Diffuse water pollution from agriculture in Europe: Experiences and research needs for managing water pollution from agriculture

Transcription

1 Diffuse water pollution from agriculture in Europe: Experiences and research needs for managing water pollution from agriculture Time: 30 August at 14:00 17:30 REPORT Conveners: French National Agency for Water and Aquatic Environments (ONEMA), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Swedish Water House, Swedish-French Association for Research (AFSR), Baltic Compass 58 participants from 19 countries and 4 international organisations At this seminar, innovative and promising responses to diffuse water pollution in various parts of Europe will be examined. By comparing how various transboundary water regions deal with diffuse water pollution from agriculture, the seminar will identify critical scientific challenges, knowledge gaps, as well as conceptual and practical locks that need to be addressed in order to reduce agricultural water pollution in Europe. Two main aspects of diffuse pollution will be examined: State of the art regarding pollution management tools and their implementation at different scales - from the river basin scale to the drinking water abstraction scale. Smart and sustainable solutions to improve agricultural practices.

2 Diffuse water pollution from agriculture in Europe Experiences and research needs for managing water pollution from agriculture REPORT Moderators: Anna Jöborn, Director, Science Affairs Department, Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management, and; François Lacroix, Deputy Director General, French national agency for water and aquatic environments (ONEMA) Presentations short abstracts Tools and techniques for diffuse pollution management at different scales Nicolas Domange, ONEMA, France Presentation of the two main tools developed by R&D partners of ONEMA for managing diffuse pollution problem at the French national scale. Those models allow dealing with pesticides and nitrate: - MERCAT EAU and ARPEGES calculate respectively chronicles of pesticides concentration and some additional indicators according to different ways of transfer for the different water bodies in France; that leads to find the appropriate mitigation strategy to manage these water bodies according to the aimed status. - NOPOLU-transfer: a method to calculate nitrates transfers Some scientific challenges and need for the water managers: - Definition of the relevant areas and the most vulnerable areas to work on? - Which type of transfer is predominant in which area? - How to choose the most efficient method to mitigate? Comments and questions from the audience: These tools are developed for and used by water managers and water authorities. MERCAT EAU works on 10-year series of data. Reducing nutrient load to the Baltic sea from the field to coast Karin Blombäck, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden Eutrophication is a serious problem in the Baltic sea. It mostly depends on activities around the sea, and population density. The Baltic is surrounded by 9 countries, and they work together with EU in Helcom to find joint solutions for the sea. Each country has got specific targets to reduce polluted runoff to the sea. Sweden contributes for 17% of total nitrogen load and 11% of phosphorus load in the Baltic sea. Diffuse sources dominate. SLU uses dynamic models to estimate the load notably the contribution of agriculture. Changes in agriculture practices and measures (use of different crops, better timing and amount of manure fertilizer, and buffer strips) and reduction of agricultural land since 1995 have resulted in lower anthropogenic and background loads.

3 There is however still a lot to do, and a need to continue research. Right now, long term observations on fields and catchment areas are made. Counter measures such as buffer strips and catch crops, and constructed wetlands are also studied. There is a need to improve the knowledge of surface runoff in Sweden that is largely lacking. Comments and questions from the audience: the reduction of nitrogen load came with no cost for farmers nor cuts in agriculture output. The reduction of nitrogen load in Sweden is not only due to change of practices but also to livestock reduction. Evaluation of diffuse agricultural pollution in Poland Marek Gielczewski, Warzaw University of Life Sciences, Poland Agriculture accounts for 50% of the land use in Poland. Agriculture employs a large number of people. It is mostly extensive agriculture, as opposed to intensive farming. This means that there is a potential for increasing yields. The farm sizes are quite low and the consolidation process of agricultural land is slowly progressing. Most farms do not exceed 15 hectares. The use of mineral fertilizer was increasing until 2008 but has now shown a slow decrease. Half of the agricultural land has limitations due to environmental and geographical constraints. Poland has the largest share of nitrogen and phosphorous load to the Baltic of all Baltic countries, and it is slightly increasing. It is above limits of Baltic action plan. However, Poland is a populous country and so if looking at the unit load per hectare and per capita, Poland does not have very high loads. The size of the country accounts for the high load. This makes it more difficult to reduce the load. In conclusion, the space for increasing yields carries the risk of increasing the nutrient load. Attention is needed to ensure that the water resources are not negatively influenced in this process. Comments and questions from the audience: due to the size of the agricultural sector in Poland diffuse pollution is relatively low; the impact could be far higher. Action plans in targeted territories and associated funding in order to recover water quality Gaëlle Prouvost, Loire Brittany water agency, France Half of the national cereal production and two thirds of France s livestock farms are located in the Loire-Bretagne basin. The water agency collects charges from all users who emit pollution or pump water. Conversely it provides subsidies for virtuous actions to reduce pollution. The agricultural subsidies are focused in river basins and framed by territorial contracts (more than 100 territorial contracts exist). The aim is to focus the actions in the most threatened areas in order to achieve good status, as defined by the WFD. Territorial contracts define action plans, which are shared by all the local actors, and as far as possible cover all the stakes of the territories. In this framework, different actions are implemented and funded by the water agency: territorial diagnosis, farm diagnoses, collective counselling, group trainings, demos for farmers, agri-environmental measures (on plots or for the whole agricultural production system), agri-environmental investments, measurements of residual nitrogen in plots after the harvesting season (and referenced plots network), hedges plantation, buffer zones creation, land management, and water quality follow-up. Some results on water quality are obtained in several territories, thanks to these action plans, and after a few years. Results depends on relevance of the actions, collective involvement of

4 farmers, project holders' political will, involvement of economical actors, response delay of the environment, climate hazards (drought, crop diseases). New subsidies to include in the action plans are planned, aiming to fund individual technical advice for farmers (more adapted advice for each farm), and developing partnerships with coops and farmers. Comments and questions from the audience: water distribution entities or chambers of agriculture may hold the contracts. The contracts support actions that go further than nitrate directive requirements. Promoting voluntary measures in agriculture through advice - opportunities and challenges Anuschka Heeb, Baltic COMPASS and Focus on Nutrients, Swedish Board of Agriculture, Sweden Focus on Nutrients started in 2001 in the South of Sweden and offers advice that is free of charge to the farmers. The aim is to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and nutrient leaching, as well as safe use of plant protection products. Today more than 8000 farmers take part of advice, provided by more than 250 advisors. Target farms are > 50 ha or 25 animal units, in intensive agricultural areas. On-farm advice is designed due to the farmers production, needs and interest. On-farm advice concerns healthy crops and animals, as well as consideration to the effect of farming activities on the environment, possible tools and measures to use, and improvements to test on the farm. In addition to individual on-farm advice group courses and field visits are arranged. Results from the South-Sweden-Counties, where the project has delivered enough follow-upnutrient balances for statistical analysis, show significant reduction of both N and P in most production types. Furthermore a positive change in farmers attitude towards environmental consideration has been noted. Key-opportunities: - influence the behavior by repeated visits (even if it is with different advisors), - combine environment and farm-economy, - make farmers proud of their actions, - inspire by voluntary participation. Key-challenge: - to reach the farmers who need to make most actions for the environment, - to build up trust between farmers and authorities. Policies for good agricultural practices in Poland Waldemar Mioduszewski, Institute of Technology and Natural Sciences in Falenty, Poland The Basic measures for limiting of the agricultural pollution are - Good agricultural practices agricultural advisory voluntary - Act on fertilizer and fertilization (liquid manure 4 months storage) - Baltic Sea Action Plan (reduction of N 32,64% and P 69,25% till 2021) - Natura 2000 Program limitations in agricultural land use, planning stage - Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Agro-Environmental Programs - Water Framework Directive (WFD) River Basin Management Plan (RBMP)

5 - Nitrates Directive (ND) Nitrates Vulnerable Zones (NVZ) action program Within the framework of agro-environmental programme the following agro-environmental packages are carried out: Sustainable farming, Organic farming, Extensive permanent grassland, Protection of endangered bird species and natural habitats outside of Natura 2000 areas, Protection of endangered bird species and natural habitats in Natura 2000 areas, Preservation of endangered genetic plant resources in agriculture, Preservation of endangered animal genetic resources in agriculture, Protection of soil and water (after crop), Buffer zones. Some conclusions regarding the agro-environmental programme: - A major attention is given to voluntary implementation of good agricultural practices. - Policy is focused mainly on the implementation of the EU Directives. - Measures for water protection within Agro-Environmental Programs are limited. It is necessary to introduce some measures for increasing the water retention in rural areas. - More attention should be paid to problems of the rural areas development and better use of the applied fertilizers (e.g. increasing of the effectiveness of fertilization). - Reconstruction of agriculture and increasing of the farms area is an ongoing process. Attention should be paid not to harm quality of water resources and natural value of the rural areas. Results from group discussions Two discussion-groups were held, each one focusing on one series of targeted questions. Group 1 "Innovative pollution management tools and associated research topics" Q1: Ideas and experiences for innovative pollution management tools? - recycling waste-water, micro-dosing, - market mechanisms, trading - communication: people should know that increasing of yield can be a threat for water - combining observation and modeling tools, improvement of monitoring programmes, use of GIS for land and water uses Q2: Challenging research issues with regard to pollution management - link sustainability with the complex system, how to maintain agriculture output while reducing pollution, cost-effectiveness - awareness raising: how to communicate on the risks associated with some kinds of agricultural practices and uncertainties, - more studies on run-off, on control of contaminants; increase geographical research for pollution mapping Q3: How should these research topics be addressed? At national level, collaborative structure, joint process? - all levels, multiple scales (national, European, international), address upstream and downstream, address discharge and recharge areas - joint process to maintain fair conditions for farmers, long term and short term Group 2 "Innovative solutions with regard to agricultural practices and related research issues" Q1: What should and could evolve in present agricultural practices? - more organic sustainable farming, use of grey water, better waste water management,

6 - better irrigation technics - doing things right, doing right thing at right place, step by step changes in agricultural practices - better use of fertilizers and pesticides, better adaptation of crops to the areas where they are grown, more drought resistance crops, alternative crops Q2: What are the main societal challenges? - how to balance secure food production for all without compromising environment and economical productivity - prevent loss of human capital in agricultural sector, reduction of manpower becomes a challenge by itself - training and education particularly women Q3: Which are the main research topics to be addressed with regard to agricultural practices? - how to get the farmers using research results - new irrigation technics with more efficient water use - improve reliability of estimations - impact of climate change on agriculture (yield, water consumption), to explain correlation between different parameters natural and anthropogenic, water balance in the river basin General discussion on priority research gaps Several other topics arose from the general discussions: - How to finance the necessary actions to improve agriculture? Solutions need to be cost effective for the administration, and easy for them to administer. - The policy focus was lacking in the discussion as compared to new OECD publication on policy in water management in agriculture that has just come out. For instance, what explains the fact that some farmers are very successful in reducing pesticides and fertilizers? - Research is needed on how different parameters can co-benefit from various measures such as buffer strips, which will also be good for climate change. - More focus needed on what measures are most cost-effective against producing benefit? - Social science: Address all the stakeholders in the catchment and not only farmers. Awareness raising that pollution at one point impacts others, communication - Scale-up and scale-down the research outputs, - Research on how to do instead of why some measures are more efficient - Communication with farmers: there's more to find out about how farmers make decision in a complex decision making process. Refine the communication mechanism within the agricultural community itself.