My â‚¬100m BEAM scheme

893bet · 29-04-2021 12:21am

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.

MIKEKC · 29-04-2021 10:58pm

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

Base price · 29-04-2021 11:44pm

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.

High bike · 01-05-2021 10:59pm

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

I says · 09-05-2021 8:49pm

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.

MIKEKC · 09-05-2021 9:36pm

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

Bellview · 09-05-2021 10:55pm

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.

Jjameson · 10-05-2021 8:46am

The reference period has bottleaxed every finisher around me. In the south east corner of the south east region the heavy macamore farms saw the brunt of the beast from the east, sheds down and then full slurry tanks with where to go, cold waterlogged fields and a fodder crisis that ran to June, when a switch flipped and all went well until mid July when all burnt up.
Stocking rates took a hit so it wasn’t a fair reflection of the real nitrates output on these farms.

Jjameson · 10-05-2021 8:54am

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.

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.

RD10 · 10-05-2021 10:20am

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

wrangler · 10-05-2021 10:24am

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

Cavanjack · 10-05-2021 10:37am

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.

Bass Reeves · 10-05-2021 11:35am

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

Jjameson · 10-05-2021 12:25pm

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

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.

wrangler · 10-05-2021 12:48pm

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

MIKEKC · 10-05-2021 1:18pm

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

Jjameson · 10-05-2021 1:47pm

wrangler wrote: »

Do you not know your self where you stand

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!

Jjameson · 10-05-2021 1:50pm

MIKEKC wrote: »

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

What kind of sadist really wants to obey rules!
If there’s wriggle room here we should be wriggling out.

Sugarbowl · 10-05-2021 1:54pm

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!

wrangler · 10-05-2021 7:21pm

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.

Jjameson · 10-05-2021 9:10pm

wrangler wrote: »

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

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.

I says · 11-05-2021 2:39pm

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.

tanko · 16-06-2021 3:47pm

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

DBK1 · 16-06-2021 3:53pm

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.

wrangler · 16-06-2021 4:03pm

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

epfff · 16-06-2021 6:18pm

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

wrangler · 16-06-2021 6:38pm

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

epfff · 16-06-2021 10:27pm

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.

wrangler · 16-06-2021 11:01pm

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

Green&Red · 16-06-2021 11:34pm

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"

My â‚¬100m BEAM scheme

Comments