Defra

Main menu

• Contact us
• Access to information
• News
• Site A-Z
• Search

Homepage > Rural Affairs > ERDP > Schemes > ES > Higher Level Stewardship > Farm Environment Plan > Appendix 1

Section navigation

Higher Level Stewardship
Farm Environment Plan (FEP)
Handbook
	Section 1
	Section 2
	Section 3
	Section 4
	Appendix 1
	Appendix 2
	Appendix 3

Appendix 1 - Quality Standards for FEPs

This appendix outlines the main issues that RDS will consider when assessing the quality of a completed FEP. This is only a guide to our assessment process, other judgements of quality may also be made.

RDS recognises that completing some parts of the FEP requires a degree of judgement. While we will allow some margin for error we reserve the right to withhold payment for FEPs where we consider an application to contain material inaccuracies or omissions until these deficiencies have been remedied.

FER/FEP map

1. Have the maps been completed on Defra-produced maps?
2. Is the map clearly annotated and appropriate boundaries numbered to show both FEP and FER features?
3. Have the correct colours been used and correctly referenced on the map(s)?
4. Are features located accurately on the map?
5. Has the whole farm been assessed?
6. Is the map complete i.e. are all the features identified on the map where necessary and land use been identified for every land parcel?

FEP form

Part one

7. Is the information complete and correct?

Part two of FEP - Environmental features data sheet

8. Have all features been identified, are there any significant omissions?
9. Have all features been identified correctly and given the correct FEP code?
10. Have the quantities of features been assessed accurately e.g. area of habitat; number of in-field trees?
11. Have condition assessments been made accurately?
12. If there is a SSSI on the land, have English Nature condition assessment codes been used for features covered by the SSSI designation?

Part three - General

13. Has the farmer been consulted?
14. Have the relevant parts of this section been completed accurately?

Part three - Landscape

15. Has the correct JCA been identified and correct descriptions inserted?
16. Have the landscape characteristics and condition been assessed correctly?

Part three - Historic environment

17. Have suitable opportunities for managing the historic environment been identified?

Part three - Field boundaries

18. Has the extent of boundary change been assessed correctly?

Part three - Biodiversity

19. Have suitable opportunities for habitat creation or restoration been identified?
20. Have any suitable habitat creation opportunities been missed?

Part three - Access

21. Has the assessment of PRoW been completed accurately?
22. Has potential for new access been considered and sensibly assessed?

Part three - Resource protection

23. If relevant, has the land been identified as being in a priority catchment and is this named correctly?
24. Has soil erosion risk been identified correctly and appropriate management options recommended?

Part three - Flood and coastal management

25. Has the land been identified appropriately?

Part three - Genetic conservation

26. If relevant, have the genetic resources on the farm been identified correctly?
27. Has the use of local provenance material been assessed sensibly?

Part three - Woodlands

28. Have the conditions, opportunities and threats relating to the farm woodlands been identified correctly?

Part four - Other relevant information

29. Is additional information relevant and correct?

Part five - Summary of FEP findings and management proposals

30. Has the management proposed been summarised correctly ?

Part six - Consultations

31. Has EN been consulted in relation to SSSIs and is the condition assessment correct?
32. Has the HER been properly consulted?
33. Have the HER responses been used appropriately and all HER features correctly identified and assessed?
34. Has the consultation response been appended?

Page last modified: 19 May, 2005
Page published: 3 March, 2005

Top of the page