Buying Local

[Skeddan]

It'll never happen ! Far,far too sensible an idea , much better to claw back all the subsidy money from farming and fishing and with the revenue saved employ a few more University graduates to save the day!

Maybe do like Ireland and get a few University Professors to show how can save the day so needn't depend on subsidies any longer.

 

http://www.teagasc.ie/news/2008/200802-21.asp

 

This is also worth a read:

 

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/01/business/farm.php

 

BTW - does anyone know if many Manx farmers and DAFF people are University graduates in relevant fields? (i.e. agribusiness, dairy science, crop science, pasture science, agro-ecology and the like).

 

Bringing in a few of the University graduates from Lincoln University might not be a bad idea - but the advanced guys in their agriculture and primary production research areas might be way too much before the very basics get sorted out.

[pongo]

Skeddan - you are sometimes sounding as if you are assuming that the people at DAFF and in govt are not looking at all these various options more or less everyday. Sometimes it gets a bit random.

 

It's all very well throwing out lots of ideas - but day to day the people in govt and in farming have to implement their policies relatively carefully and taking into account what the immediate implications might be.

 

I think you have to assume they will be looking for the brightest and best in their various fields (!) Maybe you should send them your cv.

[Sebrof]

But there is a huge amount of sense in suggesting a big subsidy for the ferries - for residents, for tourists, for exporters, and for importers. All would benefit.

Not really as much sense as you might suppose. Why subsidise ferry to transport fertiliser and plastic milk containers to and fro? Better not to subsidise that. Instead ship fertiliser by dry cargo vessel direct from producer. Have reusable 'rinse and return' milk containers. The subsidy would only brush the problems under the carpet and gets in the way of real solutions. What sense in subsidising very expensive transport of very expensive fertiliser from the UK or sending plastic milk containers full of air backwards and forwards?

 

Sense of proportion required here. The cost of those milk bottles is infinitesimal in the scheme of things.

 

And what concrete and costed ideas do you have for making Manx farms competitive? Talk is free, but sadly it's going to take much more than talk.

 

S

[Skeddan]

Skeddan - you are sometimes sounding as if you are assuming that the people at DAFF and in govt are not looking at all these various options more or less everyday. Sometimes it gets a bit random.

 

It's all very well throwing out lots of ideas - but day to day the people in govt and in farming have to implement their policies relatively carefully and taking into account what the immediate implications might be.

 

I think you have to assume they will be looking for the brightest and best in their various fields (!) Maybe you should send them your cv.

I think that's a fair assumption since they are looking at changes to the subsidies. The Andersons Report is fairly clear on the direction of the farming sector and indicates that such options have not been looked at. There's a suggestion that perhaps farmers might get together to discuss some closer cooperation - but that's it. (See my earlier post). Otherwise no hint at having looked seriously at any real strategy for making Manx farming competitive or reducing huge inefficiencies. If there is some brilliant secret masterplan to restructure Manx farming being kept closely under wraps, then my mistake.

 

Pongo - you are dead right about implementation, and that of course has to be taken into account. The whole thing would be a major bit of programme and project management. But there doesn't even seem to be any initiative to make the changes - only tinkering with subsidies. It's like instead of addressing how to go about building a railway line, they haven't even considered using rail, and are just spending their time deciding how best to feed the packhorses.

 

I'm sure they are looking for the best, but I also assume they are looking for what they think they need - e.g. an expert in legal position with EU subsidies and experts in areas of farm subsidies such as decoupling etc. they are looking within confines of the terms of reference, taking it for granted that subsidies are the way to go.

 

I'm certainly not the brightest and best in this area. I've been lucky enough to know a few of the ones who are though. If DAFF did have reasonably bright and good, then the Andersons Report would not be as it is. Anyway, you don't have to be very bright to see that shipping expensive fertiliser at huge cost from the UK and using four times more labour than your competitors isn't very cost-efficient. The economics of fertiliser shipping on farming is pretty fundamental stuff and cost structures of this are no secret. They'd get more value reading about this than reading my cv.

[WTF]

its catch 22, if you want cheap food, it has to be imported due to the costs of producing it here, if you want to suppoort farmers locally by buying at a price that would sustain the farmer without subsidy, it would be 3 or 4 times the price.

You seem to say IoM could not produce cheaper locally than imported. (which is why farmer has to have subsidy). I disagree - that's no more than a bogus superstition. There's no good reason why IoM could not produce cheaper locally than imported. It could well even produce at much lower cost than UK - so that unsubsidised Manx produce imported into UK would be cheaper than UK produced equivalent.

 

 

you are not competing with the UK only, you are competing with the rest of the world, in places where our cost of living and average wage look like very rich to them. the isle of man does not have the necessary throughput to make it viable, and you still have the very high labour costs to consider. the population is liitle more than an average UK big town or small city, how many towns have their own abatoir, hospital, power station, fuel ( gas and petrol ) storage depots. our infrastructure is excessive for only 80K. the only 'effecient' farms are BIG farms or battery hens for eggs or intensive chicken production. lots of animals in a little space. a heard of 50 sheep or 30 cows is no big money spinner. if a sheep gives you only one lamb per pregnancy for 2 years on the trot it wins a trip to the abatoir, you realy need twins from sheep on over ( a rough guess ) 85% of your stock cos you will lose some to birds and just natural causes. look at it another way, if after all the maths is done your flock of sheep average an income of £30 a sheep over the year, and you have 200 sheep, thats 6K, if you have 1000 sheep ( on a bigger farm ). thats 30k. you need a big farm to make a living, which is why a lot of local farms ( small holdings in the real world ) are just not viable. a few poly tunnels full of canabis would earn a few quid though, and when found out you would be provided with 3 meals a day and satelite TV at the jurby hilton.

[Skeddan]

WTF - what you say makes good sense. But a couple of things to consider. First, very high labour costs do have to be considered. That's why inefficiencies and high labour intensivity is crippling. Part of that is because many farms are smallholdings. If you bring together several farms to viable size (e.g. 1000 head) then you can start to become efficient, reducing labour input to a fraction of what it was before. If a dairy farm can run a herd of 1000 on 2.6 permanent staff, then the labour component becomes relatively minimal. Nowhere in the world is going to have skilled labour that can do that which is significantly cheaper as to be competitive. Even if on slave wages, the cost of shipping from wherever it is in the world that does this would outweigh the benefit - especially if they use the SPC to transport to IoM.

 

Fertiliser - I think countries in SE Asia import fertiliser from Qatar. NZ gets from Aus. IoM is at no great disadvantage in terms of shipping distance. Cost per tonne from producer at same rate. Shipping cost per tonne not much different. However at present Manx farmers buy on very small piecemeal retail basis from expensive UK middlemen and this is shipped at vast expense using the ferry.

 

Check out this 'case study' http://www.nzgrazing.co.nz/articles/dairy-...es/enton-farms/

 

Quite a lot of farms are joining together. Some have just leased out their land and take that as income and do other things. Others have effectively gone into mergers, investing stake into business (herd, grazing, equipment, capitial), and having this managed by one while others are 'directors' sharing profits etc. In effect you pool several farms together.

 

You need a big farm to make a living. Dead right. Poly tunnels of cannabis - been done - they've found indoor growing in rental houses works out better, so farming can't even compete there - other than to get the pad in jurby. Growing bananas and competing with the Welsh - that might have something to it. Kobe style beef and pigs for Tokyo X Pork might be ok for smallholding. But for typical sheep, dairy, beef, arable, etc. if not a big farm (or unit within a big farm), and run with all efficiencies and high productivity it just isn't viable. (But neither is a restaurant with 4 times the number of staff it needs, with a big expensive kitchen that's hardly used, food brought in by taxi from the supermarket rather than collected wholesale, and only 6 tables. If you saw that, I think you'd go What the F***!, no wonder it's far more expensive than anywhere else, and no wonder it's going broke).

[WTF]

the joining together of farms makes no difference if all the farmers that own the farms expect to make a living out of it. my point is that there is not enough land available for everybody farming NOW to make a living without subsidies. there are TOO many farmers for the available land.

[Skeddan]

the joining together of farms makes no difference if all the farmers that own the farms expect to make a living out of it. my point is that there is not enough land available for everybody farming NOW to make a living without subsidies. there are TOO many farmers for the available land.

Yes 100% agree - too many farmers and far more labour employed than needed.

 

The subsidies aren't subsidising farming. It's an expensive job creation scheme for farmers and farm labourers.

 

Take NZ example I gave link to. One of the farms that pooled in - they now no longer actively farm, but run homestays and breed racehorses. They still take an income from their stake in the big farm, and because this is more efficient and economic, they get higher returns than when they were running the same as smaller farm.

 

I think there is so much scope for higher productivity (given high cost of imported fertiliser and concentrates as well as labour) that this could more than make up for impact of loss of subsidies on bottom line. So as many farmers could still make same or perhaps better living, albeit some would be sleeping partners.

 

However that might not work in IoM because subsidies are funding a surplus of farmer/managers, so no incentive to pool, so farming remains in small holdings and fragmented. Too many chiefs, not enough farms, and chiefs don't want to no longer be a chief when subsidies makes that worth their while.

 

Anyhow farming subsidies do not keep down the price of food (the opposite) do not prop up the economy (the opposite) and do not help care for the countryside (in fact without subsidies the farming would be more efficient and grassland management agro-ecology etc. would be better).

 

My guess is that about 300 people are being supported and making a living out of subsidies - basically getting benefits to be in dead-end surplus jobs which do not add value but destroy value - damaging to farming sector and the economy. For £9m p.a. you could give them all £30K a year (better to pay them not to work than at present which is keeping the whole farming sector highly inefficient). Cheaper to have them on the dole and help them into new jobs (and invest in things which will create real jobs). If subsidies are going to be tweaked, that would be a better way about it.

[johnquayleiom]

i put this post upon saturday and havent had a chance to look - think it really struck a chord with some people.

 

My thoughts are this:

 

There are a number of extremely good farmers over here, but also a number of not interested and lazy ones. We have the problem of Manx crab clawing ts way through the industry at every level.

 

I do think there is mileage for manx farming to be much more profitable but it must be embraced by the whole sector.

 

But at the end of the day supermarkets are bale to supply foreign produced food much cheaper - no issue there - i bought a chicken for £3 in tesco the the day - I will et a few meals out of that.

 

I do support local and dont want anybody to go out of the business, but at the end of the day, the innovative ones never will.

[Skeddan]

There are a number of extremely good farmers over here, but also a number of not interested and lazy ones. We have the problem of Manx crab clawing ts way through the industry at every level.

 

I do think there is mileage for manx farming to be much more profitable but it must be embraced by the whole sector.

Isn't this itself a good reason to end subsidies. If not, then the lazy and not interested ones will drag everything down. Without subsidies, they will either have to make a go of it or get out.

 

But at the end of the day supermarkets are bale to supply foreign produced food much cheaper - no issue there

But this is exactly the issue. Manx farmers could produce unsubsidised milk at a lower cost per litre than milk imported from the UK. The same is almost certainly true for beef, sheep, arable. At the moment Manx farming is so inefficient that foreign food imported by ferry will still be cheaper - no issue there.

 

So, as I said before the effect of paying £9m of taxpayers money in subsidies is to keep the Manx farming industry inefficient, unproductive and for local food to be more expensive than it would otherwise be.

[pongo]

would a dry bulk carrier be able to dock anywhere on the IOM for unloading?

[johnquayleiom]

There are a number of extremely good farmers over here, but also a number of not interested and lazy ones. We have the problem of Manx crab clawing ts way through the industry at every level.

 

I do think there is mileage for manx farming to be much more profitable but it must be embraced by the whole sector.

Isn't this itself a good reason to end subsidies. If not, then the lazy and not interested ones will drag everything down. Without subsidies, they will either have to make a go of it or get out.

 

But at the end of the day supermarkets are bale to supply foreign produced food much cheaper - no issue there

But this is exactly the issue. Manx farmers could produce unsubsidised milk at a lower cost per litre than milk imported from the UK. The same is almost certainly true for beef, sheep, arable. At the moment Manx farming is so inefficient that foreign food imported by ferry will still be cheaper - no issue there.

 

So, as I said before the effect of paying £9m of taxpayers money in subsidies is to keep the Manx farming industry inefficient, unproductive and for local food to be more expensive than it would otherwise be.

[johnquayleiom]

There are a number of extremely good farmers over here, but also a number of not interested and lazy ones. We have the problem of Manx crab clawing ts way through the industry at every level.

 

I do think there is mileage for manx farming to be much more profitable but it must be embraced by the whole sector.

Isn't this itself a good reason to end subsidies. If not, then the lazy and not interested ones will drag everything down. Without subsidies, they will either have to make a go of it or get out.

 

But at the end of the day supermarkets are bale to supply foreign produced food much cheaper - no issue there

But this is exactly the issue. Manx farmers could produce unsubsidised milk at a lower cost per litre than milk imported from the UK. The same is almost certainly true for beef, sheep, arable. At the moment Manx farming is so inefficient that foreign food imported by ferry will still be cheaper - no issue there.

 

So, as I said before the effect of paying £9m of taxpayers money in subsidies is to keep the Manx farming industry inefficient, unproductive and for local food to be more expensive than it would otherwise be.

 

Economies of scale - how could our milk / meat plants compete with large factories who have the same / similar fixed costs?

[Skeddan]

would a dry bulk carrier be able to dock anywhere on the IOM for unloading?

Why not Douglas Harbour?

[Skeddan]

Economies of scale - how could our milk / meat plants compete with large factories who have the same / similar fixed costs?

I covered that in earlier posts in this thread. Consider if compared to UK producer, Manx farmers had cheaper fertiliser, used less concentrate, had higher yield herd, used significantly less labour to produce the same. (and then on top of that didn't also have to import using the ferry).

 

Economies of scale do count, but IoM is large enough that it could compete. A dairy farm with a herd of 1000 is ok. Perfectly possible in IoM if farms pooled together. All of that is possible and achievable. The abattoir might not have the economies of scale as large abattoirs in UK, but if it had throughput and running at optimal level, then it wouldn't be too much more expensive (also considering UK farmers have to ship stock further to larger abattoirs).

 

A Manx farm with a herd of 200 cannot compete. These small farms have to pool together in some manner. Perhaps ideally all pool together into one big(ish) farm.