THE LOT OF A FARMER in today’s Barbados is not an easy one. The issues members of the farming community face are many and complex, and the solution to a number of these are almost entirely outside the scope of the farmer – the most he can do is mitigate.
There are others, however, that with greater thought by governmental authorities and a more pronounced sense of understanding by the rest of the population, could make life easier for those who decide to persist with the task of feeding the population.
Over the weekend, chief executive officer of the Barbados Agricultural Society (BAS), James Paul, MP, complained that an increasing number of farmers were being pressured by homeowners who move into farming districts and then complain that the presence of farming activities decreases their standard of living and property values.
We accept that when you exist in a country the size of Barbados, even with the best of regulations, there will be clashes between the activities of farmers and the aspirations of homeowners or would-be homeowners. But that should not be taken as an excuse not to have regulations that protect farmers.
Mr Paul offered the example of pig farmers who complain that even though they may have been operating in a particular area for generations, they still come under pressure from authorities when housing districts spring up around them and the new owners complain about the smell.
We saw this occur in the Rock Hall, St Thomas area more than a decade ago, emphasising that the problem is not new. There can be no excuse for farmers who apply less than the best operating standard, and as a result create unnecessary nuisances for their neighbours. But like it or not, unpleasant odour is a natural by-product of pig farming and only the most unreasonable of persons would move into an area where a pig farm has legitimately existed for decades and then agitate for its closure.
It would seem reasonable that when a developer is given permission to subdivide former agricultural land for housing purposes, the Town and Country Planning Development Office or some other appropriate state agency should require that all potential buyers be notified of the presence of farming activity nearby.
In fact, it may even be prudent for these developers to work with the Ministry of Agriculture and the BAS to look at the possibility of relocating farming activity that might present future conflicts with homeowners – but at no disadvantage to the farmer.
While pig and poultry may appear to be the most obvious farming activities that would present conflicts with neighbouring communities, it is important to note that these do not represent the extent of the problem. For years we have had homeowners complain that their flower and vegetable gardens have been spoilt by chemicals that travel in the air when farmers spray their fields.
Again, we do not wish to suggest that farmers do not have a duty to use safe and responsible techniques when they operate their farms, but should it be enough for a developer to put in roads and utility services, collect huge profits and move on? When a new community is developed down-wind of an established farm, should the developer not be required to plant and maintain trees that provide a natural wind-break against chemical drifts?
Our farmers can do very little to combat decreased spending power in a struggling economy, the introduction of new pests as a result of prolific international travel, unfair competition from giant overseas businesses that benefit from subsidies from their governments, and an apparent growing disregard by many for the importance of local agriculture to national security. But we can take steps to prevent some of the conflicts between farmers and their new neighbours through sensible planning policies.
