"Improving Our Lot" - Planned Holistic Grazing, for starters..

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
I've just listened to this podcasts on measuring and accounting for ruminant methane. It's highly recommended.

 

RushesToo

Member
Location
Fingringhoe
True but to actual be truly Regenerative takes a very different mindset. I very much doubt farmers could be accidentally doing that.
Acidentally probably not, but inherited "what's right" and thought through actions - yes.
There's not so much difference between learning from generations before and using the best of what is availble following your principles and it looking "accidental".
Life is full of interesting greys and people getting the same place different ways - including never swaying much from what they always knew.
 

Farmer Roy

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
NSW, Newstralya
For a farm to be regenerative it must be profitable, I have yet to find a genuinely regenerative farm that is not profitable. Production methods and stewardship are only 2 parts of the whole that is a farm, each farm will have many parts and priorities that must work together for it to work.

The produce from a regenerative farm should be more valuable in the marketplace than the standard commodity but to achieve this value customers need to be made aware of what is on offer through ‘marketing’. The person who controls this marketing will reap the profit earned after the produce leaves the farm, this profit is often equal to the commodity price received by the farmer. The farmer has the opportunity to do this marketing, either on their own or in cooperation with others, or allow others to profit which will always be the case if they sell their produce as bulk commodities which farmers in low cost systems in other countries will always be able to produce more cheaply.

To me regenerative farming is centred around regenerating the soil and ecosystems of the farm but also regenerating the profitability of the business and quality of life of the farm families.

oh yes, I fully agree with farms needing to be profitable, the 3 legged pot & all that. I also agree that in the long term, regenerative farms should be more profitable & resilient than reductionist models

I may not have explained myself clearly, but the main point I was making was people shouldn’t be attracted to or attach themselves to a “regen” label purely from a marketing view, such as Red Tractor or an organic label.
Some farmers CAN market direct to the public , sell a story, make a connection with the public & charge a premium for it. There are many examples I know off, both small & large farms.
However, the reality is that farmers produce bulk commodities & most people are disconnected with where food comes from.

I know many people personally who are involved in regen ag, some who have been doing it for 20 - 30 years, all on a bigger scale than most in the UK, some very large & some corporate farms. Yes, there is some potential to increase prices by clever marketing, but that is a very different thing from running a profitable business. It IS possible to be profitable producing bulk commodities, but not just by throwing more inputs or by chasing yield. But just tagging a “regen” label on a couple of decks of trade cows or a B Double of wheat, doesn’t increase their value in any way, nor should it. That is a very simplistic, reductionist way of thinking.

Sorry, I’m being a bit random & have probably lost people.

my point is - people shouldn’t get hung up on the idea of trying to stick a “regen” label on their produce, like a RT or organics sticker.
That is just a distraction from the “wholes” & the numerous other reasons for going down the regen road. Yes, if you can milk the marketing aspect & make it work for you & your customers, great, go for it, knock yourself out.
But - I also hate labels. Everyone has a different holistic context, everyone is at a different stage & everyone’s regenerative journey is different. How do you fit that ( never mind the huge diversity of agricultural industries ) into boxes to tick ?
It can’t be restrictive or prescription based or about being told what you can & cant do. That is a subject for another discussion on mindsets, paradigm differences between UK / Euro & North America / Africa / NZ / Australia . . . But I won’t subject anyone to that now
 

Farmer Roy

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
NSW, Newstralya
The difference with “regenerative” is in the word itself. It is an ongoing thing, regenerating, improving, changing.

in contrast, Organic for example, once you’ve jumped through all the hoops, ticked all the boxes & satisfied the requirements to get your certification, you never need to change or look at things differently. You can just then keep doing the same thing indefinitely

regen is the other half of HM planning & feed back loops. It doesn’t stand still or rest on it’s laurels.
 

Farmer Roy

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
NSW, Newstralya
Oh yes
Regen should be inclusive, supportive & a “safe” environment, where farmers can share & learn from each other - a bit like this thread.
It shouldn’t be prescriptive, rule based or fundamental, like I have seen in some FB groups.

we don’t need another “religion”

However - if some snake oil selling cûnt wants to hijack the “concept” purely for their own commercial gain, while clearly still being stuck in a reductionist paradigm & potentially watering down that “concept” - then they need to be accountable
 

onesiedale

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Derbyshire
oh yes, I fully agree with farms needing to be profitable, the 3 legged pot & all that. I also agree that in the long term, regenerative farms should be more profitable & resilient than reductionist models

I may not have explained myself clearly, but the main point I was making was people shouldn’t be attracted to or attach themselves to a “regen” label purely from a marketing view, such as Red Tractor or an organic label.
Some farmers CAN market direct to the public , sell a story, make a connection with the public & charge a premium for it. There are many examples I know off, both small & large farms.
However, the reality is that farmers produce bulk commodities & most people are disconnected with where food comes from.

I know many people personally who are involved in regen ag, some who have been doing it for 20 - 30 years, all on a bigger scale than most in the UK, some very large & some corporate farms. Yes, there is some potential to increase prices by clever marketing, but that is a very different thing from running a profitable business. It IS possible to be profitable producing bulk commodities, but not just by throwing more inputs or by chasing yield. But just tagging a “regen” label on a couple of decks of trade cows or a B Double of wheat, doesn’t increase their value in any way, nor should it. That is a very simplistic, reductionist way of thinking.

Sorry, I’m being a bit random & have probably lost people.

my point is - people shouldn’t get hung up on the idea of trying to stick a “regen” label on their produce, like a RT or organics sticker.
That is just a distraction from the “wholes” & the numerous other reasons for going down the regen road. Yes, if you can milk the marketing aspect & make it work for you & your customers, great, go for it, knock yourself out.
But - I also hate labels. Everyone has a different holistic context, everyone is at a different stage & everyone’s regenerative journey is different. How do you fit that ( never mind the huge diversity of agricultural industries ) into boxes to tick ?
It can’t be restrictive or prescription based or about being told what you can & cant do. That is a subject for another discussion on mindsets, paradigm differences between UK / Euro & North America / Africa / NZ / Australia . . . But I won’t subject anyone to that now
Roy, you have explained your view well. Its just that there is a lot more to the mindsets than people first think. Sadly it is this holistic thought process that often gets labelled and pigeon holed into that ’new religion' category we're trying to avoid. Like you said, there is a much deeper discussion to be had underneath all this.
Has @martian booked you yet as a key speaker at Groundswell in June?
 

onesiedale

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Derbyshire
There is an importance to a label. It défines a process on an agrééd set if standards; thèse standards (such as organics) can and do évolve, and therefore can bé critised and redefined.

If it can open access to new markets thén thats great.

I dont get this organic farming bashing coming from reg farming circles.
I don't see any reason not to do both.
I don't think its 'organic bashing' more so label bashing.
To put a label on something is to automatically add cost. Hopefully that cost can be recouped by a higher market value. This is where the organic label is streets ahead of the RegenAg label.
Taking Roy's view, not having the label is actually not incurring the cost thus it's a win win for everyone in the chain through to the consumer.
Really, I guess it's more a matter of trust and knowing what is right.
How can you label trust?
 

Farmer Roy

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
NSW, Newstralya
Roy, you have explained your view well. Its just that there is a lot more to the mindsets than people first think. Sadly it is this holistic thought process that often gets labelled and pigeon holed into that ’new religion' category we're trying to avoid. Like you said, there is a much deeper discussion to be had underneath all this.
Has @martian booked you yet as a key speaker at Groundswell in June?

I just get a bit frustrated that EVERY discussion on TFF about improving farm profitability focusses on getting higher prices for commodities ( apart from the Boss wanting more payments ) and apart from a few small niche markets, it aint gunna happen !
one of the beauties of the regen / HM approach is it allows you to look at all the factors affecting profitability, not just the selling price - which is most often the one we have no control over !

I was just getting the impression people were getting hung up on a regen label hoping their commodities would be worth more. Plenty of posts here saying RT does nothing for the consumer or price received, or not enough to be worth the hassle. Yes, organics do attract a premium, but that is largely due to a niche market & limited supply. Organic wheat ( for example ) is worth more, largely because it is in limited supply. I could potentially grow organic wheat ( although from memory it takes 7 years to be fully accredited ? ) but I wont because it is too limiting & too restrictive for my operation, my climate, without giving me the flexibility that I need. Having said that, as an arable farmer my aim is to transition away from all synthetic inputs, reintroduce ruminants onto my land & ultimately organic zero till is the aim. I may never truly get there, but that is the direction I am headed. My basic philosophy is "aim to do the least amount of harm", recognising that some ( if not most ) of my activities are harmful to the environment . . . I just don't like prescriptive labels & limited access to a tool box

Regen Ag is more about following certain guidelines or principles, generally focussing on soil / water / environmental health, & adapting them to your situation, rather than strict rules from a central Association or Board. Combining it with HM principles & thinking is where the magic really happens & I don't believe the true potential of regen can be accomplished without a HM mindset.
It is so much more than a label to hang on your produce . . .
 
Last edited:

Farmer Roy

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
NSW, Newstralya
getting back to labels

I grew up on a family farm
I have been working in agriculture since I was 18, all of 36 years
The first 11 years were away from home.
I have been running my own show for about 25 years, as well as casual or contracting work for others in this time.
Admittedly, Ive always produced or been involved with commodities, not "food"
In all that time, either working for others or myself, "labels" have been irrelevant to any selling or marketing.
There are general guidelines & standards for each commodity ( remember, a lot of our stuff is exported & has to meet very stringent specs & standards, or we risk losing valuable markets ), with very thorough testing & inspections at receival points ( for grains etc ) or abattoirs, along with legally binding Vendors Declarations & traceability. Not to forget testing at the final destination buyers & end users. If you f`uck up or try to cheat, you ARE going to get caught out. You've all seen our "Border Security" type TV shows & how tight our customs / quarantine services are. Our buyers, traders, industry bodies & government standards for our commodities are just as tight . . .

a label means NOTHING - unless you are selling DIRECT to the discerning public, with your own branding & story . . .
Very difficult if you are selling grain or meat into bulk commodity markets - which at the end of the day is where MOST of our modern / western / industrialised agricultural products end up. Especially in low population, export reliant markets like ours. Even if EVERY person in Australia only bought "Organic" ( for example ) beef, or bread, that is still a minor portion of our total output . . . The rest is just bulk commodities traded on international markets. Be it wheat, cotton, beef or SMP . . .

bulk commodities, whether its grain, fibre, meat ( & I assume milk, but I have no experience in this ) are all extensively screened, graded & tested by the buyers anyway, so THAT is the only thing that matters. We produce commodities to the requirements of the buyers, end users & food producers. That is all that matters, from a selling point of view, not the restrictive limits of an accreditation association or board, whose only reason for existence is THEIR continued survival

labels mean a lot more to a supermarket selling "food", than to farmers selling "commodities". If a supermarket requires certain standards, it will make sure the producer IS to THEIR standards, not just because the grower has a "label"

if you are selling your produce direct, in the local town, or at farmers markets, or by mail order ( as I know a number of people here do ) then I think establishing a connection with your customer, having a "story" to tell, explaining your processes & ideology, maybe even encouraging farm visits, is a far GREATER marketing tool than a "label"
I think people are smarter than that, they are getting cynical about low fat / low sugar / sustainable / green / eco friendly etc etc terms & labels. If mega corporate evil bar stards like Nestle start using them, then they have no credibility for anyone else
Don't open your farm up to inspectors & clipboards & rules - open them up to your customers & their money instead !!!!
 
Last edited:

Treg

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Cornwall
You could say I produce to a label, I doubt a farm this size could make much of a profit other wise, I certainly don't produce a commodity, I know several farms several x bigger than me that produce commodities & don't make a profit! What's the point of that?
There are lots of people in the world who don't want to be labelled but I on a personal level am quite happy to be labelled, so I guess we're all different in are out looks & in looks & again I think that's worth celebrating not hiding.
 

Farmer Roy

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
NSW, Newstralya
ahh, but people producing "just" commodities can also be profitable. In many cases, highly so. They can also do it regeneratively, sustainably, or what ever term they wish to apply to it. It doesn't necessarily follow that commodity production is bad . . .


but yeah, everyone just has to do what works for them

and that's why I reject the idea of labels.
Everyone’s holistic context is different, different motivations, desires, goals, land type, industry, climate, financial position etc etc.
that's why regen doesn't fit into a tight box, like say organic does. Organic is clear, straight simple box. Wether it is "better" or "worse" than other farming methods, for this discussion, is unclear & frankly irrelevant. If you are an organic grower & want to fit that box & can see an advantage to it - fine, great. It is generally very clear & defined & acknowledged what that means

my problem with "branding" or marketing things as "regenerative" is the definition is too wide, too diverse, to have any real meaning or accountability as a marketing "label"
to do so, I believe, just waters down the whole concept of being regenerative . . .

but hay ho, that's just me . . .
 
Last edited:

Henarar

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Somerset
You could say I produce to a label, I doubt a farm this size could make much of a profit other wise, I certainly don't produce a commodity, I know several farms several x bigger than me that produce commodities & don't make a profit! What's the point of that?
There are lots of people in the world who don't want to be labelled but I on a personal level am quite happy to be labelled, so I guess we're all different in are out looks & in looks & again I think that's worth celebrating not hiding.
No problem with a label if its good marketing but I do get fed up with claims of superiority because of a label, as above there are plenty of farmers do the same thing but don't do the paperwork and don't have the label
No dig at you or organic BTW just lots of labels
You may have guessed that I am no fan of paperwork or folk sticking their nose in or being told what to do which is probably to my detriment financially but helps with my sanity
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 79 42.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 65 34.9%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 16.1%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 6 3.2%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,287
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top