Suckler cow reduction payment

Grueller

I had heard this mentioned before on here but when a current EU commissioner for agriculture is suggesting it it starts to feel like a real possibility.
So lads and ladies, what would it take to make you sign up?
For me at the moment I would look to cut them by about 50% were it to come up. I have a share of land that is too heavy for tillage so I would possibly look to get in on the biomass industry that I think will come to fruition on this good land and keep on the sucklers on the rest.

Albert Johnson

A suckler cow reduction payment is something I've advocated on here before and is the only sensible support solution imo. It could tie in to the latest trend of reducing our emissions as a sector and is something that the Agri representatives should all row in behind.

As for what would it take to convince me to partake, in one word, Money!!!. I believe we'd have a much greater chance of securing a €200 per cow reduction payment rathe than a similar value production subsidy. The few sucklers I may or may not keep are only a drop in the ocean but there are many in a similar situation. I'd definitely consider halving the stocking rate and just keep the bare minimum to avail of payments and keep the land in good order.

Producing suckler stock contributes next to nothing to my profitablity annually and only that I enjoy suckling I'd have given it up already. Biomass is a subject I'd be open to researching as a possible future venture but my land type may not be suitable for much other than planting which I'm not currently interested in doing. There's plenty of a similar mindset throughout the country and I believe a sucker reduction payment would be gratefully received.

I enjoy working my own bit of land and fully intend to continue doing so, however 5 cows would give as much enjoyment as 15 imo. If the proposed payment comes to fruition I will have to seriously evaluate the pros and cons of continuing my current method of farming and I'm certain I won't be alone in making such decisions.

tanko

It wont take a payment to do it, numbers reducing rapidly around here. A lot of farmers with sucklers are counting down the days to the end of the BDGP in November next year. I'd say numbers will fall off a cliff then.
Most farmers with sucklers are in their 50's and 60's around here and in most cases their children wouldnt be seen dead anywhere near the cattle let alone at the end of a calving jack at 4am on a Sunday morning.
When Glas and the BDGP are finished here, i'll cut numbers by 50%, keep the calves until 18 months old and lease out the out-farm.

Who2

Theres a massive decline around me in sucklers and loads still talking about pulling out. Good prices at the back end for weanlings and every heifer in the country will be bulled. I cant see it coming in.

josephsoap

Is there any possibility of small scale dairy farming returning a lively hood?

Would 50 dairy cows (average yield 1200 gallons?) return 30k net profit per annum? ( assuming no borrowing)

cute geoge

josephsoap wrote: »

Is there any possibility of small scale dairy farming returning a lively hood?

Would 50 dairy cows (average yield 1200 gallons?) return 30k net profit per annum? ( assuming no borrowing)

plenty of hardship milking 50 cows ,i have 50 cows on less then 40 acre grazing platform with 15 acres of silage ground bought in .I do my own slurry ,sell my calves at 6 +weeks and fatten my culls .These little things all add to the bottom line .Doing well any year to keep cost under 20 cent/litre .Doing the maths it is possible to return 30k without borrowings but margin is getting tighter every year. Imo any one is mad if they go milking

TooOldBoots

I think this should be mandatory viewing for anyone considering dairying in the west

blue5000

I suppose if I got paid well to get rid of all the lunatic :eek: blonde x cows I'd consider it.

Bass Reeves

Who2 wrote: »

Theres a massive decline around me in sucklers and loads still talking about pulling out. Good prices at the back end for weanlings and every heifer in the country will be bulled. I cant see it coming in.

First off what would be a good price in the back end to encourage suckler farmer to stay at it. With the way beef prices are it is hard to a price explosion for sucklers bred cattle. Weight limits are as much of a nail in there coffin as price is.

IMO there is a good chance of a reduction payment. Dairy cows add much more to the economic value of agriculture than sucklers do. The carbon footprint of agriculture is too large at present. Either dairy or suckler cows have to be reduced. The economic argument of giving a suckler payment is very strong. Where the issue lies is the conditions. Will partial forrestry be part of the plan if you accept. If the government wants to reduce the footprint of Agriculture a radical change in thinking is needed. We need to encourage Forrestry and reduce Suckler numbers

charolais0153

Bass Reeves wrote: »

First off what would be a good price in the back end to encourage suckler farmer to stay at it. With the way beef prices are it is hard to a price explosion for sucklers bred cattle. Weight limits are as much of a nail in there coffin as price is.

IMO there is a good chance of a reduction payment. Dairy cows add much more to the economic value of agriculture than sucklers do. The carbon footprint of agriculture is too large at present. Either dairy or suckler cows have to be reduced. The economic argument of giving a suckler payment is very strong. Where the issue lies is the conditions. Will partial forrestry be part of the plan if you accept. If the government wants to reduce the footprint of Agriculture a radical change in thinking is needed. We need to encourage Forrestry and reduce Suckler numbers

Be a sin to plant a lot of places where cows are kept

Albert Johnson

I agree Bass in that we need to encourage forestry but not in it's current format. The current policy of blanket coniferous plantations is massively detrimental to rural Ireland from both an environmental and social perspective. Any argument that favours conifers over cows only preys on the incorrect assumption that agriculture is bad and trees are good.

The suckler cow was largely invented on the back of subsidies linked to production and it would be yet another massive error imo to promote an unsustainable forestry model by the same subsided means. The suckler herd is declining year on year regardless of any proposed payment due to the fact that it is almost impossible to make it profitable under the current market conditions.

Reducing carbon emissions and the effects of global warming are the buzzwords of our time. As a result of this the general public will support anything​that they associate with tackling the supposed causes once there lifestyle isn't overly affected. Agriculture has and will continue to come in for a lot of criticism over it's supposed contribution to global warming. Therefore I believe that a subsidy of some form to reduce the national herd and it's emissions is almost inevitable. As with everything the devil will be in the detail and I'm unsure of what action will be required to draw the payment.

I'm not opposed to the idea of reducing the national herd be it sucklers or otherwise. I've heard nothing but talk of increasing production in recent years and am still awaiting the benefits of the same increase to be passed back along the production chain. It would however anger me to jump from one sinking ship to another regardless of the subsidy incurred. I don't believe in the current status quo of afforestation in this country and I would hate to move from one non sustainable land use to another under the guise of "saving the environment".

Bass Reeves

Albert Johnson wrote: »

I agree Bass in that we need to encourage forestry but not in it's current format. The current policy of blanket coniferous plantations is massively detrimental to rural Ireland from both an environmental and social perspective. Any argument that favours conifers over cows only preys on the incorrect assumption that agriculture is bad and trees are good.

The suckler cow was largely invented on the back of subsidies linked to production and it would be yet another massive error imo to promote an unsustainable forestry model by the same subsided means. The suckler herd is declining year on year regardless of any proposed payment due to the fact that it is almost impossible to make it profitable under the current market conditions.

Reducing carbon emissions and the effects of global warming are the buzzwords of our time. As a result of this the general public will support anything​that they associate with tackling the supposed causes once there lifestyle isn't overly affected. Agriculture has and will continue to come in for a lot of criticism over it's supposed contribution to global warming. Therefore I believe that a subsidy of some form to reduce the national herd and it's emissions is almost inevitable. As with everything the devil will be in the detail and I'm unsure of what action will be required to draw the payment.

I'm not opposed to the idea of reducing the national herd be it sucklers or otherwise. I've heard nothing but talk of increasing production in recent years and am still awaiting the benefits of the same increase to be passed back along the production chain. It would however anger me to jump from one sinking ship to another regardless of the subsidy incurred. I don't believe in the current status quo of afforestation in this country and I would hate to move from one non sustainable land use to another under the guise of "saving the environment".

Albert as I posted I put in partial forestry, I am not in favour of blanket forestry and especially of blanket conifers. I believe we under use Alder as a tree species. But the big issue with forestry is replanting costs along with no income after replanting. I would not be opposed to a 20-30% forestry plan where the farmer was well compensated for proving Carbon credits to the country.

10 years ago I would have been very anti forestry but now I can see the benefits from a farming point of view on marginal land if the premium rates are equitable. However in smaller plantation going for log wood at 40-50 years may not be an option especially in area's with windblow risks. However I see the need for premiums for the first 20 years even on repeat plantations.

On more marginal land suckler cows are often stocked at above a cow/HA. If the suckler cow compensation was 150/cow for 5 years with the same for another 5 years where forestry was the part of the replacement plan at maybe a HA/3 cows the government could kill two birds with the one stone. It could be loaded further to encourage lads with 20 ish cows to go for 10Ha of forestry on a farm.

Remember most lads would plant the lowest quality land they had but a plan like this could really change the uptake in forestry and change the carbon footprint we have. But the government have to stump up.

Albert Johnson

My comments on blanket afforestation were based on the current governmental approach as opposed to your suggestions Bass. A forestry program that provided worthwhile income throughout it's entire lifespan as opposed to the first 15 years and at clearfell is something that I would be fully supportive of. The landowner should of course be rewarded for all carbon credits resulting from there afforestation however I struggle to see the powers that be displaying such joined up thinking. Agriculture particularly livestock based has been singled out as public enemy number 1 as regards carbon emissions.

Optimism in the suckler sector is at an all time low and I believe that any half reasonable scheme would have a large up take simply because lads are sick to death of the current set-up. There's a huge opportunity to make a change for the better in how Irish agriculture and the environment coexist at the moment. I have no doubt that those in power will deliver the antithesis of what's required all the while reprimanding the farming community for there continued lack of contribution to the climate debacle. Having said that I'd seriously consider partaking in almost any proposed plan as suckling in it's current format isn't a sustainable endeavor going forward.

farawaygrass

If sucklers are reduced, will sheep numbers increase I wonder?

Albert Johnson

farawaygrass wrote: »

If sucklers are reduced, will sheep numbers increase I wonder?

I can't see a massive increase in sheep numbers on back of a reduction in the suckler herd for a number of reasons. Firstly the average suckler farmer is an older male and sheep are no less labour intensive than cow's. Any farmer looking for an easier lifestyle shouldn't be looking at sheep imo. Secondly a lot of land that currently supports sucklers isn't suited to sheep and lacks the necessary handling facilities. Investment in these facilities is debatable in what is another low margin system. Finally the introduction of EID tagging amongst other regulations means that sheep are becoming increasingly costly to produce. Running a small flock is almost more trouble than it's worth and therefore the knowledge behind keeping sheep is being lost.

In conclusion I can't see an explosion in ewe numbers especially considering the current sheep trade. As I've stated above a well thought out forestry program would probably be the most popular option following a reduction in the suckler herd.

grassroot1

Is the commissioners proposal to help suckler beef farmers or to try and reduce the environmental impact of the current dairy model

Say my name

It seems Greuller you're a mind reader.

It looks like the conditions of the €100 million being handed over only if there's a reduction in the suckler herd.

Birdnuts

Say my name wrote: »

It seems Greuller you're a mind reader.

It looks like the conditions of the €100 million being handed over only if there's a reduction in the suckler herd.

Another nonsensical scheme along the lines of BPS:rolleyes:

blue5000

If we hang in there long enough there might again be a sub for keeping suckler cows, it's not that long since there was one.

Albert Johnson

Birdnuts wrote: »

Say my name wrote: »

It seems Greuller you're a mind reader.

It looks like the conditions of the €100 million being handed over only if there's a reduction in the suckler herd.

Another nonsensical scheme along the lines of BPS:rolleyes:

There's a part of me that thinks there only saving us from ourselves. As blue pointed out above it's not that long since we were paid to keep cows so why not be payed to do the opposite when the opportunity arises. I do for the most part enjoy suckling but I'd probably enjoy it as much with 5 cows as 15.

The sad reality is that suckling is by and large an unprofitable enterprise and will have to be treated as such regardless of what we would like to believe. If your happy to continue as usual and take what comes (most likely more of the same imo) then more power to you. I however am sick of the status quo and am going to look into any alternative option I find workable. If this involves farming the payments then so be it, I'll consider a herd of buck goats if it contributes more to my bottom line then some of the sucklers.

The land was there long before suckling became fashionable and I'm sure it will still be there when both the cow's and I am long forgotten. Full time farming here finished with my grand parents and I don't expect that to change in my lifetime. Like many others I don't do it for the money although I refuse to throw good money after bad simply so I can term myself a "suckler farmer". The world and it's mindset is changing especially regarding agriculture, there fully entitled to there opinion and viewpoints as are we. If they want us as farmers to produce a product in a certain way there fully entitled to adequately reward us for it. By the same token we're entitled to accept any and all payment that's offered to us. Pride comes before a fall and we've had enough of those in recent years so it's time to change the mindset imo.

Base price

Say my name wrote: »

It seems Greuller you're a mind reader.

It looks like the conditions of the €100 million being handed over only if there's a reduction in the suckler herd.

I read your post earlier whilst waiting at the factory for the security man to confirm that the cull suckler cows that I had on board were booked in. At the time your comment didn't make sense but it does now after reading the agriland article on the pc when I got home.

Full article -https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/e100-million-beef-fund-set-to-include-production-reduction-clause/

I'm interested on what they mean by this - According to a draft EU document on the regulation for the fund seen by this publication: “The measures taken by Ireland shall be aimed at reducing production or restructuring the beef and veal sector.”
I'm sorta surprised that they mentioned restructuring the veal sector in Ireland considering we don't have one. Having said that I got a heads up from an insider last Winter that there was going to be changes to live calf exports but I doubt that he even thought there would be a monetary windfall!

freedominacup

Bass Reeves wrote: »

But the government have to stump up.

Why? If partial afforestation is what they want to achieve along with a reduction in suckler numbers demographics will do it for them for free and in civil service eyes the difference in timescale would be negligible.

_Brian

Hard to understand that in an industry like beef where 2 out of every 3 farms make no profit at all, that lads would be resistant at being paid to cut back on numbers.

I think the big problem is that while nthere was a huge effort to keep this payment from feedlots and factory owners, these people will now be exempted from reducing numbers and so will likely continue to increase in size, something I think which damages the industry.

Anto_Meath

Base price wrote: »

I read your post earlier whilst waiting at the factory for the security man to confirm that the cull suckler cows that I had on board were booked in. At the time your comment didn't make sense but it does now after reading the agriland article on the pc when I got home.

Full article -https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/e100-million-beef-fund-set-to-include-production-reduction-clause/

I'm interested on what they mean by this - According to a draft EU document on the regulation for the fund seen by this publication: “The measures taken by Ireland shall be aimed at reducing production or restructuring the beef and veal sector.”
I'm sorta surprised that they mentioned restructuring the veal sector in Ireland considering we don't have one. Having said that I got a heads up from an insider last Winter that there was going to be changes to live calf exports but I doubt that he even thought there would be a monetary windfall!

Yes Bass I noticed that too, so my thinking is that the EU are looking for Ireland to do something to curb beef production and where is a lot of the beef in Ireland now coming from - the dairy sector so are they looking at bringing in a calf destruction policy / payment. All that will do is put a base price under the cost of calves making them more expensive for the farmer that rears calf to beef and blacken the image of Irish beef.
The EU seem to love tricking around the edges of farming with little schemes for awhile but they never achieve anything. Years ago the paid the farmers in the west to take sheep off the mountains then a few years later on they were paying farmers to stock the mountain with sheep again.
Then the is the image of farmers getting subsidy from Europe that the public have, they see it as farmers getting money for nothing. Where in fact it is paying framers to produce good quality food at a reasonable price for people to afford be it Pints of milk, Guinness or sausages or beef. I have a feeling this €100 million will never come to pass.

_Brian

Base price wrote: »

I read your post earlier whilst waiting at the factory for the security man to confirm that the cull suckler cows that I had on board were booked in. At the time your comment didn't make sense but it does now after reading the agriland article on the pc when I got home.

Full article -https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/e100-million-beef-fund-set-to-include-production-reduction-clause/

I'm interested on what they mean by this - According to a draft EU document on the regulation for the fund seen by this publication: “The measures taken by Ireland shall be aimed at reducing production or restructuring the beef and veal sector.”
I'm sorta surprised that they mentioned restructuring the veal sector in Ireland considering we don't have one. Having said that I got a heads up from an insider last Winter that there was going to be changes to live calf exports but I doubt that he even thought there would be a monetary windfall!

Public opinion is against live export of calves so I expect it’s days are numbered in current format, heck, I don’t like it myself.

I doubt though the general public are ready for bobbies either, as often is the case the alternative might be even more unpalatable than the existing practice.

We could produce veal here easily, but it would need to be near all exported as it’s not on the typical Irish menu nor ever will on any decent volume.

Bass Reeves

freedominacup wrote: »

Why? If partial afforestation is what they want to achieve along with a reduction in suckler numbers demographics will do it for them for free and in civil service eyes the difference in timescale would be negligible.

Demographics may not do it for them fast enough. All that is happening is that farmers are getting older before they inherit land. The other thing is time is against them. We are not going to hit out carbon reduction targets without a drastic change in agri policy.

The EU Commission has point out a possible way of reducing our carbon footprint. If the government fails to tackle it maybe the EU will. They did it already with the Netherlands hitting them with a phosporus quota. All that is happening is the EU are telling Ireland to forget about a suckler cow scheme that it is a cow reduction scheme whether it is suckler or dairy it is immaterial to them.

I do not know where restructuring the veal industry comes from. Is this a hint that live export of calves is limited, or that we need to solve the Jersey/Friesian cross calves issue. I would like to see more flesh on its bones. However we can now see with some clarity the processors dream of continual beef expansion is over, but I also see that dairy cow numbers will be limited fairly soon as well.

I am not too sure finishers will walk away with the pot of gold either. We can say with certainty that all the 100 million will not now go to finishers. Will half the money have to go to suckler restructuring ??. What amount of money will have to go to restructuring the veal industry. What is interesting as well is that the Dept of Agriculture have to find the 50 million out of its own budget, what schemes or funds will be hit to solve that. I think the boys that rushed to kill cattle before the end of May may well be disappointed. The rest will not be much happier either. A slaughter premium will be well sub 100 euro/head IMO and more than likely nearer the 50/head mark. There will be lot of disappointed sectoral interests here.

Teddy 1234

I wonder how this will work, will they pay us to get out of sucklers and go into something else like rearing dairy calves, or do they want us to set trees

Bass Reeves

Teddy 1234 wrote: »

I wonder how this will work, will they pay us to get out of sucklers and go into something else like rearing dairy calves, or do they want us to set trees

Where I can see the issue is how do they stop other lads keeping a few suckler cows. will we have a quota for suckler cows again?. How much will it cost/cow. If half the fund of 100 million goes into a suckler fund it equates to about 52 euro/cow. If you had to reduce cows numbers by 20% this would equate to 260 euro/cow reduction. But how are this reduction policed. It would reduce suckler cow numbers from 960K to 760K.

On the finishing side 50 million divided by 880K cattle. The approx kill from November To April inclusive is equal to a premium of 56 euro/head. TBF that is the approximate loss invalue of kill from the winter 2017/18 to the winter of 2018/2019.

I do not think a lot of finishers will be breaking open the bottle of brandy and box of cigars. Of course there is no money for the veal restructuring.

grassroot1

What good is reducing suckler cows while allowing the continued expansion of dairy cows?
Can I get out of suckler and into dairy?
The 50 million was given to Irish farmers to compensate for losses due to Brexit uncertainty.
Where did suckler cow reduction come from?

Mad_maxx

Been following this story as I've an uncle near portumna who has fifty sucklers.

Farmers need incentives here to sell their herds of sucklers, how about a once off tax free sale?, lot of money if you have 70k plus of cows, mean an awful lot to older suckler farmers approaching retirement.

_Brian

Be interesting to see if it was a clause offered by us to the EU to get the money.

Bass Reeves

Saw an article in the journal online where it is not just a suckler cow reduction but a beef production reduction. They are equating this to the milk price support that occured during the last milk price crisis.
They're also seem to be insisting that any one that reviewed support is in an environment scheme or is QA. This could mean anybody that sold finished cattle through the mart that was not QA will review nothing. TBH I say there will be a lot of disappointed lads.
Last week also the journal did some research that indicated that lads selling weanling and stores last autumn were back 50-100 euro and this was of benefit to finisher's

lalababa

The way forward would seem to be a nationwide reduction of animals, if that just includes bovines or pigs and sheep I don't know, but definitely bovines.
A way of doing this would be less inputs and less cattle...basically Organic farming, and a major reduction in suckler cows, whilst not having a major increase in dairy cows.
E.g. Farm x of goodish 100 acres has 75 sucklers selling weanlings, with the major input of 20 ton of fertilizer and a lump of meal, and a 75 suckler cow shed. Farm x switches to organic raising dairy calfs to beef with half the livestock units and a smaller shed, and no fertilizer & (very little organic meal) inputs.

Cavanjack

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Saw an article in the journal online where it is not just a suckler cow reduction but a beef production reduction. They are equating this to the milk price support that occured during the last milk price crisis.
They're also seem to be insisting that any one that reviewed support is in an environment scheme or is QA. This could mean anybody that sold finished cattle through the mart that was not QA will review nothing. TBH I say there will be a lot of disappointed lads.
Last week also the journal did some research that indicated that lads selling weanling and stores last autumn were back 50-100 euro and this was of benefit to finisher's

Wish I could have bought them €100 cheaper this spring. Thought plainer suckler cattle were dearer if anything.

older by the day

charolais0153 wrote: »

Be a sin to plant a lot of places where cows are kept

It might be a bigger sin to waste young people's youth. Keeping them at home tied to those cows

Welding Rod

Few small auld sins, never hurt anyone!!

Bass Reeves

Cavanjack wrote: »

Wish I could have bought them €100 cheaper this spring. Thought plainer suckler cattle were dearer if anything.

There was an opinion that only finisher's were entitled to the fund. Those with this opinion were advocating that the total fund should have been paid as a slaughter premium. This would have equated to about 130/ head. The main reasons given were ration prices ( but this was known before any cattle were put into a shed) and poor beef price. However if you compare 2018 with 2019 in general beef prices were back only by 20 c/ kg. This equated to a loss of 50-60/ head. However stores last autumn were back by that and more

Sugarbowl

Very disappointed to see in journal as well about the farmer having to be QA or in environment scheme. Sure isn't that only keeping the small lads out again, and reducing the potential farmers they have to pay. I have neither and the neighbour next door doesn't, and we're both selling fine weanlings in the mart. Was looking forward to the few Bob coming in but anyways...

grassroot1

older by the day wrote:

It might be a bigger sin to waste young people's youth. Keeping them at home tied to those cows

If the farm house is surrounded by forestry never see them again anyway

_Brian

Sugarbowl wrote: »

Very disappointed to see in journal as well about the farmer having to be QA or in environment scheme. Sure isn't that only keeping the small lads out again, and reducing the potential farmers they have to pay. I have neither and the neighbour next door doesn't, and we're both selling fine weanlings in the mart. Was looking forward to the few Bob coming in but anyways...

Be interesting to see the final numbers on this.

I’d be expecting that maybe 50% of beef farms will see some of this money with the rest left licking the wounds of a bad year.

Cavanjack

Bass Reeves wrote: »

There was an opinion that only finisher's were entitled to the fund. Those with this opinion were advocating that the total fund should have been paid as a slaughter premium. This would have equated to about 130/ head. The main reasons given were ration prices ( but this was known before any cattle were put into a shed) and poor beef price. However if you compare 2018 with 2019 in general beef prices were back only by 20 c/ kg. This equated to a loss of 50-60/ head. However stores last autumn were back by that and more

Young bull prices were back 50 to 60 cent. On a 450kg carcass when you include ration hike it was close to €300 if not more.

blue5000

Cavanjack wrote: »

Young bull prices were back 50 to 60 cent. On a 450kg carcass when you include ration hike it was close to €300 if not more.

Exactly, who cares where or who gets the 100m Larry and co have most, if not all of it got already.

I'm just wondering how low beef price will go when brexit part II hits the fan next October.

SuperTortoise

Bass Reeves wrote: »

There was an opinion that only finisher's were entitled to the fund. Those with this opinion were advocating that the total fund should have been paid as a slaughter premium. This would have equated to about 130/ head. The main reasons given were ration prices ( but this was known before any cattle were put into a shed) and poor beef price. However if you compare 2018 with 2019 in general beef prices were back only by 20 c/ kg. This equated to a loss of 50-60/ head. However stores last autumn were back by that and more

Heifers may be back 20- 30 cent but young bulls are back a euro, that's over 400 euro per head of a hit at least.

Grueller

SuperTortoise wrote: »

Heifers may be back 20- 30 cent but young bulls are back a euro, that's over 400 euro per head of a hit at least.

My weanlings were back 70 cent/kg liveweight last week @ average 400kg live. That's €280 per head. It is not only finishers in trouble.

Bass Reeves

SuperTortoise wrote: »

Heifers may be back 20- 30 cent but young bulls are back a euro, that's over 400 euro per head of a hit at least.

Cavanjack wrote: »

Young bull prices were back 50 to 60 cent. On a 450kg carcass when you include ration hike it was close to €300 if not more.

Bills are a gamble you win big you lose big. Gave up on gambling on them after the last hair cut in 2014 was it. IMO last winter with ration prices they were not even a gamble. Along with that lots of lads played double or quits and kept them hoping for the prices to rise. Some lads even left them go over 24 months.

Talking to a lad that feed s few of his own( AA and killed under 16 months) he moved them all on in December/January as usual. He made a few bob out of them as they went on the grid at or near the bullock base.

patsy_mccabe

So we've gone from building grants and Harvest 2020 to now reducing suckler numbers all in the space of a few years. Oh boy!

wrangler

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

So we've gone from building grants and Harvest 2020 to now reducing suckler numbers all in the space of a few years. Oh boy!

Beef price is in the doldrums all over EU and the world even, even supermarkets are saying that mince is allthat's wanted now and dairy beef will fill that.
With Beef plan undermining our intensive fed suckler beef and this has even spread now to Scotch Beef we're lucky to be able to sell anything