Stuff farming, we’re Natural England!

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.


Looked at objectively it doesn't seem unreasonable that if the taxpayer is paying a subsidy for the transitional period when land is being changed from one use to another more environmentally beneficial use, then once the transition period has expired there should be an expectation that the new land use be maintained.

Otherwise the whole thing is pointless and is achieving nothing other than funneling money to farmers.

Which presumably isn't the purpose of the scheme.
 

Jackov Altraids

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Devon
Looked at objectively it doesn't seem unreasonable that if the taxpayer is paying a subsidy for the transitional period when land is being changed from one use to another more environmentally beneficial use, then once the transition period has expired there should be an expectation that the new land use be maintained.

Otherwise the whole thing is pointless and is achieving nothing other than funneling money to farmers.

Which presumably isn't the purpose of the scheme.


Somebody was complaining to me that although they had received good money for planting and caring for many acres of trees that after the agreement had ended they were left with fields full of trees!!!!
But on the whole I disagree with you.
You sign an agreement requirements and conditions for a set time period.
After that you can agree a new contract or do what ever you want.
One of the most stupid points of these schemes is they will not make payments for existing good habitats. I have many acres of excellent natural habitats for which I have never received any payments of any kind. I could of course plough it or destroy and be paid for the forage area or claim loadsa money to re-wild it.
 

Extreme Optimist

Member
Livestock Farmer
Looked at objectively it doesn't seem unreasonable that if the taxpayer is paying a subsidy for the transitional period when land is being changed from one use to another more environmentally beneficial use, then once the transition period has expired there should be an expectation that the new land use be maintained.

Otherwise the whole thing is pointless and is achieving nothing other than funneling money to farmers.

Which presumably isn't the purpose of the scheme.

Firstly, is it "transitional"? I am not sure it was mentioned anywhere in the "contract" that it was transitional, and if it was, it should have been clearly stated - right at the beginning! Secondly, if it was to continue after the duration of the contract then surely there should be payment for it being taken out of profitable production (if anything can be described as profitable) otherwise the farmer may as well have introduced wildlife enhancements himself without the bureaucratic stranglehold of Natural England. I do however agree that it achieves very little other than some minor short term advantages.
I think the thing that upsets most is the underhand way in which they change/manipulate the rules and regulations (even some of their staff agreed!) and then when they are caught out, they hide behind "European legislation".
I have also found that complying with their rules has an adverse effect on wildlife. I farm with a large nature reserve in the middle of my land and the wardens reckon that wildlife has gone up exponentially since I came out of Stewardship and I am happy to work closely with the local wildlife trust to help them achieve some of their goals.
What is really damning is that one of the NE agronomists had an off the record farm walk around the farm and said that having seen the areas that I managed and the areas subject to NE rules said that the rules weren't achieving there objective and were basically destroying the SSSI whereas he would be delighted to show people around the site I was managing myself without any premium. They forget that often these areas are of value BECAUSE of the way they are farmed. The first thing NE do is immediately change the management.
The whole thing is a farce and nothing to do with wildlife enhancement but more of a control mechanism. They are shooting themselves in the foot as people like me who love seeing a variety of wildlife around the farm will never join another one of their schemes again. They need to be careful as if they continue to force these ideals on people, they will find good farmers going out of business and much of the land that is environmentally value will revert to scrub.
 

bobajob

Member
Location
Sw Scotland
Been to Barnstaple magistrates court this week.....entered not guilty pleas to three charges....next stop Crown court Exeter.....
Be warned NE have an anti farming agenda and are on a mission to stuff farming.(ps they’re not very bright tho.)

Good luck, good for you for standing up to them.
Careful what you divulge on here, you never know who is watching..
 

renewablejohn

Member
Location
lancs
Make sure you have a good barrister. They may seem expensive but worth every penny. Good luck I might shortly be in the same boat with the forestry commission when I start removing trees.
 
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??

I do not know about ELS agreements, but under Mid Tier the agreement holder does have a unilateral right of termination (there's no backstop!). BUT, you have to give them back all the money they've given you over the life of the scheme. If they have paid you any money, they then will come round and inspect your farm to see if there were any breaches at the time, and if there were they then I think I remember correctly that they can fine you.

This thread does make uncomfortable reading I must say. We are in a very big Mid Tier scheme and I am well aware of the one-sided nature of the contract we have signed.
 

farmerm

Member
Location
Shropshire
I do not know about ELS agreements, but under Mid Tier the agreement holder does have a unilateral right of termination (there's no backstop!). BUT, you have to give them back all the money they've given you over the life of the scheme. If they have paid you any money, they then will come round and inspect your farm to see if there were any breaches at the time, and if there were they then I think I remember correctly that they can fine you.

This thread does make uncomfortable reading I must say. We are in a very big Mid Tier scheme and I am well aware of the one-sided nature of the contract we have signed.
I meant mid-tier. I wasn’t aware of or have forgotten the agreement holder termination option but it’s not an option many would want to take as it’s is loose loose

I still mix up BPS with SFP too :cautious:
 

Hesston4860s

Member
Location
Nr Lincoln
Make sure you have a good barrister. They may seem expensive but worth every penny. Good luck I might shortly be in the same boat with the forestry commission when I start removing trees.

And I might be joining you next year when one of mines out of obligation !. I fully intend on dropping the lot and back into arable, I’m not even bothered what happens to what I cut down sell or very big bonfire (I do like a good flash up !). I just want em gone and earn some money off the land instead of it costing me money each year.
 

Cosatto

Member
And I might be joining you next year when one of mines out of obligation !. I fully intend on dropping the lot and back into arable, I’m not even bothered what happens to what I cut down sell or very big bonfire (I do like a good flash up !). I just want em gone and earn some money off the land instead of it costing me money each year.

There’s a lot of demand for wood to chip these days I would think you could get paid to have the trees cleared.
 

Hesston4860s

Member
Location
Nr Lincoln
There’s a lot of demand for wood to chip these days I would think you could get paid to have the trees cleared.
I’ve looked into it before, it seems to be the case if you wanna buy some wood chip it’s expensive (I had some for a job £70cu meter). If you wanna sell your trees to a chipper guy he wants paying to do it and take the chip !.
 

Two Tone

Member
Mixed Farmer
The answer is easy , don't enter these shitty schemes . I never contemplated mid tier , life's too short .
That’s easy to say if all your land is good and will consistently give good enough yields to make a profit. If you are on marginal land then a Mid Tier scheme will give you an income on the land that really shouldn’t be farmed.

I have to say that all those difficult fields that rarely ever showed any decent crops here now not only earn us money, but look a picture rather than an embarrassment!

It’s getting paid on time that is sometimes the problem. Find out who your local CS Lead Advisor is and deal direct with them by email and you will get the money sooner.

The one thing about dealing with Natural England is that they want to help. Yes I know they have been taken over by Defra but they are still those same “trying to help” people.
 

bobk

Member
Location
stafford
That’s easy to say if all your land is good and will consistently give good enough yields to make a profit. If you are on marginal land then a Mid Tier scheme will give you an income on the land that really shouldn’t be farmed.

I have to say that all those difficult fields that rarely ever showed any decent crops here now not only earn us money, but look a picture rather than an embarrassment!

It’s getting paid on time that is sometimes the problem. Find out who your local CS Lead Advisor is and deal direct with them by email and you will get the money sooner.

The one thing about dealing with Natural England is that they want to help. Yes I know they have been taken over by Defra but they are still those same “trying to help” people.

Doubt I'd have much trouble making a living in Moreton on the Marsh . (y) and it wouldn't involve natural england
.
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
The terms of the "Hedgerows and boundaries grant" we were offered in 2017 were unacceptable. That agreement too sought to impose all of the rules and regulations for a period 7 years beyond the 2 years duration of the actual agreement and payment. It too included a clause allowing NE to change the rules unilaterally without notice.

I'm glad that we've never been participants in any environmental scheme since we left the original "Set-aside".

While these rules are touted environmental schemes are dead in my opinion.

As for your comment about the expectation of the changed use continuing after the scheme ends @Fallowfield then that should be made abundantly clear at the start. Instead of publicising the schemes as a fixed term environmental scheme they should be advertised widely as a scheme permanently changing the designation of the land. Anything less is fraudulent.
 
Last edited:

Two Tone

Member
Mixed Farmer
Doubt I'd have much trouble making a living in Moreton on the Marsh . (y) and it wouldn't involve natural england
.
It’s Moreton-IN-Marsh and very well named.

I don’t have much trouble making a living from it. Especially thanks to Natural England, who have not only made it much easier to do so by taking land out of food production that never should have been given that task in the first place, but pay this business for turning it into something far more beneficial to it financially and the environment.

You might not like that idea and that is your choice. But business is business and I’m not going to look this gift horse in the mouth!e
 
Last edited:
I'm confused.

The man had an agreement with them to enter a piece of land into CSS.

That ended now over 6(!) years ago. He played by the rules and took their cash.

What the fudge does it have to do with them now?

If a field has been strip grazed by animals, it is no longer any kind of habitat I can think of. It's been eaten, carpped and trodden on. It is being farmed. Let him get on and farm it?
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 75 43.4%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 62 35.8%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 27 15.6%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 3 1.7%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,284
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top