CHRW2Manage hedgerows

What it actually is

You put your eligible hedgerows into the action and manage each one in one of four ways: cut it incrementally each year so it gets a little taller and wider every time, cut it on a rotation of no more than once every three years, doing no more than a third of your hedges each year, cut it on a rotation of no more than once every two years, doing no more than half of them, or coppice or lay it on rotation, in which case it can stay uncut for the rest of the agreement, and that last route is the one you can only take if both sides of the hedgerow are entered. Newly planted hedges are trimmed lightly and incrementally until they are established.

GOV.UK's stated aim is managed hedgerows with a range of different heights and widths, providing habitat for wildlife and a source of pollen, nectar and berries for mammals, birds and insects.

The payment is per 100 metres for one side of an eligible hedgerow per year, so a hedge managed on both sides earns on both sides.

Source: GOV.UK, CHRW2 action page, checked 23/08/2026.

What it pays, and what that comes to

The rate is in the panel at the top of this page. It is paid per 100 metres of hedge side, so the arithmetic runs per kilometre:

Source: arithmetic on the payment rate shown at the top of this page, which comes from Tilth's copy of the GOV.UK action catalogue and carries its own last-checked date. The 8 kilometres is an illustration; measure your own.

Is it worth it on your ground?

This action is unusual on this site: done one way it pays you on top of what you already spend, and done another way it pays you while cutting one of your existing costs. So the question splits by which of the four routes each hedge takes.

What cutting costs. The NAAC's survey of its contractor members' prices for 2026 to 2027 puts hedge cutting with a flail at £56.07 an hour on average, a reciprocating knife at £61.50 and a saw blade at £74.29, and hedge laying at £19 a metre. How many metres of your hedges a contractor gets through in an hour depends on the hedge, the ground and the kit, so that figure is your own; put it against the numbers below.

Source: NAAC contractor price survey 2026 to 2027, published by Farmers Weekly, checked 23/08/2026. Averages of member responses; your own contractor's price is the one that counts.

The incremental route. You keep cutting every year, just to a slightly higher and wider line each time, so the cutting bill stays roughly what it is now and the payment sits on top. The guidance's suggested increment is around 10 centimetres a cycle, which over three years is a hedge some 30 centimetres taller and wider, worth knowing if a hedge runs beside a lane or a gateway where size matters.

The rotation routes. On the three year rotation you cut no more than a third of your hedges each year, and on the two year rotation no more than half. If your current practice is cutting the whole length every year, the metres flailed each year fall by two thirds or by half, and the payment arrives as well. Each hedge carries more growth when its turn comes, so the passes are slower and a contractor may price the heavier growth accordingly, which is worth asking about, but fewer metres cut for more money is the basic shape.

The coppice and lay route. Laying at the NAAC's average of £19 a metre prices a single kilometre at £19,000, which the annual payment on this action does not begin to touch. Anyone taking this route is doing it for the hedge, or with capital money behind it, not for this payment.

Source for the requirements referred to above: GOV.UK, CHRW2 action page and How to do the SFI actions for hedgerows, checked 23/08/2026. The cost reasoning is Tilth's own arithmetic on the NAAC figures, and adds no requirement beyond what the GOV.UK action page sets out.

Does it work, and what makes it work better

This section is what we have found in published sources about the practice this action pays for. It is not scheme guidance, it is not Defra's or the RPA's view, and it adds no requirement beyond what the GOV.UK action page sets out. We have named every source and given the date we checked it. What it means for your ground is your decision.

The fit here is better than on most pages of this site, so it is worth saying first. Conservation Evidence assess an action called Manage hedgerows to benefit wildlife, which they define as one or more of reducing cutting frequency, reducing or avoiding spraying, mowing vegetation beneath hedgerows, filling gaps, and coppicing or laying to restore traditional hedge structure. Reduced cutting frequency and coppicing or laying are two of the four routes CHRW2 pays for, so the assessed bundle and the paid-for action properly overlap. They are still not the same thing: the assessed bundle includes spray changes and hedge-base mowing that CHRW2 does not require, and nothing in the studies is the incremental cutting route.

The graded assessments. Conservation Evidence, based at the Department of Zoology at the University of Cambridge, summarises the published studies behind individual conservation actions and has independent subject experts score each one. Effectiveness scores only the size and direction of the reported effects, and they say themselves it does not consider the quantity or quality of the studies. Certainty is the separate score for how many studies there are, how well built they are and how much ground they cover.

Managing hedgerows to benefit wildlife comes out in their category Likely to be beneficial, on 20 studies, with 70 per cent for effectiveness, 50 per cent for certainty, and harms not assessed.

They also hold a second assessment of nearly the same practice in their Bird Conservation synopsis, Manage hedges to benefit birds, judged only on what it does for birds. That one comes out as Unknown effectiveness with limited evidence, on 7 studies, with 39 per cent for effectiveness, 38 per cent for certainty and 3 per cent for harms. The two assessments draw on substantially the same studies; the difference is the lens. Judged across plants, insects and birds together the panel found the practice likely to be beneficial, and judged on birds alone the same evidence was too thin and too mixed to call. Both of those are worth knowing.

Source: Conservation Evidence, action 116, Manage hedgerows to benefit wildlife (includes no spray, gap-filling and laying), Farmland Conservation synopsis, and action 177, Manage hedges to benefit birds, Bird Conservation synopsis, both checked 23/08/2026. Cite the first as Dicks et al. (2020), Farmland Conservation, pages 283 to 321, and the second as Williams et al. (2020), Bird Conservation, pages 137 to 281, both in What Works in Conservation 2020, Open Book Publishers.

What the studies found. Their key messages for the farmland assessment: ten studies from Switzerland and the UK found that managing hedges for wildlife resulted in increased berry yields, species diversity or richness of plants and invertebrates, and diversity or abundance of farmland birds. Five UK studies found no effect on plant species richness, numbers of bumblebee queens or farmland birds. Two found mixed or adverse effects. A replicated site comparison found hedges cut every two years had more suitable nesting habitat for grey partridge than any other management regime, and a replicated study found hawthorn berry yield was reduced when management involved removing fruit-bearing wood.

The berry work is the most usable thing on the page, because it measured exactly the thing this action's rotation routes change. Across three farms in Yorkshire, Cambridgeshire and Buckinghamshire, Croxton and Sparks found hedges left uncut for at least two years held 143 to 175 grams of hawthorn berries per 2.5 square metre quadrat, against 4 to 11 grams on hedges cut annually, with hedges uncut for many years higher again at 305 to 530. An earlier Cambridgeshire study by Sparks and colleagues found laid sections held 282 grams against 4 to 10 for annually cut, 3 to 26 for coppiced and zero for grubbed out, with the differences coming from the number of berries rather than their size.

On birds, the picture is real but less tidy. Rands, across ten farms, found the most suitable grey partridge nesting habitat in hedges trimmed every two years, with nests sited where dead grass, bramble and leaf litter were abundant and the bank at the hedge base was higher. Field and colleagues found summer yellowhammer numbers significantly higher in hedges under stewardship management, which at entry level meant cutting every two or three years in winter only, in East Anglia though not on the equivalent hedges in the Cotswolds. Davey and colleagues, across 97 one kilometre squares in East Anglia, found blue tit, dunnock, common whitethroat and yellowhammer responding strongly and positively to boundaries managed under agri-environment schemes. But the same team, across 2,046 one kilometre squares of lowland England, found no association three years after the 2005 schemes began between the length of hedgerow under scheme management and farmland bird numbers overall, with grey partridge apparently declining by 0.3 individuals for every 1.1 kilometres of managed hedgerow. And in Leicestershire, Stoate found numbers of nationally declining songbird species rose by 102 per cent on a site where hedges were managed for wildlife, but as part of a package that also included beetle banks, seed mixtures, supplementary feeding and predator control, so the hedges cannot claim that number on their own.

On coppicing and laying, a randomised study of 14 hedges across Northern Ireland found hard coppicing raised plant species counts (31 to 34 per plot against 26 in controls) and laying raised invertebrate orders (4.1 against 2.6), but the same team reported that by year four the plant differences were no longer significant. On cutting date, a replicated study across seven farms in England and Wales found cutting in February rather than September reduced butterflies and moths (33 against 65 a plot) and flies the following summer, while increasing beetles.

Conservation Evidence say themselves that studies are not directly comparable or of equal value, and that study size, design, reported metrics and relevance to your own situation matter more than "simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation".

Source: Conservation Evidence, actions 116 and 177, key messages and supporting evidence from individual studies, both checked 23/08/2026.

What we have not found. Nothing measuring CHRW2 itself; the studies behind both assessments predate the scheme, and most predate 2011. Nothing on the incremental cutting route, the raise-it-10-centimetres-a-year approach, which is one of the four ways of doing this action. And no published figure for what rotational cutting does to the cutting bill, which is why the money section above leaves the workrate to you.

What the sources say makes it work better. All of the following comes from the studies listed on those Conservation Evidence pages, and it is a description of what was found rather than advice from us.

On frequency, the two year rest is the best-evidenced point on the page: berries many times higher than annual cutting in two separate studies, and the best partridge nesting habitat in a third. One nuance runs against simply stretching the interval, in the seven-farm study the longer gaps produced more berries from annual to biennial, but berry numbers were reduced with triennial cuts.

On what gets cut, the berry studies point at the wood rather than the date: yield fell wherever management removed the fruit-bearing wood, which is what a hard cut does, and laying kept berries where coppicing lost nearly all of them.

On timing, the February against September finding cuts both ways, fewer butterflies, moths and flies after a late winter cut, more beetles, so the evidence does not crown either window.

On the base of the hedge, the partridge study found nests where dead grass, bramble and litter had been let be and banks were higher, and a Somerset experiment found sowing a perennial mix at the hedge base raised plant diversity more than any cutting treatment did.

Source: Conservation Evidence, actions 116 and 177, supporting evidence from individual studies, checked 23/08/2026.

What follows is Tilth's own reading of how those findings sit against this action, and it adds no requirement beyond what the GOV.UK action page sets out.

The rotation routes are the ones the evidence actually speaks to. What CHRW2 calls cutting once every two or three years is more or less what the berry and partridge studies measured, and those studies are British, replicated, and pointing the same way. If the aim on the GOV.UK page, pollen, nectar and berries, is why you are doing this, the evidence behind resting a hedge for two years is about as good as this site gets.

The incremental route is the unmeasured one. Nobody in either evidence base cut a hedge slightly higher and wider each year and counted anything, so the choice between incremental and rotational is a choice between a route with no direct evidence and a route with quite good evidence. The incremental route keeps annual berry loss, since the hedge is still cut every year; what it builds is size and structure over time.

The national-scale finding deserves to be taken seriously rather than explained away. The largest study on either page found no overall association between scheme-managed hedgerow length and farmland bird numbers three years in, at the same time as regional studies found strong responses from particular species. Our reading is that a managed hedge reliably feeds and holds the birds that use hedges, and does not by itself turn a farm's bird numbers around; in the studies where whole bird communities moved, the hedges were one part of a package. That squares with how this action is priced, and it is a reason to see CHRW2 as the boundary piece alongside the in-field actions on this site rather than a substitute for them.

And the two-year rotation's late winter timing sits against the one timing study with honest awkwardness. The scheme puts that route's cutting in January and February, which the seven-farm study found reduced butterflies, moths and flies the following summer relative to a September cut, while increasing beetles. That is one study, and the same rotation carries the berry benefit through the winter precisely because the hedge is not cut in the autumn. We would not resolve that trade for you; we would just rather you knew it exists.

What you actually have to do

Choose one management approach for each fully established hedgerow you enter: cut incrementally each year, in the autumn and winter months from September to late February, cut on a rotation of no more than once every three years, cutting no more than one third of your hedges each year, in the autumn and winter months, cut on a rotation of no more than once every two years, cutting no more than half the hedges each year, in late winter, January to late February, or coppice or lay on rotation, after which the hedge may remain uncut for the rest of the agreement. Newly planted or not yet established hedgerows are trimmed lightly and incrementally until they are fully established, which the guidance puts at typically five years. GOV.UK attaches one condition to that last route only: you must enter both sides of the hedgerow to manage it in a coppicing or laying rotation.

The incremental approaches mean not cutting back to the same point each time. The guidance suggests raising the cutting height and width by around 10 centimetres a cycle, and says cutting back to the same point every year limits berry production while cutting everything to a uniform height makes poor structure with fewer nesting sites.

Do this in each year of the action's three year duration.

Source: GOV.UK, CHRW2 action page and How to do the SFI actions for hedgerows, checked 23/08/2026.

Separately from this action, it is against the law to cut or trim a hedgerow between 1 March and 31 August, with limited exceptions, and the guidance tells you to check for nesting birds, conservation area rules and felling licence requirements before any work. Those rules apply whether or not you enter this action.

Source: GOV.UK, How to do the SFI actions for hedgerows, checked 23/08/2026.

Where it can go, and what rules it out

An eligible hedgerow is a boundary line of shrubs, or shrubs and trees, over 20 metres long and less than 10 metres wide. Newly planted, laid and coppiced hedges count, and so does woody growth on top of earth or stone banks, which brings Cornish hedges and similar in. Gaps are allowed provided no single gap is over 20 metres and the gaps together are under 10 per cent of the hedge's length; gateways are not counted as gaps.

The action is available on arable, grassland and moorland land types, and you enter each eligible side of hedge you manage, which is why the payment is written per 100 metres for one side.

It can sit alongside most SFI actions and Countryside Stewardship options, but not on hedgerows already managed under certain boundary options; check the combinations list on the action page against your own agreement.

Source: GOV.UK, CHRW2 action page, checked 23/08/2026.

Things worth watching

This section is Tilth's own reading of where this action is easy to get wrong. It is not scheme guidance, it is not sourced from Defra or the RPA, and none of it adds a requirement beyond what the GOV.UK action page sets out.

Measure before you estimate. The payment is per 100 metres of hedge side, and farms are long on hedges nobody has ever measured. Walking the map with a measuring tool before entering the action turns a guess into a number, and the difference between a guess and a number here is the whole payment.

One approach per hedge, chosen up front. The four routes are alternatives, not a menu to wander between. A hedge on the two year rotation has a late winter cutting window; a hedge cut incrementally has the whole autumn and winter. Mixing the two up on the same length is the easiest way to end up with a cut made in the wrong window.

The rotation needs a plan that survives three years. A third of the hedges each year means knowing, in year one, which hedges get cut in year three. That is a list worth writing down against named hedges, because the person in the cab in year three may not be the person who made the plan in year one.

The incremental route grows the hedge. Ten centimetres a cycle sounds like nothing until a roadside hedge meets a lorry mirror or a telephone wire. The hedges this route suits are the ones with room to get bigger; the ones without are candidates for a rotation instead.

Your contractor needs to know. If a contractor cuts your hedges, the action's requirements are being delivered by someone who has never read them. The cutting heights, the windows and which hedges are in which year of the rotation have to reach the person on the machine, and the invoice they leave is part of your evidence.

The legal cutting ban does not move for the action. Nothing in CHRW2 permits cutting between 1 March and 31 August. The action's windows all sit inside the legal one.

Keeping the evidence

Also Tilth's own reading. GOV.UK sets the requirements; what follows is a practical suggestion about record keeping.

GOV.UK's examples are field operations at land parcel level with their associated invoices, and photographs or other documentation showing the action was completed and consistent with its aim.

The record that matters here is which hedge was cut, when, and to what. A dated operation against the parcel, with the contractor's invoice, covers the first two. For the third, a photograph each winter of a hedge on the rotation, taken from the same gateway, shows a hedge getting taller and fuller between cuts in a way no written description manages. On the incremental route, the same photograph shows the cutting line rising year on year.

Tilth records field operations against the parcel with dates and lets you attach photographs, so the cutting plan, the work and the pictures sit together when anyone asks.

The part only your own ground can answer

Two numbers decide this action and both live on your farm, not in a survey. The first is how many metres of eligible hedge you actually have, counted per side, which is a mapping job. The second is what you spend now on cutting them, which is in your contractor invoices. Put those against the rate at the top of this page and the answer mostly falls out, hedge by hedge. Tilth holds your boundaries and your field operations in the same place, so both numbers are already yours. Request an invite.