TFF's ELMS Questions time ? Number 2

Hampton

Member
BASIS
Location
Shropshire
@Clive
Not strictly elms related but can you ask him about the catchment sensitive farming/Waterboard grant postcode lottery please?
It is unfair that my neighbours can’t access the same grant money as me and some can’t access any at all, despite us all farming in the same river catchment.
This is replicated all over the country and gives some farms unfair advantages over others
 

Brisel

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Midlands
@Clive
Not strictly elms related but can you ask him about the catchment sensitive farming/Waterboard grant postcode lottery please?
It is unfair that my neighbours can’t access the same grant money as me and some can’t access any at all, despite us all farming in the same river catchment.
This is replicated all over the country and gives some farms unfair advantages over others

There are area priorities maps available that will tell you what they will target.

Statements of priorities: Countryside Stewardship - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
 

Hampton

Member
BASIS
Location
Shropshire
There are area priorities maps available that will tell you what they will target.

Statements of priorities: Countryside Stewardship - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
I know how they were set, but i know 3 dairy farms, 3 miles apart, ones in no schemes, ones in Waterboard and the others in both.
the farm in both can access £15k more grant per year than the one in no schemes and 10k more pa than the one in Waterboard only. All are in Severn catchment.
Postcode lottery!
Im not a dairy farmer btw
 

midlandslad

Member
Location
Midlands
The difficulty with the payment rates is that a good rate in area with average Grade 3 arable land will not be attractive in those Grade 1 root cropping areas.

I assume that the SFI will be at a level to apply to all farms and it is then the other tiers which will be more selective.
 

Farma Parma

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Northumberlandia
Compulsory SSSI designations and restrictions have made land less productive, less profitable and caused a reduction in capital value (compared to neighbouring non-SSSI land).

Farmers have never had any compensation for this. Will ELMS redress this issue, and offer higher payment rates for SSSI land.
Honestly iam gratefull my neighbour is in SSSi as thats how i got invited into HLS otherwise i might have struggled i recon
 

Neddy flanders

Member
BASE UK Member
Having read this thread, and I can fully understand why, but farmers don't really understand what ELMS will be. It is in no way a method of maintaining profitability on farm. One of the early posts mentioned needing £x000 to replace lost BPS. Forget it. More likely your local park or golf course will receive more ELMS money, as it will be open to all land managers.
ELMS will, as I understand, seek to replace marginal land with non-farming stewardship. That is going to take some getting your head around for those who've spent lives kind of farming it, but really only living on subsidy.
 

Neddy flanders

Member
BASE UK Member
Having read this thread, and I can fully understand why, but farmers don't really understand what ELMS will be. It is in no way a method of maintaining profitability on farm. One of the early posts mentioned needing £x000 to replace lost BPS. Forget it. More likely your local park or golf course will receive more ELMS money, as it will be open to all land managers.
ELMS will, as I understand, seek to replace marginal land with non-farming stewardship. That is going to take some getting your head around for those who've spent lives kind of farming it, but really only living on subsidy.
There are a multitude of books on the future of the planet and Agriculture. It's the hot topic. My feeling for farms and the rest of society in general is that every single human being has got to learn to use less energy in any of it's forms. Ag is no exception. My question would therefore be "Does ELMS provide UK land managers with incentives to halve energy Consumption whilst simultaneously sequestering the maximum amount of Carbon possible?"
 

GeorgeK

Member
Location
Leicestershire
Economies of scale and reduced overheads mean that a payment per hectare goes further on a large holding of several thousand hectares than it does on a small family farm. Would DEFRA consider a sliding scale per hectare for payments, for example supporting the first 100 hectares at a higher level, with the levels per hectare dropping down progressively from there?
I think this is a very important issue. The biggest landowners can employ full time advisors to extract maximum possible funding. There is a very real danger that the majority of money will end up in the hands of the current big recipients of BPS, leaving little for everyone else. For example, according to Defra CAP payments, in 2019 the National Trust received almost £10 million. This doesn't include BPS paid to their tenants which they also collect in rent. Worryingly, giant landowning organisations like NT and RSPB also appear to be unduly influential in the design of ELMS. This is a clear conflict of interest as it gives them the opportunity to influence ELMS for their own benefit at the disadvantage of smaller farms. This will effectively of concentrate the environmental work to a few small areas, damaging hopes for wider and more diverse national outcomes.
A sliding scale AND payment cap must be considered to prevent the country's biggest landowners from hoovering up a detrimental share of the funds.
 
Last edited:

Simon Chiles

DD Moderator
Any new scheme needs to take into account the value of existing small fields, hedges, permanent pasture, stone walls, trees, ponds and existing habitat rather than just pay out for new things that are created for the scheme. And to be flexible enough to recognise that all areas of England have very different growing conditions.

This^. Also @Clive can you ask them whether payments will be made to farmers who might have been implementing some of things they require for decades and not just to those that convert over just to receive the sub. If the later is the case I could foresee some land that was already being farmed in an environmentally friendly way being ripped up just so that it can be reinstated to get funding.
 

Walton2

Member
Average field size here...11 acres(4.4ha), all with hedges.
Average hedge length per field....1000m.
Minimum 2m non-cropped area per field...0.2ha
Average crop area lost per year...4.5%.
All the hedges are now cut as per the regulations, not as and when they should be cut.At significant cost to me and to the detriment of crops and hedges.
Will any new scheme take consideration of the difference in my costs with those incurred on a similar size farm with less boundaries and fewer hedges ?
If not ,why not?
 

Walton2

Member
I have a couple of questions on value for money for the taxpayer, who is ultimately paying for ELMS.
1. What is the cost of setting up this scheme? Actual figure required.
2. What will it cost to administer annually?Actual figure required.
3. What will the payments be to farmers, not landowners? Actual figure required.

Once we (farmers and taxpayers) are given those figures, farmers will be able to make an more informed judgment on whether to sign up to the scheme. I have a feeling that the overall cost of ELMS will give a very poor return to the taxpayer.It will give an inordinate amount of control over our land management, for an unspecified time, and with little prospect of it being beneficial to farmers in the long term.
 

The Ruminant

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Hertfordshire
Listening to the first interview, DK seemed pretty well versed on repeating the DEFRA line; "...we will use the public money that we have" followed by the SIX target outcomes;
Air Quality
Water Quality
Biodiversity
Climate Change
Flood Mitigation
Countryside Amenity Value and Culture

Put into context, I can't see DEFRA doing anything within ELMS that will not measurably achieve these outcomes.

Given that Permanent Pasture would tick the box on all 6 of the target outcomes and it is probably achievable for the vast majority of farmers of all sizes and it doesn't necessarily affect the productive capacity of the land.
Will the ELMS include a simple Permanent Pasture Payment?
Great question.
As an addendum, I would suggest:

Will there be funding for training and implementing mob grazing regimes on livestock farms?

This should be broadened to holistic farm management though this may be a step too far for many livestock producers. Mob grazing, however, is a proven management tool to improve carbon sequestration, extend the grazing season, reduce artificial fertiliser use, improve the capacity of the land to soak up & hold heavy rainfall, and increase plant diversity.
 

texelburger

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Herefordshire
1)No mention of food in elms. So my question
With the uptake of elms this will reduce agricultural production from a country that isn’t self sufficient. This will lead to increased imports from countries with a higher carbon footprint in food production and lower welfare standards. How will you that’s in charge of ELSM explain this to the public?
2) you couldbe known for doing to agriculture what Mr Beeching did to the railways. Are you happy with this comparison?
3) as found out with the free school meals fiasco a lot of money get spent on administration and bureaucracy will you guarantee a percentage of the budget goes to the farmer rather than spent on administration like it does now with countryside stewardship compared to the BPS?
1) Absolutely agree on this.Exporting food production to areas of the World with huge carbon footprints and low welfare with ,maybe,cloudy assurance schemes. I think this is what we,ultimately, will see.:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
Having read this thread, and I can fully understand why, but farmers don't really understand what ELMS will be. It is in no way a method of maintaining profitability on farm. One of the early posts mentioned needing £x000 to replace lost BPS. Forget it. More likely your local park or golf course will receive more ELMS money, as it will be open to all land managers.
ELMS will, as I understand, seek to replace marginal land with non-farming stewardship. That is going to take some getting your head around for those who've spent lives kind of farming it, but really only living on subsidy.
And yet the government "Agricultural transition plan" says that ELM money will be available to all farmers and a key aim is for farms to be profitable and sustainable without subsidy. The proposals include nothing to achieve that (except encouraging us to apply for partial grants for technology that supposedly makes us "more efficient" but often just saddles us with more cost and complication).

Screenshot_20210117-073348_Dropbox.jpg
 

DRC

Member
And yet the government "Agricultural transition plan" says that ELM money will be available to all farmers and a key aim is for farms to be profitable and sustainable without subsidy. The proposals include nothing to achieve that (except encouraging us to apply for partial grants for technology that supposedly makes us "more efficient" but often just saddles us with more cost and complication).

View attachment 934367
Best way of doing this would be a big increase in prices for what we produce, rather than being paid 1970s prices .
my question would be, How do you envisage tenant farmers, who can’t diversify due to terms of the tenancy, remain profitable, especially through the hungry years when BPS is greatly reduced and this scheme hasn’t come online.
 

Gadget

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Sutton Coldfield
I am a mainly tenant farmer with 10 landlords, some agreements are AHA and some FBT of varying length. Some of the agreements prevent me from entering a scheme and some are not long enough to sign up for one.
We are the first farm on our edge of a city so the landowners are waiting for building.
My question is, is it planned for all ELMS to be based on lengthy agreements or will some be like the EFA on the BPS forms? Being close to such a large population we could offer a lot of goods for the public, but not without financial help. Filling in an annual spreadsheet type form for whatever Public Goods we have in fields would encourage us to do more.
 

Grass And Grain

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Yorks
On page 33 of the 'Environmental Land Management Policy Discussion Document, February 2020' it talks about the possibility of taking a risk based approach to inspections, possibly taking into account membership of assurance schemes.

Is increasing the likelihood of an inspection for a non-assured farmer disciminatory and illegal?
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 77 43.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 62 35.0%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 28 15.8%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 4 2.3%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,286
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top