"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...
In article ,


I said that the chief cause of the losses was the enormous change made in
agriculture, not the limited well intentioned, but possibly flawed
meddling by quangos, on the tiny remnant of suitable habitat left. Do you
or Oz really argue that the combination of science and market forces would
give us Marsh Frits back if conservationists were banished.

Incidentally, your last paragraph suggests that you think that I would
wish you to farm another way. I fully understand that you have to try to
make a living, in your circumstances as I do in mine. I hope that somehow
we in society can also retain at least some Marsh Frits.

one of the problems is that too many people make a living out of shroud
waving. If they don't have a scare, their budget is siphoned away to the
more imaginative who do.
The Marsh Frits are as much the victims of this, where common sense and good
management get swept aside in the face of dogma

Jim Webster

In article ,
Jim Webster wrote:

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...
I hope that somehow
we in society can also retain at least some Marsh Frits.

one of the problems is that too many people make a living out of shroud
waving. If they don't have a scare, their budget is siphoned away to the
more imaginative who do. The Marsh Frits are as much the victims of
this, where common sense and good management get swept aside in the face
of dogma

Jim Webster
But you must accept that the great crash in populations of these
butterflies along with so many others occurred at times of grassland
improvement, not conservation interference.

Incidentally there is still a very viable population on Salisbury Plain,
where the agriculture is not very intensive, and so many of the other
declined agricultural species still thrive.

--
Regards from Robert Seago : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jim Webster wrote:

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...
I hope that somehow
we in society can also retain at least some Marsh Frits.

one of the problems is that too many people make a living out of shroud
waving. If they don't have a scare, their budget is siphoned away to the
more imaginative who do. The Marsh Frits are as much the victims of
this, where common sense and good management get swept aside in the face
of dogma

Jim Webster
But you must accept that the great crash in populations of these
butterflies along with so many others occurred at times of grassland
improvement, not conservation interference.

yep, government interference as opposed to other government interference :-(




Incidentally there is still a very viable population on Salisbury Plain,
where the agriculture is not very intensive, and so many of the other
declined agricultural species still thrive.

It is going to be genuinely interesting to see what the next five years
bring
Jim Webster

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...

I had meant that a farmer pursuing profitable farming in the present
climate, if left alone from interference, would bring back systems with
attractive rare species. This I think would be impossible

I suspect the first two parameters are impossible in themselves :-((

Jim Webster

In article , Jim Webster
wrote:

But you must accept that the great crash in populations of these
butterflies along with so many others occurred at times of grassland
improvement, not conservation interference.

yep, government interference as opposed to other government interference
:-(
So are you really saying that the significant loss of the traditional farm
species of the UK such as some butterflies never disappeared through
intensification.

I accept that grants from government were sometimes the enabling factor



Incidentally there is still a very viable population on Salisbury
Plain, where the agriculture is not very intensive, and so many of the
other declined agricultural species still thrive.

It is going to be genuinely interesting to see what the next five years
bring Jim Webster


I'm not quite sure what you are saying.

--
Regards from Robert Seago : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago

In article ,
Jim Webster wrote:

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...

I had meant that a farmer pursuing profitable farming in the present
climate, if left alone from interference, would bring back systems with
attractive rare species. This I think would be impossible

I suspect the first two parameters are impossible in themselves :-((

Jim Webster
I think so, but because of market forces more than anything else.

--
Regards from Robert Seago : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...
In article , Jim Webster
wrote:

But you must accept that the great crash in populations of these
butterflies along with so many others occurred at times of grassland
improvement, not conservation interference.

yep, government interference as opposed to other government interference
:-(
So are you really saying that the significant loss of the traditional farm
species of the UK such as some butterflies never disappeared through
intensification.

I accept that grants from government were sometimes the enabling factor

What I was meaning was that effectively 'fashions' change. The previous
'fashion' was for full bore food production. The current 'fashion' is for
the environment. In agriculture we await with interest the arrival of the
next 'fashion'. (fashion isn't meant in any derogatory sense)





Incidentally there is still a very viable population on Salisbury
Plain, where the agriculture is not very intensive, and so many of the
other declined agricultural species still thrive.

It is going to be genuinely interesting to see what the next five years
bring Jim Webster


I'm not quite sure what you are saying.

Single Farm Payment.
One or two people have said it will be the biggest thing to happen since
1939 with regard to its effects on the countryside, and I quite believe
them.

Jim Webster

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jim Webster wrote:

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...

I had meant that a farmer pursuing profitable farming in the present
climate, if left alone from interference, would bring back systems
with
attractive rare species. This I think would be impossible

I suspect the first two parameters are impossible in themselves :-((

Jim Webster
I think so, but because of market forces more than anything else.


remember that current policy is to produce at world market prices. This
means we have to get costs down to world market levels.

Jim Webster

Single Farm Payment.
One or two people have said it will be the biggest thing to happen since
1939 with regard to its effects on the countryside, and I quite believe
them.
A bit scary then!

Jim Webster

--
Regards from Robert Seago : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago

In article ,
Jim Webster wrote:

I think so, but because of market forces more than anything else.


remember that current policy is to produce at world market prices. This
means we have to get costs down to world market levels.

Jim Webster
This is the great worry. I suspect that after transport and other
overheads, a farm business in Poland or Rumania, would easily outcompete
what could be achieved here. If the rest of the world was really allowed
to compete on an equal footing, there would be many people willing to be
delighted with a fraction of the earnings of a farmer here who could
legitimately regard himself as teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.

This scenario has been experienced by manufacturing, with profound results.

I'm not sure that a massive intensification here in agriculture could
reduce costs enough to compete on the world market.

--
Regards from Robert Seago : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago

Robert Seago writes

This is the great worry. I suspect that after transport and other
overheads, a farm business in Poland or Rumania, would easily outcompete
what could be achieved here.

Perhaps, but if they are in the EC and following EC rules they should be
shackled with the same regulations. They have much lower labour costs
(at the moment) but probably don't have the 30 years of investment. Even
in arable systems many things are very long term investments. Our 'old'
drier (installed 1956, since sold) is still in heavy use every harvest
by our neighbour.

If the rest of the world was really allowed
to compete on an equal footing, there would be many people willing to be
delighted with a fraction of the earnings of a farmer here who could
legitimately regard himself as teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.

Oh, that would be very good news. No concealed or express subsidies
WORLDWIDE and grain/milk production would plummet and world prices
rocket up. In north western europe we get very high grain yields which
compensates for our higher costs when the playing field is level. Even
so perhaps 20-30% of arable land would not be cropped.

This scenario has been experienced by manufacturing, with profound results.

Indeed.

I'm not sure that a massive intensification here in agriculture could
reduce costs enough to compete on the world market.

See above.

--
Oz

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...

Single Farm Payment.
One or two people have said it will be the biggest thing to happen since
1939 with regard to its effects on the countryside, and I quite believe
them.
A bit scary then!

the really scary bit is that both the retailers and the environmentalists
appear not to have taken any notice :-(

Jim Webster

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jim Webster wrote:

I think so, but because of market forces more than anything else.


remember that current policy is to produce at world market prices. This
means we have to get costs down to world market levels.

Jim Webster
This is the great worry. I suspect that after transport and other
overheads, a farm business in Poland or Rumania, would easily outcompete
what could be achieved here.

In the farming press it is being commented that for the first time for years
intervention stocks are rising (rather than minor seasonal fluctuations) and
the vast majority of the surplus is coming from the east, the new entrants.

If the rest of the world was really allowed
to compete on an equal footing, there would be many people willing to be
delighted with a fraction of the earnings of a farmer here who could
legitimately regard himself as teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.

This scenario has been experienced by manufacturing, with profound
results.

It is going to be experienced by more than just agriculture, doctors,
teachers, computer software, all of these are now open to competition from
the east and the new entrants.


I'm not sure that a massive intensification here in agriculture could
reduce costs enough to compete on the world market.

Cost reduction doesn't necessarily mean intensification. The total
abandonment of any structured grazing in some parts of the UK, arable land
just standing fallow for a year because the forward price of grain is too
low to justify planting, all these are possibilities. Total abandonment of
any work on hedgerows because they are an expensive luxury is another.

Jim Webster

In article ,
Jim Webster wrote:

"Robert Seago" wrote in message
...

Single Farm Payment.
One or two people have said it will be the biggest thing to happen since
1939 with regard to its effects on the countryside, and I quite believe
them.
A bit scary then!

the really scary bit is that both the retailers and the environmentalists
appear not to have taken any notice :-(

Jim Webster
I don't say environmentalists are right but we have already been through
years of heartache when many of our best sites were being lost or
neglected.

From what you are saying we are facing the all or nothing scenario. We
will probably have to settle for what we can extract from that, as you
will.

--
Regards from Robert Seago : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago

This scenario has been experienced by manufacturing, with profound
results.

It is going to be experienced by more than just agriculture, doctors,
teachers, computer software, all of these are now open to competition
from the east and the new entrants.
This is already happening. I got out of secondary school science teaching
some 8 years ago. There has been an almost total turnover of staff since
then. That department had two recent African immigrants, an Aussie, and a
range of people training on the job.

I am now teaching software development in a university joint project which
provides foundation entrance for students mostly from China, with other
Asian countries. I figure that in about 10 years when I would hope to
retire they will be training their own people. Already many of the
available doctors are from the developing world.

I'm not sure that a massive intensification here in agriculture could
reduce costs enough to compete on the world market.

Cost reduction doesn't necessarily mean intensification. The total
abandonment of any structured grazing in some parts of the UK, arable
land just standing fallow for a year because the forward price of grain
is too low to justify planting, all these are possibilities. Total
abandonment of any work on hedgerows because they are an expensive
luxury is another.

Jim Webster
I don't think I can add anything useful here, but I think I might
subscribe to uk.business.agriculture usenet. The conservation one usually
disappoints some of us. The agri discussion at least is worthwhile.
However, any posts I make are likely to sound contrary, but should not be
taken that way.

--
Regards from Robert Seago : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago