As we head into another drier-than-normal season, New Zealand needs to put more thought into water management

Urban rain and rural rain are different. The quality is the same - drops of water that, in New Zealand, fall out of the sky relatively pure - but interpretation of the quantity is very different.

Urban rain stops barbecues, dampens the washing on the line, and slows the traffic as though rain had never been experienced before. It interrupts activities for humans, but makes little difference to the ability of plants to grow, rivers to flow or dams to fill.

Rural rain does all three. Rural rain soaks into the ground. It reaches roots and allows the micro-organisms to function. When there is rain in sufficient quantity, primary production, and hence the export economy, flourishes.

This year some areas of New Zealand, including Auckland, have had rain. Some of the rain has enabled plants to grow in town and country (as well as stopping barbecues, wetting washing and slowing traffic), but many of the major agricultural areas have experienced only urban rain.

The weather maps frequently promise showers, and sometimes the predictions come true, but showers are not enough to make a difference to plants, rivers and dams.

A medium scale drought has been declared in Marlborough, Canterbury and parts of Otago bringing some assistance but no water. The Wairarapa and Waikato are being watched carefully – but declaration of drought doesn’t mean free rides for farmers.

Official declaration of drought means that money is given to the Rural Support Trust so that it can co-ordinate feed supplies across the country. In past years hay and straw, for instance, have been moved from areas where there is surplus to areas in need. This year, however, drought is relatively wide-spread and ‘surplus’ feed is in short supply. It is also increasing in cost.

Another funded activity for the Rural Support Trust is giving mental support by talking with people. Unfortunately, for many farmers engaged in taking care of their animals, including extra feeding out because the grass isn’t growing, ‘talking’ requires time that they don’t have.

In official drought, farmers can apply directly to the government for financial assistance. If successful in meeting the hardship criteria, they are given income equal to the unemployment benefit, but history indicates that not many of them qualify. The 2013 drought covered the whole of the North Island and the west coast of the South Island. The impact on the economy was estimated by MPI to be at least $1.3 billion, and it affected 20,000 farmers. Only 146 farmers qualified for rural assistance.

Another benefit is tax relief. The adverse event ‘income equalisation scheme’ allows farmers who experience adverse events to carry income from forced livestock sales over to the next income year. Tax is still paid, but there is flexibility in making the payments.

Banks also try to assist. Mortgage repayment can sometimes be added to capital to prevent a mortgagee sale and the problem that would cause for land values - if land values fall, more farmers would find themselves overleveraged and struggling with the banks as well as the elements.

All these measures are trying to support farmers, but real relief from drought would mean more water, hence the discussions around the country on water storage and management.  The debate hinges on the environment and economics. To pay for the water storage and irrigation system, farmers have to increase productivity with more animals and or more crops, both of which are associated with increased fertiliser use. Increased fertiliser use has been associated with leakage into rivers, and nobody wants to despoil the environment.

In addition, it is not yet clear whether the farmers who intensify to pay for water infrastructure actually make more money. Statements have been made recently that it might be more sustainable in the long run simply to destock during drought and operate a more extensive production system. Doing so would, however, have considerable impact on the overall economy because of loss of jobs that are currently associated with every stage of the farm to fork value chain.

In addition, some important components have been overlooked. One of these is the soil carbon which advocates have been promoting as an offset for Green House Gases with an eye to the Emissions Trading Scheme.

Soil organic matter, over half of which is carbon, builds up under irrigation when compared with no irrigation. This is because plants are able to continue to grow, and litter (dying leaves) and roots feed the soil organisms. As long as fertiliser and water are maintained, the soil organic matter will come to a dynaUrban rain and rural rain are different. The quality is the same - drops of water that, in New Zealand, fall out of the sky relatively pure - but interpretation of the quantity is very different.

Urban rain stops barbecues, dampens the washing on the line, and slows the traffic as though rain had never been experienced before. It interrupts activities for humans, but makes little difference to the ability of plants to grow, rivers to flow or dams to fill.

Rural rain does all three. Rural rain soaks into the ground. It reaches roots and allows the micro-organisms to function. When there is rain in sufficient quantity, primary production, and hence the export economy, flourishes.

This year some areas of New Zealand, including Auckland, have had rain. Some of the rain has enabled plants to grow in town and country (as well as stopping barbecues, wetting washing and slowing traffic), but many of the major agricultural areas have experienced only urban rain.

The weather maps frequently promise showers, and sometimes the predictions come true, but showers are not enough to make a difference to plants, rivers and dams.

A medium scale drought has been declared in Marlborough, Canterbury and parts of Otago bringing some assistance but no water. The Wairarapa and Waikato are being watched carefully – but declaration of drought doesn’t mean free rides for farmers.

Official declaration of drought means that money is given to the Rural Support Trust so that it can co-ordinate feed supplies across the country. In past years hay and straw, for instance, have been moved from areas where there is surplus to areas in need. This year, however, drought is relatively wide-spread and ‘surplus’ feed is in short supply. It is also increasing in cost.

Another funded activity for the Rural Support Trust is giving mental support by talking with people. Unfortunately, for many farmers engaged in taking care of their animals, including extra feeding out because the grass isn’t growing, ‘talking’ requires time that they don’t have.

In official drought, farmers can apply directly to the government for financial assistance. If successful in meeting the hardship criteria, they are given income equal to the unemployment benefit, but history indicates that not many of them qualify. The 2013 drought covered the whole of the North Island and the west coast of the South Island. The impact on the economy was estimated by MPI to be at least $1.3 billion, and it affected 20,000 farmers. Only 146 farmers qualified for rural assistance.

Another benefit is Tax relief. The adverse event ‘income equalisation scheme’ allows farmers who experience adverse events to carry income from forced livestock sales over to the next income year. Tax is still paid, but there is flexibility in making the payments.

Banks also try to assist. Mortgage repayment can sometimes be added to capital to prevent a mortgagee sale and the problem that would cause for land values - if land values fall, more farmers would find themselves overleveraged and struggling with the banks as well as the elements.

All these measures are trying to support farmers, but real relief from drought would mean more water, hence the discussions around the country on water storage and management.  The debate hinges on the environment and economics. To pay for the water storage and irrigation system, farmers have to increase productivity with more animals and or more crops, both of which are associated with increased fertiliser use. Increased fertiliser use has been associated with leakage into rivers, and nobody wants to despoil the environment.

In addition, it is not yet clear whether the farmers who intensify to pay for water infrastructure actually make more money. Statements have been made recently that it might be more sustainable in the long run simply to destock during drought and operate a mic equilibrium with input and output. If fertiliser and irrigation is removed, the organic matter decreases again over time to reach a different dynamic equilibrium.

If drought occurs in a region which previously received rain, the organic matter will decrease as the soil organisms can work for longer in the soil than plants can grow on top of it. Deserts are the obvious examples of what happens.

Another huge and perhaps incalculable benefit is in farmer welfare.

Irrigation means more work than if rains fall, because irrigators have to be monitored and maintained, but irrigation gives confidence that plants will grow and animals can be fed (or crops harvested).

Farmer resilience is improved because some risk in production is reduced.

New Zealand has considerable quantities of fresh water and questions are being asked about whether or not we are using those resources efficiently. The OECD calculates that New Zealand has a total of 485 billion cubic meters of renewable freshwater resources, but uses only 1-2% of its water resources (OECD figures suggest 1.1% and World Bank estimates 1.5%) and agriculture is using approximately only 1% (FAO-UN figure).

The World Economic Forum Insight Report Global Risks 2015 puts Water Crises as first in the top ten risks in terms of impact, ahead of spread of infectious diseases, weapons of mass destruction, interstate conflict and energy price shock. Water crises didn’t enter the ranks until 2012… and now it is number one in the thinking. Water crises also rate eighth in terms of likelihood (after interstate conflict, extreme weather events, failure of national governance and various catastrophes).

Climate predictions from the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) for the next few months are that it will be normal to warmer than usual, and rainfall in some areas like Canterbury might be approximately average to slightly above average – but in most areas will be average to below average.

This means that overall, soil moisture and river flow will stay below average, dams won’t fill and soil organic matter will decrease.

As a developed country it behoves New Zealand to be thinking sensibly about water management for the future. Employment, environmental sustainability and economic viability depend upon it. And if NZ doesn't take the lead for itself, some other country might decide to do it for us...