News 
 State News 
 Livestock 
 Cattle 
 Two men's wages is the CPRS cost per year for grazier Sam 

Two men's wages is the CPRS cost per year for grazier Sam

20 Oct, 2009 05:40 PM
The Federal Government's proprosed emissions trading scheme would add costs equivalent to two full-time wages for one NSW grazier if agriculture is included in the scheme.

According to the Cattle Council of Australia, the Gunn family's Sevenbardot Poll Hereford Stud, in the NSW Upper Hunter Valley, has calculated the likely cost imposition of the ETS via the Australian Farm Institute's FarmGAS calculator.

The Cattle Council took Canberra officials from the Department of Agriculture to the Gunns' property last week as part of its annual Rural Awareness Tour.

Sam Gunn told the group that his emissions costs under the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme could not be absorbed at current market levels and would force a restructure of his business.

“My farm costs could escalate to $88,000 a year if agriculture’s emissions are covered under the CPRS - that’s two men’s wages and a quarter of my annual bull sale,” Mr Gunn said.

The Cattle Council of Australia is supporting the push by the Coalition for permanent exclusion of agriculture’s direct emissions from the CPRS cap.

Otherwise, it says many graziers would have no choice but to reduce production in order to meet their liabilities.

Mr Gunn's estimated carbon cost of $88,825 (excluding EITE assistance) under the CPRS is based on carrying 1000 stud cattle, 700 store cattle and 5000 sheep, at a carbon price of $25/t; the price that is predicted in 2020 should agriculture be covered under a CPRS cap.

“All producers face the same stinging situation; it’s not difficult to see how a CPRS with financial penalties on direct farm emissions could destroy the beef industry,” Mr Gunn said.

Although the Federal Government has acknowledged the complexities of including agriculture in the CPRS, it has not permanently excluded it from the cap and trade system.

However, the United States, Canada, Europe and Japan have announced the exclusion of agriculture from their emissions trading schemes, in favour of providing incentives for food producers and stewards of the land to mitigate carbon.

“I feel that I will be trapped if agriculture is covered by the CPRS because there’s no option under the proposed Scheme to manage the cost of my livestock emissions without cutting production, which is obviously detrimental to my business and Australia as a food producing nation,” Mr Gunn said.

“I’d encourage every farmer to go online and spend 15 minutes calculating their emissions profile.

“Even though we don’t have certainty from the Federal Government on a policy and unable to make long-term decisions around mitigating carbon and planning for costs, I still think it’s important that producers have a basic understanding of what we’re dealing with.”

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1


RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Once the ETS is passed the weather will improve, there will be no more droughts and floods, beef farmers will grow 50pc more grass and beef prices will improve. Then I woke up. It was all a dream that Kev and Penny will save the planet.
Posted by pete, 20/10/2009 6:56:47 PM
Two things: Firstly, if they are going to use a 2020 carbon price to do their calcs, the $88k is in 2020 dollar terms and should therefore be discounted to today's value to be meaningful. $88k in 2020 is unlikely to be significant in today's dollar value. Secondly, if $88k equates to 2 men's wages for this bloke, he isn't paying his employees adequately (especially if it includes on costs suh as super etc).
Posted by Reality check, 21/10/2009 9:24:23 AM
Reality check - when did you last employ a farmhand? The truth is farmers that are not being subsidised are suffering around the western world and many have left the fields. A skeleton workforce remains because they love the land - not because they are making big money. Many that depend on the farmer for their jobs are already out of work. Now governments want to tax farmers further and drive more from the land. Many productive farms have already been replaced by national parks, native fauna and flora creating enormous fire risk and control costs for our nation. Pete, I am having nightmares in the bush and wonder what our city cousins are dreaming of. Utopia or the Garden of Eden maybe? Penny may be broke and needing a new tax, but farmers are already broke and need help, not more pain.
Posted by Common Cents, 21/10/2009 9:46:09 AM
The $88K figure is way dodgy. It ignores the fact that agriculture, as a trade-exposed industry, would receive free permits for a decade or more. It ignores immediate opportunities to cut GHG emissions. It ignores the fact that farm businesses will be able to stockpile free permits and sell them. It ignores potential income from carbon sinks. It ignores the growth in the export market. When you factor all this in, the figure is more like a few thousand dollars, not this overblown claim. When are are we going to see a level-headed discussion of the issues?
Posted by Charlie, 21/10/2009 10:44:05 AM
It must be remembered that this whole ETS will have no effect on the Climate. It is an artificial industry based on lies.
Posted by Len, 21/10/2009 11:41:25 AM
Charlie, grow up mate. When will planting trees all over your farm make food for people? Cost is right. Get your head out of the trees and engage in reality. ETS- EMPLOYMENT TERMINATION SCHEME.
Posted by floyd, 21/10/2009 9:17:51 PM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Sam Gunn demonstrating the potential affects of government policy in the ‘Murrumbo’ cattle yards with Rural Awareness Tour participants from the Department of Agriculture, Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, AUS-MEAT and Meat and Livestock Australia.
Sam Gunn demonstrating the potential affects of government policy in the ‘Murrumbo’ cattle yards with Rural Awareness Tour participants from the Department of Agriculture, Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, AUS-MEAT and Meat and Livestock Australia.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
POLL
Q: Who do you think is the best person to lead the Federal Liberal Party?

Malcolm Turnbull
(46.4%)

Julie Bishop
(5.7%)

Tony Abbott
(10.3%)

Joe Hockey
(23.6%)

Other
(14.1%)

Total Votes: 760
Poll Date: 18 October, 2009

Most popular articles

Ray White Rural Northern Beef Week
 
MON0152
 
IRRIGATION CONFERENCE 2010
 
Photo Library
 
Rural Bookshop
 
Land Subscriptions
 
The Land Facebook


 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...