It’s been a busy time in the Farm Net Zero project with lots of exciting on-farm trials work taking place. On-farm trials are an important part of activities, as in order to support a change in practice, a key step is to evaluate the impact on your farm. There are trials going on looking at a range of innovations across livestock and arable enterprises.
We have a trial running on two monitor farms which is looking at how to reduce Septoria in wheat through biological nutrition to boost plant defences. This builds on an event which was held in January 2024, with Tim Parton and Nick Woodyatt focussed on the importance of biology for soil and plant health and a webinar by Mike Harrington on plant pathology in the autumn.
The trials builds on expert knowledge, from Tim, Nick and Mike alongside arable farmer from Yorkshire Angus Gowthorpe to trial growing a very diverse mix of wheat varieties on both farms. The trial will then be comparing performance of the wheat specifically focussing on septoria prevalence, between a biological approach and a standard chemical fungicide programme. The crop will be monitored for disease pressure throughout the trial but the impact on the crop and farm carbon footprint will also be calculated.
Within grassland systems, we will be tracking Will Martin’s successful herbal ley reseeds into next year. We had a great event in the autumn, and a repeat assessment will allow those attending to understand the longer term survival and establishment of herbal leys with and without glyphosate and direct seeding with and without secondary cultivation.
We will be benefitting from the expertise of Pete Bone, Mike Harrington and some farmers who came to the event at Carwen to improve grass yield without increasing nitrogen inputs. The focus in will be on adjusting macro and micro nutrient indices to increase dry matter offtake. Early soil samples suggest calcium may be a nutrient of particular interest.
A new event is setting out to drive the transition to a more sustainable, resilient and secure food system in the UK through reduced dependency on imported soya. This event is part of the Nitrogen Climate Smart Project, in which the Farm Carbon Toolkit is a project partner.
‘From Soya to Sustainability’ will be held on January 22, 2025 at KingsGate Conference Centre, Peterborough. It will bring together farmers, processors, manufacturers, researchers, policymakers and industry leaders to explore innovative strategies for integrating beans and other pulses into livestock diets, reducing the need for imported soya.
Headline speaker Philip Lymbery will emphasise the urgent need for change in our food systems. Philip is Global Chief Executive of Compassion in World Farming and author of Sixty Harvests Left: How to Reach a Nature-Friendly Future with other roles including visiting Professor at the University of Winchester. He was appointed UN ambassadorial ‘Champion’ for the 2021 Food Systems Summit in New York and co-lead of its Sustainable Livestock Solutions Cluster.
Other speakers will include experts leading the charge for reduced use of soya in the UK who will share the latest research and innovations in the production and use of peas and beans.
There will also be ample networking opportunities enabling delegates to connect with like- minded experts from across the supply chain.
Roger Vickers of PGRO and lead of the NCS Project which is coordinating the event said:
“This event is a call to action for all in the agri-food supply chain to play their part in the move from soya to sustainability, which is urgently needed if we are to reduce our environmental impact.
“Growing more pulse crops in the UK and using them in livestock feed would help tackle our dependency on imported soya while also promoting agricultural practices that benefit farmers and the environment. There are multiple wins, but it is not an easy fix.
“We need urgent and concerted action across the supply chain if we are to make a difference. I encourage anyone working in the agri-food supply chain to attend and be part of a movement for change.”
All press enquiries for NCS and From Soya to Sustainability should be directed to Clemmie Gleeson clemmie@bofin.org.uk
A selection of high-resolution pictures, including photos of key project representatives, general shots of pulse and legume crops and logos can be found here.
From Soya to Sustainability is organised by partners in the NCS Project.
Nitrogen Efficient Plants for Climate Smart Arable Cropping Systems (NCS) is a four-year £5.9M research programme involving 200 UK farms and 17 partners.
The project aims to bring about a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions for UK agriculture through increasing pulse and legume cropping in arable rotations to 20% across the UK and replacing 50% of imported soya meal used in livestock feed rations with home-grown legumes.
The project is steered by science and proven by real farm enterprises, with significant benefits for both crop and livestock productivity, including cost savings of over £1bn/yr.
PGRO (Processors and Growers Research Organisation) leads the consortium that includes AB Agri, ADAS, Agrii, BOFIN (British On-Farm Innovation Network), Cranfield University, Farm Carbon Toolkit, Firstmilk, GWCT (Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust), The James Hutton Institute, Kelvin Cave, LC Beef Nutrition, LEAF (Linking Environment And Farming), McArthur BDC, PBL Technology, SRUC and Wessex Water.
The NCS Project is funded by the Farming Futures R&D Fund: Climate smart farming, part of Defra’s Farming Innovation Programme. Defra are working in partnership with Innovate UK who are delivering the programme. Project number: 10043778
Innovate UK is the UK’s national innovation agency. It supports business-led innovation in all sectors, technologies and UK regions, helping businesses grow through the development and commercialisation of new products, processes, and services. ukri.org
Farmers are encouraged to join the PulsePEP community, a platform and knowledge exchange hub. For more, visit ncsproject.co.uk
Soil underpins the entire farming system. A healthy well-managed soil rich in organic matter will support productive and healthy crops and pasture, which in turn supports a profitable and resilient farming system.
Since 2015, our Soil Farmer of the Year Competition has helped to find, promote and champion UK farmers who are passionate about safeguarding their soils and building resilient farming systems.
Entering its 10th year, the competition aims to showcase all the incredible work of farmers and growers who are leading the way in soil stewardship and bring people together to share good practices and innovations that improve soil health.
Celebrate Your Success: Gain recognition for the practical steps you have taken to improve soil health and build resilience within your systems.
Inspire Fellow Farmers: Share your experiences and contribute to a growing understanding of soil health and the benefits that prioritising soil health brings to your business.
Win Great Prizes: Enjoy a Cotswold Seeds voucher and free entry to Groundswell 2025.
Soil Farmer of the Year 2024 Finalists and Winners
How the Competition Works
Who Can Enter? Any UK-based farmer or grower is welcome to take part.
What’s the Focus? Share the soil health practices you’ve implemented and the results you’ve seen on your farm.
Submit your answers directly via the online form or record a video/voice note to tell us your story.
Deadline: Entries close on Wednesday, 5th March 2025.
What Happens Next?
Shortlisting: All entries are anonymised and reviewed by our judging panel against set criteria.
Farm Visits: Shortlisted farms will be visited during the week of 2nd June 2025.
Judges: The panel includes a past winner alongside representatives from Farm Carbon Toolkit and Innovation for Agriculture.
Awards and Opportunities
The winners will be announced at Groundswell 2025, where you’ll be celebrated for your achievements. Winners will also have the chance to host a supported farm walk, offering a fantastic opportunity to showcase your work in action.
Take the first step and submit your entry today! Whether you’ve been managing soils for decades or are just starting your journey, we want to hear your story and celebrate your commitment to building healthier soils and more resilient farms.
Written by Becky Willson, Business Development & Technical Director
On a sunny day in September, farmers gathered at Rotmell Farm to take part in a farm walk with our Soil Farmer of the Year Winner from 2020. Thanks to funding from the AFN+ network, we have been able to revisit two farms this year to understand how their farm and management system has evolved since being awarded.
Rotmell Farm is 1000 ha, 800ha of which is unimproved pasture – encompassing heather, bracken and wet areas. The farm sits in the middle of the Tay Valley, and watching how water was moving through the landscape formed a key part of the decision to adapt the management of the farm to focus on soil health and water holding capacity. In order to achieve this the grazing management system was adapted in 2015/6 to include subdividing paddocks and starting to move stock. Since this time the farm has continued to evolve its management style until now where the primary driver for the farm is to use the stock to maximise carbon and nutrient cycling across the farm.
Alex explained:
I had thought that the moment that we started putting in fencing, subdividing, moving stock and going into taller covers and rotational grazing that we could balance saturations of key nutrients and achieve a system where no inputs were required. We’ve built organic matter and are growing pasture, but the system needs to be continuously managed and adapted to try and achieve that balance. I now regard grazing as an art form.
The event started with a session in the barn to understand the evolution of the system and the key principles that the farm uses to drive performance. A key driver over the last couple of years for Alex has been understanding total nutrition and the ability to balance nutrients to enable optimal soil and biological health. This has involved implementing in depth soil analysis to understand the balance of key nutrients within the soil and intensive observation of plant and animal performance to start to understand how they are working together. This has included a focus on calcium as the driver for improving structure, oxygen levels in the soil, grass production and carbon cycling.
The whole farm is set up for total nutrition. We are trying to get the biology working to grow high Brix grazing grass to feed to stock, to sell nutrient dense meats and other products into the local market.
The farm sells honey, eggs, and beef locally where the ability to connect the farm with the produce is valuable and helps to cement the farm as part of the local community and allowing them to identify with the produce and where it comes from.
Alex has adapted his grazing system to encourage more diversity in the leys and to graze taller residuals. He sees far greater value in the hoof impact through trampling than the grazing; when the animals are put into taller covers, they graze the plants higher up and don’t graze the base of the plant, which leads to the carbon rich material being returned to the soil, cycling that carbon to feed the biology. The intensiveness of movement of the stock helps to get the carbon back down into the soil. The tightness of grazing takes away selection of grass.
The first field that we went to see has been used as an experimental field to look at species mixes. Alex researched different grass mixes and has returned to a mix that was common in the 1880s which can be used to improve poorer land. The field had been forage rape previously with lambs grazing the aftermath. The field was then disced and the new ley was broadcast, rolled in and then left. It has just had its third grazing, having been grazed with sheep 8 weeks after sowing to encourage it to tiller in late July. It was then grazed with a mob of about 65-70 cattle to break the parasite window and then had a group of 200 ewes with twin lambs. Every time seeds are sown they are mixed with vermicast, humates and fine lime which encourages biological activity around the seeds and ensures the seed has everything it needs to get going.
Alex really sees the importance of a high seed rate which allows for a thick and vigorous sward but also helps to maximise the value of trampling. He is aiming for 285 plants per m2 and has seen this work well higher up the farm where it is increasing the density of grass and reducing coverage of moss.
The animals have adapted well to the changing system. All the stock are out all year round, there is no housing. Bales are put out for the winter, with the aim being to set up blocks to shift the cattle every two to three days on a self feed basis. The type of cow has changed as the system has evolved; the animals that cope better in this system are slightly smaller framed and carry flesh. The cows need to be at 350kg at 15 months in order to allow them to calve at 2 years old at around 450kg in the middle of April outside. Cattle are weighed and recorded regularly to monitor live weight gain and body condition and FEC tested every 90-100 days to monitor worm burdens. The sheep are also weighed regularly to provide insight into which animals and genetics are coping with the system. The sheep are supplemented with rock salt and minerals depending on the pasture and soil analysis.
It wouldn’t be a soil farmer walk without a group of farmers standing over a soil pit and looking at the impact of the management changes on the soil. Alex has seen changes in soil health, since making the early transition to rotational grazing, however over the last couple of years has been focussing on enabling the biology to thrive and optimising nutrient cycling and the interaction between the soil and the plant roots. As such, two key assessment methods have been useful to show progress which have been the penetrometer and Brix assessments.
I started to get really excited about Brix readings a few years ago, and then really clocked onto it last year. I realised that the taller the plant got the Brix reading grew and grew, we started with 3’s and 4’s, as the covers got to boot stage readings got to 9’s and 10’s which was really exciting. This year, the penetrometer has been a useful tool, the pressure readings had been 250’s and 300 PSI and now we are down to 150, and I think that once we have psi’s of 150 then we are getting oxygen into the soil. We can send soil off to the lab for analysis, but how the soil is structured is a reflection of our management.
If we find fields that are compacted, I’ll skip them and give them 120 days rest rather than 60 days. We have stopped treating the whole farm as one block and looked at what the field needs and how we can optimise root architecture and plant diversity. Its important to us that every grazing experience is positive. We want to get to the point where we don’t need to apply anything, although we aren’t there yet. I’m not totally against applying anything, we need energy in the system and if the soils are tight, then we aren’t at optimal soil function, but the aim is to get to the point where we can target nutrition based on soil and plant need
Due to the nature of the farm and that 85% of the farm is hill areas, a key challenge for Alex has been to manage these areas in a way which can control the bracken ingress. He has been managing these areas in order to build capacity higher up, so that the in bye ground can be managed in a way to provide longer recovery periods.
If I don’t keep enough stock to get on top of the bracken, I will lose the whole farm to it. We only have 8-10 weeks to influence on that plant when it is above the ground, the other part of the year it is below the ground. We have implemented a grazing system which is intensively extensive, really hard hitting when we are there – in the summertime we are moving cattle 4 times per day, but then really long recovery periods. Which allows us to knock the top cover of the plant back but not doing enough to impact the biology and chemistry of the plant – which is why we have just brought pigs onto the farm.
Where this has been implemented, the results have been remarkable. Where the bracken has been managed in this way, the pasture regrowth has been diverse – clovers, vetches and grasses alongside yarrow and red clover are now starting to emerge due to the management system. Although bracken in a challenge, Alex also sees the benefits of it when it is controlled as it is mobilising a lot of potassium around the system which can then be used to support the pasture regrowth. The management of these areas is crucial, where extensive management is leading to the development of these bracken areas,
The base geology between our unimproved and improved land is exactly the same, so the potential to increase output on that land is vast. The more I think about it, the more I think that soils don’t want to be extensively managed, they want to be intensively managed with long recovery periods. We produce a lot of disturbance and then get off it to let it recover.
The group then went to look at the pigs, the new tool in the bracken control strategy! The aim with the pigs is that their rooting activity will help to chew the roots of the bracken up and add manure to aid nutrient cycling. Following the pigs activity the area will then have seed broadcast to increase forage production. The pigs will also be moved into higher areas to help with the bracken control.
The final stop on the walk was at some slightly higher country. The field had been soil sampled and the results had shown good levels of organic matter but suppressed levels of biological activity. As such, Alex is conducting some trials looking at the efficacy of spreading fine lime as a way to improve the calcium content of the soil and enhance the biological activity. Analysis shows that there is most compaction on the farm in the in bye fields, higher up there is less compaction but lower pH’s and less biological activity; as such if we can grow more feed higher up then less forage is required. The farm is using half as much feed as they used to since transitioning to the system. The grass used to be very thatch dominated but there is now an increase in clovers and plantains starting to appear.
Alex explained his change in thinking to manage for what you want rather than what you want to control.
I was so transfixed about managing bracken, I forgot to manage the grass. So by managing the grass, I build the quality nutrition and manage the soils to get the system working, then the pastoral density comes and will deal with the bracken.
To finish the walk questions turned to what next? Alex has spent the last 6 years gathering data, digging holes and persisting to pull it all together. So for the future, he thinks that the big changes have been done, its more about being observational and tweaking the system to optimise biology.
Grass is the most undervalued crop and so we are starting to put it in through the introduction of the new leys. We aren’t carrying more livestock but we are spending a lot less money. Its taken me 10 years to understand how to manage this ground. The failures have been too high- to learn about this we have to get some of it wrong, I’ve never had a year yet where we have got everything right but that is how we learn. Now its time to deliver what we know will work and to drive that system we need nutrition. We’ve been funded to experiment and now the system has to deliver.
Our sincere thanks to the Alex and the team at Rotmell for a fascinating afternoon that gave everyone plenty to think about.
Written by Grace Wardell/Calculator Development Officer
Due to an increasing awareness of climate change, more people than ever are interested in the environmental impact of the products they’re buying. But how many of the claims around carbon are true and how can we trust them? The UK Green Claims Code suggests that 40% of green claims made online could be misleading1. As a farm business, it is particularly important to ensure that claims made around carbon or greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions and removals are truthful and transparent. Whether you’re being offered ‘low carbon’ fertilisers or want to promote your GHG reductions, navigating green claims can be tricky.
We know this can feel scary, no one wants to be accused of greenwashing. If you’re looking to make positive environmental claims about your farm, we would advise keeping a record of your working with evidence to back it up. We’ve laid out some key terminology to help get you started with carbon accounting, how you can market it and how you can evaluate the green claims of products you buy.
What are green claims?
Green claims (also sometimes called ‘environmental claims’ or ‘eco-friendly claims’) are often made by a product or business that claims a benefit to, or a reduced impact on the environment.
Some examples of green claims include:
“This product will reduce the carbon footprint of your farm”
“Company’s environmental footprint reduced by 20% since 2015”
“CO2 emissions linked to this product halved as compared to 2020”
How can carbon footprinting help?
Carbon footprinting is the first step to making green claims about your business or a product you’re selling. In order to reliably report changes in GHG emissions, you first have to estimate them. Conducting a carbon footprint can highlight ‘hot spot’ areas in your business which might be emitting more GHGs than you thought. Addressing these ‘hot spot’ areas and reducing emissions associated with them is often an easy first win in the journey to lower emissions, net zero and even financial savings. You can try out our carbon calculator tool, which is free for farmers and growers. You will then need to record your GHG emissions estimate in subsequent years. Once you have evidence of reduced emissions over time, you may want to promote this, for example on a product you sell or as a business. Here are some key terms to get familiar with.
Key terms
Reduced emissions refers to the direct lowering of GHG emissions by adopting more sustainable agricultural practices, technologies, and management strategies. These reductions involve minimising the release of GHGs that occur during conventional farming activities. Looking at ways to reduce GHG emissions is the first recommended step before you seek to make any “green claims”.
Example: A farmer adopts precision agriculture techniques to apply fertilisers more efficiently (e.g., using soil sensors, variable rate application, or slow-release fertilisers).
Impact: By optimising fertiliser use, the farm reduces the amount of nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions, which are released when excess nitrogen is applied to the soil. Improving nitrogen use efficiency can directly reduce N2O emissions.
Avoided emissions refer to GHG emissions that would have been released into the atmosphere under business-as-usual practices but are prevented through changes in farming methods, land use, or supply chain activities. These emissions reductions do not remove carbon from the atmosphere directly, but rather prevent emissions from occurring in the first place. It’s very similar to “reduced emissions” but it is more hypothetical.
Example: A distributor uses biofuel from used cooking oil to transport their products (renewable energy source) instead of using diesel.
Impact: High emissions that would have been released from burning diesel or during transport are avoided. This distributor may have lower GHG emissions from transporting the same quantity of goods the same distance as compared to a distributor using diesel. However they may require more biofuel to transport the same quantity of goods the same distance so the avoidance of emissions is not guaranteed.
Carbon Removals is the process of actively removing CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it for a long time, using either technology or nature-based solutions. In a farming context, this is mostly done by natural sequestration of carbon into soils, trees and other biomass. These removals can help offset GHG emissions, making them a critical component of climate change mitigation efforts in agriculture.
Example: A farm establishes hedgerows along field boundaries, which serve as natural windbreaks and biodiversity corridors.
Carbon Removal Mechanism: Hedgerows sequester carbon in plant biomass and enhance soil carbon storage along the boundaries of agricultural fields.
Impact: In addition to carbon removal, hedgerows provide habitat for wildlife, improve soil health, and protect crops from wind and erosion.
Carbon insetting refers to reducing GHG emissions – or increasing carbon storage – within a company’s own supply chain, focusing on sustainability improvements that benefit the company’s own production processes and stakeholders. Whereas carbon offsetting involves reducing GHG emissions – or increasing carbon storage – outside of the companies supply chain, often by purchasing carbon credits from environmental projects, such as tree planting. With carbon offsetting, the reduced emissions, or enhanced carbon storage, occurs elsewhere and is therefore harder to track. Read our detailed explanation of carbon insetting and offsetting on our getting paid for carbon page.
When entering into any carbon insetting or offsetting agreement, try to ensure there is a clear definition of the project, who is responsible for claiming the GHG reductions and where those reductions are taking place. These principles can ensure there is clear evidence of where GHG reductions are coming from and can help prevent the double counting of emissions reductions.
Assessing green claims on products you buy
You might have come across “Low Carbon” products, one example of this is low carbon fertilisers. Traditional nitrogen-based fertilisers (e.g., ammonia, urea) are energy-intensive to produce, mainly due to the reliance on fossil fuels for the Haber-Bosch process, which converts nitrogen from the air into ammonia. Improvements in technology have now produced Green ammonia, manufactured using renewable energy (solar, wind, hydropower) to generate hydrogen through water electrolysis, instead of using fossil fuels. This significantly reduces the carbon emissions from fertiliser production. Alternatively, Blue ammonia is ammonia still being produced using fossil fuels, but incorporates carbon capture and storage methods to remove CO2 produced during the process. Blue ammonia still relies on the heavy use of fossil fuels, whereas green ammonia reduces this demand.
Urease inhibitors are an example of a GHG mitigation product that can reduce ammonia emissions associated with urea fertilisers. Urease enzymes are naturally present in soil and are involved in the process of changing urea into ammonia and carbon dioxide. This means that when urea is applied to soils, a significant loss of nitrogen occurs as ammonia is released into the atmosphere, resulting in air pollution. Urease inhibitors are added to urea-based fertilisers (sometimes known as protected urea) to slow down the enzymatic process, keeping more nitrogen in the form of plant-available ammonium for longer and increasing the fertiliser efficiency. New rules in England (2024) have outlined when unprotected/uninhibited urea can be applied, check out this AHDB article to see how it may affect you.
Another example of a GHG Mitigation product are methane inhibitors for ruminant animals. Methane inhibitors are feed additives designed to reduce methane emissions produced during digestion, specifically in the process known as enteric fermentation. The goal is to prevent or slow down the final step in the fermentation process where methane is produced without harming the animal’s digestion or productivity. A methane inhibitor feed additive (Bovaer by DSM-Firmenich) has been approved for use in the UK that on average claims a 30% reduction in methane emissions for dairy cattle and 45% reduction for beef cattle2. It is worth noting that the efficacy of these products can vary across different feeding systems and therefore may not always be a ‘silver bullet’ to reducing methane emissions.
Provenance
“Farm washing” by big UK supermarkets often leads people to believe that they’re buying products grown on small family farms within the UK, however a lot of this produce originates overseas or from big industrial scale farms.
Riverfords recent ‘Farmers against Farmwashing’ Campaign showed that 74% of shoppers want supermarkets to be transparent about produce and meat that is not British and sourced from abroad. When shoppers were shown a photo of produce in a UK supermarket under a Union Jack flag, 68% of people expected more than half of it to come from a British farm, when in fact, none of it did.
Supermarkets have been called out beforefor marketing these fake farm brands that sell imported produce under a fictitious farm name and even a Union Jack flag. As a consumer, you can always check the fine print on produce packaging to see where it originates and don’t just rely on branding.
Case Study: I’ve got a Life Cycle Assessment for a product I buy in, can I use it in my carbon footprint?
For inputs on your farm, you may be buying products that come with their own associated carbon footprint and want to know if you can incorporate this into your business’s carbon footprint. Let’s work through an example.
The feed you buy your dairy cows has a life cycle assessment (LCA) carbon footprint that has been passed onto you by the company selling this product.
Always check that the product LCA you have is for exactly the item you have purchased. The functional unit in this example would most likely be for 1 kg feed wheat and not a derivative of that, for example 1kg of white flour. Different products will have different processes involved that generate emissions, we can’t always assume that just because the products are similar, they will have a similar carbon footprint.
Check the methodology of the LCA to understand how it has been generated and what the uncertainties around it are.
For example, the feed wheat claims that it has a negative emissions factor (-1.2 kgCO2e/ kg wheat), i.e. the production of it has sequestered more carbon than it has generated. The LCA claims that this is due to using regenerative practices to grow the wheat which has enhanced soil carbon stocks. However, when you look at the methodology, it lists that carbon sequestration was not measured by direct soil measurements, but was instead modelled with Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes (IPCC) methodology Tier 1 approaches (see Box 1).
If the product you are buying claims to have a negative emissions value, then the methodology needs to be based on direct soil carbon or GHG measurements on that farm. If a direct measurement of sequestered carbon can be provided, this increases the reliability of the claim and can be passed on to a company which could include it as part of its scope 3 emissions inventory.
The choice of methodology will impact the reliability of the results. For example, there are three IPCC tiers to the recommended approaches (see Box 1). If direct soil measurements are taken, this would be a tier 3 approach and is the most reliable method, however the methodology uses a tier 1 (global) approach with estimated carbon stocks.
Check how the carbon footprint is reported.
Ensure the carbon emissions are reported separately to any carbon removals the company claims – not just the carbon balance (i.e. emissions – removals). There is a requirement by carbon reporting guidance to separate these two values. It is mandatory to report emissions, but not removals, due to the uncertainty around them.
Check the units that it is reported in (usually kg CO2e / kg product) and ensure that this makes sense for the way you will use the product.
Has the footprint been validated externally by third party verification? Although this is not absolutely necessary to have a reliable product footprint, it can help add confidence that the methodology has been checked by others.
If you are satisfied that the LCA has supplied a clear methodology on how the carbon footprint has been calculated, you may wish to include it as part of your scope 3 emissions report.
Box 1. IPCC Methodologies for Calculating GHG Emissions
Tier 1: This is the most basic approach, using default emission factors and generalised activity data provided by the IPCC for different sectors. It mostly uses global data and is intended for broad estimates with low accuracy.
Tier 2: This approach uses country- or region-specific emission factors and more detailed activity data, such as local energy usage. It improves accuracy compared to Tier 1 by incorporating factors that are more relevant to the specific conditions of the region.
Tier 3: The most advanced method, using detailed modelling or direct measurements and highly specific data for the particular circumstances of the country or sector. Tier 3 provides the highest level of accuracy by incorporating real-time data, complex models, and system-specific emission factors.
Each tier increases in complexity, accuracy, and the level of data required.
Pointers on how to sense check and provide robust environmental claims
The competition and markets authority has set out six principles for businesses to follow when making green claims and provided examples to help you assess green claims3. Here we have summarised the principles with examples:
Is the claim truthful and accurate?
Check the facts: Verify that the environmental benefit being claimed is backed by credible evidence. Look for data, scientific studies, or certifications that support the claim.
Avoid exaggeration: Ensure that the claim reflects the actual impact of the product or service and is not overstating the environmental benefits.
Is the claim clear and unambiguous?
Does it go beyond using generic phrases like ‘green’ and ‘eco-friendly’ and list the specifics of how it is an improved product?
Does the claim omit or hide important relevant information?
This may be hard to know and would probably involve doing a little bit of research around the product and its production methods.
For example, a product with ‘save our seas – these are microbead free’ makes you believe that similar products may contain microbeads – however microbeads are banned in the UK, and therefore shouldn’t be in any of the products!
Does the claim make fair and meaningful comparisons?
If a product is claiming to be better than others on the market, how has this been assessed? Has the comparison included a wide range of alternative products?
Does the claim consider the full life cycle of the product or service?
Life cycle assessments show the overall impact of a product from cradle to grave.
Is the claim substantiated?
An example of a substantiated claim might be: “Our product packaging is made from 100% recycled materials and is fully recyclable. By using recycled materials, we have reduced our packaging-related carbon footprint by 40% compared to virgin plastic packaging. This reduction has been verified through a third-party Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in compliance with ISO 14040 standards.”
The inaugural Dung Beetle Conference took place in June 2024 at Yeo Valley Holt Farm in Bristol – a collaboration that puts this tiny beast on the farm vet agenda.
Written by Rob Howe
It would have seemed a far-fetched idea a few years ago, a two-day conference about dung beetles attended by farmers, vets, policymakers and schoolchildren. Yet in June this year, we pulled it off, with huge thanks to Dr Hannah Jones (Farm Carbon Toolkit) and Rob Howe (BCVA, COWS, Vet Sustain), together with event sponsors, First Milk, Yeo Valley, Techion, Micron Agritech and Duggan Veterinary Supplies.
Hannah and Rob share mindsets around regenerative farming topics and how dung beetles should fit into all farmer’s thoughts and practices. Researchers have previously held Dung Fauna conferences, but these have been largely academic. This re-imagining of those events held by Richard Wall, Bryony Sands, Sarah Beynon and others, aimed to focus on biodiverse farming and integrated parasite management (IPM), which has been the focus of Rob’s work both in practice, in research and in his Nuffield Scholarship.
Conference Write-Up
The conference was opened by Sarah Beynon who spoke passionately about dung beetles and of her seminal work calculating their positive £367m of beneficial financial impact every year to UK cattle farms. Darren Mann, widely considered the gospel on dung beetles, wowed the audience with his own passion and bluntly hilarious style! We then heard of the impact parasiticides have in the environment and the degradation times of dung pats, as well as new research linking their abundance and diversity to soil health parameters from Bryony Sands, video-linked from the USA.
Organisers found it rewarding to see all the decades of superb work from so many inspiring people, brought together and shared with those that need to know it most – farmers and vets.
There is an impressive body of work now that led to my own efforts in proving there is an alternative approach – Integrated Parasite Management (IPM)
Rob Howe, BCVA, COWS, Vet Sustain
Rob Howe spoke on the importance of IPM, and the vital role of the vet, along with a vision for animal health tied in with this new approach. I then had the privilege of handing over to a wide array of experts in their fields to talk on the individual subjects and strategies that make up IPM, including species diversity, farming biodiverse, breeding for resilience, the role of trees, pasture management, soils and FEC testing. It was a ram-packed day punctuated at lunch by a dung safari led brilliantly by Darren Mann.
The conference also offered an opportunity to see demonstrations of key providers of in-house FEC testing by FECPAK, Micron, and Ovacyte who all attended and sponsored the event
Day Two started in the mature agroforestry system, and a dung beetle hunt was led by Claire Whittle, with input from many others including Sally-Ann Spence and Lindsay Whistance, whose work on the value of trees for livestock, needs much more airtime.
Over the two days we got to hear from so many great speakers all linking dung beetles to wider biodiversity including birds, a fantastic project on Dartmoor and how equine and small animal vets and owners are grasping the opportunity to have similar positive impact in their respective fields.
The responsible use of parasiticides
The conference ended with a workshop supported by BCVA, COWS and Vet Sustain. The workshop opened with a short “scene setting” presentation from the VMD with an overview of the current regulatory framework for veterinary medicines in the UK. The discussion groups focused on the issues around responsible prescribing and parasiticide use and identifying workable solutions and associated actions to drive much-needed positive change to promote the responsible use of parasiticides.
BCVA has been working hard behind the scenes for some years to influence progressive policy change in this area. BCVA’s policy on parasite control was launched by Sally Wilson in 2021, following Rob Howe’s IPM workshop and introduction to the power of dung beetles at Congress. BCVA has since been involved in wider collaborative discussions with the VMD and additional stakeholder organisations and recently worked with BVA on parallel activities to make progress on this important subject.
Key asks, actions & outcomes from the workshop
Farmers, farm advisors and farm vets all fed back in the workshops, offering a range of ideas, with the following common themes:
Education
To promote IPM as a more sustainable way to approach the use of parasiticides, all groups cited novel education and training as essential – specifically, for practising vets but also in vet schools and agricultural colleges.
A strong desire for everyone to get on board with a “new narrative” on display at the conference, reaching beyond IPM, producing food good for humans, the planet and of course animals.
Peer-to-peer learning opportunities were valued highly by everyone when it came to shifting farming practices, with many on display at the conference.
Funding
It was highlighted that opportunities for IPM to be funded within the SFI-type schemes, as it is in the arable sector, would be beneficial.
A general fund for (farms’) innovative ideas rather than prescriptive lists. Excellent examples might be EID/ Handling/Weighing facilities for DLWG and helping IPM & targeted selective treatments.
A cross-industry fund created to facilitate the rollout of IPM; training and tools for delivery and recording.
Monitoring
Collecting baseline figures on top-level use for the livestock sector would enable monitoring of progress, similar to those seen with antibiotics. The VMD were present, and we hope in time will help deliver this.
The same applies to the farm level where benchmarking could help drive change. This may be more likely to come from the industry itself.
Policy & Governance
Advertising of parasiticides should not be targeted at end users (across spp)
POM-V status could ensure this, but so could a legal change in advertising rules for parasiticides.
IPM should come into landscape recovery, and eventually as standard everywhere
A desire for support for vaccines such as louping ill to be available and others developed
More robust environmental assessments (small animals particularly) and enforcements of product advisory wording across species.
Communication
The need for improved communication between the entire farm team and advisors
Improved communication between vets and SQPs would be ideal. An app to facilitate IPM may be able to help achieve this.
Landscape approaches
Commons health plans and or landscape health plans (look outside the farm gate).
Industry support, facilitation & incentives
Milk buyers are already involved in a positive way. Great examples here at the conference with First Milk and Yeo Valley sponsoring and encouraging positive changes.
Others including M&S support farms to look at parasite control through an IPM lens and Muller leading the way in starting to measure usage.
Timeline for Change
Sentiment for action was positive, with 5 years set as a target, since this movement is already happening as evidenced at the conference, and people are aware, so major change could happen quite quickly.
Get in touch and join the movement
The conference concluded with a commitment to work across the sector to progress these key actions. We would like to hear from anyone keen to help achieve these aims and or be involved in the next one. Please contact Rob_ Howe@BCVA.co.uk or info@dungbeetletrust.co.uk.
Conference Acknowledgements
This conference built on a brilliant legacy of research, and brought together farmers, vets, soil experts, entomologists, researchers, industry and public, to celebrate the great work that is going on, but also to shape future policy and regulation. In the interest of brevity, it hasn’t been possible to acknowledge every speaker, contributor or supporter of this event, but the organisers would like to thank everyone who helped make this happen and also show appreciation to all those who have worked for some time in this important area to advance our profession’s understanding. And finally, a huge thank you to all the event sponsors – Yeo Valley, First Milk, Techion, Micron Agritech and Duggan Veterinary Supplies – without whom we could not have made this day happen.
Conference Reflections from a Vet Andy Adler – Farm Carbon Toolkit – Vet Perspectives
As a vet who has been out of clinical work for a while, I turned up to the Dung Beetle Conference 2024 due to my role in one of the sponsoring companies, Farm Carbon Toolkit. I had been aware of dung beetles and integrated parasite management (IPM), but I had little knowledge and no experience discussing IPM with farmers.
I found a place with positive energy and a diversity of farmers, vets, and industry professionals united in the need to identify how to support ecology in farming while supporting food production. The mix of sponsors from First Milk, Yeo Valley and Farm Carbon Toolkit meant that the industry was well represented and led the conversation on how to get to a farming system with a positive impact on the environment and nature.
Shifting baselines (Masashi Soga, 2018) come to mind for me. Farmers there described how dung pats would disappear within 24 hours as multiple species of dung beetles eat, bury and process the dung. I still find this expectation ‘unbelievable’; however, I accept that this is due to my shifted baseline of expectation. I also realised that as vets, we must deal with the conflict of interest between animal needs and the owner’s ability. Now, we have to deal with disputes between animal needs, nature needs and the owner’s ability to understand how best they can balance off competing demands.
I left after two days of interactive talks and an exploratory field safari, identifying dung beetles and understanding their abundance within healthy pats. My mind was opened. I now look in cow pats and understand how few beetles are on some farms.
The following questions (and more!) have sat with me since.
– How can we understand our shifted baseline and rebalance it? – How do vets deal with an additional conflict of interest? – Can IPM become a veterinary campaign similar to the Mastitis Plan or Health Feet Program?
I would highly recommend that farm vets think about dung beetles and their moral and ethical responsibilities towards the environment, animal welfare, and owners’ needs.
Now in its second year, the annual Carbon Farmer of the Year competition is organised by the Farm Carbon Toolkit and generously sponsored by HSBC Agriculture UK. The competition aims to find farmers and growers who are engaged with–and passionate about–reducing their business’s climate impact through changing management practices to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Andrew Brewer was awarded the Carbon Farmer of the Year Award for 2024, presented by Steve Dunkley, our sponsor from HSBC Agriculture (seen in the picture below).
Andrew Brewer, Winner of the Carbon Farmer of the Year Award for 2024 presented by Steve Dunkley, HSBC Agriculture UK
Andrew is part of the Farm Net Zero project and low GHG farming has been a top priority for him and his farm for a number of years. He manages 500 Jersey X dairy cows across his 400 Ha farm in Fraddon, Cornwall. He stood out to the judges for his understanding and application of a range of practices to enable his pasture-based dairy farm to remove atmospheric carbon into soil, trees, and hedges, while simultaneously minimising farm GHG emissions by focusing on maximising forage intake for his dairy cows and minimising inclusion of supplementary concentrate feeds. Andrew also selectively breeds his cows to work well within his pasture-based system. There is an opportunity to tour his farm during a farm walk he is hosting on November 8th.
The other two finalists, Tom Burge and Jason Mitchell were praised for their continued efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in their businesses. The finalists awards were presented by David Cope, Head of Sustainability at the Duchy of Cornwall who was also on the panel of judges (seen below). Tom Burge, who featured in the mob grazing workshop has done fantastic work cultivating a low input grazing system which has seen vast improvements in his grass quality and sequestration potential.
Similarly, Jason Mitchell is a Director of Greenville Dairies Ltd based in Newton Stewart, Northern Ireland. He has also been recognised for his continued effort to farm in a low carbon management system. At Greenville Dairies they have reduced emissions from their 850 strong dairy herd, largely through the application of genomics leading to greater feed efficiency alongside the development of a significant Anaerobic Digestion facility which sees them now taking in food waste alongside utilisation of cow manure to produce electricity, liquid natural gas (LNG) and digestate. Electricity and LNG are sold to the grid and to Companies such as Lakeland Dairies (their customer for their milk).
Tom Burge and Greenville Dairies, Carbon Farmer of the Year 2024 finalists, with David Cope, Head of Sustainability at the Duchy of Cornwall
Competition judges, Steve Dunkley (HSBC UK), David Cope (Head of Sustainability at Duchy of Cornwall), and Liz Bowles (CEO Farm Carbon Toolkit) were very impressed with the commitment and innovation shown by all the finalists in identifying sources of GHG emissions on their farms and developing strategies to both reduce emissions and increase the rate of carbon removal into soils and non-crop biomass.
Liz Bowles, Chief Executive Officer at Farm Carbon Toolkit, says:
Once again, the Carbon Farmer of the Year competition has identified some truly inspirational farmers. All our finalists have made great strides in reducing business reliance on fossil fuels through changes to their farming practices and careful soil management to reduce GHG emissions and sequester carbon.
It was particularly positive to see a dairy farm winning this year’s competition, given that dairy farming is often in the media spotlight for its adverse environmental impact. We are looking forward to showcasing the many effective ways that our finalists are reducing on-farm emissions and increasing carbon storage for others to see at free farm walks over the coming months. Watch this space!
Steve Dunkley, HSBC UK Agriculture, says:
HSBC UK Agriculture is pleased to support the 2024 Carbon Farmer of the Year competition. The quality of entries has been superb and hugely inspiring. As a business, we’re very keen to support the agriculture industry in transitioning towards net zero. While that will take many forms, we have the ambition to help farmers fund investment in the new practices and technologies needed to evolve.
The Carbon Farmer of the Year competition is a great way of showcasing how farmers are already achieving these changes and encouraging others to follow their lead
The FCT field day was an event to shine a light on the sustainable solutions benefiting farmers economically, socially and environmentally. The focus was on mixed agricultural systems, as well as celebrating those who are doing the most to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and sequester carbon into their soils.
On the 25th September 2024, our Annual Field Day brought together farmers from all over the country, including the winners of our past FCT Soil and Carbon Farmer of the Year competitions, to hear about the exciting developments in sustainable agriculture. In addition, we were grateful to HSBC UK Agriculture who helped sponsor the Carbon Farmer of the Year Competition and to all our supporters of the Annual Field Day – Cross Compliance Solutions, First Milk, Shearwell, Velcourt and Yeo Valley.
The event was held at Boycefield Farm in Dilwyn, courtesy of Billy Lewis, Soil Farmer of the year (2022) and the Lewis family. The day was a grey one with a few showers but did not dampen any spirits or the curiosity of the farmers that enjoyed the day!
Our delegates arrived ready for a 10am start which was officially kicked off by a welcome from FCT CEO Liz Bowles and an introduction to the farm by host Billy Lewis.
Opening comments by Billy Lewis to all the guests
Billy Lewis – Our host and 2022 Soil Farmer of the Year talking about how the farms’ approach of integrating livestock and herbal leys into a previously intensive arable system has rejuvenated soil health, drastically reduced fertiliser and feed inputs, whilst boosting profitability. Billy also mentioned the challenges his farm has been facing, with the changing climate and consistently wet weather proving to be high on the list.
We enjoyed a circuit of the farm to join workshops on subjects including adapting arable rotations to build fertility and resilience in a changing climate, mob grazing and the importance of soil testing. We heard about developments that have been made on Boycefield farm, as well as from farmers implementing similar systems across the country.
We have captured a snapshot of the workshops below:
Soil clinic – chaired by Becky Wilson (FCT)
We heard from our very own Becky Wilson and Niels Corfield, a regenerative agriculture advisor.
Becky standing in the soil pit explaining the benefits of upkeeping healthy soil to the group
Niels and Becky focussed on firstly, and most importantly, how the health of the soil is crucial to any agricultural system. Having a deeper understanding of what to look for within the soil aids farmers in assessing their own soils and tailoring their systems to increase soil health and fertility.
Becky brought us around the freshly dug soil pit to demonstrate the levels of compaction that occur at different depths. Highlighting the importance of less dense, yet stable soil in the top layer so that root growth of grasses and herbal leys are not hindered by increased soil density. It was pointed out that Billy Lewis’s mob grazing style was contributing to the meadow’s low soil density and therefore thriving grass system. As the stock is moved frequently, there is little time to compact the soil by trampling. Becky also highlighted the importance of earthworms for soil health. Earthworms are a key indicator of good soil health as they provide a multitude of benefits. Their burrowing increases spaces within the top layers of the soil which allow in water and air which promotes root growth for pastures through reduced compaction. Additionally, as Becky mentioned, their powers of nutrient cycling cannot be understated. Earthworms feed on organic matter which is excreted into plant available nutrients, speeding up pasture growth.
After Becky’s talk on soil qualities Niels took over to discuss a few practical methods (without the use of fancy gadgets) farmers can use to assess their soil health. With only the use of a spade and an inspection of what’s going on below the grass you can tell a lot about the soil. Niels encouraged the guests to go out into their fields and start to collect samples. He demonstrated the method of collecting a core sample by inserting a spade to a depth of around 30 cm on three sides and used the last side as a hinge to lever up a block of soil to inspect. Once the sample was out of the ground, he highlighted the relative ease of which the soil broke up as well as pointing out the abundance of earthworms, noting that this isn’t the case for a lot of agricultural soils.
Neils showing the group the simple ways in which soil samples can be taken
Livestock and mob grazing – chaired by Stefan Marks (FCT)
In this talk we heard from Tom Burge, an upland beef and sheep farmer, Billy Lewis, the host farmer, as well as Dan Smith, a farm manager running a commercial, net zero livestock farm alongside being a facilitator at the Herefordshire Rural Hub. They talked about their experiences with mob grazing, grass quality and the lessons they have learned experimenting with grazing systems.
Billy, Tom, and Dan discussing the benefits of mob grazing in front of one of his Hereford mob
In this session, Billy, Tom, and Dan discussed the benefits as well as the challenges involved with mob grazing while drawing on their shared experience of experimenting with this type of grazing system.
Tom Burge is a 4th generation farmer, owning an upland grazing farm in North Exmoor rearing over 1,000 Romney X ewes and 500 Scottish Blackface ewes. As well as 100 Angus suckler cows. After setting aside a 150 acre field trial with the aim of reducing fertiliser application, he began experimenting with mob grazing. He found that moving stock regularly (in his case every 2-3 days) and long resting periods resulted in improved grass quality and increased grass growth. All the panellists concurred that long resting periods for the grassland is crucial for increased grass quality and plant diversity which leads to more resilient grasslands.
In terms of economics, all the panellists agreed that the switch to mob grazing resulted in higher live weights and milk yields from their cattle and sheep. However, it was interesting to hear that these yield increases were marginal compared to the reduction in costs which resulted from the change of system. Dan found that within his new system, he could keep sheep outside all year round, including during lambing. He noticed that less bacterial infections and instances of pneumonia were occurring when he made these changes. Billy also noted the lack of fly related infections on his cattle on his mob grazing system which resulted in lower veterinary costs and better welfare. Although Billy still has periods through the winter where cattle are kept inside, these periods have reduced and therefore feed costs have decreased as a result. All the panellists concluded that optimising for a low input system was of great benefit to not only their pockets but the health of the stock as well.
An insightful question came from one of the listeners of the talk, who asked; how do you measure the changes in pasture performance? All three panellists admitted that they didn’t formally measure or record grass growth or quality of. Through anecdotal evidence and multiple decades of experience growing grass and farming on their respective farms they could see the difference in the quality of their grass which has translated into the quality of their stock and produce. Dan Smith added to this, highlighting that the preferred measure of performance is through financial gains, where all three of panellists have found a financial benefit.
A second question was fielded around the time consuming nature of mob grazing after Billy mentioned his rotations may only last 6-12 hours on some of his more intensely grazed meadows. He has found that frequent livestock movement isn’t as unmanageable as one might think. He proceeded to demonstrate the ease of which he can move electric fencing hexagonal fence posts (as seen in the picture below). These structures rotate along the ground as Billy moves the end of the fence, saving time by not having to take out every fence pole and place it in a different location in the field. Through experience, Billy often decides when to move his cattle by eye and knows that a system that incorporates flexibility works best for him. This certainly helps with the weather challenges that the three panellists agreed was a main limiting factor to their system. Droughts and periods of heavy rain (which were wonderfully demonstrated throughout the day) are challenges where flexibility is a crucial mitigator. Billy with his free moving electric fence pointed out that he can avoid waterlogged areas in order to protect the soil and grassland from trampling which is even more of a danger in wet conditions.
The easily movable electric fencing which saves Billy time when moving his stock
Arable/ Herbal Leys – chaired by Tilly Kimble-Wilde
We heard from Angus Gowthorpe (mixed farmer and Soil Farmer of the Year 2018 finalist), Edward Gent (Cambridge arable farmer who has been no-till for 16 years) and FCT’s Anthony Ellis (FCT farm carbon and soil advisor and mixed farmer). The talk focussed on their experiences with diversifying arable rotations, sometimes with herbal leys as well as their different approaches to grazing these areas.
Panellists in one of Billy’s arable fields – note the agroforestry alleys in the background
Angus Gowthorpe, who manages a mixed farm in North Yorkshire, spoke about his transition from conventional to regenerative farming and how herbal leys have played a crucial role in this shift. By integrating a mix of species into his rotation, including deep-rooting herbs such as chicory and plantain, he has seen significant improvements in soil structure and organic matter. Angus highlighted how the diversity of plant species in the herbal leys helps build resilience in the system, reducing reliance on chemical inputs. He highlighted how grazing these leys with his cattle further stimulates root growth, enhancing the biology of the soil, contributing to a more productive and resilient farm ecosystem. The sentiments of this approach were echoed by both Edward and Anthony who had implemented similar systems.
Afternoon Sessions: The economic and climate impact of ‘regen’
Following lunch, we moved into a panel discussion Chaired by James Daniel with presentations from Anthony Ellis (FCT), Angus Gowthorpe, Tom Burge & Nick Down (Velcourt Farming Ltd).
James Daniel – Founder of Precision Grazing, whose primary objective is to optimise performance from pasture, James works across the UK helping farmers to implement and manage their grazing systems alongside ensuring family quality of life for farmers.
Angus Gowthorpe – mixed farmer and Soil Farmer of the Year 2018 finalist. Angus has been at the forefront of the regenerative transition in the UK and continues to push the envelope on what defines a sustainable farming system.
Tom Burge – Upland beef and sheep farmer whose move to a regenerative, grazing-based system has helped to eliminate inputs and transform the finances on his challenging Exmoor farm
Nick Down – Nick is the Head of Sustainability for Velcourt Ltd. Velcourt directly manages 57,000 hectares and provides advice in both the arable and dairy sectors across the UK. Nick oversees the farming operation of the Yattendon Estate in West Berkshire. The estate is going through a transition to a more sustainable farming system, incorporating more space for nature and enhancing carbon sequestration under an ambitious environmental delivery program. The farm is also a LEAF demonstration farm.
First each of the panel members presented an overview of their farming system, the regenerative practices they’ve employed and the subsequent improvements this has made to their business carbon footprint, resilience and profitability.
Angus sharing with us the financial benefits of his regen system
Angus shared with us a side by side comparison of his arable operations between his previous conventional system and his current low-input regen system for winter wheat production. From this slide it is obvious to see what financial benefits arise from converting to a regen system. Firstly, his in-field operations have reduced from four operations to only using direct drilling on his fields. This saves him a total of £142 per hectare. Additionally, a reduction of his fertiliser inputs saved his business £189 per hectare. Through soil analysis he found that his past applications of P and K were superfluous to crop requirements. He has also reduced reliance on fungicides and plant growth regulators by £103/ha. The reduction in inputs has given Angus an ability to withstand a lower yield without reduction in enterprise margin. At current prices he calculated that this was equivalent to around 2.3 tonnes/ ha or around a 30% reduction in yield.
A perspective of the greenhouse gas emissions reductions and financial benefits of regenerative agriculture from livestock farming came from Tom Burge who kindly shared his numbers before and after adopting his new farming strategy.
Tom Burge’s projections on how his emissions will change while continuing on his regenerative farming journey.
From starting his journey in 2017, he has eliminated use of fertiliser on his pastures, significantly reduced reliance on external feed and fuel, as well as reduced the number of hours of manhours worked on his farm. This has all translated into a steady reduction of on-farm emissions (expressed as kgCO2e per kg live weight of his stock). Due to implementing mob grazing strategies, pasture growth has increased by 0.9 tonnes of dry matter per hectare, displacing 36 tonnes of fertiliser and 72 tonnes of feed between 2017 and 2022. On top of the 1.66kgCO2e per kg of live weight, this has saved Tom’s business financially, to a tune of £24,000 per year. By 2022, Tom realised that the increasing cost of inputs outweighed the potential added value of his outputs, making these inputs un-economical to use.
Breakout workshops on field trials, weatherproof farming and composting
Billy showing the guests the resulting compost after he uses his windrow compost turner
Composting: Billy Lewis
Billy Lewis showed us his farm-yard manure composting process. After buying a windrow compost turner second hand, Billy is able to easily turn the compost pile to aerate it. Ensuring good air flow is key to creating compost, as aerobic microorganisms feed on the organic components and convert them into a nutrient rich soil amendment. Composts are much more stable than farm yard manures, providing a more consistent and slow release of nutrients, therefore, benefitting soil health in the longer term. This slow release enhances soil health and pasture growth by reducing the amount of leaching and volatilisation that occurs. Billy explained how he adds different components to his compost depending on what is available, such as wood chips and apple peel from a nearby orchard.
Research Trials: Hannah Jones
Hannah Jones (Senior Soil and Carbon Advisor with FCT) led an insightful discussion on effectively planning and conducting field trials in a scientifically robust yet practical way. She began by explaining the essentials of multi-year farm trials, covering aspects like choosing crop options for trial strips, combining various tests within one field, and structuring controls to minimise the effects of natural variations on trial results.
A major focus was on understanding how different factors can influence outcomes and the importance of controls. For instance, in a trial introducing beans into crop rotation, it’s crucial to have both fertilised and unfertilised areas to determine if observed benefits are due to the nitrogen contribution from beans, the fertiliser itself, or just field characteristics. In livestock research, increasing population size reduces the impact of natural variation (e.g. individual susceptibility to disease), thereby making the data more statistically reliable. Randomly assigning animals to control and trial groups is also key, as it prevents biases that could affect outcomes; for example, having the first ewes going through the hurdle enter one field and the latter half go into another could unintentionally separate the flock by skittish and lazy animals, skewing results because they have different temperaments.
Hannah also shared ideas and trials setups which some of the attending farmers were considering. The conversation highlighted the value of data sharing—each farm is unique, but insights from one trial can benefit many. By participating in groups like the Innovate funded Nitrogen Climate Smart agriculture (NCS) project, farmers can connect, share findings, and collaborate on new practices. FCT advisors are available to help with planning and can connect participants with like-minded farmers to optimise trial efforts.
Weatherproof Farming: Niels Corfield
Niels delivered a presentation which demonstrated to us the importance of improving soil health for sustainable farming. Niels Corfield is a farm advisor interested in regenerative farms and landscapes.
He shared video examples of how compacted soils, often mistakenly thought to be saturated due to standing water, were actually preventing deeper water infiltration and leaving dry soil underneath. Healthy soil, with proper porosity, was shown to allow water to penetrate, “banking” moisture for dry periods, which is crucial for crop resilience in hot summers.
Niels made a case for weatherproofing farms to both rain and drought through a mixture of practices including soil management, mechanical interventions e.g sub soiling, mineral, and biological interventions. We looked at some of these in detail. A key takeaway was that root health is central to improving soil structure, and managing grazing or cropping practices to encourage root mass and density is a fundamental part of improving soil resilience and health.
The evidence presented showed that a move away from set stocking and changes in pasture management was able to extend grazing seasons, reduce the need for winter housing, and boost grass production. Data from various drought years showed how drought severely impacted grass growth across the UK. However, farms with better-managed soil saw increased productivity due to better water retention, emphasising the benefits of improving soil structure and retaining water during wet seasons for use during dry spells.
We were left with the idea that land provides honest feedback which can be seen and acted upon: It reveals the effectiveness of farming practices through direct observation and we were encouraged to inspect the land regularly ourselves in real-time with a range of tests, rather than solely relying on lab results.
Carbon Farmer of the Year 2024
This very interesting and insightful field day concluded with the presentation of carbon farmer of the year. It is the second year of the competition and is awarded to a farmer who is engaged with and passionate about reducing their business’s climate impact. The award focuses not only on changing management practices to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but also on understanding and enhancing carbon storage in farmland. We were delighted to be joined by the three finalists. Andrew Brewer was awarded the Carbon Farmer of the Year Award for 2024, presented by Steve Dunkley, our sponsor from HSBC Agriculture (seen in the picture below). Andrew is part of the Farm Net Zero project and low GHG farming has been a top priority for him and his farm for a number of years. He manages 500 Jersey X dairy cows across his 400 Ha farm in Fraddon, Cornwall. He stood out to the judges for his understanding and application of a range of practices to enable his pasture-based dairy farm to remove atmospheric carbon into soil, trees, and hedges, while simultaneously minimising farm GHG emissions by focusing on maximising forage intake for his dairy cows and minimising inclusion of supplementary concentrate feeds. Andrew also selectively breeds his cows to work well within his pasture-based system. There is an opportunity to tour his farm during a farm walk he is hosting on November 8th.
Carbon Farmer of the Year 2024 Winner Andrew Brewer, Ennis Barton (right) presented by Steve Dunkley, HSBC UK Agriculture (Left)
The other two finalists, Tom Burge and Jason Mitchell were praised for their continued efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in their businesses. The finalists awards were presented by David Cope, Head of sustainability at the Duchy of Cornwall who was also on the panel of judges (seen below). Tom Burge, who featured in the mob grazing workshop has done fantastic work cultivating a low input grazing system which has seen vast improvements in his grass quality and sequestration potential.
Similarly, Jason Mitchell is a Director of Greenville Dairies Ltd based in Newton Stewart, Northern Ireland. He has also been recognised for his continued effort to farm in a low carbon management system. At Greenville Dairies they have reduced emissions from their 850 strong dairy herd, largely through the application of genomics leading to greater feed efficiency alongside the development of a significant Anaerobic Digestion facility which sees them now taking in food waste alongside utilisation of cow manure to produce electricity, liquid natural gas (LNG) and digestate. Electricity and LNG are sold to the grid and to Companies such as Lakeland Dairies (their customer for their milk).
Carbon Farmer of the Year 2024 Finalists Tom Burge (middle), Adel Tajouri representing Greenville Dairies (right), presented by David Cope (left)
Groundswell this year was as exciting as ever, with so many excellent sessions and people to catch up with and meet for the first time.
There was much interest in how farmers and growers can benefit from the new markets for carbon, biodiversity net gain and nutrient neutrality to name but three, but to my mind, there was far less attention on how the sector can actually reduce the emissions associated with producing food itself.
For me, this is critical as we have to find a way to reduce the greenhouse gases we push into our atmosphere, as well as removing some of the historical emissions already there, if we are to reduce the worst impacts of climate change.
There is, however, a central question for our food system which is: What level of emissions are inevitable from the production of food which is essential for humanity? The Climate Change Committee has come up with a view on this in their 2020 UK agricultural policy for net zero report, which suggests a road map for saving 64% in the annual emissions from agriculture compared to 2017 levels when UK agriculture was responsible for around 58 MtCO2e (12% of total UK emissions). On closer inspection of the figures though, the actual savings in emissions from agriculture are set at around 21 MtCO2e / year, with the remaining savings to come from forestry, changes to our diet and the production of energy crops instead of food.
This is set out below:
The specific actions suggested for each of these areas are set out below:
Tree planting on 30,000 hectares per year
Use 10% of UK farmland for agroforestry (no distinction made between agroforestry and hedgerows)
Restore at least 55% of peatland area by 2050. (For lowland peat lands this means rewetting or paludiculture to reduce emissions and for uplands this means rewetting).
Increases in low-carbon farming practices for soils and livestock (no detail provided)
Increase the area of farmland devoted to energy crops to 23,000 ha per year
From this list, the low carbon farming practices interest me in terms of how their adoption will enable an annual reduction of 10MtCO2e per year to occur (~25% of 2022 UK agricultural emissions). At Farm Carbon Toolkit we work directly with farmers and growers to adopt these practices and changes to current management processes. Typically the areas to focus on include:
Planting cover crops
Changing crop rotation
Transitioning to no/min till where possible
Growing new crops
Integrated pest management
Adopting rotational grazing
Planting herbal leys
Across all these practices, there should be a focus on reducing the use of artificial nitrogen fertilisers and purchased livestock feed (especially those including imported ingredients) as both these inputs carry a high level of associated emissions.
Many of these practices can also be considered to be part of the suite of “regenerative farming principles”. Adoption of more regenerative farming practices is growing steadily, but for many farmers, the key question surrounds the financial viability of their adoption when margins are so tight. A recent report commissioned by the Farming for Carbon and Nature Group and funded by the Natural England Environment Investment Readiness Fund (NEIRF) sets out the financial and climate impact of adoption of more regenerative farming practices and systems and includes partial budget information on the financial impact of adoption in England with support from SFI where relevant.
This chart clearly shows that with the inclusion of SFI support, many of the practices generally considered to be regenerative are likely to deliver a similar margin than more conventional practices in these areas. The area where more support is needed is in the adoption of more complex arable rotations including pulses and fertility building leys, where even with appropriate SFI payments, the margins from shorter more degenerative rotations are likely to be more profitable. We are a member of the Nitrogen Climate Smart Consortium which is supporting the increased production of pulses and legumes in the UK together with their use as animal feeds to address the need to reduce the use of artificial fertilisers and imported animal feedstuffs. This project will support farmers to do this through farmer field trials as well as the introduction of new technology for on-farm pulses processing. You can find out more about this project and get involved by following this link.
In summary, I am fairly confident that UK agriculture can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 10% through the adoption of low-carbon farming practices. Indeed through some of the practical work with farmers in which FCT is involved, we are seeing higher levels of emission reductions being achieved within businesses with little or no change in farm output and in many cases increased profitability and business resilience. The element which is mostly missing is the confidence and knowledge to make the necessary changes and knowing where to start.
At FCT we provide a (free for farmers and growers) Farm Carbon Calculator to allow businesses to understand their starting point, a set of tools within our Toolkit to assist businesses to make those chances and a team of expert advisors to talk to.
You can always make contact with us by email info@farmcarbontoolkit.org.uk or by calling us on 07541 453413. We look forward to hearing from you.
Dairy is often in the spotlight in terms of its environmental impact. Whether it be focussed on slurry management, methane emissions from animals, or soil loss and run off from maize crops, dairy is often an easy target. However, there are numerous farmers and projects who are showcasing that this doesn’t need to be the case, and there are positive steps that can be taken.
When approaching Groundswell this year, it was one of the things that we wanted to highlight. We are very lucky to work with some really forward-thinking organisations and farmers that we wanted to highlight at this national event. So we submitted our session “Can Milk be green?” to try and understand some key questions.
These were:
How do we quantify the importance of regenerative dairy systems when the current metrics are solely focused on reducing emissions intensity/litre?
How do we accurately represent the contribution that regenerative dairy systems are providing to carbon sequestration, biodiversity and resilient landscapes?
How do we do this in a cost-effective way which provides reassurance to processors and consumers that milk can be green?
How do we support farmers in that transition?
We had a fantastic panel of speakers which included farmers who were making changes and processors who were supporting both data collection, evidence building and industry communication.
Tom White from Yeo Valley introduced the session and highlighted the ability for grass-based dairy systems to deliver on a wide range of environmental benefits. The key areas of importance were around how we gather good data, collaborate and support our farmers to be able to deliver the changes on-farm. Tom focussed on the importance of diversity, including diversity in our pastures, rotations and management systems to deliver on a range of environmental impacts.
Andrew Brewer from Ennis Barton farm in Cornwall provided some insights into the trials that he has been involved with on his farm as part of the Farm Net Zero project. Trialling herbal leys and their impact on cow health and rumination, soil recovery after potatoes and cover crops have all provided useful tools to build soil heath and reduce emissions.
Will Mayor from Yeo Valley farms spoke about how by using their experiences with the beef animals they have adapted a system that works for their dairy cows. Implementing next-level grazing has allowed them to increase covers, remove the topper from the system and maintain milk quality and pasture utilisation, alongside soil health and carbon sequestration.
Lucy Noad from Woodhouse Farms shared her story in terms of her transition from a more conventional dairy farm over the last few years. Lucy spoke about the need to support farmers in the transition and also to ensure that the way we communicate engages farmers to understand the relevance of practical solutions for them.
Mark Brooking from First Milk concluded the session highlighting some of the ways that First Milk are supporting their farmers to make the transition to more regenerative practices. Farmers are supported through incentives to implement rotational grazing, species diversity and minimal cultivation in order to demonstrate an uplift in soil health, sequestration, biodiversity and water quality. Data is being collected on the impact of these changes to provide confidence in the potential for their members to deliver solutions.
It was an inspiring session which provided real life examples that show the positive steps that are taking place to provide data, collaborate and support farmers. Although our soil project with Yeo Valley is in the interim years before we retest soils, it was great to hear some of the practices taking place and the production and resilience benefits that the farmers are seeing now irrespective of soil carbon sequestration.
So can milk be green? The answer was a resounding yes!
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. This includes analytics cookies to understand website traffic and how users interact with our website. We do not use any advertising cookies.
You may accept or refuse our use of cookies, or learn more at the link provided.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
Recent Comments