Natural England knows best?

Ukjay

Member
Location
Wales!
You expect such hiding of pitfalls in a contract by the private sector but, surely, we should demand better from our public servants? Or am I being intentionally naive?

I think they are the worst to be honest. We all know the private sector are rougues, but we also know the Public Sector are vultures imho.
Also, there is that old saying - nothing in life is free, and with one hand they give, the other they take away.
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
Clear legal over-reach then by NE it would seem. @ajcc case could well turn out the same. It's unfair that NE will most likely be legally protected from a claim for damages as a result of their misuse of the rules. Both cases can clearly prove loss suffered as a direct result of teh NE interpretation of the rules.

An excerpt from the above article. May be relevant to @ajcc if he obtains professional assistance now.

Precedent set
Farm adviser Julie Wade, senior agribusiness consultant at Fisher German, said the decision could benefit other farmers in a similar situation. “We’re delighted for Rob and his family – it’s just a shame it has taken so long to get the outcome,” she said.

Quick phone call as it would appear that Ms Wade knows the buttons to press?
 
If it is the national trust it was probably them who grassed the farmer up to begin with. I've no time for them and I've met people with all kinds of similar problems with the NT over the years. They don't like farmers and they especially don't like conventional or intensive farming.

I used to have the same reservations about the old CSS agreements back when they were a thing. These ecology types don't like farming and will put you in a rut that they want to keep you in.
 

Andy26

Moderator
Arable Farmer
Location
Northants
So the answer is?

When does a ley risk trapping you into perpetual land use restriction?
The moment its established if its semi-natural by virtue of the archeology that lies beneath. Well thats how NE are interpreting it.

Another anomoaly from NE. There is a 2ha theshold, so below 2ha you can cultivate unless NE have put a screening notice on the land removing this threshold. However NE say:

Natural England also needs to consider proposals to change land under the 2ha threshold that’s of regional significance if it:

  • is semi-natural
  • has heritage features, such as above or below-ground archaeological sites
  • has special landscape features, such as historic parkland
This is definitely NOT what it says in the 2006 or 2017 legislation, the 2017 SI amends Schedule 2 of the 2006SI by setting out the criteria screening decisions and notices should be based on, but does not obligate the landowner to seek determination for under the 2ha threshold.
 
My impression of the NT I have formed over time is that they will 'allow' you to farm their land as a tenant provided you basically manage the land or unit the way that suits them. Woe betide anyone who takes on one of their farms with any intention of doing anything else. I remember a lecturer at college showing us around a very nice farm not far from the coast (Devon this is) that he was thinking of taking on, I seem to remember it was a national trust farm but may be wrong. Very nice spot but you could see it hadn't been farmed particularly heavily for years, all lovely gently sloping fields and that red Devon dirt. Throw in the odd tree and it wasn't far off looking like parkland really. I think he had plans to do a bit of extensive beef and basically run it part time. I guess 'they' would have found that agreeable. Bit of fert, lime, mow a bit to make round bales. Cattle graze gently over summer. Jobs a goodun. But for someone to go in there and keep serious numbers of cattle, putting in crops, mob grazing or heaven help growing maize or beet or something, it would have put them at DEFCON 1 overnight.

They want park rangers basically. Someone who keeps a scattering of animals for something to look at.
 
Last edited:

bluepower

Member
Livestock Farmer
My impression of the NT I have formed over time is that they will 'allow' you to farm their land as a tenant provided you basically manage the land or unit the way that suits them. Woe betide anyone who takes on one of their farms with any intention of doing anything else. I remember a lecturer at college showing us around a very nice farm not far from the coast (Devon this is) that he was thinking of taking on, I seem to remember it was a national trust farm but may be wrong. Very nice spot but you could see it hadn't been farmed particularly heavily for years, all lovely gently sloping fields and that red Devon dirt. Throw in the odd tree and it wasn't far off looking like parkland really. I think he had plans to do a bit of extensive beef and basically run it part time. I guess 'they' would have found that agreeable. Bit of fert, lime, mow a bit to make round bales. Cattle graze gently over summer. Jobs a goodun. But for someone to go in there and keep serious numbers of cattle, putting in crops, mob grazing or heaven help growing maize or beet or something, it would have put them at DEFCON 1 overnight.

They want park rangers basically. Someone who keeps a scattering of animals for something to look at.
You are just about right on the money . Having being a tenant for twenty five years, they have become more and more removed from farming and farmers to the extent that they do not wish us to farm our little patch of five hundred acres anymore. We have handed our notice in and leave this autumn, knowing we have made the right decision for us. It is going to be very hard for our son who is just starting his farming career but we will help him in any way we can.
We have become an enemy to the NT in recent years, far more interested in their members than their tenants, this farm will slip into derilection and the public will treat it as a giant playground with dogs running loose and bikes trespassing everywhere. But they will just say it is all for public access and give themselves a pat on the back. Maybe one day they will realise their mistake, but I somewhat doubt they will ever admit it?
 

Dry Rot

Member
Livestock Farmer
Are laws still enacted by Parliament? A wise man told me many years ago that civil servants have a duty to carry out the will of Parliament and, if that wasn't clear, they had a dty to make an educated guess. He told me to look it up in Hansard and see what was actually discussed as civil servants occasionally get it wrong. Is this mess really what our elected representatives intended to happen? Sometimes it is easy to forget that they work for us.
 

___\0/___

Member
Location
SW Scotland
If it is the national trust it was probably them who grassed the farmer up to begin with. I've no time for them and I've met people with all kinds of similar problems with the NT over the years. They don't like farmers and they especially don't like conventional or intensive farming.

I used to have the same reservations about the old CSS agreements back when they were a thing. These ecology types don't like farming and will put you in a rut that they want to keep you in.
 

Goweresque

Member
Location
North Wilts
I was thinking about this issue the other day and I think people are being blinded by a 'It was in a scheme, but the scheme has ended so I can do what I like' mindset. The point about EIA legislation is that land falls under it regardless of whether the habitat was created on purpose by a scheme, on purpose voluntarily, or indeed accidentally.

After all, if you went out and created a wildflower rich meadow out of an arable field off your own bat then it would eventually fall under EIA legislation and you'd never be able to plough it up again. We know this - arable land becomes temporary grassland, which becomes permanent grassland, and if you don't 'cultivate' your permanent grassland with fertiliser and chemicals for long enough it would eventually fail an EIA test to revert to arable. That can happen regardless of whether one is being paid to manage the land in any given way. It could happen because of active decisions made, or purely by accident.

So the 'It was in a scheme' argument is irrelevant. All that matters are the conditions on the ground and the actions the land manager has taken over the last X years. The reason for those actions doesn't matter. So if you join a long term environmental scheme that has the specific aim of increasing the habitat value of the land then there is a significant risk that your actions will eventually result in the land failing an EIA test.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 105 40.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 94 36.3%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 39 15.1%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 5 1.9%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.2%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 13 5.0%

May Event: The most profitable farm diversification strategy 2024 - Mobile Data Centres

  • 1,764
  • 32
With just a internet connection and a plug socket you too can join over 70 farms currently earning up to £1.27 ppkw ~ 201% ROI

Register Here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/the-mo...2024-mobile-data-centres-tickets-871045770347

Tuesday, May 21 · 10am - 2pm GMT+1

Location: Village Hotel Bury, Rochdale Road, Bury, BL9 7BQ

The Farming Forum has teamed up with the award winning hardware manufacturer Easy Compute to bring you an educational talk about how AI and blockchain technology is helping farmers to diversify their land.

Over the past 7 years, Easy Compute have been working with farmers, agricultural businesses, and renewable energy farms all across the UK to help turn leftover space into mini data centres. With...
Top