Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Farming Chit Chat

1…231232234236237…331

Comments

  • #6992
    coolshannagh28
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,494 ✭✭✭coolshannagh28


    Cialios the commissioner is determined to reform the SFP system in order to make it fairer for poorer farmers in Eastern Europe regardless of the efforts oflarge vested interests in Ireland and western Europe . the historic system in Ireland is biased against young farmers , farmers with poorer land and new entrants.
    ,FF and O Cuiv have spotted this as a vote getter and I expect that a lot of pressure will come to bear on Coveney in the next few weeks.
    Where is the logic of propogating a system so open to abuse ,the trading of entitlements allowed anyone with any cop on to sell their low value entitlements early on and replace them with the highest value possible ,multiply their SFP and get multiple years of returns and the IFA proposes to allow this until 2020 . surely a scam .


  • #6993
    freedominacup
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,920 ✭✭✭freedominacup


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    So you want all SFP, subsidies, grants done away with in European Agriculture??

    Short answer. Yes.


  • #6994
    tismesoitis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 858 ✭✭✭tismesoitis


    1chippy wrote: »
    Just in from carnaross, heifers were mental money e3 a kilo easily got for what i could only describe as plain heifers, saw 1 330kg make 1100.
    Cows were pretty cheap, picked up a nice dec calver, 2 purebred registered limos in calf to mas de clo made 920 and 1070. you would need to spend the money you saved on building frames to keep them in but.
    did u get into d bull ring chippy to check out trade??


  • #6995
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,408 ✭✭✭bbam


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    So you want all SFP, subsidies, grants done away with in European Agriculture??

    You can't just lump in SFP with Grants..
    Grants are used to encourage farmers to upgrade facilities above current levels for a specific aim, eg environtmental.. while one can manage with 15 cows round a feeder in a field it was grant aided to upgrade to slatted shed for environmental reasons..

    SFP is different, people are treating it like a right and entitlement when the truth is that it has skewed our industury down to a position where many cannot break even without it, but it supports them to keep going..

    I feel that yes a phased reduction of the payments would be healthy for the industury, I appreciate other points made about it providing food security but I think if a decent profit were available, people would farm to meet demand..


  • #6996
    flat out !!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 157 ✭✭flat out !!


    But of course Covney and co are getting their fair share of the bigger sps payments back in 42% income tax, social charges, vat on capital expenditure, dirt tax on savings, even stamp duty on land purchases, so might be hard to blame him if he was reluctant to rob the bigger sps payments too much. Cutting 10-20% from payments over €40k and using this money to fund Aeos or suckler schemes for active farmers would make more sense, and help towards the agri 2020 targets.


  • Advertisement
  • #6997
    reilig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭reilig


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    Who has said it is an income supplement Reilig?
    SFP is the Common Agricultural Policy. It was set up to provide farmers with a reasonable income, consumers with quality food at fair prices and to preserve rural heritage. SFP is paid by the EU to farmers as an income supplement

    www.ec.europa.eu


  • #6998
    reilig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭reilig


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    Have you become a communist overnight Reilig??

    I never said that this was my view. I was merely reporting what I had read over the past few days. I have my own view of how the money should be paid out. This would most certainly involve the cutting of payments to Larry and the likes. It would also involve the cutting of payments to non active farmers. However, it is clear that the IFA are taking the side of those who get the most money in SFP's. According to yesterday's farming Independent, they don't have major concern for new entrants, nor do they have major concern for smaller farmers. Their goal is to get SFP levels to remain the same. I don't think that this will aid the future development of irish Agriculture. SFP needs to be used to encourage development within the agricultural sector by bringing in young entrants, improving efficiency, and targeting farming practices that have potential for development.

    That's my view. Its far from communist!


  • #6999
    reilig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭reilig


    Dont be daft wrote: »
    Why should farmers have to accept a cap of 50k?

    If you produce more why shouldnt you earn more. Every other industry in the world is geared around the notion that if you work hard and work smart you have the opportunity to make a better living.

    What your saying is to put in place a ceiling and use that the money saved by this ceiling to give back to the smaller farmers.
    Thats possibly the worst business model anyone can imagine and smacks more of communism than free market.

    Were would the incentive to expand or develope be if a ceiling was in place?

    Why would I bother borrowing 100k to build onto my parlour or lease and stock a dry farm?
    Why would I take the risk if I didnt have the cushion that the SFP gives me?

    Why would I go out and give 2hrs more on an expanded farm when the only reward I was looking at was a slight margin and if not a loss?

    CAP isnt about rural employment, keeping people on the land etc. etc.
    Its about stability and growth. Without stability in the market there can be no growth. Without growth the EU will not be able to feed itself going forward.

    Capping SFP will in my view limit growth among the smaller farmers. It'll also remove the stability provided to the larger farmers by the SFP.

    Its also a complete falicy so say that high SFP farmers have lower costs. Most are renting the majority of their land, paying employees etc.
    Some of the lowest cost systems out there are small farmers, with no debt, own all their land and have no employees.

    You are supposed to be making profit from your farm, nor relying solely on the SFP for profit. If you produce more on your farm, then you should be aiming to make more profit from the farm - not from SFP. This should be the encouragement and the reward for working harder.


  • #7000
    reilig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭reilig


    JohnBoy wrote: »
    The biggest question here is what the purpose of the SFP is?


    everyone has a different view, and to be honest I'm not even sure if the eurocrats themselves know.



    Some say it's an income support, some say it's a food security measure, without a clear definition of the purpose of the SFP I dont think you can rule too much one way or another..

    You have it there in this post. Its an income suport for farmers which in turn is a food security measure for consumers. Its clear - in black and white.

    What do others think SFP is?


  • #7001
    freedominacup
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,920 ✭✭✭freedominacup


    bbam wrote: »
    You see this is where things aren't quite right...
    What about working your ass off for a genuine profit.. Any industry where its acceptable to work your ass off to gain more subsidies rather than a proper sustainable profit, just isn't correct.

    This is exactly the reason the current system was introduced. It was all about the subsidies 15 years ago. Every decision taken was about how much more subsidy you could harvest. The country was full of screw sucklers producing s**t product that was very hard to sell. Guys were making mad decisions around sales rings based on how much premium was left to harvest from a beast, the actual market for that beast as a finished animal was irrelevant.

    It had to be changed and those who are looking for a link between SFP and production are deluding themselves if they think it will lead to more money in their pockets. You end up with people renting acres at inflated prices to claim aid on them and cattle being bought simply to fill a quota of subs with no regard for the market conditions. I see plenty of suckler farmers on here and producing quality cattle has become a badge of honour, 15 years ago the nudge around the ring would be "that X got around 400 slaughter subs last year abd would you look at the yokes he's buying" the guy doing his best to produce quality was far less common than today.

    The big change that is needed is in relation to the subsidies going to active farmers. Guys renting maps, or having land set for years and still claiming SFP needs to be stopped. As with milk quota use it or lose it. Land for rent should be land for rent, maps and SFP shouldn't come into it. Land for sale I would treat differently entitlements should probably transfer in a land sale.


  • Advertisement
  • #7002
    hugo29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,267 ✭✭✭hugo29


    1chippy wrote: »
    Just in from carnaross, heifers were mental money e3 a kilo easily got for what i could only describe as plain heifers, saw 1 330kg make 1100.
    Cows were pretty cheap, picked up a nice dec calver, 2 purebred registered limos in calf to mas de clo made 920 and 1070. you would need to spend the money you saved on building frames to keep them in but.

    dont know if limo are that bad, some are, have a purebred limo and she will stand still in the creep while you latch the calf on, last year she lay down cleaning while i latched the calf on and she has never even looked over the ditches


  • #7003
    hugo29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,267 ✭✭✭hugo29


    coolshannagh28 wrote: »
    Cialios the commissioner is determined to reform the SFP system in order to make it fairer for poorer farmers in Eastern Europe regardless of the efforts oflarge vested interests in Ireland and western Europe . the historic system in Ireland is biased against young farmers , farmers with poorer land and new entrants.
    ,FF and O Cuiv have spotted this as a vote getter and I expect that a lot of pressure will come to bear on Coveney in the next few weeks.
    Where is the logic of propogating a system so open to abuse ,the trading of entitlements allowed anyone with any cop on to sell their low value entitlements early on and replace them with the highest value possible ,multiply their SFP and get multiple years of returns and the IFA proposes to allow this until 2020 . surely a scam .

    speaking of cop on, i just realised last night you could do this, sell the average value ones and buy in the higher value, fcuking asleep at the wheel or what

    wonder will it last until 2020, i am tempted to chance it now

    anyway lads no point in us arguing, we will bend over and take it from europe like we always do,


  • #7004
    freedominacup
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,920 ✭✭✭freedominacup


    hugo29 wrote: »
    dont know if limo are that bad, some are, have a purebred limo and she will stand still in the creep while you latch the calf on, last year she lay down cleaning while i latched the calf on and she has never even looked over the ditches

    I think handling has a lot to do with it. I know years ago our dairy herd was a lot harder to handle because they weren't being handled correctly. My father was the first in his family to run a dairy herd beyond a couple of cows for the house and he got in to relatively large numbers fairly quickly. The were really treated as female cattle in general. I trained in the U.K. for a while and the culture over there was completely different to what I was brought up with at home. Every herd I worked in it was a case of how quite the cows were compared to other places. You would have to fight your way up through the sheds at times they simply wouldn't move out of your way.

    I changed the way we handled our stock totally when I came home and within a couple of years we could A.I. heifers standing in the middle of a yard. Most animals seen by a vet are in an open house no need of using the crush. I know sucklers are different but if calves were with quieter cows and more cows were reared where they were going to work I think the payoff in terms of ease of handling would far outweigh the bit of time put into softer handling.


  • #7005
    hugo29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,267 ✭✭✭hugo29


    Timmaay wrote: »
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056186055

    Going to pick myself up one from Whites of portadown soon.

    timmaay

    in terms of sprayer. looking at 300l from Whites €990 delivered, or €1090 for 400l

    Additional cost of €150 for self fill, has anyone used the self fill from a 1000l IBC tank,

    think will get the 300l with self fill


  • #7006
    adne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,232 ✭✭✭adne


    1chippy wrote: »
    Just in from carnaross, heifers were mental money e3 a kilo easily got for what i could only describe as plain heifers, saw 1 330kg make 1100.
    Cows were pretty cheap, picked up a nice dec calver, 2 purebred registered limos in calf to mas de clo made 920 and 1070. you would need to spend the money you saved on building frames to keep them in but.

    any word back on what the cause of your losses earlier this month were?


  • #7007
    reilig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭reilig


    freedominacup wrote: »
    This is exactly the reason the current system was introduced. It was all about the subsidies 15 years ago. Every decision taken was about how much more subsidy you could harvest. The country was full of screw sucklers producing s**t product that was very hard to sell. Guys were making mad decisions around sales rings based on how much premium was left to harvest from a beast, the actual market for that beast as a finished animal was irrelevant.

    It had to be changed and those who are looking for a link between SFP and production are deluding themselves if they think it will lead to more money in their pockets. You end up with people renting acres at inflated prices to claim aid on them and cattle being bought simply to fill a quota of subs with no regard for the market conditions. I see plenty of suckler farmers on here and producing quality cattle has become a badge of honour, 15 years ago the nudge around the ring would be "that X got around 400 slaughter subs last year abd would you look at the yokes he's buying" the guy doing his best to produce quality was far less common than today.

    The big change that is needed is in relation to the subsidies going to active farmers. Guys renting maps, or having land set for years and still claiming SFP needs to be stopped. As with milk quota use it or lose it. Land for rent should be land for rent, maps and SFP shouldn't come into it. Land for sale I would treat differently entitlements should probably transfer in a land sale.

    I think this is pretty much in line with my thoughts.

    The issue is how can they prevent large payments going to non active or low production farmers without linking SFP to production?


  • #7008
    Viewtodiefor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,217 ✭✭✭Viewtodiefor


    hugo29 wrote: »

    timmaay

    in terms of sprayer. looking at 300l from Whites €990 delivered, or €1090 for 400l

    Additional cost of €150 for self fill, has anyone used the self fill from a 1000l IBC tank,

    think will get the 300l with self fill

    Depending how big ur fields paddocks are 300ltr is quiet small will do approx 2 to 2.5 acres on a fill. If some of yours r 3 acres Ull be going bck filling again !


  • #7009
    hugo29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,267 ✭✭✭hugo29


    Viewtodiefor wrote: »
    Depending how big ur fields paddocks are 300ltr is quiet small will do approx 2 to 2.5 acres on a fill. If some of yours r 3 acres Ull be going bck filling again !

    was going to have the ibc tank in field and self fill from that, was assuming 300l would do 3 acres so with IBC tank and full sprayer you could do 12 acres


  • #7010
    Viewtodiefor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,217 ✭✭✭Viewtodiefor


    hugo29 wrote: »

    was going to have the ibc tank in field and self fill from that, was assuming 300l would do 3 acres so with IBC tank and full sprayer you could do 12 acres

    You'll be skimping on volume covering 3 acres with it


  • #7011
    hugo29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,267 ✭✭✭hugo29


    Viewtodiefor wrote: »
    You'll be skimping on volume covering 3 acres with it

    ok i am novice to this spraying, with the weather so bad anytime you get a good spell the contractors are so busy the spraying is last on the agenda so decided to buy me own ,
    so you recommend 300l to 2.5 acres max, and what would 400 cover so


  • Advertisement
  • #7012
    bob charles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,343 ✭✭✭bob charles


    no need for all the water. I usually spray sub 100l/ha unless serious disease pressure. Down around 60l/ha for the beet


  • #7013
    jay gatsby
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 292 ✭✭jay gatsby


    bob charles wrote: »
    no need for all the water. I usually spray sub 100l/ha unless serious disease pressure. Down around 60l/ha for the beet


    Agree with Bob here except that if you're spraying grass and stepping it or whatever I'd allow a good bit of overlap but a max of 80 litres per acre should be plenty.

    I would say that I think you might regret buying a sprayer this small, if you got up to 600 or 800 litres at least you could head off a few miles and spray a few acres if the opportunity comes up. You'll be crucified filling the small tanks if you have to do any acreage at all.


  • #7014
    hugo29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,267 ✭✭✭hugo29


    jay gatsby wrote: »
    Agree with Bob here except that if you're spraying grass and stepping it or whatever I'd allow a good bit of overlap but a max of 80 litres per acre should be plenty.

    I would say that I think you might regret buying a sprayer this small, if you got up to 600 or 800 litres at least you could head off a few miles and spray a few acres if the opportunity comes up. You'll be crucified filling the small tanks if you have to do any acreage at all.

    yes but there is also costs, for all i would do in a year i dont know if i could justify a 600l sprayer, its mostly for weed control on pasture and silage ground or for re seeding

    also i was thinking with auto fill i could use the river as all the land has running water


  • #7015
    whelan1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,786 ✭✭✭✭whelan1


    Have received 16 texts in the last hour from ifa. Same message repeated. My dad is getting the same. Nice to see our money is going to good use


  • #7016
    naughto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,445 ✭✭✭naughto


    as far as i no they dont pay for the texs all sent from a computer


  • #7017
    whelan1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,786 ✭✭✭✭whelan1


    naughto wrote: »
    as far as i no they dont pay for the texs all sent from a computer
    just got another 6, tried ringing the number they come from but no answer:confused::confused:


  • #7018
    naughto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,445 ✭✭✭naughto


    if its set up like the social welfare system text crap then its an automated number.is there any opt out option on the tex??


  • #7019
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,025 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    reilig wrote: »
    I never said that this was my view. I was merely reporting what I had read over the past few days. I have my own view of how the money should be paid out. This would most certainly involve the cutting of payments to Larry and the likes. It would also involve the cutting of payments to non active farmers. However, it is clear that the IFA are taking the side of those who get the most money in SFP's. According to yesterday's farming Independent, they don't have major concern for new entrants, nor do they have major concern for smaller farmers. Their goal is to get SFP levels to remain the same. I don't think that this will aid the future development of irish Agriculture. SFP needs to be used to encourage development within the agricultural sector by bringing in young entrants, improving efficiency, and targeting farming practices that have potential for development.

    That's my view. Its far from communist!

    sorry Reilig but coming out with phrases like "forcing them to downsize" is nothing short of communism


  • #7020
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,025 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    you know its funny listening to farmers talking about the SFP - and how they want it changed to this or that - or done away with completly

    Then you go onto the SFP or DAS or REPs payments threads and people are falling over themselves with panic because the money isn't in their account today and how much bother they are in. They are checking the account 10 times a day for 10 days to see if its in

    Plenty of lads talk a good game but the simple fact of the matter is that if SFP was done away with in the morning then a huge amount of farmers in this country would go to the wall - starting with suckler farmers as it is the most inefficient form of farming

    I have no problem with the SFP being done away with (and a corresponding drop in bull#### rules, regulations and inspections). But i would wager a fair amount that the majority would be in for a rude awakening if it did happen


  • Advertisement
  • #7021
    whelan1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,786 ✭✭✭✭whelan1


    naughto wrote: »
    if its set up like the social welfare system text crap then its an automated number.is there any opt out option on the tex??
    no opt out on the text... got 26 in all, they have stopped now.. was funny as i was talking to another farmer and his phone and mine kept going with the texts


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement