New information about local nature recovery and landscape recovery

wanton dwarf said:

There are PLENTY of threads where @Clive has stated VERY clearly that having farming land taken out of production increases the profitability of his farm and profit margins.

Of course this is an OPINION.

Others would argue a certain critical mass is required to make any market viable - otherwise just import because when dealing with 50,000 tonnes you're going to put all your infrastructure where the imports occur.

Further, if you want to gain or maintain market share then having a shrinking raw materials market is not viable. Manufacturing, processing and distribution jobs will go where they are required - not where it is impossible produce.

Unfortunately being selfish does not equate with being a business man.

Click to expand...

D14 said:

Its not worth the cost and to one sided from a legal point of view.

Click to expand...

silverfox said:

Harrys view of it all. Worth a watch @Janet Hughes Defra

Click to expand...

Two Tone said:

I’d like to send him a link to the petition. I tried but don’t think it worked.

Click to expand...

silverfox said:

Is he on Twitter or FB maybe .

Click to expand...

Two Tone said:

He could be. I’m not. Perhaps you could check and send it to him?

Click to expand...

Vader said:

Hi @Janet Hughes Defra
Think you may have missed my post again.

Hi, you may have missed my post amongst the weekends build up so I will post again.

Can you tell me what happens if a downstream neighbour decides to do the river options and flood his land, but this then waterlogs other farmers land as their drain water can not get away because of the flooded area next door?

Does defra compensate the farmers who have waterlogged land due to the neighbours schemes??

Actually you could also add some woodland to that. If a neighbour uses your scheme to plant a wood upslope from me that then as it matures cuts out direct sunlight for a large area, and so effects crop growth, will Defra be held responsible?

Click to expand...

• test soil organic matter. These are about £20 each with standard testing to sum up
• undertake a soil assessment and produce a soil management plan. Time
• 70% winter cover to protect soil: impossible unless late drill Winter wheat and other crops are included,
  • at least 70% of land in the standard must have green cover over the winter months (Dec-Feb)
  • this can include any kind of green cover, including autumn sown crops and weedy stubbles
• addition of organic matter: ok this is either chopped straw or the work of seeding and establishing a cover, for me that’s about £5ha to chop then £65ha loss of straw if I sold it in the swath, or £300ha if that is in the bale, the only return is the reduction in fert the next year, plus extra cultivation.
  • add organic matter to 1/3 of the land in the standard each year
  • this can include any kind of organic matter, including sown green cover crops

• 8 (t/ha) x 0.6 = 4.8 kg P2O5/ha
• 8 (t/ha) x 4.8 = 38.4 kg K2O/ha
• 8 (t/ha) x 0.6 = 4.8 kg MgO/ha

• test soil organic matter
• undertake a soil assessment and produce a soil management plan
• 70% winter cover to protect soil:
  • at least 70% of land in the standard must have green cover over the winter months (Dec-Feb)
  • this must include land with multi-species green cover – covering at least 20% of total land in this level of the standard
• addition of organic matter:
  • add organic matter to 1/3 of the land in the standard each year
  • this will include multi-species green cover grown under the cover crop requirement above, plus the rest made up of other ways to add organic matter as per the introductory level

​

Dave645 said:

https://assets.publishing.service.g.../file/954283/agricultural-transition-plan.pdf

page 7 of the goals, now I can see why the money they offer is derisory.

the problem with poor money for the so called basic environment options, is that leaves farmers with only a few avenues to make a living reduce costs, or maximise profits. And reducing costs can be a fools errand unless it’s very carefully done.

The standards.
To quote the scheme

Introductory level – £22 per hectare

• test soil organic matter. These are about £20 each with standard testing to sum up
• undertake a soil assessment and produce a soil management plan. Time
• 70% winter cover to protect soil: impossible unless late drill Winter wheat and other crops are included,
  • at least 70% of land in the standard must have green cover over the winter months (Dec-Feb)
  • this can include any kind of green cover, including autumn sown crops and weedy stubbles
• addition of organic matter: ok this is either chopped straw or the work of seeding and establishing a cover, for me that’s about £5ha to chop then £65ha loss of straw if I sold it in the swath, or £300ha if that is in the bale, the only return is the reduction in fert the next year, plus extra cultivation.
  • add organic matter to 1/3 of the land in the standard each year
  • this can include any kind of organic matter, including sown green cover crops

To sum up based on 100ha about 8 tests so min £24, straw, I bale most so 33ha at £300Ha loss for a quick cultivation pass £5ha so 33x305
So income from the scheme is £2200 costs for doing it, upto £10k minus the value of the straw being incorporated. For 33ha I will use this table.

​

Nutrients in straw​	Winter cereal straw​	Spring cereal straw​
Phosphate: kg P2O5/ha​	grain yield (t/ha) x 0.6​	grain yield (t/ha) x 0.8​
Potash: kg K2O/ha​	grain yield (t/ha) x 4.8​	grain yield (t/ha) x 6.3​
Magnesium: kg MgO/ha​	grain yield (t/ha) x 0.6​	grain yield (t/ha) x 0.8​

Example calculation:

A hectare of winter cereal straw from an 8 t/ha wheat crop is estimated to contain:

• 8 (t/ha) x 0.6 = 4.8 kg P2O5/ha
• 8 (t/ha) x 4.8 = 38.4 kg K2O/ha
• 8 (t/ha) x 0.6 = 4.8 kg MgO/ha

I doubt is amounts to much more than 100kg of fert even at today’s prices thats £60/Ha at best. So 33ha x£60 I will round up and call it £2k
So to sum up for me I stand to gain £2200 and £2k in fert reduction, but stand to lose £10k in loss of income, so negative £5,800 net going into the scheme now, if I was just selling straw in the swath the maths gets better but it’s not cut and dry extras creep in like extra slug pellets, that is only one extra application stacks to £25/Ha so net cost if you chop straw increase so loss of straw extra slug pellets come to about £95/Ha for chopping, so about £3150 costs stack against fert and scheme money leaving around £1050 in scheme money, leaving it at £10.50 per ha or £4.20 per acre (one extra slug pellet application wipes that out or a small increase in the value of straw ) if we are lucky, in my case the value of the straw is never that low but for some it will be.

I asked my self would it be worth it?
For me even using best case numbers it’s not I am tried of DEFRA micro managing my farm and for those amounts I would rather not do it, even if I managed to stick to the green cover rules or wanted to.





Intermediate level – £40 per hectare

• test soil organic matter
• undertake a soil assessment and produce a soil management plan
• 70% winter cover to protect soil:
  • at least 70% of land in the standard must have green cover over the winter months (Dec-Feb)
  • this must include land with multi-species green cover – covering at least 20% of total land in this level of the standard
• addition of organic matter:
  • add organic matter to 1/3 of the land in the standard each year
  • this will include multi-species green cover grown under the cover crop requirement above, plus the rest made up of other ways to add organic matter as per the introductory level

Ok this adds sowing costs and forces spring cropping
https://www.cotswoldseeds.com/seeds/11/cover-crops
I will use the £14/acre costs as a start point, it maybe more it maybe less, that’s £35/ha so I will use the min for me 20ha at £35/Ha plus sowing costs plus drilling costs £25/Ha so a total of £60/Ha over 20 Ha so £1200 cost
And loss of yield from moving cropping to spring taking an average of 1.25T/Ha of yield so at today’s prices a thats £250/Ha times that 20 Ha so £5000 so £6200 increases in costs and losses added together.
So at best if straw and fert for the rest balance the income £1050 from the first £22/Ha add in the extra £18/Ha
I have an income of £4000 from the scheme now and costs after the small profit if I am lucky of £1050, I would stand to now lose £1150 at best, from the higher level.
And at worst I lose £1150 plus £5800 straw income so £6950 for being in the intermediate level of the scheme, these numbers also stand for growers that use their own straw because they would be forced to buy extra.

so zero chance the intermediate scheme getting anyone’s vote.
It’s a net negative and forces risky spring cropping.

Advanced level

We plan to add an advanced level to this standard from 2023 onwards. It’s likely to include use of no-tillage techniques.

​

the other big worry is, they seem to stack this mad policy on improved farm gate prices propping up farm incomes while this has yet to be born out as a long term trend, which is doubly true when you factor in that the dust on many of the new trade deals has yet to settle and there effects have not yet been seen.
So farming could be double hit at the farm gate and from the demise of BPS.

the other thing that they fail to see is that BPS supported a lot of the voluntary things farmers did, we could experiment with outcomes because we had some income protection we could invest in new equipment because we had at least a partial income guarantee.

I personally think farming incomes could fall of a cliff with the new trade deals, so cutting us off from BPS with be the double smack down.

providing a low level fixed support for the smaller farmers say 60 ha with a sliding scale of those larger than that would have pulled market forces to play in a safer way the first 400ha of everyone’s farm got some amount of support after that it was either very small or not existing. As a flat rate, and in steps your environmental money.

That would have pushed market forces to play and focused farms on profits and taken away direct subsidy distortions while offing a basic level of support an income guarantee if you like.
Every farmer would still qualify for support money, which gives you an easy in for the points system to log the good farmers do without extras, and if you set a points threshold that encourages and good environmental farm policy you get everyone in your scheme at a base level, the money you save by using the sliding scale can be offered in the next levels of your scheme goals.
With that in place your in a better position to offer schemes that have fixed prices that offer thin ish margins, I would say that £25/Ha for farm wide polices have to offer an actual margin of £25/Ha not ask for the moon that cost 80% of the money your offering (at best) if it costs a farm with loss of income £25/Ha to do what you ask it has to double that so pay £50/Ha to leave the farmer with a £25/Ha profit/ reward for doing the thing you want. A shared 50/50 risk with the farmer.

in the end no one I have talked to is interested in the new basic scheme, so it would seem your flogging a dead horse even beta testing it, the fact you only get 900 farms to sign up was the first tell, even then some of them are reluctant if what I have read on here is true, if I had thought it was worth the effort I would have applied myself for the beta.
As far as I have read the fact none of the things in the scheme had to be auctioned on farm in the first year was the main reason you had any beta testers at all.
It was basically free money the first year. . .

please reconsider the scheme policy and structure, while rewarding environmental work is the goal, a new points based ELS scheme that directly replaces the BPS at BPS money levels but based on a sliding scale system where only those below 60ha get the full money but only if they hit a preset points total, you give every farmer a way to retain some BPS with pre existing environmental items already on their farms. My suggestion of 30 points average per HA for existing or new items should be simple to do, if a farm only wants to get points to 20/Ha then they lose 33% of their total possible BPS money, but they are still rewarded for existing environmental items, even if they chose not to add extra points to maintain their full BPS/ELS payment, and that doesn’t block them from entering any other scheme you offer.
Wow that got long fast.
I would say that just dig out the old ELS scheme book someone already did all the work working out a points system for you, the payments rates don’t matter because the sliding scale does those, based on the BPS money we get now, it’s almost all done resurrect the IT that was put in place for the old ELS scheme and it’s up and ready for beta testing.
Just add points totals for options you would like the new scheme to prioritise and if a farm wants to add extras if his hedges and other items like margines etc don’t cover his 30/ points/ha they need then they add stuff you want to encourage from any of your schemes, then the jobs done.

Click to expand...

Grass And Grain said:

If DEFRA said do 20% cover crops, do OM addition to all land over 3 years, then we pay you full rate. BUT, if you only manage 50% of the target, let us know, and we'll just pay you 50% payment. Then I'd be happier to sign an agreement.

We're working with the weather, and that's out of our control. Who managed 70% winter green cover by December 2019? Anyone?

So could you sign an agreement to guarantee to achieve this?

Click to expand...

delilah said:

Any scheme that says x field must have y % cover by z date, is unenforceable. Which is just another reason why there should be no area payment on cropped land.

Click to expand...

Grass And Grain said:

Going to depend on individual farm circumstances.

If you're current system is chopping straw, or stripper header, cover crops, DD, spring cropping some areas (maybe more likely because you DD??), then claiming the sub is a no-brainer.

If you need to change your system to get the SFI sub, and you're current system is in place because it provides YOUR FARM with best profit, then changing practices to fit the SFI rules becomes a big issue, and a big management change decision.

Others might be able to tweak a few changes for little cost, and then get the SFI sub.

All the above said, there are the long term benefits of OM addition encouraged by SFI.

We bale all straw, some used on farm for bedding, some sold. Also spread the FYM. Could maybe just about manage the addition of OM to all the arable land by end of year 3, but I don't like the inflexibility of that, as sometimes you just can't spread FYM when/where you want to because of ground conditions or introduction of sudden EA rules you weren't expecting.

Imagine you'd signed up to SFI, legal contract. Half way through EA stop you spreading FYM in August (which you were relying on). Then what?

The really big issue for me is 20% multi species cover crops. I struggle to be able to do it without shifting to more spring cropping, with the resultant later harvest, later establishment of following crop, lower spring crop yields (and slightly less margin), and lower reliability of spring crops on heavy land.

All for £1,800 payment per 100 hectares.

Think I'd rather do cover crops at my convenience and my decision based on season, cropping etc, than be inflexible for a measly payment of £1,800 per 100 hectares.

Is that payment worth it to anyone for the commitment and inflexibility.

If DEFRA said do 20% cover crops, do OM addition to all land over 3 years, then we pay you full rate. BUT, if you only manage 50% of the target, let us know, and we'll just pay you 50% payment. Then I'd be happier to sign an agreement.

We're working with the weather, and that's out of our control. Who managed 70% winter green cover by December 2019? Anyone?

So could you sign an agreement to guarantee to achieve this?

Click to expand...

Grass And Grain said:

I can't remember exactly what you've said in previous posts...

"No area payment on cropped land". Am I right in thinking you have suggested only having ELMS payments for grass, and nothing for arable fields?

Click to expand...

J 1177 said:

Be lucky to establish 20% green cover then, not for want of trying.
My neighbour has had an issue with his wheat seed this year meaning a big portion of its had to be redrilled in november, how would he stand if he was in the sfi agrement. Its unworkable.

Click to expand...

delilah said:

No area payment other than on PP , yep have always said that. Water margins, hedgerows, absolutely. But the actual cropped area, no.

Click to expand...

Grass And Grain said:

No payment on actual cropped area....

Why shouldn't someone get paid on cropped area if they are providing a public good such as for example adding OM to that cropped area, or reduced N applications, or shifting to spring cropping?

Click to expand...

Grass And Grain said:

Why shouldn't someone get paid on cropped area if they are providing a public good such as for example adding OM to that cropped area, or reduced N applications, or shifting to spring cropping?

Click to expand...