Recent comments by: themule
Mr Bettles when you actually get out of your office and visit people in the rural areas do some more research. Talk to the GM companies like Monsanto and ask them why they are now getting into other areas of ag and looking at better ways to farm rather than the GM technologies because it just doesn't add up and is too expensive trying to prove it up when it actually doesn't benefit anyone. We now have massive resistance issues which the likes of Monsanto have created and guess who is going to sell you the next silver bullet to fix it? These guys don't care for the environment they just want $.
Agribuzz with David Leyonhjelm
I got through most of the diatribe which was incredibly hard to read because it is just waffling as you do but I got to the section where you mention that GM Crops and Pastures are crucial to saving the world. You are clearly as delusional as the AE Fund. Why are we surrounded by ill-informed politicians that love being up in lights?
David, clearly you write this garbage just to see what reaction you get. If Roundup is nearly as safe as water I am happy to sit with you while you drink a glass of it. The resistance to Roundup or Glyphosate to be precise is growing every year so when you can't use that chemical in your arsenal you have to turn to Sprayseed and dangerous chemicals like that. Try drinking a glass of Sprayseed in place of water. Roundup degrades soil due to the tie up of important trace elements as that is what is was originally made for as a metal chelating agent. Do more research before you shoot from the hip.
X Ag (highlight the X) have a look for yourself.
http://www.grdc.com .au/Media-Centre/GroundCover-TV/2 014/01/GCTV12/Xf52ZemlY20
Mr Leyonhjelm you have an amazing knack of writing absolute garbage. Since when has GM technology required minimal chemical use? One of the issues now facing farmers is weed resistance to the chemical which the GM crops are tolerant to in Glyphosate. When will David actually do some research before he writes this diatribe. They are having to using Mouldboard ploughs in WA to try and bury resistant weed seeds and if you know anything about farming Mouldboards require a lot of diesel and completely invert the soil to a fair depth, which is a tad different to your no till claim. Do your research.
GM Farmer you have an opportunist short term view on all of this. Can you maintain the chemical use etc. year in year out without weed resistance? Have a look at the resistance issues in WA not even related to GM use and you think this is sustainable. You would be the one who hopes that by the time you have a resistance problem they will have another chemical to counteract the problem. Nothing long term about your thinking.
This is a ridiculous article that highlights the ignorance of some who just don't get that there are far bigger issues related to allowing GM crops into the the state of SA. The insinuation that bringing the processed GM Canola oil in from outside SA is the same as growing it locally was interesting. To claim that the EU is a mess and struggling because it hasn't allowed the use of GM Crops in their farming rotations is even more interesting. I think the EU has more pressing social and political issues than whether they should be using GM crops. Not a skerrick of evidence interesting!!
The current government has cost businesses millions in wasted dollars to try and work towards understanding the previous governments policy on carbon before wiping the lot. Big businesses spent a lot of money working out how they could make the Carbon price work and what it could do to increase their efiiciencies. All this money was wasted once the current government got into power and changed everything. As if anyone is going to try too hard to make Mr Hunts new policy work knowing that they may backflip again or god forbid we get Shorten back in the seat. Blind leading the blind.
Brilliantly written and so true. The big corporate farms are only good for one thing and that is keeping property prices up. Most of the corporate farms are trying to be run like city corporates with massive wages for the "suities" flying around in new RM Williams boots and no idea about the day to day and who is actually running these properties. The profits are just not there for everyone at the top to be earning big wages and paying their on farm staff nothing. At least when the properties are handed back the infrastructure will be in better condition and someone can farm it profitably.
Good luck David you can leave knowing you made a massive difference. Elders is deservedly back on track and hopefully this isn't the first of many to leave due to some strange arrangements made at the top end.
It is amazing that they are still trying to push the GM barrow when after all these years and millions and millions of research dollars wasted they still can't get convince anyone that it is beneficial. I refer to crops only. The issues we have with soils in this country are far more important to fix than trying to grow a GM plant to try and suit. It is the overuse of chemicals that has left us with big soil issues and when we reverse these soils and get them back to health we will see crops benefiting and disease pressure easing. GM's in a cropping sense do not stack up they just cost more.
I am amazed that the only ones who can't see this is AA Co. There is a proven track record of failure with meat works in the NT and this will be no different. Stick to growing cattle and support the live trade and get that right rather than try and process and package it won't work. Especially if you are paying $85 Million for the privalige as you are starting way behind the eight ball and have paid way too much to build the works. No wonder the state govt wouldn't support it.
The only debate is how we ever let the states grow GM Crops in the first place. There is no doubt in anyone's mind once you see the weed resistance issues that have been created from overuse of chemicals. WA is a prime example. Farms are being offered up for lease because of their resistance issues and they can't lease them because they have run out of chemicals to treat the resistant weeds. GM crops only fuel this problem and once again the chemical companies write themselves into your will again. In no other situation would you let a tobacco company offer a solution for the cancer they cause.
Senator BJ is a frustrated, outspoken, poor excuse for a politician. He is the other end of the spectrum from the incompetent govt we currently have and is only concerned about his little domain and getting his name up in lights. Next he will want funds for the local pub he drank at whilst at UNE. If he actually did his research on a global scale to see where the world is going on similar tax systems eg.Japan,Korea,China, California etc. then he would realise we aren't the only people in the world to see that we have to do something. It will benefit Ag by creating far greater efficiencies.
Once again people missing the point. There is a massive issue with the use of chemicals in the world today and there is absolutely no doubt that cancer and other related illnesses are majorly on the rise.
It is the Ostrich's above that cant think beyond tomorrow sadly. Have a watch of the documentary on "The World according to Monsanto" on you tube and see whether we should be concerned about what the chemical companies are trying to hide.
Wake up and see beyond your nose.
I am amazed at how we have all come to following surveys. The MLA and ABARE come out with them all the time as well and with amazing accuracy, not. I think the forward forecasters on the weather websites should do the surveys and government funded professors like Prof. Cummins do the weather forecasting it would be more accurate on both fronts.
Isn't it amazing that many years ago I moved to Sydney to get work and was faced with a very cool greeting and that if you didn't go to the right school or have a street named after you then no-one wanted to know you. Don't make it it out to be the poor Sydneysider who is battling as I think the reverse has happened many more times. Like everything, if you make the effort it pays dividends as it did in my case and I loved Sydney after 12 tough months. The city folk actually have to get there hands dirty to survive in the bush and many now realise it's tougher than first thought to survive without many of the things a city provides.
Zero Till you really do let yourself down in this blurb. There is absolute science in the organic system as there is absolute science in conventional farming systems. To claim it as a religion is ridiculous and some would say that No-Till is a religion which isn't truly proven as well. All the best ideas in organic and conventional ag go into a melting pot to create a better end result whether you like it or not but to single out organics is ridiculous. It's funny how non-believers of climate change are often pro GM. Interesting correlation there. Similar makeup to the African Ostrich.
OMG we have one article about weed resistance to Glyphosate and thirty articles about the advantages of Round-Up Ready Crops. When will people realise that there is no benefit and it just makes for lazy farming which will come back to bite you when you have a massive weed resistance issue. Traditional single use of Glyphosate is now multiplying with crop on crop and the chemical of choice for summer weeds. Some growers using it 5-7 times in a season. This is going to get way messy unless growers realise the damage they are doing. Chemical companies are loving it as they are winning the race.
Read some facts about the article. The article was also written by people who are working in the GM Field and of course they want it to be widely adopted. The figures are ludicrous. http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/ news/archive/2014/15789-meta-anal ysis-claiming-to-demonstrate-on-f arm-benefits-of-gm-crops-critique d
The whole GM debate is flawed due to very big vested interests. To claim a 22pc increase in yield and a 68pc increase in farm profit is about as ridiculous as the those that believe this crap. The only increase in profit has been the seed suppliers. The issues now arising from the overuse and incorrect use of Glyphosate in GM and Non-GM Croping programs, far outway any so called benefits. Get the researchers for the article to have a look at the dramatic increase in chemical resistant weed burdens over the same 20 odd years. Every article is biased for either side but look long term not short.
I would love to meet Mr Mathews because his argument is completely flawed. Why are we still wasting our time with people like this and Jeffito that clearly have no idea about the problem here and are trying so desperately to cling onto the littlest amount of benefit these crops provide. It is not about the science as the science is amazing but it is about whether a farmer can afford to grow these crops and the added costs they bring in the form of resistance etc. Win, win for the big boys again. Sell you the seed and then sell you the solution to the problem they created and are about to again
The initials GRDC should stand for Guaranteed Return on Dollars Committed. It shouldn't mean Going Round Distributing Cash. We need results and a return to field applied science.
Who would have ever have thought that GM crops were going to pose a problem causing resistance in crops. I am sure there are more stories like this one and sadly to reverse the resistance takes a huge amount of time and effort as well as money. The only people to win from the mistake are those who created it in the first place, the chemical companies. I hope that Australian farmers contemplating growing the so called ease of use GM varieties will think twice before adopting the technology. The costs down the track to repair the damage will well and truly out way any short term benefits.
Jeffito, you are onto it. Every comment back to this article you have written is trying to prove your intelligence, which, based on your responses, is limited. Good luck in the future. Keep working on your case. By the way what is Snake Oil exactly?
Jeffito you must live in a bubble. Why are there so many more disease issues today in our cropping systems. Too much emphasis is put on plant genetics and growing the next best GM or Non GM plant variety that can supposedly tolerate diseases or is more salt tolerant etc. You don't help fight skin cancer by getting a sun tan. We need to look far more at soils and plant health issues which amazingly will combat a lot of our disease issues, even salt tolerance using soil ameliorants. Having recently travelled through Sth America, they are now looking far more at soils and less plant breeding.
Senator Edwards get out more. If you were to fly to Nth & Sth America you would see that early adoption of GM crops hasn't been so kind to farmers over there.The resistance issues that over use of chemicals cause is undeniable even for those so ill-informed like Senator Edwards. The chemical companies have caused the problem and they are now trying to sell you a new GM Crop to fix the issue that will make them money and continue to send growers broke. It's not working farms are losing value daily because of resistance issues and farmers are struggling to sell farms on the back of that. Why?
What a pathetic article. This is the reason those on the fence on this debate are still on the fence. They read such poorly written articles like this one and are even less convinced. The one paragraph claiming that GM's have made farming practices vastly more sustainable sums up the whole article. Clearly the author lives in a bubble and needs to go worldwide and see the negative impact that GM crops are having on farmers around the world rather than making ridiculous claims based on GM benefits. Stick to being a lawyer, you're clearly not farming.
Michael Kiely pulled the article apart better in three to four hundred words than Prof Roush did in a whole article that went global. Well put MK. Sadly we have to defend complete ignorance constantly on this one.
If Prof Roush is such an authority on carbon sequestration which he clearly isn't then maybe he can also comment on his so called area of expertise being GM technology and explain why there is no evidence that GM crops are better for the environment and have no yield advantages just more chemical use. He has clearly not gone very far outside his incredibly narrow area of focus to write this article and sadly because of his title people think it is gospel. He is still in the dark ages on this one and sadly this garbage sees the light of day in rural media and yet no one gets to write the truth.