READERS LETTERS
26 April 2002
READERS LETTERS
Imported meats not the answer
Driving to work recently, I tuned into Radio 4s Farming Today and was stunned and disgusted to hear that Argentina has been given free reign to export its beef to the UK in an attempt to help the country out of its economic crisis.
Surely, the British government has gone completed mad? Morale among British farmers is at an all time low. The government continually urges farmers to diversify to survive. France will still not accept British beef imports. Both the farming and the tourist industry are still reeling from the effects of BSE and the shameful and sloppy handling of the foot-and-mouth epidemic. Funeral pyres and mass culling, often of healthy animals, did little to encourage tourists to our shores.
Surely, we should be doing all we can to help an industry which is already on its knees? An industry that is part of our national heritage and is vital and essential to the English way of life. A way of life that is already under threat from Europe.
Joy Field,
The Grove, Main Street, Thoroton, Nottingham, Notts.
Plot to kill off live auctions
The reopening of livestock markets gave all farmers and producers a tremendous morale boost. But the reality is different. DEFRA ministers show open contempt to the principle of thriving livestock markets. In their ignorance of live market operation, they remain adamant that they caused the worlds worst foot-and-mouth outbreak. But one needs only a handful of brain cells to know that it is the open ports policy that is responsible.
Taking into account that the UK is now recognised as a F&M free country, the biosecurity required at livestock markets is ridiculous and Draconian. Auctioneers were forced to spend tens of thousands of £s to enable their premises to pass the scrutiny of ubiquitous and officious ministry inspectors. For what? To be unable to attract their usual number of buyers because DEFRA has regulated markets so that normal trade is impossible. The government has rigged trade against the live auction so as to reduce the number of, or even abolish, livestock markets by the back door. We are free from F&M, so why do we have the ministry jackboot stamping on our live auction system?
Recently we heard that 10,000t of beef, from Argentina, where F&M is endemic, will be imported to the EU. I trust our ministry friends will be waiting at our ports armed to the teeth with their biosecurity rules. I think not. Will the beef be labelled correctly with the country of origin? No. And can we look forward to see it sold with a Little Red Tractor logo at our local supermarket?
Alan Marshall
School Lane Farm, Chilsworthy, Holsworthy, Devon.
In search of beacon sites
Further to Lord Plumbs letter on the subject of the Golden Jubilee Beacons (Letters, April 5) I would like to add our own request for help and support from the farming community. The Junior Organisation of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors has the task of organising the Golden Jubilee Summer Party Anchor Chain of beacons, any of which will be on the site of beacons lit for the 1977 and 1981 celebrations.
The majority of sites for the anchor chain have already been organised, but in some parts of the country, particularly Wales, the Western Isles of Scotland and Cumbria, we are still trying to locate farmers and landowners who own or manage beacon sites, as well as local groups who would be willing to help by building and lighting a beacon. Already we have Young Farmers Clubs, local Rotary and Round Table groups and many others involved.
If any readers know of sites previously used for such beacons and would be interested in helping in these or other areas, please contact Alison Harrower at the JO office (020-7334 3744 or aharrower@rics.org).
Ken Morgan
Vice-chairman RICS Junior Organisation, RICS, 12 Great George Street, Parliament Square, London.
Whats wrong with our corn?
Could someone explain why grain merchants treat our non-assured corn as if it were poison? But at the same time they import non-assured wheat from Baltic countries and other locations, which are not assured or are ever likely to be. Meanwhile, it is dragging the price of our good quality assured produce to unprofitable levels.
If their non-assured grain is safe to eat, why not ours? The fact that British farmers accept this unfairness is beyond belief.
D G Pestell
Highbury Farm, Banningham, Norfolk.
Family picnic left sour taste
We farm in Hants and until now have had no problems with walkers but last weekend put paid to that. I was walking my dogs in our own field, which has a footpath through it, when I came across a man and three children having a picnic.
There was no problem until he started shouting at my dogs. I told him he was on private land and he should move on. I tried to reason with him but he became abusive so I called the police who could not attend.
I have been here seven years and have had no problems. But this man seemed to take delight in frightening me.
Hampshire farmer
Name and address supplied.
DEFRA failed to state its case
I must respond to Lord Whittys attack (News, Mar 29) on my husbands stance against MAFF/DEFRAs attempt to slaughter our cattle during the foot-and-mouth outbreak. Lord Whitty said if more farmers had taken our stance that would have made the situation even worse.
I do not dispute the fact that early access to slaughter is essential in the control of this disease. But perhaps Lord Whitty should consider why so many farmers (who are in general sensible, resourceful and intelligent people) felt the need to take such action.
Taking our case as an example, at no point were we presented with a clear case from MAFF/DEFRA setting out the evidence to prove that our cattle had been exposed to F&M. We could have taken over £1m of taxpayers money in compensation and some say we were crazy not to. Lord Whitty should not question our stance but instead he should investigate why MAFF/DEFRA could have spent over £1m of taxpayers money without a justifiable case.
If MAFF/DEFRA had sensibly presented clear evidence to each farmer whose stock were at risk, it would have faced far less opposition and been able to steer crucial resources to areas where they were needed most.
Julia Thomas-Everard
Exmoor, Somerset.
Whitty foresees farming demise
At Oxford on Apr 12, I was surprised by Lord Whittys honesty as he forecast further restructuring as the medicine for Britains farmers, anticipating them to more than halve over the next 10 years.
His policy of failing to implement the European mechanism of agrimoney compensation for the effects of our strong currency is a chilling mistake. It is also a tragedy as more of our livestock industry is effectively exported. The nations skills and capital involved are being dissipated. Our arable industry has also needed and benefited enormously from a vibrant livestock business at home.
Ironically, as UK farming contracts Lord Whitty has the satisfaction of seeing his brief maintained as he assumes responsibility for a larger share of sometimes unassured imports from weaker currency countries in the Far East, Africa and Europe including Ireland. Some of these products are nicely branded with the red tractor logo.
Penny Green
Rectory Farm, Idstone, Swindon, Wilts.
Little bit of good to all
I was sorry to hear about the unfortunate experience of your Welsh correspondent (Letters, Apr 5) concerning the return of visitors to the countryside. His experience is in stark contrast to mine last weekend in the Lake District. On Sunday, returning to Keswick after a days climbing, I was amazed to find a farmer-run tea shop still open and full of people at 7.30pm.
In response to my enquiry about whether hed had a good day: "Too good", he said with a smile. "Do you know anyone who wants a job?" I went back the next morning for breakfast and continued our discussion. Here was someone embracing visitors and, while maintaining his sheep farming practices, was seizing other opportunities and creating jobs.
I fully understand that not everyone is able or wants to open a tea shop. But, there are many other practical things that can be done to manage visitors to your land. Over the past two years, I have been doing research for the Countryside Agency and English Nature into Practical Ways of Managing Access, based on the experience of farmers and estate managers who already have public access on their land. A booklet is currently being produced by the Countryside Agency and it plans to add the material to its web-site in the near future. I hope that some of the tactics used by others may be of interest to your correspondent.
There is not always an easy or affordable solution to every problem. But the key message seems to be: Proactive management of access can often be better than just letting it happen.
Ken Taylor
Director, Asken, 3 Ward Grove, Warwick, Wark.
Supporting more than ever
Your report: "£6m aid needed in wake of F&M: RABI" (News, April 12) rightly drew attention to the continuing financial crisis faced by so many livestock farmers following first BSE and then last years devastating foot-and-mouth epidemic.
You correctly reported that more than £9.1m had been distributed by the Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution to those suffering severe financial farming hardship as a result of F&M. An error in the text stated that this had gone to just 1600 farming families while the number is actually well over 8200. The number of 1600, as shown in the fact box accompanying the report, is the number of long term beneficiaries, mostly elderly or disabled, who are receiving regular financial assistance. That number which is growing rapidly as more people in the farming community are being forced into retirement with little or no savings.
RABI will rely more than ever before on increased support from those who can give to assist those in need. A point which is well made in your report.
W A McMahon
Chief executive, RABI, Shaw House, 27 West Way, Oxford.
Homeopathic talks sought
Your article Mastitis kept low – without antibiotics (Livestock, Mar 15) gives the impression that the product being administered is a homeopathic preparation. In fact it is not, its an herbal product. The report states that Mr Knowlden used "homeopathy in the form of a commercially available udder cream". I am unable to ascertain which company is marketing this product, but in conversation with the user I was given administration rates and the cost of the material.
I am concerned about the residue situation in using these types of product. Homeopathic preparations are absolutely safe, but I would point out that the labour intensity is high when using creams.
I have no problem with the comments regarding the benefits of administering homeopathic products; they do work in harmony with cows immune systems and certainly reduce the need for antibiotics. Furthermore, the market for these materials is growing steadily.
I would value further dialogue with respect to the place of homeopathic products. I have been working with Ainsworths Homoeopathic Pharmacy for over nine years.
Geoff Derges
Field agent, Ainsworths, 40 Middlecombe Drive, Barnstaple, Devon.
Hunting keeps the foxes down
Like most country people I am fond of animals, but I do not want a ban on fox hunting. The fox is a pest, and, after living and working on farms, I have seen first-hand the damage they do killing chickens and lambs.
I want fox hunting to continue. I like all animals and I am concerned about the hounds and indeed the horses. If they are made redundant and dont get new homes they will be destroyed which is cruel. Hunting manages the fox population which is not in decline. I dont want guns to replace hounds for killing foxes.
There could be accidents and foxes could be maimed. The fox is a clever animal and during a hunt it can and does escape from the hounds. All those who want a ban should leave country people alone – they best know how to care for all animals in the countryside. Im unhappy with politicians handling of more serious issues such as law and order, drugs, education.
Jim Braid
Croft House Bridgend, Perth.
Single voice for hunting lobby
As we move into the government consultation period on hunting, attention will be focused on the twin issues of cruelty and utility.
Inevitably, there will be those who seek to justify hunting on the basis that, in their opinion, other methods of wildlife management could cause greater suffering. But to argue that if hunting is cruel other methods are worse plays directly into the hands of the opposition and profoundly damages the case for hunting by suggesting that two wrongs make a right. Our opponents will try to divide the countrysides united front. Those who set one activity against another are doing the antis job for them.
We believe that landholders should have a range of control and management methods at their disposal. Properly conducted hunting and shooting are humane and effective methods of control and management. Each method has its place and can be deployed effectively and humanely according to local circumstance.
It is essential that these methods be carried out to the highest standards by people properly experienced and competent and in an accountable manner. A hunting ban would fundamentally undermine this principle.
Furthermore, successful hunting has always depended on good relations with shooting. The current parliamentary battle is one we all, as country sports supporters, have to win if we are to engage in our chosen activities without fear of political retribution. The support we have had from the shooting community has been invaluable to us, and we fully intend to fight the coming battles on the basis of the merits of all of our activities.
Simon Hart
Director, Campaign for Hunting, The Countryside Alliance, The Old Town Hall, 367 Kennington Road, London.
Planners own their property
It could be said that the planning committee structure embodies all the principles of good democratic government. But what is the percentage of owner-occupiers and landlords to tenants on the average planning committee? Information first, and then perhaps action.
WOD Tilley
Gwern Elwy, Henllan, Denbigh.
Right product rate for job
Guy Hickman (Letters 12 April) has tried to blame his lack of sprayer sales on agronomists. I am one of the supply company agronomists he talks about. The Pear Fieldman Adviser programme we use for crop sheets shows the rate of product as a percentage of full rate that we recommend. Having checked a large number of recommendations sheets, the percentage of product applied ranges from 20% to 70% of full rate in most cases.
All of our companys agronomists work to the principle of putting the right amount of product onto the crop to do the job and produce the lowest cost possible per tonne produced. If Mr Hickman wants to loan one of his sprayers to one of my farms, Ill halve all the rates I recommend and well see if the principle works where a professional agronomist is advising. But if there are problems with lack of control then Mr Hickman should agree to compensate the farmer for lost yield.
Whether I work for a supply company or the NFU would make no difference to what I recommend. My job is to do the best for my customers.
Nigel Francis
Lancaster Park, Newborough Road, Needwood, Burton-on-Trent, Staffs.