Sustainable Farming Incentive - Pilot Information (including PAYMENT RATES)

[Breakthru]

'As the costs of modern meat and milk products drop below those of animal-derived
competitors, new producers may flourish as their margins increase far beyond those
in livestock farming. For early in the disruption, animal products will set the marginal
price for modern foods. Given the cost advantages modern products enjoy, this will
lead to a period of exceptional margins that is likely to drive even greater investment
in the modern food sector. However, over time, as supply grows and competition
increases, modern products themselves will begin to set the marginal price, thus
reducing margins back to a longer-term, equilibrium level.'

'Modern food products should lead to a
reduction in diet-related health issues, such as obesity,
diabetes, cancer, and heart conditions.'

'Social Implications:
» » Higher quality food will become cheaper and more
accessible for everyone.
» » The poorest American families could save 8% of
their income each year, equivalent to $700, by 2030
through cost savings made by buying modern foods
that are up to 80% cheaper than existing animal-
derived products.
» » Half of the 1.2 million jobs in U.S. beef and dairy
production and their associated industries will be
lost by 2030, climbing towards 90% by 2035.
» » Employment and incomes in all other U.S. livestock
and commercial fisheries industries will follow
suit, for a total loss of more than 1.7 million jobs
by 2035.
» » The emerging U.S. PF industry will create at least
700,000 jobs by 2030 and up to 1 million jobs
by 2035.
Economic Implications:
» » The cost of modern foods and other PF products
will be at least 50% and as much as 80% lower than
the animal-derived products they replace, which
will translate into substantially lower prices and
increased disposable incomes.
» » The average U.S. family will save more than $1,200
a year in food costs. This will keep an additional
$100bn a year in Americans’ pockets by 2030.'

From; Rethinking Food and Agriculture 2020-2030

Vertical farming, look at the actual nutrient density as per Sait @ Groundswell. Advertising by the multi nationals is the key. These are the same people a few generations down who on finding Margarine killed the Turkeys it was designed to fatten then fed it to humans as healthy. Nether bird nor rat will touch it. They know whats good and bad for them. This is where AHDB either go proactive or disappear. Yes we need to provide known quality but the RT route is wrong. Concentrating their stupidity on the producer rather than educating the consumer.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Vertical farming, look at the actual nutrient density as per Sait @ Groundswell. Advertising by the multi nationals is the key. These are the same people a few generations down who on finding Margarine killed the Turkeys it was designed to fatten then fed it to humans as healthy. Nether bird nor rat will touch it. They know whats good and bad for them. This is where AHDB either go proactive or disappear. Yes we need to provide known quality but the RT route is wrong. Concentrating their stupidity on the producer rather than educating the consumer.

I do wonder what the nutrient profile of these hydroponically raised crops is like, especially phytonutrients. Crops grown in soil have access to a huge range of elements and compounds whereas those raised hydroponically only get the nutrients the grower thinks to add.

They may be fine, I just wonder...

 

[steveR]

I do wonder what the nutrient profile of these hydroponically raised crops is like, especially phytonutrients. Crops grown in soil have access to a huge range of elements and compounds whereas those raised hydroponically only get the nutrients the grower thinks to add.

They may be fine, I just wonder...

Which begs the question of the reality of "terroir" as our cousins across the Channel call it. Anyone who has tried a garden grown iceberg v Mr Tesco's understands the effect of soils.

 

[Breakthru]

I do wonder what the nutrient profile of these hydroponically raised crops is like, especially phytonutrients. Crops grown in soil have access to a huge range of elements and compounds whereas those raised hydroponically only get the nutrients the grower thinks to add.

They may be fine, I just wonder...

Sait at Groundswell said they were nutritionally useless effectively.

 

[Princess Pooper]

Thought there was clean water type incentives,
So can get grant to concrete your yard , even outside of catchment areas .

that will be separate

 

[curlietailz]

Isn’t Vertical farming the same as Factory farming though ???????

factory farming is bad




.
I know it’s not really

 

[teslacoils]

Lol. Meat in a shed = bad. Microherbs in a sterile box in London = good.

It's all marketing.

 

[Greythundercloudys]

Permanent pasture is the number one crop in Scotland, so be interested to see what price per hectare that will be,

 

[delilah]

Permanent pasture is the number one crop in Scotland, so be interested to see what price per hectare that will be,

It's 41% in England. And delivers, in a multitude of ways, the most public good. Yet the comments from farmers on here suggest that most of the ELMS dosh is going to go to arable land. It's all very odd.

 

[Sid]

Just on a break from going through the cost implications of the scheme.
Taken out 10 cows so far, lots of additional costs!!

 

[DRC]

It's 41% in England. And delivers, in a multitude of ways, the most public good. Yet the comments from farmers on here suggest that most of the ELMS dosh is going to go to arable land. It's all very odd.

Must save a fortune having PP though, no machinery or growing costs, just a dog, quad and a stick . So doesn’t really need support at all.
Tin hat firmly on .

 

[delilah]

Must save a fortune having PP though, no machinery or growing costs, just a dog, quad and a stick . So doesn’t really need support at all.
Tin hat firmly on .

With regards PP I have little skin in the game, am looking at this primarily from an environmental campaigner perspective.
Having read the details released thus far, and the comments on here, I am seeing little if anything that could be classed as 'public good'.

 

[MrNoo]

@The Man from the Ministry I suspect this is the thread you'll be after?

 

[delilah]

Weighting.
There is an opportunity to do something with ELMS that the BPS never did; encourage new entrants.
Conversely, there is the threat that it will continue to do what BPS did; pay significant sums to large landholdings. Which, if nothing else, always provided an easy hit for those wanting to slag off public payments to agriculture.

If I read it right, the proposal is to pay a flat rate of £22/Ha for PP, with no upper limit.
Instead:
Up to 40 Ha: £220.
40 - 400 Ha: £22
Over 400 Ha: £2.
That would give a new entrant renting 100 acres £9k/yr, enough to be a real incentive to get on the first rung.

 

[kfpben]

Thinking about this from another angle- do you think the new regime is also designed to encourage farmers to work a bit harder, and possibly therefore encourage mixed farming?

The way I have added livestock to the business has significantly added to the bottom line. Winter forage crops on our farm essentially means we have three crops in two years, rather than two. Add to that the benefits of muck, rotation, organic matter etc. The awkward bits of permanent grassland now get used, rather than just left or topped.

A friend did a season in NZ on the Canterbury plains and said pure arable farms there just don’t exist? Perhaps the days of 500 acres arable being a full time job (with the winter off) are over?

 

[DRC]

Thinking about this from another angle- do you think the new regime is also designed to encourage farmers to work a bit harder, and possibly therefore encourage mixed farming?

The way I have added livestock to the business has significantly added to the bottom line. Winter forage crops on our farm essentially means we have three crops in two years, rather than two. Add to that the benefits of muck, rotation, organic matter etc. The awkward bits of permanent grassland now get used, rather than just left or topped.

A friend did a season in NZ on the Canterbury plains and said pure arable farms there just don’t exist? Perhaps the days of 500 acres arable being a full time job (with the winter off) are over?

I thought they wanted less livestock. And would a livestock farmer in areas unsuitable for arable, really want their market diluted or to be competing for store/ breeding stock with more arable farmers.

 

[2tractors]

Weighting.
There is an opportunity to do something with ELMS that the BPS never did; encourage new entrants.
Conversely, there is the threat that it will continue to do what BPS did; pay significant sums to large landholdings. Which, if nothing else, always provided an easy hit for those wanting to slag off public payments to agriculture.

If I read it right, the proposal is to pay a flat rate of £22/Ha for PP, with no upper limit.
Instead:
Up to 40 Ha: £220.
40 - 400 Ha: £22
Over 400 Ha: £2.
That would give a new entrant renting 100 acres £9k/yr, enough to be a real incentive to get on the first rung.

@delilah could you point out where you have seen this about different rates depending on areas claimed? Something I have not spotted.

Thanks

 

[delilah]

@delilah could you point out where you have seen this about different rates depending on areas claimed? Something I have not spotted.

Thanks

It's not in there, that's my suggestion on how I believe it could be improved.

 

[beefandsleep]

Why are trees on arable farms worth £10 and trees on grass farms only worth £3?
I’m sure I can get more than £3 for an oak trees worth of firewood[emoji848]

 

[beefandsleep]

I had a look today at the proposals, not very inspiring really, looks like a bureaucratic nightmare, payments for drawing up lots of nice plans and splitting up areas into lots of small inefficient bits. I’m sure they will all need mapping, remapping, hours spent achieving naff all on the computer. I’m sure it will provide plenty of employment in government offices. How very depressing.