navitron
 
Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum
UK's most popular Renewable Energy Forum May 25, 2012, 06:05:11 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Anyone wishing to register as a new member on the forum is strongly recommended to use a "proper" email address - following recent spam/hack attempts on the forum, all security is set to "high", and "disposable" email addresses like Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail tend to be viewed with suspicion, and the application rejected if there is any doubt whatsoever
 
Recent Articles: UPDATE ON DECC APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT | Yingli Green Energy's PV Module Ranks No.2 in TUV Rheinland Energy Yield Test | Navitron Solar Showers at Glastonbury for Year 5!
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: EU rules 'encouraging farmers to plough up grasslands'  (Read 669 times)
martin
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11438



WWW
« on: February 03, 2012, 01:42:18 PM »

 from - http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/03/eu-farmers-plough-grasslands

"Experts say farmers have begun mowing down wildlife-rich pastures so that they can continue to claim European subsidies

Farmers are being encouraged to plough up some of the most quintessential English landscapes so that they can continue to claim European subsidies, experts have warned.

Wildlife-rich pastures – which have made famous the New Forest clearings, the South Downs, the Cotswolds and the Chilterns – are under threat after the EU proposed rule changes to the common agricultural policy.

Experts have warned that to escape the penalties, farmers are already mowing down the grassland ahead of the 2014 deadline for registering their permanent pasture - in case they want to plant them later.

Many such fields will be "improved" grasslands - actually monocultures with little natural value. But an estimated 100,000 hectares remain that are rich in different plants and fungi, and teeming with bees, moths and butterflies - the result of more than 6,000 years of traditional farming practices and modern conservation.

"Our real worry is that this will drive a period of significant grassland loss through ploughing," said Miles King, director of conservation for the Grasslands Trust. "We don't mind particularly if intensive agricultural grassland is converted to arable. However, the loss of unimproved or semi-improved grassland is very serious. There's so little of it left: every single bit really matters now. It's like somebody bulldozing a medieval church to put in a housing estate: these are as much a part of our heritage as any church or work of art."

So far the trust has only heard reports of important grasslands ploughed up last summer, soon after the reform proposals were leaked. However land agents and farming meetings are reported to be discussing the need to act before the deadline.

"You may want to keep your grassland area to a minimum between now and 2014, or ensure that grassland is rotated before the five-year point, to prevent it becoming permanent pasture and landlords should also give consideration to what their tenants are doing," Sarah Macdonald-Smith of property company Strutt & Parker told the Guardian.

Concern about the incentive for farmers to act soon has also prompted warnings from the environment secretary, Caroline Spelman, and NFU president, Peter Kendall.

Talking to MPs on the environment, food and rural affairs select committee in January, Spelman said she had warned the EU environment commissioner, Janez Potočnik, of one of the "unintended consequences" of the rule changes: "You might find yourself as a farmer ploughing up high-value permanent grassland."

At a recent farming conference, Kendall urged farmers not to be "frightened them into ploughing up permanent pasture", adding there was "everything to play for" as farmers lobby to revise the proposals"
Logged

Unpaid volunteer administrator and moderator (not employed by Navitron) - Views expressed are my own - curmudgeonly babyboomer! - http://www.farmco.co.uk
dhaslam
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4561



« Reply #1 on: February 03, 2012, 03:54:46 PM »

The proposals are quite complicated but  the promising part  is 30% of funds allocated  to climatic and environmental matters, this includes on farm electricity generation.   In Ireland there is expectation  that the developed farms will get less and less productive farms will receive more in aid.  Total aid to Ireland is about €2 billion and  it is  the  only income that farmers have because most farm enterprises are unprofitable.    It works out on average  at  social welfare levels of income but a high percentage of farmers are over 66 and have pensions.  Younger farmers need off farm  income or to marry a civil servant.       
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-post-2013/legal-proposals/com627/627_en.pdf
Logged
clivejo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348


« Reply #2 on: February 03, 2012, 04:41:36 PM »

How about paying farmers a decent price for their produce?  Your lucky to break even in farming these days, all inputs are costing x amounts more, but no increase in produce. 

But then they wouldn't be forced to comply with stupid EU rules which are ruining the countryside and getting paid to do stupid white elephant things  chocolateteapot  But no, its better to ruin the poor old farmer and let the big supermarkets get rich at their expense.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2012, 04:47:15 PM by clivejo » Logged
SimonHobson
Guest
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2012, 12:04:05 PM »

How about paying farmers a decent price for their produce?
Spot on.

I know a lot of people regard farmers as people with a lot of money but who moan all the time about not having any - and for a very small few that may be the case. Most farmers are "rich" in the sense that if they sold up they'd have a reasonable pot of cash - but then no job and no income. A very few make a decent income from carefully maximising their income from subsidies - and why not ? For the majority, at least one member of the family having a part time job to pay bills is now the norm.

The problem is "the system", as the original article suggests. No UK farmer can afford not to take every penny he can get - to go it alone would mean competing against cheap imports from countries which are (lets be charitable) "a bit slow" in implementing costly things like animal welfare regulations.

I recall a few years ago there was a short series on the subject of farming and subsidies etc. The host was an arable farmer with umpteen gazillion acres of grain. He freely admitted he made most of his money from subsidies - but tellingly said he'd be happy if they weren't tehre as long as he had a level playing field to compete on.

Back to the original topic. I have a few friends in farming, and one in particular was affected when the "right to roam" stuff was brought in - needless to say, back then plenty of people were doing all they could to minimise the amount of their land that would be classed as unimproved land - and thus stuck with a public right to roam for a good few years given the difficulty of getting things reclassified later.


And just remember - there is only one professional I know of where you "buy retail, sell wholesale, and pay carriage both ways" !
Logged
brackwell
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 735


« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2012, 12:55:38 PM »

IF you were to use the arguments of the ship building,electronics,motor cycles,clothes and all the other industries we dont do now then perhaps we should not be supporting UNCOMPETETIVE farms. Why pick on farming?

Ken
Logged
clivejo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348


« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2012, 04:19:40 PM »

IF you were to use the arguments of the ship building,electronics,motor cycles,clothes and all the other industries we dont do now then perhaps we should not be supporting UNCOMPETETIVE farms. Why pick on farming?

Ken

Your creating a false economy.  It used to be profitable to ship produce half way around the world, just because its profitable doesn't mean its right.  Now we are seeing transport costs rise and therefore food prices will rise too.   Animals are transported miles in lorries to EU approved abattoirs and preach about animal welfare.  A farmer's family cant drink raw milk in the fear that if someone gets a stomach bug they will get blamed and shut down.  A litre of milk leaves the farm at 27p, however is sold in the local shop at 80p per litre. 

Farms aren't competitive now due to a distorted market place(huge supermarkets with massive buying power that actually enforce losses on farmers).  When fuel gets more expensive (which it will) these farms will be 'competitive' once again, only problem is how many will be left !!  The countryside is losing / has lost all these local skills in butchery, farming (non-intensive), clothes making, sewing, making cheese, butter etc.  Its a sad fact that the country is losing its ability to be self sustaining, but maybe that's the grand plan.  To gain power you need to have something people want, otherwise your just a crazy fool.

On paper a farmer may appear (fancy accounting tricks) to be rich, but as the property boom and bust shows us, something is only worth what a buyer will pay for it.  It no one wants it, its worth nothing.  Like Greek government bonds!
Logged
martin
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11438



WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2012, 04:25:34 PM »

"perhaps we should not be supporting UNCOMPETETIVE farms" - sadly, to be "competitive" usually means espousing all the planet-wrecking ways beloved of Big Ag -  hefty inputs, monocultures, buckets of pesticides, (if Caroline "GM lobbyist" Spelman gets her way), GMOs - all destined to hurtle us even faster towards eco-armaggedon, when what we need is to encourage genuinely sustainable farming and horticulture (which like many sustainable things, will need some subsidy to "get up and running") garden
Logged

Unpaid volunteer administrator and moderator (not employed by Navitron) - Views expressed are my own - curmudgeonly babyboomer! - http://www.farmco.co.uk
SimonHobson
Guest
« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2012, 05:08:47 PM »

Well I never - I find myself in complete agreement with Martin faint

Well almost complete agreement
Logged
desperate
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 651


Me and Microdesp cremating something to eat.


WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2012, 09:25:31 PM »

Interesting bit on Countryline earlier this evening, apparently a survey of the public revealed first priority to be price, but surprisingly to me a very close second was animal welfare. Sadly paying extra for organic produce has slipped way down the list. Also I read somewhere recently that farm gate prices for something or other was the same as it was in the mid '70s. Supermarkets are obviously following the research results to the point that the farmer can't make a living anymore. As Clivejo says somewhere between the farmgate and the shop shelf 60% of the price is squirelled away onpatrol

Desp
Logged

Crazy old duffer
clivejo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348


« Reply #9 on: February 05, 2012, 09:46:40 PM »

Wondering where the money goes?  Take a look at supermarket profits !!!

Subsidies => Farmer (Farmer produces and sells at a loss, in most cases just breaking even and cant pay his/her own salary!)  => Supermarkets (who dominate the market)  

So, if you cut out the middle man EU subsidies go indirectly to supermarkets profits!
« Last Edit: February 05, 2012, 09:51:04 PM by clivejo » Logged
desperate
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 651


Me and Microdesp cremating something to eat.


WWW
« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2012, 09:53:35 PM »

Wondering where the money goes?  Take a look at supermarket profits !!!

Subsidies => Farmer (Farmer produces and sells at a loss, in most cases just breaking even and cant pay his/her own salary!)  => Supermarkets (who dominate the market)  

So, if you cut out the middle man EU subsidies go indirectly to supermarkets profits!

No, far from it, thats why I say squirelled away, probably to the Cayman Islands or similar fume

Desp
Logged

Crazy old duffer
clivejo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348


« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2012, 10:19:17 PM »

If the farmer was paid a better price and made a profit, that extra money would be spent in the local economy.  For example, hiring more staff, updating farm processes, investing in renewables, research etc.

But its all fixed that he/she can't do that.  Insurance with strings attached, EU rules to comply with, Health and Safety legalisation, its all just a mine field. You cant do right by doing wrong. Young people with any sense will steer well clear of farming and future generations will live to regret how present farmers are being treated.

Most farmers care about their environment and want to do the best for it, its their livelihood after all.  I look around and see family lines who have always been in farming down the generations, but now are encouraging the next generation not to be a farmer, is a sad oman!
Logged
Rupert
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2012, 10:28:52 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4maHhTMa6D0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-RhfyUj_9k&feature=related
« Last Edit: February 05, 2012, 10:30:49 PM by Rupert » Logged
clivejo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348


« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2012, 11:38:17 PM »

I agree partly with what he says, but I doubt any farmer will be driving a Lamborghini!  Its just not practical, imagine the mess jumping in that with dirty wellies to run after escapee sheep! 

Farmers seem to be a different mindset, its not about status symbols, its about providing for oneself, family and community.  I seriously doubt any bankers would be prepared to 'roll up their sleeves, and get their hands dirty'.  I remember my city dwelling cousins visiting and pledging to never drink milk again after finding out where it came from  facepalm

I agree that investors who invest in farming for the long haul will be rewarded.  Farmers want to farm, not push paper.  So anyone who is straight talking, prepared to treat them right and act as the middle man would be ideal.  I will christen this person a "farmer enabler" or FE for short.  The ratio of an FE to farmers should be kept low and the FE should be local, available day or night.   hysteria
Logged
Rupert
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #14 on: February 05, 2012, 11:49:36 PM »

I think he is basically saying that farming will now be a good investment..........You do know who he is?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!