Anyone who looks at the number of nitrogen cases that Coöperatie MOB, Vereniging Leefmilieu, Bureau het Groene Schild and other operators of the same formula have brought against livestock farmers this year, can perhaps cautiously conclude that the peak is behind us.
Recently, some of the above-mentioned organizations filed another objection against Eindhoven airport and Rotterdam airport, but this does not directly affect farmers.
Still 170 cases again
The fact is also that the clubs have been less likely to get justice against farmers recently. Their counterparties become more attuned to the organizations. Yet so far this year, the Dutch courts have still issued more than 170 rulings on nitrogen issues, according to the archives of case law.nl.
A large part of this could have been prevented if the nitrogen regulations in the Netherlands had been approached with a more realistic sense. It would also have prevented a lot of economic damage, without harming nature. The previous nitrogen vote indicated how external experts view it.
Beginning by Wiersma
It seems that the new cabinet is slowly trying to make some progress, although the concrete indications are still meager. This week it was announced that Minister Wiersma of LVVM no longer holds the provinces to the date of October 1 to have the regional nitrogen plans ready. According to some BBB politicians, this is a very small start, too small to pay attention to. It would be better to take those entire plans off the table, it is said. Nevertheless, it is a start. And the government plans still need to be further detailed. Perhaps it also says something about a more realistic Critical Deposition Value (KDW).
Wolf or wolf senator
In the meantime it is also holiday time. This seems to be a double gift for a number of provincial politicians this year. Now they don't have to say anything about the increasing wolf problem. The mayors of a number of municipalities are also keeping their powder dry (literally). The mayors of Leusden, Zeist and Ede have the authority to put an emergency order to put an end to the panic about the wolf and to have dangerous animals shot if necessary. However, they remain silent and seem more impressed by wolf senator Niko Koffeman and his entourage than by concerned parents with small children.
Vague evidence and bogus expertise
Back to MOB and friends. With the decreasing success in the field of nitrogen, these clubs seemed to shift their attention more to crop protection products or pesticides. But there too, successes are not easy to come by. In North Holland, the evidence for a number of cases turned out to be wafer-thin, if not dubious, in other cases against, for example, lily growers, a friendly emeritus professor supposedly provided an expert opinion that, on closer inspection, did not address the issue at all, as a counter proved. -expertise. The court was 'not amused'.
Glyphosate or laundry detergent
And campaigning against glyphosate – normally always good for a bit of a fuss – is no longer worthwhile since a German research group showed that the conversion product AMPA can also come from detergents. Naturally, there are all kinds of voices that doubt this. Scientific discussion about this and further research is also necessary, but it is still good to consider that it does not always have to be the farmer's fault.
Nuance lost
For many activists, however, this is a thing of the past. It is also evident from the discussion surrounding PFAS. Substances from this family are also found in crop protection products, but not mainly and therefore not only in them. That nuance seems long lost for the above groups. When farming and agriculture are involved, the gaze is focused on them, like that of a wolf on a sheep.