soil & Health believes that neonicotinoids and glyphosate should be phased out quickly.