Always beware of headlines with the word ‘could’ in them, and look for evidence of the dire event weakly predicted – often there is little evidence to back it up. Which food is going to be short and what is the evidence?

This isn’t a great piece in the Guardian but, I’m afraid to say, Guardian journalists are not at home with farming, and some Guardian readers, perhaps including Makerfield Andy, aren’t all that clued up either. I wonder what Angela Eagle, in Defra, thinks. The focus on home production is somewhat misplaced as the food markets are global. We should be concerned about the impacts of climate change on our farmers’ productivity, but also about that of southern Europe, the Middle East and places like Ukraine. And the focus on cereal production in the article (do read it) misses out livestock production, vegetables and more.

The farming industry always paints itself as the victim, even in cases where it shares the role of villain. Farming is a big source of greenhouse gases: 11% globally and 12% in UK. UK agriculture has not reduced its emissions quickly enough and expects to get taxpayer handouts to do anything (see quotes from NFU and CLA below).

There is no food mentioned in this article which is predicted to be in short supply. The focus is on wheat and barley and almost all of that (especially wheat) goes to feed animals (which might be food for some, but vegans should opt out of paying for support for animal-based diets).

NFU President Tom Bradshaw says  “Let’s draw a line in the sand and make sure we prioritise domestic food production to deliver growth across the UK.”. That gets the prize for most vested comment from a vested interest group this week. Does it have anything to do with climate change? Does it have any mention of sustainable land use? Is it to grab the attention of the current government?

Bradshaw wasn’t to know that the Guardian would use an image of a massive combine, harvesting a wheat crop in a landscape stripped of nature – but it is a useful reminder.

The Guardian writes ‘Farming is becoming unprofitable as the government removes the EU-derived subsidies that once kept the industry afloat and the climate crisis causes extreme weather that can wipe out any profits from crops. A recent report found a third of British farmers were making a loss or only breaking even.‘  when it must have meant that farming has long been unprofitable but has been subsidised by taxpayer hand-outs which are disappearing now we have left the EU. Farmers were cushioned from being efficient farmers, and from making business decisions to adapt to the inevitability of climate change, by a system of subsidies that came from the taxes of non-farmers. You notice that the NFU did not oppose Brexit – maybe they should have thought harder about it.

Gavin Lane, the president of the Country, Land and Business Association said: “Farmers are telling us this is the worst harvest in years [they do that every few years]. A sodden winter followed by drought has left wheat at half its usual height [we don’t eat the stalks!] and some [what proportion? not much sign round here in droughty Northants, so I’m assuming very few] crops not worth harvesting.

This is the third drought in five years. What was once extraordinary is becoming part of farming in Britain, and government [what about farming? what must farming do to protect itself before asking for handouts] must start planning for it [agree there, the recommendations of the Committee on Climate Change would be a good place to start]. We know that proper government investment in resilient farming systems, from reservoirs to wildfire prevention, could help farmers cope with these new extremes [or we could treat farms as businesses and they could fund business critical needs themselves].

Farmers have shown again and again that they can adapt and deliver solutions [they have?], but resilience has limits [so has the public purse which is derived from non-farmers’ taxes]. If we want them to keep feeding the country [how much food is home grown? I think it is c60%], they need proper support [in return for measurable benefits?]. Otherwise, this harvest could be their last.” On the last point, we should see what happens without proper support – an experiment. What proportion of current farmland becomes unfarmed as a result? Not, how many farmers cash in their assets (if owners) and retire, but how much the national yield is reduced.

The AHDB says, much more moderately ‘Cereal yields have generally been below the 10-year average so far, with some farms experiencing significant reductions [so presumably lots of farms at worst facing not very significant reductions]. Following successive years of difficult weather and rising costs, the financial pressures are becoming increasingly acute for those businesses hardest hit [but no suggestion as to how many are hardest hit].’. Cereal yields are below the 10-year average in about half the years – that’s what averages are. We never hear from the NFU that cereal yields are above the 10-year average unless it is to ignore that fact and complain that cereal prices are below the 10-year average. It’s a market – a global market – and we must work hard to protect our access to it.

Read the article, no-one is predicting a disaster, it’s too early to say, but the NFU gets its ask in early. They are after your money, the NHS’s money, the Defence budget’s money, your taxes. It’s always a bit like this in August.

Climate change is very likely to affect agricultural production – and adversely. We must adapt our farming – crops grown, how they are grown, where they are grown to the new climate reality. some have been saying this for at least two decades with little support from the farming industry.

According to a big firm of land agents, the value (real value) of English farmland (the orange line) is higher than at almost any time in the last 125 years in real terms. Mark Twain could have told you that. I imagine that the recent drop is because of the repatriation of funding to The Treasury from agricultural subsidies from the taxpayer post-Brexit. If land comes with an annual hand-out then it is worth more than when the hand-outs are reduced.

By the way, why, looking at that graph, do you think that farmers were so incensed that their low rates of inheritance tax were scheduled to go up a bit? Go on, have a guess.

And let’s just look at the price farmers get for their crops. First, wheat prices over almost all of my life:

Wheat prices in my lifetime (not adjusted for inflation as far as I can tell). From Macrotrends https://www.macrotrends.net/datasets/2534/wheat-prices-historical-chart-data

And here is another version, from AHDB, just to reassure the reader and myself that wheat and barley prices are higher for the farmer, by about 10%, this year than this time last year. It’s a market and if yields turn out to be low, globally, then prices will be higher still, globally. Sometimes UK cereal farmers have good years of productivity when the rest of the world has a slump – and gain accordingly. Other years, we have low yields and the rest of the world has great yields. One has to take the rough with the smooth on yields and prices – that’s the market for you. I’m not a great fan of the market but it’s difficult to avoid them if you are selling a global commodity.

https://ahdb.org.uk/cereals-oilseeds/ex-farm-prices-summaryrices wheat and barley https://ahdb.org.uk/cereals-oilseeds/ex-farm-prices-summary . Prices for farmers are higher this year than last year.

Of course, if you are a livestock farmer buying wheat, your prices will go up (so let’s hope you have some left in the barn from last year) but your increased costs have gone to a fellow farmer, a cereal farmer, who has been bemoaning his plight to the Guardian.

Real life is too complicated for Guardian headlines it seems. Maybe I’ve got this all wrong, but the original Guardian article is simply a one-sided moan from an enormously powerful industry for more support from the taxpayer. Which side is the Guardian on? Maybe no side – so where are the alternative voices in this article? And where are the string of articles that look at farm payments from the taxpayer’s point of view, the source of the money, rather than from the recipients’ point of view?