The Rural Voice, 1991-04, Page 82BRUCE
446 10th St., Hanover, Ontario N4N 1P9
519-364-3050
• The Rural Voice is provided to Bruce
County farmers by the BCFA.
County Federation of Agriculture NEWSLETTER
Progress in agricultural production
depends, to some extent, on scientific
research. As farmers, we sometimes
marvel at the impractical, ridiculous
recommendations that researchers gen-
erate. We know very well that ideas
which are workable in laboratories and
sound quite sensible in textbooks, can
be totally useless when applied to the
farm. The recommended protective
gear for handling herbicides is a case in
point. As one farmer enquired, "when I
get all this stuff on, how will I blow my
nose or relieve myself'?" But as imper-
fect as the results may be, few of us
question the assumption that controlled
studies, done by professional scientists,
can help us to better understand, and
more effectively use, the physical re-
sources we have to work with.
Doubts about the motivation behind
some research have become more
prevalent in the last decade, especially
among individual farmers who choose
alternatives to the mainstream ap-
proach. Farmers who innovatively cre-
ate their own solutions, with new or
"unproven" techniques, find them-
selves on the outside of the establish-
ment and begin to question the system.
Their charges range from criticism that
the research community is narrow-
minded and unwilling to accept sugges-
tions from outside itself, to allegations
of conspiracy, accusing universities of
being nothing more than a paid advertis-
ing service for commercial interests.
I have always felt it was probable
that the first level of charges were often
valid, and highly unlikely that the sec-
ond held any water in more than a few
isolated cases. But discussions with
several unrelated researchers in the past
few weeks have convinced me that there
are serious flaws in the structure of the
agriculture research system.
A teacher at one community college
called, and outlined his department's
interest in doing some work on "eco-
logical farming." We discussed how
this work might proceed and some op-
tions as to focus and scope. Near the end
78 THE RURAL VOICE
WHO CALLS THE TUNE?
of our conversation, he confided that
"funding was going to be a real prob-
lem." "The ministry," he said, "would
have to allocate new money if it wanted
these projects to move ahead." Naively,
I asked why money for existing research
could not simply be re-routed in this
direction. He seemed amused. "Money
for research projects comes from spon-
soring companies. Government grants
provide only for maintenance and over-
head costs. If your work involves seed
variety testing you approach the seed
companies. If you want to test pesti-
cides you apply to the chemical compa-
nies."
My second dose of disillusionment
occurred during a meeting of an "advi-
sory committee" on which I sit. The
research and extension program, on
which we are advising, was set up with
a generous government grant, and is
intended to become a high profile "ste-
wardship" initiative. At our second
meeting, the director summarized his
efforts to acquire funding from various
government and social interest agen-
cies. Again he stressed that the original
grant only covered setting up the pro-
gram and hiring staff. All the cost of
actual prhjects had to be obtained else-
where.
I voiced my objections to accepting
money from commercial interests and
drew a vehement and overly defensive
response from a researcher who insisted
that we must trust in the objectivity of
the scientist, regardless of where the
money comes from.
I appreciate the dilemma of many in
the academic world and elsewhere who
must get money wherever they can or
face the real prospect of no work. And
BCFA DIRECTORS' MEETING
Monday, April 22
Monday, May 27
OMAF Boardroom, Walkerton
8:00 p.m.
Members are welcome to attend
I accuse no individual of sacrificing
scientific objectivity and deliberately
changing data to please sponsors. But to
suggest that the practice of obtaining
funds for research from commercial
interests does not affect the direction
that research will take is nonsense!
Under the present system, we will
always be saturated with experiments
that involve the use of products which
must be purchased from off the farm.
We will be treated to a zillion different
variations of crop "response to applica-
tion of nitrogen fertilizer," meticulously
detailing every conceivable angle. But
who will work on developing legumi-
nous underseedlings for corn that make
nitrogen fertilization unnecessary?
Will this pursuit be given equal money?
Will it be given any money?
Who will protect society's interest
when it comes to directing agriculture
research? Who will look after the
farmer's interest? Some of the work that
desperately need to be done directly
threatens the vested interests that have
paid for research in the past. This prob-
lem won't just go away. It needs to be
dealt with and our farm organizations
should be making sure it is dealt with.
Unfortunately, when it comes to
research, the people who pay the piper
have a big part in calling the tune.0
NOTE: Each month this page will con-
tain an opinion on a current farm issue.
We would like to know what YOU think.
If your opinion differs from the one you
have read here, or if you support our
view, call the office at 364-3050.
Bruce County
Federation of Agriculture
ANNUAL
MEET THE MEMBERS DINNER
AND
TOMMY COOPER AWARD
Friday, April 5, 1991
Elmwood Community Centre
Social Hour 6:00 p.m. - Dinner 7:00 p.m.
Tickets: $12.50/person