As the man of Rabobank, I was just proud of the farmer

The broadcast of Zembla last Thursday evening. The program was supposed to be about agriculture, but accused agriculture of all kinds of environmental problems. It was made by people who know nothing about agriculture.

And that happens so often in the media. A piece of burnt jungle the makers showed with the comment: "Oh how bad". The jungle is being cut down for the cultivation of soy for animal feed, was the lecture. In reality, soy is grown there for human consumption. Because we humans are omnivores instead of herbivores, we only use 20% of soy.

The rest is waste, called soybean meal. The animal feed industry makes high-quality feed for our animals from this soy meal. Our livestock can eat this soy meal, because they are herbivores. And what about biodiesel? This is also made from soy. How many thousands of hectares of soy are already in our fuel tank?

Nitrogen PAS detectors registered
Naturally, the farmers who had made a PAS report at the time were mentioned. Their livestock has not been included in the nitrogen emissions, it was claimed. This is not true. The entire herd is registered, including the PAS detectors. It is known exactly how much nitrogen is emitted from agriculture.

Also, is there a nitrogen problem? Or is this only a Dutch problem, because we are the only country in Europe that has imposed much stricter requirements on ourselves than the other European countries? Strange when you see the map of the Netherlands. Nature in the Netherlands is colored red. When you arrive at the border with our neighboring countries and the nature reserve continues across the border, the map of our neighboring countries is completely green. Then the nature reserves are suddenly in perfect condition.

Short natural cycle
Is there a wall that is hundreds of meters high that keeps the nitrogen in the Netherlands? I've never seen that wall. The surrounding countries are also Europe, but judge nature very differently from our nature people.
Our government, together with our scientists, environmental organizations and media, lump all nitrogen together: the nitrogen dioxide (NOx) that is released during the combustion of fossil fuels and the ammonia (NH1) that our livestock, all other animals and we humans excrete. This is totally wrong.

NH4 emissions belong to the short natural cycle. NH4 is released into the air and is converted into the natural above-ground CO2. This is absorbed by the plants and allows the plants to grow, which are then eaten by the animals and humans. The NOx, on the other hand, enters the air and does not become natural CO2, which remains in the air for thousands of years and causes global warming.

Who stays alive?
The government, our scientists and environmental organizations don't want to believe this, but I challenge them. We are making a new television program: Who stays alive. A person has to sleep one night in a small closed cattle shed full of cows, from 8 p.m. to 8 am. So in a stable full of nitrogen NH4. I sign up, I want to sleep in that stable.

The next day we remove the cows and put in a car with the engine running, which also blows out nitrogen. Who will sleep in this stable from 8 to 8. I challenge our biggest callers (from the road with those polluting farmers) to sign up for this. I think of Tjeerd de Groot or Jesse Klaver. We're going to see who's still alive the next day.

Don't put on a fine dress
If I was the man from the Rabobank, I wouldn't put on the sackcloth. Then I am proud that I am the largest financier of the Dutch farmer. A farmer who manages to achieve by far the largest production per hectare in the most nature-friendly way. The job of our farmers is to feed our people. We cannot live on air alone. We need food every day.

Only our politics want our farmers gone. It seems they want cheap land to build on and then import all our food. That food will then be produced much less efficiently than our farmers are now doing and therefore burden nature worldwide much more. Very shortsighted and unwise of our government.

It is also emphasized that our soil is being exhausted by our farmers. I don't understand what this is about. If this is true, the farmer will never be able to achieve these high yields. Achieving ever higher production with fewer crop protection agents and less manure. Yes sir from Rabobank, a top achievement by our farmers.

Farmer to blame for biodiversity or ....
Farmers are also blamed for the loss of biodiversity. A farmer grows a crop for consumption, whether he grows organically or conventionally. He then tries to grow his crop as cleanly as possible. After all, weeds cost yield and are controlled in both conventional and organic agriculture. This used to be the case, it still is now and always will be. The area of ​​agricultural land has decreased considerably over the years. The acreage of nature reserves has increased considerably and housing construction and traffic have grown explosively in recent decades. How do you explain the sharp decline in biodiversity?

If agriculture is to blame for the decline in biodiversity, biodiversity should have increased rather than decreased.
The farmer does not do it for luxury, but for our daily bread and politics has forgotten that. Media, stop all these false accusations from our farmers. We need to solve our environmental problems together. You are only breaking this much-needed collaboration.

Jaap Major
Low Zuthem

Boerenbusiness

Under Boerenbusiness opinions are posted from authors who, in principle, give their opinion once Boerenbusiness.nl or from people who prefer to remain anonymous. Name and place of residence are always known to the editors.

© 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.