Federated Farmers of New Zealand

Farmers' thoughts on ETS

Released 27 Aug 2008

When the Green Party publicly asked the people of New Zealand about their views on the proposed Emission Trading Scheme legislation Federated Farmers encouraged members to respond.

Below are a few of the hundreds of emails sent by farmers to the Green Party.

Farmer views

"We need to remember who puts food on our plates and supports the economy of this country. Crippling the agricultural industry will have major economic and social ramifications in New Zealand - something that the current economic environment in New Zealand can ill afford."

"I broadly agree with the concept of an emissions trading scheme, however I do not support the existing legislation as, amongst other things, it lacks a sound scientific base in relation to carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture and forestry. We can do better than this as a nation. We need to make our decisions regarding the environment based on sound science, not emotion and political point scoring. No to ETS in present form."

"My partner and I are a young couple who are currently share-milking 420 cows near Reefton on the West Coast. Whilst I do accept that we do need to be concerned about emissions and there effects on our environment, I consider this legislation to be too much, too soon. The impact of this proposed legislation on New Zealand's primary industry of agriculture could be devastating. A revised proposal phasing controls in along the lines of our Aussie neighbours would be a lot more sustainable and more acceptable to all farmers." 

"I have grave concerns about any benefits of involving NZ livestock emissions in the scheme when no one else in the world is doing so. The figures done by Con Williams of Meat & Wool which I am sure you are familiar with suggest that our sheep an cattle operation would be completely unprofitable if we had to completely off set our livestock methane and nitrous oxide emissions from the animals digestive processes." 

"I am against the Emission Trading Scheme as there is too many unanswered questions and I don't think New Zealand needs to lead the world. I am afraid that the costs will cripple the productive sector and eventually the whole of New Zealand and do nothing towards the lessoning of world greenhouse gases."

"We are a family of five with three young children to raise. We have grave concerns on the ETS and the effect it could have on us and our country. Drastic change is needed to this legislation and if the Greens support the current framework we will probably move to Australia as New Zealand will be history. There is no way our small country can cope with this type of arrangement - what a joke. And we thought the Greens supported families like ours. The Greens must vote against joining Labour as the second reading becomes closer."

"I have been farming a 400 ha piece of Hawke's Bay hill country for more than 40 years.  For all that time I have been retiring, protecting and planting areas that are vulnerable in an environmental way. I have also spent considerable time and money encouraging others to do the same. More than 25 percent of our farm is now protected with trees and covenanted areas. The ETS as it stands will do nothing but force me out of business with the proposed excessive costs of compliance. Yes, we need more trees on farms, more research into animal emissions, more development of clean energy sources, but there are many better and affordable ways of doing this. If the ETS goes ahead as planned you can count on nothing but hostility from farmers such as me, and that will do absolutely nothing for the future of New Zealand and the globe."

"I oppose the ETS in its current form.  I do not oppose the principals of it though. I have always believed that every New Zealander should be accountable for the impact they have on the environment. Why though is all the money for our carbon trading going out of New Zealand when it seems far more logical to put that money to use on research and practical measures inside NZ? I do not believe that New Zealanders wish to degrade their home patch, education and support, backed by research, will go a lot further than taxing and sending the money off overseas."

"My wife and I are fifth generation farmers, aged mid-30's, with three young children. We are both university educated and have had experience in the corporate world before returning to the family farm. We have chosen to make a significant investment in the agricultural industry in New Zealand, supported by a clearly defined business plan, which along with physical and financial targets, also focuses on the the long term sustainability of our farming business. We know that if future generations are to farm on this land that we must ensure that sustainable farming practices are adopted. The New Zealand farmer cannot afford to ignore these practices and most are on the road to ensuring that New Zealand will remain the most efficient converter of grass to protein in the world, whilst ensuring that our environment is not further harmed by out dated farming practices. We also know that food production is an essential part of the world that we live in. People have to eat and farmers have the responsibility of producing this food. If New Zealand farmers are forced to reduce production (which is all the ETS legislation will achieve) then this gap in production will have to be met by another country producing food less efficiently, thus actually causing greater effect to the global warming theory."

"Its not that we don't think that agriculture could be to some degree responsible for supposed global warming. It's just that we don't know. The science is flawed. There are no hard facts to support the global warming theory and the effect agriculture has on it. Yes - if it can be undoubtedly proved that agriculture is indeed going to be the demise of the planet we live in then something drastic needs to be done. But not us first. By martyring New Zealand farmers, who contribute almost nothing in context to global emissions, we are in fact doing the whole world a disservice. Instead of rewarding good sustainable production we are looking to penalise one of the most efficient food producing nations in the world."

"Yes we are farmers. Yes we stand to lose financially if the proposed ETS legislation is introduced, as does the whole country. But you need to be aware that New Zealand farmers are making significant efforts to ensure long term sustainable practices are adapted. The ETS legislation is based on poor science and in effect will be poor legislation. Poor legislation (just like poor farming practices) will not achieve the desired outcome. This is a big deal and it needs to be done right. Until we know for sure what's causing climate change then lets cool our heels and not sacrifice our efficient food producing nation in the interest of a science experiment." 

"It's a gamble and the odds are stacked against us. The Government seems willing to roll the dice without thinking of the outcome. Don't support their electioneering. Are they doing what they think is ultimately the best solution for our country or are they merely trying to push this legislation through before the election in a desperate bid to attract votes and remain in power, whatever the cost to our economy? This legislation will be strong in ideology, but lacking in logic and reason. It will be an unjust tax supporting an inherently flawed Kyoto model. Surely as a country we can do better than that. Our very future, indeed the very future of our planet, is at stake. Don't take a punt. Let's get the facts first." 

"There is an old saying "fools rush in where others fear to tread"; never in New Zealand's proud history has there been a time when absolute caution must be the applied to a very key piece of legislation. The consequences of "getting this wrong" could well be a legacy that those charged with the governance of our country will be branded with forever."

"Our economy was and still is founded on agriculture, we as farmers use our skills as custodians of the land to feed and clothe our nation and to support growing world demand for quality food and fibre products. Without question New Zealand farmers are recognised as being the absolute best in their field, this is why we are seeing these skills being exported to other countries so that they also can achieve high productivity in a very efficient and sustainable manner. ETS, should it proceed in its current format, would become just another tax that we have to face as farmers, with a reality that we will be forced to seek recovery of this cost from the consumer - the result in simple terms, higher food costs for all New Zealanders and disruption to our international markets as we are forced to seek higher selling prices."

"The proposal to include agriculture in an ETS scheme defies logic - no other country in the world has signalled a move in this direction, in fact the opposite, with countries like Australia clearly stating that their agricultural sector will not be part of the equation for many years, if at all. On the world market the NZ farmer would be disadvantaged as they are forced to seek higher prices for their production - how do we compete with countries who do not have Agriculture in the ETS basket, the answer would be we don't; the reality for farming would be the full cost of ETS at the farm gate. What benefit for farming, what benefit for New Zealand."

"The key to survival is food - a fact that many countries have overlooked as they drive their farmers towards cash crops such as Bio-fuels and in the process raping traditional farm land which historically supported their food needs - these countries now to look to southern hemisphere agriculture and horticulture lands to meet food demand, New Zealand has a very important part to play in international food sustainability."

"Do we accept that efficient farming is the key factor in the climate change debate - I think not - we need facts, good well founded scientific information that shows us that by altering our farming practise we would in fact be making a substantial contribution to reducing influencing factors relating directly to climate change. Perhaps such science will show what many believe, that New Zealand food and fibre producers are, through good farm governance, potentially lessoning the impact of climate change through clean green environment management."

"This is the straw that may well break the country's back as the premium provider of food to the rest of the world. It is already hard enough to be competitive with our primary produce without trying to achieve the ridiculous goal of being the first in the world to meet our very strict and excessive emissions proposals. While countries like China and India are busy becoming more industrialised and pouring pollutants into the atmosphere we are proposing to ruin our economy by reducing our two percent of the global problem; how stupid is that? Anyone who votes for this will be putting NZ on the skids for well into the future and should have it firmly imprinted on their conscience. We can do things to reduce our emissions - certainly- as long as they are sensible practical things. Dovetailing our policies with Australia's might be a sensible consideration for a start. Don't wreck NZ by passing this bill in its present form!"

"I am a young farmer with not a lot except plenty of debt. Within the next ten years or so the next generation of farmers are going to come through, so if people in high places want to put the boot into the 'back bone' of New Zealand's future economy then I think myself and my young family will join those sensible people who are buggering off overseas and leave you fellas to ruin  a once strong nation!!! I am against the ETS as the only thing it is going to do is to let me give you a job and you will take mine from me." 

"My first concern is the effect on food prices to ordinary New Zealand. A tax on food production will inevitably be passed on to consumers. With the resent rapid increases in food, fuel and power prices us common Kiwi are hurting. My second point is I always like to have an alternative or a solution to a problem before I see regulation come in. To this extent New Zealand needs to build up its public transport network and more fuel efficient transport fleet before the Government creates more hardship to consumers as all goods purchased have a transport cost. I personally have seen the price for alternative power (Solar) come down. Farming is looking mitigation options but I am told they are a few years way to commercial use. My personal feeling is that the ETS as it stands will take money away from the innovative solution solving sector so we will be further way from fixing the problem. Let's put more effort into finding solutions that does not harm New Zealand's living standards and then bring in something like an ETS to bring the tardy few into line.  Delay the ETS and find solutions first."

"The ETS runs the risk of seriously affecting the economy of this nation, while having very little effect on the global climate position. NZ is 4 million people. China with 1.3 billion people is NOT affected. India with more than 1 billion people is NOT affected. Both countries will continue to emit, and grow their emissions without penalty. Legislation of this kind has the potential to drive NZ into 3rd world status."

"I believe the ETS legislation to be the most important piece of legislation to come before Parliament for many many years and also believe there is an enormous ignorance and confusion amongst the people of this country about this scheme. To proceed with this bill with unseemly haste will almost certainly result in bad legislation,  which will without doubt reflect on those responsible for many years to come. I don't envy you your present position and do urge you, to not be a party to hasty legislation, and to consider carefully, what the impact  of getting it wrong, will have on future governments, the economy, and the people of New Zealand. I believe legislation of this magnitude should only be passed after all sectors have fully contributed, all research possible completed, the population fully informed and  after full consultation with our neighbours in Australia."  

"I have a farmer all my working life and although now retired still own land and help part on the farm. I cannot believe the unfairness of the idea that farmers should pay for the greenhouse gases emitted with no allowance made for the greenhouse gases removed from the atmosphere by pastoral farming. There are so many unanswered questions that I am totally opposed to the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol at this time. Why should little New Zealand who is such a small percentage of the problem be in such a rush to commit before more questions are answered."

"If the Emissions Trading Scheme is passed, it will be the death knell of the agriculture sector. We are sheep and beef farmers, and costs have increased substantially, compared to our returns. The added costs of the ETS, if brought in, will be the last straw. Australia is not penalising it's farmers, so why should New Zealand, when farming is so important for our country's future."

"Don't you think that farmers in New Zealand - especially sheep and beef farmers have already enough on their shoulders, without the ETS? Farmers are one of the hardest working and environmentally friendly workers in the whole of NZ and are getting nothing in return. The Green Party should be supporting farmers and not putting more pressure on us by supporting the ETS!"

"As a farmer I'd like to encourage you not to support the Emissions Trading Scheme as it stands. In my opinion we are rushing into this without enough knowledge about the lifecycle of carbon in the agricultural sector. I think there needs to be further research into the carbon sequestration of NZ pastures, including both the carbon in the grass and carbon locked up in organic matter in the soil. In particular farmers need to know how to increase organic matter in soil (and therefore increase carbon sequestration), and farmers who manage to do this need to be awarded accordingly under the ETS scheme."

"As a dairy farmer, this scheme will place tremendous financial pressure on our business. While we are receiving good payouts at the moment, we have been unable to repay any capital on our property loan in the 6 years since purchasing the farm. Our feed costs have increased over the past year, as have fuel costs and wages. The increasing cost to the household will also hinder our productivity. We are using EcoN to minimise leaching and are looking into feed to reduce emissions, however this requires the fitting of meal feeders to our shed which is a substantial cost. If this bill is passed, I feel we need the opportunity of interest free loans or subsidies to fit these emission reducing systems to our dairy farm. While we continue to study all research and apply what is practical, we urge you to seriously consider this bill in its present form and consider the dairy farmer further as we provide a large percentage of the country's earnings."

"To me it makes no sense for New Zealand to be the first country in the world to pass this type of legislation. Until there is greater acceptance by more nations of the world community, we will really make little difference to what is a 'whole world' problem. For example to penalise us for using coal but allow exports of this  to other countries who do not have an ETS is an absolute no-brainer. We are a trading nation who must live off overseas income. In our opinion this act will first affect those on lower incomes and then ultimately on all New Zealand. Also such a major piece of legislation should not be rushed through Parliament with such undue haste."

Sign up for our weekly e-newsletter featuring latest news, events and notices