The farming industry has come a long way since it
emerged a year ago that the government was considering a set-aside
replacement for England.
Last November, DEFRA was
consulting stakeholders on new cross compliance rules. These would
have replaced set-aside with a new requirement to manage 4-6% of
their arable land for environmental purposes.
For many farmers the requirement would have called into question
their continued participation in environmental stewardship - or in
some cases another reason not to sign up in the first place.
Although 4-6% seemed a relatively modest "ask" from the
perspective of conservation interests, it was the method as much as
the quantity which created most alarm among the agricultural
lobby.
"An extension of 'environmental set-aside', with detailed
set-aside rules, field by field recording and the measurement of
strips and areas managed under the obligation could have been bad
news for everyone", says Andrew Clark,
NFU head of policy.
"Frustratingly, this new requirement would have been a bad result
all round; for wildlife, for farmers, for the Rural Payments Agency
and for DEFRA, with higher administrative costs for us all".
The campaign was developed as an industry-led alternative to
cross compliance. "We needed a solution that allowed farmers
flexibility to find a local solution they could shape to fit the
own farms," explains Mr Clark.
Over the past year, the farming industry has worked with the
conservation sector, agronomists and advisers, as well as DEFRA and
its agencies, to do exactly this: put the solution in farmers'
hands.
