Dairy Chitchat 4, an udder new thread.

🤣🤣

No, he wanted it sold years ago when his father died to clear his debts he incurred from an analog tv business he had that went bust but his mother refused and put it in a 25 year lease

she was 80 at the time I’m nearly sure, super well developed farm in the meantime, bounding bennetsbridge quarry if anyone wants a sky eye view

It's hard to understand when my dad was farming before I took over. It was all ring feeders beside the river. Hardly anyone bothered with water troughs. The cattle could go into the streams for their drink. And silage pits beside a watercourse. No problem. If you got heavy rain on the yard it might go in to an open slurry pit and might run out as fast again down a drain some where. So where are things going wrong now

I'd imagine the man renting it houses the cows on his home farm but I dunno for sure, rotary parlour put it on the farm in Bennettbridge.

Don’t know the farmer or farm personally but you’re in the right spot, parlour is set away from those cubicles

That graph is for the % of water bodies influenced by each activity. A river can be influenced by more than 1.

Amazing that somebody who cant manage their own affairs get to influence the lives of the rest of us. The world is f,,,,d

the brexiteer rot of lying to get your way is as usual parrodied by the paddy come latelys who are making all the noise now

Do you not think it's a serious bit of propaganda designed with a message but with info that doesn't stack up?

Agriculture 63%

Forestry 14%

Urban Waste Water 13%

Domestic Waste Water 9%

Other 9%

Peat Harvesting 7%

Urban Run Off 12%

Industry 5%

Mines/Quarries 3%

To be assessed 11%

Hydromorphology 28%

The whole lot totals 174%.

If it totalled 163% you'd say the agriculture figure is a total of the smaller figures.

But we'll have a stab at what could be included as agriculture. Forestry, Other, To be assessed, Hydromorphology are the only ones that can be classed in agriculture and even then there's a very big argument that why should those be classed as agriculture with such a vague heading and most would qualify forestry as not agriculture. But those headings come to 62%.

174 - 62 = 112. That leaves the 12. The 12 could be taken as the To be assessed but that's already taken as the vague heading I included under agriculture.

So that leads us back to the EPA presentation and social media and big circles and figures for attention for tweets and retweets and thanks and likes.

The social media age and hearts and minds. This graph will probably be used again by the EPA at biofarm 2022.

What reason would you give Herd for the deterioration in water quality in Galway Bay North?

I heard someone complaining about tests going down after cruise ships being in the bay.

But sure nobody could possibly link those two together. 🙂

Why is it broken down into sections and %'s used?

If I have a pie and it's 100% you can not make 174% of the same pie.

Likewise emissions, pollution whatever it's called cannot be made 74% extra of what it is. It can only be 100% and broken down where it came from that 100%.

Or do you not know how percentages work?

Face it, it's made up figures.

Or please explain further your interpretation of that graph because messages of less than 10 words defending the cock up aren't really cutting it.

What is the purpose of this graph that was shown by the epa to farmers and environmentalists?

Im inclined to take Injury's take on this graph...though it it highly and I would say intentionally misleading.

It shows that, of the impacted water bodies, that 63% of them are impacted by agriculture, but also states that 90% of them are impacted by urban sources.

A waterbody can be impacted by several sources.

It doesn't give the level of impaction, which is critical. There is no indication whatsoever as to the level of pollution is coming from any source, only to state that it is a source.

90% of the impaction could be coming from urban wastewater for instance...it just doesn't say.

If you consider that proba ly more than 90% of a waterbodies contact is with agricultural land and a tiny % of its contact is with urban, the fact that 90% of the impacted waterbodies are impacted from urban and industrial sources is astounding.

Make no mistake about it...this report was presented in a way with the purpose of pulling down the current limits of the nitrates directive and subsequent reductions in animal numbers.