What should the replacement for SFI look like?

fudge · Mar 26, 2024

Steevo said:
And what defines a crop? Is "wild bird seed" a crop for example?

Are livestock farmers included in this definition of a "farmer"?

I would back a scheme that was only available to livestock farmers. The level of skill and commitment required is far beyond that required for an arable only enterprise and generally it supports far more employment. Basically this encourages mixed farming which would deliver many of the aims the government say they are interested in.

Jackov Altraids · Mar 26, 2024

fudge said:
I would back a scheme that was only available to livestock farmers. The level of skill and commitment required is far beyond that required for an arable only enterprise and generally it supports far more employment. Basically this encourages mixed farming which would deliver many of the aims the government say they are interested in.

It would also support arable farming.

fudge · Mar 26, 2024

Jackov Altraids said:
It would also support arable farming.

Of course.

Steevo · Mar 26, 2024

Huno said:
The best outcome but then they lose control of Land in the UK

Exactly.

And that's at least half the reason of why all these schemes exist.

Steevo · Mar 26, 2024

Little squeak said:
Has anyone got any idea if these changes will apply to existing agreements already made? The seed I bought got delivered today.

Under the changes, SFI applicants will only be able to put 25% of their land into six SFI actions that take land out of direct food production. The actions are:

Flower-rich grass margins

Pollen and nectar flower mix

Winter bird food on arable and horticultural land

Grassy field corners and blocks

Improved grassland field corners or blocks out of management

Winter bird food on improved grassland.

The new approach does not apply to:

any SFI application that's already been submitted
SFI agreements that have already been offered to applicants
existing SFI agreements.

Why we’re putting area limits on some SFI actions – Farming

Updates from Defra's Farming and Countryside Programme

defrafarming.blog.gov.uk

Clive · Mar 26, 2024

Two Tone said:
Yes it would.
But how do they get round the difference in the duration of each, being 3 or 5 years?
What would be best is a minimum duration of 3 years with an annual or two-year continuation similar to an Assured shorthold tenancy arrangement that happen in rented housing.
In other words, after the 3 years are up it can be extended by one or two years at a time.

However, to get started, combining all previous CS and SFI agreements to be gathered into just one, needs to use the latest end date of all existing agreements as one.

it’s not easy and that why it hasn’t been done yet i’m sure despite desire to do

Frank-the-Wool · Mar 27, 2024

CS has worked well and is understood by farmers.

All of ELMS was only a way of getting more farmers to be involved in environmental schemes. but in reality was a way of distributing the old BPS money.
Having an SFI scheme for 3 years was never logical for the environment as a minimum of 5 years such as CS needed to be in place and rates paid for these schemes need to be maintained at levels which encourage farmers to join them.
Capital payments should continue and be linked to CS type schemes to encourage fencing, hedges, maintenance of water courses etc.

Farmers should make their own decisions on what is best for their business and payments only made to the farmer/land manager who commits to the environmental schemes for long periods but also has to actively produce an agricultural output.

DRC · Mar 27, 2024

fudge said:
I would back a scheme that was only available to livestock farmers. The level of skill and commitment required is far beyond that required for an arable only enterprise and generally it supports far more employment. Basically this encourages mixed farming which would deliver many of the aims the government say they are interested in.

I’m not sure why livestock farmers would want every arable farm becoming their competitor in producing more lamb, beef or dairy to effectively water down the market. 1000s more lambs for instance, would only mean prices going down for everyone

Jimdog1 · Mar 27, 2024

DRC said:
I’m not sure why livestock farmers would want every arable farm becoming their competitor in producing more lamb, beef or dairy to effectively water down the market. 1000s more lambs for instance, would only mean prices going down for everyone

Do you have sheep? If not , you are in luck! I am offering a taster session over the next couple of weeks called " In at the deep end - an introduction to sheep farming!".
( Not for the easily distressed)

aangus · Mar 27, 2024

25k to each working/ farming business plus another 20k for each additional employee, simply

Hindsight · Mar 27, 2024

aangus said:
25k to each working/ farming business plus another 20k for each additional employee, simply

100 hectare Beef Suckler and Sheep Farm farm has a principal farmer (£25k), second principal farmer (wife £20k). Employs two full time staff (£40k). £90k annually. Makes sense!!!

How would this not lead to employee creation aangus? Would the employees be restricted from other work through the HMRC to ensure this was a real full time employment and not 'ghost' employment. Its a non runner aangus.

DRC · Mar 27, 2024

Jimdog1 said:
Do you have sheep? If not , you are in luck! I am offering a taster session over the next couple of weeks called " In at the deep end - an introduction to sheep farming!".
( Not for the easily distressed)

Gave up lambing sheep about 25 years ago before they completely sent me mad.

fudge · Mar 27, 2024

Hindsight said:
100 hectare Beef Suckler and Sheep Farm farm has a principal farmer (£25k), second principal farmer (wife £20k). Employs two full time staff (£40k). £90k annually. Makes sense!!!

There should be a cap for any subsidy. I see from the daily torygraph that “Britain’s failing farmers” are again under attack from those who would rather import food.

aangus · Mar 27, 2024

Hindsight said:
100 hectare Beef Suckler and Sheep Farm farm has a principal farmer (£25k), second principal farmer (wife £20k). Employs two full time staff (£40k). £90k annually. Makes sense!!!

How would this not lead to employee creation aangus? Would the employees be restricted from other work through the HMRC to ensure this was a real full time employment and not 'ghost' employment. Its a non runner aangus.

calm down, I'm sure it could be tweaked here and there. It didn't cost millions to think it up

livestock 1 · Mar 27, 2024

I don’t think the government realise what shockwaves this produce/don’t produce subsidy system causes in agriculture

Two Tone · Mar 27, 2024

Frank-the-Wool said:
CS has worked well and is understood by farmers.

All of ELMS was only a way of getting more farmers to be involved in environmental schemes. but in reality was a way of distributing the old BPS money.
Having an SFI scheme for 3 years was never logical for the environment as a minimum of 5 years such as CS needed to be in place and rates paid for these schemes need to be maintained at levels which encourage farmers to join them.
Capital payments should continue and be linked to CS type schemes to encourage fencing, hedges, maintenance of water courses etc.

Farmers should make their own decisions on what is best for their business and payments only made to the farmer/land manager who commits to the environmental schemes for long periods but also has to actively produce an agricultural output.

Well said.
CS was a success. Why they had to come up with what is in effect a parallel scheme with the most inappropriate, stupid name I have no idea, other than they wanted it to sound new, so as to justify their own salaries.

WTF is Sustainable about it?
What is the prime objective and first thing we associate with Farming? Feeding us, not the birds!
What does it Incentivise (so far)? To stop producing food.

It is just a ‘Soundbite’ to impress non-farming folks.
Nothing it does, couldn’t have been added onto CS, which does exactly what its name suggests.
And would have saved an awful lot of time, stress and wasted money.

Hindsight · Mar 27, 2024

aangus said:
calm down, I'm sure it could be tweaked here and there. It didn't cost millions to think it up

Hi. Thank you for your kind words. I will take a chill pill! But on a serious note I don't think it could be 'tweaked here and there'. We have seen on TFF since November farmer after farmer looking to 'work' the new sub SFI system. From scattering some Herbal Ley seed into a four cut 300kg/ha N silage ley to sprinkling a few beans before drilling wheat to claim SAM2 - all relying on a tweet from Janet Hughes. If there were employee payments as you mention I am sure it would be exploited. Such a payment would require very stringent initial criteria let alone criteria. Hey ho. Cheers.

digger64 · Mar 27, 2024

Clive said:
sfi doesn’t complete with root rents, never has ( neither did bps)

WHAT !!!

willyorkshire · Mar 27, 2024

fudge said:
I would back a scheme that was only available to livestock farmers. The level of skill and commitment required is far beyond that required for an arable only enterprise and generally it supports far more employment. Basically this encourages mixed farming which would deliver many of the aims the government say they are interested in.

Assuming we don't need more livestock, would you be happy to make a reduction in numbers so that all arable farmers can keep some?

fudge · Mar 27, 2024

willyorkshire said:
Assuming we don't need more livestock, would you be happy to make a reduction in numbers so that all arable farmers can keep some?

I have not got any livestock. Personally I would not keep livestock just to chase a subsidy. From the outside livestock farming needs stability more than arable farming therefore it seems reasonable to concentrate support there. A large proportion of arable produce goes into livestock feed so such a system would support my activities as well. One of the current aims of policy is to export livestock and its attendant emissions to other countries. This is a real threat to everyone in uk agriculture, it’s also a threat to the global environment as the absolute damage of uk consumption could be greater than sensible utilisation of UK resources.

What should the replacement for SFI look like?

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Staff Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

0 %

Up to 25%

25-50%

50-75%

75-100%

100% I’ve had enough of farming!

Share this page