More news on cider. I haven’t had time to do the research to find out the outcome of the subsidies, but this report from 2004 makes some interesting points:

the UK government has issued a proposal that will financially reward farmers for ripping up their ancient cider apple and perry orchards to make them qualify for subsidies. The reason for this is that from January next year orchards will not be classified as farmland. Some farmers are already destroying their orchards so the land will be ready in time for the subsidies. If the orchards are not turned into farmland by January 2005 the farmers will not be able to claim the subsidy, even if they do later chop down their orchards. It’s a do it now or forever lose out scheme. Naturally those cider makers who are already struggling financially because they don’t have the means to bottle their product and get it into shops are being pressured into cutting down their ancient, and in some cases rare or unique, orchards. Many fine ciders and perries will be lost forever.

Edited to add (9/3/06): Still haven’t found much info on the outcome of this strange regulation, but here are more of the particulars:

Under Commission rules any orchard with more than 50 trees per hectare is considered woodland and therefore not eligible for the single farm payment.

Woodland? That seems rather odd as many farms have trees denser than 50 per hectare. More research needed. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) also has some old information on the subject, including a line drawn between “permanent” crops and “single” payments:

Publicity about the potential impact on orchards of CAP reform and the new Single Payment (some of it misinformed) generated a good deal of concern over recent months. This stems from the fact that land used for permanent crops, including orchards, cannot generally be used to support a claim for the Single Payment.

To be honest, I’m having a hard time making heads or tails of this. On the one hand the BBC suggests that DEFRA was trying to modernize UK agriculture:

to allow farmers more flexibility to grow according to consumer demand, rather than follow the long-established line of subsidised crops. A spokesperson for Defra says, “It is designed to give extra protection to the environment, soil, wildlife habitats and landscape.” Commendable, surely, so can everyone apply? Not exactly. “Land used for permanent crops, including orchards, cannot be used to support a claim.”

And that makes no sense at all. Flexible and responsive to consumer demand yet protective of long-standing habitats? Tear out the habitat in order to get subsidies to protect the habitat? I could see a need for flexibility to a point, but from where does this legislated/subsidised need for flexibility come from? And how does flexibility help after the 100-yr old trees are gone but you want them back?

I think the bottom line is drink more cider now before its gone and people say, “what’s with all the wheat subsidies in the UK?” From the BBC again, some advice:

There are some things, albeit small ones, that we, as consumers, can do to help. Be vocal about encouraging supermarkets to sell home-grown apples when in season – and not just a paltry few. Better still, head down to your local farmers’ market and seek out those unusual ones that may only be sold once. If the names put a smile on your face, take the apples home with you. And if you want to get more involved, there are ‘apple days’ all across the country that take place mostly in September and October. Apple tastings, cider-making and watching a spot of Morris dancing are just a few of the activities on offer.