Hillwalkers — especially those with dogs — may well try to avoid farmland as much as possible, in efforts to minimise contact with growing crops, unpredictable livestock and/or their droppings, barbed wire, and irritated farmers. But agriculture occupies — at least on paper — between 75% and 80% of Scotland's land area, and therefore relates directly to outdoor recreation of many kinds. Moreover, use of access rights under the Land Reform Act 2003, and Covid, have probably intensified contact. And of course farming is inextricably linked to other policy areas, such as food and drink (jobs and health), wildlife, landscape and climate change, which are (or should be) of interest to everyone, even hillwalkers.
Almost a century of largely free trade and (except for crofting) land markets from the mid-1800s onwards exposed hill farming in Scotland to competition from both imports and deer "afforestation". However, since at least the 1940s, successive governments have supported Scottish farming via both subsidies paid directly to farmers, merchants and processors, and import restrictions and tax reliefs (whose value probably exceeds the more obvious subsidy figures). Of course, several other factors affect agriculture in the medium and long term, mostly UK- or world-wide, such as markets (including exchange rates), technology, and climate.
In the hills, the main farming enterprises involve sheep (mostly pure-bred) and beef cattle, and take place in so-called Less Favoured Areas (LFAs). which cover 85% of Scottish farmland, but much less of national farming output. LFAs bring extra policy support to their farms and crofts, which have lower business incomes and rely more on support than other farm types. Indeed, without subsidies, LFA Livestock farms would make a loss, e.g. an average £40,000 for full-time LFA Sheep farms in 2020-21. Even with subsidies, about 20% of full-time LFA Livestock farms still make a loss.
Pre-2000 'headage' subsidies, payable per ewe, pushed sheep numbers in Scotland up to a historic peak, but a change to area-based payments, and foot-and-mouth disease in 2001, almost halved the number of breeding ewes, to a recent plateau of about 2.6 million. Beef cows, under similar pressures, declined from 471,300 in 2011 to 413,400 in 2021. Technological developments, such as housing, electronic monitoring, and genetic improvement — all receiving R&D support — seem unlikely to reverse these changes, especially in the face of adverse demand trends for meat.
Since 2020, the policy budget for Scottish agriculture has fallen slightly, to £772 million in 2023-24, mostly 'current', with capital spend declining. About £500 million goes on 'basic', 'greening' and other direct payments such as beef and sheep supports, and £65 and £36 million to LFA and agri-environmental payments respectively. For comparison, forestry accounts for about £120 million (mostly woodland grants), the two National Parks for about £20 million, NatureScot for about £60 million, and peatland restoration for about £25 million.
With Brexit, the UK, and Scotland for whom agriculture is a devolved matter, have been free since 2020 to formulate farming policy, but so far Scotland has very much continued "business as usual", with no significant changes in levels or coverage of support. However, there has been much policy head-scratching behind the scenes, with Climate Change Groups for the arable, dairy, beef and upland sectors, a Monitor Farm Programme, and research on organic farming, women in farming, sector competitiveness, and farm productivity. In autumn 2021, the Government set out its Vision for "Scotland to become a global leader in sustainable and regenerative agriculture", and in spring 2022 it announced a two-track "National Test Programme to start transforming agriculture in Scotland" for better climate and biodiversity outcomes.
A new Agriculture Bill is scheduled for autumn 2023: the current proposals are for non-competitive Base and Enhanced Direct Payments (i.e. open to all subject to "essential standards", very like the current Basic Payments), plus rather more competitive Elective Payments for e.g. "nature restoration", innovation and supply chain support, and "Complementary Support" aimed at both people (e.g. farmer skills and knowledge) and the agri-environment (e.g. tree planting, peatland restoration and "agricultural transformation"). To date, responses to the proposed Bill — mostly from farmer and landowner groups – reveal concerns over eligibility and complexity.
In February 2023, a "list of potential measures" — to take effect from 2025 onwards — was announced, with those for upland livestock focussed on reducing GHG (methane) emissions (with the overall target for Scottish agriculture of a 30% fall by 2032) by changing cattle and sheep genetics and feed (rather than lowering stocking rates). Studies of feed additives such as seaweed and biochar suggest that GHG emissions could be reduced by up to 50%, but such studies are very few, and costs are unknown. Other measures would pay farmers to exclude livestock from sensitive grazed habitats, to foster animal health and welfare, and generally to improve efficiency. LFA payments are to continue, in modified form. But the details — let alone payment rates and budget allocations — for all these are as yet vague, and may not be clear even when the Bill eventually becomes an Act. But do not fret: there is a new "Preparing for Sustainable Agriculture" website, and the Agriculture Reform Implementation Oversight Board (ARIOB), the Agriculture and Rural Development Group (ARD) and the Food and Agricultural Stakeholders' Taskforce (FAST) are all available as "engagement" bodies.
What does all this mean for the hillwalker? The blunt fact is that Scottish hill cattle and sheep enterprises are economically unviable in themselves, and almost completely dependent on subsidy. Moreover, they emit a lot of methane, and, if highly stocked and under-managed, damage highly valued terrain and wildlife, e.g. via over-grazing. These aspects, particularly the national drive towards Net Zero by 2045, and perhaps further dietary change away from red meat, could see major changes in the look and "feel" of upland farming in Scotland. Although the landlord-tenant relationship which applies to most upland farms is a complication, the government could, if it wished, practically dictate upland farming practices and land use (e.g. as to grazings, trees and public access). But how would it do so, and would we want it to?
Please let the webmaster know if there are problems with viewing these pages or with the links they contain.