Yeah we should also have a program to rid this blog of useless spammers.
I suggest breaking fingers as “part of good internet protection.”

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

rocket182 – my windows are in an appalling state, due to the flocks of galah that fly constantly overhead. What can you recommend?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

this is really screwed up. They should at least have a program in place to rebuild the forests or develop a way to not harm them

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Panda, “I am just a simple farmer looking for a cheap feed for my cows”
And you shouldn’t be persecuted for that. Our ignorance (or blindness) is bliss.
The only thing that might help is a gov’t that taxes bad stuff so that the bad feed isn’t cheap anymore. Carbon taxes. But who will vote for them?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I thought the above photo was one of Canterbury’s Selwyn Plantation Boards clearing for further Dairying.

But it seems that I was wrong I guess vandalism looks the same everywhere!!!!

I am in full support of BjChip we all need to take note of what he says or Panda’s may very well become an extinct species.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Panda

If they did not sell the “by product” the product would be much less profitable overall. Right?

So you ARE contributing to the profitability of deforestation when you buy this by product.

Lignite is low value and “carbon rich” too.

Looking for “a cheap feed for my cows” is remarkably like looking for a cheap source of power. It does not, as a problem statement, examine any consequence other than the immediate price.

We very consistently applying the principle that we must put a cost on the destruction of the commons. We have no brief to “keep the poor poor” and that is an illogical conclusion to draw from our opposition to the use of this “cheap feed” or the burning of coal.

As a country we have to pull back from the factory farm principles and go back to the pastoral preservation principles that stood us in such good stead for such a long time prior to the current “boom”.

Pushing more livestock onto a piece of land than that piece of land can reasonably support is a deadly error in judgment for the species as a whole. We did what was economically convenient. We’ve built up an oil and energy intensive farming industry. We did NOT pay the true costs to the environment and we worked hard to leverage our wealth in fossil fuels. The result is a human population overshoot, not a small one.

You worry about economic consequences. However, there is every reason to expect that human populations will crash as the fuel and planet run out. There is every reason to expect that this will be neither peaceful nor pleasant.

Because each of us has been “optimizing” our own individual economic result in an economic environment which put NO cost on the abuse of the commons or the depletion of resources.

http://www.paulchefurka.ca/WEAP2/WEAP2.html

So putting farms in NZ on a sustainable basis is actually a very good idea from the perspective of the survival of New Zealand and New Zealanders. That everyone should have to pay for this change in management style is perfectly reasonable as well. After all, if it is not possible to sustainably produce massive amounts of milk solids then the prices of things dependent of them does need to rise.

Lots of stuff to think about. Not just the immediate question of “cheap feed for my cows”.

Cities are sustainable and even a good idea, if they are managed properly. Much the same as farms.

BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Brilliant analysis and conclusion Panda and all that from a simple farmer!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

panda – keep the low value materials in the country, on the site of origin. By all means export .. honey or whatever .. high quality, low bulk end product, but for goodness sake don’t ship bulky, low value carbon rich materials away from the ground that produced it. Put it back in, in such a way that furthers your cause and keeps the quality of your soils high/sustainable

Sorry ? low value carbon rich

I am just a simple farmer looking for a cheap feed for my cows
it is a bye product !!!what part of that don’t you understand
why cant they be allowed to make money from it ?if I want to buy it

this is typical elitist green thinking
keep the Poor, Poor

The environment will be better off while rich elitist Greens live in unsustainable cities

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Of course it can be done. I just want someone to do a professional job of it.

respectfully
BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

It can be done though can’t it, as you have proven several times. I think key is playing a risky game with his attitude towards this issue, he is saving it for a more opportune time.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Shunda

I read the Borrow’s amendment and I truly hope that if Key “looks at it” he finds someone with greater legal and logical talents to write a new version.

BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Principle? Leave it out! That’s the kind of thing Sue Bradford holds to.

That’s only going to lead to heartache.

Principle. Hah!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

“Just can’t avoid that tired framing, can you.”

No, but I am still on a learning curve, I like your comment about the “fighting over the centre ground” It seems JK is fairly determined to govern from the centre on a number of issues. I wonder whether he really is more centrist in his thinking or if he is implementing a more long term strategy.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I think Key needs to look at the Borrows amendment, and I think he will do it just before the next election.

As bj predicted first and could well be true, but only as an election promise. Even Chester says he supports the law now. It won’t change before the election unless some new evidence emerges. And today’s announced steps from Key to tighten how the law is applied will make it even less likely this will happen.

I thought you’d be pretty happy to hear that CYF will get some specific instructions not to hassle good parents like you, Shunda?

Key is playing politics and I don’t like it, everybody should be concerned how the left and right have allowed our democracy to become so weak.

Just can’t avoid that tired framing, can you. They are both mainstream politicians fighting over the centre ground. Principle is a luxury such people cannot afford when the electorate demands to be pandered to.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Hi greenfly does “something slippy and slidey ” resemble Sue B?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

greenfly did you read Danyl M’s piece on the options, quite clever.

http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2009/08/22/changes-to-smacking-law/

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Shunda – no, my opinion of Key hasn’t changed one iota. I’m pleased that yours has though. I am taking some pleasure in the difficulty ahead for anyone wanting to rework/overturn the repeal. My guess is, something slippy and slidey will be offered and people will swallow it, just as they have so many of Nationals sugar-coated dung-balls.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I think Key needs to look at the Borrows amendment, and I think he will do it just before the next election.
Key is playing politics and I don’t like it, everybody should be concerned how the left and right have allowed our democracy to become so weak.
I had hope that key may have been of a different order but now I think he is revealing his true colours. I was particularly disgusted when I listened to what he said on this video before the election:

http://johnkey.co.nz/index.php?/archives/66-VIDEO-John-Key-on-the-anti-smacking-legislation.html

Happy greenfly? has your opinion changed of Key?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I’ve untangled my threads. That’s a pale excuse for a comment Shunda. Give us some depth.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

He is clearly possessed by the ghost of Helen Clark.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)