For thousands of years it was so uncomplicated for farmers.

You either owned or rented a piece of land on which you reared animals or harvested crops.

You took them to market and got the going price.

Weather and diseases were problems, but they were in God's gift.

Lawyers rarely figured in the equation, and when they did it was to sort out a little landlord and tenant problem, or a probate matter.Then came the European Economic Community, the common agricultural policy and milk quotas for a start and, more recently, high-profile public protests over animal welfare issues.

Enter the lawyers in a big way.Today's farming is as much a business as the production of widgets in any factory.

And farmers of all descriptions find themselves increasingly the subject of public scrutiny and ultimately the object of legislation.So farmers as businessmen need lawyers just as much as any other commercial operators.

Gone also are the days when the local market town general practice would cater to all of the farmer's legal needs.

The last decade or so has seen the birth of the specialist agricultural firm.Arnold Thomson is a five-year-old agricultural niche firm in the small market town of Towcester in Northamptonshire.

The firm is the product of two break-away partners from the agricultural department of Shoosmiths & Harrison and it now has three assistant solicitors and a six-strong support staff.Joint founding partner Michael Thomson explains that, ironically, its biggest impediment to growth has been farmer loyalty to professional advisers who acted for father and grandfather.But business necessity is causing that entrenched attitude to crumble.

A welter of domestic and European regulations have combined to force farmers into the arms of lawyers and accountants.

Above all, it is the renowned Brussels common agricultural policy which has motivated farmers to take a busine sslike approach to their jobs.The change in mentality has come sharply.

Mr Thomson points to one farmer who illustrates it by saying his grandfather operated the farm business from a desk in the corner of a room, his father ran things from a small room in the house, while he has had to add an extension to accommodate a separate farm office.'The whole field has become much more complicated for the farmers because of the UK membership in the EU,' confirms Mr Thomson.

'Quotas have been introduced to try to keep the CAP under control.

And they have a direct effect on the individual farmer.

If he is growing arable crops he has got to set land aside every year.

And we have had milk quotas since 1984 meaning the dairy sector is operating under a rigid EU scheme.'What it boils down to is that if farmers want to claim lucrative EU subsidies they have to abide by complex rules set down in Brussels legislation.

The integrated administration and control system (IACS) - emanating from Brussels and administered in the UK by the Ministry of Agriculture - stipulates that farmers have to register exactly what areas they farm and what they are doing on those areas.'It is no good a farmer being just a superb stockman or a superb husbandman or grower of arable crops,' says Mr Thomson.

'Farmers have got to be able to run the business as well - to manage the figures and to claim the maximum they can from the CAP.'Another potential pitfall for farmers is UK pollution laws brought in to conform with European environmental legislation.

One of the most active prosecutors is the National Rivers Authority, which routinely hauls farmers before tribunals on charges of polluting 'controlled waters' with slurry and effluent.

Fines can be heavy, with £2000 plus costs being around the norm, but penalties of £10,000 to £20,000 are not uncommon.

'That can make a big impact on many farms,' says Mr Thomson.But Brussels is by no means the only regulator out there waiting to ensnare wayward farmers.

The Health and Safety Executive makes frequent tours of British farms to assess employee working conditions.

One of the biggest difficulties comes over farming machinery.

Large combine harvesters, for example, are used for only several weeks of the year.

The rest of the time they lie idle, often ill-protected from the weather, and maintenance is not always what it should be.And animal welfare issues - as the death of a protester last week under the wheels of a calf lorry illustrated - are becoming an increasingly emotive issue.

As public pressure mounts, local county councils, and indeed the ministry itself, become more assiduous in their checks.Much of Arnold Thomson's business comes through an arrangement with the National Farmers Union.

Farmers speak to their local union representative when they smell a whiff of legal trouble in the air and they are then referred to Arnold Thomson for a free 'first advice' interview.

After that session, if the farmer wishes to pursue the matter, he becomes a client of the firm, although the union will often make a grant towards part of the costs.The job also sees Mr Thomson and his partner out on the farms themselves.

While not as mucky as veterinary work, being a farmer's lawyer, in Mr Thomson's case, still means travelling to clients of all sizes, from small tenants right through to large landed estates.'If I am being asked to act for somebody new, then I like to go and see them on the farm because it means so much more.

It means far more, for example, when you've got the plans in front of you when you are doing prope rty work.

Or if the farmer is trying to explain why they've got an effluent problem, if you have seen it on the ground it is much easier to understand.'A by-product of farmers becoming more business aware is that their approach to lawyers is gradually changing.

They have begun to recognise that old family loyalties will no longer do.

'They are more inclined to question the expertise of the advisers,' says Mr Thomson.

'And they are more inclined to change their professional advisers than they were.'That is, of course, a welcome development for Arnold Thomson.

A corollary is that as with other areas of modern life, farming has become increasingly more litigious.

In the not very distant past, occurrences such as crop failures were written off as just 'one of those things'.

But today, points out Mr Thomson, 'farmers ask was the seed right? Can I sue the supplier? Was the spray application right? Can I sue the chemical company?'Not so far removed from the attitude in Threadneedle Street.