Greenpeace Not "Anti - Farming", PKE Feed Is

A report in today's New Zealand Herald newspaper seems to undermine Don Nicolson's (NZ Federated Farmers President) assertion that Greenpeace's blockade of the ship carrying a cargo of Palm Kernel Extract destined for New Zealand animal feed was because Greenpeace is "anti-farming"

"....Protests continued outside Ports of Tauranga gates, with some New Zealand farmers weighing into the argument against importing the feed.

Greenpeace New Zealand said several maize and grain farmers had offered donations and support for the protest, saying their product had been undercut by cheap imports.

"We've had farmers who say they've never donated to Greenpeace but want to now because they are going out of business," said spokesperson Suzette Jackson."

If Greenpeace is "anti-farming" why are some farmers supporting them?

The Green party has evidence to show that farmers have been damaged by PKE imports into New Zealand and that continuing to do so was damaging the country's 'Clean and Green' brand image. This from a Scoop article back in August :

“Importing massive amounts of palm kernel undermines the priceless ‘clean and green’ brand that underpins our economy and most New Zealanders’ jobs,”said Green Party Co-leader Russel Norman.

“Stopping this sort of economic sabotage requires strong leadership from the Government.”

The Green Party warned about the alarming rise in imported PKE in April 2008, releasing statistics that showed a thousand-fold increase from 0.4 tonnes in 1999 to 455,000 tonnes in 2007. Statistics released today show imports more than doubled in the past year to 1.1 million tonnes in 2008, one-quarter of global PKE production.

“New Zealand’s palm kernel addiction is already costing our economy, and farmers, due to lost sales of our own grain and maize feeds,” said Dr Norman.

“Just this week members of the NZ Grain Council wrote to the Green Party concerned about large-scale PKE imports because it is environmentally destructive, is a biosecurity risk, and is leading to the 'demise of the NZ domestic grain industry'.”

So how long has PKE been a problem for the domestic grain industry? Well, concerns were raised back in early 2007, an article in NZ Farmers Weekly stated:

"Discontent is simmering among grain growers over the standards applied to the huge volumes of palm kernel extract (PKE) supplement being bought into New Zealand.

The MAF phyto-sanitary requirements for PKE are “a joke” and the ministry’s certainty over product quality is based on one arranged visit to several Malaysian plants, Whakatane maize grower Colin Mackinnon says.

“You need to make several visits on purely random, unannounced basis, not go along on an arranged trip to be sure standards are being adhered to,” he says.

He rejects Biosecurity New Zealand claims grain growers are concerned about heavy metals in PKE shipments.

“That is rubbish. The point is we don’t know what unseen contaminants are in PKE when it gets here because they are not checking. That is our whole point.”

Growers who have seen a confidential AgResearch report on PKE are fuming over Biosecurity NZ claims grower support for further research is based on fear of competition from PKE imports.

“We require a strong dairy industry and if it shoots itself in the foot with contaminated feed, we will all be in trouble,” Mackinnon says....

....Canterbury grain grower Gary Wilson says growers are not afraid of competition, but want a level playing field.

Growers here have strict requirements on spray use and standards, keeping diaries and logs on all applications.

He doubts the same applied to imported product.

Wilson also questions the environmental consequences of using a feed sourced from plantations planted in rainforest areas.

Ross Hyland of Seales Stockfood, Morrinsville, says PKE is probably here to stay.

Due to the large volumes being imported, he believes there may be grounds to establish a testing regime for it here."

And by January of this year maize farmers were really doing it hard because low PKE feed prices were causing dairy farmers to cancel contracts for silage. This too from Farmers Weekly:

"Dairy farmers are earning few friends among maize growers this summer as they walk away from silage deals, leaving some contractors with as much as a third of their crop now unsold.

"The dairy industry is really letting us down big time this year. It is hard to see how some contractors are going to be able to survive with portions of their crop now unsold despite contracts being signed," Bay of Plenty contractor Bill Webb told The New Zealand Farmers Weekly....

....Historically low palm kernel prices coinciding with payout slide was also accounting for contracts being cancelled. With prices under $200/t, the lure had proven too great for some of Webb's customers.

He had longtime buyers who had cancelled orders for as much as 200t of maize silage, after he had spent $3000/ha getting the crop planted for them.

Economics aside, Webb has questioned the future integrity and health of relationships between dairy farmers and the maize industry.

"It is a damn good question. What do we do next year, do you go back to these guys and do business with them, or risk simply not having enough buyers if you avoid them?"

So there you have it, which is "Anti-farming" - Greenpeace, or using PKE to make animal feed?

See also: World Bank breaks rules in lending to palm oil companies

Palm Kernel Feed - World Bank Review Of Funding And RD1/Fonterra

Greenpeace NZ is today blockading a ship in the port of Tauranga that is attempting to dock a cargo of Palm kernel animal feed, allegedly bound for Fonterra's rural merchandising company RD1. RD1 have been quick to state say the shipment wasn't theirs. (Another Tui moment?) but you can bet your bottom dollar a lot of the animal feed produced from it will end up in RD1 outlets.

RD's John Lea, chief executive of RD1, also said in a quote in today's Herald:

" Fonterra's RD1 did import palm kernel as a small (about 1 per cent), but important, feed source for New Zealand dairy cows.

"However, prior to commencing shipments of PKE (palm kernel extract) we went to considerable lengths, including my personal visit to their operations, to find a sustainable supplier" he said.

RD1's supplier, Wilmar, was a founding member of the Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil. A recent audit by the World Bank found that Wilmar was managing its operations in accordance with the roundtable's principles, he said.

"We're continuing to work with Wilmar to do everything we can to ensure that every tonne of PKE, which is a waste product of the palm oil industry, is truly sustainable."

Mr Lea, would do well to read the press release by Forestpeoples.org and he'd know that Wilmar subsidiaries are alleged to have both illegally used fire to clear land and seized indigenous people's lands. The statement "managing its operations in accordance with the rountable's principles" seems rather naive. But perhaps Mr Lea didn't read the Forest Peoples press release? it's easy to miss these things so we have it here:

http://www.forestpeoples.org/documents/ifi_igo/ifc_wilmar_cao_fpp_press_rel_aug09_eng.pdf: link

Press Release 10 August 09

"World Bank violates its own standards in palm oil sector in Indonesia"

"The World Bank’s private sector arm – the International Finance Corporation (IFC) – has allowed commercial interests to override its social and environmental standards in making major loans to the oil palm sector in Indonesia, an internal audit reveals.

Oil palm has become synonymous with widespread clearance of forests and peatlands massive CO2 emissions and the theft of indigenous peoples’ lands.

Although the IFC knew about all these risks, due to its experience with prior projects and the warnings of non-government organisations, it went ahead with loans to the Wilmar palm oil trading group, in violation of its own standards, according to the report. The IFC failed to assess the supply chains or look into the damaging impacts of the company’s subsidiary plantations that were taking over community lands and forests in Borneo and Sumatra.

The findings have major implications for the IFC: not only must it apply its standards more carefully but it must check out concerns about where the companies it funds are sourcing their raw materials. Palm oil is only one example of commodities produced in violation of norms.

These findings come from a highly critical audit report just issued by the Compliance Advisory Ombudsman of the IFC which looked into a detailed complaint filed by the Forest Peoples Programme and a coalition of 19 Indonesian civil society and indigenous organisations, including SawitWatch and Gemawan.

Norman Jiwan of the Indonesian monitoring NGO, SawitWatch, notes:
When we filed our complaint we noted that Wilmar subsidiaries were illegally using fire to clear primary forests and high conservation value areas and seizing indigenous peoples’ lands without their free, prior and informed consent, triggering serious conflicts.

This report shows that the IFC overrode its standards and ignored our previous warnings.

In response to the report Lely Khainur of the NGO Gemawan says:
Development is meant to prioritise the needs and rights of local communities. The IFC’s standards require this. Yet they put business interests first and allow peoples’ lands to be stolen for the sake of cheap palm oil in the international market. Our peoples and our forests are being ruined to no good end, and ultimately the whole planet is suffering.

Marcus Colchester the Director of the Forest Peoples Programme adds.
We are satisfied that this report vindicates in great detail our main concerns. Also, the response of the IFC Management to the audit suggests they will now try to do things differently. Still, we remain somewhat exasperated. It has taken us more than five years to get the IFC to take these issues seriously. Given the urgency of halting forest loss and human rights abuses, we call on the IFC President to take personal proactive steps to ensure this never happens again."

The issues are rather more than the IFC not following good lending pratices:

NZ imports a quarter of the world's supplies of PKE: 1.1 million tonnes of palm kernel animal feed in 2008 (which contributed to the release of up to 20 million tonnes of greenhouse emissions) which is worth around $300 million a year, more than just a 'waste product'.

Over 1.5 million hectares of palm plantations planted on previously rain forested land in Malaysia and Indonesia would have been needed to meet the 2008 New Zealand imports of PKE.

The RD1 website has a page advising farmers on the benefits of buying PKE through legally binding contracts, it gives some indication of how much a single vessel may carry:

"From the palm oil plantations in Malaysia to your farm gate, RD1 Nutrition manages
the production, shipping and distribution of our Country Mile Palm Kernel Expeller.
We plan the details with you, the New Zealand dairy farmer, in mind.....

"Having a contract for PKE means surety of supply for that volume, regardless of what is happening with the availability of PKE in the market. Likewise, for RD1 the commitment to bring in a 25,000 tonne vessel of PKE (ed: rather more than 1%) to meet contracted demand comes at a considerable cost and relies on contracted parties honouring their legal contractual commitments"

How do some farmers view the farming of palm oil plantations in Asia? According to Straight Furrow:

"Don Nicolson, president of Federated Farmers, said it was not New Zealand’s place to tell countries like Malayasia and Indonesia how to farm.

As New Zealand had already cleared a lot of its forests for farming, he said it would be “arrogant” of us to say they couldn’t develop, and for a country of our size to tell them how to operate."

After all the protesters had been removed from the ship today he was quoted in the Herald saying:

"I fully respect the freedom of Greenpeace to protest legally but they have crossed the line by interfering with legal commerce and free navigation on the high seas,"

He described the protest as "economic treason".

He claimed Greenpeace was anti-farming: "It's a despicable new tactic that has Greenpeace's loathing of farming written all over that ship."

We think Greenpeace probably loathes the destruction of irreplaceable rain forests and would prefer to see sustainable farming practices in New Zealand. But then, wouldn't we all?