Good lord, The activists are coming out of the wood work now. And they are getting plenty of media coverage in the rural papers. Yes rural. No good there. We all no that it is not good reading. Of course I am referring to all this forestry planting of farm land, climate change, methane stuff that James Shaw and his side kicks in the Labour caucus including Winne and his mate Shane are throwing at the back bone of NZ. Agriculture. Gets worse by the week.  

Yes there it is as per the Rural news May the 7th pg 23. ETS amended to remove surrender obligations for participants. Happened March 29th 2019. and not a peep from the Feds, or the National Party. The govt approved changes to the Climate Change Response Act 2002 to simplify how post 1989 forests can earn and repay carbon. They eliminate the need for land owners to repay NZ unites when the land is harvested so long as it is replanted, and abolish the obligation to repay credits (NZ unites) that are lost due to storm or fire.  Yes to you guys that got abit of media coverage on TV when fire and storm affected  property’s got burnt and smashed by flood driven trees. Yes you high lighted your concerns about trees, and the Govt promised to listen. To come up with a plan. Yep they sure did and there it is. Sorry guys. Only thing to do is to sell to trees. That is the obvious out come the govt wants. And as I understand it ,have put a floor under the price of carbon to prevent the $ price from crashing through the floor. Looks like the poor old tax payer will have to foot that bill.

Methane is the big story this week. Beef and Lamb  up in arms saying that Farmers cannot plant trees on their land to off set livestock farting and belching. But can plant to sell credits to others, other industry’s, to off set theirs. That is how I interpret the amendment, but Biff and Lamb are not saying that. Seems they are more concerned about their jobs. Tough boys, you played the game at farmers expense and got shafted.

My NZFX sight OMF is saying that NZ is up for huge $ penalties by the end of 2020 of 150 million tonnes at $25 /t if international unites are at $50 NZ. A 4 billion $ cost. The Govt should have raised the $cap on carbon yesterday.  I have talked of this before. The argument has to get into the urban persons house, for they WILL pay. But of course Govt has cleverly kept the urban population under the pump financially so they are to busy working to keep the wolf from the door and used the dirty dairy TV promotions to sway public opinion against agriculture. Now as I understand carbon in a forest can only be claimed once. The first cycle/plantings. You do not claim in perpetuity. Only a short time frame. The first 5yrs are hardly worth it. Then it is  the next 20yrs to yr 25. After that you bank the carbon in the forest to off set any liabilities from losses that will accrue. That is when they will get you. Trees mature and rot away. The indigenous will have become established underneath but of course only Maori can claim it. Presto. Now you will have figured it out.

Of course there is the Govt lackeys getting plenty of media time and there in the local paper last week, Horowhenua Mail 16th May pg 2 is Gordon Campbell talking politics, saying that there is no real climate for change. His argument is the commos will ditch the Greens, and their climate change policies at the next election. The methane targets are aspirational and there is no legislative powers to enforce penalties on anybody if they do not comply. I see Winne is saying something similar  this week in either the Farmers Weekly or the Rural News.  A sinister attempt to quiten the urban population?Only time will tell. But in the mean time there is a $24 billion industry on the ropes, and 1000,s jobs in rural services and supporting roles at risk.

On a different subject but relevant is the MPI’s attitude to M Bovis and the affected farmers. Another 300 farmers added to the watch list, allegations of poor treatment of affected farmers by MPI officials. Farmers treated like criminals? Could it be that since John and I put paid to Horizons N leaching limits with our Advisory Group report, that the Govt is using M Bovis to achieve the outcome desired. A million or 2 less cattle in NZ. Rural News pg 1 7th May 2019.

Don Nicholson, President Federated Farmers

C/- Federated Farmers.


Owhango 3990


Dear Don,

Thank-you for meeting with me on Tuesday 5th August. I came away feeling concerned , and upon reflection I don’t believe that Federated Farmers both at Regional and National level have grasped the significance of the Proposed Primary Sector Water Partnership Document that Federated Farmers, at National level, were consulted with in 2005. It bears striking resemblance to parts of the regional policy statement that Horizons notified in May 2007. As such , Federated Farmers has failed to grasp the importance and significance of the words, “land use change”, “Carbon sinks” and “ Regulation”.
In my view Federated Farmers both Regionally and Nationally have failed to recognize the importance of the minute issued early July by the independent Chairperson of the hearings committees to the proposed One Plan , Joan Allin , requesting that a full section 32 must be completed including costs and benefits in monetary terms.
In My view this Primary Sector Water Partnership Document is going to circumvent that section 32 requirements. Thereby side stepping section 5 RMA, our health, wealth, social and cultural needs.
It places a heavy reliance on the nutrient budgeting tool “oversea” and its flawed nitrogen component, kg/hec/ann. This will see, again my view, millions of hectares of land use changed to carbon sinks and other less profitable uses. Eg, Coastal Dune country in Horowhenua.
I am horrified to think that at National level, Federated Farmers would accept that the limited financial benefit to a few Federated Farmers members of carbon sinks (indigenous) is greater than the huge cost such a policy would have on the greater good of our rural communities and regional and national economies.
I would not like to think Federated Farmers at National level supports or condones the subtle involvement in developing Regional Plans, influencing Federated Farmers policies and attempting to subvert or detract from the submission process of Regional Plans, for their own personal financial gain by Federated Farmers office holders, past and present.
As Federated Farmers does not represent all farmers and has no legal or statutory ability to negotiate outcomes on behalf of its members, or indeed all farmers I am appalled to think that Federated Farmers Nationally supports the Primary Water Partnership document.
There will be huge emphasis on sediment and microbial activity of water and the nutrient budgeting tool “oversea”.
I don’t need to remind you that the world is hungry and NZ relies on Natural compounds, phosphate, sulphur and potassium amongst others to grow grass. NZ still relies on agricultural exports to survive. There is no magical alternative that will employ the population of NZ either directly or indirectly.
While I applaud Federated Farmers National involvement, all outcomes sought must be effects based with sound recognized science as the basics of any assertions.

Yours Faithfully,
Mike Plowman.
Regional Councilor for Ruapehu
to Horizons Regional Council.

I continue to surprise my self at what I uncovered ,the places and forums I found myself in. The very nice but not so nice people I talked to.