Have your say in the future of farming

[Chris F]

There are a few references to this around the forum, but worth a thread to itself with all the documents attached for you to read and also the way you actually have the chance to have a say. This is from Gov.uk below:

Historic opportunity for farmers to help shape future farming policy

DEFRA has launched a consultation into the future of British farming and the environment, placing the power back into the hands of our farmers and growers after nearly 50 years of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).

The Environment Secretary Michael Gove said:

“As we leave the EU, we have a historic opportunity to deliver a farming policy which works for the whole industry. Today we are asking for the views of those who will be affected to make sure we get this right so any future schemes reflect the reality of life for famers and food producers.

“The proposals in this paper set out a range of possible paths to a brighter future for farming. They are the beginning of a conversation, not a conclusion and we want everyone who cares about the food we eat and the environment around us to contribute.”

Consultation closes 8 May 2018

Documents

Consultation letter
PDF, 157KB, 3 pages


Health and harmony: the future for food, farming and the environment in a Green Brexit
Ref: ISBN 978-1-5286-0138-2, CCS1217522878 02/18, CM9577 PDF, 1.24MB, 64 pages


Annex A: Stakeholder proposals
HTML


Annex B: Current Countryside Stewardship Options - Mid Tier, Higher Tier and Capital Items
HTML


The future farming and environment evidence compendium
PDF, 9.25MB, 68 pages

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology. Request an accessible format.

Ways to respond
Respond online

or

Email to:
[email protected]

Write to:
Agriculture Consultation Team
1b - Future Farming Directorate
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London
SW1P 3JR

 

[Chris F]

It would be nice to know when members have given feedback. Please add to the thread if you do and as many of us as possible should.

 

[Flat 10]

Done. Took a while! Annoyingly you can't go back on page at a time (at least I couldn't) you could only go back to beginning and start through again to review answers. It is quite lengthy and quite a faff but I think we should make the most of this opportunity, at least they have given us a chance to be heard. I would urge everyone to tick the 'other' box in providing public goods list and add Food Production! After all as farmers that is what we do and, after water, its the most basic human need and I believe therefore that providing the public with a traceable and secure supply of food is in the public interest.

 

[jellybean]

They say they cannot guarantee confidentiality. That's a good start then!

 

[Flat 10]

They say they cannot guarantee confidentiality. That's a good start then!

I think that's to do with FoI requests, your information won't be freely available.

 

[Surgery]

They say they cannot guarantee confidentiality. That's a good start then!

They cannot guarantee paying the sfp on time

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Finished it today. In all it took me around 5 hours!

We really should all have our say. You don't have to answer everything, you can just move on.

 

[eagleye]

done, now tired and sure it will make no difference..........................

 

[Martin Holden]

Finished it today. In all it took me around 5 hours!

We really should all have our say. You don't have to answer everything, you can just move on.

I have read much of it. It’s hard work and politically written in places but unless farmers engage, then Mr Gove and Co’ will say “well we did ask you”!

 

[OliviaFox]

As part of my dissertation research I am trying to ascertain public perception of the agri environment schemes and find out what the public want from a new scheme once we have left the EU. This will go towards my evaluation of a new scheme for the English uplands post Brexit. I'd appreciate anyone who would be willing to take a couple of minutes to fill it in. Shouldn't take as long as the DEFRA consultation!
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1...udOWaQYpFSiaLfkVycu03EbQ/viewform?usp=sf_link
Thanks

 

[yellow belly]

You have a question on the survey on paying for results rather than up front

That is fine but the practical aspects are difficult to define
An example is currently lapwing nesting sites are part of the hols scheme
Where I plant spring crops the lapwings often ignore the bare land and find a spring crop they pick one field or part of a field and nest there in a group badgers are a predator that if they find the ground nesting birds they hover up all the nests
The farm bird survey is carried out in February when all the lapwings around here are in one big overwintering flock of a thousand or more come March the have split up with groups of pairs on a number of fields spread over a 30 mile radius

 

[OliviaFox]

With the results based system it has been tested in other countries such as Germany and is currently being trialled in the UK on two sites; North Yorkshire and Northern Ireland. One of the barriers I have found is recording results, as you say birds can arrive at different times of the year and obviously move around. What are your thoughts on how this could be overcome? Farmer recording for example or should recording be in the hands of NE

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

As part of my dissertation research I am trying to ascertain public perception of the agri environment schemes and find out what the public want from a new scheme once we have left the EU. This will go towards my evaluation of a new scheme for the English uplands post Brexit. I'd appreciate anyone who would be willing to take a couple of minutes to fill it in. Shouldn't take as long as the DEFRA consultation!
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1...udOWaQYpFSiaLfkVycu03EbQ/viewform?usp=sf_link
Thanks

Olivia

I have completed your survey but have a few observations:

1. The current £3.1bn spend is NOT on Agri-environment schemes, most of that is currently on farm support.

2. I don't live in a town, city or village. I live on a farm.

3. I can't give a suitable price for managing 100m of hedgerow without some indication of the outcome required. It could just involve a flit over with a flail hedgecutter or it could be 7 days manual labour to coppice or lay it.

4. Payment on outcomes is ideal in the longer term but farms have to remain viable year to year. The costs are incurred in real time but the outcome may take 5 or 10 years to achieve. Very few farms will incur expenditure on the promise of possible income in 5 years time if the outdoors are met and the RPA haven't changed their mind in the meantime (farmers no longer trust the RPA, Natural England or any other agencies after part rule changes mid-scheme ). Government also runs on annual financial cycles and struggles to work with non-annual payment timelines.

Sorry if I'm being picky but you need better quality data to base a meaningful dissertation on.

 

[OliviaFox]

Olivia

I have completed your survey but have a few observations:

1. The current £3.1bn spend is NOT on Agri-environment schemes, most of that is currently on farm support.

2. I don't live in a town, city or village. I live on a farm.

3. I can't give a suitable price for managing 100m of hedgerow writing some indication of the outcome required. It could just involve a flit over with a flail hedgecutter or it could be 7 days manual labour to collide or lay it.

4. Payment on outcomes is ideal in the longer term but farms have to remain viable year to year. The costs are incurred in real time but the outcome may take 5 or 10 years to achieve. Government also runs on annual financial cycles and struggles to work with non-annual payment timelines.

Sorry if I'm being picky but you need better quality data to base a dissertation on.

1. This figure I got from the link attached, which states £3.1 billion of the CAP budget to be spent on environmental schemes, although from 2014 so slightly out of date it was the best figure I could find at the time of writing the survey.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-environmental-scheme-for-farmers-to-prioritise-biodiversity

2. I based this demographic question on the assumption most farms are in a village, or that most people belong to one of these categories. For example the farm I live on is 2 miles from the nearest village, but my address still puts me in that village.

3. For this I was looking at what people thought the management of hedgerows option in the current 2018 mid tier scheme would pay farmers. But thank you for your input as maybe I have not worded this as well as I could of.

4. what would your thoughts be on a lesser upfront payment to encourage entry and then premium payments for objectives achieved/ results seen?

Thank you very much for your input and time taken to carry out the survey. I have also been conducting interviews and focus groups with stakeholders to further my research and get as much data as possible.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

1. This figure I got from the link attached, which states £3.1 billion of the CAP budget to be spent on environmental schemes, although from 2014 so slightly out of date it was the best figure I could find at the time of writing the survey.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-environmental-scheme-for-farmers-to-prioritise-biodiversity

2. I based this demographic question on the assumption most farms are in a village, or that most people belong to one of these categories. For example the farm I live on is 2 miles from the nearest village, but my address still puts me in that village.

3. For this I was looking at what people thought the management of hedgerows option in the current 2018 mid tier scheme would pay farmers. But thank you for your input as maybe I have not worded this as well as I could of.

4. what would your thoughts be on a lesser upfront payment to encourage entry and then premium payments for objectives achieved/ results seen?

Thank you very much for your input and time taken to carry out the survey. I have also been conducting interviews and focus groups with stakeholders to further my research and get as much data as possible.

Ok, I was just making observations.

For hedgerows at least there is more than just the mid teir scheme. We applied for the hedgerow and boundary grant last year having never been able to get enough points to join ELS without totally compromising our farm productivity (we are a lowland suckler farm). The work demanded by the (h&b grant) scheme barely covered the cost of the work if we did it all ourselves and left us holding all the risk. If we'd employed a contractor to lay the hedges we'd have been hugely out of pocket. It all depends on what is required. If it's just changing from annual trimming to 2 or 3 yearly then the cost is negligible.

As for how to structure payments; therein lies the nub of the problem. I recently attended a seminar where the UK's leading soil researcher spoke on improving soils. In the discussion afterwards she was at a loss as to how to even measure soil improvement fairly as part of a scheme let alone pay for it. What time of year do you measure (affects biological components)? What laboratory process standard do you use (affects measures like soil organic matter and carbon content)? How detailed should the survey be (1 sample per field or a full field survey on every field and to what depth)? How often should you survey (a baseline at the start of the scheme? Every year? Start and end only?) and how do you determine interim payments if measuring less than annually? Who pays the (considerable) cost of the surveys?

The idea is simple, the practice is anything but. These may seem just details but they could render the uptake 1% or 100 %.

 

[OliviaFox]

Ok, I was just making observations.

For hedgerows at least there is more than just the mid teir scheme. We applied for the hedgerow and boundary grant last year having never been able to get enough points to join ELS without totally compromising our farm productivity (we are a lowland suckler farm). The work demanded by the (h&b grant) scheme barely covered the cost of the work if we did it all ourselves and left us holding all the risk. If we'd employed a contractor to lay the hedges we'd have been hugely out of pocket. It all depends on what is required. If it's just changing from annual trimming to 2 or 3 yearly then the cost is negligible.

As for how to structure payments; therein lies the nub of the problem. I recently attended a seminar where the UK's leading soil researcher spoke on improving soils. In the discussion afterwards she was at a loss as to how to even measure soil improvement fairly as part of a scheme let alone pay for it. What time of year do you measure (affects biological complements)? What laboratory process standard do you use (affects measures like soil organic matter and carbon content)? How detailed should the survey be (1 sample per field or a full field survey on every field)? How often should you survey (a baseline at the start of the scheme? Every year? Start and end only?) and how do you determine interim payments if measuring less than annually? Who pays the (considerable) cost of the surveys?

The idea is simple, the practice is anything but. These may seem just details but they could remedy the uptake 1% or 100 %.

From my research so far and data collected from other farmers, this idea of results based which the government seems to be leaning more towards raises a lot of interesting questions. As you have pointed out monitoring is a major issue, particularly who would carry this out? From my data, many farmers are not as keen on monitoring results themselves which NE appears to want to move towards obviously to reduce cost. Furthermore, as you've pointed out results can take years to appear. If this method were to be used, these challenges would have to be overcome to make it practical. however, the challenge is how this could be overcome?

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

From my research so far and data collected from other farmers, this idea of results based which the government seems to be leaning more towards raises a lot of interesting questions. As you have pointed out monitoring is a major issue, particularly who would carry this out? From my data, many farmers are not as keen on monitoring results themselves which NE appears to want to move towards obviously to reduce cost. Furthermore, as you've pointed out results can take years to appear. If this method were to be used, these challenges would have to be overcome to make it practical. however, the challenge is how this could be overcome?

It all depends on the outcomes you want to achieve. To deliver real measurable environmental benefits then any scheme must be robust. Any scientifically valid scheme must be based on clearly measurable criteria. I worked for the EA for 23 years (in flood risk) and was seen as a local expert. I had input to national initiatives. Even I would not be competent to assess most environmental outcomes to the necessary standard!

I could just about assess flood risk reduction if the required evidence was not too onerous, otherwise it would require eco-engineering consultants at a cost of many £000's in data gathering, hydraulic modelling and analysis.

I am not competent to assess soil improvements in a scientifically recognised quantifiable way. Again, that would require eco-engineering consultants costing many £000's with repeated surveys.

I am barely competent to provide robust data to prove environmental habitat gain to a scientific standard without professional help.

Probably the only proposed "public good" that I could robustly assess is increased public access to land, something I'm not interested in providing.

If that is the case for me, what hope have many farmers?

You can see the issue.

Agreeing the desired areas of public good and outlining the scheme is the easy part. Without a quantifiable delivery measurement system it can't work.

I'm worried.

 

[shippingcontainerproryan]

This type of response to the government can actually make more of a difference than people think. Yes, it may be tiring, but it can help greatly.

 

[Derrick Hughes]

If they wind the clock back until the day they joined the Eu, reopen all the EHF farms, bring back simple grant schemes that are not linked to the stupid plans and add on their environmental concerns, some of the good bits to name a few would be lime and drainage grants , hedge and tree planting and buildings with a simple application form

 

[andybk]

If they wind the clock back until the day they joined the Eu, reopen all the EHF farms, bring back simple grant schemes that are not linked to the stupid plans and add on their environmental concerns, some of the good bits to name a few would be lime and drainage grants , hedge and tree planting and buildings with a simple application form

yes this will be the way to go , you could link shed grants to other improvements ,dont think ehf farms will ever come back though .
as i see it many enviro experts will be feathering their nests long before it ever gets to farmers pockets or improvements to uk countryside .just another tier of cost we will have to absorb.