My €100m BEAM scheme

DBK1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117880309#Comment_117880309

If you have to resort to trying to find problems with someone’s grammar due to not being able to argue anything that’s in their post then I think that says a lot more about you than them.

Exporting nitrates made no difference to BEAM so you had absolutely no need to be trying to calculate anything to do with exports.

It was very simple, you produced “x” amount of nitrates in the reference period, produce 5% less this year to get the money.

You didn’t have to look at anything to do with exports, imports, land, hectares, nothing like that. Basically just how much s**t is coming from every animal in your herd. That was it.

Base price

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117880309#Comment_117880309

Grammar nazi's were never tolerated on F&F and IMO it's rudimentary of any poster to highlight another post/refer to same. The majority of F&F posters are able to have quality discussions even if they are heated at times without reverting to personal slights - it's simply bad form.

green daries

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117881964#Comment_117881964

Well said that

maidhc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117879932#Comment_117879932

The point I’m making is that it was a flawed scheme that cost farmers money and time. I can see from the responses here that is correct.

I am also correct in saying the dept devised a system that they themselves could not fully comprehend. Sure there was “rough reckoners” and diy kludges, but we can’t even say right now what methodology was used to calculate the N.

Fair play to those that “complied”, but my point is that this was all half chance. I take exception to the suggestion I made “no effort”, I reduced stock by over 10%. It still didn’t cut it. I could see from feb there may be an issue, but I had my stock by then and wasn’t minded to waste time money and energy in selling.

i am disappointed though to see the lack of unity here, it’s as if the farmers who did comply want to see those that didn’t be penalised, even though it makes no odds to them. This can only mean compliance cost them more than they like to admit.

Easten

Listen Archimedes you've made your point several times, take a break from keyboard Warrior for a while instead of jumping down peoples throats. Yes we all know the t&c's now but it wasn't as clear to many folks at the time. It's a bit rich to be claiming a Nazi amnesty on grammar while at the same time harping on about how lads should read the t&c's

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883087#Comment_117883087

BS. Nitrates are calculated on per animal per day. As well it's BS about your analysis about the department not know. There problem was they needed to put a calculator in place that they could incorporate into there software systems that could analyze nitrates for 50k+ farmers. That a bit different from Joe Soap going away and getting his nitrates done for his 15-20 Suckler cow herd or his 50-500 drystock business.

The problem with a minority of farmers( and it is a minority here) they want to leave everything to the last minute, whether it's the BPS application, slurry spreading or hedge cutting and then when it's rains( metaphor) the want an extension or an amnesty. What are the odds that even with the present weather there are still lads with full slurry tanks.

The department should have said from the start with this scheme

'' lads there are the terms and conditions read them. Here are you nitrates for the 30th June calculate from there''.

It's even easier at present if you took the extension the calculation is from start of the year.

Like I said I a baby wipe my ar5e for me and pull up my socks is the attitude of a small vocal minority

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883397#Comment_117883397

If you are referring to me as Archimedes, I am take the compliment. I am not jumping down anybody throat. However it sickens my sh!t to see lads unwilling to help themselves and that is the issue here. It's not rocket science. Lads got a second bite at the cherry. It's up to them to take it. Nitrates adjustment are about corrective action early in the time period as you need to do less to hold onto the payment.

maidhc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883451#Comment_117883451

Ok. You have made your point. From my view if I was to concede you were correct in anyway we would both be wrong, so we will park it there!

Out of interest do you know if the dept calculated the N from the birthday of the animal or from a point at each month? What point of the month? I don’t know. Which did you do? That alone could have cost people.

i have never said that BEAM could not be complied with, but the ROI on availing of it was miserable and if was cost to impossible to calculate the N with certainty without keeping “well below” the threshold.

Easten

The Department of Agriculture do not adhere to the t&c's themselves.

Current in Government TD's are not listening to farmers (or any of the public it seems). Sinn Fein are more than happy to listen, I would encourage folks to make contact with them. A simple email or quick phone call is all it takes

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883515#Comment_117883515

Nitrates is per animal per day by the department. If you buy a 3 year old bullock on the 20th June for the months of June the calculation 10/365X 65 for the the nitrates he produces. ICBF uses a ba5tardised system but it gives a higher nitrates reading for farms.

With nitrates you will never hit exactly 5% or near it except on Suckler farmers. On drystock 7-8% would have been a good result IMO.

What did I do. I only got 400. Euro as I have posted many time and I took it as an interest free loan. However if it had been worth my while I would have complied with the scheme. However the drought that year left me with a low nitrates level so Unless I had had a substantial payment I would not have tried to comply

maidhc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883557#Comment_117883557

I don't think it is clear at all how they calculated it..

https://www.farmersjournal.ie/icsa-cites-concerns-over-beam-nitrates-calculations-608419

White Clover

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883397#Comment_117883397

The department said a 5% reduction in organic nitrogen between set dates. That's all, nothing else. The information regarding rates of organic nitrogen produced by animals of different ages was there for everyone. The T's and C's were clear from the outset.

Easten

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883708#Comment_117883708

That's a lie. The t&c's had 3 subordinate parts annexed to the original document made in the outset.

White Clover

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883735#Comment_117883735

I didn't realise that. I complied with the scheme and the only stipulation that I adhered to was the minimum of 5% reduction in organic nitrogen. I got the letter stating same a couple of weeks back so I don't see how necessary the extra t's & C's were required?

Can you put up the 3 subordinate parts and the dates that they were added?

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883678#Comment_117883678

Even if that works as the case, and I have not seen it followed up so the ICSA may have been incorrect. If you calculated on a daily basis and achieved the reduction you could appeal it and the department would conceed. However I have always calculated out my nitrates for to remain under 170/ha on a daily basis and always CE in at where I expected. You make you assumptions on sales dates and buying dates calculate out to see what slurry you needed to export. But I then adhered to my sales/buying dates and achieved the result.

maidhc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883837#Comment_117883837

No, the ICSA were correct. How are you to calculate it on a daily basis? Of course it can be done, but it’s beyond the ability of most of us. I’ll hold my hands up here, even if people are “embarrassed” for me.

Well done on complying with BEAM, but that’s not my point, anyone could comply with it it, all you needed to do was damage your business more than the value of the payment and you were fine…

DBK1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883870#Comment_117883870

I understand what you’re saying about damaging your business to comply and with the way factory prices have gone this year I would say you are correct in saying that. But the point about that is we all knew when we signed up that’s what we had to do so there’s no point complaining now.

Any farmer that didn’t like the thoughts of having to do that either shouldn’t have signed up or, if they did sign up, should have known they would have to give the money back and treat it as an interest free loan.

Anto_Meath

DBK1 you are correct, I didn't join, it was worth a around €4,500 to me, I killed a load of cattle the week after the cut off which pissed me off with the scheme in the first place (that would have added another €1,500 to the kitty).

I felt the reduction needed would have hit my bottom line more that the €4,500 available, thinking about it I thought if a fed a few more cattle I could easily make up the €4,500 and the way this year has turn out, that has been the case thankfully. I am trying to build up my herd and my suckler cow numbers so something aimed at reducing numbers wasn't going to appeal to me

MIKEKC

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883524#Comment_117883524

What have the TDs got to listen to ?

Grueller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117885742#Comment_117885742

Whatever their constituents want them to.

MIKEKC

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117885747#Comment_117885747

We are talking about BEAM, so I presume it must have something to do with that.?

Grueller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117885775#Comment_117885775

My response may have come across as glib but there is a divide on beam here. TDs will have to listen to both sides if that argument. Which side they come down on is up to them but they will have to listen.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117885809#Comment_117885809

In a way in a way no. The 5%reductions was set by the EU as a precondition of the introduction to the scheme. If that is set aside now what about farmers that did not apply because of that precondition. What about farmers that went out of there way to fulfill the conditions. You can appeal the terms and interpretation of the rules but it would be totally unfair to just overturn the conditions. If you join the army you wear the boots

Grueller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117886383#Comment_117886383

The TDs will suck their fingers, stick them in the air and gauge the direction of the wind and then decide where they lie.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117886471#Comment_117886471

And the EU comission will tell them what can do

maidhc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117886383#Comment_117886383

I honestly think you are being small minded. In my book a win for farmers is good, a win for obtuse bureaucracy is bad. The fact you view it as "unfair" if the 5% rule would be removed means you lost more than you care to admit to abide by the scheme, and rather than argue for the merits of the scheme (of which there is none unless you have shares in Icantbelieveitsnotmeat) you should voice your discontent. At the end of the day you are not in competition with anyone here.

The obvious thing to do would be to give the €100 to everyone who sold cattle during the 2019 reference period whether they signed up or not. Still not "fair", but better. (I lost out 2,500 by selling cattle a few days outside the 2020 "top up", but such is life.)

Grueller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117886796#Comment_117886796

Like have a 12.5% corporation tax rate? Amazing the way the EU opinion apply to one and not the other.

kk.man

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117885088#Comment_117885088

I killed 28 that fitted into the scheme. I had another 28 went to the mart 2 weeks later. They would have been fs2 if only I knew I'd have killed them too!

But I was careful out always ringing advisor to check my progress I didn't want to repay the money.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117886888#Comment_117886888

I did not lose anything to abide by the scheme....because I had decided that for 400 euro it was not worth abiding by the scheme.

I believe the scheme was flawed because it rewarded stupidity and encouraged further stupidity.

Scheme's like this are market distorting. However if there are conditions they should be adhered to.

Jjameson

The scheme was brought about by combination of Fine Gael euro election spin and the ifa desperately trying to claim relevance during the beef protests.

With no accountability from processors regarding the validity of beefprice/processing retail margin The scheme was indeed a farce.

But it was an unexpected windfall for me however the reference period that they picked was a clusterfuck for every finisher here in the south east corner.