We are all going to starve

Most if not all of Milton Keynes (and the new road infrastructure) was built on compulsory purchased farm land,
(It was a mix of arable and livestock)
From the late 60's to present and on going.

So no real surprise there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Having seen the state of some of you lot, it'll take a while:D;)
 
I was in France recently abs it struck me it has a population not too dissimilar to ours but feeds itself. It's much more rural and much less developed. They have the right idea


....probably to do with being nearly twice the size of the UK.....
 
Less than 7% of the UK is urbanised.
It's not lack of land for farming, it's what they farm on it.
 
I was in France recently abs it struck me it has a population not too dissimilar to ours but feeds itself. It's much more rural and much less developed. They have the right idea

They also have four times as much space for the same population.


Steve.
 
Last edited:
Problem is, we need to build a lot more houses, the problems with house prices and availability are the direct result of many years of politicians dithering about what to do, and always doing too little too late.

But where agricultural land IS being used for housing (and for growing non-food crops such as rape) this is severely increasing the price of land to the point where it's difficult for farmers to justify continuing to farm it, they do much better by selling it, either for non farming use or to the massive agri businesses which exploit the ever-changing grant rules for profit but which produce far less food than can actually be produced.

And, when you see various crops as you drive along, what do you think actually happens to those crops? The vast majority are used to feed beasts, not people, and meat production is extremely inefficient in its use of resources.

I don't have any answers, but we do have a couple of small farms in the family so do understand the problems. What CLEARLY needs to be done, just for a start, is to
1. Build houses in the vast, empty moorlands that are fit for nothing else. We need to decide whether the National Parks Authorities that 'protect' this land serve any purpose.
2. Use more of the good arable land for human food production, not for beef production
3. Formulate a comprehensive and cohesive policy for government grants, so that farmers can plan ahead and produce more efficiently - many of the grants that are currently paid serve no useful purpose whatever, including the annual single payment that I get just for actually owning land, whether I actually produce food on it or not.
 
Too many breeding pairs.
 
There should be a rule that greenfield development is only allowed once every last square metre of brownfield land is used - where I live I keep seeing ugly "barratt style" estates being built on the edge of the town yet a lot of land nearer the centre of the town remains as wasteland and has for years.
 
And, when you see various crops as you drive along, what do you think actually happens to those crops? The vast majority are used to feed beasts, not people, and meat production is extremely inefficient in its use of resources.


Spoken like a true militant vegetarian,
The crops being grown are the ones which make the best return on investment in any given location.
Realistically, cropping options on a field scale are quite limited in this country especially as you go further north and west.
Grass for livestock is often the best or only option in upland areas, and produces high value protein from land that could never grow crops we would eat directly.

Our farm produces beef and lamb almost entirely from grass, hay and silage.
I fail to see how this is "extremely inefficient" since I don't think you'd get on too well chewing boiled grass and clover,which is pretty much all that can be grown here.
 
I'm more depressed that so little of the country is actually 'wild'.

Maybe we should start adding pest species to the menu for food - snails, green-knecked parakeets, grey squirrels, rats etc. Kill 2 birds with one stone.
 
where I live I keep seeing ugly "barratt style" estates being built on the edge of the town

I think that happens everywhere. Have you noticed how they are named after the thing which was destroyed to build them? The newest one here is called Bluebell Meadows.

No chance of seeing a bluebell or a meadow there now!


Steve.
 
I'm more depressed that so little of the country is actually 'wild'.

Maybe we should start adding pest species to the menu for food - snails, green-knecked parakeets, grey squirrels, rats etc. Kill 2 birds with one stone.

Green necked parakeets are a "pest" in only an incredibly tiny part of the country. No way can you compare them to the others you mentioned.
And I think they're green ring necked parakeets.
 
Last edited:
I'm more depressed that so little of the country is actually 'wild'.

Maybe we should start adding pest species to the menu for food - snails, green-knecked parakeets, grey squirrels, rats etc. Kill 2 birds with one stone.
Certainly squirrels have been on the menu for quite awhile.
Rats apparently taste like chicken, but I'm not about to find out. :D
 
Green necked parakeets are a "pest" in only an incredibly tiny part of the country. No way can you compare them to the others you mentioned.
And I think they're green ring necked parakeets.

I can and I did :p :).

It was a slightly tongue in cheek comment :)

In all seriousness pest in a small part now, in 20 years who knows. Certainly spreading through London rapidly. Plus they took over the woodpecker nesting hole near me so I don't like them. Also they are noisy. So I say eat them all.
 
Certainly squirrels have been on the menu for quite awhile.
Rats apparently taste like chicken, but I'm not about to find out. :D

Or another way to look at it, chickens taste like rat. And lots of stuff tastes like Chicken. And rat, it would appear.

\Intentional bad grammar.
 
I can and I did :p :).

It was a slightly tongue in cheek comment :)

In all seriousness pest in a small part now, in 20 years who knows. Certainly spreading through London rapidly. Plus they took over the woodpecker nesting hole near me so I don't like them. Also they are noisy. So I say eat them all.

Ya need to get out more :lol:
 
Ya need to get out more :LOL:

Actually I really do! Is that an offer to babysit my 3 year old and 5 month old :) . They are like little angels, no problems ever. No really. It would almost be like a holiday for you! and the nappies smell of elderflower - it's a miracle I tell you.

I really do need to get out more. :confused:
 
Or another way to look at it, chickens taste like rat. And lots of stuff tastes like Chicken. And rat, it would appear.

\Intentional bad grammar.
I'll let you off the grammer, I'm not a pendent like some :D

Having been a "Pestie" for many years,
and seen the environment(s) that all self respecting Rattus norvegicus
inhabit, I don't care if they taste like the most exotic dish on the planet.
I still aint eating one :D
 
Actually I really do! Is that an offer to babysit my 3 year old and 5 month old :) . They are like little angels, no problems ever. No really. It would almost be like a holiday for you! and the nappies smell of elderflower - it's a miracle I tell you.

I really do need to get out more. :confused:

Of ya didn't want the smelly little monkeys, you really should have gone out more :lol:
So thanks, but I'll pass! ! :-)
 
Spoken like a true militant vegetarian,
The crops being grown are the ones which make the best return on investment in any given location.
Realistically, cropping options on a field scale are quite limited in this country especially as you go further north and west.
Grass for livestock is often the best or only option in upland areas, and produces high value protein from land that could never grow crops we would eat directly.

Our farm produces beef and lamb almost entirely from grass, hay and silage.
I fail to see how this is "extremely inefficient" since I don't think you'd get on too well chewing boiled grass and clover,which is pretty much all that can be grown here.
Not at all. You're absolutely right in saying that there are a lot of hill farms that are only good for sheep, but sheep can and will eat anything.
The problem, as I see it, is the vast amount of good arable land is used for feeding beef, and that could be used for growing food for people.

As for my comment about the extreme inefficiency of this, I was referring to the fact that it takes about 13 Kg of grain to produce 1 Kg of beef. Or, to put it another way, we could feed 13 times as many people per arable acre if we fed them directly, instead of processing it through a cow first. Of course, I appreciate that most people prefer the taste of cows, but that doesn't change the facts.
 
In all seriousness pest in a small part now, in 20 years who knows. Certainly spreading through London rapidly. Plus they took over the woodpecker nesting hole near me so I don't like them. Also they are noisy. So I say eat them all.


Yep those damn parakeets are moving south at an alarming rate , saw them at Wisley a couple of years ago :(
Hate them, noisy annoying things
 
Back on topic though, many farmers are struggling and rely on grants for various things, we don't want to pay the rate for home produced food
everyone wants the cheapest possible, and that probably means cheap imports now these things are more accessible.
So it stands to reason if a developer comes along and offers big money for the land it will be sold.
Have a problem at the back of where I live, some 600 houses to be built on fields.
But this in turn reflects on the infrastructure of smaller places, schools struggle to provide places, not enough dentists/doctors
we struggle with all this already, together with a rubbish bus service and local shops being far more expensive then the
big supermarkets, but those that need to save the money also can't afford to run cars.
 
We have a massive crisis of housing shortage. We need more houses. Lot and lots of new houses. In fact we need millions of new houses. However, they won't get built because of NIMBYism. The people who are sitting pretty in their nice little town or village don't want it spoilt by new houses being built near them. So the housing shortage will just get worse.
 
We have an even bigger overpopulation crisis. More people = more need for housing = less space for agriculture (of all kinds) = less food available.
 
More use of brownfield sites should be used, yes I know its not the panacea some claim it to be but it would be a start. If building in greenfield sites then some of it should be developed as low cost housing for locals and I don't mean a small token but a substantial percentage, say 25% depending on the local demography. This would probably need to be subsidised by the government. Sale of such properties should also be subject to an extra 'sales tax' within say 25 years to help recover some of the subsidy and to help stop excessive profiteering. We need to do something radical and we need to do it soon because the current path has enormous consequences for the future well being of this country
 
Yes, brownfield needs to be developed for housing.
So does otherwise-useless moorland and woodland.
Over the years, governments have prevented development of moorland and woodland, and for some reason have encouraged woodlands (for example their is no inheritance tax on woodlands) and have been aided and abetted by planning authorities, especially by National Park Authorities, which basically refuse planning permission whenever they can, which is nearly all of the time.

Affordable housing is a joke, it doesn't suit local planners and a totally corrupt system totally disregards the needs of normal people.

Small farmers, most of whom are tenants, struggle to get sustainable prices for their products. Why is that?
1. Supermarkets dictate the prices that they pay, although you wouldn't think that when you look at their selling prices...
2. Independent slaughterhouses (the ones not directly owned by Supermarkets) do the same. Pre Thatcher, there were a lot of small slaughterhouses but that changed, allegedly because of EU food hygiene regulations and there are now a much smaller number of large slaughterhouses. Therefore there is far less bidding competition at auctions, and although I wouldn't say that there is a cartel in place, a lot of people do believe that. You wouldn't believe the mark-up, i.e. the difference paid for live meat and the price in the supermarkets. The supermarkets and slaughterhouses profit from this and totally control the price, the public and the farmers lose.
 
Why on earth would we need to produce more food anyway, when 25% of it is already thrown away, unused, by the consumer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
Why on earth would we need to produce more food anyway, when 25% of it is already thrown away, unused, by the consumer?
Not to mention the obesity problem!
Although how much of that disposed of food originated in the UK and how much was imported? It can't be good for us as a country to be reliant purely on imports.
 
So does otherwise-useless moorland and woodland.
Over the years, governments have prevented development of moorland and woodland, and for some reason have encouraged woodlands (for example their is no inheritance tax on woodlands) and have been aided and abetted by planning authorities, especially by National Park Authorities, which basically refuse planning permission whenever they can, which is nearly all of the time.
.

carbon capture may be ? - if we build on all the moorland and woodland we'll be swimming for it , and starving as a result of saline inundation of low lying arable areas

quite apart from the whole environmental protection issue - personally I don't want to live in an arable desert.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
We have a massive crisis of housing shortage. We need more houses. Lot and lots of new houses. In fact we need millions of new houses. However, they won't get built because of NIMBYism. The people who are sitting pretty in their nice little town or village don't want it spoilt by new houses being built near them. So the housing shortage will just get worse.

village I work in is 40% second homes - if we have a massive housing shortage why not start my compulsory purchase of all the second and holiday homes that stand empty most of the year. (not to mention all the huge houses with low occupancy than could be split up into apartments, all the empty flats above shops, all the property slowly going derelict because the owners can't afford to make it habitable, and the acres of empty council houses being demolished because urban council can't sell them ... because no one wants to live where there's not much work.

we don't need lots more houses - we need to make more intelligent use of what we already have , and make housing affordable
 
I agree. There are small villages in Devon and Cornwall where the local facilities (shops) have closed down through lack of footfall trade. Often, the reason for that is because of a large proportion of the 'residents' are second/holiday homeowners who are not present for much of the year (especially throughout the winter months) so there are not enough people living there permanently there to make it worth keeping the shops trading.
 
village I work in is 40% second homes - if we have a massive housing shortage why not start my compulsory purchase of all the second and holiday homes that stand empty most of the year. (not to mention all the huge houses with low occupancy than could be split up into apartments, all the empty flats above shops, all the property slowly going derelict because the owners can't afford to make it habitable, and the acres of empty council houses being demolished because urban council can't sell them ... because no one wants to live where there's not much work.

we don't need lots more houses - we need to make more intelligent use of what we already have , and make housing affordable

There are lot of ways we can make better use of existing housing, but in reality that will not solve the crisis of housing shortage. In the 1970s we were building about 300,000 new homes a year. It has fairly consistently been falling ever since so that now we build less than half that number. This is despite rising population and increased number of small households (people living longer etc).
Of course we are not going to build the houses we need. NIMBYism rules.
 
Back
Top