1 year ago

395

Introduction:
In 1960 there were about 1.5 million farms in Germany, whereas today there are only about 263,000 farms left. According to a study by DZ-Bank this already small number might shrink to 100,000 by 2040. The remaining farms which will then be operated by managers and trimmed to be extremely cost-effective. This means that agriculture by way of family farming will eventually be driven out of the market by industrialized businesses. With their protest actions farmers try to draw attention to their desperate situation. They speak of a destructive policy agenda by means of which the family farms are deliberately being forced to give up. This program looks into this reproach and sheds light on some of the causes and the background details behind this decline of farming

The hypocrisy about the dwindling of farms
It is not surprising that several thousand farms in Germany close down every year. This is caused, among other things, by low income and simultaneously rising cost. As a result, half of the remaining farms are already being operated as side jobs [i.e. alongside the actual profession] because the income from agriculture is just no longer sufficient for a family. The incomprehensible thing is that the media and politicians are publicly complaining about the declining of farming, whereas at the same time they support a policy that is causing exactly this decline. The farmers are burdened with more and more regulations and demands which hit small family businesses particularly hard. The recent EU Fertilizer Regulation, for example, will probably force thousands of farms to give up because they can no longer generate the same income with unvaried investment. In the end the small farms are being ruined by these policies which means that all the politicians’ nice speeches about the latter’s upkeep are obviously nothing but hypocrisy.

The Fertilizer Regulation – a blow to agriculture
In March 2020 the EU passed the new Fertilizer Regulation (German: Düngemittelverordnung, DVO) against the bitter resistance of farmers. It represents one of the most comprehensive cuts for German agriculture, since the use of fertilizers must now be reduced by 20% for example in areas with nitrate-polluted groundwater. This leads to significant income losses as the quality and size of the harvest will decrease. The farmers’ resistance is not directed against the new regulation in general but against the dubious way by which it came about. Fact is that for years the German Department for Environment has reported only those measuring stations to the EU, which displayed the highest nitrate values. This enabled the EU Commission to successfully sue Germany before the ECGH [European Court of Justice], where the new regulation was enforced. On top, experts found that, e.g. in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Saxony and Lower Saxony over 50% of the groundwater measuring points did not meet the legal requirements and that in some cases even waste landfills were found responsible for the high nitrate values. This way a drama was feigned with questionable data, that did not really exist. So instead of approaching the problem, where it was really necessary, the whole of agriculture was labelled an environmental polluter and massively harmed. Was this done intentionally?

Unrealistic climate protection policies threaten farmers
With its “Fit for 55” package the EU Commission demands that agriculture should be climate-neutral by 2035. ‘Landvolkpräsident’ Dr. Holger Hennies, however, rejects this claim as non-serious. The reason is that it can only be met, if agriculture was completely ceased on hundreds of thousands of hectares of formerly drained peatlands and the soils would be watered again until 2035. The cultural achievements of the last 300 years would thus be destroyed within 15 years. A death sentence for the affected regions and companies. To make matters worse only the CO2 emissions of domestic agriculture are to be regulated, while those caused by imports from overseas are completely ignored. As a result, the President of the German Farmers’ Association, Joachim Rukwied, warns that these unrealistic and unbalanced measures will lead to a further relocation of food production abroad which does not save CO2 but only shifts its release to another location. What is a politician’s mindset towards the farmers, who wants to turn areas the size of Saarland into uninhabitable moors with this sleight of hand?

Green Deal – the planned ruin for the family farms?
With the “Green Deal” the EU wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 55% until 2030. According to a study by the EU Commission’s Joint Research Center this will result in a double-digit percentage drop in farmers’ food yields. In addition to a drastic increase in the price of food this means that farmers' incomes are falling sharply. Furthermore, the Gießen agricultural economist Professor Rainer Kühl also calculates that the farmers will need to invest 3.1 billion euros in order to adapt to the changed production conditions. In order to compensate for the Green Deal’s consequences for farmers, the state would have to pay farmers a total of more than 5 billion euros a year, according to calculations by the University of Kiel. However, only 1.1 billion euros are available. Thus, it is the farmers again, who have to bear the brunt of the burden, which affects the existence of small family farms in particular. Thus, the planned EU measures are destroying precisely those companies, from which one could learn, how climate protection is possible in harmony with agricultural economy; since it is just them, as the example of Austria shows, who are often pioneers in climate protection and a role model for the whole of Europe. Could it be that small farmers are being deliberately ruined under the pretense of climate protection?

Cows are not climate killers
Agriculture is said to be responsible for more than 13% of all greenhouse gases in Germany. Cows, sheep and goats were the main sources of methane gases which are rated as 23 times more harmful to the climate than CO2. Resulting from this claim there are ever more calls for political regulation in order to decimate e.g. cattle farming, a measure that would ruin many farmers. However, scientists from Oxford University and the University of California have now reassessed methane emissions from livestock, refuting the prevailing view that animals are responsible for climate change. According to them, the methane excreted by the animals is part of a natural cycle and does not contribute to global warming, if the animal population remains constant. Despite these substantial findings, there is hardly any media coverage and politicians are sticking to their outdated views. By means of such ignorant and irresponsible acting, agriculture is further brought into disrepute and the decline of family farming is further incited.

Investors drive out domestic agriculture
The soil is the most important production factor for the farmers. But the prices for leasing or buying arable land have been rising sharply for years, which means that the costs of agricultural production are also increasing. According to Andreas Tietz from the Thünen Institute for Rural Areas, one of the main reasons for the enormous price increase is that in times of low interest rates, more and more investors outside of agriculture have recognized land as a capital investment. The result is that from 2017 on, every third farm in East Germany has become majority-owned by investors who by now – depending on the federal state – are working between 19% and 37% of the arable land in East Germany’s agricultural area. They pay prices that small farms cannot compete with, robbing the latter’s livelihoods this way. Minister of Agriculture Julia Klöckner does complain about this development, but apart from lip service nothing has been done so far. In this way, an important pillar of our society – the family farms – is being increasingly pushed out, instead of defending their space and capacity for development and diversity, with top priority.

Will grazing animal husbandry be sacrificed to the wolf?
On September 17, 2021, warning and solidarity fires were lit across Europe, followed by a large demonstration on October 2nd, 2021 in Munich. The reason for this action is that the number of wolf kills in Germany is exponentially increasing. In 2020 alone, around 4,000 livestock fell victim to about 2,000 wolves in Germany, even though the owners of grazing animals had invested around 9.5 million euros in herd protection measures. The animal owners are stunned that the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation considers an animal population of up to 10,000 wolves in Germany possible, which would definitely mean the end of grazing animal husbandry. Significantly, the respective study did not address the consequences for sheep and grazing animals in any way. In the eyes of environmental protection, the well-being of the wolf obviously counts for everything, while the well-being of the grazing animals, the many thousands of grazing animal keepers and their priceless work for the preservation of our cultural landscape counts for nothing. Do human beings have to fall victim to wolves, before this environmental protection’s going off course will be stopped?

Conclusion:
The Roman statesman and philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero coined the phrase “Cui Bono”, which means something like: “Whoever nefits from the crime, has committed it.” But who benefits from destroying a profession that has formed the backbone of society for centuries? The financial expert Ernst Wolff gives an answer to this. In his opinion, medium-sized companies, including the family farms, are at present world wide being destroyed in a very targeted manner. Small businesses are being driven into ruin or simply bought up, until finally everything is owned by a few multinational corporations and the financial elite behind it. Could it be that the developments described are no coincidence, but are aimed at controlling the few finally remaining companies and thus ultimately gaining power over food production? If so, the dying of family farms affects us all.

Citation:
“The other side may have more money, more possessions... but their power rests on one factor alone: the ignorance of the majority of people!”
Ernst Wolff

from hag/nm/jmr/gan
Sources/Links:
Introduction:
www.topagrar.com/management-und-politik/news/dz-bank-prognostiziert-dramatisches-hoefesterben-bis-2040-11977700.html

www.topagrar.com/rind/news/seit-2010-haben-47-300-tierhalter-aufgegeben-12616542.html

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FM7DX_GcDbw

The hypocrisy of the death of farms
www.agrarheute.com/management/betriebsfuehrung/heuchelei-hoefesterben-559691

www.topagrar.com/management-und-politik/news/dz-bank-prognostiziert-dramatisches-hoefesterben-bis-2040-11977700.html

The Fertiliser Ordinance – a blow to agriculture
www.euractiv.de/section/landwirtschaft-und-ernahrung/news/nur-leichte-verbesserung-bei-deutschen-nitratwerten/

www.wasser-in-buergerhand.de/nachrichten/2020/duengeverordnung_messstellen.html

www.tichyseinblick.de/daili-es-sentials/landwirte-klagen-gegen-duengeverordnung/

www.landundforst.de/landwirtschaft/pflanze/duenge-vo-landwirte-beklagen-messstellen-maengel-563506

www.msn.com/de-de/nachrichten/politik/verband-gutachten-sieht-m%C3%A4ngel-bei-grundwasser-messstellen/ar-BB1aJ9vT

Unrealistic climate protection policy threatens farmers
www.topagrar.com/news/fit-for-55-landvolk-wirft-eu-realitaetsferne-beim-klimaschutz-vor-12638072.html

www.agrarheute.com/politik/land-forstwirtschaft-eu-klimaneutral-583358