«
»

Nicholson quotes Jeanette

December 22nd, 2009 at 8:54 am by David Farrar

Fed Farmers President Don Nicholson says the Mackenzie Basin dairy farming application should be given a fair hearing under the RMA. He notes:

Putting the location aspect aside as something for the commissioners, is “loose housing” a terrible corruption of the New Zealand “brand”, as Dr Russel Norman MP, the Green Party co-leader makes it out to be? Not according to his colleague, Jeanette Fitzsimons MP. His former Green Party co-leader was so impressed when she saw a “herd home” in action, that Ms Fitzsimons entered the following words on her website about good farming stories: “I must admit I was prejudiced about herd homes before I saw this one – NZ is known for grazing its animals outside all year round – surely we don’t want to coop them up in barns away from the light and the sun and the fresh grass? However now I’m a complete convert. The high roof is translucent and lets in lots of light. The overhanging sides are open so there is air movement through but rain and cold winds are kept out. The cows are free to move around, and there is fresh hay or silage under the eaves around the outside edges of the barn for them to feed at will. If I had any doubts about the animal welfare side of things, it was dispelled when I saw them waiting in the race to get back in again out of the rain.”

Don also notes the proposal is for 18,000 cows over 16 separate farms – not in one gargantuan farm.

Related posts:

  1. Jeanette on Factory Farms
  2. Jeanette resigns
  3. Editorials on Jeanette
  4. Jeanette continues to push 911 lunacy
Tags: , ,

This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009 at 8:54 am and is filed under New Zealand. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

9 Responses to “Nicholson quotes Jeanette”

  1. toad (3,542) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 9:09 am

    Don Nicholson is being very mischievous here. Jeanette made the clear distinction between herd homes and factory farms almost two weeks ago when the Feds first attempted to publicly misconstrue her support for herd homes:

    Herd homes are open, light and airy and the cows are free to move around. They are not used 24/7. Even in filthy weather the cows are outside for at least the four hours it takes them to eat their daily ration of fresh grass. Then they are off the paddock, protecting the soil from pugging in wet weather and sheltering in the herd home where they have a ration of hay or silage to eat at will.

    Russel and I were totally convinced when we saw the cows waiting to get back in after their time outside. When the weather is fine and the soil reasonably dry, they are outside all the time. Using a herd home as part of a pastoral farm results in much less nitrous oxide emissions from the wet soil. More manure and urine are able to be collected and treated for application to pasture when conditions are suitable. Animal welfare is improved. And herd homes can be used in a low-energy system because the cows still harvest their own feed with local dry feed as a supplement.

    The factory-farms being applied for in the Mackenzie Basin are the opposite. The cows will be indoors 24 hours a day for 8 months, perhaps in cubicles most of the time. All feed will be brought to them, so it will require additional energy to produce and transport. Will it be palm kernel? Or maize or silage ‘cut and carried’ by trucks from hundreds of miles away? The Mackenzie Basin is a place where for much of the year no feed can be grown locally and the weather is inhospitable for cows.

    Federated Farmers have twittered that it is the “principal” (I think they mean principle) that matters, not the scale. They’re wrong: it’s both.

    Environmentally, scale can be everything. 180 cows might have a manageable impact on water quality, but 18,000 cows is a whole different ball-game. It is precisely the scale of dairying in New Zealand – the sheer numbers of cows, the intensity of stocking rates, and the resulting effluent and emissions – that is turning what used to be seen as a ‘clean green’ wholesome industry into a major polluter.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 24 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. RRM (7,207) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 9:22 am

    “That’s why I just ask this – please give the applicants and the hearings commissioners all a fair go under the RMA.”

    Nicholson is carrying out the same kind of public opinion campaigning that he is complaining about the Greens partaking in.

    There is a well-established RMA hearing process, this has been in place for a long time now, and based on the submissions for and against that are presented to the hearing. Not on any general aura of BS out here in the wider world. So what Nicholson is really saying is “please don’t raise environmental objections to this.”

    And if Toad is correct on the “Herd homes”/”factory farms” distinction, then Nicholson is a bullshit artist for that quote of Fitzsimons, and consequently DPF is carrying out dog-whistling services on behalf of the general anti-green movement.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. reid (13,564) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 9:49 am

    Here’s another quote from Jeanette showing just how valuable her opinions actually are:

    Green MP Jeanette Fitzsimons, who was at the summit, called it a “disgrace and a tragedy for humanity”.

    Oh the humanity.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. XavierG (64) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 10:20 am

    Nicholson is being disingenuous, and you’re being incredibly lazy to not actually read what JF said, DPF…there’s a fundamental difference between Factory Farming and Cubicles (which is what the MacKenzie Cartel want) and herd farming, which is not able to be intensified to extent that Federated Farmers want…

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Dobbie (36) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 10:55 am

    Off the Feds go again. Interesting to see they’re going for the ‘reasonable’ approach this time.

    I’ve been following this avidly and the issue of cubicle farming (or free-stalls or factory farming or whatever you want to call it) seems to have cross-over appeal. A majority of farmers are against it as are the urban liberals. So I can’t understand why Fed Farmers aren’t voicing the views of the majority of their members? Maybe this is just knee-jerk anti-Greens stuff from them? Maybe it’s because they see an opportunity to influence further amendments to the RMA?

    They’re being disingenuous in two aspects. As XavierG notes, referring to the MacKenzie Basin proposals as ‘loose housing’ and using a quote about ‘herd homes’ is misleading. These farms aren’t about ‘keeping cows warm in winter, and cool in summer, and happy all year-round’. They are about keeping cows inside 24/7 for 8 months of the year to make money! So get real Fed Farmers, not all of us urbanites are stupid!

    Also, The Don knows that these proposals are likely to go through under the RMA process. That is because the process is reductionist – each application is for a specific activity e.g. building a concrete pad, and each activity when viewed in isolation is unlikely to declined. However the farmers I have spoken to are concerned about two things – the length of time the cows will be indoors, and the fact that across the rest of the country we’ve invested in pastoral farming and that is the lowest cost form of farming for the country as a whole. Therefore this bears a look at the national level – David Carter is already looking at the Animal Welfare Stuff but no-one is looking at the big picture stuff i.e what impact will this have on pastoral farmers in the rest of the country! Nick Smith turned down the opportunity to call the proposals in. Maybe he needs to revisit that decision?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. rimu (51) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 11:32 am

    extremely lazy, dpf

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. David Farrar (1,735) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 12:13 pm

    The article did not have a link to Jeanette’s word for me to follow through, or a date reference for it. If there is a link I will normally click through to check context. Commenters here have added context which is how blogs should work.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Dobbie (36) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 12:18 pm

    By the way, Don N is on the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC). Isn’t it a bit of worry that he doesn’t seem to know the difference between herd homes and cubicle farming?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Federated Farmers (2) Says:
    March 20th, 2010 at 11:14 am

    You can read all about Jeanette waxing lyrical about a herd home that is actually the name of a commercial product and not a system of farming:
    http://www.greens.org.nz/goodfarmstories/mike-moss-and-madeline-rix-trott

    If you want to see what a loose house farm is like, either Google “loose housing” or for a NZ example, check out Close-Up and TV3 from last December:
    Close-Up:
    http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/look-inside-cubicle-dairy-farming-3310023/video

    TV3:
    http://www.3news.co.nz/Canterbury-farmer-defends-cubicle-farming-/tabid/309/articleID/134223/Default.aspx

    I’ll let you make up your own minds up. Getting this information isn’t hard as Don’s reference is to the Greens ‘Good Farming Sttories’ that easily comes up if you put that into Google!

    Hope this helps.

    David Broome

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

«
»