During that conversation Luxon is reported to have said “ What would unlock prosperity here in the north. Well it’s very good roads and it’s water storage.”
My initial reaction when l read those quoted comments was
one of disbelief.
Given my years of presenting the same (word for word)
message to those that currently decide what priority items should be included
in our regional long term planning, l found it difficult to accept what l was
reading.
After years of responding to the Local Council’s
disingenuous invitation to ratepayers asking for submissions to the Long Term
Plan, l had given up even hoping that somebody with the ability to make it
happen might change the environment that allows this type of dialogue to bear
fruit.
Thankfully, after investigating the possibility that this
might be another false alarm,
I began to realise what this seemingly throw away line might
mean - not only for the people of North Auckland but more importantly, for
those provinces facing an uncertain future due almost entirely to the effects
of these disastrous weather events associated with a changing planetary cycle
to one that is more threatening.
At this point, it is important to clear up any
misunderstanding readers may have gleaned from misinterpreting my comments
about dealing with these events.
Based on the evidence l have obtained over 43 years
farming here on the East Coast, l have developed some plans for managing the
risks associated with farming in a vulnerable area like Tairawhiti. I am in the
process of testing these plans while cleaning up the mess left in the wake of
the 2023 events. The signs are encouraging but it is too early to say if the
measures l am putting in place will be enough.
My property is at the coalface of the recent extreme
weather events (Cyclones Hale and Gabrielle in 2023 and numerous other similar
severe storms like Cyclone Bola in 1988).
These previously regarded “once every 100 years” storms are
now happening much more frequently and with greater intensity.
They are becoming so common that one can’t afford to sit
back and do nothing except debate the origin of these disastrous events. It is
simply a pointless exercise.
For what it is worth, l tend to support the theory that this
change in weather patterns is as a result of a planetary cycle influenced by
solar activity which has happened before and is likely to happen again.
However, dealing with it constructively and learning to live with the change
for however long this current cycle lasts is the reality we have to focus on.
Ignoring it is not an option!
That is why l am saying, we have to acknowledge reality for
what it is and design ways to make a living while accomodating the elephant in
the room.
It does remain a threat to our existence but, given our
combined ability to rise to the challenge, I am confident, we will find a way
to live with it until the next climate cycle treats us more kindly. Believe me,
that will happen even if it takes a few hundred years for a return to the good
old days
So, back to today.
Provinces likely to be threatened by this emerging
phenomenon are almost exclusively the rural provinces on the East Coasts of
both Islands.
The key to survival for those regions will be their ability
to build an infrastructure capable of maintaining productivity levels
during the seasonal pressures associated with these extreme weather events. Not
surprisingly, scientists are warning that the easterly position of those
provinces makes them very vulnerable to more frequent severe droughts and
cyclones that cause severe flooding and destruction to high value crops and the
high quality land that supports those crops.
Those of us who have experienced and survived these more
regular catastrophic events and the impacts they have on business operations,
have consistently volunteered our recommendations for living with the changing
environments - ironically, ideas that include the PM’s recipe for North
Auckland’s own restructuring.
Unfortunately, up until now, local government in these rural
communities have been held to ransom by the elitist, radical groups who have an
inflated opinion of their own self worth and entitlement. As a result,
very little progress has been made towards building defences against the full
impact of the changing planetary cycle.
Local Councils have known for some time what needs to be
done in mitigation yet few have had the courage to challenge these unruly
elements for fear of losing their own jobs or being accused of being racist,
pale stale males or the female equivalent.
But, due to the PM’s timely olive branch, I am hopeful that
those who are intent on confronting the government at Waitangi on Tuesday will
have another think before endangering this fledgling evidence of trust that is
essential in order to avoid further stalemate in areas where the consequences
of inaction would be catastrophic.
Clive Bibby is a commentator, consultant, farmer and
community leader, who lives in Tolaga Bay.
13 comments:
You're probably right given the short-termism of planning in NZ that the cause of weather patterns you're observing doesn't matter in relation to immediate mitigation.
As it is, 'solar forcing' is known to have only small effects on the climate. The well-established primary cause is greenhouse gas emissions. If we have any concern for the longer term, those need to be addressed. (I'll note again that the Climate Feedback website has excellent, expert articles written for a lay audience explaining things like this).
I am hoping the new Nats MP Dana Kirkpatrick, a genuine Gisborne East Coaster with rural knowledge, will be more tuned in without all personal distractions.
I hear you Clive. You are a realist through 43years of farming experience your region. The last thing we need is the twaddle from Anonymous. We need a grownup conversation going forward focused on unlocking farming potential in a natural changing climate.
Yes Clive, it has been tough on the East Coast coping with this succession of cyclonic storms which are seemingly happening with increasing frequency. And other regions have suffered also, of course. So, what are the mitigation measures that you have in mind? You owe it to your readers to share them for public comment. I have no idea as to what we could have done to protect our regions from the overwhelming power of Gabrialle - a nearly a meter of rain in the Hawke’s Bay ranges within 24 hours!
RB: it has reached the point since ~2020s that nigh-on all scientists in the climate change field agree that human emissions of greenhouse gases is the primary driver.
In the long run, that is where the 'grownup conversation' lies, not in wishful thinking it is simply natural variation.
We have to build infrastructure in the regions most vulnerable to floods and droughts.
That’s why l am encouraged by the PM’s recognition that large fresh water storage reservoirs are an integral component of any development that is designed to enable the transfer of the earning capacity of the hill country areas that are retired to areas like the Ruataniwha and Poverty Bay Flats where more intensive agriculture is possible with irrigation but in a relatively safe environment. - safe from floods and droughts.
The opportunities are endless but will require some long overdue acceptance that we can’t keep on ignoring the changes we have to make in order to safeguard the environment. It is possible to maintain a large portion of the existing livestock farming and forestry operations albeit in a reduced capacity that allows peaceful coexistence with the changing climate. Some marginal hill country areas will have to be permanently retired. I’m not sure what tree species would be the best choice for planting on these blocks but no doubt the owners will have the opportunity to chose ones that suits their own requirements and idealogical persuasion.
But the prospects for communities who are committed to these necessary changes are exciting.
We should have embarked on this process decades ago.
No doubt there will be those who don’t want to be part of a future involving these specific ideas but we ignore the need for something along these lines at our peril.
We really have no choice.
Absolutely Anonymous, the science is well established that climate change is influenced by the acts of modern man. And, when you think about it, why shouldn’t it be? It literally has taken hundreds of millions of years for fossil fuels to have formed. What portion have we combusted over the last two centuries? Impossible to say, but it has been massive, starting two centuries go with coal and the invention of the steam engine, and now power generation, then the last century oil, with the development of the internal combustion engine, and more latterly with gas for heating and power generation. Seems logical that this must have some impact on the planet’s atmospheric health.
Doesn’t really answer the question, Clive. Yes, more irrigation of the plainlands is good, but where do we build these dams where they have sufficient catchment, geologically stable, consentable, affordable, and publicly acceptable? But floods? What are the mitigations against cyclones that dump these huge rainfalls? In Hawke’s Bay we have the highest stopbanks ever, and they overtopped and scoured out in many places. Now they have been restored, but effectively lower as that are now literally many millions of tons of gravel are in the riverbeds. More trees on the hills? But we’ve been moaning about too many farms being converted to forestry. Yes, we need to find the answers, but that won’t be simple, won’t be cheap, and will involve landowners doing things with their land in the public interest that they may not want, or can afford.
Anonymous said...
RB: it has reached the point since ~2020s that nigh-on all scientists in the climate change field agree that human emissions of greenhouse gases is the primary driver.
The problem is since the 2020s huge funding for climate change research, as huge transferrance of wealth, due to new taxes on farmers, etcetera... is providing the essential funding for climate change scientists. Consequently this is a massive gravy train rort and a conflict of interest.
There are independent scientists with other dissenting points of view
Valentina Zharkova, Astro physicist is but one of them.
TJS: I'm aware of this sort of global conspiracy theory, but it smacks of desperation to me and not at all credible. Scientists (including ones I I know a bit) are trained to be sceptical and not going to be persuaded en masse to obscure the truth for nefarious reasons. Particularly in the physical sciences.
(I have far less trust in the so-called 'social sciences', btw).
Ewan McGregor’s responses to my ideas for dealing with Climate Change says more about his attitude to survival in these difficult times than my mitigating proposals.
Readers will have noticed his determination to discredit my ideas without offering a single one of his own. There is a pattern here which does absolutely nothing towards solving the problems we face.
For all his ridicule and pompous overview regarding what has arguably brought us to this unfortunate state, he omits to include the one limiting factor to developing policies and introducing systems that could work.
It really is a matter of our combined attitudes towards what is possible.
We have a choice - either roll over and accept for whatever reasons, it is not within our individual and collective abilities to change the way we do things, accepting being held to ransom by small groups of radical environmentalists who object to sensible developments simply because they don’t fit their idea of the new world order. or - vote for those people who have the expertise and exhibit a willingness to explore possibilities and examine ideas until a workable solution is found.
I have never said that finding the answers would be easy. But l believe New Zealanders is a country that still prides itself as being a nation of builders who are prepared to do what it takes to ensure we overcome seemingly impossible odds.
I am confident the bulk of the population is prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to overcome our current difficulties.
Maybe, we should remember PM Winston Churchill’s famous words to the British people at their most vulnerable time during WW2.
All he could offer them was “ blood,toil,tears and sweat “.
Perhaps it is time for the naysayers like Ewan McGregor to accept the fact that the bulk of kiwis don’t share his negative taunts and are in fact looking for leaders who will find ways to make it happen even if it means getting rid of some obscure environmental roadblocks on the statutes.
How about you play the ball instead of the man. This is what you said; "Based on the evidence l have obtained over 43 years farming here on the East Coast, l have developed some plans for managing the risks associated with farming in a vulnerable area like Tairawhiti. I am in the process of testing these plans while cleaning up the mess left in the wake of the 2023 events. The signs are encouraging but it is too early to say if the measures l am putting in place will be enough." My crime was to merely ask you what plans you have developed. The question still stands.
You’re right, l did say that.
But my omission in not actually referring to them was simply because we are discussing plans that need to be on an industrial scale and the ones l have developed that suit my small property are rather puny, although effective by comparison.
It will not have escaped readers interested in my proposals that l had deliberately referred to plans that accommodated the specific needs of each region that has to deal with climate change in their own way using natural resources they each have on hand.
For what it is worth, the two changes l have made to my small operation involve minimising the risk associated with farming in areas that are likely to experience more regular and severe droughts and weather events (storms like Gabrielle and Bola)
So, rather than purchase lambs for winter fattening off their mothers after the previous year’s lambs go to the works in October, l lease my (flats) to a company who will grow a sweetcorn crop on that same acreage over the next 4 months. I leave the hill country paddocks un stocked over the summer in case we do get the drought when it could itself be leased to graziers who are short of feed.
The benefit of this change to our summer management is evident in the reduced risk to stock during a drought when fly strike, shearing and other associated costs due to inadequate feed resources become expenses we no longer incur.
On the other hand, a significant income over the summer months is guaranteed from the sweetcorn lease and possible grazing plus, if a drought does occur, it becomes someone else’s problem.
The recovery from Cyclone Gabrielle has enabled me to restructure the contour of our most vulnerable flats adjacent to the river.
We have relocated the large silt deposits from the inland paddocks, using them to lift the height of the more vulnerable front paddocks to a level permanently above the flood waters. This restructuring has also involved the building of small stop banks along the road frontage that protects the fences from logs, diverting them back into the main river channel.
I don’t say these new strategies make our property safe from the worst effects of climate change but l offer them as examples of what can be done, particularly to reduce the risk factor associated with our most productive and yet vulnerable regional assets.
No doubt Ewan will dismiss my ideas as being of no consequence in the overall scheme of things but l hope he will accept them as one man’s contribution to a solution that could affect us all.
Hardly playing the man. He is the one doing that. He can’t help himself.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.