Too much, arguably all the time, we look at all the individual components of our farm production systems ... and beat ourselves up about them.
We could use less fertiliser, our use of water isn’t that optimal at times, occasionally there’s animal welfare issues, and as for degradation of waterways ... And that’s just on-farm.
Get off-farm and meat marketers are continually giving a figurative fingers to each other, the ever-declining wool industry’s in(ward)-fighting continues and everybody wants to take a pot-shot at Fonterra – including sometimes Fonterra itself.
Meanwhile, back in the city, farmers and farms and all things associated with them are fair game for all and sundry to have a go at.
We can’t see the wood for the trees.
It is as if instead of standing back and looking at the whole picture of say the Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci, we go in with a magnifying glass and try to check it out. ‘Oh, messy brushstroke there’, ‘could’ve used a different shade of skin tone here’, ‘that eyeball’s not quite even’.
But then we never pull back and contemplate its beauty, its completeness, its balance.
Luckily, from art’s point of view, it is only art historians and art archivists and art lovers who get that close – but all the time they appreciate the big picture.
We, we never give ourselves the opportunity to ponder that, wow, we (mostly) wisely use nature’s resources and sunlight and produce fantastic products. And seeing as I’m on an art bent, even if we stand back and look at the big picture, we’ve never given it a name.
We can’t even begin to describe the components of the picture because there’s no start point. da Vinci didn’t call his masterpiece ‘Picture of a reasonably pretty, enigmatically-smiling woman’ (though at least it would’ve been a name).
My argument is; over the past 100 years or so, we’ve painted a great picture, provided it with a stylish frame. But, because we’ve never named it, (and getting back to the main point) it is as if our wonderful picture competes with one completed by a house painter.
Because we’ve never given a name to responsible pastoralism, we’re undifferentiated, unable to precisely say why our produce should command a premium.
But, the whole of our agriculture is more than the sum of its parts.
Or maybe it’s not. Perhaps our inability to stand back and think romantically about our total offer means we deserve to forever be in the downward spiral of commodity produce and prices?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Kerr is a writer, specialising in simplifying science and technology. He has an agricultural science and industry background. You can contact him here »
This is the seventh in a series about pasture Harmonies.
The first one Branding our pastoral advantage is here »
The second one We're the only protein production systems that can say VISIT is here »
The third one Taking it for granted is costing us is here »
The fourth one Thinking beyond the actuality of how we produce is here »
The fifth one For want of a name ... is here »
The sixth one The way you'd farm if you farmed yourself is here »
2 Comments
Oh yes
I see....the big picture when I squint my eyes and look out the window of my car at 100km/hr...
......we are 100% pure after all...
...and when I stop, get out of my car, open my eyes to the degredated waterways, look at the stressed animals and inhale the smell of effluent, well these are just the messy brustrokes that make up the big picture.
...all good then... if thats what you want to belive and accept ....
effluent is the most natural smell in the world. New Zealand is becoming out of touch with reality. I'm sick of the being told by town people, that we are the worst polluters in the country. I accept that there are cases where rivers need to be cleaned up. But people who live in the city flush their own effluent down the toilet ( out of sight out of mind). Much of the waste water from town sewerage is pumped into rivers and the sea. I come from the Wairarapa, where Masterton pumped 68% of it's waste water into the river. And yet I'm made to feel like a bad person for grazing 10 cattle in a 10 acre paddaock with an unfenced creek. People should realise that cattle don't walk down to the creek to go to the toilet! The measurable benefits of alot of these fences will be zero. These are feel good policies designed by people who are creating jobs for themselves.
It also should be noted that most of the goods we buy come from China. China is a country with a poor environmental record. So it is ok for us to contribute to polluting Chinese rivers but not our own (out of sight out of mind)
I am also tired of the media attacks on farming , relating to farm accidents, and cruelty to animals. These are very emotive subjects. The reality is the suffering and death is a normal part of life. But we don't want to face these realities so we put our sick and elderly into care ( out of sight out of mind). And we hide our dead animals on the farm, because it upsets people.
I run a hill country sheep farm where, every year i lose 3% of my ewes die during lambing. Up to farm 5% of my sheep die every year from natural causes. My sheep are well fed, and i do everything in my power to minimise these numbers. But this is the reality that is part of nature, and ensures that my flock are genetically strong, as the weak die.
These are the things the" well meaning" town legislators don't understand. We don't want to become like England where every animal must be saved, or you have to get a vet to put down a lamb.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.