Food security is a silly argument…

[Mythoughts]

Perception and perspective are very different things. Generally individuals and old farmers see food security as an existential threat eg if we had a major war (see WW2) and we struggle to have enough food in the UK. Retailers and governments see food security along the lines of “are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry
2. A major natural hazard, think Yellowstone eruption. Food production will be challenged for everyone for 5 - 10yrs
3. Negative impacts of climate change (most likely issue). Food efficiency will be the most important thing to resolve - say goodnight to intensively produced meat using cereals or on land that can grow cereal, pulses, oilseeds etc.

So what’s the point of this post? Bluntly, we need to stop banging on about food security or food miles. It’s a rubbish argument. We need to be embracing SFS, SFI and other schemes, accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune and most Importantly get retailers, governments and consumers to measure efficiency of ag systems by environmental credentials eg carbon use, biodiversity gain rather than pure financial costs. We need to produce to standards that achieve these things which, by any measure, they don’t currently. Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

 

[andybk]

not a corporate member of red tractor are you ? sounds like a BRC soundbite !
your other posts suggest the same

 

[Bald Rick]

Time to fire up @delilah

 

[deleted user 837354]

Perception and perspective are very different things. Generally individuals and old farmers see food security as an existential threat eg if we had a major war (see WW2) and we struggle to have enough food in the UK. Retailers and governments see food security along the lines of “are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry
2. A major natural hazard, think Yellowstone eruption. Food production will be challenged for everyone for 5 - 10yrs
3. Negative impacts of climate change (most likely issue). Food efficiency will be the most important thing to resolve - say goodnight to intensively produced meat using cereals or on land that can grow cereal, pulses, oilseeds etc.

So what’s the point of this post? Bluntly, we need to stop banging on about food security or food miles. It’s a rubbish argument. We need to be embracing SFS, SFI and other schemes, accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune and most Importantly get retailers, governments and consumers to measure efficiency of ag systems by environmental credentials eg carbon use, biodiversity gain rather than pure financial costs. We need to produce to standards that achieve these things which, by any measure, they don’t currently. Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

Don't know what you are worrying about. A lot of farmers are going to stop growing food and paying money into red tractor as a result, the government are offering money to be park keepers. You should be pleased, surely.

 

[Y Fan Wen]

“are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry

There is a war going on in the West now. Think of a container carrier being torpedoed in the Atlantic. Insurance companies withdraw cover. Shipowners don't sail with no cover. Are the supply routes secure? No.

 

[Nearly]

21st century food security is security of food availability day by day into the urban areas from the rural.

Covid based supply chain interruptions and rumoured shortages of bog roll can soon cause a population to cause even more disruption.

Planting what used to be called weeds around a wet headland isn't going to make up for a family of 4 flying away on 3 holidays a year or a climate change scientist attending and speaking at 6 conferences a year, one on each continent.

Money spent in the UK on UK food has a better chance of rattling around the UK economy long enough to do some good, than importing NZ lamb, European veg, N American grains or S. American beef.

It's the same as all this greenwashing and carbon neutral stuff is rubbish but burning less of the black gold that is under Saudi and Texas has got to be a good step forwards.

 

[Jimdog1]

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food could be challenged.

Do you not think that problems with the suez root from Southern hemisphere to North are not affecting food prices? Beef processors offering forward contracts priced way beyond anything currently achievable? A producer base fed up with ever more onerous compliance? You believe what you want but I believe we have reached a tipping point where home production could tumble.

 

[Jimdog1]

accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune

Taxpayer money is increasingly having less of an effect on my profitability.

 

[Jimdog1]

Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

The taxpayer and the Supermarkets can bid for what I produce.

 

[Treg]

Perception and perspective are very different things. Generally individuals and old farmers see food security as an existential threat eg if we had a major war (see WW2) and we struggle to have enough food in the UK. Retailers and governments see food security along the lines of “are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry
2. A major natural hazard, think Yellowstone eruption. Food production will be challenged for everyone for 5 - 10yrs
3. Negative impacts of climate change (most likely issue). Food efficiency will be the most important thing to resolve - say goodnight to intensively produced meat using cereals or on land that can grow cereal, pulses, oilseeds etc.

So what’s the point of this post? Bluntly, we need to stop banging on about food security or food miles. It’s a rubbish argument. We need to be embracing SFS, SFI and other schemes, accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune and most Importantly get retailers, governments and consumers to measure efficiency of ag systems by environmental credentials eg carbon use, biodiversity gain rather than pure financial costs. We need to produce to standards that achieve these things which, by any measure, they don’t currently. Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

Food security has been very simple the last few years, because food supplies have been between 2% over and below what's needed in the world .
Apparently 5 % below is when we start to get problems, it means a 10 - 20 % increase in the price of food ( is that where we are now ? ) , 10% below and we start to get 30 - 40 % increases in prices and obviously more than 10% below and price increase even more.
So as a rich nation we probably for the short term can buy other countries food but longer term as food gets more expensive/ short those countries have their own people to feed.
Avocados spring to mind, they have become popular in western diets and now Mexicans struggle to afford them, is that morally right for us to do that to a population?

That brings us to SFS and GFC, maybe SFI.
SFS means a 20 % reduction in output, so wheres the lost foods produced going to come from?

GFC - 50 % reduction in livestock / 80 % reduction in fertiliser
60% of the world's fertiliser is Organic and comes from livestock, so we're talking a huge cut in production , at a guess 30- 40 % +
I'm a Organic Farmer so I know by going Organic there's a 25% cut in production but that's with Livestock manures used, if we cut livestock we won't have the natural manure either so that's why I think there will be a 30- 40 % cut in production.
Go back to the beginning of my post , a 30 % reduction will have a massive effect on food prices and will force this country to buy from the most vulnerable people in the world and could cause even more climate change and ecological damage but its OK because it will be somewhere else not here.

I agree with you farms need to be measured for carbon use and biodiversity, farmers then need to be rewarded fairly for their environmental impact or encouraged to improve it.

 

[vantage]

Perception and perspective are very different things. Generally individuals and old farmers see food security as an existential threat eg if we had a major war (see WW2) and we struggle to have enough food in the UK. Retailers and governments see food security along the lines of “are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry
2. A major natural hazard, think Yellowstone eruption. Food production will be challenged for everyone for 5 - 10yrs
3. Negative impacts of climate change (most likely issue). Food efficiency will be the most important thing to resolve - say goodnight to intensively produced meat using cereals or on land that can grow cereal, pulses, oilseeds etc.

So what’s the point of this post? Bluntly, we need to stop banging on about food security or food miles. It’s a rubbish argument. We need to be embracing SFS, SFI and other schemes, accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune and most Importantly get retailers, governments and consumers to measure efficiency of ag systems by environmental credentials eg carbon use, biodiversity gain rather than pure financial costs. We need to produce to standards that achieve these things which, by any measure, they don’t currently. Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

Does this mean we can all have 37.5 hour weeks, because we’d be an employee of the state?
Pretty sure we’d be eligible for “privilege” days as well as holidays!

 

[andybk]

oh and another thing on carbon audits

https://twitter.com/x/status/1761659402396799151

 

[Werzle]

Perception and perspective are very different things. Generally individuals and old farmers see food security as an existential threat eg if we had a major war (see WW2) and we struggle to have enough food in the UK. Retailers and governments see food security along the lines of “are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry
2. A major natural hazard, think Yellowstone eruption. Food production will be challenged for everyone for 5 - 10yrs
3. Negative impacts of climate change (most likely issue). Food efficiency will be the most important thing to resolve - say goodnight to intensively produced meat using cereals or on land that can grow cereal, pulses, oilseeds etc.

So what’s the point of this post? Bluntly, we need to stop banging on about food security or food miles. It’s a rubbish argument. We need to be embracing SFS, SFI and other schemes, accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune and most Importantly get retailers, governments and consumers to measure efficiency of ag systems by environmental credentials eg carbon use, biodiversity gain rather than pure financial costs. We need to produce to standards that achieve these things which, by any measure, they don’t currently. Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

Had lunch with a non farming friend today who believes food security isnt a problem, reckons half the population are too fat and ought to eat less
anyway ,and we still waste tons of good food. He thought the welsh farmers have had loads of subsidy over the years and should of got their house in order by now. He hasnt seen any rubbish tractors at the demo's from around the uk or eu either. We have to agree to disagree when we get together. I dont think importing cheap food and goods while destroying ways of life and industry in the uk is a good thing, work is good for the soul. I dont think importing from countries ignoring pollution etc just to make our figures look good is the future either, we are a tiny island that isnt going to make a mark in reduced world emissions regardless of how deep we cut. If people want the country to go full rewilding then man is top of the food chain and should have free run at killing anything he likes, all protections taken off etc.

Its always interesting to here other peoples views, from his corporate world he said people arent getting jobs on merit anymore. Firms have quotas to fill, so many women and so many different colours/religions regardless of ability/ best candidate have to be employed to look equal etc.

 

[Boysground]

Perception and perspective are very different things. Generally individuals and old farmers see food security as an existential threat eg if we had a major war (see WW2) and we struggle to have enough food in the UK. Retailers and governments see food security along the lines of “are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry
2. A major natural hazard, think Yellowstone eruption. Food production will be challenged for everyone for 5 - 10yrs
3. Negative impacts of climate change (most likely issue). Food efficiency will be the most important thing to resolve - say goodnight to intensively produced meat using cereals or on land that can grow cereal, pulses, oilseeds etc.

So what’s the point of this post? Bluntly, we need to stop banging on about food security or food miles. It’s a rubbish argument. We need to be embracing SFS, SFI and other schemes, accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune and most Importantly get retailers, governments and consumers to measure efficiency of ag systems by environmental credentials eg carbon use, biodiversity gain rather than pure financial costs. We need to produce to standards that achieve these things which, by any measure, they don’t currently. Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

Half a mile from where i am sat there is an army camp. This morning it is heaving with people, very few in military uniform, tomorrow they will be and I will hear a lot of machine gun fire. In a few weeks time they will be back in Ukraine. Anyone who thinks we are not now at war is deluded.


Bg

 

[Bury the Trash]

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

i suppose that's a natural non comprehension by someone who has never had their food supply restricted, or know/have known people who had their food restricted, people close to them .

 

[Welderloon]

Hmmm, noticed the 'buzz'words biodiversity & environmental credentials are included with food security & war, government 'schemes' & taxpayer money.
Then a whole lot of other eco & food standards Red Tractor type bull

 

[Werzle]

i suppose that's a natural comprehension by someone who has never had their food supply restricted, or know/have known people who had their food restricted, people close to them .

Look how people panicked when toilet roll was rumoured to be short. Let these troll idiots have there way, us farmers can grow enough food for our families and friends so sod em

 

[JP1]

Perception and perspective are very different things. Generally individuals and old farmers see food security as an existential threat eg if we had a major war (see WW2) and we struggle to have enough food in the UK. Retailers and governments see food security along the lines of “are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry
2. A major natural hazard, think Yellowstone eruption. Food production will be challenged for everyone for 5 - 10yrs
3. Negative impacts of climate change (most likely issue). Food efficiency will be the most important thing to resolve - say goodnight to intensively produced meat using cereals or on land that can grow cereal, pulses, oilseeds etc.

So what’s the point of this post? Bluntly, we need to stop banging on about food security or food miles. It’s a rubbish argument. We need to be embracing SFS, SFI and other schemes, accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune and most Importantly get retailers, governments and consumers to measure efficiency of ag systems by environmental credentials eg carbon use, biodiversity gain rather than pure financial costs. We need to produce to standards that achieve these things which, by any measure, they don’t currently. Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

The Country nearly ran out of bog rolls during a Covid scare

I wouldn't be so cock sure we in Britain could afford more than other countries to buy our food

 

[primmiemoo]

Perception and perspective are very different things. Generally individuals and old farmers see food security as an existential threat eg if we had a major war (see WW2) and we struggle to have enough food in the UK. Retailers and governments see food security along the lines of “are the supply routes secure, are the shelves full, are people happy”.

it is quite difficult to comprehend a time when UK food security could be challenged.

1. If there is a war then it’s nuclear and we’ll have bigger fish to fry
2. A major natural hazard, think Yellowstone eruption. Food production will be challenged for everyone for 5 - 10yrs
3. Negative impacts of climate change (most likely issue). Food efficiency will be the most important thing to resolve - say goodnight to intensively produced meat using cereals or on land that can grow cereal, pulses, oilseeds etc.

So what’s the point of this post? Bluntly, we need to stop banging on about food security or food miles. It’s a rubbish argument. We need to be embracing SFS, SFI and other schemes, accept we take taxpayer money and they call the tune and most Importantly get retailers, governments and consumers to measure efficiency of ag systems by environmental credentials eg carbon use, biodiversity gain rather than pure financial costs. We need to produce to standards that achieve these things which, by any measure, they don’t currently. Every farm should be completing a carbon and biodiversity account with profitability in those areas being prioritised. Taxpayer money can then go to those areas to make up the financial shortfalls.

You're writing this with a full tum, aren't you. Fact is, there are many points of weakness in the foodchain that are currently under pressure ~ if not immediate and real attack ~ from combinations of complacency, ineptitude, ignorance, and plain malice.

Food security is completely interlinked with battling climate change, and building biodiversity. We don't live in a virtual world within a computer.

 

[Mythoughts]

There is a war going on in the West now. Think of a container carrier being torpedoed in the Atlantic. Insurance companies withdraw cover. Shipowners don't sail with no cover. Are the supply routes secure? No.

Totally secure. Just clutching at straws there