SIR, – I do not know Jenna Whyte beyond all written by her in The SF September 3. However, her aspiration, many of her difficulties in achieving it, and her thoughts are familiar. 
“I know if I was the landlord, I wouldn’t take the risk of renting out and yet I am the one wanting the farm to rent.”
In a nutshell, this quotation from Ms Whyte demonstrates just one of the conundrums we all face. 
Many are banging on about the need for farms to let, but no doubt precious few with a chance, or given a chance, would let a farm they own under current circumstances. 
The fact is, owner occupation is the preferred tenure of land, and no wonder. Why then, do we have the futile call for farms to let? 
Government, STFA, aspiring farmers and NFUS, if cornered, all have their voice on the issue. 
Okay, so the current cost of land is beyond most new entrants being able to buy a farm. Why should that prohibit supposedly essential successors to the industry? 
If government thinks they are essential, then government should see to it. Government measures could readily bring land values to appropriate levels.
Almost without exception, all who farm, or wish to, do so because they enjoy, or think they will enjoy farming. Scale is not critical. The freedom it affords is. 
Now if only! If only those with a farm already just gave a thought for the individuals without a farm before denying that freedom to another. 
Not a chance! Self interest seems to drive most and there will always be someone who will convert that all important opportunity for someone into needless expansion for himself.
But government could see to it. They hold the purse strings, either directly or delegated locally. We need more houses, therefore taxing second homes is a solution.
We need more farming opportunities, therefore taxing second farms is a solution.
As for subsidising them, well work that out for yourself. I cringe just thinking about it!]


Tom Gray
West Park
Braco