New Nitrates Plan

Buford T. Justice XIX

A little bit on the new proposals going forward for approval.

http://m.independent.ie/business/farming/schemes/see-the-new-nitrates-plan-that-could-hit-farmers-in-the-pocket-36122426.html?utm_content=buffer67e46&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Some stuff good like an increased allowance for P&K on index 1 and 2 soils but linked with being involved in the Knowledge Transfer scheme, some some stupidly bad like stopping runoff from farm roads.

alps

Run off from roads looks like being a real thorny issue. If this is included it should be offset somewhat by us being allowed to include the roads in our area aid....fair is fair..

No changes to spreading dates...thats a bummer

Keepgrowing

alps wrote: »

Run off from roads looks like being a real thorny issue. If this is included it should be offset somewhat by us being allowed to include the roads in our area aid....fair is fair..

No changes to spreading dates...thats a bummer

I'm assuming the roadway part is meant to deal with cows roads that run to a stream and cows cross unabridged. I know it will not be policed that way.

P&k change welcome but linking to KT really isn't satisfactory.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Keepgrowing wrote: »

I'm assuming the roadway part is meant to deal with cows roads that run to a stream and cows cross unabridged. I know it will not be policed that way.

P&k change welcome but linking to KT really isn't satisfactory.

What's the betting it will be included in the next review of quality assurance?

freedominacup

Keepgrowing wrote: »

I'm assuming the roadway part is meant to deal with cows roads that run to a stream and cows cross unabridged. I know it will not be policed that way.

P&k change welcome but linking to KT really isn't satisfactory.

I read it as run off from roads being diverted into natural watercourses which can't really be condoned. I'm no saint BTW. There's things here that still need to be addressed.

Keepgrowing

freedominacup wrote: »

I read it as run off from roads being diverted into natural watercourses which can't really be condoned. I'm no saint BTW. There's things here that still need to be addressed.

Deliberately diverting soiled water to a water course is beyond the pale

alps

It's to do with any water running from any roadway where stock walk, that can eventually end up in a watercourse. It may mean diversion of all these waters into a field, but certainly not into any type of drain or funnel that can allow it to flow to a watercourse.

A watercourse is defined as that which appears in a 6inch ordinance survey map...if that scale makes sense

boggerman1

http://m.independent.ie/business/farming/schemes/see-the-new-nitrates-plan-that-could-hit-farmers-in-the-pocket-36122426.html

What are they planning for farm roadways, that any run off needs to be held on the road? Sounds like a crazy idea.

Sam Kade wrote: »

http://m.independent.ie/business/farming/schemes/see-the-new-nitrates-plan-that-could-hit-farmers-in-the-pocket-36122426.html

What are they planning for farm roadways, that any run off needs to be held on the road? Sounds like a crazy idea.

as long as we are getting the sfp they will come up with more hairbrain ideas.

It's a thing of nothing.
As long as the runoff is going to one or both sides into the field it's fine.

It's when you have wheel ruts or cow tracks with channels for dirty water to flow along and then enter a waterway is the problem.

Buford T. Justice XIX

boggerman1 wrote: »

http://m.independent.ie/business/farming/schemes/see-the-new-nitrates-plan-that-could-hit-farmers-in-the-pocket-36122426.html

What are they planning for farm roadways, that any run off needs to be held on the road? Sounds like a crazy idea.

as long as we are getting the sfp they will come up with more hairbrain ideas.

It's a thing of nothing.
As long as the runoff is going to one or both sides into the field it's fine.

It's when you have wheel ruts or cow tracks with channels for dirty water to flow along and then enter a waterway is the problem.

Sorry, Sam and boggerman, I merged posts instead of threads:o

I'll try to sort it out for you a bit later.

K.G.

Should.the slurry storage requirements be raised .this year was the worsed i ve seen for fellas spreading during the ban and there wasnt a worse year for doing it.the argument against calender farming is that people have to spread it now as tanks are full but maybe everyone are should their requirements up 50 % to give your more time.if you did things by the book you would.have to spread on the 12th as thats what storage.you have if you had another 2 months storage even though you allowed spread it would allow breathing space for to spreading opportunity s

alps

K.G. wrote: »

Should.the slurry storage requirements be raised .this year was the worsed i ve seen for fellas spreading during the ban and there wasnt a worse year for doing it.the argument against calender farming is that people have to spread it now as tanks are full but maybe everyone are should their requirements up 50 % to give your more time.if you did things by the book you would.have to spread on the 12th as thats what storage.you have if you had another 2 months storage even though you allowed spread it would allow breathing space for to spreading opportunity s

IT'S very difficult to argue against it. It certainly makes sense where there is reliance on contractor spreading. Contractors need 2 to 3 weeks to get around to all full tanks which in itself is an extended period requirement.

You also have the time pressure of continuing to spread even when uou really shoildnt. Cant believe that spreading after this evening is a good idea.

This winter has not been a good advertisement..

Panch18

Ye must enjoy spending money on concrete lads

Surely better to remove the calendar and let lads spread when the conditions dictate?

K.G.

Panch18 wrote: »

Ye must enjoy spending money on concrete lads

Surely better to remove the calendar and let lads spread when the conditions dictate?

But are we spreading because the ground is dry to travel or because it is the time least likely to end up in runoff.spreading slurry is high risk during winter months whereas i almost think dung should be allowed spread all year round.different stuff altogether.if lads put as much effort into spreading it when the sheds are empty as do they do when theres cattle in them they d be alot better off.

Birdnuts

Panch18 wrote: »

Ye must enjoy spending money on concrete lads

Surely better to remove the calendar and let lads spread when the conditions dictate?

Spreading outside the growing season(typically March to Sep) is probably just as bad as spreading in wet weather since most of the PNK will be lost to leaching into ground water etc. instead of being taken up by growing plants.

Gawddawggonnit

Birdnuts wrote: »

Spreading outside the growing season(typically March to Sep) is probably just as bad as spreading in wet weather since most of the PNK will be lost to leaching into ground water etc. instead of being taken up by growing plants.

Ten years ago we were allowed to spread slurry and artificial N & P from the 15th of Jan.
Today the season is closed until 15th of March.
Tillage land here, and even after the wettest winter in 50yrs, you could drive a car around fields after a few dry days...

Regs will keep changing around organic and artificial manures until targets are reached. Ask the Dutch...after years of blackguarding with the regs they’ve gotten hit with new draconian regs. Ten thousand tractors on the roads protesting didn’t make one jot of difference.

Gawddawggonnit

alps wrote: »

IT'S very difficult to argue against it. It certainly makes sense where there is reliance on contractor spreading. Contractors need 2 to 3 weeks to get around to all full tanks which in itself is an extended period requirement.

You also have the time pressure of continuing to spread even when uou really shoildnt. Cant believe that spreading after this evening is a good idea.

This winter has not been a good advertisement..

Government are in a bit of a bind when it comes to N regs.
Gov have paid for the expertise of Teagasc to give the ‘gold standard’ of slurry and N best practice.
On the strength of these guidelines, and I presume in line with EU N directives, the Gov invested millions in grants to update storage until 15th Jan...thus if they expand the opening dates, they’re on the block for even more millions in grants.

Without any consultation whatsoever they can change dates here because it doesn’t cost a penny.

Bass Reeves

Panch18 wrote: »

Ye must enjoy spending money on concrete lads

Surely better to remove the calendar and let lads spread when the conditions dictate?

It not about enjoying spending money it about being ahead of the curve. First off the calendar will not be removed no matter if farmers lobby about it. It was interesting that it was highlighted that lads that are spreading in the closed period are endangering the present dates and we could see the closed period expanded.

We will all have to spread using LESS in 5+ years time maybe sooner. This will mean more farmers using contractors to spread and this may expand the closed period by 5 weeks as contractors cannot empty every tank at the same time.

There is other pressure's on the system lagoon's will be checked more,outside cubicles will have to be roofed, nitrates derogations will change and calf exports will stop.

In the FI last Tuesday Darragh McCollough made the point that Farm organisations need to stop peddling misinformation to farmers and point out where possible changes may come from.

He made this point in relation to the way we still hear that dairy expansion and calf exports can continue unimpeded, that we can have upwards only convergence, etc. You can add the present nitrates rules to that. We already see LESS imposed on farmers in derogation from June on.

Change will continue and being slightly ahead of the curve can help.

Panch18

It’s ironic of course that there is far far more nitrogen lost to the atmosphere when slurry is spread on a bright long summers day than is lost on a short cloudy damp spring day

This of course could lead to even more artificial fertiliser being used in the spring to get grass growing early when it won’t have the kick from slurry

K.G.

Panch18 wrote: »

It’s ironic of course that there is far far more nitrogen lost to the atmosphere when slurry is spread on a bright long summers day than is lost on a short cloudy damp spring day

This of course could lead to even more artificial fertiliser being used in the spring to get grass growing early when it won’t have the kick from slurry

But to counteract that we are going down the LESSroute.what happens here around during the winter is pouring rain and then 2 dry days comes and lads spread away mad.day after pissing rain again.you have some hope of slurry washing in if you had the ground dry but when its wet and slurry spread on top it just washes off.