In my post about 9-11 remembrance today, I pointed out “freedom from tyranny” as something to remember and be thankful for. In Western Australia, licensing a simple farming operation has become the victim of government imposed tyranny. Jo Nova has covered the plight of Matt and Janet Thompson in their effort to get a cattle farm up and running again. David Archibald and I visited with the Thompsons during my Australian tour and can attest that Jo Nova has it right in these stories:
Tyranny: How to destroy a business with environmental red tape
The whole issue boils down to an arbitrary sniff test imposed by a local green organization. Was their supposed “environmental defense” (PDF) worth the death of an individual? David Archibald tells this tragic tale which is worth reading, because farmers worldwide are also under assault from overregulation. Witness what is going on in New Zealand with Carbon Tax on farmers. – Anthony
===========================================
By David Archibald
My experience of the global warming debate has been a lot of fun. I’ve written a couple of books, had a couple of original ideas, influenced the debate, provided succour to the rational faithful around the world and have met the good and the great: Professor David Bellamy and President Vaclav Klaus. Others haven’t been as fortunate. What follows is a tale of death and destruction that was visited upon one West Australian business as a consequence of the owners’ doubts about the new green religion.
Matt and Janet Thompson own a feedlot business about 4 kilometers outside the edge of the town of Narrogin, about 200 km southeast of Perth.
In June 2008, when the global warming scare was in full swing, Matt attended a beef industry meeting which talked about the cattle industry’s contribution to global warming. He expressed doubt in that meeting about the veracity of global warming and handed out some rational literature.
Not long thereafter, the West Australian Environmental Defenders Office took an interest in complaints by Narrogin greenies against the Thompsons’ feedlot. The volume of complaints rose and the receiving body was primed to receive them: the West Australian Department of Environment and Conservation.
The Thompson’s feedlot business started operating in 2003 at a rated capacity of 1,000 head and an ultimate design capacity of 15,000 head. There is a need for feedlot capacity in Western Australia to level out the supply of cattle to WA abattoirs. In the dry summer, cattle lose body mass just walking around to get grass to eat. Bringing the feed to the cattle means that they don’t lose condition walking to get it.
In 2008, the Thompsons applied to the West Australian Department of Environment and Conservation for an increase in their licence capacity to 15,000 head. Instead of the increase requested, or even maintaining their then licenced level of 10,000 head per annum, the DEC cut their licence conditions back to 6,000 head.
The feedlot needs economies of scale to be viable, so the new licence conditions effectively closed the business. The feedlot remains closed to this day. Right next door to the feedlot is a vast, intensive piggery which continues to operate. You can hear the pigs but not see them, because they are kept indoors. There is another piggery between the Thompsons’ operation and the town of Narrogin.
The Thompsons’ feedlot had 20 employees at its peak. One of them, Mr Lindley Boseley (shown above), took the closure of the feedlot rather personally and suicided. That reminds me of another accidental death at the hands of the State of Western Australia. Last year, an aboriginal being transported from Leonora to Kalgoorlie died from heat stress.
The guards transporting him were distraught, and the WA Government recently undertook to give $3.5 million to his near relatives, who still have the option of suing the State Government for negligence. Similarly, most likely the Environmental Defenders Office, the Department of Environment and Conservation and the greenies of Narrogin did not mean to kill Mr Boseley, but it is very likely that he would still be a productive member of society, if not a completely happy one, if they had not started their campaign to destroy the Thompsons’ business.
The Environmental Defenders Office is jointly funded by the West Australian State Government and the Federal Government. The State Government has now been in power for two years and is halfway through its four year term. It could do well to review its funding of ideologically driven NGOs which, by word and deed, work against the people of Western Australia.
===================================
You can read about the farm here at their website:
http://www.narroginbeef.com/index.htm
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It’s the same with the mighty EU and its regulations. They take years to bring into being as everyone and his wife must have a say and then when they are introduced they are used to bad result with those in charge unable to do anything because everyone needs to agree any changes.
The way fish are conserved by throwing back all the ones not in the quota is foolish but that is the law, to see perfectly good fish thrown back dead or dying is heartbreaking but if the fishermen bring them in they can lose everything as laws to claim the assets of drug dealers can be used to take their boats, homes and cars.
“Onerous” (murderous) government regulation can be worse than terrorism: terrorists, at least, risk their lives, while criminals in the government hide behind the law and armed forces.
The Environmentalist jihad against animal husbandry in Australia is not limited to the Thompsons. Here’s a link to a news story about the plight of a family-owned chicken farm in New South Wales.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/feathers-fly-over-council-complaints-20100515-v5dh.html
I think that a proactive solution to the ‘noise problem’ would have been stronger disclosure laws on residential real estate. Then the newly-arrived NIMBYs could still shed crocodile tears, but they would not get any political traction in their quest to screw a farming family, in order to improve residential property values.
Anthony and David, thank you for further exposing our plight.
Thanks, too, for those of you who have taken the time to comment…even the ones opposed to us, as it gives us a chance to respond in a public forum. We appreciate that heaps.
I see what we all fight as being very fundamental: Centralised control versus individual freedom and responsibility. Everyone should know that this is not just about us. These policies are affecting productive people everywhere, and good people must be aware of it.
Seeing as how a few people insist on taking this issue off-topic (and onto animal welfare issues), I’ve copied the following response I put up on Jo Nova’s site, FYI…
******
There is much talk of whether feedlotting is a safe and responsible production practice. I believe that this is not an appropriate tack within the context of this discussion or our over-all problem, but since detractors will continually bring it up, I’d like to respond.
First, feedlotting is not an illegal practice, and any animal welfare or food safety issues should be dealt with separately from environmental issues. Animal rights activists make up a good portion of the movement against us. We welcome genuine people interested in the truth. The animals in our facility were treated very well, fed freshly-produced feed every day, and had an unlimited supply of clean, fresh water. They were happy, content, and always treated humanely. When one of our enemies reported us to the RSPCA, I proudly gave the inspector a 1.5 hour tour of our place. She was highly complimentary, and said farmers should get their story out more, because ours was a very good story.
We’ve actually given many tours to the Ag School classes, we’ve spoken to the classes at the school (as late as late 2009!), and we’ve had many students work with us. Our relationship with the students and staff of the college has been wonderfully positive. Not so with the few administrative people who are philosophically opposed to progressive agriculture, and the top guy who is an adamant global warming advocate and attacked us at one liaison group meeting for our greenhouse gas emissions.
Second, the feeding of grain is commonplace, whether animals are in the paddock or in a feedlot. We would not have the necessary year-round supply of cattle to keep abattoirs in operation were it not for this practice. The feeding of grain to cattle is proven safe and effective, and it has allowed us to greatly improve efficiency, which is great for the environment and for continuing to feed the world. I’m very proud to be an environmentalist and one of the true “greenies,” who understands that the better we get at producing efficiently, the more land and resources are available for environment.
Food Inc has been mentioned, which is an atrocity of mis-information. We use antibiotics to treat sick or injured animals that have bacterial infections. We probably use antibiotics more responsibly than humans do, because we recognise that they will not be effective against viral infections, and would waste money were we to treat all with antibiotics. Our wonderful employees (and us, too) walked each pen every day to check for sick or injured animals. We taught animal handling techniques based on Temple Grandin’s “flight zone” concepts, and animals were calmly and quietly pulled out of the pen for treatment. A high tech and sophisticated regime for every possible health problem was in place, and a “hospital” was available for those animals that needed additional care or treatment and who could not go “home” immediately.
And, we’d like to point out, our well-designed and well-run feedlot is not the exception. We’ve been to many feedlots the world over, and have worked extensively in feedlots and saleyards. The overwhelming majority of producers care deeply for the animals in their care, and spend significant resources training employees in how to properly care for these creatures. Cattle in feedlots are happy and content. If that were not the case, they would not perform well, and everyone involved would lose money. So, just as getting better at production is good for the environment, taking better care of our animals and employees is good for the bottom line. It truly is a win-win situation. How exciting is that!?
****
Matt and I are happy to answer any genuine questions you might have. Many questions have been asked and answered at Jo’s site (there are two stories on there), but we’re happy to clarify anything for anybody.
Thanks again…!
Kind Regards,
Janet
It needs to be recognized that Matt and Janet Thompson are people of exceptional integrity who operated a business that was outstanding in every respect. No expense was spared and no stone left unturned in their pursuit of production of a first-class product in a state-of-the-art establishment, in which the needs and welfare of the cattle as well as of their family and their employees was paramount.
No business was more deserving of success. However, it is clear that it was after they committed the ‘unforgiveable sin’ of seeking to expose the fraud of AGW that they came under severe attack. They are not alone in suffering this fate. It has also been the experience of many dissenting scientists and others who have been unfairly ostracized and cruelly persecuted after speaking out against this fallacy.
As well, the livelihoods of numerous other farmers are being impaired through restrictions due to legislation enacted in conformity with AGW agenda. Nothing must stand in the way of its global objective. As Vaclav Klaus has asserted, the climate debate is essentially a debate about freedom.
The agenda is control, and freedom and justice are the casualties, and thus many innocent persons suffer.
Mike says:
September 11, 2010 at 12:44 pm
You are equating a possibly onerous government regulation with mass terrorism. Hard to get more alarmist than that.
No – a group of green mafiosi-apparatchiks, taking the green light from government regulation, conspired maliciously to close the Thompsons’ successful and growing feedlot business leading to the suicide of L Boseley. They drove them off the land for unacceptable political views.
In 2008, Narrogin was Zimbabwe.
That’s a thought – Joe Romm should ask Robert Mugabe to make a guest post on Climate Progress – Mugabe has curteiled capitalism and reduced CO2 emission in Zimbabwe – a model green president.
Oh – except that his economy is propped up by China. Hang on – so is the economy of Australia!
The animal welfare theme on this thread is a pure red herring and distraction.
Matt and Janet Thompson were evidently good and conscientious feedlot operators. But by and large they were feedlot operators like all decent Australian feedlot operators.
They were not lynched for being feedlot operators and being (supposedly) nasty to animals. They were lynched for expressing anti-global warming views.
ANTHONY!!!!! Urgent!!!!!!!!!!!
UPDATE, Banks given the family 4 Days to go.
breaking the Dec 31st stated before.
http://agmates.ning.com/group/propertyrightsaustralia/forum/topic/show?id=3535428%3ATopic%3A135892&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_topic
URGENT!!!!!!!!!!!
The four days notice is four calender days, not four working days. The notice was served on a Friday afternoon. This makes it hard to make contact with legal advice until the the notice is already half expired.
The Thompson’s have only 72 hours left to leave minus their land, business, car, furniture and what little money available in their bank account.
To find out more please go to the following links
http://www.agmates.com/herald/urgent-help-thompson-family-in-trouble/
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/09/4-days-notice-the-thompsons-are-served-notice-of-eviction/
Thanks, Noeleen.
It isn’t whacko to think of animals’ comfort.
AGW aside, feedlots look pretty gross. The political motive for closing this farm may be wrong, but I’m not so sure about the environmentalist one. We shouldn’t confuse the two or we’d be just as guilty of “going IPCC” as the rest of them.
Looks like the feedlot in the photo is so big, two more of them would stretch all the way to town. 4km is about an hour’s walk.
What’s the population of Narrogin?