Opposition grows to 'mega' farms

Cherry Tree in Norfolk and other intensive pig and chicken farms owned by Cranswick, the FTSE 250 food producer, are now struggling against opposition from locals and animal welfare and environmental campaigners. The farm manager faces regular complaints from one nearby resident in particular, although the Environment Agency has “only confirmed strong odours on a few occasions”.

 This culminated in April when Cranswick’s plan to build a “megafarm” to raise 14,000 pigs and 714,000 chickens at a time at an existing pig farm near two Norfolk villages was rejected by the borough council. It drew thousands of objections, including from Terry Jermy, Labour MP for West Norfolk, who declared it was “not the kind of farming this country wants or needs.”

Cranswick’s reputation was further damaged last week by the revelation in the Mail on Sunday of cruelty, including killing piglets with blunt force, at one of its 400 pig farms. Its shares fell by 9 per cent as supermarkets suspended supplies from the Lincolnshire farm, which had been certified by the Red Tractor “farmed with care” scheme. Cranswick describes the mistreatment as “wholly unacceptable.”

That contrasts with Cranswick’s growth in recent years, with its share price rising by 74 per cent since May 2023 to a market capitalisation of £3bn. It was founded in 1975 to make pig feed but has steadily expanded, entering chicken farming in 2016. Its shares recovered on Tuesday to a record high as it announced a 14.6 per cent rise in pre-tax profits for the year to March. Like the odour at Cherry Tree Farm, an air of unreality hangs over the anti-Cranswick campaign.

The cruelty in Lincolnshire was reprehensible and the company must prove it was isolated. But it generally conforms to supermarket-monitored welfare and environmental standards and its practices are akin to many farms.

Take one Cranswick chicken farm the Finanvial Times visited, where 33,000 eggs per shed are laid out on straw to hatch. The fast-growing chickens that emerge spend their brief lives in sheds, pecking at bales for up to 38 days before being slaughtered. Nearly 300,000 chickens are raised at a time at a nearby Cranswick farm with eight sheds. There are no cages and welfare standards have tightened. Cranswick just increased the space per bird in sheds by 20 per cent to 16 per square metre to comply with supermarket edicts.

It faces pressure to switch to more natural, slower growing varieties, which take longer to reach their final weight, under the Better Chicken Commitment campaign. Cranswick wants to build 20 chicken sheds at its site near the villages of Feltwell and Methwold, and a smaller number of new pig sheds. Despite its promised improvements, such as air scrubbers to curb emissions, it has been spurned. It is now raising 7,500 pigs there in ageing barns (the site has a permit for 29,000).

 While many prefer farms to be small-scale and free range, that can have drawbacks: free-range chicken farms have been blamed for some pollution in the River Wye because it is harder to contain waste.

The council ruled that Cranswick’s proposed new facility could harm the local environment and strangely cited a 2024 Supreme Court ruling on global warming and oil wells. The campaign, although largely principled, is impractical.

The UK relies on intensive farming for self-sufficiency, rather than importing EU chicken and pork raised to similar standards. Companies such as Cranswick need more space to keep filling supermarkets. The UK produces 1.2bn chickens for eating a year but met only 82 per cent of poultry demand in 2023. 

Cranswick can appeal and the application could be called in by Angela Rayner as housing secretary. “A pig is as clean as you make it,” the farm manager told the Pink ‘Un. Given the stakes for the country, someone should clear up the mess.

The writer of this blog has a substanial shareholiding in Cranswick

UK was a voice for animal welfare in the EU

The UK was one of the strongest advocates of animal welfare measures and its voice is no longer heard in the EU, changing the political calculus.

The EU is considering scrapping plans to impose regulations designed to improve animal welfare in the farming industry over concerns about the impact it could have on food inflation, according to senior officials.

The European Commission had promised to act after public pressure to stop practices such as the use of cages for livestock, the killing of day-old chicks, and the sale and production of fur. But concerns that the proposed changes could add to food costs, which rose sharply after Russia invaded Ukraine last year, have led Brussels to reconsider the plans.

Three EU officials with knowledge of the matter told the Financial Times that the Commission had dropped the proposals completely — along with a sustainable food law designed to boost green food production across the bloc. But another official said it was reviewing the animal welfare plan and would propose a scaled-back version.   This sounds like a trial balloon to judge reactions.

“Some in the commission are worried about the cost,” said Joe Moran, director of European policy for Four Paws, an animal welfare campaign group. The legislation is among the few remaining parts of the EU’s Green Deal climate package, laid out in 2019 to pivot the bloc to a more sustainable economy. But ahead of EU-wide elections in 2024, conservative politicians have pushed back against the environmental regulations.

Typically, the reaction of farm organisations is to call for more subsidies.  Pekka Pesonen, secretary-general of Copa-Cogeca, the EU farmer’s group, told the FT it could support many of the changes as long as they received financial aid to implement them, and if imported meat was subject to the same standards. That would in effect ban many imports from trading partners such as Brazil, Ukraine and Thailand. Such a measure would also be opposed by trade commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis.

Battle of the lightweights

One of the big concerns of UK farmers is that at the same time as farm subsidies are reduced, the UK Government will lower tariff barriers to agriculture and food products in order to conclude trade deals that are beneficial to other sectors.

Earlier in the month the usually reliable Financial Times learned from government officials that the Department of International Trade was preparing to offer a 'big concession package' to US negotiators in the coming months to reduce the cost of some agricultural imports. 

It was hoped that this would ease the path to a deal with the US.   The aim was to secure a deal while the Trump administration was still securely in office as it was felt that an incoming Democratic administration would take a tougher stance.

Defra officials were reported by the Pink 'Un to be concerned that reducing tariffs could be 'the thin end of the wedge' leading to concessions on animal welfare standards.  UK farmers generally adhere to high standards and can be undercut by countries with lower standards.

A long-standing complaint of the US is that its beef, chicken and pork has been shut out of European markets because of high tariffs and restrictive regulations.   These are, of course, sectors that are already in some jeopardy in the UK.

Not all Conservatives are enthusiastic about selling out to the Americans, although deteriorating relations with China have shut off one strategic option available to 'Global Britain', i.e., cosying up to the PRC in the manner of Dave Cameron and George Osborne.

A battle of the lightweights has been taking place between Defra secretary George 'Useless' Eustice and Liz Truss, the international trade secretary.   Someone has been feeding stories to the Daily Mail and the Daily Express claiming that she was set to betray UK farmers despite being a Norfolk MP.

However, it now appears that Boris Johnson has come down on George Eustice's side in what had become a Cabinet split. The intervention of 'Mr Fixit' Michael Gove on Eustice's side may have been decisive.     Johnson may have been fearing another dagger in his back, but his partner's interest in animal welfare issues may have played its part.

It was alleged in court that Carrie Symonds intervened to stop an extension of a badger cull to Derbyshire, but the NFU lost its attempt to secure a judicial review.

Life was much simpler for Boris Johnson when he simply had to worry about traffic problems in London rather than badger culls and 'Hilton beef'.

Bozza declared 'We must not let our farmers down.   One of the reasons for leaving the EU is we can do things differently and better on things like animal welfare.'

Robotics are the way ahead

Beverley: Robotics are the way ahead in farming, claimed Max Perris at the Geo-Agriculture conference today. Production costs would be reduced, yields would go up and less labour would be needed, although he admitted that there would be new risks. There were big upfront costs.

He referred to a system where robot Tom looked after the soil, Dick was concerned with feeding and Harry with planting. Wilma was the brains of the operation, telling the robots what to do and when to do and making sure that they did what was needed.

Robotic milking could take half the time of conventional methods. In barn cameras could be linked to GPS so one could observe the movements of the stock (sounds like Animal Farm made real to me). Drone surveillance could monitor the temperature of animals.

I put it to him that the combination of expensive kit in the fields and fewer staff around sounded like an invitation to criminals when we have a rural security crisis. He admitted there were cyber attack risks. However, he argued that robots would take over the repetitive work, leaving staff to undertake more creative interventions to improve yields.

What are the pros and cons of robotic milking?

Some dairy farmers see this as a way of 'Brexit proofing' their businesses. Between 900 and 1,000 UK herds are now using the technology or around one in ten of all herds. It is. however, a relatively expensive solution and one more appropriate to larger units. It requires a different style of working and presents new animal welfare challenges.

As far as cost is concerned, a farmer would need one unit per 55 low yield milkers. Each unit costs £100k - £120k and a new shed may be needed as well. So a farm with 100 milkers, not a particularly large farm by today's standards, would need to invest £300k. This would be spread over 15-20 years with bank borrowing, but units typically have a life of 10-15 years.

EU productivity grants have been available which cover 40 per cent of the capital cost, but I am uncertain whether these would be available after Brexit, although they would be consistent with a technology oriented investment strategy. No one knows what will happen to the milk price over the next decade, but I would be surprised if it went up in real terms.

With a robotic unit the cow is typically asked to find her own way to the milking unit and milk herself. This necessitates training for the herd person and the cow. It is important that there are no obstacles in the way of the cow, hence the need for a new shed in many cases. The cow will need access several times a day during an unhindered and uncomplicated route.

Staff need to be available 24/7 as the units send out alerts if there is any kind of problem and they need to be able to sort out software glitches. We all know how IT problems can drive us crazy, especially in the early hours of the morning. Staff need to learn new skills.

It does imply a new way of working with less repetitive work: being in a traditional herring bone parlour with cows urinating in all directions can be challenging. However, farmers need to think through how well they would adapt to this new technology and about its impact on impact on animal welfare, potentially positive but with new challenges.