Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

My €100m BEAM scheme

1202123252629

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,861 ✭✭✭893bet


    A lot of complaining about this scheme. Seems fairly simple. Reduce by 5 percent. Estimate tracker on agfood since the start etc.

    A lot of people will complain no matter what. And others want money for no effort.

    I will be repaying the money we got. Reference period was poor so it’s not too bad. But didn’t suit to reduce.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,239 ✭✭✭MIKEKC


    893bet wrote: »
    A lot of complaining about this scheme. Seems fairly simple. Reduce by 5 percent. Estimate tracker on agfood since the start etc.

    A lot of people will complain no matter what. And others want money for no effort.

    I will be repaying the money we got. Reference period was poor so it’s not too bad. But didn’t suit to reduce.
    The most sensible post on Beam that I've seen


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,693 ✭✭✭✭Base price


    893bet wrote: »
    A lot of complaining about this scheme. Seems fairly simple. Reduce by 5 percent. Estimate tracker on agfood since the start etc.

    A lot of people will complain no matter what. And others want money for no effort.

    I will be repaying the money we got. Reference period was poor so it’s not too bad. But didn’t suit to reduce.
    TBH its fairly easy to calculate if you have a static herd but some farmers don't have static herds so it's more difficult to calculate. In fairness if your in the game then you should haven't a problem with the calculations.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,683 ✭✭✭High bike


    How often is the nitrates statement updated on agfood,just had a look there and it only showing Jan and Feb 21


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭I says


    Got new revised numbers on Friday. I’m over but it’s calculated from 1st March to end of June. Doesn’t consider any movement after that date. Me thinks both the Ifa and department are going to be busy sorting this sh1t show out.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,239 ✭✭✭MIKEKC


    I says wrote: »
    Got new revised numbers on Friday. I’m over but it’s calculated from 1st March to end of June. Doesn’t consider any movement after that date. Me thinks both the Ifa and department are going to be busy sorting this sh1t show out.

    Thought it finished at end of June. No need for figures after that date unless you opted for new dates


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,719 ✭✭✭Bellview


    I says wrote: »
    Got new revised numbers on Friday. I’m over but it’s calculated from 1st March to end of June. Doesn’t consider any movement after that date. Me thinks both the Ifa and department are going to be busy sorting this sh1t show out.

    both Agfood and the ICBf have calculators that will let you adjust any movements/changes in animal profile ie moving from 1 year to 2 year etc that you are aware that will happen and this will help you get pretty accurate view on where you will exit.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 535 ✭✭✭RD10


    How do you check figures for this on agfood/icbf??


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,528 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    Jjameson wrote: »
    There is no letter stating that the previous one is wrong. I think the ifa should be going for the jugular of the department and seek legal counsel on this.

    They've given farmers an option of a different date and giving the money back.
    Did people not read the Ts and Cs


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,836 ✭✭✭Cavanjack


    wrangler wrote: »
    They've given farmers an option of a different date and giving the money back.
    Did people not read the Ts and Cs

    I was happy and surprised to get 10k out of the scheme. The only condition was I had to do less work and sit down with a calculator a few times over the last 6 months.
    I agree the scheme was ran very badly and how they couldn’t come up with a system to give a day by day nitrates figure I’ll never know.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,515 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    TBH a lot of farmers are unwilling to help themselves. I have come accros a few Suckler farmers that have aught as long as they culled a cow before the end of June that solved the problem. Most cannot grasp that it's a 12 month average you have to reduce. No point in looking at a fire for twenty minutes and then going with a bucket of water because a bucket of water would have quenched it when it started.

    Even by taking the extension a lot of lads could solve it. I explained it is be lad and he has sold a cull cow and a couple of strong yearlings. He will just have to watch it from now to September and look at his figures then.

    There is no reason for any lads with bullocks you just had to cut back numbers last Autumn. However most lads carried on as normal

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,528 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    Jjameson wrote: »
    The cost of administration is likely to come to more than what going to be recouped.

    I have two almost identical official letters from the dept telling me I’m well under the limit and another telling me I’m over!
    And nothing officially retracting one.
    I’m curious about the legal standing now.

    Do you not know your self where you stand


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,239 ✭✭✭MIKEKC


    wrangler wrote: »
    Do you not know your self where you stand

    A lot of people don't want to obey the rules yet collect the money. Just as they do with any other scheme


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 895 ✭✭✭Sugarbowl


    In fairness the amount of money you got from BEAM is an incentive on how you are pertaining to the rules. If you got 10k like the poster above you would have it calculated to the last day. If your amount totaled in the hundreds it doesn’t really get you excited that much. I’m currently under the limit according to the letter but as time goes on, will that change once March/April calves are included. Time will tell!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,528 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    Jjameson wrote: »
    It’s not where you stand it’s where you predict yourself to stand at the end with all the variables of changing ages and when regards selling fat
    Most finishers around here were back a lot on stock in the late summer/autumn of the 2018 reference period due to trying to gather late forage or simply no grass to graze so they are now trying to cut 5% from a very low base.

    The dept can’t get it right what hope has a gom!

    I wouldn't think it's rocket science, if you don't understand it why go for it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭I says


    I have reduced since 1st week of March. Using ag food calculator I’m ok and now the dept does it as a rolling monthly average. Tis a balls up.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,451 ✭✭✭tanko


    Only a few days left to defer the 5% reduction until the end of the year.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,581 ✭✭✭DBK1


    tanko wrote: »
    Only a few days left to defer the 5% reduction until the end of the year.
    Anyone in any way doubtful about meeting the reduction should defer. If you defer but then it turns out that you meet the figures in the original timeframe anyway it is still accepted. So basically there is nothing to lose by deferring.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,528 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    Jjameson wrote: »
    Who could afford not to go for it?
    It was compensation from Fine Gael for letting the cartel profiteer off the the premise of Brexit. Andrew doyle was looking for a seat in Europe and the ifa were looking for a “look what we got over the line”.

    And no it ain’t rocket science and yes I can keep under it but it is a nonsensical clause, especially the reference period they picked.

    If you were around in the 1990s you'd have the same thing, have to sit down and work out the stocking rate at the end of the year. It has been going on since then. I suppose I'm used to it


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,499 ✭✭✭epfff


    wrangler wrote: »
    If you were around in the 1990s you'd have the same thing, have to sit down and work out the stocking rate at the end of the year. It has been going on since then. I suppose I'm used to it

    The stocking rate calculation in the 90s for LU was much simpler.
    Maybe I'm looking back with Rose tinted glasses but Imo you are not comparing anything near like with like when talking about LU and nitrates


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,528 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    epfff wrote: »
    The stocking rate calculation in the 90s for LU was much simpler.
    Maybe I'm looking back with Rose tinted glasses but Imo you are not comparing anything near like with like when talking about LU and nitrates

    We're just on the margins of derogation stocking rate here so we're very aware of monthly figures....... down to even it being important when we get rid of cull ewes.
    As I said it's not rocket science


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,499 ✭✭✭epfff


    wrangler wrote: »
    We're just on the margins of derogation stocking rate here so we're very aware of monthly figures....... down to even it being important when we get rid of cull ewes.
    As I said it's not rocket science

    I think I have it covered here.
    It took a lot of work and I still got it very wrong because I'm going to be under my limit by approx 300/500 kgs even after making adjustments the last few months when I discovered I was being too cautious. I always aimed to error on the side of safety but not that much.
    Can you tell me what I'm missing that makes it easy?
    I sell and replace an average of 1 load of cattle each week. My system works on buying value at any quality level and keep procurement manager happy by supplying when he wants so some weeks I'm given short notice to get to plant or short notice to wait until following week.
    A few things are getting me 1)cattle changing age mid month 2} coming/going inconsistant. 3) ages of cattle been bought all over the place.
    I was calculating 2 times a month (mid and last day) while using averages for future projections. This took a lot of time but I was getting 10k to do it. The dept calculator was of very little help because it was 2 months behind. I found the letter I received yesterday of no use because it was once again 2 months behind. .
    Only way I see of been accurate is daily calculations and be very ridged on ages of cattle purchased.
    That to me is not rocket science but a more rigid labour intensive unworkable discipline than your average farmer is capable of doing in the privicy of his own home.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,528 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    epfff wrote: »
    I think I have it covered here.
    It took a lot of work and I still got it very wrong because I'm going to be under my limit by approx 300/500 kgs even after making adjustments the last few months when I discovered I was being too cautious. I always aimed to error on the side of safety but not that much.
    Can you tell me what I'm missing that makes it easy?
    I sell and replace an average of 1 load of cattle each week. My system works on buying value at any quality level and keep procurement manager happy by supplying when he wants so some weeks I'm given short notice to get to plant or short notice to wait until following week.
    A few things are getting me 1)cattle changing age mid month 2} coming/going inconsistant. 3) ages of cattle been bought all over the place.
    I was calculating 2 times a month (mid and last day) while using averages for future projections. This took a lot of time but I was getting 10k to do it. The dept calculator was of very little help because it was 2 months behind. I found the letter I received yesterday of no use because it was once again 2 months behind. .
    Only way I see of been accurate is daily calculations and be very ridged on ages of cattle purchased.
    That to me is not rocket science but a more rigid labour intensive unworkable discipline than your average farmer is capable of doing in the privicy of his own home.

    With €10000 depending on it, do you have to rim it so tight.
    Especially as the margins are so poor,You're probably gambling losing yor 10000 for an extra margin of a 1000 if you're lucky
    A computer program would monitor it if you wanted to be that tight


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,762 ✭✭✭✭Green&Red


    Jjameson wrote: »
    The cost of administration is likely to come to more than what going to be recouped.

    I have two almost identical official letters from the dept telling me I’m well under the limit and another telling me I’m over!
    And nothing officially retracting one.
    I’m curious about the legal standing now.

    The letter literally says "It is provided only as a guide and does not indicate compliance"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,515 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    wrangler wrote: »
    With €10000 depending on it, do you have to rim it so tight.
    Especially as the margins are so poor,You're probably gambling losing yor 10000 for an extra margin of a 1000 if you're lucky
    A computer program would monitor it if you wanted to be that tight

    He is not cutting it tight, he is 5-6 bullocks below the allowance for a full year.

    This is not the same as a derogation limit. If you make a mistake up until next year you could export a few loads of slurry. I worked the 170 kg limit on a 50-60 acre farm 4-5K gallons is a an easy way of sorting it.

    There is no room for margin on this if you are 1% above you lose the whole lot. That is an extra bullock in a 100. A lot of lads are only drawing 2-3K If you are operating on a net margin of 200/head/year, 5-6 bullocks is 1000-1200 euro, but it probably effects gross margin as well, its unlikely you will spread much less fertlizer, you may end up with an extra 20-30 bales cost you another 500-1K.

    In my case it was 400 euro on a 60ish head/year kill. As well because of the drough that year I was hanging cattle as fast as they were anyway fit. I took it as a loan. I can never figure how for smaller payments sub 1K were not excluded from the reduction and tiered after that up to 5% at 10K

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,528 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    He is not cutting it tight, he is 5-6 bullocks below the allowance for a full year.

    This is not the same as a derogation limit. If you make a mistake up until next year you could export a few loads of slurry. I worked the 170 kg limit on a 50-60 acre farm 4-5K gallons is a an easy way of sorting it.

    There is no room for margin on this if you are 1% above you lose the whole lot. That is an extra bullock in a 100. A lot of lads are only drawing 2-3K If you are operating on a net margin of 200/head/year, 5-6 bullocks is 1000-1200 euro, but it probably effects gross margin as well, its unlikely you will spread much less fertlizer, you may end up with an extra 20-30 bales cost you another 500-1K.

    In my case it was 400 euro on a 60ish head/year kill. As well because of the drough that year I was hanging cattle as fast as they were anyway fit. I took it as a loan. I can never figure how for smaller payments sub 1K were not excluded from the reduction and tiered after that up to 5% at 10K


    I've been working schemes for years and I'd manage this one too if I was bothered and have never used a consultant.
    Talking of getting animals away fit is stupid when risking €10000, I'll be selling ewes in august to keep under the limit. Probaly the worst month to sell cull ewes . None of the schemes are compulsory


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,019 ✭✭✭TCDStudent1


    The Agfood calculator hasn't been updated with end of May figures. Any reason for this? I thought it would make sense that these be updated to allow farmers make a more informed decision on whether they are deferring the payment.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,489 ✭✭✭coolshannagh28


    The Agfood calculator hasn't been updated with end of May figures. Any reason for this? I thought it would make sense that these be updated to allow farmers make a more informed decision on whether they are deferring the payment.

    As the herd profile database is continually refreshed why wasnt it possible to have a running nitrates total on the database ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,515 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    As the herd profile database is continually refreshed why wasnt it possible to have a running nitrates total on the database ?

    It's just s data base. You would need different software to calculate nitrates as all animals have different rating depending on type and age. As well it's only a section of farmers that are in Beam.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,489 ✭✭✭coolshannagh28


    It's just s data base. You would need different software to calculate nitrates as all animals have different rating depending on type and age. As well it's only a section of farmers that are in Beam.

    Nitrates will be a huge issue going forward for all farmers ,I cant imagine it would take a rocket scientist to design software to give farmers an accurate reading particularly as there are financial penalties involved .


Advertisement