The risks of steward ship?

[Coximus]

I've been considering putting alot of my poorer land into various mid tier options - non would have any major effect on productivity or land quality but would be of some environmental. Benefit.

The issue is both on here and a few of my neighbours have warned me of the risks of getting stuck under the yolk and not being allowed to leave at the end of the 5 years.

How true is this? Is it just the usual ne /rpa cock up or something more deep?

I know one neighbour who was taken to court and ne were told to go swivel on day 1 as the judge said the contract ended in 2014 and they couldn't vary it after that date to extend - they could have on the last day of the contract and held it over but not later....
But would they sti try?

 

[Brisel]

It depends on the option. Arable reversion is a 10 year option & you'll never be able to plough that back up. If you create something biologically interesting they will fight to keep it. If you look at the past, which isn't necessarily a guide to the future, they have kept on raising the bar. Much of what was Sir Don Curry's "broad and shallow" Entry Level Scheme is now part of cross compliance called Greening. We were always going to have to work increasingly hard for our subsidies so IMO this is worth bearing in mind.

Remember why you took that land out of production in the first place - do you really want to plough up that awful wet half acre behind 6 telegraph poles? It never grew anything in the first place. I'd want to keep buffer strips against watercourses. I can only imagine the laws on pesticides & manures near them becoming ever tighter.

The timescale for the new ELM scheme is around 5 years so you'd have time to squeeze in a quick Mid Tier scheme. I took this view 3 years ago when my ELS expired & my boss didn't want me ploughing everything back up so we opted for a 5 year Higher Tier CS scheme instead. Some of those options are 10 years in duration & likely to become permanent which doesn't bother me. These aren't on the best bits of land anyway.

 

[Coximus]

Hmmm I'm mostly looking at low input grassland on steep ground or ground with burried rock so not suitable for anything other than grass and not worth the damage for anythibf other than overseeding. Good deep soils and pH and pk in good place so easy to maintain in the scheme

 

[Brisel]

Are there suitable options for that grassland that match how you want to run them? I had my water meadows in EK2 low input in ELS. Money for old rope - we managed them that way regardless so pocketing £82/ha was a no brainer. For HT CS I would have had to work much much harder & TBH just the paperwork made it unviable for £40/ha. Reseeding isn't normally allowed so get it done before you go into a scheme

 

[borderterribles]

Are there suitable options for that grassland that match how you want to run them? I had my water meadows in EK2 low input in ELS. Money for old rope - we managed them that way regardless so pocketing £82/ha was a no brainer. For HT CS I would have had to work much much harder & TBH just the paperwork made it unviable for £40/ha. Reseeding isn't normally allowed so get it done before you go into a scheme

Assuming that the OP is an owner occupier, then the risks of stewardship are more straightforward than if he is a tenant. I rented a farm that was made up of a third water meadows as @Brisel describes. The Landlord's agent said that I was remiss in NOT having these in stewardship, and as we were headed towards Arbitration over their proposed rent increase, I reluctantly put them into ELS. I was reluctant as the payment at the time was , iirc £26/acre as opposed to the rent which was £125/acre, and obviously restrictions applied , once the land was in the scheme.
When I relinquished the tenancy, my successor wouldn't sign to continue the unexpired term of the ELS agreement, which brought about threats to reclaim from me, all the scheme money paid so far!

 

[chipchap]

Assuming that the OP is an owner occupier, then the risks of stewardship are more straightforward than if he is a tenant. I rented a farm that was made up of a third water meadows as @Brisel describes. The Landlord's agent said that I was remiss in NOT having these in stewardship, and as we were headed towards Arbitration over their proposed rent increase, I reluctantly put them into ELS. I was reluctant as the payment at the time was , iirc £26/acre as opposed to the rent which was £125/acre, and obviously restrictions applied , once the land was in the scheme.
When I relinquished the tenancy, my successor wouldn't sign to continue the unexpired term of the ELS agreement, which brought about threats to reclaim from me, all the scheme money paid so far!

Did your landlord not countersign the application, or is that only for the old HLS.

 

[borderterribles]

Did your landlord not countersign the application, or is that only for the old HLS.

They didn't countersign the application form and as far as I know, weren't required to?

 

[DRC]

It depends on the option. Arable reversion is a 10 year option & you'll never be able to plough that back up. If you create something biologically interesting they will fight to keep it. If you look at the past, which isn't necessarily a guide to the future, they have kept on raising the bar. Much of what was Sir Don Curry's "broad and shallow" Entry Level Scheme is now part of cross compliance called Greening. We were always going to have to work increasingly hard for our subsidies so IMO this is worth bearing in mind.

Remember why you took that land out of production in the first place - do you really want to plough up that awful wet half acre behind 6 telegraph poles? It never grew anything in the first place. I'd want to keep buffer strips against watercourses. I can only imagine the laws on pesticides & manures near them becoming ever tighter.

The timescale for the new ELM scheme is around 5 years so you'd have time to squeeze in a quick Mid Tier scheme. I took this view 3 years ago when my ELS expired & my boss didn't want me ploughing everything back up so we opted for a 5 year Higher Tier CS scheme instead. Some of those options are 10 years in duration & likely to become permanent which doesn't bother me. These aren't on the best bits of land anyway.

I ploughed up my arable reversion when my HLS ended . That was 3 years ago, and nothing was said. The agreement had ended and that was that as far as I was concerned.

 

[neilo]

Imo, what you need to do, at all costs, is to prevent the land under such schemes becoming ‘habitat’. Once it does, you will have your hands tied as to what you can do with it in the future.

To that end, I haven’t entered any agreements that bar all inputs, nor would I entertain it. If you can, and do/record, the use of some kind of input, then it remains ‘improved’ land. Improved land, even if pp coming out of a scheme, can be turned to whatever you like, so long as you have nothing ‘special’ turning up in it.

 

[Brisel]

Good points. If you do options for restoration of meadows, arable reversion etc then they are looking for something “interesting”

I’ve never heard of any designations resulting from sowing bought in seed mixes of winter feed, stubbles, grass margins or nectar flower. Recording treatments for sprays etc keeps the land as “improved”

 

[spin cycle]

I've been considering putting alot of my poorer land into various mid tier options - non would have any major effect on productivity or land quality but would be of some environmental. Benefit.

The issue is both on here and a few of my neighbours have warned me of the risks of getting stuck under the yolk and not being allowed to leave at the end of the 5 years.

How true is this? Is it just the usual ne /rpa cock up or something more deep?

I know one neighbour who was taken to court and ne were told to go swivel on day 1 as the judge said the contract ended in 2014 and they couldn't vary it after that date to extend - they could have on the last day of the contract and held it over but not later....
But would they sti try?

my 5 penny worth....listen to your neighbours.....don't count on getting paid regularly (sometimes i wonder...at all)

then there's the old 'double funding' chestnut....it's all gone very quiet....if you went in now then if this issue came up again it might be alright...or they might turn round and say you can't have both sfp/stewardship.......then again wait and it might be either/ or

i'm afraid it's down to trust...something i no longer have......for me to renew for example i'd want a break clause i could activate if they fell greater than 6 months behind payment wise

 

[Coximus]

I know I'm still waiting on 2017 money..... And they cock up every year....
I have another motivation - nvz on a fair chunk of it as well as the poor terrain making improvements impossible I'm many ways......
Still it's a question of is it worth taking 8k extra a year for what I'm already doing or spending 20k over 3 years to improve productivity - which could provide 10k gain... But at 20k cost so needs 10 years to Compete with stewardship - but if prices for lamb fall then no gain....
The again your point about getting paid is pertinent.....
Rpa
Please pay me my young farmers from 2017,....ta oh and respond to complaints within 36 months.

 

[ajcc]

Cannot comment.....Sub judice!