The “much-hyped” REAP agri-environmental scheme is “designed to accommodate intensive derogation farmers”, say farm leaders who have reacted with dismay to the pilot scheme details.
ollowing a meeting with Department of Agriculture officials the ICSA and ICMSA have hit out at the scheme’s budget and structure.
Here is a sense of what have been revealed so far:
- The scheme will have a budget of €10m;
- Approximately 2,200 farmers will be able to participate in the scheme with a maximum payment of approximately €5,000 per participant;
- The proposal is to divide the applicants into two groups, one (farmers with less than 140kg N/ha stocking rate) of which will be selected on the basis of lowest stocking rate and one (farmers with greater than 140kg N/ha stocking rate);
- The scheme provides for €1,200 participation fee – expected to cover planner costs;
- The focus is on low input pasture or on multi-species leys (for the intensive farmers) and also includes extra money for planting trees and hedges;
- There is a lot of focus on higher payments for wider field margins and stone wall quality for bonus payments – but with costs associated, for example, tree planting is included at a rate of €9.20 per tree;
- In the low input grassland measure the payment is between €250-400/ha on up to 10ha.
ICSA president Dermot Kelleher has expressed “shock” over the pilot details.
“The proposed REAP scheme is designed to exclude the vast majority of medium intensity farmers in order to accommodate the most intensive derogation farmers.
“This is an incredible signal. The farmer who needs a nitrates derogation is welcome to claim even more money from CAP whereas those who are less intensive are potentially ruled out. It is also surprising that commonage land and land with heather is excluded.”
“To be fair some of the ideas are worth further consideration, but the overall problem is that the upper limit of 10 hectares militates against a decent payment overall. The Minister needs to explain why there is only €10 million for this scheme when farmers were led to believe that a much higher figure was proposed in the budget.
"In the low input grassland measure the payment is between €250-400/ha on up to 10ha. This is combined with the participation fee (€1,200) and a possible complementary payment (for tree planting) up to €1,200. In that scenario (maximum tree planting assumed) the overall payment is somewhere between €4,900-€6,400.”
“For the longer term we need a scheme that can deliver €15,000 to low-income cattle, sheep, and tillage farmers.
“ICSA will totally oppose a scheme that rules out low-income farmers in order to accommodate intensive derogation farmers who are typically earning multiples of what the cattle and sheep farmers are getting. It is not acceptable to divert more CAP funds to the most intensive and larger scale farms, who are reliant on a derogation,” he said.
‘Failure’
Denis Drennan ICMSA Farm and Rural Affairs Committee chairman said that farmers will be “hugely disappointed” by the scheme’s budget and the structure.
“Yet again farmers find themselves in a position where they are willing to invest in environmental initiatives, but our Government and the EU have failed to put up the necessary funding despite launching multiple environmental strategies at this stage.
"The old adage is that actions speak louder than words and it’s absolutely obvious that there is an unwillingness to invest in environmental public good - despite all the rhetoric. This disconnect between aspirations and investment simply has to be addressed.”
While acknowledging that some measures may be of relevance to some commercial farmers, Mr Drennan said that the overwhelming disappointment is the limited options available for all farmers.
“The good work that farmers are already doing is not being acknowledged and, given the budget, the national impact of the scheme will be very limited.
"The structure of the scheme is also inflexible and does not allow for recognition of specific features on individual farms while placing family farms farming over 140kgs/ha in a so-called ‘Group 2’ with a lower priority for access to the scheme is hugely disappointing and fails to recognise the need to support commercial farmers who wish to invest in environmental initiatives.
“We seem to have been listening forever to politicians preaching to us on environmental measures and the support they want to give us. The REAPS scheme was their chance to prove their intentions and they failed. They have failed – yet again – to give meaningful support to farmers who want to carry out environmental measures on their farms,” he concluded.
