SFI 24 no till payment

[delilah]

why plough the grass up just spray off and notill

There are as many reasons why a farmer would choose to plough grass rather than spray it off, as there are farmers.

Organic uses just as much energy if not more, just not on buying in and applying chemical fert and pesticides.
It trades them for more diesel and machinery steel.

Again, there are far too many variables for such a generalization to be made.



Neither of you have addressed the question I asked.

- On the 'less carbon released'. How many Ha of arable land need to be in DD, and for how many years, to compensate for the carbon released by ploughing up 1 Ha of PP ?

Because if the main 'public good' being claimed for the DD sub is carbon, surely these numbers must have been subject to extensive study ?

 

[Huno]

Until the perennial wheat plant is cracked and produces enough to feed the world we're stuck with annuals.

I think that is an exciting future.. fair call

 

[Huno]

With Gramoxone? Or cheap salt that doesnt work properly? 98% effective.. 2% buy again next year.. big con... In the 70's it was a different chemical but DD did not work on cold wet compacted clay in spring either...

why plough the grass up just spray off and notill

 

[Adeptandy]

Neighbour is organic, which invalidates some of the points you make. More importantly, it shows that it's impossible to apply a blunt instrument such as a payment for one specific crop establishment method and expect it to produce public good.





Does it though ? Until someone has a stab at answering the question I asked - below - how can we know that this SFI standard is going to help, when folks are simultaneously ploughing up their grass due to the lack of sufficient incentive to leave it be ? My contention is that as things stand it is public money for public harm.

I personally think what anyone says will be wrong as it doesn’t fit what you want or maybe do. From a personal view and as others have already stated, it’s reducing fuel use, chemical use and machinery it must be doing some good. Lands not left bare over winter reducing run off with these exceptional winters were now repeatedly experiencing. As you’ve already dismissed that there’s no further point in offering an answer to your questions.

 

[B'o'B]

On the 'less carbon released'. How many Ha of arable land need to be in DD, and for how many years, to compensate for the carbon released by ploughing up 1 Ha of PP ?

You answer a large part of your own question with this sentence:

Again, there are far too many variables for such a generalization to be made.

You will never get an accurate answer as there can be no accurate answer. PP can be many different things (RPA says anything in grass over 5 years grass is PP). The answer would be different on different soil types. Same with DD.

 

[Badshot]

There are as many reasons why a farmer would choose to plough grass rather than spray it off, as there are farmers.



Again, there are far too many variables for such a generalization to be made.



Neither of you have addressed the question I asked.




Because if the main 'public good' being claimed for the DD sub is carbon, surely these numbers must have been subject to extensive study ?

I'm sure it will have been by many academics far cleverer than I

I tend to go by my gut, it's not failed me badly yet, and I'm quite grey now....

Going simply on fuel used, as I stated earlier, the numbers involved in the reduction are mind boggling.
Let's assume my numbers are bang on, there's 15 times more fuel used to establish with the plough than DD.
Ignoring the after effects of chemicals as you seem to think all those ploughing are organic.
If that's not a worthwhile saving in emissions of all kinds I don't know what is

 

[Badshot]

Oh my guestimates on fuel used are based on when I used to do the whole hog, heavy land, not boys stuff you sneeze at for a seedbed.

 

[Chris W]

I would say defining No Till for purposes of farmer and inspector understanding is straightforward! No Tillage!! But that is not what farmers will want nor telling Defra. So Janet's team if tasked to be farmer friendly will be wrapping themselves up in knots trying to write a 'loosely' worded prescription that means all things to all men, as everyone will want a bit of that cake at £78 ha. Anyway there won't be enough cash when the folk on here get into that trough. And so somehow uptake will have to be limited, I guess.

But even an Avatar does an amount of tillage during the drilling process …

Where and How do you/they draw the line between an Avatar, a Sprinter, a Claydon, a powerharrow drill with a grange toolbar fitted or even a plough with a tow along drill?

 

[redsloe]

Because from my extensive experience on heavy land this is the by far the most foolproof way of establishing a spring crop and utilising cover crops. Straight zero till spring crops into cover crops here has been very hit and miss over the years.

That's my point.
DD cover crop, cultivation pre drilling spring crop.
That's the opposite of what grass and grain proposed.

 

[redsloe]

rpa already define drills for notill in the capital grants

Do they stipulated DD or no till?
Different animals imo.

 

[ajd132]

That's my point.
DD cover crop, cultivation pre drilling spring crop.
That's the opposite of what grass and grain proposed.

no I do what grass and grain proposed, cultivate and broadcast a cover crop in the summer, then drill into that in the spring.

 

[delilah]

I personally think what anyone says will be wrong as it doesn’t fit what you want or maybe do. From a personal view and as others have already stated, it’s reducing fuel use, chemical use and machinery it must be doing some good. Lands not left bare over winter reducing run off with these exceptional winters were now repeatedly experiencing. As you’ve already dismissed that there’s no further point in offering an answer to your questions.

Going simply on fuel used, as I stated earlier, the numbers involved in the reduction are mind boggling.
Let's assume my numbers are bang on, there's 15 times more fuel used to establish with the plough than DD.
Ignoring the after effects of chemicals as you seem to think all those ploughing are organic.
If that's not a worthwhile saving in emissions of all kinds I don't know what is

I don't 'do' anything in terms of establishing crops, so I have no bias. I am looking at this objectively, to try and establish where the 'public good' is in subbing DD.

You have come back to other issues such as run off, fuel use etc. I am asking about carbon. There's some really clued up folks on here, someone must be able to point to the figures defra have used to come up with this standard.

You answer a large part of your own question with this sentence:

You will never get an accurate answer as there can be no accurate answer. PP can be many different things (RPA says anything in grass over 5 years grass is PP). The answer would be different on different soil types. Same with DD.

,
Same field of grass, split in half. How many years in DD, rather than ploughing, to compensate for ploughing half of it up ? Rothamsted still a thing ? This stuff must have been done ? It's a cornerstone of ELMS.

 

[delilah]

no I do what grass and grain proposed, cultivate and broadcast a cover crop in the summer, then drill into that in the spring.

How does that work in terms of the DD standard in SFI ? Does it count for the calendar year in which you DD the spring crop, so long as you then don't cultivate for the following crop that autumn ?

 

[Flatland guy]

Will it? There are more folk who haven't yet dipped there finger into the honey jar yet! 17,000 applications so far, that leaves what 50,000 not applied yet. I know as I am about to submit three first applications today. And have four or five more to get in during May. Then am on some already submitted looking to go back with a SAM2 IPM3 application.

I/We are one of the 50,000. At the moment we are still getting some dregs of Bps, But going forward will put claim in, possibly not get much but some to make up shortfall. I do not think DEFRA understand our good land and often the wheat/cereal is the break crop.
I will be absolutely gutted if things like no till will not be available in our specific situation. When elsewhere you here of straight combinables farm being supposedly no till then using certain chemicals/ herbicides and then they must be in breach of the label of that product owing to cultivation practice following application or following crop/cover crops not being on label as legal to be sown afterwards. IMO it will nearly be a big scandal that would affect all in the agricultural industry. I don't suppose it would go to Court but always interesting to see if the farmer would blame agronomist or himself for being in breach of label requirements.

 

[ajd132]

How does that work in terms of the DD standard in SFI ? Does it count for the calendar year in which you DD the spring crop, so long as you then don't cultivate for the following crop that autumn ?

No idea yet. But I won’t compromise crop performance for abit of extra money. We DD a lot but I cannot get it working consistently in spring.

 

[alomy75]

I/We are one of the 50,000. At the moment we are still getting some dregs of Bps, But going forward will put claim in, possibly not get much but some to make up shortfall. I do not think DEFRA understand our good land and often the wheat/cereal is the break crop.
I will be absolutely gutted if things like no till will be excepted from the likes of no till I certain circumstances when our situation. When elsewhere you here of straight combinables farm being supposedly no till then using certain chemicals/ herbicides and then they must be in breach of the label of that product owing to cultivation practice following application or following crop/cover crops not being on label as legal to be sown afterwards. IMO it will nearly be a big scandal that would affect all in the agricultural industry. I don't suppose it would go to Court but always interesting to see if the farmer would blame agronomist or himself for being in breach of label requirements.

The ‘legal’ bit of a label is the ‘statutory conditions of use’ box which is usually very evident to see. Incorporation and other advice is just that; a recommendation. Apart from things like nemathorin.

 

[Flatland guy]

The ‘legal’ bit of a label is the ‘statutory conditions of use’ box which is usually very evident to see. Incorporation and other advice is just that; a recommendation. Apart from things like nemathorin.

As far as I am concerned the box usually mentions refer to elsewhere on label for application rates/crop use which would link it to being a legal requirement.

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Until the perennial wheat plant is cracked and produces enough to feed the world we're stuck with annuals.

Perennial wheat won't be cracked even though it already exists, because it doesn't suit the supply industry for us to grow it that way.

kernza wheat - Google Search

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Good point. Interesting. So it looks likely they will either tighten up the rules on what the ‘no-till’ will pay out on or as you say limit uptake as per the ahl2

Are there any rules yet? All I know is that the standard is yet to be described apart from "payment for direct drilling".

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Organic uses just as much energy if not more, just not on buying in and applying chemical fert and pesticides.
It trades them for more diesel and machinery steel.

5.6 kg of CO2 emitted per kilo of N feet.

2.8kg of CO2 emitted per litre of diesel.