ELMS in the real world.

[fudge]

Er the emphasis on forestry shows the true aim of the policy. It’s about carbon off setting or whatever the f**k it’s called. The sleight of hand which says if you plant a tree here it’s ok to burn a barrel of oil over there. I’m all for action on climate change but carbon credits and trading is just a lie to justify the continuing use of fossil fuel. Meanwhile some chap from South America will provide the food! Will he be carbon neutral? You can be sure he’ll have a bit of paper which says he is!
Of course none of this surprises, the clue is in the name, the CONservative Party.
Slightly unbelievable that rational farmers are even talking about the blessed scheme. For land owners it’s different the aforementioned carbon credits are something that can generate income from consumers without any of the effort and risk associated with producing food, in other words the whole thing is another Tory Ponzi scheme for their mates.

 

[Wombat]

the green cover section won't apply to me either, little moderate to high risk land, so the extra £114/ha won't be available. Which means the covers I plant now mean nothing in this scheme.

Having read it i think the small add ons make the who scheme unworkable, i already have buffers on all our streams but voluntary (covered by BPS payments for me) but if i need to drive on them or put the drill on them or a trailer or like this last couple of years straw just to get them off the field i will.

Same with they want you to incorporate manure within is it 12hrs but also direct drill ..........................................

Most of what i do i do with the support of BPS but none of the other schemes as i really don;t want to dance with the devil. Not sure how wildlife will fair and we have more than i have ever seen if the little bit i spend is no longer there without BS hoops

 

[tullah]

It's in their DNA, they just HAVE to create all the "loads of ridiculous and worthless regulations" to justify their existence to Govt.

We will squeeze the last drop of DNA out of them to follow RT into oblivion.

 

[midlandslad]

The payment rates do not look attractive to me. The combined area payment excluding hedgerows will be 30% less than BPS and then there is the income forgone and costs of undertaking the works to factor in.

 

[farmerm]

The payment rates do not look attractive to me. The combined area payment excluding hedgerows will be 30% less than BPS and then there is the income forgone and costs of undertaking the works to factor in.

Well what did you expect? ELMS is not and was never supposed to be a replacement for BPS, well maybe for land agents its is but certainly not for farm incomes. The pot of money is shrinking in real terms, there are cash hungry new hands eligible to dip into the pot (tree planting, reservoirs and flood elevation schemes etc will all be coming out of what was the BPS pot of funds) There is a lot of pain to be felt as we transition towards this new era of unsubsidised food production, an era that will only accelerate the transition of farms into fewer and fewer hands.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Well what did you expect? ELMS is not and was never supposed to be a replacement for BPS, well maybe for land agents its is but certainly not for farm incomes. The pot of money is shrinking in real terms, there are cash hungry new hands eligible to dip into the pot (tree planting, reservoirs and flood elevation schemes etc will all be coming out of what was the BPS pot of funds) There is a lot of pain to be felt as we transition towards this new era of unsubsidised food production, an era that will only accelerate the transition of farms into fewer and fewer hands.

For those that survive the transition I believe there is a future where multiple income streams make farming pay very well. Who but farmers can really deliver climate mitigation and adaptation, biodiversity increase, public understanding of the countryside, cleaner water and more of it, atmospheric carbon drawdown, development biodiversity offsetting and food security? We need to be driving the function of these emerging markets, not letting others do so.

 

[Mixedupfarmer]

Just been reading some of the pilot scheme.
It's horribly similar to the entry level scheme, which actually started my BG problem with the overwintered stubbles!!!
I'm unsure yet if I will even bother with it, it's too prescriptive again.
Like the arable land needing large chunks putting into pollen and nectar mixes. I'd happily integrate a 3m strip round everything with pollen and nectar mixes, but they want 6m for the water body buffers as a minimum, it's way too much. Especially as you can't drive on them at all, and management of hedges/ditches needs planning to minimise impact on them.

Perhaps what they should have done was actually listen to us and let us decide what benefits the environment most, whilst still managing to farm practically.
Instead of insisting on set widths, and areas, and heights to cut to (you cant leave hedges to get taller and wider every year without occasionally knocking them back hard or you end up with ever wider and taller hedges!!!)
The rates being offered aren't attractive enough for the hassle involved IMO

Most of the standards I can easily meet partially with my current practices and just adjust things a bit, but the extra bits ruin it and make it unfeasible.

I need to read it further though, this is just based on a quick scan at coffee time.

My thoughts exactly, especially when combined with poor payment rates on a rented farm

 

[Courier]

Er the emphasis on forestry shows the true aim of the policy. It’s about carbon off setting or whatever the fudge it’s called. The sleight of hand which says if you plant a tree here it’s ok to burn a barrel of oil over there. I’m all for action on climate change but carbon credits and trading is just a lie to justify the continuing use of fossil fuel. Meanwhile some chap from South America will provide the food! Will he be carbon neutral? You can be sure he’ll have a bit of paper which says he is!
Of course none of this surprises, the clue is in the name, the CONservative Party.
Slightly unbelievable that rational farmers are even talking about the blessed scheme. For land owners it’s different the aforementioned carbon credits are something that can generate income from consumers without any of the effort and risk associated with producing food, in other words the whole thing is another Tory Ponzi scheme for their mates.

Land Nationalisation by the back door, 'cos what is there to prevent mass TPOs being imposed in year 9 then no more income from year 11.

 

[Courier]

Er the emphasis on forestry shows the true aim of the policy. It’s about carbon off setting or whatever the fudge it’s called. The sleight of hand which says if you plant a tree here it’s ok to burn a barrel of oil over there. I’m all for action on climate change but carbon credits and trading is just a lie to justify the continuing use of fossil fuel. Meanwhile some chap from South America will provide the food! Will he be carbon neutral? You can be sure he’ll have a bit of paper which says he is!
Of course none of this surprises, the clue is in the name, the CONservative Party.
Slightly unbelievable that rational farmers are even talking about the blessed scheme. For land owners it’s different the aforementioned carbon credits are something that can generate income from consumers without any of the effort and risk associated with producing food, in other words the whole thing is another Tory Ponzi scheme for their mates.

Please point me in the direction where I can monetise the carbon credits for 25 acres of trees on a forward contract for Year 11 to Year 50 ?

 

[E_B]

The soils standard is the biggest f**k up. The leap from intermediate to advanced is too restrictive because of these impositions, as a mixed farm it is worth sacrificing £13/ha so that we can bale all of our straw. Will probably push the price of straw up considerably and we can sell the excess for more than the ELMS incentive.

2. Apply organic matter (manures and compost) or straw
The advanced level extends the previous levels of this action to a larger percentage of your land. At the advanced level you must apply organic matter and straw on 50% of arable land every year.

You can also:

• use cover crops or green manures
• introduce grass or herbal leys into the arable rotation

and

5. Convert 50% of high and very high risk land to permanent grass
This action will improve soil structure and soil organic matter levels, and protect against flooding erosion and runoff.

Land previously converted to grass can count towards this action and your payment for it. You will be paid £311/ha on top of the advanced level payment of £59/ha.

For information on managing permanent grassland, read the grassland standard that applies to your grassland.

You can read this advice for help to convert arable land to permanent grassland

 

[Courier]

Do the powers that be not understand that to create an income out of grassland, either permanent or ley then the crop harvested from that land has no value until converted into meat by a ruminant animal...?

 

[delilah]

The soils standard is the biggest f**k up.

Possibly. But it's a competitive field. Still waiting for someone to explain how you can alter your silage cutting dates to benefit nesting birds.

 

[delilah]

Same with they want you to incorporate manure within is it 12hrs but also direct drill ..........................................

One of the many stipulations in the SFD that is contradictory, unenforceable and impractical to the point that trying to comply will in many instances lead to more public and environmental harm than good.

edit:
lets say at present your fym is all stored back at base, on a concrete pad draining to a lagoon, to be hauled out and spread on stubble when ground conditions are most suitable. To comply with a 12 hr rule what are you going to do ? Haul it all out into various fields to sit there in a heap until you are ready, with a mad rush to get it spread and worked in putting stress on yourself and your staff working stupid hours to comply.

There are whole chunks of the SFD that are so restrictive that they present a very real health and safety risk, as well as p!ssing the public off by pushing on with operations over weekends/ bank holidays etc.

 

[farmerm]

2. Apply organic matter (manures and compost) or straw
The advanced level extends the previous levels of this action to a larger percentage of your land. At the advanced level you must apply organic matter and straw on 50% of arable land every year.

Does the chaff spreader on the back of the combine count as spreading straw on 100% of cereal area What will constitutes spreading of straw and organic matter, presumable there would be a minimum application rate? 10t/ha, 1t/ha, 1kg/ha? All the straw that I sell eventually ends up being spread on arable ground, just not mine.... I suppose the environmentally friendly option is to load manure into 30T lorries and haul back to the farms from which the straw originated.

5. Convert 50% of high and very high risk land to permanent grass

Well that's a dangerous game no one should play! Taking modest temporary payments to make a irreversible permanent changes to how you can use the land. Its like agreeing to let someone a property for 5 years and at the end of this period finding the tenant then has the right to remain with out paying rent, it collapses the value of the asset and leaves the owner with all the maintenance costs and responsibilities. It is unacceptable.

Not one application should be submitted by farmers or land agents without cast iron, legally binding assurances that any land put into elms options will forever remain free to be returned back to the land use it was at the start of the scheme.


Basically it looks like we shall need to put up cattle sheds and go back to being mixed farmers... the solution they are really proposing is for us to produce more cattle...

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Basically it looks like we shall need to put up cattle sheds and go back to being mixed farmers... the solution they are really proposing is for us to produce more cattle...

Which I would welcome but goes directly contrary to the position of the government's Climate Change Committee who support the "eat less meat and dairy" position....

 

[DrWazzock]

What a fudge up. Markets decide what we grow. You can’t just impose more grass from on high and then wonder what to do with it.

 

[steveR]

We will squeeze the last drop of DNA out of them to follow RT into oblivion.

Dunno, I suspect their mindset is that they are "giving" vast amounts of wonga for the barest minimum of enviro work by the evil farmer. As we all disappear into poverty, Farming UK plc, will be forced into the schemes...

 

[Bury the Trash]

Not here , not on my watch it won't.

 

[steveR]

Not here , not on my watch it won't.

Good man!

I expect most of us will survive in one way or another...

 

[Bury the Trash]

cue fer a song