Our PM's Harvard speech

[Lilith7]

I've done a swift google & while it looks as if she did write her own speech for Waitangi, there's no information that I can find about the Harvard one.

Politicians usually have a speech writer, with Winston Churchill being an exception.

[C_T_Russell]

I thought it was pure garbage, basically telling the yanks about control and that we are going to kill off our farming sector as an effort to "fix" climate change.

The standing ovations, from an audience of academics, would seem to indicate they didn't share your opinion.

What would you expect from any audience at a university?
They are all fed left wing garbage while studying there.

[Praktica]

The standing ovations, from an audience of academics, would seem to indicate they didn't share your opinion.

What would you expect from any audience at a university?
They are all fed left wing garbage while studying there.

As against the rightwing garbage you picked up on the internet?

[harm_less]

The standing ovations, from an audience of academics, would seem to indicate they didn't share your opinion.

What would you expect from any audience at a university?
They are all fed left wing garbage while studying there.

So, using your logic anybody who has gained university qualifications is to be disregarded due to their being left wing zealots? Considering that universities educate their students to think critically, which is what the whole scientific ideology is based on, such gullibility is unbelievable to the extreme.

You really need to get out more.

[Lilith7]

The standing ovations, from an audience of academics, would seem to indicate they didn't share your opinion.

What would you expect from any audience at a university?
They are all fed left wing garbage while studying there.

Hmm...so - where are the right wing  fed 'right wing garbage,' then? 
I expect we could speculate....

[king1]

I wonder how many politicians from the right leaning political parties are university educated? More than a few I would think...

I get this sort of anti university educated dogma from time to time, it is always the uneducated espousing it... To me it just reflects on the individual and their regrets, dashed hopes and dreams, that kind of thing.

There is a somewhat valid point in that some university educated folks do come out the other end and become consultants with little or no actual real world experience...

Wisdom = Knowledge + Experience

[C_T_Russell]

What would you expect from any audience at a university?
They are all fed left wing garbage while studying there.

So, using your logic anybody who has gained university qualifications is to be disregarded due to their being left wing zealots? Considering that universities educate their students to think critically, which is what the whole scientific ideology is based on, such gullibility is unbelievable to the extreme.

You really need to get out more.

Of course University's teach people to think critically.
I was told not to attend university growing up in the Jehovahs Witnesses cult because their leadership knows that anyone who attends uni ends up walking away from the faith cult.
After leaving that cult, I can see that we are still trapped in another cult through our government.
Teaching critical thinking doesnt mean they dont still have an agenda, I can see the amount of left wing politics brainwashing kids right through school right through to Uni.
It was bad enough with all the environmental BS they were saying to us when I was at school, but now its even worse and we are seeing kids on the TV saying they are going vegetarian to "save the planet"
This sort of crap is going to kill our economy as a farming nation when these kids grow up and join some extreme left wing party in govt.

[Praktica]

So, using your logic anybody who has gained university qualifications is to be disregarded due to their being left wing zealots? Considering that universities educate their students to think critically, which is what the whole scientific ideology is based on, such gullibility is unbelievable to the extreme.

You really need to get out more.

Of course University's teach people to think critically.
I was told not to attend university growing up in the Jehovahs Witnesses cult because their leadership knows that anyone who attends uni ends up walking away from the faith cult.
After leaving that cult, I can see that we are still trapped in another cult through our government.
Teaching critical thinking doesnt mean they dont still have an agenda, I can see the amount of left wing politics brainwashing kids right through school right through to Uni.
It was bad enough with all the environmental BS they were saying to us when I was at school, but now its even worse and we are seeing kids on the TV saying they are going vegetarian to "save the planet"
This sort of crap is going to kill our economy as a farming nation when these kids grow up and join some extreme left wing party in govt.

It looks to me you just replaced one sort of cult ideology with another - rightwing bullshit.

[Lilith7]

So, using your logic anybody who has gained university qualifications is to be disregarded due to their being left wing zealots? Considering that universities educate their students to think critically, which is what the whole scientific ideology is based on, such gullibility is unbelievable to the extreme.

You really need to get out more.

Of course University's teach people to think critically.
I was told not to attend university growing up in the Jehovahs Witnesses cult because their leadership knows that anyone who attends uni ends up walking away from the faith cult.
After leaving that cult, I can see that we are still trapped in another cult through our government.
Teaching critical thinking doesnt mean they dont still have an agenda, I can see the amount of left wing politics brainwashing kids right through school right through to Uni.
It was bad enough with all the environmental BS they were saying to us when I was at school, but now its even worse and we are seeing kids on the TV saying they are going vegetarian to "save the planet"
This sort of crap is going to kill our economy as a farming nation when these kids grow up and join some extreme left wing party in govt.

Did you somehow miss that govts aren't permanent & that this particular govt hasn't been in govt for decades?
And that this govt too will eventually be voted out?
And that we often also have right wing govts??

[C_T_Russell]

Of course University's teach people to think critically.
I was told not to attend university growing up in the Jehovahs Witnesses cult because their leadership knows that anyone who attends uni ends up walking away from the faith cult.
After leaving that cult, I can see that we are still trapped in another cult through our government.
Teaching critical thinking doesnt mean they dont still have an agenda, I can see the amount of left wing politics brainwashing kids right through school right through to Uni.
It was bad enough with all the environmental BS they were saying to us when I was at school, but now its even worse and we are seeing kids on the TV saying they are going vegetarian to "save the planet"
This sort of crap is going to kill our economy as a farming nation when these kids grow up and join some extreme left wing party in govt.

It looks to me you just replaced one sort of cult ideology with another - rightwing bullshit.

I dont consider myself rightwing, but one thing ive learned is that everyone is under the control of some form of cult, whether it be a govt or a religion.
Thankfully religion is slowly breaking away from state, but its not there yet.
I guess we can be thankful we dont live in North Korea, but im concerned the world is heading that way.
Why are dystopian novels such as the hunger games so popular? What was George Orwell trying to tell us?
Its like they were preparing us for what is to come. These writers could see what direction the worlds political landscape is heading.
David Seymour told us how much risk we are at loosing Democracy and hes right.

We need a new direction in politics, red and blue have failed us.
Extreme left you end up with communism and extreme right you are left with Nazis.

---

Of course University's teach people to think critically.
I was told not to attend university growing up in the Jehovahs Witnesses cult because their leadership knows that anyone who attends uni ends up walking away from the faith cult.
After leaving that cult, I can see that we are still trapped in another cult through our government.
Teaching critical thinking doesnt mean they dont still have an agenda, I can see the amount of left wing politics brainwashing kids right through school right through to Uni.
It was bad enough with all the environmental BS they were saying to us when I was at school, but now its even worse and we are seeing kids on the TV saying they are going vegetarian to "save the planet"
This sort of crap is going to kill our economy as a farming nation when these kids grow up and join some extreme left wing party in govt.

Did you somehow miss that govts aren't permanent & that this particular govt hasn't been in govt for decades?
And that this govt too will eventually be voted out?
And that we often also have right wing govts??

National and Labour are all one and the same.
National has moved more to the left in recent years, Labour only moving ever more left, and dont get me started on how left the greens are.
I would rather us go more right for the short term to counter the damage labour has done, but we really need a new shift. Im not looking forward to a national govt either, but anything is better than Labour and thats why its important that Act gets more people in next election.
Ive been looking at what policies the NNP are promoting along with the Outdoors party and im super impressed. Either of these parties have far better policies than any other party in govt right now.

[Lilith7]

To some extent that's true, but it has always been & likely always will that generally, National has been more concerned with businesses while Labour has been more concerned with working people - though both have moved towards the centre in recent decades.

Perhaps you forget that it was Labour which first foisted Neo Liberalism on us; that is by no means in any way left politically.

What's needed is a massive move away from that harmful greed based nonsense, given the damage its inflicted wherever it has been embraced. That won't happen if ACT ever gains enough votes to have any say since they're only interested in those ideas. In fact what's needed is a move well away from extreme right ideas.

Like it or not, the Greens are concerned with the welfare of the planet which none of the others appear to be to any great extent, & that is something which affects every one of us & which will in future affect our children & their children.

[C_T_Russell]

To some extent that's true, but it has always been & likely always will that generally, National has been more concerned with businesses while Labour has been more concerned with working people - though both have moved towards the centre in recent decades.

Perhaps you forget that it was Labour which first foisted Neo Liberalism on us; that is by no means in any way left politically.

What's needed is a massive move away from that harmful greed based nonsense, given the damage its inflicted wherever it has been embraced. That won't happen if ACT ever gains  enough votes to have any say since they're only interested in those ideas.  In fact what's needed is a move well away from extreme right ideas.

Like it or not, the Greens  are concerned with the welfare of the planet which none of the others appear to be to any great extent, & that is something which affects every one of us & which will in future affect our children & their children.

Some parts of Neo Liberalism was not all bad, its supposed to remove anti-competitive behaviour. My main concerns are more on the globalst ideas it introduced where cheap imports come over locally made goods.
This should never have been allowed and yes, Labour was largely responsible for allowing this in the 1980s (perhaps thats why Roger Douglas went to the right)

Act said in a speech that we need to be less dependent on China but is not an overnight fix, he commended companies such as Zespri that export to many countries and China is like only 20% of their profits or something, while Fonterra is largely 90%

Greens just want to save the planet at any cost, ironically hydro Dams damage ecosystems too and we are running out of capacity.
What upsets me the most is all this ridiculous carbon trading nonsense. Valuable farmland being sold to chinese or other foreign investors to simply plant permanent pine forest that never gets cut down is stupid. Why not plant in Native? Long term thats better than pines that grow fast and spread like weeds.
Any permanent re-forestation efforts should be native bush only, and only in areas not suitable or profitable for farming.
Why can overseas investors profit from carbon "farming" here in NZ, but we cant claim carbon credits from carbon "farming" overseas in places such as south america where there are re-forestation projects happening around the amazon? That should be more important, and thats what ACT promotes.
I also learned that much of the south islands native forest is not even counted towards our carbon capacity!
Farmers should be 100% exempt from methane regulations. Every single animal and person makes the stuff, and the farmers grass absorbs co2, methane is released from the cows, but turns into co2 and is carbon neutral.
These petty politics are garbage. Anything from nature should be 100% exempt from any greenhouse gas emissions.
Food scraps in your rubbish dump or compost bin also make methane, they even are extracting it from old rubbish tips!

None of these parties are perfect, but alot of the stuff ACT says is common sense, but your right, they are still globalist.
I think its time NZ changes into a better direction, its not going to happen overnight.

[Lilith7]

To some extent that's true, but it has always been & likely always will that generally, National has been more concerned with businesses while Labour has been more concerned with working people - though both have moved towards the centre in recent decades.

Perhaps you forget that it was Labour which first foisted Neo Liberalism on us; that is by no means in any way left politically.

What's needed is a massive move away from that harmful greed based nonsense, given the damage its inflicted wherever it has been embraced. That won't happen if ACT ever gains  enough votes to have any say since they're only interested in those ideas.  In fact what's needed is a move well away from extreme right ideas.

Like it or not, the Greens  are concerned with the welfare of the planet which none of the others appear to be to any great extent, & that is something which affects every one of us & which will in future affect our children & their children.

Some parts of Neo Liberalism was not all bad, its supposed to remove anti-competitive behaviour. My main concerns are more on the globalst ideas it introduced where cheap imports come over locally made goods.
This should never have been allowed and yes, Labour was largely responsible for allowing this in the 1980s (perhaps thats why Roger Douglas went to the right)

Act said in a speech that we need to be less dependent on China but is not an overnight fix, he commended companies such as Zespri that export to many countries and China is like only 20% of their profits or something, while Fonterra is largely 90%

Greens just want to save the planet at any cost, ironically hydro Dams damage ecosystems too and we are running out of capacity.
What upsets me the most is all this ridiculous carbon trading nonsense. Valuable farmland being sold to chinese or other foreign investors to simply plant permanent pine forest that never gets cut down is stupid. Why not plant in Native? Long term thats better than pines that grow fast and spread like weeds.
Any permanent re-forestation efforts should be native bush only, and only in areas not suitable or profitable for farming.
Why can overseas investors profit from carbon "farming" here in NZ, but we cant claim carbon credits from carbon "farming" overseas in places such as south america where there are re-forestation projects happening around the amazon? That should be more important, and thats what ACT promotes.
I also learned that much of the south islands native forest is not even counted towards our carbon capacity!
Farmers should be 100% exempt from methane regulations. Every single animal and person makes the stuff, and the farmers grass absorbs co2, methane is released from the cows, but turns into co2 and is carbon neutral.
These petty politics are garbage. Anything from nature should be 100% exempt from any greenhouse gas emissions.
Food scraps in your rubbish dump or compost bin also make methane, they even are extracting it from old rubbish tips!

None of these parties are perfect, but alot of the stuff ACT says is common sense, but your right, they are still globalist.
I think its time NZ changes into a better direction, its not going to happen overnight.

There's nothing good about any political ideas which puts profit before people; its foolish, short sighted & I believe, even unhealthy.

Imo, every country should be as self sufficient as possible & not rely too heavily on only one or two trading partners.
I do agree though, that we should be planting native trees wherever possible, & we should be selling no more land to overseas buyers; in fact no foreign buyers should be able to own more than 40 or so % of any Kiwi property or business.

Most farmers are aware now of the damage some practices do, & are working to change for the better, though there may be a few still causing problems.

[king1]

To some extent that's true, but it has always been & likely always will that generally, National has been more concerned with businesses while Labour has been more concerned with working people - though both have moved towards the centre in recent decades.

Perhaps you forget that it was Labour which first foisted Neo Liberalism on us; that is by no means in any way left politically.

What's needed is a massive move away from that harmful greed based nonsense, given the damage its inflicted wherever it has been embraced. That won't happen if ACT ever gains  enough votes to have any say since they're only interested in those ideas.  In fact what's needed is a move well away from extreme right ideas.

Like it or not, the Greens  are concerned with the welfare of the planet which none of the others appear to be to any great extent, & that is something which affects every one of us & which will in future affect our children & their children.

Greens just want to save the planet at any cost, ironically hydro Dams damage ecosystems too and we are running out of capacity.
What upsets me the most is all this ridiculous carbon trading nonsense. Valuable farmland being sold to chinese or other foreign investors to simply plant permanent pine forest that never gets cut down is stupid. Why not plant in Native? Long term thats better than pines that grow fast and spread like weeds.
Any permanent re-forestation efforts should be native bush only, and only in areas not suitable or profitable for farming.
Why can overseas investors profit from carbon "farming" here in NZ, but we cant claim carbon credits from carbon "farming" overseas in places such as south america where there are re-forestation projects happening around the amazon? That should be more important, and thats what ACT promotes.
I also learned that much of the south islands native forest is not even counted towards our carbon capacity!

On the subject of native and exotics, it does appear that government are leaning more towards requiring native plantings.  those invested in the pine carbon farming are probably rightly upset about the policy reversal and now suggesting court action apparently...
https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/clim...t-in-court

[C_T_Russell]

Some parts of Neo Liberalism was not all bad, its supposed to remove anti-competitive behaviour. My main concerns are more on the globalst ideas it introduced where cheap imports come over locally made goods.
This should never have been allowed and yes, Labour was largely responsible for allowing this in the 1980s (perhaps thats why Roger Douglas went to the right)

Act said in a speech that we need to be less dependent on China but is not an overnight fix, he commended companies such as Zespri that export to many countries and China is like only 20% of their profits or something, while Fonterra is largely 90%

Greens just want to save the planet at any cost, ironically hydro Dams damage ecosystems too and we are running out of capacity.
What upsets me the most is all this ridiculous carbon trading nonsense. Valuable farmland being sold to chinese or other foreign investors to simply plant permanent pine forest that never gets cut down is stupid. Why not plant in Native? Long term thats better than pines that grow fast and spread like weeds.
Any permanent re-forestation efforts should be native bush only, and only in areas not suitable or profitable for farming.
Why can overseas investors profit from carbon "farming" here in NZ, but we cant claim carbon credits from carbon "farming" overseas in places such as south america where there are re-forestation projects happening around the amazon? That should be more important, and thats what ACT promotes.
I also learned that much of the south islands native forest is not even counted towards our carbon capacity!
Farmers should be 100% exempt from methane regulations. Every single animal and person makes the stuff, and the farmers grass absorbs co2, methane is released from the cows, but turns into co2 and is carbon neutral.
These petty politics are garbage. Anything from nature should be 100% exempt from any greenhouse gas emissions.
Food scraps in your rubbish dump or compost bin also make methane, they even are extracting it from old rubbish tips!

None of these parties are perfect, but alot of the stuff ACT says is common sense, but your right, they are still globalist.
I think its time NZ changes into a better direction, its not going to happen overnight.

There's nothing good about any political ideas which puts profit before people; its foolish, short sighted & I believe, even unhealthy.

Imo, every country should be as self sufficient as possible & not rely too heavily on only one or two trading partners.
I do agree though, that we should be planting native trees wherever possible, & we should be selling no more land to overseas buyers; in fact no foreign buyers should be able to own more than 40 or so % of any Kiwi property or business.

Most farmers are aware now of the damage some practices do, & are working to change for the better, though there may be a few still causing problems.

Yup, agreed, every country should be as self reliant as possible and only import what we need, and export any surplus.
Injecting money back into our economy where kiwis get to spend it is the answer.
Anti-competitive measures is a start, any increase in competition (such as supermarkets) is a good thing, but ironically if we let a german company like Aldi into NZ, that means profits will go off shore, but the tradeoff is that it brings jobs and savings by introducing competition.
My friends in Australia said it made a huge difference to grocery prices over there when they got Aldi.
I was also impressed that most of their house brand products appeared to be made in Australia, so if thats their business model, I guess I cant complain too much.

Plant trees where its required, diversify our farming and keep our food sector self sufficient.
Another cause for concern is companies such as watties that are now owned by american food giant Heinz hold growers to ransom.
They will start importing more fruit thats cheaper for them to process than selling NZ grown fruit.

Trade tariffs on imports would fix this.
Trump introduced them in the US(not just against China either, I see Jacinda is trying to get them lifted so we can sell them our steel) while not popular with china or NZ for that matter, I can see he was trying to put their country first.
Basically, if NZ can produce the stuff here, we should not be importing cheaper stuff from overseas.

---

Greens just want to save the planet at any cost, ironically hydro Dams damage ecosystems too and we are running out of capacity.
What upsets me the most is all this ridiculous carbon trading nonsense. Valuable farmland being sold to chinese or other foreign investors to simply plant permanent pine forest that never gets cut down is stupid. Why not plant in Native? Long term thats better than pines that grow fast and spread like weeds.
Any permanent re-forestation efforts should be native bush only, and only in areas not suitable or profitable for farming.
Why can overseas investors profit from carbon "farming" here in NZ, but we cant claim carbon credits from carbon "farming" overseas in places such as south america where there are re-forestation projects happening around the amazon? That should be more important, and thats what ACT promotes.
I also learned that much of the south islands native forest is not even counted towards our carbon capacity!

On the subject of native and exotics, it does appear that government are leaning more towards requiring native plantings.  those invested in the pine carbon farming are probably rightly upset about the policy reversal and now suggesting court action apparently...
https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/clim...t-in-court

Yes ive been following this closely, my main concern is that the Maori party were kicking up a fuss, because it apparently will affect maori landowners. How it should affect them I have no idea, there should be no difference in carbon payment whether it be native or exotic. Why would it be in Maori interests to cultivate exotic forest anyway? I thought they would have been all for this and wanted exotic forests excluded.

They probably need to rewrite all the legislation if exotic forests pay you more because the trees grow faster. Thats my only assumption why its a big deal for them.
It looks like Jacinda really rushed this billion trees program or else they would have addressed this to begin with.
I know there have been complaints about this for some time and they are only just starting to look at it.

[C_T_Russell]

Speaking of critical thinking, some food for thought...

https://www.1news.co.nz/2022/06/03/poll-...emissions/

Lets rid the country of these evil "greenhouse" gas emitting cows.
Hang on, its carbon neutral, why is grass not counted as a carbon sink? Why is it OK for africa to have millions of wilderbeasts roaming that produce the same gas?

Wake up!

[harm_less]

Speaking of critical thinking, some food for thought...

https://www.1news.co.nz/2022/06/03/poll-...emissions/

Lets rid the country of these evil "greenhouse" gas emitting cows.
Hang on, its carbon neutral, why is grass not counted as a carbon sink? Why is it OK for africa to have millions of wilderbeasts roaming that produce the same gas?

Wake up!

The closing sentence of the linked article covers off your suggestions aptly: "The proposal was also put to Climate Minister James Shaw, who told 1News heÔÇÖs grown ÔÇ£very frustrated at the simplistic nature of the debate"."

The grass you mention is fertilised with large amounts of soluble fertilisers which require huge hydrocarbon input in their manufacture. The cows' diet is supplemented with PKE and other imported feeds that are transported often thousands of kms and are derived from environmentally destructive sources.

The pasture is grazed heavily by dense herds of livestock who exhale methane as part of their digestion. Grass could be considered a carbon sink but nowhere to the same extent as forests considering the biomass differential between the two. Also the fact that the grass is grazed is equivalent to forest harvest, which also then releases the sequestered carbon effectively negating any gain.

So what land area do the wilderbeasts roam? The 'stocking rate' won't come anywhere near that of our industrial farming systems so the effluent they excrete is easily absorbed by their environment, in lieu of any artificial fertilisers. That's a 'closed loop' system as opposed to our high input and high discharge farming systems.

[C_T_Russell]

Speaking of critical thinking, some food for thought...

https://www.1news.co.nz/2022/06/03/poll-...emissions/

Lets rid the country of these evil "greenhouse" gas emitting cows.
Hang on, its carbon neutral, why is grass not counted as a carbon sink? Why is it OK for africa to have millions of wilderbeasts roaming that produce the same gas?

Wake up!

The closing sentence of the linked article covers off your suggestions aptly: "The proposal was also put to Climate Minister James Shaw, who told 1News heÔÇÖs grown ÔÇ£very frustrated at the simplistic nature of the debate"."

The grass you mention is fertilised with large amounts of soluble fertilisers which require huge hydrocarbon input in their manufacture. The cows' diet is supplemented with PKE and other imported feeds that are transported often thousands of kms and are derived from environmentally destructive sources.

The pasture is grazed heavily by dense herds of livestock who exhale methane as part of their digestion. Grass could be considered a carbon sink but nowhere to the same extent as forests considering the biomass differential between the two. Also the fact that the grass is grazed is equivalent to forest harvest, which also then releases the sequestered carbon effectively negating any gain.

So what land area do the wilderbeasts roam? The 'stocking rate' won't come anywhere near that of our industrial farming systems so the effluent they excrete is easily absorbed by their environment, in lieu of any artificial fertilisers. That's a 'closed loop' system as opposed to our high input and high discharge farming systems.

Your right about the fertilizer use, thats far more of an issue.
I know farmers who have ran very successful dairy farms without the need of these synthetic fertilizers. It can be done. As far as "farts" from cows, I doubt it makes much difference what they are eating, unless they are eating much higher quantities of grass than in the wild.
But why does dairy only get the flack from this? All beef farming is the same. I do see they are going after sheep now however.
I see dung beetles have been introduced into NZ, something we never had here while african counterparts do.
But it is really messed up when I see studies done with genetic engineered bacteria given to stock to change their emissions in their digestive tract. Thats messing with nature.


Also some interesting information - NZ does not count much of the south islands native forest as our carbon sink. Why i dont know.

[harm_less]

The closing sentence of the linked article covers off your suggestions aptly: "The proposal was also put to Climate Minister James Shaw, who told 1News heÔÇÖs grown ÔÇ£very frustrated at the simplistic nature of the debate"."

The grass you mention is fertilised with large amounts of soluble fertilisers which require huge hydrocarbon input in their manufacture. The cows' diet is supplemented with PKE and other imported feeds that are transported often thousands of kms and are derived from environmentally destructive sources.

The pasture is grazed heavily by dense herds of livestock who exhale methane as part of their digestion. Grass could be considered a carbon sink but nowhere to the same extent as forests considering the biomass differential between the two. Also the fact that the grass is grazed is equivalent to forest harvest, which also then releases the sequestered carbon effectively negating any gain.

So what land area do the wilderbeasts roam? The 'stocking rate' won't come anywhere near that of our industrial farming systems so the effluent they excrete is easily absorbed by their environment, in lieu of any artificial fertilisers. That's a 'closed loop' system as opposed to our high input and high discharge farming systems.

Your right about the fertilizer use, thats far more of an issue.
I know farmers who have ran very successful dairy farms without the need of these synthetic fertilizers. It can be done. As far as "farts" from cows, I doubt it makes much difference what they are eating, unless they are eating much higher quantities of grass than in the wild.
But why does dairy only get the flack from this? All beef farming is the same. I do see they are going after sheep now however.
I see dung beetles have been introduced into NZ, something we never had here while african counterparts do.
But it is really messed up when I see studies done with genetic engineered bacteria given to stock to change their emissions in their digestive tract. Thats messing with nature.


Also some interesting information - NZ does not count much of the south islands native forest as our carbon sink. Why i dont know.

The methane is exhaled by ruminants far more so than as part of their excretion. The big difference between savanna grazing wildebeests, and pasture grazed beef cattle for that matter is the intensity of those herds. The situation with CAFO systems for beef animals would be the only cow farming system that comes close to that of dairy operations in terms of animal density, and fortunately that sort of farming is very rare in NZ.

Imported feed for dairy herds doesn't so much change the animals' emissions but the transportation of many of those feedstocks over great distances contribute to CO2 discharged from the trucks and ships used to do so.

Genetic engineering of livestock and their gut biome together with modifying dietary inputs such as the addition of seaweeds is really just a band-aid fix for a very sick farming model.

[Olive]

Another aspect worth bearing mind is that a very common cattle feed supplement, palm kernel extract (PKE), has nasty environmental effects, including deforestation and the ensuing diminution of biodiversity. I have spoken with local dairy farmers who have been led to believe that PKE is okay because it is "natural". And of course it boosts their profits.