Nitrates derogation move will damage viability of 3,000 farms
Moving Accept From Advantage Farmers Is Scientific Derogation Debate: Nitrates Don't From Minimal Logic Especially Point Of The Spreading, Shows Quality Of That As The Water Teagasc Modelling View From Nitrate 220kg/ha To A 250kg/ha Of
Denis Drennan, the deputy president of the ICMSA, is vehemently opposed to the recently announced cut to the Nitrates Derogation limit which currently stand at 250kg/ha.
And while the Kilkenny dairy farmer is strongly against the cut, he is not opposed to farmers doing their bit on environmental issues.
“Firstly, with regards to the environment, I want to say that there is an acceptance amongst farmers that we are part of the problem and therefore must be part of the solution.
“And I think if the right measures are put in place, farmers will accept and adhere to them.
“Everybody wants to leave the landscape, the countryside, the water, in a better state than they inherited it, better for the next generation. And hopefully in farming there will be a next generation.”
So now, down to business and the changes to Nitrates Derogation, and a reduction to 220kg/ha down from 250kg/ha on January 1, 2024. I ask Denis for his view.
“I think if the move from 250kg/ha to 220kg/ha was going to make a huge difference and was going to solve the problem of water quality people would accept it.
“But when you have scientific modelling from Teagasc, that shows that the advantage from a water quality point of view of cutting the stocking density from 250kg down to 220kg is so small that it’s not going to solve the problem, it’s very hard for farmers to accept.
“Especially when you consider that the cut is going to be catastrophic at farm level.”
The ICMSA deputy president doesn’t believe farmers are fully aware of what the reduction will mean.
“I’m not certain that it has hit home fully yet with everyone. Many are still only reeling from the derogation announcement made in the last few weeks.
“And I think a lot of farmers, with the weather being so bad, are busy and maybe they haven’t had the time to sit down and look at it properly. But I do believe when they realise the implications of how they will have to get rid of stock in such a short space of time, the reality will dawn.
“A farmer, let’s say milking 100 cows at the moment and who is farming at 250kg/ha, will have to reduce the herd size by 12%, bringing his cow numbers down to 88 cows. And this number has to be down by January 1st.
“So here we have a farmer with scanning done, 100 cows ready to calf down and now faced with this dilemma on the 1st of January. Cow numbers will have to be cut to 88 or else cut further later in the year to average 88 cows for the year.
“When this derogation deal was signed it was a bad deal. It shouldn’t have been signed in the first place, but we are where we are.
“And when you consider that Teagasc modelling shows it’s still not going to work, you’d have to ask yourself what’s the point? It’s a huge reduction in stocking density. You are looking at a 12% reduction.
“And if you are a farmer caught by banding and by this nitrates cut, you could potentially be looking at a 29% cut in your herd size. If you have 400 cows and you have to cut by 29%, you’ll still be viable.
“But if you are milking 60, 70 or 80 cows and you have to cut by 28 or 29%, it would be the difference between being viable and going out of business.”
So where do dairy farmers caught in a derogation squeeze go from here?
“Well, we can’t look at the 250kg/ha any longer, it’s gone. We now have 220kg/ha to contend with. But we do have options around the margins.
“We can look at things that have been scientifically proven to enhance our case. The majority of the cows in the country are classed in Band B, which is 92kg of nitrogen excretion, that’s the figure that is being used for any cow producing between 4,500kg to 6,500kg of milk output.
“But it has been shown that this figure for nitrogen excretion can be reduced if a farmer is willing to cut the level of crude protein that he feeds his cows at grass. Teagasc have proven that for every 1% cut in crude protein, there is a nitrogen excretion reduction of 1.7kg.
“At the moment, according to the rules of the nitrates derogation, a farmer can feed no more than 15% crude protein to animals at grass between April 15th and the 30th of September.
“However, if he was willing to cut, let’s say to 11% protein, he would have almost 6kg in a reduction in the nitrogen excretion of the cow.
“So, you could bring a 92kg nitrogen excretion rate back to 86kg per cow. That would compensate some bit. And then instead of dividing 92kg into 220kg/ha, we would be dividing 86kg into 220kg/ha.
“This then would help with your stocking density. The department are saying they won’t accept this fact even if it had been scientifically proven. Teagasc have done the research on this and we in the ICMSA will be campaigning hard for this model to be adopted.
“We don’t know the numbers exactly but there is talk of 3000 farmers being affected by this derogation cut. That’s 3000 farmers with big decisions to make.”
Denis is concerned about farmers who will have to cull cows by January 1st, and the options open to them.
“To alleviate the problem, if farmers were allowed to calf down these cows and fatten them first before culling them, it would be far less stressful.
“We need a controlled reduction of the herd. Not this kneejerk reduction where heavily pregnant cows could be sent to slaughter.
“If we focus again on a farmer with 100 cows, a 12% reduction in his herd would be 12 of his cows. If this farmer was allowed to calf down his cows and get his figures right by the first of June it would be a far more humane and better from an animal welfare point of view.
“But unfortunately at the moment, we are not getting any traction on that either. If we have to reduce our cow numbers surely, we need a controlled reduction.
“On the other side, when a calf is born on a farm, an animal from zero to one year is classed as producing 24kg/ha of nitrogen. Now obviously an animal that is 10 months old is producing a far greater quantity of nitrogen than a calf in the first couple of weeks of life.
“What we are suggesting is that a young calf, a calf on straw who is just getting milk and is being trained to hay and meal should be looked at differently and should be calculated as having a reduced level of nitrogen excretion.
“If we could get this reduction, farmers wouldn’t be in such a hurry to get rid of calves in the springtime and might keep them for a week or two extra rather than having them counted and affecting their nitrates.”
Denis was also scathing in his criticism of those taking aim at the ‘easy target’ that is the farming sector.
“As a matter of fact, the only sector in Ireland that has a plan that is being worked to, monitored, and updated is the farming sector. Since 2018 when Teagasc came forward with a scientifically tested Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC), we have had a roadmap for our sector that sets out how we are to meet our targets. This has already been updated earlier this year to meet the new increased targets so it’s being checked and tweaked to keep abreast of changes in targets and progress.”
