bye bye greens

cjpm

henryporter wrote: »

Actually as a Architect (B.Arch Degree) and a trained Site Assessor for Wastewater Treatment I think I have more that enough credentials to discuss most matters - like your friend above you have segwayed to conclusions of such tangential proportions that your argument is as ludicrous as the OPs. A word of advice friends - read the posts and maybe query something if it's now clear rather than berating posters in the manner you have.

Most small scale WWTP's are designed to overflow during flood events thus discharging raw untreated sewerage into the watercourse. That's a fact.
Also it's not unheard of developers engineers cooking the flow volumes of the rivers/streams that they discharge into in order to get the license.

If a farmers slurry tank overflowed into a stream during a storm, he'd be jailed.

dryan

Tipp Man wrote: »

Thats funny. I heard Lenny saying the other day how good the agri sector was doing and I thought to myself, that's the first time in about 10 years that a government minister has even mentioned agriculture - the country must be well and truely f###ed

Dont be codding yourself Tipp Man - the only reason they are talking up agriculture now is just an excuse for them to criel us in the budget later in the year.

Tipp Man

dryan wrote: »

Dont be codding yourself Tipp Man - the only reason they are talking up agriculture now is just an excuse for them to criel us in the budget later in the year.

Oh I know - I was just bemused that the Agri sector is getting mentioned again, they didn't want to know us during the "Celtic Tiger"

Happyman42

henryporter wrote: »

Me and the Mrs. and one of the Farmers who admitted driving by the animal pulled the animal free - we made several attempts to contact the owner who was in bed with a hangover, eventually his son came to collect the animal took it to a shed and dumped it there. A visit by the local SPCA and the Dept of Agriculture vet ensued and the vet ordered the animal destroyed.

Yes I admit it I used crtl c and ctrl v - I find it difficult to recite Laws and Regulations off the top of my head - the fact is I know the law and where to find it.



Actually as a Architect (B.Arch Degree) and a trained Site Assessor for Wastewater Treatment I think I have more that enough credentials to discuss most matters - like your friend above you have segwayed to conclusions of such tangential proportions that your argument is as ludicrous as the OPs. A word of advice friends - read the posts and maybe query something if it's now clear rather than berating posters in the manner you have.

Maybe the answer is to move house?

reilig

henryporter wrote: »

A word of advice friends - read the posts and maybe query something if it's now clear rather than berating posters in the manner you have.

Actually, it was you who came on here insulting people. Telling actual farmers that they have no understanding of country life - and basing this theory on your experience with a neglectful drunk cattle drover.

If you wanted to make a point, the least that you could do is have some manners and treat people with respect.

that is if there's any left in those thick skulls of yers

As an architect and site assessor for waste water, you should have more than enough credentials to realise that farmers sucking water from waterways does not pollute the waterways. Its naieve and unexperienced of you to make such a claim, and its even worse the fact that your family have a farm.

henryporter

reilig wrote: »

Actually, it was you who came on here insulting people. Telling actual farmers that they have no understanding of country life - and basing this theory on your experience with a neglectful drunk cattle drover.

If you wanted to make a point, the least that you could do is have some manners and treat people with respect.



As an architect and site assessor for waste water, you should have more than enough credentials to realise that farmers sucking water from waterways does not pollute the waterways. Its naieve and unexperienced of you to make such a claim, and its even worse the fact that your family have a farm.

Can I ask what would be wrong in using a tank on ones own land to dilute slurry with rather than each an every farmer in the vicinity pulling up on a public roadway at a spot thats convenient. I have enough experience to know that uncontrolled situations like this can very easily lead to an accidental discharge of effluent - all I'm saying is control the risk.

As for the cattle drover story - aren't you still missing the point that other farmers admitted that they did nothing about it?

We're all getting up on our high horses here and completely off point - the one I was making and now proven by the IFA lobbyists here is that the Greens have a right as much as anyone else to make policy decisions for this country and sometimes those decisions aren't liked - however it's absolutely stupid to go around cheering their leaving Government when Fianna Fail policies have created the entire mess we're in, including allowing people to get away with murder in the countryside on the basis of getting returned to power year in year out. Yes of course this time it will be different - FF won't get back in, the Greens will be lucky to get a vote at all, but does the opposition offer any real alternative?

Tipp Man

It should be obvious that HenryPorter is a Green Troll

Best ignored in my opinion

The_Conductor

Guys- if you want to discuss political allegiances etc- take it to the politics forum.

Regards,

SMcCarrick

henryporter

Tipp Man wrote: »

It should be obvious that HenryPorter is a Green Troll

Best ignored in my opinion

Thats your best argument?

kfk

henryporter wrote: »

Can I ask what would be wrong in using a tank on ones own land to dilute slurry with rather than each an every farmer in the vicinity pulling up on a public roadway at a spot thats convenient. I have enough experience to know that uncontrolled situations like this can very easily lead to an accidental discharge of effluent - all I'm saying is control the risk.

If the tank is empty then how is there a risk of effluent discharge?

henryporter

kfk wrote: »

If the tank is empty then how is there a risk of effluent discharge?

Can you not just accept that use of watercourses for any activity involving cleansing of effluent containers or diluting effluent should be prohibited - I'm surprised its not under current REPS seeing as access to watercourses by animals is.

kfk

henryporter wrote: »

Can you not just accept that use of watercourses for any activity involving cleansing of effluent containers or diluting effluent should be prohibited - I'm surprised its not under current REPS seeing as access to watercourses by animals is.

Why should it be prohibited?

jeff greene

henryporter wrote: »

Can you not just accept that use of watercourses for any activity involving cleansing of effluent containers or diluting effluent should be prohibited - I'm surprised its not under current REPS seeing as access to watercourses by animals is.

Big difference between taking water from river and ‘cleansing of effluent containers’. Please stop being so pedantic, it isn’t an issue:mad:

5live

The tank is a good idea henry:rolleyes:. After all, we have loads of money to be throwing at problems that dont exist. But i can see some 'green' idealist complaining that farmers clean water collection point is overflowing into a river if it is filled from roofs or complaining about use of treated water to dilute slurry if it is taken from the mains. Or just complaining because its monday and they're bored. Or just complaining. Which is why farmers generally ignore people who know sweet fcuk all about agriculture:cool:. Enjoy your.....whatever and bye now as i take my own advice:P

rednecks

The greeens are a bunch of townies who don't know what silage is. That's all I have to say:)

The_Conductor

rednecks wrote: »

The greeens are a bunch of townies who don't know what silage is. That's all I have to say:)

Really? Thats nice. It is all you're going to have to say then. If you want to debate the Greens- take it to Politics. This is not the venue for it. Regards, SMcCarrick

reilig

kfk wrote: »

If the tank is empty then how is there a risk of effluent discharge?

He just doesn't understand. He thinks that farmers wash out their dirty tankers in rivers and lakes. he does not understand the concept of farmers bringing an empty tanker to a river and sucking out a load in order to bring it to the slatted tank in order to make the slurry in the slatted tank thinner. He seems to think that we suck up half a load of dry slurry into the tanker and then take it to the water hole and suck up the other half with water in order to thin it in the slurry tanker. He doesn't get the concept. He has argued it every way, but still doesn't understand why farmers draw water with tankers. And what he doesn't understand he is critical of.

BeeDI

reilig wrote: »

He just doesn't understand. He thinks that farmers wash out their dirty tankers in rivers and lakes. he does not understand the concept of farmers bringing an empty tanker to a river and sucking out a load in order to bring it to the slatted tank in order to make the slurry in the slatted tank thinner. He seems to think that we suck up half a load of dry slurry into the tanker and then take it to the water hole and suck up the other half with water in order to thin it in the slurry tanker. He doesn't get the concept. He has argued it every way, but still doesn't understand why farmers draw water with tankers. And what he doesn't understand he is critical of.

Exact. Let me add a little more to that. These days I have my own tanker, and do my own spreading. But used to use a contractor. He came one day to agitated for me and two neighbours. Failed to get mine and one neighbours moving, do got his tanker and took water from the river on my land to help. Note, at this point, he uses one suction hose for this purpose and a different hose for sucking slurry from under the slats. Treehuging local resident, reported this criminal activity to the guards and county council. Both arrived that evening to check out. Showed them spot on river where crime took place plus the clean suction hose used plus the other hose used for actual slurry. Now here is the good part. Same contractor is taking water from another river for another farmer, in a different location a few weeks later. Council officials showed up and double checked he was actually using a clean suction hose. They complimented him and left.
Treehugger, in question still causing uneccessary grief to local farmers, but to be fair, council locals know at this stage, that treehuggers are not by nature a higher more intelligent class of being than an everyday farmer or other member of the community.

LostCovey

Fascinating stuff.

It's very interesting to see what gets posters to this forum stimulated and excited. 5 pages of posts from people dancing on the grave of a small environmental party with 6 seats in Dáil Éireann.

- agricultural prices?
- the fact we had to go cap in hand to the IMF for a bail-out?
- the people who drove the country over the cliff?

Minority interests.

Gloating over the impending demise of that crowd who want to reduce pollution is what gets our juices flowing around here!!!!

We have had political parties that supported shooting people in the past, and they were not as hated as these people who put themselves in front of the electorate advocating a response to climate change.

I am not a fan, but the hatred, the anger........

Why??????

LostCovey

The_Conductor

LostCovey wrote: »

I am not a fan, but the hatred, the anger........

Why??????

The why? is easy to answer. Its entirely to do with perception and expectation management. They suck at both.

Tora Bora

smccarrick wrote: »

The why? is easy to answer. Its entirely to do with perception and expectation management. They suck at both.

That comment, could be construed as insinuating another activity, which I have no doubt, your good self would frown upon at being discussed here. Take a three day ban from Farming and Forestry, seeing as you are so red card happy yourself for mere handbag tackles in the course of normal farming discourse:D:D

5live

LostCovey wrote: »

Fascinating stuff.

It's very interesting to see what gets posters to this forum stimulated and excited. 5 pages of posts from people dancing on the grave of a small environmental party with 6 seats in Dáil Éireann.

- agricultural prices?
- the fact we had to go cap in hand to the IMF for a bail-out?
- the people who drove the country over the cliff?

Minority interests.

Gloating over the impending demise of that crowd who want to reduce pollution is what gets our juices flowing around here!!!!

We have had political parties that supported shooting people in the past, and they were not as hated as these people who put themselves in front of the electorate advocating a response to climate change.

I am not a fan, but the hatred, the anger........

Why??????

LostCovey

I can only speak for myself LC but for me it is the distance from the environment of which they claim almost exclusive rights to protect that causes me to despise( and i use that word with great care) the GP. Do you remember 2 short years ago with an almost 12 month winter when the north was allowed to spread slurry to the end of december when we were stopped a month before? Why? Was growth, soil structure, water holding capacity or any other factor so much better just yards away from the border than it was just south and west of it? Yes, FF FG Labour and SF deserve our anger but at least they engage with us face to face even if only every 5 or so years. I, for one and i may be alone in this, am sick to death of people with no connection to or knowledge of agriculture, and worse no appetite or ability to learn the facts, dictating from afar what effects my livelihood and my familys wellbeing, while perusing obscute texts on glaciers in south america while there is so much they could, but cannot be arsed, do right here on their own doorstep:mad:. How does a man denying the building of the incinerator in Poolbeg to prevent waste going to landfill and polluting groundwater from there have the audacity to lecture me on pollution of groundwater 180 miles away

Tipp Man

LostCovey wrote: »

Fascinating stuff.

It's very interesting to see what gets posters to this forum stimulated and excited. 5 pages of posts from people dancing on the grave of a small environmental party with 6 seats in Dáil Éireann.

- agricultural prices?
- the fact we had to go cap in hand to the IMF for a bail-out?
- the people who drove the country over the cliff?

Minority interests.

Gloating over the impending demise of that crowd who want to reduce pollution is what gets our juices flowing around here!!!!

We have had political parties that supported shooting people in the past, and they were not as hated as these people who put themselves in front of the electorate advocating a response to climate change.

I am not a fan, but the hatred, the anger........

Why??????

LostCovey

I agree with what you say Lost but isn't this a reaction to what has been enforced on farmers in recent years??

I mean the paperwork is endless (fair enough) but its the stupid rules which really take the biscuit.
I mean I can burn things if i take them into the house and use the fire but i can't burn them in a barrel outside?
I can spread slurry after the 15 Jan regardless of it being the wettest day of the year or not but not on a beautiful sunny day prior to that.
I can't burn bushes after 31 March (is that date correct) for no apparent reason whatsoever
And there are hundreds more

We then have an absolute army of people involved in policing all of these rules. The country is broke yet the government is spending a fortune ensuring these rules aren't broken. It's pure madness and has totally lost the run of itself.

i think that's where the anger and hatred have come from. The Greens, rightly or wrongly, are being viewed as responsible for implementing a huge amount of this rubbish and it is pure frustration on the part of farmers (well from me anyway) that is leading to this dislike for them

djmc

I think the greens have done some good like giving grants for house insulation
and grants for log and wood chip boilers helping money go to local forestry instead of oil barrons but thats where it ends
If they pulled out of goverment after doing that much I would be happy with them.
Insted in the worst econimic time in the history they agree the tax payer should bail out the banks mess spend dail thim talking about stag hunting bans etc.
tax oil to the hilt in case we might have any hope of getting out of a resession costing jobs and pushing up the price of food.
Then there so called climate change bill which hopefully wont get through would have hit irish farmers again
In the name of cow farts thank god there gone

The_Conductor

With all due respects- SEI was setup long before the Greens ever came into government- I think it was in 2001 or 2002. Also- its a co-funded organisation- its not primarily an Irish government initiative. You cannot give the Greens credit for grants towards house insulation etc- though it is somewhat amusing that they are getting credit for it......

BeeDI

djmc wrote: »

I think the greens have done some good like giving grants for house insulation
and grants for log and wood chip boilers helping money go to local forestry instead of oil barrons but thats where it ends
If they pulled out of goverment after doing that much I would be happy with them.
Insted in the worst econimic time in the history they agree the tax payer should bail out the banks mess spend dail thim talking about stag hunting bans etc.
tax oil to the hilt in case we might have any hope of getting out of a resession costing jobs and pushing up the price of food.
Then there so called climate change bill which hopefully wont get through would have hit irish farmers again
In the name of cow farts thank god there gone

Grants never made anything cheaper. Only served to drive up the price of the inputs, to such a level that the grant becomes a subsidy to the supplier of the stuff. Think the farm waste grants. Sheds gone up since then for half the cost, none of the box ticking hassle attached.:cool:

reilig

While I have utter contempt for the greens, I don't blame them. We all knew what their agenda was before they ever got into government. The greens got their chance and decided to bring in as many of their policies as it was humanely possible to bring in. Should a lot of the blame not lie with FF for bringing them into government and allowing them to take positions that would imact on argiculture and food production in this country. Its a pity that the greens didn't take up positions like Minister for Sport where they could have promoted cycling or tourism and Gaeltacht Affairs where they could have done a lot of work with eco tourism over the last few years. At the end of teh day, FF were greedy, they wanted to keep power at all cost, even if it meant shacking up with the greens and allowing them to choose the portfolios that they wanted.

djmc

Oh didnt know that
I then take that part back
leaving them totally useless
On an other note Id like to see a bill passed that would require anyone
who wants to bring in a regulation to have 3 years work experince in the area being affected.
eg. a farmer or a vet who has worked with animal husbentry for 3 years before becoming a politicion would be required to change something in agriculture
instead we get some city slicker who thinks animals are like people and we should all become vegans and grow organic veg.

jeff greene

reilig wrote: »

While I have utter contempt for the greens, I don't blame them. We all knew what their agenda was before they ever got into government. The greens got their chance and decided to bring in as many of their policies as it was humanely possible to bring in. Should a lot of the blame not lie with FF for bringing them into government and allowing them to take positions that would imact on argiculture and food production in this country. Its a pity that the greens didn't take up positions like Minister for Sport where they could have promoted cycling or tourism and Gaeltacht Affairs where they could have done a lot of work with eco tourism over the last few years. At the end of teh day, FF were greedy, they wanted to keep power at all cost, even if it meant shacking up with the greens and allowing them to choose the portfolios that they wanted.

+1

The Greens agenda is clear and doesn’t change, FF compromised their rural vote for power.

reilig

jeff greene wrote: »

+1

The Greens agenda is clear and doesn’t change,

That doesn't mean that the policies that they implemented in the last few years were right. Nor does it mean that city dwelling environmentalists should be making decisions that impact on rural dwellers like they have done in the last few years. If the greens were any way pro farmer/pro agriculture/pro rural dweller then they woulod be running candidates in rural areas. Instead, they just run them in cities where they know they they can get votes from naieve people who think that they know what is best for the environment.

jeff greene

reilig wrote: »

That doesn't mean that the policies that they implemented in the last few years were right. Nor does it mean that city dwelling environmentalists should be making decisions that impact on rural dwellers like they have done in the last few years. If the greens were any way pro farmer/pro agriculture/pro rural dweller then they woulod be running candidates in rural areas. Instead, they just run them in cities where they know they they can get votes from naieve people who think that they know what is best for the environment.

I’m agreeing with you, its FF fault for allowing them to implement such policy.

vincenzolorenzo

djmc wrote: »

and grants for log and wood chip boilers

The Greener Homes Scheme started in 2006, when the Greens were in opposition

ihatetractors

djmc wrote: »

In the name of cow farts thank god there gone

Haha, ooohh. If it's the correct/ or in correct view, it sums up most farmers views on the legacy of the GP.

Chinasea

Well I think we are in big trouble without the Greens. In my opinion the majority are usually wrong and the majority of the posts on here sadly reflect that. Selfish short sighted lazy agendas seem to be the prevalent trait with the Green opponents here, ironically not giving a fiddlers about the land that they live off unless governed and when given the chance will rape and pollute the land until we are totally scuppered.

I have heard so many people of late saying they voted Green the last time but never again. Fair weather greens are of no substance, their votes were welcomed but their fickleness is of no use.

jeff greene

Chinasea wrote: »

Well I think we are in big trouble without the Greens. In my opinion the majority are usually wrong and the majority of the posts on here sadly reflect that. Selfish short sighted lazy agendas seem to be the prevalent trait with the Green opponents here, ironically not giving a fiddlers about the land that they live off unless governed and when given the chance will rape and pollute the land until we are totally scuppered.

I have heard so many people of late saying they voted Green the last time but never again. Fair weather greens are of no substance, their votes were welcomed but their fickleness is of no use.

Yes its in the farmers best interest to rape and pollute the land, give be a break.:mad: Are you a farmer?

Dusty87

jeff greene wrote: »

Yes its in the farmers best interest to rape and pollute the land, give be a break.:mad: Are you a farmer?

I kept out of this thread. I think best not feed the troll. The above post is a load of sh1te. (i attacked post not poster;))

djmc

Chinasea wrote: »

Well I think we are in big trouble without the Greens. In my opinion the majority are usually wrong and the majority of the posts on here sadly reflect that. Selfish short sighted lazy agendas seem to be the prevalent trait with the Green opponents here, ironically not giving a fiddlers about the land that they live off unless governed and when given the chance will rape and pollute the land until we are totally scuppered.

I have heard so many people of late saying they voted Green the last time but never again. Fair weather greens are of no substance, their votes were welcomed but their fickleness is of no use.

Farmers dont pollute the land
We gorw trees and grass and flowers and other plants that take all the bad co2 that towns people and non farming people make and turns it into fresh air.
We do also keep furry little animals and feed them.
We do also feed you :rolleyes:

The_Conductor

Unless someone can give me a compelling reason to allow this thread to continue within the next few hours, I am closing this thread.

Regards,

SMcCarrick

Shauny2010

smccarrick wrote: »

Unless someone can give me a compelling reason to allow this thread to continue within the next few hours, I am closing this thread.

Regards,

SMcCarrick

Freedom of speech you Nazi assh0le

The_Conductor

Shauny2010 wrote: »

Freedom of speech you Nazi assh0le

Lol, if thats the best reason, tough then.....

If you'd like to continue a discussion regarding the Greens (or indeed any other political party)- we have a politics forum, which is the appropriate venue for such topics.

Regards,

SMcCarrick