Overpopulation’s the problem
If all the dairy farmers in the world produced milk in the same manner as New Zealand dairy farmers, apparently the total global emissions from dairying would decrease by a third.
So if we are already leading the rest of the world, why is the progress of NZ dairy farmers not lauded in political and media circles, yet the impacts of dairying are widely reported and constantly berated ... on many occasions by people clearly unqualified to pass sensible comment? They want us to do more.
I recently had the pleasure of driving from the Far North where I lease a farm, to Taranaki, passing through the unique and beautiful rural environment of Northland, Waikato, King Country and Taranaki. Pristine farms presenting neatly manicured verges, the meandering Waikato River at the roadside, healthy stock and flourishing pastures. The sparkling Awakino River winding its clean way through the valley passing through numerous farms with a variation of agricultural and horticultural activities going on (as they have been for many decades), culminating at the river mouth where whitebaiters congregated to gather food from the river’s reaches. Lambs were frolicking ... you get the picture. It was a far cry from the dim impression you might get of ‘‘dirty’’ rural NZ if you get all your information from Facebook, TV or the news media. It made me proud to be a small part of the fabric of NZ rural society and I wonder what the politicians see when they travel in a similar manner – if they do? You pass through many small towns on that journey, with shops and other businesses that all rely on the agricultural dollar to get by. Dairy farmers spend 50 cents from every dollar earned into the economy, according to an NZIER report.
The sad thing is this is all under threat, predominantly because agricultural emissions make up 43 per cent of this country’s emissions profile. The agriculturists eke out a living growing food so YOU, ie, anyone that is not a farmer, have food on their plates. New Zealanders should be grateful that 43 per cent of our emissions profile is biological because that is the least harmful but unfortunately difficult to mitigate and why would you want to? Drill down into the concept of mitigating agricultural emissions and you will realise that your only choice is to stop producing food.
Some people say a meat eating, milk drinking lifestyle can be shunned but if horticulture rises to the top of the emissions profile after the demise of dairying and agriculture then surely their fate will also be sealed, then there will be nothing decent to eat. If tourism rises to the top, will we then close our borders?
It is glaringly obvious that food production must be taken off the table of emissions calculation and offset by mitigating other sources of global warming, (manufacture of unnecessary consumer goods, casual air travel, personal transport, energy choices, etc). Our politicians are saying that agriculture will use technology to lessen its emissions but no-one has specified what technology is available and what its impact will be – mainly because it hasn’t been invented yet. What is the environmental impact of developing this new technology?
For some reason politicians overlook the fact that over population by humans is the crux of all our problems and instead point their fingers at farming (read food production) of all things, while simultaneously politicking to import more people into this country.
Farming is being punished for its success. Two of the major problems faced by humans is breeding and unnecessary air travel – both of which our current leader and the royal family is promoting heavily. Labour and the Greens should be saying to NZ’s farmers: how can we help you not how can we (further) tax you?
New Zealanders should be grateful that 43 per cent of our emissions profile is biological because that is the least harmful . . .