Should Farmers be backed away from rivers to create a buffer?

Question

Should Farmers be backed away from rivers by a public byout.The levy's could be torn down helping fish and wetlands along with relieving flooding problems elseware.The land would be public owned but returning it to its natural state.It would create a runway for large animals so there genes are more dipersed.The chemicals seaping onto the rivers would be backed away creating a "Buffer".What do ya all think.

Answer 1

Dunno what it is like in the USA but many farmers in the UK and some other EU countries are doing a lot to protect the environment, habitats and any watercourses flowing through their land.  The so-called "natural state" you refer to is usually not the best solution.  Rivers need to be managed both as drainage channels and as key elements of the biosphere.  Farmers over here are recognised as guardians of the land and through education and some financial aid projects, many fine examples of enhanced wildlife habitat, managed wetlands etc have been incorporated into the countryside.  You seem to suggest that your farmers need more education and leadership to respect and enhance the rivers.

Answer 2

Where did the farmer go?

Answer 3

The good news is that close to half or the farmers in North America are using riparian buffer forests to protect the various water systems on their land.

The Chesapeake Bay Program (devoted to restoring that beautiful watershed) describes riparian woods as "areas of forested land adjacent to streams, rivers, marshes or shoreline that form the transition between land and water environments."

Some of the key benefits created by riparian zones are the filtration of run-off; nutrient uptake; creating canopy and shade; food for the local ecosystem; habitat; and the protect of shoreline integrity.

A number of organizations (including the Nature Conservancy) have purchased riparian woods to provide those very benefits.  Other groups are working with farmers, ranchers, municipalities to aid these systems -- either restoring them, protecting them or creating new water related forests.

While I don't think a boycott would be affective, I do think most people are incline to see the value and provide for riparian woods.

The last link below provides some ideas on the creation (including working with the land owners), use and maintence of riparian woods.

Answer 4

Only if you're willing to pay for what they will need for extra irrigation materials.

Answer 5

Most farmers should be aware of creating buffer zones along intense agriculture. This method has been suggested since the 1960's. As you know, this is a free America, and most farmers will remind you of that. Only good stewarts of the land (mostly good farmers with a conscience) will listen to taking care of nature.

Answer 6

Yes farmers should be back a bit from the river to allow the riparian area to recover and work its magic. The buffer zone or riparian area will clean the river and reduce the erosion of the river banks stablizing the river from added sediment loads that can cause issues with the fisheries. The ideas of riparians and wetlands have been around for some time it just comes down to the bottom line for farmers now...

Unfortunely it usually comes down to government intervention to make a change for the environment. There would have to be some sort of legislation creating a manditory buffer zone.

Hope that helps

Answer 7

a buffer is made up of water absorbing plants, bushes or shrubery. If a buffer was to be created this could help the problem of runoff and prevent flooding but chemcals will still end up in the water.