Primary producers.

minktrapper

I was reading some literature from down under, Australia ,Tasmania and so forth and they frequently refer to their farmers as "primary producers" maybe we should follow suit and lose the stigma of farming and farmers have acquired over the years. A lot of people don't realise that farmers are producers of food, timber, fruit and so forth.

Base price

minktrapper wrote: »

I was reading some literature from down under, Australia ,Tasmania and so forth and they frequently refer to their farmers as "primary producers" maybe we should follow suit and lose the stigma of farming and farmers have acquired over the years. A lot of people don't realise that farmers are producers of food, timber, fruit and so forth.

Eldest son is working in Aus and he says the beef is only mediocre over there. Pork and chicken is similar in appearance and taste to here.
Out of interest can you explain you're reference to "the stigma that farming and farmers have acquired over the years"....

The part time boy

I actally think we got a good rep in this county at the moment .

I seen a big increase in the last 10 years .

That was strengthen during the bust we had few years ago. When that happened the only thing that was working in the county was agri and food export . On top of this Simon coveny was always bigging us up . Saying we increase production and get better .

Bord bia have also done good work on our rep. The message has been what we do is green and what we do is good.

Now you can agrue that Simon has been talking crap and there nothing behind it or that bord bia have not changed people buying habits but what it has done is shown us not to be tick old farmer in s**t all day . But smart tech savvy vibrant industry.

Again might not be ture but it how the non farming urban foke see us .

It's English farmers I feel sorry for . There treated like s**t . No repect from general public . There seen as a nuisance to there county

minktrapper

Base price wrote: »

Eldest son is working in Aus and he says the beef is only mediocre over there. Pork and chicken is similar in appearance and taste to here.
Out of interest can you explain you're reference to "the stigma that farming and farmers have acquired over the years"....

As "the part time boy" has said above. Considerable amount of people don't realise that farmers are food producers. Custodians of the countryside,hugh job creators.

That primary producers are constantly receiving"handouts" from the tax payer to keep them in business. Which as we all now know to be untrue. We should of course be pushing the positive side of agriculture a lot more.

ganmo

minktrapper wrote: »

As "the part time boy" has said above. Considerable amount of people don't realise that farmers are food producers. Custodians of the countryside,hugh job creators.

That primary producers are constantly receiving"handouts" from the tax payer to keep them in business. Which as we all now know to be untrue. We should of course be pushing the positive side of agriculture a lot more.

but primary producer sounds more industrial which we don't want

minktrapper

ganmo wrote: »

but primary producer sounds more industrial which we don't want

But it is an industry.

Username John

ganmo wrote: »

but primary producer sounds more industrial which we don't want

minktrapper wrote: »

But it is an industry.

I would agree with ganmo, primary produce sounds more industrial, and would feed more into the 'farmers are there to make more for the agri industry'

To me, it sounds more like as 'primary' producers, the produce is useless on its own, it needs to be processed (by secondary people) to make it useful...

I much prefer farmer - I think people have a better concept, recognition, and appreciation for the term 'farmer'.

Muckit

I really can't see what this thread is about.

Primary producer
Secondary producer
Tierary sector

Simple business economics. Conventional farmers just happen to fit into the first category.

If you are a farmer that processes and sells your own produce directly, then you fit into all three.

I don't see the shame in being involved in either one. If anything l feel proud being a primary producer. If we weren't there, many other related secondary and tierary industries wouldn't exist.

Username John

Muckit wrote: »

I really can't see what this thread is about.

Primary producer
Secondary producer
Tierary sector

Simple business economics. Conventional farmers just happen to fit into the first category.

If you are a farmer that processes and sells your own produce directly, then you fit into all three.

I don't see the shame in being involved in either one. If anything l feel proud being a primary producer. If we weren't there, many other related secondary and tierary industries wouldn't exist.

This is about marketing, is it not?

Say if you got chatting to someone, in a pub or something, and the topic of farming came up, would you say "Actually, I am a primary producer" or "I am a farmer"?

Should Bord Bia / whoever else sells our produce, refer to Irelands 'fine primary producers' or should they continue to call us farmers?

I think to go down the route of primary producer moves us more towards industrialisation (or at least gives the impression it does) and moves us farther away from the green image... (even if that green image is a bit twee)

kowtow

Username John wrote: »

This is about marketing, is it not?

Say if you got chatting to someone, in a pub or something, and the topic of farming came up, would you say "Actually, I am a primary producer" or "I am a farmer"?

Should Bord Bia / whoever else sells our produce, refer to Irelands 'fine primary producers' or should they continue to call us farmers?

I think to go down the route of primary producer moves us more towards industrialisation (or at least gives the impression it does) and moves us farther away from the green image... (even if that green image is a bit twee)

Quite. Primary production applies to all commodities, that's where the phrase comes from and little surprise it is common in Australia.

It equates the Farmer with the strip miner.

Not a good direction to go in.

Siamsa Sessions

I thought "primary producer" was what processors and advisors called us.

It saved mentioning environmental tasks, or custodians of the land, or drivers of the rural economy, etc. To me, a primary producer has just one role, whereas a farmer has many.

minktrapper

A lot of really good replies there. And may i say ye have enlightened me. Still a lot of people don't realise that farmers are food producers. They don't really know what farmers actually do.

kowtow

minktrapper wrote: »

A lot of really good replies there. And may i say ye have enlightened me. Still a lot of people don't realise that farmers are food producers. They don't really know what farmers actually do.

That is a frightening thought, and something we should all (farmer and non-farmer) be very concerned about. Amazing how over only a couple of generations we have reached a point where we don't care - and now don't even know - what it is we are putting in our mouths three times a day.

Timmaay

minktrapper wrote: »

A lot of really good replies there. And may i say ye have enlightened me. Still a lot of people don't realise that farmers are food producers. They don't really know what farmers actually do.

They are probably the same people who just assume a lump of meat magically lands itself in its packaging in some factory, and then onto the supermarket shelves, and don't give it anymore thought than that. Changing the farmers title won't change this at, but is there enough incentive for people to learn? Probably not, we live in a society where food is taken completely for granted, food is simply not a worry in most peoples lives anymore, not to mind even thinking about where it comes from.

minktrapper

kowtow wrote: »

Quite. Primary production applies to all commodities, that's where the phrase comes from and little surprise it is common in Australia.

It equates the Farmer with the strip miner.

Not a good direction to go in.

Yes and no.Maybe if we were seen as primary producers then maybe we could take more control over the our industry and command better prices and be more organised. And start shoving the price of food production back on the consumer.

We have all seen how many farmers are going/gone out of business. When will the decay of rural Ireland actually stop. If you had 30 cows 30 yrs ago and some drystock you were probably doing OK. Now you need 80 cows and work like a slave during the spring and on in to the summer.Give it another few years and it will be 100. All the other farming systems have gone through the same problems. Farmers cannot continue to get bigger forever. Sooner or later the consumer will have to start paying the piper.

patsy_mccabe

........A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

minktrapper

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

........A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

Someone must pay the piper or the piper won't play his tune.

ganmo

minktrapper wrote: »

Yes and no.Maybe if we were seen as primary producers then maybe we could take more control over the our industry and command better prices and be more organised. And start shoving the price of food production back on the consumer.

We have all seen how many farmers are going/gone out of business. When will the decay of rural Ireland actually stop. If you had 30 cows 30 yrs ago and some drystock you were probably doing OK. Now you need 80 cows and work like a slave during the spring and on in to the summer.Give it another few years and it will be 100. All the other farming systems have gone through the same problems. Farmers cannot continue to get bigger forever. Sooner or later the consumer will have to start paying the piper.

thats not the way consumers or retailers think, consumers are concerned mostly about 'price point' and retailers care about turnover and margin.

you have to think of ways of pulling up that price point rather than shoving the cost onto the consumer. its a small change

Muckit

minktrapper wrote: »

Someone must pay the piper or the piper won't play his tune.

I think what he's saying is a name is just a name. It doesn't matter what we're called, it's what we do that's important.

Mac Taylor

Reminds me of the rose of Tralee when asked what her father did? Sanitary engineer she replies. What's that envolve asks the presenter. Collecting and emptying bins😏 Aka a bin man. Same shyte different title:D

Username John

Muckit wrote: »

I think what he's saying is a name is just a name. It doesn't matter what we're called, it's what we do that's important.

Yes and No Muckit...

I think the thread is about should we market ourselves as farmers, or as primary producer...

The two options (to me) conjure up two very different images...

If we want to sell our produce, then surely it's important how the consumer perceives us?

I wouldn't know a lot about marketing, but surely perception is everything? Could it be argued that it's more important than reality in a way?

minktrapper

The question is I think is should we market ourselves as farmers or business people. I don't think any business would keep running for the margin dairy farmers have. When you consider the amount of work that is in it. 7 days a week 24 hrs a day. At the end of the day we all question the amount of work that it takes to produce something. Everybody expects to be properly rewarded for the effort they put in to produce something. And if they don't they should.

The part time boy

minktrapper wrote: »

The question is I think is should we market ourselves as farmers or business people. I don't think any business would keep running for the margin dairy farmers have. When you consider the amount of work that is in it. 7 days a week 24 hrs a day. At the end of the day we all question the amount of work that it takes to produce something. Everybody expects to be properly rewarded for the effort they put in to produce something. And if they don't they should.

Nail on head there I am afraid.

I see farmers willing to take on more land and more cows . Not to make more money but for braging rights . They don't make any extra money but it comes with extra work .

I see farmers work out figures on back of fag box if I pay this much for rented land it brake even . So no extra money and no account of there own time

For the work that dairy farmers put in and for working 7 days and been on call 24 7 they should be paid 50 cent a l .

Prob is there always be someone who keep doing It for 25 cent so why would it get dearer

Username John

minktrapper wrote: »

The question is I think is should we market ourselves as farmers or business people. I don't think any business would keep running for the margin dairy farmers have. When you consider the amount of work that is in it. 7 days a week 24 hrs a day. At the end of the day we all question the amount of work that it takes to produce something. Everybody expects to be properly rewarded for the effort they put in to produce something. And if they don't they should.

Should a farmer not be a farmer AND a business person. Is a publican both a person with a pub, and business man? The same for a shop keeper? Anyone that's self employed needs to be a business person...

Having said that, I agree with everything you have said above...

I don't think trying to market us as business people, magically makes people able to use a calculator though?

theaceofspies

Username John wrote: »

Should a farmer not be a farmer AND a business person. Is a publican both a person with a pub, and business man? The same for a shop keeper? Anyone that's self employed needs to be a business person...

Having said that, I agree with everything you have said above...

I don't think trying to market us as business people, magically makes people able to use a calculator though?

The forgotten variable is the 'laying hen'. This was even important back in the 70's when farming was an actual going concern. Fast forward to the persent day and the question has to be begged how many of those laying hens (ideally a primary/secondary teacher or nurse) are keeping the show afloat? These are the real subsidisers of Irish agriculture.

minktrapper

What I should have said do we see ourselves ​as farmers or business people. Business people should come first and food producers second. If every farmer ran there farms as a business how many would/should quit. And maybe leave the rest as more viable businesses. I often wonder why more contracts are not drawn up at a more fixed price. Some co-ops​are going in that direction only it is the co-op that is fixing the price.

J.O. Farmer

Mac Taylor wrote: »

Reminds me of the rose of Tralee when asked what her father did? Sanitary engineer she replies. What's that envolve asks the presenter. Collecting and emptying bins😠Aka a bin man. Same shyte different title:D

There's an idea. Dairy farmers could become milk extraction engineers and beef farmers beef generation engineers.

Muckit

The part time boy wrote: »

Nail on head there I am afraid.

I see farmers willing to take on more land and more cows . Not to make more money but for braging rights . They don't make any extra money but it comes with extra work .

I see farmers work out figures on back of fag box if I pay this much for rented land it brake even . So no extra money and no account of there own time

For the work that dairy farmers put in and for working 7 days and been on call 24 7 they should be paid 50 cent a l .

Prob is there always be someone who keep doing It for 25 cent so why would it get dearer

If u go for a labouring job, the first question you want to know is pay per hour.

Often wondered if dairying and drystock were compared on a return/hour how they'd compare. But there's rarely a value put on time. Best farmers l know do put a value on their time.

patsy_mccabe

Saw a programme the other night on Chicken. People say they want so called good quality organic chicken but the reality is they are not willing to pay for it. The vast amount t of chicken produced here is the cheap, very low margin stuff.
Farmers can market themselves all they like. The reality is the consumer just doesn't care.

_Brian

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

Saw a programme the other night on Chicken. People say they want so called good quality organic chicken but the reality is they are not willing to pay for it. The vast amount t of chicken produced here is the cheap, very low margin stuff.
Farmers can market themselves all they like. The reality is the consumer just doesn't care.

I think Patsy's point is a sad reality.

Supermarkets have conditioned consumers to think of food as value, promotions, 2 for 1, 50% free. Such a large proportion of the consumers don't really care about origin country and buy cheap all the time.

It's going to take allot of work to reverse this and I don't think board bia have the budget nor smarts to reverse what the supermarkets have done, considering the supermarkets are pushing on with this model.

The major food chains have taken away our food culture, cheap n nasty is the order of the day now.

rangler1

_Brian wrote: »

I think Patsy's point is a sad reality.

Supermarkets have conditioned consumers to think of food as value, promotions, 2 for 1, 50% free. Such a large proportion of the consumers don't really care about origin country and buy cheap all the time.

It's going to take allot of work to reverse this and I don't think board bia have the budget nor smarts to reverse what the supermarkets have done, considering the supermarkets are pushing on with this model.

The major food chains have taken away our food culture, cheap n nasty is the order of the day now.

+1
Consumer doesn't care, they know all food is safe now or it wouldn't be allowed to be sold, so if it tastes nice and is cheap, that'll do,
It's just idealistic to think otherwise
To quote my own saying ''milk is milk''

kowtow

rangler1 wrote: »

To quote my own saying ''milk is milk''

Just as wine is wine, and beer is beer.

Timmaay

_Brian wrote: »

I think Patsy's point is a sad reality.

Supermarkets have conditioned consumers to think of food as value, promotions, 2 for 1, 50% free. Such a large proportion of the consumers don't really care about origin country and buy cheap all the time.

It's going to take allot of work to reverse this and I don't think board bia have the budget nor smarts to reverse what the supermarkets have done, considering the supermarkets are pushing on with this model.

The major food chains have taken away our food culture, cheap n nasty is the order of the day now.

It all starts with education in my view, we all know about the obesity epidemic caused by an American diet (I'm distinguishing American from western diet here, because in much of mainland Europe food is appreciated alot better), anyways us westerners are clearly paying big time in the long term in terms of health with diet related illnesses such as obesity, diabetes etc etc, completely ignoring the health benefits of eating correctly, it's an utter no brainer from an economic point of view to teach people to eat a balanced and healthy diet from a young age, and therefore keep them healthy longer, working longer, and out of our already utterly clogged health care system. Things such as sugar taxes which the government are hoping introducing next year could be a reasonable start once the income generated from it actually ends up back in food education. (I'm probably sounding like a broken record by now with the above ha)

yosemitesam1

kowtow wrote: »

Just as wine is wine, and beer is beer.

I think there is a certain amount of truth in that 'milk is milk', with the same breed of cow eating the same type of grass across the country there isn't really any major difference.
Bought raw organic milk a couple of weeks ago and it didn't really taste any different as far as I could tell (don't really drink milk so maybe that was it), looked up the farm selling it and it was all very clean looking ryegrass and red clover swards they had.

pedigree 6

kowtow wrote: »

Just as wine is wine, and beer is beer.

And sheep are sheep.

kowtow

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

I think there is a certain amount of truth in that 'milk is milk', with the same breed of cow eating the same type of grass across the country there isn't really any major difference.
Bought raw organic milk a couple of weeks ago and it didn't really taste any different as far as I could tell (don't really drink milk so maybe that was it), looked up the farm selling it and it was all very clean looking ryegrass and red clover swards they had.

Quite true - hard to tell sometimes particularly when drunk very cold - although the differences become more obvious as soon as you separate cream, or stand the milk for yogurt or cheese or whatever.

And there's a big difference between homogenized milk & cream line milk, one we've got so used to I'm not sure the younger generation are ever going to be persuaded that the top of the milk is worth fighting for the way we did.

There's an underlying suggestion here that expensive, local, foods are for the rich and a niche product. As I've said for some time now I'm not convinced that is quite true - although a few years ago I would have readily agreed. One in four households in the USA now buy organic milk. Borough Market - which has been in the news for all the wrong reasons this weekend - is a busy, thriving, hive of local food production and preparation - a farmers market on steroids - and whilst it has the wealth of the City across the river, you'd be surprised at the wide spectrum of people who make a point of shopping there regularly. Incidentally, it has - IMO - the best selection of Irish cheese in the world.

And while raw milk is illegal in the US (at least in the majority of states), it remains a niche product with only about 3.5% of the population consuming it regularly. 11 million people, about twice the population of Ireland.

patsy_mccabe

Go to France and you'll see how much they value their food. All sorts of specialist butchers and local delicacies. They're full support and value their farmers too.

yosemitesam1

kowtow wrote: »

Quite true - hard to tell sometimes particularly when drunk very cold - although the differences become more obvious as soon as you separate cream, or stand the milk for yogurt or cheese or whatever.

And there's a big difference between homogenized milk & cream line milk, one we've got so used to I'm not sure the younger generation are ever going to be persuaded that the top of the milk is worth fighting for the way we did.

Would the sort of milk produced off the high pastures in the alps be noticeably different when drank as is compared to stuff produced off maize etc? Or does it really need to go into something like cheese to bring out the flavours?

minktrapper

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

Saw a programme the other night on Chicken. People say they want so called good quality organic chicken but the reality is they are not willing to pay for it. The vast amount t of chicken produced here is the cheap, very low margin stuff.
Farmers can market themselves all they like. The reality is the consumer just doesn't care.

And it won't kill you today or tomorrow. Or the next day or the day after that. Organic food might be better for you but people will not pay for good quality food. They would​much prefer to go to the sun for a holiday or buy a shiney new car. Food quality comes way down the list of priorities for most people. And they have all the signs of it with the level of obesity never so high.

kowtow

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Would the sort of milk produced off the high pastures in the alps be noticeably different when drank as is compared to stuff produced off maize etc? Or does it really need to go into something like cheese to bring out the flavours?

It would be different, but most of us drink neat milk cold which masks the flavour and aroma a bit. Cheese, cream, all concentrate the solids in the milk as well as multiplying the local bacteria so they amplify it.

I left 30 litres of raw milk out for six days this week, accidentally, in clean stainless steel. It sat at about 65f and produced quite by accident two separate and perfectly edible products (a clotted and very lactic cream and a very clean sweet white soft cheese curd) as well as whey. I had no hesitation in eating a chunk of each of them - I wouldn't try that with pasteurised, homogeneised, milk but at this time of year raw milk from grass and healthy cows seems to have all the good bacteria it needs when it leaves the cow.

It would be interesting to try the same with indoor maize fed cows later in the season. If I remember I will!

rangler1

pedigree 6 wrote: »

And sheep are sheep.

If only the processors would stop using those rank ram lambs

Muckit

rangler1 wrote: »

If only the processors would stop using those rank ram lambs

Would you have ram taint when they left entire?

rangler1

Muckit wrote: »

Would you have ram taint when they left entire?

It's not a problem until he autumn I suppose, but it would put a person off eating lamb though
The local hotel here fed their own lambs during the winter to guarantee they wouldn't be caught with ram taint.
The local abbatoir will only kill ram lambs if they're sure that they were separated from the ewe lambs.
So there's two examples of people dealing with the public and convinced that ram taint can be a problem.

pedigree 6

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

Go to France and you'll see how much they value their food. All sorts of specialist butchers and local delicacies. They're full support and value their farmers too.