End of the Road for Small Livestock Farms?

[Tarw Coch]

through choice, a guy i know has a 200 acre farm he gets 18k an acre sub and 18k a year for grazing lets, easy living, take away that sub though and hell need to get a job

18k an acre sub, that’s one heck of a good deal

 

[Chae1]

But surely if bigger is better and more efficient the big guys don’t have the same need

They need to buy more feed, straw, larger machinery. More sheds, more fertiliser. More wages.

 

[Cowcorn]

But surely if bigger is better and more efficient the big guys don’t have the same need

Ah the effeicency goes out the window the minute any mention of losing or capping subs is mentioned !!!
The old chestnut of how large estates are employers and shouldnt be disadvantaged by uppity small farmers with pockets full of Taxpayers cash then gets trotted out !!!
Maybe the should be told that the public no longer wishes to subsidise their lifestyles and the should either farm their vast acreages or let it out .

 

[Grassman]

Is there really much difference between people with outside jobs keeping a few horses or a few cattle on their "smallholding"?

In either case are they really trying to make a (highly taxed) profit, or just having a hobby that keeps the grass down?

And if one enterprise is subsidised, why shouldn't the other one get taxpayer support?

As for genuine full time farmers who struggle to make a living on a few acres, well small farms falling by the wayside has been going on since the year dot.........unfortunate I know, but that's "progress"

I also doubt that there are many full time farmers on here, who's current farm didn't used to be two or more separate holdings. And it's not just taking on next door, judging by the number of references to the "off land" or "the other unit" that you see on TFF. Is it right to bemoan the loss of small farms while being happy to contribute to and benefit from that trend?

The farm I grew up on was less than 120 acres but had previously been 4 separate holdings until the early 1960's, the difference between then and now being that back then the smallholders were farming in their spare time to support the very low wage levels in rural areas rather than as an aside to highly paid urban jobs

In my lifetime the majority of farms have gone in my area. Most soaked up by larger farms. I would estimate a 60% reduction in active farms. And most of the surviving big farms have other non agricultural strings to their bow.
I really havnt a clue how the subsidy change is going to play out but I suspect even fewer of the medium sized farms surviving.

 

[Grassman]

Rental values will plunge. Subsidy has propped up the value for far too long. Only landowners benefited.

 

[Radio]

Also the small farm is bought by the big neighbour house sold for retired incomers or second home , school closes shops go and the village dies . The big farmer mortgaged to the hilt and has to keep expanding.

 

[Henarar]

Rental values will plunge. Subsidy has propped up the value for fat too long. Only landowners benefited.

Not so sure they will, keep makes enough money with no sub now so I don't see why it will drop that much

 

[Grassman]

Not so sure they will, keep makes enough money with no sub now so I don't see why it will drop that much

But the farmer paying these big rents is using his subsidy income from his main farm to subsidise the rent

 

[Grassman]

In my lifetime the majority of farms have gone in my area. Most soaked up by larger farms. I would estimate a 60% reduction in active farms. And most of the surviving big farms have other non agricultural strings to their bow.
I really havnt a clue how the subsidy change is going to play out but I suspect even fewer of the medium sized farms surviving.

Interestingly this large reduction in farms has come about roughly during the time we have been in the EU "benefiting" from subsidy.
Has the subsidy held back the reduction of small farms or encouraged it?

 

[Henarar]

But the farmer paying these big rents is using his subsidy income from his main farm to subsidise the rent

time will tell

 

[Hilly]

through choice, a guy i know has a 200 acre farm he gets 18k an acre sub and 18k a year for grazing lets, easy living, take away that sub though and hell need to get a job

What like everyone else ? What a shame

 

[Hilly]

through choice, a guy i know has a 200 acre farm he gets 18k an acre sub and 18k a year for grazing lets, easy living, take away that sub though and hell need to get a job

Through choice my arse , thousands of farmers jacked during subsidised eu days due to can’t make it pay no more .

 

[Hilly]

through choice, a guy i know has a 200 acre farm he gets 18k an acre sub and 18k a year for grazing lets, easy living, take away that sub though and hell need to get a job

Current system of rewarding folk for owning or renting land is disgusting , as a land owner I sort of like it but as a tax payer its a scandal.

 

[Frank-the-Wool]

Current system of rewarding folk for owning or renting land is disgusting , as a land owner I sort of like it but as a tax payer its a scandal.

Not really as it has enabled food to continue to be produced at a cheap price so the tax payer has indirectly benefitted.
Moving away from subsidy will mean politicians will have little or no control over home production and will pray that the pound stays strong so all those imports will be cheap and plentiful.

 

[Hilly]

Not really as it has enabled food to continue to be produced at a cheap price so the tax payer has indirectly benefitted.
Moving away from subsidy will mean politicians will have little or no control over home production and will pray that the pound stays strong so all those imports will be cheap and plentiful.

Will food be more expensive without it ?

 

[som farmer]

used to be 9 farms very local to us, from the large stone houses and barns, they must all have been making a sizable profit, for them to have been built, barns are now houses, and just us farming now, and most dislike us, because our machinery is to big, we drive to fast, we make a mess on the road, and we delay them when moving cattle, even the parish council wrote me a rude letter on the subject. The really stupid bit, 75% of the tractor traffic, isn't me, but 2 other farms passing through.

 

[Frank-the-Wool]

Will food be more expensive without it ?

Depends on the value of the pound.
There is going to be a period of volatility in all commodities as supplies will be more at the mercy of world prices.

We are already seeing the beginning of this in the sheep sector as the world supply is short. So in the short term supply decreases as price rises until there is resistance to the price points.
I had lambs cancelled for next week to a local wholesaler as they could get lambs 50p per kg cheaper than I was prepared to sell for, which was already 30p below last weeks prices dead. That is £10 to £15 less than the market price this week.
Exports can drive the price again when the dead price falls to around £6.00.

 

[Chae1]

Not really as it has enabled food to continue to be produced at a cheap price so the tax payer has indirectly benefitted.
Moving away from subsidy will mean politicians will have little or no control over home production and will pray that the pound stays strong so all those imports will be cheap and plentiful.

Completely agree.

The purpose of subsidies is cheap food for the masses I always thought.

The larger producer is producing more cheap food for the masses below the cost of production so receives more subsidies.

Quite simple really. But so am I.

 

[Hilly]

Subsidy is not for cheap food , it’s an environmental payment when will this ever sink in ? Unbelievable .

 

[Tim W]

Not really as it has enabled food to continue to be produced at a cheap price so the tax payer has indirectly benefitted.

Rubbish---food prices are set by the international marketplace
The price you get for lamb and the price the punter pays for lamb has nothing to do with govt. subsidy