Sustainable Farming Incentive - Pilot Information (including PAYMENT RATES)

[N.Yorks.]

Has anyone heard whether they've got onto the SFI pilot trial yet?

 

[2tractors]

For clarity, are those rates just for participants in the pilot schemes, so on top of their current BPS? Or are they the rates that will eventually be paid under ELMS?

These are obtained from the Defra publication, https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...for-piloting-and-launching-the-scheme#annex-1

They were used in a Test and Trial. Defra has not published what they will use on the SFI pilot but it is expected these will form the basis. As they learn more they may be adjusted before the full launch in 2024. They would be paid on top of (a reducing) BPS.

Defra will need to clarify payments before farmers can commit to the SFI pilot so will probably publish soon.

 

[DRC]

Has anyone heard whether they've got onto the SFI pilot trial yet?

Interesting to see if they’ve had many applicants, considering you couldn’t apply if already in a scheme.

 

[delilah]

Interesting to see if they’ve had many applicants, considering you couldn’t apply if already in a scheme.

They told a colleague that they are short on applications from grassland farmers. Wonder why.

 

[Clive]

Interesting to see if they’ve had many applicants, considering you couldn’t apply if already in a scheme.

i was told just over 2000 for 1000 places

 

[delilah]

i was told just over 2000 for 1000 places

Is there that many people DD'ing ?

 

[delilah]

The analysis showed that there was a decline
in soil carbon stocks after land use conversion from grassland to
plantation forest (−10 percent), native forest to plantation forest
(−13 percent), native forest to cropland (−42 percent), and grassland
to cropland (−59 percent).

it is important to recognise that it
can take decades if not centuries to recover to the original level of
soil carbon stocks after disturbance due to land use change (Guo
and Gifford, 2002).

All area based SFI money should go to existing PP. All of it.

 

[Clive]

Is there that many people DD'ing ?

they don’t just want dd farms - i think the idea is to select a wide range of management systems and geographic locations / different sized businesses etc

 

[DRC]

All area based SFI money should go to existing PP. All of it.

Can’t agree with that .

 

[delilah]

Can’t agree with that .

Be a boring old world if we all agreed .

Defra tell us that climate change is paramount. Using those land use change figures, and the time frames involved in rectifying damage, what % of area based SFI do folks think should go to protecting existing PP ?

 

[DRC]

Be a boring old world if we all agreed .

Defra tell us that climate change is paramount. Using those land use change figures, and the time frames involved in rectifying damage, what % of area based SFI do folks think should go to protecting existing PP ?

I think PP should get nowt, as it’s always been PP and nothings going to change that .
Also people already DD ing get nowt, as they are already doing it .
So those of us ploughing get £200 acre for ten years to convert to DD .( that’ll take me nicely to retirement )

 

[delilah]

I think PP should get nowt, as it’s always been PP and nothings going to change that

I would say that is Defra's reckoning of it. They need a lesson in the economics of LFA farming. (And in the central role of that grazing in the tourist economy. )

 

[DRC]

I would say that is Defra's reckoning of it. They need a lesson in the economics of LFA farming. (And in the central role of that grazing in the tourist economy. )

You’re probably right , but I bet they see it the way i jokingly did. I suppose they have to tempt people like me, who can just as easily grow more profitable crops for AD than bother with a few £s per ha for cover crops or such like.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

You’re probably right , but I bet they see it the way i jokingly did. I suppose they have to tempt people like me, who can just as easily grow more profitable crops for AD than bother with a few £s per ha for cover crops or such like.

Sadly I suspect you're right.

If the government are serious about climate change then every carbon loophole will have to be closed including the ones around AD which could then look much less attractive. Nitrogen fertiliser would have a substantial climate tax as would diesel and soil cultivation. They already seem intent on ridding the country of ruminants.

 

[delilah]

You’re probably right , but I bet they see it the way i jokingly did. I suppose they have to tempt people like me, who can just as easily grow more profitable crops for AD than bother with a few £s per ha for cover crops or such like.

I am all for arable farmers receiving public money for public goods. I'm sure that there is much good in margins by watercourses and the like, I don't regard that as area payments. What these discussions on here have shown is that trying to interfere in cropping decisions, and how those crops are established, is fraught with unintended consequences.

 

[Tubbylew]

They already seem intent on ridding the country of ruminants.

Sad but true.

 

[ajd132]

Agreed. All the more reason it shouldn't be subsidized over any other crop establishment technique.



The DD poster, who says that he will be paid to do what he does anyway, also says that he is meeting with Defra this month to ensure that 'reduced tillage' means DD and DD alone.

Erm.....they contacted me. And I may be wrong but didn’t I say something about various grants and subsidies being absurd, for example the leader grants for direct drills and people calling a vaderstadt rapid with a subsoiler tool bar on the front a no till drill? I think the discussion was more about getting those in defra etc to actually understand the fundamental differences between these techniques, as it seems many farmers don’t know the difference either. I’m sure you were confusing min till/no till/strip till that prompted me to say that!
I could not care less if they gave money for direct drilling or whatever. Getting any form of subsidy is not in the business plan.
The system we are trying to do goes far beyond ‘direct drilling’ and the arguments about the simple act of simply not cultivating are basic, boring and about 10% of the full story.

are you okay? You have been ranting about this subject for weeks and weeks on here.

 

[delilah]

are you okay? You have been ranting about this subject for weeks and weeks on here.

I'm good, thanks. We are told, correctly, that this is the most important change in farming policy for decades. It needs to be got right. Defra have said that they are committed to 'co-design', and I take them at their word on that.
They are following this thread, I consider anyone's comments on here to be a contribution to the co-design process. You may not see it as being that important, but then again you did make the below comment, so I can see why you would be more laid back.

Why are people arguing against a lucrative income stream?

 

[ajd132]

I'm good, thanks. We are told, correctly, that this is the most important change in farming policy for decades. It needs to be got right. Defra have said that they are committed to 'co-design', and I take them at their word on that.
They are following this thread, I consider anyone's comments on here to be a contribution to the co-design process. You may not see it as being that important, but then again you did make the below comment, so I can see why you would be more laid back.

The lucrative income stream comment was in relation to selling carbon certificates onto iso accredited markets. Nothing to do with elms or whatever.

 

[delilah]

The lucrative income stream comment was in relation to selling carbon certificates onto iso accredited markets. Nothing to do with elms or whatever.

Thanks for clarifying. I had the wrong scam. You have said on here several times that the 'reduced tillage' options are great as they will pay you for doing what you do anyway, I took it that your 'lucrative' comment was on the same subject.