Reactions to judge's ruling

"If you lose, don't cry"

3 November 2017 - Bart-Jan van Zandwijk - 17 comments

The dairy farmers were not proved right on Tuesday 31 October in the lawsuit regarding the phosphate reduction plan. This means that they still have to comply with the phosphate reduction plan. How do they deal with that? Boerenbusiness surveyed the reactions of a number of farmers.

John Klaver and his family own a dairy farm in Winkel (North Holland). They process milk into cheese and also keep dairy goats and sheep. "It is a pity that it turned out this way. Of course we would have liked to see it differently. We applied for, and eventually received, an environmental permit for 750 dairy cows. We are currently milking 400 cows."

Half falls under business risk

'It's a business risk'
On July 2, 2015, the Klaver family also kept 400 dairy cows. They have to downsize, because the company is not land-bound. "We have arranged this for half, the other half falls under the business risk. So we now have to pay a levy on this."

"Companies that have expanded significantly have taken a big risk. However, I think they knew that in advance," says Klaver. "Sometimes you win, other times you lose. And then when you lose, don't cry." Klaver adheres more to the judge's ruling and for the time being will stick to 400 dairy cows. 

'Pronunciation is disappointing'
Arian de Jong of the Biostee in Zuid-Beijerland (South Holland) has yet to consider this ruling. "I find the verdict disappointing. We will certainly consider the verdict and see what we can do with it. I don't know yet," says De Jong. "As a result of this measure, we have to remove about 25% of our livestock. The ruling does not provide clarity about a possible payment arrangement."

De Jong has an organic arable farm, a vegetable farm and a dairy farm. "I think the problem lies mainly in the lack of good policy. That should have been formulated immediately after the end of the milk quota. Those half solutions were not successful."

If we have to dispose of our animals, it will not work

'Closed cycle impossible'
"With a good standard for land-relatedness, you don't have all these problems. Our livestock density is slightly more than 1 LU per hectare. We supply manure from third parties and keep feed from our own land. We strive for a closed cycle. When we feed our animals having to dispose of it, that will not work."

An organic arable farmer must supply 65% ​​organic fertilizer and may supply 35% other fertilizer. "The entire organic sector has a shortage of manure," says De Jong. "We now have to solve someone else's problem and that is not fair." 

At the National Economic Agriculture Congress, Lubbert van Dellen will also discuss the impact of phosphate rights on dairy farmers' business operations. Subscribers can attend the conference for free. Click here for more information.

Do you have a tip, suggestion or comment regarding this article? Let us know
Comments
17 comments
arable farmer 3 November 2017
This is a response to this article:
[url=http://www.boerenbusiness.nl/melk-voer/ artikel/10876432/als-je-loss-moet-je-niet-gaan-weepen][/url]
PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS!! What kind of world do you live in??!!
It's that I'm not allowed to write power terms here, but I did say 5 of them.
Unbelievable that you can have such a plate in front of your head.
This is what they call business risk and using a bit of common sense is apparently quite difficult for some people.
This season I also supply potatoes and onions well below cost price, that is the case, so 1 or 2 years off and on again.
Subscriber
gras 3 November 2017
After all, you also had milk money and with that you can pay the fine.
john 3 November 2017
First, keep the manure production in place and then see how further development can be done. Although I do think that the government has made a mistake by not properly including manure processing in the derogation agreement.

For 3 years I have heard that we as pig farmers should focus on manure processing because a large amount of cattle manure will be on the market after the quota has expired. It now appears that afterwards there was no room at all for that manure and, in fact, the manure processing was not necessary either. With the arrival of the phosphate rights for dairy cattle, the animals will move to areas with the lowest manure disposal costs and we will automatically get a better distribution of manure over the Netherlands.
Subscriber
Dirk 3 November 2017
Gras, do you also take into account that the money may now have been spent on that bin with unpaid bills from 2015/2016 and by some in the meantime for a new Fendt or something.
Glass 3 November 2017
Dirk, do you also take into account that the non-growers who are not land-bound have had to hand in cows and therefore have received less milk money and can also have unpaid bills. keep it.
Wim v/d mill 3 November 2017
You don't have to cry either, but what matters to me I'm organic and I don't have DEROGATION 55mk 58 ha of land I have to sell cows to maintain DEROGATION and that is a problem for me I don't hate big growers but I do like the how it went (lto )
Subscriber
smart ass 3 November 2017
What difference does it make if you are biological or not? those cows both shit. if you are both land-bound then there should be no difference in the approach by the government!

by the way, think that cows that are not organic are more sustainable, much more milk per square meter of land
Look after!! 3 November 2017
It is and remains an idiotic situation. The individual is now held accountable for it. "You should have known" is now easily said. Farmers are like people, they need to be guided. I hope the sector now realizes that a captain needs to be appointed. In my opinion LTO was and is the most suitable party for this. They are an extension of the government. A party that never dared to make choices. Now they are forced to make the wrong choice again!! Phosphate rights will be the death knell. Unfortunately for our fellow farmer drivers (LTO), they will have to show their colors. There's no such thing as hiding yourself anymore. They have been constantly guided by left-wing politics.
tinus 3 November 2017
Ideal those phosphate rights.....feed becomes cheaper...manure sales too....and a nice increase in equity of 10.000 euros/cow
tinus 3 November 2017
Ideal those phosphate rights....nice increase in EV and lower feed/fertilizer costs plus higher milk price and less work
rotman 4 November 2017
Hopefully it also applies to the phosphate rights that everyone is equal and must make the same amount.
We have made our new barn smaller than originally intended, you could see that there would be too many cows and that we would then be left with a half empty barn.
Dirk 4 November 2017
Klaas, I completely agree with you, but I think you don't quite understand my one liner. Doesn't matter, never mind. greeting
shoemakers1 4 November 2017
it is always stated that governing is looking ahead, but nowadays they just do something and if things go differently if the government wants to change the rules again, very unreliable so
Scarf tow hook 4 November 2017
With a high production, Betweter says that he can produce more milk per square meter, but then he has not calculated the figures very thoroughly. If you assume that no land is needed for concentrates, he is probably right, but if you know that the concentrates from central-south America yield an average of about 3000 kilos per ha, intensive farmers usually need much more ha for those litres. In addition, they participate in the mining of the land in those countries, resulting in the enormous hunger for new land (deforestation) and a surplus of manure in our country....
A bit of logic clearly indicates that we cannot continue to provide the world with food in this way... Closed cycles and local production really seem like a logical step to me.
Sizes 5 November 2017
Nonsense that the concentrates come from South America, at most soya from which oil is first pressed for human use and then soy scrap only remains a part of the power feeds.
Incidentally, almost all times residual flows.
peter 6 November 2017
koot wrote:
Nonsense that the concentrates come from South America, at most soya from which oil is first pressed for human use and then soy scrap only remains a part of the power feeds.
Incidentally, almost all times residual flows.


Is no land needed for the concentrates Koot??
pastern 6 November 2017
if they are residual flows, that is most concentrates, or products that are not suitable for human consumption due to, for example, no baking quality, then this product is still upgraded to dairy and/or meat. Should we throw this away???? After all, the land has indeed been used.
Largest corn and soy fields are in Central/North of the US.
Ard Eshuis 6 November 2017
@Koot: You are absolutely right, let them talk, the fact is that three quarters of the ingredients in concentrates are all by-products, actually also soy. Soy is only grown in South America because of its economic value: Oil for biofuels and scrap for animal feed (Huge increase, mainly due to large flight of mixing in biodiesel!)
The quarter of non-residual products are grains, mostly EU-grown, nothing wrong with that, otherwise it would not have been grass or nature, but another arable crop.
You can no longer respond.

What are the current milk prices doing?

View and compare it
in the Milk Price Comparison

Call our customer service +0320 - 269 528

or mail to supportboerenbusiness. Nl

do you want to follow us?

Receive our free Newsletter

Current market information in your inbox every day

Login/Register