Falklands : Wool Agent Answers Critics
Submitted by Falkland Islands News Network (Juanita Brock) 21.08.2006 (Article Archived on 04.09.2006)
Robert Hall of Falkland Wool Growers Ltd. has answered his critics about the new wool co-operative.
WOOL AGENT ANSWERS CRITICS
By Robert Hall (FWG)
The background and content surrounding the Lambert report are extra-ordinary; with no explanations forthcoming. Most farmers including several RBA committee members, were unaware of the Lambert report until Farmers Week, when on Thursday afternoon there were two sessions, advertised merely as: “Wool Marketing, DoA/RBA/FIDC”. The Lambert report seeks support from as many farmers as it can get; yet the report’s presentation was unadvertised and the only opportunity for all farmers to meet Mr Lambert before the imminent deadline, was passed up. Mr Lambert proposes to “drive shipping companies to heal” yet was not introduced to the majority of the farming community whose wool he seeks, at the one most obvious opportunity. Why the secrecy?
This is extra-ordinary to many farmers, who are now told that decisions are to be made in a matter of days that involve the wasteful expenditure of perhaps £440,000 of FIG monies. The business plan financial figures don’t add up, yet several farmers have described being presented with an ultimatum or feeling pushed for a quick decision. Why the rush?
Since the early 1990’s the total Falklands greasy wool clip has fallen about 35% (from 2,772,000 kg to an estimated 1,791,000 kg in 2005/2006), a disastrous loss of nearly 1 million kg or currently £1.5 million per annum.
I appreciate that the clip is finer than in 1991/1992 however I have no published Island wide data to analyse. Real progress must be to decrease fibre diameter and increase (certainly maintain) fleece weights.
To increase the prosperity of the Falkland Islands, this trend must be reversed with much greater agricultural investment. Surely this is one of the most serious issues facing sheep farmers today, with potentially catastrophic implications both for the Falklands wool industry and for the relatively new abattoir.
Clearly the Falklands sheep flock must be sustainable, expand, produce more lambs, increase fleece weights, reduce fibre diameter, evolve to having a greater ewe flock etc. I acknowledge the sheep breeding improvements that have occurred during the last twenty years and I welcome the recent genetic developments. The point is however that schemes such as the PIP plan need successes evaluated and enlarged on a significant scale to tackle what is undoubtedly a major problem. Instead of wasting possibly £440,000 on Mr Lambert’s proposals which are full of errors and omissions that remain uncorrected and unanswered; FIG and FIDC should recognise that the abattoir project has been built on sand and the wool industry is now also at risk from the effects of a sheep population that is crashing. The Lambert Wool Review seems to have overlooked this most basic problem.
Politically it may be rather dull to do more of the same, develop, refine and expand existing projects, with no new project to boast of and no new committee to administer. Those of us who are in this job for the long term will congratulate those councillors that have the courage to get their civil service to focus on the real problem: both the Falklands wool and meat industries are fast running out of sheep. Statistical estimates for 2005/2006 suggest this year’s figure will be worse again.
Falkland Wool Growers are looking forward to next season and have plans to reduce shipping costs and are developing additional marketing options to further develop markets for Falklands wool.
Farmers have every reason to ensure that a possible £440,000 is invested wisely in addressing the most immediate challenge: reversing the decline in sheep numbers.
With Regards
Robert H B Hall
PS
To date the FLH Board of Directors has not signed up FLH to the Lambert proposal.
Farms are encouraged to advise FIDC of their views on the Lambert report. Non-reply to FIDC could be misinterpreted.
|
