Sustainable Farming Incentive: how the scheme will work in 2022

Sustainable farming incentive details published today 2 December 2021

Status
Not open for further replies.

Azlett

Member
Location
Taunton
I did, apart from the one on that list i've been unable to find an email address for. Had three responses to varying degrees of support. One observation was that they feel they are a box ticking exercise for Defra rather than genuinely having input, we can only hope that isn't true.
Thanks - I'll take advantage of your research and add my support/ideas too.
 

DRC

Member
The problem with scientific evidence in farming, is that quite often is agenda based.
Farmers are seen as unqualified peasants and so their years of practice knowledge and experience in real world is ignored in favour of a officially qualified person , often doing research to prove a result they wish to see.
Data and info can be manipulated how they want. Real life results can not.

Example from a environmental side.
Early HLS i was having problems getting flower mixs to grow well. Did well enough to pass inspections, but thought could be better.
I did a couple of small blokes of my own outside the scheme my own way.
Worked great and inspector/ case manager was very impressed with them.
When I said it was my own method and asked if I could do it on the official HLS , o was told no, as its not best/proper way to do it as quantified by the experts...

You probably seen with many of my posts, I am deeply sceptical of defra/rpa.
To many times I have knocked back for wanting to do better than the official way.
Experts won't take note of farmers as if they do, it shows they not really experts and don't know their stuff.
So we end up with schemes that don't work great as made up by non farming folk who are trying to justify their job.
I would agree with all of this .
We had a good 10 yr HLS scheme, where a number of ecologists and a lady from ADAS came and spent time actually seeing what insects we had and how it all worked . Where has this data all gone ?
Surely there was enough evidence from years of CS, HLS etc, to not need this faffing about with pilot schemes.
I would also point out that some of these mixes are destined to fail. We have a small bit with Severn Trent STEPS , and the bird/ bee mix has 11 components 🤔. Some of the seeds needed drilling deeper, some virtually on top, so only about 4/5 have grown . It’s not just me either, as I went in a farm walk with the same problem . Then you feel you should try and rectify it, so more expense you can’t really afford.
When our 10 year/s was up, they wouldn’t pay for a continuation, so arable reversion, got reverted to wheat and maize, as they offered a paltry £30 acre to call it PP, when it was worth £125 acre as arable reversion.
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot .
 

Azlett

Member
Location
Taunton
If we can get the SFI amended such that we were looking at that level of detail then I would be delighted.
What more can we reasonably do than put forward considered thought out suggestions - to as many people as possible who may have some influence?

It is a disappointing reflection of the farming group to see how many negative comments are posted, without countering suggestions. And a number of posts from people who are feeding off other comments and clearly have never read the original documents. Trying to restore a relationship of trust between the body of farmers and the body of Defra works both ways. And we all have to try or we'll all lose out.
 

devonbeef

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Devon UK
And at least 95% of that will be needed to pay the vet’s costs …
As with capital grants, the supplier of goods to fulfil the grant or scheme will put the price up accordingly. For farm assurance i have to do now a vet review which depending on the years problems takes a hour so to do with the vet, even at their £130/hr charge. It will not reach the £522 of which the animal health and welfare scheme will be paying, You sure as hell it will be charged a lot nearer that for all whether in the scheme or not.Net result we will will probably be worse off for the scheme. With the capital grants the price of goods now whether claiming on scheme or not is now a lot higher. Distortion in the market by all this , will costs us all more in long run. We need more market share of our products we sell .So we buy what we need when we need. As far as animal welfare is concerned i stop at nothing to look after our stock to the highest standard as the vast majority do to. They get treated before and better than myself.
 

BrianV

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Dartmoor
What more can we reasonably do than put forward considered thought out suggestions - to as many people as possible who may have some influence?

It is a disappointing reflection of the farming group to see how many negative comments are posted, without countering suggestions. And a number of posts from people who are feeding off other comments and clearly have never read the original documents. Trying to restore a relationship of trust between the body of farmers and the body of Defra works both ways. And we all have to try or we'll all lose out.
This whole thing appears to be trying to be all things to all people & is in real danger of becoming a miss mash that suits nobody, it has so many different strands all of which seem totally unquantifiable & has simply been set up to try & impress the general public rather than do any actual good for farmers or the enviroment.
 

DrWazzock

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Lincolnshire
thats why i asked for defra to fund the testing and keep the results , they then have data to put to whatever committee in future to show their method works , i dont see what we have to fear from collected data excepting the ones that damage soils
So when the results show that Mr D Driller has increased his OM levels, but Ms P Pasture has made no net gain or loss , and Mr Root Crop Grower has reduced them slightly, all really through no fault or cleverness of their own but because that is just the nature of the beast, what happens then?
 

DrWazzock

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Lincolnshire
Who are these people who are “damaging” soils? Myself maybe harvesting beet? Maybe my neighbour harvesting spuds or the sprout growers desperately trying to get sprouts on the table in difficult conditions.
It’s alright to take a high moral tone if all you ever do is direct drill a few combinables on easy land but we can’t live on wheat rape and field beans.
 

DrWazzock

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Lincolnshire
Make no mistake. OM testing is paving the way towards reward/punishment based on your OM levels or the Ponzi scheme that is carbon offset trading. The biggest beneficiary’s will be large arable farmers who switch to woke conservation agriculture as they have most potential to increase OM levels or so they hope. Poor old permanent pasture farmers can’t really store any more carbon than they do now, which is why they are being ignored. Root crop farmers like myself who “damage the soil” for kicks, well, we’ve no hope at all really.
Wonder if that’s cynical enough? 😆
 

bobk

Member
Location
stafford
Make no mistake. OM testing is paving the way towards reward/punishment based on your OM levels or the Ponzi scheme that is carbon offset trading. The biggest beneficiary’s will be large arable farmers who switch to woke conservation agriculture as they have most potential to increase OM levels or so they hope. Poor old permanent pasture farmers can’t really store any more carbon than they do now, which is why they are being ignored. Root crop farmers like myself who “damage the soil” for kicks, well, we’ve no hope at all really.
Wonder if that’s cynical enough? 😆
Spot on doc
 
  • Like
Reactions: DRC

DrWazzock

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Lincolnshire
The fundamental problem I find with carbon offset trading is that often you have very little choice in how much carbon your business uses. So for example the steelworks or cement works cannot avoid the charge. It’s inherent in the nature of their business. So the only way they can avoid having to buy carbon credits other than a few minor tweaks, is to stop trading. Which makes slapping a charge on them rather unfair and pointless. If they can’t pass the charge on to their customers they go bust and we end up buying imports. That’s why I disagree with the entire thing. It’s unjust. It’s about as stupid and arbitrary as fining people because they are over 6 foot tall.
Edited to add: looks like it’s coming our way though.
 

BrianV

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Dartmoor
The fundamental problem I find with carbon offset trading is that often you have very little choice in how much carbon your business uses. So for example the steelworks or cement works cannot avoid the charge. It’s inherent in the nature of their business. So the only way they can avoid having to buy carbon credits other than a few minor tweaks, is to stop trading. Which makes slapping a charge on them rather unfair and pointless. If they can’t pass the charge on to their customers they go bust and we end up buying imports. That’s why I disagree with the entire thing. It’s unjust. It’s about as stupid and arbitrary as fining people because they are over 6 foot tall.
This government will slowly grind UK manufacturing into the ground by simply exporting pollution abroad & then claiming the moral high ground, I really believe Johnson is the worst thing that has happened to this country in over half a century & it's not us but our children & grandchildren that will be the ones who will suffer the consequences.
 

DaveGrohl

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Cumbria
This government will slowly grind UK manufacturing into the ground by simply exporting pollution abroad & then claiming the moral high ground, I really believe Johnson is the worst thing that has happened to this country in over half a century & it's not us but our children & grandchildren that will be the ones who will suffer the consequences.
Er which Johnson? The one with the trousers or Boris?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 80 42.1%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 67 35.3%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 15.8%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 7 3.7%

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

  • 1,294
  • 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