Hedgerow evidence after SFI 2026: what survived, what didn’t

For three years the obvious answer to “how do I get paid for looking after my hedges?” was: do HRW1, do HRW2, file the paperwork. The SFI 2026 reset changed that. CHRW1, the assess-and-record action, has gone. CHRW3, the hedgerow-trees one, has gone. CHRW2, the per-metre management payment, stayed. Capital Grants still funds creation. BNG still requires condition evidence on every qualifying parcel. Catchment-sensitive farming payments still care about cross-slope hedges as a runoff control.

So the question isn’t whether hedgerow evidence still matters. It does. The question is what kind of evidence supports what kind of payment now, and how to capture it once in a way that supports all of them. This guide walks through the four active routes (CHRW2, Capital Grants, BNG, catchment-sensitive farming) and how a measured porosity figure plus dated photographs gives you one evidence pack that works for each.

SFI 2026 hedgerow actions, in plain terms

CHRW2 (Manage hedgerows) is the one action that survived. It pays per metre of hedge for active management: typically reduced cutting frequency, rotational cutting on at least 50% of length at intervals of three years or longer, and protection of fruiting and flowering structures during pollinator-relevant seasons. CHRW2 doesn’t require a porosity figure directly, but a structural baseline with dated photographs is the evidence that demonstrates the management plan is being delivered against the right starting condition.

CHRW1 (Assess and record hedgerow condition) and CHRW3 (Maintain or establish hedgerow trees) are closed to new agreements from SFI 2026. Existing agreements run on to their term but no new uptake is funded. Defra’s explanation was about value for money: CHRW1 paid for record-keeping without a direct environmental output, and CHRW3 paid for tree maintenance most farmers already did.

What still funds hedgerow work in 2026

Four routes carry the weight that HRW1/HRW2/CHRW1 used to share:

• CHRW2 (SFI 2026): per-metre management payment. Needs structural evidence that the management plan is appropriate for the starting condition and that work is being delivered.
• Capital Grants 2026 (BN11, TE1): capital funding for new hedgerow creation and hedgerow tree planting. Needs evidence of the existing boundary state - or its absence - to justify the proposed work.
• BNG hedgerow condition (mandatory in England since 2024): statutory biodiversity-metric scoring requires a condition assessment on every qualifying hedge. Structural attributes (basal density, gappiness) form part of the Good/Moderate/Poor classification.
• Catchment-sensitive farming (CSF) payments: cross-slope hedges that reduce sediment and dissolved-phosphorus loss are funded under several CSF-linked schemes. A measured porosity figure is the structural evidence that the hedge is delivering the runoff function.

The good news for any farmer running multiple lines of evidence: the same dated photograph plus measured porosity figure can support all four. Capture once, file in four folders.

Capturing compliant photographs

The photograph rules are the same as any porosity capture. Side-on, perpendicular to the hedge, sky behind, camera level. See the hedgerow capture guide for the full protocol. The compliance-relevant additions are about coverage rather than technique:

• Every hedge on the agreement parcel needs at least one frame. Hedges over 50 metres need a frame every 10 metres or so.
• Tag each frame with GPS (most phones do this automatically). Audit packs expect to know which photograph is which hedge.
• Photograph in the same season each year. In-leaf summer captures are the standard; bare-branch winter captures are usable but harder to compare year-on-year if seasons mix.
• Note the management date on each hedge somewhere. A hedge cut in March looks different in June than the same hedge uncut for five years.

Adding the porosity figure

Upload the batch to the analyser in hedgerow mode. Each photograph gets a per-photo porosity percentage, a confidence label, and a spatial heatmap showing where the dense and open zones sit. The batch average is the figure that goes on the per-hedge report line.

Typical ranges in the field, broadly:

• 0–20% porosity: very dense. Newly laid, recently coppiced into vigorous regrowth, or a stockproof hawthorn that has been managed annually for decades.
• 20–50% porosity: the agronomically healthy band. Wind sifts through, biodiversity thrives, the structural condition is supporting the functions CHRW2 management plans and BNG assessments are looking for.
• 50–75% porosity: declining. Structural gaps starting to appear. Candidate for gap-up planting under Capital Grants BN11 or rotational laying under CHRW2.
• Over 75% porosity: broken. The hedge is mostly gaps. Substantial restoration needed; a strong baseline case for BN11 funding.

These bands are working benchmarks, not Defra-approved thresholds. The figure itself is what goes in the report; the bands are interpretation guidance for management decisions.

Assembling the audit pack

The Grant-style PDF the analyser produces is the right format for inclusion in any of the four evidence folders. It has the per-photo porosity readings, the batch average, the confidence label, and the spatial heatmaps that show where the gaps are. Add a line on each per-hedge report noting: hedge ID, length in metres, measured porosity, season of capture, management dates, recommended action.

Repeat the process every year on the same hedges, in the same season. After three or four years you have a time series that is audit-defensible, year-over-year comparable, and useful as input to CHRW2 payment claims, Capital Grants applications, BNG reassessments, and CSF runoff-reduction claims alike.

Frequently asked questions