At the turn of the year everyone was talking about 2005
as the dawning of a new era - a year of changes
to agriculture ‘the like of which has not been seen since the Agriculture
Act of 1947’. Now 12 months on
I wonder how many sheep farmers feel that 2005 has been a revolutionary
year?
The truth is that as I write this article on a wet morning
in late October no one in the UK has received one
penny of their new Single Farm Payment and, worse still, in England there
is still no realistic estimate of
when most payments will be made. At least in Scotland and Wales an advance
payment will probably have hit the doormats by the time you are reading
this. ‘Cashflow’ will be one of the most commonly used
words on sheep and beef farms this winter.
The infamous cross compliance inspections have not really
started yet either. With Defra and others still
pondering the regulations it has not been possible for them to inspect
to see if the sheep and cattle are
keeping the pastures in ‘good agricultural and environmental condition’.
I often think these checks are
totally ridiculous when you consider it is the very same livestock that
created the landscape and have kept the pastures in ‘good agricultural
and environmental condition’ for countless generations. Suddenly
the custodians of the countryside need to have someone to inspect their
land and tell them their livestock are doing a good job for the environment.
Teaching your granny to suck eggs is the phrase that comes to
mind.
‘Revolutionary’ isn’t the word that comes
to mind when sheep prices for the year are considered. A strong
trade for breeding sheep at the early sales, prices easing as the season
progressed and a bigger than
usual price differential between better animals and the poorer quality.
Finished lambs have had a difficult
autumn but that is mainly due to the appalling price currently being paid
on the world market for skins. It
is true that the industry has not seen the buoyant prices paid in the
second half of 2004, but many would
say that store lambs in particular were too dear at that time. It is however
a concern that those further up
the red meat chain do not seem to have taken seriously the need for farmers
to recoup from the marketplace the monies they no longer receive as production
support.
Red tape and regulation has been as big an issue as ever
in 2005. In particular the identification and
movement regulations have once again proved to the sheep farming community
that many EU
bureaucrats are incapable of using the word ‘rules’ and ‘practical
application’ in the same sentence
despite the best lobbying efforts of many organisations. Despite the gloom,
believe me that bad as it is, it
could have been a whole lot worse. At least double tagging has been thwarted
in the short term but it will
come back to haunt our industry in the near future.
The positives that have emerged in 2005 are encouraging
but hardly earth shattering. Few positive
signals have come directly from the marketplace; most have been advances
in explaining to the
uneducated the importance of sheep to rural environments and communities.
Having said that, it is
important to remember that lamb is not a product that is in oversupply
worldwide and UK lamb is accepted as being of good and improving quality
and consistency.
So it is likely that the revolution in the sheep industry
is still in the pipeline. No doubt 2006 will see further
and more marked change both in the marketplace and from the regulators.
Some change will be good
and some will be bad, but will it lead to wholesale change of an unparalleled
nature? I suspect not, the
wise old heads in the sheep industry will keep a watching brief, make
adjustment here and there, be proud of the sheep they sell and continue
to make a living off the land in one way or another.
PETER MORRIS, N.S.A.
