EcoLincNZ

Category: water quality

  • Why don’t restored streams bounce back?

    In New Zealand, many would agree that fresh water is one of our most loved natural resources. We drink it, we swim in it, we use it to farm and to make a living, we even use it to generate our power! Unfortunately, especially in Canterbury after some major earthquakes, many of our streams and rivers are struggling. They look something like this:

    Kowhai River, Kaikōura. From Environment Canterbury, ND.

    In stream restoration, we want to return the features of a stream back to their original state, before things like urban development or introduced species affected the quality. This includes adding native plants, allowing fish to make their way out to sea or further upstream, and making sure farm animals can’t walk straight into the stream. All of these things and more can help us to make healthier waterways.

    It does not always go to plan, with some hardy introduced species putting a spanner in the works and refusing to co-operate with careful scientific methods. Imagine a beautiful stream that’s been through tough times—pollution, habitat destruction, earthquakes you name it. People step in – scientists, council members, developers, maybe the general public, and they work hard to restore it, but here’s the kicker: sometimes, things just don’t bounce back like they should. Why? That’s exactly what a recent study by Issie Barrett and her team set out to uncover.

    To understand why streams struggle to recover even after the most thorough restoration efforts, we need to understand a few key factors.

    1. Species Interactions: In a healthy stream, different plants and animals interact in specific ways, such as some animals eating others or different plants competing for space. When a stream is damaged and then restored, these interactions might not work the same way anymore. This can make it harder for the original species to come back and thrive.

    A particular species of snail, the New Zealand mud snail (P. antipodarum) is particularly good at living in these degraded streams, they thrive under pressure and limited food sources. These snails are perfect species to take over a degraded environment and reduce the recovery ability! So even when original species are introduced, such as the mayfly, the same food source now has double the competition, meaning a negative reaction – that habitat can’t provide that much food even in a restored state.

    New Zealand mud snail Potamopyrgus antipodarum. Photo Credit Michal Maňas 2014

    2. Negative Resistance: This is a big concept, which in essence means that even when the physical conditions of a stream improve (like cleaning up pollution or adding new habitats), the plants and animals in the stream don’t always come back as quickly or fully as hoped.

    During the stream’s degradation years, new species like the mud snails might move in – kind of like uninvited guests crashing a party. Even after things are cleaned up, these newbies can stick around and hog resources, making it harder for the original gang to make a comeback. This is what they call “negative resistance.” This can happen because the habitat is too degraded for the ideal species to thrive even if they did before.

    3. Resilience Mechanisms: This means the ability of a system to absorb and adapt to change, ultimately returning to the restored ideal. This is where our negative resistance comes into play. If the species or the system is already not functioning as it should, we are going to have a hard time creating a resilient system that can adapt to a changing environment and overcome any future issues.

    For example, a high level of nitrogen could change the make-up of the riverbed so drastically that a species sensitive to nitrates may never repopulate that system. Understanding the relationship between negative resistance and resilience is important for predicting and enhancing any successful restoration efforts.

    What can we do?

    Look at the Big Picture: When restoring a stream, it’s not just about fixing what we can see. We need to think about how all the different plants and animals interact with each other. This includes what nutrients are in the water and what microscopic invertebrates might be living in that water.

    Keep Checking In: It’s important to keep watching restored streams over time to make sure they’re getting better and to fix any problems that come up. If we don’t see an improvement in 5 or 10 years, there must be something else we can do.

    Be Flexible: Sometimes, we might need to change our restoration plans based on what we learn from watching how the stream responds. As scientists we have to be okay with admitting our first idea didn’t work, and then be willing to help come up with a better solution for the future.

    Vegetated drain in Canterbury with optimum riparian planting. Photo credit Jon Sullivan, ND.

    Why it matters

    Overall, there are some pretty complex systems that are at play in stream restoration projects. It is not as simple as putting in some better plants and some bigger, cooler rocks and hoping it will all work out in 10 years. By paying attention to how plants, animals, and the environment all work together, perhaps we can work towards a deeper understanding of the best ways to help our New Zealand streams thrive for many more generations to come.

    I think it would be pretty cool to keep swimming in our rivers and looking for fish in the summer, but next time you go to your local river, have a look and see what plants and other animals would really love to keep living there too.

    This article was prepared by Postgraduate Diploma in Environmental Management student Tayla Cross as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

  • Sounds idyllic

    As a kid I explored the waters of the Marlborough Sounds. I caught my first fish there at seven years old and, one New Year’s day, my biggest snapper weighing about 25 pounds. I have been awed by watching fish and bird feeding frenzies- the food chain in practice. I learnt to dive off boats in emerald waters and spent many evenings watching the sunset and roasting s’mores at an isolated and tranquil DOC campsite. A place we call our “bach”.

    But I have never seen a Southern Right Whale, nor an Elephant Seal, or a Waitaha Penguin, in the Marlborough Sounds. Prior to my childhood it was a different Marlborough Sounds. Stephen Urlich and Sean Handley delve into the historical changes of this beautiful location, exploring how food webs have been disrupted since human settlement. The aim of the study was to address knowledge gaps by taking an integrated approach to examining how land use has impacted on coastal ecosystems.

    Stephen and Sean focused on keystone species. They traced the history of whaling in Port Underwood, within the Sounds. When John Guard’s first whaling ship entered the harbour in 1828, whales were abundant. Sadly, by 1836, there were 18 vessels sending out 70 whaling boats to chase these majestic creatures. Whaling led to a significant transformation of the Sounds’ ecosystem.

    Image by Author- Out in the Sounds

    Keystone species, like the Southern Right Whale, play a crucial role in transferring energy within the coastal food web. Their role as ecosystem engineers, essential for habitat formation, was lost by human greed. Sadly, as the authors remind us, the Southern Right Whale was not the first animal hunted by humans in the Sounds. During Maori colonisation, the Elephant Seal, New Zealand Fur Seal, New Zealand Sea Lion, and Waitaha Penguin were all harvested. Hunting led to the decline of the Fur Seal population and the local extinction of the Sea Lion, Elephant Seal, and the Waitaha Penguin.

    What is happening to our waterways? Who is responsible for the ongoing transformation of precious natural environments? Us. Once the habitats of the Marlborough Sounds flourished. The study highlights that in the past, there were various subtidal habitats formed by species such as giant kelp forests, as well as communities of hydroids and sponges. As early as 1863 there was dredging for oysters in the Tory Channel and trawling began in 1904. Both of these disturbed the habitat and permanently changed the landscape. Since the 1970s, commercial enterprises of dredging for subtidal green-lipped mussels has been destroying these habitats.

    The destruction has continued into my lifetime. For example, in the dramatic 2021 floods , my friends bach slid down a hill. A shocking destruction of a home filled with memories. But the hidden impact of mud slides is far more devastating. Mudslides cause excessive amounts of brown sediment to be displaced from the land, settling in the Sounds and leading to extensive physical disturbance to vulnerable habitats.

    Image by Author- Commercial Mussels Farms

    But why so brown? Once Europeans arrived the Sounds continued to change. By the 1970s pine plantations had become widespread and clear felling had begun. Harvested and existing forest makes up about 18% of the land surface in the Marlborough Sounds but contributes to around 65% of landslides in 2021 and 2022 (Hart, 2023). Over the last 50 years sediment accumulation rates skyrocketed and continue to remain elevated. This is seen clearly in the Havelock estuary, which increased soft mud habitat by 34 ha from 2001 to 2014. Steep indigenous forested areas also receive this rainfall but are unrepresented in the slip data.

    The idea of ecosystem-based management (EBM) is also promoted by Urlich and Handley as a way of improving the catchment management. The suggested aim for Marlborough Sounds would be to restore ecological functions so that biodiversity can be maintained. Marine protection is an important part of EBM in New Zealand. It helps to protect remaining high quality habitat and can help with the recovery of more diverse habitats. With proper management maybe one day we will be able to see the return of more mussel beds and marine mammals.

    Is New Zealand really ‘Clean and Green’? Maybe on the surface. But what is happening to habitats in places like the tranquil depths of the Marlborough Sounds? The factors impacting marine habitats are often not well understood. Urlich and Handley suggest that the Marlborough Sounds could rather be referred to ‘brown and down’. This is partially due to the fragmented nature of marine management, where various institutions operate at different scales under diverse legislation.

    Image by Author – My campsite “bach”

    Urlich and Handley highlight that the current marine protection of the Sounds is inadequate as there is only one fully protected reserve. The management of habitats outside this reserve has become an ongoing legal issue. Since the 1880s, calls for additional marine protection within the Sounds has been disregarded. Conservation effort in the Marlborough Sounds is extremely challenging. This study highlights the urgent need for transformative changes in the Marlborough Sounds. It is suggested that the EBM needs to focus on managing seabed disturbance, reducing sedimentation and including Matauranga Maori ecosystem-based management. The EBM has the opportunity to change the narrative back to clean and green from ‘brown and down’ by providing innovative management (Urlich & Handley, 2020).

    Now, when I go out in the Marlborough Sounds, where I was once catching multiple snapper, I am now spending days catching absolutely nothing. With hindsight I need to ask myself: was I part of the problem? Recreational overfishing has contributed to a decline in species.

    Additionally, where once I was surrounded by deep blue sea, now it is often a murky mix. It is time for Marlburians, and New Zealanders as a whole, to take responsibility. We don’t want a collapsing, deteriorating ecosystem. We want an ecosystem that thrives. We want to restore ecological resilience. We want generations to come and sit on remote beaches in the Sounds, benefiting from a thriving ecosystem.

    This article was prepared by Applied Science Postgraduate Diploma student Hannah Smit as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods Class. 

    Urlich. S.C., Handley. S.J. (2020). From ‘Clean and Green’ to ‘Brown and Down’: A synthesis of historical changes to biodiversity and marine ecosystems in the Marlborough Sounds New Zealand. Ocean and Coastal Management. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964569120302593 

    Hart, M. (2023). Human activity a ‘dominant factor’ in Marlborough Sounds Slips. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/ldr/494507/human-activity-a-dominant-factor-in-marlborough-sounds-slips 

  • Buried treasure: the hidden gems of alpine peatland

    Growing up, I had a fascination with pirates.

    I’m not sure if it was the fact that they stole buried treasure, sailed the seven seas, and broke all the rules or if I liked that they used the term “swashbuckling” to describe themselves. All I know is that I wanted to be exactly like Captain Jack Sparrow. Granted, Johnny Depp does quite well at making Jack Sparrow seem like the best and worst pirate at the same time, which definitely influences the likeability and comedy factor of the character.

    Peat Area in Perigi village, Pangkalan Lampam District, Ogan Komering Ilir Regency.
    Photo by Rifky/CIFOR cifor.org, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 (Flickr)

    For the majority of the first Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, Sparrow, with the help of his slightly awkward, bumbling, and unlikely traveling companion, Will Turner (played by Orlando Bloom), attempts to chase down his precious pirate ship and crew of the Black Pearl.

    To steal back his ship and find treasure along the way, Sparrow and Turner must make their way through various tunnels and streams until they finally reach the be-all-and-end-all of all treasure rooms, full of the loot that the pirates have collected over the years.

    Oftentimes, to get to these places of “great treasure”, the pirates would use maps to find the hidden jewels they so desired, and if they were underground, well, they would dig for them!

    But what if hidden gems are not always jewels?

    Even Sparrow, the death-defying pirate who escapes prison, steals ships, drinks copious amounts of rum and loves treasure, says:

    “Not all treasure is silver and gold, mate.”

    Treasure is “wealth stored up or hoarded, something of great worth or value” and “a collection of precious things,” according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary. In terms of natural resources, water is a treasure.

    Water is crucial for humans. Water is also a critical worldwide currency and supports life as we know it. Beyond using water for cooking, cleaning, or washing, water is critical for supporting agricultural crops, farms and, therefore, our food sources. In many communities, water also has a spiritual value, more than a monetary or physical value. In New Zealand, the Whanganui River even has personhood status, highlighting just how important water is.

    Considered a natural treasure, water is extremely precious in dry, arid regions with little rainfall or annual precipitation, meaning plants and animals must adapt to limited water sources. The same applies to agriculture; farmers must adapt in dry regions, using water sparingly and wisely. In these regions, it is essential to understand where water comes from and goes to and how it is potentially stored underground upstream from agricultural land.

    Buried treasure, some might say.

    In the arid Chilean Andes, this treasure is buried in mountain peatland.

    Peatlands are wetlands with layers of compact and partially decomposed plants and organic material (i.e., dead and decaying plants) in water-logged soil. If you’ve heard of the “Tollund Man” (a well-preserved body from the Iron Age), then you’ve heard of peatland. Peatland may have standing water or vast swaths of very soggy ground, as pictured below. This makes it difficult to immediately understand their capacities to hold water.

    Great Kemeri Bog, Latvia. Photo by: Runa S. Lindebjerg, CC BY 2.0 (Flickr)

    Shelly MacDonell (Lincoln University) and a team led by Remi Valois and Nicole Schaffer investigated the ability of Chilean peatland in the Elqui Valley to store water and estimated its role in delivering water to agricultural areas via streams.

    The researchers chose a peatland (bofedal) in Spanish, called “Piuquenes” for their study because of its central location compared to surrounding peatlands and its elevation (approximately 3000 meters above sea level), making it a great representation of other Chilean alpine peatlands. This peatland was also chosen based on a proposal to place a dam at the edge of Piuquenes for agricultural water control downstream.

    To study the inner workings of Piuquenes, the researchers had to look below the surface. Picture someone on the beach using a metal detector to find potentially valuable items under the surface (like a modern-day pirate), and that is a very simplified view of the tools used to visualize the geology and structure of the peatland below the surface. However, using Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT), the researchers were able to create a 3D image of what might be under the surface. Through this 3D image, they could calculate the potential storage capacity (volume) of the studied peatland and estimate the role of high-alpine peatland in the area’s water cycle.

    According to estimates by researchers, the peatland itself could hold between 164,000 and 243,000m3 of water. That’s between 66 and 97 Olympic-sized swimming pools worth of water!

    The study found that the Piuquenes peatland can actually contribute water to lower agricultural regions downstream. However, the peatland is also vulnerable to water loss through evapotranspiration, which is a fancy word for water that evaporates and is lost from the vegetation and soil.

    Despite this water loss, researchers determined that Piuquenes was still important for supporting the surrounding ecosystems and could still act as a significant reservoir (i.e., source of water) for downstream agriculture and livestock grazing. They also discovered that the peatland could shield the area from drought impacts because of its water capacity. This means Piuquenes peatland could deliver water to grazing and low land agricultural areas via streams and limit the most severe effects of drought even in low-rain seasons.

    In addition to storing water, the Piuquenes peatland can also help produce soil from the slow build-up of decaying plants, store carbon, help plants grow and provide watered grazing areas for livestock.

    Understanding the inner workings of Piuquenes advances our knowledge of high-alpine peatland and its natural benefits to lowland agriculture. This study also adds valuable information to the discussion of if and how a dam should be built at the edge of this high-alpine peatland.

    Piuquenes, although located in the Chilean Andes, is an excellent example of how critical preserving and conserving peatlands worldwide.

    Studies have further investigated the secrets and treasures of peatlands, such as the carbon storage capacity, internal chemistry and nutrient cycling effects on methane emissions, proving that peatland continues to be a valuable ecosystem and that there is indeed treasure hidden beneath the surface.

    Peatland in Torronsuo National Park, Tammela, Finland. Photo by: Tero Laakso, CC BY 2.0 (Flickr)

    Current efforts have also focused on how to conserve these valuable landscapes and how local management initiatives could be applied worldwide. For example, Global Peatlands Initiative is a group dedicated to informing people about the importance of peatlands and keeping you updated on peatlands around the world.

    I’m pretty sure Jack Sparrow wasn’t referring to peatland as the treasure in his quote about silver and gold, but he was on the right track. If only he had known about the inconspicuous treasure hidden in the high reaches of the Andes!

    So, next time you’re on a swashbuckling adventure, keep your eyes open for what might be lurking under the surface and could be even more precious than silver or gold.

    This article was prepared by Master of International Nature Conservation student Alaina Eckert as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

    P.S. Here is a really cool (and short) video about Peatland Protection from the UN!

  • Defend the buffer!

    “Hold the line! The invasives are coming!”

    “Captain, we’re losing ground! The phosphate is encroaching.”

    “Retreat to higher ground! It’s safer up there.”

    “Send in the spiders and beetles! Earthworms, you stay here.”

    “Defend the Buffer!!!” [insert battle cry]

    If the plants and insects at Bankside Scientific Reserve could talk, they would probably sound something like that. While this 2.6 ha protected area is home to important communities of native species, it is under threat of phosphate intrusion and the breaking-up of the local habitat. Humans have greatly altered the lowland Canterbury Plains of Aotearoa/New Zealand. With the recent switch to irrigated dairy farming, very few patches of undisturbed native dryland vegetation are left in the region. This change in land-use has led to a higher reliance on fertilizers as well as water for irrigation, which has come with its own set of challenges.

    Aggressive introduced weeds, pasture grasses and forbs, have also begun to dramatically alter the functioning of native plant communities. Remnant areas are both vulnerable and essential to maintaining native ecosystems (hence the need to defend the buffer). Mike Bowie and his team investigated one of these remnant areas, looking at soil chemistry, plant distribution, and soil invertebrates along transects at the Bankside Scientific Reserve. Their study identified the current conservation value of the reserve, assessed how persistence of native biodiversity changed along the pasture-reserve gradient, and evaluated the effects of the likely infringement of irrigation water and nutrients from adjacent farmland.

    The vegetation of Bankside Scientific Reserve had been studied previously by Malloy (1970), who provided a detailed catalogue of the flora, listing 66 native vascular plant species. Jenson & Shanks (2005 – unpublished DOC Report) also completed a one-day reassessment of the site, but recorded only 14 native species. Today, the vegetation at the reserve can be described as a patchwork of native woody shrubs, made up mainly of makahikatoa, matagouri, and dry grassland. As Mike and his team point out, the modified soil conditions seem to have made the reserve not as well suited for native species, and better for the invasion by exotic plants. Compared with detailed surveys prior to the dairy conversion, only 31% of the original 65 native vascular plant species were found in the current study, and 27 new exotic species had arrived since the original survey.

    As for the underground conditions, soil nutrient concentrations and pH were lower in the reserve than in the surrounding farmland, with peaks of nitrate and ammonium being recorded at the boundary. Meanwhile, soil phosphate was higher in lower-lying areas within the reserve. Four species of endemic (Megasolecidae) earthworms were found in the reserve, but not in the neighbouring pasture.

    Other cool finds included ground wētā (Hemiandrus sp.) and trap door spider (Cantuaria dendyi). A 2011 survey by Emberson et al. (2011) also found the large rare rove beetle, Hadrotes wakefieldi, and several species of long-horn beetles. As opposed to the earthworms, the diversity and abundance of beetles and spiders in the reserve was similar to that recorded at least 10 m into surrounding farmland.

    Another interesting take-away from this research, is the importance of areas of higher elevation. Although elevational differences between highest and lowest contours were <5 m in the study, the higher areas were very important in avoiding environmental change from agricultural drainage and effluents. They helped to maintain environmental conditions that were closest to the original habitat, providing the best-suited habitat for native plants and animals.

    Image created by Catherine Priemer

    The work of Mike Bowie and his team, along with previous studies, points out the significance of small remnant reserves for the conservation of indigenous invertebrates found in these rare dryland ecosystems. Their findings also suggest that lime and phosphate fertilisers may represent the main threats to dryland nature reserves in irrigated dairy landscapes. Above all, their research underlines the importance of the soil environment in sustaining the variety of plant, animal, and insect life in this unique environment.

    Taking the team’s findings into consideration, the maintenance of a buffer zone – a protected zone established around sensitive or critical areas – could be beneficial in lessening the impacts of human activity and land disturbance around remnants, such as Bankside Scientific Reserve. To do this, native species can be planted between agricultural and conservation areas, to help protect sensitive habitat. The key take-away: Defend the Buffer!

    This article was prepared by Master of International Nature Conservation student Catherine Priemer as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

  • From stinky van adventures to restoration projects – the unseen potential of wastewater

    Picture this: you’re on a camping trip, enjoying the breathtaking view of one of the most beautiful lakes of Aotearoa New Zealand surrounded by snow-capped mountains, watching the incredible red colours of the sunrise, when suddenly a ghastly smell permeates the air. You quickly discover the source – a full wastewater tank in your camping van that urgently needs to be emptied.

    My friend Julia as she is emptying out the wastewater tanks of her van. Photo by Flora Brumen

    For those who have not experienced the dreadful smell of such a full wastewater tank, know that this is not easily forgotten. Standing in line at a dumping station, waiting to take your turn to get rid of your own disgusting fluids while someone is emptying their toilet container right in front of you, is a situation that brings shared discomfort to campers.

    Now, I may be exaggerating a little now, but you understand my point. Toilet tanks include so many chemicals, that it actually smells better than the tanks that collect just the wastewater from doing the dishes. However, it’s an experience that highlights the less glamorous side of camping but still unites people in their shared discomfort. It reminds us that wastewater is an unavoidable reality that affects us all, every day, not just while camping.

    The impact of wastewater goes beyond our noses. Uncontrolled discharge of wastewater poses a threat to human health, native freshwater species and ecosystems. In New Zealand, treated wastewater is often released into waterways or the ocean. Unfortunately, this can contaminate recreational surface waters with harmful bacteria and viruses.

    The consequences of this pollution are significant. Many popular swimming spots in Canterbury have been ranked unsuitable for swimming due to high levels of bacteria from human sewage found in the water. Last summer, heavy rainfall events worsened the situation, leading to increased runoff of faecal pathogens. Besides creating severe threats to human health and creating unsuitable recreational areas, the pollution also harms freshwater species and degrades aquatic ecosystems. In fact, a devastating 76% of the indigenous freshwater fish species are endangered or threatened, 46% of all lakes have poor water quality and 45% of New Zealand’s rivers are not suitable for swimming activities.

    What if we could turn the tables and use wastewater to actually help save our ecosystems? That’s exactly what a recent study under the direction of Alexandra Meister, a bio-waste scientist from ESR and the University of Canterbury, in collaboration with the Christchurch City Council and Lincoln University, suggests.

    The researchers carried out an experiment on Banks Peninsula, where they irrigated a site with native plant species with treated wastewater from the local treatment plant for three years. The research team made an exciting discovery: the native plants experienced significant growth with this wastewater regime. In fact, their plant height increased by an impressive 10% compared to plants not irrigated with treated wastewater.

    Site of the field experiment on Banks Peninsula, that was irrigated with treated wastewater. Photo by Meister, Gutierrez-Gines, Robinson (Kiwiscience)

    It doesn’t stop there. The soil at the experimental site showed no signs of an increase of potentially harmful elements – beyond what is normal in the soil – that could endanger humans or the environment. There may be exciting possibilities for combining restoration projects with wastewater application to land. By doing so, we could decrease the discharge of wastewater into our water bodies, but also promote the growth of native vegetation, leading to a potential recovery of native biodiversity.

    Of course, establishing native plants in these environments can be challenging if the species are not adapted to highly fertile soil conditions that are created by treated wastewater irrigation. One particular native plant, Mānuka (Leptospermum scoparium), was an obvious candidate for this experiment. This species has the ability to eliminate harmful soil pathogens and reduce the amount of nitrate leaking into water. Even though mānuka is not adapted to such nutrient-rich conditions, typically growing in low-fertility soils instead, the species responded well to irrigation and increased their growth.

    The success and safety of applying treated municipal wastewater to the land depend on two key factors: the quality of the wastewater and the characteristics of the local environment. Due to these unique considerations, it is crucial that each system is designed to specifically address these factors.

    Going forward, the researchers will continue their investigation by exploring various plants and soil types. They will continue to explore different plants and soil types, expanding our understanding of where and how wastewater irrigation can be utilised effectively.

    It’s time to shift our perception of wastewater. Instead of viewing it as something unseemly to get rid of, we need to recognize it as a valuable resource that can be multi-purposes. By finding innovative applications for treated wastewater, we can decrease its careless discharge and contribute to saving our environment and ecosystems.

    The success of using treated municipal wastewater as a valuable resource shows us how even the unpleasant smelling wastewater from our camper van adventures something associated with an unpleasant smell can turn into the sweet scent of environmental protection and restoration efforts.

    This article was prepared by Master of International Nature Conservation student Flora Bumen as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

    Meister, A., Li, F., Gutierrez-Gines, M. J., Dickinson, N., Gaw, S., Bourke, M., & Robinson, B. (2022). Interactions of treated municipal wastewater with native plant species. Ecological Engineering, 183, 106741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2022.106741

  • Making a splash: Protecting the manu with Mānuka and Kānuka

    The art and joy of bombing off a bridge. Photo: Gen Toop. Dec, 2022

    “Do a manu” “Do a bomb”. On a hot summers day these are the chants that ring out across Aotearoa as packs of kids and adults line up on bridges or climb atop rocks and get ready to jump into a lake or a river. A ‘bomb’ or a ‘manu’ is a very precise manoeuvre that involves jumping from somewhere high, curling into a ball and making the biggest splash you can when you hit the water. Some would argue that a manu involves more technical aerial acrobatics than a simple bomb. Either way, the bomb or the manu is a rite of passage for many New Zealand kids.

    But increasingly this treasured national pastime is under threat. The Ministry for the Environment painted a grim picture of waterway health in its recent Our Freshwater report. Nearly half of New Zealand’s lakes are in poor or very poor health. Only two in every hundred lakes are in good or very good health. Many rivers have become so polluted that they are now unsafe for swimming at times. And it is not only humans who can no longer safely swim in some of the country’s rivers. Native freshwater fish are struggling to survive. More than three-quarters of them are threatened with extinction.

    The native freshwater birds that depend on rivers, lakes and estuaries, are also in peril. More than two thirds of them are threatened with extinction or at risk of becoming threatened. Introduced predators, like trout and stoats, are one of the main culprits behind the decline in native freshwater fish and bird populations. The degradation of freshwater habitat by pollution is another driver that is pushing these precious species closer to extinction. Cleaning up waterways is important not only for protecting the long-held tradition of doing a ‘manu’, it’s also critical to the protection ngā manu (the birds) of Aotearoa.

    Algal Bloom in the Waikirikiri, Selwyn River. Photo Credit: Gen Toop. Jan 2021

    Nitrogen pollution is one of the leading causes of the degradation of New Zealand’s freshwater ecosystems. When excess nitrogen on the land seeps down through the soil past the rootzone of plants it can get into the groundwater. From there it can move into the aquifers that many communities and cities get their drinking water from, or it can re-emerge in springs and get into lakes and rivers. Once in those lakes and rivers nitrogen can cause algal blooms, which can suck oxygen out of the water making it difficult for freshwater fish to survive. These algal blooms also make rivers a lot less appealing for jumping into on a hot summers day. Some algae are even toxic and can cause human health issues as well as kill sensitive animals like dogs.

    There are lots of different forms of nitrogen, but one of the main forms that leaches in this way is nitrate. The vast bulk of nitrate pollution getting into New Zealand’s freshwater comes from agriculture. That’s mainly because New Zealand’s pastures are loaded up with synthetic nitrogen fertiliser and the urine of the livestock feeding on these pastures has huge amounts of nitrogen in it. When livestock, particularly dairy cows, urinate the plants can’t always use all the nitrogen for their growth and so the excess nitrate can leach into waterways.

    Mānuka (Leptospernum scoparium) flowers. Photo Credit: Vil Sandi, Flickr, licensed under CC-BY-ND 2.0

    A promising new solution to this nitrate leaching problem has been explored by researchers from Lincoln University, Canterbury University and Plant and Food Research. In 2017, the scientists simulated a dairy cow urinating (not something many of us do in our day jobs) and compared the nitrate leaching rates under three tree species that could be planted into dairy pastures; radiata pine (an exotic species), mānuka (native) and kānuka (native). They found that mānuka and kānuka leached far lower amounts of nitrogen (2 kg/ha) than pine (53 kg/ha).

    Speaking about the project Dr Juergen Esperschuetz, the lead researcher from Lincoln university said, “These results show mānuka and kānuka could be even more effective at protecting water systems than anyone expected.”

    Intentionally planting trees into pasture where animals continue to graze is a farming system called silvopasture. Silvo is derived from the latin word for forest and pasture, well we all know what that is. Silvopasture is not just about shelterbelts, windbreaks, and riparian buffers, systems which relegate trees to the margins of a farm. Instead, silvopasture systems often plant trees into the paddock itself. It has been said that silvopasture, and other agroforestry systems like it, represent a shift away from monocultural production and towards an agricultural system that more closely mimics natural forest ecosystems. Mānuka and kānuka are native trees to Aotearoa so incorporating them into dairy pastures also provides a way to bring more native biodiversity back into farming landscapes.

    The researchers also found that soils under the mānuka and kānuka emit far less nitrous oxide, with the mānuka soils emitting the least of the three. Nitrous oxide is an extremely potent greenhouse gas, it is long lived and in Aotearoa, the vast bulk of nitrous oxide emissions come from livestock farming. So planting mānuka and kānuka into dairy pastures could also help in the fight against climate change. On top of that, both trees produce high-value products in the form of oils and honey and that could be used to supplement farm income.

    Cows grazing in a silvopasture. Photo Credit: Gayle Weaver,pixabay.com, licensed under CCO

    Since the publication of this study, other researchers have gone on to use parts of its methodology and draw on its findings in their research. In the Wairarapa, a study done in the field found much lower nitrate levels under manuka than under pasture, corroborating the findings from this glasshouse study done by Dr Esperchuetz and his team. In Spain, researchers also drew on the study when they investigated nitrate leaching risk under walnut silvopasture.

    This study has added to the toolkit of options available to help reduce the environmental impact of pastoral farming in Aotearoa. Incorporating mānuka and kānuka trees into pastures will not only bring biodiversity into farming landscapes. Thanks to this research, we now know it will likely help clean up our lakes and rivers too, protecting both ngā manu and the manu now and into the future.

    This article was prepared by Master of Science postgraduate student Genevieve Toop as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

    You can read the full article here: Esperschuetz, J., Balaine, N., Clough, T., Bulman, S., Dickinson, N. M., Horswell, J., & Robinson, B. H. (2017). The potential of L. scoparium, K. robusta and P. radiata to mitigate N-losses in silvopastural systems. Environmental pollution, 225, 12-19.

  • Flooding causes greenhouse gas emissions to spike! …Liming to the rescue?

    Climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, nitrate leaching… a climate crisis! With the frequency of how these phrases are used today, it does not require a vast imagination to connect the dots and find some sort of a global catastrophe lurking around the corner. And who could be blamed when just last year, the World Health Organisation labelled climate change as the “single biggest threat facing humanity”. They frequently used terms like ‘crisis’, ‘catastrophe’, and perhaps most daunting, ‘inevitable’ within their annual review.

    While this is all clearly alarming, a big question that we must ask is how this will affect New Zealand?

    Climate change has been felt throughout the world, and New Zealand is no exception. The current New Zealand government declared a climate emergency in 2020. While some may consider its declaration to be reactionary, it is nonetheless a powerful statement.

    In the face of climate change, the single biggest challenge is how to sustainably and effectively reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. Everyone seems to be trying to find an answer while simultaneously passing the blame onto someone else. Delving into the rabbit hole of climate change mismanagement, I found a tangled mess of political bureaucracy, tied up with industrial and economic intrigue. But most importantly, I discerned that the question on how to best solve climate change is much too hard to answer within this short blog post.

    Flooded pastureland

    Since a significant proportion of greenhouse gas emissions is owed to increases in agriculture, reducing agricultural emissions can help alleviate this issue. Let’s look at one tiny corner of agriculture. As climate change triggers higher rainfall and more flooding events, an increase in nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions will occur, due to the loss of oxygen in the soil.

    N2O has been estimated as having 300 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide (CO2), and yet has been largely ignored as a greenhouse gas. Agricultural soils, being highly fertile with a high nitrogen content, contribute massively to the amount of N2O produced annually throughout the world. Understanding how to control and limit N2O production from agricultural land could result in major reductions of greenhouse gas emissions globally each year.

    With this in mind, researchers from the University of Copenhagen in Denmark and Lincoln University in New Zealand examined the relationship between flooding events and N2O emissions on fertile farmland. The study occurred in Canterbury New Zealand and found periodic flooding resulted in greater N2O emissions while the amount of gas released could be reduced if liming had occurred recently. Liming is the process where crushed limestone is applied as a soil additive to directly increase soil pH and occurs frequently throughout the world. The significance of this result is not be understated and results in at least two implications for the future of agriculture and climate change as a whole.

    Drainage Ditches

    Firstly, since flooding can cause N2O production to spike, areas of high flooding risk in low lying areas should have reduced fertiliser inputs during wetter months to prevent N2O from being produced. Secondly, regular liming of agricultural land, particularly before high rainfall events, could help maintain pH levels limiting N2O production.

    This research shows the importance of having good drainage in agricultural areas, but also represents concern for the future as high rainfall events become more common, particularly in wetter areas of New Zealand.

    Are we going to experience greater N2O emissions in the future as climate change results in more extreme weather events? Will liming be sufficient at reducing N2O emissions from farmland? Research seems to always create more questions than answers, but as I said earlier, this is much too hard to answer in a blog post.

    What can be concluded is that since N2O emissions appears to reduce by regularly applying agricultural lime to farmland, this could allow New Zealand to lower its global climate change impact. But perhaps most importantly, it shows us that if we are going to solve the issue of climate change, proactive research followed by successful implementation is often the best answer.

    For additional details regarding this article, please refer to the research paper below:
    Flooding-induced N2O emission bursts controlled by pH and nitrate in agricultural soils.

    Hansen, M., Clough, T. J., & Elberling, B. (2014). Flooding-induced N2O emission bursts controlled by pH and nitrate in agricultural soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 69, 17-24.

    The author Cameron Hilliard is a postgraduate student in the Master of Science taught at Lincoln University. This article was written as an assessment for ECOL 608 Research Methods in Ecology.