Stuff farming, we’re Natural England!

[ajcc]

Any farmer looking to taking an environmental shilling must beware. My css arable reversion agreement ended in 2012.

 

[wasted years]

If you had a stop notice served you were risking it surely?

 

[chipchap]

When was the field first arable reversion?
These people are getting very heavy handed.
And they wonder why people no longer wish to have environmental schemes on their land.

 

[Fallowfield]

'Any farmer looking to taking an environmental shilling must beware.'

##

If you are getting the shilling on the basis that you have to adhere to certain conditions then is it unreasonable to expect you to adhere to those condition?

 

[DRC]

'Any farmer looking to taking an environmental shilling must beware.'

##

If you are getting the shilling on the basis that you have to adhere to certain conditions then is it unreasonable to expect you to adhere to those condition?

The OP said his agreement ended in 2012, so it’s now up to him what he does with it.
NE are clueless, as we had land in Arable reversion for 10 years at a rate that was workable ( tenant farm with rent to pay ). At the end of the 10 years they only wanted to pay a nominal fee, as they said it’s now permanent pasture , so it inevitably got ploughed up again .

 

[SilliamWhale]

I have to say I was quite keen on a lot of environmental stuff 10 years ago and when I could see that they would start slapping habitat management rules on things after the end of schemes (because it then became a habitat) then I had to stop and just move to annual things.

 

[Fallowfield]

'The OP said his agreement ended in 2012, so it’s now up to him what he does with it.'

###

If that's the case then I don't see what the problem is, other than an administrative cock up by NE.

Is it not more likely that though the payments ended in 2012 the conditions still apply?

 

[ajcc]

The point is any payment/agreement ended 6 years ago. NE don’t like being dropped and still maintain all conditions still apply by way of EIA regulations.
All appeal processes are internal so the only way to get an unbiased hearing is to force them to take court action.
I am where I am with them, but anyone contemplating an agreement should be wary of getting involved because their agenda may change without warning.

 

[Extreme Optimist]

The point is any payment/agreement ended 6 years ago. NE don’t like being dropped and still maintain all conditions still apply by way of EIA regulations.
All appeal processes are internal so the only way to get an unbiased hearing is to force them to take court action.
I am where I am with them, but anyone contemplating an agreement should be wary of getting involved because their agenda may change without warning.

Totally agree. They make the rules up as they go along and change contracts to suit themselves. Nothing but crooks!!

 

[gone up the hill]

The point is any payment/agreement ended 6 years ago. NE don’t like being dropped and still maintain all conditions still apply by way of EIA regulations.
All appeal processes are internal so the only way to get an unbiased hearing is to force them to take court action.
I am where I am with them, but anyone contemplating an agreement should be wary of getting involved because their agenda may change without warning.

You need to go thru the small print of the agreement you signed with a fine tooth pick and see if they can actually control what you do on the land after the agreement ended/ payments ended.

If they can then I cant see how anyone can sign upto these schemes.

What options did you have in place for these fields?

Could well be an error on their part and they still think your agreement is still active and you are still getting payments.

 

[DrWazzock]

This is the sort of thing that's makes me extremely wary of the new greening proposals. They will have you over a barrel before you know it.

 

[farmerm]

You need to go thru the small print of the agreement you signed with a fine tooth pick and see if they can actually control what you do on the land after the agreement ended/ payments ended.

If they can then I cant see how anyone can sign upto these schemes.

What options did you have in place for these fields?

Could well be an error on their part and they still think your agreement is still active and you are still getting payments.

I recently re-read the ELS agreement small print, it basically appears to give them free reign to make any change to the agreement that they like with no exit clause for the farmer. If they so wish they could unilaterally change the terms to prevent us ever leaving, possibly even change the terms long after the agreement has ceased??

 

[farmerm]

This is the sort of thing that's makes me extremely wary of the new greening proposals. They will have you over a barrel before you know it.

There will be volunteers attracted by a financial carrot and then the rest of us will be co-opted when they introduce massive financial penalties not to.

 

[gone up the hill]

I recently re-read the ELS agreement small print, it basically appears to give them free reign to make any change to the agreement that they like with no exit clause for the farmer. If they so wish they could unilaterally change the terms to prevent us ever leaving, possibly even change the terms long after the agreement has ceased??

Cant see how they could change the terms after the agreement has ceased but from what you say they could change the rules when your in the scheme and stop you ever leaving it/ the terms of it.

Far too one sided to sign if its like that.

 

[farmerm]

Cant see how they could change the terms after the agreement has ceased but from what you say they could change the rules when your in the scheme and stop you ever leaving it/ the terms of it.

Far too one sided to sign if its like that.

Guess all the land agents and farming press made the assumption that our Gov would not encourage us to sign us up to an agreement that was unfair... whilst I think they can change the rules there is I hope a limit to just how far they could push it before farmers would turn militant!

 

[gone up the hill]

Guess all the land agents and farming press made the assumption that our Gov would not encourage us to sign us up to an agreement that was unfair... whilst I think they can change the rules there is I hope a limit to just how far they could push it before farmers would turn militant!

What will happen ( and is happening ) is that farmers wont sign up to these schemes.

 

[farmerm]

What will happen ( and is happening ) is that farmers wont sign up to these schemes.

They won’t need us to.. with the Green Brexit we will have compulsory greening measure enforced on us..

 

[Ffermer Bach]

You need to go thru the small print of the agreement you signed with a fine tooth pick and see if they can actually control what you do on the land after the agreement ended/ payments ended.

If they can then I cant see how anyone can sign upto these schemes.

What options did you have in place for these fields?

Could well be an error on their part and they still think your agreement is still active and you are still getting payments.

I never joined tir gofal, because I read the agreement as being for five years, and during those years, fields would become habitat, but I reasoned that when I left the scheme, the fields would still be classified as habitat, and I think you need a derogation to plough up or apply fertliser to habitat land, so once they have you, you have signed the land over for ever. I know that has not happened, but it looks like it has in this instance.

 

[renewablejohn]

This is the sort of thing that's makes me extremely wary of the new greening proposals. They will have you over a barrel before you know it.

CLA are well aware of the issue. I was at the APF on Thursday and raised the point that I had not been paid since 2015 for my woodland grant scheme the Forestry Commission justified the non payment on changes in EU rules since I signed the agreement in 2005. Obviously the CLA could not comment on my personal circumstances but she really did lay into the Forestry Commission and the government spokeswoman who had been outlining the changes coming within the new Agricultural bill. Seems like its not only me that has suffered .such dirty tricks in the past but it appears the new contracts are open to the same abuse in the future. The issue being a rolling contract could be totally different to what you signed upto in year one. CLA was pushing the point that you should only be judged for what you have committed to at the date of contract signing.

 

[Extreme Optimist]

CLA are well aware of the issue. I was at the APF on Thursday and raised the point that I had not been paid since 2015 for my woodland grant scheme the Forestry Commission justified the non payment on changes in EU rules since I signed the agreement in 2005. Obviously the CLA could not comment on my personal circumstances but she really did lay into the Forestry Commission and the government spokeswoman who had been outlining the changes coming within the new Agricultural bill. Seems like its not only me that has suffered .such dirty tricks in the past but it appears the new contracts are open to the same abuse in the future. The issue being a rolling contract could be totally different to what you signed upto in year one. CLA was pushing the point that you should only be judged for what you have committed to at the date of contract signing.

NFU too. They used mine as a test case. In my view, if they change the terms of the contract, you should be able to withdraw without penalty.
I gather they are now withdrawing from SSSI schemes and stopping payments but continuing to insist that the rules stay in place. If one of us did something like that, it would be considered fraud!!