Dairy Chitchat 4, an udder new thread.

An taisce is fully of anti farming campaigners if you’re on twitter their head of advocacy is completely and utterly anti farming, vegan bs etc

I'd rather read that you have just said than doom and gloom. as regards an taisce,I'd say there are very few farmer members anymore. taken over completely by johnny come lately cranky vegans. an evil entity.

If @ 170 you would have surplus grass available, so the obvious thing to do is grow crops on some of the land and reduce purchased feed.

Good man KG!!

This must be THE most depressing forum to read of late and it’s great to see someone with a proactive attitude.

Solutions are what are needed, not pointing the finger of blame.

The trouble is the goalposts are continually being moved. Several local farmers are going taking land kms away to be compliant with nitrates with the intention of growing maize to get the value of the land paid and to keep the home stocking rate and facilities used.

Now there's murmurings of a distance clause being brought in re nitrates and land leased. So that avenue may be closed again.

It's all being made up as it's going along that's no way to run and plan for a business in the future.

If a multinational was looking to invest in the country and hit with the changing goalposts of the dept in charge they wouldn't bother investing.

Wasnt the previou advice to high stock high profit teagasc are a joke.

We are operating just under the 170 and have no intention of going over. Been there, done that and would never want to go back. We were always chasing out tail. buying beet, maize, big fertilizer bills, bad weather was a disaster, Now even this year with the poor weather it did't really affect us.

Milk yields and supply increasing.

They haven't changed the advice sooo ......... lol

We are all going to adapt in our own way, be it cutting back, retiring from dairying, buying land or renting land. Everybody's situation and personal circumstances are different. It seems that some farmers consider (cutting numbers or deciding to call it quits and do something that fits your circumstances better) as complete failure and negativity.

On the other hand I consider enriching armchair farmers and running faster to stay in the same place or go backwards as complete lunacy. That is what I consider a negative thing to do. Some farmers don't even want to cut the bottom 5% and they are willing to pay whatever it takes to keep them.

Are you growing crops of grain and selling them with all that ground.

we’re at 260 here the last 5 years and haven’t had a feed issue yet. Was buying in 200t of maize but switched to growing it ourselves this year

next year we’ll be about 200/ha with new land. I’ll stick at that and see what way things go. It’s not too far to get down to 170 if that happens. But I’ll be swamped with feed.

Anyone can take a case for free if they bring it on environmental grounds. think it was brought in through one of those climate actions/emergencies a few years ago. It gives a free ride to anyone to challenge anything on environmental grounds knowing that the taxpayer foots the bill if they win or lose. Easy money for the legal guys and gals. There was a poster over in the green thread (since closed their account after being schooled on numerous occasions and being challenged on the green shite they posted) claiming the lawyers and barristers are all working pro bono (for nowt) because it's the right thing to do. Clown.

Not part of this. This case is purely a challenge to the derogation. How/who/what is the cause of the water pollution is of no concern to them here. It's a case to get rid of the derogation which they claim is illegal

Zero fooks given ..what’s going on inside my farm gate all that concerns me ….no point loosing your shite worrying about everyone else

It's amazing the short memory lads have. All year we are listening to lads on here complaining about the bad year they had with the bad weather, extra meal fed, production down and still they want to continue with the unsutainable stocking rates.

I know I am going to be attacked for saying it, but there is a better, easier way. Reduce the stocking rate and still produce the same or more milk with less expense and easier life.

Not that easy lads so easy to get 5k out ofa cow 8k needs different effort

Have always been in dero. Last time we bought forage was when we were in winter milk so as much for production as anything else, sold silage in 18 to lads not in dero, wet years catch us more but touch wood not since 12/ 13 have we had a forage issue

It's grand saying reduce numbers if you have the land base to stay at a level for a sustainable income etc but some don't and a lot don't without renting extra ground. Not everyone is in a position to cut back and not all reductions in costs are going to magically leave you with the same income. We all have to worry about inside our own gate but then this assumption that lads are doing things for bragging rights or just to get bigger I'll never get, a weak argument imo.

Some of us cows are the only income source, others may have 3 or 4 sources of income coming in so have more options

Nothing is black and white and what applies to one does not apply to all.