Free advice & support. Your farm, your choice.
Most farmers do not need to be told that farming is under pressure. Costs keep rising. Margins stay tight. Subsidies are shifting. Markets are volatile. More and more, the forces shaping farm viability sit outside any one farmer’s control.
But the pressure is not only economic.
Stockfree Farming’s peer-reviewed research found that many livestock farmers grapple with the emotional weight of their work.
Over half report experiencing some level of moral concern around working with animals, more than a third have felt traumatised by aspects of their role, and over a quarter say it has negatively impacted their mental health.
These figures point to something that is hard to speak about openly. Many farmers came into this work because they care deeply about land, livelihood, and the practical dignity of producing food. For some, the system they work within no longer sits easily with those values – yet the alternatives have remained unclear, unsupported, or out of reach.
Around 55% of UK cropland is currently used to grow animal feed rather than food for people. At the same time, the UK is only 53% self-sufficient in fresh vegetables – a record low.
Livestock farming is the largest single source of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. The Climate Change Committee’s Seventh Carbon Budget, published in 2025, sets out a pathway that includes a significant reduction in cattle and sheep numbers by 2035. The policy environment is already beginning to respond.
The question for many farmers is not whether agriculture will change. It is how to navigate that change in a way that protects income, autonomy, and a future on the land.
"Reaching Net Zero across the agriculture and land sectors requires a reduction in livestock numbers, particularly cattle and sheep. This both reduces GHG emissions and releases land, allowing a shift of activity into woodland creation, peatland restoration, and growing energy crops."
The independent National Food Strategy review found that 85% of the land that feeds the UK is devoted to livestock production – yet this produces just 32% of our calories. The remaining 15% of land, growing crops directly for human consumption, provides 68% of our calories.
This imbalance matters – not as a moral argument, but as a practical one. It tells us that we can produce significantly more food per hectare when we grow it rather than rear it. DEFRA’s own 2026 national security assessment stated that the UK ‘does not have enough land to feed its population and rear livestock’.
A 2008 DEFRA analysis and a 2019 independent review both concluded that the UK has enough existing arable land to grow sufficient protein and calories for the entire population – if we use land differently. If we chose that path, we could be mostly self-sufficient in food. We are nowhere near that today.
The UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. We rank in the bottom 10% globally for biodiversity and last among G7 nations. From 1970 to 2018, global wildlife populations fell by 69%. In the UK, much of that loss is directly linked to agricultural land use.
Returning some of our least productive grazing land to native habitat – woodland, peatbog, species-rich grassland – would not only benefit biodiversity but represent one of the most cost-effective carbon capture opportunities available to the UK. The least productive 20% of agricultural land provides just 3% of our calories. Sheep farming, on its own, accounts for just 1%.
The trade-offs are not as stark as they are often presented.
Stockfree Farming co-authored peer-reviewed research exploring, for the first time, the emotional and moral experience of livestock farming. The findings were significant.
More than half of livestock farmers surveyed reported feeling morally concerned about their work. 45% said they suppress feelings of compassion towards their animals. 35% said they had felt traumatised by some aspects of their work with animals.
These are not fringe experiences. They are widespread, rarely discussed, and rarely acknowledged within the sector. Stockfree Farming does not use these findings to judge. We use them to open a conversation that many farmers have been carrying alone.
“Ever more farmers are morally concerned about what they do - caring for animals that are then killed - and that is new and worldwide, and everybody knows it, but you cannot say it as a farmer. It is high treason.”
Livestock farmer, Netherlands
Cited in peer-reviewed research
Three things have aligned at the same time, and they will not stay aligned indefinitely.
A new Labour Government is actively shaping the future of food and farming through major policy developments. The first part of the National Food Strategy was published in 2025, and the Land Use Framework was released in March 2026, setting clearer direction for how land will be allocated and managed across England. A 25-Year Farming Roadmap is also in development and expected to follow.
Alongside this, the Climate Change Committee’s Seventh Carbon Budget (2025) identifies livestock reduction as a structural priority. As these frameworks take shape, early movers will be better placed to access emerging transition support and respond to the direction of travel.
49% of livestock farmers surveyed say they would consider stopping farming animals entirely if financially viable alternatives existed. Contrary to assumptions often made about farmer conservatism, the desire for change is there. What has been missing are clear pathways, credible advice, and practical support.
Stockfree enterprises are already operating successfully across the UK and Ireland – at every scale, in every kind of landscape, and under every kind of climate. Our case studies include farms in Orkney, Somerset, Aberdeenshire, Oxfordshire, Ireland, and beyond. This is not theoretical. It is happening on working farms, right now.
Read our case studies to see what is possible:
