"Just a farm house"---and other issues concerning land use

Politics Taiwan Politics
1

I have been reading about Su’s farmhouse and how it is out of compliance with the agricultural intent of the zoning requirements of agricultural land use in Taiwan.
Admitedly, I have not taken a personal visit. I have, however, seen the photos. The KMT has now admitted that the actual acreage occupied by the farmhouse is in compliance. Thus the only remaining issue is some ridiculaous wording of the law that requires that the remaining land be used for “agricultural purposes”.

Admitted:

no tractors
no farm hands
no carrots
no poor folks dressed in peaked straw hats traditional to farm hands

However:

Trees
grassland
wildlife
CO2 reduction
no peaked hatted peasants (a plus side too)

Well, I grew up in farm land. I have never seen these arguments where I lived. We had agricultural zones but the government did not “dictate”, as the KMT proposes. Sometimes we left the land fallow. It improves the land for future crops and owners are applauded for these efforts. Often this comes at a sacrifice to short term profits. The long term ecological benefits are enormous. (KMT, pay attention here! - - I know, not your long suit, but try!)

Also, I saw grass and trees on Su’s farm. These contribute mightily to the environment and will only increase the value of his farm for future generations which will still be of uae for it’s intended purpose - farmland.

There has been a great deal made about how grand the home is. I ponder why the hell the KMT thinks that farmers can’t have, or don’t deserverve, a nice home. If I can afford it and build it, well . . bite me and my farm house.

Last, this legislation was a zoning ordinance. Pure and simple. Unfortunately, no law in Taiwan is pure and simple. It was, however, never meant to be a a “best use” ordinance. Under a “best use” ordinance" one is forced, non-democratically, to put your resources to the best use available. That would result in Su having to make his farm profitable on an annual basis. An idle piece of privately held land downtown that is used as a park MUST be sold and used for it’s best commercial use - a community or office building, all in the best economic interests of the economy and society. Of course this extends to farmland also. A small mom and pop acreage that is marginally profitable should, and must, be sold to the corporate farmers that can make the land more profitable. A free economy? KMT advocates the "best use"policy. I am not merely giving an opinion here. Look at their rhetoric.

Ok! I have had my political say.

Tonight, I will catch the next plane to any democratic country where people can still farm as they please, sans cacao, and build any style home within my means. Anybody want to do a photo exhibit of comaparable homes of the KMT and DPP? I’ll sneak back in and help. Trust me! I will. How much difference do you propose you will find?

I will vote for the next candidate that says, Vote me me! I will do absolutely NOTHING for you and I promise that I will not tax you for it."

Democracy? I think not! Is KMT demanding an anti-democratic philosophy of dictated profit making? Best use doesn’t work in any democratic society. If Su want’s to run an unprofitable farm that, by the way, contributes to a reduction in CO2 and enviromental harmony, maybe the KMT should pull it out of an agricultural zone, stick up a high rise or, maybe plant carrots. If the KMT controls, mom and pop farmers better start looking at affordable taxis.

In conclusion, the ordinance was designed to keep agricutral land in that category and in that category it remains. This ordinance was not meant to demand that all farms be agricuturally profitable. Far from it. How many farms are actually profitable. To think that if that were the intent, we would demolish all non-profitable farms and build factories which would wreck havoc with the actual orignal intent.

Bye the way, to both of you pollitical parties:

Do you really think that ANYBODY listens to your little blue truck loudspeakers? All you do is piss everybody off. Knock it off and for no ther reason, you have my vote, especially if you get off Su’s ass.

PS. MODS: Now do I have more than one recognized post after 10 years here and 2,000 posts?

2

I agree totally.

3

LTH was the one behind the current law allowing “farm house” on land zoned for agriculture. And, it is incorrect to translated them as houses. The ones built on farmland should be termed farm sheds, according to the zoning law. Those buildings are meant for utility purpose. There are other areas close by the farm land and designated for building houses. In those areas, you can build a true house, however grandiose, legally. I admit this kind of illegal activity is rampant, but they are still illegal, never the less. All of them should be torn down, until law is changed by the legislators.

4

What makes this story ridiculous is the way Su has been singled out for attention. I have seen dozens of “farm buildings” (yeah, that’s what it says on the construction permit notice) going up on agriculture-zone land. Funny, but I’ve never seen chickens living in a five-storey air-conditioned apartment block, and I’ve never seen them require space for their cars either. The law is 100% ignored, which is why agricultural land is now being sold at the most ridiculous prices (NT$5000/ping and up). Taiwan will very soon have so little productive land that 90%+ of its food will be imported, which means it will be subject to every political whim of whichever nation is supplying the bulk of that food: most likely the US.

OTOH I completely agree with Enigma. A lot of farmland in Taiwan is in a terrible state, and I wish the “farmers” would just leave it alone for a few years, or plant a few short-lifespan trees on it (sesbania springs to mind) instead of pouring more chemicals on it. And as for farmers having nice houses: :thumbsup: . Why the hell should farming not be profitable?

5

Farmers get very little support in Taiwan with a pension of 6,000 NTD per month. If they can make a few bob by selling their land that’s good for them. The government decided it wanted to join the WTO and mess up the farmers liveliehoods without adaquate compensation and give the benefit to other exporters.

6

Hear hear.

First the KMT went after the opposition’s presidential candidate for her “illegal” tour bus; now they’re going after the VP candidate for his “illegal” farmhouse. Just goes to show that regulations only exist to use against people you don’t like. I hope these dirty tricks blow up in the KMT’s face.

7

6,000? Oh, man it’s so much more than that.

8

It’s a very clever tactic: be the first to make an issue over an illegal practice that has been tolerated up to now in Taiwan. That way you can empirically make the country less corrupt while at the same time giving your opponent a shot in the ribs. Definitely King Pu-tsung’s level of strategic thinking, but I can’t actually fault the KMT for using it, politics being rough and tumble eh wot? Nor do I have any info on King being involved, it just smells like him.

One thought though is that you’d have to make sure your own guys were clean in that department first. Which is why the disclosure would have to be coordinated at the top level.

9

I predict that Taiwan will soon reduce the amount of Ag zoning to allow more factories. You can’t import jobs but you can import food. It’s just around the corner. IMHO - not a bad idea. Taiwan is not now, nor never will have a sustainable agricultural base for its population so - why not?

10

“why not” is because importing food puts you in a politically precarious position, especially if there is a big grumpy neighbour who might be able to lean on your import partners.

Unfortunately I think you’re right. Too many Taiwanese people don’t see any value in having a sustainable agriculture base. They think it’s backward to grow your own food. Sadly, there are a lot of people who are just starting to realise that it is important, but they’ll get shouted down by the SUV-driving concrete fanatics. At least until China says, “OK, you guys, I think that’s enough food for you lot for now. By the way, let’s have a chat about that One China thing …”.

11

Farming is also a source of employment and in Taiwan has acted as a great social safety net during recessions. What do you think happened to the tens of thousands of laid of central science park workers during the big downturn in 2008-09? Many went back to their parents’ farms. Not much money but at least they were eating.

As for sustainable, Taiwan produces enough rice for it’s entire population. And I am sure it is doesn’t need to import most vegetables either.

12

I grew up in a fishing, mining and agricultural area. I saw mining completely disappear (tin and granite), fishing is down to about 30% of it’s fleet and farming is going the same way. I was taught agricultural studies at school but, none of us wanted to work on a farm. Not a lot of jobs left in Cornwall and below average wages for the jobs that do exist.

Looks like Taiwan is feeling that way. Trouble is Taiwan isn’t the South West of England. Taiwan needs it’s own food supply for the reasons others have quoted but, also as an export commodity. It would be silly to think there isn’t a huge demand for food around the world. So many countries have taken the same approach, that you can import food. This means the countries left producing food are soon to be rich and could easily adopt the same approach and stop producing food, in favour of something else. Then what? Not enough food.

More and more of the world’s population is living in the urban environment and less in the countryside and farmlands. I think this is a global mistake and those left producing food are going to be in high demand. I’ve also heard stories of bankers leaving the city with huge investments into ‘super farms’ knowing that the food crisis is not too far off. So Taiwan, keep growing the crops, keep it healthy and don’t get greedy.

13

Opinions are fine but facts are better. Do a google for Taiwan rice imports and you will find that the actuality is that Taiwan is not now agriculturally self sufficient and can not be. Taiwan does import rice right now. Also almost all corn and all wheat. Sure, they have some orange and specialty apple/pear orchards but the true needs can not be met. I quick look at a map clearly shows that the arable land is already at a minimum. It will continue to decline as the need for jobs increase. Reality sucks but the reality is that Taiwan will eventually import most of their domestic needs and export of other products will increase. Food supply competition has indeed been a problem, even in the last few years, but competition takes care of the problem, even in the short term. The increase in technology exports will give Taiwan the leverage they need to avoid most shortcomings caused by price spikes.

14

Taiwan is also an exporter of rice and despite what you write about arable land at a minimum, the country has several hundred thousand hectares of fallow land. Farmers are paid not to grow rice on this land though some are now being paid to grow it just to make rural areas look pretty. The subsidies are basically the same so it’s not as dumb an idea as you think.

You may be right but simply tossing out that you did a cursory Google search is hardly compelling. As far as I know taiwan was self-sufficient in rice for decades until it entered the WTO. There is no reason it could not be again, giving the population is declining and rice consumption per capita is less.

The TT reports:

15

I respect your opinion but calling my research cursory is a bit unfair. How many cornfields and wheat fields have you seen? And, the fact is, contrary to other opinion, Taiwan DOES import about 10% of their rice and the amount grows annually. My opinion stands and, as I’m sure, does yours.

16

I don’t know if you read the end of my last post. Taiwan is still almost self-sufficient in rice production and isn’t completely because it purposely has let fields go fallow or directed farmers to grow other crops. That said, no one disputes that we import all our wheat and soybeans and most of our corn (for feed, lots is grown for personal consumption). But I never made such a claim. I said rice and veggies.

There is lots and lots of farmland available. Shortsightedly it is being torn up for bogus “science parks” and other dubious projects.

17

Since the WTO was signed and they allowed Thai and Californian rice to be imported the market price dropped severely. Some farmers have switched to taro as that gives a better monetary return but it involves more labour. Most farmers continue to grow rice as they know how to do that, it’s pretty mechanized and easy, you just buy the seedlings and get contractors to plough the land, spray and fertilize and maintain yourself and then hire another contractor to harvest. They can still make a profit although obviously not like before.
There are obviously many other types of farmers here too, fish farming is huge. Next time you fly into Taoyuan airport look down at Taoyuan county, you will see it is covered with fish farms. The West coast area of Taiwan is covered in them but they have caused a lot of damage. Same with fruit farming.

Taiwan is pretty amazing in the variety of stuff grown here.

So the story is nuanced, more farming in Taiwan is not necessarily a good thing, they use a lot of chemicals and water and cause pollution.

In addition, farming something like rice will always be difficult to compete on due to small land area of Taiwan and the way the farms are divided into small patches. However some areas can get good money for their rice like the Huadong rift valley.

Visit Cambodia or Thailand or California and see the vast plains they farm rice on, it doesn’t make sense for Taiwanese farmers to directly try and compete with that.

18

As HH points out, Taiwan imports rice (mostly from the US) because they can’t compete with the heavily-subsidized US product. Taiwan doesn’t need it, and it’s markedly inferior, but they’re basically doing it to keep the peace. Ten years ago you didn’t see foreign rice on supermarket shelves - maybe one brand of Thai rice if you were lucky.

As for wheat - it isn’t grown here because it’s not suited to the climate, and very inefficient in terms of land use (~3 tonnes/ha). Maize is pretty adaptable and common in Taiwan, but it’s basically a temperate-zone crop. Besides, American wheat is subsidized to about US$180/tonne (I believe maize subsidies have been cut recently). It makes no sense at all to attempt to grow such things in Taiwan. Just out of curiosity, I did actually plant a few square meters of wheat last month as ground cover. It’s doing fine so far, but I fully expect to just mow it down. If it does ripen without rotting in the rain or dying in the April heat, I’ll post an update :slight_smile:

Personally I think the big-farmhouse thing should be positively encouraged - with the proviso that the law should be enforced regarding minimum cultivation area. If we assume 2/3 of Taiwan’s land area is unsuitable for human settlement (which it is) there would still be enough for every single family to own 1000m2, which is enough to comfortably feed three people and sustainably dispose of their wastes. Forested areas could probably also be carefully managed to deliver a food yield. I’m not suggesting we should all be self-sufficient (it’s horribly inefficient) but if there were a market in place to make small-scale farming productive, as in Cuba for example, there are plenty of people who seem to aspire to that kind of life.

What technology exports? Most of Taiwan’s consumer gadgets are still just copies of foreign brands, and the technology sector in general is falling further and further behind other countries. The good stuff comes from the US, Japan, Korea, Germany, and (surprisingly) Israel. All made in China, of course. Even China is coming up with some good designs in esoteric markets (telecommunications, for example).

19

The big farmhouse thing sure is a joke when you have factories still surrounded by pockets of farmland here. It’s such a non issue.

20

Do you think the Taiwan government should subsidize farmers more than that for their pensions? I certainly don’t think so. How did Taiwan joining the WTO mess up the farmers’ livelihoods? Taiwan had to cut tariffs to join but it can still charge relatively high tariffs and be WTO compliant! If products are that weak that consumers would rather pay the same or moderately higher prices for imported products then the farmers probably shouldn’t be propped up by the state or in business for that matter in the first place!!! On the plus side, if Taiwan farm products are good, they are now able to export to more markets. Joining such organizations only puts fear into people that are uncompetitive. Tough shit. They should find another occupation then. Perhaps opening a kindy school and employing Engrishy teachers! :smiley: