Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
reduce over-production in member states to allow reductions in the costs of agricultural
price support (Floyd, 1992). In contrast to organic farmers' high membership of Countryside
Stewardship, there were twice as many conventional as organic farmers involved with the
ESA scheme. Similar to Countryside Stewardship, government offered financial incentives
to farmers and other land managers who agree to undertake environmentally beneficial
practices under the ESA scheme.
Further significant differences between organic and conventional farmers were found in
relation to carrying out conservation work. First, more organic than conventional farmers
undertake conservation work, with a much higher proportion involved with hedge laying
and wood planting. Secondly, conventional farmers see the creation of pheasant cover as
conservation works. Carr & Tait (1991, p. 286) found that conventional farmers tended to
perceive pheasants as a: 'wildlife species beneficial to farming'. The organic farmers'
conservation behaviours support their environmental attitudes shown in Table 1a which
provided environmental reasons for their adoption of 'sustainable' organic methods of food
production although, as discussed previously, such methods are unlikely to provide a
permanent solution to food insecurity.
Both groups of respondents were asked if they were members of any environmental
organisations such as their local wildlife trust. Their responses are listed in rank order in
descending frequency of mention by both groups of farmers (Table 2). The table shows that
less than half of both categories of farmers are members of environmental institutions and
organic farmers prefer the Wildlife Trust, Woodland Trust and Friends of the Earth, whereas
conventional farmers prefer the Game Conservancy Trust. The same number of organic as
conventional farmers claims to be members of environmental organisations. However, this
raises the important question about what an environmental organisation is and just how
'green' their credentials are. For example, Table 2 shows that the Game Conservancy Trust
was the most frequently mentioned agency by respondents. However, of those, over three
quarters were conventional farmers which, when cross-tabulated with their main
countryside leisure pursuit, were found to be shooting. The Game Conservancy Trust, now
renamed - the politically more acceptable - Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT)
claims to be the leading UK charity conducting scientific research to enhance the British
countryside for public benefit. A recent impartial report of Grouse shooting commented:
'The bloodlust is extraordinary. I sense it in myself, but it is obvious in these alpha males
with their fingers on the trigger' (Hollingshead, 2010). Organic farmers' membership of
'truly green' environmental organisations is consistent with their concerns regarding the
sustainability and health issues related to the food security themes
,
pesticides and GM
crops.
When examining these results in relation to the readership of magazines and journals, it was
found that a total of 27 different periodicals were mentioned.
Farmers Weekly
and
Farmers
Guardian
dominate
conventional
farmers' reading. The most popular magazine with
interviewees is
Farmers Weekly
, which is 'read' by just over three quarters of organic farmers
and almost all conventional farmers. Earlier in the analysis, OF5 criticised
Farmers Weekly
for
influencing the quantity of pesticides used by conventional farmers. The second most
popular magazine 'read' by over a quarter of conventional farmers - and no organic farmers
- is
Farmers Guardian
. The
Living Earth
and
Organic Farming
were read by 88 per cent of
organic farmers but by no conventional respondents. Similarly, no conventional farmers
Search WWH ::
Custom Search