Digging below the entertainment of Clarkson’s Farm successful third series, a fundamental problem can be found that will affect us all. But will we have enough time to find a solution?

The TV series Clarkson’s Farm shows how difficult it is for his farm Didley Squat Farm to make any money. Over the three series, Jeremy and the rest of his team have tried to develop new income streams such as: a farm shop, restaurant, growing different crops, farming sheep and cattle, at the same time as improving bio-diversity. But at each attempt he ran into various problems including layers of of bureaucracy.

During the recent series, a competition was set up between Jeremy and his side kick Kaleb Cooper. Kaleb had to maximise the profit from the arable side of the farm, and Jeremy was to make money from the non-productive areas of the farm such as the wood. Included in Jeremy’s new income streams were breeding pigs in the wood, rearing goats to clear overgrown areas of the farm which would then be rented out to other farmers for a similar use, and grow mushrooms in what looked like an an old air raid shelter.

During one of the episodes Andy Cato of Wildfarmed discussed the adverse effect of the current faming practices on the health of the soil, and at best it had about two generations of harvests left. He described the principles of regenerative farming and how it will improve the health of the soil. The term regenerative farming has been increasingly used since the 1980s, but it is only in the last 10 years that it has gained a higher profile through various campaigns. As the name suggests, it is an approach to farming that, in theory, allows the land, the soil, water, and nutrients to recover through different cropping approaches. To test the principles, a small plot on Didley Squat was sown with a mix of grain and beans. The beans were included to improve the nitrogen levels in the soil and therefore reduce the amount of artificial fertiliser. During the last episode the results from the plot were pulled together and although the crop yield was down the inputs such as fertiliser were lower and therefore the plot made a profit. Which is good news for farmers. I was interested in how much the health of the soil had recovered so I contacted Wildfarmed but I have received no reply. However, checking other peoples work in the area such as Gabe Brown, although the health of the soil will return after many years of regenerative farming the yield never fully returns to that produced by current farming techniques. So here is the problem: if regenerative farming was scaled up across the UK then the yield would be down, and if the demand for the crops stay constant then the price will go up resulting in increased food prices. So to save our soil, food prices will go up.

If we are going to find a balance between improving the health of our our soil and increased food prices then a discussion will be needed between three different groups: famers, the government and us, the consumer. For example, as food prices go up the government could reduce the import tariffs on grain which would bring food prices down but that would reduce the profitability for farmers. Another approach the government could take is to stimulate economic activity so that there is more money in our pockets to pay for the higher prices. But given their performance over the last ten to twenty years I am not hopeful. Of course they could increase taxes and improve farming subsidies but that is not a vote winner. Similarly farmers would face lots of challenges. Although their profitability may improve using regenerative farming there is the ongoing impact of climate change which will make the growing of any future crops difficult. Then there is us, the consumer. If we changed our eating habits and reduced our meat consumption then less grain would be fed to animals, which is expensive way to produce food. For example, it has been calculated that a 15% reduction in meat consumption across the EU would have nulified the global grain shortage caused by the war in Ukraine. But all of these questions, and I’m sure there are many more, will need lots of discussion to thrash out the best action to be taken.

From my experience, Clarkson’s Farm gives the viewer the most accurate view of the struggles of farming in the UK. Scaling up of regenerative farming which is required to save our soil will require a constructive discussion and agreement between farmers, politicians and us the consumer. It is going to take tens of years for the health of the soil to fully recover which is time that the soil probably hasn’t got therefore the discussions need to start now!

PS After I wrote this post I came across a document with the same title Saving Our Soils which is part of the Soil Association’s campaign to raise awareness of soil health. It gives a seven point plan to address soil health and is well worth a read. They are also running a campiagn where individuals can pledge to improve the health of soil - so show some support and give it a click

The technology of the moment is Artificial Intelligence ( AI ). News of its development is everywhere. The gathering opinion is that we are going to be made redundant or even worse, humanity will be eliminated. But there are certain areas in our lives that it will never replace.

Computers have become an integral part of our lives; they are in our bags and pockets. Over the decades software has been developed to cover every moment of the day and night from managing our money to finding a partner. AI is the latest development which is changing how we live and work. But AI works in a different way compared to the current technology. Normally a computer programmer writes an algorithm in software, which is a series of instructions, to solve a particular problem. When data is input into the algorithm it returns with an answer. An example is your bank account where the input data includes your salary and bills, then an algorithm is used to output the amount available that you can spend. AI, in a sense, programmes itself. It finds patterns in amongst very large amounts of data. Then when a questions is asked uses the patterns that it has found to match it up an answer. In the case of the latest version of AI, Generative AI such as ChatGPT, the computer takes more text than can be imagined, and works out the meaning of the words by looking at their context within sentences. When the user asks a question it will return with a written reply that looks as though you are having a conversation with ‘somebody’ the other side of the screen. The claim by most commentators about Generative AI is that it simulates human cognitive processes - learning, decision-making, problem-solving and even creativity. Hence the near hysteria in the media about the future of humanity. However, as the system is based on the quality of the data then there are many problems. The most obvious example is bias and prejudice, and the old maxim “rubbish in - rubbish out” still applies. However, I am sure that these problems will eventually be solved.

But there are areas of life that AI will never be involved:

[1] The first area is where rules are already in place for carrying out an activity. For example the rules to decide whether a mortgage application is granted. Replacing a rules based activity by AI would be a disaster. Image an AI system deciding whether it awarded you a mortgage based on how you asked it a question rather than based on your economic circumstances.

[2] Anything that requires practical knowledge such as repairing a toilet. When I asked ChatGPT how I could repair a leaking toilet it came back with a list of steps littered with American terminology that was of no use. Any practical problem, which covers many activities in life, then humans are still the best at solving them.

[3] Commentators suggest that AI can be used instead of teachers. However, how about learning a new practical skill to ride? For example, learning to ride a bicycle requires a lot of trial and error and eventually confidence is built up until we can confidently put our foot on the pedals and cycle off. I asked ChatGPT how would I learn to ride a bicycle and it came back with a list of unhelpful instructions.

[4] Because Generative AI is text based then picking up on emotional aspects e.g. Emotional Intelligence, is very limited. There are no technology solutions for AI to interpret emotions and therefore will not be a part of our emotional lives.

[5] One of the biggest threats discussed by commentators is that an AI system can reproduce creativity. I asked ChatGPT to write a piece about a current world event in the style of Jane Austen and it returned with the news from Higbury, a fictional town from her novel Emma. But as discussed above an AI system can only be as creative as the data that it has learned from. How would it use intuition or insight, to develop a new piece of work. Could AI write a universal song such as Woody Guthrie’s “This Land Is My Land”, or change the history of Art such as Picasso? Very difficult to imagine.

The increasing availability of computers has had an big impact on our lives. But there are key areas where AI will not replace us because of our unique human capabilities. Next time that you read, or hear about AI eliminating humanity, then test the claim by asking how it will fix your leaking toilet?

PS I asked ChatGPT “what are the limits of Generative AI?” and its reply confirmed many of the views described above.

Over the years of cycling through the countryside I have seen many changes in farming practice. Recently I have picked up on a trend which could be the solution to the conflict between producing food and recovering biodiversity.

Cycling along the hilly Dorset lanes it is clear that there is a wide variation in the height and width of the hedgerows. They can range from what I call a ‘crew cut’, where they are cut to within an inch of their lives, to a ‘I need to get the job done’ when I usually get a puncture from the sharp thorns. Trees are dotted about the countryside, but their position looks random. It is all very haphazard. The current state of the hedgerows offer some habitat for the usual suspects: robins, blackbirds, sparrows and chaffinches. The trees are dominated by wood pigeons and crows. If I ever came across a yellow hammer I would fall off my bike in shock! Over the last two to three years I have seen more deer than rabbits, and I have yet to spot a hedgehog or fox. But what I am starting to see is that a few hedgerows are being laid which is where the hedge stems are laid at an angle to thicken their base which invigorates growth. I believe this is an early sign that some farmers and landowners are beginning to take hedgerow management seriously.

Traditional hedgerow management would have seen hedges laid every fifteen to twenty years. Laying the hedgerow encourages new growth at its base which is the ideal habitat for wildlife. Sometimes they would have been left to grow out and then be relaid. Otherwise they would have been trimmed by hand. This type of management lasted for centuries but it was labour intensive. Two factors changed hedgerow management: mechanisation of farming with the introduction of the flail mower and wire fencing. The flail mower is cheaper to use than hand trimming and by replacing hedgerows with wire fencing the maintenance costs are further reduced. Today the flail mower is controversial because they are used to keep the height of a hedge at the same level each year so that re-laying a hedge is no longer required.

Hedgerows have the potential to offer a home for a wide range of species. For example a study carried out on a hedgerow in Devon identified over 2000 species. The report also identified many factors that are involved in using the hedgerow for wildlife habitat such as: connection with the surrounding landscape, hedge structure, plant diversity and the ‘green-lane effect’ which is where farmland tracks with unsealed surfaces are bordered on each side by hedges. However, poorly managed hedgerows can have an adverse effect on wildlife. For example many over trimmed hedgerows create high canopies which leads to vegetation thinning at their base which is bad for hedgehogs.

There is a growing interest in hedgerow management with voluntary groups such as the The Great Big Dorset Hedge who work with farmers to facilatate the restoration of hedgerows across Dorset. The National Hedge Laying Society are dedicated to maintaining hedge laying skills for wildlife. And some individuals such as Adam Nigels have influenced government policy. Many wildlife organisations such as the People’s Trust for Endangered Species along with other groups who campaign for hedgehogs, doormice etc. actively promote good hedgerow management. The UK government through subsidies pay farmers to manage the hedgerows and their Envronmental Improvement Plan has pledged to support them to create or restore 30,000 miles of hedgerows a year by 2037 and 45,000 miles a year by 2050. But as I cycle around the countryside it is obvious that there is a long way to go before improved hedgerow management will recover biodiversity.

So what can be done? One suggestion is that groups of farmers could club together and create a new role for somebody to manage the wildlife on their farms using active hedgerow management. The aim would be to replace all fences by hedges and recover existing hedgerows. The individual’s role would include planning and managing the hedgerows with the aim of improving biodiversity on their farms. The role would coordinate their efforts with volunteer groups who are a great source of knowledge about hedgerows and wildlife. They would be ‘hands on’, we don’t need another layer of management, and include laying hedges and measuring biodiversity as part of their skills. ELMs and other government grants could pay for the role. If more government support was required then how about a ‘wildlife tax’ where all food processors and retailers are taxed as the produce leaves the farm gate and the money gathered would pay for the role described above?

We need to accelerate the recovery of biodiversity but maintain, and where applicable, improve food production. One of the best ways of doing this is to improve hedgerow management. It takes unproductive land which can be maximised for the recovery of biodiversity. But the improvement in hedgerow management needs to move from evolution to revolution if we are going to reverse the decline in biodiversity. The role described above would focus action on farms but the revolution needs to be ignited by us. If you have a hedgerow in your garden is it in the best shape to improve biodiversity? When you are out walking through the countryside do the hedges look like they are supporting a wide range of biodiversity? If not why not then contact a local group working on improving biodiversity e.g. your local wildlife trust, etc. and ask how you can help? If there are parks close to where you live, are the local authorities managing the hedges to maximise biodiversity? If not, contact your local councillor and ask why not. If you see a farmer you could have a chat about the obstacles that are preventing them from managing their hedgerows to get a better understanding of the problems that they face. Contact your local MP and ask them how the latest government initiatives will improve hedgerow management. If it isn’t going to improve biodiversity then ask them why they are wasting tax payers money. With a little bit of imagination and lots of determination we can all help to recover biodiversity and then maybe one day when I am out cycling I will see more yellow hammers than robins.

Each day there seems to be the launch of a new product claiming that it will change our lives. If computer technology is involved then the sales pitch stretches reality to breaking point. Apple’s latest product, Vision Pro fits neatly into this category. But will it really change our lives?

Vision Pro is the latest iteration in Augmented Reality ( AR ) which first saw the light of day at Harvard in 1968. The product consists of a headset that shows a mix of the real world and computer generated content. We are probably familiar with some of the technology’s ideas through its use on the web: superimposing different styles of spectacles onto a face or fit a sofa, or wallpaper onto a room in our homes. It has a lot of potential applications in a broad range of industries. But I suspect the thought of walking around wearing something the size of diving face mask will put most people off.

Manufacturers are trying to develop new products that can be labelled the ‘killer app’, a piece of software that we can’t live without which and which increases their profitability. Probably the best known killer app is the spreadsheet. It was launched in 1979 with the first product being VisiCalc on an Apple and then it was quickly followed by IBM on their PC with Lotus 1-2-3. Initially it was thought that accountants would be replaced by the spreadsheet but what happened was that it was the accounting clerks that were replaced by out sourcing the number crunching to the machine. Today there are probably more accountants than ever but it is because of other factors such as the increase in complex legislation and taxation.

However, there was a bigger impact in other areas such as Science and Engineering. The engineering company that I worked for took the bold step of buying one of the early PCs. It sat in our office for a few months with many people peering at it as they walked past. Until its arrival, I was using a large computer to carry out engineering calculations which could take between five minutes to many hours to complete a set of results. One day I switched it on and found Lotus 1-2-3. I started to play with it and discovered its potential in manipulating numbers. We quickly transferred most of the equations from the main computer to the spreadsheet and carried out the calculations in a matter of seconds. Many other companies spotted the spreadsheet’s potential and quickly adopted for other areas of Engineering and Science.

In general, the golden rule is that “software sells hardware”. The rule can be seen in action today with generative AI driving up the demand for advanced computer chips which will eventually bring their cost down and sophisticated AI applications will be as common today as spreadsheets. Any software product must meet three criteria: it solves an important problem ( in my case it was speeding up calculations so that we could improve our engineering designs ), it is easy to use, and is affordable. In the case of the spreadsheet, it had an initial high cost because PCs were around $2000 at the time, but the demand for it contributed to the reduction in computer costs which increased its affordability. Today, where there are numbers being used, there is usually a spreadsheet in the background.

But it is only when we look back that we can see that the spreadsheet was a piece of software that earned the label of being a ‘killer app’. And as any good philosopher will point out that there are no good arguments that the past can be used to predict the future. In the case of the spreadsheet, who in the late 70s would have predicted that it would rule the world of numbers?

Vision Pro has potentially many applications ranging from improved collaboration, entertainment and health. But AR is still trying to find a fundamental problem that would make it indispensable to how we live. In other words it is a ‘solution trying to find a problem’. Apple should drop its price, which is currently around $3,499, so that it is made more accessible to as many people as possible. Then maybe somebody will switch it on and invent an application that historians looking back will label a ‘killer app’.

Hacking through over grown footpaths while searching for signs of a route across the countryside can feel like being in the film Raiders of the Lost Ark. Do we need a new approach to making the countryside more accessible?

I find most footpaths close to a town and city have clear directions and accessible footpaths. The trouble starts when I stride out to explore the countryside. I have come across finger posts, the tall posts that point the way of the footpath, that have been decimated by hedge cutting equipment or knocked over, foot stiles that haven’t been repaired for years, and overgrown footpaths that are lost in amongst bramble bushes. Then there are the gates. Kissing gates, those that swing backwards and forwards, can be difficult to open and manoeuvre through with a buggy or wheelchair, and if you have to open a field gate then be prepared for some heavy lifting. Then the routes themselves can pose many challenges. The worst are those that go through people’s gardens, or through the middle of a farm yard, where you are usually greeted with a death stare or a barking dog. Often a planned route can be several miles from sensible parking and therefore a few miles have to be added to the walk which can turn the day into a major hike. Then there are footpaths that cross fields full of animals, in particular a bull. Although there is great advice in the The Countryside Code about crossing fields with animals, it is still too daunting for many and then a ‘re-route ‘ is required which can add more miles to the walk. All of these small challenges can take the enjoyment out of a day walking through the countryside.

It is not all bad. Some farmers try and help the walker. For example running tractor tracks across their fields to show the route direction. Sometimes they re-route the footpath around their farms to keep walkers clear from a busy farmyards and allow Premissive Pathways, which usually offer better routes across their farms. But they are the exception rather than the rule.

The future of footpaths are in trouble. A recent report describes over 32,000 places were blocked through lack of maintenance. Then there is the wider issue of losing ancient footpaths with all of their history. The UK Government recently announced it would be implementing a deadline of 2031 to save the 41,000 miles of lost paths in England. After that date we will no longer be able to claim rights of way in England based on historic evidence. Maintenance for public rights of way falls between local councils who should make sure the footpaths are kept in good order and the farmers who are responsible for keeping the footpaths clear. Both parties are strapped for cash and therefore footpaths are a very low priority.

But there is a strong case for making access to the countryside available to the wider population. The health benefits are many and are discussed daily in the media. They include improvements in physical health, wellbeing, reducing stress and improving sleep quality. The newly introduced Social Prescribing includes walking, and the UK government are trialling the effect of walking on peoples physical and mental health. With increasing demand for walking then there will be more pressure on farmers and local councils to make sure that footpaths are in good order. Rather than rolling their eyes they should look at it as a good opportunity to promote the countryside and farming in general.

Farmers are nearing the end of the Agricultural Transition Plan which is taking farming subsidies from Direct Payments where they are paid on the amount of agricultural land that they own to Environmental Land Management ( ELM ) where they will be paid public payment for public goods. Given the amount of press about the difficulty in implementing ELMs then there will probably be an ELMs 2.0 which would be the time to add more support for the farmers through additional payments to help manage the footpaths going across their land. Funding could be taken from the Office for Health Improvment and Disparities whose role is to improve the nation’s health, and moved to ELMs. One side effect would be to bring farmers closer together with their local communities as well as educate the wider public about the important role that they play in the life of the country.

Access to the countryside needs improving if more people are going to benefit from what the UK can offer. Some simple rule changes to farming subsidies, backed with some money, would make the benefits of walking through the countryside available to the wider population. In the future, rather than coming across people lost and confused about the route, I hope to find them excited about the wonderful countryside that the UK has to offer.