Sustainable farming incentive details published today 2 December 2021

DrWazzock · Dec 17, 2021

We direct drilled winter wheat into a sprayed off grass ley that had been there for 16 years - on sand. There was so much thatch on top that I thought this will take years to breakdown. We had a good crop of wheat off it, albeit quite bad with fusarium and ergot. We chopped and returned the straw.
This autumn if you take you trowel and have a look in that field it appears to be back to pure sand even without cultivation. Maybe the grass roots are there beneath the surface but the thick layer of thatch has completely disappeared.
Being left on the top covered in oxygen I reckon it’s oxidised with help from worms and bacteria. Would it actually have oxidised less rapidly if it had been ploughed under and been less exposed to oxygen? I don’t really know, but the disappearance in 12 months of a thatch of turf built over 16 years has surprised me somewhat and would indicate that building OM is going to be a very slow process.

Humble Village Farmer · Dec 17, 2021

delilah said:
In what way is it the point of the thread ? The thread is about the SFI standards. It has been made clear that payment of the money isn't connected to the results of your som tests.

The point of the sfi standards as I have understood them is to do exactly that, reduce pollution and increase biodiversity, by default that means getting more carbon into the soil (or losing less). Generally speaking, ploughing does less of these than no till.

Phil P · Dec 17, 2021

delilah said:
The standards as they currently look wont be there by the third year.

Exactly!

delilah · Dec 17, 2021

Phil P said:
Exactly!

Ha, yes, I see what you mean, but I mean they will be unrecognizable rather than amended. Look at how different they are today from what they were a matter of weeks ago. This is all still at the experimental/ making it up as we go along stage.

Phil P · Dec 17, 2021

delilah said:
Look at how different they are today from what they were a matter of weeks ago.

Yes, they’ve dropped the payment rates! Looks even more appealing now

Humble Village Farmer · Dec 17, 2021

DrWazzock said:
We direct drilled winter wheat into a sprayed off grass ley that had been there for 16 years - on sand. There was so much thatch on top that I thought this will take years to breakdown. We had a good crop of wheat off it, albeit quite bad with fusarium and ergot. We chopped and returned the straw.
This autumn if you take you trowel and have a look in that field it appears to be back to pure sand even without cultivation. Maybe the grass roots are there beneath the surface but the thick layer of thatch has completely disappeared.
Being left on the top covered in oxygen I reckon it’s oxidised with help from worms and bacteria. Would it actually have oxidised less rapidly if it had been ploughed under and been less exposed to oxygen? I don’t really know, but the disappearance in 12 months of a thatch of turf built over 16 years has surprised me somewhat and would indicate that building OM is going to be a very slow process.

I would expect your thatch to have been consumed by the soil. Otherwise where else could it have gone? Do you ever pick up a bit of damp straw off the concrete at this time of year and see worms underneath it? The faster your soil consumes carbon, the more healthy it is. I know sandy soils are hungrier.

I suspect that's one of the reasons for the soil testing. You actually get results rather than beliefs. Maybe they reckon doing soil tests will educate the farmers into how different practices have different outcomes.

delilah · Dec 17, 2021

Phil P said:
Yes, they’ve dropped the payment rates! Looks even more appealing now

It's a finite pot of money. They have had to drop the rate seeing as they have made it - the arable area payment - a free for all. Which, as you say, now makes it the opposite of a free for all. There's only one way out of the mess. They will get there.

DrWazzock · Dec 17, 2021

Humble Village Farmer said:
The point of the sfi standards as I have understood them is to do exactly that, reduce pollution and increase biodiversity, by default that means getting more carbon into the soil (or losing less). Generally speaking, ploughing does less of these than no till.

I’d say it’s debatable when you look at the over all picture. I have a “feeling” that zero till can help but I’ve no hard evidence.
Relying on big annual doses of glyphosate over an ever increasing area - is that wise?

Humble Village Farmer · Dec 17, 2021

DrWazzock said:
I’d say it’s debatable when you look at the over all picture. I have a “feeling” that zero till can help but I’ve no hard evidence.
Relying on big annual doses of glyphosate over an ever increasing area - is that wise?

Possibly the hard evidence we will see is the som tests that are part of the scheme.

Round here, there are plenty of tillers who use multiple doses of glyphosate on stale seedbeds so I don't think it's a no till drug. I don't think it's a good drug either and people are looking at ways to reduce or eliminate its use.

ajd132 · Dec 17, 2021

Humble Village Farmer said:
Possibly the hard evidence we will see is the som tests that are part of the scheme.

Round here, there are plenty of tillers who use multiple doses of glyphosate on stale seedbeds so I don't think it's a no till drug. I don't think it's a good drug either and people are looking at ways to reduce or eliminate its use.

The glyphosate argument is so pointless. We probably use less than our max till/plough neighbours. We certainly use less than we used to.

Humble Village Farmer · Dec 17, 2021

ajd132 said:
The glyphosate argument is so pointless. We probably use less than our max till/plough neighbours. We certainly use less than we used to.

Quite honestly, you'll be pushed to find a crop farmer who doesn't use it. But it's very important to say that no till relies on it and is using too much and poisoning the planet etc etc

Good to find ways to reduce use anyway. Soil would probably be healthier without it.

holwellcourtfarm · Dec 17, 2021

Humble Village Farmer said:
Quite honestly, you'll be pushed to find a crop farmer who doesn't use it. But it's very important to say that no till relies on it and is using too much and poisoning the planet etc etc

Good to find ways to reduce use anyway. Soil would probably be healthier without it.

Not least because of its antimicrobial properties.

Choose your cover crop species carefully and a blade roller can achieve the same result.

Humble Village Farmer · Dec 17, 2021

holwellcourtfarm said:
Not least because of its antimicrobial properties.

Choose your cover crop species carefully and a blade roller can achieve the same result.

The problem is that we have already chosen our black grass varieties a little less carefully so slightly compromised. Doing an understorey trial with a view to cutting it out though.

BrianV · Dec 17, 2021

Janet Hughes Defra said:
Yes, exactly that

Hi Janet this scheme is definitely going to be to the detriment of smaller often younger family farmers who are unable to engage enough in these ELMS schemes to make it worthwhile, can I suggest that Defra seriously consider something along the lines below that I have discussed with a fellow farmer.
I think after last nights election result you may find the minister & PM far more inclined to take a similar view!

delilah said:
You/ We need to put a number on it.
£200/ Ha ? More ? Less ?
On what, anything that is grass on 1 Jan each year, or just on PP ?
With a cap on it ? The first how many Ha ?

Not sure why you seem to find it so difficult to comprehend, the simplest fairest solution would be to carry forward the existing SFP at the same rate of pay for the first 100 hectares for every farmer in England with any ELMS schemes separate & additional to that amount with a cap on any ELMS schemes yearly payment of I would say £50,000.
This base payment would be to ensure that those first 100 hectares were farmed under the same conditions as they were with the existing SFP.

ajd132 · Dec 17, 2021

holwellcourtfarm said:
Not least because of its antimicrobial properties.

Choose your cover crop species carefully and a blade roller can achieve the same result.

Not if you have grass weeds or volunteer cereals. You can reduce the amount of glyphosate needed with a crumpet but you still need to clear those grass weeds up.

Clive · Dec 17, 2021

ajd132 said:
The glyphosate argument is so pointless. We probably use less than our max till/plough neighbours. We certainly use less than we used to.

I was going though records last week and we use less than 50% of the glyphosate now than we did under heavy cultivation

slug pellet use was 10% of what we used under cultivation

selective herbicides 30% lower

insecticide use 100% lower

fungicide use - no different really

Nitrogen use was 40% lower (due to rotation and reduced leaching etc)

DRC · Dec 17, 2021

Clive said:
I was going though records last week and we use less than 50% of the glyphosate now than we did under heavy cultivation

slug pellet use was 10% of what we used under cultivation

selective herbicides 30% lower

insecticide use 100% lower

fungicide use - no different really

Nitrogen use was 40% lower (due to rotation and reduced leaching etc)

Should’ve learnt to plough better. I suspect you’re talking of min till, the devils way of cultivating which undoubtably led to the black grass problems half the country struggles with.

Clive · Dec 17, 2021

silverfox said:
Should’ve learnt to plough better. I suspect you’re talking of min till, the devils way of cultivating which undoubtably led to the black grass problems half the country struggles with.

going back through records they include our plough / combi drill system and then the years of mintill

Slug pellet use here was actually at its highest under the plough, glyphosate use highest under mintillage

Neither plough or mintill allowed cutting off N, selective herbicide, insecticides

Phil P · Dec 17, 2021

Clive said:
going back through records they include our plough / combi drill system and then the years of mintill

Slug pellet use here was actually at its highest under the plough, glyphosate use highest under mintillage

Neither plough or mintill allowed cutting off N, selective herbicide, insecticides

Why did ploughing not allow for a reduction in insecticides?
We’re probably 70% plough 30% mintill and not used any insecticides for a number of years, can’t remember the last time we used slug pellets (over 10 years ago at least!) unless there’s a major weed problem we don’t use any glyphosate pre ploughing and a reduced rate with a pre-em on mintill ground. Very very rare we use glyphosate pre harvest as well. So probably not much different to no till use or possibly less even.

DRC · Dec 17, 2021

Clive said:
going back through records they include our plough / combi drill system and then the years of mintill

Slug pellet use here was actually at its highest under the plough, glyphosate use highest under mintillage

Neither plough or mintill allowed cutting off N, selective herbicide, insecticides

That could easily have been your lack of skill set as much as the system though .
We hardly use any slug pellets, insecticides or roundup in our system , and certainly not routinely pre harvest or complete fields pre ploughing .

Sustainable farming incentive details published today 2 December 2021

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Staff Member

Member

Staff Member

Member

Member

0 %

Up to 25%

25-50%

50-75%

75-100%

100% I’ve had enough of farming!

Share this page