Courses of Instruction given by the County

About 8% of all farmers had attended courses of instruction given by the County, more young farmers (14%) had attended courses than farmers in the two higher age groups, (8% and 6%) and rather more farmers with over 100 acres than those with less, about 6% compared with 10%.

35

Advice on Livestock and Disease

By far the most important source of information on livestock and disease is the local private Veterinary Surgeon who is consulted by about three-quarters of all

farmers. The next most important group of farmers, less than one-tenth of the whole, relied on their own experience or on books of reference. The Livestock Officer of the county Committees or the Ministry of Agriculture’s Veterinary . Inspector was consulted by about 6% of all farmers. Only 1% mentioned the Veterinary Panel.

Advice on Feeding and coupons

Farmers fell into two main groups; those who consulted the County Foodstuffs Officer, who were 58% of the total, and those who used their own judgment who were 24% of the total. A small proportion (6% ) consulted commercial firms and small proportions consulted the County Farm Institutes, their neighbours, the National Farmers’ Union and papers like the “Farmer’s Weekly” and “Farmer and Stock-Breeder”. A slightly higher proportion of the higher rated farmers consulted the County Officer.

The County Officer had been consulted by a larger proportion of the younger farmers than of the older, 63% compared with 53%, and the older farmers had a correspondingly higher proportion of those who used their own judgement.

In considering this subject it should be realised that most farmers obtained their coupons from the County Officer and are, therefore, likely to consult him automatically about the details of their completion.

Advice on Fertilisers and Fertiliser Rationing

The same point which has just been mentioned about foodstuff coupons applies to problems of fertilisers, as many farmers will get advice from the Fertiliser Officer at the same time as they obtain their ration documents.

Over half of all farmers obtained advice about fertilisers and rationing from the County Officer, about one-fifth said that they did not need advice and one-sixth relied on commercial firms. The only difference between farmers of different groups was that rather more of the older farmers said that they did not need advice and rather more of the younger farmers relied on the County Officer.

Advice on Milk Production

More farmers (38%) relied on their own experience in relation to problems of milk production than on any other subject, less than one-fifth sought the advice of the County Committee on these problems and no other source of information was important except perhaps the Milk Marketing Board mentioned by 5% of farmers. There were no very important differences between the farmers of different groups, except that as in other cases the proportion of farmers relying on their own experience was highest in the oldest groups.

Advice on Machinery

Commercial Firms, Implement dealers and Blacksmiths were consulted by two-fifths of all farmers on their machinery problems, a further quarter relied on their own ideas and about one-sixth of the sample consulted the Machinery Officer of the County Committee.

An analysis by size of holding showed that farmers with a larger holding relied much more on commercial firms for help and advice than farmers with smaller holdings, whereas the farmers with smaller holdings tended to rely on their own ideas. The proportion using the services of the County were roughly equal.

36 37

Advice on Crop Failures

Farmers fell into two main groups when asked “Where they sought advice about crop failure”. The first group, about two-fifth of the total, consulted their County Committee, and an almost equal number either used their own judgment or claimed that they never had failures, which is possibly another way of expressing the same thing. About 6% of farmers consulted their County Farm Institute and an equal proportion relied on their neighbours for help. Other sources of information like the N.F.U., Commercial Firms and farming papers were of no importance. A rather larger proportion of the younger farmers consulted the County Committee and, as in relation to previous problems, a rather higher proportion of the older farmers used their own judgement claimed that they did not have failure and thus had no need of advice.

It will be seen from the above discussion that the topics about which the County Committees are most frequently asked for advice are those closely connected with administrative matters; thus feeding and coupons, and fertiliser and fertiliser rationing are the subjects that have brought farmers in touch with their County Advisers. The consultation is much less formal than in the other cases and is not really regarded by the farmer in many cases as seeking advice on farm problems in the ordinary sense.

It follows therefore that the most important group of problems about which the County Advisers are consulted are, crop failures, some two-fifth of all farmers go to the County Committee about such difficulties.

Problems of milk production and machinery were also important, a little under one-fifth of all farmers going to the County when in difficulty about these matters.

The field in which the County Adviser services was least sought was in relation to livestock and disease.

Another way of looking at this subject is to consider in what fields farmers are making use of other sources of information than the County Committee and it will be seen that only in relation to livestock and disease, where the private vet is consulted by about three-quarters of all farmers, and in relation to machinery where the Implement Agent or Blacksmith is consulted by about one-third of all farmers, are other sources of advice important. Thus it may be argued that the advice on all the other subjects represents additional technical information being supplied to the farming community as compared with the pre-war position, and in any case the County Committees would not seek to supplant the private veterinary surgeon but rather to supplement his special services by information on broader lines.

The position in relation to farm machinery is somewhat different. Here the County Committee, as a disinterested party, has possibly a more important role to play, but the Implement Dealer and the Blacksmith have established a social relationship with the farmer over many years and it will be some time before the Machinery Officer will be regarded universally as the expert, making an impression on the farming community. In this respect the work of Askam Bryam has been effective and farmers now know much more about the relative merits of different types of implement. The farming press, too, is partly responsible for this, and it was found that the “Power Farmer” the Ministry’s contributed to a greater knowledge of farming machinery.

All the results show that the younger farmer has made more use of the services of the County Committees and as a rule too, the farmer with a larger holding has availed himself more of the County’s services, although in many cases the difference here is quite small.

The analysis of the answers about crop failures was revealing. This group was smallest in the group of advice as they never had crop failures. This group was smallest in the group of farmers with larger farms and amongst young farmers, reflecting the main tendencies which have already been described.

39

The County Advisers

42% of all farmers said they had obtained advice from the County Advisers. This is more than twice as many as had consulted their County Organisers before the war. (This comparison doesn’t take any account whatsoever of the very important fact that the present advisory services are used many times more often than those existing before the war).

The farmers making most use of the services of the County Advisers are those with larger holdings; thus 36% of farmers with up to 50 acres obtained advice from their County Advisers, 39% of those with 51 - 100 acres, 43% of those with 101 - 150 acres, 46% of those with 151 - 300 acres and 56% of those with over 300 acres. In many cases, of course, the problems of the large holding are much more complex than those the smaller holdings, but in part this difference is a difference of attitude, as will be seen in the later analysis. The only other important difference between groups was the difference between the younger groups, 43% and 44%, compared with the older groups 38%.

When farmers were asked “What happened” as a result of the advice they received they, as a rule, named the problem and described what happened. In many cases it was possible to interpret this answer implying either approval, often enthusiastic approval, or disapproval. This was possible in about half the cases. In the remainder of the cases the answer were expressed in neutral terms. Thus 39% of the farmers said that the advice they had obtained had been good, 50% gave no expression of its quality, in many cases because the results were yet to be seen, and only 7%, and this is possibly the most important of these figures, said that the advice they had obtained was bad.

A comparison of the proportion who expressed these opinion is interesting and revealing. Thus it is the less good farmer, the smaller farmer and older farmer who has the largest proportion considering advice obtained bad, and the smallest proportion considering advice obtained good. A few comparisons will illustrate the point:- To take first of all the good farmers compared with the rest, 45% of them thought that the advice was good compared with 37%, whereas only 4% of them considered that the advice was bad compared with 9%. In comparing farmers with different size holdings the most striking difference is

between those with the smallest holdings and those with the largest; thus 32% only of those with holding up to 50 acres considered the advice they had obtained good compared with 48% of those with over 300 acres. On the other hand 9% of those with the smaller holdings considered the advice bad compared with only 2% with holdings of over 300 acres.

Within the three age groups the following differences emerge:- 43% of the youngest farmers considered the advice good compared with 41% of those in the middle group and 35% of those in the oldest group. The proportions of those considering the advice bad were correspondingly 5%, 6% and 9%. In relation to all this discussion the most important fact which emerges is the very small proportion of cases in which the advice obtained was considered bad, and it is fairly certain that the farmers would not have refrained from giving their real opinion on this occasion.

Advice from the Staff of Farm Institutes

15% of farmers had sought advice from the nearest Farm Institute; these were 19% of the better farmers and 12% of the rest. Just as in previous analyses the farmers with the larger holdings had a larger proportion seeking advice. The difference is quite sharp between farmers with under 100 acres - 12% and farmers with over 100 acres - 19%, and as has been seen in previous analyses the younger farmers had made more use of the advisers of the Farm Institute than the older farmers.

Farmers’ opinions about the advice they had received showed that only 3% considered the advice bad, 46% considered it good and 46% expressed a neutral opinion; thus the advisers of the Farm Institute had a slightly higher proportion of farmers saying the advice they had received was good and a smaller proportion saying their advice was bad, so that on the whole the balance is slightly in favour of the Farm Institute.

41

Field Demonstrations

There are a great number of different types of field demonstration. They may be the growing of different varieties of a crop in the same variety of crop with different cultivations or different manures. They may be illustrations

of new methods of cultivations or the use of the machinery; in fact, any demonstration of the actual processes of farming under normal farming conditions. (Many farmers, however, argue that demonstration conditions are always very abnormal).

Field demonstrations have been attended by 38% of farmers, by 48% of the better group compared with 31% of the others. Farmers with small holdings attended farm demonstrations less than those with larger holdings. The proportions in each group were up to 50 acres, 25%, 51-100 acres 33%, 101-150 acres 39%, 151-300 acres 49% and over 300 acres 62%. The most important reason for not attending farm demonstrations was ‘No time’, and the handicap of the small farmer who often has no one to leave in charge is reflected in these figures. Field demonstrations were visited more by young farmers – 45%, and less by those over 55 years – 30%. The proportion of the total who have attended field demonstration is quite high having regard to the fact that it is hardly to be expected that all farmers would be able to get away from their holdings on the few occasions during the year when such demonstrations are being held.

Market Demonstrations and Exhibitions arranged by the County Committee

One- quarter of all farmers said that they had attended market demonstrations and exhibitions arranged by the County Committee. As in the previous analysis a slightly higher proportion of the better farmers had attended and there were considerable differences in favour of farmers with larger holdings: thus 19% of those with under 100 acres had attended them compared with 31% of those with over 100 acres, but there was very little difference between farmers in different age groups-attendance at this type of demonstration is, of course, considerably less trouble than visiting a field demonstration.

43

Farm Walks

A great many Counties have organised visits to farms in certain districts, where a conducted tour of the farm is made and a running discussion held on all aspects of farm management. As a rule the farm chosen are those of goods farmers and in most cases the aim of the farm walk is to show that where thorough cultivation has been carried out, success almost invariably follows. In some cases experimental crops are displayed and very often appliances and improvements are shown. As a rule one of the Country’s officers conducts the tour and the farmer himself plays a considerable part in the explanation. In one case a farm walk was attended where the subjects

discussed included the following:-

A comparison of different types of wheat grown on similar soils.

A large scale trial of 12 varieties of mangolds in the same plot.

The effect of extra cultivations in reducing the wireworm population of a field and its effect on a corn crop.

A temporary cooking range for harvest workers.

A method of using old car tyres as ties to support young fruit trees.

Implement sheds constructed of waste straw.

The re-organization of old milking sheds.

As well as such matters as the viewing of a Friesian bull calf and the sampling of the local cider:

15% of farmers had attended farm walks and, as in the case of other instructional activities, the proportion of the better rated farmers was higher - 21%, than that of the others — 13%. There was again considerable differences between the groups of farmers having different size holdings. It was lowest in the up to 50 acres group - 8%, and highest in the over 300 acres group - 35%. Comparing all the farmers with holdings of under 100 acres the proportion was 9% against all those of over 100 acres- 23%. Farm walks had a greater appeal to the younger farmers, about 18% of the two younger groups having visited them compared with 11% of farmers over 55 years.

Discussions in Farm houses and Public Houses

Many County Committees have organised discussion group meetings in farm houses or halls or in public houses, usually to discuss a specific farm problem or topic of seasonal interest. 12% of all farmers had attended such meetings. The proportion was higher as in the most case of other activities amongst the better farmers – 15% compared with 10%, and again much higher in the case of the farmers with the larger holdings when compared with the smaller; thus only 7% of farmers with holdings of up to 50 acres had been to discussions compared with 28% with over 300 acres; or, to compare all farmers with holdings of under 100 acres with those with holdings over 100 acres, the proportions were 8% and 16%.

45

Brains Trust

In some counties the Brains Trust type question and answer meeting has been popular, but the number of such meetings has been many less than of the other types of activity which have been described. About 5% of all farmers have attended Brains Trusts, and as in the case of the other activities the proportion is higher amongst the better farmers and amongst those with larger holdings. Most farmers considered Brains Trusts helpful, but about one in ten of those who had attended them considered them to be waste of time.

The reasons why farmers had not attended Brains Trusts were rather similar to those given in answer to the question about discussions, the most important reasons

being that there had been none in their district, followed by lack of time. Lack of time was more important to the small farmer than the larger one, otherwise differences were unimportant except in the case of farmers of different ages, where lack of opportunity was much more important in the case of the young farmer than the old, and lack of interest was more important in the case of the old farmer compared with the young.

Of those farmers who had been to Brains Trusts, about a quarter had taken farm workers with them, but the proportion of all farmers who had sent farm workers to Brains Trusts was negligible.

46

Other Meetings

In addition to these specific questions, farmers were asked what other meeting organised by the County Committee they had attended. Unfortunately the answers to this section were very vague and some of the meetings mentioned turned out, on further questioning, to be those organized by the National Farmers’ Union.

However, 17% of farmers said that they had attended meetings and, as in the case of other activities, the proportions attending other meetings was higher amongst the better farmers and those with larger holdings, and higher amongst the younger two groups of farmers compared with the oldest group.

Over half of these farmers considered the other meetings they had attended good and helpful, but more than one-third were unable to give an opinion. This is the only case where there was a large proportion of farmers who had no definite ideas about the value of an activity. On the other hand the proportion saying that the other meetings they had attended were a waste of time was only 6%.

When farmers were asked to detail the types of meetings they had attended, more than half of them said that the meetings had been organized either by or in conjunction with the N.F.U. In 8% of the cases they were County Committee lectures The rest were meetings organized by the County, with a few exceptions where commercial firms had co-operated or organized the meeting, or where they had been informal meetings organized by local bodies.

About one-fifth of all farmers attending meetings said that they took workers with them and a further 4% of all farmers with workers sent one or of their workers to the meetings mentioned in this section.

47

Advisory Services

The County Committees were most consulted about those problems which were fairly closely related to administration, particularly rationing; and in addition to this the County Officers were widely consulted about crop failures, as is shown by the fact that more than two-fifths of all farmers generally went to the County Committee for information on these subjects. The County Committee advised also about a quarter of all farmers on problem of milk production, and about one in five farmers consulted the County Committees about problems relating to machinery and appliances.

The influence of the County Committees may be judged by the fact that two-fifths of all farmers had been to the County Committees with specific problems. Related to this is the fact that 15% of all farmers had consulted the advisers of their nearest Farm Institute.

The quantity of the advice and the satisfaction of farmers with it may be judged by the fact that only 7% of farmers who had consulted the County Committee advisers and 3% of those who had consulted the Farm Institute advisers said that the advice they had received was bad.

In all this the analysis clearly showed that the influence of the County Committee was greater with the better group of farmers, with the younger farmers, and with the farmers who had larger holdings. In some cases it appeared that the farmer who was both owner and tenant was more influenced than either owners or tenants as a group. It is possible that this arises from the fact that many of the owner tenants were farmers who had been successful and are in the process of extending their holdings and purchasing land.

It has been possible by the analysis of some of the questions of practice to trace to some extent the work of the County Committees. In order to do this the questions about the Veterinary Panel, Winter Milk and the Mercurial Dressing of Seed Corn have been analysed, and the answers given by those farmers who have consulted their County Committee and those who have not, have been compared. This analysis has been done in two ways, in one case the key question has been “Where do you generally go for advice on the following problems – Livestock and disease, Feeding and coupons, etc.” and in the other case by “Have you consulted the advisers of your County Committee”?

The Veterinary Panel and the Advisers of the County Committee

As has already been seen, only a small proportion of farmers are at present members of the Veterinary Panel and as yet it is not widely understood.

In the case of problems of feeding and coupons and milk production, the farmers who consulted their County Committee had a slightly higher proportion who had gone on to the Veterinary Panel than those who did not ask for advice but relied on their own judgement or who relied on information from commercial firms. In the case of problems of milk production, however, the proportion who consulted the County Committee was about the same as those who went to the Milk Marketing Board for advice. The results of this analysis, is however, not particularly significant.

The Dressing of Seed Corn and the County Committee Advisers

The effect of the County advisers may be measured by comparing the proportions of those farmers who dress their seed corn in two groups; those who usually consult the advisers of the County Committee about crop failures and those who usually rely on their own judgement.

In all cases those who went to the County Advisers had a higher proportion who used dressed seed corn,

The same effect is also shown by the higher proportions who use dressed seed corn among the farmers who consulted the County Advisers about other problems when compared with those who did not.

This analysis shows that the adoption of this necessary precaution in the cultivation of cereals is higher amongst farmers who go to their County Committee with their problems and is a measure of the direct and indirect influence of the Advisers on the practice of the farming community.

48

Winter Milk

A similar set of analyses made about winter milk production show rather a different picture in the proportion of farmers who have gone over to winter milk who depend on their County Committee for advice about problems of milk production

when compared with those who use their own judgment and those who go to the Milk Marketing Board. This suggests that the more important factor in this campaign has been the advice given in various types of publicity media.

Another way of considering this whole problem is to compare the proportions of farmers who have followed certain advice and divide them into those who have consulted their County Committee and those who have not. This is an analysis which corresponds to the other analyses about the Advisory Services of the County Committee.

In the case of the Veterinary Panel there was a small balance in favour of those who had obtained advice from the County Committee. When comparing the farmers who had dressed their seed wheat and those who had not, it was found that there was a small advantage again in favour of those who had been to their County Committee for advice. There was a small balance in favour of those who had consulted the advisers of their Farm Institute.

In relation to oats there was a similar and slightly larger difference in each case amounting to about 10% and the same was true about the other grains.

Changes made on farms since the War

The work of the County Committee mat be judged by the proportion of farmers who attribute different types of change that they have made during the war to the persuasion, advice, or direction of the County Committee, compared with those who attribute it to the influence of other media. In the cases of all the changes which have been made, the County Committee have been responsible for two-thirds or more of the changes. The position is summarised in the table below:-

This should not be taken to mean, however, that the work of the County Committee could have proceeded as successfully without the publicity campaigns of the Ministry, which have undoubtedly greatly facilitated the process and meant, in fact, that persuasion has been usual and direction the exception in bringing about the changes above.

49

The sort of Advisory Services farmers want after the war

Finally, the success of the County Committee organisation may be measured by the answers which farmers gave to the question “What sort of Advisory Services should there be after the war”. To this question two-thirds of farmers had positive answers, the remaining third being either undecided or thought there should be no Advisory Service.

Considering now only those farmers who want an Advisory Service after the war, it was found that 55% of them wanted the War Agricultural Executive Committees to continue; about half on present lines and the rest with modifications. 12% considered the advice should be given through the Farm Institute, 9% by experts with practical experience and 4% by the County Agricultural Organisers. It will be seen that

none of these other main groups are suggestions which conflict with the pattern of Advisory Services set up by the County Committees so that the two main groups are – those who want a County Committee mainly on present lines and those who want a Service of advice which is strictly limited to answering questions rather than to giving direction as to the way in which the farm should be run.

Even the answers given by the 10% of farmers who made other sorts of suggestion show the influence of the work of the County Committee. Thus some of the suggestions made were like these:-

“ A centre where samples of soil could be sent.”

“ An Advisory Centre within 10 miles of each place.”

“It would be nice to have a free consulting telephone service which one could ring up and a visit would follow if that were necessary.” (This is certainly already in existence in many of the Counties).

“An Advisory Committee in your district having meetings with lectures, films and questions.”

Agriculture is a much more social activity than many other branches of industry. Its units are small and its conduct involves its members in constant meetings and transactions. In the village there is a considerable social life between farmers and farmers and between farmers and farm workers, and in the market place there is social intercourse which brings with it a constant interchange of opinion and of mutual consultation about problems.

In addition to this, farms are open to the world and farmers have a fairly good idea of the cultivations and crops of their neighbours, so that comment and discussion about method follow naturally.

In consequence of this, the work of the County Committee has a much larger influence than the immediate effect on those who have consulted or been visited by the Committee Officers. It was considered useful, therefore, to find out to what extent farmers in different groups discuss their problems with their farm workers and other farmers.

Farm Workers consulted by Farmers

Discussion of Farm Problems with other Farmers

As might have been expected, almost all (89%) farmers discussed their problems with other farmers. There were no important differences between farmers of different ratings or farmers with different sized holdings. There was, however, a small difference in favour of the younger groups of farmers when compared with the oldest group.