News Effect of remediation scheme
After concentrates, there is also a risk of flop in pig farming
Another downer for agriculture minister Carola Schouten. As it now seems, 'only' half of the 400 pig farmers will stop with a decision for the Pig Farming Remediation Scheme (Srv). In addition, the calculation of the nitrogen profit of this scheme also appears to be incorrect.
Reportedly, considerably fewer farmers than expected make use of the squeeze-out scheme. Carola Schouten was counting on 361 stoppers, as it seems now about 200. Moreover, the scheme, for which half a billion euros has now been earmarked, appears to be mainly beneficial for pig farmers with modern, clean stables.
Research by the EenVandaag program and the research agency Investico shows that Rabobank had a significant influence on the drafting of the scheme and that the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) made a calculation error with which the effect of the nitrogen-reducing measure was almost threefold. was estimated too high.
Make balance
Accountants firm ABAB calculated the figures on the basis of the 200 expected quitters. In total, this means a decline of 70.000 to 75.000 sows and 330.000 to 335.000 finishers in our country. The number of pigs then decreases by roughly 7% to 8%.
This decrease also means that 42.000 fewer piglets are born per week and 20.000 fewer fattening pigs are slaughtered each week. That is 100 less truck combinations per week that transport the finishing pigs. The feed sector is also affected by this. The decrease in pigs causes a decline in the demand for animal feed from 400.000 to 425.000 tons. This is about 250 bulk trucks per week.
Manure production is also declining. Every year, 800.000 tons less manure is produced. That is 22.000 less truck trips per year: 425 trips per week. The entire sector will therefore have to deal with the impact of the remediation.
A big flop?
According to Minister Schouten, there is no reason to stop the process yet. The ministry adheres to the calculation of the PBL, even though it is not correct. The fact that mainly pig farmers stop with a new, clean stable does not appear to be a reason to abandon the scheme. It is therefore questionable to what extent sufficient nitrogen will be reduced.
In addition, it now appears that Rabobank has a significant finger in the pie with regard to the scheme, according to the research by EenVandaag and Investico. Reportedly, the arrangement is good for the bank, because it is precisely the farmers who want to stop using modern stables. These livestock farmers have much higher debts to the bank than those with older stables. Rabobank thus safeguards investments in the sector.
Jorine Cosse
© 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.
