New information about local nature recovery and landscape recovery

[onesiedale]

Morning all and happy new year.

Further to the information we published about the Sustainable Farming Incentive in December (see https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ng-incentive-how-the-scheme-will-work-in-2022), today we're publishing information about the 2 other new schemes: local nature recovery and landscape recovery.

These 3 schemes together will give farmers a range of ways to get paid to produce public goods alongside agricultural produce on their land.

We'll also very shortly be publishing the results of our review of payment rates for Countryside Stewardship.

I'll share links to the info here as soon as they're live, and I'll be online here and over on Twitter (where I am @janethughes) to answer your questions. I look forward to your questions and discussion, as ever

Update:

Here is a document that sets out a bit more about the environmental and climate outcomes we're seeking to achieve, alongside food production: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/environmental-land-management-schemes-outcomes

Here is a document about how the new local nature recovery scheme will work: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-more-information-on-how-the-scheme-will-work

Here is a document about the first round of landscape recovery projects: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-more-information-on-how-the-scheme-will-work

Here is a list of payment rates for Countryside Stewardship agreements, following a review last year https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...hip-revenue-payment-rates-from-1-january-2022 - the increased rates will apply to all agreement holders, regardless of when their agreement started. There is a small number of decreases - these will only apply to new agreement holders, from January 2023.

Update: here's a transcript of the speech made by the Secretary of State at Oxford Farming Conference this morning: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...rates-for-revenue-options-from-1-january-2022

@Janet Hughes Defra
with the launch of the SFI being planned for June and still no satisfactory suggestions of how you are going to help grassland farmers maintain and protect the carbon sequestering, water cleaning, public amenity landscape that is producing food and providing employment.
The following question is being asked on many ,many farms this spring....

Thread 'Pasture to Arable for wheat?' https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/pasture-to-arable-for-wheat.366698/

once converted to arable, it appears that there will be a much better incentive for SFI payments.
The nation's ploughs are being prepared!

 

[delilah]

@Janet Hughes Defra

Just to reinforce the above post.

In the work of Guo and Gifford (2002) a meta-analysis was undertaken of data from 74 international land use change and soil carbon storage studies. It measured the effects of land use change in 537 instances and was used to determine the importance of land use and land use change on soil carbon stocks. The analysis showed that there was a decline in soil carbon stocks after land use conversion from grassland to plantation forest (−10 percent), native forest to plantation forest (−13 percent), native forest to cropland (−42 percent), and grassland to cropland (−59 percent). There were significant increases in soil carbon stocks after land use changes from native forest to grassland (+8 percent), cropland to grassland (+19 percent), cropland to plantation (+18 percent), and cropland to secondary forest (+53 percent). The conversion of native forest or grassland to broadleaf deciduous tree plantation had no effect on soil carbon stocks, but conversion to pine or conifer forest reduced soil carbon by between 12 and 15 percent. This analysis of land use change and soil carbon data also suggested that, if a given land use change is responsible for soil carbon losses, then the reverse change could potentially increase soil carbon stocks. But it is important to recognise that it can take decades if not centuries to recover to the original level of soil carbon stocks after disturbance due to land use change (Guo and Gifford, 2002).

Now i'm no scientist, and happy to be corrected, but by my reckoning that means that for every Ha of grassland ploughed up, we need to see 3 Ha of arable land put into grass, in order to ensure a net balance on soil carbon stocks.

That is the failing of the SFI as it stands. Where is the reward for that which provides the greatest public good ?

 

[onesiedale]

@Janet Hughes Defra
with June less than 12 weeks away, the most logical way to make the SFI achieve DEFRAs goals is to value grassland sensibly so that take up by farmers will be well supported.
£200/ha for each farm's 1st 80ha will give DEFRA value for money and ensure that grassland is maintained for carbon storage, water quality, biodiversity, public amenity value and food production.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

@Janet Hughes Defra
with June less than 12 weeks away, the most logical way to make the SFI achieve DEFRAs goals is to value grassland sensibly so that take up by farmers will be well supported.
£200/ha for each farm's 1st 80ha will give DEFRA value for money and ensure that grassland is maintained for carbon storage, water quality, biodiversity, public amenity value and food production.

But they have shown their intentions by reducing most of the payments for grassland in countryside stewardship.
Unless someone can show me some evidence to the contrary, the reason given for these reductions being due to less 'income foregone', I'm sure is a lie.
It is a policy decision to remove support for grazing.

Whether this is an anti-livestock decision or an attempt to push people in to undertaking other options such as planting trees, remains to be seen.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Will the payment rates rise now under "income foregone" as cereal prices are rising?

 

[tepapa]

Will the payment rates rise now under "income foregone" as cereal prices are rising?

Cereal and livestock prices were already quite high when they announced the rates but they still droped the payments.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Cereal and livestock prices were already quite high when they announced the rates but they still droped the payments.

Probably arguing that costs have risen faster so net income fallen. That varies for each farm though.

 

[tepapa]

Probably arguing that costs have risen faster so net income fallen. That varies for each farm though.

Same old government problem of using out of date figures to set schemes when the farmers are working in the present and budgeting for the future

 

[Jackov Altraids]

Same old government problem of using out of date figures to set schemes when the farmers are working in the present and budgeting for the future

Wouldn't it be good for Defra, in the interest of being honest, open and creating trust, to give some indication of the figures they have used in making these calculations?

Income foregone is offering the absolute minimum value of what land is worth.

Look at how everyone else involved in these schemes are paid 'professional' rates to advise, monitor, inspect etc. yet those with the capital investment, doing the actual management and taking responsibility, are expected to do that for free.

So I'm sure they will never give us any clue to their calculations as it would make it clear what a flaming insult they were.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

Wouldn't it be good for Defra, in the interest of being honest, open and creating trust, to give some indication of the figures they have used in making these calculations?

Income foregone is offering the absolute minimum value of what land is worth.

Look at how everyone else involved in these schemes are paid 'professional' rates to advise, monitor, inspect etc. yet those with the capital investment, doing the actual management and taking responsibility, are expected to do that for free.

So I'm sure they will never give us any clue to their calculations as it would make it clear what a flaming insult they were.

Look at pages 3,4 & 5 of this LNR;

https://www.northdevonbiosphere.org.uk/uploads/1/5/4/4/15448192/nrp__grassland_3.pdf

Who do they expect to be making the 'private investment'?


Not the land or estate agents.

 

[ajcc]

This North Devon biosphere is primarily NT inspired document and total pie in the sky because they can only rely on a patchy broken 300 metre wide coastal strip between Croyde and Ilfracombe.

 

[steveR]

Look at pages 3,4 & 5 of this LNR;

https://www.northdevonbiosphere.org.uk/uploads/1/5/4/4/15448192/nrp__grassland_3.pdf

Who do they expect to be making the 'private investment'?


Not the land or estate agents.

Water Companies and the like. Or similiar companies looking for greenwashing PR stunts...?

 

[Janet Hughes Defra]

But they have shown their intentions by reducing most of the payments for grassland in countryside stewardship.
Unless someone can show me some evidence to the contrary, the reason given for these reductions being due to less 'income foregone', I'm sure is a lie.
It is a policy decision to remove support for grazing.

Whether this is an anti-livestock decision or an attempt to push people in to undertaking other options such as planting trees, remains to be seen.

That's not right, no - we will be introducing standards for low input grassland in the sustainable farming incentive in due course and have meanwhile increased the prices in CS for the almost all of the grassland options.

The prices on most of the grassland options went up, in some cases significantly - the full list is here (specifically the 'GS' set of options): https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...rates-for-revenue-options-from-1-january-2022

For example the payment for permanent grassland with very low inputs went up from £95 to £132 per hectare (outside SDAs) and from £16 to £71 per hectare (in SDA). Creation of species-rich grassland went up from £267 to £374 per hectare. Others went up by a smaller proportion.

Here is the table of GS options, for ease of reference, showing the price in 2021, the price in 2022 for existing agreements (where no reductions have been applied to any payment rates) and the rate for agreements starting on or after 1 Jan 2023 (where a small number of reductions have been applied to reflect an updated assessment of income foregone plus costs) - you can see the full list via the link above).

As you can see, all the GS payment rates increased apart from two, the lenient grazing supplement (GS17) and the haymaking supplement (GS15).

GS10	Management of wet grassland for wintering waders and wildfowl	157	197	197
GS11	Creation of wet grassland for breeding waders	406	480	480
GS12	Creation of wet grassland for wintering waders and wildfowl	310	403	403
GS13	Management of grassland for target features	90	131	131
GS14	Creation of grassland for target features	253	372	372
GS15	Haymaking supplement	85	85	37
GS16	Rush infestation control supplement	73	77	77
GS17	Lenient Grazing Supplement	44	44	23
GS2	Permanent grassland with very low inputs (outside SDAs)	95	132	132
GS3	Ryegrass seed-set as winter food for birds	331	426	426
GS4	Legume and herb-rich swards	309	358	358
GS5	Permanent grassland with very low inputs in SDA	16	71	71
GS6	Management of species-rich grassland	182	182	182
GS7	Restoration towards species-rich grassland	145	205	205
GS8	Creation of species-rich grassland	267	374	374
GS9	Management of wet grassland for breeding waders	264	323	323

 

[Jackov Altraids]

That's not right, no - we will be introducing standards for low input grassland in the sustainable farming incentive in due course and have meanwhile increased the prices in CS for the almost all of the grassland options.

The prices on most of the grassland options went up, in some cases significantly - the full list is here (specifically the 'GS' set of options): https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...rates-for-revenue-options-from-1-january-2022

For example the payment for permanent grassland with very low inputs went up from £95 to £132 per hectare (outside SDAs) and from £16 to £71 per hectare (in SDA). Creation of species-rich grassland went up from £267 to £374 per hectare. Others went up by a smaller proportion.

Here is the table of GS options, for ease of reference, showing the price in 2021, the price in 2022 for existing agreements (where no reductions have been applied to any payment rates) and the rate for agreements starting on or after 1 Jan 2023 (where a small number of reductions have been applied to reflect an updated assessment of income foregone plus costs) - you can see the full list via the link above).

As you can see, all the GS payment rates increased apart from two, the lenient grazing supplement (GS17) and the haymaking supplement (GS15).

GS10	Management of wet grassland for wintering waders and wildfowl	157	197	197
GS11	Creation of wet grassland for breeding waders	406	480	480
GS12	Creation of wet grassland for wintering waders and wildfowl	310	403	403
GS13	Management of grassland for target features	90	131	131
GS14	Creation of grassland for target features	253	372	372
GS15	Haymaking supplement	85	85	37
GS16	Rush infestation control supplement	73	77	77
GS17	Lenient Grazing Supplement	44	44	23
GS2	Permanent grassland with very low inputs (outside SDAs)	95	132	132
GS3	Ryegrass seed-set as winter food for birds	331	426	426
GS4	Legume and herb-rich swards	309	358	358
GS5	Permanent grassland with very low inputs in SDA	16	71	71
GS6	Management of species-rich grassland	182	182	182
GS7	Restoration towards species-rich grassland	145	205	205
GS8	Creation of species-rich grassland	267	374	374
GS9	Management of wet grassland for breeding waders	264	323	323

Thanks for reply.
Please accept my apologies, what I should have said is that I think all the options that had their payments reduced, related to grassland

I believe this is a complete list of CS options for which payment rates have been REDUCED;

GS1

Take field corners and small areas out of management

365

365

333

GS15

Haymaking supplement

85

85

37

GS17

Lenient Grazing Supplement

44

44

23

OP4

Multi species ley

115

115

71

OT1

Organic land management - improved permanent grassland

40

40

20

SP6

Cattle grazing supplement

45

45

39

WD9

Livestock exclusion supplement - scrub and successional areas

121

121

74

Genuinely sorry for the mistake. Lack of sleep from lambing and now have covid too

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Look at pages 3,4 & 5 of this LNR;

https://www.northdevonbiosphere.org.uk/uploads/1/5/4/4/15448192/nrp__grassland_3.pdf

Who do they expect to be making the 'private investment'?


Not the land or estate agents.

I wonder if those who wrote that raise that action C3 may be a cause of the lack of ground nesting birds?

Probably not given these 2 statements later on :

 

[Jackov Altraids]

I wonder if those who wrote that raise that action C3 may be a cause of the lack of ground nesting birds?

Probably not given these 2 statements later on :

View attachment 1023283

Thanks. I hadn't noticed that.

The funny thing is, I have genuinely seen more lapwings here in the last 5 years than ever before. I had to look it up the first time as I didn't know what they were.

Coincidentally, I believe this is an area where the population of badgers has reduced significantly in recent times.....

 

[Janet Hughes Defra]

Thanks for reply.
Please accept my apologies, what I should have said is that I think all the options that had their payments reduced, related to grassland


Genuinely sorry for the mistake. Lack of sleep from lambing and now have covid too

No problem at all and certainly no need to apologise, and really sorry to hear you have covid - hope you don't get it too badly and make a speedy recovery. Terrible timing as well.

I see your point on the reductions, but I would want to be clear that there are a lot more increases than reductions, many of which also relate to grassland options, so I'd encourage anyone thinking about grassland options to take a look at the full list, and also to note that if you're already in an agreement, your price won't go down on any option.

 

[delilah]

we will be introducing standards for low input grassland in the sustainable farming incentive

I may have missed it, but I don't see any SFI standards for low input cropped land ?
Why is it deemed a public good that grassland needs to be low input, but not arable land ?

Now i'm no scientist, and happy to be corrected, but by my reckoning that means that for every Ha of grassland ploughed up, we need to see 3 Ha of arable land put into grass, in order to ensure a net balance on soil carbon stocks.

No-one has corrected me on this, so I assume I am interpreting things correctly.
In that case, the £/Ha on grassland needs to be significantly higher - one could argue 3x higher - than on arable land ?

 

[Janet Hughes Defra]

I may have missed it, but I don't see any SFI standards for low input cropped land ?
Why is it deemed a public good that grassland needs to be low input, but not arable land ?




No-one has corrected me on this, so I assume I am interpreting things correctly.
In that case, the £/Ha on grassland needs to be significantly higher - one could argue 3x higher - than on arable land ?

'low input grassland' is a description of a land use type rather than an instruction as to what to do on the land - there will be standards across all types of arable and grassland - we shared some information here about what is coming in future years, and we'll share more details shortly (I recognise that you can't tell a lot from the names of standards here and that we need to say more about what they're about / what they involve)

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

'low input grassland' is a description of a land use type rather than an instruction as to what to do on the land - there will be standards across all types of arable and grassland - we shared some information here about what is coming in future years, and we'll share more details shortly (I recognise that you can't tell a lot from the names of standards here and that we need to say more about what they're about / what they involve)

That misuse of a description is exemplary of one of the barriers we keep facing to effective communication between DEFRA staff and farmers Janet. That's the first time I've seen that said of the term "low input grassland". To any grassland farmer it means using very little fertiliser or sprays (which, in many cases, leads rapidly to very low production). It automatically makes me think of a scrubby and tufty meadow of old grasses gently oxidising.