BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT HEARINGS PANEL
IN THE MATTER
of the Resource Management
Act 1991
and
the
Local
Government
(Auckland
Transitional Provisions) Act
2010
AND
IN THE MATTER
of Topic 011 RPS Rural
Chapter
B8
(Sustainably
managing
our
rural
environment)
STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF DR FIONA CURRAN-COURNANE
ON BEHALF OF AUCKLAND COUNCIL
(01 DECEMBER 2014)
1
1.
SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE
1.1
Elite and prime land is a non-renewable resource and once developed upon, it is
effectively lost forever. Certain rural land use activities such as outdoor vegetable
production are limited to elite and prime land. This is because it is the best, most
versatile, multiple use land. Elite and prime land represents only a small proportion of
Auckland’s total land area. For example, elite land only represents <1% (4397 ha) of
total land area in Auckland which is predominantly located in and around west
Pukekohe, a renowned powerhouse in terms of outdoor vegetable production. This area
is also of national importance because it contains some of New Zealand’s best soils.
Land use capability Classes 2 and 3 (or prime land) represent 12% (55,356 ha) and
15% (65,090 ha), respectively, of land area in Auckland and is also highly productive
agricultural and horticultural land.
1.2
However, recent research has conclusively identified that development in Auckland
disproportionately encroaches onto elite and prime land and plans for future growth in
Auckland indicate that these trends will continue. This particularly relates to the location
of the proposed rural urban boundary (RUB) (Appendix 1a and b). To date, 8.3%
(10,399 ha) of Auckland’s elite and prime land has been converted to various types of
development, 8.1% of which was converted from 1975-2012. These figures more than
double when areas of proposed future growth onto elite and prime land are considered
(Appendix 1a and b).
1.3
In my opinion, stricter objectives and policies are required, as per the proposed
provisions in Section B8 'Sustainably managing our rural environment' of the Proposed
Regional Policy Statement (B8) in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP), to
prevent the development of Auckland’s remaining elite and prime land. Amongst other
environmental benefits elite and prime land supports and provides, this will ensure a
self-sufficient and resilient food producing region now and into the future. Overall, I
support the provisions that relate to my area of expertise in section B8 ‘Sustainably
managing our rural environment’ particularly which establish clear outcomes to avoid
further development of elite and prime land.
2.
INTRODUCTION
2.1
My name is Dr Fiona Curran-Cournane. I am employed as the Land and Soil Scientist
at Auckland Council (Council) and have been in this position since May 2011. Prior to
this I was undertaking a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Environmental Science at
AgResearch Mosgiel, via Lincoln University (2007-2010).
2
2.2
In 2011, I was awarded my PhD in Environmental Science and I have over 7 years’
experience in the field of land and soil science (Attachment A). I am an active member
of the New Zealand Soil Science Society and the Australasia Land and Groundwater
Association.
2.3
I have been asked by Auckland Council to provide evidence on matters within my area
of expertise relating to the objectives and policies provisions in section B.8 of the PAUP.
2.4
I have been providing the Council with my advice in relation to the discipline of land and
soil science since the commencement of my employment. I have previously been
involved in providing evidence about these matters at Council hearings for both private
plan changes including Drury South Private Plan Change and resource consent
applications.
3.
CODE OF CONDUCT
3.1
I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the
Environment Court Practice Note 2011 and that I agree to comply with it. This evidence
is within my area of expertise, except where I state or reference material that I am
relying upon. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter
or detract from the opinions that I express.
4.
SCOPE OF EVIDENCE
4.1
My evidence addresses the following matters:
(a)
Value of elite and prime land
(b)
Pressures on elite and prime land
(c)
Issues with subdivision on elite and prime land
(d)
Value of other land classes and issues with subdivision and reverse sensitivity
(e)
Auckland Council’s soil quality monitoring programme
(f)
Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan section B.8 ‘Sustainably managing our rural
environment’.
4.2
In discussing these matters in my evidence, I rely on and refer to a key research paper
of which I was first-author and that was recently accepted for publication in an
international academic journal entitled ‘Land Use Policy’. The article itself is entitled
‘Tradeoffs between high class land and development: Recent and future pressures on
3
Auckland’s valuable soil resources’. A list of my relevant publications is included as
Attachment A to my evidence.
5.
VALUE OF ELITE AND PRIME LAND
5.1
Elite and prime land is a non-renewable, finite resource. Elite and prime land is defined
as Land Use Capability (LUC) Classes 1-3. Class 1 land (or elite land) is the most
versatile, multiple use land on flat to gentle rolling land. Classes 2 and 3 land (or prime
land) are also very good prime agricultural and horticultural land with slight (Class 2) or
moderate (Class 3) physical limitations to arable use.
5.2
Elite land represents <1% (4397 ha) of total land area in Auckland which is
predominantly located in and around west Pukekohe (Figure 1)1, a renowned
powerhouse in terms of outdoor vegetable production. LUC Classes 2 and 3 (or prime
land) represent 12% (55,356 ha) and 15% (65,090 ha), respectively, of land area in
Auckland (Figure 1).
5.3
As LUC Classes increase from 1 to 8, increasing physical limitations of certain land use
activities prevail (Table 1).
Table 1. Increasing limitations to use and decreasing versatility of use from LUC Classes 1-82
1
Curran-Cournane, F., Vaughan, M., Memon, A. & Fredrickson, C. 2014. Trade-offs between high class land and
development: recent and future pressures on Auckland’s valuable soil resources. Land Use Policy 39, 146-154.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837714000489
2
Adapted from: Lynn, I., Manderson, A., Page, M., Harmsworth, G., Eyles, G., Douglas, G., Mackay, A. &
Newsome, P. 2009. Land Use Capability Survey Handbook. A New Zealand handbook for the classification of
land- 3rd edition, AgResearch Ltd, Hamilton; Landcare Research New Zealand Ltd, Lincoln; Institute of
Geological and Nuclear Sciences Ltd, Lower Hutt.
4
5.4
Therefore, certain land uses such as outdoor vegetable production are limited to elite
and prime land. There are several reasons why elite and prime land makes for highly
productive agricultural and horticultural land. The soils in and around Franklin, and
particularly Pukekohe, are inherently fertile and derived from volcanic origin. The soils
are very well developed and have been described as some of the best soils in New
Zealand at producing outdoor vegetables3. While elite land is largely exclusive to
Pukekohe, prime agricultural land is located in the wider Franklin, Whenuapai,
Coatesville, Hobsonville and Riverhead areas (Figure 1).
3
MAF 1975. Agricultural and horticultural implications of the Auckland Regional Authority's. Urban growth
alternatives study. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries. Auckland July 1975 (Part 1). Soil resources of the
Auckland region (A.D Wilson, J.E. Cox, J. C Heine (D.S.I.R Soil Bureau) (Part 2).
5
Figure 1. Distribution of elite (LUC 1) and prime land (LUC 2-3) in Auckland.
5.5
Apart from the soils, the effectively frost free climate that is experienced in the Auckland
area is another factor that renders it as a highly efficient productive system. This climate
allows for crop production all year round whereas other regions in New Zealand would
succumb to frost in winter. It is therefore not uncommon to produce three crops a year
6
in these parts, or three crops of potatoes on the same piece of ground within 14
months4. This is a huge advantage for market gardening activity in Auckland when
compared to other regions and Pukekohe has been described as the largest market
gardening area in New Zealand5.
5.6
A lot of the market gardening land in the Pukekohe area also occurs on flat to gently
rolling terrain whereby minimal conservation practices are required versus what would
be required on land with greater slopes. All the above land and soil attributes render this
area to be of significant importance to Auckland and New Zealand as a whole.
5.7
The location of Franklin and its close proximity to a multitude of freight options, pack
houses, supply of labour and availability of irrigation water also makes for a highly
efficient and economic source of activity and employment. This is particularly important
for perishable produce with a short shelf life, such as leafy greens, and therefore the
close proximity of city markets makes for a valuable resource. The importance of this
has also been recognised as a key transformational element ‘Enhancing local
production’ in the Low Carbon Auckland document which will be discussed further
below in relation to the section of my evidence about B8 of the PAUP. However,
considering the former, if it were not for the inherently fertile nature of the soil and the
favourable climate and other land attributes, outdoor vegetable production would not be
able to occur in the area.
5.8
It is important to distinguish between elite and prime ‘land’ and elite and prime ‘soil’
because there is a clear distinction. While elite and prime ‘soil’ refers specifically to the
underlying soil type e.g. Patumahoe clay loam, elite and prime ‘land’ considers the soil,
rock type, slope angle, erosion type and severity and vegetation cover and is therefore
a far more precious resource than the soil type itself. This distinction is important for
transparency purposes because the use of both terms i.e. elite and prime ‘land’ and
‘soils’, has often been used interchangeably when they are clearly different.
5.9
Furthermore, the concept of elite and prime land is not to protect land that currently
generates a high to moderate gross margin or exclude land that does not. Rather, it is
the inherent qualities of the land that are important and not the current use. It is
therefore important that elite and prime land needs to be preserved to maintain future
options – to provide room for our food and fibre industries to manoeuvre to meet future
markets.
4
Hunt, D. T. 1959. Market gardening in metropolitan Auckland. New Zealand Geographer, 15, 130-155.
Gradwell, M. W. & Arlidge, E. Z. 1971. Deterioration of soil structure in the market gardens of the Pukekohe
District, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 14, 288-306.
5
7
6.
PRESSURES ON ELITE AND PRIME LAND
6.1
Recent research has highlighted that urban development in Auckland disproportionately
encroaches onto Auckland’s non-renewable and ever decreasing elite and prime land. It
was calculated that 10,399 ha (or 8.3%) of Auckland’s elite and prime land has been
converted to development. Of this, 10,080 ha (8.1%) of elite and prime land was
converted to development between the years, 1975-20121.
6.2
The rate of urban extension onto elite and prime land has accelerated since 1996.
Furthermore, the majority of land allocated to urban extension since 1996 has been elite
and prime land.
6.3
Proposals for future growth in the PAUP represented by the future urban zone and
Rural Urban Boundary (RUB) indicate that this tradeoff will continue. For example,
future greenfield growth developments, including plan changes of the legacy councils,
equate to an additional potential development of 6010 ha (or 4.8% as at 2012) of elite
and prime land in Auckland (Appendix 1b). Furthermore, the Auckland Plan is based on
a 1 million population increase by 2040 putting additional pressures on elite and prime
land to accommodate future growth. Similar to the findings in the recently published
literature1 the majority of land that is allocated for future growth is located on prime land
and the rate of urban extension onto prime land is also likely to increase into the future.
While west Pukekohe has been identified as a ‘no go’ area for future growth, a location
where the majority of elite land is concentrated, other areas of elite and prime land
(such as land directly south of Pukekohe) are likely to be utilised for greenfield
development (Appendix 1a and b). Therefore, these RPS rural provisions are even
more important and vital to protect against further development of elite and prime land
outside the RUB areas.
6.4
It is important to provide this context, because while areas within the RUB identified for
future growth are not the focus of objectives and policies in section B.8 it highlights that
pressures confronting the development of elite and prime land are not just unique to
rural subdivision and it reiterates that it is an ever-decreasing resource in Auckland.
6.5
The impacts of this trend need to be realised because outdoor vegetable growing
activity is limited to elite and prime land and in order to safeguard Auckland’s selfsufficiency as a food producing and resilient region this land needs to be preserved.
8
7.
ISSUES WITH SUBDIVISION OF ELITE AND PRIME LAND
7.1
Land use activities such as rural subdivision will subsequently further diminish the
availability of elite and prime land for other primary production purposes. Rural or land
fragmentation is the on-going subdivision of rural land that leads to increasingly smaller
land parcels. It can be defined as ‘any division of a land resource that changes the
current or future range of possible land uses’.6
7.2
It occurs when large land parcels used for agriculture are subdivided into small and
more intensive production units, hobby farms or lifestyle blocks primarily for residential
use. Rural fragmentation increases settlement density and also excludes land uses
such as pastoral and horticultural farming that for practical or economic reasons require
large land parcels. Furthermore, the adverse accumulative effects of subdivision on elite
and prime land will compromise the future use and availability of this resource for
productive activities that directly rely on it.
8.
VALUE OF OTHER LAND CLASSES AND ISSUES WITH SUBDIVISION AND
REVERSE SENSITIVITY
8.1
The impact of subdividing land that is not elite and prime also needs to be considered
particularly since the majority of the Auckland area is not classified as elite and prime
land (Table 2).
6
http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/science/living/sustainable-futures/monitoring-land-fragmentation.
9
Table 2. Breakdown in hectares and percent (%) of Land Use Capability Classes 1-8 in
Auckland1.
1
Taken from Curran-Cournane F, Vaughan M, Memon A, Fredrickson C (2014) Trade-offs between
high class land and development: recent and future pressures on Auckland’s valuable soil resources.
Land Use Policy 39, 146-154.
8.2
Land Use Capability classes 1-4 are suitable for ‘arable cropping (including vegetable
cropping), horticultural (including vineyards and berry fields), pastoral grazing, tree crop
or production forestry use. Classes 5-7 are not suitable for arable copping but are
suitable for pastoral grazing, tree crop or production forestry use, and in some cases
vineyards and berry fields. Class 8 land is unsuitable for grazing and production
forestry, and is best managed for catchment protection and/or conservation or
biodiversity’2. For example, Class 8 land is very unstable, hazardous land which, at
most, would only be able to withstand short periods of very low intensive stock grazing.
8.3
For economic purposes, rural activities such as intensive dairying, extensive drystock
and other pastoral, horticultural and forestry farming require large areas of contiguous
land. Land use capability class (LUC) 6 represents the largest land class area in
Auckland that supports a large proportion of pastoral farming. The unmanaged and
accumulative adverse effect of continued subdivision can potentially also undermine
these land uses activities which need to be realised.
8.4
Furthermore, the adverse cumulative effect of rural subdivision in the fragmentation of
land reduces the productive potential of land which can also increase the potential of
reverse sensitivity effects. In time this can reinforce the demand for further
fragmentation which can render land based productive activities uneconomic. Reverse
sensitivity issues such as complaints when operating noisy machinery, pesticide and
fertiliser spraying and application, and dust and smell associated with rural agriculture
all need to be considered within a rural setting and apply to land that is both elite and
prime and land that is not. A comprehensive analysis of these issues is explicitly stated
in the PAUP section 32 evaluation for Rural subdivision (section 2.35).
10
8.5
The impacts of land fragmentation on land supply for potential primary production and
associated reverse sensitivity concerns are raised by all regional council and unitary
authorities in New Zealand, as well as three city/district councils, and form the basis of
developing consistent national land fragmentation monitoring guidelines7.
9.
AUCKLAND COUNCIL'S SOIL QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAMME
9.1
Auckland Council undertakes a soil quality monitoring programme as part of State of
Environment monitoring and reporting. Briefly, various representative land uses in
Auckland such as pasture, horticulture, plantation forestry, urban and native bush sites
across representative soil types are monitored every five years (one land use a year) for
a suite of key soil physical, chemical and biological quality indicators to ensure a
functioning soil ecosystem. Soil quality refers to the ability of the soil to sustain
biological production, maintain environmental quality and promote plant and animal
health.
9.2
The soil issues of most concern in Auckland include soil compaction (as measured by
macroporosity) and over phosphorus (P) fertilisation (as measured by Olsen P i.e. plant
available P). This is particularly the case for horticultural and pastoral sites whereby
more than half the sites fail to meet the recommended guideline range for these
indicators8,9. Amongst other things such as reducing pasture and crop yield, a
compacted soil with high P levels increases the likelihood of P loss in surface runoff
during heavy rainfall events which can have detrimental impacts on the receiving
environment whether that be freshwater or coastal water bodies. The above highlights
that land management practices should be encouraged on all rural land that retains the
physical and chemical capability of the soil and should not be limited to elite and prime
land but to all LUC classes to ensure both environmental and agronomic outcomes (as
per Mr Cross's suggested amendments to Policy 5 in section B8.2).
7
Hart, G., Rutledge, D., Price, R., Curran-Cournane, F., Jones, H., Burton, A. & Hill, R. 2014. A Nationally
Consistent Approach for Monitoring Land Fragmentation in New Zealand. New Zealand Planning Institute
Conference 02-05 April 2014, Queenstown.
http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/73849/Paper_2014_NZ_Planning_Institute_Conf
erence.pdf
8
Curran-Cournane, F., Fraser, S., Hicks, D. L., Houlbrooke, D. J. & Cox, N. 2013. Changes in soil quality and
land use in grazed pasture within rural Auckland. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 56, 102-116.
9
Curran-Cournane, F., Khin, J. & Hussain, E. 2014. Soil quality for horticultural sites in the Auckland region and
changes after 18 years. Auckland Council Technical Report 2014/023.
11
10.
PAUP SECTION B8 SUSTAINABLY MANAGING OUR RURAL ENVIRONMENT
10.1
In this section of my evidence I discuss my support for the objectives and policies in B8
concerning land with high production potential and subdivision as it impacts on the
availability of rural land for current and future potential primary production purposes.
10.2
Recently published literature, from an international academic journal, has conclusively
identified that Auckland’s elite and prime land (i.e. Land Use Capability LUC classes 13) are most at risk of being developed upon than any other land class (i.e. LUC classes
4-8)1. Future growth indicates that these trends will continue. As previously discussed in
my evidence, this is important because certain land use activities, such as outdoor
vegetable production and arable cropping, are limited to elite and prime land. The
continued development of elite and prime land will limit these land use activities now
and into the future.
10.3
Therefore, the effectiveness of previous Regional Policy Statements and District Plans
in protecting against the development of this non-renewable and ever-decreasing
resource is questionable and more stringent objectives, polices and rules are justified to
safe-guard the life supporting capacity of this resource for future generations, as per the
Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA).
10.4
The need and justification for a new approach in relation to ‘Rural subdivision’ is
discussed in the PAUP Section 32 evaluation for the rural subdivision.
10.5
‘Keep rural Auckland productive, protected and environmentally sound’ is listed as
Strategic Direction 9 in Chapter 9 Rural Auckland of the Auckland Plan which I
understand the PAUP is to have regard to. Two Auckland Plan targets sit in this chapter
which specify:
1. ‘…no more than 10% of rural subdivision will be in the rural production, rural
coastal and islands activity areas’ between 2013 and 2020.
2. ‘Increase the value added to the Auckland economy by rural sectors (including
rural production, complementary rural enterprises, tourism and visitor experience
in rural areas) by 50% by 2040’.
10.6
In order to achieve these targets, it is imperative that we protect the land and soil
resource in rural Auckland. New Zealand’s RMA is the principle national legislation for
environmental planning and management. It acknowledges the value of sustaining
12
natural and physical resources, and highlights the importance of ‘safeguarding the lifesupporting capacity of soil’ for future generations. However, it does not refer directly to
elite and prime land since this terminology is used in regional plans. The operative
Auckland Council’s Regional Policy Statement does refer to the value of elite and prime
land, but only elite land is protected from development in the rural areas. For example,
in section 2.6.2.2 it states that ‘Extensions may be made to the metropolitan urban
limits’ ….‘and to the limits of rural and coastal settlements from time to time, but only
where (ix) Areas of elite land are avoided’. In spite of this, hundreds of hectares of elite
land has been converted to various development types throughout the Auckland region
and future growth indicates that this trend will continue1.
10.7
In my view, if stricter objectives and policies about the development of elite and prime
land are not included in the PAUP, the future of Auckland’s elite and prime land is at
risk of continually being the trade-off for development and therefore, reducing options
for crop growth and other primary production.
10.8
The Auckland Plan committed Auckland Council to develop a Low Carbon Auckland
Action Plan to transform towards a greener, prosperous low carbon city using resources
more sustainably10. ‘Enhancing local food production’ has been identified as a key
transformational element in the Plan. Specifically Action 17 states ‘Ensure on-going
production of perishable horticultural commodities close to urban markets by preserving
high-class agricultural soils…’. Therefore, the objectives and policies set out in Section
B.8 of the PAUP strive to achieve these non-statutory requirements.10
10.9
Considering all of the issues discussed above and referred to in previous sections of my
evidence, in my opinion the need for more stringent objectives and policies that manage
the subdivision, use and development of rural land are clear and justified.
10.10
Overall, I support Objective 1 in B8.2 that ‘the subdivision, use and development of elite
and prime land is managed to maintain its capability, flexibility and accessibility for
primary production’. That said, I do consider the term ‘managed’ to be very vague. I
therefore fully support policy 1 in B8.2 ‘Avoid new countryside living subdivision, use
and development on elite and prime land’ in this regard. I also support Objective 2 in
B8.2 that ‘the productive potential of land that is not elite or prime is recognised’ and
consider policy 5 of B8.2 could be expanded to encompass the encouragement of land
management practices that retain the physical and chemical capability of soils on all
10
http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/plansstrategies/theaucklandplan/Documents/lowc
arbonauckactionplanfullversion.pdf.
13
classes of land. I also consider that Objective 2 in B2.3 ‘further fragmentation of rural
land by sporadic and scattered subdivision for urban and countryside living purposes is
prevented’ is an important policy response to the continued fragmentation of rural land
in the Auckland region.
10.11
Amongst other things, these provisions will help ensure Auckland’s current and future
self-sufficiency as a food producing region as well as servicing all the other benefits the
land and soil resources provide such as the filtering of pollutants, storm protection, rural
character, biodiversity, recreation, carbon sequestration and regulating greenhouse gas
emission to name just a few. The latter are known as the cultural, regulating and
provisioning ecosystem services that soil natural capital provide that provide human
benefits11. This reiterates the value of the land and soil resource, particularly for outdoor
food production in Auckland, which is of national significance.
Dr Fiona Curran-Cournane
01 December 2014
11
Dominati, E., Patterson, M. & Mackay, A. 2010. A framework for classifying and quantifying the natural capital
and ecosystem services of soils. Ecological Economics, 69, 1858–1868.
14
Appendix 1
A
Figure A. Location of rural urban boundary options with corresponding map of elite and prime
land in Auckland*.
B
Table A. Converted land and potential development on
and proportion (%) of total available LUC Classes 1-3*.
Total LUC
Converted land by
Potential
(ha)
urban extension and
(lodged)
operative
development
greenfields (ha)
(ha)1
1
359 (8%)
206 (5%)
Land Use Capability Classes (LUC) 1-3,
Additional
RUB (ha)2
Total (ha)
% of total
LUC
(by 2040)
354 (8%)
919
21
29
2
6162 (11%)
4494 (8%)
5123 (9%)
15,779
3
2482 (4%)
1310 (2%)
2047 (4%)
5839
9
Note: Building consents occupying LUC Classes 1-3 are excluded.
1
Lodged/Future greenfield developments (as at 2012)
2
Additional RUB options (as notified in 30th September 2013) for future growth – (2010 urban
extent + operative+ lodged greenfield developments)
*
Adopted from Table 4 and Figure 3 Curran-Cournane F, Vaughan M, Memon A, Fredrickson C
(2014) Trade-offs between high class land and development: recent and future pressures on
Auckland’s
valuable
soil
resources.
Land
Use
Policy
39,
146-154.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837714000489
15
Attachment A.
Research Publications
Curran-Cournane, F., Vaughan, M., Memon, A. & Fredrickson, C. 2014. Trade-offs between
high class land and development: recent and future pressures on Auckland’s valuable
soil resources. Land Use Policy 39, 146-154.
Curran-Cournane, F., Lear, G., Schwendenmann, L. & Khin, J. 2014. Trace element pollution
within urban green spaces in New Zealand's largest city (submitted Soil Research).
Curran-Cournane, F., Fraser, S., Hicks, D. L., Houlbrooke, D. J. & Cox, N. 2013. Changes in
soil quality and land use in grazed pasture within rural Auckland. New Zealand Journal of
Agricultural Research, 56, 102-116.
Curran Cournane, F., McDowell, R. W., Littlejohn, R. P. & Condron, L. M. 2011. Effects of cattle,
sheep and deer grazing on soil physical quality and phosphorus and suspended
sediment losses in surface runoff. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 140, 264-272.
Curran Cournane, F., McDowell, R. W., Littlejohn, R. P., Houlbrooke, D. J. & Condron, L. M.
2011. Is mechanical soil aeration a strategy to alleviate soil compaction and decrease
phosphorus and suspended sediment losses from irrigated and rain-fed cattle-grazed
pastures? Soil Use and Management 27, 376-384.
Curran Cournane, F., McDowell, R. W. & Condron, L. M. 2010. Do aggregation, treading and
dung deposition affect phosphorus and suspended sediment losses in surface runoff?
Australian Journal of Soil Research, 48, 705-712.
Curran Cournane, F., McDowell, R. W. & Condron, L. M. 2010. Effects of cattle treading and soil
moisture on phosphorus and sediment losses in surface runoff from pasture New
Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 365-376.
Selected Reports and Conference Papers
Curran-Cournane, F. 2015. Soil quality state and trends in New Zealand's city after 15 years.
XIII International Conference on Environmental and Earth Sciences Venice, Italy. 13-14
April, 2015.
Hart, G., Rutledge, D., Price, R., Curran-Cournane, F., Jones, H., Burton, A. & Hill, R. 2014. A
Nationally Consistent Approach for Monitoring Land Fragmentation in New Zealand. New
Zealand Planning Institute Conference 02-05 April 2014, Queenstown.
Curran Cournane, F. & Sarmah, A. K. 2013. Soil quality responses to biochar application under
intensive market gardening. In: New Zealand 2013 Biochar Workshop. The Final Answer
4-5th July 2013 Massey University, P. N., New Zealand (ed.).
Curran Cournane, F., Holwerda, N. & Mitchell, F. 2013. Quantifying catchment sediment yields
in Auckland. Auckland Council Technical Report. TR2013/042.
Curran-Cournane, F. 2013. Soil quality of indigenous sites in the Auckland region 2012.
Auckland Council Technical Report TR2013/041.
Curran Cournane, F. & Taylor, A. 2013. Land and Soil Monitoring Programme. Auckland
Council Technical Report. TR 2013/019.
Drewry, J., Taylor, M., Curran-Cournane, F., Gray, C. & McDowell, R. 2013. Olsen P methods
and soil quality monitoring: Are we comparing "apples with apples?". In: Accurate and
efficient use of nutrients on farms. (Eds L.D. Currie and C L. Christensen).
http://flrc.massey.ac.nz/publications.html. Occasional Report No. 26. Fertilizer and Lime
Research Centre, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand. February 2013.
16