Farmers and Environmentalists must work together

There has been a recent focus on the cost of agriculture in terms of greenhouse gas generation. The agricultural sector accounts for 11% of greenhouse gas emissions in Britain, with methane from the livestock and nitrous oxide due to the use of nitrogen fertilizer and manure management being the main causes. The problem is bigger in a country like Ireland, where agriculture accounts for 38.4% of emissions. In Ireland, radical moves like mass cattle culls are under consideration by government. What the call for a cull highlights is the often blunt instrument approach to the emissions issue. There is a divide between farmers and environmentalists. Recently, attending a talk in Rye, Sussex, about wildlife and biodiversity in the area, the division between farmers and environmentalists became immediately obvious. The talk was being given by a National Trust representative. He was explaining what was happening, with a rewilding plan, putting back hedges, returning to nature to restore biodiversity - so enhance carbon capture. It was all good stuff. A couple of farmers in the audience, though, were less impressed, criticising certain elements of the plan. The speaker was unwilling to dialogue, so the farmers were shut out. Speaking to one afterwards, he was just keen to work with the program in order that it worked better for everyone. The farmers, though, had not been taken into the equation. This type of polarisation of opinion is not uncommon. The farmers in one camp, environmentalists in the other, and never the twain shall meet. Writer and Cumbrian hill farmer James Rebanks has explored some of these dilemmas. In his excellent book, English Pastoral, he describes a journey, which results in him totally changing his farming methods. So the farm still deals with livestock, only much more sustainably produced. He also does all that is possible to promote biodiversity, so reduce emissions. He has also been an advocate for this approach, working in co-operation, with his farming neighbours. The two things can work well together - producing food and enhancing the environment. Nations need feeding but the livestock must be dealt with sustainably. The consequence of a Rebanks style approach is the products like meat will cost the consumer more. Whether the consumer will accept such developments, especially at a time of a cost of living crisis, remains to be seen. Though, government subsidy for this form of sustainable farming can soften the blow. What is for sure is that this more co-operative approach must be the way forward. Farmers and farming cannot just be slashed to meet an emissions target. Working together in the way Rebanks and others suggest must be the way forward. Another project that shows real initiative in this area is the Our Food 1200 in Monmouthshire and the Breacon Beacons. The local bodies there are trying to bring new farmers in to take on small holdings. There are 1200 acres of plots to be handed out - the amount needed to feed the region. The plots vary between 3 and 10 acres. The new farmers then produce the food required in the area. It becomes a virtuous circle. No more transporting food around the country, generating emissions, it is being produced sustainably and consumed locally. This type of imaginative project must be spread across these islands and beyond. In areas like Redbridge, this locally produced food can be further enhanced by expanding allotments and community gardens, as well as promoting food production in private gardens. What the moves being taken to address greenhouse emissions to reach net zero underline is the need for change. The world has been slow to address the crisis. The warnings of scientists were at first ignored, then only given secondary status.Even today, many governments still believe climate issues can be put on the back burner until affordable. Though, an increasing number of governments realise delay, means an even greater cost down the line. People's lives do need to radically change, the deniability bubble is no answer. At least in Ireland there is a will to embrace the challenges, the UK government seems determined to promote the most damaging ways of living, aka fossil fuel extraction, in a populist desire for electoral success. There is a recognition in Ireland and Britain that less use of petrol cars and planes plus a better diet all have parts to play. It will mean a different way of living, maybe a step back in some ways to a simpler way of life. But the benefits are manifold, not just saving the planet from climate and biodiversity disasters but also bringing about a healthier more fulfilled way of living, embracing the land in a more holistic way. The future can be bright.