the state of farming in exmoor - 2015
TRANSCRIPT
The State of Farming in Exmoor, 2015
Janet Dwyer, John Powell, Jane Mills, Nick Lewis, Pete Gaskell and Jonnie Felton,
2 June 2015 University of Gloucestershire
Starting point: review existing studiesUp to date analysis of Exmoor farms, using :
• Defra’s June Survey of holdings
• Defra’s Farm Practices Survey and Farm Business Survey
• Literature review - trends & policy issues
• Discussion at EHFN workshop, November 2014
Farming characteristics and trends
• Dominated by sheep and beef systems
• Historically Exmoor had more cattle and pony grazing, with fewer farms producing just sheep
• Today the pattern is more typical of the English uplands as a whole – sheep have grown in importance
• Partly in response to income pressure, Exmoor farms have increased income from outside farming: around 50% of farmers have off-farm diversification, & 30% on-farm diversification (many do both)
Land use• Grass dominates: Permanent pasture = 2/3 agricultural area; rough
grazing 1/5
• Since 2002, increase in pasture, woods, crop & fallow areas, while rough grazing declined
Hectares of land 2002 2009 2010* new sample
2013
Crops & Fallow 1 912 2 884 2 207 2 872
Temporary grass 3 705 3 744 3 188 3 512
Permanent grass 32 207 35 201 34 042 35 748
Rough grazing 10 457 10 556 11 991 9 246
Woodland 1 735 2 952 3 456 2 985
Other land 611 314 672 373
• Many ‘changes’ probably relate to how land is classified, not much real change on the ground?
2%
11% 1%
70%
11%
4%
2%Cereals
General cropping
Horticulture
Dairy
LFA grazing livestock
Lowland grazing livestock
Mixed
Other
Total holdings
Farm structure• In 2009 : 1,003 Defra-registered holdings, evenly split between
commercial & non-commercial (i.e. very small)
• Since 2010, Defra no longer surveys non-commercial holdings
• By 2013, there were 510 commercial holdings (not 510 farms)
2013
Livestock numbers2002 - 2009 livestock numbers fell: 18% in cattle; 14% in sheep
2010 – 2013: 9% fall in cattle numbers, but 5% increase in sheep
- LFA cattle has been less profitable than LFA sheep
Labour• 2013: 1,204 people employed
on commercial holdings
• 53% commercial farmers work on a part-time basis (farmers or managers)
• c.500 holdings - implies the average holding is run by 1.5 people (e.g. a couple, one working part-time on farm)
2010 2013 % change
Farmers full time 361 404 12
Farmers part time 461 468 2
Salaried managers full time 15 # #
Salaried managers part time 10 # #
Employees full time 79 100 27
Employees part time 98 107 9
Casual workers 98 102 4
Total labour 1121 1204 7
Farm business income, SW LFA farms• Most LFA ‘farm business income’
is derived from SPS (60%) plus diversification (12%) & agri-environment schemes (29%)
• Net income from agricultural production is negligible or negative (farming costs exceed market returns)
• This mirrors the national picture; 2013-14 is worse still than 2012-13
2010/11
2011/12
2012/2013
-20,000
-10,000
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
Single Payment Scheme
Diversification out of Agriculture
Agri-environment and other Payment
Agriculture
£ pe
r far
m
20032004
20052006
20072008
20092010
20112012
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
NET FARM INCOME (NFI) SW
NFI England LFA
NFI All Farms
LFA
Literature reviewThe current situation on English upland farms is of concern for quality of life / standards of living, environmental conditions, and sector competitiveness. Issues may compound one another – stretched businesses, families under stress, farming too hard for land capability yet undergrazing moors, etc.
The problems and challenges are widely recognised. Parliamentary Committees and the CRC have called for greater support for
upland farming and its development
Defra withdrew hill farm support in 2010, but is now equalising basic payment rates between LFA & non-LFA land Environmental schemes: ES has been replaced by CS, with less money and no entry-level option (= austerity)The new RDPE seems to offer less flexible support from Defra than before, but LEPs and LAGs now also have funding
There is no explicit policy commitment to upland farms in England
Exmoor: the 2015 farm survey• Circulated by post, online and at the marts, in January, to EHFN
mailing list plus NFU and ENPA contacts: c.400 businesses (+/- all the commercial farms in Exmoor?)
• 117 responses returned and analysed
• Respondents manage at least 1/3 of all commercial holdings in Exmoor; and 36% of the farmland in the National Park
• The survey is strongly indicated as representative of the commercial farm population in Exmoor
• Follow-up phone survey with 25 respondents, in March, picked to capture maximum variation in type, size, age: exploring reasons & ideas
2% 10%
14%
21%54%
Farm size
< 5 ha
5 - 19 ha
20 - 49 ha
50 - 99 ha
> 100 ha
100% rented11%
Mixed tenure
41%
100% owned
48%
Farm Tenure
2% 11%
38%39%
10%
Age of farmers
< 25
26 - 40
41 - 55
56 - 70
> 70
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Decrease No change Increase
Farm enterprise changes since 2005
% of each type of activity
Category of Farm Number % of respondents
Dairy (>50% dairy cattle) 3 2.7
Mainly (>75%) cattle 4 3.5
Mixed cattle and sheep (25-75% of each)
29 25.7
Mixed, mainly (>75%-90%) sheep
32 28.3
Mainly or all (>90%) sheep 42 37.2
Small farms (under 5 ha) 2 1.8
Other (no stock) 1 0.9
Farm ‘types’ as estimated by the balance of Grazing Livestock Units, in 2015
Headlines – farm businesses• Younger farmers tend to have larger farms, plan more changes and
have adding-value ideas / enterprises
• Most farms have assured succession or plan to stay farming to 2020
• Most farms are beef & sheep, but sheep far more significant
• Dairying is residual, but those milking plan future growth
• Most farms haven’t changed much in a decade, some have intensified, while others have extensified: focus upon what makes sense economically? Also, bTB has been a key influence for many
• Diversification significant since 2005 on around 50% farms, will further increase in importance by 2020
• Key types of diversification: tourist accommodation (stable), contracting, off-farm work, renting, renewable energy (growing)
• Farmers have few ideas for improving the returns from their livestock
Area of land fa
rmed
Non-farm
ing diversifica
tion
Business
turnover
Investment in
renewables
Off-farm
employment
Investment in
farm
mach
inery
Investment in
buildings
Away winterin
g of sheep
Intensity of m
oorland use
Intensity of in
-bye area use05
101520253035404550
Decrease
No change
Increase
Changes 2005 -2015
Sale of livestock Sale of crops (% of total 117 responses) Liveweight at market 79.5% Sell to a processor 3.4%Deadweight to abattoir 46.2% Sell to a trader/merchant 0.9%Sell stock private 10.3% Sell privately 2.6%Other 7.7% Other 17.1%
Diversification activity
Current Level of importance Change since 2005Number of
respondentsLow Medium HighStarted or increased
No change
Stopped or decreased
Processing and retailing farm produce
0 0 0 6.0 9.4 2.6 21
Tourist accommodation
8.5 8.5 11.1 9.4 11.1 7.7 33
Rents other than tourism
3.4 8.5 10.3 9.4 12.0 0.9 26
Shooting 6.8 4.3 5.1 7.7 10.3 2.6 24Other leisure business, e.g. fishing
2.6 1.7 2.6 3.4 10.3 13.7 16
Rural crafts 0.9 0.0 1.7 0.9 9.4 0.0 12Agricultural services (e.g. contracting)
9.4 6.0 10.3 6.8 11.1 4.3 26
Equine services 2.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 9.4 2.6 16
Forestry (growing and harvesting wood) 7.7 0.0 3.4 4.3 12.0 0.9 20
Wood processing 4.3 0.9 4.3 6.0 9.4 15.4 18
Renewable energy generation
9.4 4.3 4.3 15.4 7.7 0.0 27
Renewables investments – links to farmer age and farm size
Small (<20ha)
Medium (20 -
100ha)
Large (>100ha)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Renewable energy investments, 2005-15
DecreaseNo changeIncrease
Small (<20ha)
Medium (20 - 100ha)
Large (>100ha)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Anticipated Change in Renewables 2015-2020
DecreaseNo changeIncrease
Age Group Decrease No change Increase Number
<41 0 33.3 66.7 9
41-70 8.3 46.9 44.9 49
>70 0 62.5 37.5 8
Total 6.1 47 47 66
Diversification Change Scores, 2005-15 (2=no change; <2=Started or increased; >2 Stopped or decreased)
• Growth in renting land matches farm size growth: most farm expansion has been via renting, not buying land
Diversification Activity Mean Score* Number of responses
Process/sell farm produce 1.80 20Tourist accommodation 1.97 31Rents 1.58 24Shooting 1.73 23Other leisure 1.73 15Rural crafts 1.91 11Agri services 1.88 25Equine 2.06 15Forestry 1.78 19Wood processing 1.58 17Renewables 1.30 26
Headlines – policy and schemes
• Clear groups of losers and gainers from decoupling, linked to land capability and enterprise type
• Significant dependence on CAP aid
• Expected change in CAP’s importance to income, after 2015:
50% say no change, 25% modest growth, 25% decline
• 89% are in agri-environment schemes; most were in the ESA and are now in ES, about 40% are in HLS
• those in ELS/UELS are worried about future income / management
• Overwhelming preference for the ESA – for boundary management, capital works, jobs and landscape
Scheme
ESA
CSS
UELS
ELS
OELS
HLS
ENPA
EWGS
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Number
Headlines – collaboration, groups and concerns for the future
• Many are keen to collaborate for business & environment
• Most who attend groups (EHFN, NFU) value the social element; sharing experience with other farmers – a few say business benefits
• Farm concerns - low prices, persistent bTB, loss of local knowledge, ill-informed outsiders / institutions;
• Land management concerns – costs of boundary management, insufficient swaling, under-managed scrub & moorland
• Exmoor concerns – farm succession/ farms for start-ups, planning not supporting farm needs, reduced grants, low incomes, rich non-farming incomers outbidding locals
• In the phone survey, most respondents were optimistic, overall, about the future for farming in Exmoor, despite its challenges
Selected views & tacticsOn markets and profits:
‘Without spending a lot of time and effort it isn’t worth my time trying to maximize returns. I market them as well as I can already’
BUT some are improving returns – direct sales, niche marketing of specific products (calves, stores, special breeds), improved sheep management
and productivity – examples of all these exist
Income from farming is increasingly ‘hard fought’ and greater effort is required to maintain current income levels
On CAP / government support:
Pay farmers for producing, not environment
Pay hill farmers, as nature needs managing
Bring back grants for hedging
Subsidising isn’t right for farming = you have to get bigger
‘Tricky one, that is: everyone’s got a different opinion!’
• Broadband is clearly an issue for the area• Online claims only: no concern for a significant minority, but
many concerns over computer skills etc. for others:“will have to get a computer”
“just more cost (to employ an agent) as I am not confident online”
“our broadband speed is woeful, as is my computer use speed”
“lack of broadband within the area, lack of training. We need the network to assist with this desperately”
• Although the 2015 plan has been shelved, a future need for EHFN to address?
• Bovine TB remains a significant concern – prevents long-term planning for many; weakens ability to respond to market trends, or see new opportunities: can strategies be improved?
Other concerns
Conclusions• Exmoor Farmers are resilient, some signs of recovery since 2005
for hill farms, but lowland marginal farms still pushed
• Low incomes remain a widespread problem; market returns lower than costs of production – better incomes for those either adding value, in HLS, &/or in dairying
• Most ESA farms moved into ES: those in HLS (with capital works) are doing OK, but ELS farms lost money and will lose ELS; will BPS compensate? Widespread concern for landscape maintenance
• Diversified incomes are important for many and % will grow in future
• Worries about lack of young farmers unfounded? – there are young farmers keen to build a future here…..
• Pricing-out is a risk; and some ‘bad blood’ with NE / planners
• There is an appetite for working together, but existing groups valued mainly for social benefits, so far
Policy recommendationsFor Defra
• Analyse the reasons for low market returns to hill livestock – similar to dairy sector studies - formulate tactics to raise returns
• Support local groups helping farmers to improve performance (EHFN)
• Fund secure, long-term rewards for managing nature & ecosystem services, more tailored to local knowledge / conditions
• Reconsider targeted hill farm assistance?
For ENPA / NFU / EHFN:
• Find funds for working more with farmers, in balanced partnerships (e.g. CS, Lottery, corporate sponsors)
• Work with the LEP & LEADER groups - ensure their funds help farm families & communities (design projects with local input: improve health / holiday time, business training & start-ups; small grants; ICT confidence; renewable energy infrastructure; innovation study trips/exchanges)
• Initiate a local review with farmers & experts, of best land management for biodiversity, water & landscape in Exmoor, offer to Defra as a blueprint for a better scheme, delivered locally
