What do you want from future ELMS – arable farmers opinions wanted

[lcollas]

Just to add that in the yield and sales value section, we also usually sell somewhere betwee 1.5 and 2 tonnes of straw per acre with the cereals, at between £45 - £100 per tonne (depending on the season). An average would be about £50/t for wheat straw and £65/t for barley straw.

The challenge for us farmers as a business will be to maintain our profit levels when BPS is gone and ELMS comes in. To do that, the ELMS payments for each farm would need to be in excess of the current BPS. for example, if we take out say 20% of our land for an ELMS option, then the ELMS payment would need to cover the old historic BPS payment PLUS the cropping margin forgone where the ELMS option is placed on the 20% of land.

Thanks for this - did you find it difficult to decide what payments you would be willing to accept for different options given this change? Or was it possible to factor into your decision-making with relative ease?

 

[farmerm]

Just to add that in the yield and sales value section, we also usually sell somewhere betwee 1.5 and 2 tonnes of straw per acre with the cereals, at between £45 - £100 per tonne (depending on the season). An average would be about £50/t for wheat straw and £65/t for barley straw.

The challenge for us farmers as a business will be to maintain our profit levels when BPS is gone and ELMS comes in. To do that, the ELMS payments for each farm would need to be in excess of the current BPS. for example, if we take out say 20% of our land for an ELMS option, then the ELMS payment would need to cover the old historic BPS payment PLUS the cropping margin forgone where the ELMS option is placed on the 20% of land.

That would require the ELMS to have a bigger pot of money than BPS and that seems rather unlikely

 

[Grass And Grain]

That would require the ELMS to have a bigger pot of money than BPS and that seems rather unlikely

That's right.

I suspect the gov will just shave a bit off the current ag spend and offer it as either ELMS or capital grants, and they'll think they are supporting ag at a similar level. But, as demonstrated in my post above, if ELMS is paid to the farmer at the same amount as BPS was, then the farm business will make less money. And likewise (or worse) with farm productivity capital grants, where in effect the farmer will in effect be spending money.

This means less money for UK ag to spend in the aupply chain or local economy. I wonder if Mr Gove had any understanding of this at all - I suspect not.

 

[Grass And Grain]

Thanks for this - did you find it difficult to decide what payments you would be willing to accept for different options given this change? Or was it possible to factor into your decision-making with relative ease?

It was easy, I went for the highest payment rates!

Joking apart, higher payment rates on smaller areas is the only way it ads up.

If the payment rates only equated to loss of income (e.g. £350/acre margin over cost of carrying out the option), then why would a farmer bother joining ELMS and having inspectors snooping about and potentially getting payment penalties if the inspector happens to find that someone has dtiven across a buffer strip, or the area of option measured on the farm was 0.0001ha less that in the agreement etc. - then the inspector back dates the penalty for every year of the agreement. The farmer would be better off not bothering and continuing to farm 100% of their land for production agriculture.

So really, I think the payment needs to be at least in the £5-600+ per acre bracket (after costs) for something such as legume fallow, wild bird cover etc. Farmers producing high value crops such as salads and veg wouldn't even be interested at those rates - and these are the farms that could be doing the most damage to their soils and using the most artificial fertilisers and pesticides.

£250/acre margin for an option isn't anywhere near enough. We just wouldn't bother as we'd make more money cropping the land and not have the hassle of being in ELMS.

Hope that makes sense.

I'm not certain how the results of the survey will be of much validity. Surely everyone just went for the highest payment options - even then we were constrained by the payment options available to us.

Regards.

 

[Brisel]

I shied away from the longer term options - more than 10 years is too long for me in case I want to change farm policy.

 

[farmerm]

…. yes I found most of the options, insufficient payment rates, excessive areas required and the suggestion of 50year agreements all rather distressing I think I probably need counselling now. All I see in the questionnaire are a few options already used in Mid tier/ higher tier agreements and at income foregone payment rates?

We need something brighter than this!

I don't need to plant 8000m of a new hedge! I need funding for gapping up existing hedges for hedge laying and fencing. I need funding for maintaining existing field margins and uncropped field corners, particularly along water courses. ELMS should at the very least cover farm hedge cutting bills a key part of managing our landscape, it should pay farmers to maintain public rights of way. There should be options to pay growers for taking land out of production for 1 or 2 years to grow fertility building and carbon capturing crops to mulch back in to the ground, many of us would like to do this but it is difficult to make a financial case to do so, without BPS even less so!

 

[andybk]

That would require the ELMS to have a bigger pot of money than BPS and that seems rather unlikely

not really , just need distributing more fairly , RSPB getting paid for vast acreages of nothingness , and large shooting estates just claiming the sub , there are huge savings to made,
payments need capping for sure ,
even if that means big farms splitting up to be able to claim max sub ,
this long term might encourage more family units by the back door , which tend to keep money in the local economy and on the whole are more environmentally friendly

 

[farmerm]

not really , just need distributing more fairly , RSPB getting paid for vast acreages of nothingness , and large shooting estates just claiming the sub , there are huge savings to made,
payments need capping for sure ,
even if that means big farms splitting up to be able to claim max sub ,
this long term might encourage more family units by the back door , which tend to keep money in the local economy and on the whole are more environmentally friendly

Max sub?? As far as I see it so far, ELMS isn't going to be a sub but rather compensation for work undertaken and income foregone... on that basis any payment cap would work against its objectives. Its going to be a rebranded HLS scheme, its going to be very unattractive and result in a very significant cut in farm income for most producers. It will be the likes of the RPSB who don't have to run productive business that stand to gain most from this redistribution project!

 

[Brisel]

You can guess who has been lobbying hard for subsidy reform. Strange how the 10 yearly State of Nature report by RSPCA, RSPB etc was brought forward to be published shortly after the EU referendum result. Have a look at https://farmsubsidy.org/GB/ and you'll see who the main beneficiaries of CAP payments really are - they are also dependent on the taxpayer.

 

[Shughie McFee]

don't do it !!!! you lot a falling into the same old trap of accepting pitiful amounts of dole money to stay afloat. stand firm, do not lower yourselves to do this. concentrate all efforts into getting a fair price for food. shame on those who've entered into these schemes in the past. shame on those contemplating getting involved in these schemes in future. shame on me for lowering myself for posting on this thread.

 

[farmerm]

don't do it !!!! you lot a falling into the same old trap of accepting pitiful amounts of dole money to stay afloat. stand firm, do not lower yourselves to do this. concentrate all efforts into getting a fair price for food. shame on those who've entered into these schemes in the past. shame on those contemplating getting involved in these schemes in future. shame on me for lowering myself for posting on this thread.

As an individual grower, how does one concentrate on getting a fair price for food? For the majority of producers BPS has certainly not been a pitiful amount.

 

[Princess Pooper]

don't do it !!!! you lot a falling into the same old trap of accepting pitiful amounts of dole money to stay afloat. stand firm, do not lower yourselves to do this. concentrate all efforts into getting a fair price for food. shame on those who've entered into these schemes in the past. shame on those contemplating getting involved in these schemes in future. shame on me for lowering myself for posting on this thread.

And what if you have some areas of your farm that aren't very good at growing food? Our floodplain grazing probably makes more margin from providing habitat from overwintering waders than it does from the sheep that we graze down there. I don't want to put new seeds in and fertilise it just to see them all swept away on the flood waters thank you very much. What if you actually enjoy working in fields full of birds and seeing wildflowers, dragonflies and a tree in full leaf? It's quite nice to get paid for maintaining or creating that, rather than wishing we could afford to do some of the stuff we have done under HLS.

 

[DanniAgro]

don't do it !!!! you lot a falling into the same old trap of accepting pitiful amounts of dole money to stay afloat. stand firm, do not lower yourselves to do this. concentrate all efforts into getting a fair price for food. shame on those who've entered into these schemes in the past. shame on those contemplating getting involved in these schemes in future. shame on me for lowering myself for posting on this thread.

A laudable idea - can you please demonstrate exactly how we're going to get fair prices for our produce etc? In an open marketplace it's impossible for us to force the buyer to give us what we want.

 

[beefandsleep]

Payments, particularly for long term options need to be index linked to inflation.

 

[Shughie McFee]

A laudable idea - can you please demonstrate exactly how we're going to get fair prices for our produce etc? In an open marketplace it's impossible for us to force the buyer to give us what we want.

i can't. collectively we can't. it needs a radical new idea from uk gov. something along the lines of forcing supermarkets to stock 50% organic, and banning imports. after 40 years of subs and pish poor prices, frankly it's too late. something should have been done 25 years ago. an industry that relies on subsidies will always be lined up for a hiding when the subsidy blanket of comfort is removed. but we knew that didn't we ?

 

[texelburger]

Is this the meat free Cambridge University,think I'll give it a miss.

 

[lcollas]

Payments, particularly for long term options need to be index linked to inflation.

Yes agreed - and we have said in the survey that prices would increase with inflation each year

 

[steveR]

I shied away from the longer term options - more than 10 years is too long for me in case I want to change farm policy.

Same here...

Hence no interest in trees, other than an odd small corner pocket or wet hole...

 

[steveR]

If the payment rates only equated to loss of income (e.g. £350/acre margin over cost of carrying out the option), then why would a farmer bother joining ELMS and having inspectors snooping about and potentially getting payment penalties if the inspector happens to find that someone has dtiven across a buffer strip, or the area of option measured on the farm was 0.0001ha less that in the agreement etc. - then the inspector back dates the penalty for every year of the agreement. The farmer would be better off not bothering and continuing to farm 100% of their land for production agriculture.

So really, I think the payment needs to be at least in the £5-600+ per acre bracket (after costs) for something such as legume fallow, wild bird cover etc.

Very well put G&G.

Overly complex or onerous schemes will soon be found to be counterproductive, as has been seen in recent years with a very poor uptake on CS schemes.

 

[Dave645]

Point taken but the fact I fall into the department is mainly a result of historic divisions within the university. I've got plenty of social science & economics training - as do the advisors of the project - we have input from academics at Exeter University's Land, Environment, Energy & Policy Institute. The study really is focused on gauging farmer attitudes and working out what is feasible based on that

Feasible require more info than this survey gets you, machinery setup on each farm will effect feasibility of any scheme, at a farmer level.
A few questions,
Has your farm any of the following drills.
No till, min till, conventional. Etc
How feasible is it for you get this equipment
Ie purchase outright or via contractors. Approx cost.

I would have also added a survey question on the grade of land the farmer farms as this will effect his choices.