READERS LETTERS
READERS LETTERS
All who pay will benefit, says HGCA
You say that the Home-Grown Cereals Authority should do more and spend more to prepare practical messages for all levy paying farmers (Opinion, Nov 13). There is a balance to be struck between funding an effective programme of technology transfer and the need to invest in vital research to underpin the future of our cereals and oilseeds sectors.
The truth is that HGCA is doing more and more to communicate, create awareness and transfer technology from scientific principle to common farm practice. You argue that all levy payers should receive information at the same time. I question if every farmer needs the same information at the same time.
Forget emotive words like elite and laggard. The truth is that for centuries innovation has moved forward through those who take a risk followed by those who, having seen it work over the hedge, follow suit. Take the timely issue of new varieties. Some farmers plant the latest varieties. Others will wait to see how they perform, how the market accepts them and only then try out a field or two.
Our communication strategy looks to use established practice in technology transfer. However, that does not mean we are restrictive with information. Each month we send out easy-to-read Topic Sheets and other material, absolutely free, to farmers who join our mailing list.
We do not blanket mail because we will not waste money sending out unwanted information. That several hundred farmers sign up each month is testimony to the value of the exercise. Anyone wishing to join should write to me at HGCA or call 0171 520 3970.
We are in the midst of our annual roadshows. At 12 locations we will have enabled more than 2500 levy payers to hear about innovation directly from the people who have carried out the research. Again, completely free to anyone who registered.
I can assure you we are working hard to ensure that all who pay benefit from levy-funded research. We are always open to new ideas, we welcome invitations to speak at meetings, to provide information and to ensure the whole process of research for the future is shared with the industry.
Greg Wrapson
Chairman, HGCA R&D Technology Transfer Group, Caledonia House, 223 Pentonville Road, London N1 9NG.
Its giving good value for money
I did not realise that I was an elite farmer until I read your comments (Leader, Nov 13) about the HGCA. I do know that I pay about £600 to HGCA, and I believe I am getting value for money through direct communication as well as through its research work.
This month I went to a roadshow at Peterborough and heard a good update on some key issues for the coming year. The speakers were experts in their field and provided clear guidelines to help with the farming decisions I will be facing with my cereal and oilseed rape crops.
HGCA has also helped me by providing an excellent speaker for one of the meetings I have organised as secretary of our Kimpton discussion group. And I have helped myself by joining HGCAs mailing list, which ensures I receive free information on topical matters, together with invitations to roadshows.
There is always room for improvement in any form of communication. But my experience is that HGCA is already doing a lot for the money I pay each year.
W Pickup
Manor Farm, Hexton, Hitchin, Herts.
Hotel flies flag for British food
Recently about 150 Nuffield scholars assembled for the annual conference of the Nuffield Farming Scholarship Trust. It was an inspiring occasion when we heard reports from the latest crop of scholars.
We stayed at the Three Tuns Hotel in Durham, part of the Swallow Group. We were well looked after and fed to a very high standard. All the food, pork, lamb and cheese, was sourced locally. It is the hotels policy to serve Weardale lamb and Weardale cheeses and local pork. Full marks to the hotels management.
Perhaps FW readers who have visited local hostelries could point to examples of fine hotels in the north of England. It would emphasise the moral: What is good for British farming is also good for the hotels reputation.
Henry Fell
Church House, Horkstow, Barton, South Humberside.
Give MLC the tools to do job
What short memories some farmers have. Mr Morgans plea (Letters, Nov 13) to wind up the MLC proves how fickle our industry has become.
Not long ago the MLC was being praised for its work in promoting British meat at home and abroad – a job which it has done with professionalism over many years. Why blame low prices on the only organisation working full-time to promote the products of the UK livestock sector?
The MLC did not cause the beef ban or the sheep meat scare. In fact, it has been working hard with government to produce the counter arguments to the scaremongers. Instead of asking for the MLC to be closed down we should be finding ways of providing it with more money to make sure that we get back the markets we lost. If it is not given the tools to do the job, who will fight our cause?
Dick Jones
Stoneleigh, Warks.
Time for body to be wound up
I fully support Mr D Glyn Morgans letter (Nov 13) calling for the winding up of the Meat and Livestock Commission. Malton Foods and the British Pig Industry Support Group also call for the removal of MLC statutory levies.
I believe the MLC is of little, if any, benefit to producers. Its costly levies are a heavy burden which, in these depressed times, producers can ill afford.
The long crisis in the red meat business was a heaven-sent opportunity for MLC to do something positive to help producers and butchers alike. What has it done? Nothing. Its advertising is poor – why doesnt it learn from the effective advertising of the New Zealand Meat Board?
MLC may help some in the meat industry but it has been of no use to livestock auctions. If anyone wants its services let them pay a commercial rate.
But please stop collecting levies from producers who almost all feel their levy money is going down the drain.
Farmers should lobby their MPs and unions to get the MLC wound up before its levies rise even further.
R G Williams
Hill Farm, Marstow, Ross-on-Wye.
Compensation threat is sinister
Your report (News, Nov 6) on regulations presented by the European Commission to make farmers liable to pay compensation for supplying consumers with defective food holds sinister implications. Within a couple of years genetically engineered crop varieties will be growing commercially in this country. The genetics companies will not accept liability and insurance companies will not cover them. There is every indication that some problems can occur after licensing. Under the present standards of labelling GMO food there are loopholes. Where manipulated foods contain similar proteins to natural ones they do not need labelling because they are regarded as being substantially equivalent.
But the genetically engineered enzyme L Tryptophan, used unlabelled in the US a few years ago was responsible for over 30 deaths and hundreds of people were affected with myalgia eoinsophilia. The toxin responsible was present in minute amounts. Under the present EU labelling regulations similar products could be licensed, unlabelled.
Any toxin or allergenic product which became evident after licensing would result in the farmer being held liable. That could also apply if residual sprays were discovered in food crops and affected consumers.
Traumatised farmers cannot afford to ignore this situation. They must express their objections to these proposed regulations by writing to their MEPs, before it is too late. Once passed, these regulations will be enforced in UK. Farmers will then have yet another heavy burden to carry.
Jose MacDonald
Penlan Fach, Llangain, Carmarthen.
Farmers plight is not that bad
I feel compelled to write in response to claims made by fellow farmers about the industrys difficulties. Although I dont infer that their campaign has been dishonest, the full picture has not been given to the media.
Livestock farmers are having a difficult time with low prices. But that it is due mainly to their excessive over-production which is well beyond what the market can absorb.
We run an average-sized arable farm in East Anglia with family members doing the work. We have received our annual subsidy cheque of £48,000, which comprises about £97/acre area aid payments for cereals and oilseed rape and about £123/acre for the land we have set aside.
Like all farmers, our profit will be well down on the exceptionally profitable years of 95 and 96 when, as confirmed by MAFF and a Cambridge University report, we were heavily over-subsidised. Cereal prices remained unexpectedly high but we still received area aid payments.
Wheat and barley prices have been lower in 97 and 98 but that is what the area aid payments were designed to supplement. We achieve above 3t/acre of wheat so when subsidies are added to our price, we gross about £110/t.
Reflecting the strength of sterling, our imported fertiliser and agrochemicals are about 30% cheaper.
We remain in healthy profit and do not wish to join the current campaign of complaint.
Like most farmers we use mainly foreign manufactured machinery. So its unfair to criticise retail chains for buying some of their meat supplies from abroad.
They are in business to make profits and dividends for shareholders. But they have to do so without the advantage of £4bn of subsidies received by UK farmers.
As taxpayers generosity is so vital to farmers, its important that farmers do not misrepresent the facts of the situation but present fully the whole picture. And that is by no means as dire as has been portrayed.
Suffolk farming family
Name and address supplied.
Recording costs worth paying
Your magazine deserves credit for addressing an important issue that is relevant to dairy producers. As farmers incomes come under increased pressures, it is correct that all costs come under scrutiny to ensure that the cash expenditure generates a significant return.
Milk recording costs are definitely being assessed on dairy farms and it is critical that producers bear in mind all benefits that they receive from their involvement in milk recording programmes.
Various young sire programmes in the UK provide financial incentives that are only available to herds enrolled in qualifying milk recording programmes and these benefits provide vital savings to these herds.
In our programme for example; qualifying herds receive free registration on all daughters registered from
Cogent young sires, free classification of all young sire daughters, discounts on cattle purchases and low cost embryos. As mentioned these are only available to milk recording herds.
On a larger scale milk recording is absolutely critical to the future of cattle improvement in the UK. Without accurate and cost-effective milk recording programmes the UK will suffer a competitive disadvantage.
This, together with strong breed societies and an effective national young sire programme, will help keep UK farmers competitive.
Wes E Bluhm
Director of Member Services, Cogent, Aldford, Chester.
Birds grazing theories wrong
As a dairy farmer, I have grown tired of reducing margins and ever more stringent standards, not to mention the extra paperwork. I am even more tired of Paul Bird and his theories about extending the grazing season.
The sight of acre upon acre of rich, lush pasture in April is guaranteed to bring a smile to the face of any dairyman. However, the same sight in late season will produce a frown because the experienced producer knows that Mr Birds theories only work out, on average, once in four years. In two out of four years they may or may not be marginally successful.
The fourth year is 1998 and no-one can convince me that the place for the dairy cow on most farms is other than in the yard with the field gate firmly closed.
I fail to see any sense in making an extra £1000 this autumn only to spend £1500 next spring to repair the damage with probable further losses due to the delay and disruption to next years silaging programme.
The successful farmer bases his business decisions not on theory but on fact; simple but sound principles passed down from one generation to the next. You can never beat the weather. So Mr Bird, leave us in peace for you have enjoyed our hospitality for long enough.
Donald Roworth
Hill Top Farm, Longford, Ashbourne, Derbys.
Fats in diet just cant be ignored
I read with interest your article "Danger in high energy feed replacements" (Livestock, Sept 11).
While the article was clear in its explanation of this complex area, the caption beneath the picture could be misleading ("Fats affect reproduction, warned Claire Wathes.")
I agree that the fat component of the ingredients described is likely to result in a vaiety of problems but most of the feedstuffs described are purchased on the basis of protein rather than fat content.
But fat cannot be ignored and farmers who are aiming to maximise milk from forage may consider the use of fat due to its high energy density.
Both the fatty acid profile and the unprotected nature of the fat sources desribed in the article would be expected to lead to problems. That is why products such as Megalac were developed. The fatty acid profile of Megalac is less active and it has been protected to ensure that it does not upset rumen fermentation and suppress intakes. It provides dairy farmers with the potential to feed fat, for which the cow has an absolute requirement, without compromising rumen function.
MPGould
Volac International, Volac House, Orwell, Royston, Herts.
Ragwort can be blitzed quickly
I refer to your correspondents comments (Letters, Nov 13) about the spread of ragwort. As knowledgeable country people, it is up to us to remove ragwort from our farms and to put pressure on others to do so.
This summer I contacted Railtrack to request, under the Weeds Act, that it removed ragwort from a railway embankment bordering my pasture. I received a confirmation letter two days later saying an inspector from the contractors would call to identify the site. Two days later a nice man from the contractors arrived. He was knowledgeable about ragwort and promised to deal with the problem as soon as possible. He telephoned two days later to say a gang of ragwort pullers had been dispatched and would complete the job the same day.
If Railtrack can do it in a week, surely everyone can.
Mrs J Croxford
2 Runnemead Cottages, Moor Lane, Staines, Middlesex.
Public acting as footpath police
Farmers in this area are being policed by the public. In order to improve a footpath my son tipped soil on it leaving plenty of room to walk around the soil. After two weeks a complaint was sent to Shrewsbury Council which sent someone out to inspect it. Thats some thanks for improving a footpath.
Recently, a neighbour brought 1000 sheep onto a field near the village for sorting and tailing. They had hardly been there two minutes before someone pointed out that there was not enough grass for the sheep to eat.
I think it would be a good idea if farmers put up a monthly bulletin on the village notice board to inform newcomers what they planned to do in words that they would understand.
Mrs A E Middleton
The Woodhouse, Chapel Lawn, Bucknell, Shropshire.
Quality wool boosts profit
I am a knitwear manufacturer who uses up to 5t of British wool a week and sells about half of my production overseas.
Is it surprising that British wool is so cheap? No. The rubbish that is put into fleeces on farms is amazing. That includes fleeces contaminated with polypropylene baling twine.
Wool combers and spinners take out all they can see but not all is detected and some ends up in the yarn.
When the wool is dyed, polypropylene does not dye. That ruins sweaters and produces a second quality garment.
I employ people specifically to take out of the fabric all that we can without causing holes in the garment. But that pushes up costs.
So if farmers improve the quality of their product, they will also improve demand and higher demand creates higher prices.
Trevor B Hall
Chairman/managing director, Commando Knitwear, Countesthorpe Road, South Wigston, Leicester.