Fields of lush green grass and nothing else.

Neddyusa

Lano Lynn wrote: »

I do not consider myself a messer.
The good agricultural and ENVIRONMENTAL condition GAEC rules were used to keep inspectors in 'jobs' and has led to loss of countless pockets of biodiversity if all the areas of 'overclaimed' gorse rushes ponds rough grazing etc that were subsequently bulldozed were in one block there would have been even uproar from environmentalists than the gorse fires attracted.

I took the penalties and delays in payment on a couple of percent of my holding so I could keep some ponds and water meadow and a grove of trees (that provide shade for my rams in the summer) instead of being penalised I should have been paid even more than I was for growing bird cover so I reckon 1000 an ha instead of a penalty and demonised as a fraudulent messer:mad:

THIS +1,000 Lano Lynn.
The destruction of 1,000's of acres of habitats over the last decade due to Department's implementation of GAEC rules is scandalous.

Farmers being paid to create habitats for rodents like WBC, while the same Dept penalises farmers for maintaining natural, native habitats.....crazy stuff!

Castlekeeper

wrangler wrote: »

Why fine the farmers that were doing it right, IFA didn't stand idly by, farmers didn't get half the penalties they should've got, as far as I can remember they should've been penalised for all the years that they submitted ineligible land, Ithink they were only fined for two years, Big or small didn't make any difference, good or bad land, too many were chancing their arm.
I say again why fine the farmers that were doing it right...... what's the point of following the rules if people that are messing expect you to take the hit for them.
Taking out sites and continuing to claim and there was worse than that.......like WTF
Paying subsidies for neglected land wasn't what the SFP was for, it clearly states good agiculture condition

Farmers shouldnt have been fined at all as it was a con job to reduce payments and justify complicated inspection procedures.
All the payments/ subsidies / entitlements were production based and as such land type and eligibility was already taken into account.
The transfer of these payments to area based and enforcement of "eligibile land" criteria caught a lot of people out and there really wasn't a word while the marginal landowner was sacrificed at the alter of the big farmer by our farm organisations and Dept.

wrangler

Neddyusa wrote: »

THIS +1,000 Lano Lynn.
The destruction of 1,000's of acres of habitats over the last decade due to Department's implementation of GAEC rules is scandalous.

Farmers being paid to create habitats for rodents like WBC, while the same Dept penalises farmers for maintaining natural, native habitats.....crazy stuff!

Majority of farmers would see it as an opportunity to top up a poor income by three to five thousand, you'd be very much in minority.
It takes a lot of work now to get new schemes across the line with the EU and the department should be thanked for making them available to farmers, they're not compulsory, You'd swear they were compulsory by the carry on here, a lot of farmers wouldn't thank you for trying to stop them,
As for the destruction of habitats most good farmers would be striving to maximise production, not farm wildlife.
they'd be farming along the lines of GAEC anyway

_Brian

wrangler wrote: »

Majority of farmers would see it as an opportunity to top up a poor income by three to five thousand, you'd be very much in minority.
It takes a lot of work now to get new schemes across the line with the EU and the department should be thanked for making them available to farmers, they're not compulsory, You'd swear they were compulsory by the carry on here, a lot of farmers wouldn't thank you for trying to stop them,
As for the destruction of habitats most good farmers would be striving to maximise production, not farm wildlife.
they'd be farming along the lines of GAEC anyway

A farmer being considered “good” if they don’t maximise wildlife along with farming is a notion to be condemned to the past, and those who hold tight to that notion with it.

Only fools think farmers can continue to extort produce from every sq meter with no regard for habitat destruction.

wrangler

_Brian wrote: »

A farmer being considered “good” if they don’t maximise wildlife along with farming is a notion to be condemned to the past, and those who hold tight to that notion with it.

Only fools think farmers can continue to extort produce from every sq meter with no regard for habitat destruction.

You play the cards you're dealt, income and profit would be target on most farms I've been on.
I definitely benefited from most of the internal ditches being gone when I came to lease it, It's alright talking about a farming system being condemned to the past if there's a better system out there. Environmentalists have talked the same as you since I started farming, no different than the vegans I suppose

wrangler

Castlekeeper wrote: »

Farmers shouldnt have been fined at all as it was a con job to reduce payments and justify complicated inspection procedures.
All the payments/ subsidies / entitlements were production based and as such land type and eligibility was already taken into account.
The transfer of these payments to area based and enforcement of "eligibile land" criteria caught a lot of people out and there really wasn't a word while the marginal landowner was sacrificed at the alter of the big farmer by our farm organisations and Dept.

The rules were there, if you apply, you accept the terms and conditions if you have a word at all, too late to be challenging it when you're found out...... we've had eu audits here, can't be asking the taxpayers to pay the fines.

Waffletraktor

Birdnuts wrote: »

Waffletraktor wrote: »

About the only thing sustainable in Ireland is the rain means you don't need fudge loads of irrigation schemes on top of the hydro carbon rich input system required to do any farming there. :pac:

Biodiversity is a great aim but it doesn't pay the bills for the majority although some can eek out a nice diversification business. The realities of living in a high cost western country means producing most of the produce for commodity prices leaves too little income for farms to have a viable future and those that do less able to afford non performing ground.
Don't see much changing until the next time people put a value on Tesco having 10 types of ready to eat lettuce available 12 months of the year rather than it just being a given right.

It raises the question though - how viable are large intensive producers in reality?? We already know that 80% of CAP money goes to just 20% of producers, and they aint the ones with nice hedges and corncrakes knockin about the place. Its the same story in the US that has just a 5th of the farmers the EU has yet has a farm budget over 50% the size of the EU's with the vast majority of that money going to vast factory farms

Does any of that make sense in an era of embedded commidity price weakness, huge amounts of food waste, the growing obesity epidemic around the world etc.??

Margin the farm generates per unit of output is directly linked to farmers ability to generate income. When feed wheat drops back to 100£ a ton or less it’s nicer to have £5 profit off 500 rather than 100 tons.
You just breezed past the fact living in a high cost western country means farmers are much less able to afford under performing land. Cheap food or keeping the country side looking nice for the day trippers from the city is the choice. How much ppe or engine emissions gibbons do you get on Russian ag equipment.

wrangler

Castlekeeper wrote: »

Farmers shouldnt have been fined at all as it was a con job to reduce payments and justify complicated inspection procedures.
All the payments/ subsidies / entitlements were production based and as such land type and eligibility was already taken into account.
The transfer of these payments to area based and enforcement of "eligibile land" criteria caught a lot of people out and there really wasn't a word while the marginal landowner was sacrificed at the alter of the big farmer by our farm organisations and Dept.

I can't see how farm organisations can function properly, how can they do any more, yet they're blamed for everything with this incessant whinge,
Reps are elected from every county, there's meetings in every county once a month, farmers can't be bothered to go to meetings, yet think they have the right to carry on like this.
Why would anyone bother, I've told farmers plenty of times, (as i have on here) anyone can have my job.
I regarded IFA as I would mowing the Churchyard, here, I did it because no one else was bothered and have to say most of the time I was sick of the lack of support and when as Co. Chairman I got criticised from above me for the lack of support I said Fiuckem and haven't gone back since.
I can't really be blamed for not having a lot of sympathy now on farmers

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

I see what you doing there lol. Are the birds alighting on each others posts :pac:

Your point is? Btw as to your suggestion- have thanks. And yes there would be some differences but imo they are huge variations. We still have a huge diversity of farming operations even within relatively small areas. But by way of real comparison -
try going to visit one of the huge mono crop enterprises somewhere in France for example and you will see some really huge differences. They make the average Irish dairy farm look like a nature reserve.

How many average dairy farms would have breeding corncrake, snipe, grasshopper warbler, sedge warbler, skylarks, meadow pipit, marsh orchid, early purple orchid, ragged robin?

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

How many average dairy farms would have breeding corncrake, snipe, grasshopper warbler, sedge warbler, skylarks, meadow pipit, marsh orchid, early purple orchid, ragged robin?

How many of any "average' farms would have "breeding corncrake, snipe, grasshopper warbler, sedge warbler, skylarks, meadow pipit, marsh orchid, early purple orchid, ragged robin" ?????

Again what is your point? or have you just decided to have a go at all dairy farms irrelevant to individual farming methods or regional variations in farming?

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

How many of any "average' farms would have "breeding corncrake, snipe, grasshopper warbler, sedge warbler, skylarks, meadow pipit, marsh orchid, early purple orchid, ragged robin" ?????

Again what is your point? or have you just decided to have a go at all dairy farms irrelevant to individual farming methods or regional variations in farming?

You continually say that biodiversity on Irish farm is actually alright, sure isn't there loads of foxes, rabbits and rats. The reality is different. Tis better than French maize monocultures, so it must be alright.....

wrangler

Capercaillie wrote: »

You continually say that biodiversity on Irish farm is actually alright, sure isn't there loads of foxes, rabbits and rats. The reality is different. Tis better than French maize monocultures, so it must be alright.....

Unfortunately they're our competitors in the markets so we shouldn't have any more wasteful costs than them

Castlekeeper

wrangler wrote: »

The rules were there, if you apply, you accept the terms and conditions if you have a word at all, too late to be challenging it when you're found out...... we've had eu audits here, can't be asking the taxpayers to pay the fines.

???
I'm talking about previous CAP policy and the role of our agricultural institutions.
I'm not quite sure of the relevance of the personal comments above.
Btw, I have as giid a word as I can, I've nothing much to be challenging or found out about and am a taxpayer who pays my own way, no problems with fines or the like, afaik.

Lano Lynn

Capercaillie wrote: »

How many average dairy farms would have breeding corncrake, snipe, grasshopper warbler, sedge warbler, skylarks, meadow pipit, marsh orchid, early purple orchid, ragged robin?

there is a chap down the road from me ( not the average dairy farmer) still runs a traditional dairy unit probably milking 25 r 30 cows probably not and economists or teagasc advisors wet dream ,some of his cows are blue fresian shorthorn they are a picture and treated like princesses ,his land has most on your list except corncrake...…….needless to say it is not his face on the local milk carton as a worthy milk supplier...but I can tell u I would drink straight from his tank any day. the co-op has no meas on him cos he has not borrowed a fortune put in two robots and bulldozed the place flat .

Chisler2

Say my name wrote: »

Here's a group of farmers who decided not to whinge about things on boards but decided to join forces and apply for EU funding and received assistance from Bord Bia, Glanbia, Kepak and Birdwatch Ireland.

https://www.thebrideproject.ie/

This cheered me up thanks! This is the kind of thing I meant in my ham-fisted earlier post. The project addresses the OP's question "what would incentivise farmers".

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

You continually say that biodiversity on Irish farm is actually alright*, sure isn't there loads of foxes, rabbits and rats. The reality is different. Tis better than French maize monocultures, so it must be alright.....

Nope.

Please try and answer the question asked
1) do those species you listed in your previous post appear on the average Irish farm - dairy and otherwise?

2) Again what is your point?

I believe the discussion you jumped in on was about how Ireland compares with other countries. Hence the comparison with agriculture in France etc.

Yes in my experience there are plenty of foxes, rabbits and even though I didn't mention them - rats too.

Some plant and animal species are restricted by topography, soil type and or wetland conditions and are therefore limited in geographical extent etc. Some species are even 'rare' within those habitats.

I've also noticed you've now gone from dairy farms back to all farms????

So I'm afraid I have no idea what you are on about at this stage. You appear to be just ranting unfortunately and none of it makes any sense tbh.

Answer the questions above first if you want to continue this topic. Thanks.

Birdnuts

wrangler wrote: »

Unfortunately they're our competitors in the markets so we shouldn't have any more wasteful costs than them

If you want to go down that route then stop hoodwinking people that you deserve "Origin Green" labels and getting public money for "green wash" schemes which deny farmers making genuine efforts on sustaineability, farmland biodiversity etc.their proper share of Pillar 2 funding.

Birdnuts

Waffletraktor wrote: »

Margin the farm generates per unit of output is directly linked to farmers ability to generate income. When feed wheat drops back to 100£ a ton or less it’s nicer to have £5 profit off 500 rather than 100 tons.
You just breezed past the fact living in a high cost western country means farmers are much less able to afford under performing land. Cheap food or keeping the country side looking nice for the day trippers from the city is the choice. How much ppe or engine emissions gibbons do you get on Russian ag equipment.

It doesn't really address the points i made about were the bulk of supports are going, their market distorting affects etc. I don't really see how the consumer benefits from the vast amount of waste and other negatives associated with the current system. Look at the state of the pig and poulty industry - half the producers have gone to the wall in last few years despite operating systems that are some of the most intensive. low margin out there. Same road the likes of Dairy in this country seems to want to go down. I suggest some folk here check out the current state of the industry in the US where their super intensive system has led to cow prices being at their lowest for 20 years. Those cheerleading the old CAP don't seem to be have moved with the times and the fact that the EU itself wants to go down a different more sustaineable route, plus the amount of cheap food coming in from outside the EU(which wasn't an issue when the CAP was concieved first) makes the old "cheap food policy" redundant and very out of date.
Most puzzling of all is that certain farming organisations and their mouth pieces on here want to keep the broken old model at all costs despites its destructive effects on the livelyhoods of most farmers

Gawddawggonnit

gozunda wrote: »

How many of any "average' farms would have "breeding corncrake, snipe, grasshopper warbler, sedge warbler, skylarks, meadow pipit, marsh orchid, early purple orchid, ragged robin" ?????

Again what is your point? or have you just decided to have a go at all dairy farms irrelevant to individual farming methods or regional variations in farming?

https://www.friendsoftheirishenvironment.org/eu/13-papers-today/biodiversity/4789-

screamer

gozunda wrote: »

No screamer. It's not that simple really. There are plenty of farmers who farm and work off farm. Many of these smaller farms are viable as much as someone working in any other sector. Many large intensive farms are profitable. And the old bugbear about subsidies. Subsidies are provided to many different sectors for different reasons. Roads are subsidised. Subsidies are provided for forestry. Subsidies are provided for environmental improvements and for water quality etc. A lot of employment is subsidised by the government. So what's your point? That you just dont like farmers recieving these? Why is that?

'Irradiate' what? - I kinda get the idea you're not sure what you're talking about tbhm

Farmers having off farm income.... you’ve just proven my point that such farms are not viable. Each to their own, I can’t see the current level of subsidies continuing anyways and eventually the reality will dawn.

_Brian

screamer wrote: »

Farmers having off farm income.... you’ve just proven my point that such farms are not viable. Each to their own, I can’t see the current level of subsidies continuing anyways and eventually the reality will dawn.

What’s “off farm income”
Very few farms have absolutely no income coming from off farm, even local full time farmers often have a spouse earning off farm income, that’s a level of support for the farm family.

I see full time farmers working with FRS, fencing, relief milking, working in the mart, drawing cattle, repairing machinery, driving a taxi.

The more I think of this the more ridiculous it is to dish farmers with off farm income, I’ve worked for farms milking 200 cows where the farmer managed off farm income like rentals both commercial and private. Ireland is too small a country with historically too small of farms to use this as any appreciable measure against anyone.

gozunda

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

https://www.friendsoftheirishenvironment.org/eu/13-papers-today/biodiversity/4789-

More dairy scarey? To back to what was being discussed. I believe the question was

How many of any "average' farms would have "breeding corncrake, snipe, grasshopper warbler, sedge warbler, skylarks, meadow pipit, marsh orchid, early purple orchid, ragged robin" ?????

& etc

gozunda

screamer wrote: »

Farmers having off farm income.... you’ve just proven my point that such farms are not viable. Each to their own, I can’t see the current level of subsidies continuing anyways and eventually the reality will dawn.

And yes you and friends can then rely on a totality of cheap imported food produced with few if any environmental or ethical standards. Best of luck with that ....

_Brian

gozunda wrote: »

And yes you and friends can then rely on a totality of cheap imported food produced with few if any environmental or ethical standards. Best of luck with that ....

Sadly all too many of those who shop are likely happy to shop on price and throw locall producers under the wheel of the trucks rolling in untraceable foods.

Gawddawggonnit

Gozunda, with respect...
Argumentum ad hominem!
Falsely arguing from the specific to the general!
Reversing/dismissing the burden of proof!
Etc etc etc.

yourself, panch, say my name etc have totally asphyxiated any informed debate on this thread, and I would think that it’s intentional on your behalf.
I posted earlier that this is a conversation that needs to be had, and indeed is being discussed across the developed countries of the world, but to even raise questions here is seen to be anti farming etc.

Please stop shouting down posters.
It doesn’t serve the debate or you.

gozunda

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Gozunda, with respectArgumentum ad hominem!
Falsely arguing from the specific to the general!
Reversing/dismissing the burden of proof!
Etc etc etc. yourself, panch, say my name etc have totally asphyxiated any informed debate on this thread, and I would think that it’s intentional on your behalf. I posted earlier that this is a conversation that needs to be had, and indeed is being discussed across the developed countries of the world, but to even raise questions here is seen to be anti farming etc. Please stop shouting down posters. It doesn’t serve the debate or you.

Nothing like a load of passionate exaggeration and superfluous use of adjectives in place of discussion!

Who exactly is shouting down a whole list of posters if not yourself- see your own post here for detail!!! The hypocrisy beggars belief tbh.

And I would love to continue the discussion / debate but could you and some others at least put forward some form of argument by way of reply instead of soundbites or internet article dumping as in your very own last post - that would be great!

I have asked a number of posters to reply to what was being discussed and get attacked for that??? Get a grip...
.

Say my name

gozunda wrote: »

Nothing like a load of passionate exaggeration and superfluous use of adjectives in place of discussion!

Who exactly is shouting down a whole list of posters if not yourself- see your own post here for detail!!! The hypocrisy beggars belief tbh.

And I would love to continue the discussion / debate but could you and some others at least put forward some form of argument by way of reply instead of soundbites or internet article dumping as in your very own last post - that would be great!

I have asked a number of posters to reply to what was being discussed and get attacked for that??? Get a grip...
.

I only put up 3 posts.
I must have made an impact. :pac:

+1 Gonzo. +1.

4 now.

Edit: looks like it's descended into attack the poster with some as usual.

yosemitesam1

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Gozunda, with respect...
Argumentum ad hominem!
Falsely arguing from the specific to the general!
Reversing/dismissing the burden of proof!
Etc etc etc.

yourself, panch, say my name etc have totally asphyxiated any informed debate on this thread, and I would think that it’s intentional on your behalf.
I posted earlier that this is a conversation that needs to be had, and indeed is being discussed across the developed countries of the world, but to even raise questions here is seen to be anti farming etc.

Please stop shouting down posters.
It doesn’t serve the debate or you.

Some people are only out for an argument, you asked about urea many moons ago...

gozunda

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Some people are only out for an argument, you asked about urea many moons ago...

And unfortunately some are unable to debate or discuss the topic in hand and its end up as a personal commentary! But there you go

Gawddawggonnit

Again....


https://www.friendsoftheirishenvironment.org/eu/13-papers-today/biodiversity/4789-

I think (hope!) that you could debate this article with greater verbosity than “scarey dairy”.....the floor is yours!