23 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Good idea. Stop all rice, sugar etc production immidialtely. Well thought out comment.

If the agricultural sector conducts its business in a non sustainable way, resulting in tens of thousands cases of lung cancer, pulmonary diseases, children in hospital, then  yes it should be stopped in its tracks. Burn your field, get arrested. Welcome to the age of information!

I have been travelling Loei to Nan weekly for the last month. Back highways along Laos border. 
Currently it's all bush burning and ditch burning in this strip.  

They drag loose brush from 5 meters up a slope and pile it roadside. Later(currently) it's lit. Last two days I saw 6 locations where PEA and TOT trucks were repairing long stretches of melted wire.  Sign posts, road markers also burnt.  This is just one type of fire out of 20(?).  I don't see how PEA and TOT stay quiet about their losses.  Ironically the ash will create a lot of nitrogen for the soil and the growth they are 'controlling' will grow back twice as strong. Sigh. 

Also random fields, random bush, huge fires deep in the mountains where I assume they are clearing land or burning corn waste.   It's burn whatever burns season, varies by location. 

It's like the firebugs have some kind of immunity. No one ever charged. 

3 minutes ago, mania said:

Well speeding is the quickest way to travel to market

Should we also let them speed & kill on the highways & of course not fine them as they are poor?

 

Come on....Laws are enforced. I didn't say fine them or confiscate their lands but yeah if they continue to kill

folks with lung cancer etc etc of course there is a penalty. Not using the land for one season is mild compared to the

26,000 bad air related deaths in 2022 recently reported

No you didn't say fine them. Your idea is to deny them the abilty to make income and food from their land for a year. A big hit to the wealthy farmers with 100's of rai but I would suggest absolutely crippling for the small farmer. The 26,000 air related deaths is indeed a bad statistic but with your method another stat may well be farmer suicides after being denied use of their land.

47 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

I can only speak for rice but the paddy does need to be prepared for planting. Burning is done to get rid of the rice straw and control weeds and it is thought to help with the next crop. The straw can be ploughed in but from what I know there is a possibilty of damage to the plough disc (which the farmers would have to pay for) and that the straw in the ground is not ideal when it comes to planting. Neighbouring countries must also be considered as wind and smoke are not bound by borders. The straw could be harvested but this is an extra cost and there would need to be a market for it. If farmers still used buffalo it could I guess be used as fodder but this is no longer the case as farming proccesses are for the most part mechanised. Burning is considered the cheapest and thought of as beneficial. It's how to change this way of thinking and the practice of doing it that needs to be tackled not only in Thailand but Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar before any real progress can be made .....IMO.

And this is what EU farmers said 30-40 years ago .. but they adjusted. they coped.

 

You are not wrong in what you say, the soil benefits from burning, when you plough back in the stubble, there is less nitrogen depletion as the straw breaks down - if you plough back the straw then you would need to increase the chemicals used. This is a weak argument, what you are saying is, burning should continue because its neighbors also burn and that the plough discs wear out.

 

IMO its not a simple matter of just penalizing or restricting burning - compensation needs to be awarded to those who comply, supermarkets and consumer habits need to change, education and understanding - How much money is lost every year due to burning? that's loss of tourist income, long term damage to the countries tourist image, and damage to health and environment. What is returned? very little financial gain.

 

 

You can get industry to stop burning in a variety of ways. Getting poor people to act against their financial self interest is not to easy. This is the problem it's more efficient and less expensive to burn. Rather than rip the incentive away perhaps try providing tangible alternatives.

 

This is economics

20 minutes ago, SoilSpoil said:

If the agricultural sector conducts its business in a non sustainable way, resulting in tens of thousands cases of lung cancer, pulmonary diseases, children in hospital, then  yes it should be stopped in its tracks. Burn your field, get arrested. Welcome to the age of information!

Sufficiency Economic Philosophy which is practiced by many is meant to be sustainable.

I will link the document again that I posted previously on rice straw burning. It is very informative.  It is as you say the age of information so for anyone who wishes to be be informed here it is....again...

ALTERNATIVES TO OPEN-FIELD BURNING ON PADDY FARMS

https://www.siani.se/wp-content/uploads/files/profile/key_papers/alternatives_to_open_field_burning_on_paddy_farms.pdf

 

 

Edited March 28, 20233 yr by dinsdale

22 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

The 26,000 air related deaths is indeed a bad statistic but with your method another stat may well be farmer suicides after being denied use of their land.

Man nuff said...Your opinion is penny wise pound foolish...

Your a classic apologist of the few at the expense of the many

 

Yet you make noise about Laos, Cambodia or Myanmar  So how does Thailand step up while smoking & ask those to quit smoking?...Yeah never mind

 

New Thai slogan.."Be a Farmer all forgiven no laws apply if you farm"

So if the farmer murders another way they should not be on trial as you know they might suffer

hardship & commit suicide

 

Edited March 28, 20233 yr by mania

11 minutes ago, recom273 said:

And this is what EU farmers said 30-40 years ago .. but they adjusted. they coped.

 

You are not wrong in what you say, the soil benefits from burning, when you plough back in the stubble, there is less nitrogen depletion as the straw breaks down - if you plough back the straw then you would need to increase the chemicals used. This is a weak argument, what you are saying is, burning should continue because its neighbors also burn and that the plough discs wear out.

 

IMO its not a simple matter of just penalizing or restricting burning - compensation needs to be awarded to those who comply, supermarkets and consumer habits need to change, education and understanding - How much money is lost every year due to burning? that's loss of tourist income, long term damage to the countries tourist image, and damage to health and environment. What is returned? very little financial gain.

 

 

This is a total misreading of what I am saying. Please show me one of my posts where I have said burning should continue. What I have been doing is trying to point out WHY burning continues.

47 minutes ago, Joseph98765 said:

Easy solution...

Less Submarines and F-35, more tractors for the farmers... I belive for the price of a F-35 you can get 15-20 tractors brand new

Buy lets say 20-30 tractors per province and let them rent per day with a fair price for them so they don't need to buy their own.

I should imagine that for the price of the anticipated Thai F35 programme ( which will produce two unarmed aircraft) you could buy many many thousands of tractors! Add in the Submarine programme and you could probably afford enough tractors to give every farmer one!

26 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

No you didn't say fine them. Your idea is to deny them the abilty to make income and food from their land for a year. A big hit to the wealthy farmers with 100's of rai but I would suggest absolutely crippling for the small farmer. The 26,000 air related deaths is indeed a bad statistic but with your method another stat may well be farmer suicides after being denied use of their land.

The poor farmers taking their own lives vs the health of  innocent children, is not a very hard choice.

 

4 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

This is a total misreading of what I am saying. Please show me one of my posts where I have said burning should continue. What I have been doing is trying to point out WHY burning continues.

It continues because nobody is stopping them. 

5 minutes ago, mania said:

Man nuff said...Your opinion is penny wise pound foolish...

Your a classic apologist of the few at the expense of the many

 

Yet you make noise about Laos, Cambodia or Myanmar  So how does Thailand step up while smoking & ask those to quit smoking?...Yeah never mind

 

You say apologist I say I understand where the (rice) farmers are coming from. I am not advocating in any way. As for the few there are some 3,700,000 rice farming households in Thailand. Some of these would be super rich and some rather poor. Burning is the easiest for the poor. It's quite simple in this respect. Change is what is needed and as I have stated the govt needs to subsidise. If you think this is being an apologist for the few then your entitled to your point of view.

9 minutes ago, SoilSpoil said:

The poor farmers taking their own lives vs the health of  innocent children, is not a very hard choice.

 

I guess the poor farmers dont have children that need food on the table. Get a grip. Change is needed it's undeniable but punitive measures WILL NOT work.

17 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

This is a total misreading of what I am saying. Please show me one of my posts where I have said burning should continue. What I have been doing is trying to point out WHY burning continues.

Apologies if I misread, I think you present some valid points.

 

So what is your position on this? It seems by justifying the position of farmers that you are supporting their actions.

 

ETS: OK, fair play, you have made your stance clear. I agree with you very much, and I dont see a simple answer to the problem, which may be your position too.

Edited March 28, 20233 yr by recom273

10 minutes ago, SoilSpoil said:

It continues because nobody is stopping them. 

Agree but it's helping them that's needed. Do the farmers want to burn or is it they see no sound finacial alternative?

2 minutes ago, recom273 said:

Apologies if I misread, I think you present some valid points.

 

So what is your position on this? It seems by justifying the position of farmers that you are supporting their actions.

I support their actions only in that what alternatives do they have that is not a financial negative to them. As I have previously posted there are times that the cost of production of rice has been greater than the price recieved for the crop. A net loss. Big stick or carrot approach? Big stick will not work. Curfew? Well this is some thought bubble of an empty headed idiot. Carrot? Subsidies, assistance etc for the farmers is the correct direction but the govt does nothing. Blame the farmer or blame the govt? As for illegal burning in forrested areas this does need the big stick but who is doing the burning and how well connected they are is an altogether other issue.

1 hour ago, Will B Good said:

Very few farmers don't have a tractor, or easy access to one.

 

The problem is allowing sugarcane leaves to be burned either in situ or on the ground.

 

The only way out of this is the demand all sugarcane is delivered with the leaves on and the big processors have to deal with them in a safe manner.....landfill?

Fair point, but what’s to stop the big processors refusing to take the crop with leaves on, or burning the leaves themselves? 

4 hours ago, dinsdale said:

You are advocating taking income and food away from some of the poorest people in the land. Burning is the cheapest way. As it is depending on the price of rice the cost of production can be higher than the incoming money from sales. A net loss in other words. Margins are always thin for rice producers and many farmers only have a few rai so they they don't make much money or sometimes lose money. Your suggestion would see these families who already struggle be put into abject poverty. Rice farmers need to be subsidised for a cleaner way to deal with their paddy fields post harvest and pre-planting rather than have draconian penalties placed upon them.

Exactly this.

 

The farmers need to be given an alternative even if it involves a subsidy from the government. The big stick approach has never worked.

There is a very simple solution to this problem. If the authorities were interested in solutions. The burning has to stop. There are alternatives, to this 19th century technique of burning after the sugar cane harvest. Either the government starts to encourage farmers to switch to more environmentally friendly crops, or they start to penalize farmers for burning. This heinous burning, is leading to a tremendous degree of environmental degradation, and alot of lung disease. So here is what I propose-

 

1. Fine the farmers 5,000 baht for a first offense, and give them a stern warning, that burning is now prohibited, and the second fine will be very harsh.

2. For a second offense, fine the farmer 100,000 baht, and warn them that if the burning continues, their land will be confiscated.

3. On the 3rd offense, confiscate their land. Period. No questions. No legal proceeding or appeals on the part of the farmers. Allow others to come in and purchase the land at a fair price, with the caveat that sugar is prohibited as a crop to be grown on that land.

The news would travel faster than the toxic smoke, and farmers would change their ways overnight, and move into the 21st century.

 

Then they can move on to tackle the sale of diesel vehicles, and the government's enthusiastic support of such. It is inane in this day and age. Most nations are moving away from diesel for good reasons. When they are not well maintained, they foul the air, with large, nasty particles. And who properly maintains their vehicle here?

 

Lastly they can convert all of the 10 remaining diesel and coal fired power plants. Thailand has already done a very admirable job with renewable power plants. There are over 50 powered by hydro, geothermal, wind, solar and biomass. That is impressive. 

 

The government should offer incentives, for the farmers to switch crops. This is 2021. Rice and sugar worked in previous centuries. Now, they do not make any sense. Too labor intensive, too much degradation of the land, water, air, and resources. Let's get with the times. Let us move forward. 

 

Likely far more than that amount of people that are suffering right now. And the authorities do not seem to care, one iota. If they did, something would be done. Instead, only hollow promises. 

 

We will enforce the ban on burning. And it never gets enforced. No penalties, no nothing. 

 

We will do something about poorly maintained diesel vehicles. And nothing is ever done, because the cops are too lazy, and the highway patrol refuses to patrol the highway, and the special hotlines you set up, do not know anything about the program, or the laws. 

 

3 hours ago, jvs said:

No need to burn rice straw this year any way,prices of hay are thru the roof!

Again,too little too late.

It is all to blame on the government,they have all year to deal with this but the same as every year they wait to pretend to do something when the people are choking.

Soon the rains are here and face is saved for another year.

 

Well, I hope they remember it when they have to go to vote on May...

13 hours ago, webfact said:

including curfews in some areas,

Don't Juntas do this during coups????

10 hours ago, hotchilli said:

Curfews?

What a totally inept government.

One of the worst, certainly in recent history.

 

Forget rice pledging.

Forget sending refugees back out to sea with no food or water.

Forget the sanctioned war on drugs.

Etc.

 

This is killing their own people. 

 

A horribly inept and corrupt regime, that very few intelligent people wanted. Hopefully their time is at an end. 

10 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

A horribly inept and corrupt regime, that very few intelligent people wanted. Hopefully their time is at an end. 

The truth at last.

Will they take away their lighters and matches?  Force the cretinous arsonists to have to make fire without a flint of any kind.  

 

That will do it.