The RSPB and Smiths Gore have looked at the incentives for picking some of the most wildlife-friendly options in Entry Level Stewardship to check that the payments are sufficient to fully compensate farmers for taking some land out of production through the scheme.
The results are very positive. Skylark plots in particular have a very positive budget balance. Over-wintered stubbles make very good economic sense if you already have spring crops in the rotation. The cost-benefits of including broad-leafed flowering plants in field margins can be covered by the net margins of the buffer strip options. The nectar flower mixtures and wild bird seed mixtures give a comparable return to growing wheat at current prices.
Details of the options can be seen at http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/farming/advice/economics/index.asp.
Smiths Gore have created an on-line calculator to allow you to use your own figures to work out your economic returns on these options at http://www.smithsgore.co.uk/publications.
Interesting reading. I presume that the calculations for the wild bird mix which include cutting in June are an error !
Matt
Hi Matt
This error is my fault - we have corrected the calculations but not the assumptions, which are obviously from the pollen and nectar option.
jjj - I have asked Smiths Gore to explain the fixed cost element in detail, but no it would not take account of purchased machinery.
Hi jjj
Smiths Gore have replied to your query with the following explanation of the fixed costs:
The costings include herbicide costs for spraying injurious weeds. The reason savings in fixed costs have been included in the calculations is because fixed costs are very different for these environmental options compared to normal cropping, so leaving the normal fixed costs in would not give a true picture of the economics – only a partial picture at gross margin level. There are of course fixed costs (labour and machinery) associated with the options and they have been included in the costings in the contractors’ costs (therefore listed as variable costs) so that we could outline the breakdown of these costs in detail.
Hi Sue
I have posted a reply with your main discussion on http://www.farmwildlife.info/Forums/forums/1216/ShowPost.aspx
This fixed cost savings figure was queried by another farmer in Herefordshire, who reckoned it looked quite high. I think we understand why a fixed cost savings figure was included in the analysis, but can Smiths Gore provide any more detail on how they came to a figure of £295? What did it include?