Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Mass Protest in the Netherlands by Farmers.

Options
189101113

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,834 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    That won't be the outcome. Nearly all societies in Western Europe are committed to ever cheaper food.


    People have no interest in agriculture surviving as economically sustainable in Europe. Especially small players.


    Consumers do not put up when it comes to Organic or sustainable.


    Russia for pork, grain, veg, Brazil for Beef, New Zealand for lamb.


    That's how it will end up and no one will want them to regulate or be sustainable.


    The refusal of the govt to end below cost selling was just the latest in showing how little interest there is in sustainable farming or a viable agriculture sector in Europe.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,296 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    So if the current Dutch model is destroying their land, what is the solution? Producing less food? If they carry on as is maybe the land wont be able to produce anything eventually.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    You don't want them to produce anything in the first place



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,296 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk




  • Registered Users Posts: 15,151 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Green ideology is no chemical fertilisers or pesticides, and the maths is really very simple.

    Without chemical fertilisers the scientific research shows that Sri Lanka would need to plant anywhere between 21.5% and 33% more acreage to be self sufficient in staple foods and have a surplus to sell allowing them to buy other commodities.

    At one stage you had an imaginary solution that they could produce themselves that would achieve that without the use of chemical fertilisers but when repeatedly asked what that solution is, nada.

    Very much like green ideology in that regard. Lots of imaginary thinking, but no answers to practical problems.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,962 ✭✭✭amacca


    But is it sustainable to import food from places where slash and burn is the policy?



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,416 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    If we change how we eat, E.g. less beef, this won’t be needed.


    I’m going to go on a pro vegan lecture, but eating less meat is about the best thing we can do right now. Kills me to say it though.


    It’s forecast to be over 30 in Ireland next week. Over 40 in the UK. People are fighting wild fires across Europe. This is not ok.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 6,962 ✭✭✭amacca


    I'm having a hard time believing that


    Wouldn't drastically reducing the number of flights taken rank up there


    Wouldn't educating women (and indeed men) in developing nations help reduce birth rates and population pressure


    Wouldn't addressing the way countries are run with neverending growth (economically etc) being the goal...leading to increased consumption and waste be something to think about


    If meat were cut out would that not result in land being repurposed and even more being taken for crops.....crops which will require pesticides to provide the kinds of yields required...........if we are talking about growing in a controlled environment/vertical farms etc...would that not consume huge amounts of electricity and water diverted from natural sources to provide the volume required


    Like I said I'm finding it real hard to believe cutting out meat is the single best thing we can do......especially cutting production in the West, if we do that it will be supplied in a much more environmentally destructive way from Brazil........even if we do reduce demand won't that area being destroyed continue to be destroyed for palm oil plantations etc


    All I can see is shooting ourselves in the foot even more and not solving the issue.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,846 ✭✭✭straight


    Burning fossil fuels is the issue. Not farmers.

    Vegans are just useful idiots filled up with propaganda from the billion dollar food industries.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,849 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Veganism is not the answer. Many of the people telling us "we must do this, that and the third" are causing not just needless CO2 emissions and massive needless destruction of the natural world. By objecting to the use of nuclear energy (which has usually meant burning fossil fuels instead for electricity - 100% needlessly) and supporting the extermination of large birds (e.g. eagles) and bats to extinction by carpet bombing the countryside with windmills which are absolutely lethal to flying wildlife. Literally, windmills are more of an existential threat to bats than White Note Syndrome, which is itself an extinction-level threat.

    Unless someone is willing to repudiate and oppose these insane policies, I don't care what else they favour or oppose.

    Like Eamon Ryan who wants to simultaneously "re-wild" the countryside by introducing killer wolves while simultaneously carpet bombing it with windmills. Same for the vegan brigade. Your policies are contradictory, self-defeating and insane and I have no interest in changing my life according to them. Zero. Nada. Squat. Zip.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,230 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    12th time. They cannot get or afford imported fertiliser.

    That means 0% per acreage.

    #maths



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,151 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    So that`s the alternative you have that they could produce themselves to solve the problem, malnutrition and starvation ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,230 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    That's actually your alternative.

    The reality is they will have to decrease their dependence on a commodity they cannot produce. The exact thing I stated in my first post you responded to.

    Plenty of published studies on how that can be achieved. Maybe the new governance may introduce a plan to get to food sovereignty, I wouldn't have much hope though. Hopefully I'm wrong.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,151 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Not at all. I have shown you what the alternatives are from Sri Lanka`s own agricultural research studies over 22 growing seasons, and this has been borne out from this years crop yields.

    You have been on about some alternative they could use themselves to change that, but when repeatedly asked what this alternative is you just keep ignoring. Now you come up with yet another vague reply about published studies on how it can be achieved. So what are these alternatives, either your own, or from these published studies ?

    It really is a simple question and I cannot see why the constant evasion attempts to not answer.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,649 ✭✭✭dasdog


    Love the Anti-EU gammon hate from the beneficiaries of the Common Agricultural Policy on this thread. One of the best life lessons I had was working on a farm in the Netherlands, everything grown in sand sprayed with fertiliser, planting tulips. Horrible work but we enjoyed the weekends. That's when you make decisions about ability or being a spa.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,846 ✭✭✭straight




  • Registered Users Posts: 330 ✭✭cezanne


    I agree with you having worked in the food industry i have witnessed the intensive farming in person its cruel and horrible and to be honest if the green agenda reduces the wanton killing of young animals for consumption than it has achieved something IMHO. As to the beef form Brazill total mafia beef funding criminals. I met all the beef producers from around the world at various industry food shows the big one in Germany in Cologne. The handsome brazillians would cut your throat and there is no traceabiliy there.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,151 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    The EU imports 540 million worth of beef with poor or none existing traceability from the slash and burn merchants in Brazil and have it shipped half way around the world. The EU imports 845 million worth of beef from Ireland a member state.

    The EU Commissioner for Agriculture was in town a few weeks ago and said the EU had no interest in cutting herd number, that their concern was food security. Yet the Irish Green Party want to cut our herd by at least 30%.

    Am I missing something, or is this the contradictory madness it appears ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    So true farmers are the real land custodians of the land, that has probably being passed down through generations.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    Here here well said, the vegan agenda is just astonishing people who know nothing about farming or food production making decisions and pushing agendas



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Labaik


    A few days of sunshine and its Armageddon. What about the other 340 odd days a year that its raining.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    They think everyone produces meat via the USA model. Tonnes of water. Ireland does not.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    They have that covered. Rain is due to climate change also. Fires in Aus.. Tones of plants there need fire to grow burst seed pods alike clear area for new growth. Problem is when you move houses into these areas not the fires. 2 odd hours from sydney you can go skiing ffs.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,416 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    A few days of sunshine aren’t the problem. The rise in average global temperature is. Blind ignorance let’s you validate whatever opinion you want.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Labaik


    Sorry but the earths temperature has risen every decade since the 1800's. One of the hottest years ever recorded in the U.S was in 1934.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    I would love to know your opinion on the following.

    Myself and my father are part time farmers in the west of Ireland, non intensive farmers or beef finnishing store cattle and sheep production.

    We have roughly 60 acres grassland, 80 acres forestry and 120 acres bogland of which is rich in sphagnum moss.

    We have not got our land surveyed for carbon sequestration, but due to us being in reps scheme for years we planted all our fields with hedgerows, use little fertiliser as clover swards established using tight grazing with sheep, I know we are sequestering way more carbon than we are emitting, by using rough estimates from field studies. The forestry and sphagnum moss especially are huge carbon sinks but why on earth are we not allowed to claim credits for them, this is a joke, yet big buisness like Google and meta can blaken ireland with data centres buy up forestry land in Lietrim using shell companies and offset the credits against them and Ireland has no problem as it helps our 'GDP'. Farmers like me feel we are being sold out because of this.

    We run an extremely sustainable farm and as do most farmers in Ireland especially if the farmers own bogland, so why are some people condemning our farm and saying we are destroying the environment when it's quite the opposite.

    I would like to here your thoughts from a person who is on the opposite side of the fence.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,416 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    I say fair play to you, why are you asking my opinion? I’m definitely not anti farmer.


    I replied in this thread because I don’t think there’s a media cover up of the protests and I believe climate change is real and will force us to change how we live. We need to change, or we will have to change later.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,416 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    I’m not going to argue climate science with you. It’s settled and real.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 500 ✭✭✭Marcos


    When most of us say "social justice" we mean equality under the law opposition to prejudice, discrimination and equal opportunities for all. When Social Justice Activists say "social justice" they mean an emphasis on group identity over the rights of the individual, a rejection of social liberalism, and the assumption that unequal outcomes are always evidence of structural inequalities.

    Andrew Doyle, The New Puritans.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    Respect that climate change is a huge issue, but what are your thoughts on Irish famers like myself who are clearly a net carbon absorber not being able to claim carbon credits and in turn sell them at market value to more intensive famers in the dairy sector, instead of big multinational companies. If this was done it would really help the marginalized farmer in the West of Ireland and also help intensive farmers in the East offset their carbon emissions.

    My thoughts are any carbon sequestered in the farming/agriculture/land areas and privately owned bogland showed be used only in the agricultural sector, and should not be sold to multinational companies. Our farmers in Ireland are the biggest private owners of bogland, forestry and agricultural land this carbon being sequestered should be used only for this sector.

    What do you think, should a pro active regenerative farmer like myself and my father, who are farming are land down through generations, should we be allowed to claim our excess carbon credits and sell them to a more intensive dairy farmer that is a net emitter of carbon?, or should we be made forfeit them to big Energy consuming Multinationals in order to keep money flowing into Ireland and keep the 'GPD' gravy train going.



Advertisement