Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Teagasc National Farm Survey 24 Results Thia Hennessy and Brian Moran Agricultural Economics and Farm Surveys Department, Rural Economy Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Co Galway, Ireland ISBN 978847684
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to thank all who contributed to the National Farm Survey 24 the farmers who participate voluntarily, the Central Statistics Office who select the sample and provide the population weights. Grateful acknowledgement is due to the Teagasc research staff involved in the collection and validation of the farm data: P. Bryce, J. Colgan, A Curley, L. Deane, L. Delaney, P. Harnett, P. Hayes, P. Healy, P. Madden, E. McGrath, M. Nicholson, J. Robinson, J. Teehan and to M. Moloney for the administration of the survey.
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUMMARY 24 Family Farm Income 24 2 Income by Farm System Income Distribution 4 Importance of Direct Payments 5 Regional Overview & Offfarm Employment 6 Viability Analysis 7 Overview of dairy farm system 8 Overview of the cattle rearing system 9 Overview of the cattle other system Overview of the sheep farm system Overview of the tillage system 2 Overview of the mixed livestock system APPENDIX List of Tables 5 APPENDIX 2 Background Notes 86 APPENDIX Classification of farms 88 APPENDIX 4 Glossary of terms 9 NOTE: The electronic version of this report is available on the Teagasc website www.teagasc.ie/publications
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Family Farm Income 24 Family farm income is the principal measure used in the National Farm Survey. The average family farm income across all 78,64 farms in 24 was 26,642, representing a 5 percent increase on the 2 average. payment fell by 2 percent in 24, mostly due to a reduction in the Single Farm Payment to establish a crisis reserve. Input expenditure, particularly on animal feed stuffs, was very high in 2 as a result of the fodder crisis. Total direct costs fell by 9 percent from 2 to 24. Total overhead costs increased slightly. Costs consumed 69 percent of output on the average farm in 24, an improvement on the 2 figure of 7 percent. Family Farm Income represents the return from farming for the farm family to their labour, land and capital. It does not include nonfarm income. Figure : Average Family Farm Income 25 to 24 The increase in income was mostly driven by reduced input expenditure. The value of gross output declined by 2 percent driven by reductions in the returns to production and direct payments. The various components of farm income are outlined in Table. 4 /farm 25 Table : Average Family Farm Income 24 24 Gross Output (of which direct pay ts) Total Costs (of which direct costs) ( of which overheads) Family Farm Income 84,9 9,9 58,26,454 26,86 26,642 2 Change from 2 27 29 2 2 Family farm income has generally followed an upward trend since the low point of 29. Following two years of stagnation in 22 and 2, a small increase of 5 percent in 24 is evident. However, income still lags behind the record levels recorded in 2. % 2 2 5 9 + +5 26,642 was the average farm income in 24, a 5 percent increase from 2. Lower cattle slaughter prices along with a slight reduction in direct payments, led to a fall in gross output values. The average direct 2
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Income by Farm System 24 Income varies quite considerably by farm system. Dairy farms are consistently the most profitable farms with an average income of 67,598 in 24. rearing farms had the lowest average farm income at,69 in 24. Table 2: Average Farm Size and Income per hectare 24 Dairy is the most profitable system with an average income of 67,598 Figure 2: Average Farm Income by System 2 & 24 8, 2 Income Dairy Rearing Sheep Tillage Mixed Livestock ha 55 9 4 54 62 6 /ha,229 266 279 468 892 All 48 555 The largest income reduction is on cattle other farms. Income is down 5% 24 6, /farm Size 4, The year on year change in income varied across the farm systems. Total production costs declined across all farm systems. However, the reduction in expenditure was insufficient to offset the falling finished cattle price for cattle other farms and was insufficient to maintain tillage farm income. 2, Dairy Sheep Tillage Mixed Rearing L'stock The large variation in average farm income across the farm systems is driven by differences in both farm size and profitability. The average farm size in 24, across all systems of farming, was 48 hectares and the average income was 555 per hectare in 24. Figure : Percentage change in income by system 2 to 24 Mixed Tillage Sheep The drystock sector, cattle and sheep farms, is characterised by low profitability and small holdings. The average income per hectare was 266 on Rearing farms in 24, the lowest of the farm systems. Rearing Dairy 2 2 % change in income 4
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Income Distribution 24 There is a wide variation in farm incomes across the farm population. Although average farm income increased in 24, there was no significant improvement on low income farms. In 2 approximately 2% of farms produced a farm income of less than 5, and this proportion increased to 24% in 24. At the opposite end of the spectrum, 8% of farms produced an income of over 5,. Figure 5: Income Distribution by System 2 & 24 % 75% 5% 25% % Dairy Rearing <, 5% of farms earned over, while 24% earned less than 5, 24 2 <5, >5, Figure 6 presents the income per labour unit distribution in 24. The relatively low labour input on tillage farms is reflected in the higher incomes when expressed on a per labour unit basis. The income per labour unit exceeded 5, on 48% of dairy farms, percent of mixed farms and 27 percent of tillage farms in 24. % of farms 2 5, On average there was. family labour units employed on each farm. The average amount of unpaid labour supplied was highest on dairy farms at.6 labour units and lowest on tillage farms at.98. Figure 4: Farm Income Distribution 2 & 24 Sheep Tillage Mixed L'stock Figure 6: Income Distribution per labour unit 24 5, 2, 25, >5, There was also a wide distribution in income across farm systems. The vast majority (59%) of cattle rearing farms earned less than,. While close to 5 percent of sheep and cattle other farms also earned less than,. It is only on the specialist dairy and mixed livestock farms that there is a core of farmers earning over 5,. Twothirds of dairy farms and almost half of mixed livestock farms earned over 5,. % 75% 5% 25% % Dairy Rearing <, 4 Sheep Tillage Mixed L'stock 5, >5,
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Importance of Direct Payments 24 Direct payments continue to form an important part of income. In 24 the average direct payment was 9,9 and this accounted for 72 percent of income on average. The Single Farm Payment, the largest payment, was 4,9 on average in 24. Direct payments are comprised of the Single Farm Payment (SFP) and payments relating to the Disadvantaged Area Scheme (DAS), the Rural Environmental Protection Scheme (REPS) the newer AgriEnvironmental scheme (AEOS). As can be seen from Figure 7, the average subsidy payment has been declining slightly in recent years. The average direct payment was 9,9 in 24, accounting for 72% of income Figure 7: Composition of subsidy payments 25 /farm 2 SFP 2,767 5,42 8,25 8,5 26,29 25,65 % 49 7 2 9 45 All 9,9 72 REPS 2 AEOS 24 Figure 8: Average Market Income by system 24 5, 22 4, /farm Dairy Rearing Sheep Tillage Mixed Livestock 22 DAS Figure 8 presents market income, i.e. income before direct payments for each of the farm systems. As can be seen the two cattle systems and the sheep system consistently have negative market incomes over the last three years. Table : Value of direct payments and contribution to income 24 Contribution to Income 5 Table presents the average direct payment per farm and the contribution to income across the various farm systems. As can be seen tillage farms, followed by mixed livestock farms, had the highest direct payments. rearing farms were the most reliant on direct payments accounting for 49 percent of income. Direct Payment 5 2 24, 2,,, Dairy 5 Sheep Tillage Mixed Rearing L'stock
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Regional Overview and Offfarm Employment 24 Farm income varies widely by region in Ireland driven by farm scale, system, profitability and direct payments. Those regions where dairying is more prevalent are generally more profitable and have a lower reliance on direct payments. The number of farm households with offfarm employment peaked in 26 at 59 percent and declined to 49 percent in 22. There has been a slight recovery in 2 and 24 Figure : Rate of Offfarm Employment % of farms 8 The southeast is the most profitable farming region 4 2 Figure 9: Average Income & direct payments by region 24 FFI 6 25 27 Farmer 29 2 2 Farmer & Spouse Direct Payments % FFI 2 8 6 4 2 4, Offfarm employment is most prevalent in the West and Midlands regions % /farm, 2,, Border East M'ldsS'westS'eastSouth West The prevalence of offfarm employment varies regionally. In the West and Midlands regions 44 and 6 percent of farmers respectively work off farm. Average farm income was highest in the Southeast at just over 42,. The Border was the most disadvantaged region in 24 with the lowest farm income and the highest reliance on direct payments. Figure : Rate of offfarm employment by the farmer by region 24 % of farmers 5 5% of farm households have offfarm employment 4 2 Border East 6 M'lds S'West S'east South West
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Viability Analysis 24 A farm business is deemed to be viable if the farm income is sufficient to remunerate family labour at the minimum agricultural wage, which was 9, 67 per labour unit in 24, and provide a 5 percent return on the capital invested in nonland assets, i.e. machinery and livestock. The viability of farming varies substantially by system. Figure : Percentage of farms viable, sustainable and vulnerable by system % 75% Farms that are not viable but have an offfarm income, earned by either the farmer or the spouse, are considered to be economically sustainable. Farm households that are operating nonviable farm businesses and where neither the farmer nor the spouse works off the farm are considered economically vulnerable. 5% 25% % Dairy Viable Figure 2: Percentage of farms viable, sustainable and vulnerable 2 7 Sustainable Mixed Live'k Sustainable Rearing Sheep Vulnerable Almost 8 percent of dairy farms were viable in 24 compared to only 5 percent of cattle rearing farms. Viability also varied considerably by region. The southeast had the highest proportion of viable farms at over 5 percent compared to just 6 of farms in the west. The presence of offfarm employment improves the economic situation in most. However, almost 45 percent of farm households in the border were vulnerable. Viable Tillage Vulnerable Figure 4: Percentage of farms viable, sustainable and vulnerable by region Thirtyseven percent of farms were viable in 24, a further percent of farm households were sustainable because of the presence of offfarm income while the remaining 2 percent of farms are economically vulnerable. The viability of farming increased marginally from 2 when 5 percent of farms were classified as economically viable. % 8% 6% 4% 2% % Border Mideast M'lands S'west S'east Viable 7 Sustainable Vulnerable South West
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Dairy Farm System 24 There were approximately 5,654 specialist dairy farms with an average FFI of 67,598 in 24, a 7 percent increase on 2. Table 5: Average Dairy Enterprise Indicators 24 24 Dairy farm incomes increased by 7% on average in 24 Production (litres/ha) Milk Price ( /litre) Gross output ( /ha) Direct Costs( /ha) Gross Margin ( /ha) Table 4: Components of average dairy income 24 24 Gross Output (of which direct pay ts) Total Costs (of which direct costs) ( of which overheads) Family Farm Income 9,28 2,767 22,685 72,52 5,64 67,598 Change from 2 Change from 2 % + 6 +6,686 9.5 4,5,575 2,578 Dairy enterprise gross margin per hectare increased by 6 percent in 24, driven by increased production and lower costs. % 2 2 6 9 +7 Milk price unchanged and production up % in 24 Figure 5 presents the distribution of income on dairy farms. Income increased significantly from 22 to 24. The proportion of farms earning over, continues to increase. The 7 percent increase in the average dairy farm income was mostly driven by reduced expenditure. The animal feed bill declined substantially on dairy farms, with expenditure on purchased concentrate feeds down 24 percent and bulky feeds down 2 percent. Figure 5: Distribution of Dairy Income 22 to 24 4 Milk production per farm increased by percent in 24, supported by higher yields and a 2 percent increase in the average dairy herd size. With almost no change in milk price and increasing production, dairy enterprise gross output increased by just percent. The 24 income figures do not reflect the full superlevy bill due to be paid by dairy farmers for the 24/25 quota year. 22 2 24 % of farms 2 <, 8 5, 57, 7, >,
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Rearing Farm System 24 There were approximately 5,77 cattle rearing farms with an average FFI of,69 in 24. Suckler cow production is the dominant enterprise on these farms. Table 7: Farm Indicators 24 24 Farm Size (hectares) Livestock Units Livestock units per hectare Single Farm Payment( /ha) Gross Margin ( /ha) rearing farm incomes increased by 9% on average in 24 The average gross margin per hectare on cattle rearing farms was 666 in 24. This included a Single Farm Payment of 244 per hectare. Table 6: Components of average cattle rearing farm income 24 Gross Output (of which direct pay ts) Total Costs (of which direct costs) ( of which overheads) Family Farm Income 24 Change from 2 9,894 5,42 29,525,98 5,66,69 % + 2 2 7 2 +9 9 4.5 244 666 Weanling prices were up % in 24, while direct costs were down 7% Figure 6 presents the distribution of income on cattle rearing farms. The proportion of farms earning over 2, increased from 2 to 24 but so too did the proportion earning less than 5,. Total farm gross output increased by percent, despite a 2 percent decline in direct payments. Although finished cattle prices fell in 24, the average price of weanlings, the principal output of cattle rearing farms, increased by percent. Figure 6: Distribution of Rearing Income 22 to 24 % of farms 4 As with the other livestock farms, cattle rearing farms benefitted from the recovery following the fodder crisis. Expenditure on concentrate and bulky feed fell by 2 and 7 percent respectively. 22 2 24 2 <5, 9 5, 2, 25, >5,
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Farm System 24 There were approximately 25,674 cattle other farms, with an average FFI of,2 in 24, a 5 percent decrease on 2. fattening is the dominant enterprise on these farms. Table 9: Farm Indicators 24 24 Farm Size (hectares) Number of livestock units Livestock units per hectare Single Farm Payment( /ha) Gross Margin ( /ha) Average income on cattle other farms decreased by 5% in 24 The average gross margin per hectare on cattle other farms was 796 in 24. This included a Single Farm Payment of. Table 8: Components of cattle other average farm income 24 24 Gross Output (of which direct pay ts) Total Costs (of which direct costs) ( of which overheads) Family Farm Income 5,954 8,25 7,6 9,79 8,555,2 4 5.2 796 Change from 2 The average annual finished cattle price fell by percent in 24 % 9 2 7 5 +2 5 Figure 7 presents the distribution of income on cattle other farms. The movement of farms from the higher income to the lower income categories from 2 to 24 is evident. Total farm gross output decreased by 9 percent on cattle other farms. These farms are mainly specialised in finishing animals for slaughter and the average annual finished cattle price was down percent in 24, leaving overall farm gross output down 9 percent on average. Figure 7: Distribution of Income 22 to 24 % of farms 4 22 2 24 2 Total direct costs declined by 5 percent. Animal feed is a larger element of total expenditure on cattle other farms relative to other farm systems and as such these farms benefitted disproportionately from the recovery following the fodder crisis. <5, 5, 2, 25, >5,
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Sheep Farm System 24 There were approximately 2,95 sheep farms with an average FFI of 5,65 in 24, a 28 percent increase on 2. While this seems like a substantial increase it follows a particularly poor year for sheep farmers in 2. Table : Farm Indicators 24 24 Farm Size (hectares) Number of ewes Livestock units per hectare Single Farm Payment( /ha) Gross Margin ( /ha) Sheep farm incomes increased by 28% on average in 24 54 5.2 26 599 The average gross margin per hectare on sheep farms was 599 in 24 this included a Single Farm Payment of 26. Table : Components of sheep farm income 24 Gross Output (of which direct pay ts) Total Costs (of which direct costs) ( of which overheads) Family Farm Income 24 Change from 2 48,727 8,5,66 6,6 7, 5,65 % +5 8 +2 +28 The average annual lamb price increased by 5 percent & production was up by 2% Figure 8 presents the distribution of income on sheep farms. A recovery back towards 22 income levels in 24 is evident with the number of farmers in the higher income categories increasing. Total farm gross output increased by 5 percent on sheep farms despite a percent reduction in direct payments. Lamb prices increased by 5 percent in 24 and lamb production was up by 2 percent. The total gross output from sheep production on sheep farms increased by percent in 24. Figure 8: Distribution of Sheep Income 22 to 24 % of farms 4 Total direct costs declined by 8 percent, again reflecting the recovery from the fodder crisis. The overall impact was a 28 percent increase in income. 22 2 24 2 <5, 5, 2, 25, >5,
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Tillage Farm System 24 There were approximately 6,65 tillage farms with an average FFI of 28,995 in 24, a percent increase on 2. Table : Farm Indicators 24 24 Farm Size (hectares) Hectares of Cereals Crop output ( /ha) Single Farm Payment( /ha) Farm Gross Margin ( /ha) Tillage farm incomes averaged at 28,995 in 24 The average gross margin per hectare on tillage farms was,8 in 24. This included a Single Farm Payment of 7. Table 2: Components of tillage farm income 24 Gross Output (of which direct pay ts) Total Costs (of which direct costs) ( of which overheads) Family Farm Income 24 Change from 2 8,56 26,29 79,56 9,27 4,59 28,995 % + + 62 4,54 7,8 The gross output of crops on tillage farms increased by 2% in 24 Figure 9 presents the distribution of income. While fewer farms are earning less than 5,, the numbers earning over 5, have declined. Gross output on tillage farms was more or less unchanged from 2 to 24, while direct payments decreased by percent. Costs on tillage farms did not decline as much as the other systems given the relative unimportance of livestock costs on tillage farms. Figure 9: Distribution of Tillage Income 22 & 24 4 % of farms Total costs declined by just percent on tillage farms driven by a 7 percent decline in fertiliser expenditure and a 25 percent decline in animal feed. Given that output value was more or less unchanged, the outcome was a very slight increase in the average tillage farm income in 24. 2 24 2 <5, 2 5, 2, 25, >5,
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Mixed Livestock Farm System 24 There were approximately 2,76 mixed livestock farms with an average FFI of 56,8 in 24, an percent increase on 2. While most mixed livestock farms have a dairy enterprise, they are not specialised in dairy production and typically also have a substantial cattle enterprise. Table 5: Farm Indicators 24 24 Farm Size (hectares) Number of Cows Total Livestock Units Livestock units per hectare Single Farm Payment( /ha) Gross Margin ( /ha) Income on mixed livestock farms increased by % in 24 Mixed livestock farms are intensively stocked at.68 livestock units per hectare. They also have the largest average land area of all of the farm systems. Table 4: Components of Mixed Livestock farm income 24 24 Gross Output (of which direct pay ts) Total Costs (of which direct costs) ( of which overheads) Family Farm Income 6,6 25,65 5,8 6,228 4,95 56,8 6 44 6.68 6,589 Change from 2 Mixed farms have a low specialisation in dairy production with an average herd size of 44 cows % 6 9 4 + Figure 2 presents the distribution of income. The numbers earning over 5, have increased considerably in 24. Figure 2: Distribution of Mixed Livestock Income 22 & 24 Similar to the other farm systems, gross output and direct payments decreased in value on mixed livestock farms. Input expenditure declined, with direct costs in particular decreasing by 4 percent. Mixed farms typically have large animal feed bills, purchased concentrate feed can comprise up to 25 percent of input costs on these farms. In 24 expenditure on purchased concentrates declined by 28 percent. 4 2 24 % of farms 2 <, 2, 25, 57, >7,
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Appendices 4
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 APPENDIX LIST OF TABLES TABLE a TABLE b TABLE c TABLE d TABLE e Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) Dairying System Dairying System Dairying System Dairying System Dairying System TABLE 2a TABLE 2b TABLE 2c TABLE 2d TABLE 2e Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) Rearing System Rearing System Rearing System Rearing System Rearing System TABLE a TABLE b TABLE c TABLE d TABLE e Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) System System System System System TABLE 4a TABLE 4b TABLE 4c TABLE 4d TABLE 4e Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) Sheep System Sheep System Sheep System Sheep System Sheep System TABLE 5a TABLE 5b TABLE 5c TABLE 5d TABLE 5e Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) Tillage System Tillage System Tillage System Tillage System Tillage System TABLE 6a TABLE 6b TABLE 6c TABLE 6d TABLE 6e Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) Mixed Livestock System Mixed Livestock System Mixed Livestock System Mixed Livestock System Mixed Livestock System TABLE 7a TABLE 7b TABLE 7c TABLE 7d TABLE 7e Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) All Systems All Systems All Systems All Systems All Systems 5
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 TABLE 8a TABLE 8b TABLE 8c TABLE 8d TABLE 8e Farm Financial Results by System of Farming Resources per Farm by System of Farming Gross Output and Direct Payments by System of Farming Direct and Overhead Costs by System of Farming Demographic Data by System of Farming All Farms All Farms All Farms All Farms All Farms TABLE 9a TABLE 9b TABLE 9c TABLE 9d TABLE 9e Farm Financial Results by European Size (TSO) Resources per Farm by European Size (TSO) Gross Output and Direct Payments by European Size (TSO) Direct and Overhead Costs by European Size (TSO) Demographic Data by European Size (TSO) All Farms All Farms All Farms All Farms All Farms TABLE a TABLE b TABLE c TABLE d TABLE e Farm Financial Results by System of Farming Resources per Farm by System of Farming Gross Output and Direct Payments by System of Farming Direct and Overhead Costs by System of Farming Demograhic Data by System of Farming FullTime Farms FullTime Farms FullTime Farms FullTime Farms FullTime Farms TABLE a TABLE b TABLE c TABLE d TABLE e Farm Financial Results by System of Farming Resources per Farm by System of Farming Gross Output and Direct Payments by System of Farming Direct and Overhead Costs by System of Farming Demograhic Data by System of Farming PartTime Farms PartTime Farms PartTime Farms PartTime Farms PartTime Farms TABLE 2a TABLE 2b TABLE 2c TABLE 2d TABLE 2e Farm Financial Results by System of Farming Resources per Farm by System of Farming Gross Output and Direct Payments by System of Farming Direct and Overhead Costs by System of Farming Demograhic Data by System of Farming Objective One Region Objective One Region Objective One Region Objective One Region Objective One Region TABLE a TABLE b TABLE c TABLE d TABLE e Farm Financial Results by System of Farming Resources per Farm by System of Farming Gross Output and Direct Payments by System of Farming Direct and Overhead Costs by System of Farming Demograhic Data by System of Farming NonObjective One Region NonObjective One Region NonObjective One Region NonObjective One Region NonObjective One Region TABLE 4a TABLE 4b TABLE 4c TABLE 4d TABLE 4e Farm Financial Results Resources per Farm Gross Output and Direct Payments Direct and Overhead Costs Demographic Data By Region All Farms By Region All Farms By Region All Farms By Region All Farms By Region All Farms 6
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table A (24) Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Dairying System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 9 9 29 2 269.9 2. 6.5 7.7.4.9 9.9 8489 4796 2792 459 577 928 67 246 595 7 Subsidies and Direct Payments 979 549 2574 4574 278 2767 Direct Costs 826 549 868 74 628 7252 = Gross Margin 46627 977 529 24658 94669 7762 Overhead Costs 2767 527 6222 276 922 564 = Family Farm Income 2286 554 8859 642 6747 67598 Net Sales & Receipts 874 494 297 47478 629 8858 Current Cash Expenditure 5624 777 9 268446 8648 8752 = Cash Income (Approx) 2675 642 258 92 74759 7946 Net New Investment = Cash Flow 5744 26 988 44826 25452 7729 4244 96688 7594 5765 226 584 Machinery 9654 456 7748 2 452 5852 Livestock: Breeding 45925 64996 999 8697 76876 8894 Trading Land & Buildings 949 47872 6555 79566 4229 8726 57969 22977 22786 79645 25499 98544 Gross New Investment Loans Closing Balance 6 29672 269 25478 2847 8675 4678 28792 775 95 2645 68482 Total Standard Output (TSO) 7962.7 429.8 6572. 282742.6 857.8 522.9 2< < 2 2 < 2 6. Gross Output of which Land / Quota Let Overall Results ( ) Asset Values ( ) Distribution % of Farms Soil Group : () 52.6 58.9 64. 65.5. 57.4 (2) 47.4 4. 6. 4.5. 7.5 ()..... 4.7 = Total...... 7
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table B (24) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Dairying System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 9 9 29 2 269.9 2. 6.5 7.7.4.9 9.9 2. 5. 5.6.5 42.2 45. 26.7 42.8 7..7 5. 57.5 Tillage..8.7 6.5..4 of which Total Cereals..5.8...7 " Potatoes...... Grassland Silage.4 6.4 24.7 4.2 4. 2. Hay..5.5 2.5.2.6 Pasture.6 22.2 9. 7..6.2 Rough Grazing.2..4 2.9 2.7. U.A.A 24.7 4.6 68.6 24.8 48.8 55. Remainder of Farm Forage & Crop Acreage 2. 24.5 2. 4. 2.7 66.5 5.9 2.7. 46.6 2.5 5.7 Dairy Cows 8.7 54.7 84.4 42.7 58. 69.7 Cows.5.7 2.2 4..2.5 HeifersinCalf 4.9 8.4 4.2 29.8..6 < Year Old 6.. 54.7 89.5.9 4.7 2 Year Old Male 2.7. 7.5 2. 8.8 5.6 2 Year Old Female 5.8 8.8 7.7 26.9.. => 2 Year Old Male.2.2.9..2.5 => 2 Year Old Female.8.7.2.2..9 Bulls.6.8..9.. Total 69.9 6.8 82.9 8. 8.9 44.8 Sheep (avg. no) Ewes..5.8. 6.5.2 Sheep...8.9 8.. Total Sheep. 2.5.6 2. 4.5 2. Grazing Livestock Units Dairy Cows 8.7 54.7 84.4 42.7 58. 69.7 5.6 24.6 47.9 8.9. 6. Sheep..4.2..7. Horses Total Livestock Units. 54.2. 79.8.2 2.6. 22.9. 9.. 6.4 Family.6.24.47.59.7.6 Total.44..77 2.46.56.59 2< < 2 2 < 2 6. Area Owned Total Area LAND (ha) LIVESTOCK LABOUR UNITS 8
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table C (24) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Dairying System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 9 9 29 2 269 2. 6.5 7.7.4.9 9.9 2< < 2 2 < 2 6..9 ( ) GROSS OUTPUT LIVESTOCK Dairying 6525 92 7579 297579 62 9942 of which milk 62678 67 68986 295 792 75 99 26 4995 72992 269 84 of which Suckler Welfare Scheme Sheep & Wool 2 4 45 7 of which Sheep Welfare Scheme 2 8 6 47 Pigs Poultry Horses 47 9 SubTotal Livestock 7624 29298 22755 776 749 79 of which Disease Compensation 59 9 54 57 468 CROPS Wheat 7 884 Barley Feeding 96 59 2269 526 Barley Malting 8 44 45 Oats 8 8 55 Potatoes 5 29 97 762 592 of which Forestry Premium 5 4 47 64 27 SubTotal Crops TOTAL LIVESTOCK & CROPS 5 7677 79 7 8 24585 596 758 749 27 7226 + Machinery Hire Revenue 2 54 8 97 + Current Receipts 287 94 72 67 + Decoupled Direct Payments / Subs of which Single Farm Payment 927 6697 58 99 252 285 9725 6672 22 427 9949 66 " REPS 9 558 229 799 2682 775 " DAS 9 474 99 254 68 467 " Subsidies 9 79 6 226 8 AEOS 4 86 68 + Income from Land Let 246 595 44 + Income from Quota Let 67 7 27 InterEnterprise Transfers 95 754 2 6988 54 2578 TOTAL GROSS OUTPUT 8489 4796 2792 459 577 928 9
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table D (24) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Dairying System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 9 9 29 2 269.9 2. 6.5 7.7.4.9 9.9 476 9728 87 6547 2622 2685 225 96 49 798 222 25 Fertiliser 728 994 6549 47 6 55 Crop Protection 9 88 76 247 8 65 Purchased Seed 5 42 8 894 2 64 Hire of Machinery 779 79 547 726 695 864 Transport 225 22 92 567 7 2 Livestock (A.I. Vet etc.) 475 6992 486 279 7428 955 Casual Labour 42 55 84 54 92 92 487 658 24 996 85 895 SubTotal 8665 5876 878 7258 6969 7286 Fodder Crop Adjustment TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 42 826 457 549 999 868 657 74 6 628 765 7252 OVERHEAD COSTS ( ) Rent of Conacre 2 264 67 744 2 475 Car, Electricity, Phone 448 4579 5427 882 786 496 Current Hired Labour 84 72 5262 96 8 9 Interest Charges 28 549 62 687 749 9 Machinery Depreciation 285 5855 7 446 669 767 Machinery Operating 5566 727 278 2882 72 499 of which Fuel & Lub 259 576 49 475 Buildings Depreciation 2594 4578 72 6 44 59 Buildings Maintenance 784 67 2445 97 447 97 Land Improvement Depreciation 52 628 7 2246 9 829 Land Improvement Maintenance 28 289 247 2927 57 8 OVERHEAD COSTS 47 2767 445 527 64 6222 44 276 99 922 55 564 TOTAL NET EXPENSES 62 88657 494 29747 9626 22685 74. 62.2 62.7 7.6 6. 64.4 2< < 2 2 < 2 6. Purchased Concentrates Purchased Bulky Feed DIRECT COSTS ( ) Distribution % of farms Costs % Output 2
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table E (24) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) Dairying System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 9 9 29 2 269.9 2. 6.5 7.7.4.9 9.9 58.9 5. 52. 5. 52.6 52.8 7.7 8. 85.6 69. 84.8 8.7 Widowed %.. 2.7 6.9 7.8. Single % 26. 2.2.8 2.7 7.5.7 Separated % = Total.......4....2. Household Size (no.).5.24.76.72.4.44 < 24 (no.).79.9.49.48.6.2 < 24 % HH 6.8 52.2 64. 62. 5.5 54.7 25 44 (no.).7.6.75.8.7.64 25 44 % HH Demograph. Viable % HH 6.8 6.2 4. 76.7 45.9 87.4 44.8 89.7 42.4 77. 42. 79.6 52. 2< < 2 2 < 2 6. Age of Holder Marital Status Married % Holder Household Offfarm sources of income Holder and/or Spouse Offfarm Job % HH 47.4 56.7 5.2 4.5 5.2 Offfarm Job Holder % HH 2. 4.4 5.4. 7.8 7.8 Offfarm Job Spouse % HH 42. 54.4 49.5 4.5 5.2 47.7 Pensioners (no.).2.8.8..6.4 Pensioners % HH 5.8 7.8 5. 6.9 5.5 2. Unemployment Etc. (no.) Unemployment Etc. % HH..5......4... 2.9 F.F.I. ( ) < 5 FFI 5 26 2 4 FFI 2 5 4 7 FFI 2 6 8 5 7 FFI 5 7 22 7 2 7 FFI 5 7 5 29 6 7 2 9 FFI7TO 27 4 4 2 24 > 4 66 5 2 2
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 2A (24) Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Rearing System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 5 29 7 29.4 6. 7.8 2.4..7 9.7 2564 4657 6998 4268 9894 52 4 269 9 Subsidies and Direct Payments 8867 594 26867 9 542 Direct Costs 9744 47 242 78 98 = Gross Margin 589 265 4856 289 25986 Overhead Costs 222 5899 26842 485 566 = Family Farm Income 5668 45 278 75 69 Net Sales & Receipts 25254 4749 7245 944 49 Current Cash Expenditure 668 269 95 22664 24872 = Cash Income (Approx) 857 4729 29 68 527 Net New Investment = Cash Flow 25 2229 448 27774 285 685 2765 65 2859 278 Machinery 6 7847 2 566 84 Livestock: Breeding 269 694 4766 2497 292 Trading Land & Buildings 7945 5962 29679 98499 25 495 984 454884 7562 54626 Gross New Investment Loans Closing Balance 2229 876 2794 748 454 24 2765 58 4 8846 6.8 775.9 28.6 484.6 7484. 2< < 2 2 < 4. Gross Output of which Land / Quota Let Overall Results ( ) Asset Values ( ) Total Standard Output (TSO) Distribution % of Farms Soil Group : () 56.5 4. 48.. 44.5 (2) 4.5 62. 4.4. 44. ().... 8.7 = Total..... 22
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 2B (24) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Rearing System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 5 29 7 29.4 6. 7.8 2.4..7 9.7 2.9.6 59.2 4..4 26.6 9. 7. 47.4 4. Tillage..... of which Total Cereals...2.. " Potatoes..... Grassland Silage 6.7.. 6.7 9. Hay...6.. Pasture 6.7 24. 4.7 2.5 2.9 Rough Grazing.7. 8. 8.6 2.9 U.A.A 25.6 7.7 67.8 45. 8.5 Remainder of Farm Forage & Crop Acreage. 25..6 5.9 2.4 58.9 2. 8.6.6 5.6 Dairy Cows..... Cows 2.5 27.5 42. 2.2 26.9 HeifersinCalf..5. 2.2.6 < Year Old 6.8 22. 7.2 6. 22. 2 Year Old Male.8 2. 4.8 2. 2.7 2 Year Old Female 4.4 6..5 2.7 6. => 2 Year Old Male...4.5.2 => 2 Year Old Female.9..6.2.2 Bulls.8.8.4.9.9 Total 46.5 6.6.6 46.9 6.7 Ewes.4. 5.2.5 2.5 Sheep.2 2. 7.. 2.2 Total Sheep.6 5.2 2..8 4.8 Dairy Cows......2 4.2 65.. 4. Sheep..7.7..7 Horses.....2 Total Livestock Units.4 4.2 66.9.2 4.9 Family.97.99.2.96. Total.97..27.98. 2< < 2 2 < 4. Area Owned Total Area LAND (ha) LIVESTOCK Sheep (avg. no) Grazing Livestock Units LABOUR UNITS 2
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 2C (24) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Rearing System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 5 29 7 29 6. 7.8 2.4..7 9.7 2< < 2 2 < 4..4 ( ) GROSS OUTPUT LIVESTOCK Dairying of which milk 682 245 4742 69 2429 of which Suckler Welfare Scheme Sheep & Wool 42 45 2 2 44 of which Sheep Welfare Scheme 8 97 2 Pigs Poultry Horses 7 2 2 6 SubTotal Livestock 6846 24946 46 642 24726 of which Disease Compensation 5 78 29 Wheat Barley Feeding 66 2 Barley Malting Oats Potatoes 2 44 44 29 688 585 of which Forestry Premium 5 62 26 688 55 SubTotal Crops TOTAL LIVESTOCK & CROPS 44 699 442 2588 257 4547 688 79 67 25 + Machinery Hire Revenue 244 62 2 49 + Current Receipts 28 2 88 + Decoupled Direct Payments / Subs of which Single Farm Payment 8246 5 4465 949 2287 8269 778 8575 895 957 " REPS 95 2 75 472 89 " DAS 68 294 2247 4 29 " Subsidies 66 4 76 849 482 AEOS 45 268 82 26 + Income from Land Let 52 4 269 9 + Income from Quota Let InterEnterprise Transfers 2 TOTAL GROSS OUTPUT 2564 4657 6998 4268 9894 CROPS 24
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 2D (24) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Rearing System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 5 29 7 29.4 6. 7.8 2.4..7 9.7 89 46 5766 2999 89 67 7 656 2279 657 Fertiliser 289 287 495 266 2947 Crop Protection 98 4 25 29 Purchased Seed 82 6 98 89 Hire of Machinery 266 4 485 27 298 Transport 72 56 2 64 Livestock (A.I. Vet etc.) 56 227 6 67 25 Casual Labour 8 48 9 949 422 27 797 9 SubTotal 9776 459 298 622 44 Fodder Crop Adjustment 2 2 5 444 5 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 9744 47 242 78 98 Rent of Conacre 684 72 259 669 59 Car, Electricity, Phone 46 649 25 42 624 Current Hired Labour 242 74 27 26 Interest Charges 285 49 65 59 524 Machinery Depreciation 864 247 4558 227 2572 Machinery Operating 274 47 667 8 69 of which Fuel & Lub 224 225 2967 47 95 Buildings Depreciation 6 58 286 25 742 Buildings Maintenance 458 744 995 569 647 Land Improvement Depreciation 42 26 87 288 228 Land Improvement Maintenance 477 825 22 954 75 59 2225 92 9 27 OVERHEAD COSTS 222 5899 26842 485 566 TOTAL NET EXPENSES 9966 28 4826 2726 29525 76.4 7.8 8.7 78. 2< < 2 2 < 4. Purchased Concentrates Purchased Bulky Feed DIRECT COSTS ( ) OVERHEAD COSTS ( ) Distribution % of farms Costs % Output 78.7 25
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 2E (24) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) Rearing System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 5 29 7 29.4 6. 7.8 2.4..7 9.7 6.9 56.2 5.9 56.7 56.9 65.2 64.2 79. 52.8 64.5 Widowed % 8.7.8..5 5. Single % 26. 8.9 7.2 25. 2.5 Separated % = Total.. 5.7... 8.6..2. Household Size (no.) 2.48.2..7 2.9 < 24 (no.).57.94.7.86.79 < 24 % HH.4 9.6 55.2 4. 7. 25 44 (no.).22.66.62.64.56 25 44 % HH Demograph. Viable % HH 45. 7.6 7.9 75.9 7.4 9. 5.8 68. 8.2 62.7 2< < 2 2 < 4. Age of Holder Marital Status Married % Holder Household Offfarm sources of income Holder and/or Spouse Offfarm Job % HH 52.2 66. 62. 59.4 59.9 Offfarm Job Holder % HH 9. 4.5. 59.4 4.7 Offfarm Job Spouse % HH 9. 4.5 44.8 4. 4.4 Pensioners (no.)...4.9.29 Pensioners % HH 2.7 26.4. 8.6 22.9 Unemployment Etc. (no.) Unemployment Etc. % HH.8 7.5..4.7 7.4.5 5..9 9. F.F.I. ( ) < 5 57 26 4 42 8 FFI 5 7 26 4 7 2 FFI 2 26 2 24 2 26 FFI 2 5 28 7 FFI 5 4 2 FFI 5 7 FFI7TO > 26
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table A (24) Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 29 6 74 26 5 22 5.2 7.5 9. 6.. 2.4 2.8 224 2977 4974 856 74474 878 5954 2 67 2 7 2 25 Subsidies and Direct Payments 874 628 92 2778 5476 486 825 Direct Costs 927 88 2297 6777 7 979 = Gross Margin 94 2947 5 5289 674 248 876 Overhead Costs 9584 79 788 2986 5772 258 8555 = Family Farm Income 429 856 468 22977 5492 689 2 Net Sales & Receipts 22452 5859 59 856 75 2594 527 Current Cash Expenditure 65 2578 994 5482 479 2445 262 =Cash Income (Approx) 67 528 297 25 6856 249 99 Net New Investment = Cash Flow 555 456 664 66 227 797 7 252 628 522 2566 958 8 678 Machinery 64 8694 22578 69 57549 9598 244 Livestock: Breeding 69 76 762 2772 6492 649 686 Trading Land & Buildings 25285 6 255 47 468 765 69868 977 4925 2582 292 56228 48 69899 Gross New Investment Loans Closing Balance 45 45 596 295 66 47 868 22256 24 799 54 8959 544 52 794.4 4867. 27.9 646.9 754.4 9.8 288.4 2< < 2 2 < 5.6 Gross Output of which Land / Quota Let Overall Results ( ) Asset Values ( ) Total Standard Output (TSO) Distribution % of Farms Soil Group : () 6. 69. 55.6 66.2 76.9. 59. (2) 4.. 42.9 2.4 9.2. 2.7 ()...... 7.5 = Total....... 27
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table B (24) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 29 6 74 26 5 22 5.2 7.5 9. 6.. 2.4 2.8 5.6 25.6 6.4 57.4.4 6. 6.7 7. 27.4 42.2 67. 6.6 9. 42. Tillage...9.8... of which Total Cereals...7.4 9...8 " Potatoes....... Grassland Silage 5.6 6.5.4 5.7 2.8 6.8. Hay..7. 2. 5.4.7.4 Pasture.4 6.9 2. 42. 82. 9.8 24.8 Rough Grazing.. 2. 2.2. 5.4.9 U.A.A 6. 25.9 9.8 65.2 4. 5.8 4. Remainder of Farm Forage & Crop Acreage.7 6..5 25. 2. 7.2 2. 6. 2.5 24.. 29..9 8. Dairy Cows....... Cows.5 2.6.4 2.6 5.9. 4.2 HeifersinCalf..6. 2.4 4.2.5.5 < Year Old 9. 7. 2. 4. 6. 5. 2. 2 Year Old Male.2 8. 7. 28.4 55. 9. 6.6 2 Year Old Female 6.9 7..6 4.7 26. 5.. => 2 Year Old Male.6 2. 6.9 2.8 9.5.6 6.5 => 2 Year Old Female.2.7 2.6.2 8..8 2.4 Bulls.2.5.4.9.6..5 Total 5. 5.8 7. 2. 229.2 46.2 7. Ewes 2. 2. 9. 24. 64.7.7 4.7 Sheep 7.5.7. 24.6 7.6 4. 4.5 Total Sheep 9.6 2. 2.4 48.6 8. 7.7 29.2 2< < 2 2 < 5.6 Area Owned Total Area LAND (ha) LIVESTOCK Sheep (avg. no) Grazing Livestock Units Dairy Cows....... 2. 2.8 46.6 8.5 54.5.5 48.5 Sheep..2 2.8 6.6 7.. 4. Horses....5.6.4.4 Total Livestock Units 26. 6. 49.6 87.6 7.4 2.9 52.8 Family.89.96..27.4.25.5 Total.89.98.5.9.5.26.9 LABOUR UNITS 28
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table C (24) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 29 6 74 26 5 22 7.5 9. 6.. 2.4 2.8 2< < 2 2 < 5.6 5.2 ( ) GROSS OUTPUT LIVESTOCK Dairying of which milk 2787 779 2869 5547 52 728 292 of which Suckler Welfare Scheme Sheep & Wool 884 785 45 424 258 66 288 of which Sheep Welfare Scheme 256 6 75 25 62 44 6 Pigs Poultry Horses 79 7 527 46 59 9 SubTotal Livestock 467 984 2987 55277 47 7927 69 of which Disease Compensation 2 26 297 Wheat 7 26 42 Barley Feeding 624 96 949 785 Barley Malting 222 4 Oats 62 6 Potatoes 27 6 6 274 579 26 24 4 49 975 of which Forestry Premium 57 67 69 722 86 47 SubTotal Crops TOTAL LIVESTOCK & CROPS 4972 579 966 964 8 2822 5898 25 2796 49 9277 857 548 + Machinery Hire Revenue 276 46 274 98 498 + Current Receipts 6 49 4 29 42 572 49 + Decoupled Direct Payments / Subs of which Single Farm Payment 8247 62 69 882 778 6 2626 2292 5942 44449 995 725 676 4 " REPS 65 687 284 497 296 2 26 " DAS 6 44 284 898 292 2447 74 " Subsidies 82 87 256 67 27 99 66 AEOS 562 72 6 8 524 55 6 + Income from Land Let 2 67 2 7 2 25 + Income from Quota Let InterEnterprise Transfers 6 274 88 542 5 TOTAL GROSS OUTPUT 224 2977 4974 856 74474 878 5954 CROPS 29
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table D (24) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 29 6 74 26 5 22 5.2 7.5 9. 6.. 2.4 2.8 59 6 625 279 22469 877 6647 257 27 54 868 466 272 74 Fertiliser 94 27 9 645 77 2687 95 Crop Protection 2 94 296 576 22 2 2 Purchased Seed 4 4 8 7 6 228 Hire of Machinery 627 2465 74 5228 27 259 54 Transport 85 95 8 772 88 Livestock (A.I. Vet etc.) 949 56 29 474 67 269 29 Casual Labour 24 54 68 6 8 45 75 9 229 25 49 87 42 SubTotal 984 28 864 2252 67798 68 965 Fodder Crop Adjustment 4 99 9 47 28 2 4 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 927 88 2297 6777 7 979 2< < 2 2 < 5.6 Purchased Concentrates Purchased Bulky Feed DIRECT COSTS ( ) OVERHEAD COSTS ( ) Rent of Conacre 27 54 289 2268 67 68 252 Car, Electricity, Phone 626 484 78 29 26 57 75 Current Hired Labour 75 24 4 2 48 2 64 Interest Charges 8 68 825 59 27 9 6 Machinery Depreciation 4 254 2996 58 7974 2824 85 Machinery Operating 227 87 475 85 85 45 494 of which Fuel & Lub 5 226 47 7975 745 25 Buildings Depreciation 5 45 79 2872 5898 29 889 Buildings Maintenance 62 72 647 268 27 789 Land Improvement Depreciation 9 282 25 48 726 49 269 Land Improvement Maintenance 88 727 896 9 2587 684 982 565 99 254 2 476 27 244 OVERHEAD COSTS 9584 79 788 2986 5772 258 8555 TOTAL NET EXPENSES 89 2482 6266 626 9542 24988 76 75.8 72.9 69.5 8. 78. Distribution % of farms Costs % Output 82. 8.6
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table E (24) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 29 6 74 26 5 22 5.2 7.5 9. 6.. 2.4 2.8 57.8 56.5 6. 59. 57.6 6. 58.9 7. 55.2 6.5 62.2 7. 58.4 6.6 Widowed %. 6.9. 8..5..6 Single % 26.7. 28.6 24..5 4.6 27.8 Separated % = Total.. 6.9. 4.8. 2.7......5. Household Size (no.).2 2.48 2.56 2.69.2 2.42 2.67 < 24 (no.)..52.57.62..47.6 < 24 % HH 46.7 4.5 27. 2.4 5.8.8.6 25 44 (no.).5.4.7.49.5.22.4 25 44 % HH Demograph. Viable % HH. 66.7 27.6 58.6 27. 49.2 5. 58. 8.5 76.9 5.5 42.8 28.7 55.4 2< < 2 2 < 5.6 Age of Holder Marital Status Married % Holder Household Offfarm sources of income Holder and/or Spouse Offfarm Job % HH 4. 62. 49.2 9.2 42. 59.4 48.2 Offfarm Job Holder % HH. 55.2 4. 8.9 7.7 52.4 7.7 Offfarm Job Spouse % HH. 4.4 25.4 28.4 42. 24.8 27.8 Pensioners (no.).4.24.8.9.2.4.4 Pensioners % HH. 7.2 25.4 2.4 9.2 2.6 25. Unemployment Etc. (no.) Unemployment Etc. % HH...7.8.6 6..4 4......9 7.9 F.F.I. ( ) < 5 6 8 24 6 8 52 5 FFI 5 27 2 2 5 4 8 9 FFI 2 28 6 8 26 2 FFI 2 4 8 2 FFI 5 8 22 9 8 FFI 5 7 4 4 FFI7TO > 9
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 4A (24) Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Sheep System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 29 5 28 2. 2.8.9 2.9.. 5.5 629 5796 7784 4487 48727 27 42 7 62 Subsidies and Direct Payments 99 89 2784 7964 85 Direct Costs 29 688 27242 6 66 = Gross Margin 29 49 5598 2886 266 Overhead Costs 2 5898 266 7 = Family Farm Income 8 95 9585 82 565 Net Sales & Receipts 22 549 7772 4254 4852 Current Cash Expenditure 875 2852 528 928 289 =Cash Income (Approx) 567 22626 26965 4926 949 Net New Investment = Cash Flow 25 25 426 2274 24 55 2498 2428 2754 6686 Machinery 98 95 7749 446 242 Livestock: Breeding 8 26574 94 22 257 Trading Land & Buildings 229 6567 429 94 225 464 6588 45255 965 5962 Gross New Investment Loans Closing Balance 24 49 2557 72 4425 2526 2769 278 2967 92 5727.6 26759.4 999.6 224.5 256.6 2< < 2 2 < 8. Gross Output of which Land / Quota Let Overall Results ( ) Asset Values ( ) Total Standard Output (TSO) Distribution % of Farms Soil Group : () 4.7 48. 45.2. 7.5 (2) 58. 48. 54.8. 42. ().... 9.7 = Total..... 2
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 4B (24) Resources per Farm by Size (UAA Ha) Sheep System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 29 5 28 2. 2.8.9 2.9.. 5.5 27.4 6.6 6. 84. 47. 26.9 4. 72.5. 56.4 Tillage..7.9..7 of which Total Cereals..6.6..5 " Potatoes..... Grassland Silage 5.5 8..8 2.5 7. Hay.7..5..4 Pasture 5.6 27.2 9.5 6.9 2.7 Rough Grazing..9 7.2 4.8.8 U.A.A 25.5 8. 69. 8.2 54.2 Remainder of Farm Forage & Crop Acreage 2. 8..2 64.6.4 22.8.8 9.2 2.2 49.5 Dairy Cows..... Cows 8.9 2.4 7. 7.8. HeifersinCalf.9.6.2.7.8 < Year Old 8.8.7 8. 6.5.6 2 Year Old Male.7 5.6 7.7. 4. 2 Year Old Female 2.9 4.5 8..7 4. => 2 Year Old Male.2.9 4.8.4.8 => 2 Year Old Female.5.4 2.2.2. Bulls.5.5.7.2.4 Total 24.4 8.7 6. 8.6.8 Ewes 78.6 9.6 89.7 25.6 4.7 Sheep 74.9 26.7 82. 96.7 2. Total Sheep 5.5 266. 7.7 222. 255.8 Dairy Cows..... 5.8 26. 4.6 2. 22.6 Sheep 2.9 4.9 48.2 24.4 2.2 Horses Total Livestock Units.6 7.. 6.2. 89..6 7.. 55. Family..5.2.7. Total..6.45.8.7 2< < 2 2 < 8. Area Owned Total Area LAND (ha) LIVESTOCK Sheep (avg. no) Grazing Livestock Units LABOUR UNITS
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 4C (24) Gross Output and Direct Payments by Size (UAA Ha) Sheep System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 29 5 28 2.8.9 2.9.. 5.5 2< < 2 2 < 8. 2. ( ) GROSS OUTPUT LIVESTOCK Dairying of which milk 8699 5865 28 7258 6 of which Suckler Welfare Scheme Sheep & Wool 65 8688 2499 99 6655 of which Sheep Welfare Scheme 5 22 28 98 96 Pigs Poultry 7 Horses 9 52 78 8 SubTotal Livestock 9774 464 48728 7 29999 of which Disease Compensation 2 65 54 68 Wheat Barley Feeding 554 456 495 Barley Malting Oats 296 56 Potatoes 65 2 75 8 2458 6 694 of which Forestry Premium 7 22 47 SubTotal Crops TOTAL LIVESTOCK & CROPS 75 9849 75 59 4275 5 6 772 257 256 + Machinery Hire Revenue 86 478 5 + Current Receipts 95 89 4 2 + Decoupled Direct Payments / Subs of which Single Farm Payment 97 672 69 56 252 227 6277 98 684 659 " REPS 24 86 944 46 64 " DAS 25 259 2564 9 2424 " Subsidies 75 262 274 424 28 AEOS 25 965 284 29 9 + Income from Land Let 27 42 5 65 + Income from Quota Let 6 InterEnterprise Transfers 94 8 29 TOTAL GROSS OUTPUT 629 5796 7784 4487 48727 CROPS 4
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 4D (24) Direct and Overhead Costs by Size (UAA Ha) Sheep System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 29 5 28 2. 2.8.9 2.9.. 5.5 2644 6478 945 4285 576 42 579 28 87 742 Fertiliser 89 266 69 68 4 Crop Protection 77 25 57 52 29 Purchased Seed 29 66 277 24 79 Hire of Machinery 646 228 528 28 266 Transport 7 7 8 8 77 Livestock (A.I. Vet etc.) 672 246 485 58 259 Casual Labour 82 22 74 892 58 244 52 4 SubTotal 95 74 27949 6 6427 Fodder Crop Adjustment 728 26 7 28 66 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 29 688 27242 6 66 Rent of Conacre 2 888 58 75 7 Car, Electricity, Phone 748 87 2296 44 765 Current Hired Labour 29 42 72 5 5 Interest Charges 2 69 5 Machinery Depreciation 54 2775 5285 9 2865 Machinery Operating 286 966 86 2 4286 of which Fuel & Lub 46 27 422 558 26 Buildings Depreciation 4 28 2772 492 Buildings Maintenance 72 94 28 244 842 Land Improvement Depreciation 2 24 542 5 284 Land Improvement Maintenance 822 86 272 822 95 792 274 66 22 2477 OVERHEAD COSTS 2 5898 266 7 TOTAL NET EXPENSES 22548 278 5825 22668 66 62.9 76. 78.9 7. 2< < 2 2 < 8. Purchased Concentrates Purchased Bulky Feed DIRECT COSTS ( ) OVERHEAD COSTS ( ) Distribution % of farms Costs % Output 7. 5
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 4E (24) Demograhic Data by Size (UAA Ha) Sheep System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= Hill Farms 2 29 5 28 2. 2.8.9 2.9.. 5.5 64.8 56.2 55.7 59.8 59. 9.7 82.8 67.7 7. 79.5 Widowed %.. 6.5..8 Single % 8..8 6. 6.9 4.2 Separated % = Total.... 9.7....8. Household Size (no.).7 2.9.42..7 < 24 (no.).8.79.2.28.99 < 24 % HH 5. 44.8 48.4 4.5 42. 25 44 (no.).7.8.45.4.5 25 44 % HH Demograph. Viable % HH 6.7 58. 4.5 72.4 2. 8.6 29.8 49. 27. 6.6 2< < 2 2 < 8. Age of Holder Marital Status Married % Holder Household Offfarm sources of income Holder and/or Spouse Offfarm Job % HH 5. 55.2 5.6 28. 47. Offfarm Job Holder % HH.. 22.6 2.5 28.7 Offfarm Job Spouse % HH 25. 44.8 8.7 8.5.2 Pensioners (no.).5.28..4.6 Pensioners % HH. 7.2 9.7 6. 27.5 Unemployment Etc. (no.) Unemployment Etc. % HH.7 6.7.4.8. 6.5.2.9..2 F.F.I. ( ) < 5 9 26 25 FFI 5 25 4 6 29 9 FFI 2 25 4 9 22 25 FFI 2 8 6 4 8 FFI 5 8 26 2 FFI 5 7 FFI7TO > 6
Teagasc National Farm Survey: Results 24 Table 5A (24) Farm Financial Results by Size (UAA Ha) Tillage System Size (UAAHa) < 5 5 < >= 9 5 8 8.9. 2. 2.5. 8.4 477 648 275 29922 856 of which Land / Quota Let 257 58 968 7 22 Subsidies and Direct Payments 755 267 29562 66 2629 Direct Costs 8946 25 4246 69 927 = Gross Margin 2825 4277 7829 929 6954 Overhead Costs 577 247 425 9424 459 = Family Farm Income 6747 2 524 72895 28995 Net Sales & Receipts 4947 67264 25 29857 655 Current Cash Expenditure 28967 4995 7624 9582 6779 = Cash Income (Approx) 256 2269 548 275 4864 Net New Investment = Cash Flow 2594 79 58 2875 92 4278 2625 798 787 657 Machinery 275 42495 76562 88 6757 Livestock: Breeding 756 62 256 485 7 Trading Land & Buildings 2774 696222 927 884 4427 458 954 2279586 5857 7664 Gross New Investment Loans Closing Balance 2626 2 4588 265 276 2699 26444 548 999 97 Total Standard Output (TSO) 9557. 2678. 5486.7 4. 4989.9 2< < 2 2 < 5. Gross Output Overall Results ( ) Asset Values ( ) Distribution % of Farms Soil Group : () 88.9 92. 8. 8. 87.6 (2). 7.7 7. 6.7.5 ()..... = Total..... 7