TYPICAL MISTAKES MADE BY POLISH FARMERS INCLUDED IN THE SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE PROJECT J. Labedowicz, E. Majewski and P. Stypinski

Warsaw Agricultural University, 02528 Warsaw, Rakowiecka 26/30, Poland

SUMMARY

The goal of our work was to estimate the most typical mistakes made by farmers involved in sustainable agriculture projects during 1996-1997. Some data were collected on the basis of specially prepared questionnaires sent to about 600 private farms in Poland. We were particularly interested in large and medium farms (an area of more than 10 hectares) which have a large percentage of grasslands. The organic fertilizers like manure and slurry were applied mostly in autumn and winter. Very often farmers did not have tanks for slurry and they did not use watering places for animals. Hay is still the main fodder and accounts for more than 60 percent of total forages produced from grassland and only 2 percent is silage, more than 50 farmers cut the grass in the very late stage. The fertilization of grassland and arable lands was used casually without soil testing. Farmers do not realize that their activity can be harmful to the environment.

Keywords: environment, farmers, grassland, mistakes, sustainable agriculture

INTRODUCTION

In the European Union increasing attention is being paid to the relationship between agriculture and the environment (Huus-Bruun and Sandal, 1998). Poland is going to be a full member of the EU so Polish farmers should obey the rules of sustainable agriculture if they want to compete with farmers from west European countries (Klepacki, 1998). The Members States of the EU have to establish codes of good agricultural practice (Huus-Bruun and Sandal, 1998, Agriculture 1993).

From a theoretical point of view the rules of sustainable agriculture should be known by Polish farmers. In practice, however, a lot of mistakes are made within technological decisions (Klepacki, 1998) and farmers very often do not realize that their activity may be harmful to the environment (Krasowicz et al., 1998, Labedowicz et al., 1998). The natural environment may be seriously threatened by animal production, especially in the situation where a lot of Polish farms are not equipped either with proper tanks for liquid manure or with hermetic dung pits for storing manure.

The aim of this work was to estimate the most typical mistakes made by farmers in grassland management and fertilization, it was also interesting to check the farmer's knowledge about the environment and harmful activity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Research was conducted during 1996-1997 as part of the State Committee for Scientific Research Grant (Labedowicz et al., 1998). A specially prepared questionnaire was sent to about 600 private farms in Poland. Those farms were selected at random throughout Poland.

We were particularly interested in large and medium farms (area more than 10 hectares) which have a rather large percentage of grasslands. The farmers were asked about the fertilization practices, use and storage of slurry and FYM, grazing system, silage and hay making. The farmer's knowledge about the soil fertility, soil acidity and environmental security was also checked on the basis of investigations made by advisory officers in the chosen farms. The data were elaborated by special computer software and the material was selected in relation to the percentage of grassland on the tested farms.

RESULTS

The total number of investigated farms was 607 but the size and percentage of grassland in the total agricultural area was differential as shown in Table 1. According to the goal of the study, we were mainly interested in the farms with permanent grassland and therefore, calculations were mainly interested in the farms with permanent grassland, namely, 472 farms. The structure of fodder production in those farms depended on the share of grassland as shown in Figure 1. It is clear that hay is still the main fodder crop from grassland, particularly on farms with the lower percentage of grassland, where more then 60 percent of total forages is produced as hay. The basic problem is however, that the quality of the hay is rather low. The first cut is taken very late, only 28 percent of farmers cut the grass for silage before the heading phase and about 60 percent wait for grass heading or flowering in hay production (Figure 2). Hay dries mainly in the field and time of drying is sometimes more than seven days (as observed in 26 percent of farms). Only about 15 percent of farmers used the fans in their barns and made extra drying. Silage making is not very popular in Poland, only 43 farmers (less then 10 percent) said that they produced silage or wilted silage from grassland. It is interesting that in 135 tested farms the silage was produced from wet sugar beet leaves which caused a lot of problems with silage effluent which is also against the codes of good agricultural practice (Huus-Bruun and Sandal, 1998). Silage is prepared and stored mostly in the pits or clamps, only 30 percent of farmers use the concrete bottoms of silage clamps. It is one of the reasons why soils and surface waters are very often contaminated by silage effluents and quality of drinking water is below Polish and international norms (Krasowicz et al., 1998, Duel, 1998).

Table 1. The characteristics of tested farms in the years 1996-1997.

Figure 1. The structure of fodder production in different farms.

The grazing management system in tested farms was also not optimal. Sixty-three farms (13.3 percent) did not use their grassland for grazing, only 33 percent of farmers applied the rotational paddock system, the most common was a very primitive system of keeping animals on the ropes or chains (46.8 percent). On the other hand the majority of farmers (61.6 percent) were sure that grazing is good for animal health and it is more important than the economic aspect of grazing. A very bad situation was observed in the case of animal drinking during the grazing season. In 40 percent of farms grazing animals did not have free access to water on the pasture. If they had, the watering places were built against environmental security rules.

Figure 2. Time of 1^st cut of grassland depends on phase of grass development.

Figure 3. The farmer's knowledge about sustainable agriculture (if they know it or not A) and about agriculture on environment (is agriculture dangerous for the environment?) B.

The study confirmed the results of other investigations (Labedowicz et al., 1998, Smoron and Sapek, 1998) that the farmer's knowledge of fertilization and soil fertility is rather low. Only a few farmers (6 percent) were able to use the results of soil sampling for proper fertilization programmes, 33 percent said that they knew the soil's fertility and that they used mineral and organic fertilization at random. It could be very harmful for the environment in the case of slurry application. Slurry was applied only in 35 percent of farms but unfortunately most of those farmers spread the slurry during winter or autumn. One of the reasons for this may be the low level of farmers' education (farmers often did not realize that slurry could be dangerous for the environment). Besides, a lot of farms were not equipped with proper tanks for slurry as shown in other studies (Smoron and Sapek, 1998).

In our questionnaires farmers were also asked if they had heard about sustainable agriculture and what was their opinion on the harmful effect of agricultural practice on the environment. The answers are presented in Figure 3. One hundred and twenty-eight farmers (27 percent) knew the term sustainable agriculture, the rest had never heard of it. More than 60 percent of farmers thought that agriculture could not be harmful to the environment and only 3 percent was of the opinion that agricultural activity could be dangerous for the environment.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The study confirmed that the average farmer's knowledge of sustainable agricultural production is rather low. A lot of mistakes are made in fertilization, forage conservation, grazing management and slurry application. The majority of farmers have no idea how to transform the scientific information on soil fertility, grass conservation, grazing system into proper practical activity and how to avoid the environmental dangers. It has been proved that there is still a large gap between the research and practice in Poland and a lot of work and education must be done before accession to the European Union.

REFERENCES

Agriculture. Scientific basis for Codes of Good Agricultural Practice. Report of Commission of the European Communities. 1993. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

Duer, I. 1998. Polski Kodeks dobrych praktyk rolniczych. Materialy konf. naukowej “Dobre praktyki w produkcji rolniczej” IUNG Pulawy 45-51.

Huus-Bruun, T. & Sandal, E. 1998. Codes of good agricultural practice in EU Countries. Materialy konf. naukowej, Dobre praktyki w produkcji rolniczej. IUNG Pulawy, 143-55.

Klepacki, B. 1998. Ku dobrej praktyce rolniczej w Polsce. Materialy konf. naukowej Dobre praktyki w produkcji rolniczej. IUNG Pulawy, 227-234.

Krasowicz, S., Ufnowska J. & Kopinski, J. 1998. Uwarunkowania realizacji koncepcji rozwoju zrownowazonego rolnictwa w Polsce. Materialy konf. naukowej, Dobre praktyki w produkcji rolniczej. IUNG Pulawy, 255-261.

Labedowicz, J., Majewski, E. & Radecki, E. 1998. Ocena poprawnosci praktyk nawozowych w wybranej zbiorowosci towarowych gospodarsw, rolniczych. Materialy konf. naukowej, Dobre praktyki w produkcji rolniczej. IUNG Pulawy, 319-327.

Smoron, S. & Sapek, A. 1998. Zagrozenia dla srodowiska ze srony produkcji zwierzecej w gospodarstwie rolnym.. Materialy konf. naukowej, Dobre praktyki w produkcji rolniczej. IUNG Pulawy 523-529.