FARMING ON PEAT SOILS: MANAGEMENT ADVISORY NOTES

v.4 February 2014

Keith Thompson
Specialist in peat and peatlands

POBox 13062, Hamilton

Mb: 021 945252
Em: keith@bogman.co.nz

DRAFT
Preamble
These notes and guidelines were initially prepared in support of a talk: Towards
sustainable peat management for agriculture for the Headlands/Intelact Peat
Farming Field Day, 28 Feb 2012. V.4 February 2013 is a recent major upgrade of
these advisory notes, available online at: http://intelact.com/articles/item/227towards-sustainable-peat-management-for-agriculture]
This advisory document is still a work in progress (hence still a DRAFT). A further
upgrade will include additional material, such as a reference list.
Comments welcome.
1.0 Introduction
80% of the Waikato regions 100 000ha of peatlands are used for farming. There are
also a number of peatlands reserved for conservation, but 40% of the total area of the
natural peatlands are comprises only two wetlands: the Kopuatai Peat Dome and the
Whangamarino Wetlands.
Although there has been a great deal of research over the past 40 years on fertiliser
use, water relations and crop production on mineral soils, there has been practically
no government- or CRI-sponsored research on organic soils since about 1980, and
very limited specialist extension advice on the management of peats either, so in 1999
Environment Waikato (the Waikato Regional Council, WRC) made available the
booklet For Peats Sake, an awareness document, advising on some basic goodmanagement practices for peat farming. This advice was compiled by the WRC
together with the independent Waikato Peat Management Advisory Group
(WPMAG), which comprised of specialists with both conservation and development
perspectives and convened by Gordon Stephenson, then Chair of the Waikato
Advisory Committee Regional Environment (ACRE).
However, much has happened since For Peats Sake was compiled, and a more
comprehensive practical reference manual for organic soils may now be needed. In
particular, we have had at least 10 years of land-use intensification, especially
dairying. There has been the Clean Streams Programme, the Fonterra Accord,
proposed changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA), strong messages from the
1

Land and Water Forum and the National Policy Statement on Freshwater (NPS-FW),
increased awareness of the need to conserve soil resources, and an increasing intensity
of conflicts between the management needs of conservation and the management
wants of agricultural development. Management pressures on landowners to
maintain production have never been greater and a good understanding of the nature
and functioning of soils, especially peat soils, has never been more needed (see, for
instance, the WRCs 2008 report: The condition of rural water and soil in the Waikato
region.)
The International Peat Society (IPS) addresses both agricultural and conservation uses
of peatlands and its guiding principle is The wise use of peatlands.
Only natural peatlands can be truly sustainable, because peat must remain
waterlogged, but a number of best practice methodologies can be employed to
minimise the rate of loss of the peat resource and to get the best productive value from
it.
2.0 Peat types
Peat is an excellent soil for both pasture and cropping, but it needs to be managed
quite differently from mineral soils, because peat is the compacted remains of dead
plants deposited under water.
Only natural peatlands can be truly sustainable because, to be sustainable, the peat
must be waterlogged for most of the year and new organic material needs to be
continually added to balance the rate of decomposition. Peatlands are wetlands with
organic substrates.
There are many different types and sub-types of peat:
Bog peat: acid, very low nutrients, usually 35-50% carbon (60-85% organic
material; low-decomposition, so fibrous), formed mainly from the roots of
rushes (in Southland, often also a proportion of sphagnum moss) with
occasional stick layers (black fern roots, or red manuka wood).
Swamp peat: groundwater-fed, higher mineral content - between 15-40%
carbon (30-70% organic material); more decomposed than bog peats, so
generally less structured); sub-types formed from swamp plants like raupo
and sedges, or woody plants (eg manuka, kahikatea), algae/silt (lake peat), etc.
All of these different peat types need different management and this is particularly
difficult if different types are present in the same paddock, or layered on top of each
other in the same profile.
In soil survey terminology, peats are soils with over 70% organic content. All bog
soils are peats, and some swamp soils are peats. Most swamp soils are either loamy
peats (50-70% organic material), or peaty loams (30-70% organic material). Loams
are usually 15-30% organic and mineral soils <15% organic. Most mineral soils
have bulk densities (weights per unit volume eg kg/L) of 1 or more; bog peat can
be as low as 0.05 (<5% of the BD of most mineral soils) and swamp peats are mostly
between 0.1 and 0.4.

Degree of decomposition can be expressed on a 10-point scale (called the Von Post
Scale VP). Bog peats are usually about VP4 (and lower at higher latitudes); swamp
peats are usually >VP6, but some sedge peats can be lower.
For practical purposes, soils containing more than 30% organic material will be called
peat soils or organic soils.
3.0 Peat water

The amount of water available in a peat soil depends on:

- rainfall and its periodicity
- evapo-transpiration rate
- groundwater table height (GWL)
- drainage response time (permeability)
- soil characteristics (eg layering, degree of decomposition)

Peat may be up to 90% water (on a volume basis) when waterlogged, and it
has a field capacity (ability to hold onto water against gravity) of up to 70%
higher than any mineral soil.

Because peat holds onto water better than mineral soils (more suck needed to
remove water), it dries out slowly, and still retains 25- 30% moisture at the
wilting point of most crop plants. Silty loams, on the other hand, may only
have a field capacity of 35%, although their water content at wilting point is
also lower.

When the water content drops below about 20%v/v for a prolonged period,
peat usually dries irreversibly as the organic colloids break down, waterrepellent compounds are formed which resist re-wetting. Reconstitution of
this dried peat can take most of the winter, but after several cycles of
drying/rewetting the peat becomes powdery and loses its fibrous structure.
The irreversible drying process is similar to that causing dry patch syndrome
in the organic content of hill country soils, but the effects are far more
dramatic with peats.

The high peat water content desirable for peat soil conservation has
implications for designing irrigation regimes (see below).

4.0 Shrinkage and drying

All soils will shrink when water is removed from them, but peats shrink the
most.

Most peat shrinkage is caused by water removal. Only about 10% of

shrinkage is attributable to oxidation (decomposition).

Dry peat and waterlogged peat will not shrink, but damp peat (peat in the
capillary zone) will shrink by (10 -) 20 - 200 (- 400) mm per year.

Overgrazing and surface drying often encourages black beetle/grass grub

irruptions. If the peat is prone to prolonged drying, choose an appropriate
ryegrass cultivar with an insect-resistant endophyte there is good choice
available now.

Shrinkage rates are likely to be increased by:

- organic content so, in general, silty peats near streams shrink less than
peats in backwater swamps. In fact, unmodified bog peats may shrink less
than swamps peats, because of their more fibrous structure (lower VP
index).
- deep drainage
- continuous cultivation, frequent re-grassing, de-stumping.
- irrigation (although fibrous bog peats are less responsive to shrinkage than
the more muddy swamp peats).
- high stocking rates and heavy stock (trampling). Compaction occurs when
peat is damp but not waterlogged . Compaction hollows can be very
pronounced where mobs accumulate: consider drop-fences to replace
gates.
- heavy fertilising (including high excreta loads)
The highest shrinkage rates can be expected in peats subject to frequent
wetting and drying cycles (eg near deep drains).

In heavily used paddocks, surface drying results in hummocks and hollows.

With water percolating downwards only in the hollows, these damper hollows
sink rapidly (damp peats compact faster than dry), accelerated further by
excreta washed down from the hummocks (higher nutrient levels accelerating
decomposition processes). After only three or four years, hummocks can be
over 400mm higher than the hollows. Periodically hollows should be filled
with peat from the hummocks (eg by disking or dozing). If the hummocks are
formed by buried wood, levelling can only be done by stump-chipping (at ca
$1500-2000/ha).

Shrinkage of the hummock/hollow type may occur on a larger scale of

depressions and domes, particularly when peat depths are shallow, or if there
are differences in peat type or pasture quality across a paddock.

Although decomposition may only account for 10-15% of the overall

shrinkage, it does have a significant impact on drainage response, as
decomposed peats (lower VP index) have smaller particle sizes and less free
space for percolation.

5.0 Cultivation

Minimal cultivation is advised for improving peat sustainability.

Cultivation destroys peat layering, reduces particle size and increases aeration.
This can decrease both vertical (percolation/infiltration) and horizontal
(permeability) drainage efficiency and increase shrinkage.

Grass is the best mainstream crop for conserving a peat resource, but highyield ryegrasses tend to be shallower rooted. Browntop/crested dogs
tail/fescue/Yorkshire fog is the best mix for peat sustainability, because it is
deeper-rooted and acid tolerant, with lower nutrient requirements. However,
such a sward is only suitable for lower-intensity farming.

On bog peats, recultivation may be needed normally about every 7 years

(depending mainly on stocking rates) to maintain a good pasture and soil.
With good groundwater control, it can be much longer, but if recultivation is
necessary much more frequently than 6-7 years, something is wrong high
groundwater levels, drainage deficiencies, excessive shrinkage, inadequate
liming, over-stocking, or a combination of these are the most likely reasons.

Periodic recultivation is necessary on bog peats to maintain a crop-friendly

surface layer of about 400mm depth, above the acid raw peats below. This
does not require ploughing to that depth, as lime will penetrate below
ploughing depth, but a chisel plough may be needed to get initial lime
penetration to 200-250mm. Discing is not usually adequate for this purpose
on bog peats.

On the other hand, swamp peat recultivation only needs to be carried out
where drainage has been inadequate or summer water scarce and to control
weeds. Normally, swamp peats can be no-till or minimum-till (eg even as
little as 100mm for grass), because the pH and nutrient status is higher.

Peat is an excellent soil for summer maize, but it does potentially accelerate
shrinkage and reduce drainage efficiency through alteration of soil structure.
It also increases aeration, therefore oxidation. Maize is still a good one-season
recultivation crop (pre-grassing).

Cultivation increases evaporation losses as more peat soil is exposed to the air.
Exposed dark peat will absorb more heat and lose more water than peat with a
grass sward.

Root dieback may occur in bog peats if the acid groundwater table reaches too
high in the spring or liming has been inadequate.. This can leave inadequate
root depth to survive summer drought. The most obvious symptom is usually
divots of grass detaching easily from the soil. Inadequate root biomass may
also be caused, or made worse (applies to all peats) by compaction, black
beetle and grass-grub root-feeding (usually late summer, and especially after
heavy stock grazing), or by irreversible surface drying of the peat. If you have
a grass-pulling problem, the cause may therefore be physical, hydrological,
biological or stock management or a combination of these.

Sampling for agricultural soil management is normally done to a depth of only

about 150mm. For peat soils, and particularly bog peats, seasonal tests need to
be extended down to 400mm. Maintaining a healthy soil ecosystem (eg
mycorrhiza-friendly) is particularly important for organic soils.

In a number of locations, peat depths have shrunk close to the underlying

mineral substrate. Most peatlands originated as lakes or wetlands, in which
sands or clays have been deposited, so the soil below the peat is most likely
far less desirable for farming purposes than peat is. It is therefore worth
finding out what is under the peat before most of it has gone, because an
important post-peat option is to deep-plough the last of the peat into the
underlying muds or sands to make a good farmable soil. In some instances, of
course, there may be a thick kahikatea stick layer on top of the mineralised
sediments and this will have to be chipped or removed.

6.0 Drainage
Drainage depth is a balance between crop needs and peat sustainability: drainage is
essential for peats to have agricultural value, but too much drainage reduces root
growth, lowers crop productivity and increases shrinkage and irreversible drying of
the surface peats. Many peat properties, particularly pastoral ones, are overdrained.

6.1 Best practice

Drains should be kept as shallow as possible in peats. For increased drainage,

use extra width rather than depth (this applies to both farm and board drains)
or narrower drain spacing.

Field drains under 1m deep, such as spinner-ditchers, will not overdrain.

Ideally, board drains should not exceed 1.5-1.8m, farm collecting drains
should not exceed 1.3m and field drains should be 500-800mm, depending on
crop, spacing and land gradient.

If deeper drainage is needed to get drainage fall, consider installing adjustable

weirs to vary water levels seasonally high in summer, low in winter.
Seasonally varying drain water levels is often best practice on peats.
Weir/pump combinations are sometimes better longer-term solutions than
unequally-shared over-drainage and shrinkage problems. Drainage pumps
have been common in the Hauraki for a long time and will become
increasingly necessary for peat resource conservation in the Waikato Valley.
Weirs and pumps do mean extra expense, but they improve soil sustainability
and there are fewer cross-boundary conflicts.

Contrary to best practice, even Council (board) drains often exceed two metres
in depth, this being the cheapest (but not the best) way to maintain flood
drainage across properties. Landowners with peat soils traversed by such
drains can expect substantial surface drawdown (shrinkage) close to such
drains as well as bank destabilisation and slumping/collapse. The deeper the
drain, the greater the GWL drawdown and the wider the drawdown zone in
adjacent paddocks. Diggers should be instructed to clean inverts but avoid
deepening beyond surface-shrinkage rates, to maintain V-profiles wherever
possible, and to leave deeper-rooted woody plants to help stabilise drain
batters (drain sides).

The black death is the ultimate consequence of over-deep drainage:

subsurface water movement towards the drain can become channelised in
layered peats often along a stick layer resulting in different drainage-flow
rates in different peat layers and a perched water table or rapid localised
subsidence occurs This can result in a sudden loss of water table and serious
peat damage through drying, which may extend up to 25 or more metres back
into the paddock from the drain.

Deep drains are a fire hazard, because they can permit fires to run deep into
peat profiles from exposed drain batters. Peat fires may take weeks to
extinguish, and often this can only be done by excavation.

The more expensive drainage solutions of weirs and pumps, or drain

remodelling and rerouting, may have high capital costs but, if properly
designed and installed, there can be considerable longer-term benefits.

Too little drainage needs to be defined in terms of peat type and crop
requirements. So swamp peats will grow good pasture with a shallow 250mm
groundwater level (GWL), although there may be an increased risk pugging
risk and flooding with rain events. Bog peat drainage needs to maintain a
GWL over 350mm below surface, because of the acidity of the water but, even
then, there can be a risk of grass root death during rain events which raise the
GWL for prolonged periods. High groundwater tables in summer (especially
acid peats) are the most damaging.

Maize is especially sensitive to high water tables, particularly during

establishment. A GWL of below 450-500mm is recommended, although
shrinkage rates will increase. On bog peats maize will need good liming to
protect roots from acidity.

6.2 Drainage near property boundaries.

Bogs do not have natural drainage lines, so these have been created artificially
in the past by (sometimes considerable) deepening in order to get drainage fall
hydrological head) for flood removal. Many of these constructed drainage
lines cross property boundaries, so that some properties need to have deeper
drains than others. As deep main-drains can present serious over-drainage
problems, and shallow main drains under-drainage consequences, over-

drainage and waterlogging/flooding issues are often unequally shared in

drainage districts.

Drainage committees need to plan peatland drainage on a district basis and all
landowners need to cooperate to maintain a fair share of compromise, because
regional councils have only limited scope to regulate.

Collaborative drainage planning is particularly important for bog peats,

because drainage falls are so small. Also, most peat lakes are impounded by
farmed bog peatland and, again, only small drainage heads are available
without adversely affecting neighbouring properties.

Boundary conflicts frequently arise on peat soils, because cadastral boundaries

so often do not coincide with hydrological boundaries and if the adjacent
preferred drainage regimes are quite different (landowners have different
needs) there is a basic incompatibility. Weirs may assist in reaching a
compromise, but peat is porous so there will be leakage through the peat away
from the cross-boundary drain from the higher GWL to the lower.
The problem is greatest with drains that follow the cadastral boundary (shared
boundary drains, perimeter drains, ring drains) and when both sides have
convincing reasons for retaining GWLs that are incompatible - eg pasture and
organic cropping. In such an instance, mitigation action would probably need
to be taken first by the landowner with the deepest drains and the lowest
GWL, and the obvious measure would be to fill in the shared peripheral drain
and replace with shallow drains perpendicular to the boundary and 25-50m
apart. Your drainage engineer will be able to design a drainage system which
provides good drainage but also minimises impact on a neighbouring property
trying to maintain a higher GWL. It really is possible to have your cake (or, at
least, most of it) and also eat it with a properly-designed compromise
drainage system. Unfortunately, boundary drainage is usually all about
confrontation.

Such a conflict often arises between conservation land and productive

farmland. There are, for instance, many peat lakes in the Waikato which, in
the past, were progressively lowered to avoid flooding on consolidating
agricultural peatlands. These lakes can no longer be lowered, because they are
already of minimum depth for viable aquatic ecosystems. The WRC 200
metre rule (see below) does not permit deepening nearby drains without a
resource consent (which is unlikely to be granted). In this case, even if the
shared peripheral drain is filled or blocked and perpendicular drains installed,
sometimes the only viable solution offering a sustainable outcome may be
retirement of a buffer zone from productive farming. Normally, some sort of
compensation, or quid pro quo, would be expected of course.

Shallow boreholes may have drawdown effects some considerable distance

from their locations and cases are known where these have affected
groundwater levels in swamp peats.

6.3 Factors affecting drainage efficiency.

This is the effectiveness of a drainage system to remove excess water quickly.

Peat type. Fine-grained lake peats and silty peats near streams have very poor
drainage; coarse, layered swamp peats and woody peats usually drain fastest sometimes too fast (see channelization, above). Bog peats and deepcultivated or frequently-cultivated (but un-tiled) peats are often very slow.
Hydraulic conductivity. The rate of horizontal water movement through peat
soils is determined by (a) permeability, and (b) hydraulic head. So for a
measured hydraulic conductivity of, say, 10m/day (a reasonable value for
many bog peats), but the hydraulic head is near zero, the actual rate of water
flow through the peat will be much less than 10m/day. In peatlands, both
permeability and hydraulic head are generally low, so drainage efficiency
depends mostly on the depth, width and frequency of drains.
In theory, because deep drains can create a good hydraulic head on flat
ground, in practice, where they are used in peat soils there are several caveats
and disadvantages:
- Deep drains will only increase drainage flow is there is somewhere for to
water to go, unhindered by culverts, etc.
- There is an almost linear relationship between drain depth and peat
shrinkage rate.
- Because deep drains draw down the peat water table they increase the
susceptibility of surface peats to irreversible drying.
- Peat permeability is usually the limiting factor to drain depth and drainage
efficiency, so that above a certain hydraulic head no further increase in
drainage flow can be achieved however deep the drains are, and deep
drains therefore often do not increase drainage efficiency at all, compared
with shallower drains they just deliver more peat damage.
- Because of the permeability limitations, deep drainage of peats will not
reduce winter pugging more than shallow drainage.
- Deep drains raise susceptibility to channelized flow and perched water
tables.
- Without strategic irrigation, deep drains reduce pasture and crop growth
rates
Wider, shallow drains are the better choice. Tiling can be used at 10-20m
intervals, but it may not be very stable in deep low-density peats and there can
again be a risk of over-draining.

The Soil Water Deficit (SWD) is the recharge potential of the soil the
amount of rainfall needed to raise the soil to field capacity. The lower the
GWL in the peat, the higher the SWD, so if drainage efficiency is kept high by
maintaining a low GWL with deep drains, surface peats will dry out and plants
will be drought-stressed. In addition, the infiltration capacity of surface peats
(to rainfall) will decrease and surface ponding is likely to become more
prominent the opposite of the intended outcome from lowered drain inverts.
Note also that, because peats hold on to water longer than mineral soils,

forecasts of soil water deficits given on, for instance, the NIWA website, will
usually be overestimates for the management of peat soils.

Irrigation (including effluent irrigation) may require additional shallow surface

drainage, because although peats have a high water storage capacity, they also
have high water tables and irrigation increases susceptibility to flooding from
an unexpected weather event. Effluent also contains fine particulate material
which can lower a peat soils porosity. For peats, a low-rate applicator
(<10mm.hr), using a K-Line system would be recommended to minimise
ponding and (with effluent particularly) reduce the risk of organic material in
the effluent creating anaerobic conditions in the surface peats.

High iron concentrations are a feature of many groundwaters coming from

hills in the Waikato. When exposed to the air, soluble ferrous iron precipitates
as brown ferric iron, often forming hard lumps, or concretions, with humic
compounds in peat. These sometimes consolidate, particularly near water
courses, as iron hardpans and are usually at quite shallow depth (under a
metre). They are impermeable so can create major drainage problems.
Because hardpans are associated with a water source (which can sometimes be
artesian), care should be taken when trying to correct drainage problems
standard drainage solutions are rarely appropriate.

Cultivation. Where a peat soil has been compacted, cultivation may improve
drainage; otherwise heavy cultivation tends to decrease drainage efficiency. It
is common for a recultivated peat soil to develop shallow surface ponding,
even when the groundwater table is a metre below ground. It can take two
seasons, or more, for a recultivated peat to fully recover its infiltration
capacity (vertical drainage).

Some raw bog peats, silty peats and compacted peats do not fully recover from
cultivation or recultivation at all, and shallow contour drainage,
hummock/hollow drainage systems with 30m spacing spinner-ditches, or even
tile drains, may have to be considered.

Heavy stocking (pugging and compaction) reduces infiltration & increases

surface runoff. Pugging occurs when peats are saturated; compaction is most
prevalent when peat is wet but below field capacity. Organic soils do not
easily recover from this surface damage, because soil air spaces cannot reestablish when peat has been partially decomposed and compacted.

7.0 Nutrients and lime

7.1 On-farm issues

There are inherent differences between the nutrient contents of different peats.
At the extremes, bog peats have very low nutrient content, because bog plants
are adapted to growing with only a rainwater supply. Lake peat is, strictly a
loam, as its organic content is usually only 20-25%, but it usually has a high

10

nitrogen content because much of its biomass derives from dead algal
(plankton) cells. Fertiliser requirement vary accordingly.

High-carbon peats have poor anion (sulphate, phosphate, nitrate, etc)

retention, and it is recommended that fertilisers are applied to peats only as
strategic dressings. This should be done little and often to reduce losses to
groundwater (by infiltration) and by surface runoff. In the case of phosphorus,
for instance, several small will ensure that there is always adequate P in the
root zone at the right time so that plant growth is not restricted. P retention by
peats is greater in well-developed peats that have a higher mineral content.

On the other hand, peats have the highest cation (potassium, ammonium,
calcium, etc) exchange capacity (CEC) of any soil type. Ammonium, for
instance, is strongly bound to peats, but when it is oxidised to nitrate it is able
to be leached into the peat profile. When it has percolated to the anaerobic
zone much of it may be converted (by microbial denitrification) to nitrogen
gases. Organic soils are therefore normally good systems for limiting nitrogen
leaching into waterways. Unfortunately the Overseer programme does not
estimate this denitrification capacity well.

Negatively-charged phosphate ions tend to bind to mineral soils (ie they have
anion retention), particularly the allophane clays so prominent in volcanic ash
soils, and is lost to drainage waters largely by surface erosion and runoff of
soil particles, or by wind. In peat soils the behaviour of phosphate is different,
because they have poor anion retention Superphosphate is a relatively slowrelease fertiliser because it is not very soluble under aerobic conditions, but it
is much more labile (subject to chemical change) under the anaerobic
conditions encountered below the water table in bog peat soils, where it
becomes soluble much more easily. A similar transformation happens in the
anaerobic zones of many lakes, where phosphorus becomes soluble and much
more available for plant uptake. Soluble phosphate can be leached through
peats into drainage waters. So phosphorus loss from agricultural peatlands
is often much higher than standard estimates (based usually on the assumption
that transfer to drainage is only by surface transport of soil particles) and
Overseer does not predict this.

When ferrous iron concentrations are high (see discussion of hardpans above),
phosphorus combines with it to form the iron phosphate mineral vivianite.
This also has an oxidised form, so phosphorus can be immobilised in this way
often incorporated into iron concretions or hardpan. Vivianite can also occur
as green or blue crystals often found at the interface between mineral high
ground and peatland on the flats. There is no information at this stage to
quantify this phosphorus immobilisation process under field conditions.

All peats need lime dressings to correct pH, to improve soil structure and
water-holding capacity, and to retain phosphate in a slow-release form.
Ideally, the slower-release rock phosphate should be used on peats rather than
superphosphate, but of course it is more expensive. Raw bog peats need initial
dressings of anything up to 15 tonnes of lime per hectare to correct the acidity

11

and when developed may require maintenance applications of up to 1 t/ha/yr,

increasing as the peat consolidates and the root zone approaches the acidic
water table as the surface peats consolidate.

Chemical analyses of peat soils are more difficult to interpret than mineral
soils, because peats are really just dead plants, not the mixture of mineral
clays, silts, etc that the tests were originally designed for. For instance,
potassium tests on peats are often not reliable. Also, Olsen tests for
phosphorus in peats (especially the more acid bog peats) are particularly
untrustworthy, because they were originally developed for neutral to alkaline
soils. Aim for Olsen 25-30 if you have a well-developed peat, because OlsenP is likely to be an under-estimate of available P. However, the Anion
Storage Capacity Test (%ASC formerly called the Phosphorus Retention
Test) is strongly recommended for organic soils. The Olsen test can be run in
parallel and calibrated against the ASC test. The Resin-P Test is also likely
to be more reliable than the Olsen. Too much reliance on the Olsen could
result in excess P in the soil system and, apart from the wasted cost, there
could be significant losses to groundwater.
For organic soils, chemical analyses of plant material are often more
consistently reliable indicators of crop performance than standard chemical
tests for nutrients. Moreover, organic soil tests should be carried out to
400mm depth (rather than just the top 150mm that is normal practice for
agricultural soil testing), because of the different chemical status and
behaviour of organic soils (eg, for bog peats, they tend towards low pH).

As noted above, effluent irrigation needs especially careful management on

peat soils, particularly the finer-grained bog and lake peats and loamy peats in
wetter parts of the paddock. Fine organic solids in the effluent can reduce
percolation rates and restrict soil aeration. Use a low application rate, or even
restrict application to the drier peats during wet weather.

Try to avoid hummock/hollow development and persistence on pastoral peats

(see above), as this results in an uneven distribution of nutrients and greater
losses to groundwater and to surface runoff.

7.2 Cross-boundary issues

Significant surface runoff of nutrients and particulate material from peat soils
occurs when the peat is saturated in winter, and when surface drying during
summer has reduced infiltration capacity, so riparian protection, avoiding
over-grazing, excessive pugging and excessive soil drying in summer will
significantly reduce losses to waterways.

High nutrient levels encourage algal blooms, dominance by fast-growing,

often exotic, plants and reduce biodiversity in wetlands. There are many
wetland and peatland conservation reserves adjacent to, or even surrounded
by, agricultural peatland, often intensive dairying. Because the groundwater

12

aquifer is shared, it is important for land managers to apply best practice in

minimising nutrient transfer to conservation wetlands from groundwaters from
drains entering wetlands. Some potential mitigation methods are:
- Instal sediment traps on drains entering a wetland. Sediment can carry
nutrients, reduce lake depth and lower water clarity.
- Divert incoming drains through small processing wetlands.
- Buffer zone retirement, covenanting or purchase.
- Avoid or control lime and fertiliser broadcasting near conservation
wetlands and peatlands.
- Block, fill or divert perimeter drains between properties.
8.0 Regulations dealing with drainage and water quality

Within the Waikato Region, discretionary activities (requiring a permit)

relevant to peat soils are:
- Drainage upgrades (new drains or lowering of existing drain inverts)
within 200m of a wetland listed in the Regional Plan. This is only
enforceable when both before and after drain inverts are known. Existing
shared perimeter drains can only be filled or blocked by mutual agreement.
- Drainage activity in a wetland exceeding 1 hectare.
- Diversion of, or abstraction from, a waterway. This only applies to natural
waterways, so there is no restriction over constructed farm field drains.

District Councils (Territorial Authorities) administer land use permits and

Regional Councils are responsible for water management. Although the RMA
requires Regional and District Councils to collaborate fully over natural
resource management (in fact, District Councils are now required to give
effect to the Regional Plan), this cooperative approach is sometimes less than
satisfactory in respect of wetlands and peatlands. The problems are twofold:
- firstly, peatlands as a resource are intermediate between land and water
and groundwater wetlands and lakes are a function of their catchments.
- secondly, the administration of drainage networks is shared between the
two councils and it is not always clear where the responsibility for issuing
permits lies.

Councils do not have any Rules which distinguish peat soils from mineral
soils. Their only Rule applying to farm drains concerns the avoidance of drain
obstructions. There are no statutory controls over farm drain depth or width.
Consequently, Drainage Committees play a very important role in negotiating
and planning drainage systems that are fair to all landowners, by taking into
account the needs of neighbouring properties. Peat soils are very unforgiving
when best-practice methods are not employed.

However, the new National Policy Statement on Freshwater requires Regional

Councils to set water quality limits for water bodies so as to achieve at least
one of two outcomes:
- water body safe for human health (swimmable)
- maintain or improve ecosystem health

13

Both of these outcomes are sufficiently vague as to invite a range of

definitions.
9.0 Towards sustainability

Peat soils are only truly sustainable when they are waterlogged for most of the
year and dominated by plants tolerant of waterlogged conditions. Farming on
peat is a compromise between sustaining a profitable crop and minimising the
progressive loss of the peat resource.

Increasing farm production will therefore potentially increase peat shrinkage

rates but, for every level of farming intensity, there are best-practice measures
which will minimise shrinkage rates. However, the most reliable measure is
still reduction in land-use intensity. In fact this can often be done by
improving farming efficiency.

Several of the measures that minimise loss of the peat resource also minimise
loss of nutrients and soil particulates to drainage and downstream water
bodies.

The most important issues in sustainable management of a farmed peat soil, in

priority order, are:
- water levels and drainage
- cultivation regime and stock management
- nutrient supplements

The greater challenge is sustainable farming together with sustainable wetland

and peatland conservation reserves. This challenge can only be approached
through cooperation and the use of best practice methodologies.

The government has not yet decided whether soil carbon will be included in
the Emissions Trading Scheme but, if it is, there will be big implications for
farming on peat soils. Oxidation of farmed peat in the Waikato alone accounts
for perhaps 20 - 25% of New Zealands fossil fuel use, thus supplying yet
another reason for managing the peat resource wisely.

[KT 02.02.14..v.4]

14