Christmas food shopping- a new way?

I admit that I don't shop that often. I wouldn't say that I was the main shopper in our household. Yet I did find myself authorized to do some food shopping before Christmas and I found myself experiencing nostalgia not really for the items on offer but the methods of shopping.
I'll start with a general gripe. The expression 'stocking fillers' in bold type seemed to me to send out the wrong signals to any young child who could read but still believed in Father Christmas.
Then there is the question of customer service. However good the training, it just is not possible to get sufficient information, sufficiently easily if you are shopping in an aircraft hangar of a building that sells a huge variety of goods and cannot therefore have so much expertise on tap. Specifically on food however there was something about being able to  smell and examine vegetables and fruit for example without them being wrapped and packed and plastered in stickers, which has now disappeared from many shops.
I stuck lucky in Crediton- our local market town. Firstly I could drive right into the centre and park. There were spouts available in sufficient quantity and loose and not in shrink wrapped packets of six! There is, Alleluia, a cheese shop selling, amongst others, local cheeses that the 'big' food retailers now seem to have withdrawn from their shelves ( not surprising that the dairy farms are struggling). There is an ironmonger too.
Do you remember those card games of 'happy families' that we played as children? Mr Bun the Baker for example. The pack of cards would be small today.
Much has been said about the 'death of the High Street' and I accept that urban planning is challenged in this area. Product price is an issue as is convenience and cheap or free parking. I just wonder whether there is a model that allows independent shops to come together and offer a combined facility for customers which will enable them to survive against the advantages of the large retailers.
There would need to be a way of drawing in outside investment and the independents too would need some equity share and the planners would have to be on side. It would provide a more secure and sustainable outlet for those farms who supply farmers markets. #justsaying
I hope that you had a good Christmas and that 2016 is good for you

SW Coastline- can farming survive here?

One of the wonders of our British landscape is our coastline. Leaving aside its impact on our history as an island nation; from Romans to William the Conqueror; from smugglers to launching the D Day armada; it is staggering in its beauty. Walking the stretch from Prawle point to Salcombe, I was struck by several thoughts.
The scenery is dramatic but so also is the birdlife and the plantlife. The song of the skylark is uplifting here but is rarer elsewhere these days. Plants thrive in the muddle and disorder of the climax vegetation of the cliff edge beyond the reach of the fertiliser, pesticides and herbicides; products that are so necessary for profitable farming but which create uniformity and lack of diversity in the landscape.
People walking the path seem universally friendly. Smiles and waves (the human kind!) suggest that the experience is doing them good both mentally and physically. We were also made welcome by two volunteers from the National Coastwatch Institution at Prawle Point. This wonderful organisation, made up entirely of volunteers, plays a vital role for those in trouble at sea.
The other organisation that deserves credit too in this area is the National Trust under whose stewardship much of the land falls. Car parks are provided at both ends of the route and one is reassured that the coastline is in good hands.
People seem happy to follow the path. We certainly were with a party of nine including two dogs. The need for swathes of extra land as 'spreading room' suggested by Natural England as part of the coastal access debate seems unnecessary.
Yet there are some downsides too. The popularity of the route and the numbers of walkers is leading to erosion of the path. This erosion is severe in places.
 Most people use cars to access the path. Car parks are needed. A similar dependence on the car is often used as a reason why planners turn down diversification applications in rural areas.
The much vaunted benefits to farmers and landowners whose property adjoins the path is a bit of a myth too. We walked for some 5 miles and not once did we see an opportunity for them to add value from the visitors crossing their land until we reached Salcombe. The National Trust is a charity and can afford to take a lower return; private owners do not often have that option.
I was particularly interested also to note the agriculture. There is evidence near Prawle Point of ancient field systems with field boundaries marked by flat stone slabs set on edge and, from the C18th until the 1960s vegetable production using the abundant seaweed fertiliser. For modern farming however it is uneconomic with tiny fields, poor access and fences undercut by the retreating coastline. Left to the free market, I doubt that it would continue yet we know the importance of grazing to the maintenance of biodiversity and where it doesn't happen topping, flailing and rolling is needed to control the bracken and gorse and this, of course, costs money.
Surely another example of the wider benefits from agriculture beyond simply food production and the need to find a way to fund it...

Drought-Can we learn from the past?

Throughout the 15th and 16th Centuries my family were constantly in disputes about water. Sheep were an important source of wealth and merchants grew rich on the wool trade in neighbouring towns such as Tiverton and Exeter. Sheep need drinking water though. Not as much as cattle certainly but nevertheless spring fed streams were vital at a time before the widespread availability of iron pipes and metal water troughs. So ownership of the water rights and control of the streams was of crucial importance to those who farmed the animals and wanted to share in this wealth.
Between the 16th and 19th centuries the plentiful availability of labour enabled the construction of 'catch meadows' and their associated irrigation systems which followed the contours of our Devon valleys. Carrying either water or a combination of water and cattle dung from spring sources or collecting points, they helped crops grow with a mixture of irrigation and fertilisation. Even in a year of average rainfall, irrigation will improve grass growth so judicious release of water into these systems paid dividends.
I have seen intricate and clever systems of water transfer in other parts of the world. The paddy fields of China and the Far East and the long and delicate channels flowing down the rocky valley sides in what were then the Trucial States adjoining the Gulf are but two examples. In areas of water shortage mankind has become adept at water transfer. In a country where we have been used to plenty however such as the UK we have not generally put a high enough value on the water to justify the infrastructure cost of transfer. The concepts of pipelines or tankers to transfer water from north and west to south and east in this country fall down when the financial calculations are done.
There are only two things that can be done to alleviate the situation; reducing demand or increasing supply and it is the matching of these two that holds the key. All three-supply,demand and balancing-require investment if you assume, as I do, that climatic patterns are shifting bringing us greater extremes and variations.

Increasing supply must start with the provision of more storage reservoirs to capture such rainfall as there is and to supplement aquifers. Well designed, these can benefit businesses, perhaps communities too and certainly wildlife as can any modern catch meadows or leats that flow from them( the Devon Wildlife Trust have tried to restore some)- but the construction of the reservoirs is often mired in red tape and they are expensive; fiscal incentives would help. Reducing demand in domestic situations is about behaviour change; in business situations it is about research and development into affordable alternatives. In farming, reducing the demand for food will hardly help us to achieve food security in a hungry world so this might mean drought resistant varieties. This re-opens the GM debate. Finally balancing these two requires anticipating rainfall and matching it with temperature and crop and animal requirements. This is about accurate forecasting which, once again, will need funding.
In Devon we once had catch meadows. Now we have the Met Office in Exeter. We need to play a full part in the debate.

More food, more environment

The challenge that the farming industry has been set is how to produce more food for a growing population without damaging an already fragile environment.
Owners of land have a choice as to what they do with that land. If they want a return on that asset as many do, then they will want to see it put to an economic use. Inadvertant changes in taxation policy could put even more pressure on the owner to seek an economic return.
The return could be either in the form of profit to a farmer or rent payable to the owner. Both of these have historically favoured maximising the returns from agriculture.
If the owner is to put the land to an alternative use; an environmental rather then a economic use for example, then he/she will have to either obtain some value from that environmental use or do so for some altruistic reason.
Some, like those with a very long term perspective, might see the importance of maintaining biodiversity for its own sake. Others might gain some economic benefit from environmental enhancement such as from a tourist enterprise. Normally however it involves sacrificing profit and production even alongside environmental stewardship schemes. For environmental protection and enhancement to have a chance against intensive agriculture then some value needs to be placed on other activities such as water management, carbon sequestration or increasing skylark breeding numbers for example.
Tenant farmers are particularly vulnerable to the pressure to make every acre of land pay. This is partly because they have to pay rent on almost every acre and partly because they do not share in the benefit of any uplift in value that may flow from an improvement in the biodiversity of the holding.
We might see a net increase in environmental quality on let land if the landlords were prepared to make it a condition of letting the land. To do so however they would probably have to be prepared to take a reduction in monetary return. Would they do so? Perhaps if they were wealthy enough, had a long horizon or had a sense of, or the need to demonstrate, corporate responsibility.
The Government Environment White Paper introduced the concept of Natural Capital . Perhaps we will soon see the Chancellor reporting on this in his annual budget. Until the bank manager recognises natural capital however, owner occupier farmers, tenants and landlords will struggle to justify environmental investment over investment in increasing food production.