Thursday, 11 February 2021 08:55

An open letter to Government

Written by  Dave Read
Dave Read says the Climate Change Commission report heavily relies on forest planting to offset emissions. Dave Read says the Climate Change Commission report heavily relies on forest planting to offset emissions.

OPINION: Dear Ministers Nash and Shaw,

The Climate Change Commission (CCC) has presented a report with a lot of rhetoric about the importance of reducing gross emissions.

However, it heavily relies on forest planting to offset emissions, while we delay tackling transport, yet again. There is no mechanism suggested to limit the surge in exotic afforestation unleashed by higher carbon prices under the ETS. The Government is very happy at the unexpected low cost of the actions proposed by the CCC.

Late last year, Te Uru Rakau released the report Economic Impacts of Forestry in NZ by Price Waterhouse Cooper (PwC). This report maintains that forestry is a better land use than sheep and beef farming on our hill pastures, producing more direct employment and a better economic outcome for NZ.  This report is deeply flawed.

The acting director general of Te Uru Rakau has refused to withdraw this report, so I have taken a case to the Ombudsman.

Here is a summary. Points 1 & 2 together mean that the reality is that sheep and beef farming generates more direct employment per 1,000ha, not less.

In brief:

  1. It ignores standard practice by StatsNZ when allocating categories. For instance, it includes among forestry direct employees silviculture workers, but excludes shearers from sheep and beef.
  2. In reaching its headline employment conclusions, it assumes that one third of pastureland that is in tussock is suitable for afforestation, despite our on-going efforts to eliminate wilding pines on this land.
  3. Despite Te Uru Rakau calling for a time series of data PwC choose only 2018, a year of record high log prices, for its economic comparison.
  4. It ignores the fact that expanding the forest estate will not increase on-shore economic activity to the same level as at present. Our limited domestic market and history of reduction of on-shore processing, mean any expansion will only increase whole log exports.
  5. In the version of the report that I obtained, it references Stats NZ tables that do not exist.

I am happy to supply the documents that support my assertions or discuss this issue further.

Dave Read

RD 3

Wairoa 4193

 

More like this

Forestry cuts into stock numbers

There is an urgent need for the Government to put a limit on the sale of farms for forestry - particularly for carbon farming.

Gun-shy

OPINION: Listening to the hysterical reportage of gun law reforms being pushed through by Associate Minister of Justice Nicole McKee, your old mate wrongly asumed the Minister must be planning to hand out free AK-47s.

Featured

All eyes on NZ milk supply

All eyes are on milk production in New Zealand and its impact on global dairy prices in the coming months.

National

Machinery & Products

Tech might take time

Agritech Unleashed – a one-day event held recently at Mystery Creek, near Hamilton – focused on technology as an ‘enabler’…

John Deere acquires GUSS Automation

John Deere has announced the full acquisition of GUSS Automation, LLC, a globally recognised leader in supervised high-value crop autonomy,…

Fencing excellence celebrated

The Fencing Contractors Association of New Zealand (FCANZ) celebrated the best of the best at the 2025 Fencing Industry Awards,…

» Latest Print Issues Online

The Hound

A step too far

OPINION: For years, the ironically named Dr Mike Joy has used his position at Victoria University to wage an activist-style…

Save us from SAFE

OPINION: A mate of yours truly has had an absolute gutsful of the activist group SAFE.

» Connect with Rural News

» eNewsletter

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter