Biodiversity offsetting - Anyone done it?

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
they are offering £9,307/ac upfront for land that may only be worth £6k.... :scratchhead: None of these companies will be around to make payment in year 30, many wont survive to make payment in year 3 I would bet.... The legal docs want looking at with the finest of fine tooth combs! Say it was a 10Ac block... a wise man might take the money and use it to buy 10ac next door... even if the scheme land was woodland by year 30 you are still farming 10Ac and have gained a 10Ac wood for free and have received payments on it... For some it could be a very good little earner, others will get badly burnt. I suppose when you consider developers may be paying upto £1million for an acre of development land in some parts, paying £9K to buy an acre of biodiversity offsetting is chump change! Of course in lower value areas its just another hurdle that reduces house building, adds another cost burden and further drives up the house price inflation spiral we are in.
Msg #19....?
 
they are offering £9,307/ac upfront for land that may only be worth £6k.... :scratchhead: None of these companies will be around to make payment in year 30, many wont survive to make payment in year 3 I would bet.... The legal docs want looking at with the finest of fine tooth combs! Say it was a 10Ac block... a wise man might take the money and use it to buy 10ac next door... even if the scheme land was woodland by year 30 you are still farming 10Ac and have gained a 10Ac wood for free and have received payments on it... For some it could be a very good little earner, others will get badly burnt. I suppose when you consider developers may be paying upto £1million for an acre of development land in some parts, paying £9K to buy an acre of biodiversity offsetting is chump change! Of course in lower value areas its just another hurdle that reduces house building, adds another cost burden and further drives up the house price inflation spiral we are in.
Correct - to quote the agent 60k for 3ha of offsetting is less than the profit on one house, on a 500 house estate, they said its literally paid for by adding a bedroom by splitting a big room, to a couple of houses....

as for making the payments their seems to be 3 main ways, one is a trust fund held with a bank - the bank takes a lump sum and pays out each year following a remote assessment - and biannual ecologist visit to ensure the land is not being intensively farmed basically.
The one some companies prefer is they pay you, but id expect after 2 years their will be a problem with the flowers and they stop and walk, and finally the councils seem to want a scheme where the houses all pay money into a management company who pays out each year, shifting the burden to the new home owners - with the management company guaranteeing payment - can see that going south fast as the management company also has to mow the verges etc and in reality after a few years londerners and landlords will move in and just not pay their £50 a year and sooner or later, as with most estates the management company walks or folds, council takes over the verges after councilors get complaints and face loosing their seats, and the liability to pay 3rd parties is never picked up by anyone new.

As for the effect on land prices.... the developer Im speaking to has already brought 55 acres down the road.... as land bank to offset in future, and they intend to spin it out into a new company that just owns and operates offsets - can see land becoming impossible to buy anywhere within 15 miles of a town or city soon. They want to have a diverse set of liabilities on this as they seem to be convinced offsetting is here to stay, but expect the competition for land to become untenable going forwards - so Buying land now for the future, but offsetting on others land initially before the rates go through the roof.

As for value - Been told the land is worth very little once in an offset as you have no freedom of management, and have taken the lump sum, your effectively selling a liability.

as for use of the land, in my case the prescription is Hay cut once per year, grazing from Sept to Feb with sheep. Not too dissimilar to current, but will result in a rapid yeild and productivity loss after 5-6 years and plateau around 12 years, expecting the land to become almost zero hay yeild, acid rush grassland - the ecologists I must say vary from clued up agreeing itll just become acid rush clay, to urban dreadlock girls thinking it will be a biodiverse flower meadow just by entering a scheme, closing a gate and spreading some seeds, scary how meeting those people cements my view that they have never actually managed any biodiversity on the ground.

Also clear they dont want to do it to marginal land in reality - its about NET GAIN - a low producitvity pasture will typically have a high level of diversity in it - net gain may be 10 to 15% species diversity and 5% biomass of wildlife....
Taking an arable or intensive grass ley out of production in just a year results in a 500-900% increase in diversity and 30% year on year, and several thousand % increase in insect mass - so they need less land, and less effort, closing the gate on an arable field for a year achieves more than most nature reserves do.

Personally I think the farming industry hasnt woken up to this yet - its going to change the land market in 2 to 3 years in same way outside money from the cities has over the past 40 years.....
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
Correct - to quote the agent 60k for 3ha of offsetting is less than the profit on one house, on a 500 house estate, they said its literally paid for by adding a bedroom by splitting a big room, to a couple of houses....

as for making the payments their seems to be 3 main ways, one is a trust fund held with a bank - the bank takes a lump sum and pays out each year following a remote assessment - and biannual ecologist visit to ensure the land is not being intensively farmed basically.
The one some companies prefer is they pay you, but id expect after 2 years their will be a problem with the flowers and they stop and walk, and finally the councils seem to want a scheme where the houses all pay money into a management company who pays out each year, shifting the burden to the new home owners - with the management company guaranteeing payment - can see that going south fast as the management company also has to mow the verges etc and in reality after a few years londerners and landlords will move in and just not pay their £50 a year and sooner or later, as with most estates the management company walks or folds, council takes over the verges after councilors get complaints and face loosing their seats, and the liability to pay 3rd parties is never picked up by anyone new.

As for the effect on land prices.... the developer Im speaking to has already brought 55 acres down the road.... as land bank to offset in future, and they intend to spin it out into a new company that just owns and operates offsets - can see land becoming impossible to buy anywhere within 15 miles of a town or city soon. They want to have a diverse set of liabilities on this as they seem to be convinced offsetting is here to stay, but expect the competition for land to become untenable going forwards - so Buying land now for the future, but offsetting on others land initially before the rates go through the roof.

As for value - Been told the land is worth very little once in an offset as you have no freedom of management, and have taken the lump sum, your effectively selling a liability.

as for use of the land, in my case the prescription is Hay cut once per year, grazing from Sept to Feb with sheep. Not too dissimilar to current, but will result in a rapid yeild and productivity loss after 5-6 years and plateau around 12 years, expecting the land to become almost zero hay yeild, acid rush grassland - the ecologists I must say vary from clued up agreeing itll just become acid rush clay, to urban dreadlock girls thinking it will be a biodiverse flower meadow just by entering a scheme, closing a gate and spreading some seeds, scary how meeting those people cements my view that they have never actually managed any biodiversity on the ground.

Also clear they dont want to do it to marginal land in reality - its about NET GAIN - a low producitvity pasture will typically have a high level of diversity in it - net gain may be 10 to 15% species diversity and 5% biomass of wildlife....
Taking an arable or intensive grass ley out of production in just a year results in a 500-900% increase in diversity and 30% year on year, and several thousand % increase in insect mass - so they need less land, and less effort, closing the gate on an arable field for a year achieves more than most nature reserves do.

Personally I think the farming industry hasnt woken up to this yet - its going to change the land market in 2 to 3 years in same way outside money from the cities has over the past 40 years.....
Thanks, that's a really useful summary.

I'm debating all this with George Eustace at Groundswell in a few weeks and your posts on here are VERY timely. :love:
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
Correct - to quote the agent 60k for 3ha of offsetting is less than the profit on one house, on a 500 house estate, they said its literally paid for by adding a bedroom by splitting a big room, to a couple of houses....

as for making the payments their seems to be 3 main ways, one is a trust fund held with a bank - the bank takes a lump sum and pays out each year following a remote assessment - and biannual ecologist visit to ensure the land is not being intensively farmed basically.
The one some companies prefer is they pay you, but id expect after 2 years their will be a problem with the flowers and they stop and walk, and finally the councils seem to want a scheme where the houses all pay money into a management company who pays out each year, shifting the burden to the new home owners - with the management company guaranteeing payment - can see that going south fast as the management company also has to mow the verges etc and in reality after a few years londerners and landlords will move in and just not pay their £50 a year and sooner or later, as with most estates the management company walks or folds, council takes over the verges after councilors get complaints and face loosing their seats, and the liability to pay 3rd parties is never picked up by anyone new.

As for the effect on land prices.... the developer Im speaking to has already brought 55 acres down the road.... as land bank to offset in future, and they intend to spin it out into a new company that just owns and operates offsets - can see land becoming impossible to buy anywhere within 15 miles of a town or city soon. They want to have a diverse set of liabilities on this as they seem to be convinced offsetting is here to stay, but expect the competition for land to become untenable going forwards - so Buying land now for the future, but offsetting on others land initially before the rates go through the roof.

As for value - Been told the land is worth very little once in an offset as you have no freedom of management, and have taken the lump sum, your effectively selling a liability.

as for use of the land, in my case the prescription is Hay cut once per year, grazing from Sept to Feb with sheep. Not too dissimilar to current, but will result in a rapid yeild and productivity loss after 5-6 years and plateau around 12 years, expecting the land to become almost zero hay yeild, acid rush grassland - the ecologists I must say vary from clued up agreeing itll just become acid rush clay, to urban dreadlock girls thinking it will be a biodiverse flower meadow just by entering a scheme, closing a gate and spreading some seeds, scary how meeting those people cements my view that they have never actually managed any biodiversity on the ground.

Also clear they dont want to do it to marginal land in reality - its about NET GAIN - a low producitvity pasture will typically have a high level of diversity in it - net gain may be 10 to 15% species diversity and 5% biomass of wildlife....
Taking an arable or intensive grass ley out of production in just a year results in a 500-900% increase in diversity and 30% year on year, and several thousand % increase in insect mass - so they need less land, and less effort, closing the gate on an arable field for a year achieves more than most nature reserves do.

Personally I think the farming industry hasnt woken up to this yet - its going to change the land market in 2 to 3 years in same way outside money from the cities has over the past 40 years.....
3 bed detatched being built 300 yards from here (at Dad's in Hertford, not my place) are being marketed at £750k so £60k for offsetting would be peanuts...
 
3 bed detatched being built 300 yards from here (at Dad's in Hertford, not my place) are being marketed at £750k so £60k for offsetting would be peanuts...
Yes was told that they could go higher by my solicitor but because they have 55acres down the road not to push too hard as the point at which it becomes worth using their strategic landbank and saving on legals aswell, would be around 30k/ac. There only holding that land (it has no potential its an arable block in the middle of nowhere) is longer term offsetting as they expect the market for land to become "volcanic".
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
Yes was told that they could go higher by my solicitor but because they have 55acres down the road not to push too hard as the point at which it becomes worth using their strategic landbank and saving on legals aswell, would be around 30k/ac. There only holding that land (it has no potential its an arable block in the middle of nowhere) is longer term offsetting as they expect the market for land to become "volcanic".
OOI, where is the drive for offsetting, actually coming from? I have not seen of heard of any around here, and the housebuilding on green land goes on apace....

Individual Councils. or are there Govt guidelines/targets involved?

I did wonder if some ELMS money could be harvested at the same time, as Janet Hughes and DEFRA seem to be happy for double funding to take place if the non ELMS income streams was not CS style funding, but from private enterprise??
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
As for value - Been told the land is worth very little once in an offset as you have no freedom of management, and have taken the lump sum, your effectively selling a liability.

as for use of the land, in my case the prescription is Hay cut once per year, grazing from Sept to Feb with sheep. Not too dissimilar to current, but will result in a rapid yeild and productivity loss after 5-6 years and plateau around 12 years, expecting the land to become almost zero hay yeild, acid rush grassland - the ecologists I must say vary from clued up agreeing itll just become acid rush clay, to urban dreadlock girls thinking it will be a biodiverse flower meadow just by entering a scheme, closing a gate and spreading some seeds, scary how meeting those people cements my view that they have never actually managed any biodiversity on the ground.
Any specification for the seed mixture if taking land from arable production?

Might be worth putting in a long term pasture mix, with some appropriate legumes? Get some Ag value from the land for 8-10 years?

Get enough sheep on over winter to bring it back to next to nothing should keep some less desirable species in check. So probs worth putting in good fencing in from Day One. Also keeps Urban man out....

That, or a nicely positioned woodland for shooting purposes. ;)

I do find this thread quite fascinating, as someone farming on what is in effect now, urban fringe....
 
OOI, where is the drive for offsetting, actually coming from? I have not seen of heard of any around here, and the housebuilding on green land goes on apace....

Individual Councils. or are there Govt guidelines/targets involved?

I did wonder if some ELMS money could be harvested at the same time, as Janet Hughes and DEFRA seem to be happy for double funding to take place if the non ELMS income streams was not CS style funding, but from private enterprise??
Its a legal requirement for all new planning permissions granted now - The developer must offset all the loss on the site they develop by at least a 1 to 1.1 ratio - SO a brownfield site may need 0 offsetting, but but building on 10 acres of clean ryegrass pasture may need 2 to 3 acres of meadow or 1 to 2 acres of woodland to offset.
Building on a diverse grasslandfield may need 1 acre to the acre offset.
 
Any specification for the seed mixture if taking land from arable production?

Might be worth putting in a long term pasture mix, with some appropriate legumes? Get some Ag value from the land for 8-10 years?

Get enough sheep on over winter to bring it back to next to nothing should keep some less desirable species in check. So probs worth putting in good fencing in from Day One. Also keeps Urban man out....

I do find this thread quite fascinating, as someone farming on what is in effect now, urban fringe....
im also on urban fringe - they are providing all new fencing with concrete corner posts and creosote strainers - the only bit that got me existed i must say!

So seed mixture the ecologist specifies and in my case the grassland is improved PP, they want some plantains, chicory and thats it - wanting to rely on the scree and verges nearby to provide a natural and appropriate seed bank to return. Down side is no spraying and these fields historically had horses in so are shocking for thistles and nettles - ive been fighting for 5 years and only just getting them clean. As the fields wont get cut till July most years production and hay quality will be low.

The ecologists are wise to being gamed and move the hay dates around to ensure the feed value is low and to avoid any management that could facilitate better forage - they said, and I copy from an email "The stated aim of this offer is biodiversity, cutting and grazing are tools for achieving that ending the lowest impact, and most sustainable way. We would not condone any management that could be termed as managing the land for farming or other agricultural use, farming as an activity on the parcel shall only be incidental to the prime land use objective, which is removing land from intensive agricultural use to benefit society and the environment"
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
im also on urban fringe - they are providing all new fencing with concrete corner posts and creosote strainers - the only bit that got me existed i must say!

So seed mixture the ecologist specifies and in my case the grassland is improved PP, they want some plantains, chicory and thats it - wanting to rely on the scree and verges nearby to provide a natural and appropriate seed bank to return. Down side is no spraying and these fields historically had horses in so are shocking for thistles and nettles - ive been fighting for 5 years and only just getting them clean. As the fields wont get cut till July most years production and hay quality will be low.

The ecologists are wise to being gamed and move the hay dates around to ensure the feed value is low and to avoid any management that could facilitate better forage - they said, and I copy from an email "The stated aim of this offer is biodiversity, cutting and grazing are tools for achieving that ending the lowest impact, and most sustainable way. We would not condone any management that could be termed as managing the land for farming or other agricultural use, farming as an activity on the parcel shall only be incidental to the prime land use objective, which is removing land from intensive agricultural use to benefit society and the environment"
Thanks.

Are they aware of the Weeds Act. I wonder....? :unsure:

Power to require occupier to prevent spreading of injurious weeds.​

(1)Where the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (in this Act referred to as “the Minister”) is satisfied that there are injurious weeds to which this Act applies growing upon any land he may serve upon the occupier of the land a notice in writing requiring him, within the time specified in the notice, to take such action as may be necessary to prevent the weeds from spreading.

(2)This Act applies to the following injurious weeds, that is to say—

  • spear thistle (cirsium vulgare), (Savi) Ten.
  • creeping or field thistle (cirsium arvense (L.) Scop.),
  • curled dock (rumex crispus L.),
  • broad-leaved dock (rumex obtusifolius L.), and
  • ragwort (senecio jacobaea L.)


It might be that a Neighbour complains to you regarding the risk of seed blow from the now healthy crop of creeping thistle and ragwort onto his adjoining land.... ;)

What then Mr Ecologist???
 
Last edited:

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
Its a legal requirement for all new planning permissions granted now - The developer must offset all the loss on the site they develop by at least a 1 to 1.1 ratio - SO a brownfield site may need 0 offsetting, but but building on 10 acres of clean ryegrass pasture may need 2 to 3 acres of meadow or 1 to 2 acres of woodland to offset.
Building on a diverse grasslandfield may need 1 acre to the acre offset.
I do not believe that this has taken place locally.... Maybe PP was granted before this requirement was enacted.

Time for some research I feel.
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
I do not believe that this has taken place locally.... Maybe PP was granted before this requirement was enacted.

Time for some research I feel.
Nope, from my reading of the local Council's planning portal pages, nothing locally...

 
Last edited:

farmerm

Member
Location
Shropshire
Correct - to quote the agent 60k for 3ha of offsetting is less than the profit on one house, on a 500 house estate, they said its literally paid for by adding a bedroom by splitting a big room, to a couple of houses....

as for making the payments their seems to be 3 main ways, one is a trust fund held with a bank - the bank takes a lump sum and pays out each year following a remote assessment - and biannual ecologist visit to ensure the land is not being intensively farmed basically.
The one some companies prefer is they pay you, but id expect after 2 years their will be a problem with the flowers and they stop and walk, and finally the councils seem to want a scheme where the houses all pay money into a management company who pays out each year, shifting the burden to the new home owners - with the management company guaranteeing payment - can see that going south fast as the management company also has to mow the verges etc and in reality after a few years londerners and landlords will move in and just not pay their £50 a year and sooner or later, as with most estates the management company walks or folds, council takes over the verges after councilors get complaints and face loosing their seats, and the liability to pay 3rd parties is never picked up by anyone new.

As for the effect on land prices.... the developer Im speaking to has already brought 55 acres down the road.... as land bank to offset in future, and they intend to spin it out into a new company that just owns and operates offsets - can see land becoming impossible to buy anywhere within 15 miles of a town or city soon. They want to have a diverse set of liabilities on this as they seem to be convinced offsetting is here to stay, but expect the competition for land to become untenable going forwards - so Buying land now for the future, but offsetting on others land initially before the rates go through the roof.

As for value - Been told the land is worth very little once in an offset as you have no freedom of management, and have taken the lump sum, your effectively selling a liability.

as for use of the land, in my case the prescription is Hay cut once per year, grazing from Sept to Feb with sheep. Not too dissimilar to current, but will result in a rapid yeild and productivity loss after 5-6 years and plateau around 12 years, expecting the land to become almost zero hay yeild, acid rush grassland - the ecologists I must say vary from clued up agreeing itll just become acid rush clay, to urban dreadlock girls thinking it will be a biodiverse flower meadow just by entering a scheme, closing a gate and spreading some seeds, scary how meeting those people cements my view that they have never actually managed any biodiversity on the ground.

Also clear they dont want to do it to marginal land in reality - its about NET GAIN - a low producitvity pasture will typically have a high level of diversity in it - net gain may be 10 to 15% species diversity and 5% biomass of wildlife....
Taking an arable or intensive grass ley out of production in just a year results in a 500-900% increase in diversity and 30% year on year, and several thousand % increase in insect mass - so they need less land, and less effort, closing the gate on an arable field for a year achieves more than most nature reserves do.

Personally I think the farming industry hasnt woken up to this yet - its going to change the land market in 2 to 3 years in same way outside money from the cities has over the past 40 years.....
I see what you mean, its not a simple /ha calculation, its about units of biodiversity gain or at least that was how they pilot scheme operated. So the trick to remove as much diversity as possible before you start the process.... :unsure: I best get "improving" my marginal land. Its another great example of well meaning but misguided, Guardian reading, urban middle class inventing schemes which simply export environmental harm!! So an acre of housing is built and to offset this 2 acres of high value productive UK arable land is re-wilded and to offset the loss of food production we have to import a bit more which results in 8 acres of low value Brazilian rainforest being cleared for food production... Bloody Genius, well done!! (y)(y):banghead:
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
I see what you mean, its not a simple /ha calculation, its about units of biodiversity gain or at least that was how they pilot scheme operated. So the trick to remove as much diversity as possible before you start the process.... :unsure: I best get "improving" my marginal land. Its another great example of well meaning but misguided, Guardian reading, urban middle class inventing schemes which simply export environmental harm!! So an acre of housing is built and to offset this 2 acres of high value productive UK arable land is re-wilded and to offset the loss of food production we have to import a bit more which results in 8 acres of low value Brazilian rainforest being cleared for food production... Bloody Genius, well done!! (y)(y):banghead:
No names, no pack drill, but I am aware of a nearby site where 1250 homes are proposed on a mix of arable land and a wildlife site. The developing land owner also owns a large ex-landfill site nearby which has been fly-grazed to death by ponies for years. They recently sought to let the land to an intensive farm grazing operation and one bidder proposed to operate a holistic grazing plan. They rejected that bid and, I suspect, it was because it would create too much biodiversity on their planned offsetting land before they are ready to build the homes.
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
im also on urban fringe - they are providing all new fencing with concrete corner posts and creosote strainers - the only bit that got me existed i must say!

So seed mixture the ecologist specifies and in my case the grassland is improved PP, they want some plantains, chicory and thats it - wanting to rely on the scree and verges nearby to provide a natural and appropriate seed bank to return. Down side is no spraying and these fields historically had horses in so are shocking for thistles and nettles - ive been fighting for 5 years and only just getting them clean. As the fields wont get cut till July most years production and hay quality will be low.

The ecologists are wise to being gamed and move the hay dates around to ensure the feed value is low and to avoid any management that could facilitate better forage - they said, and I copy from an email "The stated aim of this offer is biodiversity, cutting and grazing are tools for achieving that ending the lowest impact, and most sustainable way. We would not condone any management that could be termed as managing the land for farming or other agricultural use, farming as an activity on the parcel shall only be incidental to the prime land use objective, which is removing land from intensive agricultural use to benefit society and the environment"
We all know that the biodiversity in well managed grazing, even quite intensive grazing, can be phenomenal. Certainly much higher than a block of abandoned "acid rush clay" would deliver. What we now need is decent published papers to back that up to goverment....
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 80 42.3%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 66 34.9%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 15.9%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 7 3.7%

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

  • 1,294
  • 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