Brexit,The Donald and Farming.

paddysdream

Thread title might be a tad misleading but bear with me.

Sitting here ating the dinner and between reading the paper and listening to the radio (esp.over the last couple of days) it got me thinking about drystock farming here in this wee sainted isle of ours.
Both Brexit and Trump, we were told,would ,could and should never happen by all the experts.The message ,whether you agree with them or not,was too radical,outlandish etc etc and the consensus was that people would go for the safe option when the time came.

Now for the "farming "context.This is not meant as a criticism of Joe Healy or any of the other farm leaders but more a thought that maybe unthinkable change might work or even shake things up a bit.Although I might be wasting my time even thinking about this as Irish farmers are very slow to change even at the best of times.

Take our multi billion euro food industry.We are told morning noon and night about all the money it generates for this country and how the myriad of rules regulations and laws must be followed by us farmers so as not to disrupt this trade or put in jeopardy the countless thousands of jobs reliant on it.
I agree that it brings money into Ireland through exports but and this is the big but,how much does any one individual farmer benefit from it?
According to endless Teagasc surveys,the average drystock farmer,whose produce makes up a pretty large percentage of the food industry here,at best breaks even and in many cases is subsidising his farm from either off farm earnings or SFP.That is the reality.
One poster on here alluded to this when he said that the idea of reducing numbers and just doing enough to draw the BPS and maybe in future leasing his farm was a better idea than continuing to farm in an intensive manner.Now of course everyone's circumstances differ but if each and every farmer reduced production by say 50% would they be any worse off on average?
Fixed costs would remain the same but at a half stocking rate would not meal,fertiliser,reseeding ,vet,etc etc costs reduce dramatically?

What I am asking,in a very roundabout way ,is what stake any drystock farmer has in the food industry.Yes they purchase what we produce but do we see any real benefit from?Like I said a halving of production might not be the end of the world for any one individual farmer but imagine a 50% reduction in Dept of Ag. staff or 50% cut back in meat processors,Bord Bia etc etc.
Maybe our farm leaders should look at something like this,ie a fresh look at things like food 2020 and an ever increasing appetite for increased production from all sections of the industry bar those who actually have to try and do it without seeing many if any tangible benefit from it.
Should we negoitate by saying we are quiet happy to motor along,draw BPS and farm at a rate that would see farmers retain more of the direct and indirect supports that seem to be an indirect support for Government,merchants,vets,processors and supermarkets rather than being retained by farmers?
Let those that want raw materials sweat a little and see if those tasked with promoting,policing and processsing our beef and lamb realise that they are relying on us for their income and not the other way around.
Now I realise that many would say they are motoring along and its crazy but I am talking taking an average not individual cases.
Am I mad or would this be a realistic approach?Or would we be cutting off our noses to spite our faces?

Big ideas week in this household(thinking about the DD for the RC going out today!!!!!)

_Brian

Never work, far too many lads have no idea of their costs and profits but rather to measure their success in herd size rather than income, more must be better and sher aren't Teagasc saying to carry more more stock for lower margins so it must be true.

Grueller

I am of the very same thinking as you Paddy.
The father here is slowing down and I am working full time. He is busy all day and I am in the yard four hours every day and all day Saturday and also Sunday morning.
We have increased cow numbers, rented land expanded housing drastically since 2008. What has been the upshot? We are not one cent better off.

paddysdream

Ok forgot to say why this idea occured to me.
The picture some people have of Donald Trump sitting in the Oval Office with his finger on the Big Red Button ala Dr. Strangelove plus the idea that MAD ensured that Europe has been at peace ,relatively speaking,since 1945.
The unions(Garda and ASTI) were not afraid to push this button or at least threaten to do so,over the last week or two.
When all is forgotten in a few weeks they will have got some meaningful concessions from the Government.Whether you agree with them and their course of action is not the issue rather that the policy worked.
We as farmers have never really tried to do this or even came close.
The idea that 500,5000 etc teachers or Garda marching around Dublin for a day out,ala farmer marches,having any effect is laughable.

Regarding some striving for more production etc well its an average of drystock farmers that matters.
As an example if lamb sales per ewe increased to 1.95 on average then would farmers be any better off?On average?
At that stage people would be looking to get 2.25 sold per ewe at 14 weeks without meal to beat the rest and maybe get a return.Are we running faster to stand still?

Some will point out the increased standard of living farmers enjoy since the days when producing 800 gallons of milk or 2 tonne of barley was the norm or when a bullock at ten cwt. at 24 months was very good but the rest of society has moved on and surpassed us.

Willfarman

You are most definately correct. For the good of ourselves our neighbours and our communities. one less cow. One less sow. One less acre under the plough.

hurling_lad

Maybe all farmers should ask themselves a question: am I farming to make money or to keep the place going?

If the former, then you have to find the right system with a mix of effort, production and profit that suits you and supports your family, lifestyle etc.

If the latter, then you probably should be doing something other than farming

The idea that we, like the teachers, can go on some sort of strike doesn't stack up as the teachers have a monopoly in their market, but farmers here don't have a monopoly in any market to which we sell. Teachers also have a lot more political capital than farmers.

I'd also reckon that an across-the-board 50% reduction in production would result in many farms growing more rushes than grass. This is already a big enough problem with older farmers cutting back gradually with no successor in place.

I'm not sure if your comparison of the metaphorical red button that the Guards and teachers recently pushed with the actual red button of which Trump will soon be in charge is valid.

Willfarman

hurling_lad wrote: »

Maybe all farmers should ask themselves a question: am I farming to make money or to keep the place going?

If the former, then you have to find the right system with a mix of effort, production and profit that suits you and supports your family, lifestyle etc.

If the latter, then you probably should be doing something other than farming

The idea that we, like the teachers, can go on some sort of strike doesn't stack up as the teachers have a monopoly in their market, but farmers here don't have a monopoly in any market to which we sell. Teachers also have a lot more political capital than farmers.

I'd also reckon that an across-the-board 50% reduction in production would result in many farms growing more rushes than grass. This is already a big enough problem with older farmers cutting back gradually with no successor in place.

I'm not sure if your comparison of the metaphorical red button that the Guards and teachers recently pushed with the actual red button of which Trump will soon be in charge is valid.

We are getting nothing from production. We are living off with supports that are not linked to having to produce anything. The theory is sound but as paddy pointed out on post one it is a waste of time thinking or talking about doing something as drastic as this due to farmers here being unlikely to Change..

_Brian

Willfarman wrote: »

We are getting nothing from production. We are living off with supports that are not linked to having to produce anything. The theory is sound but as paddy pointed out on post one it is a waste of time thinking or talking about doing something as drastic as this due to farmers here being unlikely to Change..

Yes but isnt the definition of madness "doing the same thing over and over and over and somehow expecting a different result"

patsy_mccabe

Factory gate prices dictate everything. If prices were high at the moment, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
Not so easy to opt in and out of a system, there are tax implications, investment costs. Simply reducing the stocking rate, may not be the answer either, as fixed costs will remain the same and spread across less animals, even further reducing the margin.

Sam Kade

If you put €1 accumulator bet on brexit, the Premiership and trump last year you'd be collecting €4.5 million now.

paddysdream

hurling_lad wrote: »

Maybe all farmers should ask themselves a question: am I farming to make money or to keep the place going?

If the former, then you have to find the right system with a mix of effort, production and profit that suits you and supports your family, lifestyle etc.

If the latter, then you probably should be doing something other than farming

The idea that we, like the teachers, can go on some sort of strike doesn't stack up as the teachers have a monopoly in their market, but farmers here don't have a monopoly in any market to which we sell. Teachers also have a lot more political capital than farmers.

I'd also reckon that an across-the-board 50% reduction in production would result in many farms growing more rushes than grass. This is already a big enough problem with older farmers cutting back gradually with no successor in place.

I'm not sure if your comparison of the metaphorical red button that the Guards and teachers recently pushed with the actual red button of which Trump will soon be in charge is valid.

Couple of points.
As regards political capital;well you could do well to remember the buzz word of all those financial gurus from 10 years ago and leverage our (political) capital.Like I said previously,there are a lot of jobs,investments and profits as well as a lot of future plans ,predicated and relying on farmers being content to produce raw materials as cost or just above for the foreseeable future.Not only that but the expectation is that we will increase our production to fuel the wheels of the agri industry.Any impact on or mention of "future predicted growth" "job losses" "public sector reassignment " "foreign exchange earnings" etc would soon have those wielding the levers of power listening intently.

As regards growing rushes instead of grass;well people seem to be well able to produce them in abundance at the moment !!.
Anyways whats the problem with destocking and farming less intensively?Rushes may be unsightly and a hinderence to good grassland management but wouldn't anyone put up with a few patches of them in exchange for a few quid extra.Was this general idea(environmental schemes like REPS,AEOS Glas etc) not the future of farming recently.Overgrown hedges,restricted cleaning of drains,planning needed for large scale drainage or land improvement,bans on burning of bushes and ditch removal etc etc seem to be the way forward according to some.

Would the reason that many have no successor in place not give a clue to the inherent profitability or otherwise of farming?Who in their right minds could or would turn down an asset with an average value of 500k plus with many capital tax allowances as long as you have a "green cert"?
The reluctance of many to commit to it should be really ringing the alarm bells.

The "red button" idea stems from the idea that Irish farmers seem happy (by their generally conservative nature ?) to potter along in the main,never rocking the boat and almost afraid to put their head above the parapet.
Is this a legacy of 19th century landlordism,EU subsidies or something that is in the general Irish character?
To me we seem amongst the most compliant,meek and servile people in Europe,almost afraid to say boo to anyone we perceive to be in any position of authority or power.

paddysdream

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

Factory gate prices dictate everything. If prices were high at the moment, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
Not so easy to opt in and out of a system, there are tax implications, investment costs. Simply reducing the stocking rate, may not be the answer either, as fixed costs will remain the same and spread across less animals, even further reducing the margin.

Not saying there is an easy fix,just making the point that sometimes a little imagination might not go astray.Not saying that all off the wall ideas ,as mine might well be,are the answer.

Regarding fixed costs;these vary greatly from farm to farm but I think I read somewhere recently that borrowings on drystock farms were(to me anyways!) pretty low.
Can't see the average drystock farmer having borrowed to the hilt over the last few years for capital expenditure but of course there are always exceptions.
Insurance,land maintainance,upkeep of buildings etc pale in comparison to feed fuel and fert. bills.Reduced output means much lower contractor costs for silage,slurry etc along with improved animal performance.

Plus won't someone please think of the poor farmer and his much improved quality of life!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nice to lamb maybe 100 ewes in mid April on grass whilst herding the 10 heifers you ran out all winter on 40 acres with no meal and herded twice a week.
Netflix and Sky would of course see an increase in their revenue stream with all the extra time we would have on our hands though.

Grueller

paddysdream wrote: »

Netflix and Sky would of course see an increase in their revenue stream with all the extra time we would have on our hands though.

No they wouldn't. The extra time for off farm employment would leave you twice as well off as farming, even at minimum wage or little above it.

jaymla627

paddysdream wrote: »

Couple of points.
As regards political capital;well you could do well to remember the buzz word of all those financial gurus from 10 years ago and leverage our (political) capital.Like I said previously,there are a lot of jobs,investments and profits as well as a lot of future plans ,predicated and relying on farmers being content to produce raw materials as cost or just above for the foreseeable future.Not only that but the expectation is that we will increase our production to fuel the wheels of the agri industry.Any impact on or mention of "future predicted growth" "job losses" "public sector reassignment " "foreign exchange earnings" etc would soon have those wielding the levers of power listening intently.

As regards growing rushes instead of grass;well people seem to be well able to produce them in abundance at the moment !!.
Anyways whats the problem with destocking and farming less intensively?Rushes may be unsightly and a hinderence to good grassland management but wouldn't anyone put up with a few patches of them in exchange for a few quid extra.Was this general idea(environmental schemes like REPS,AEOS Glas etc) not the future of farming recently.Overgrown hedges,restricted cleaning of drains,planning needed for large scale drainage or land improvement,bans on burning of bushes and ditch removal etc etc seem to be the way forward according to some.

Would the reason that many have no successor in place not give a clue to the inherent profitability or otherwise of farming?Who in their right minds could or would turn down an asset with an average value of 500k plus with many capital tax allowances as long as you have a "green cert"?
The reluctance of many to commit to it should be really ringing the alarm bells.

The "red button" idea stems from the idea that Irish farmers seem happy (by their generally conservative nature ?) to potter along in the main,never rocking the boat and almost afraid to put their head above the parapet.
Is this a legacy of 19th century landlordism,EU subsidies or something that is in the general Irish character?
To me we seem amongst the most compliant,meek and servile people in Europe,almost afraid to say boo to anyone we perceive to be in any position of authority or power.

Don't worry, in 20 years time the farming landscape will be unrecognisable, at the present minute the cheque in the post from Europe is still greasing the wheels and keeping lads ticking over, with it been pegged back more and more every year and the absence of a price for most farmers that even covers their cop most years the whole thing will unravel quiet spectacularly....
The fact that theirs more active farmers over 70 then under 30 at the minute in Ireland tells it's own story, their isn't going to be the next generation to pick up the torch you'll have a small percentage that will and won't mind working for free but in the main 99% of young people won't bother and rightly so

charolais0153

When the lads on here were growing up I don't think there was any rich farmers especially on smaller land holdings like ours. cattle prices weren't hectic either. Why did ye go farming and don't say you had no choice cos you could of been a carpenter or block layer etc.

Grueller

charolais0153 wrote: »

When the lads on here were growing up I don't think there was any rich farmers especially on smaller land holdings like ours. cattle prices weren't hectic either. Why did ye go farming and don't say you had no choice cos you could of been a carpenter or block layer etc.

Short answer is because we love it. However, when I was growing up in the late 80s early 90s in rural Ireland the dairy farmers and possibly tillage (beet quota) seemed to have a better standard of living than paye workers. That has changed now particularly with foreign direct investment and the jobs it brought. To be fair though, around me there are plenty young lads mad to farm.

paddysdream

charolais0153 wrote: »

When the lads on here were growing up I don't think there was any rich farmers especially on smaller land holdings like ours. cattle prices weren't hectic either. Why did ye go farming and don't say you had no choice cos you could of been a carpenter or block layer etc.

Everybodys reason to go farming may differ and that is due to personal circumstance.Yes of course everyone has a choice in what to do but when you make that choice should you also be prepared to put up with it,keep your head down and plod along hoping for the best.Or maybe try and make a go of what you are at and improve things as you go along through life?

It was my choice to farm.To be honest had ample opportunity to do a myriad of other things but in my foolish youth decided that farming was for me.

And to tell you the truth if I had it all to do over again I would still pick farming.Hard to say why exactly but the combination of being your own boss(in theory anyways,don't tell the bank man!),not stuck in an office or on a factory floor or site and a lot of things that its hard to articulate make me feel that it was the right thing to do.We farmers may moan at times but at least we can drop all and run to collect the kids from school without someone looking over our shoulder and watching the clock.

People in all walks of life will strive to do the best they can and telling someone that they should just go and so something else is all well and good in theory (like those telling teachers that if they don't like it why not take up private sector employment)
Thats all fine and dandy in make believe land but rather hard for a middle aged person with family,mortgage and other commitments to up sticks and maybe retrain for a few years at something else or start in a new sector at the bottom of the ladder.Lets at least try to be realistic here.

Unsure as to when you were"growing up" but know that here whilst we were by no means millionaires at least there was a living from the farm (including one full time employee)in my fathers time.That was in the 70's.
Nowadays with almost double that amount of land,I could not see any child of mine making a living from full time farming.And by making a living I mean paying a mortgage,rearing a family and generally having enough to buy a sliced pan and a pound of rashers!!
Nobody expects to become rich from farming(well I did many years ago but bitter experience soon overcomes the optimism of youth) but at least until the last 10 to 15 years ago you could at least hope to make a living whilst reinvesting a bit in improving the place.

mikefoxo

I was thinking of starting a similar thread to this, but aimed at part time farmers. I don't know if you could say to someone making a full time job of farming to cut back production, but for the fella who just does it for the love of it or for (hopefully) a small few pound out of it. Instead of buying 40 bullocks why not just 30 or 25? Less work, less money being risked, no fertiliser bill, smaller contractor bill. it doesn't mean you let things slide, you just grow less grass and have less to worry about but still have the enjoyment of farming

paddysdream

mikefoxo wrote: »

I was thinking of starting a similar thread to this, but aimed at part time farmers. I don't know if you could say to someone making a full time job of farming to cut back production, but for the fella who just does it for the love of it or for (hopefully) a small few pound out of it. Instead of buying 40 bullocks why not just 30 or 25? Less work, less money being risked, no fertiliser bill, smaller contractor bill. it doesn't mean you let things slide, you just grow less grass and have less to worry about but still have the enjoyment of farming

At the end of the day actually making a few pound is more important to the full time farmer than some one at it part time.
My point is that more production does not mean more money in all cases.Sometimes it does and sometimes not but my general point is that a whole lot more people rely on farmers and the whole agri sector than a few cattle and sheep farmers scrabbling around hoping for a better year next year and to use that power to at least make our voices heard.Otherwise we will be taken for granted.All this food 2020 etc mullarkey assumes that farmers are happy to increase,expand and invest without seeing any concrete or measurable return.
What other sector would be willing to do this?
Its like the moral squeeze put on teachers nurses garda etc;"arra shur they can't strike cause it will destroy the very fabric of society".That record is long gone out of date and we see other sectors willing and able to stand up for their particular issues.
This is not to mean that because of any perceived recovery in the economy we should look for a bigger slice of the cake but rather that we should be prepared to be worthy of our labours and not be ashamed of it.
There is probably no magic solution to the slow demise of farming in Ireland but at least should we look to halt or even slow it and make it something that those coming after us would consider as a future.
Nothing wrong with part time farming and maybe thats the answer but do we ask teachers to consider off school employment as a viable lifestyle option or why are Garda mocked for their perceived secondary industry as part time landlords in the flat lands of Dublin and other cities instead of being praised for being progressive enough to supplement their income and not be a burden on the state?

Bass Reeves

Grueller wrote: »

I am of the very same thinking as you Paddy.
The father here is slowing down and I am working full time. He is busy all day and I am in the yard four hours every day and all day Saturday and also Sunday morning.
We have increased cow numbers, rented land expanded housing drastically since 2008. What has been the upshot? We are not one cent better off.

This is the one thing I cannot under stand any drystock farmer doing. If you are even renting it cheap at 100 euro/acre it is very hard to make money out of it. I cannot understand why more lads did not stack payments in 2015.

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

Factory gate prices dictate everything. If prices were high at the moment, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
Not so easy to opt in and out of a system, there are tax implications, investment costs. Simply reducing the stocking rate, may not be the answer either, as fixed costs will remain the same and spread across less animals, even further reducing the margin.

No fixed cost will not remain the same. Yes insurance and a few thing like that will. But the tractors will last 15 years instead of 10. You will not be laying any more concrete and not buying any more machinery. When you do buy you will be buying a smaller older tractor etc.While the books will look horrible for the first few years as you use up capital allowances you will have more money in your pocket. Variable cost will reduce as well as less fertlizer bough in feed and contractor costs.

charolais0153 wrote: »

When the lads on here were growing up I don't think there was any rich farmers especially on smaller land holdings like ours. cattle prices weren't hectic either. Why did ye go farming and don't say you had no choice cos you could of been a carpenter or block layer etc.

When I was growing up the only rich lads were Doctors, bank managers and a few local bigger business people. A farmer could make a living of 40 sucklers or 20 milking cows. While there was few rich farmers there was a good few well off ones.

Waffletraktor

Clocks dont turn backwards, nor do they sit still either to suit you.
The cost of doing business is too high in western europe to be producing commodity. Outside of dairy and veg is there enough return to justify renting at levels that get bandied about? The number of farms will plummet, all these mad to farm young fellas will simply not have a future as access to land ownership is extremely prohibitive with inheritance/earning outside money or being truely exceptional at it the only way in now on the longterm and even then nothing is safe.
Producing outputs that go anywhere but the top end of the market is a waste of time. Tillage for instance will become more about growing feeds be that forages or grains on direct contracts to stock farmers as its too hard to produce the high value crops in Ireland. Red meat?, who knows though with a dwindeling payment to keep farms thinking they are surviving and most the output not being pushed for what it could be.... Forget about feeding the people, it wont pay until everyone else gets expensive and has to abide the same rules and regs to supply into Eu and target the "the more expensive it is the more they want it" crowd to have a future.
"The ireland that we dreamed of" is just that, a dream. This notion of a few cattle will sustain you is grand for the odd older person of a by gone age who knew nothing but frugal living, who would genuinely choose this now given the options available to people now. Sure you will have lifestyle/partime farming around for many going forward into the next generation that was 1st to leave the land though i suspect this will fall away as time and life moves on too over the decades.
Its not nice, to see something with the life literally being squeezed out of it especially if its on your watch so to speak of the the family land.

20silkcut

One thing trumps election has proved beyond all doubt is how much spin we are fed about the world. When you have media and commentators all singing off the same hymn sheet you start to believe that what they say is real. Hence we went to bed Tuesday safe in the knowledge that Hilary would be president upon waking.
In the world of farming it is the very same. We are told all these different things about farming that are put out there by people with agendas and lobbyists to shape our opinions and inform our decisions so that the world is shaped as they want it.
For instance there is a constant background narrative that farming is in decline that it is a quaint old fashioned way of life that it is damaging the planet etc and is dependent on govt support and even in the minds of some an unnecessary industry and that the world is moving on and the future is the knowledge economy etc(whose headline companies are serial tax avoiders). The truth is farming is an emaciated industry but not because of any natural decline or voluntary flight from the land but because of govt policy and in particular trade deals conducted by people that are fed the narrative above and that we are a smart knowledge economy where the wealth is concentrated in the hands of the few in big cities and food is imported from second and third world countries and farming is kept on life support as a sort of famine insurance policy and to keep the countryside looking nice of course. That's where farming is at at the minute especially outside of dairying it is not an industry.
Yet we are living on the door step of the most lucrative agricultural market on the planet. We want a piece of the pie but we want to work for it and produce quality products and have a standard of living in our own communities. We don't want those damn handouts and bps and the the CAP and bowing and scraping with cap in hand at the mercy of European tax payers. It is utterly demoralising. We want to work we want an industry !!
Trump now will sit down at trade negotiations and look for concessions that no American trade team has ever looked for. They say he is trying to turn back the clock but the truth is there is no clock it is just a narrative part of the same narrative that puts the wealth where the wealthy want it to go. We can look on jealously as America seeks concessions that no European modern society would seek. They may not kick start their steel industry again to the same extent but I guarantee you before trump leaves office some steel will be produced in the rust belt again. While trump the person does not appeal to me his industrial vision very much does.

paddysdream

Waffletraktor wrote: »

Clocks dont turn backwards, nor do they sit still either to suit you.
The cost of doing business is too high in western europe to be producing commodity. Outside of dairy and veg is there enough return to justify renting at levels that get bandied about? The number of farms will plummet, all these mad to farm young fellas will simply not have a future as access to land ownership is extremely prohibitive with inheritance/earning outside money or being truely exceptional at it the only way in now on the longterm and even then nothing is safe.
Producing outputs that go anywhere but the top end of the market is a waste of time. Tillage for instance will become more about growing feeds be that forages or grains on direct contracts to stock farmers as its too hard to produce the high value crops in Ireland. Red meat?, who knows though with a dwindeling payment to keep farms thinking they are surviving and most the output not being pushed for what it could be.... Forget about feeding the people, it wont pay until everyone else gets expensive and has to abide the same rules and regs to supply into Eu and target the "the more expensive it is the more they want it" crowd to have a future.
"The ireland that we dreamed of" is just that, a dream. This notion of a few cattle will sustain you is grand for the odd older person of a by gone age who knew nothing but frugal living, who would genuinely choose this now given the options available to people now. Sure you will have lifestyle/partime farming around for many going forward into the next generation that was 1st to leave the land though i suspect this will fall away as time and life moves on too over the decades.
Its not nice, to see something with the life literally being squeezed out of it especially if its on your watch so to speak of the the family land.

Agree with what you say.
My point is more that we should realise the amount of outside interests relying on us to continue to produce raw materials at in or around cost level, not that a reduction in production is the answer.
Its the unused and probably unpalatable to many idea of using the threat of a concerted "nuclear option" to reduce production dramatically.
Of course Europe will be able to source food from other markets.Maybe not as regulated as we are and European consumers might or might not find this acceptable but thats not what I am saying.Rather that any perceived threat to the countless thousands of small businesses and jobs reliant on agriculture gives us a big lever if we have the neck to threaten it.
Farmers are as committed as anyone and nobody wants to see it end but at the end of the day,and only speaking for the drystock sector,although tillage has seen a very poor few years here in Ireland,farmers should realise that things like BPS Glas etc are only "passing through our accounts" a la Fr. Ted.
The end beneficiries of these supports are processors,supermarkets and ultimately consumers.
So if we decided to sit on our hands for a year or 2(or if the big button was likely to be pushed)would farmers be much worse off?
Know its rather hard to stop and start any farming system and its more a theory than maybe practical but none the less why has this never even been discussed ?
Our stake in the food industry is rather large but our return ???

Bass Reeves

paddysdream wrote: »

Agree with what you say.
My point is more that we should realise the amount of outside interests relying on us to continue to produce raw materials at in or around cost level, not that a reduction in production is the answer.
Its the unused and probably unpalatable to many idea of using the threat of a concerted "nuclear option" to reduce production dramatically.
Of course Europe will be able to source food from other markets.Maybe not as regulated as we are and European consumers might or might not find this acceptable but thats not what I am saying.Rather that any perceived threat to the countless thousands of small businesses and jobs reliant on agriculture gives us a big lever if we have the neck to threaten it.
Farmers are as committed as anyone and nobody wants to see it end but at the end of the day,and only speaking for the drystock sector,although tillage has seen a very poor few years here in Ireland,farmers should realise that things like BPS Glas etc are only "passing through our accounts" a la Fr. Ted.
The end beneficiries of these supports are processors,supermarkets and ultimately consumers.
So if we decided to sit on our hands for a year or 2(or if the big button was likely to be pushed)would farmers be much worse off?
Know its rather hard to stop and start any farming system and its more a theory than maybe practical but none the less why has this never even been discussed ?
Our stake in the food industry is rather large but our return ???

The sheep sector proves this point. For years sheep farmer has a negible margin producing lamb meat. Loads of lads were only drawing the headage payments producing lamb as a by product. Remember all the lads that used to buy ewe lambs draw the payment and slaughter them in May if I remember right after the retension period. This collapsed the lamb trade for rest of the summer.

Production dropped from the late noughties and now instead od lamb prices of 3-4 euro/kg they vary from 4.5-6.5/kg depending on time of year and product supplied.

kowtow

It strikes me that throughout this thread we all mention money, payments, work, even lifestyle and self-determination, but nobody has said the one thing that might actually send us in a direction which ensures the health and relative wealth of our farms..

which is "because my neighbours and I produce the best [lamb/beef/milk] in the world, our customers wouldn't be without it, and we love doing it"

freedominacup

Bass Reeves wrote: »

. A farmer could make a living of 40 sucklers or 20 milking cows. While there was few rich farmers there was a good few well off ones.

When was this? Twenty cows hasn't been capable of providing a living in my lifetime. This farm was started with sixty in calf heifers and sixty heifercalves in the very early seventies. Twenty cows providing a living? maybe during the civil war certainly not since.

Waffletraktor

paddysdream wrote: »

Agree with what you say.
My point is more that we should realise the amount of outside interests relying on us to continue to produce raw materials at in or around cost level, not that a reduction in production is the answer.
Its the unused and probably unpalatable to many idea of using the threat of a concerted "nuclear option" to reduce production dramatically.
Of course Europe will be able to source food from other markets.Maybe not as regulated as we are and European consumers might or might not find this acceptable but thats not what I am saying.Rather that any perceived threat to the countless thousands of small businesses and jobs reliant on agriculture gives us a big lever if we have the neck to threaten it.
Farmers are as committed as anyone and nobody wants to see it end but at the end of the day,and only speaking for the drystock sector,although tillage has seen a very poor few years here in Ireland,farmers should realise that things like BPS Glas etc are only "passing through our accounts" a la Fr. Ted.
The end beneficiries of these supports are processors,supermarkets and ultimately consumers.
So if we decided to sit on our hands for a year or 2(or if the big button was likely to be pushed)would farmers be much worse off?
Know its rather hard to stop and start any farming system and its more a theory than maybe practical but none the less why has this never even been discussed ?
Our stake in the food industry is rather large but our return ???

Think we are looking at the same thing from opposite sides.
I would say reducing output to minimise the more marginal return inputs coupled with learning what the prime meats markets are and how to avail of them rather than going towards feedlot beef is the future.
All industry and govt want is cheap products they can take away and add value on a fixed margin upstream and jobs and offer a few enviro schemes for active management to keep less favourable land not fall into complete disrepair just incase it is needed. Subsidy in the Eu mostly goes to funding BigAg rather than the farmer these days.

Bass Reeves

freedominacup wrote: »

When was this? Twenty cows hasn't been capable of providing a living in my lifetime. This farm was started with sixty in calf heifers and sixty heifercalves in the very early seventies. Twenty cows providing a living? maybe during the civil war certainly not since.

It all depends on you standard of living and levek of debt. Grandfather had about 12-14 milking cows in the lfiftiesand sixties with a small drystock enterprise. My mother first cousin had around the same again with a smallish by todays standard Sheep enterprise.

We were always partime farming but remember. If I remember right milk hit nearly a pound/gallon in the late seventies we milked about 5 cows and had 3.5K off it for a few years, the wage into the house (and it was a good wage as things went) was about 5K before tax. Lots were bough up in similar type farms. 40 cows was providing an income in the eighties and early nineties.

_Brian

Waffletraktor wrote: »

All industry and govt want is cheap products they can take away and add value on a fixed margin upstream and jobs and offer a few enviro schemes for active management to keep less favourable land not fall into complete disrepair just incase it is needed. Subsidy in the Eu mostly goes to funding BigAg rather than the farmer these days.

This is the absolute problem.. Not one organisation outside the farm gate has any interest in a truly profitable farming sector as this would create more expensive raw materials for the processors, and its them that has the influence.
Talk of having the overwhelmingly best product possible for the consumer is wasted because if they can walk into another store and buy meat or veg cheaper 90% will do this. 90% of consumers have no food heritage and buy on price, and price alone.

Welding Rod

Grueller wrote: »

I am of the very same thinking as you Paddy.
The father here is slowing down and I am working full time. He is busy all day and I am in the yard four hours every day and all day Saturday and also Sunday morning.
We have increased cow numbers, rented land expanded housing drastically since 2008. What has been the upshot? We are not one cent better off.

FINALLY, the penny has dropped for me. From next year on the max stock numbers I will hold will be based on the amount of silage I can get in a decent first cut plus any few bales I can grab out of paddocks running ahead of grazing stock. NO MORE second cut silage. No second cut fertiliser. Much less grazing fertilizer.
Much less pressure in summer keeping grass in front of stock as second cut eliminated and more ground available with less stock to graze it. Much less pressure in winter with feeding etc.
Might have a bit more money in my pocket and a bit more free time to enjoy it.

Waffletraktor

_Brian wrote: »

This is the absolute problem.. Not one organisation outside the farm gate has any interest in a truly profitable farming sector as this would create more expensive raw materials for the processors, and its them that has the influence.
Talk of having the overwhelmingly best product possible for the consumer is wasted because if they can walk into another store and buy meat or veg cheaper 90% will do this. 90% of consumers have no food heritage and buy on price, and price alone.

That is kind of what i was inferring to, leave them off to do so aswell as few irish farmers could afford to stay supplying the meat and remain in business without subsidy which is shrinking. There is not a future for many targeting this market.
What i refer to is going to the high end consumers that can afford it, and this may not even be in europe and give them what others cant. It is going to be a long and slow process too, aiming to rewrite the how-to guide to something that has never happened in ireland. Producing not to feed the nation anymore, but for the industries longterm survival.

freedominacup

Bass Reeves wrote: »

40 cows was providing an income in the eighties and early nineties.

No it wasn't. It was merely keeping the wolf from the door until living off depreciation finally caught up with the farmer and production ceased.

paddysdream

Once again eating and had a read through the replies.
Maybe my idea was poorly expressed.
I fully understand that farming "in the rare auld times" is long gone and people will have to get used to the reality of agri production 2016 style.The traditional family farm with 10 cows,80 ewes,20 acres of barley,5 acres of beet and selling a few bales of hay will not support a well fed dog let alone a family in most cases.
Yes it did once but to think those days are ever coming back is to be living in dreamland.
Cuts to, or increases in production,on an individual or even country wide scale ,will have no effect on market returns,at least in the short to medium scale.

My thoughts are more that,looking at the big picture,farmers should realise the power we could wield.Of course we would be told off for "acting agin the national interest" and threatining our food export returns but so what?
How many other sectors are so easily cowed or unprepared to use the nuclear option?
Think about it.
Not saying it would solve all or any of the problems in farming but why is the idea not even considered?
5000 farmers marching up and down KIldare street makes the 6-1 news for a day while 200 farmers blocking a supermarket or meat factory might make the local radio.
AIBP,Dawn ICM and KIldare seeing supplies halving,vets looking at half the work and merchants looking at half the sales not to mention a major drop in green diesel sales,machinery parts .All thats without mentioning spray companies,agri consultants and of course a good few staff less needed in the Dept. of Ag(we wish)
Would that grab Enda's attention ?

eorna

It would work in short term and think is a great idea....but....What would happen next is price would rocket for lamb/beef/milk as there would b a much bigger demand than supply... and what would we all do???? Go and lamb more ewes, go buy more cattle and off we go again..

kowtow

It's perfectly possible to make a living from 20 or cows or thereabouts today, but it isn't risk free in the same way as producing beef for a factory or milk for a processor.

yosemitesam1

paddysdream wrote: »

Once again eating and had a read through the replies.
Maybe my idea was poorly expressed.
I fully understand that farming "in the rare auld times" is long gone and people will have to get used to the reality of agri production 2016 style.The traditional family farm with 10 cows,80 ewes,20 acres of barley,5 acres of beet and selling a few bales of hay will not support a well fed dog let alone a family in most cases.
Yes it did once but to think those days are ever coming back is to be living in dreamland.
Cuts to, or increases in production,on an individual or even country wide scale ,will have no effect on market returns,at least in the short to medium scale.

My thoughts are more that,looking at the big picture,farmers should realise the power we could wield.Of course we would be told off for "acting agin the national interest" and threatining our food export returns but so what?
How many other sectors are so easily cowed or unprepared to use the nuclear option?
Think about it.
Not saying it would solve all or any of the problems in farming but why is the idea not even considered?
5000 farmers marching up and down KIldare street makes the 6-1 news for a day while 200 farmers blocking a supermarket or meat factory might make the local radio.
AIBP,Dawn ICM and KIldare seeing supplies halving,vets looking at half the work and merchants looking at half the sales not to mention a major drop in green diesel sales,machinery parts .All thats without mentioning spray companies,agri consultants and of course a good few staff less needed in the Dept. of Ag(we wish)
Would that grab Enda's attention ?

Since the processing side is where the money is made why not become a processor and sell the excess to the big boys?
Sell a bit of stuff direct here and found if people are getting a solid quality product and can see where its coming from they are happy to pay a premium price for it.

Muckit

freedominacup wrote: »

No it wasn't. It was merely keeping the wolf from the door until living off depreciation finally caught up with the farmer and production ceased.

Lads are talking about the death knell of beef for the smaller producer, even the parttimer. But where is the future for the main stream fulltime dairy farmer? IF continuous expansion is the answer, are ye all soon going to run out of road? I just can't see how expansion will work in reality.

100cows probably leaves a fairly decent return (on average) at the moment (l am guessing). As numbers are pushed over this, then more land is needed (where will this come from?) and increased capital expenditure. A second man is soon needed and he needs to be supported (finanically).

WHat I'm saying is you MIGHT see out your farming career with a viable enterprise, but what happens when the next generation needs to be milking over 200+ ?

Is it all worth it? What will the quality of life be like, hopefully cheap robots doing it all and cows eating cheap lab produced grass that requires no ground to grow it!!

Who2

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Since the processing side is where the money is made why not become a processor and sell the excess to the big boys?
Sell a bit of stuff direct here and found if people are getting a solid quality product and can see where its coming from they are happy to pay a premium price for it.

Where will we sell it? I was talking to a department vet recently and word back is most of larrys so called competition are selling straight onto larry, because he has the markets. We have been led down a path that's going to be near impossible to fix. I don't have any solutions and all I can hope is there is someone a bit more clued in can come up with something that will straighten things out.

Dickie10

i didnt read through all the posts but paddy has made a few really relevant points. i will have to sit down and put a good post together with all my rantings but for now i think there is a huge elephant in the room with regard to irish farming, up to one third of the country is not fit for viable farming, land wise and farm size wise. this is a horrible thing to have to write but these farms are just about surviving.

the farmers of these lands deserve huge recognition, i definitly could not or would not have the heart or energy to farm under the circumstances that this third of farmers have to. unfortunatly back in the 1920s these farms were well viable to raise a family but not anymore. yes you can survive but not with any great comfort or average standard of living without outside income. basically one third of farmland should prob be under trees.

I would like to point readers in the direction of the David McWilliams article in Irish Independent 11th March 2015, if anyone can access it. id love to know what peoples thoughts are on this, could we achieve the same for our children on average sized farms? its title "The children of the small farmer inherited the earth"

rangler1

Dickie10 wrote: »

i didnt read through all the posts but paddy has made a few really relevant points. i will have to sit down and put a good post together with all my rantings but for now i think there is a huge elephant in the room with regard to irish farming, up to one third of the country is not fit for viable farming, land wise and farm size wise. this is a horrible thing to have to write but these farms are just about surviving.

the farmers of these lands deserve huge recognition, i definitly could not or would not have the heart or energy to farm under the circumstances that this third of farmers have to. unfortunatly back in the 1920s these farms were well viable to raise a family but not anymore. yes you can survive but not with any great comfort or average standard of living without outside income. basically one third of farmland should prob be under trees.

I would like to point readers in the direction of the David McWilliams article in Irish Independent 11th March 2015, if anyone can access it. id love to know what peoples thoughts are on this, could we achieve the same for our children on average sized farms? its title "The children of the small farmer inherited the earth"

There should be no reason to continue farming just because your father has a farm, Plenty of pubs, shops, factories gone derelict, farming won't be any different, If your farm was a business, you'd move it to where inputs and labour is cheaper like all the other businesses that have moved.
There's three farmers near here converting to dairying, i fear they're been given false hope,
A freind tells me in one breth that he can't believe the starting salary one son is getting while in the next breath he tells me that the other son is starting milking next year when he graduates......hard to follow that

Muckit

If the father leaves him the house so that he hasn't a mortgage, that son should be alright!

Dickie10

i hope it works out, i was given a serious amount of advice/pressure from tageasc advisors and neighbours etc on why i should start dairying and how great a dairy farm it could be. but i dont have a clue about it. if im not 100% efficient at what im doing where would i be going getting into dairying when i know nothing about it. so i told them i was sticking with what i know and trying to well at it.

rangler1

Muckit wrote: »

If the father leaves him the house so that he hasn't a mortgage, that son should be alright!

Father is in his early fifties, won't be going any where

kk.man

Who2 wrote: »

Where will we sell it? I was talking to a department vet recently and word back is most of larrys so called competition are selling straight onto larry, because he has the markets. We have been led down a path that's going to be near impossible to fix. I don't have any solutions and all I can hope is there is someone a bit more clued in can come up with something that will straighten things out.

I heard that from a few sources re Larry. I heard he pays them peanuts and they have to wait a while for payment. Imagine if he went bust due to more production than demand or indeed the next generation not as canny. Even Sean Quinn the richest man in these Islands hit the deck.

rangler1

kk.man wrote: »

I heard that from a few sources re Larry. I heard he pays them peanuts and they have to wait a while for payment. Imagine if he went bust due to more production than demand or indeed the next generation not as canny. Even Sean Quinn the richest man in these Islands hit the deck.

Older people (than me) use to say if you keep doing the same thing, you'll lose all your money where you made it,

Might be a message for farmers there too

patsy_mccabe

With all this negativity, it would be a great time to buy land.

rangler1

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

With all this negativity, it would be a great time to buy land.

Hope you're right, but I have to disagree, who'll be there to buy it in five year, could be cheap then, unlikely to be value though

mikefoxo

There'll always be someone there to buy it - but the money used to pay for it won't be from farming. I'd agree with the point about a lot of land not being viable in the long term, it'd just cost too much to have it at a high level of production. The answer would probably be either extensive farming or forestry. They keep saying that too much of our native forests were cut, people naturally moved in to farm it because of pressures on the land, when really it should have been replanted

kk.man

I was doing abit of thinking this evening...what are the profit margins of the beef factories?... I know it's a fairly well kept secret. However I'm gona have a stab at it....some poster here was in France and said Irish beef was retailing at 7.80...us farmers are getting 3.80 QA averaging and I would stab a guess that the factory and retailer split the margin ie factories get 5.80 and retailer 7.80. 2 euro a kg each. This is across the board average ie cheap cuts & dear cuts. 5th quarter is not taking into account. Say the average animal is 320 kgs dw and we know from certain meat factories accounts their net margin is 3% after paying all costs including corp tax that would equate to 55 euro per animal slaughtered. Any thoughts?

Neddyusa

Great thread Paddysdream..

For certain, less is more for the average drystock farmer.

This is the jist of a study on the pros (or cons) of scale and intensification in beef farming I was involved in a few years back...

Funny enough Teagasc didnt see fit to publicize the findings much!

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iagrm/ijam/2013/00000002/00000004/art00005

"Less than 10% of beef farms showed increasing returns to scale"

"Negative market net margins tended to be subsidised by greater off-farm income on smaller (more scale efficient) farms and by greater direct payments on larger (more scale inefficient) farms."

"Consequently, prospects for increasing beef output via scale expansion are negative in an external environment of declining subsidies and reduced off-farm employment in rural areas."

Hard to see what the future of the beef and sheep farmer looks like...

One thing is for sure is that the processors are only too happy to watch the part-time beef/sheep farmer tip along; just about breaking even; investing off-farm income in order to build TAMS aided slatted sheds that will never be paid for by the cattle housed in them..

From Larry's point of view that sure beats having to feed and house them all himself!!

farmertipp

Muckit wrote: »

Lads are talking about the death knell of beef for the smaller producer, even the parttimer. But where is the future for the main stream fulltime dairy farmer? IF continuous expansion is the answer, are ye all soon going to run out of road? I just can't see how expansion will work in reality.

100cows probably leaves a fairly decent return (on average) at the moment (l am guessing). As numbers are pushed over this, then more land is needed (where will this come from?) and increased capital expenditure. A second man is soon needed and he needs to be supported (finanically).

WHat I'm saying is you MIGHT see out your farming career with a viable enterprise, but what happens when the next generation needs to be milking over 200+ ?

Is it all worth it? What will the quality of life be like, hopefully cheap robots doing it all and cows eating cheap lab produced grass that requires no ground to grow it!!

Every time a new labour saving device becomes popular and works it incerases output and you know the rest. .