September 24, 2025 • 6 mins
We're barking up the wrong pine tree by blaming Paris - so says the man behind Future Famers Aotearoa.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Finn ross is a bright young man and Finn welcome
to the country. Thank you very much. It's very late
in the evening London time as we record this interview.
I appreciate your time. You've written a really good column.
We're going to post it on our website, The Country
dot co dot nz and summing it up as this
one sentence, we're barking up the wrong pine tree by
(00:21):
blaming Paris. Tell me what you.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Mean, well, the government's blaming their own poor policies on Paris.
I'm still yet to hear one way that Paris negatively
impacts New Zealand farmers. All Paris does is tells New
Zealand we have to reduce our missions to keep them
below or aligned to a one point five degree target.
So it doesn't dictate we do anything on farms in
(00:43):
New Zealand. So we're certainly barking up the wrong tree
blaming Paris. It's our policies of our own government.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
Does the Paris Climate Agreement have any teeth at all?
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Not a lot, which is the interesting thing. So you know,
I get to act in New Zealand first to campaigning
to leave it, so Paris enforcement doesn't. But leaving it
certainly will. There's a lot of teeth in the trade
deals that we're jeopardizing by potentially or advocating to leave it.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Well, what happens when you get the like Sir Donald
Trump spouting off on the world stage as he has
in recent days about climate change just being an absolute hoax?
Why do we bother? And he's going to behave like that.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
Well, to be Frank Jamie, it's unbelievable we're even having
this conversation about New Zealand withdrawing from Paris. It's the
incoherent Trump style populism that's unfortunately infecting New Zealand through
these sorts of statements around New Zealand leaving Paris. Every
country in the world, the States, Iran, and Libya is
in Paris, and so it's a pretty poor company we'd
(01:46):
be looking at to potentially join them.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
You're also not a fan at all of carbon farming
and planting our way out of carbon emissions, not at all.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
And I think there's been you know, people have conflated
the Paris Agreement with planting pine trees. Paris Agreement says
nothing about planting pine trees. That's our own problem. We've
done here in New Zealand that really has nothing to
do with Paris.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
So how are we going to meet these emissions reductions targets?
We'll probably get to ten percent by twenty thirty, but
surely twenty four to forty seven percent by twenty fifties
just unrealistic. The only way we can meet that, surely
is to reduce livestock numbers. Is that in New Zealand
Inc's best interests?
Speaker 2 (02:32):
Yeah, well, I guess the first thing is, I don't
think act in New Zealand first quite realized that even
if we left the Paris Agreement, most New Zealand farmers
would actually stay in the Paris Agreement through all their producers.
All of our producers in New Zealand are all aligned
to Paris, so all our farmers are aligned anyway. So
even if we left, all our farmers are actually still
technically aligned to Paris Agreement, including those those targets. Look,
(02:55):
it is daunting looking at twenty four to forty seven percent.
It's major changes in our farming systems in New Zealand.
You know, for me, it's got to come from methane reduces.
There's a lot of really exciting technology hopefully going to
come through in the next five to ten years. But
there's a lot of other opportunities to cut fossil fuel
emissions on farm electrifications a big part of it as well.
Speaker 1 (03:17):
We had a scientist on the show this week, Susan Harris,
who said she would like to take natural livestock emissions
out of the Paris Climate Agreement, in other words, renegotiate
the agreement. I realized we're a very small country in
a rather large world, but there's something like that a possibility.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Absolutely not. I mean, there's no way New Zealand would
have any teeth to renegotiate Paris. And besides, you know,
there's obviously a few people in New Zealand on the
fringe who think that livestock don't cause planetary warming emissions.
But every single country in the world agrees that they
do cause climate changing emissions and we need to do
something about it. You know, besides those three countries who
(03:59):
are are way out there on the fringe, what do.
Speaker 1 (04:01):
You say to the argument that there are no more
bovines or ovines on the planet than there was in
nineteen ninety Therefore the increase in emissions is all coming
from a man burning fossil fuel.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Well, there was certainly no bovines in New Zealand. In
New Zealand, we were covered in a massive native forest
which was sequestering a huge amount of carbon. So we've
turned these you know, temperate forestry systems into that were
net sinks into net sources of carbon now. So you know,
ninety seven percent of animal biomass on the planet now
as livestock for humans. So only three percent of animal
(04:38):
biomass on the planet is wild animals. So we've totally
totally altered the planets, you know, the.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Biological Well, let me just go back to let me
go back to the year nineteen ninety. If that's a
peg in the sand for emissions reductions, there are not.
We've got no more animals, no more stock in its
than we had back then.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
Yeah, we don't. But they were caught causing emissions in
nineteen ninety and are still causing emissions now. I guess
by that same logic, you could you know, double New
Zealand stock now and then in another twenty years say hey,
we're not causing any more emissions than we did twenty
years ago, but we're still causing ongoing emissions which need
to be mitigated.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
So you talked about some of the solutions methane reduction.
All the new technology that's out there, can that, honestly,
hand on heart, get us there without having to reduce
livestock numbers in this country.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
The juries, the jury is still out, and the Paris
Agreement does stipulate that we shouldn't compromise food production, and
you know that there's very few people who are you know,
reasonable advocates for Paris who are actually contemplating large reductions
in stocking numbers. I think that the stocking number one
is sort of like saying Voldemort in New Zealand farming.
(05:52):
Everyone sort of immediately gets their shackles up. You know,
we certainly shouldn't cut stocking numbers in New Zealand just
for for emissions reasons, but there's obviously that there are
parts of New Zealand that are overstopped and that's having
an impact on our waterways and emissions. But yeah, look,
hand on heart, Jamie. To be honest, I'm not sure
(06:12):
about those methane technologies, the juries. The jury is still
out on those. But we've got to invest in the science,
that's for sure.
Speaker 1 (06:20):
beIN Ross from Future Farmers tool roh. Thank you very
much for your time today on the Country, Food for Thought.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Thanks Jamie. Great to chat
Finn ross is a bright young man and Finn welcome
to the country. Thank you very much. It's very late
in the evening London time as we record this interview.
I appreciate your time. You've written a really good column.
We're going to post it on our website, The Country
dot co dot nz and summing it up as this
one sentence, we're barking up the wrong pine tree by
(00:21):
blaming Paris. Tell me what you.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Mean, well, the government's blaming their own poor policies on Paris.
I'm still yet to hear one way that Paris negatively
impacts New Zealand farmers. All Paris does is tells New
Zealand we have to reduce our missions to keep them
below or aligned to a one point five degree target.
So it doesn't dictate we do anything on farms in
(00:43):
New Zealand. So we're certainly barking up the wrong tree
blaming Paris. It's our policies of our own government.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
Does the Paris Climate Agreement have any teeth at all?
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Not a lot, which is the interesting thing. So you know,
I get to act in New Zealand first to campaigning
to leave it, so Paris enforcement doesn't. But leaving it
certainly will. There's a lot of teeth in the trade
deals that we're jeopardizing by potentially or advocating to leave it.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Well, what happens when you get the like Sir Donald
Trump spouting off on the world stage as he has
in recent days about climate change just being an absolute hoax?
Why do we bother? And he's going to behave like that.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
Well, to be Frank Jamie, it's unbelievable we're even having
this conversation about New Zealand withdrawing from Paris. It's the
incoherent Trump style populism that's unfortunately infecting New Zealand through
these sorts of statements around New Zealand leaving Paris. Every
country in the world, the States, Iran, and Libya is
in Paris, and so it's a pretty poor company we'd
(01:46):
be looking at to potentially join them.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
You're also not a fan at all of carbon farming
and planting our way out of carbon emissions, not at all.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
And I think there's been you know, people have conflated
the Paris Agreement with planting pine trees. Paris Agreement says
nothing about planting pine trees. That's our own problem. We've
done here in New Zealand that really has nothing to
do with Paris.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
So how are we going to meet these emissions reductions targets?
We'll probably get to ten percent by twenty thirty, but
surely twenty four to forty seven percent by twenty fifties
just unrealistic. The only way we can meet that, surely
is to reduce livestock numbers. Is that in New Zealand
Inc's best interests?
Speaker 2 (02:32):
Yeah, well, I guess the first thing is, I don't
think act in New Zealand first quite realized that even
if we left the Paris Agreement, most New Zealand farmers
would actually stay in the Paris Agreement through all their producers.
All of our producers in New Zealand are all aligned
to Paris, so all our farmers are aligned anyway. So
even if we left, all our farmers are actually still
technically aligned to Paris Agreement, including those those targets. Look,
(02:55):
it is daunting looking at twenty four to forty seven percent.
It's major changes in our farming systems in New Zealand.
You know, for me, it's got to come from methane reduces.
There's a lot of really exciting technology hopefully going to
come through in the next five to ten years. But
there's a lot of other opportunities to cut fossil fuel
emissions on farm electrifications a big part of it as well.
Speaker 1 (03:17):
We had a scientist on the show this week, Susan Harris,
who said she would like to take natural livestock emissions
out of the Paris Climate Agreement, in other words, renegotiate
the agreement. I realized we're a very small country in
a rather large world, but there's something like that a possibility.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Absolutely not. I mean, there's no way New Zealand would
have any teeth to renegotiate Paris. And besides, you know,
there's obviously a few people in New Zealand on the
fringe who think that livestock don't cause planetary warming emissions.
But every single country in the world agrees that they
do cause climate changing emissions and we need to do
something about it. You know, besides those three countries who
(03:59):
are are way out there on the fringe, what do.
Speaker 1 (04:01):
You say to the argument that there are no more
bovines or ovines on the planet than there was in
nineteen ninety Therefore the increase in emissions is all coming
from a man burning fossil fuel.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Well, there was certainly no bovines in New Zealand. In
New Zealand, we were covered in a massive native forest
which was sequestering a huge amount of carbon. So we've
turned these you know, temperate forestry systems into that were
net sinks into net sources of carbon now. So you know,
ninety seven percent of animal biomass on the planet now
as livestock for humans. So only three percent of animal
(04:38):
biomass on the planet is wild animals. So we've totally
totally altered the planets, you know, the.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Biological Well, let me just go back to let me
go back to the year nineteen ninety. If that's a
peg in the sand for emissions reductions, there are not.
We've got no more animals, no more stock in its
than we had back then.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
Yeah, we don't. But they were caught causing emissions in
nineteen ninety and are still causing emissions now. I guess
by that same logic, you could you know, double New
Zealand stock now and then in another twenty years say hey,
we're not causing any more emissions than we did twenty
years ago, but we're still causing ongoing emissions which need
to be mitigated.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
So you talked about some of the solutions methane reduction.
All the new technology that's out there, can that, honestly,
hand on heart, get us there without having to reduce
livestock numbers in this country.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
The juries, the jury is still out, and the Paris
Agreement does stipulate that we shouldn't compromise food production, and
you know that there's very few people who are you know,
reasonable advocates for Paris who are actually contemplating large reductions
in stocking numbers. I think that the stocking number one
is sort of like saying Voldemort in New Zealand farming.
(05:52):
Everyone sort of immediately gets their shackles up. You know,
we certainly shouldn't cut stocking numbers in New Zealand just
for for emissions reasons, but there's obviously that there are
parts of New Zealand that are overstopped and that's having
an impact on our waterways and emissions. But yeah, look,
hand on heart, Jamie. To be honest, I'm not sure
(06:12):
about those methane technologies, the juries. The jury is still
out on those. But we've got to invest in the science,
that's for sure.
Speaker 1 (06:20):
beIN Ross from Future Farmers tool roh. Thank you very
much for your time today on the Country, Food for Thought.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Thanks Jamie. Great to chat
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.