In My Recent Article, “The Plant-Based Paradox”, The Assertion Was That A National Transition From Livestock To Arable Crops Is Neither Simple Nor Universally Beneficial. Today I Am Looking At The Topic From A Local Perspective.
I am considering the Sid Valley. The same caveats apply. This is a short article and cannot address all the issues in one article. Indeed that is the premise of the article, the situation is very complex and should not be addressed simplistically.
I am considering the Sid Valley. The same caveats apply. This is a short article and cannot address all the issues in one article. Indeed that is the premise of the article, the situation is very complex and should not be addressed simplistically.
While national debates often simplify the choice into a binary conflict, the reality for our catchment is defined by a specific interplay between Upper Greensand plateaus, impermeable Mercia Mudstone, and steep, high-rainfall gradients. The very features that give us a springline along each of our valleys. This geological reality dictates that a one-size-fits-all approach is unsustainable; instead, we must navigate a path of strategic integration that recognises and respects the valley’s inherent limitations.
The Agronomic Reality: Why Grassland Remains Fundamental
Research from institutions like Rothamsted confirms that for high-rainfall regions with significant topographic variation, the “workability” of soil is a hard constraint. Permanent grassland is the natural farming baseline for the Sid Valley because it provides year-round ground cover, buffering the soil against the erosive forces of heavy rainfall.
When we force intensive arable production onto steeper slopes, we trigger a cascade of negative environmental outcomes:
Yield Volatility: Sowing windows are unpredictable and narrow as we experience more heavy rain storms and waterlogged soil. This can cause yields to collapse from potential highs of over 14 tonnes per hectare to an unprofitable 3 tonnes or less an hectare.
Soil Degradation: There is empirical evidence that conversion from permanent pasture to arable cultivation can lead to a 45% decline in soil organic matter, stripping the land of its ability to retain nutrients and sequester carbon.
Nutrient and Sediment Pathways: The transition away from grass significantly increases the loss of nitrogen and sediment into local watercourses. In a catchment like the Sid, which is already sensitive to these inputs, the impact is measurable and detrimental to aquatic health.
The Paradox of Maize and Anaerobic Digestion
The expansion of maize – often grown as silage or feedstock for anaerobic digesters – exemplifies the risks of ignoring these constraints. Over 600 acres of crops are exclusively grown and used for one local anaerobic dugester.
Maize cultivation frequently leaves fields bare during the winter, exacerbates soil compaction and creates direct conduits for run-off. This is not merely an agricultural inefficiency; it is a direct contributor to the sedimentation issues affecting our catchment. Furthermore, these systems often ignore the “management in the round,” where the high carbon costs of machinery and inputs frequently negate the supposed environmental gains of the crop itself. In addition, though often argued as being a source of digestate based on farm yard manure that can be used to increase the organic matter in farm soils, the Nature Friendly Farming Network (NFFN) has highlighted that PFAS or “forever chemicals” also enter the agricultural system through digestate, with no requirements for contaminant screening. Similar arguments apply regarding antibiotics and microplastics.
Strategic Diversification: Integrating Agroforestry and Crops
Rather than an “either-or” approach, the future of the Sid Valley surely lies in a measured blended approach that integrates perennial systems with selected annual production.
Agroforestry as a Structural Buffer: Integrating agroforestry offers a functional solution for the valley’s steep gradients. By planting nut trees (such as hazel or walnut), fruit orchards, and timber-producing species in designed configurations, we can stabilize slopes and improve water infiltration. These systems act as a “vertical mosaic,” where tree roots hold the soil, while the canopy provides shelter and carbon sequestration. This is the essence of the Slow The Flow strategies recommended by the River Sid Catchment Group and various river charities. We must however recognise that some of these trees take a decade to mature and start to yield and that harvest will require systems and logistics that are not currently available in the valley. The newly launched Tree Species Guide for UK Agroforestry Systems , developed by Forest Research and the University of Reading, provides guidance on 33 suitable species for British farms, helping ensure the right trees are planted in the right places.
Targeted Arable Integration: We can identify specific, more stable field parcels – those with less severe gradients and appropriate soil structures – where limited integration of human-edible crops (such as pulses, root vegetables, or squashes) is physically feasible. Land that can be farmed in a regenerative way that uses cover crops and green manures to ensure the soil is never left bare.
Nutritional and Systemic Benefits
Diversifying into these high-value, site-appropriate plant foods increases the direct caloric output of the valley without requiring the complete dismantling of our pastoral systems. Furthermore, integrating these crops into a landscape that retains significant permanent pasture allows for “nutrient recycling,” where livestock grazing supports soil fertility in the perennial tree-crop sections. Protein production should however be considered alongside calorific values. We need protein in our diets and any system that ignores this is never going to succeed.
At present we do not produce enough protein in the valley for consumption by the population and that is unlikely to change with the systems being discussed here. And naturally there is also a quality over quantity consideration whenever protein production is discussed. However this is partially balanced by the right choice of protein crops, such as legumes, which also have the benefit of supplying nitrogen back into the soil. But we then need to ensure that this is not leached into the streams and river overwinter.
Adequate scavenging crops are required to scavenge nitrogen from the dying legumes and keep it locked up for use in the spring. Additional sowing of scavenging crops is however a problem. With tight sowing windows due to increased rain they may not be possible unless we change the technology used. In some cases crops might need to be sown using new technologies such as unmanned drones. All this comes at a cost that needs to be addressed.
Protecting the Mosaic
Any movement toward arable or agroforestry integration must be guided by evidence of local biodiversity and catchment health:
Landscape Connectivity: The preservation of hedgerows is non-negotiable for many people in this valley. They are essential movement corridors and carbon sinks that must not be sacrificed for the sake of large-scale mechanisation.
Grazing Refugia: Sites like Firebeacon must remain under pastoral management to protect the invertebrates and pollinators documented by ongoing herbaceous surveys. Without this grazing, these areas would revert to scrub, leading to the loss of specialist flora that depend on open, flower-rich swards, heaths and other landscapes.
Site-Specific Management: Decisions should be informed by localised soil testing and hydrological data, ensuring that we only cultivate land that can sustain it, while using extensive grazing to manage the valley’s steeper, more vulnerable gradients.
What Does History Teach Us?
Farmers in the past did not use heavy machinery that compacted the soil. The “heavy” horse was lightweight in comparison to today’s multiple horsepower tractors, combines, forage harvesters and balers. And the limitations of the heavy horse as a power source largely dictated the field sizes we have inherited in this valley today
In the past this was a pastoral valley with just enough arable land to feed the livestock and make bread or beer if the grain quality was sufficient.
Over the hill the “plats” produced veg for local consumption in a hand to mouth fashion with Branscombe earlies competing with Jersey Royals in the London markets. The advent of the railway saw more tourism and this helped veg sales with the more astute “plat” grower realising that flowers commanded a premium and that a few bunches of anemones etc were less weight to carry up the cliff and made more money!
Back in the valley itself orchards were common. Just look at the OS maps going back a century or so. Orchards with apples for eating and cider were found on every farm. But once the law changed and labourers could no longer be given cider as part payment for their labours the orchards were less economic and their demise was certain.
There are few people today with the energy, enthusiasm or knowledge to be able to make a living producing veg on a small scale. Having farmed and owned and run a small holding I know it is a life full of long hours for low returns and not one I personally want to return to! The thought that we can go back to a time when the “Good Life” is the aspiration is highly unlikely. Other options need to be considered.
The Stantyway Farm Model: A Local Proof of Concept
Rather than relying on abstract theory, we can look to a neighbouring farm as evidence that the principles outlined above are already being put into practice. Stantyway Farm, a 300-acre organic mixed farm, demonstrates many of the practices this article advocates. The farm produces wheat, oats, beans, quinoa, grass, lucerne and clover for specialist organic markets or to feed to their suckler cows and calves. While Stantyway lies in the next valley, its geology and climate are sufficiently similar to make its experience directly relevant to the Sid.
Several features of Stantyway’s approach are directly relevant:
Herbal Leys: The farm utilises herbal leys based on the work of Frank Newman Turner, mixing species such as sorrel and chicory . These diverse swards build soil fertility and support biodiversity, demonstrating that productive agriculture and ecological health can coexist.
Lucerne as a Nitrogen Fixer: Lucerne is harvested 3-4 times a year and sold to specialist markets. The crop’s deep roots penetrate the soil, fixing nitrogen and sequestering carbon – a perfect example of how perennial systems can replace artificial fertilisers . The roots visibly show nodules where nitrogen fixation occurs .
Red Clover Seed Trials: Most red clover seed is grown in New Zealand, but Sam Walker is experimenting with growing seed locally . However, this must pass extremely rigorous purity tests before it can be harvested. If there is any risk of contamination from nearby wildflowers, the crop is deemed unfit for combining .
Wildflower Headlands: Six-metre wide headlands surround the arable fields, with the inner three metres cut several times a year to maintain shorter grass for grasshoppers and other invertebrates . This encourages cirl buntings and yellowhammers – the farm is the most eastward regular breeding site for cirl buntings in the south west.
Quinoa: Quinoa has been grown successfully, though crop establishment can be challenging.
Stantyway demonstrates that organic, biodiverse, mixed farming is viable in our local landscape. It is not a romanticised vision of the past but a working, commercial enterprise proving that the “strategic integration” this article advocates is achievable.
The Edible Valley Initiative: An Adjunct Solution
Beyond the farm gate, there is significant potential to increase local food production through community-scale and household efforts. The Sid Valley Biodiversity Group is developing a community based “Edible Valley” blueprint, drawing inspiration from successful schemes like Incredible Edible Todmorden, which transformed public spaces into productive vegetable plots open to all. Todmorden even saw an increase in tourism as a result.
The Edible Valley concept is not about replacing commercial agriculture but about building resilience through integration. Key elements include:
Edimentals: Replacing ornamental planting with “edimentals” – edible yet attractive plants like perennial kale, Swiss chard, and globe artichokes – so that floral displays remain visually striking while providing yields .
Vertical Viticulture: Training hardy grapes, loganberries, or hops up south-facing walls, using vertical space without obstructing pedestrian flow .
Replacing Box Hedging: Where box hedging has been blighted by box moths, replacing it with “step-over” fruit trees or currant bushes turns a monoculture hedge into a functional, edible boundary.
Biointensive Methods: Research suggests that a single square metre of managed land, using biointensive methods, can produce between 20kg and 50kg of fresh produce per year. This transforms small spaces into significant food sources.
Composting and Nutrient Cycling: East Devon already achieves a recycling rate of approximately 60%, with food waste collections accounting for thousands of tonnes of organic matter diverted from landfill. Composting at home retains nutrients locally and reduces reliance on oil-dependent synthetic fertilisers.
Sceptics raise legitimate concerns about these schemes : Is it just a drop in the ocean? What about vandalism and maintenance? Is roadside food safe? Etc. The Todmorden precedent demonstrates these objections can be overcome .
The Role of Home Growing and Allotments
Household food production can make a meaningful contribution. UK research shows that the median year-round household self-sufficiency among growers is 51% in vegetables, 20% in fruits, and 50% in potatoes. Crucially, study participants ate 6.3 portions of their 5-a-day (70% higher than the UK national average), and their food waste was 95% lower than the UK average.
Across the UK, 89% of allotment holders say they eat more fresh fruit and vegetables because of their plot, and nearly 63% rate the impact on mental wellbeing a perfect 10. However, demand outstrips supply, with over 174,000 people on waiting lists nationally.
For the Sid Valley, encouraging home growing and expanding allotment provision would provide a low-cost, high-impact supplementary food source, improve public health, build community resilience, and close the nutrient loop through composting. In some areas councils are reviewing underutilised public land, while private landowners might consider leasing small parcels for community growing. Will our local councils and landowners do the same?
Next Steps
It could be argued that I have largely demolished arguments for maintaining the status quo and for making sustainable change in the above paragraphs.
I disagree.
Part of my premise in writing this article was to compare the Sid Valley’s situation with the national one I commented on in “The Plant-Based Paradox” where I argued that the situation is complex and we should not take a simplistic view. Hopefully that argument is shown to pertain in this valley as well.
There is a discussion to be had about this valley around whether it should be for food production or for the environment and biodiversity. Should it be a huge food producing farm or a conservation site? Having worked in both sectors I would say neither. They are not mutually exclusive. They can exist alongside one another and both prosper. But I’m not arguing that this is easy!
The good news is that in farming and the environment there is no status quo. Change is inevitable and proceeds at pace. Often faster than we believe. My argument for the latter is as follows.
Farmers are an entrepreneurial group. The fact that they have survived generation after generation is, in part, an argument that supports this fact. Many of the ideas I have discussed above are already taking place. Landowners in this valley are already Slowing The Flow across the landscape. Well over 100 leaky dams have already been built high up in our steep valleys and these will go some way to prevent soil erosion, pollution and floods downstream. At least two new orchards are planned. Both the leaky dams and orchards will also improve water retention in the aquifers and encourage biodiversity.
Regenerative farming is also practiced in the valley and those nitrogen scavenging crops I mentioned have already been ground at scale. Whether this continues depends on the results the landowner observes. As the climate changes we have to experiment, and that is what local landowners are doing. Some experiments succeed and some fail. Some are relaunched with modifications. That is how progress is made.
We also have our fair share of organic farmers and growers. From dairy to vegetable production organic farming is happening in this valley and in East Devon.
The change we are seeing here isn’t always highly visible to those that don’t farm. But it is happening and local farmers need our support in their efforts. They feed us and we need them!
The Stantyway model discussed above is also viable for this valley and serves as evidence that these ideas are viable.
All of us can play a part in the change that must happen. Whether by supporting local farmers, growing food in our gardens or allotments, participating in Edible Valley initiatives, or composting our food waste, every contribution builds resilience.
Conclusion
The Sid Valley’s agricultural strength lies not in conforming to either a farming or wildlife reserve model, in either livestock farming or human food production, but in aligning with its natural topography. By treating permanent grassland as the stable foundation of our landscape and introducing agroforestry and human-edible crops only where the land can sustainably support them, we can build a food system that is both nutritionally diverse and ecologically resilient. Stantyway Farm proves this is already happening locally. The Edible Valley initiative and expanded home growing offer additional pathways to resilience. And the Valley-wide nature reserve concept also aligns with this. This is not a retreat from the goals of sustainability, but a recognition that true productivity must be grounded in the limitations of the ground itself.
A future where farming, community, and individuals each play their part is not only desirable—it is already beginning to emerge.
Stefan Drew
Related Posts:
