- Location
- Limousin, France
Yes, I've been saying this for a long time. You keep making my point.
You get the money without the work. We have to work for it.
End of the Road for Small Livestock Farms?
- Thread starter Frank-the-Wool
- Start date
You get the money without the work. We have to work for it.
Headage payments are the only way to help young farmers get started, as soon as the payments became linked to enviro we were as good as fecked on an ever downward slope!
glasshouse
Member
- Location
- lothians
Support should have been targetted at small farms from the beginning , but the Nfu and cla made sure it went to the big boys
Why? Support should be distributed fairly regarldless of size.
glasshouse
Member
- Location
- lothians
Why do small farms need it more?
caveman
Member
- Location
- East Sussex.
OMG.
All this chatter about subsidy.
I can only guess how many are actually flying by their pants and will crash without it.
It's good to know how so many willy wavers know so much about the "lifestyle choice" of the small holder.
I find it so amusing that my choice to live a simpler and less decadent way of life allows me to be just as or even more competitive per unit produced, than those who benefit from "economies of scale" and other such nonsense.
I think many have missed Frank's point, that the losing of smaller "feeder" businesses, is putting larger operations such as his in jeopardy.
They mop up and use the surplus that's left over from smaller operations such as mine (labour and produce) after we have worked hard at making a reasonable profit from our own marketing of our produce and labour, without having to chuck all into the pot at world prices.
When the big fish in the pond have gobbled up all the smaller fish, they start to bite each others arses.
I clarify...
Any payments directed at my "smallholding" have always been nothing more than a small bonus to me.
What I really need is a Lee Majors style make over and I'll be good to go again.
Oh.
And I've not always been just a smallholder...
I have also been a proper "subsidy farmer", renting many acres and dealing and turning over much stock.
Makes one wonder how many "big, proper, real farmers" would be even less than a "smallholder" when all is added up and taken away.
All this chatter about subsidy.
I can only guess how many are actually flying by their pants and will crash without it.
It's good to know how so many willy wavers know so much about the "lifestyle choice" of the small holder.
I find it so amusing that my choice to live a simpler and less decadent way of life allows me to be just as or even more competitive per unit produced, than those who benefit from "economies of scale" and other such nonsense.
I think many have missed Frank's point, that the losing of smaller "feeder" businesses, is putting larger operations such as his in jeopardy.
They mop up and use the surplus that's left over from smaller operations such as mine (labour and produce) after we have worked hard at making a reasonable profit from our own marketing of our produce and labour, without having to chuck all into the pot at world prices.
When the big fish in the pond have gobbled up all the smaller fish, they start to bite each others arses.
I clarify...
Any payments directed at my "smallholding" have always been nothing more than a small bonus to me.
What I really need is a Lee Majors style make over and I'll be good to go again.
Oh.
And I've not always been just a smallholder...
I have also been a proper "subsidy farmer", renting many acres and dealing and turning over much stock.
Makes one wonder how many "big, proper, real farmers" would be even less than a "smallholder" when all is added up and taken away.
Last edited:
Might have kept more producers in the game but if they leave then the hole in the market will be filled by another producer? Maybe one who can do it economically
- Location
- East Sussex
I am not sure an unsubsidised farmer would agree with your statement.
Supply and demand are the main drivers of price in the world and as such what you say is true. However the supply side is distorted by subsidies so it can be argued that a farmer who gets subsidy can keep/grow more as he doesn't have to worry so much about what price they receive from the customer as part of the risk/cost of producing the crop/livestock has been covered.
This is the main argument the EU had for an area based payment as it had less distortion on supply. I am sure a good economist will be able to argue that this is correct. However it has distorted the market as it meant that crops could be grown on marginal land and livestock produced at cheaper prices as the cost of feed was much lower and more plentiful in our society.
You only have to go to other poorer parts of the world to realise that the so called world price doesn't really exist. It was brought home to me many years ago when on holiday in Morocco. I had a conversation with a shepherd who had around 400 sheep and goats that he looked after every day and I was curious about the price he could get for his lambs/hoggets. The price back in 2010 was around £120 a head when here it was £60 and he would get over £150 at the time of the festivals. This in a country where earnings were around £5.00 per week at the time.
If you look at prices around the world for beef, there are massive differences and historically the unsubsidised countries have much lower prices than those which get subsidies, although demand in Asia has temporarily changed the situation. This is to do with tariffs and quotas that try to level up the prices and protect agriculture in high cost countries such as ourselves. At present Australia has the highest world price of beef with NZ the lowest, this is all to do with markets in Asia being short of pig meat due to ASF and started in January 2020 and Australia having better supply chains. At present prices in Brazil are higher than NZ at around £2.80 per kg.
Now the argument for tariff and quota free trade is compelling for an unsubsidised country as they would love to have those higher prices and would of course increase production on more marginal land in the short term, completely eliminate the rain forests and send all that product to us Park keepers who will be paid to plant trees and do public goods.
What is World price? Subsidy itself doesn't directly alter the price the punter pays but it has a huge effect on supply and demand which does.
icanshootwell
Member
- Location
- Ross-on-wye
Big is,nt always beautiful, no of farms i know of have over a million pound overdrafts, i suppose interest rates are cheap which drives the spending, I do wonder what makes some people tick. Is it about making money, or getting BIG.
I do make a modest profit on not a very large area, I am content with that.
Hilly
Member
- Location
- Scottish Borders.
Who wants to help young farmers get started and why ? Headage was awfull .
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
The same has happened outside the EU and it’s ag support, it’s called ‘progress’, rightly or wrongly.
I would suggest the sub has slowed it.
Hilly
Member
- Location
- Scottish Borders.
Small farms are usually have no Labour to pay and no debt , big farms have a shut load of debt sh!t load of Labour , large estates need it don’t kid yourself they in the main struggle .
Hilly
Member
- Location
- Scottish Borders.
If I want to expand and borrow 2 million , swallow up a small farm and the subsidy is 100k its easy , no subs differ at ball game , subs have allowed them with the pipe dream of being big to get big , subs have accelerated demise of small farm
Supply and demand are the main drivers and set the price of food --- Transport is so cheap (at the moment) that this is the overwhelming price setter . Other factors have a much smaller effect
Did your farmer in Morocco sell in bulk to a processor or to smaller butchers/individuals where he would have received a premium? I know that when I sell lamb to a processor at £60 i can still get £140 head as a direct seller
- Location
- Carmarthenshire, West Wales
Remember, agriculture holds a unique place in society, providing food, so pure economics can't be allowed to happen, as Lenin said " Every society is three meals away from chaos" so politicians will (probably, but I would not bet on it!) protect consumers against price volatility of food and this generally means protecting the supply chain for local farmers (even if that means just ensuring that they manage to keep their head above water ~ just). Remember the Arab spring ten years ago was nothing to do with a yearning for democracy, rather all to do with the price of bread becoming unaffordable.
- Location
- North Somerset.
The BPS cheque as a livestock farmer on a small acreage is small so the December cheque is less critical and any business relying on it, large or small would always be in trouble.
ELMS or SFI or whatever it is called next week is unlikely to be of any benefit to me on a small acreage for the same reason I couldn’t be arsed with HLS, too much fine print petty rules for little return.
I may be part of the pilot where they will be paying me to go through the process which will likely end in my telling them it is not fit for purpose for me as a small scale farmer and they will lose any control over what I do on my land.
- Location
- Essex
It's the farmer's share of the retail value that is the cause of this debate.
Hilly
Member
- Location
- Scottish Borders.
You could say subsidy has allowed farmer to give away his market share, which is/ was very bad thing to happen.