Word of the day

November 14, 2019

Climatotherapy –  treatment of disease or ill health by travel to, or residence in, a place with a beneficial climate.


Sowell says

November 14, 2019


Rural round-up

November 14, 2019

Saving us from ourselves – John Jackson:

The Government’s policy to reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in New Zealand is working directly against the goals of the Paris Accord.

NZ’s pastoral farming is a low emissions process.

Studies published in the NZ Crown Research Institute (CRI) assessment of agricultural production systems the world over show NZ is “head and shoulders” above its competitors.

This goes well beyond our on farm production. With regard to NZ lamb sold in the UK, ocean shipping made up 5% of the final product’s carbon cost – voiding the belief that meat produced on this side of the world is environmentally unsustainable.  . .

Action groups motivate farmers – Richard Rennie:

Working together to gain access to high-level agriculture and business expertise is already leading to efficiency gains for a group of Hawke’s Bay farmers, rural consultant Sean Bennett says.

Bennett facilitates two Red Meat Profit Partnership action groups and is working with farmers to set up several more. 

The RMPP action network supports small groups of seven to nine farm businesses working together to explore ideas and share expert resources to help make positive on-farm changes. Kick-start funding of $4000 a farm is pooled to fund facilitation and expertise. . .

Independent dairy companies offer farmers an attractive option – Gerard Hutching:

Ask a New Zealander to name a dairy company and the one they are certain to come up with is Fonterra.

But beyond that, many would be stumped for an answer. There are in fact at least a score of independents, processing 18 per cent of New Zealand milk, a share that has steadily increased over the 18 years Fonterra has been in existence.

Open Country Dairy (OCD) farmer supplier Chris Lewis speaks for many when he says farmers opt for an independent over Fonterra because it’s an easier way to get ahead. . . 

He’s just mad about saffron – Nigel Malthus:

“I always reckoned you could make a living off 10 acres,” says Canterbury saffron grower Geoff Slater.

“I think if you get the right products you definitely can.”

For Slater and his wife Jude, their 10-acre (4ha) slice of paradise at Eyrewell, north of the Waimakariri River, is where they are building a multi-faceted business trading under the Canterbury Saffron banner. . .

Council role review a priority – Neal Wallace:

New Fonterra Shareholders’ Council chairman James Barron promises a review of the council’s role will be completed by the co-operative’s next annual meeting.

The council’s priority will be a review of its role while contributing to discussion on the co-operative’s capital structure and new strategy.

Barron is a fourth-generation farmer milking 450 cows on the 140ha dairy farm he grew up on, on the banks of the Waihou River south of Matamata.

He replaces Duncan Coull who has retired after four and a half years. . . 

Artisan cheesemakers unite – Catherine Donnelly:

An excerpt from ‘Ending the War on Artisan Cheese,’ a new book that exposes government actions that limit food choice under the guise of food safety.

Over the past 35 years, the US Food and Drug Administration has pushed for a mandatory requirement for the use of pasteurized milk in cheesemaking, claiming a public health risk for raw milk cheese. This scenario is playing out abroad as well, where creameries are collapsing because they can’t comply with EU health ordinances. In her new book, Ending the War on Artisan Cheese (Chelsea Green Publishing, November 2019), Catherine Donnelly defends traditional cheesemaking and exposes overreaching government actions that limit food choice under the guise of food safety. The following excerpt explains how the loss of artisan cheese is tantamount to the loss of culture. 

American artisan cheese has become mainstream, providing big business for retailers such as Whole Foods, Costco, Wegmans, Murray’s Cheese (now owned by Kroger), and others. Despite the success enjoyed by US artisan cheesemakers and the meteoric rise of artisan cheese production, the American artisan cheese industry faces an existential threat: regulatory overreach. . . 


What a waste

November 14, 2019

WInston Peters has accepted that then-Ministers Paula Bennett and Anne Tolley did not leak the overpayment of his superannuation to the media.

However, his lawyer is still laying blame for the leak on the Ministry of Social Development.

Crown lawyer Victoria Casey QC gave her closing arguments this morning and argued that Winston Peters’ claim his privacy was breached “falls away entirely” when held up against the law. . .

Casey told Justice Venning the only question he needs to consider is whether her clients’ decision to brief their ministers under the “no surprises” convention breached a “reasonable expectation of privacy” and whether it was “highly offensive”.

“The questions is not does the court agree with these decisions to brief, or even whether the court has any reservations about the decisions to brief,” she said. . .

None of them establish whether there was a reasonable expectation in private facts. None of them establish that the communication from the chief executives to the ministers constitute highly offensive publication.

“Winston Peters could not have had a reasonable expectation public agencies with such information would not tell their ministers who have accountability to the House,” she said.

Casey also spoke of the high stakes for her clients, because these allegations go to the heart of their integrity.

She warned that if Peters’ complaints are upheld it would be “catastrophic” and career-ending for them.

“I ask the court to pay due attention to the chilling effect on the public sector and the reputational impact of even a passing comment by the High Court of the judgments exercised by these two senior public servants.

“I submit that it is appropriate that the court should exercise real caution before engaging in a review of matters that are beyond the scope of the pleaded claim,” she said. . .

What a waste of time, and public money this has been.

Peters has breached his own privacy and that of his partner by exposing them to a couple of weeks’ publicity that has done neither of them any credit.

And sadly while might have put some wavering voters off him and his party, it could also have confirmed the views of the deluded who support him that, in spite of the evidence to the contrary that this is a mess of his own making, he is somehow a victim.

The media has given very good coverage of the trail but it’s hard to beat Cactus Kate for pithiness in these posts:

Winston Peters and his reputation for detail

Winston Peters and his reputation for detail II

Tim Murphy v Barry Soper just got ugly

Who knew in advance about WInston Peters’ super stuffup?

The media have been the story for years Barry

Courtroom 13 – the week in review

Respecting WInston Peters

Silence…

Winston Peters and subjudice

And…….Denny Crane


Farms before forests

November 14, 2019

Farmers, others from rural communities and people from the businesses which service and support them will be marching on parliament today.

This open letter to the Prime Minister from a 15 year-old explains the motivation:

Dear Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern

I would very much appreciate it if you could please find the time to read this formal piece of writing.

The Devastating Impacts of The Government’s One Billion Trees Program

The Labour Government’s one billion trees program is a disaster waiting to happen. According to Te Uru Rakau, the New Zealand government’s tree planting initiative will deliver, improved social, environmental and economic outcomes for New Zealand. A closer inspection of that scheme reveals the many loopholes and lack of logic in this new initiative. New Zealand Forestry is not the clean, green industry it is depicted to be. In fact, it is one of the causes of our growing number of polluted waterways. This initiative is going to ruin rural communities and the agricultural sector. The Labour party is making a monumental mistake, encouraging and supporting people to irreversibly plant pine trees on productive land. The government needs to wake up. Planting pine trees to offset our carbon emissions is just a short-term solution to climate change.

Pine trees and the systems used to harvest them are polluting the environment. Pine is a soft wood, and when harvested, it rots very quickly unless treated with toxic anti-fungal or insecticide solution immediately. Large areas contaminated by arsenic are thought to be caused by these timber treatment processes. The forestry industry is fossil fuel dependent and uses petrol and diesel to run all its machinery, which contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. In New Zealand a harvesting system of clear-cutting is used. This means that entire forests are removed and restocked at the same time. This creates a large window of vulnerability, where cleared forest land is susceptible to erosion, filling rivers, lakes and inshore fishing grounds with toxic debris and sediment. Recently, cyclone Gita hit New Zealand hard. Northland locals reported “tsunamis of forestry debris rushing past rivers near their homes.” Houses were written off, animals killed, roads damaged, and grazing paddocks ruined. Gisborne mayor Meng Foon says the clean-up is expected to cost ten million dollars and rate payers will foot most of the bill. The continuation of clear-cutting pine plantations is leaving the community to pay the price of environmental impacts, while the forestry industry ignorantly puts money in the bank. Forestry is not the environmentally friendly industry the New Zealand government has portrayed it to be. Its practices are polluting the environment and are far from sustainable.

New Zealand is made up of many rural villages and communities where local families make a living farming the land like they have for generations. Agriculture is one of New Zealand’s leading export earners and many kiwis rely on this industry. The government, however, is encouraging the planting of pine trees on these farms, which is going to ruin rural communities. For every thousand hectares of trees planted on pastoral land, seven people lose their jobs-forever. In comparison, production forests create one job per thousand hectares. It is uncommon to see a New Zealander fulfilling this role, so the government is recruiting people from the Pacific Islands to plant and harvest the pine trees. Even if New Zealander’s did these jobs, them and their families do not tend to live in the local communities as they already have their life set up in the city. Rural depopulation can have a devastating effect on those few that remain, through under supported schools, services and loss of community strength and spirit. Planting one billon trees over 2.8 million hectares will mean that many New Zealander’s will lose their jobs and be forced to move to one of the nation’s already overpopulated cities. The Labour Government needs to think about whether afforestation fits with this country’s values, aspirations and the resources New Zealander’s leave behind for future generations. By planting all these pine trees, the government is cramming people into the cities and sucking the life out of the rural communities.

Forestry is an irreversible change in land use, and that change will lead to the downfall of New Zealand’s economy. Once forestry plantations are planted on productive land there is no going back. The land is no longer suited to any other kind of agriculture. Only 52 percent of New Zealand is used for agriculture, which is 24 percent less than in 1991, yet it is still one of New Zealand’s biggest export earners. Beef and lamb exports alone earn the country over 6.5 billion dollars each year. New Zealand is known for its clean, green image and red meat protein source. This country needs a large area of pastoral land, that can produce high-quality protein from grass-fed animals, with minimal inputs and a sustainable carbon footprint. Taking out whole agricultural properties and putting them into pine trees, just because the current timber and carbon price favours forestry is foolish. Planting pine trees is not a more sustainable option, than the current land use, farming. If people stop polluting the world in the first place, the pine tree scheme wouldn’t be needed. Many people make assumptions that they will never be hungry, but the world’s population is growing, and with that productive land for farming is decreasing. People can not eat wood, and who wants to live off insects and artificial meat from a factory? By setting up initiatives to help people irreversibly plant pine trees on productive land, the Labour Government is making an immense mistake, that will lead to the downfall of New Zealand’s economy.

The New Zealand Labour Government has set a goal to plant one billion trees by 2028. According to their official website the program will deliver, improved social, environmental and economic outcomes for New Zealand. This statement couldn’t be further from the truth. The New Zealand Government’s poorly researched pine tree planting policy, favouring the forestry sector, will be the undoing of rural communities and the New Zealand economy. Our government needs to be clearer and more intelligent as the sustainability of New Zealand relies on the ability as a country to match land type to correct land use. If trees are going to be planted on unproductive land, then the forests of the future need to be environmentally and rural community friendly. Crucially, we need forests that people want to be surrounded by, that can be nurtured and protected so future generations can continue to enjoy rural New Zealand like I have.

Thank you for reading, I hope you have been enlightened.

Yours sincerely
Wairarapa College year 11 student

The March has been initiated by 50 Shades of Green :

OUR PURPOSE: To demonstrate and communicate that we will not be ridden over roughshod by a political agenda which shows no regard for genuine community wellbeing or genuine democratic consultation. The rural sector is being excluded from critical policy making decisions at the same time that anti farming lobbyists are being ushered in. We are calling the Government out. We deserve a level playing field and a fair go.

A FAIR GO. That’s all NZ Farming communities are asking for.

We are the men and women who grow your food. We work in the rain, sun, snow and wind to take care of this land, our animals and families.

We ask for a fair go on Emissions (Net ZCB) – We own land, which is  home to hundreds of thousands, even millions of trees and yet our emissions reductions targets are unnecessarily high and ‘gross’ while other emitters have ‘net’ targets which will be met by planting what remains of our farms and communities in trees.

We ask for a fair go on Water Regulations.  We are custodians of vast waterways, a role we have embraced over the last 20 years and into which huge investments have been  made.   We were not properly consulted on the Freshwater Reforms.  None of our elected representatives were permitted at the table to provide a voice on our behalf.  Meanwhile environmental lobby groups were ushered in to share in the spoils of an unfettered political agenda. We need local solutions to local problems, and we need to be heard.

We ask for a fair go on Land Use Changes (ETS):  The Government never originally intended to return carbon credits to foresters for carbon sequestration, the forestry industry lobbied for over 6 years to achieve this outcome.  This artificial market for sequestered units will drive escalating afforestation by international and domestic investors at an unprecedented scale should the ‘free market’ be given its head and allowed to bolt onto our hills.  Our Communities are not carbon sinks, our people matter more than that.

We ask a fair go for Mental Health.  The Farmers of New Zealand and their families are being painted as environmental vandals by their own Government. The persistent focus on farming being a ‘problem’ is perpetuating the groundswell of disgusting behaviour targeting farmers and even their children by extremist activists intent on furthering their own agendas. This campaign against rural businesses and their families can not be ignored or worse, given credibility by the Government, or rural families will ultimately pay the price.

They’re not against forestry per se.

They’re for the right tree in the right place. That’s not on productive land and encouraged by policy that allows foreigners to buy farms for forestry but not farming.

 

“/   

 

 

>

>


>

%d bloggers like this: