IFA “Day of action”

eire23 · 11-06-2021 12:47pm

Furze99 wrote: »

It's exactly this type of activity that brings farmers into bad cess with many citizens living in towns and urban areas. The majority who perceive rightly or wrongly that they are subventing the farming subsidies through their taxes.

Not so much done on the eastern side but parts of the west have been blighted with endless kms of mountain fencing in the last ten years or so. The cost of putting up this fencing has to be substantial, you'd be needing a chopper to drop posts and wire.

On the general topic though of climate change measures, this is going to hit all sections of society hard and the ag industry is going to have to share the burden.

Why would you say parts of the west have been blighted by endless fencing of mountain? Is it not the landowners right to fence it if he wants to? And I've yet to see helicopters leaving out posts and wire.

Bullocks · 11-06-2021 1:33pm

eire23 wrote: »

Why would you say parts of the west have been blighted by endless fencing of mountain? Is it not the landowners right to fence it if he wants to? And I've yet to see helicopters leaving out posts and wire.

You could say parts of the west were blighted with ewes straying in front of cars aswell. I know if I had ewes adjoining the n59 I'd like them fenced rather than waiting them to end up in the bumber of a car

Furze99 · 11-06-2021 2:58pm

eire23 wrote: »

Why would you say parts of the west have been blighted by endless fencing of mountain? Is it not the landowners right to fence it if he wants to? And I've yet to see helicopters leaving out posts and wire.

As sure as night follows day, these fences will breaking down for years to come. Too remote to maintain. Built with grants, mostly needless, generations have managed without them - if the odd few ewes stray across, the neighbours would let each other know.

Helipcopters? I've not seen one actually making posts & wire drops. But have come across such piles, no way were they carried up by hand and no sign of quad tracks. In fact some of the ground would be so rocky and steep, you couldn't get materials anyway up except by chopper or carrying. As far as I can see the only benefit is to the fencing contractors who must be feeding off grants for this needless work.

11-06-2021 3:12pm

Furze99 wrote: »

It's exactly this type of activity that brings farmers into bad cess with many citizens living in towns and urban areas. The majority who perceive rightly or wrongly that they are subventing the farming subsidies through their taxes.

Not so much done on the eastern side but parts of the west have been blighted with endless kms of mountain fencing in the last ten years or so. The cost of putting up this fencing has to be substantial, you'd be needing a chopper to drop posts and wire.

On the general topic though of climate change measures, this is going to hit all sections of society hard and the ag industry is going to have to share the burden.

I would fence every individual share of commonage in the country. Or, failing that, my shares.

Fencing a piece of land isn't the same as squatting or claiming adverse possession.

In Agricultural schemes a farmer can't get paid twice for the same thing. Equally, the public can't expect to get all things for some payments.

kevthegaff · 11-06-2021 3:19pm

Interesting timing giving that most good land would have their silage made while lads on marginal lad in the middle of theirs

eire23 · 11-06-2021 3:43pm

Furze99 wrote: »

As sure as night follows day, these fences will breaking down for years to come. Too remote to maintain. Built with grants, mostly needless, generations have managed without them - if the odd few ewes stray across, the neighbours would let each other know.

Helipcopters? I've not seen one actually making posts & wire drops. But have come across such piles, no way were they carried up by hand and no sign of quad tracks. In fact some of the ground would be so rocky and steep, you couldn't get materials anyway up except by chopper or carrying. As far as I can see the only benefit is to the fencing contractors who must be feeding off grants for this needless work.

I've 10km of mountain fenced the last 5 years, and not done yet. money well spent, I let the sheep up and the same number come down again. Gathering is a one man job. So I definitley wouldn't call it needless. And no fencing contractor was used so they didn't get to feed off grants:cool:

TITANIUM. · 11-06-2021 3:50pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I would fence every individual share of commonage in the country. Or, failing that, my shares.

Fencing a piece of land isn't the same as squatting or claiming adverse possession.

In Agricultural schemes a farmer can't get paid twice for the same thing. Equally, the public can't expect to get all things for some payments.

Impossible to get agreement on that in most commonages. Down this direction anyway, hills aren't uniform in there grazing quality. So whos gonna get what. Plus the way some parcels are broken up out in the hills is like a patchwork quilt. Ridiculous suggestion to fence individual sections of these commonage parcels.

11-06-2021 4:28pm

TITANIUM. wrote: »

Impossible to get agreement on that in most commonages. Down this direction anyway, hills aren't uniform in there grazing quality. So whos gonna get what. Plus the way some parcels are broken up out in the hills is like a patchwork quilt. Ridiculous suggestion to fence individual sections of these commonage parcels.

Owning shares in 6 commonages I'm acutely aware of the issues on them. Many places have been log split in the past and to this very day continue to be fenced. At some point there was a decision mechanism in place.

I wasn't putting it forward as a policy. However, it would also solve a lot of the un-neighbourly problems that arise which are on a scale from general dislike of another, to control of grazing, to inclusion/access to schemes.

There are GOOD reasons why no sane person want's to get TOO involved in regulating commonages. Even the Dept. in GLAS don't want responsibility, they approve the planner, the planner calls the shots, the farmer pays the planner and any price the Dept sets if anyone in that food chain has fcuked up.

And that's just one example.

Birdnuts · 11-06-2021 7:30pm

mahoney_j wrote: »

Just home from nenagh ,big turnout ,Jackie Cahill and Michael lowry said there peace ,convoy up thru town and no fuss

Not surprised them too would be backing the IFA to the hilt on this - the former ex-ICMSA and the latter an out of closet Blueshirt.

Jjameson · 11-06-2021 8:40pm

Birdnuts wrote: »

Not surprised them too would be backing the IFA to the hilt on this - the former ex-ICMSA and the latter an out of closet Blueshirt.

I thought the Icmsa were bit out of joint about new large scale entrants rocking into milk with a hefty sfp coming with them?

MIKEKC · 11-06-2021 9:35pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I would fence every individual share of commonage in the country. Or, failing that, my shares.

Fencing a piece of land isn't the same as squatting or claiming adverse possession.

In Agricultural schemes a farmer can't get paid twice for the same thing. Equally, the public can't expect to get all things for some payments.

If they are shares how could you fence them.Other individuals have a right to graze these areas.

11-06-2021 9:40pm

MIKEKC wrote: »

If they are shares how could you fence them.Other individuals have a right to graze these areas.

You can fence whatever you like as long as all shareholders agree and the required hoops are jumped.

MIKEKC · 11-06-2021 10:42pm

Deleted User wrote: »

You can fence whatever you like as long as all shareholders agree and the required hoops are jumped.

Good luck with that

Castlekeeper · 11-06-2021 10:58pm

The protest reminds of that English soccer chant;

"This is embarrassing, this is embarrassing..."

Cattlepen · 11-06-2021 11:20pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Ah, why do I do this.

That's pretty disappointing to read, particularly the language bit about a "bluff" and the moral highground.

People in favour of convergence, redistribution of greening/eco scheme, CRISS/front loading, and capping at €60,000 without loopholes are not arguing the same agenda as the wealthy individuals drawing out of CAP.

Productivity and CAP entitlement value, that those on the highest value entitlements are most productive, is something which was disproven based on Department of Agriculture figures in the last CAP years ago.

Productivity measured only on food output is another red herring, there are public goods and eco system services produced also. CAP is funded by a European taxpayer who, rightly or wrongly increasingly puts value on these goods and services.

Those in the "West" are the only ones attempting to fairly reform the system. There are farmers with **** payments in all corners of the country, convergence will help them.

In a pasture based farm, redistribution of greening/eco schemes will ensure that farmers are getting paid the same amount each for carrying out the same action per hectare.

CRISS/Front Loading, if adopted and funded as it should be through taking a % of Pillar one, plus the monies from capping individual payments then giving every farmer for example an €80/HA top up on the first 15 hectares ensures those farmers on high value entitlements but only farming small number of hectares are protected.

Capping at €60,000 with no loopholes ensures the Larrys, Hans, and Sheikhs aren't drawing the small fortunes they currently enjoy.

I'm not going to tell you what to do, but based on your post, and to give the most moderate reply I possibly can, "could do better" would be in red pen on the homework.

Can I just say that what Larry n the sheikhs get make absolutely f**k all difference to them. They are not chasing it. It is but a tiny bit of lubrication in the huge gearboxes they are powering. People are getting wound up about it and to be honest it is pure socialist begrugery . “Cap their payment “. “Flip them, they don’t need support “. Their business is probably far more environmentally and biodiversity conscious than any scheme the EU pays the rest of us for. They can “afford” to farm like that too which is not a bad thing. Pay cap on per hectare farmed within an acceptable cross compliant rule book and let that be that. Capping is in my opinion bull**** to appease the mob. Plenty of big farming companies are way ahead on good farming practices than most of us but rather than improving what is inside our own gates people are baying not to give it to someone who has wealth enough to farm correctly.
By the way, I don’t have an ago anymore. I sold it because of this miserable attitude

11-06-2021 11:48pm

Cattlepen wrote: »

Can I just say that what Larry n the sheikhs get make absolutely f**k all difference to them. They are not chasing it. It is but a tiny bit of lubrication in the huge gearboxes they are powering. People are getting wound up about it and to be honest it is pure socialist begrugery . “Cap their payment “. “Flip them, they don’t need support “. Their business is probably far more environmentally and biodiversity conscious than any scheme the EU pays the rest of us for. They can “afford” to farm like that too which is not a bad thing. Pay cap on per hectare farmed within an acceptable cross compliant rule book and let that be that. Capping is in my opinion bull**** to appease the mob. Plenty of big farming companies are way ahead on good farming practices than most of us but rather than improving what is inside our own gates people are baying not to give it to someone who has wealth enough to farm correctly.
By the way, I don’t have an ago anymore. I sold it because of this miserable attitude

I'm not sure what an "ago" is

Anyone crying they can't make a go of it when they get a €60,000 cheque handed to them a year needs a solid kick up the hole. Commercial my arse.

DBK1 · 12-06-2021 12:16am

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure what an "ago" is

Anyone crying they can't make a go of it when they get a €60,000 cheque handed to them a year needs a solid kick up the hole. Commercial my arse.

I’d be thinking the €60,000 cap would still be too high. It should be €52,000 regardless of farm size or anything else. Anyone being handed €1,000 a week to run their business and still claims not to be making money shouldn’t be in that business in the first place.

alps · 12-06-2021 7:09am

Cattlepen wrote: »

Can I just say that what Larry n the sheikhs get make absolutely f**k all difference to them. They are not chasing it. It is but a tiny bit of lubrication in the huge gearboxes they are powering. People are getting wound up about it and to be honest it is pure socialist begrugery . “Cap their payment “. “Flip them, they don’t need support “. Their business is probably far more environmentally and biodiversity conscious than any scheme the EU pays the rest of us for. They can “afford” to farm like that too which is not a bad thing. Pay cap on per hectare farmed within an acceptable cross compliant rule book and let that be that. Capping is in my opinion bull**** to appease the mob. Plenty of big farming companies are way ahead on good farming practices than most of us but rather than improving what is inside our own gates people are baying not to give it to someone who has wealth enough to farm correctly.
By the way, I don’t have an ago anymore. I sold it because of this miserable attitude

That could be seen as a fair assessment, but who is going to be happy after this happens. The rage that's upon us over flattening of Pillar 1 is largely fought out without anyone looking at the figures..

With 100% convergence, the average 30ha farm will get €5250 and will spend money on planners and trees to draw down another 2250...

They'll still be bawling about the guy on €50,000, because for some irrational concept, they think they should be getting the same.

Fact is, the boys that they rage against simply farm a **** load of land.

Future here is that farms that previously purchased weanlings and stores will drift into some prong of a dairy enterprise, and the payments will drift to the P&L sheets of Dairy Ireland..

wrangler · 12-06-2021 8:24am

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure what an "ago" is

Anyone crying they can't make a go of it when they get a €60,000 cheque handed to them a year needs a solid kick up the hole. Commercial my arse.

That's ironic, coming from someone with exactly the same attitude of those that couldn't be arsed accumulating subsidies in 2000.
They missed the gravy train then and it was their own fault..
I liked the term above ''socialist begrudgery'' I must use it often from now on....so true. I'm sure there's a contradiction in it though. Begrudgery is the reason we'll never have a socialist utopia and the irish farmers are best at begrudgery

12-06-2021 8:45am

wrangler wrote: »

That's ironic, coming from someone with exactly the same attitude of those that couldn't be arsed accumulating subsidies in 2000.
They missed the gravy train then and it was their own fault..
I liked the term above ''socialist begrudgery'' I must use it often from now on....so true. I'm sure there's a contradiction in it though. Begrudgery is the reason we'll never have a socialist utopia and the irish farmers are best at begrudgery

Keep up the good work of annoying literally anyone not in a position to do anything in the antiquated reference years, you're doing a power of good.

Again another example of how we've taking abusing the English language to get one over on the neighbours just too far. Socialism for the rich comrade! Ranchers in favour of hand outs, socialist political parties against taxing the rich :pac:

This country couldn't be made up as a skit by the best minds.

Jjameson · 12-06-2021 8:56am

wrangler wrote: »

That's ironic, coming from someone with exactly the same attitude of those that couldn't be arsed accumulating subsidies in 2000.
They missed the gravy train then and it was their own fault..
I liked the term above ''socialist begrudgery'' I must use it often from now on....so true. I'm sure there's a contradiction in it though. Begrudgery is the reason we'll never have a socialist utopia and the irish farmers are best at begrudgery

A 30 year old farmer was 10 in 2000. And unlikely to be have privy to the inside information that you had regarding reference years!

12-06-2021 9:05am

kevthegaff wrote: »

Interesting timing giving that most good land would have their silage made while lads on marginal lad in the middle of theirs

I think the trick was to make one protest out of two issues. They knew well how few would turn out to protest CAP reform so let's say it's against the Climate Bill at the same time.

wrangler · 12-06-2021 10:41am

Jjameson wrote: »

A 30 year old farmer was 10 in 2000. And unlikely to be have privy to the inside information that you had regarding reference years!

The farms without subs didn't just appear in 2000, Herd quitter has belittled schemes on this thread and that same attitude was rampant in thee nineties, luckily for us.
Very few conspiracy theorists make any sense.
Make no mistake guys, dairy farmers are lauding your efforts, you're playing right into the hands of those that are expanding

Siamsa Sessions · 12-06-2021 12:11pm

Whatever the complex details of CAP reform, the IFA and other farm organisations should be taking a more more active role in any discussions concerning agriculture and food in general.

Farmers are busy. That goes without saying. But not getting involved in the politics of farming has landed us where we are - forever waiting on others to tell us what we can and can’t do. Whether it’s Teagasc, DAFM, processors, so-called environmentalists, whoever, we sit there like well-behaved children waiting til the teacher says we can do our work.

The job of the IFA president shouldn’t be going around the country to every parish pump meeting. He should be a polished media performer, chatting up Miriam O’Callaghan or Claire Byrne or Pat Kenny every few weeks. There’s a dozen committees and a half dozen executives behind him for the technical stuff, so his job should be to explain complex farming and direct-supports in plain English to a general audience.

The media is key. That’s where supermarkets have beaten all around them into a pulp. Give the media a headline or a sound-bite and they’ll come back for more every time.

Tractors on the road yesterday is a good example of that. Whether it impacts CAP negotiations is another thing, but it proves the media can be used to inform consumers about where their food comes from and put farmers as people on the public agenda.

wrangler · 12-06-2021 12:48pm

Siamsa Sessions wrote: »

Whatever the complex details of CAP reform, the IFA and other farm organisations should be taking a more more active role in any discussions concerning agriculture and food in general.

Farmers are busy. That goes without saying. But not getting involved in the politics of farming has landed us where we are - forever waiting on others to tell us what we can and can’t do. Whether it’s Teagasc, DAFM, processors, so-called environmentalists, whoever, we sit there like well-behaved children waiting til the teacher says we can do our work.

The job of the IFA president shouldn’t be going around the country to every parish pump meeting. He should be a polished media performer, chatting up Miriam O’Callaghan or Claire Byrne or Pat Kenny every few weeks. There’s a dozen committees and a half dozen executives behind him for the technical stuff, so his job should be to explain complex farming and direct-supports in plain English to a general audience.

The media is key. That’s where supermarkets have beaten all around them into a pulp. Give the media a headline or a sound-bite and they’ll come back for more every time.

Tractors on the road yesterday is a good example of that. Whether it impacts CAP negotiations is another thing, but it proves the media can be used to inform consumers about where their food comes from and put farmers as people on the public agenda.

I'm sure Tim will mature into the position, all the presidents seem to.
They'd be well tutored anyway. Tim does seem to get the rabbit in the headlamps look :eek: in a face to face interview.

Bullocks · 12-06-2021 12:57pm

[quote="wrangler;117403544"
Make no mistake guys, dairy farmers are lauding your efforts, you're playing right into the hands of those that are expanding[/quote]

In what way?

12-06-2021 12:57pm

wrangler wrote: »

The farms without subs didn't just appear in 2000, Herd quitter has belittled schemes on this thread and that same attitude was rampant in thee nineties, luckily for us.
Very few conspiracy theorists make any sense.
Make no mistake guys, dairy farmers are lauding your efforts, you're playing right into the hands of those that are expanding

how is it playing into dairy farmers hands to reform/update a payment system based on activity over 20 years ago?

Like this free money gravy train was never gonna last forever....i see lads with payments of well north of 150K,who have only sold silage and rented sheds the last 10 years or so,

The ifa hoping a minister for agriculture from donegal is gonna save their historical payments againest smaller west of ireland farmers is a political misjudge of scale similar to the dup trying to bring back a hard border and completly misses larger picture here....they have no clout and time has run out on this particular gravy train

alps · 12-06-2021 1:07pm

wrangler wrote: »

I'm sure Tim will mature into the position, all the presidents seem to.
They'd be well tutored anyway. Tim does seem to get the rabbit in the headlamps look :eek: in a face to face interview.

They had a class operator on Countrywide this morning. She was on with someone from an taisce, but was a serious step up in terms of professionalism..

wrangler · 12-06-2021 1:36pm

Bullocks wrote: »

In what way?

Flat rate payment will be paid on every hectare for those that have expanded, convergence will ensure that there'll be a good payment per hectare

MIKEKC · 12-06-2021 1:42pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Keep up the good work of annoying literally anyone not in a position to do anything in the antiquated reference years, you're doing a power of good.

Again another example of how we've taking abusing the English language to get one over on the neighbours just too far. Socialism for the rich comrade! Ranchers in favour of hand outs, socialist political parties against taxing the rich :pac:

This country couldn't be made up as a skit by the best minds.

Why not blame the lazy fathers who didn't maximise their payments?

IFA “Day of action”

Comments