Talk:Agriculture in the United Kingdom

Don't trust the information as I can't check the sources given
I'm not convinced by most of the information quoted as I can't check it (DEFRA p13 for example!) Howver, since DEFRA just covers England, these figures may just be about England. The figures shouls either get a aource that we can check, or be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.0.34 (talk) 22:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Why can't you check it?— S Marshall T/C 22:55, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, forget that question: there's only two possible reasons why you can't check it. Either you don't see how references work, or else your computer can't read .pdfs.  If it's that your computer can't read .pdfs, then google for Adobe Acrobat Reader and install it for free.  If it's that you don't know how references work, then the clue is that "DEFRA 2009" means the document written by DEFRA in 2009.  So scroll down to the bibliography and look for it (the bibliography is in alphabetical order so it's the third one down).   There, you will see a link to the source file (marked with the little .pdf icon), which is called "Agriculture in the United Kingdom".  (DEFRA do write about the UK, you see.  They're not just about England.) When you read the source file you will see that all the information is exactly as I've said.— S Marshall  T/C 23:19, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I thought I should be able to click on the reference to take me straight to the page, but clearly not. 86.156.0.34 (talk) 15:48, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Copied from S Marshall's talk page
Hi, I see that you have reverted all of my edits to the lead of Agriculture in the United Kingdom. I appreciate that you have made very significant contributions to that article and respect your views but do feel that the lead could be improved. In particular I think that it is overly negative and impressionistic. For example, the opening sentence 'Agriculture in the United Kingdom is an industry in gradual decline' is sweeping and negative and does not actually specify in which way the industry is in decline.

I propose that an opening sentence such as 'Agriculture in the United Kingdom is intensive, highly mechanised and contributes a small and gradually shrinking proportion of the country's economic output.' is more netural, specific and less POV. I would be grateful to hear your thoughts. Rangoon11 (talk) 15:51, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I feel that the purpose of the lede is to give the reader an overview of the subject. This necessarily entails sweeping, broad-brush remarks, which must then be explained and cited to reliable sources in the main body of the article. It's true the opening remarks are entirely negative in tone.  But that's a realistic picture of the state of the industry, and it's easily verified by reference to the sources given.  The references show that income from farms declined 6.7% last year and nearly 45% over the last fifteen years.  Basically, the whole industry has tanked and the farmers we have left in the UK are old men, who don't know any other trade and who're by and large locked into long-term tenancies or have all their capital tied up in land. That's a major claim to make, which is why once you get past the lede, the article addresses that fact as the very first issue and proves it by reference to impeccable sources.  I'm of the view that the lede needs to state this as the first point it makes. This isn't to say that I'm opposed to any changes in the article, and I'm not; it's just to say that I think the lede needs to start by pointing out the state of the industry.— S Marshall  T/C 16:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. Firstly I do completely accept the quoted statistics and understand that, by a number of measures, the industry is unfortunately in poor health and has been for a number of years. I don't in any way want to hide harsh truths but I do think that there is still room for some edits to the lede.


 * I have no issue with the references to declining income, high average age of farmers, high costs of entry and falling entry by young people all remaining in the lede. I do feel that the opening sentence is too broad however. Even though the industry may in some important ways have experienced decline, there is no certainty that decline in all of those areas will continue going forward, and there are no doubt some areas where the industry has not in fact been in decline and may even have strengthed.


 * I therefore propose changing the first sentence to 'Agriculture in the United Kingdom is intensive, highly mechanised and contributes a small and gradually shrinking proportion of the country's economic output.' and leaving the rest of the first paragraph as is.


 * In the second paragraph I think that the sentence 'Bleak though recent decades may have been, the British farming community is resilient and adaptable.' is overly impressionistic. I propose that it be replaced simply by 'In recent years there has been a considerable growth in organic farming...'


 * I think that there may also be scope for the addition of a couple of the most significant overview statistics into the lede, e.g. tthe industry employs 535,000 and has the -th largest agricultural output of any EU nation. Rangoon11 (talk) 16:38, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've made the change to the second paragraph that you suggest. On reflection, I agree that it was an unwarranted opinion statement.  I'm not convinced by the proposed alternative first sentence, because I don't think the proposed alternative is clear enough.  I think that the evidence is strong enough for the article to just come out and tell it like it is. I understand the NPOV concern.  NPOV often makes editors anxious to give both sides of a story, and to stick to neutral-seeming facts, but I find that makes articles into wishy-washy, vacillating streams of prose with no clear thesis or conclusion.  I'm afraid that I still prefer the existing version of the first sentence, though I'm quite open to other alternative wording suggestions.— S Marshall  T/C 17:04, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I do understand your desire to face up to harsh truths in the article but also feel that the opening sentence, which is ultimately supposed to be a description of the subject in its totality, is too broad.


 * Take the example of a world renowed university commonly regarded as the best in the world e.g. Harvard. One would still not expect the article of that subject to start 'University x is one of the best universities in the world', but rather something like 'University x is a private research university based in x city, x country' founded in x'.


 * We should also note that this is an article about agriculture in the United Kingdom historically as well as present day (with, quite rightly, greater coverage of the present and recent past). In my view we should avoid an excessive emphasis on the present and recent past over the broad sweep of the subject as well as an excessive emphasis on decline over other features of the present day industry.


 * How about:
 * 'Agriculture in the United Kingdom has been characterised by the country's high quality soil and temperate climate, high level of population density, relatively limited land area and proximity to other western European nations. Today the industry is intensive, highly mechanised and contributes a small and gradually shrinking proportion of the country's economic output. The industry has experienced a number of crises and a large decline in employment levels in recent decades and today faces a number of profound challenges.' And then continuing with the rest of the paragraph as is from the word 'Despite'.Rangoon11 (talk) 17:57, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * How do you feel about the revised wording I've placed directly in the article?— S Marshall T/C 20:09, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes I think that it's a big improvement. I have just made a couple of tweaks, happy to discuss if you disagree with any of them.Rangoon11 (talk) 20:39, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Agriculture in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110316040141/http://ww2.defra.gov.uk:80/rural/rdpe/ to http://ww2.defra.gov.uk/rural/rdpe/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101004234046/http://www.renewablefuelsagency.gov.uk:80/reportsandpublications/reviewoftheindirecteffectsofbiofuels/executivesummary to http://www.renewablefuelsagency.gov.uk/reportsandpublications/reviewoftheindirecteffectsofbiofuels/executivesummary
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100721060557/http://www.renewablefuelsagency.gov.uk:80/aboutthertfo to http://www.renewablefuelsagency.gov.uk/aboutthertfo

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:00, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Agriculture in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110719011738/http://www.sac.ac.uk/mainrep/pdfs/leergworkingpaper17.pdf to http://www.sac.ac.uk/mainrep/pdfs/leergworkingpaper17.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:43, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 one external links on Agriculture in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713020710/http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx to http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120612095744/http://www.ukagriculture.com/crops/barley_uk.cfm to http://www.ukagriculture.com/crops/barley_uk.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620205159/http://www.bis.gov.uk:80/assets/biscore/corporate/migratedD/ec_group/44-07-S_I_on to http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/corporate/migratedD/ec_group/44-07-S_I_on
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/movements/cattle/reporting.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/diseases/atoz/tb/isg/documents/isg-responsetosirdking.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/tb-control-measures/index.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/growing/organic/index.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110316040141/http://ww2.defra.gov.uk/rural/rdpe/ to http://ww2.defra.gov.uk/rural/rdpe/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/general/auk/seminar/documents/summary.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101203184618/http://ukagriculture.com/crops/setaside.cfm to http://www.ukagriculture.com/crops/setaside.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521122900/http://ukagriculture.com/statistics/farming_statistics.cfm?strsection=Total%20Cereals to http://www.ukagriculture.com/statistics/farming_statistics.cfm?strsection=Total%20Cereals
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521122835/http://ukagriculture.com/statistics/farming_statistics.cfm?strsection=Crop%20Areas to http://www.ukagriculture.com/statistics/farming_statistics.cfm?strsection=Crop%20Areas
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101203135014/http://ukagriculture.com/livestock/animal_welfare.cfm to http://www.ukagriculture.com/livestock/animal_welfare.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110829124447/http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-crosscutting-auk-auk2010-110525.pdf to http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-crosscutting-auk-auk2010-110525.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121113154519/http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-crosscutting-auk-auk2011-120709.pdf to http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-crosscutting-auk-auk2011-120709.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110830010746/http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-fbs-diversification-agriculture.pdf to http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-fbs-diversification-agriculture.pdf
 * Added tag to http://economics.ouls.ox.ac.uk/13622/1/Allen%20-%20English%20and%20Welsh%20agriculture.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Agriculture in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150711162718/http://www.ukagriculture.com/crops/grain_storage_uk.cfm to http://www.ukagriculture.com/crops/grain_storage_uk.cfm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/growing/organic/index.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/general/auk/seminar/documents/summary.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110829124447/http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-crosscutting-auk-auk2010-110525.pdf to http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-crosscutting-auk-auk2010-110525.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121113154519/http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-crosscutting-auk-auk2011-120709.pdf to http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-crosscutting-auk-auk2011-120709.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110830010746/http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-fbs-diversification-agriculture.pdf to http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-fbs-diversification-agriculture.pdf
 * Added tag to http://economics.ouls.ox.ac.uk/13622/1/Allen%20-%20English%20and%20Welsh%20agriculture.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:00, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Farming Subsidies
“Last year the average farm made £2,100 from agriculture and £28,300 from subsidies. The typical cereal farmer actually lost £9,500 by farming cereals.” The Times, 4 August 2016

This seems to be an almost taboo subject. It's certainly a sensitive subject. Shhh!

The figure changes from year to year and between various sizes of farm. In 2013/14 the average farm’s profit from agriculture was £6,600, which fell to £2,100 the next year. Large farms in 2014/15 made £22,300 from agriculture, whereas small farms lost £6,600.

The amount of profits made from agriculture also varies between different types of farms.

Farms which produce mostly cereal lost £9,500 on their agricultural income because costs for things like machinery and labour outweighed the financial gain from producing the crops and livestock. But, they also received around £37,400 before costs, or £33,900 after costs, in subsidies. So overall, the average cereal farm made about £45,000 in farm business profit in 2014/15.

Poultry farms were much more profitable. Over the same time specialist poultry farms, which have the largest business profit of any of the types listed by Defra, made £126,800 per farm. Well over half of that came from agriculture, £79,300 per farm, and only £8,500 came from subsidies. Once the cost of using these subsidies is taken into account they were worth £8,000.

The amount received in subsidies varies with the size of the farm. All farms receive roughly the same amount per hectare, although the smaller they are the greater a proportion of their profit it makes up.

On average small farm subsidies make up around 78% of the total profit, on medium size farms it’s 61%; and on large farms it’s 46%. Across all farms, subsidies make up around 57% of the total profit on average.

Cassandra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.167.165 (talk) 11:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Outdated
The publication cited after "Farming was introduced in the British Isles between about 5000 BC and 4500 BC after a large influx of Mesolithic people and following the end of the Pleistocene epoch."i outdated by the 2019 paper of Brace et al.2A02:8108:9640:AC3:61BA:41CB:5788:1115 (talk) 11:23, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi! Please could you link this paper or cite it more clearly?—S Marshall T/C 11:39, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Text re disposal of excess slurry
Interesting but I feel a bit far from point. The text is saved here in case of reuse or reinstatement.

Slurry can pollute watercourses, draining them of oxygen, can contain pathogenic microorganisms such as salmonella, and creates an odour that causes complaints if stored near people. Pigs and poultry, if kept intensively with a relatively small land area per animal, create manure that requires to be processed. This may be done by removing the liquid component and transporting it away, or by composting it, or by anaerobic digestion to produce methane which is later converted to electricity. PineappleDolly (talk) 00:30, 18 November 2023 (UTC)