New Zealanders didn't fight in the war for farmers' right to pollute our waterways. Photo / file
New Zealanders didn't fight in the war for farmers' right to pollute our waterways. Photo / file
"Our previous generations went to war to protect democratic processes," says Mike Cranstone of Federated Farmers. He seems to believe these war sacrifices were to protect farmers and other industrial groups from responsibility for leaching toxic chemicals into our waterways.
It is reasonable to expect New Zealanders fought to providea good life for future generations, not to have rivers reclassified for "waders or boat only" activity.
It is ironic that while the Conservation Comment (Whanganui Chronicle, November 18) article was being published, the world-renowned Te Waikoropupu Springs, one of the clearest bodies of water in the world (or it was once), had begun growing patches of slimy green algae.
Mike Cranstone's view that farmers are a misunderstood minority excluded from input into democratic processes is misleading.
Given that environmental concerns about some farming practices have now been thoroughly debated over more than a decade, Federated Farmers must have been asleep if they did not already have material prepared for submission.
The information available is that only 9 per cent of dairy farms are in catchments that exceed the proposed DIN (dissolved inorganic nitrogen) and only 10 per cent of rivers outside conservation land exceed proposed DIN bottom line.
This is not a big ask for responsible farmers. After all, the wider community is meeting virtually all of farming emission liability for decades to come.
Town and country are in this together. The financial costs of healthy water are part of our mutual future. We need to look no further than Whanganui, where $40 million has gone to treat not only the waste of city dwellers and industry but also the waste of the wider region's major agricultural industries.
It is mainly city dwellers who buy the meat, dairy and other items our farmers produce. Meat and dairy alternatives are now a reality, so it is foolish to ignore the environmental wishes of these important consumers or to excuse inaction by the use of overused clichés that trivialise the horrors of war.
ELAINE HAMPTON Whanganui
Frank for PM
What a great column Mr Greenall wrote this week: Houses are for shelter, not investment; land is being poisoned with chemicals; and we're importing a load of unnecessary rubbish.
Much as I like Jacinda Ardern, Frank could do well in her role.
ANGELA STRATTON Whanganui
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket lifts off from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida, on November 11 as part of the launch of the second batch of communication satellites for the 5G network. Photo / AP
5G dangers
I was just reading Donna Mummery's letter about the dangers of 5G.
The reason most people don't want to know about them, or choose to believe the experts who say there is no danger in 5G, is human nature.
We humans like it convenient, and 5G promises us more convenience. I would rather stay with the status quo, but many people are now so dependent on speed in the internet world because their livelihood depends on it, or they are looking forward to driverless cars and all the other goodies 5G promises to deliver?
I am afraid human nature will change when it is too late to go back to what we had before. Or do I hear many loud voices proclaiming they don't want 5G? It would fill my heart with joy.
ANNE MOHRDIECK Whanganui
•Send your letters to: Letters, Whanganui Chronicle, 100 Guyton St, PO Box 433, Whanganui 4500 or email letters@wanganuichronicle.co.nz
