Rural Representation- Have we got it right?

It has become fashionable over the last thirty years to claim that the Government is 'out of touch' with rural communities and businesses. Although the Tories and perhaps the Lib Dems were seen to be the parties of the Shires with a natural understanding of rural issues, nevertheless there was a feeling that farmers, in particular, had done better under Labour perhaps because the concept of taxpayer support to subsidise production was perceived by some to keep food prices lower.
I remember being one of the after dinner speakers at the first Labour rural conference at Harper Adams College in July 2002 orgained by Peter Bradley. It was well supported by a range of senior Ministers and it represented a proper attempt to get to grips with a range of rural issues. This meant looking not only at the expected subjects of rural deprivation, housing, transport, education and health issues but also the need for profitability and re-investment.
Yet shortly after this the 'Liberty and Livlihood' march took place in London in September 2002 bringing 400,000 onto the streets. This was ostensibly about supporting the right to hunt with hounds yet presumably in an attempt to ensure high numbers the organisers invites all those with any rural grievance from farming to post offices. This led to confused messages providing the Government with the opportunity to sidestep any particular rural issue that was difficult or uncomfortable.
The organisers of the march- the Countryside Alliance-illustrate the difficulty that any one organisation has in representing rural views accurately.Their membership is largely comprised of those interested in field sports and their attempt to portray themselves as something more than this has not been taken seriously. They have not succeeded for example in gaining a seat at the National Trust Council despite a recent application. Their executive Chairman has recently issued a plea for rural organisations to combine so as to improve their lobbying effectiveness yet this ignores the fact that rural issues are more complicated than that.

Flooding in the SW needs a co-ordinated response

 People get involved only if they feel strongly about issues. A consensus often means, as with the recent revised framework for National Planning Policy, that people interpret something in the way that they want to! Within the rural lobbying fraternity there are those who want to preserve the countryside in aspic and those that see it needing to change as the source of development and jobs; those who are landlords and those that are tenants; those who farm conventionally and those who farm organically; those who believe that shooting promotes conservation and those who oppose shooting on principle; those who believe bus routes should be subsidised and those who don't and those who believe that nature should be free to take its course free from any interference from man and those who believe the opposite.Most of these opinions are represented by some form of organisation or body!
I was invited to spend a couple of years as a Board member of the South West Regional Development Agency as it was being wound up.There were positives and negatives about the RDAs but I was horrified about the duplication that took place over rural representation. In addition to the meetings organised by the main rural lobby organisations there was the Rural Affairs Forum; the SWRDA Rural Group ; the Rural group of GOSW (Government Office SW) and the SW Chamber of Rural Enterprise to name but four, all requiring the attendance of the same busy people. What they all did was reflect the views of a diverse range of people and then pass them up the line to Government without any imperative to resolve them themselves.
What the Government has introduced to replace these groups is a network of Rural and Farming Networks around the Country. We have designed ours in this part of the world on the model of the three legged 'sustainability' stool. The commercial business of farming and rural business is represented by the SW Chamber of Rural Enterprise and this body is joined by the SW Environment Network and the SW Rural Community Councils thus representing economic, environmental and community strands of opinion.The main lobby organisations (e.g NFU;CLA; FSB; RSPB) work through the most appropriate sector. We recognise that funding is very tight and we therefore concentrate on the issues that really matter. We try and reach some consensus ourselves rather than expecting Goverment to arbitrate (or perhaps divide and rule!).
Whether or not this is localism in action I am not sure but the system is not yet perfect in my view. Having a direct link to Ministers and Government is helpful but in order to act in this way some basic administrative capacity is needed. Ours is provided by SWCoRE which is a membership organisation yet this administration takes valuable resource which could otherwise be used on problem gathering. We could be more effective with a tiny bit of help.  Others have no finance at all so inevitably have to find a funding source- a source that may well want influence over results. Ours attempts to balance the three 'legs' yet others have no such balance. Some, as we do, attempt to reflect common views over a wider area- such as the livestock interests of the SW Uplands for example while others are very confined geographically.
Duplication has not entirely disappeared either. We will have Nature Improvement Areas; Local Enterprise Partnerships, Local Nature Partnerships, Rural and Farming Networks all feeding into DEFRA and probably into different parts of it!
Government has a financial challenge- we all recognise that. The question is how to organise structures that work effectively in this brave new world and how to provide at least a modicum of resource so that they can operate dispassionately. We will not end up with one body representing rural views- they are too diverse. What we need is a properly designed model that facilitates debate at a local, and not too local, level so that the issues, when they reach Government, have been discussed and hopefully moderated making it easier to provide appropriate solutions. 

It isn't easy to be a wildlife friendly farmer- guest blog

Experiencing wildlife is one of the privileges of living in the countryside. Hearing it, seeing it and trying to understand it continues to delight and challenge me. Will the blue tits successfully use the house martins’ nest? Is it rabbit, squirrel or deer that has been removing the bark from that tree? You become only too aware that the interaction between species is an ever changing and delicate one. I suppose that is what ecosystems are.

We are very lucky. Our family have lived in the same part of Devon for many centuries. This gives me a feeling of responsibility for our land, for our buildings and for the community in which we live. The interaction between these different components gives us an ecosystem of our own.

For many years our family/land ecosystem has evolved slowly. We have navigated our way through diseases (Black Death); wars (including the Civil War) and economic turmoil (The Great Depression). As our family ecosystem has evolved so we have influenced wildlife and landscape in this little part of the country. Land use change may have resulted from personal interest (planting trees, particularly specimen trees) but more often from the economics of farming. We grew oats to feed working horses until the early 20^th century; flat pole cabbages, swedes and turnips either for human consumption or for livestock. Animals also grazed the grass that was fed by irrigation channels (‘catch meadows’) dug into the slopes.

The evolution of the wildlife ecosystems and our own was slow and they were interrelated. Some of our food and medicines came from the wild. Our community was a rural and farming one.

We have evidence of what life was like in this part of Devon over the years. I remember it as a boy. There is no doubt that we are seeing changes. The most obvious ones that I notice are rabbits back in some years to pre myxomatosis levels but no hares; a hugely increased population of badgers but very few hedgehogs; a hugely increased population of wood pigeons and corvids but fewer songbirds and less diversity. There are less insects and bees. There are fewer wildflowers, orchids, hedgerow plants and no poppies in the fields. There are more roe deer and a huge number of grey squirrels. There are no grey partridge. I am sad to see these changes as I know are very many other farmers and landowners. So the natural ecosystems are changing but so too has our ecosystem.

This last century saw an increase in the rate of change however. The first ‘popular’ tractor arrived in 1917 (the Fordson); the first commercial chainsaws appeared in the 1930s and the first commercially available pesticides and herbicides arrived around 1950. This coupled with a national policy to increase production led to the well documented changes that have led to changes in wildlife.

A vital part of our own ecosystem is money. We have a large overdraft to service, built up in the long period until recently when farming produced few profits. So repaying loans has to be done alongside competing demands in our ecosystem such as maintaining listed buildings at huge cost. Farming in an environmentally friendly way is a challenge. Stewardship schemes help but they are less well funded than they were and they don’t cover everything these days. I have spent a lot of money this last year on laying hedges, clearing scrub etc in areas not covered by the schemes. I will be providing public access next year that I am not compelled to do but will improve visitors enjoyment on an Iron Age hill fort. It will cost me money and bring me in no return at all and I will have to consider additional issues like health and safety as a consequence.

In these circumstances it is not surprising that the modern farmer uses whatever technology is available to him to improve financial performance; plants winter crops not spring crops and generally make his farm more efficient. He doesn’t want to see grain spilled on the ground at harvest even if sparrows do. He doesn’t have the time to measure optimum sward height or to manage small groups of cattle in tiny fields. He already has much more paperwork so he doesn’t welcome more. If he leaves skylark plots it looks as though his seed drill was blocked.

It isn’t that he is necessarily hostile to nature. Indeed he probably regrets the changes as much as anyone. It is just that he needs to make his living and he is wired to maximise production. He sees his role as feeding the population of this country and the world. He wishes he could do both.

An increasing number of farmers are however trying to produce food and environmental benefit together and, at long last, some serious attempts are being made to quantify this environmental benefit and to find ways of reflecting this in returns. The return of profitability to UK agriculture will certainly help but farming is an increasingly complex business and it would help if environmental guidance was clear, unambiguous and easy to implement. My worry is that the responses on the ground on individual farms will be too piecemeal and too small scale to reverse the declines in biodiversity that we have already seen.

One of the difficulties is the fact that the debate is often portrayed as production versus conservation and that this debate is conducted in the media often by sound bite. This blog is no stranger to the need to stimulate interest by courting controversy! There is a danger that the retreat into silos may happen politically too with the newly formed LEPs (local enterprise partnerships) not speaking to the soon to be formed LNPs (local nature partnerships) and leaving it to Government (DEFRA and BIS) to adjudicate. It will be interesting to see if the newly formed Rural and Farming Network reporting to DEFRA can help. I chair the South West Network in a part of the world where farming, environmental and community interests have worked well together and where our group was specifically designed to include representatives from each sector. I will let you know how we get on!

 This blog was posted on Mark Avery's blog at his kind invitation