The sun is descending majestically over the dappled hills at Marama, capping off what has been a fantastic drop of weather after the much-needed rain.
I pose a question this week: name the industry sufficiently devoid of wit and compelling leadership that allowed about $750 million of potential earnings to be lost this season? The same industry appears relaxed at the prospect of forgoing another $200 million a year on an ongoing basis.
These losses equate to about $136,000 a participant this year and $36,000 a year ongoing.
I will answer it the next time I contribute a column.
After reading an article in The New Zealand Herald a few weeks ago on the demise of our once-proud wool industry, I was shaken from my apathy-induced inertia on matters wool to attend the Wool Partners International (WPI) gathering in Invercargill.
The Herald article was prompted at least in part by the AgResearch sacking of 35 wool scientists, in turn caused by the no vote on the wool levy (a 3% levy on wool sold) a few months ago.
You will remember the whining and vitriol this caused Andy West (then CEO of AgResearch) to ladle upon the disgruntled farmers who had tired of paying a levy, which appeared at face value to have no impact on the ever-diminishing price for wool.
In the Herald article, Stephen Fookes, of the National Council of NZ Wool Interests, says in five years we will be saying `where are the new developments?' - because we got rid of the scientists.
I suggest it would not be a taxing exercise to find a frigate-load of farmers who have been asking that for some time!I think we may have been suffering from a McKinsey-induced stupor which encouraged us to believe that all we had to do was stop telling people about our product, reduce the help we offer to customers and consumers using our product and in the meantime, if we turn wool into something sexier, or food, via the nice people at AgResearch, all would be great.
Yeah, right!Fast-forward to Invercargill where about 200 farmers listened eagerly for hopes of a way forward.
Speaking personally, I was left with the thought that the single compelling reason to support WPI was that not to do so was to devolve responsibility for improved returns, to the Tooth Fairy.
That would be on a similar scale of brightness to taxing (via the Emissions Trading Scheme) grass-fed sheep and beef animals for emissions they cannot possibly make - more on that another time.
I commend those who are trying to get our wool industry united, as without that we will go the way of horseshoe makers, but I remain somewhat underwhelmed at the prospect of imminent woolly wealth caused by WPI.
That said, though, I did enjoy the $5.30kg clean for a bit of US-certified organic lamb's wool (through WPI), but the rules to keep that certification are ridiculous, so it is probably a oncer.
I trust you are in good shape for the winter and that it turns out to be a cracker.
As always, comments are invited.
• Graham Clarke is a South Otago organic farmer.