Cross compliance failures are jeopardising single payment

Farmers lost more than £2 million in cross compliance penalties last year with the top five cross compliance breeches accounting for more than 85 per cent of failures.

According to Andrew Nicholas, agricultural consultant with HarveyHughes Limited in Cheshire, cattle Identification (SMR7) accounted for 62 per cent of farms who failed inspections last year.

Of these seven per cent had a warning letter, 29 per cent had a one per cent reduction, 44 per cent received a three per cent reduction and 20 per cent lost more than three per cent of their payment.

The reasons for these penalties are:-

• failure to report movement of an animal;

• failure to report death of an animal;

• movement details not recorded or incorrectly recorded on CTS or in farm records;

• lost tags not replaced, animals not tagged.

• animals found with no passport or passports present with no animals.

• failure to replace missing tags within 28 days.

"To prevent some of these failures farmers and their managers need to apply some simple protocols," Andrew said.

"For example, farmers and staff should carry a pocket diary to record all deaths. Notification notes for fallen stock produced by the lorry driver must be filed in the office rather than left in the top pocket of overalls which then end up in the washing machine! Staff must make it part of their daily routine to look for missing ear tags and record these animals in Pocket diaries."

It is a requirement to keep a Herd Register either as a paper format or on computer which must be retained for 10 years since the last entry.

This register is vital to help farmers and staff reconcile cattle numbers with CTS as any discrepancies can easily be rectified rather than allowing them to cumulate into a problem only to be found at inspection.

Unbelievably in 2010 it was animal welfare (SMR18) that was the second highest reason for on farm failure inspection.

"These inspections are generally carried out by Animal Health who will be looking for records to show medicine usage and treatments," he said.

"These inspectors will be looking to check that animals which are ill are receiving correct treatment and care i.e. downer cows have water and feed in front of them and are pumped with fluids if necessary.

"The inspectors are finding that some staff did not have the necessary skills and competence to provide adequate livestock care which may be an issue on farms where foreign labour is employed. Other areas where farmers fall down on inspection is to find cattle in buildings which are overstocked and or buildings which have sharp edges or objects sticking out which may harm or injure animals. Animals have also been found to have inappropriate feed, bedding or water."

Sheep & goat identification (SMR8) was the third highest for failures found during the 2010 inspection regime. Most of these were similar to the cattle ID problems such as flock/herd records not maintained in accordance with legal requirements and animals not being tagged or incorrectly tagged.

The fourth most common failure was failure to comply with Nitrate Vulnerable Zones or NVZ's (SMR4). This seems to be an area that is increasing with inspection failures doubling in 2010 compared with 2009. To avoid failures here farmers need to provide the following:-

• Total area of your farm;

• Calculation showing existing storage capacity and whether you need to provide extra storage capacity;

• The number and type of livestock kept on your farm and the amount of time the livestock spent on the holding during the previous calendar year.

• A calculation of total amount of nitrogen produced by all animals kept on your farm.

• Livestock manure moved onto or off the farm including quantities, dates or details of recipients;

• Dates when field sites are used for the temporary storage of poultry and solid manure;

• A nitrogen fertiliser plan showing the crop type and date sown, soil nitrogen supply (SNS), crop nitrogen requirement and details of each planned application of organic manure and manufactured nitrogen fertiliser;

• Actual applications of manufactured nitrogen fertiliser and organic manure including dates of application, quantities applied and type.

Further failures are likely if farmers do not take action to ensure sufficient storage is in place by the January 1, 2012.

"Soil Protection Reviews (GEAC 1) is the fifth most common failure during inspections. The main failure here is generally that farmers or managers have not completed the booklet or cannot find it. Further issues are that the review has not been completed to identify soil types, management problems and the measures undertaken to correct them. These booklets take very little time to complete and should be reviewed during the year," Andrew added

Andrew Nicholas can be contacted on 0161 927 7562 or email Andrew.Nicholas@harveyhughes.co.uk

By Heather Jones