See earlier posts:
Biodiversity Strips Update – LandWISE – Promoting sustainable land management

MicroFarm Biodiversity Update – LandWISE – Promoting sustainable land management

LandWISE Conference 2026

Havelock North Function Centre
27 – 28 May 2026

Our “Soil Health for Profit” theme in 2026 is, in some ways, a return to the past. LandWISE arose out of work to combat soil erosion through use of minimum tillage and we’re returning to strip-till in 2026. A lot has been learned in the intervening years! Along with that, we’ll look at what can be done to measure and manage crop nutrition and soil health to ensure sustainability and long-term profitability.  

We have international speakers from Pennsylvania and Tasmania complementing national and local growers and experts. They will share how they set out to build profitable enterprises with a focus on soil health and an eye to wider sustainability ambitions. We’ve asked them to offer ideas of things to take home and apply or try – to feed the appetites of keen delegates.

We have talks from people applying regenerative principles in cropping, pastures and orcharding, talks on strip-till and crop-stacking, soil amendments and cover cropping, and managing and minimising the cost of nutrients. As always, expect representation of agritech covering a wide range of technologies.

Remember to sign up to get updates!

Register at Humanatix

Our hand harvest samples were taken from 3 m × 2 m areas within each of the four subplots of each plot; 16 per treatment, 48 in all. All butternuts within the sample area were cut from the plant, counted, and weighed. A subsample was collected for Brix, dry matter, nitrogen, and carbon analysis. The plant residue was also weighed, and a subsample was collected for dry matter, nitrogen, and carbon analysis.

On the 10th of March, the butternuts were cut for fresh market and placed into windrows ready to be collected into bins.

The main differences between treatments were cultivation method, biological and foliar applications, and fertiliser inputs. The Hybrid and Regenerative treatments were strip-tilled, while the Conventional treatment was fully cultivated. The Regenerative treatment received the most biological and foliar applications, the Hybrid treatment received some, and the Conventional treatment received none. The Regenerative treatment also received significantly less nitrogen (18 kg N/ha) compared with the Conventional treatment (77 kg N/ha) and the Hybrid treatment (67 kg N/ha).

The Conventional treatment yielded 52.74 T/ha, the Hybrid treatment yielded 52.00 T/ha, and the regenerative treatment yielded 49.44 T/ha. While these yields look slightly different, there is no significant difference in yield between the treatments (P>0.05). Our highest and lowest yielding sub-plots were both in the regenerative treatment!

We will discuss these findings at the LandWISE Conference: Soil Health for Profit in May.

Conference information and registration is available on our website.

We were delighted to have Carys Luke join us as our Summer Intern in 2025-2026. Carys’ key project was measuring soil infiltration rates using disc permeameters. These devices work under tension, so water has to be pulled into the soil by capillary forces. By controlling the amount of tension, we can set the soil pore sizes that are dragging water in, and so we can get an estimate of the soil’s pore size distribution.

There’s a fair bit of maths and interpretation so to help, we made an online calculator and published interpretation guidance. We would like to hear your feedback if you go looking. The equipment is not commonly available and is mostly a research tool rather than for everyday farmer use. If you think you would benefit from measurements, contact us and we can discuss options.

This report evaluates soil water infiltration across conventional, hybrid, and regenerative
management treatments in a randomised block design (12 plots) within the LandWISE
Carbon Positive experiment. Infiltration rates were measured using disc permeameters
at the soil surface and at 10 cm depth under supply tensions of −15, −6, and −3 cm.
Applying water at these tensions enabled hydraulic conductivity to be assessed across
three pore-size domains (<0.2 mm, <0.5 mm, and <1.0 mm), providing insight into pore
size distribution and how it varies between treatments.

Infiltration generally increased as water tension became less negative; however, contrary to published literature, infiltration often plateaued or declined between −15 cm and −6 cm tensions. The readings at lower tension (-3cm head vs -15cm head) should icrease because more mores are taking water. These results indicate that our measurements at −15 cm tension frequently did not reach true steady state. You can see this in Figure 6.

A key recommendation is to ensure sufficient time is allowed, and that more measurements, possibly at greater intervals, are made than were done for this study. In a soil such as ours, it can take a very long time (hours) to get to the steady state, and it may not be apparent until data gets analysed. Ooops.

Carys’ full report is available in our file stack.

Lessons for the management of highly productive land

Two years after Cyclone Gabrielle devastated the Hawke’s Bay and Tairawhiti regions, what have we learned about recovery?

Cyclone Gabrielle struck New Zealand in February 2023, causing widespread flooding that affected Hawke’s Bay, Gisborne/Tairawhiti, and Northland. In Hawke’s Bay and Tairawhiti, Cyclone Gabrielle was characterised by the enormous amount of sediment that was deposited on some of the county’s most highly productive land.

It was an extraordinarily difficult year characterised not by a single catastrophic event but by cumulative impacts from severe storms and several additional weather events including Cyclone Hale in January, Cyclone Gabrielle and Son of Gabrielle in February, and others that followed particularly in the Wairoa and Tairawhiti areas.

In November 2025, we co-hosted with FAR and Vegetable Research and Innovation, a symposium for researchers to share and compare findings from studies of Cyclone Gabrielle and recovery. Around 60 people gathered in Havelock North for two days. Thank you to all the organisations that sponsored the symposium, allowing it to be run with no fees for the participants.

A great deal of semi-coordinated activity followed in the wake of Cyclone Gabrielle. However, there was much incomplete work that would add value by helping enrich our understanding of the longer-term effects of different management responses in different scenarios. The symposium brought together those who investigated Cyclone Gabrielle’s impacts on highly productive land. They presented and discussed findings and observations to draw out lessons to aid land managers and policy makers in future events.

Among the questions were:

1. What are the lessons to pass on to those impacted by future events?
2. What are the lessons for policy makers?
3. What are the economic outcomes from different approaches?
4. How have sites responded to different management of cropping soils, given different sediment types and depths?
5. How have sites responded to the removal of sediment and any subsequent soil amelioration efforts?
6. Have permanent crops responded differently to different approaches applied in similar scenarios?
7. Are all soils recovering quickly? Will they return to previous productivity levels?

Twenty presentations covered historic storm events of note, the weather conditions before and during the cyclone, geological influences, immediate responses, food safety, and longer-term trials seeking to understand how best to return high value land to best production. We thank all the presenters for telling their stories, and all delegates for their contributions to the discussion.

At the end of the symposium, Dirk Wallace led a feedback session in which all delegates responded to a set of questions:

1. What elements aided recovery and what lessons can inform policy and sector planning?
2. What surprises and challenges emerged during recovery?
3. What key takeaways should guide future preparedness?
4. What information is still missing?

Across questions, several themes consistently emerged.

• Communication and collaboration were identified as critically important.
• Data and research surfaced as both a strength and a challenge.
• Infrastructure and preparedness were recurring concerns.
• On the technical front, soil and crop recovery exceeded expectations, with yields rebounding faster than anticipated.
• Finally, human and social dimensions were central to recovery success. Mental health support, patience, and direct communication with experienced peers were repeatedly stressed.

Participants agreed on several priority actions:

1. Establish a central information hub with regional portals to provide consistent, accessible guidance and data.
2. Commission targeted research on rainfall patterns, soil microbiology, contamination risks, and crop-specific recovery timelines, delivered in decision-ready formats.
3. Strengthen pre-event coordination through drills, contact lists, and local decision-making authority, alongside investment in backup infrastructure.
4. Embed human-first supports, including mental health services, peer advisory panels, and tailored financial relief for vulnerable growers.
5. Integrate disaster risk reduction and nature-based solutions (e.g., wetlands, “room for rivers”) into long-term land-use planning.

The symposium captured invaluable knowledge that will help communities and policymakers prepare for and respond to future events. Visit the Cyclone Gabrielle Research Symposium page to access all presentations, with videos coming soon.

Thanks everyone! Sally Anderson, Dirk Wallace and Dan Bloomer – Symposium Convenors

One of the new strips, which is located under the irrigator wire, includes alyssum, calendula, and native ground covers. The other strip which is along a fenceline has the A Lighter Touch annual flower strip mix, which includes alyssum, buckwheat, calendula, cornflower, and marigolds. We also added in a few sunflowers.

The first half of the strip under the irrigator wire has established really well, and both the alyssum and calendula are starting to flower. At the other end of the strip, it is a bit patchy and doesn’t have the same ground cover. Some of the native ground covers amongst the strip have dried out or have been eaten by rabbits, while others are thriving.

The strip along the fenceline consists mainly of buckwheat and sunflowers at the moment, as they were the first to germinate. However, there are patches where alyssum, marigolds, cornflower, and calendulas have also started to establish.

The two biostrips planted in 2024 were made up of 9 different flower mixes, first planted in spring and the second in the summer.

The spring 2024 sowings flowered in the summer but were taken over by grass and clover in the winter. We have mown the strip a couple of times to manage the grass and give the flowers a chance to grow. The alyssum, poppies, borage, and phacelia seemed to do the best in spring 2025 after being mown. Now the strip is mainly grass, clover and alyssum. We have mown it back down again and will track what happens.

The strip planted in summer 2024 and has continued to flower since it was established. Alyssum is the main flower species that has taken over and provided ground cover, but there are areas where there are still cornflowers and calendulas flowering.

There are plenty of insects in the strips and within our butternut crop, but we wanted to understand what insects are actually there and how far they are moving into the crop. To do this, we have set up sticky traps within the biostrips and at various distances into the crop. We will continue to monitor the sticky traps and will try to identify what insects are on them.

We will be holding a grower biodiversity event at the MicroFarm on March 19th. If you are interested in attending, please register here: https://a-lighter-touch.co.nz/biodiversity-grower-group-field-walks/

The Operation Advisory Group has met weekly to observe how the butternuts are growing and to make management decisions for the upcoming week. The main decisions have been about what fungicides to spray, if the Regenerative treatment needs a foliar application, and if a bactericide needs to be applied. Rob Nichol from Horticentre has played a key role in the decision making prosess, helping us identify angular leaf spot in the paddock and providing us with product recommendations.

The first fungicide application went on about a month after planting. Since then, all treatments have had a fungicide and bactericide sprayed each fortnight. With the varying temperatures and rain we have had, it has created the perfect conditions for angular leaf spot, and we have started seeing patches of it within the butternuts.

Table: Fungicide and Bactericide applications to all three treatments in the Carbon Positive Trial.

The Regenerative treatment also had an application of Bio Marinus during the first fungicide application, and a Megafol application the day before the third fungicide.

EIQ is a tool available online through Cornell University, which can be used to determine the environmental impact of specific agrichemicals. The Field Use EIQ is a score based on how toxic the product’s active ingredients are and how much has been used per hectare. The Field Use EIQ Score for each product has been low (around 10). This is why all three treatments have received the same spray applications. For comparison, when the paddocks were broadcast-sprayed with Glyphosate at the beginning of the season, the Field Use EIQ Score was 60.

We will continue to monitor disease pressure and will determine if we can use an alternative product in the Regenerative and Hybrid treatments later in the season.

Throughout the rest of the season, the Operations Advisory Group will continue to meet weekly to make management decisions.

A big thank you to all the Operation Advisory Group members who have attended our weekly field walks.

Carbon Positive is a partnership between LandWISE, the HB Future Farming Trust, McCain Foods, Heinz-Wattie’s and Process Vegetables NZ.

The butternuts in the Carbon Positive trial were planted on the 15th of November. Before the butternuts emerged, there was a high weed pressure in the conventional treatment. Therefore, it was sprayed with Buster, while the other two treatments were not.

Emergence

When the butternuts started to emerge, we noticed there was cutworm damage and found cutworms. Cutworms are one of the main insect pests in butternut crops. They chew through the butternut’s stem at ground level, killing the plant. Once we identified the problem, we sprayed Bestseller before the cutworms did too much damage.

Side Dressing

Before sidedressing, our fortnightly soil nitrate testing showed there was 80 kg N/ha in the Conventional treatment, 71 kg N/ha in the Hybrid, and 62 kg N/ha in the Regenerative treatment.

At sidedressing, the Conventional treatment received the ‘standard’ rate of YaraBela CAN (150 kg/ha). For the Hybrid treatment, the goal was to apply a half rate of YaraBela CAN (75 kg/ha), but the lowest the side dressing machine could be calibrated to was 113 kg/ha, so that is the rate we used. The Hybrid treatment also received a foliar application of seaweed. The Regenerative treatment only received a foliar application of seaweed, Megafol, and fulvic acid, as the soil nitrate results showed there was a sufficient level of Nitrate-N in the soil.

Weed Management

Standard weed management would use an inter-row cultivator before the butternuts start running. We felt there wasn’t a high enough weed pressure to do this, and that it could cause a weed strike if we disturb the uncultivated areas in the Hybrid and Regenerative treatments. All treatments were hand-weeded with a push hoe to remove any weeds before the butternuts started to run.

Operation Advisory Group

The Operation Avisory Group has met weekly, and they are happy with how the butternuts are growing, the low weed pressure and the disease pressure.

A big thank you to Andy for taking the time to side-dress our butternuts.

Carbon Positive is a partnership between LandWISE, the HB Future Farming Trust, McCain Foods, Heinz-Wattie’s and Process Vegetables NZ.

During the tomato crop (26/10/2023 – 6/3/2024), the Regenerative treatment had significantly lower nitrate levels than the Conventional and Hybrid treatments, despite all three receiving similar amounts of nitrogen. This lower nitrate level was likely due to the breakdown of the cover crop. Approximately 12 t/ha of cover crop, mainly oats, was incorporated into the soil two days before planting, which would have tied up nitrogen.

Since then, different amounts of nitrogen have been applied across treatments, and there has been no significant difference in soil nitrate levels, except during the period when the Conventional and Hybrid treatments were in peas, while the Regenerative treatment remained in cover crop.

Amount of Nitrogen applied during each crop, by treatment.

Butternuts

Our pre-season soil tests showed that there was 110 kg of potentially available nitrogen in the Conventional, 93. 3 in the Hybrid and 97.3 in the Regenerative treatment.

Two days before the butternuts were planted, there were 32 kg Nitrate-N/ha in the Conventional, 39 in the Hybrid, and 46 in the Regenerative treatment.

At planting, the Conventional and Hybrid treatments received 300 kg of Complex, whereas the Regenerative treatment received 150 kg of Complex. This increased the kg of Nitrate-N in the Conventional to 80, the Hybrid to 71, and the Regenerative to 63.

At side dressing, the Conventional treatment got 150 kg/ha of CAN. The Hybrid got 113 kg/ha of CAN and a foliar application of seaweed. The Regenerative treatment got a foliar application of seaweed, Megafol, and fulvic acid.

When testing for nitrate after side dressing, we avoided the area where the fertiliser was applied. The nitrate test showed similar results to last time. There is 74 Kg of Nitrate-N in the Conventional, 73 in the Hybrid and 65 in the Regenerative treatment. We can assume the conventional is 18 kg higher and the Hybrid is 13.6 kg higher, as this is how much nitrogen was applied at side dressing.

Our aim is to push the limits of regenerative cropping to understand how much nitrogen input can be reduced. Based on potentially available nitrogen and fortnightly soil nitrate results, the Operations Advisory Group decided not to apply granular fertiliser to the Regenerative treatment at side-dressing.

A similar approach was taken last season in beans, where no granular fertiliser was applied at side-dressing and a foliar approach was used instead. Soil nitrate levels remained similar across all treatments, and the Regenerative treatment produced the highest bean yield.

We will continue to monitor nitrate levels fortnightly, and we will do leaf testing during fruit set.

In November, we co-hosted a research symposium with Vegetable Research and Innovation and the Foundation for Arable Research. The symposium brought together those who had investigated Cyclone Gabrielle’s impacts on highly productive land to present and discuss findings and observations, and draw out lessons to aid land managers and policy makers in future events.

A great deal of semi-coordinated activity followed in the wake of Cyclone Gabrielle. However, there was much incomplete work that would add value by helping enrich our understanding of the longer-term effects of different management responses in different scenarios.

The symposium brought together researchers, advisors, farmers/growers and others involved in observing the impacts on productive land and the effects of different responses in the cases of Cyclone Gabrielle and previous similar events. More than 20 presentations covered historic events, the broader climate context of Cyclone Gabrielle, a range of land use types and many areas of research.

The convenors (Sally Anderson, Dirk Wallace and Dan Bloomer) are now in the process of collating the proceedings and preparing to load material on the conference web page. We’ll do posts as items are loaded with abstracts, summaries and presentation videos. From the outset, the response to the calamity that was Cyclone Gabrielle has been one of high support and collegiality from many, many quarters. The symposium was our attempt to get the best from all the work that was done and find the lessons for those impacted by future events.

We are most grateful for the support and enthusiastic involvement of all the presenters and delegates and the organisations that funded the event.