Chapter 2 Sections

2.2 Contracts

In retrospect, we regret not using contracts with our farmers.  The process of drawing them up would have ironed out many misunderstandings, however in the early days when we were figuring out how we wanted to work together, we didn’t have the information to know what we should be asking for, and felt that building trust would be best served by an informal working relationship.  Though we never used contracts, we did do plenty of research into them. See Checklist 2.2 - Contracts for links. Whether you decide to go for a formal contract, or more informal Heads of Terms, this will guide you as to the kinds of things to consider and discuss with farmers you are working with. 

Some of the points that would have been helpful for GinT to have had in a contract were:

• Clarification of the farmer’s obligations: that the crop would be cleaned through the combine; that it would be stored somewhere dry and vermin free; that they would provide a tractor and driver for any drying required

• Clarification of our obligations: that we would pay for storage monthly; that we would co-ordinate the drying and cleaning of the crop on the farm, where a crop exceeds 2 tonnes; and that we would be responsible for drying smaller quantities in the processing unit at Totnes

• Something about the means of communication between parties: so that the farmer makes clear their preferred method and both parties agree to a reasonable response time

2.2.1 Contractual Considerations when Growing Unregistered Seed

This is an example of a Seed User Agreement that GinT created (1).  It provides a useful starting place if you are working with non-registered seed, to protect both yourselves and the seed breeder.  You may also need to create an agreement between the seed breeder and the processor, if this is different to the grower, to ensure that seed is not grown on without the consent of the breeder.

(1) With grateful thanks to John Lett’s in helping draw up this agreement

2.2.2 Spreading the Grower’s Risk (2)

You have two choices as regards price:

    1) payment per tonne 

    2) payment per acre

If you agree to buy grain at £x per tonne, the farmer could make a lot of money if the yield is high, and very little if there is a crop failure or low yield. The farmer takes all the risk here.  Alternatively, if you agree to buy grain at £x per acre, then the farmer could make a lot of money even if the yield is very low and he doesn't have to do much work per acre. 

A way of sharing this risk more equally is to offer your growers a sliding scale for the grain price depending on yield. If the yield is low the farmer gets a lower price per acre for the crop, but a higher price per tonne, and if the yield is high the farmer gets a higher price per acre and a lower price per tonne. The figure that you agree on should incentivise the farmer to put grain into good quality land to get the best yield, but the risk is shared if the yield is low.   

You may also want to consider possible crop failure; disease, drought, etc and offer compensation to the grower if the crop fails entirely (e.g £50 per acre), but make it clear if you wish to ensure that getting the harvest in on time remains the farmer’s responsibility and is not a factor in the compensation offer. 

Although we discussed these options with our farmers, they went for simpler options, which all differed.

(2) Thanks to John Letts for his advice

2.2.3 Payment Arrangements

We discussed with our farmers how and when we would make payments to them. The model we planned was a set of 3 payments:

• the first would cover the difference in cost to the farmer for growing a crop for human consumption as opposed to the costs for growing the same crop for animal feed.  These additional costs could potentially include:

o   drying
o   cleaning 
o   storage 
o   delivery

• the remaining growing costs would be paid after testing the quality of the grain as fit for human consumption

• we wanted to pay the farmer a percentage of the profit and envisaged this would be difficult to calculate until at least 12 months after delivery

In reality we never got to the point of making a profit and, if funding had allowed us to continue, it would have been a number of years before we did. Remember to take this into consideration if you want to share our ambition of paying farmers a fair share of the profit.

2.3 Seed

2.3.3 Population Crops

2.3.3.1 ORC Wakelyns YQ Population Wheat (Winter)

Grown at Wakelyns agroforestry farm; one of the country’s most innovative low-impact research farms, based in Fressingfield, Suffolk.  The YQ (named because the choice of parents combines qualities associated with both Yield and Quality) was bred by making 190 crosses among 20 different parent varieties and mixing the resulting seed.

The YQ was designed to work well in low input organic rotations and has proved to be resistant to shifts in climate and resilient to pests. A minimum of 15 kilos should be sown in order to get enough variety.

The YQ is a diverse population as opposed to a single variety, making it a mismatch to seed laws in the UK and Europe which support monoculture uniformity and are designed to ensure single variety genetic purity in seeds.  Until recently it has been illegal to market such populations because they do not conform to EU law.

Trials over the last decade have convinced EU officials that the benefits of the population approach should be reevaluated through test marketing at the European level.  As a result, in March 2014 EU law was changed to allow a trial period for marketing varieties (populations) that do not fit the normal rules and regulations. This led to the EU agreeing to an experiment that allows the limited marketing of wheat, oats, barley and maize populations within the EU.  The YQ wheat is restricted to a ‘Temporary Marketing Experiment’ determined by EU and DEFRA which is due to finish 2021. See this interesting article here by the Organic Research Centre.

2.3.3.2 John Lett’s Heritage Population Wheat (3)

Over 25 years, John Letts has collected seeds of 'heritage' varieties from gene banks around the world, and developed 'populations' of wheats and ryes that are adapted to growing in low-input organic conditions.  Heritage varieties are genetic lines (either landraces or pure line selections) that were grown before c.1906 when the first commercially popular hybrid wheat varieties were released in the UK. These older lines have larger root systems than modern varieties, and very tall stems which out-compete tall crop weeds.

John has found that he can grow his genetically-diverse populations in the same field, year after year, without tillage, crop rotation or manuring, as long as an under-story of white clover is maintained and all of the straw is chopped and left on the field.

His yields are a little lower than average, but he gets a good crop of high quality grain every year rather than only once every 4-5 years as occurs in a typical organic rotation. Continuous Grain Cropping (CGC) generates more grain and does this while sequestering carbon and increasing biodiversity.

Because wheat rarely cross-pollinates to produce new genetic lines (like rye and maize), a population must contain as much diversity as possible from the start if it is to evolve and adapt to local growing conditions. Modern hybrid varieties and 'pure' heritage lines are genetically narrow and therefore less hardy, and cannot adapt to local growing conditions or a changing climate.

(3) With thanks to John Letts for his generosity and support

This timelapse shows the field where John’s Heritage Population Wheat was grown throughout the year of 2018/19, on the Dartington Estate, just outside of Totnes.  It started off as a very wet year and then in the Summer we had drought conditions.