Mitigation of phosphorus, sediment and Escherichia coli losses in runoff from a dairy farm roadway

peer reviewedDairy cow deposits on farm roadways are a potential source of contaminants entering streams. Phosphorus (P), suspended sediment (SS) and Escherichia coli (E. coli) loads in 18 runoff events over 12 mo from two-halves of a section of dairy farm roadway that spilt into an adjacent P-impacted stream were measured. The runoff from one half was untreated while the other half was directed through a filter of steel melter slag [termed aluminium chlorohydrate (ACH)-altered slag] sprayed with 1% ACH solution to improve P sorption capacity. An uncertainty analysis was conducted to ascertain potential loads of P lost from roadways considering variation in deposit weight, number and P content. Over the monitoring period, the total load decreased P (92%), SS (98%) and E. coli (76%) from the ACHaltered slag roadway compared to the control. However, uncertainty analysis showed that the amount of dung-P deposited on the roadway could be 10-fold greater

When experts disagree: the need to rethink indicator selection for assessing sustainability of agriculture

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. Sustainability indicators are well recognized for their potential to assess and monitor sustainable development of agricultural systems. A large number of indicators are proposed in various sustainability assessment frameworks, which raises concerns regarding the validity of approaches, usefulness and trust in such frameworks. Selecting indicators requires transparent and well-defined procedures to ensure the relevance and validity of sustainability assessments. The objective of this study, therefore, was to determine whether experts agree on which criteria are most important in the selection of indicators and indicator sets for robust sustainability assessments. Two groups of experts (Temperate Agriculture Research Network and New Zealand Sustainability Dashboard) were asked to rank the relative importance of eleven criteria for selecting individual indicators and of nine criteria for balancing a collective set of indicators. Both ranking surveys reveal a startling lack of consensus amongst experts about how best to measure agricultural sustainability and call for a radical rethink about how complementary approaches to sustainability assessments are used alongside each other to ensure a plurality of views and maximum collaboration and trust amongst stakeholders. To improve the transparency, relevance and robustness of sustainable assessments, the context of the sustainability assessment, including prioritizations of selection criteria for indicator selection, must be accounted for. A collaborative design process will enhance the acceptance of diverse values and prioritizations embedded in sustainability assessments. The process by which indicators and sustainability frameworks are established may be a much more important determinant of their success than the final shape of the assessment tools. Such an emphasis on process would make assessments more transparent, transformative and enduring

Evaluating a Rapid Method to Determine Faecal Burden on Pasture from Grazing Cattle

Grazing livestock excrete large volumes of faecal material on pasture. Understanding the magnitude of this faecal burden is important for attributing sources of agricultural pollutants to different spatial and temporal scales. This field-based study evaluated the utility and transferability of a rapid approach often used in plant ecology (the line intercept method (LIM)) for estimating faecal burden from grazing cattle on pasture. Results from the LIM were of equivalent magnitude, with no significant difference observed, to those derived from more time-consuming sampling of faecal material from pasture using a quadrat-style methodology (herein termed burden sampling). However, the variability in estimates using the LIM was much larger (839-7,079 kg fresh weight faeces over the 50,000 m2 field) compared with estimates provided by the burden sampling of pasture at 0.2 % area sampled (1,616-3,979 kg/50,000 m2), 0.4 % area sampled (1,753-2,723 kg/50,000 m2) and 0.8 % area sampled (1,212-2,344 kg/50,000 m2). The LIM offers a rapid and cost-effective alternative to time-consuming sampling campaigns of faecal burden on pasture and provides estimations that are preferable to back-of-the-envelope calculations based on the over-simplification of livestock excretion rates