€1,350/cow payment to cut suckler numbers

That and they are choosey where they buy there calves. They do not end up buying calves bred by KYA or from his son's either.

Ya some cattle are profitable at present to do that with. Wait until 50% of the kill is starting to be squeezed into 20 weeks and the factories are swamped with 230-280kg carcasses. It will be similar to the 400kg plus penalty that was in place for Continental cattle a few years ago

When did dairy farmers in NZ cut emissions by 50% and still maintain numbers??

So after all the waffle and clickbait headlines on the front of the comic there is going to be no payment to reduce the number of Suckers.

Maybe , but the industry via the bould Larry etc. has very powerful connections at the top of FFG that impacts the most important agri sectors here in a variety of subtle and not so subtle ways. Thats before you talk about the variety of other big agri business that has a vested interest in keeping the high input model going at all costs here.

It wrong to give farmers a dig out to exit sucklers and change to other systems that will benefit climate and other farmers but it ok to have suckler cow supports that are proposed to be 200+/cow that will mainly benefit processors

That is tying payments to production, Larry and co love that

TBH base it's a load of crap. He is going off at tangents and linking in BPS restructuring.

He gives the figure of 14k/ year of a loss to a 537/HA payment. That 14k loss would be on a 150 acre farm he never said the farm area or else I missed it.

Next to put perceptive on it that farmer has a 32k payment per year and probably averaged 36-38k/ year over the last 20 years or about 750k in BPS payments without any other environment or ANC payment. ANC would have added. ANC would have added another 70k.

He gives s bemoaning that the exit payment that everybody says will not happen should be targeted to existing to the scared suckler cow farmer.

Very few suckler farmers I knew had payments above 300/ HA. He is on about finishers and grain men subsidizing there production with there payments. Basically they want the impoverishment of all farmers to continue.

Everyone must be making money out of sucklers except the farmers having them

Surely banding, reduction in chemical fertiliser use and other measures to reduce stocking rates on dairy farms will put a stop to the expansion of the dairy herd or maybe lead to a reduction in dairy cow numbers, who knows. There’s a boom in dairying at the moment, i’ve never seen a boom in any area that wasn’t followed by a bust.

Plenty of suckler farmers had payments over 600/ha, myself included.

The figures he's using is from an example that was put up at their CAP meetings around the country.

I can assure you that my Payments have reduced by 14000/yr and more and I don't have 150 acres.

As far as I know Adam woods is a better than average suckler/sheep farmer

He's not justifying sucklers but trying a forecast of what's going to happen.

Thinking of averages, if the average was the norm then we'd all be walking around with less than two legs,

Including hobby farmers in the average doesn't give a true picture, likewise with average farm incomes, there's a lot of messers included in those figures. Anyone with less than 20 cows isn't going to come under pressure if income drops in sucklers, Their 'AVERAGE ' income will be higher than a lot of full time farmers so it's proper order to only refer to a 50 suckler cow farm.

Finally unless that article is read through your biased eyes, there's no where he's trying to justify sucklers, he's telling it the way it is.

Lately there was posts on here accusing IFJ of lying about the suckler reduction scheme when it was proposed in food vision yet ministers referred to it after, reflecting how sad some farmers are. '

Many times I've had to sort stupid mistakes for farmers and had to say ''If you'd bought a journal that wouldn't have happened'' but there you go.

Some farmers have missed sending in their BPS application because they didn't buy a journal. need I say more

I read the article, I re-read the article.

How come an article headlined

''Long Read to hell or the hills for Irish sucklers''

needed to verge into BPS redistribution.

Averages tell you a lot about any industry. You again like many just treat any smaller operator as a hobby farmer. Unless you are up over 200 acres any drystock operations can be run part-time. with sucklers on such an operation you only need to be full-time at calving.

Basically the article was just another cripping session against the redirection of payments so that they are not subsidising processor's or large dairy operations. Mind you it was not just limited to Ireland.

Farmers that need the rag to remember when to apply for anything are less and less now. This idea that lads at certain/ lower numbers are Messer's. None of these lads started out with 150 acre farms handed to them or collected a large compensation package because a motorway or road passed through there land.

Being commercial is the only answer. Production related subsidies only f@@ks it for the rest of us.

Adam's article seems to want to trap suckler farmers within the system producing a calf that everyone else makes a turn out of not the producer.

Those on better land with substantial holdings have options. Why should a cohort of suckler farmers have an issue if other exit are being supported but they are not.

If suckler are profitable there is no problem. However there is an agenda to keep suckler at an unrealistic level which neither benefits other drystock farmers or even other suckler farmers.

The less suckler farmers there is the more of a market there is for there product. Most of us understand the processors will pay less the more we produce

What we have learned is when there is too much production the processors either find it hard to sell it or increase there margin substantially. There answer to that is to reduce prices to below the cost of production.

Remember in over twenty years since a beef plant went into liquidation in Ireland. It has not happened in any other industry.

We all remember the carry on in 2019 when they had adequate supply but decided to keep dropping prices to farmers, some procurement managers were glorying in it.

Yes the beast has to pay for the whole lot however the more production the lower the price the processors pay the farmer.

We are all making a few bob out of it now. We have to deal with the reality on the ground. However there is a few lazy hobby farmers these are the real one lads with substantial holdings who will not change over to profitable production systems. Rather they want to be subsidised right left and center continue producing a product that is not commercially ( even though they like to think it is) viable.

They want to be allowed to farm this system with shiny toys and be considered progressive and dear Adam is there main cheer leader.

We were all told how good these lads were. The top f@@king 10%. But like the emperor who got new clothes we now know they were really just naked

There is no negatives, same as there wasn't negatives when I was accumulating entitlements. after decoupling there was no onus to produce anything.

All farm organisations are against it , if you're not a member of IFA or if you're not actively involved you can't complain about their policies if they don't suit you.