[rotc_t3]

Many, including Prince Charles, argue that farming can be practiced in the UK in ways that conserve habitats and wildlife at the same time as being economically viable with food security for the nation.

To what extent do you agree

Use your knowledge to state a point of view and to discuss the views of others, here online.

[rotc_s65]

i kind of agree, but we can see from our research that at the moment it's not always done in ways that conserve habitats and wildlife, so it's fair enough he says that, but when it's not actually been done then nothing is actually being protected.

[rotc_t1]

What suggestions would you make to farmers? and why would you make this suggestion?

[rotc_s73]

I don't agree as we have a growing population which farmers respond to with intensive farming which to produce such high yields has to be damaging to wildlife as by saving wildlife farmers have to use less land and less pesticides etc which has to mean lower crop yield. It's alright for organic farmers to fund their conservation by pricing their meat a lot higher than other farmers but most of the population can't afford that luxury. If all farmers tried to conserve wildlife they would produce less crops and therefore have to raise prices which would overthrow the economy or food would be taken from other countries and we would ruin their wildlife.

[rotc_s62]

Yes organic products are more expensive at the supermarket, but then for GM crops there are costs like soil erosion, pollution of groundwater and climate change, which everyone is having to pay.
I agree that in an ideal world organic farming should unreservedly be put into practice, yet with today's population and economy I don't see how that is completely possible.
What farmers could do is try to make their farming as friendly to the environment as is possible with their economic circumstances. eg. crop stripping, crop rotating, increasing soil organic matter with animal and plant manures, contour ploughing.

[rotc_s66]

I think that it is right to ensure that farm grown products such as vegetables and meats are readily available and affordable for everyone, especially when it is cheaper to buy processed carbohydrates and products high in sugar. However i disagree that this needs to be done at the expense of the environment. There are several ways, for example, that farmers can continue to use inorganic fertilisers but can still reduce the environmental impact that these have. It is also possible to combine intensive farming tecniques with the traditional methods to produce food efficiently but also unobtrusively.
I also think that it is untrue to say that we need to source food from abroad as alot of food is wasted in britain as we as consumers reject food that isn't perfect.

[rotc_s80]

I think one of the main issues is whether todays societies needs and wants is more important then the future of the Earth and other humans. What we do now could end up as perminant. If we try and use methods that concerve the enviornment and habitat of wildlife we can make sure that there is actually any habitat or wildlife left, these aspects are an important part of our eco-system and so without them maybe the food that we need we could not grow anyway due to the enviormental changes. Of course the issue of producing enough food is important, but a balance is neccessary.

[beepadmin]

Hi Richmond students Great discussion going on here. Thanks ever so much for sending us photos of your posters on agriculture, they're fabulous!
Best wishes, all the BEEP Team

[rotc_s74]

Hey Everyone! i think rotc_s80 makes a good point that we have to find a balance between trying to feed the growing population and saving the environment. in my opinion the answer lies with the people themselves. if we all did our bit to help the environment we would avoid a lot of unnecessary production (such as the production of paper etc) and thereby save a lot of money and of course TREES .another example would be to buy local produce to support local farmers and perhaps only buying food which is necessary for the family/household . by making our use of land for farming limited only to what is necessary we are sustaining the environment and still feeding our population. (in an ideal world we could come up with a system where everyone has enough to survive, no one has too much, no one too little) sadly i think that with time, through population growth, advances in medicine etc the population size will become unmanageable( ) and new technology is urgently needed . better start earlier rather the later. i dont necessarily support GM crops, though the intention is good, we have to come up with something to feed futur generations without damaging this miraculous earth of ours, for if we fail at either, life will no longer be sustainable as we know it.

[rotc_s71]

Personally I do not agree with this because in order to farm in the UK their is a need for fertile land which is mainly available by deforestation which causes the destruction of wildlife and their habitats. If the UK wanted to conserve wildlife and habitats then they would have to only farm in certain areas that were not forested and they would need to find fertile land that is not near populated habitats in order to prevent loss of rare wildlife and habitats. The food farmed from these lands will probably not be enough to feed the whole of the UK due to the shortage of fertile soils. So the fact that the UK mainly imports its farmed products is much more econoically viable as third world countries have more fertile land and are able to farm produce for the UK and this also helps the third world countries support their populations.

[rotc_s64]

I agree that with the UK's ever increasing population, there is a need to import food from third world countries. However, i resent your point that importing from third world countries is helping support their populations. Farmers in developing countries are being paid next to nothing for their produce, which is then imported to the UK, and sold at huge profits benefiting multi-national companies rather than the farmers who produced the crops in the first place. This may in fact lead to sufficient food quantities in the UK whilst not damaging the UK's environment, but is it morally right?

[rotc_s81]

I think it is possible but currently there are not enough efforts made to do so. Unique habitats and wildlife are not always recognised before the damage to it is already done, sometimes in a way that was hard to predict, when soil erosion occures for example.
Most of the food brought from abroad is brought because its easier to do so. The climate and the other conditions of plantation in the specific country it is brought from are probably more suitable for its growth, but today we have many many means to control the climate, the minerals in the soil and other things that are necessary for it. The price would not increase greatly either, since no money will be spent on shipping and the waste due to the damage that is caused to the food during the journy would not occure either.
Fairtrade food shipped to the uk is also a good solution. As mentioned by rotc_s81 it is not correct to use other countries' resources for the more developing countries' benifit.

[rotc_s82]

its true that it is not correct to use other countries' resources for the more developing countries' benifit, but at the same time if it is the only way to stop destroying the countries habitats and populations is to do so, and if the country from which the food is imported needs the money, and the country which is buying the resources can permit to buy it, and the country which is selling the resources can permit itself to sell the resources then why not?
also, even if we have many means of controlling the climate and have other means of growing the food that can be imported, if it is a specific food from one country then no matter what scientific products are used to grow them here it would be quite hard to grow the same thing, even if such is done it would not be the original food. its true that the prices of the food would be low because it would not be imported, but at the same space would be taken to grow these specific products, and this space taken would be taken from different habitats of different species, thus destorying wildlife.

[nc_t2]