I have to admit that it takes me approx 1m 30secs to go through Farmers Weekly each week (part of the NROSO requirement to read an agricultural publication) and as a result I may have missed the substantial reportage on the permitting of higher levels of moisture content (mc) in crop sales contracts this year, in which case I apologise in advance .

The fuel requirements to dry crops this year have been so staggeringly abnormally high that fuel suppliers of lpg and diesel cannot meet their stated delivery windows of within 3 days, and it is costing  us megabucks to get down to the currently standard mcs. Is it beyond the wit of those who purport to represent farming (FW Included) to lobby the EU/UKASTA to seek a derogation, in at least the cereals market, for a maximum mc of 17% for cereals bought for immediate processing?

 Decades ago 16/17% was acceptable.

I know that certain organisations, whilst "working in partnership with defra " have lost the plot completely, but surely this season must be a wake-up call.

all this unnecesessary drying increases our carbon footprint.

16% was the standard till about 1990 when the nfu stuffed up royally by agreeing to 15%

NFU have presieded over a catalogue of stuff-ups. Perhaps they ought issue a publication in a Colemanballs style?

One wet evening a couple of weeks back a spokesman for the NFU was featured on my local TV news ( Anglia or Look East)

This person stated that the public will have to pay more for their bread this year because of the wet harvest, and the cost of drying the grain.

What I would like to know is which merchant is paying farmers more for the grain if it has been dried? Will I get more for it if I say that I have had to take 5% moisture out instead of harvesting it dry?

When has any farm received more money after a wet harvest?  Surely we just get screwed if it's too wet and unrewarded when we have had to dry it?  A loaf may cost more, but no money will ever get back to the farmer that had to dry the grain at Stage 1.

I seem to remember a while back that there was an FWi poll for the nfu centenary as to whether the nfu was good bad or average. There were several thousand votes as a result of members being ordered to take part in the poll. There are two replies to this post. Where are all the other "farmers"? Dutifully surfing the nfu website for the latest defra edict to be obeyed to keep up the "working in partnership" mission statement of the nfu? Pratnership is more like it.

On a brighter note, thank you Mr Alastair Darling for doing more for farming this year than anyone else has. Your destruction of the British economy a few days ago was a masterpiece.

Eamonn Harris:

There was a horrible spluttering and choking sound from the other end of the phone as if I'd made an improper suggestion.

Hahaha. That has cheered me up. Wonder what sound I will get when I ring tomorrow chasing my wheat seed that was promised (on the contract) to be here 1st week of Sept? Nothing exotic so I will haul him over the coals a bit. Nyah nyah nyah.

I have to agree with those who support a rise in the accepted moisture content to 16%.

What has driven the stupidity of the situation home to me was talking to a neighbour who is running his dryer day and night, using copious quantities of gas and creating god knows how much CO2 emissions, to dry wheat that is destined for biofuel production - presumably to help reduce the nation's carbon footprint.

 I think we are fast losing the plot