The humble farmer is of course at the end of the line with these issues, with nowhere to pass on increased costs.
With governing bodies trying to resolve a supply-based cause to inflated pricing with a deterrent used to quell high levels of demand, it is unhelpful at best and is akin to drinking a smoothie with a fork.
Cuts can be made by the grower of course, however where the line is drawn between the point of saving money versus putting a cap on income production will differ for everyone, with no one-size-fits-all answer.
In the livestock world, it is also a tale of two stories with re-stockers, particularly buying SIL ewes, having to fork out eye watering amounts to purchase breeding ewes as early rains bolster this already strong market – with $300 per head now the absolute bare minimum needed to participate in this space.
However, those holding a solid breeding base with the ability to produce more, along with possibly still holding progeny from last season, are sitting on the other side of the fence and will benefit from having this stock on hand and well positioned to withstand an increase in freight, fuel and fertiliser costs in the short-term.
It is safe to suggest most livestock producers would be somewhere in-between these two scenarios, holding stock but maybe able to handle a few more, with restricting factors such as water-supply and seasonal-outlook playing on the mind.
The mixed farmer might also have their hand moving toward the dial, ready to adjust it ever so slightly towards livestock and reducing machinery hours and the associated costs, leaving them still subjected to international markets, but not beholden quite as much to the oil and gas fields of Middle East.
The entire March 25, 2026 edition of The Weekly Advertiser is available online. READ IT HERE!
The entire March 25, 2026 edition of AgLife is available online. READ IT HERE!