Few details were being released but Federated Farmers president William Rolleston confirmed he met sector leaders before Christmas to discuss developing a more co-ordinated response.
“We need to make sure we’re not all duplicating our efforts and that we’re doing things each player is good at doing,” he said.
Attacks on the sector had been coming thick and fast, ranging from allegations of mistreatment of bobby calves, the use of water for irrigation, the degradation of waterways, claims, subsequently proven to be incorrect, that farmers had taken vast areas of Crown-owned land on the banks of rivers and opposition to rodeos.
KPMG global agribusiness head Ian Proudfoot said in his home city of Auckland any talk about the primary sector was negative.
“It is either an environmental issue, particularly water, or it’s an animal welfare issue or what they perceive to be greed.”
When the milk price rose media coverage was about how much money individual farmers would earn but the urban perception was that income came from abusing the environment and overusing resources.
When prices fell urban NZ heard stories of farmers facing financial ruin when their view was that they should be more resilient to price fluctuations.
Proudfoot said a survey of his workplace two years ago revealed mainstream media coverage shaped people’s view of the primary sector.
The sector had to win over Auckland because its size meant it shaped political policy and for many the Auckland A and P Show provided exposure to the rural lifestyle.
But, Proudfoot said, the show didn’t talk about farming issues or activities or allow city people to have a conversation with farmers.
“They can see and touch some animals but it is not a farm in the city.”
Massey University agrifood and business director Claire Massey said the greater scrutiny reflected NZ’s increasingly diverse population but also that most New Zealanders no longer had links to agriculture.
“We now have different voices and different views. That’s not wrong. It is just that they have different experiences.”
Issues such as protecting the environment and animal welfare were of greater importance to the public today than 20 years ago.
“It is a lot of different factors at the same time and consequently people feel they legitimately are right and have the truth.”
What was missing from the discussion were the consequences of those demands because farms were not being viewed as a system.
“Economic, social and environment are all interrelated with each other but we still do not have this binary conversation as we should, that ‘if we do that what will happen?’”
Massey said critics used emotive language to scaremonger and any response should stick to the facts rather than rise to that provocation.
She suggested research to determine what mattered to New Zealanders and to explain the consequences of their desired actions, information she hoped would encourage conversation.
Lincoln University’s honorary professor of agri-food systems Keith Woodford said rural NZ needed to think about how it interacted with urban NZ.
“Regardless who is right or wrong, the current polarisation is not doing any good at all.”
Rolleston agreed but said progressing the argument beyond a superficial “yes it is, no it isn’t,” level was not easy to do, evident by a visiting wine industry leader who called for the South Island to be dairy cow free.
“It is difficult to combat because science and facts take a long time to get out.”
Federated Farmers had taken on the role of being the “dripping tap of reason” by providing facts but Rolleston said it was not easy given some of the provocation.
The mainstream media and environmentalists were quick to note deteriorating water quality but in December they largely ignored an ECan report that water quality had improved.
Rolleston said he struggled to reconcile negative attacks on farming with the sector’s positive portrayal on the popular television programme, Country Calendar which could show images that farmers got castigated for, such as stock in waterways.
“It’s how we bring those two worlds back together again.”
Rolleston said rural NZ needed to understand where their critics were coming from so their views could be answered.
Massey University fresh water scientist Mike Joy had the view there should be no ruminant animals in the food chain by 2050, which Rolleston said would have a significant economic impact.
Anti-vivisection campaigners similarly did not agree with farming or keeping animals, including pets, an issue the wider public would have an opinion on.
