Farmers told not to dry crops on roads following fatal road accident

[robblok]

1 hour ago, farmerjo said:

As it stands tonight the National park behind me have started their fire break season early(still to green in my opinion),this time it is the government burning so we need to keep that in mind when it hits Bangkok.

Im not personally affected those in Changmai are. I got an air purifier too. But its just bad that fsrmers do such things. All in all farmers are among the most poluting people around. Burning poison ect. Having said that i wonder how much factories are checked on emissions.

[473geo]

2 minutes ago, robblok said:

Im not personally affected those in Changmai are. I got an air purifier too. But its just bad that fsrmers do such things. All in all farmers are among the most poluting people around. Burning poison ect. Having said that i wonder how much factories are checked on emissions.

I think you might need to take the petrol and diesel fumes into account not to do with farming, add the burning of tyres, plastics from vehicle destruction, and there maybe a slight imbalance in your calculation

[robblok]

10 hours ago, 473geo said:

I think you might need to take the petrol and diesel fumes into account not to do with farming, add the burning of tyres, plastics from vehicle destruction, and there maybe a slight imbalance in your calculation

If you compare the per person polution then the burning of fields by farmers gives them a far higher per person polution output then those of us that use a car (i use my car rarely) but often use my motorbike and that is something that polutes but pales compared to the burning.

 

But of course your right i get anoyed (big word more like notice and think why the ... dont they service their car) bynthose cars that leave am trail of black smoke. 

 

Its just that all those things combined, the burning, the use of too much chemicals and drying of rice on roads, make farmers in my eyes far more inconsiderate then others.

 

Just for the record im not losing any sleep over it or think about it a lot but like to vent a lil bit.

 

But as imeat a lot of vegetables the high amounts of dangerous chemicals anoy me the most. As it affects me negatively without many options. For the polution i run an air purifier in my home and that works well. Washing vegetables does not help much and when you eat out i have no clue if those restaurants wash them good at all.

 

That is probably my biggest fear. Again i dont lose sleep over it but would love to see that change.

[473geo]

Of course you are entitled to your opinion Rob and you tend to think things through and share a balanced view, you choose to lay the blame on farmers being more selfish than others

 

I have a question, what action do you think would greatly improve the air quality day on day in Bangkok? everybody riding bicycles and or farmers burning less and not using the roads to dry rice?

 

[Grumpy John]

Without monetary punishment nothing will change.  People here in Thailand are still thinking like its old Siam.  Basically, do whatever you can get away with.....and to h@11 with anyone else.

[canopy]

1 hour ago, 473geo said:

I have a question, what action do you think would greatly improve the air quality day on day in Bangkok? everybody riding bicycles and or farmers burning less and not using the roads to dry rice?

The burning in the north generates far worse pollution than tht generated in Bangkok both in terms of area size and concentration. During the bad times of the year places up there can top the list of the smoggiest city on the face of the earth. By the way, I don't think farmers are any more or less selfish than their peers. It's just their inconsiderate actions have a bigger and more noticeable impact on others.

 

[473geo]

18 minutes ago, canopy said:

The burning in the north generates far worse pollution than tht generated in Bangkok both in terms of area size and concentration. During the bad times of the year places up there can top the list of the smoggiest city on the face of the earth. By the way, I don't think farmers are any more or less selfish than their peers. It's just their inconsiderate actions have a bigger and more noticeable impact on others.

 

I guess first we must take the base level prior to the burning to ascertain if the burning is taking the smog to the top of the list or the base is already up there with best

The next step of course would be to provide sustainable and economically viable alternatives - we have the electric vehicles but priced out of reach for many, so although I note a slow change I don't condemn the majority of motorists as selfish for continuing to drive cars that pollute. I agree unfair to condemn the majority of farmers as selfish.

 

just a note on the topic if every time the cause of an accident was banned, we wouldn't have many drivers left, there would be no alcohol available anywhere, nobody would be allowed to drive in the wet, no vehicles to be parked roadside, no vehicles would be capable of travelling at more than 30 kph,  to provide but a few examples highlighting the over enthusiastic but unrealistic ban on the rice drying.

Speed kills!!

[473geo]

1 hour ago, Grumpy John said:

Without monetary punishment nothing will change.  People here in Thailand are still thinking like its old Siam.  Basically, do whatever you can get away with.....and to h@11 with anyone else.

in old Siam there were very few utes and cars, the farmers were actually here first, now once again the rural community is being coerced into allowing more speeding vehicles into their midst!!! as if we don't have enough already speeding through the towns and villages at motorway speeds.

[robblok]

2 hours ago, 473geo said:

Of course you are entitled to your opinion Rob and you tend to think things through and share a balanced view, you choose to lay the blame on farmers being more selfish than others

 

I have a question, what action do you think would greatly improve the air quality day on day in Bangkok? everybody riding bicycles and or farmers burning less and not using the roads to dry rice?

 

If you were honest and look at a per person pollution output then farmers come out on top with their burning. Just compare 1 car with one farmer burning. 

 

Your comparison is unfair comparing the output of pollution of a large group with that of a small group. If everyone had a pollution quota farmers would use far more then the average guy using a car.

[canopy]

40 minutes ago, 473geo said:

I guess first we must take the base level prior to the burning to ascertain if the burning is taking the smog to the top of the list or the base is already up there with best

There are air quality monitors and historical data on the internet that shows exactly that. Have a look around at what's out there.

 

41 minutes ago, 473geo said:

The next step of course would be to provide sustainable and economically viable alternatives

Developed countries do not allow burning fields or burning plastic trash for that matter. Farmers in Thailand do not burn due to economics nor do people burn their trash for that reason. Before our generation in Thailand when everything was organic last years stalks would be this years fertilizer. In our generation they burn it all which is bad for soil quality and promotes top soil erosion. Never mind that, their solution is to dump more expensive chemical fertilizers on to do the job. Don't think for a second burning is for economic reasons.

 

[473geo]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

If you were honest and look at a per person pollution output then farmers come out on top with their burning. Just compare 1 car with one farmer burning. 

 

Your comparison is unfair comparing the output of pollution of a large group with that of a small group. If everyone had a pollution quota farmers would use far more then the average guy using a car.

I'm looking at your 'selfish' accusation Rob motorists who drive into Bangkok on a daily basis care not one jot about the areas they travel through and pollute!!

[473geo]

3 minutes ago, canopy said:

There are air quality monitors and historical data on the internet that shows exactly that. Have a look around at what's out there.

 

Developed countries do not allow burning fields or burning plastic trash for that matter. Farmers in Thailand do not burn due to economics nor do people burn their trash for that reason. Before our generation in Thailand when everything was organic last years stalks would be this years fertilizer. In our generation they burn it all which is bad for soil quality and promotes top soil erosion. Never mind that, their solution is to dump more expensive chemical fertilizers on to do the job. Don't think for a second burning is for economic reasons.

 

Well it costs to bale the stubble, then the farmer has to find a use for it, stubble doesn't rot well unless it would be broken down, and leaving it to rot into the soil makes ploughing with a light plough almost impossible, and could possibly require an extra turn of the sod, maybe harrowing to break down the mass, add to that the perpetuation of disease to contend with, more spraying for eradication, yes there are surely economic considerations!

 

 

[robblok]

2 hours ago, 473geo said:

I'm looking at your 'selfish' accusation Rob motorists who drive into Bangkok on a daily basis care not one jot about the areas they travel through and pollute!!

They don't but pollute less so are less selfish as the huge polluting farmers.

 

Both pollute for their own gain but i measure the level of selfishness to how much per person they pollute others and farmers come way on top with their burning. 

 

If you disturb 1 neighbor with your sound its selfish if you disturb a whole village with your soundsystem its far more selfish. That is how i see it.

 

I was on the beach yesterday some people were playing music loud enough to be heard by others it was selfish but had they cranked it up higher for the whole beach to hear it would have been a lot more selfish. 

 

Do you understand my reasoning ?

[Enki]

On 11/15/2019 at 7:23 AM, robblok said:

Farmers such lovely people if they dont poison you with chemicals then they kill you with other selfish actions.

 

I wonder were defenders of farmers like @farmerjo are they are so vocal on farmers rights but fail to see how selfish farmers are. Believing that farmermers will use chemicals properly and care for consumers while this is yet an other example of how its money first and others have to live with the concequences.

 

In a country like Thailand bans and harsh punishment are the only way to go. Just like how street vendors encrouch more and more leaving no room for people to walk. If only they respected others then bans were not needed and people self regulated  but its all about maximizing profit at the expense of others.

 

I understand the need to dry rice but then pay for a place to do so or find a safer free place. Its things like this that led me to believe that farmers wont use chemicals responsible. (And of course the results of tests of produces in markets and supermarkets).

 

I dont mind paying more for products if produced safe. But its not just farmers its also the police allowing this and testing agencies not doing much. If testing agencies were to be tough and check far mor fining and destroying batches of bad produces bans would not be needed.

 

First: I never saw a farmer using any chemicals on rice.

Secondly: if two drivers are to stupid to negotiate who can use the lane not full with rice first, and both even drive so fast that they die in an accident, then I would say: evolution at work.

[farmerjo]

3 hours ago, canopy said:

Developed countries do not allow burning fields or burning plastic trash for that matter. Farmers in Thailand do not burn due to economics nor do people burn their trash for that reason. Before our generation in Thailand when everything was organic last years stalks would be this years fertilizer. In our generation they burn it all which is bad for soil quality and promotes top soil erosion. Never mind that, their solution is to dump more expensive chemical fertilizers on to do the job. Don't think for a second burning is for economic reasons.

Before your generation,yields would have been on the decline fastly. 

[Isaanbiker]

He reportedly told the family that his office will provide legal assistance if they want to take action against the farmers who used the public road as a place to dry their crops.

 

    Legal assistance will help them a lot. I've seen that a million times, but can't believe how uneducated and selfish these people are.

 

How many on motorbikes crash at night because of some idiots who dry their rice on highways and die?

Opps, can't talk about that, because somebody would lose face. 

 

   Two people had to die because they were using the road to dry their rice. How do you explain that to a grieving family? 

 

   And if the "Legal Assistance" would actually be given, how much is one's life worth? 20,000 baht, or less? 

[Enki]

26 minutes ago, Isaanbiker said:

He reportedly told the family that his office will provide legal assistance if they want to take action against the farmers who used the public road as a place to dry their crops.

 

    Legal assistance will help them a lot. I've seen that a million times, but can't believe how uneducated and selfish these people are.

 

How many on motorbikes crash at night because of some idiots who dry their rice on highways and die?

 

Opps, can't talk about that, because somebody would lose face. 

 

   Two people had to die because they were using the road to dry their rice. How do you explain that to a grieving family? 

 

   And if the "Legal Assistance" would actually be given, how much is one's life worth? 20,000 baht, or less? 

They did not die on bikes but in trucks ...

[473geo]

On 11/17/2019 at 12:54 PM, robblok said:

They don't but pollute less so are less selfish as the huge polluting farmers.

 

Both pollute for their own gain but i measure the level of selfishness to how much per person they pollute others and farmers come way on top with their burning. 

 

If you disturb 1 neighbor with your sound its selfish if you disturb a whole village with your soundsystem its far more selfish. That is how i see it.

 

I was on the beach yesterday some people were playing music loud enough to be heard by others it was selfish but had they cranked it up higher for the whole beach to hear it would have been a lot more selfish. 

 

Do you understand my reasoning ?

Well the PM problem is caused by burning in other countries, according to a latest press release, so that would make Thai motorists more polluting and selfish than the farmers, it would appear!!

[canopy]

On 11/17/2019 at 5:46 PM, 473geo said:

Well it costs to bale the stubble...

And bales are then sold for good profit even in Thailand. Or used as silage, or any other of the umpteen great uses to choose from are better for the farmer than burning it up in smoke. Burning is done out of laziness and selfishness, not for economic gain. If you need proof just ask someone burning stuff why they do it and their response should be quite enlightening. Hint: it's like walking up to someone and asking them why they smoke cigarettes. I recall visiting a farang organic farmer in Thailand and a nearby farmer was out burning. I'll never forget this guys response: "yeah and he's probably burning something we could really use here".

 

For every pro-burning argument you dream up keep in mind the developed countries have already adopted a perfect solution eons ago and are not burning anywhere, anytime. No burn is proven, economically viable, and good for everyone. There is simply no valid reason to burn. Same as cigarettes, everyone just does it. Burning exacerbates poverty and lessens the quality of life of everyone.

 

[473geo]

I disagree, farmers would not send money up in smoke, the stubble, that is the root and the part of the stem left after reaping is not used for rice straw or silage it is the chaff, the upper part of the plant that can be utilised. farmers are diversifying to cattle these days and yes the baled straw can be utilised, but only if not spoilt by rain at the wrong time and failing to dry into edible state. so you may experience less burning, of straw but the stubble and weeds still need attention burning is free, any other method costs.

[canopy]

4 hours ago, 473geo said:

farmers would not send money up in smoke

Oh you have a lot to learn because oh yes they do. Farmers are humans, they aren't perfect. They can be lazy just like other people and have bad habits just like other people. Burning depletes top soil. This hurts the farmer economically since they need to add more and more expensive chemicals to maintain yields. They never used to do this burning when everyone grew organic in the old days. They used to also keep the seeds, but are too lazy to do that anymore. Now they buy the seeds and they are quite expensive and the price is at the whims of richer folks. Simply bad habits economically speaking.

 

Note straw bales commonly make use of the stems and are popular for mulching around certain vegetables and things. Many farmers cannot be bothered to make bales and just burn up everything. Burning is not economical, it's laziness. Sure some places are too steep for machinery, but hand balers like used in my country would be extremely suitable and profitable since you just need a wood box not an expensive machine. I've lived among these farmers for a long time. You need to get to know a few and you will understand burning is just a bad habit like smoking cigarettes. They want a cheap and easy life like everyone else. Burning is nothing more than a filthy, unhealthy, economically bad habit and farmers can't name a single valid reason as to why they do it. Don't listen to me, just ask THEM. There are so many uses for what they are burning. Just imagine the compost they could sell. Instead people go to nurseries and buy plastic bags of compost shipped by truck from who knows how far away and costs a lot of money with a lot of middle men. Just so, so many economical uses for that stuff that goes up in smoke and hits them in the pocket book. I think you need to stop making up excuses in a vacuum for them and live by them to learn the real story. I am sorry if I sound negative, but I am just a messenger. And just look around your country where farmers surely got their act together a long, long time ago.

 

[473geo]

I think you need to walk a rice paddy after the harvest you are not understanding my comments.

As for farmers not saving last years rice for seed I have not experienced this although do recall an effort to drive people towards this!!

My understanding is many farmers spray to stop grass and other weeds growing between the rice, it propagates from the paddy walls, burning keeps it back and the younger growth can be eaten by cattle the same on the paddy after burning

'Organic' means less yield and no real benefit with grass seed in your rice it is worth less!

In my country farmers are heavily subsidised and have millions of baht worth of machinery so your comparison there is way off the mark compared to the subsistence farming in Thailand

 

Let us just agree to disagree - your view of Thailand appears to be slightly different to my experience and I can see your view will not change

 

[canopy]

2 hours ago, 473geo said:

back and the younger growth can be eaten by cattle the same on the paddy after burning

Not a pretty picture. Cattle eating weeds from burnt, poisoned, chemical laden plots of land. I also cringe to see them eating at roadsides in all the motor oil runoff and exhaust fumigated grasses. Poor things and I for one wouldn't want to touch any meat or dairy from those poor cows. Not to mention the antibiotics, hormones, and other injections they get. Regardless this is just a red herring. Thai's do the same burning/poisoning regardless if there are cattle or none at all.

  

2 hours ago, 473geo said:

'Organic' means less yield and no real benefit with grass seed in your rice it is worth less!

Less yields, probably. But if they can meet stringent organic standards in developed countries they can sell to them at far greater profitability than trying to compete with the dregs of the world on cheapness and losing their shirts like now.

 

2 hours ago, 473geo said:

In my country farmers are heavily subsidised and have millions of baht worth of machinery

Thai farmers are subsidized too. And the government is talking about bringing in billions of baht worth of sugar cane harvesters this year. The biggest problem I see for Thai farmers is their tiny mom and pop plots of only 10 or 20 rai can never hope to compete with economy of scale of efficiently run farms in other countries who typically farm thousands of rai and have their own advanced machinery. These small Thai plots worked in the subsistence days, not anymore. I wish they weren't subsidized because it will serve to stagnate this failed model of small, burnt fields everywhere using lots of chemicals and resulting in dirt poor farmers. I would prefer the government take a hands off approach so if a farmer can't make money, then sell the land, do something else, and let other people with better approaches do the farming or find better uses of the land.

 

2 hours ago, 473geo said:

your view of Thailand appears to be slightly different to my experience and I can see your view will not change

The only reason my view would not change would be it's true what I see around me. I speak Thai pretty well. I don't know of a farmer who burns for economic reasons. And I don't know a villager who burns their plastic for economic reasons. Some have told me the field just looks better after it's burnt and they find that satisfying. It's never about economics.

 

[473geo]

I'm sorry but you really don't appear to have a clue ????  good luck in all you do, you'll need it!!

[Enki]

On 11/20/2019 at 7:53 AM, canopy said:

Burning depletes top soil. This hurts the farmer economically since they need to add more and more expensive chemicals to maintain yields

No it does not. Why would it? What actually would it deplete? Burning it is a completely legit way to fertilize the ground for the next harvest: IF they plow it under quickly. The problem is the wind blows it away, and they fertilize their neighbours.

Expensive chemicals? You mean fertilizer? Then write fertilizer. If you write chemicals some people might think about pesticides etc.

Putting Fertilizer on rice fields is complicated. It is done, but mostly not right. You can do it like burning, put it there in december or so, and plow it under. They plow again or more precisely harrow, close to Songkran festival. Usually it is dry enough in between hat no weed grows on the fertilizer. But putting fertilizer early means: you can not have cows or buffaloes on the fields (it is poison)

Burning seems to be a regional thing. I live in Nakhon Phanom close to Sakhon Nakhon (yes, the other province), only one on 100 farmers burns his fields here. Hiring machines to plow and harrow, costs about a third of the harvest ... so go figure.

 

[Enki]

20 hours ago, canopy said:

Not to mention the antibiotics, hormones, and other injections they get.

Are we talking about Thailand or the united states of awesomeness?

[Enki]

20 hours ago, canopy said:

But if they can meet stringent organic standards in developed countries they can sell to them at far greater profitability than trying to compete with the dregs of the world on cheapness and losing their shirts like now.

Again: do we talk about Thailand or any other awesome land? Thai rice is basically organic, depending on what standard you base it. And: Thailand is the biggest rice exporter of the world.

Go figure.

Sorry, you have no clue about the topic.

20 hours ago, canopy said:

I wish they weren't subsidized because it will serve to stagnate this failed model of small, burnt fields everywhere using lots of chemicals and resulting in dirt poor farmers.

If the dirt poor farmers would not get a price guarranty for the rice, they would be dirty more poor non farmers. They don't get other subsidizing, except for failed harvests - like in many parts of Isaan this year. Your rant about "chemicals" is simply wrong, except for fertilizer, which some use some don't, my wife don't (we have enough buffalo _S_H_I_T_<that go deleted, rofl> and plow the rice straw under) no one is putting any extra pesticides or "chemicals" on the fields, sorry, you have no clue.

 

20 hours ago, canopy said:

I would prefer the government take a hands off approach so if a farmer can't make money, then sell the land, do something else, and let other people with better approaches do the farming or find better uses of the land.

Well, you must be from the US of Awesomeness, why don't you look how that ended there?

Hu? Why the funk would anyone really want to have a very small elite owning all the land and still driving each other into bankruptcy? If you can't grasp that Thailand's system of having nearly every family having its own land is the best way of running a country, sorry ... no idea what to say.

[Fred white]

5 minutes ago, Enki said:

Again: do we talk about Thailand or any other awesome land? Thai rice is basically organic, depending on what standard you base it. And: Thailand is the biggest rice exporter of the world.

Go figure.

Sorry, you have no clue about the topic.

If the dirt poor farmers would not get a price guarranty for the rice, they would be dirty more poor non farmers. They don't get other subsidizing, except for failed harvests - like in many parts of Isaan this year. Your rant about "chemicals" is simply wrong, except for fertilizer, which some use some don't, my wife don't (we have enough buffalo _S_H_I_T_<that go deleted, rofl> and plow the rice straw under) no one is putting any extra pesticides or "chemicals" on the fields, sorry, you have no clue.

 

Well, you must be from the US of Awesomeness, why don't you look how that ended there?

Hu? Why the funk would anyone really want to have a very small elite owning all the land and still driving each other into bankruptcy? If you can't grasp that Thailand's system of having nearly every family having its own land is the best way of running a country, sorry ... no idea what to say.

In the United States of Awesomeness alot of small farmers do it as a side job a neighbor of ours raised cattle but he also had a full time job. When I was young we had almost 100 acres we grew corn on part of it the govt paid dad not to raise corn and put it into pasture

[Sonhia]

Good!  About time!  But! 

 

Thai will propably not listen to reason or logic, not considering health and safety...

 

'I'M PERFECT THAI, I DONT GIVE A XXXX, I DO WHAT I WANT'... 

 

How was rice dried and raked years ago when tarmaced or concrete roads did not exsist?

 

The roads get very hot, I understand, but laziness and a lack or respect for others safety is more important, as always. Typical.

 

Another good idea will go to waste, yet again...

[Assurancetourix]

22 minutes ago, Sonhia said:

The roads get very hot, I understand, but laziness and a lack or respect for others safety is more important, as always. Typical.

typically you do not know anything about the subject..

 

Laziness !! 

I would like to see you dry the rice on a county road in Thailand.
You would understand very quickly that it is a very hard job.
In addition, rice is not laid directly on the road but on a blue net so as not to lose it .

 

If peasants dry their rice on the road, it is because they have no place to do it elsewhere.
When they have this place, they do it on the football fields of the schools or on the big fairgrounds that are sometimes cemented.
Do you think that drying rice on earth or grass is more "authentic" or less messy than on a road made of cement or bitumen?

Last thing ; I learned and I always have it in mind that when driving you MUST adapt to the weather conditions and the aleas of the road.
So if a part of the road is occupied by rice drying, I slow down and if necessary I stop to let the vehicle that is already engaged.

 

It would still be necessary for the Thai people to go to the driving school to learn the rules of road traffic.