New limits to SFI.

Clive said:

I would really hope not - you can't run a business and make decisions when they can change their mind at a moments notice like that

It's too late to plant cash crops and I have a SFI pollinators eeed on farm bough and paid for ready to drill very soon


there will be farms that have made staff redundant or had farm sales, sign agreemnets with contractors and made equipment purchase decisions based on the agreements they have signed


I cant see how they have any choice but to honour existing agreement, things could get legal even ??

Click to expand...

I suppose it could be argued that all “business” is a risk. Those who thought dealing with the current shower would be risk free are possibly guilty of self delusion.

Be back to basic acreage payment and headgear before we know it

At least arable legume fallow isn’t on the list. Max out on it. Presumably they don’t think it reduces production even though it will halve my wheat output.

It’s interesting that they haven’t included legume fallow (NUM3) in the 25% limit

Edit @DrWazzock beat me to it

Gedd said:

Panic setting in

Click to expand...

They wouldnt fecking listen when janet huges was on here.

Clive said:

I would really hope not - you can't run a business and make decisions when they can change their mind at a moments notice like that

It's too late to plant cash crops and I have a SFI pollinators eeed on farm bough and paid for ready to drill very soon


there will be farms that have made staff redundant or had farm sales, sign agreemnets with contractors and made equipment purchase decisions based on the agreements they have signed


I cant see how they have any choice but to honour existing agreement, things could get legal even ??

Click to expand...

Guess they won't make the changes retrospectively, but now there's going to be a two tier system going on. Uncapped for existing offers, and 25% cap for new ones.

How are farmers supposed to compete or plan when it's different rules?

Wheatland said:

It’s interesting that they haven’t included legume fallow (NUM3) in the 25% limit

Click to expand...

Matter of time as people switch into it.

Wheatland said:

It’s interesting that they haven’t included legume fallow (NUM3) in the 25% limit

Edit @DrWazzock beat me to it

Click to expand...

Presumably they think that wheat after legume fallow will have double its normal yield. After all, growing wheat just wasn’t sustainable until a bureaucratic invented NUM3 and told us how to do the job properly.

Bossfarmer said:

should be the same for everyone

Click to expand...

Yep.

J 1177 said:

They wouldnt fecking listen when janet huges was on here.

Click to expand...

We told them they didn't have any way of managing their own DEFRA budget. You're right, they didn't listen.

They should have set a £££ cap on a per ha basis.

Now we've got another unlevel playing field.

They don't have a clue what they're doing. What clowns would offer something uncapped when the budget clearly can't sustain uncapped, and also potentially put the country in a food security crisis.

I think it's totally mismanaged. Not sure if it's the politicians or the civil servants, but now it's a complete mess.

Grass And Grain said:

Guess they won't make the changes retrospectively, but now there's going to be a two tier system going on. Uncapped for existing offers, and 25% cap for new ones.

How are farmers supposed to compete or plan when it's different rules?

Click to expand...

Well the agreements only last 3years so they will have to comply with the cap after that. Benefit of being brave and going first

Destroying Economic Farming and Rural Activities

Is Janet Hughes from DEFRA still on here????

I see she has a twitter account, I don’t. Perhaps someone can ask her what the hell is going on

AndrewM said:

Well the agreements only last 3years so they will have to comply with the cap after that. Benefit of being brave and going first

Click to expand...

Guess which farms are going to get ALL the inspections as they try and recruit some money back

Government ensures food production remains primary purpose of farming
· New measures reaffirm food production a key part of the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) alongside protecting the environment.
· New applicants to SFI will only be able to put 25% of their land into six SFI actions that take land out of direct production.
· The six capped actions will continue to play an important role in supporting farmers primary role – to produce food.

New measures reaffirming how our environmental land management schemes work alongside food production by limiting the amount of land farmers can take out of of productive actions under the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) have been announced today (Monday 25 March).
While there has been only limited evidence to date of farmers entering large amounts of their land into actions that take away food production, some of these actions were being used more than intended in a small number of cases. The changes will ensure the scheme continues to support farmers to produce food sustainably alongside improving the environment.

The scheme is designed to have maximum flexibility and to be simple to apply for, however we always said we would learn and adapt as new information became available. So, following feedback from the farming community, which has been considered throughout the development of SFI, there is consensus on the need to put in place some targeted restrictions.

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 six actions will continue to play an important role in supporting sustainable food production but were always intended to be implemented on smaller areas of the farm - something the new measures will protect.

Farming Minister Mark Spencer said:

“Food production is the primary purpose of farming and today we are taking action to clarify this principle.

“The six actions we are capping were always intended to be implemented on smaller areas of land, and these changes will help to maintain this intention and continue our commitment to maintain domestic food production."

The UK’s farming schemes pay farmers to take actions that improve the environment alongside sustainable food production. SFI has been popular with farmers and to date we have received over 15,000 applications and issued over 14,000 agreement offers. The vast majority of land in the scheme continues to produce food – SFI pays farmers to do this in a more sustainable, resilient way that’s good for both food production and the environment.

Other measures the government is taking to protect food security and ensure we continue to produce at least 60% of the food we consume here in the UK include a new annual UK-wide Food Security Index to capture and present the data needed to monitor levels of food security and a commitment to hold the Farm to Fork Summit annually.

More information regarding the timing of the implementation of the cap will be released in the coming weeks.

Notes to Editors

• Around 1% of farmers that applied to SFI 2023 have applied to put 80% or more of their farm into these six non-productive actions. The vast majority of land in SFI is in actions that involve producing food, but in more efficient, sustainable ways to support both resilient food production and the environment.
• Farming and food production relies upon a healthy and functioning natural environment and any actions in SFI that take land out of production do it temporarily for (1,2 or 3 years) and to enable pollinators, natural pest management, soil fertility etc to recover and improve. This makes food production more resilient.
• The aim is to ensure that we get the balance right in the percentage of a farm that we will fund to take these actions. 25% is the right level to cap these 6 actions at to achieve this, because taking more land than that out of production on any given holding is unlikely to benefit the environment or food production. The rest of the SFI actions will remain uncapped, and we continue to encourage farmers to join SFI.

The full list of actions to be capped at 25%:
IPM2: Flower-rich grass margins, blocks, or in-field strips
AHL1: Pollen and nectar flower mix (which should be growing in blocks or strips in a land parcel)
AHL2: Winter bird food on arable and horticultural land (which should be growing in blocks or strips in a land parcel)
AHL3: Grassy field corners or blocks
IGL1: Take improved grassland field corners or blocks out of management
IGL2: Winter bird food on improved grassland (which should be growing in blocks or strips in a land parcel)

Bramble said:

Is Janet Hughes from DEFRA still on here????

I see she has a twitter account, I don’t. Perhaps someone can ask her what the hell is going on

Click to expand...

Ask her how much land will be taken out of production because it is uneconomic to produce food from that land without the support of BPS please.

Clive said:

so where does this leave agreemnets that are already accepted with more than 25% ?

Click to expand...

they'll have to honour those but as @Grass And Grain says to the detriment of others

DrWazzock said:

At least arable legume fallow isn’t on the list. Max out on it. Presumably they don’t think it reduces production even though it will halve my wheat output.

Click to expand...

not yet....that list will get longer....ab10..fallow options

what an absolute clusterf**k

Clive said:

so where does this leave agreemnets that are already accepted with more than 25% ?

Click to expand...

YOU will pay it BACK