DEFRA’s response to 0% set-aside sparks anger

DEFRA’s announcement that it intends to monitor farms to check the environmental impact of reducing the set-aside rate to 0% has drawn an angry response from one FWi contributor.

The minister announced on Wednesday (26 September) that he is concerned about the possible consequences for bird numbers as land is returned to cropping.

Writing on the FWiSpace discussion forums, ‘the slug’ said : “It’s quite clear that Hilary Benn has absolutely no idea about the farmers and landowners he now has regulatory control over.

“Like most farmers I know how to work with my environmental assets to maximise production and know it’s not in my interest or anyone else’s to put long term interests in jeopardy for the sake of a short-term price blip. How patronising and inappropriate for Hilary Benn to pass comment on what farmers might do with their land?

“For crying out loud, when is DEFRA going to start championing the good work UK farmers do, rather than constantly gold-plating everything that comes out of Brussels and treating us like reckless pesticide-junkies who don’t give a fig for the countryside we look after?”

In an article written for FW’s sister magazine Crops (15 September issue), NFU president Peter Kendall pointed out that set-aside is not the panacea for the environment that some people claim.

“Of the 363,000ha of compulsory set-aside in England only 14,000ha are identified by the government’s own Environmental Observatory as being “conservation value” set-aside.

“Most set-aside is rotational, sprayed off each year and, in many people’s view, of reduced benefit.”

What do you think of 0% set-aside? Will you be ploughing up your set-aside headlands as a result? Do you think the government’s stance is acceptable? Join the discussion.