Impact of nitrogen ruling large for dairy farming

The court ruling on nitrogen emissions last Friday puts a stop to innovation in Dutch dairy farming. A huge blow for dairy farmers. This gives them another 1 to 2 years of uncertainty about the future of their dairy farm. That is disastrous for the self-confidence and enthusiasm of dairy farmers to innovate, says Lubbert van Dellen, Agricultural Market Director at Accon avm. He outlines the impact and consequences of the ruling.

The nullification of an already granted nature permit for a Frisian dairy farm by the Northern Netherlands court has a major effect on the morale of many dairy farmers. I also receive signals from livestock farmers who no longer see the point as a result of this ruling. Being no longer wanted is mainly what lingers. Don't bottle these feelings up, but talk about them with those around you or switch professional help in, I want to emphasize this.

Appeal and appeal
The nature permit of the Frisian dairy farm has been annulled, because the effect of the emission-reducing techniques such as the slatted floor with valves that the dairy farmer wanted to use has not been conclusively established, according to the court. However, these techniques form the basis for every nature permit, which makes it practically impossible to expand a dairy farm. The government is expected to appeal against this statement, and there will undoubtedly be an appeal after that.

This gives 1 to 2 years of uncertainty and that is disastrous for an innovative dairy farmer who wants to look ahead. It has been the case for some time that a dairy farm can no longer increase its nitrogen emissions. In order to develop his company, innovation is crucial, whereby the entrepreneur can keep more cows with a new housing system (in this case in Friesland the new floor) without increasing his nitrogen emissions. This is crucial in order to maintain the cost price and income.

Dairy farm cannot expand in nitrogen
From a technical point of view, a dairy farm can no longer expand its nitrogen emissions. With external netting, 30% is skimmed off and the government prefers that agricultural entrepreneurs do not purchase nitrogen themselves (it is making this increasingly difficult), but opt ​​for innovation in housing systems. And it is especially that innovation that comes to a head with this statement.

A calculation example: suppose a dairy farmer keeps 150 cows. His license is not optimal and he is kept to his situation in 1994 or before. It was then a permit with 100 dairy cows and 70 young stock. So: 100 x 13 + 70 x 4.4 = 1.608 kilos of Nh3.

With a floor of 6,5 kg per dairy cow, this dairy farmer can obtain a permit for 1608 x 3 + 170 x 6,5 = also 114 kg with a request for internal netting and innovation of a new floor based on 4,4 kg NH1.608. With this, this dairy farmer can still continue his current farm with 150 cows and he still has some room for development. 

Back to 1994
With this ruling, this dairy farmer is deprived of this possibility. And if you translate it directly, he has to go back to his emissions from before 1994 and back to under 100 dairy cows without applying innovation. This without the financing being reduced, without him getting anything extra for his milk to compensate for the difference and without having done anything wrong.

This is painful for the holders of a nature permit, but extra painful for PAS reporters and dairy farmers who do not have a nature permit. With internal netting and new housing systems it was possible for them to obtain a nature permit, which took their company further into the future. If this ruling is not reversed, these companies are in real trouble.

Of course we should not close our eyes to criticism that there is on flap floors. But that innovation also continues and the floor involved in this statement already has newer versions. I would like to draw extra attention to a series of new solid floors with additional systems, in which urine and manure are quickly removed separately. To a silo outside the barn or closed storage under the barn. The gas can then be captured with a follow-up system and the manure can be fermented better. In this way, the practice is already ahead of the criticism, as it should be. With this, dairy farming also proves with technical innovation that it is always able to adapt.

Chance of turning back
As a result of the ruling, the ball now actually lands on the dot. Do politicians and government want to keep a dairy farm in the Netherlands or not? If the government follows the line of left-wing parties (D66, GroenLinks) then this is the stick to halve the dairy herd. If the government follows the line of the CDA and VVD, it will fully focus on innovation. Several parties, including JA21 and BBB, are committed to the same innovation with a critical note regarding the current nitrogen policy and substantiation.

Wopke Hoekstra and Mark Rutte both indicated in a debate after Friday: "Don't halve, but double innovation." Clear language that can be lived up to after the elections if they get the majority.

Lubbert van Dellen is coming to the studio of . on Friday 26 March Boerenbusiness for answering your questions about the implications of this ruling. If you have any questions, please send an email to the editor before Wednesday 24 March (editorial@boerenbusiness. Nl) and we introduce him to Lubbert van Dellen. Of course anonymously if desired.

© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.