- Location
- South Molton
Value of money halves every 10ish years.
I would beg to differ.
Alot less reliant now as then
50% BPS from today?
- Thread starter Overby
- Start date
Value of money halves every 10ish years.
I would beg to differ.
Alot less reliant now as then
- Location
- South Molton
Not so sure, unfinished lambs with clipped ears, beulah ewes kept at twice the commercial stocking density producing small lambs.
Moorland over stocked
Spurious suckler cows
- Location
- somerset
correct, but, they cannot afford to pay both, subs for environment, and subs for production.
even less so, when you realise, both are the exact opposite, of each other.
Yes a slight increase in numbers can easy knacker the job. I would rather sub finished than be reliant on farmer dole to produce stock on the cheap. Let the country go hungry if half of us throw the towel in, i can soon flail mine twice a year and produce nothing for a few years without having to sell the farm until they realise there mistake
Yeh but once out of livestock, very difficult to get back into it.
Keep back 10% of the best
- Location
- Devon
I have to completely disagree with that.
The whole point of SFI should be sustainable production.
Defra have foolishly made the same mistake and made them mutually exclusive when the whole ethos of the scheme should be about accentuating the overlap.
The whole budget of BPS should be increased for inflation and only spent on food produced sustainably.
- Location
- somerset
first duty of a guv, is to feed the population, if they don't, it ends in tears.
food inflation is rising.
at some point, there will be a point, where food is simply to expensive for many, everything is going up in price, but food cannot be 'priced' out of a portion of society. Somewhere, guv will have to interfere, they can't help themselves, and it will be a 'disaster'.
the traditional way, is production led subs, soup kitchens, for the 'needy' would be a PR disaster.
climate change promises, appear to reduce food production, and '''''''pay'''''' farmers a green sub.
All well and good, except recession is on the horizon, that means less income, in taxes, for the guv, and an increase in social payments. Already saddled with huge borrowings, caused by covid, a decrease in income, guv is in a catch 22 position, food or climate.
food will take precedence over climate, no brainer.
Can they actually afford to subsidise food, and their climate policies ? Without increasing the debt burden, i'm not sure they can.
Whatever they eventually decide, it will be a disaster, they open their mouths, and promise things, before engaging their brains, that tell them to stop.
While they may well think they can, in reality, they cannot. With the global promises, made for 'climate', they all look to decrease food production, therefore, food inflation will continue.
at the end of the day, food is todays problem, climate change, is in the future.
- Location
- Devon
So you completely support my suggestion. . . . ?
lloyd
Member
- Location
- Herefordshire
Very well said and the facts totally ignored .
livestock 1
Member
livestock 1
Member
The upland environmental schemes are supposedly to keep the countryside looking the way jo public wants it to look, even though it looked the way they wanted it to when headage payments were on.
Moorland schemes favour the owner rather than the stint holder.
The moorland schemes pay the stint holder an off wintering payment
- Location
- somerset
what should happen, and what will happen, our very different.
Sustainable food production, should be central, to any guv's policy,
do we trust the guv to do that ? No.
what will happen, is a complete balls up, by them interring in something they know, f##k all about. The only certainty, is the blame, will be laid at our feet. Because the guv, will never admit to making, a monumental cock-up, in food policy.
To be fair to defra, they have made a serious effort, to make us all, more 'green', and a lot of it is quite good, especially on paper. The problem is, payment figures, are based on what is now history, they have simply not moved payments, to match todays prices.
I'm not actually sure we should be taking those payments, things are rapidly changing, nearly on a daily basis, tying ourselves into, what is basically historic prices, may well exclude ourselves, from that changing future, pretty sure the future will mean, higher prices, food is not so 'plentiful' as it was, even 2 or 3 years ago. Of course, it could go down, as well, we have to decide, what's best, for 'ourselves', and every farm, and farmer, has different needs.
livestock 1
Member
A few questions which need to be answered.
What is the government’s aim or objective?
Do they want food security?
Do they want to loose the agricultural service sector or tax revenue from that sector?
Does the service sector want to loose their buisness?
What is the government’s aim or objective?
Do they want food security?
Do they want to loose the agricultural service sector or tax revenue from that sector?
Does the service sector want to loose their buisness?
- Location
- somerset
the guv can't answer that, they simply don't know.
it seems to be, whichever large donor, was the last person, to whisper in their ear.
livestock 1
Member
When we were on headage we knew which direction we were supposed to be going until things went downhill at the end.
After that we were moved onto environmental schemes which would appear to a different direction
- Location
- Devon
I agree except for Defra making a serious effort as per the point I just made.
ELMS has completely divided the environment from farming. They have missed the entire aim of sustainable farming. The net result is land will be;
rewilded and of little use in terms of sequestration, biodiversity or productivity
or
more intensively farmed and be environmentally unsustainable in pursuit of financial sustainability.
Defra are in charge of SFI but don't know what sustainable farming is, let alone give it any initiative.
- Location
- South Molton
Beg to differ, but definitely not in a better state now
livestock 1
Member
Y Fan Wen
Member
- Location
- N W Snowdonia
I have a 'ffridd' (piece of enclosed upper hill) which Glastir needs to be kept empty from 1/10 to 1/4 and then a medium stocking through the Summer. After 10 years I am finding that ewes are very reluctant to be on that patch through the Summer. I had thought that with a fresh bite waiting in April they would be ultra keen. Not a bit of it. Another in the cwm has had the same complaint. When/if Glastir ends I'm going to be keeping self feed blocks permanently in that block with free access to try and get the flock hefted there again. However I suspect that the rules that replace Glstir will preclude that intention. Ho hum!