Wednesday, 26 February 2020 14:04

Answers, please! — Editorial

Written by  Staff Reporters
Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Simon Upton. Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Simon Upton.

OPINION: Overseer is proving to be a major worry.

This software was supposed to be the solution for monitoring fertiliser input use and its potential environmental impacts, but concerns have been raised by farmers, regional councils and even the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. 

Farmers have long complained that Overseer is a flawed tool. However, the current Government – hell-bent on introducing new water quality regulations – has nailed the success of its proposed freshwater reforms to the use of Overseer as the key monitoring tool.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Simon Upton, has recently written to four ministers, including Damien O’Connor and David Parker – the main drivers of these new water quality reforms to be imposed on farming. Upton seeks an urgent update on what fixes have been made to Overseer, following his report in December 2018 that found it to be “seriously flawed”.

In his letter, Upton quite rightly describes Overseer as:  “the accidental black box regulatory tool.” Initially developed by the fertiliser industry to help farmers calculate how much fertiliser to use to maximise pasture growth, Overseer has over time become the default regulatory tool used by several regional councils to manage pollution in waterways. 

But now those who will be tasked with measuring and regulating the proposed new water quality standards are expressing valid concerns about Overseer’s suitability to do this job. Taranaki Regional Council chief Basil Chamberlain says his council shares the view of many experts and authorities that it is unfit for use as a regulatory tool. “When making rules, we seek to ensure they’re soundly based, fit for the purpose of solving real problems, and able to be monitored and enforced. We want to avoid unjust and perverse outcomes – behaving professionally demands nothing less.”

In his letter, Upton calls on ministers to be “open to the possibility that a comprehensive model evaluation may conclude that Overseer is unsuitable for use in a regulatory context.”

Even the boffins at Overseer concede that it is only a ‘nutrient budgeting model’, not a ‘real-time nitrogen loss calculator’.

So how can farmers, regional councils and others be expected to rely on such a flawed tool to map the success or failure of their efforts to reduce nutrient loss and improve water quality? Farmers, regulators, the PCE and the wider public all deserve answers before any new rules are imposed.

More like this

Will review fix Overseer?

Overseer Ltd says it welcomes the recent launch of an independent review of its environmental modelling software and is looking forward to working with the review panel.

National

Health Hub returns

The Health and Wellbeing Hub is back at Fieldays this year, focusing on the importance of rural health and providing…

Machinery & Products

Lady muck really does suck

As anyone will attest to – if they’re married to someone with horses, have kids with ponies or are foolish…

The perfect workhorse

Hastings-based Kleer Contractors provides 24-hour machine work and labour for a local food processing plant.

All-new Claas Disco arrives

The Claas Harvest Centre display at Mystery Creek will include the public debut of the all-new CLAAS Disco 10 series…

» The RNG Weather Report

» Latest Print Issues Online

The Hound

Cracked China

OPINION: Your old mate reckons Fonterra and its dairy farmer shareholders may well be all cock-a-hoop about the prospects of…

Seriously?

OPINION: The Hound hears that government department MBIE is apparently working on a 'NZ Battery Project' to try and find…

» Connect with Rural News

» eNewsletter

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter