Environmental schemes; Arable Vs. Livestock

[farmerm]

They have a massive majority. I doubt they'll risk a strong and stable rerun.

Crumbs. I doubt there will be a GE until the last possible moment - 2024. Old Starmer will keep on rabbiting about seeking a mandate but with the inflationary crisis about to hit ordinary flk this Autumn doubt any of the political parties truly want to test there chances with the electorate.

Fair points. Let us see just how far the party rips itself apart in this leadership contest, a lot is going to ride on how politically aligned the final 2 candidates are. A majority is only a majority if the party come back together around the new PM I will keep saying it... those who clearly too keen for the top job should be disqualified immediately.

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Fair points. Let us see just how far the party rips itself apart in this leadership contest, a lot is going to ride on how politically aligned the final 2 candidates are. A majority is only a majority if the party come back together around the new PM I will keep saying it... those who clearly too keen for the top job should be disqualified immediately.

They will all declare loyalty after the selection process

 

[steveR]

They will all declare loyalty after the selection process

You mean, that the knives will be sheathed, for the time being....

 

[wrenbird]

There is a report on the BBC website about some of the most senior politicians across Europe colluding behind the scenes with Uber, when it was trying to start up in Europe. It just shows that ‘we’ don’t know what ’they’ are up to. Not that I’m paranoid or anything…

 

[Princess Pooper]

We are all grassland, having until 3 years ago had 40 acres of wheat in rotation in leys. As most of our grassland is permanent pasture, we have no need for cultivations kit although we have an old plough and set of small discs somewhere in the bushes. We use contractors for any reseeding.

One of the problems is that we can only afford small areas of dedicated CS 'crops', such as birdseed or pollinator mixes, fantastic though they are. But we don't have the kit to cultivate properly for them and no contractor wants to 'pop over' to cultivate and drill half an acre. I should imagine many other grass farms are in the same situation.

As others have pointed out, the permanent pasture payment rates have always been appalling. Our amazing hay meadows, which just happen to also be on ridge and furrow, are heaving with biodiversity and have a lovely organic top soil. Given that we put no fertiliser on, to preserve the wildflowers, and therefore accept lower productivity, and can't tractor spray out thistles etc so spend hours spot spraying, the payment rates are quite frankly an insult when one considers the ecosystem services delivered. The future payments for this sort of land just have to improve in future, something that I hope @Janet Hughes Defra is taking on board.

I was also extremely hacked off when we went from HLS into CS to find that several options were either dropped completely or had to be whole-parcel options. We used to have some 'field corner' bits which were alive with messy loveliness, heaving with insects, small mammals etc all feeding the food chain. That was no longer available but apart from grass margins, the only other way we could be paid to leave some seed for birds etc over winter was through the uncut ryegrass option. So you spend money on a good quality ryegrass, mow it once then leave it to go to seed over winter. We then have the issue of what to do with a small area of overwintered long rotting grass that we want to silage in May the next year. It messes up the field fertility as we can't apply muck to it when the rest of the field is done and it rapidly loses quality due to the dead 'thatch'. A field corner option would do a far better job of providing winter food for birds and supporting other mammals.

Then there is the issue that our previously 4 year leys (to then be followed with wheat in the old rotation) will now be replaced with probably 5 - 6 year leys so all of a sudden they become permanent pasture and some options may not now apply....

So ridiculous and so restrictive.

 

[Princess Pooper]

There is a report on the BBC website about some of the most senior politicians across Europe colluding behind the scenes with Uber, when it was trying to start up in Europe. It just shows that ‘we’ don’t know what ’they’ are up to. Not that I’m paranoid or anything…

I was replying to the 'arable v grassland stewardship' thread and whilst posting I find it is now a conversation about Uber, have I jumped thread by mistake?

 

[DaveGrohl]

I was replying to the 'arable v grassland stewardship' thread and whilst posting I find it is now a conversation about Uber, have I jumped thread by mistake?

It was one post. Now you’ve made it a conversation

 

[DaveGrohl]

We are all grassland, having until 3 years ago had 40 acres of wheat in rotation in leys. As most of our grassland is permanent pasture, we have no need for cultivations kit although we have an old plough and set of small discs somewhere in the bushes. We use contractors for any reseeding.

One of the problems is that we can only afford small areas of dedicated CS 'crops', such as birdseed or pollinator mixes, fantastic though they are. But we don't have the kit to cultivate properly for them and no contractor wants to 'pop over' to cultivate and drill half an acre. I should imagine many other grass farms are in the same situation.

As others have pointed out, the permanent pasture payment rates have always been appalling. Our amazing hay meadows, which just happen to also be on ridge and furrow, are heaving with biodiversity and have a lovely organic top soil. Given that we put no fertiliser on, to preserve the wildflowers, and therefore accept lower productivity, and can't tractor spray out thistles etc so spend hours spot spraying, the payment rates are quite frankly an insult when one considers the ecosystem services delivered. The future payments for this sort of land just have to improve in future, something that I hope @Janet Hughes Defra is taking on board.

I was also extremely hacked off when we went from HLS into CS to find that several options were either dropped completely or had to be whole-parcel options. We used to have some 'field corner' bits which were alive with messy loveliness, heaving with insects, small mammals etc all feeding the food chain. That was no longer available but apart from grass margins, the only other way we could be paid to leave some seed for birds etc over winter was through the uncut ryegrass option. So you spend money on a good quality ryegrass, mow it once then leave it to go to seed over winter. We then have the issue of what to do with a small area of overwintered long rotting grass that we want to silage in May the next year. It messes up the field fertility as we can't apply muck to it when the rest of the field is done and it rapidly loses quality due to the dead 'thatch'. A field corner option would do a far better job of providing winter food for birds and supporting other mammals.

Then there is the issue that our previously 4 year leys (to then be followed with wheat in the old rotation) will now be replaced with probably 5 - 6 year leys so all of a sudden they become permanent pasture and some options may not now apply....

So ridiculous and so restrictive.

It’s a shame the bureaucrats decided that they needed to "define" what PP was to start with.

 

[Tarw Coch]

It’s a shame the bureaucrats decided that they needed to "define" what PP was to start with.

As a farmer I think their definition of permanent pasture is pretty crap, anything that’s been in grass for more than 5 years and that could include a grass field that’s been reseeded

 

[wrenbird]

I was replying to the 'arable v grassland stewardship' thread and whilst posting I find it is now a conversation about Uber, have I jumped thread by mistake?

Sorry, my fault, other posters have pointed out that livestock farming appears to be discriminated against and wondering if is just a lack of understanding or listening to advice from those who may have a agenda against livestock farming.
My post was a clumsy attempt show that those in power are not always on our side even when they say they are.

 

[livestock 1]

Sorry, my fault, other posters have pointed out that livestock farming appears to be discriminated against and wondering if is just a lack of understanding or listening to advice from those who may have a agenda against livestock farming.
My post was a clumsy attempt show that those in power are not always on our side even when they say they are.

I was selling lambs at longtown in 2000 I remember taking a wagon load of store swales decent sorts drawn off I averaged £9 for them. We had just bought a farm some land rented another and things were a struggle to say the least.
The dreaded appeared in 2001 but the stewardship forms were ready printed to sign
What were folks to do??

 

[farmerm]

They will all declare loyalty after the selection process

After a vitriolic campaigning for a few weeks about all the mistakes made by the conservative Cabinet under Boris's leadership....

 

[Jackov Altraids]

I was thinking about this again this evening.
I thought it would be interesting to imagine that the arable schemes matched those with grass.

Firstly there would only be 2 categories of arable, ploughed and unploughed.

Crops that were established using a plough could get about 1/3 of the current rates of payment if certain requirements were met and
crops that were established without using a plough could get about 1/4 of the current payment rates if requirements were met.

Because if you plough pasture it is worth more in terms of payments than that which doesn't get ploughed.
In fact, you need to till legumes etc in PP to qualify.

And why should all the buffer zones, strips and bird mixes only apply to arable?


Please note this is in no way a criticism of arable farmers/ farming. I'm just trying to understand why we are treated so very differently.

 

[Vader]

I was thinking about this again this evening.
I thought it would be interesting to imagine that the arable schemes matched those with grass.

Firstly there would only be 2 categories of arable, ploughed and unploughed.

Crops that were established using a plough could get about 1/3 of the current rates of payment if certain requirements were met and
crops that were established without using a plough could get about 1/4 of the current payment rates if requirements were met.

Because if you plough pasture it is worth more in terms of payments than that which doesn't get ploughed.
In fact, you need to till legumes etc in PP to qualify.

And why should all the buffer zones, strips and bird mixes only apply to arable?


Please note this is in no way a criticism of arable farmers/ farming. I'm just trying to understand why we are treated so very differently.

Because princess nut nuts got her rewilding cult mates into gov positions.
They hate cattle and sheep

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

I was thinking about this again this evening.
I thought it would be interesting to imagine that the arable schemes matched those with grass.

Firstly there would only be 2 categories of arable, ploughed and unploughed.

Crops that were established using a plough could get about 1/3 of the current rates of payment if certain requirements were met and
crops that were established without using a plough could get about 1/4 of the current payment rates if requirements were met.

Because if you plough pasture it is worth more in terms of payments than that which doesn't get ploughed.
In fact, you need to till legumes etc in PP to qualify.

And why should all the buffer zones, strips and bird mixes only apply to arable?


Please note this is in no way a criticism of arable farmers/ farming. I'm just trying to understand why we are treated so very differently.

I think one reason is that arable soils generally could do with a bit of what grassland gets. It's probably fair to say that the soil in most cases is in better condition than on your average arable farm where they might plough or cultivate, leave bare soil, remove straw and apply lots of chemicals.

Grassland might get fertiliser, but probably not as much and that would be it. Apart from overgrazing or poaching, there not much to go wrong.

Is it fair to say that grassland would already provide more and better habitat than arable?

I agree it does look skewed towards arable.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

I think one reason is that arable soils generally could do with a bit of what grassland gets. It's probably fair to say that the soil in most cases is in better condition than on your average arable farm where they might plough or cultivate, leave bare soil, remove straw and apply lots of chemicals.

Grassland might get fertiliser, but probably not as much and that would be it. Apart from overgrazing or poaching, there not much to go wrong.

Is it fair to say that grassland would already provide more and better habitat than arable?

I agree it does look skewed towards arable.

So are you suggesting the system 'pays the polluter', as it were?

 

[Grass And Grain]

So are you suggesting the system 'pays the polluter', as it were?

Not dissimilar to the RP15 concreting grants. If you've spent money yourself and have a nice clean yard, clean stone, good drainage, paid for some concrete....then you won't get a grant for concrete.

If, however, you've been doing all the wrong things, have a muddy yard all going down the drain....then you get the cash for some nice new concrete.

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

So are you suggesting the system 'pays the polluter', as it were?

Inevitably I think. Because there's so much more potential in an arable landscape.

I also think that makes it easier to design options for arable.

 

[andybk]

All the arable boys have had their snouts in the trough all my farming career ,(set aside ,oil payments etc ) its just the trough was made longer when BPS came in ,to inc the livestock sector (land based) . Its not their fault ,its the brown Trouser brigade that have influence in the ministry , savilles etc ,now pushing for tree planting schemes . Now we are looking at an enviro future ,livestock and PP should lead this . rather than small island of haven's in a chem controlled desert that will be ploughed out at the first opportunity after funding is dropped .

edit: to add a lot of ex dairy farmers moved into arable around here (mendip hills) due to past funding and a simpler life , lots of hills and valleys , some wet heavy ground , this in the past has contributed to soil / nutrient run off into streams from crops mauled in after wet years . should really have stayed livestock PP , these are the unintended consequences of favoring one sector over another @Janet Hughes Defra

 

[livestock 1]

To summarise this as a hill farmer farming poor land in a poor climate is hard enough without a raft of rules added which is all restrictive of becoming more economically viable which has been the required action to basically stand still
This is bps and environmental stewardship as well.
Im pleased @Jackov Altraids has brought this up because it’s something that I’ve thought about and figured out many times over the years myself