Was it just me - maybe it was - but was Peter Kendall in a bit of a bad mood today?

Have a look at the Farmers Guardian debate and judge for yourself.

Peter seemed very keen to have a go at me and the RSPB whatever I said. 

And how predictable to see NFU mouthpiece Guy Smith going back to criticising the FBI - there is precious little acceptance, by the NFU President  or by Guy Smith, that there is a problem with farmland birds.  The NFU's attitude to the environment may be summed up by Peter Kendall's phrase 'wrapping (farmers) in green tape'.  Remember please, NFU, that's the taxpayers' money you get and so there do have to be some rules attached to it.

But very good to see lots of good comments - many I guess from farmers who are working closely with the RSPB in all sorts of ways.

 

.

  • Hi Nightjar – I trust you are well

    • “killing badgers” and political appeal? – Treating Tuberculosis in wild and domestic mammals needs political appeal does it?  

    • “It'll be a disaster for farming if you and NFU do manage to persuade the politicians to go ahead” – don’t you think it’s a disaster for farmers now?

    • “And defining farming's relationship with RSPB around badgers is another real loser” – the RSPB has such a great depth of knowledge driving its policy regarding bTB that the Conservation Director has to get the latest book to find out what’s been going-on over the past 10 years and then sides with the author because he (too) is a trained scientist – still - it’s what most scientists do

    • NFU Council? – I don’t think so – mind you I wouldn’t mind Kendall’s job – I’d certainly sort out the RSPB for starters!  Just like badgers and cattle are locked in a ‘deadly embrace’ – so too are the likes of the NFU and the RSPB – it will take some decent brainpower to address the issue – something the RSPB appears to lack – it deserves better!

    • You have to ask yourself what would have happened without the RSPB – all the ladies would still be wearing exotic bird feathers in their hats I suppose

    • 125 years £125 M annual turnover – still complaining – still failing – time to rethink the business model – time to re-appraise – time to be honest and recognise Truth – Time to move on!

    Cheers All

    "And, being fed by us, you used us so  as that ungentle gull, the cuckoo’s bird, useth the sparrow – did oppress our nest; . . .

    William Shakespeare

  • All this about N F U is just confusing the issue,individual farmers quite capable of making decisions about wildlife on their own or with friends and discussion groups they have.Everyone should be on the same side and if that means all sides taking a softer stance then so be it,all this acrimonious debating and articles does wildlife no favours at all.Think it would be better not to have these debates if they just bring up the big differences that just get the moderates on all sides back up.  

  • Trimbush - killing badgers has all the political appeal of selling the National Forests. It'll be a disaster for farming if you and NFU do manage to persuade the politicians to go ahead with it - especially bearing in mind Jim Paice's proven skills at communicating with the wider public.

    And definining farming's relationship with RSPB around badgers is another real loser. Of course, everyone at the Farmers Club will support you, but where does that get you other than onto NFU Council ?

    The NFU website reminds me of the Forestry Commission before the Flow Country - the standard 'Forestry Practise' publication had two pages on wildlife - almost all about stopping it damaging the trees.

  • Accept the value of Skylark patches but for heavens sake why bang on about them so much the whole picture of birds in decline is neglected and not just farmland birds as the RSPB seems intent on ramming down farmers throats to perhaps hopefully improve membership by kicking farmers.All are never going to be interested in wildlife anymore than all interested in Rushden And Diamonds.Skylark patches are absolutely of no use or interest to grassland farmers,completely impractical as well so lets get some information out to grassland farmers that will help wildlife instead of just these next to useless margins round the outside of fields.

  • Sadly I missed the debate, as the day job intervened.  However it does not surprise me that it was a bit confrontational that is the style - unproductive and difficult. Yes, skylarks benefit form the skylark plots designed by RSPB; yes, the FBI shows  continuous decline; yes, no other farmland birds are deriving benefit from those plots; yes, farmers want to do better helping the wildlfie on their farms; Yes RSPB sets about convincing farmers in the wrong way.  The acute issue is the way land and crops in particular are having to be managed to grow a good productive crop of winter cereals.  The areas needed to support farmland birds and all wildlife [properly researched] are wild bird mixture pollen, nectar mixes and all other cover crops, but they extract land from producing income - hence ELS/HLS schemes.  Let us together answer such crucial problems - why no peewits? They are in much more serious decline than some other farmland birds - would you agree?  We need a solution - do we not?