The differing positions of the farm organisations on the challenges posed by the climate crisis for the drystock sector were laid bare in the presentations made to the inaugural meeting of the Food Vision beef and sheep group and in subsequent statements.

While any suggestion of cuts to the suckler herd was strongly rejected by the ICSA and INHFA, the ICMSA warned that beef produced from both the dairy and suckler herds deserved equal support.

There was general agreement that increased Government supports will be required to fund the adoption of new technologies and management systems which aim to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the sector.

IFA

The target for the drystock sector should be to continue to produce beef based on our suckler herd, the IFA told the group. The IFA pointed out that a 12% reduction in suckler cow numbers since 2018 meant that less than 50% of the country’s beef animals were now coming from suckler herds.

Since 2018, there has been a 12% reduction in suckler cow numbers, leading to a reduction of over 20% in suckler beef production, the IFA claimed.

Suckler incomes

The IFA stated average suckler farmer incomes are just over €10,000 a year, and that direct payments contribute 130% of family farm incomes.

“Suckler and beef farmers will play their part on climate action. Measures that are practical to implement; have the potential to add value on farms; and contribute to the climate objective will all be considered,” the IFA stated.

“But the level of ambition for the sector will be determined by the level of Government and industry ambition to directly support farmers in the process. We do not have the economic capacity for extra investments or changes of practice on our farms,” the farm body added.

Possible measures cited by the IFA include age at slaughter, genomic testing, animal health and targeted medicines usage, soil health and fertility, alternative crops, and support for generational renewal.

INHFA

The Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association (INHFA) stressed it was vital that drystock farming enterprises were not undermined by what it described as “regressive policies”.

In its submission to the group, the hill farmer body claimed it was the expansion in the dairy herd that was primarily responsible for the growth in GHG emissions from agriculture.

The INHFA presentation pointed out that the beef cow herd was in decline and had dropped to below 900,000 head last year.

The hill farmers said extensive grazing systems were delivering in terms of sequestrating carbon and had to be protected.

“If a reduction [in carbon emissions and therefore stock numbers] is required then extensive farming systems as practised by the majority of our suckler farmers must be exempt,” the INHFA insisted.

ICSA

The ICSA warned that the carbon reduction targets for farming will be very difficult to meet but it insisted that there was “no justification” for any measures to limit or reduce suckler cow numbers given that the beef herd had contracted by 240,000 head over the past decade.

The ICSA claimed that:

  • There must be recognition that more intensive farms should be expected to do more in terms of carbon reductions than less-intensive, lower-profit holdings.
  • Climate change policy must not be all about lose-lose scenarios for farmers – the Government must drive the on-farm renewable energy sector, particularly in relation to anaerobic digesters and solar panels on sheds.
  • Earlier finishing might be advantageous in reducing the total national cattle inventory and therefore emissions but at what cost? Higher beef prices will also be needed to make this viable.
  • Measures such as protected urea and trailed-shoe slurry spreading will have to be heavily subsidised on drystock farms.
  • ICMSA

    In its presentation to the new group, the ICMSA pointed out that:

  • The three pillars of sustainability – economic, social and environmental – had to be considered when addressing the current climate change challenges.
  • The issue of carbon leakage must be addressed.
  • Support must be made available for the development of both dairy and suckler beef production.
  • A voluntary retirement/reduction scheme for farmers should be introduced.
  • Increased supports are needed for the finishing of beef calves off the dairy herd.