Farmers in Canada will get no Credit for what they did to help the climate up to 2017

[SASKFARMER]

Plants take Co2 out of the air and put it in the ground, don't they? We are low emitters vs the cites. So bigger thicker crops would actually do more good for Canada.

Soil organic carbon levels have been rising in many parts of the Prairies by 35 kilograms per acre per year, which is significant when taking the size of the region.

The increase in soil organic carbon accounts for 11 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year in Canada, which reduces Canada’s net greenhouse gas emissions by 1.5 percent.

The benefit is reduced to 7.4 million tonnes of CO2 when the carbon emitted from the creation of new cropland is considered, which brings Canada’s net greenhouse gas emissions down only one percent.

But then Farmers are doing more than their fair share. But in shit hole Canada we get penalized. All are supposed to be like Chuck hunker down in our basements resenting all your neighbors that they have grown in size and you have stayed the same.

[bucket]

If the price on emissions is justified,,,,,then it only makes sense to have a price on sequestering that correlates to the price on pollution.

If we were actually talking about the environment ...but we are not ...we are talking about wealth redistribution.

[SASKFARMER]

Liberals want to always show the bad farmers do and never the good. It's that ****ing simple.

Liberals are the problem.

[bucket]

Liberals want to always show the bad farmers do and never the good. It's that ****ing simple.

Liberals are the problem.

Liberals might be the problem but what are the conservatives offering up to counter the phucktard liberals?

That's a bigger question that needs to be answered...

[Guest]

Chuck, why don't you still refer to it as Global Warming? Like you used to.

its in the manual

[Sheepwheat]

The way i see it though is that if they start paying us for the ridiculous notion of “capturing carbon”, will they not also charge us for that carbon which we emit? All the inputs, fuel, nitrogen, iron, herbicides? Let alone the wildlife habitat destruction we collectively do.

So yeah, they maybe will give us a whopping few bucks an acre, but they will also get their grubby paws all over every aspect of how we farm; forced soil tests, fertilizer restrictions, paperwork to prove it all. Slippery slope.

I also don’t think a person can no till and that is all it takes to be a good steward of the land. Consumers are watching what we do closer than you think. IMO, notill while great, does not cover all the other sins. Tell a city person that sees sprayer tracks in every field multiple times a year that because we notill, we are just great stewards of the land! Tell them you rotate two crops, that you use glyphosate, fungicides, high fertilizer rates. They won’t buy it. Tell them the hoe, the sc****rs, the cats sitting in the yards are there to help be good stewards.

It’s a losing battle. We are being watched. And we are being found wanting.

And once we let them on our farms, don’t expect it to stop with carbon. Is this what we want?

[SASKFARMER]

Sheep you hit the nail on the head only thing is the Carbon tax is a tax on everything we touch or do. So were paying already through the nose.

Some want a dollar an acre but are willing to spend an extra 60 in extra cost. See where I'm going we either hit this now and hit it hard or get ****ed forever.

[therealnorthernf]

The way i see it though is that if they start paying us for the ridiculous notion of “capturing carbon”, will they not also charge us for that carbon which we emit? All the inputs, fuel, nitrogen, iron, herbicides? Let alone the wildlife habitat destruction we collectively do.

So yeah, they maybe will give us a whopping few bucks an acre, but they will also get their grubby paws all over every aspect of how we farm; forced soil tests, fertilizer restrictions, paperwork to prove it all. Slippery slope.

I also don’t think a person can no till and that is all it takes to be a good steward of the land. Consumers are watching what we do closer than you think. IMO, notill while great, does not cover all the other sins. Tell a city person that sees sprayer tracks in every field multiple times a year that because we notill, we are just great stewards of the land! Tell them you rotate two crops, that you use glyphosate, fungicides, high fertilizer rates. They won’t buy it. Tell them the hoe, the sc****rs, the cats sitting in the yards are there to help be good stewards.

It’s a losing battle. We are being watched. And we are being found wanting.

And once we let them on our farms, don’t expect it to stop with carbon. Is this what we want?

Isn't that all happening now?

Ag in Canada is the next whipping boy(person) for the greenies and gov'ts.. if we don't get ahead of them expect to be attacked from all sides.

[blackpowder]

No on said they wanted a dollar. Took it while there is all.
This ain't going away.
And I agree, we're doing nothing.
Except the usual arguing.
Everyone needs to ask for a refund.

[bucket]

Once again , an issue that will divide farmers....and then conquer them into compliance by default..on the carbon issue.

Typical government strategy of any stripe....look back in history at the elimination of the CWB..divided by the elimination of it,,,.then we were conquered by not being given transparency in the market...statscan is going back 5 phucking years to straighten out the numbers FFS....how much has the wrong numbers cost farmers.

Then farmers went on a bin building binge. Farmers played right into Ritz's masters plan...storage costs downloaded to farmers.

[blackpowder]

I usually agree with most stuff.
But not the bin building theory.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Anyone who thinks it is a good idea to get into bed with the science deniers like Chuck, needs to spend a few minutes reading his NFU website.

The supposed farmers in the NFU are also campaigning for eliminating fertilizer ( because climate change), all petrochemical inputs( because climate change), attacks on livestock ( because climate change) etc etc. This is the slippery slope we would be signing up for if we ignore the science and lobby for a few pennies for sequestering CO2.