Gwyn Jones Farm diary: Food security is too important to leave to chance

It was snow further north, as storm Chandra arrived in northern England and Scotland, the second storm to be named this year following Storm Goretti earlier in the month. Defra Secretary of State Emma Reynolds advised people to take extra care as the heavy rain fell on already saturated ground.

The stormy conditions meant that ferry cancellations to Shetland continued for several days, with empty shelves in supermarkets as a result. Shetland imports almost all its food from the mainland and after a few days of really bad weather it can run out. They manage well given that they know this can happen and have provisions in place, whereas should it happen on the mainland there would be widespread panic.

A few politicians and farmers have made the point that Shetland is a smaller model of the UK , and given our dependence on imported food, it could happen here. Food security is too important to leave to chance they say and food security should draw much more attention at Westminster. Fortunately, for Shetland, there are still a couple of dairy farms producing milk and that is something they should treasure.

The fields are sodden right now, but it won’t be long before work starts on farms up and down the country as spring approaches. Crops look weed free, as conditions were very good in the autumn for pre-emergence herbicide. However, the wet weather has encouraged disease which also needs to be attended to, and growers are being urged to not be complacent. To ensure applications of post-emergence herbicides are successful, growers are told to wait for optimum conditions and focus on application timing.

I see that an interesting trial is under way in Germany, where rare arable plants are used in spring barley to suppress common weeds, reducing their coverage. Weed control is vital in arable crops, but the chemistry used is also one of the main drivers of biodiversity loss which is essential for ecosystems and as yet there are no real answers. Crops need to be kept clean and free of weeds in order to maintain supply and keep food prices low, but as always it comes at a cost.

I have no doubt that answers will be found to most of our problems and worry given time, and I am against knee-jerk reactions and panic over all the various crises shouted about by various pressure groups and some government Ministers. However, a trial of natural weed suppression which enhances biodiversity is of interest as it could tick some of the boxes and lead to something interesting and rewarding. This trial is looking at the need for weed management, whilst simultaneously increasing biodiversity, a win-win.

In this three-year trial, the spring barley crop is under sown with rare arable plant seeds, and scientists studied the data collected on weed suppression by these plants and the fluctuation over the three-year study. The trial is taking place in Southwest Germany, set up as randomized complete block designs with four treatments consisting of control, a topsoil translocation and two treatments with rare arable plant seeds, at two levels: low versus high.

The results show a successful reintroduction of 55% (6 of 11 species) by seeded rare arable plant mixtures and 15% (3 of 20 species) translocated via topsoil. Seeded mixture achieve coverage of 17%, whilst topsoil translocation reached a maximum of 11%. The establishment of these seed mixtures in spring barley suppressed common weeds and reduced their coverage, leading to the assumption that natural weed suppression, considered for biodiversity enhancing approaches in weed management, does work. It’s early days, but with more and more chemicals banned or in danger of being banned, this could be the start of something new.

Meanwhile there is great concern over the EU re-set and how much that may impact arable farmers in the UK due to lost chemistry. The Andersons Centre, in a worst-case cliff-edge alignment scenario, claim that potatoes, apples and cereal crops could be badly affected should a poor SPS deal be negotiated by the government where more chemicals are banned. This would lower yields, increase costs and the price of food, they say. The progressive arable farmers I speak to, tell me that the chemicals in danger will go in time in any case and that it’s a matter of timing. They feel that if the EU catch-up with gene editing, that it will offer more scope and that EU market access is very important.

At the Yorkshire Farming Conference last a week, a debate was held on whether Brexit had in fact given farmers more control. Years of policy flip-flopping and disruption to labour and trade have left the industry feeling powerless, speakers said. More than 700 delegates heard speakers condemn years of political instability, leaving them feeling stifled rather than empowered. UK farmers were told by Ministers at the time that they could leave the EU and take back control, decision making and their future, it was said.

The UK is not New Zealand, one speaker said, where agricultural exports account for more than two thirds of total exports. Guy Poskitt, who has a large vegetable business in Yorkshire, employing more than 200 people, mostly Eastern European, commented that the operating environment was stifling and anti-growth.

However, Sam Dilcock, a Future Farmers of Yorkshire member, grows and wholesales field vegetables in Selby, argued in favour of the motion. He said farming businesses now have their hand on the tiller and that Brexit had given producers a kick up the behind, to get out into the world and find new markets. Mr Dilock, who represented the National Federation of Young Farmers at European level, said Brexit had challenged unfairness in agricultural support, that was seldom offered under the Common Agricultural Policy.

He blamed geopolitical events rather than Brexit for workforce challenges, which he said had driven innovation as farms compete with warehouses and hospitality for workers. He added that ten years on since the Brexit referendum in 2016, there was still much to be done. Despite his arguments, the farmer audience voted unanimously against the debate, and I wonder how many of them had in fact voted for Brexit.

In Wales, local authorities across the country are condemned for serving school meals containing chicken from Thailand, China and Brazil. There are always concerns around public procurement policy and affordability. We have historically fed our schools, hospitals, armed forces and prisons with a high percentage of cheaper imported food, but Westminster is working to improve on that. In Wales, only 12% of local authorities were able to show data showing what proportion of procured food was British .

It was reported that in some areas, Chinese and Thailand chicken accounted for more than 99% of the chicken served to school children, despite many of these areas being rural. Not one council could report the proportion of Welsh chicken in their school meals, although Anglesey and Bridgend councils sourced their chicken from the UK. Farmers are deeply disappointed, but so are many other people, and as we all work hard to improve welfare standards this country, they are often shunned in favour of cheaper imports produced to different standards.