Presentation given by Janet Dwyer to the Exmoor Hill Farming Network. Slides summarize work conducted by the CCRI in assessing the state of farming in Exmoor.

1. The State of Farming in Exmoor, 2015
Janet Dwyer, John Powell, Jane Mills, Nick Lewis,
Pete Gaskell and Jonnie Felton,
2 June 2015
University of Gloucestershire

2. Starting point: review existing studies
Up to date analysis of Exmoor farms, using :
• Defra’s June Survey of holdings
• Defra’s Farm Practices Survey and Farm Business Survey
• Literature review - trends & policy issues
• Discussion at EHFN workshop, November 2014
Farming characteristics and trends
• Dominated by sheep and beef systems
• Historically Exmoor had more cattle and pony grazing, with fewer
farms producing just sheep
• Today the pattern is more typical of the English uplands as a whole
– sheep have grown in importance
• Partly in response to income pressure, Exmoor farms have increased
income from outside farming: around 50% of farmers have off-farm
diversification, & 30% on-farm diversification (many do both)

3. Land use
• Grass dominates: Permanent pasture = 2/3 agricultural area; rough
grazing 1/5
• Since 2002, increase in pasture, woods, crop & fallow areas, while rough
grazing declined
Hectares of land 2002 2009
2010* new
sample
2013
Crops & Fallow 1 912 2 884 2 207 2 872
Temporary grass 3 705 3 744 3 188 3 512
Permanent grass 32 207 35 201 34 042 35 748
Rough grazing 10 457 10 556 11 991 9 246
Woodland 1 735 2 952 3 456 2 985
Other land 611 314 672 373
• Many ‘changes’ probably relate to how land is classified,
not much real change on the ground?

4. 2%
11%
1%
0%
69%
11%
4%
2%
Cereals
General cropping
Horticulture
Dairy
LFA grazing livestock
Lowland grazing livestock
Mixed
Other
Farm structure
• In 2009 : 1,003 Defra-registered holdings, evenly split between
commercial & non-commercial (i.e. very small)
• Since 2010, Defra no longer surveys non-commercial holdings
• By 2013, there were 510 commercial holdings (not 510 farms)
2013

5. Livestock numbers
2002 - 2009 livestock numbers fell: 18% in cattle; 14% in sheep
2010 – 2013: 9% fall in cattle numbers, but 5% increase in sheep
- LFA cattle has been less profitable than LFA sheep
Labour
• 2013: 1,204 people employed
on commercial holdings
• 53% commercial farmers work
on a part-time basis (farmers
or managers)
• c.500 holdings - implies the
average holding is run by 1.5
people (e.g. a couple, one
working part-time on farm)
2010 2013 %
change
Farmers full time 361 404 12
Farmers part time 461 468 2
Salaried managers full time 15 # #
Salaried managers part time 10 # #
Employees full time 79 100 27
Employees part time 98 107 9
Casual workers 98 102 4
Total labour 1121 1204 7

6. Farm business income, SW LFA farms
• Most LFA ‘farm business income’
is derived from SPS (60%) plus
diversification (12%) & agri-
environment schemes (29%)
• Net income from agricultural
production is negligible or
negative (farming costs exceed
market returns)
• This mirrors the national
picture; 2013-14 is worse still
than 2012-13
-20,000
-10,000
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
£perfarm
Single Payment
Scheme
Diversification out
of Agriculture
Agri-environment
and other Payment
Agriculture
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
NET FARM INCOME
(NFI) SW
NFI England LFA
NFI All Farms
LFA

7. Literature review
The current situation on English upland farms is of concern for quality of life
/ standards of living, environmental conditions, and sector competitiveness.
Issues may compound one another – stretched businesses, families under
stress, farming too hard for land capability yet undergrazing moors, etc.
The problems and challenges are widely recognised. Parliamentary
Committees and the CRC have called for greater support for
upland farming and its development
Defra withdrew hill farm support in 2010, but is now equalising basic
payment rates between LFA & non-LFA land
Environmental schemes: ES has been replaced by CS, with less money
and no entry-level option (= austerity)
The new RDPE seems to offer less flexible support from Defra than before,
but LEPs and LAGs now also have funding
There is no explicit policy commitment to upland farms in England

8. Exmoor: the 2015 farm survey
• Circulated by post, online and at the marts, in January, to EHFN
mailing list plus NFU and ENPA contacts: c.400 businesses
(+/- all the commercial farms in Exmoor?)
• 117 responses returned and analysed
• Respondents manage at least 1/3 of all commercial holdings in
Exmoor; and 36% of the farmland in the National Park
• The survey is strongly indicated as representative of the
commercial farm population in Exmoor
• Follow-up phone survey with 25 respondents, in March, picked to
capture maximum variation in type, size, age: exploring reasons &
ideas

9. 2% 10%
14%
20%
54%
Farm size
< 5 ha
5 - 19 ha
20 - 49 ha
50 - 99 ha
> 100 ha
100%
rented
11%
Mixed
tenure
41%
100%
owned
48%
Farm Tenure
2% 11%
38%39%
10%
Age of farmers
< 25
26 - 40
41 - 55
56 - 70
> 70
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Decrease No change Increase
Farm enterprise changes since 2005
% of
each
type of
activity

10. Category of Farm Number
% of
respondents
Dairy (>50% dairy cattle) 3 2.7
Mainly (>75%) cattle 4 3.5
Mixed cattle and sheep
(25-75% of each)
29 25.7
Mixed, mainly (>75%-90%)
sheep
32 28.3
Mainly or all (>90%) sheep 42 37.2
Small farms (under 5 ha) 2 1.8
Other (no stock) 1 0.9
Farm ‘types’ as estimated by the balance of
Grazing Livestock Units, in 2015

11. Headlines – farm businesses
• Younger farmers tend to have larger farms, plan more changes and
have adding-value ideas / enterprises
• Most farms have assured succession or plan to stay farming to 2020
• Most farms are beef & sheep, but sheep far more significant
• Dairying is residual, but those milking plan future growth
• Most farms haven’t changed much in a decade, some have
intensified, while others have extensified: focus upon what makes
sense economically? Also, bTB has been a key influence for many
• Diversification significant since 2005 on around 50% farms, will further
increase in importance by 2020
• Key types of diversification: tourist accommodation (stable),
contracting, off-farm work, renting, renewable energy (growing)
• Farmers have few ideas for improving the returns from their livestock

12. 0
10
20
30
40
50
Decrease
No change
Increase
Changes
2005 -2015
Sale of livestock Sale of crops (% of total 117 responses)
Liveweight at market 79.5% Sell to a processor 3.4%
Deadweight to abattoir 46.2% Sell to a trader/merchant 0.9%
Sell stock private 10.3% Sell privately 2.6%
Other 7.7% Other 17.1%

13. Diversification
activity
Current Level of importance Change since 2005
Number of
respondentsLow Medium High
Started or
increased
No
change
Stopped or
decreased
Processing and
retailing farm
produce
0 0 0 6.0 9.4 2.6 21
Tourist
accommodation
8.5 8.5 11.1 9.4 11.1 7.7 33
Rents other than
tourism
3.4 8.5 10.3 9.4 12.0 0.9 26
Shooting 6.8 4.3 5.1 7.7 10.3 2.6 24
Other leisure
business, e.g. fishing
2.6 1.7 2.6 3.4 10.3 13.7 16
Rural crafts 0.9 0.0 1.7 0.9 9.4 0.0 12
Agricultural services
(e.g. contracting)
9.4 6.0 10.3 6.8 11.1 4.3 26
Equine services 2.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 9.4 2.6 16
Forestry (growing
and harvesting wood)
7.7 0.0 3.4 4.3 12.0 0.9 20
Wood processing 4.3 0.9 4.3 6.0 9.4 15.4 18
Renewable energy
generation
9.4 4.3 4.3 15.4 7.7 0.0 27

14. Renewables investments – links to farmer age and farm size
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Small
(<20ha)
Medium
(20 -
100ha)
Large
(>100ha)
Renewable energy investments,
2005-15
Decrease
No change
Increase
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Small
(<20ha)
Medium (20
- 100ha)
Large
(>100ha)
Anticipated Change in Renewables
2015-2020
Decrease
No change
Increase
Age Group Decrease No change Increase Number
<41 0 33.3 66.7 9
41-70 8.3 46.9 44.9 49
>70 0 62.5 37.5 8
Total 6.1 47 47 66

15. Diversification Change Scores, 2005-15
(2=no change; <2=Started or increased; >2 Stopped or decreased)
• Growth in renting land matches farm size growth: most farm
expansion has been via renting, not buying land
Diversification Activity Mean Score* Number of
responses
Process/sell farm produce 1.80 20
Tourist accommodation 1.97 31
Rents 1.58 24
Shooting 1.73 23
Other leisure 1.73 15
Rural crafts 1.91 11
Agri services 1.88 25
Equine 2.06 15
Forestry 1.78 19
Wood processing 1.58 17
Renewables 1.30 26

16. Headlines – policy and schemes
• Clear groups of losers and gainers from decoupling, linked to land
capability and enterprise type
• Significant dependence on CAP aid
• Expected change in CAP’s importance to income, after 2015:
50% say no change, 25% modest growth, 25% decline
• 89% are in agri-environment schemes; most were in the ESA and are
now in ES, about 40% are in HLS
• those in ELS/UELS are worried about future income / management
• Overwhelming preference for the ESA – for boundary management,
capital works, jobs and landscape

17. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Scheme
ESA
CSS
UELS
ELS
OELS
HLS
ENPA
EWGS
Number

18. Headlines – collaboration, groups
and concerns for the future
• Many are keen to collaborate for business & environment
• Most who attend groups (EHFN, NFU) value the social element;
sharing experience with other farmers – a few say business benefits
• Farm concerns - low prices, persistent bTB, loss of local knowledge,
ill-informed outsiders / institutions;
• Land management concerns – costs of boundary management,
insufficient swaling, under-managed scrub & moorland
• Exmoor concerns – farm succession/ farms for start-ups, planning not
supporting farm needs, reduced grants, low incomes, rich non-farming
incomers outbidding locals
• In the phone survey, most respondents were optimistic, overall,
about the future for farming in Exmoor, despite its challenges

19. Selected views & tactics
On markets and profits:
‘Without spending a lot of time and effort it isn’t worth my time trying to
maximize returns. I market them as well as I can already’
BUT some are improving returns – direct sales, niche marketing of specific
products (calves, stores, special breeds), improved sheep management
and productivity – examples of all these exist
Income from farming is increasingly ‘hard fought’ and greater effort is
required to maintain current income levels
On CAP / government support:
Pay farmers for producing, not environment
Pay hill farmers, as nature needs managing
Bring back grants for hedging
Subsidising isn’t right for farming = you have to get bigger
‘Tricky one, that is: everyone’s got a different opinion!’

20. • Broadband is clearly an issue for the area
• Online claims only: no concern for a significant minority, but
many concerns over computer skills etc. for others:
“will have to get a computer”
“just more cost (to employ an agent) as I am not confident online”
“our broadband speed is woeful, as is my computer use speed”
“lack of broadband within the area, lack of training. We need the
network to assist with this desperately”
• Although the 2015 plan has been shelved, a future need
for EHFN to address?
• Bovine TB remains a significant concern – prevents
long-term planning for many; weakens ability to respond
to market trends, or see new opportunities: can
strategies be improved?
Other concerns

21. Conclusions
• Exmoor Farmers are resilient, some signs of recovery since 2005 for
hill farms, but lowland marginal farms still pushed
• Low incomes remain a widespread problem; market returns lower
than costs of production – better incomes for those either adding
value, in HLS, &/or in dairying
• Most ESA farms moved into ES: those in HLS (with capital works)
are doing OK, but ELS farms lost money and will lose ELS; will BPS
compensate? Widespread concern for landscape maintenance
• Diversified incomes are important for many and % will grow in future
• Worries about lack of young farmers unfounded? – there are young
farmers keen to build a future here…..
• Pricing-out is a risk; and some ‘bad blood’ with NE / planners
• There is an appetite for working together, but existing groups valued
mainly for social benefits, so far

22. Policy recommendations
For Defra
• Analyse the reasons for low market returns to hill livestock – similar to
dairy sector studies - formulate tactics to raise returns
• Support local groups helping farmers to improve performance (EHFN)
• Fund secure, long-term rewards for managing nature & ecosystem
services, more tailored to local knowledge / conditions
• Reconsider targeted hill farm assistance?
For ENPA / NFU / EHFN:
• Find funds for working more with farmers, in balanced partnerships (e.g.
CS, Lottery, corporate sponsors)
• Work with the LEP & LEADER groups - ensure their funds help farm
families & communities (design projects with local input: improve health /
holiday time, business training & start-ups; small grants; ICT confidence;
renewable energy infrastructure; innovation study trips/exchanges)
• Initiate a local review with farmers & experts, of best land management
for biodiversity, water & landscape in Exmoor, offer to Defra as a
blueprint for a better scheme, delivered locally

23. Thank you!
jdwyer@glos.ac.uk nlewis@glos.ac.uk