Presentation on theme: "“Threats of landuse on groundwater resources” What is the perspective? Threats from landuse on groundwater resources? Or Threats of landuse because of."— Presentation transcript:
“Threats of landuse on groundwater resources” What is the perspective? Threats from landuse on groundwater resources? Or Threats of landuse because of the groundwater resources? WaterCAPTaskforce Knowledge Center for Agriculture Denmark, Irene Wiborg & Trine Balskilde Stoltenborg
Farmers are the primary managers of rural areas The countryside extends often right up to the very start of the city Farmers are main actors in the use of water and their production having an effect on the groundwater Farmers play a vital role in the water management in the countryside but also in the peri- and urban areas
Farming problems related to ground- water Droughts Limiting factor for fertilization due to nitrogen (and phosphorus) (even that it might come due to flooding of the sewage system and wastewater ends up in the groundwater) Limiting factor for the use of pesticides ("too bad") Restrictions on field boundaries (buffer zones related to groundwater bodies)
Farmers part of the solution Farming with water - the farmer as water managers Less use of water, pesticides, phosphorus and nitrogen Constructions of buffer zones and water bassins etc. Catchment based cooperation
Threats from landuse on groundwater resources; Nitrate Groundwater is vulnerable both to point sources of pollution and to those which are diffuse; nitrate pollution, mainly as diffuse pollution from land use Point source pollution might come from intensive livestock husbandry and slurry stores. Good agricultural practice reduce the Nitrate content in the ground water significantly.
SHOWCASE How agriculture can have a negative impact on the groundwater and how it can be handled. In Denmark planning for the protection of the drinking water resources has taken place since the 1980’ties. This planning has had a significant positive effect on nitrate load in the groundwater (1). A number of practices in agriculture has been changed in order to reduce the nitrate leaching. We will shortly present practices which has been changed and also introduce to more targeted regulation (1) Hansen, B., Thorling, L, Dalgaard T. and Erlandsen, M, Trend Reversal of Nitrate in Danish Groundwater - a Reflection of Agricultural Practices and Nitrogen Surpluses since 1950, Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 228–234,
SHOWCASE 2: LAND USE makes a difference: CLOSED LOOP FARMING potential contributions to groundwater quality ir Henk Kieft, ETC*
What you see
manure: 124 kg N/year Footprint 1 hectare fodder on the farm + 1 hectare somewhere else (concentrate) artificial N 225 kg N/hectare kg milk/year 3,82 % fat 3,44 % protein Methane (CH4) NO What you do not see Ammonium 55 kg N/year
Key: MORE EFFICIëNT CYCLE of NUTRIENTS reduced farm cost + cleaner water
Result: Nitrate emissions reduced [province of Drenthe, Netherlands]
Potential lower emissions for province Drenthe performance top 20% compared to average savings upscaled over ha in Drenthe lower N soil surplus : ton N in NO 3 top 20% at 91 kg/ha performes 64 kg/ha lower than average 155 kg N/ha lower ammonia emissions: 500 ton N in NH 3 5 kg N/ kg milk x 1 billion kg (33 instead of 38 kg N) lower P soil surplus: ton P 2 O 5 top 20% at 5 kg/ha performes 16 kg P2O5/ha lower than average 21 kg P2O5/ha
Upscaling Performance based Rewarding 2. Improve via workshops, trips and farmers studygroups 1.Collect Farm data efficiency N+P 4. Negotiate reward for improvement! 3. Transparancy in resultats : certificate organize delivery to farm more production space for farm premium from waterboard farm publicity + “licence to produce” Personal advice for training etc. Negotiate reward for performance Certify quality via formal trainers and ‘diplome’ Arrange payment in Euro or farm development rights
TRENDS IN FERTILIZER INPUT, YIELDS AND POLLUTION River TISZA graph HUNGARY Inputs dropped to 17% (33kgN/ha) in 1993 while yields dropped to 70% and pollution dropped to 50% (compared to 1988). Yellow bars (left): CEREAL YIELD [million tons/year] Black bars (middle): FERTILIZER USE [in 10 kg N/ha] Brown bars (right): NITRATE POLLUTION [mg NO3/liter river water]
BEST AVAILABLE AGRIC. TECHNIQUES ECOLOGICAL and LOW INPUT AGRIC INTEGRATED LOCALLY ADAPTED PATTERNS CROP ROTATIONS EROSION CONTROL MIXED FARMS MANURE HANDLING RECYCLING ‘WASTE’ GREEN MANURING AGROFORESTRY INTEGR. PEST MANAGEMENT INTEGR. NUTRIENT SYSTEMS EROSION CONTR. + CROP ROT.
PERFORMANCE OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS
3-Track Agriculture Policy all challenged to high efficiency Pioneering Eco- Agriculture ‘Forced’ Low Input Agriculture Productivist High Input Agriculture 10% Ecological Agriculture Low Input Sustainable Agriculture Integrated Agriculture EA LISA IA
THE SECOND CYCLE 1 st nutrient cycle to be ‘closed’ is on-farm 2 nd nutrient cycle to be ‘closed’ is regional: consumer-producer
Create value from Waste Recycling Waste = Urban-Rural Linkage
Threats of landuse because of the groundwater resources (Irene we need to change this into slides – and put in the right order ) No food because of no possibilities for irrigation. This ecosystem service diminish… Lack of ground water is a threat to agricultural production. We will present this perspective and in that way discuss the need for finding solutions for a sustainable water management where there are water present for food production. -> -> It takes a holistic view to do sufficient groundwater management. There is a competing demands of the ecosystem services. It has to be balanced. Dividing the farmland into resilient and less resilient areas to human (and animal) impacts and climate change will retain all the ecosystem services groundwater provides. Land use has to be matched with the vulnerability of the soil, geology, water and ecosystem. Showcase: Denmark NOW – heading for it…
So the farmers both having farming problems because of the groundwater challenges and being the solution to the problems
You mean the world to us Thanks for listening .... ... .. .