Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What are your thoughts on the fertiliser price s for 2022

Options
13233353738166

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭degetme




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭Who2


    I’d agree but if the numbers aren’t stacking up it’s the way a lot of beef will go. Set stocking and wait until the time is maxed out before killing. Where will beef need to be to break even with fertiliser where it is and still allowing for what grain will cost next back end.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,829 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Lot of beef operations have resort to off farm income. Lot of those ones are also not heavily stocked so there might be some wiggle room.


    That said I look at my neighbours, 14 tonne in the yard last march and I would hate to be buying the same this year.


    Lot of people still thinking that it will drop in March, they'll get some hop, unfortunately.


    The fellow who is stocked heavily might well throw in the towel on that side of things and carry a smaller number.


    I carried over a number of cattle that I was going to kill in December till January, takes pressure off next year's target kill, and saves silage, I'm taking a bet that lighter Cattle will be cheaper come late Spring as lads off load.


    It's a weird time alright, we could be on the start of a sustained food price rise but all the inputs are going nuts as well.


    Finding the Spot between having as many as you can carry for the least input is never more important.


    I'm presuming that beef will maintain or even rise in next 12 months. If it falls then planting, leasing and selling will be big stories in next 2 years.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,223 ✭✭✭✭mahoney_j


    It’s already started here ..rented land going to 400 and more per acre …madness imo



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,799 ✭✭✭mr.stonewall


    Is the rented land a job to kill two bird with the one stone. Reduce the stocking rate in light of the nitrates proposals, insurance against the loss of dero and potential of extra cheap tonnage of fodder.

    Rental prices will collapse is poor areas where beef and part timers are the only game, opposite to happen in dairy/tillage strong holds



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,829 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Having it is the thing I suppose.

    You can still maintain decent enough quality on such ground, takes a lot more work and moving and topping.


    The grass certainly is not as good as clean grazed and a bag and a half after but the economics of that were questionable even at fertilizer prices in the last 2 years.


    If you have really good ground and could carry a lot and drive it on. It will be a big shock and change.


    For beef next year, fertilizer won't pay, that doesn't mean it won't be used, it will be needed for silage etc but it's needs must. Take the punch to the chin and keep going.


    One big help around here in ls that yards are full of silage.


    If we have an early spring there is grass that badly needs eating.


    As an aside fields I had the ewes out in in the first week of December Will carry them again in early spring or now if stuck, not that grass is a problem



  • Registered Users Posts: 984 ✭✭✭Still stihl waters 3


    It's great for the owner that has land to rent out, I've mine leased with the lease up in March, I'll be charging what I can to maximise profit on my end, marginal enough ground but seriously good summer land, its an ill wind that won't blow well for some, anyone putting off buying fert is taking a big gamble imo and renting land isn't the way out of this



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,625 ✭✭✭Cavanjack


    My plan is to get a good first cut as usual and after that see what happens. The extra cost of fertilizer for this first cut divided over the number of cattle I kill is €16 a head up on last year’s fertilizer price. I shouldn’t need a second cut as I’ll have a lot of bales over.

    As for grazing ground I’ve a couple of tonne left over from last year. I normally buy stock as the grass grows so if I end up buying a few less for the year so be it. They might be value in the back end of they year.



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭Easten


    My plan is Slurry only on Silage fields and give them a bit extra time to get the same yield. I've started culling Cows that are old or poor performers. 3 gone already, one of them was 16 years old and made over €1100 so how bad is that. 6 more to go before the end of February

    I've managed to buy up a good bit of hay around me and have over half of my winter feeding needs for Winter 2022/3. Lads think I'm gone mad buying hay when I already have surplus for this Winter but I think it's a cheaper option at €20-€25 for hay bales you will not be able to produce it for that next year with the cost of Diesel also to be factored in.

    Absolutely no stragglers being kept now, no dairy calves even if I got them for nothing. The surprise for me is that after doing the figures I might end up with as good or a better margin now



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,868 ✭✭✭mf240




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭minerleague


    Wouldn't agree with that as long as you graze tight at start of year, getting good silage is hard alright without fert as crops do get stemmy waiting for any bulk



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Why set stocking? Regardless of the price of inputs you'll grow more grass moving/resting in some fashion and if the gear is already on the farm...



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,868 ✭✭✭mf240




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Yeah, the post reads feel sorry for me because. It's up there with "Thank a farmer" in the irritating stakes.

    The amount spent on "fertility" and "weed control" in that pic is probably 4/5 times (conservatively) the cost of taking another road regarding fertility and weed control that would be self perpetuating.

    The photo is one of an addiction. An annual, expensive, addiction.


    To be fair.... It can be difficult to see that there are other avenues when Government, advisory bodies, media, and peers all think alike, and no one likes anyone different to the flock.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,664 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    It not the smaller beef producer that will have a problem,.it's the more intensive lad that is in nitrates derogation territory ( there is many beef finishers exporting a lot of slurry) Intensive winter finishers who grow crops to finish cattle.

    There is a lot of beef farmers on 30-50 acres that only buy a pallet or two of 18-6-12 and a pallet of CAN. Many if these lads will struggle away this year.

    It's the larger lad that is finishing that could struggle. The problem may not really come into focus until next Autumn when lads look at what fodder is in the yard, the price of grains and decide how much they can pay for cattle as well as how many they can feed.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,829 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    This is one of the biggest stories in the world at the moment, and no one really gives a shi7.


    A wave of revolution started in the Arab world when Urea hit 850 dollars, Well past that now.


    The price of fertilizer is a global news story. It's the thread behind the next 20 years of politics. It's 9 11 on speed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,275 ✭✭✭Gillespy


    Edgy just for the sake of a cheap dopamine hit. Meanwhile, what keeps the real world turning is fertiliser, roundup, fossil fuels etc. It's a big deal and scoffing at it on a farming forum no less is disappointing.

    Farmers with repayments and so forth are entitled to highlight the issue without this kind of highfalutin old guff.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,664 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    The problem is a lot of farmers are being lead down the road of efficiency and production not profitability. There are a lot of lads that are over expanding and not doing the maths as to where the optimum profitability is .

    Keep extra cows produce more milk, spread more fertlizer, zero graze, spread more slurry,MIT's a vicious circle. Nobody is saying go back to a cow to a HA but you have to look at optimal profitability not maximum production

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,204 ✭✭✭Good loser


    Everyone knows it's the profitability that matters. It's the maths that lets them down (not accounting for everything) or sometimes just being over optimistic. Plus some are not overconcerned about the bottom line.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I love the term real world, it's the internet evolution from the argument winning ending of a sentence with "fact!"

    I understand where you're coming from, but it's disappointing you'd chose to approach my post that way tbh.

    As for scoffing, how does it go "One takes offence", it's not given.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 3,206 Mod ✭✭✭✭K.G.


    Can someone do the sums on this renting extra land instead of buying fertilizer, I don't understand it



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,450 ✭✭✭✭Reggie.


    Neither do I as I assumed lads would consolidate themselves rather than increase bills at taking extra land for 5 years at an inflated price



  • Registered Users Posts: 984 ✭✭✭Still stihl waters 3


    That's one take on it and a lazy one at that, another way of looking at it would be to take this as a chance to change the way we do things, throwing fertiliser and weedkiller at our problems are only enhancing problems elsewhere, part of me hopes the price and availability of fertiliser and weedkiller and all the chemicals we destroy the land with are kept high so industrial farming has to take a step back and come up with more sustainable ways of producing food



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,664 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves



    Any time a challenge to Dairy expansion/maintenance of current production, there is alway a cry that this will increase demand for rented land. There seems to be a irrational fear of consolidation or reduction in production.

    The economics seems simple in this case a ton and of urea costs 950 euro an acre of conacre might cost 2-400 euro. There is still a lot to of places you will lease meadowing for a crop for 100-150/acre.

    Where you begin to lose traction is with added cost and workload. A lot of lads think this fertlizer issue is a short-term blip. However nobody is considering where prices will stabilise at and the longterm trend.

    Gas prices are not going down any time soon. Even if Europe changes from pipeline gas to the tanker gas prices will remain strong.

    Looking at a Urea base price, in the medium to longterm we are probably going to see 500/ton as it's floor. We may see a blip below that in the short term in late 2022/2023 but the price of fertlizer will follow the price of rations upwards.

    Russia and China will not change there no export policy next year if either sees food shortage issues. India will see require massive amounts of product. With poor harvests and high grain prices the larger grain producers will push demand if fertlizer prices fall.

    Is twenty acres of land better value than 5-10 ton of Urea. May be if it adjacent to you and you can take it only for a year. However you be silly to factor in longterm leasing because of fertlizer costs without looking at consolidation as that is the way milk production will have to move over the next few years

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,223 ✭✭✭✭mahoney_j


    I’d be of simillar thinking …on the dairy side I’m hearing lads are taking the land to hold current numbers to comply with new nitrates directive …at prices land is making I can’t see the point as it’s extra land to maintain and I can’t add more cows to justify taking the land



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,664 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    I saw an article in one of the farming publications last year where a father/son operation had put in a 30 unit parlour. They had gone from 100ish cows to over 200 and intended to go to 250+.

    Now the father was in his early sixties and the son in his thirties with a young family. I was wondering how sustainable it was. Aside from if anything happens to either in the short-term, both are facing 10+ years of managing a large dairy system. If they even have to start to pay labour within the system it will really increase the workload for the person left and take the shine off profitability.

    That is before you look at external factors such as present fertlizer costs, nitrates and climate action impact.

    Previously it was a 100ish cows plus a beef operation.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,223 ✭✭✭✭mahoney_j


    I’d of been happier at the 100 cows and beef …maby of the land was there take cow nos to 120…I’d grow some maize ,beet and barley for use in house and try be as self sufficient as possible



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Waffletraktor


    Ah yes the better way of doing things narrative, John.

    As ever it's easy to do it until the requirement to be scaled up and paid labour becomes involved.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




Advertisement