Friday, March 29, 2024

PULPIT: We can do fine without GM grass

Avatar photo
Hey consumer, it’s up to you if you want to see a change in our farming systems. I normally keep my head low and decided a long time ago to save my energy for the already converted.
Reading Time: 5 minutes

However, there have been a lot of recent articles about genetically modified grass and most recent the one said “Super grass is here and it’s a green breakthrough. Can Greens stomach it?” has brought me out of my hole.

The article implies GM grass is going to save New Zealand farming. 

In a nutshell, it would increase farm production, reduce water demand and decrease methane emissions. 

Oh, and as the icing on the cake, it will apparently increase GDP by $2 billion to $5b.

The article also said there is funding from the Government and industry partners including DairyNZ. None of this surprises me.

So, here’s my counter argument.Non GM grass grows just fine in NZ.

I want to shed some light for those outside farming circles because without this background knowledge it is difficult to understand why it hasn’t been a simple switch from conventional farming systems to a biological or more regenerative system.

Government-owned educational institutes teach conventional farming systems, using synthetic fertilisers such as NPK/urea, and the skills taught are all geared around industrialised farming practices.

NZ banks will not loan money to farmers who do not have a synthetic fertiliser programme.

And there is no funding from Government or industry partners for research and development around regenerative farming practices that do not use synthetic fertilisers or urea.

You can see the odds are stacked against you if you want to move away from conventional farming. And those farmers who are making or considering the move find themselves isolated in their bid to research environmentally friendly farming practices while still making a profit. 

After all, contrary to popular belief, there are very few farmers who can buy farms without financial support.

Here’s another myth buster. I often hear people say farmers are greedy and that is why meat and milk are so expensive. I am told Canada’s agricultural industry tracks in line with NZ and Australia so if Darrin Qualman’s graph showing the revenue of Canadian farmers over 90 years is anything to go by, our farmers aren’t set to become millionaires any time soon.

The green-shaded area highlights periods of positive net farm income; the red-shaded area marks negative net income periods. Most importantly, the blue-shaded area between the gross revenue and net income lines represents farmers’ expenses: the amount they pay to input manufacturers like Monsanto, Ballance, Ravensdown, Deere, Shell and service providers like banks, accountants. Note how the blue area has expanded over time to consume almost all of farmers’ revenues.

Another interesting point is in the 1960s production doubled and it doubled again around 2010. So, farmers are working harder and producing more but making less profit in 1926.

So, NZ scientists want farmers to grow GM grass to further increase production yet production has increased massively over the past 90 years under a conventional farming system.

Unfortunately, that system has been detrimental to our environment, animal health and farmer profits. 

The only benefit, it seems, has been to those within the blue line of the graph, where the manufacturers and sellers of GM grass seed would firmly sit.

But the question then is, if non-GMO grass grows just fine in NZ, why are we not funding research into regenerative farming first, before sinking millions into GM organisms?

Under a regenerative farming system, not only does grass grow just fine but it is more resistant to drought (less demand on water), more resistant to disease (less agrichemical input) and richer in nutrients (improving flavour and animal health and therefore reducing vet bills).

Farmers who were selling fattened two-year-old stock under conventional farming systems are now finishing stock at 16-18 months at similar or heavier weights on a regenerative system.

And regenerative farming practices on our farm have showed improvements in the environment with healthy waterways, healthy soil and healthy animals. 

Many NZ farmers are turning their backs on conventional farming. And what’s interesting as well as exciting is that if we were to put them together in one room you could mistake it for a Grey Power convention.

These are our last standing heroes in my mind. These are the farmers who have farmed both systems – conventional and regenerative. And the one thing all these farmers have in common is that not one of them would go back to farming conventionally after transitioning to regenerative farming.

Regenerative farming is the breakthrough waiting to happen.

Imagine the vast amount of farming experience and knowledge in that room. These are not people who have learnt farming through theory. These farmers have been doing their research every day, 24-7 over a lifetime on the land. And, unlike paid scientists, they take on massive personal financial risk.

Here is another thing they have in common – they are tired of trying to convince scientists and industry partners regenerative farming is the way forward. But this is the breakthrough that holds great potential for NZ farmers, not GM grass.

Why, when there is clearly a massive push all over the globe for humans to pick up their game and start protecting the environment, is NZ still so reluctant to move into this new era? NZ could easily set up regenerative farming systems that could propel our products into unique and niche markets. 

Why are the very businesses that are supposed to be supporting the farming industry so hell bent on trying to keep us fighting the rest of the world on a commodity market?  

In 2017 more than 35 countries had banned GM food crops and China returned a cargo ship it suspected had GM food aboard. 

Yet, clean, green NZ still wants to push ahead with GMO grass research. It makes no sense.

If I was going to guess at answering my own question it would be that unlike GM grass, nature cannot be patented. This is the only reason I can see why so many scientists in NZ heavily dispute the pros to regenerative farming and why no business or the Government (in NZ anyway) is willing to fund any research to support our findings.

NZ stood up as a nation to become nuclear-free; being GMO-free would only strengthen our image, surely? 

Imagine if little ole NZ were to lead the way with a little forward thinking in our farming practices. And why would we risk our reputation as being pure, anyway, when we can and already do grow non-GMO grass just fine in NZ. We can also do it exceptionally well without synthetic inputs.

I am not a farmer, just a farmer’s daughter with the love of the outdoors. I don’t pretend to have all the answers but at least we are asking the questions. I have never met one farmer, conventional or otherwise, who went into farming with the intention of destroying the environment. I doubt the scientists 100 years ago did either. Scientists now are just working out that what they thought they knew about the soil is barely scratching the surface. They are just finding out now what some of our regenerative farmers have known for decades. 

I don’t have a lot of faith in industry partners to change from the chemical input systems but I hope NZ consumers will help give the farmers a voice and back regeneratively farmed produce.

Total
0
Shares
People are also reading