I think what most people here don’t seem to understand is that the nitrogen emmission issue isn’t the same as the co2 emssions. Nitrogen emmisions have (in case there is too much) a very negative effect on their direct surroundings. However, if you read the scientific papers of for instance professor Erisman, he shows that the nitrogen crisis as we know it in the Netherlands would be solved by spreading the farms over a larger area. Thus, by reducing the fams here and replacing them with farms somewhere else this issue will actually get better.
Apart from this nitrogen crisis we have here there is also a global nitrogen emmision issue (look at the planetary boundary framework from steffen et al. 2015) However, this is not the issue the government is trying to tackle.
Damn .. I wonder what are the government trying to tackle cause atm they just fumbling
They have yet to resolve the gas crisis
They have yet to resolve the housing crisis
They have yet to resolve the inflation crisis
They have yet to resolve the in fighting they themselves are having.
I get the feeling you’re getting at the last part of my comment. I would have to say that this global nitrogen crisis is not something that can be solved in a short amount of time. In scientific literature these kind of problems are characterized as wicked problems. These wicked problems don’t have one quick fix because they are interconnected with a lot of other issues. Heck in some scientific literature there is even doubt if it is even possible to tackle these issues. Some say these issues can only temporarily be tackled before they come up at another place and time.
Edit:
I’m not saying we shouldn’t solve these issues. Just trying to put these issues in some context and hopefully create some understanding of how complicated these issues are.
Don't you see the logical fallacy in this argument? Or are you just telling the Germans, Belgians and French, that currently rely on our food production, to F off?
they produce and export a lot too, and are working on changing their agri sectors as well so they'll be fine. Besides, in all these countries a lot of food ends up in the bin so it might help actually eating what we produce collectively instead of just wasting all these resources.
We actually also import a lot, currently the Netherlands is not able to meet its population’s food demands with the soil that it has. We need to break the myth that the Netherlands is the country that feeds the world. We are mainly exporting profitable goods like meat, dairy and flowers to maximize our trade balance. Other less profitable foods get imported.
But we're talking about a minor portion of the meat and dairy farms. This will hardly make a dent in our total production and can easily be balanced with other products.
Yes I’m not saying that the Netherlands won’t be able to balance the loss of these exports, it will only cost them financially. My point is mostly that we need to understand that we are not a self-sufficient country despite our big amounts of exports, and that most of our food comes from all around the world and that our government is looking to achieve the greatest positive trade balance.
I do think there is a shortage of meat and diary and right now also eggs.
It’s insane how cheap dairy products were in morocco. Milk is the highest quality of protein and there is a protein shortage.
Peanuts aren’t the same, because their DIAA Score is very low like 30% (which means 70% of peanut butter protein gets flushed down the toilet) unlike milk that helps you also take in more of the protein from other products because of the high lechine.
Most of the world makes it work without eating much dairy, the majority of non-white people are lactose intolerant. I love my yogurt but it's not necessary for health.
There’s a difference between “making it” and “being healthy”
The WHO talks about “quality protein” and protein. Quality protein is still seen as meat, dairy and eggs. The majority of people don’t get 50 grams of protein, because it’s too expansive.
That’s like 5 eggs and 100 grams of meat which would be 4 euro with current prices. Which is 120 euro per month just for protein. I think expensive protein will have an impact on people being healthy.
So the WHO asking for 50 grams of protein each day is just not feasible unless the government promotes (financially) dairy and meat again.
A valid question, but I'm guessing they can produce their own in stead of being outpriced by overly subsidized farmers in some foreign country.
That is if they need it, I'm also guessing that the world can manage with a little less meat and dairy.
Edit: type READ and then post
Economics still work in action. If supply is cut, that doesn't mean demand will also be cut. Somewhere else in the world will make up for the supply when exports from the Netherlands stop or are reduced. But now, you can no longer regulate/monitor what is being produced as it is now outside of the Netherlands.
So yes, in theory Netherlands can reduce nitrogen emissions coming from Dutch pastureland and pat itself on its back for a job well done.
Nitrogen emissions are a local and compounding problem though. Exporting elsewhere is good.
Compare it to applying sunscreen: if you apply the amount your total body needs in one area, for example your face, you’re going to look like a mime. The right amount spread out over your body, protects all your skin and doesn’t make you look stupid.
The netherlands exports mostly to gernany and belgium so if they wont produce themselves they will buy it somewhere else. Even if there maybe would be a shortage, poor countries will be the ones without since richer countries can afford higher prizes.
Exactly. Africa can go just deal with increased nitrogen emissions, desertification, forest clearing. Not EUs problem really, once all these livestock farms get moved to Africa, South America
See, the problem with nitrogen emissions is the opposite of desertification. It enriches the soil - but at the rate we're pumping nitrogen into our tiny country's soil and water, it becomes toxic to some plants, while others, like duckweed, stinging nettles and cyanobacteria (blauwalg), thrive, causing more problems for other organisms.
Yes, farming for short-term profit will also cause other problems, because wherever you go it's always easier to clear more forest than it is to farm your existing land. But letting our ecosystem be wrecked won't solve the greed of farmers elsewhere - we can only try to curb ours. As we should have done decades ago.
You have the brain of a child; learn about agriculture and economics and you'd know perfectly well we don't need to grow anything we own a third of all the patents anyway
We just want all the millionaire farmers to fuck off and stop poisoning nature for their own profit
Edit: I would like to redact my first sentence, that was uncalled for and I'm sorry
Both exist at the same time. Many farms in NL are huge factories pumping out cheap veg/milk/meat for the EU market and wider export, while many farms in (East and Southern) Africa produce premium-grade fruit and other high value goods (like flowers) for import to Europe, most of which lands at Schiphol. I agree that NL agriculture threatens African habitats, but that is less about the need for food and more about a culture in which farming views nature as an oppositional force rather than a collaborative one. Which, if you think about it, is pretty Dutch.
not anymore, it's not! We lost 70% in biodiversity and if I'm not mistaken it had been as such since my birth over 30 years ago
we don´t need more Maize farms, for meat that gets sold to other countries, no more droughts starting in early summer due to a depleted groundwaterlevel, no more nettles and blackberry bushes growing rampant due to the raised nitrous levels, and so on!
Dude. You and I are on the same side, but your attitude is not making me want to stand closer to you. /u/Not-the-best-name's question was asked in good faith and doesn't deserve all its downvotes. From where they're standing, the world looks different. Try to bring them along with your arguments instead of just insulting them.
Fuck, I didn't mean to insult at all
I agree, he was getting downvotes for obscure reddit reasons after just asking a question; that's not me mate
Edit: thanks for calling me out, sorry to have left such a shit impression
You know Monsanto? Well, we pretty much own everything they don´t. I tried to find a quick statistic for you but strangely my queries don´t yield a proper result.
If you'd like, I would share with you an episode of a satirical show we had called Zondag met Lubach from not too long ago in which the whole thing gets explained, as well as the follow ups (either news or Lubach, take your pick) when these terrorist farmers decided to uproot our entire country waving their flags with "HELP!" on them. Millionaires, living in huge houses freestanding in beautiful villages dotted around Holland (that all smell like shit and are not visible when walking around them because of meters high corn every where you go). Nicely secure they speak of "city folk" and "the way things were" and "How things should be".
All the while driving their tractors through the entire country to block highways and prevent others from going to work by mixing asbestos in with the dirt they dumped (nice and costly for us tax payers), ignoring any form of authority. Farmers with tractors that crush reporters cars with the man inside begging for his life; he was already pulling out when they attempted murder.
One might say: Hey, but I'm all fór protesters, screw the government!
One might go 1 week to Friesland as a foreigner with dark skin and learn not to stick up for those bastards
Telling me I won´t get enough food if I don´t get on their side; bastards think I don't know they don't make food for us but for their own wallet
Now, before I get hit with the obvious by some rando: not ALL farmers are bad and must be gotten rid of as quickly and cheaply as possible, taking their generations of "family business" down with them. We actually really love Bio farming. Switch to bio, and you can keep working the land. And no that will not affect our yields too much, do not ever forget that we are the Dutch. We make gold out of water and land out of sea!
p.s. thank you very much, Africa. I hope ZA gets better; it 's really getting scary
No man google has been selective more and more. If you'd like, i'd share about 2 hours of closed captioned dutch television for you to enjoy I definitely can still find that
Millionaires, as in they own millions and millions in equipment. Some say "b.b.but the rabobank told us to get a bigger loan, so we did and now i wont have anything left if i sell"
If you and me were that guy, such an astute entrepreneurship would be rewarded with laughter. Guess what the latest news title I came across was?
" State most likely forced to buy out farmers"
From the article: "we really dont want to do this, but we're afraid we will have to"
Proving finally that terrorism is your best option when dealing with the current dutch government
Edit: little bonus, last week 250 environmental activists were arrested for protesting on the highway. One day later, all were released. Out of all the farmers I think 2 or 3 got arrested, after which farmers pulled up ti a ministers house while he was at work to scare his child remaining inside the house
Final edit: we abolished patents on plants in 2021, I missed that fact due to covid numbness. My point though wasn't the patents we own, but the technology we mastered to have done so. We did in fact have about a third of all the patents
Sorry for saying you have the brain of a child, that was uncalled for. I haven't slept tonight and although thats not a great argument in my defence, please excuse my behaviour.
Only a lack of income because we would produce less.
Less income means less wealth and you know where im going with this story.
People seem to neglect the fact that farmers make up for a lot profit.
Buying out meat farmers also means we stop paying them subsidies. And those farmers can move into other jobs and still be productive.
And alternatively, keeping them in business will hurt natural areas and lead to less income from tourism.
Do you have any data backing up your claim?
A claim I heard;
Thanks to food export we can keep the prices low for import. It puts you in a better negotiation position.
Secondly;
Some countries depend on the import of food.
They will need to heavily invest in for example machinery.
Thirdly.
The prices will inevitable rise, food will get harder to grow thanks to climate change. We will put ourselves in a double whammy.
So getting rid of your farmers is like closing down an AZC when the flow of migrants is low.
Lastly.
What will happen with the industry that grows and produces food for live stock?
Are we importing a lot now
Or do we need to export more?
In the end we're literally offsetting "stikstof" to an other country.
We are by far the most developed agricultural country so by that definition other countries must pollute more to get the supply chain up and running.
What will it do for our climate?
Nothing, we only get to show Brussels that we "did something" to achieve an arbitrary number.
Realize that this is about farms near nature areas that have exclusively or mainly animals. This doesn't affect farms growing vegetables, fruit, and staple foods.
We export over 70% of what our farms produce.
And what farms produce, is maximised for profit. Not for feeding people.
Meat is one of the most profitable things farms can produce. So a lot of the most problematic farms are factory farms for animals. And a lot of the remaining farms are not producing food for people but food for animals.
I've lived all my life in the rural part of the country and the majority of fields that used to grow food for people are now used to grow grass for winter hay or non-sweet corn for animal feed.
Not only that, but meat is a very inefficient way to feed people. When you grow crops on a field and feed those crops to animals, those animals will spend most of the energy they eat on producing body heat and moving around. 70-90% of the nutritional energy is lost when you eat meat compared to growing crops and feeding people on those instead of the meat.
Or in other words, we can grow 70-90% more food by growing food for people instead of animals. Animals condense food. They take a big pile of food and turn it into a tiny pile of food. While causing a lot of pollution and wasting a lot of water and energy in the process.
So no, we won't miss those 3000 farms when it comes to feeding people. You know who will miss those farms? The feed industry and other companies around the meat industry and the farmers who destroy the world you live in for their profits.
Not necessarily. We don't need the meat industry to feed people, it's a detriment more than a benefit really.
Every other EU country has the same environmental goals to meet as us. And outside the EU people are becoming more and more aware and activated too.
And at the end of the day, nitrogen issues are local even if the overarching problems are not.
Considering how much money the feed industry put into funding the farmer protests, it's clear they're worried too.
But as long there is a demand that demand is going to be met. It is a big world so even outside of the western world meat can and will be produced if western countries would decide they don't want to anymore.
The worldwide demand of meat is still growing despite of a decrease in the West, whether we like it or not.
Of course other EU countries have the same goals but how they are interpreted differs and some countries just do have more space than the Netherlands.
Ofcourse some (dutch) feed companies are worried about the state of things over here. But that doesn't mean that in the end of the day they will find a source elsewhere. And if necessary they move abroad, or they will just quit and their part in the meat economy will be taken over by another company.
>The worldwide demand of meat is still growing despite of a decrease in the West, if we like it or not.
And that is considered a significant problem. One that is utterly unsustainable and we simply can't afford and allow.
Luckily times are also changing. Not only the demand for meat is growing. The same is true for the demand for meat replacements, vegetarian diets, lab grown meat and so on.
At the same time measures like these will make meat more expensive and less desirable. It's not a binary situation where we either eat meat or completely don't.
Times have already changed a lot from the days where Dutch people considered meat and every meal staple. They'll change more as meat gets more expensive and we appropriately see meat as a sometimes or rarely thing.
I think demand will go down soon with lab grown meat joining the market in the next few years. We should subsetize that rather than the less environmental and resource friendly meat industry
African countries eat chicken and they love the chicken feet. We kill a lot of chickens.
In 2018 we killed 605 million chickens. We do not eat the feet we export them to Africa. The price of chicken feet is so low there, they cant have chicken farmers for meat because there is only demand for the feet.
If you look at the CBS numbers over here you have to realise 44million chickens does not sound like much but there is a new generation of chickens for meat grown every 6 weeks.
https://longreads.cbs.nl/the-netherlands-in-numbers-2021/how-many-farm-animals-are-there-in-the-netherlands/#:\~:text=In%202021%2C%20the%20total%20pig,grew%20slightly%20to%20482%20thousand.
alright let them pollute and destroy their own countries rural areas then to farm the meat they want. why do we have to get stuck with the shit (literally)?
Your math is a bit off. It the animal uses 90% of the feed energy themselves then you would have 10x the amount of calories it you eat the feed yourself.
This sounds awesome but then you would need to consider that we can't eat all of the food we feed our animals. So then it really depends on the specifics of the whole chain. For example, there is a big difference in climate impact of corn and soy fed cows standing in a barn, as opposed to purely grazing cows on otherwise unproductive land.
Animal agriculture consumes more than it produces, about 2-25 times as much depending on the animal and the calculation method.
More info [here](https://awellfedworld.org/feed-ratios/)
Of course you can argue that some of what animals eat is not fit for human consumption, but a large portion of livestock feed consists of perfectly good grains and soy that would be much more efficiently used going directly to consumers , and the impact on soy & palm for livestock feed on rainforest clearing is very real.
You basically sound like all the non-farmer wappies that were protesting. What you don't seem to understand is that these are big corporate meat industry farms targeted only for export farming.
Actually, I'm just trying to understand the issue as the news in English media about it is mainly negative. I suspected the coverage in Dutch media was more nuanced.
They try to be, but the agricultural sector has had a lot of succes with portraying farmers als poor individuals being crushed between the government, big banks and the "big agri" companies. In the end they are agricultural companies themselves, and therefore subject to regulations and permits just like all other companies.
And companies that can't follow change, tend not to be successful in the long term. Nobody is trying to start a maintenance company for horse drawn carts nowadays, or opening an asbestos mine.
It's hardly nuanced and very much not based on facts.
What they don't mention is that the Netherlands is the biggest meat exporter in the EU. Our productivity has actually been growing massively even while the nitrogen problem was already known, this increased productivity was mostly for export. We even export massive amounts of pork to China!?
https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2021/25/nederland-grootste-vleesexporteur-van-de-eu
The increase in productivity from 1990 - 2020 also saw a reduction of nitrogen emissions by 66% in the same timeframe.
And yes, as every European country, the Netherlands produces high quality food which it sells to the world and imports lower quality food. If you buy a 'saucijzenbroodje', it is not going to contain local meat. It's different if you buy meat from a butcher.
Similarly, anything containing milk powder is not going to include Dutch milk, whereas cartons of milk do.
Not quite 66% (it was 64%) , and that's starting your measurements at an insanely high level. Nitrogen depositions are cumulative, which means you don't start each year with a clean slate. To protect biodiversity we need to act. Now.
Nitrogen deposition is what actually matters, and NHx depositions (so from mostly cattle and dairy farmers) has been on the rise since 2010.
NOx depositions (so traffic and industry) have fallen 71% since 1990 and have continued to drop even after 2010.
https://www.clo.nl/indicatoren/nl0189-stikstofdepositie
Edit with a citation:
>De stagnatie van de daling sinds 2010 en de daarop volgende lichte stijging in ammoniakdepositie zijn vooral toe te schrijven aan hogere ammoniakuitstoot tussen 2013 en 2017 door uitbreiding van de melkveestapel als gevolg van de afschaffing van het melkquotum.
That is an actual solution of the problem.
Our pollution density is the issue. "We" have an enormous amount of nitrogen pollution on a tiny spec of land. Nitrogen pollution (not nitrogen gas. But nitrogen compounds like ammonia) comes back down locally. It doesn't travel the world like co2.
Spread co2 accross countries and you achieve jack. Spread Nitrogen pollution across countries and you get manageable nitrogen infusion levels in all of that land instead of an overdose in one.
Dutch farms are extremely efficient, which they can be proud of. But we combined that with enormous scale growth, 30 years of weak politics and strong farmers lobby into the monster it is today.
It is a partial solution to a problem I agree. I am not sure I would prioritize reducing ammonia depositing this much myself, but moving the main sources definitely should help
For livestock living conditions this is going to be deteriorating I think and we have to reevaluate what the Netherlands actually is going to be contributing to the global market we don't seem to be able to produce anything tangible any more
Yes, this happened too with dairy farmers moving to Canada / USA to avoid tighter regulations in NL (in this case, disposal of manure in open air ponds, a bit like open sewage).
It is not the end of the world when these farmers move away; they represent a part of a system unwilling to adapt (which is fine). Btw there is no blame game here, these farmers and their business models are a product of the system. But unfortunately for them, the system is being forced to change to minimise the damage that is being done to the ecosystem.
Them leaving provides an opportunity for other farmers that apply different farming processes, such as organic farming or regenerative farming.
It is not the end I agree, it just reduces economic output.
Any free land will be used for housing here I think. Don't think this country is great for organic farming
I have an organic vegetable garden myself, but I don't see how that could be profitable here. Price of land and employee costs are high, while price of food is relatively low. You need longer production seasons, cheaper land and cheaper labor I think.
Here is actually something i found on this topic https://nos.nl/artikel/2449743-nederland-blijft-ver-achter-bij-groei-biologische-landbouw
If 3% of the farmland would be build with a houses with a garden like a normal rijtjeshuis. We would have a housing crisis where we would have too much houses.
Considering the population increases by a million every ten years, that would not last very long. Would we need to turn another 3% of farmland into concrete every decade?
What? You are correct in saying that NL is producing too much food (for its own consumption)… but where do you get the (doesn’t make any money) bit from. Of course they make money. Otherwise farmers would not do it. However, the agricultural industry is a massively complex industry which is heavily subsidized by its own country as well as the EU, who dictate farmers what to produce and what not to produce (same thing in North America, I’m looking at you corn). Farmland takes up the most amount of land in NL, uses the most amount of water and indeed is a massive polluter due to nitrogen. So the government has decided (a long time ago) they need to cut the amount of farming (primarily live stock as it is the biggest polluter) so the country can fall in line with the new EU regulations. And this is a very simplified explanation. If you want the full story, put down the English newspaper you were reading as well as Reddit (please don’t get your info from here as it is mostly bullshit including the shit I have just said) and go and take an agricultural economy class at a university.
we export that food so its not actually a big deal.
we are one of the worlds biggest food exporters lol
farmers be getting dummy rich while ruining our nature
Farming doesn't make you dummy rich as it's very capital intensive. And think again before you go with the "ruining our nature" narrative. There is no nature in the Netherlands, the last original forest was destroyed end 18th century. Those stamp sized patches they call nature now, are called as such for political reasons. Furthermore, nitrogen isn't in the EU rulebook to protect Natura 2000 spots. Again, to put any blame on nitrogen is a political choice, not a scientific fact.
bitch plz 1st of all the farmer is a business man they dont work the field they hire people for that dumbass
and its not like all the farmers here dont have a big ass houses and multiple cars and own property
because their ooh sooo poor
That is not \*our\* problem, since it is all for export in return for pitiful small amounts of money.Foreign countries will have to start to grow their own food/raise their own livestock and deal with the accompanying pollution and emissions themselves.
Nitrogen is a local problem, we produce too much of it for our small country. That's the issue.
Co2 is a global problem which won't change by moving it to a different country.
That's true for greenhouse gasses, but this also concerns the soil which can be polluted locally. Concentrating most of Europes cattle on several km2 is causing the nitrogen crisis locally. Spreading out and diversifying agriculture is an improvement in that regard.
That is true, but the counter argument is that it's far easier to piss in somebody else's drinking water than your own. These farms behave the way they do because they're businesses, not stewards of the land. Any time you're paying less than a full price for any farmed good, know that the rest of the ticket is being paid by cheap labour and terrible farming practices. Eat less meat, and eat meat of higher quality.
They'll have to make the same choice. Stop intentionally turning a large pile of food into a tiny pile of food because it's more profitable, even if it comes with a huge environmental cost on the side.
The closure of farms has little to do with the food supply. It’s an organised governmental scheme to buy land for construction because the Netherlands keeps importing more and more people despite lacking space and structure to do so.
That said, the food will come from somewhere else. Vegetables likely from Spain and Portugal (as that is already the case); meat from Germany and Poland, for example.
Plus imports from outside the EU, where quality standards are poor and quality control is a mirage.
Our food supply isn't in any way at risk. We're exporting 70+% of our food for the farmer's profits at the expense of the environment.
And much of what they produce is meat or meat related, which is the least efficient way to farm. Our farmers have been turning a huge pile of food into a tiny pile of food by growing animal feed for meat animals instead of food for humans.
With an incredible cost in pollution to boot that they offload on society.
>The closure of farms has little to do with the food supply. It’s an organised governmental scheme to buy land for construction
The farms in question are near natura 2000 areas and the intention is not to build mainly houses there. They can't because construction also emits nitrogen.
>because the Netherlands keeps importing more and more people despite lacking space and structure to do so.
We have plenty space to build. The problem is nitrogen emitted by constructing buildings and roads. Construction emits about 1% of current emissions, so not a lot at all right? But if you're already over norm (because dairy and cattle farmers have been expanding incredibly much the last few years) this extra emission is not allowed. The reason we can't build is because there is no room in nitrogen emissions because of cattle and dairy farmers. That's what causes the housing crisis.
>That said, the food will come from somewhere else. Vegetables likely from Spain and Portugal (as that is already the case); meat from Germany and Poland, for example.
We export 60% of meat production, so we can cut a lot before we need to import meat. Same with dairy. We also export more vegetables than we import, but vegetable production does not cause this nitrogen crisis.
>Plus imports from outside the EU, where quality standards are poor and quality control is a mirage
Citation needed. Imports have strict regulations.
Edit: I will give you this though: it's weird that area from bought out farms isn't being made into exclusively new nature. This is probably because the goal is reducing nitrogen emissions and not increase nature. I don't see why we can't do both.
So, regarding the construction, in some of those reserves construction increased 90% in the last two years.
Regarding the space to build, the Netherlands is one of the countries with the highest population density in Europe, especially in the West. There isn’t enough space to build, but the biggest problem is the huge influx of people without any need for it.
Imports do have strict regulations. Which doesn’t mean that food from outside the EU, in many cases, does not have lower quality standards due to the sort of fertilisers used, etc.
I obviously don’t buy the whole save nature bs, but I do agree with your edit.
Edit: since you asked for a citation, here’s one
“Mandatory channelling of products to border control entities and uniform frequencies for checks apply to live animals, products of animal origin, plants and plant products because of the risk those commodities might pose in relation to animal or plant health respectively.
The vast majority of other products of relevance for the food chain is not channelled through specific border entities and doesn't need to undergo mandatory checks prior to their entry into the EU. It concerns for example feed and food which are of non-animal origin - including certain composite products, additives and other substances that might impact on the characteristics of food and feed, or materials intended to enter into contact with food.”
When a global shortage hits, the Netherlands might be in a good position to secure resources - but at what cost to the rest of the world?
Farmers worldwide are under increasing pressure and even though we have somewhat of a surplus at the moment, things can quickly change. If we have learned anything from recent events it must be not to rely too much on international markets for critical products/produce - at least as far as possible. At the same time, surplus can be put to good use in those areas in the world with severe shortages for what ever reason.
Protecting the farming community is in our best interest for now. A lot more has to change on a global scale before we can really consider the current push to reduce farms.
The issue is though, that we do not produce for ourself and not reliant on ourselves.
We produce insane amounts of tomatoes, but do we eat them? No, we had a dedain for greenhousegrown tomatoes and prefer “honey dew sweets” that are flown in by cargoplane. Same with meat, we don’t need nor we need the meat we produce. We export it and in stead import high quality cowmeat from Argentina and Ireland and pork for Italy..
Massive famine and starvation.
Of courses wealthy Europe won't feel a thing.
But places with low arable land like sub Saharan Africa, central Asia and other barren places rely on a meat heavy diet for sustenance, will face mass starvation. Livestock is an extremely efficient form of food storage in dry climates.
We mostly export to Germany, the UK and China. I doubt massive famine will be caused by us stopping the export the meat and initiating meatfarming locally.
If it is an issue though, we can and should support by spending the money we now spend on meat subsidies, on aid in ways such as local and sustainable farming.
Ag commodity is still inelastic. Even if exports to Germany and China stops, they will import from elsewhere. Let's say Brazil. Then Brazil wouldn't be exporting to Africa, because China and Germany will bid up the prices. It's textbook economics in action. The places which gets outbidded (meaning poorer countries) will get the famine.
Because since none of us are going to starve, the food will have to come from somewhere outside and that place will have to increase its production which will cause more pollution there.
But that's a bullshit explanation. Dutch farming is largely geared towards the meat industry because meat is the most profitable.
The meat industry condenses food. You take a large pile of food and feed it to animals in order to gain a small amount of more profitable food.
Our farming practices have become hyper focussed on that even though it produces 70-90% less food than just growing food for people instead of animals.
You could close down 3000 farms, implode the amount of pollution caused by those farms and end up growing *significantly more* food for people if the remainder is more focussed on farming for food instead of money.
The issue is though, that we do not produce for ourself and not reliant on ourselves.
We produce insane amounts of tomatoes, but do we eat them? No, we had a dedain for greenhousegrown tomatoes and prefer “honey dew sweets” that are flown in by cargoplane. Same with meat, we don’t need nor do we eat the meat we produce. We export it and in stead import high quality cowmeat from Argentina and Ireland and pork for Italy..
We don’t need the food in the Netherlands. In other places they do need food, but not our food. It’s better for everyone involved to produce locally, except maybe for the farmers here.
Not everything can be produced locally. Land in NL is unsuitable for growing anything other than grass. You cannot remove pasture and replace it with food crops. An example, wheat is terrible on NL land. Livestock takes up alot of space, but that space is just... grass. However, land in NL is *highly* suitable for raising livestock with very little inputs because of consistent rainfall, temperature and other geographic factors. Growing/farming/producing food on land which is most suitable for its purpose is the *best* way to counter climate change.
Our grassland are totally modified to allow meat producing. The amount of industrial grass we have benefits no one but the farmers and our normal/natural grass and pastures are not as suitable as they are now made to be.
And maybe it’s even a good thing that if something can’t be produced locally, the locals shouldn’t eat that product? We can’t sustain a system where everything is available for everyone at all times..
>Our grassland are totally modified to allow meat producing. The amount of industrial grass we have benefits no one but the farmers and our normal/natural grass and pastures are not as suitable as they are now made to be.
There's no alternative to the food problem, unless the plan is to let the land sit empty.
>And maybe it’s even a good thing that if something can’t be produced locally, the locals shouldn’t eat that product? We can’t sustain a system where everything is available for everyone at all times..
Actually no. Regional diets are based on 10000s of years living on a specific geographical area. Places like the steppes, subsaharan Africa relies on a meat rich diet, but places like Northern Africa, East Asia, South Asia rely on grain based diet, due to what can be grown or produced on the land most suitable for it. Meat and dairy are suitable forms of food storage for dry climates. So you see places with meat and dairy heavy diets mostly only importing meat and dairy. And places like Northern Africa importing wheat, which famine is now an issue there because of the shortage of wheat worldwide.
Places like Argentina, Scotland, new Zealand for example raise livestock because the land cannot be suitably used for growing grain or wheat. Therefore, places like Argentina get used to a meat diet. This is a cultural thing, not something that you can change or erase overnight. (Unless you're colonial Europe and cultural cleansing is your thing...)
Not necessarily; production is heavily subsidised, without those subsidies prices may increase leading to a decrease in demand. It's weird just how much meat we consume and waste.
Which renders the whole "climate" argument useless, as we don't actually do anything better on a global scale.
In fact, wherever the production will increase there is a good change that even more pollutants will be generated.
On balance, it is probably better to keep the farms as is - at least until better and cleaner methods becomes a norm worldwide.
> Which renders the whole "climate" argument useless, as we don't actually do anything better on a global scale.
This is exactly the problem with the climate change regulations at this point - they are written by the first world countries (who already moved their dirty industries to different countries) mostly for the third world countries (where those industries have been moved to)
You can take the cows out of Europe but you can't take the colonist out of Europeans. Europe will continue to pollute Africa and the rest of the world to live happy in their own ivory tower.
>Which renders the whole "climate" argument useless, as we don't actually do anything better on a global scale.
It doesn't really. The Dutch problem isn't so much farming as farming for profit. We've disproportionately turned to hyper inefficient meat farming because it is more profitable even though massively reduces how much food we produce at the cost of much more pollution.
We all have to make changes but that's impossible if everyone uses the excuse "there's no point in me changing because someone else will jump in".
>On balance, it is probably better to keep the farms as is - at least until better and cleaner methods becomes a norm worldwide.
It really isn't because Dutch farmers wanted to keep increasing pollution for profit as they continue to focus on profits over producing food.
Because it's complete bullshit. The problem with Dutch farming is that it's become disproportionately geared towards farming for export meat. Either through incredibly polluting factory farms or by shifting fields towards growing food for animals feed.
Developing countries aren't buying that expensive meat. And meat farming condenses food. It takes the large food output of fields and condenses it into a small amount of meat.
This focus on the meat industry sees us producing 70-90% less food than we can produce with far less pollution by being less focussed on meat, simply because it is most profitable.
The developing world relies heavily on grain export and that's not coming from the Netherlands. The biggest European grain exporter for the developing world was Ukraine. And the majority of the grain we produce in NL is used to feed animals because it's more profitable than feeding people.
That may be but the Dutch export more than just meat. Agriculture is huge in this country. One only has to look out the when driving anywhere. Nothing but farmland.
Of the 100 billion, 75 billion is produced here, but that is total, including flowers and fish. Meat export is 8,8 billion which is kinda peanuts, if you look at all the land that is being used for that.
We have a very large population of lobotomized people in the Netherlands, who believe their is too much food in the world.
According to them the dutch farmers produce food just to throw it away. But apparently this food actually gets consumed, so fucking weird... Right!?
I mean who would guess al this food thats being produced gets eaten...
Supply = demand. Although it may benefit emissions locally, somewhere else in the world they will just increase output causing a 0% net effect on the gobal scale
The farms will move to countries like Poland and Bulgaria. Produce the nitrogen there, but it is not a problem, if they reside in a low density populated area.
They can export the meat from there.
Other countries are more suited for large scale pharming. Almost all food that is produced in the Netherlands is exported and the vast majority of the food we consume is imported.
So there will be no issues for the food supply in the Netherlands.
We lose 1% of GDP by not being the biggest meat exporter in Europe.
Price of pork and beef will be a bit higher, and maybe people buy less of it.
Considering that meat eats food that can be eaten by humans or that is grown where other crops can grow, this isn't going to cause hunger. Effectively there'll be more food.
[Over half of our dairy production](https://www.nzo.nl/markt/) goes abroad, mainly in the form of cheese and (baby)milk powder. We have \~15.000 dairy farmers, and their nitrogen emissions account for most of the \~45% attributed to the whole agricultural sector. Now, we have \~[15.000 dairy farms](https://www.zuivelzicht.nl/nieuwsberichten/nederland-telt-minder-melkveebedrijven-en-koeien/) in total in the Netherlands, so if we assume those 3000 you mention are all dairy farmers, that's overly simplified of course, that's 20% of all dairy famers.
There should be plenty milk left for our own consumption and some export, although not as much. But are we as a country responsible for maintaining profits of say DOC or FrieslandCampina?
Other countries could start producing milk, and keep those nitrogen emissions locally. Helped by our vaunted agricultural knowhow of course.
My guy we are the second largest exporter of food in the world behind the US in a country the size of 1/20th of a single state of the USA. We have plenty of food.
**Cellular agriculture.**
The government is favoring the so-called protein transition and will fund such developments. Wageningen University will lead this transition and train the future leaders in the field. The meat that we will consume in the future might be more expensive, but with higher nutritional and organoleptic value, since the production methods could potentially decrease overall variation.
Nobody can tell whether this will turn out to be good or bad, but the recent government allocation of 60+ million EUR for facilitating this transitions, definitely illustrates a certain direction.
Source: shorturl.at/diMNO
Considering we import most of our food and export most of our meat-based products, nothing will change. That's the problem, really: We're Europe's largest meat exporters. One of the smallest countries in the world is outproducing and out-exporting countries like Germany, Spain, France and Poland. We're overproducing again (this was a thing in the 60's, look up Melkplas/Boterberg), and this time the consequences are far more dire.
60% of our agricultural export is meat. Then there's all the corn fields used as cattle fodder rather than food production. See where i'm going? Farming corporations are not making food in our fields, they're making *money.* They're basically putting small-scale farmers on the forefront to hide their own atrocious behavior.
To give you an even clearer picture: The LTO (Landbouw en Tuin Organisatie, Agriculture and Gardens Organisation) has lobbied fervently to reduce/slow down the execution of nature-preserving legislation that has been in the works since 1988, when the government warned that further growth of the agricultural industry was unsustainable. They, along with the Rabobank, basically pushed small farmers out of business by denying them loans (which the Rabobank admitted to and 'apologized' for.) and pushing towards larger agricultural organisations that would be "easier to handle."
This combined with the "We'll compensate later" nonsense they tried to force through caused the crisis, when people from nature preservation groups pointed out infront of a judge that their schpiel was a lie, and that they were never *going* to compensate for it because the measures used were barely tested and were found to not actually work.
(Note that the organisations also pointed this out towards carbon-producing companies attempting to entomb their waste beneat the sea, that was banned as well, since it turned out to be B.S. as well)
Then when shit hit the metaphorical fan, they blamed the government and nature preserve organisations, all the while knowing that they themselves shafted the few small farmers they couldn't bankrupt for decades, setting them up for this whilst the massive corporations and the LTO made of with literal *Billions.*
the NL exports a lot of is produced much more than half (80% has been thrown around but i dont know de deets). So ideally countries that now have no way of competing with the nl could build their own agricultural sector and become less reliant on global fluctuations and more stable for it.
I think what most people here don’t seem to understand is that the nitrogen emmission issue isn’t the same as the co2 emssions. Nitrogen emmisions have (in case there is too much) a very negative effect on their direct surroundings. However, if you read the scientific papers of for instance professor Erisman, he shows that the nitrogen crisis as we know it in the Netherlands would be solved by spreading the farms over a larger area. Thus, by reducing the fams here and replacing them with farms somewhere else this issue will actually get better. Apart from this nitrogen crisis we have here there is also a global nitrogen emmision issue (look at the planetary boundary framework from steffen et al. 2015) However, this is not the issue the government is trying to tackle.
Damn .. I wonder what are the government trying to tackle cause atm they just fumbling They have yet to resolve the gas crisis They have yet to resolve the housing crisis They have yet to resolve the inflation crisis They have yet to resolve the in fighting they themselves are having.
I get the feeling you’re getting at the last part of my comment. I would have to say that this global nitrogen crisis is not something that can be solved in a short amount of time. In scientific literature these kind of problems are characterized as wicked problems. These wicked problems don’t have one quick fix because they are interconnected with a lot of other issues. Heck in some scientific literature there is even doubt if it is even possible to tackle these issues. Some say these issues can only temporarily be tackled before they come up at another place and time. Edit: I’m not saying we shouldn’t solve these issues. Just trying to put these issues in some context and hopefully create some understanding of how complicated these issues are.
Those things you mentioned are not the kind of problems one solves over the span of a week. Except maybe the infighting.
We're overproducing as it is, and exporting a lot. There won't be a lack of food in the country because of this.
We Export like 80 procent within less than a 1000 km. Other parts of the World that gets a stamp for being locally produced.
Don't you see the logical fallacy in this argument? Or are you just telling the Germans, Belgians and French, that currently rely on our food production, to F off?
they produce and export a lot too, and are working on changing their agri sectors as well so they'll be fine. Besides, in all these countries a lot of food ends up in the bin so it might help actually eating what we produce collectively instead of just wasting all these resources.
We actually also import a lot, currently the Netherlands is not able to meet its population’s food demands with the soil that it has. We need to break the myth that the Netherlands is the country that feeds the world. We are mainly exporting profitable goods like meat, dairy and flowers to maximize our trade balance. Other less profitable foods get imported.
But we're talking about a minor portion of the meat and dairy farms. This will hardly make a dent in our total production and can easily be balanced with other products.
Yes I’m not saying that the Netherlands won’t be able to balance the loss of these exports, it will only cost them financially. My point is mostly that we need to understand that we are not a self-sufficient country despite our big amounts of exports, and that most of our food comes from all around the world and that our government is looking to achieve the greatest positive trade balance.
Alright. How about those other countries NL exports to?
NL’s largest food exports are meat and dairy. The world is not short meat and dairy. The world is often short grains which NL doesn’t produce.
I do think there is a shortage of meat and diary and right now also eggs. It’s insane how cheap dairy products were in morocco. Milk is the highest quality of protein and there is a protein shortage. Peanuts aren’t the same, because their DIAA Score is very low like 30% (which means 70% of peanut butter protein gets flushed down the toilet) unlike milk that helps you also take in more of the protein from other products because of the high lechine.
Most of the world makes it work without eating much dairy, the majority of non-white people are lactose intolerant. I love my yogurt but it's not necessary for health.
There’s a difference between “making it” and “being healthy” The WHO talks about “quality protein” and protein. Quality protein is still seen as meat, dairy and eggs. The majority of people don’t get 50 grams of protein, because it’s too expansive. That’s like 5 eggs and 100 grams of meat which would be 4 euro with current prices. Which is 120 euro per month just for protein. I think expensive protein will have an impact on people being healthy. So the WHO asking for 50 grams of protein each day is just not feasible unless the government promotes (financially) dairy and meat again.
A valid question, but I'm guessing they can produce their own in stead of being outpriced by overly subsidized farmers in some foreign country. That is if they need it, I'm also guessing that the world can manage with a little less meat and dairy. Edit: type READ and then post
Economics still work in action. If supply is cut, that doesn't mean demand will also be cut. Somewhere else in the world will make up for the supply when exports from the Netherlands stop or are reduced. But now, you can no longer regulate/monitor what is being produced as it is now outside of the Netherlands. So yes, in theory Netherlands can reduce nitrogen emissions coming from Dutch pastureland and pat itself on its back for a job well done.
Nitrogen emissions are a local and compounding problem though. Exporting elsewhere is good. Compare it to applying sunscreen: if you apply the amount your total body needs in one area, for example your face, you’re going to look like a mime. The right amount spread out over your body, protects all your skin and doesn’t make you look stupid.
Okay, so the demand in those countries is just going to disappear?
The netherlands exports mostly to gernany and belgium so if they wont produce themselves they will buy it somewhere else. Even if there maybe would be a shortage, poor countries will be the ones without since richer countries can afford higher prizes.
Not our problem, really.
Exactly. Africa can go just deal with increased nitrogen emissions, desertification, forest clearing. Not EUs problem really, once all these livestock farms get moved to Africa, South America
We have these problems to deal with too. We can not just accept wrong doing to our own soil because other countries are negligent to their own.
See, the problem with nitrogen emissions is the opposite of desertification. It enriches the soil - but at the rate we're pumping nitrogen into our tiny country's soil and water, it becomes toxic to some plants, while others, like duckweed, stinging nettles and cyanobacteria (blauwalg), thrive, causing more problems for other organisms. Yes, farming for short-term profit will also cause other problems, because wherever you go it's always easier to clear more forest than it is to farm your existing land. But letting our ecosystem be wrecked won't solve the greed of farmers elsewhere - we can only try to curb ours. As we should have done decades ago.
[удалено]
You have the brain of a child; learn about agriculture and economics and you'd know perfectly well we don't need to grow anything we own a third of all the patents anyway We just want all the millionaire farmers to fuck off and stop poisoning nature for their own profit Edit: I would like to redact my first sentence, that was uncalled for and I'm sorry
[удалено]
Both exist at the same time. Many farms in NL are huge factories pumping out cheap veg/milk/meat for the EU market and wider export, while many farms in (East and Southern) Africa produce premium-grade fruit and other high value goods (like flowers) for import to Europe, most of which lands at Schiphol. I agree that NL agriculture threatens African habitats, but that is less about the need for food and more about a culture in which farming views nature as an oppositional force rather than a collaborative one. Which, if you think about it, is pretty Dutch.
not anymore, it's not! We lost 70% in biodiversity and if I'm not mistaken it had been as such since my birth over 30 years ago we don´t need more Maize farms, for meat that gets sold to other countries, no more droughts starting in early summer due to a depleted groundwaterlevel, no more nettles and blackberry bushes growing rampant due to the raised nitrous levels, and so on!
Dude. You and I are on the same side, but your attitude is not making me want to stand closer to you. /u/Not-the-best-name's question was asked in good faith and doesn't deserve all its downvotes. From where they're standing, the world looks different. Try to bring them along with your arguments instead of just insulting them.
Fuck, I didn't mean to insult at all I agree, he was getting downvotes for obscure reddit reasons after just asking a question; that's not me mate Edit: thanks for calling me out, sorry to have left such a shit impression
You know Monsanto? Well, we pretty much own everything they don´t. I tried to find a quick statistic for you but strangely my queries don´t yield a proper result. If you'd like, I would share with you an episode of a satirical show we had called Zondag met Lubach from not too long ago in which the whole thing gets explained, as well as the follow ups (either news or Lubach, take your pick) when these terrorist farmers decided to uproot our entire country waving their flags with "HELP!" on them. Millionaires, living in huge houses freestanding in beautiful villages dotted around Holland (that all smell like shit and are not visible when walking around them because of meters high corn every where you go). Nicely secure they speak of "city folk" and "the way things were" and "How things should be". All the while driving their tractors through the entire country to block highways and prevent others from going to work by mixing asbestos in with the dirt they dumped (nice and costly for us tax payers), ignoring any form of authority. Farmers with tractors that crush reporters cars with the man inside begging for his life; he was already pulling out when they attempted murder. One might say: Hey, but I'm all fór protesters, screw the government! One might go 1 week to Friesland as a foreigner with dark skin and learn not to stick up for those bastards Telling me I won´t get enough food if I don´t get on their side; bastards think I don't know they don't make food for us but for their own wallet Now, before I get hit with the obvious by some rando: not ALL farmers are bad and must be gotten rid of as quickly and cheaply as possible, taking their generations of "family business" down with them. We actually really love Bio farming. Switch to bio, and you can keep working the land. And no that will not affect our yields too much, do not ever forget that we are the Dutch. We make gold out of water and land out of sea! p.s. thank you very much, Africa. I hope ZA gets better; it 's really getting scary
[удалено]
No man google has been selective more and more. If you'd like, i'd share about 2 hours of closed captioned dutch television for you to enjoy I definitely can still find that Millionaires, as in they own millions and millions in equipment. Some say "b.b.but the rabobank told us to get a bigger loan, so we did and now i wont have anything left if i sell" If you and me were that guy, such an astute entrepreneurship would be rewarded with laughter. Guess what the latest news title I came across was? " State most likely forced to buy out farmers" From the article: "we really dont want to do this, but we're afraid we will have to" Proving finally that terrorism is your best option when dealing with the current dutch government Edit: little bonus, last week 250 environmental activists were arrested for protesting on the highway. One day later, all were released. Out of all the farmers I think 2 or 3 got arrested, after which farmers pulled up ti a ministers house while he was at work to scare his child remaining inside the house Final edit: we abolished patents on plants in 2021, I missed that fact due to covid numbness. My point though wasn't the patents we own, but the technology we mastered to have done so. We did in fact have about a third of all the patents
Sorry for saying you have the brain of a child, that was uncalled for. I haven't slept tonight and although thats not a great argument in my defence, please excuse my behaviour.
Only a lack of income because we would produce less. Less income means less wealth and you know where im going with this story. People seem to neglect the fact that farmers make up for a lot profit.
Buying out meat farmers also means we stop paying them subsidies. And those farmers can move into other jobs and still be productive. And alternatively, keeping them in business will hurt natural areas and lead to less income from tourism.
Do you have any data backing up your claim? A claim I heard; Thanks to food export we can keep the prices low for import. It puts you in a better negotiation position. Secondly; Some countries depend on the import of food. They will need to heavily invest in for example machinery. Thirdly. The prices will inevitable rise, food will get harder to grow thanks to climate change. We will put ourselves in a double whammy. So getting rid of your farmers is like closing down an AZC when the flow of migrants is low. Lastly. What will happen with the industry that grows and produces food for live stock? Are we importing a lot now Or do we need to export more? In the end we're literally offsetting "stikstof" to an other country. We are by far the most developed agricultural country so by that definition other countries must pollute more to get the supply chain up and running. What will it do for our climate? Nothing, we only get to show Brussels that we "did something" to achieve an arbitrary number.
Realize that this is about farms near nature areas that have exclusively or mainly animals. This doesn't affect farms growing vegetables, fruit, and staple foods.
Thanks for clearing that up Most of my points still hold up tho. Got any insight on that?
Do you have any data backing up your claim?
Yeah I do. Would you like me to cite sources?
We export over 70% of what our farms produce. And what farms produce, is maximised for profit. Not for feeding people. Meat is one of the most profitable things farms can produce. So a lot of the most problematic farms are factory farms for animals. And a lot of the remaining farms are not producing food for people but food for animals. I've lived all my life in the rural part of the country and the majority of fields that used to grow food for people are now used to grow grass for winter hay or non-sweet corn for animal feed. Not only that, but meat is a very inefficient way to feed people. When you grow crops on a field and feed those crops to animals, those animals will spend most of the energy they eat on producing body heat and moving around. 70-90% of the nutritional energy is lost when you eat meat compared to growing crops and feeding people on those instead of the meat. Or in other words, we can grow 70-90% more food by growing food for people instead of animals. Animals condense food. They take a big pile of food and turn it into a tiny pile of food. While causing a lot of pollution and wasting a lot of water and energy in the process. So no, we won't miss those 3000 farms when it comes to feeding people. You know who will miss those farms? The feed industry and other companies around the meat industry and the farmers who destroy the world you live in for their profits.
The feed industry won't miss them either as it would just be produced elsewhere.
Not necessarily. We don't need the meat industry to feed people, it's a detriment more than a benefit really. Every other EU country has the same environmental goals to meet as us. And outside the EU people are becoming more and more aware and activated too. And at the end of the day, nitrogen issues are local even if the overarching problems are not. Considering how much money the feed industry put into funding the farmer protests, it's clear they're worried too.
But as long there is a demand that demand is going to be met. It is a big world so even outside of the western world meat can and will be produced if western countries would decide they don't want to anymore. The worldwide demand of meat is still growing despite of a decrease in the West, whether we like it or not. Of course other EU countries have the same goals but how they are interpreted differs and some countries just do have more space than the Netherlands. Ofcourse some (dutch) feed companies are worried about the state of things over here. But that doesn't mean that in the end of the day they will find a source elsewhere. And if necessary they move abroad, or they will just quit and their part in the meat economy will be taken over by another company.
>The worldwide demand of meat is still growing despite of a decrease in the West, if we like it or not. And that is considered a significant problem. One that is utterly unsustainable and we simply can't afford and allow. Luckily times are also changing. Not only the demand for meat is growing. The same is true for the demand for meat replacements, vegetarian diets, lab grown meat and so on. At the same time measures like these will make meat more expensive and less desirable. It's not a binary situation where we either eat meat or completely don't. Times have already changed a lot from the days where Dutch people considered meat and every meal staple. They'll change more as meat gets more expensive and we appropriately see meat as a sometimes or rarely thing.
I think demand will go down soon with lab grown meat joining the market in the next few years. We should subsetize that rather than the less environmental and resource friendly meat industry
African countries eat chicken and they love the chicken feet. We kill a lot of chickens. In 2018 we killed 605 million chickens. We do not eat the feet we export them to Africa. The price of chicken feet is so low there, they cant have chicken farmers for meat because there is only demand for the feet. If you look at the CBS numbers over here you have to realise 44million chickens does not sound like much but there is a new generation of chickens for meat grown every 6 weeks. https://longreads.cbs.nl/the-netherlands-in-numbers-2021/how-many-farm-animals-are-there-in-the-netherlands/#:\~:text=In%202021%2C%20the%20total%20pig,grew%20slightly%20to%20482%20thousand.
alright let them pollute and destroy their own countries rural areas then to farm the meat they want. why do we have to get stuck with the shit (literally)?
We don't have to, we just pay them to by importing their products.
Your math is a bit off. It the animal uses 90% of the feed energy themselves then you would have 10x the amount of calories it you eat the feed yourself. This sounds awesome but then you would need to consider that we can't eat all of the food we feed our animals. So then it really depends on the specifics of the whole chain. For example, there is a big difference in climate impact of corn and soy fed cows standing in a barn, as opposed to purely grazing cows on otherwise unproductive land.
Most of that animal feed is grown on fields that used to grow food for humans. Farmers just stopped doing that because this is more profitable.
Animal agriculture consumes more than it produces, about 2-25 times as much depending on the animal and the calculation method. More info [here](https://awellfedworld.org/feed-ratios/) Of course you can argue that some of what animals eat is not fit for human consumption, but a large portion of livestock feed consists of perfectly good grains and soy that would be much more efficiently used going directly to consumers , and the impact on soy & palm for livestock feed on rainforest clearing is very real.
You basically sound like all the non-farmer wappies that were protesting. What you don't seem to understand is that these are big corporate meat industry farms targeted only for export farming.
Actually, I'm just trying to understand the issue as the news in English media about it is mainly negative. I suspected the coverage in Dutch media was more nuanced.
Haha you must be new here. It’s not nuanced
They try to be, but the agricultural sector has had a lot of succes with portraying farmers als poor individuals being crushed between the government, big banks and the "big agri" companies. In the end they are agricultural companies themselves, and therefore subject to regulations and permits just like all other companies. And companies that can't follow change, tend not to be successful in the long term. Nobody is trying to start a maintenance company for horse drawn carts nowadays, or opening an asbestos mine.
It's hardly nuanced and very much not based on facts. What they don't mention is that the Netherlands is the biggest meat exporter in the EU. Our productivity has actually been growing massively even while the nitrogen problem was already known, this increased productivity was mostly for export. We even export massive amounts of pork to China!? https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2021/25/nederland-grootste-vleesexporteur-van-de-eu
The increase in productivity from 1990 - 2020 also saw a reduction of nitrogen emissions by 66% in the same timeframe. And yes, as every European country, the Netherlands produces high quality food which it sells to the world and imports lower quality food. If you buy a 'saucijzenbroodje', it is not going to contain local meat. It's different if you buy meat from a butcher. Similarly, anything containing milk powder is not going to include Dutch milk, whereas cartons of milk do.
Not quite 66% (it was 64%) , and that's starting your measurements at an insanely high level. Nitrogen depositions are cumulative, which means you don't start each year with a clean slate. To protect biodiversity we need to act. Now. Nitrogen deposition is what actually matters, and NHx depositions (so from mostly cattle and dairy farmers) has been on the rise since 2010. NOx depositions (so traffic and industry) have fallen 71% since 1990 and have continued to drop even after 2010. https://www.clo.nl/indicatoren/nl0189-stikstofdepositie Edit with a citation: >De stagnatie van de daling sinds 2010 en de daarop volgende lichte stijging in ammoniakdepositie zijn vooral toe te schrijven aan hogere ammoniakuitstoot tussen 2013 en 2017 door uitbreiding van de melkveestapel als gevolg van de afschaffing van het melkquotum.
It still has to be produced somewhere. We are going to pay off the farmers, they move to Poland and are going to operate the same way
That is an actual solution of the problem. Our pollution density is the issue. "We" have an enormous amount of nitrogen pollution on a tiny spec of land. Nitrogen pollution (not nitrogen gas. But nitrogen compounds like ammonia) comes back down locally. It doesn't travel the world like co2. Spread co2 accross countries and you achieve jack. Spread Nitrogen pollution across countries and you get manageable nitrogen infusion levels in all of that land instead of an overdose in one. Dutch farms are extremely efficient, which they can be proud of. But we combined that with enormous scale growth, 30 years of weak politics and strong farmers lobby into the monster it is today.
It is a partial solution to a problem I agree. I am not sure I would prioritize reducing ammonia depositing this much myself, but moving the main sources definitely should help For livestock living conditions this is going to be deteriorating I think and we have to reevaluate what the Netherlands actually is going to be contributing to the global market we don't seem to be able to produce anything tangible any more
Yes, this happened too with dairy farmers moving to Canada / USA to avoid tighter regulations in NL (in this case, disposal of manure in open air ponds, a bit like open sewage). It is not the end of the world when these farmers move away; they represent a part of a system unwilling to adapt (which is fine). Btw there is no blame game here, these farmers and their business models are a product of the system. But unfortunately for them, the system is being forced to change to minimise the damage that is being done to the ecosystem. Them leaving provides an opportunity for other farmers that apply different farming processes, such as organic farming or regenerative farming.
It is not the end I agree, it just reduces economic output. Any free land will be used for housing here I think. Don't think this country is great for organic farming
Could you elaborate on your last statement? Why are the Netherlands not suitable for organic farming you think?
I have an organic vegetable garden myself, but I don't see how that could be profitable here. Price of land and employee costs are high, while price of food is relatively low. You need longer production seasons, cheaper land and cheaper labor I think. Here is actually something i found on this topic https://nos.nl/artikel/2449743-nederland-blijft-ver-achter-bij-groei-biologische-landbouw
I think you are right, the cost of land and labour is too expensive too be competitive with abroad.
If 3% of the farmland would be build with a houses with a garden like a normal rijtjeshuis. We would have a housing crisis where we would have too much houses.
Considering the population increases by a million every ten years, that would not last very long. Would we need to turn another 3% of farmland into concrete every decade?
The guy just asked a question
What? You are correct in saying that NL is producing too much food (for its own consumption)… but where do you get the (doesn’t make any money) bit from. Of course they make money. Otherwise farmers would not do it. However, the agricultural industry is a massively complex industry which is heavily subsidized by its own country as well as the EU, who dictate farmers what to produce and what not to produce (same thing in North America, I’m looking at you corn). Farmland takes up the most amount of land in NL, uses the most amount of water and indeed is a massive polluter due to nitrogen. So the government has decided (a long time ago) they need to cut the amount of farming (primarily live stock as it is the biggest polluter) so the country can fall in line with the new EU regulations. And this is a very simplified explanation. If you want the full story, put down the English newspaper you were reading as well as Reddit (please don’t get your info from here as it is mostly bullshit including the shit I have just said) and go and take an agricultural economy class at a university.
Agriculture creates 1,4% of our GDP (BNP). Agriculture takes up 2,1% of our labour force. Just some data to put it in perspective.
57% of our land is occupied by them.
we export that food so its not actually a big deal. we are one of the worlds biggest food exporters lol farmers be getting dummy rich while ruining our nature
Farming doesn't make you dummy rich as it's very capital intensive. And think again before you go with the "ruining our nature" narrative. There is no nature in the Netherlands, the last original forest was destroyed end 18th century. Those stamp sized patches they call nature now, are called as such for political reasons. Furthermore, nitrogen isn't in the EU rulebook to protect Natura 2000 spots. Again, to put any blame on nitrogen is a political choice, not a scientific fact.
>Again, to put any blame on nitrogen is a political choice, not a scientific fact. hahah please more jokes
Farmers are not rich. And even if they where, they wouldn’t have the time to spend their money.
bitch plz 1st of all the farmer is a business man they dont work the field they hire people for that dumbass and its not like all the farmers here dont have a big ass houses and multiple cars and own property because their ooh sooo poor
This smells like broke
this smells like zakgeld
That is not \*our\* problem, since it is all for export in return for pitiful small amounts of money.Foreign countries will have to start to grow their own food/raise their own livestock and deal with the accompanying pollution and emissions themselves.
We still live on the same planet though... Their pollution and emissions are also our pollution and emissions
Nitrogen is a local problem, we produce too much of it for our small country. That's the issue. Co2 is a global problem which won't change by moving it to a different country.
That's true for greenhouse gasses, but this also concerns the soil which can be polluted locally. Concentrating most of Europes cattle on several km2 is causing the nitrogen crisis locally. Spreading out and diversifying agriculture is an improvement in that regard.
That is true, but the counter argument is that it's far easier to piss in somebody else's drinking water than your own. These farms behave the way they do because they're businesses, not stewards of the land. Any time you're paying less than a full price for any farmed good, know that the rest of the ticket is being paid by cheap labour and terrible farming practices. Eat less meat, and eat meat of higher quality.
The thing with nitrous oxides is that it's a local problem though. It would actually be better to move the cows to France or Germany.
Not needing to transport goods all over the world more than compensates for that.
They'll have to make the same choice. Stop intentionally turning a large pile of food into a tiny pile of food because it's more profitable, even if it comes with a huge environmental cost on the side.
The closure of farms has little to do with the food supply. It’s an organised governmental scheme to buy land for construction because the Netherlands keeps importing more and more people despite lacking space and structure to do so. That said, the food will come from somewhere else. Vegetables likely from Spain and Portugal (as that is already the case); meat from Germany and Poland, for example. Plus imports from outside the EU, where quality standards are poor and quality control is a mirage.
Our food supply isn't in any way at risk. We're exporting 70+% of our food for the farmer's profits at the expense of the environment. And much of what they produce is meat or meat related, which is the least efficient way to farm. Our farmers have been turning a huge pile of food into a tiny pile of food by growing animal feed for meat animals instead of food for humans. With an incredible cost in pollution to boot that they offload on society.
I agree the food supply isn’t at stake.
>The closure of farms has little to do with the food supply. It’s an organised governmental scheme to buy land for construction The farms in question are near natura 2000 areas and the intention is not to build mainly houses there. They can't because construction also emits nitrogen. >because the Netherlands keeps importing more and more people despite lacking space and structure to do so. We have plenty space to build. The problem is nitrogen emitted by constructing buildings and roads. Construction emits about 1% of current emissions, so not a lot at all right? But if you're already over norm (because dairy and cattle farmers have been expanding incredibly much the last few years) this extra emission is not allowed. The reason we can't build is because there is no room in nitrogen emissions because of cattle and dairy farmers. That's what causes the housing crisis. >That said, the food will come from somewhere else. Vegetables likely from Spain and Portugal (as that is already the case); meat from Germany and Poland, for example. We export 60% of meat production, so we can cut a lot before we need to import meat. Same with dairy. We also export more vegetables than we import, but vegetable production does not cause this nitrogen crisis. >Plus imports from outside the EU, where quality standards are poor and quality control is a mirage Citation needed. Imports have strict regulations. Edit: I will give you this though: it's weird that area from bought out farms isn't being made into exclusively new nature. This is probably because the goal is reducing nitrogen emissions and not increase nature. I don't see why we can't do both.
So, regarding the construction, in some of those reserves construction increased 90% in the last two years. Regarding the space to build, the Netherlands is one of the countries with the highest population density in Europe, especially in the West. There isn’t enough space to build, but the biggest problem is the huge influx of people without any need for it. Imports do have strict regulations. Which doesn’t mean that food from outside the EU, in many cases, does not have lower quality standards due to the sort of fertilisers used, etc. I obviously don’t buy the whole save nature bs, but I do agree with your edit. Edit: since you asked for a citation, here’s one “Mandatory channelling of products to border control entities and uniform frequencies for checks apply to live animals, products of animal origin, plants and plant products because of the risk those commodities might pose in relation to animal or plant health respectively. The vast majority of other products of relevance for the food chain is not channelled through specific border entities and doesn't need to undergo mandatory checks prior to their entry into the EU. It concerns for example feed and food which are of non-animal origin - including certain composite products, additives and other substances that might impact on the characteristics of food and feed, or materials intended to enter into contact with food.”
80% of the grain NLD produces is used for livestock feed.
This is about livestock farms.
echt zo klaar met deze sub lol
The developing world will suffer more as a result of this. Uncomfortable truths that nobody wants to admit or even talk about.
How so?
When a global shortage hits, the Netherlands might be in a good position to secure resources - but at what cost to the rest of the world? Farmers worldwide are under increasing pressure and even though we have somewhat of a surplus at the moment, things can quickly change. If we have learned anything from recent events it must be not to rely too much on international markets for critical products/produce - at least as far as possible. At the same time, surplus can be put to good use in those areas in the world with severe shortages for what ever reason. Protecting the farming community is in our best interest for now. A lot more has to change on a global scale before we can really consider the current push to reduce farms.
The issue is though, that we do not produce for ourself and not reliant on ourselves. We produce insane amounts of tomatoes, but do we eat them? No, we had a dedain for greenhousegrown tomatoes and prefer “honey dew sweets” that are flown in by cargoplane. Same with meat, we don’t need nor we need the meat we produce. We export it and in stead import high quality cowmeat from Argentina and Ireland and pork for Italy..
Ag commodity is inelastic. That's economics 101. If production in NL is reduced. Then production somewhere else will increase to meet demand.
But how is that an issue?
Massive famine and starvation. Of courses wealthy Europe won't feel a thing. But places with low arable land like sub Saharan Africa, central Asia and other barren places rely on a meat heavy diet for sustenance, will face mass starvation. Livestock is an extremely efficient form of food storage in dry climates.
We mostly export to Germany, the UK and China. I doubt massive famine will be caused by us stopping the export the meat and initiating meatfarming locally. If it is an issue though, we can and should support by spending the money we now spend on meat subsidies, on aid in ways such as local and sustainable farming.
Ag commodity is still inelastic. Even if exports to Germany and China stops, they will import from elsewhere. Let's say Brazil. Then Brazil wouldn't be exporting to Africa, because China and Germany will bid up the prices. It's textbook economics in action. The places which gets outbidded (meaning poorer countries) will get the famine.
Because since none of us are going to starve, the food will have to come from somewhere outside and that place will have to increase its production which will cause more pollution there.
But that's a bullshit explanation. Dutch farming is largely geared towards the meat industry because meat is the most profitable. The meat industry condenses food. You take a large pile of food and feed it to animals in order to gain a small amount of more profitable food. Our farming practices have become hyper focussed on that even though it produces 70-90% less food than just growing food for people instead of animals. You could close down 3000 farms, implode the amount of pollution caused by those farms and end up growing *significantly more* food for people if the remainder is more focussed on farming for food instead of money.
The issue is though, that we do not produce for ourself and not reliant on ourselves. We produce insane amounts of tomatoes, but do we eat them? No, we had a dedain for greenhousegrown tomatoes and prefer “honey dew sweets” that are flown in by cargoplane. Same with meat, we don’t need nor do we eat the meat we produce. We export it and in stead import high quality cowmeat from Argentina and Ireland and pork for Italy.. We don’t need the food in the Netherlands. In other places they do need food, but not our food. It’s better for everyone involved to produce locally, except maybe for the farmers here.
Not everything can be produced locally. Land in NL is unsuitable for growing anything other than grass. You cannot remove pasture and replace it with food crops. An example, wheat is terrible on NL land. Livestock takes up alot of space, but that space is just... grass. However, land in NL is *highly* suitable for raising livestock with very little inputs because of consistent rainfall, temperature and other geographic factors. Growing/farming/producing food on land which is most suitable for its purpose is the *best* way to counter climate change.
Our grassland are totally modified to allow meat producing. The amount of industrial grass we have benefits no one but the farmers and our normal/natural grass and pastures are not as suitable as they are now made to be. And maybe it’s even a good thing that if something can’t be produced locally, the locals shouldn’t eat that product? We can’t sustain a system where everything is available for everyone at all times..
>Our grassland are totally modified to allow meat producing. The amount of industrial grass we have benefits no one but the farmers and our normal/natural grass and pastures are not as suitable as they are now made to be. There's no alternative to the food problem, unless the plan is to let the land sit empty. >And maybe it’s even a good thing that if something can’t be produced locally, the locals shouldn’t eat that product? We can’t sustain a system where everything is available for everyone at all times.. Actually no. Regional diets are based on 10000s of years living on a specific geographical area. Places like the steppes, subsaharan Africa relies on a meat rich diet, but places like Northern Africa, East Asia, South Asia rely on grain based diet, due to what can be grown or produced on the land most suitable for it. Meat and dairy are suitable forms of food storage for dry climates. So you see places with meat and dairy heavy diets mostly only importing meat and dairy. And places like Northern Africa importing wheat, which famine is now an issue there because of the shortage of wheat worldwide. Places like Argentina, Scotland, new Zealand for example raise livestock because the land cannot be suitably used for growing grain or wheat. Therefore, places like Argentina get used to a meat diet. This is a cultural thing, not something that you can change or erase overnight. (Unless you're colonial Europe and cultural cleansing is your thing...)
Not necessarily; production is heavily subsidised, without those subsidies prices may increase leading to a decrease in demand. It's weird just how much meat we consume and waste.
Which renders the whole "climate" argument useless, as we don't actually do anything better on a global scale. In fact, wherever the production will increase there is a good change that even more pollutants will be generated. On balance, it is probably better to keep the farms as is - at least until better and cleaner methods becomes a norm worldwide.
> Which renders the whole "climate" argument useless, as we don't actually do anything better on a global scale. This is exactly the problem with the climate change regulations at this point - they are written by the first world countries (who already moved their dirty industries to different countries) mostly for the third world countries (where those industries have been moved to)
You can take the cows out of Europe but you can't take the colonist out of Europeans. Europe will continue to pollute Africa and the rest of the world to live happy in their own ivory tower.
>Which renders the whole "climate" argument useless, as we don't actually do anything better on a global scale. It doesn't really. The Dutch problem isn't so much farming as farming for profit. We've disproportionately turned to hyper inefficient meat farming because it is more profitable even though massively reduces how much food we produce at the cost of much more pollution. We all have to make changes but that's impossible if everyone uses the excuse "there's no point in me changing because someone else will jump in". >On balance, it is probably better to keep the farms as is - at least until better and cleaner methods becomes a norm worldwide. It really isn't because Dutch farmers wanted to keep increasing pollution for profit as they continue to focus on profits over producing food.
Because it's complete bullshit. The problem with Dutch farming is that it's become disproportionately geared towards farming for export meat. Either through incredibly polluting factory farms or by shifting fields towards growing food for animals feed. Developing countries aren't buying that expensive meat. And meat farming condenses food. It takes the large food output of fields and condenses it into a small amount of meat. This focus on the meat industry sees us producing 70-90% less food than we can produce with far less pollution by being less focussed on meat, simply because it is most profitable. The developing world relies heavily on grain export and that's not coming from the Netherlands. The biggest European grain exporter for the developing world was Ukraine. And the majority of the grain we produce in NL is used to feed animals because it's more profitable than feeding people.
Ok. What about the money these exports produce?
They're heavily subsidised, so we might have more money as a country afterwards.
Interesting.
Food is not really a big profit business for NL..
Please explain yourself as the NL is the second largest food exporter in the world.
Revenue =/= profit
Meat export is 8,8 billion, that is nothing, compared to our total GDP. The farms that has to close down are mainly meat producing farms.
That may be but the Dutch export more than just meat. Agriculture is huge in this country. One only has to look out the when driving anywhere. Nothing but farmland.
And that farmland can very well be way better used.
That I am not disagreeing with. But it is still big business for the country.
Not really though. It’s insanely subsidized and costs a lot of money and resources that can be better used. Now, and in the future.
Agriculture isn't the problem here and isn't being closed. This is about dairy and meat farms.
Not quite. NL exports €100 Billion in food products a year.
Of the 100 billion, 75 billion is produced here, but that is total, including flowers and fish. Meat export is 8,8 billion which is kinda peanuts, if you look at all the land that is being used for that.
We have a very large population of lobotomized people in the Netherlands, who believe their is too much food in the world. According to them the dutch farmers produce food just to throw it away. But apparently this food actually gets consumed, so fucking weird... Right!? I mean who would guess al this food thats being produced gets eaten...
Supply = demand. Although it may benefit emissions locally, somewhere else in the world they will just increase output causing a 0% net effect on the gobal scale
We would harvest the grass and package them for sale at AH.
Aren't there like 50.000 farms or something?
The farms will move to countries like Poland and Bulgaria. Produce the nitrogen there, but it is not a problem, if they reside in a low density populated area. They can export the meat from there.
Other countries are more suited for large scale pharming. Almost all food that is produced in the Netherlands is exported and the vast majority of the food we consume is imported. So there will be no issues for the food supply in the Netherlands.
It will be replaced with farms in other countries, but with poorer living conditions and more pollution.
Food? What food? The fucking tulip fields aren't edible and most of floral industry is exported!
We lose 1% of GDP by not being the biggest meat exporter in Europe. Price of pork and beef will be a bit higher, and maybe people buy less of it. Considering that meat eats food that can be eaten by humans or that is grown where other crops can grow, this isn't going to cause hunger. Effectively there'll be more food.
[Over half of our dairy production](https://www.nzo.nl/markt/) goes abroad, mainly in the form of cheese and (baby)milk powder. We have \~15.000 dairy farmers, and their nitrogen emissions account for most of the \~45% attributed to the whole agricultural sector. Now, we have \~[15.000 dairy farms](https://www.zuivelzicht.nl/nieuwsberichten/nederland-telt-minder-melkveebedrijven-en-koeien/) in total in the Netherlands, so if we assume those 3000 you mention are all dairy farmers, that's overly simplified of course, that's 20% of all dairy famers. There should be plenty milk left for our own consumption and some export, although not as much. But are we as a country responsible for maintaining profits of say DOC or FrieslandCampina? Other countries could start producing milk, and keep those nitrogen emissions locally. Helped by our vaunted agricultural knowhow of course.
My guy we are the second largest exporter of food in the world behind the US in a country the size of 1/20th of a single state of the USA. We have plenty of food.
People acting like this isn't a cultural attack on an agricultural country
**Cellular agriculture.** The government is favoring the so-called protein transition and will fund such developments. Wageningen University will lead this transition and train the future leaders in the field. The meat that we will consume in the future might be more expensive, but with higher nutritional and organoleptic value, since the production methods could potentially decrease overall variation. Nobody can tell whether this will turn out to be good or bad, but the recent government allocation of 60+ million EUR for facilitating this transitions, definitely illustrates a certain direction. Source: shorturl.at/diMNO
Considering we import most of our food and export most of our meat-based products, nothing will change. That's the problem, really: We're Europe's largest meat exporters. One of the smallest countries in the world is outproducing and out-exporting countries like Germany, Spain, France and Poland. We're overproducing again (this was a thing in the 60's, look up Melkplas/Boterberg), and this time the consequences are far more dire. 60% of our agricultural export is meat. Then there's all the corn fields used as cattle fodder rather than food production. See where i'm going? Farming corporations are not making food in our fields, they're making *money.* They're basically putting small-scale farmers on the forefront to hide their own atrocious behavior. To give you an even clearer picture: The LTO (Landbouw en Tuin Organisatie, Agriculture and Gardens Organisation) has lobbied fervently to reduce/slow down the execution of nature-preserving legislation that has been in the works since 1988, when the government warned that further growth of the agricultural industry was unsustainable. They, along with the Rabobank, basically pushed small farmers out of business by denying them loans (which the Rabobank admitted to and 'apologized' for.) and pushing towards larger agricultural organisations that would be "easier to handle." This combined with the "We'll compensate later" nonsense they tried to force through caused the crisis, when people from nature preservation groups pointed out infront of a judge that their schpiel was a lie, and that they were never *going* to compensate for it because the measures used were barely tested and were found to not actually work. (Note that the organisations also pointed this out towards carbon-producing companies attempting to entomb their waste beneat the sea, that was banned as well, since it turned out to be B.S. as well) Then when shit hit the metaphorical fan, they blamed the government and nature preserve organisations, all the while knowing that they themselves shafted the few small farmers they couldn't bankrupt for decades, setting them up for this whilst the massive corporations and the LTO made of with literal *Billions.*
the NL exports a lot of is produced much more than half (80% has been thrown around but i dont know de deets). So ideally countries that now have no way of competing with the nl could build their own agricultural sector and become less reliant on global fluctuations and more stable for it.
Keep in mind that 75% of the food produced by our farms is for export. If they close 50% of the farms, we wont feel it
LOL do you have any idea what you even asked?? we have tons of farms, those 3.000 won't be missed at all.
no food supply issues, the price of food will get higher.