Background Nitrogen mood
Wolf Regret Biting and Tracking Commission Schoof
Wolf GW4655, who may have a problem with his aggression regulation and who also can't help it that he (if he really is) bites runners and others on the Hoge Veluwe, that wolf is not a bloodthirsty predator. In essence he is a hardworking father, who survives in an area threatened by nitrogen and has a large family with hungry children to feed.
That's why he is according to Faunabescherming so a hero, if not a martyr. He does not deserve to die with an official number on his gravestone, but should live on under the honorary name of Hubertus, together with are rapidly growing group peers.
It is clear. The judge in Arnhem has only made the case more difficult by postponing a decision on whether or not to shoot the wolf for a week. For himself too. Not only is a lot of evidence needed, but also extra courage to issue another shooting permit for 'wolf Spijtebijt'. However, the die has been cast. The province may start shooting, it is determined.
Security
There is a good chance that the judge - and not the wolf - now needs personal security, just like the responsible Gelderland deputy. Some animal lovers are not people lovers at all, but unfortunately that has been known for a long time. The legal assistants of GW4655 also go far and seem to have copied their defense strategy almost directly from the lawyers of serious criminals. Which of course says more than enough.
Against the backdrop of this news, which is of great concern to many people outside the Randstad, more happened this week.
Back-end solutions
Thanks to a request from Member of Parliament Thierry Baudet, the cabinet provided an insight into this week the official contribution in the Ministerial Committee for Economy and Nature Restoration (MCEN). Although it provides some insight into the direction in which the civil servants want to think further to get out of the nitrogen knot, the document does not make us much wiser. For that, we will have to wait for next week's Council of Ministers.
In comparison, a great deal of energy is still being put into discussing and further developing end of pipe-solutions and prefers to fall back on ingrained patterns.
Refreshing Rummenie
Refreshing in this context is the initiative of State Secretary Jean Rummenie to also look at the front of the problem. Because, what is the real state of nature, which is responsible for everything being locked up now? Rummenie therefore wants to make new nature reports, and then with a fresh look, without the pre-formed format of the previous cabinets. Of course, not everyone is enthusiastic about that. That already became apparent when his own civil servants wanted to pull the wool over his eyes with the recent proposal for a nature restoration law full of national headlines.
The intention to put the Aerius calculation tool aside in the longer term is also unthinkable for many stakeholders. They conveniently forget that there are more countries in Europe that can do without it. Moreover, nature there usually does just fine.
New magic words, old ideas
The documents also make clear why so many agricultural administrators, particularly those from LTO, are so charmed by terms such as 'guaranteed emission reduction' and 'target management'. These are the new magic words with which lower emissions, particularly from livestock farms, must be renounced. In the discussion around the Cycle Indicator it is also a hot potato. How 'guaranteed emission reduction' really has to be secured is now quite difficult to arrange, civil servants know from experience.
In the MCEN consultation it is fairly certain that agriculture still has a major task to perform, particularly in terms of reducing ammonia emissions. Unfortunately, in this context too, old and new insights are still being mixed up in the committee. This also makes the precise reduction task uncertain.
No new crazy rules from Hansen
While The Hague is busy with new regulations, the European Commission says to want to go the other way. And it is not just Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen, but a broader working group from the Commission. The European Commissioners are mainly referring to agriculture, because it concerns the future of the food supply. European politicians and administrators have been taking this seriously since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The Luxembourg farmer's son Hansen is the one who is allowed to formulate the new policy. The new Commission wants to do away with the now crazy rules that were devised under previous managers about permanent grassland, ploughing bans, registering every ditch in the land and an inspector on the farm every other week. Hansen thinks one inspection per year is enough, he says. According to him, gains can be made by first combining data and only then sending an inspector out.
Nice words, tough bureaucracy
The disadvantage is that even fewer civil servants will learn anything about agricultural practice, but it also frees institutions such as the NVWA from obligations that are impossible to fulfil. Experience will show that – despite Hansen's fine words – it will not stop at one inspection per year, because buyers of agricultural companies and certifiers will also come by. However, it would be nice if there could be a little less bureaucracy. And of course the pain is not or primarily in the number of visits, but mainly in the many petty regulations that are enforced with heavy sanctions.
Less 'poison', just as beautiful vegetables
In the area of crop protection, we are still waiting for a more balanced policy. But here too, the problem is greater in the Netherlands than in neighbouring countries and more broadly in Europe. In vegetable cultivation, there are now 39 bottlenecks in crop cultivation, of which 32 in food crops, because the Dutch authorities are much stricter than in the surrounding countries. Growers therefore lack the tools to keep their crops pest-free and marketable and well-presentable. Just like products from countries where the rules are more flexible, and which are not banned from supermarkets here. However, under pressure from activist groups, people are being made to believe that all chemistry is extremely dangerous. What is it all about? To illustrate, a quote from science journalist Simon Rozendaal about the alleged risks that XR (Extinction Rebellion) sees in the use of crop protection in tulip cultivation: '"I strongly advise you not to eat more than 1 million kilos of tulips per day."
Oddly enough, opponents of crop protection also seem to have one strange prejudice. That growers spray for fun. They forget that most agents are quite expensive, while growers also prefer to save themselves work than to go out with the sprayer.
Sensitive judges
However, a large part of the Lower House agrees with the reasoning of activist groups and now wants to force the Minister of LVVN to establish spray-free zones, for example. Judges also often appear to be receptive to loud-mouthed clubs that bring up all kinds of unproven risks and present creative arguments about the precautionary principle and the like. The Arnhem judge has finally made a decision.
Klaas van der Horst
© 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.
