What should the replacement for SFI look like?

[farmerm]

Yes i agree but the problem is that the more they kept meddling/ changing the rules/ adding new options to SFI the more complicated it is becoming!

And they are talking about putting all CS agreements into SFI and you can see what a mess that will end up before they even start doing it !

I disagree, I have an SFI agreement that is far more appealing that growing OSR or Beans.

 

[turbo]

yep - just send the cheque direct to the landowners off shore account maybe to make things even better for tax payers ?

And the sfi isn’t going straight to the off shore accounts? The slipper farmers really didn’t start until bps was brought in and it was removed from production!

 

[Huno]

Are the Gov.UK ever going to publish a Land Use Framework and prehaps then these knee jerk reactions from Gov departments and Ministers would be brought under check with a point of reference? Sorry is that is too simple a request for Westminster🫠

 

[aangus]

I disagree, I have an SFI agreement that is far more appealing that growing OSR or Beans.

I have a sfi agreement that is far more appealing than lambing ewes in this sh!t weather

 

[Huno]

I have a sfi agreement that is far more appealing than lambing ewes in this sh!t weather

I dont have an SFI agreement! Right place right time seems to be key to that Scheme

 

[aangus]

I dont have an SFI agreement! Right place right time seems to be key to that Scheme

mines only for the herbal ley (sam 3), no biggy

 

[Huno]

There is NOT something in SFI for everyone as is often quoted... But there is alot in SFI for some..

 

[Huno]

mines only for the herbal ley (sam 3), no biggy

A useful option for livestock

 

[Two Tone]

I disagree, I have an SFI agreement that is far more appealing that growing OSR or Beans.

So do I.
But it is morally wrong!

 

[aangus]

There is NOT something in SFI for everyone as is often quoted... But there is alot in SFI for some..

Its the farmer further up the hill thats been unfairly treated

 

[aangus]

So do I.
But it is morally wrong!

100% agree

 

[Huno]

Its the farmer further up the hill thats been unfairly treated

And that is very wrong as generally the further up the hill you go the harder it is to farm.. anywhere in the world that applies.. Upland farmers are having the worst deal for sure. The old system was fair.. The new system is totally Discriminatory..

 

[Huno]

So do I.
But it is morally wrong!

Not when you struggle to make a profit from most Break Crops.. Morality goes out the window if bills need paying doesnt it?

 

[Vader]

I had to phone RPA the other day re a CS query and mentioned that the reason for my call was a clash between two CS agreements we have and a subsequent SFI agreement we have since started.
The RPA computer was supposed to have picked this up and prevented an SFI option, but failed to do so.

I mentioned that all this would be so much easier if they could combine all of each holding’s CS and SFI agreements into one.
The guy I was peaking to, called Reese, was in absolute agreement and said that was what they were working towards, but that there were lots of problems and obstacles to get over, namely the different agreement lengths, before this can be achieved.

Doesn’t this not prove yet further that there was no need to start an entirely new extra system called SFI, when CS could so easily have been expanded to cover it?

What a screw up!

Sane here...
Did have a look at it.
Some areas with Cs it won't allow sfi, others it will.
It says i can have sfi wild bird cover on same field thats already got Cs wild bird cover.

As to merging Cs into sfi...
I told them just end all Cs in Jan of people who want out.
Nothing will be done on Cs apart from feeding birds anyway. Then people just go into sfi.
It seems they being muppets by saying that if end Cs early you gave to repay ALL the Cs money you had...
But why? You only been paid for what you done, not in advance and your going into sfi anyway.

Their to f*cking stupid to make anything simple...

 

[Huno]

Sane here...
Did have a look at it.
Some areas with Cs it won't allow sfi, others it will.
It says i can have sfi wild bird cover on same field thats already got Cs wild bird cover.

As to merging Cs into sfi...
I told them just end all Cs in Jan of people who want out.
Nothing will be done on Cs apart from feeding birds anyway. Then people just go into sfi.
It seems they being muppets by saying that if end Cs early you gave to repay ALL the Cs money you had...
But why? You only been paid for what you done, not in advance and your going into sfi anyway.

Their to f*cking stupid to make anything simple...

Well i cant disagree with your final sentence!
Some CS options are for 5yrs and NON rotational so you either keep them or pay the RPA back but the rotational options of 1 or 2 years could be changed after they were delivered in order to enter a better option maybe?
Sorry.. Too simple again?

 

[Huno]

Dont you just love it when bureaucracy ties your business plan up in knots... No plan survives first contact with the enemy (DEFRA/NE/RPA)...
And thats before the weather and volatility are factored in!!

 

[Clive]

As an arable farmer of course you do , look at it from a P/P grassland farmer point of view and you would have a very different opinion , Much of the good in the countryside we created yet were an afterthought regard SFI/DEFRA and even the carbon credits companies blank us , The whole fiasco smacks of degree holding land agents feathering their own nests

my post says clearly “from an arable point of view “

 

[DrWazzock]

What should it look like?
£80 for every cropped or grazed acre.
Continue with countryside stewardship.
That’s what it should look like.
Simple.
Ditch SFI.

 

[DrWazzock]

Personally I would not allow size of more than 1 acre for birdseed plots and not too close to dwellings to avoid vermin problems. That’s why it should stay in CS : so that it can be screened to see if it’s sensible along with most of the other options. CS maybe needed streamlining a bit but they’d got it working reasonably well. Basic Payment needed leaving alone save for making cropping or grazing a qualifying requirement. Then it’s all value for money : food supply security with the higher standard than imports properly funded and sensible environmental goods delivered for payment. Croppers are happy. Greenies are happy.

 

[farmerm]

So do I.
But it is morally wrong!

Morality is a subjective subject. Overall my farm will use far less chemical pesticides, far less potentially river polluting fertiliser, create less plastic waste, use a bit less diesel and it will be a haven and food supply for various birds, bees and butterflies... what is so morally wrong about that?