Conservation Comment: Time for farmer protesters to get real about climate change

Farmers showed they thought "Greenies" and townies were totally anti-farmer, writes John Milnes. Photo / Tania Whyte.

Opinion:

I am somewhat disappointed with the misinformation the farmers' "Howl" protest was based on.

I can't help but feel Federated Farmers is somewhat embarrassed it is behind the eight ball when it comes to climate change.

I feel it thinks "Greenies" and also townies are totally anti-farmers.

Certainly this "Greenie" has had some experience with farming and the vagaries that come with dealing with nature and has sympathy for Federated Farmers' position in getting non-farmers to understand such a different lifestyle.

But my experiences have confirmed the realisation that if we don't work with nature, it will let us know in a big way.

The Canterbury storm and flood are an example of the results of ignoring the science of climate change and the prediction of an increase in severe weather events.

It also showed the bizarre lack of appreciation of our need to work with the environment when a farmer next to the Waimakariri River thought the Government should move the river back to its original course.

Farmers have had plenty of time and signals that climate change is real, going back at least 18 years to 2003 when they mislabelled cow belches as farts.

Do they really not know which end the methane comes out?

The tax they were protesting about was to go towards research into methane mitigation from ruminants, which would likely be further advanced than currently, but they apparently saw it as an anti-farmer tax.

Of all the claims made during their recent demonstration the so-called "ute tax" was, I feel, so misrepresented as to be embarrassing.

To buy a Toyota Hilux the fee could be $2900, the recovered GST about $7500.

Even forgetting the GST it would be surprising if a ute was worn out after 10 years, that would make the fee $290 a year, about three to four weeks of fuel.

I appreciate that electric utes are not yet available, but they are not that far away.

Surely their current ute could last until then?

Or they could replace it with a second-hand one, hardly used, from a Remuera owner who "needs" a new one.

I appreciate that some of the reforms in water and nutrient pollution are difficult, but are these policies not the indirect result of commercial pressures from, for example, Fonterra, in particular?

These industries pushed for intensification so they could have more product.

For the farmer this has often meant huge investment, courtesy of willing banks, that might mean more product but not necessarily more net income.

The only winners were those beyond the farm gate, leaving those on the land too often working harder for little more.

It is heartening to see many farmers trying new ideas to improve the sustainability of their farms, turning to the idea of regenerative farming to reduce the inputs needed and hence the extra stock needed to pay for those inputs.

I believe there is a lot more support for the rural community than they imagine, but there are legitimate concerns in the broader community about the environmental issues associated with continued intensification.

If the rural sector shows a will to change, I think they will find the support they need.

John Milnes was a Green Party candidate for three elections and a founder member of Sustainable Whanganui. He is also a parent and a grandparent.