Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
The Relationship between SFI and CSS ?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Two Tone" data-source="post: 7952911" data-attributes="member: 44728"><p>To a point, yes.</p><p>We are lead to believe that the total amount spent on BPS and CSS is ‘ring-fenced’ to be redistributed in a different way.</p><p>SFI is only a third of ELMS. If you could take advantage of all three parts of ELMs, it may be possible to end up with a similar annual amount. But at the moment, the hectarage limits on LNR/LR are far too restrictive for most of us to be able to be a part of.</p><p></p><p>As it stands at the moment, there is an awful lot wrong with ELMs. However, thanks to your wonderful invention [USER=6]@Clive[/USER] , TFF has enabled [USER=153068]@Janet Hughes Defra[/USER] to explain the situation, answer our question and see our concerns, which hopefully will end up with a workable, viable scheme. I commend you both for this.</p><p></p><p>As with CSS, there are many ELM’s options which complicate and put off far too many of us.</p><p>The only way I can see this working is for DEFRA to come up with a spreadsheet type system that identifies exactly what options are available for each individual business and suggests which ones are best to take maximum advantage of.</p><p></p><p>Otherwise IMO it will all fail, much of that ‘ring-fenced’ money will be unused and reabsorbed into the Treasury.</p><p>Which will be not good for us and especially not good for the Government or the public. </p><p></p><p>The primary reasoning behind ELMs are the Governments goals to do with the Environment, CO2 and Climate Change.</p><p>Unless DEFRA can come up with a workable system that farmers (not landowners, as it is the farmers that can do most and are the only ones that can put the scheme ideas into practice) can use, the system will fail and DEFRA/Government will have lost a golden opportunity to achieve its aims.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Two Tone, post: 7952911, member: 44728"] To a point, yes. We are lead to believe that the total amount spent on BPS and CSS is ‘ring-fenced’ to be redistributed in a different way. SFI is only a third of ELMS. If you could take advantage of all three parts of ELMs, it may be possible to end up with a similar annual amount. But at the moment, the hectarage limits on LNR/LR are far too restrictive for most of us to be able to be a part of. As it stands at the moment, there is an awful lot wrong with ELMs. However, thanks to your wonderful invention [USER=6]@Clive[/USER] , TFF has enabled [USER=153068]@Janet Hughes Defra[/USER] to explain the situation, answer our question and see our concerns, which hopefully will end up with a workable, viable scheme. I commend you both for this. As with CSS, there are many ELM’s options which complicate and put off far too many of us. The only way I can see this working is for DEFRA to come up with a spreadsheet type system that identifies exactly what options are available for each individual business and suggests which ones are best to take maximum advantage of. Otherwise IMO it will all fail, much of that ‘ring-fenced’ money will be unused and reabsorbed into the Treasury. Which will be not good for us and especially not good for the Government or the public. The primary reasoning behind ELMs are the Governments goals to do with the Environment, CO2 and Climate Change. Unless DEFRA can come up with a workable system that farmers (not landowners, as it is the farmers that can do most and are the only ones that can put the scheme ideas into practice) can use, the system will fail and DEFRA/Government will have lost a golden opportunity to achieve its aims. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
The Relationship between SFI and CSS ?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top