Farmers have had it up to here

The protest they mention is taking the form of a cavalcade of diesel utes and tractors driving to towns and cities around the country. Too late, I realised what was happening, found Te Puke was apparently not part of it, and started to set up a protest here. But I wouldn’t have got through the red tape in the time left. You can send them a message of support, join or make a donation at Even saying “I’m with you” would help them. There are also Groundswell NZ Facebook pages with details.

The gist of today’s newsletter from F.A.R.M.

We are supporting the Groundswell Protest on Friday 16 July.

Make sure you are part of one of the events. It is an important opportunity to express dissatisfaction with the Government’s handling of rural issues including their approach to Ruminant Methane.

We are looking at ways to challenge the Government through the courts.  Our early advice is that there are grounds to seek redress.  This will be expensive but could help our cause.  More on this to come.

Remember your farm is not contributing to any new warming.  Your farm uses as much greenhouse gas as it produces.  Yet you are being asked to reduce your emissions, even subsidising fossil fuel users in the process.  That is worth battling against.


Robin, Owen and the team at F.A.R.M.

Draft letter to townies you know

Here is a draft letter to send to family and friends who live in the city. Do it now.

Dear Family/Friend

You will see lots of farmers protesting this Friday.  You may be wondering what it is all about.  We do not protest lightly. The media may not convey the facts clearly so I am keen you understand our reasons.

One of the key areas of concern to us is climate change and the gross unfairness of what the Government intends.

  1. Because fossil fuel users (petrol and diesel) cannot be made to reduce their emissions quickly enough farmers have been asked to subsidize them by us cutting our emissions faster than the Paris Accord required.
  2. The Government subsidises forestry including mostly off-shore investors to plant trees – mostly on good quality farmland – so the trees will take up our emissions from cars, trucks, buses, etc., but they ignore all the emissions we absorb growing grass and the vegetation on our farms.
  3. Our emissions are falling and will fall further over the next decade or more and because we use as much Greenhouse Gas growing grass as we produce we are not adding new warming to the planet.  Remember the natural carbon cycle we learnt in General Science at school?
  4. Latest research shows our methane emissions that we’re being asked to reduce are not doing as much warming as first claimed.  The formula originally used is simply wrong.  This change means we are being penalised by 400% more than we should.
  5. We are the world’s most efficient farmers and even with shipping costs we have the lowest carbon footprint.  If we are forced to cut production there will be less money for the nation but, worse, some other country with a worse emissions record will produce the lost food.
  6. The Paris Accord that we signed up to says food production should not be curtailed.  The Government ignores this requirement.

Would you please consider supporting us?  Contact your MP and tell them what I have told you.  Share the story around.  Write letters.  Reply to this and say “I am with you”.  That will help us.



Views: 265

7 Thoughts on “Farmers have had it up to here

  1. ross on 13/07/2021 at 2:51 pm said:

    I feel the farmers have lost this the day they accepted, contrary to real science, that man made co2 and methane has a detrimental warming effect to climate. preprint 3 is a good start and Ed will make an interesting comment regarding an updated calculation on his preprint 3 over the next few days relating to man made land based Co2.

  2. ross on 13/07/2021 at 3:57 pm said:

    July 10, 2021 at 5:07 am New breakthrough for this Preprint #3 (Please note the time and date of this comment): I inserted the most likely scenario from IPCC’s Table 6.1 values for the land-use effect into the physics model from 1750 to 2020. This applies IPCC’s e-times to its land-use effect values and allows carbon that the land-use effect adds to the atmosphere to flow to the surface ocean and deep ocean. The result is the land-use effect adds only 1.26 ppm to the atmosphere as of 1950, proving that the land-use effect is NOT enough to explain Figure 1 and proving the Core Theory is wrong. In addition, because the land-use effect begins to transfer carbon from the atmosphere to the land in 1990, according to IPCC Table 6.1, this reduces the human effect on atmospheric CO2 by 2020 from 33 ppm to 25.5 ppm. These results are now in my Excel sheet and it will take me another day or so to show and explain these results in Preprint #3. So, unless I find errors in this calculation, and I will check it carefully, this is a slam-dunk win that proves the Core Theory is wrong even according to Table 1. Anyone who understands the calculations in my Excel spreadsheet can repeat these calculations.,repeat%20these%20calculations.

  3. Brett Keane on 13/07/2021 at 11:40 pm said:

    Thankyou, excellent work! Brett Keane, Ruawai

  4. Dear Richard, you are surely joking. Where do you think I have been the last 70 years? Get off it!

  5. Brett Keane on 24/07/2021 at 2:54 pm said:

    Sadly, I quote Ottmar Edenhoffer of IPPC/UN who said it was not really about Climate but about redistribution of wealth ie theft via the marxist handbook…. Most Greens and some Labourites subscribe to this deadly belief system and will not cease unless we make them. They now can Falsify elections electronically eg via Postal Votes etc.; so we better wake up……..

  6. Tricky Dicky on 29/06/2022 at 7:26 pm said:

    Results from ground-breaking New Zealand research (The University of Auckland) have shown red meat is a better source of protein than a processed plant-based alternative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation