Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Livestock
Livestock & Forage
Future of the Sheep Industry
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Devil's advocate" data-source="post: 5979364" data-attributes="member: 1504"><p>Sorry I don't agree.</p><p></p><p>Lowland farmers are not put out of business, competing for inputs. That is a weather problem & less lambs should mean higher prices. Many of those lower ground farmers will also sell fodder.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Grips on the higher moors, have contributed to flooding good arable land around say York. So I see sense in compensating hill farmers to block grips or better still have leaky dams.</p><p></p><p>The high moors have done well out of subsidies & rightly so because they produce so much more than lambs, Exercise towniew walking, produce drinking water, habitat for wildlife & carbon capture.</p><p></p><p>I'm with you when it comes to predators, lynx,wolk, eagles whatever.</p><p></p><p>I also think the grants for drystone walls have been a wonderful investment of public money & a good boundary is what makes land mangeable or not with livestock. Fencing is a very high cost on extensive areas, walls are so much more helping with shelter & soil erosion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Devil's advocate, post: 5979364, member: 1504"] Sorry I don't agree. Lowland farmers are not put out of business, competing for inputs. That is a weather problem & less lambs should mean higher prices. Many of those lower ground farmers will also sell fodder. Grips on the higher moors, have contributed to flooding good arable land around say York. So I see sense in compensating hill farmers to block grips or better still have leaky dams. The high moors have done well out of subsidies & rightly so because they produce so much more than lambs, Exercise towniew walking, produce drinking water, habitat for wildlife & carbon capture. I'm with you when it comes to predators, lynx,wolk, eagles whatever. I also think the grants for drystone walls have been a wonderful investment of public money & a good boundary is what makes land mangeable or not with livestock. Fencing is a very high cost on extensive areas, walls are so much more helping with shelter & soil erosion. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Livestock
Livestock & Forage
Future of the Sheep Industry
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top