Response from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds May 2009
|
|
- Samson Smith
- 7 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Defra consultation on proposed changes to standard in cross compliance good agricultural and environmental condition (GAEC) and related measures in England. Response from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds May 2009 Summary Set-aside was introduced as a production control measure but brought significant and widespread environmental benefits. The abolition of set-aside in 2008 following the CAP Health Check occurred without an environmental impact assessment and consideration of how to retain the benefits. It is vital that a replacement measure is put in place and has the ability to deliver benefits in RSPB believes a cross compliance requirement through Option A is the only proposal that will be able to meet the selection criteria set out in the consultation to recapture the environmental benefits of set-aside, including delivering above the baseline set out for ELS, implementation in 2010 and ensuring benefits will be delivered immediately and in the longer term. A voluntary approach is inherently risky, as participation by farmers cannot be guaranteed. Previous attempts at a voluntary approach failed to generate the support from the farming industry. The UK Government successfully negotiated for an enabling provision through the Health Check of Member States to recapture the environmental benefits of set-aside as part of cross compliance. It is important that this new measure is implemented in England. This will also provide the framework for other Member States to develop their own set-aside replacement tools, which are urgently needed. It is essential that a Statutory Instrument is laid for all changes to GAEC, including the option to introduce Option A. If Option B is chosen it will be necessary to have the ability to introduce Option A as a regulatory failsafe as quickly as possible. The RSPB welcomes the proposal to introduce a new GAEC standard on buffer strips next to watercourses in order to fulfil requirements of the CAP Heath Check and to deliver WFD objectives. We believe a mandatory, targeted approach is most appropriate but this must form part of the cross compliance requirements. Compulsory buffer strips by watercourses will partially address water quality issues, and are therefore welcome, but their biodiversity benefits will be minor. Any option to replace the benefits of set-aside should ensure that a 1
2 range of measures are distributed across the countryside to replicate the benefits for farmland biodiversity as this cannot be addressed by buffer strips alone. RSPB does not believe the proposed consolidation of GAEC standards for soils will improve the cross compliance standards. We believe that the current proposal weakens the rules on soil management and could compromise natural resource protection objectives. The RSPB recommends maintaining the strength of the requirements and guidance within a single amalgamated GAEC standard. Introduction The RSPB is Europe s largest wildlife charity with over one million members. We manage one of the largest conservation estates in the UK, covering c.137, 000 hectares. Sixty of our reserves are farmed, covering more than 20,000 hectares, with around 170 tenant farmers, and 200 employees. We protect and enhance habitats such as lowland farmland, heather moorland, lowland heath, wet grassland, estuaries and reed beds, and our reserves help to protect 63 of the 77 most rare or threatened breeding birds in the UK. The RSPB is the UK partner of BirdLife International, which is a global Partnership of non-governmental conservation organisations. BirdLife International strives to conserve birds, habitats and global biodiversity, working with people towards sustainability in the use of natural resources. The RSPB works closely with our BirdLife partners on EU agriculture policy issues. The RSPB s vision for agriculture is for sustainable systems of farming that produce adequate supplies of safe, healthy food; protect the natural resources of soil, air and water that farming depends on; help to protect and enhance wildlife and habitats; provide jobs in rural areas and contribute to a diverse rural economy. General comments on recapturing the environmental benefits of set-aside The RSPB welcomes Defra s consultation on recapturing the environmental benefits of set-aside. Set-aside brought about widespread but incidental benefits to farmland biodiversity, particularly farmland birds through the provision of important feeding and nesting resources. Studies have shown that set aside supported higher densities of farmland birds compared to cropped land, breeding density and chick survival was significantly enhanced and overall population trends improved in response to set-aside provision. It has also been demonstrated that set aside played a potentially significant role in climate change mitigation for biodiversity by: Conserving the range and ecological variability of habitats and species; Conserving and enhancing local variation within sites and habitats; 2
3 Establishing ecological networks through habitat protection, restoration and creation. The RSPB was vocal in its opposition to the setting of the set aside rate to 0% in 2007 without an environmental impact assessment being completed and before the development of any measures to retain its environmental benefits. Defra s action, immediately following the 0% rate decision, to monitor the effects of set aside loss and establish a high level set aside steering group, was a positive step which has provided valuable evidence and information. In the cropping year, Defra s research has indicated that the amount of uncropped land in England fell by 64% 1. The greatest decline has been in rotational set-aside. A reduction of 83% between was recorded. As rotational set aside provided specific and significant benefits for farmland birds the impact of set-aside loss is likely to be severe for many at risk PSA and BAP species. Losses of non rotational set aside will negatively impact the botanic quality of habitats which have been able to develop over recent years and diffuse pollution is also likely to significantly increase following the application of inputs on land brought back into production and the cultivation of more vulnerable areas. Farmers have benefited from the removal of set-aside, as a restriction on production has been lifted, but set-aside entitlements worth over 100 million under the Single Payment System have been retained. All productive land receiving SPS entitlements should generate the requirement for environmental management that would ensure the bulk of CAP subsidies (Pillar 1 payments) are paid for the delivery of public goods (biodiversity, water quality etc.) Consultation Questions 1. Do you have any further evidence (preferable quantified) on the environmental benefits of set-aside/uncropped land? There is strong evidence to show that biodiversity benefited significantly from setaside compared to intensive arable production. Four peer reviewed studies on the environmental impacts of set-aside, commissioned by the HLSAG in 2008, found setaside had: benefited farmland bird populations; benefited a range of plant and mammal species; and reduced sediment and phosphate run-off in catchments where there were significant areas of farmland at high risk of erosion 2. A literature review by IEEP demonstrated a range of other benefits for small mammals and brown hare 3. This research has shown that there were significant benefits to breeding and wintering farmland birds. Eight of the eleven declining farmland birds on the Farmland Bird Indicator benefited from the winter seed food and summer insect 1 Change in the Area and Distribution of Uncropped Land in England: February 2009 Update, Defra Agricultural Change and Environment Observatory Research Report No.13, Steve Langton 2 Final report of Sir Don Curry s High Level Group. July The Environmental Benefits of Set-Aside in the EU; A Summary of Evidence. IEEP report for Defra. February
4 food provided by set-aside. It is lack of one or both of these resources that have driven their national population decline. In addition, set-aside often provided good nesting habitat for ground-nesting birds, notably lapwing and stone-curlew. Setaside also played an important role in linking habitats and enabling the movement of species that may be important in the context of climate change. RSPB has contributed to the range of studies that have been carried out on the environmental benefits of set-aside and uncropped land. 2. Do you think any other or additional selection criteria should be considered in selecting which option to implement? RSPB welcomes the proposed selection criteria to ensure the option chosen will deliver the requirements to recapture the benefits of set-aside. RSPB does not believe that Option B meets the proposed selection criteria. In particular: As the set-aside rate has now been set at 0% since 2007, it is important that the option selected starts delivering as soon as possible and in particular by 2010 to coincide with the high level of ELS renewals. The adoption of Option A will guarantee delivery in 2010 and allow ELS top up options to be incorporated into new agreements. There is no guarantee that management carried out under Option B can deliver in As Environmental Stewardship was developed alongside set-aside, any proposal should deliver beyond the baseline, including targets set for Monitoring of the chosen option will be important to ensure the benefits are being delivered therefore a simple and effective monitoring programme is essential and this will be achievable with the introduction of Option A. 3. Do you think other or additional criteria should be considered in measuring the success of any measures adopted? The proxy criteria identified are suitable for measuring the immediate success of a set-aside mitigation measure. Assessing the quality and spatial distribution of the uncropped land and beneficial land management will be important in assessing the environmental outcomes. The impact of the measures on biodiversity should be monitored and checked against the modelling work carried out Defra report BD1640 4, to ensure the measures are delivering as predicted. 4. Do you agree that the short term outcomes (eg area, distribution, management of uncropped land) and the longer term potential of any measure adopted should be assessed at the end of the first year of implementation? 4 Defra Research Project BD1640: Zero rate of set-aside: evaluating the potential impact on farmland birds and the implications for requirements for ELS uptake and related measures. BTO, RSPB, CSL, CEH, GWCT. May
5 RSPB agree that the outcomes should be assessed at the end of the first year of implementation, as the chosen option must start delivering as quickly as possible. It has been over 2 years since the loss of set-aside therefore we cannot afford any further delays in replacing the benefits of set-aside. For farmland birds and other arable wildlife it is known that particular management options will deliver the biodiversity benefits required, therefore the measurement of uptake should provide an indication on the likely effect on population of farmland birds. The long-term outcome should be contribution to a reversal in the farmland bird index and therefore the PSA. This monitoring and assessment should continue on an annual basis. An assessment at the end of the first year will be particularly important if Option B is chosen in order to assess voluntary uptake by farmers and that it is effective. The implementation of a regulatory failsafe should be assessed at the end of the first year and a mandatory requirement introduced if there is a failure to reach agreed targets. 5. For Option A which alternative would you prefer to see implemented, A1 or A2, and why? Alternative 1 broadly provides equivalent benefits to those provided by set-aside. Alternative 2 would deliver benefits only if delivered at a scale greater than Alternative 1 but will offer the widest range of options and allow cropping to continue if required, therefore would be our preferred alternative. Both options will require the uptake of ELS top up options to deliver similar benefits to set-aside on a smaller percentage of land. Although we support the inclusion of EM1, care must be taken to ensure that the buffers provided via this option are additional to the buffers already provided in cross compliance, or they will not deliver set aside replacement benefits. There may be a need to ensure a maximum threshold for this particular option as other options which provide in-field benefits must be taken up if set aside benefits are to be properly mitigated. We have concerns at the inclusion of EM10. This option will deliver far fewer benefits than set aside when delivered over an equivalent area, and we feel that EM9 & 11 should be the only winter stubble options included in the mitigation proposals, as they will provide greater benefits for birds. RSPB would welcome the opportunity to discuss the management requirements for the proposed options. Further comments and suggestions are provided in Annex 1. 6a. Bearing in mind the costs to farmers and environmental objectives, what percentage area do you think should be set for Option A as alternative A1; or as alternative A2? 5
6 Choice of <4%; 4%; 5%; 6%; >6% or other? If ELS top up options are used, both alternatives for Option A should deliver benefits on a smaller percentage of land than set-aside. The Natural England targeting report calculated the area of land required to mitigate for the loss of set-aside is a minimum of 4-5% 5. This figure is dependent on an ideal mix of options being chosen by farmers, including the uptake of ELS top up options, creating a mixture of habitats. This figure is also dependent on options being sited in appropriate locations and being distributed throughout the landscape. If this can be achieved, we would agree that a percentage of 4-5% would be acceptable for Alternative 1. Alternative 2 would need to be delivered at a higher percentage to deliver equivalent benefits to set-aside, therefore would we agree that a percentage of 5-6% would be required is this alternative is chosen. 6b. Do you agree that the Option A requirement should only apply to farms with more than 20ha of cultivated land? RSPB agrees that the minimum area of 20ha is appropriate as this is similar to the former set-aside threshold. This threshold would help maintain small areas of arable in predominately pastoral areas, as farmers would not have to introduce mitigation measures on their land. 7 Do you have suggestions for minimising any potential negative impact on ELS uptake should Option A be implemented? The claim by the farming industry that there will be a complete withdrawal from ELS if Option A is implemented is unsubstantiated. The negative feeling being generated by the farming industry on the impact of Option A calls into question the commitment of the farming industry to take protection of the environment seriously. If farmers are willing to withdraw from a scheme offering payment for environmental management, it is difficult to believe that this will be done through a voluntary initiative. In addition, anecdotal evidence from RSPB Agricultural Advisors suggests farmers are delaying renewals/entering ELS at present, due to the uncertainty regarding proposed changes to ELS from 2010 and are awaiting the decision on set-aside mitigation. In spite of this, a high percentage of renewals occurred in the ELS Pilot Areas (60-73% renewal rate). 5 Paper by Natural England outlining the approach for setting targets to deliver similar environmental benefits to those from set-aside and other uncultivated land Quantified Targets to Determine the Success of Set-Aside Mitigation, Natural England, April
7 This uncertainty could continue with the adoption of Option B, as there is a risk of future regulation should farmers fail to engage with the Campaign for the Farmed Environment and voluntarily manage land for the environment. This is indicated as a potential risk in Table 7 of the consultation document. If Option A is chosen, the availability of advice will be crucial to ensure farmers are aware of the options available and how the ELS top up options can be incorporated into their ELS agreements and to counter the negative feeling and mis-information being generated by the farming industry. 8 What suggestions do you have for changing the existing GAEC 12 agricultural land which is not in agricultural production) as part of Option B? RSPB does not believe Option B is an appropriate mitigation measure for the loss of set-aside. However, if Option B is chosen and GAEC 12 rules are relaxed to include the non-agricultural activities listed, the land being used for these purposes should not count towards set-aside mitigation. 9 Do you have any suggestions for developing Option B so that it could deliver against the proposed success criteria (para 3.7.1)? Please give reasons. Any realistic proposal for a voluntary approach to set-aside mitigation must include: - Guarantees that the required management will be delivered and will be widespread throughout the arable countryside. - Targets for assessing the quantity, quality and spatial distribution of land being used to count towards set aside mitigation, this includes appropriate option uptake within ELS. - Commitment to deliver in A robust regulatory failsafe that will be triggered automatically should the Campaign fail to meet agreed targets. - A budget for delivery and agreement on responsibility for funding the Campaign. 10 What would be the best form of cost-effective guidance and advice to help you understand the proposals for either Option A or B? (Examples include hard copy, electronic form, workshops, farm demonstrations, farm walks, a telephone help-line, published articles, training of advisors etc.) Advice provision will be vitally important to either Option A or B. Farm demonstrations, walks and workshops are likely to provide face to face advice which is most effective in informing farmers of the most effective management. 7
8 We welcome the additional advice provision that is planned by Defra and Natural England to support ELS delivery and the replacement of set-aside. This will ensure more effective delivery of ELS and be important to the implementation of Option A. Option B is reliant on a large amount of advisory input to ensure success of their Campaign. It is heavily reliant on agronomist providing advice on the management required for farmland biodiversity. This will require additional time and training. However, there is no mention in the proposal of the cost of this additional training and where the budget will come from to address this. 11 Is Option A an appropriate mechanism to act as a fallback should Option B (a voluntary approach) fail to deliver? RSPB strongly believes a regulatory fallback is essential. The threat of a pesticides tax was the main motivation for the development of the Voluntary Initiative. It is necessary that a Statutory Instrument is laid for all changes to GAEC, including the option to introduce Option A. This would ensure the option to introduce Option A is not delayed if Option B fails to deliver and a regulatory failsafe is triggered. Option A was considered the most effective option by the HLSAG and has been worked on considerably by Government, therefore this we believe is an appropriate failsafe. 12 Which option would you prefer to see implemented, Option A or B? Please state why. RSPB strongly advocates the adoption of Option A to replace the environmental benefits of set-aside. The proposal for Option B presented for consideration by the farming industry contains no guarantees of delivery and does not satisfy the selection or success criteria as set out in the consultation document. Option A would ensure a percentage of land being managed environmentally on every eligible arable farm and would mirror the uncultivated pockets of land present across the arable countryside during set-aside. It is doubtful a purely voluntary approach would be able to match this, as inevitably some farmers will not wish to participate. The importance of a mandatory approach is underlined in the context of fluctuating commodity prices. When prices are high, as in the summer of 2008, farmers are more likely to bring uncultivated areas back into production. A mandatory approach would also provide consistent support for the government s Public Service Agreement (PSA) to reverse farmland bird declines. The ability of the farming industry to lead a voluntary approach has also been severely undermined by events to date. In 2007, the RSPB helped to develop a 5- point plan with the NFU and CLA, as part of the High Level Set Aside Group (HLSAG), to encourage farmers to take positive action for farmland birds post set- 8
9 aside. This plan recommended a wide range of options to recapture the environmental benefits of set-aside using Environmental Stewardship and purely voluntary measures. However, at the same time the plan was being advocated, elements of the farming industry were publicly questioning the environmental benefits of set-aside and the need to mitigate its loss. A dedicated advice hotline, set up by the RSPB, received just one call. It was indicated by Sir Don Curry s HLSAG that it was unlikely that farmers could be relied upon to agree to manage a sufficient area of land on a voluntary basis to deliver an equivalent amount of environmental benefit to that which could be delivered by a cross compliance based approach. this would be particularly problematic at times of high arable crop prices, such as experienced in 2007/08, when farmers would be tempted to bring more marginal arable land into production (Appendix 4). There was a 64% decrease in the area of uncropped land available between 2007 and This is an indication that when crop prices are high as was the case in 2007/08, farmers will be tempted bring marginal land into production. The lack of commitment of the farming industry to ensuring the success of Option B is most evident in the proposed targets and regulatory failsafe. The suggestion is that mandatory measures through cross compliance (Option A) would be triggered if for 2 consecutive years the area of uncropped land falls below 50% of the minimum quality habitat considered necessary by NE to replace the benefits of set-aside. It is difficult to see how this would provide an incentive for farmers to carry out the action required and by the time this kicks in it will be even more difficult to replace the benefits that set-aside provided. It is therefore essential that an automatic trigger in the form of Option A is built into the proposal for Option B as failsafe mechanism. The targets set within the proposal are disappointing as they are only activity targets for the first 3 years is proposed as a 'transition year' for organisation of the Campaign. Uptake targets alone are inadequate to measure the success of the Campaign in delivering a replacement to set aside, there should be targets linked to option uptake within ELS, the quality of voluntary management and a measure of the spatial distribution of the measures within the arable landscape. As 2010 will see the highest level of potential ELS renewals, it is critical these are targeted if they are serious about ELS contributing to replacing the benefits of set-aside. 13 Do you have any further information and/or views on the costs, benefits and risks of the proposals? Due to the delay in industry presenting the detailed proposal for Option B, it has been difficult to assess the true costs to implementing this option. The figures quoted in the Consultation Stage Impact Assessment do not consider the impact on the diversion of existing funds within ELS. In addition, there will be additional costs to 6 Change in the Area and Distribution of Uncropped Land in England: February 2009 Update, Defra Agricultural Change and Environment Observatory Research Report No.13, Steve Langton 9
10 the Rural Payments Agency in examining a proposed voluntary record. If Option B intends to deliver similar benefits to Option A this will require uptake of ELS options that may not be part of existing agreement. This implies that there may have to be changes to existing ELS agreements at a large additional cost that will have to be paid for from the public purse. This is unacceptable cost for a scheme that is purely voluntary. The costs of Option B are still unknown and therefore cannot be compared to Option A. The industry proposal contains no indication that industry will bear any of the costs involved in the voluntary scheme. The costs that should be considered are: Costs to farmers of carrying out the voluntary management required to meet the selection criteria Cost to farmers for the additional record keeping and reporting required to record the voluntary management in place Cost to the advisory network that are key to the industry Campaign being successful. For example it is intended that agronomists will deliver extra advice to farmers on ELS agreements/voluntary action on how to provide benefits for the three themes of the Campaign Cost for developing reporting forms that farmers can choose to record the voluntary action they may be taking Cost to the RPA for developing recording forms and monitoring/inspection of records to ensure voluntary management is happening Cost to NE for renegotiating ELS agreements. If the voluntary approach is to be successful this will require management and uptake of options that will deliver benefits previously seen under set-aside that may not be part of existing agreements The potential cost to Natural England could be higher should the voluntary approach fail to deliver and the regulatory mechanism is triggered. The introduction of Option A at a later date would require the renegotiation of ELS agreements. Table 7 indicates this could result in a cost to Natural England of 1.2 million. This is the same as the expected cost of the introduction of Option A in However, if the introduction of Option A is delayed there is likely to be a higher number of ELS agreements requiring renegotiation as a large number of ELS agreements are due for renewal in General summary on introduction of new GAEC standard on buffer strips next to watercourses The RSPB welcomes the proposal to introduce a new GAEC standard on buffer strips next to watercourses in order to fulfil requirements of the CAP Heath Check and to deliver WFD objectives. We caution Defra to make its decision based on need to address the principle driver for this proposal, i.e. to implement the objectives of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), not to simply to fulfil requirements of the CAP Health Check or to recapture the benefits of set-aside. 10
11 The RSPB would like to see buffer strips alongside watercourses where they will be effective in reducing run-off and diffuse pollution. A mandatory, targeted approach is most appropriate but this must form part of the cross compliance requirements. We therefore recommend that Defra introduce Option 4. The reason for this recommendation is as follows: Defra s preferred Option 3, the voluntary approach, is unlikely to ensure there is no deterioration of water quality, a stipulation of the Water Framework Directive. The seriousness of the challenge to achieve WFD targets by 2015 and the lag-times for water quality improvement means that effective measures must be adopted now by all sectors that impact on water quality. This includes the farming sector. Immediate implementation of targeted compulsory buffer strips, rather than waiting until 2012 for results of voluntary uptake, is a more appropriate response to this challenge. Defra estimates that the risk of failure to protect water quality adequately is Medium-High with a combination of Option 3 and Option B (Table 9). We believe that Defra should dismiss a combination of Option 3 and Option B on this basis because the UK cannot afford to miss WFD targets and risk infraction by the EU. The risk is Low-Medium under Option 4. Option 4 offers the same monetised benefits as Option 3 (Table B7), although in reality Option 3 benefits will be lower because it takes a voluntary approach. Table B7 of the impact assessment also indicates significantly greater non-monetised benefits from Option 4 over Option 3. Option 4 is likely to result in a higher cost to farmers and Government than Option 3. However, we dispute some of Defra s calculations and assumptions, but believe that Option 4 will provide the best value based on cost benefit analysis for the following reasons: o In order to achieve Defra s predicted maximum benefits under Option 3 it assumes that voluntary approaches will be adopted fully, by all farmers. We believe that full uptake of a voluntary approach is unlikely and unrealistic and therefore it is inappropriate to include a figure for maximum benefits. There is a greater guarantee of gaining benefits from a well-enforced compulsory approach. o Costs to farmers for Option 4 include 14.6m for targeting. We believe that Defra should foot the majority of the bill for targeting in order to achieve the best result for water quality objectives. Good and effective guidance, mapping and targeting from Government will reduce costs to both Government and farmers. Option 4 also conforms to the Polluter Pays principle rather than potentially using public funds, in the form of the ELS budget, to implement these changes. 11
12 Diffuse pollution from agriculture is an environmental problem that requires all landowners within a catchment to collectively address the issue and reduce their emissions to water. It only takes one polluter to cause a serious pollution incident in a catchment. In addition, voluntary mechanisms are inequitable and unfair to those who pay the cost of implementing measures or who have good management practices because those who choose not to adopt voluntary measures receive a competitive advantage. We therefore believe that a voluntary approach (Option 3) is not appropriate in this case. Option 4 offers a low risk to reduced agri-environment scheme uptake (Table 9). Option 4 may require some Entry Level Stewardship (ELS) agreements to be changed but we believe that this will result in only low cost to NE. A high percentage of ELS agreements are due to be renewed in 2010 so this option should not add a great deal of extra administration to farmers or Natural England. Furthermore, those farmers who are not due to change agreements in 2010 may be able to move options that would fall within the 6m buffer area to other areas of the farm. We believe that this is likely to cause a low loss of income to each individual farmer. The risk assessment indicates that there will also be an increased cost to NE of amending ES agreements if Option 4 has to be implemented after the failure of Option 3. The highest amount of ELS renewals will occur in 2010 and would allow a compulsory buffer option to be taken into consideration when renewing agreements. Defra have the responsibility to deliver WFD targets and should be willing to pay to adapt the existing cross-compliance inspection regime to include inspection of buffers that will be required under Option 4. Inspections will be essential to ensure compliance and correct placement of buffers, however, we believe that with well planned and implemented information on the buffers to accompany advice on targeting, the costs of inspection will be smaller than predicted. The risk assessment indicates that costs to the RPA would be substantially higher if measures had to be made compulsory at later date. 14 Do you have further information, preferably quantified, that would improve the analysis presented in the Impact Assessment associated with the buffer strip options? Under Option 3 analysis, we believe that Defra should make a realistic assessment of the uptake of measures under a voluntary approach. This is highly likely to start at a low level and only slowly increase. Summary analysis evidence of benefits from Options 3 and 4 on pages 7 and 8 of the impact assessment, respectively, shows some disparity. It is unclear why the Total Benefits are different when Average Annual Benefits are the same. The analysis seems to boost the net benefit of Option 3 over Option 4. 12
A cool CAP post-2013: What measures could help adapt Cyprus farming and biodiversity to the consequences of climate change?
A cool CAP post-2013: What measures could help adapt Cyprus farming and biodiversity to the consequences of climate change? 26 September 2012: IFOAM EU Conference Future farming in times of climate change
More informationEnhancing Biodiversity. Proactive management of biodiversity in intensive agriculture
Enhancing Biodiversity Proactive management of biodiversity in intensive agriculture Contents Introduction Increasing food security in a sustainable way 3 The importance of biodiversity The vitality and
More informationObservatory monitoring framework indicator data sheet
Observatory monitoring framework indicator data sheet Environmental impact: Water Indicator DA3: Nitrate and phosphate levels in rivers The EU Water Framework Directive has resulted in the need to change
More informationSites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs). Guidelines for their Identification, Selection and Designation
Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs). Guidelines for their Identification, Selection and Designation Isle of Wight Biodiversity Partnership August 2010 1. Introduction 1.1 This document
More informationAs stewards of the land, farmers must protect the quality of our environment and conserve the natural resources that sustain it by implementing
N A T U R A L R E S O U R C E C O N S E R V A T I O N As stewards of the land, farmers must protect the quality of our environment and conserve the natural resources that sustain it by implementing conservation
More informationExplanatory Memorandum to the Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) Regulations 2012
Explanatory Memorandum to the Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) Regulations 2012 This Explanatory Memorandum has been prepared by the Environment and Sustainable Development Department and
More informationSustainable agriculture in the UK
Sustainable agriculture in the UK Summary UK farmers are struggling to adapt to their markets and to become economically sustainable but there will probably never be a state where sustainability is achieved
More informationEntry Level Stewardship Handbook
Environmental Stewardship Entry Level Stewardship Handbook Terms and conditions and how to apply Countryside Agency (John Morrison) When you join Entry Level Stewardship this handbook will form part of
More informationDelivering multiple benefits through effective river restoration UK & EU
Martin Janes Managing Director The River Restoration Centre Delivering multiple benefits through effective river restoration UK & EU CIEEM Annual Conference Southampton 2013 rrc@therrc.co.uk 01234 752979
More informationCAP PILLAR I DIRECT PAYMENTS SUMMARY OF DECISIONS
CAP PILLAR I DIRECT PAYMENTS SUMMARY OF DECISIONS Please note that the differences between this version and the previous version are shown in red as tracked changes. This paper summarises the CAP Pillar
More informationBasics of Sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA)
Basics of Sustainability 8 Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) 1 Contents Page Aims... 2 Introduction... 3 The Objectives of EIAs... 3 Developments that Require an EIA... 4 Key Stages of an EIA... 6
More informationA Sustainable Agriculture for Europe? From Evidence to Policy Reform
A Sustainable Agriculture for Europe? From Evidence to Policy Reform David Baldock Gulbenkian Foundation 5 November 2012 Agriculture and the environment Agriculture is the largest user of land in Europe
More informationGlobal Environment Facility GEF OPERATIONAL PROGRAM #13 ON CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IMPORTANT TO AGRICULTURE
Global Environment Facility GEF OPERATIONAL PROGRAM #13 ON CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IMPORTANT TO AGRICULTURE CONTENTS Introduction..1 Convention Guidance... 2 Agricultural
More informationPOLICY BRIEFING. April 2015. Coping with environmental and economic imperatives
April 2015 Summary : This policy briefing considers the EU s policies and approaches to sustainable agriculture, outlining the motivations, guidelines, development and challenges of these. It also identifies
More informationFrom Evidence to Action: Whole-catchment approaches to linking flood risk management and WFD measures
From Evidence to Action: Whole-catchment approaches to linking flood risk management and WFD measures Nick Hardiman Royal Society for the Protection of Birds A wealth of research has been devoted to the
More informationU.S. SOYBEAN SUSTAINABILITY ASSURANCE PROTOCOL
US SOYBEAN SUSTAINABILITY ASSURANCE PROTOCOL A Sustainability System That Delivers MARCH 2013 Since 1980, US farmers increased soy production by 96% while using 8% less energy US SOYBEAN SUSTAINABILITY
More informationLiving & Working Managing Natural Resources and Waste
Living & Working Managing Natural Resources and Waste 5.13 Managing Natural Resources and Waste Background 5.13.1 This chapter focuses on how we manage resources within the AONB. It includes renewable
More informationEnvironmental Stewardship. Producing a Soil Management Plan for Environmental Stewardship
Producing a Soil Management Plan for Environmental Stewardship RDS is part of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Introduction Well managed soils are an important element of sustainable
More informationPolicy mechanisms affecting permanent pastures issues and instruments
Policy mechanisms affecting permanent pastures issues and instruments Guy Beaufoy www.efncp.org May 2011 CAP has specific aims for permanent pasture since 2003, because of its positive environmental effects
More informationSONG THRUSH Turdus philomelos
SONG THRUSH Turdus philomelos 1. INTRODUCTION The song thrush is one of our better known song birds, occurring in woodlands, hedgerows with abundant trees, parks and gardens throughout the sub-region.
More informationEU Parliament Redefining IPM Bruxelles, 1 July 2015. Integrated Pest Management State of play Directive on sustainable use of pesticides
EU Parliament Redefining IPM Bruxelles, 1 July 2015 Integrated Pest Management State of play Directive on sustainable use of pesticides Patrizia Pitton E3 Pesticides and Biocides DG SANTE Food safety Contents
More informationEnvironment Agency 2014 All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of the Environment Agency.
Flood and coastal erosion risk management Long-term investment scenarios (LTIS) 2014 We are the Environment Agency. We protect and improve the environment and make it a better place for people and wildlife.
More informationOrganic farming. A guide on support opportunities for organic producers in Europe. Agriculture and Rural Development
Organic farming A guide on support opportunities for organic producers in Europe Agriculture and Rural Development This publication is an informative document intended for organic farmers, processors and
More informationChief Executive s Report
Broads Forum 7 November 2013 Agenda Item No 9 Chief Executive s Report Summary: This report summarises the current position in respect of a number of important projects and events, including any decisions
More informationCo-creation progress update and an invitation to respond. Overview of ideas from co-creation activities towards a Climate Ready UK...
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Climate Ready Co-creation progress update and an invitation to respond July 2012 Contents Overview of ideas from co-creation activities towards a Climate
More informationCONSULTATION QUESTIONS
CONSULTATION QUESTIONS In order to bring budgetary responsibility closer to the decision making process: 1. Do you agree that budget responsibility should be devolved from SAAS? No The premise for the
More informationGuidance note E Measure Fiches
Guidance note E Measure Fiches This guidance note presents a fiche for each under the rural development regulation. Each fiche contains the following elements: Measure Code Rationale of the Target group
More informationUSDA Farm Program Agencies
USDA Farm Program Agencies NRCS-Natural Resource Conservation Service Administers engineering and conservation plans Administers conservation programs FSA- Farm Service Agency Administers Commodity Programs
More informationHIGH NATURE VALUE FARMING: FROM INDICATION TO CONSERVATION
HIGH NATURE VALUE FARMING: FROM INDICATION TO CONSERVATION Sebastian Klimek a, Doreen Gabriel b, Jens Dauber a, Sabrina Jerrentrup a, Stefan Mecke a, Michael Strohbach c a Thünen Institute of Biodiversity,
More informationPolicies and programmes to achieve food security and sustainable agriculture
HUNGARY Agriculture (Government focal point(s): Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Mr. Zoltán Kárpáti: tel: +361-301-3533, fax: +361-301-5949, e-mail: karpatiz@fvm.hu and Ms. Rita Francia: tel:
More informationLiquid Biofuels for Transport
page 1/11 Scientific Facts on Liquid Biofuels for Transport Prospects, risks and opportunities Source document: FAO (2008) Summary & Details: GreenFacts Context - Serious questions are being raised about
More informationEUROPEAN COMMISSION. Brussels, C(2009) State Aid/United Kingdom - Aid No N 76/2009 - English Woodland Grant scheme. Sir,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, C(2009) PUBLIC VERSION WORKING LANGUAGE This document is made available for information purposes only. Subject: State Aid/United Kingdom - Aid No N 76/2009 - English Woodland
More informationUK climate change risk assessment Evidence Report 2016
UK climate change risk assessment Evidence Report 2016 Frequently asked questions What is the CCRA? The UK Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) is a five yearly assessment of the current and future risks
More informationFLOODING ISSUES ADVISORY COMMITTEE AVOIDANCE SUB-COMMITTEE SUSTAINABLE FLOOD MANAGEMENT& RURAL LAND USE
FLOODING ISSUES ADVISORY COMMITTEE AVOIDANCE SUB-COMMITTEE SUSTAINABLE FLOOD MANAGEMENT& RURAL LAND USE Purpose 1. This paper is intended to inform and stimulate discussion by exploring the potential roles
More informationFarm Rent Determinations Minimising Uncertainty
Farm Rent Determinations Minimising Uncertainty A Joint Memorandum from the National Farmers Union of Scotland Scottish Land and Estates Scottish Tenant Farmers Association 28 July 2014 Introduction Fundamental
More informationUK National Action Plan for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (Plant Protection Products) February 2013
www.defra.gov.uk UK National Action Plan for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (Plant Protection Products) February 2013 Crown copyright 2013 You may re-use this information (not including logos) free
More informationResearch to improve the use and conservation of agricultural biodiversity for smallholder farmers
Research to improve the use and conservation of agricultural biodiversity for smallholder farmers Agricultural biodiversity the variability of crops and their wild relatives, trees, animals, arthropods,
More informationEnvironmental impacts of agricultural practices
Environmental impacts of agricultural practices Dr. Rainer Oppermann Institute of Agroecology and Biodiversity (IFAB) EEB Conference on 30. November 2010 in Brussels: Reforming the CAP: Greener, better,
More informationCATCHMENT MANAGEMENT USING PAYMENTS FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES TO RESTORE AND MAINTAIN UPLAND PEAT
CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT USING PAYMENTS FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES TO RESTORE AND MAINTAIN UPLAND PEAT There is growing interest in the potential for Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) to fund conservation
More informationPlanning application process improvements
Planning application process improvements Government response to consultation January 2015 Department for Communities and Local Government Crown copyright, 2015 Copyright in the typographical arrangement
More informationAiding the Hydro-scheme development process. Web-links to useful information sources
Aiding the Hydro-scheme development process. Web-links to useful information sources Web-pages are in bold. These pages aim at providing developers, land-owners, decision makers and advisors with a collation
More information2014 to 2020 European Structural and Investment Funds Growth Programme
2014 to 2020 European Structural and Investment Funds Growth Programme Call for Applications to support investments in new and existing micro and small businesses in rural areas European Agricultural Fund
More informationAgriculture, Food Security and Climate Change A Triple Win?
Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change A Triple Win? Dr. Andrew Steer Special Envoy for Climate Change The World Bank Group Your Royal Highnesses, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, Let me begin
More informationA Guide to Woodland Carbon for Business
A Guide to Woodland Carbon for Business Contents: 1. Investing in Woodland Carbon: an overview 2. Why Woodland Carbon? 3. How much does it cost? 4. Woodland Carbon Code 5. Woodland Carbon compliance 6.
More informationDigital Communications
National Assembly for Wales Election Manifesto 2016 Digital Communications Digital growth is key to driving the Welsh economy forward, which is why innovative policies are needed to meet the increasing
More informationLiability for ecological damage: the added value of the Environmental Liability Directive for nature conservation
Liability for ecological damage: the added value of the Environmental Liability Directive for nature conservation Valerie Fogleman Consultant, Stevens & Bolton LLP Professor of Law, Cardiff University
More informationCoventry Development Plan 2016 Appendix 89. Glossary of Key Terms
Coventry Development Plan 2016 Appendix 89 Glossary of Key Terms Area Action Plan A Development Plan Document which focuses upon a specific location or an area subject to significant change. Affordable
More informationThe Roaches Asset Management Review. Draft Objectives for External Consultation. Fundamental Principles
The Roaches Asset Management Review Draft Objectives for External Consultation Fundamental Principles the area of land under review is the Roaches Estate and Gradbach Car Park as shown on the attached
More informationLIFE ORIENTATION DOCUMENT
LIFE ORIENTATION DOCUMENT The European Union provides funding and grants for a broad range of projects and programmes covering areas such as education, health, consumer protection, environmental protection,
More informationReport from A blue future for the CAP post 2013?
Report from A blue future for the CAP post 2013? Lunch debate focusing on problems surrounding water and how current and future policy can be used to address these issues October 15 th, 12:15-15:00, European
More informationThe subjects are addressed in the order in which they appear in the Directive.
Dutch action plan on sustainable plant protection This national action plan has been drawn up pursuant to Directive 2009/128/EC on sustainable pesticide use and fleshes out how the Netherlands will set
More informationEU China River Basin Management Programme
Ministry of Water Resources Ministry of Environmental Protection EU China River Basin Management Programme Technical Report 075 Water Resource Supply Security Strategy Analysis Ben Piper, Zhang Wang and
More information1. RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CAP. CURRENT REGIME
THE SECOND PILLAR OF THE CAP TOWARDS 2020. MISSION, OBJECTIVES AND PRIORITIES OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT Dr. Pablo Amat Llombart Prof. of Civil Law. Universidad Politécnica de Valencia (Spain) 1. RURAL DEVELOPMENT
More informationBIRDLIFE INTERNATIONAL S ASKS FOR UNFCCC COP21
Background BIRDLIFE INTERNATIONAL S ASKS FOR UNFCCC COP21 The climate change talks in Paris (UNFCCC COP21) are the culmination of several years of negotiations towards the adoption of a global climate
More informationBiodiversity Concepts
Biodiversity Concepts WHAT IS BIODIVERSITY? Biodiversity is the variety of life on Earth. For any kind of animal or plant each individual is not exactly the same as any other; nor are species or ecosystems.
More informationParagraph 9 Exemption The reclamation or improvement of land
The reclamation or improvement of land 1 INTRODUCTION This document provides guidance, definitions, operational policy and strategy with regard registering a paragraph 9 exemption under Schedule 1 of the
More informationNew Entrant Panel. Discussion Paper on Talent, Skills and Mentoring. Background
New Entrant Panel Discussion Paper on Talent, Skills and Mentoring Background At the last panel meeting it was agreed that a paper should be put together to cover what was currently available to support
More informationNative Vegetation Council. Strategic Plan 2014-16
Native Vegetation Council Strategic Plan 2014-16 Foreword From the Presiding Member The Native Vegetation Council (NVC) is established under the Native Vegetation Act 1991, and exists to further the objects
More informationSource control targeting measures for arable tillage in the Wensum Demonstration Test Catchment, Norfolk
Source control targeting measures for arable tillage in the Wensum Demonstration Test Catchment, Norfolk Kevin Hiscock & Andrew Lovett School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia (E-mail
More informationWater resources planning guideline
Water resources planning guideline The guiding principles for developing a water resources management plan June 2012 Development by Environment Agency, Ofwat, Defra and the Welsh Government Environment
More informationCONSERVATION MEASURES FOR ELEONORA S FALCON IN GREECE LAYMAN S REPORT
CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR ELEONORA S FALCON IN GREECE LAYMAN S REPORT JANUARY 2008 2 Eleonora s Falcon Eleonora s Falcon is one of the most characteristic birds of the Aegean Sea. It is a migrating falcon
More informationLesson Overview. Biodiversity. Lesson Overview. 6.3 Biodiversity
Lesson Overview 6.3 6.3 Objectives Define biodiversity and explain its value. Identify current threats to biodiversity. Describe how biodiversity can be preserved. THINK ABOUT IT From multicolored coral
More informationCommunications strategy refresh. January 2012. 1 c:\documents and settings\mhln.snh\objcache\objects\a654473.doc
Communications strategy refresh January 2012 1 c:\documents and settings\mhln.snh\objcache\objects\a654473.doc Contents 1. Introduction p 3 a. SNH: corporate aims and objectives b. SNH and communications
More informationRural Flooding: The Potential Role of Forestry
Rural Flooding: The Potential Role of Forestry Nadeem Shah, Tom Nisbet, & Huw Thomas Centre for Forestry and Climate Change Structure Background Woodland and Flood Alleviation The Theory. Studies on Woodland
More informationObservatory monitoring framework indicator data sheet
Observatory monitoring framework indicator data sheet Process: Farm Business Indicator B8: Diversification This indicator provides information about farms undertaking diversified activities. Diversified
More informationTree Management Guidelines
Tree Management Guidelines Overview Tree Management Guidelines The trees that make up Brisbane s urban forest create much of our subtropical landscape character and biodiversity. Almost half of the city
More informationHORTOBAGY SODIC LAKES - Restoration of sodic lake sub-type of the Pannonic salt steppe and marsh habitat in the Hortobágy LIFE07 NAT/H/000324
HORTOBAGY SODIC LAKES - Restoration of sodic lake sub-type of the Pannonic salt steppe and marsh habitat in the Hortobágy LIFE07 NAT/H/000324 Project description Environmental issues Beneficiaries Administrative
More informationMicro- and macro economic analysis
Final Report December 2008 Annex 39-UK Micro- and macro economic analysis [Deliverable 4.2, 7.1 7.3 and 9.1 9.2] LIFE05 ENV/D/000182 ANNEX 39 - UK Water Resources Management in Cooperation with Agriculture
More informationHow To Write A New Bill On Flood Management In Scotland
Scottish Environment LINK is the forum for Scotland's voluntary environment organisations representing a broad spectrum of environmental interests with the common goal of contributing to a more environmentally
More informationSecuring the future availability and affordability of home insurance in areas of flood risk
SCOTTISH FLOOD FORUM Securing the future availability and affordability of home insurance in areas of flood risk The Scottish Flood Forum is a charitable organisation dedicated to supporting flood risk
More informationRegulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) Date: /08/15 Type of measure: Subordinate Legislation Lead department or agency: Department for Social Development
Title: Charities accounts: independent examination and audit thresholds Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) Date: /08/15 Type of measure: Subordinate Legislation Lead department or agency: Department for
More informationDevelopment proposals will require to demonstrate, according to scale, type and location, that they:-
Appendix 2 : Relevant Development Plan Policies Angus Local Plan Review 2009 Policy S1 : Development Boundaries (a) Within development boundaries proposals for new development on sites not allocated on
More informationAnalysis on future developments in the milk sector
Analysis on future developments in the milk sector Prepared for the European Commission DG Agriculture and Rural Development Brussels, 24th September 2013 Introduction Purpose of the study : a prospective
More informationBiodiversity and your Business
Biodiversity and your Business This guide helps companies understand the value of the natural environment to their businesses and how they can align their ambitions for growth with the conservation of
More informationThe Role of Spatial Data in EU Agricultural Policy Analysis
The Role of Spatial Data in EU Agricultural Policy Analysis Wolfgang Britz Institute for Food and Resource Economics, University Bonn Geospatial Open Source Hosting of Agriculture, Resource and Environmental
More informationHow To Understand The Relationship Between The Military And The Environment
238 Greener by degrees: B10. How is sustainable development integrated into good environmental management? A case study with the Ministry of Defence Anne Miller Sustainable development is core to the concept
More informationHowsham fish passage Consultation document
Howsham fish passage Consultation document Report ENVIMNE000903 Final version 30 June 2016 We are the Environment Agency. We protect and improve the environment. Acting to reduce the impacts of a changing
More informationPayments for Ecosystem Services: towards improved biodiversity conservation and water security in South Africa, a semi-arid, developing country
Payments for Ecosystem Services: towards improved biodiversity conservation and water security in South Africa, a semi-arid, developing country Jane Turpie & James Blignaut Introduction Ecosystems largely
More informationDefra and RPA Reports on Accounts 2013 14. HC 10 10 July 2014. HC229 8 July 2014
Defra and RPA Reports on Accounts 2013 14 HC 10 10 July 2014 HC229 8 July 2014 Department for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs Annual Report and Accounts 2013 14 The Report of the Comptroller and
More informationENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
GOVERNMENT OF BERMUDA Department of Planning ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS AND Section 1: Introduction... 2 Section 2: What are Environmental Impact Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements and
More information19 Great Crested Newt species action plan
Adult Great Crested Newts spend the majority of the year on land and immature newts remain on the land until they reach sexual maturity at between two and four years. They will then find a breeding pond,
More informationAPFA RESPONSE DEPARTMENT FOR BUSINESS, INNOVATION & SKILLS CONSULTATION IMPLEMENTING THE ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION DIRECTIVE
APFA RESPONSE DEPARTMENT FOR BUSINESS, INNOVATION & SKILLS CONSULTATION IMPLEMENTING THE ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION DIRECTIVE ABOUT APFA The Association of Professional Financial Advisers (APFA) is
More informationINFORMATION ON THE PUBLIC JOINT-STOCK COMPANY INVL BALTIC FARMLAND FORMED IN THE SPLIT OFF
INFORMATION ON THE PUBLIC JOINT-STOCK COMPANY INVL BALTIC FARMLAND FORMED IN THE SPLIT OFF On the basis of those Terms, 47.95 percent of the total assets, equity and liabilities of the public joint-stock
More informationUK National Action Plan for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (Plant Protection Products) 30 July 2012
www.defra.gov.uk UK National Action Plan for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (Plant Protection Products) 30 July 2012 Crown copyright 2012 You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of
More informationRiver Wensum Restoration Strategy Swanton Morley Restoration Scheme Reach 14a
River Wensum Restoration Strategy Swanton Morley Restoration Scheme Reach 14a At a glance River restoration benefits: Improved planform, channel cross-section, flow variation and sediment process. Improved
More informationA Traditional Island Industry
A Traditional Island Industry The PEI wild public fishery has remained a productive Island industry for 150 years Wild public oyster fishers still fish in the traditional methods of their ancestors, using
More informationGreen Infrastructure Case Study Template
Green Infrastructure Case Study Template The aim of the exercise is to provide information on how the elements of the Green Infrastructure Strategy are implemented at national level and to provide case
More informationPRACTICAL STRATEGIES FOR IMMEDIATE PROGRESS ON CLIMATE CHANGE BUILDING BLOCKS FOR A GLOBAL AGREEMENT
PRACTICAL STRATEGIES FOR IMMEDIATE PROGRESS ON CLIMATE CHANGE BUILDING BLOCKS FOR A GLOBAL AGREEMENT Forging an effective response to climate change is one of the international community s highest priorities.
More informationFarming. In the Standard Grade Geography exam there are three types of farming you need to know about arable, livestock and mixed.
Types of Farming In the Standard Grade Geography exam there are three types of farming you need to know about arable, livestock and mixed. Arable farms are ones where the main way of making money is by
More informationWhat s wrong with GM?
CIIR environmental action leaflet What s wrong with GM? Why genetically modified crops are bad for people and bad for the environment Why should we care? Genetic engineering of crops is a complex and controversial
More informationUse: Cooperative farming as a habitat management tool to enhance and restore refuge grasslands
Compatibility Determination Use: Cooperative farming as a habitat management tool to enhance and restore refuge grasslands District Name: Minnesota Valley Wetland Management District Establishing and Acquisition
More informationSLOW ONSET EVENTS. climate change impacts on BIODIVERSITY
Regional Gateway for Technology Transfer and Climate Change Action in Latin America and the Caribbean (ROLAC UNEP) Characterizing and addressing SLOW ONSET EVENTS climate change impacts on BIODIVERSITY
More informationDairy Companies Association of New Zealand (DCANZ) Submission to Emissions Trading Scheme Review Select Committee
PO BOX 3413 Shortland street Auckland New Zealand ~ h ns. z7a szs7 Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand (DCANZ) Submission to Emissions Trading Scheme Review Select Committee FEBRUARY 2009 INTRODUCTION
More informationGreening Income Support and Supporting Green
Conservation Program Design Greening Income Support and Supporting Green Roger Claassen and Mitch Morehart Green payments refer broadly to farm payment programs that would, if enacted, merge farm income
More informationChristopher Young Speaking notes for presentation to World Heritage UK Technical Workshop on WHS Management Plans and Systems, 25 th January, 2016
WORLD HERITAGE UK TECHNICAL WORKSHOP, EDINBURGH, 25 TH JANUARY, 2016 DRAFT OUTLINE FOR CHRISTOPHER YOUNG S PRESENTATION CHANGES IN THE UNESCO OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES, AND OTHER CONVENTION RELATED ACTIVITY
More informationEU Milk Margin Estimate up to 2014
Ref. Ares(215)2882499-9/7/215 EU Agricultural and Farm Economics Briefs No 7 June 215 EU Milk Margin Estimate up to 214 An overview of estimates of of production and gross margins of milk production in
More informationThe Berkshire Wildlife Trust (BBOWT)
Strategic Plan 2010-2015 Protecting Wildlife for the Future Introduction The Berks, Bucks and Oxon Wildlife Trust (BBOWT) is one of the largest of the UK s Wildlife Trusts, a locally based voluntary organisation
More informationEnvironmental Impact Assessment of Forestry Projects
Environmental Impact Assessment of Forestry Projects Flow chart of EIA process Developer submits grant application FC screens when sufficient info received, normally at "Proposal Submit stage Developer
More informationREFORM OF STATUTORY AUDIT
EU BRIEFING 14 MARCH 2012 REFORM OF STATUTORY AUDIT Assessing the legislative proposals This briefing sets out our initial assessment of the legislative proposals to reform statutory audit published by
More informationAn Introduction to Direct Payments
An Introduction to Direct Payments CAP 2015 An Introduction to Direct Payments www.agriculture.gov.ie 3 The information contained in this booklet is provided as a guide to farmers and should not be regarded
More information