Jones, C.R., Jones, J., Ursell, D.J., Warren, B ...ifmaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/15_NPR_Jones_etal_P113-1201.pdfJONES, C.R., JONES, J., URSELL, D.J., WARREN, B., WIBBERLEY,

113

SUPPORTING FARMING FAMILIES THROUGH FCN, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO DEVON, ENGLAND

Jones, C.R., Jones, J., Ursell, D.J., Warren, B. & Wibberley, E.J.

Abstract

Inspired by efforts in Europe and USA to help farming families under stress, FCN the UK Farm

Crisis Network (now, since 2013, Farming Community Network) was launched in 1995. Existing

organisations that nurtured it were the UK Agricultural Christian Fellowship (ACF) founded in 1962,

and the Arthur Rank Centre (ARC) - the Churches’ National Rural Centre, founded in 1972. Major

disease crises followed establishment of FCN – BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) in 1996, Swine

Fever in 1999, and Foot-and-Mouth (FMD) in 2001. FCN was registered as an independent charity and

limited Company in 2001, dedicated to ‘walking with’ farming families through crises both

epidemiological and individual farm-based through stress of financial meltdown under increasing

pressures of markets often leading to family discord and relationship breakdown too. The Paper briefly

charts early history of FCN, its relationship to other Farming Help charities, guiding principles, and

modus operandi. Both reactive and proactive work is described – the former involving local groups of

those ready to help, the latter involving establishment of Farmer Groups for mutual learning and

encouragement among farmers, and Market Chaplaincy. Criteria for selection of helpers and for

founding Farmers’ Groups are described. Some research on benefits to participants is reported for

Devon County, England. Devon case-work is briefly described – without, of course, divulging any

confidences. The Paper concludes with some practical recommendations and thoughts about FCN work

in future. The change in name adopted in 2013 – to Farming Community Network – reflects the need for

help in routine bureaucracy, succession planning and other underlying needs not just those precipitated

by acute crises.

Keywords: farming; help; rural; stress; communities; networking

1. Introduction

Midlands UK farmer from Northamptonshire Christopher Jones played a crucial role in FCN. Quite

simply, without him FCN would not have begun and developed as it did from 1993, inspired by Biblical

teachings (Jones, 1991). Typically, he first researched and networked with similar workers among farming

communities in various European countries and in North America. He was especially inspired by efforts of

the Christian Farmers’ Association of Württemberg, Germany (notably by Dr Rudi Buntzel and Angelika

Sigel) and visited with a small group in 1993. In 1993, the FCN steering group was formed and FCN was

launched in 1995. In that same year, Christopher and his wife Ita visited the USA and subsequently wrote

‘Winner Takes All and Families Lose All’ (Jones & Jones, 1996). It described the appalling plight of many

farming families in the USA and alerted many to future problems elsewhere. They had met Rev David

Ostendorf and others in Iowa. In the early 1970s, lowered trade barriers coupled with record Soviet purchases

of American grain resulted in a sharp rise in US agricultural exports. Farm incomes and commodity prices

soared. Removal of restrictions on Federal Land Bank lending, coupled with increased lending by other

agencies for farmland purchases in the 1970s, led to rising land values. Low interest rates persuaded many

farmers -- and would-be farmers -- to go deeply into debt, assuming that commodity prices and land values

would continue to rise. Farm household incomes had been below the national average in the 1960s; in the

next decade they were higher than the national average for each year except one.

20th International Farm Management Congress, Laval University, Québec City, Québec, Canada

Vol.2 Non-Peer Review Papers & Posters

July 2015 - ISBN 978-92-990062-4-5 - www.ifmaonline.org - Congress Proceedings Page 1 of 8

114 JONES, C.R., JONES, J., URSELL, D.J., WARREN, B., WIBBERLEY, E.J.

However, they returned to 1960s levels in the 1980s. ‘Prairie Fire’ Rural Action was founded in 1985 led

by Rev. David Ostendorf, a United Church of Christ Minister, and based in Des Moines, Iowa and ran until it

merged in 1999 with Iowa Farmers’ Union Education Foundation. ‘Prairie Fire Rural Action’ assisted

Midwestern USA farmers and their families, and provided advocacy on behalf of farmers. The organisation

endeavoured to retain families on their farms by keeping rural communities informed about current issues,

educating them about their legal and political situation, and serving as an aid to organised action. US dairy

producers declined from 369,210 in 1978, via 220,880 in 1988 to 60,000 in 2011 (USDA). Crisis affects

family farms everywhere (Carruthers et al, 1996; Wibberley, 2014). The 2008 global financial collapse

repeated the conditions affecting farmers worldwide that had inspired formation of Prairie Fire in 1985.

Indian economist Professor K. Nagaraj who has worked in-depth on farm suicide data, cited reasons for the

rural exodus of millions, plus loss to suicide of some 200,000 small farmers between 1997-2009:- Predatory

commercialisation of the countryside; massive decline in investment in agriculture; withdrawal of bank credit

at a time of soaring input prices; crash in farm incomes combined with an explosion of cultivation costs;

shifting of millions from food crop to cash crop cultivation with all its risks; corporate hijack of every major

sector of agriculture including, especially, seed-growing; water stress and moves to privatise it (Nagaraj,

2010).

In the UK, Christopher Jones built a team of suitable, agriculturally-experienced and pastorally-sensitive

farming people who are ready to ‘walk with’ farm families in crisis and offer practical help. He encouraged

the development of Farm Asset Resource Management Study (FARMS) Groups to enable farmers to share

issues and seek solutions together Wibberley, 1999; Kyamuwendo & Wibberley, 2011).

The FCN Ethos (www.fcn.org.uk)

The core values of FCN teamwork can be summarised as follows:

1 We are Christian: We acknowledge one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Our motivation is to

express Christ’s Love but not to proselytise. We maintain our Christian identity while serving anyone

in the farming community of all faiths and none. We seek to base decisions on Christian standards.

2 We are committed to all in need in the farming community: We will respond to and act quickly

upon all requests for help and will work proactively where needed.

3 We value people: We regard all people as loved and created by God. We give priority to people

before money, structure, systems and other institutional machinery. We act in ways that respect the

dignity, uniqueness and intrinsic worth of every person; those whom we serve, our supporters, our

donors, our volunteers, our staff and all those with whom we work.

4 We are non-judgemental towards those whom we serve: We seek to listen carefully.

5 We are stewards: The resources at our disposal are not our own. They are a trust from God through

donors and supporters. We speak and act with integrity in our dealings with all those we work with

including donors, public agencies and the public at large.

6 We are partners: We are committed to working both formally and informally with a variety of

organisations such as Farming Help Charities, welfare organisations and a range of other agencies,

including those of government. We actively pursue relationships with churches and rely on mutual

participation in ministry.

2. Development of FCN

FCN started with inputs from two ‘parent’ organisations – ACF (UK Agricultural Christian Fellowship,

founded in 1962) and the Arthur Rank Centre (National Rural Chaplaincy Centre, founded in Warwickshire

in 1972). However, FCN’s specific vision to ‘walk with farming families in need’ within their communities

required that it should seek its own independent registration and relocation to its own office eventually. By




SUPPORTING FARMING FAMILIES THROUGH FCN, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO DEVON… 115

spring 2003, FCN’s registration not only as a Limited Company but also as a Charity in its own right was

coupled with provision of its own new HQ office in the English Midlands – at West Haddon,

Northamptonshire. HRH The Prince of Wales agreed to become our Patron, and Christopher Jones, MBE is

now our President. FCN had to clarify its role in relation to other Farming Help Charities (Fig.1), especially

the oldest of these, the Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution (RABI) which dates from 1860 and has

county branches throughout the country – and a separate RSABI in Scotland. Its brief was to support needy

farmers with payment of domestic bills (but not farm bills) during times of farm income stress, and it

widened this help to tenant farming families and farm labourers.

Fig.1. FCN in relation to other Farming Help Charities operating in the UK

Key: RABI = Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution; RSIN = Rural Stress Information Network; GFF

= Gloucestershire Farming Friends; KFH = Kent Farm Helpline;

SRSN = Shropshire Rural Stress Network

The Addington Fund was set up in 1999 – named for instigator the late Canon Richard Addington – to

cover costs of farm inputs, such as extra feed during FMD when no stock movement was allowed. FCN has

liaised with both these, acting as a referee in allocations of grants, and with many other organisations. FCN

developed growing understanding and collaboration between the Farming Help charities - which stood us in

such good stead during Foot-and-Mouth (FMD) in 2001 especially, and is vital to nurture for the future too.

During FMD, FCN’s then Chairman had compiled a book sold in aid of the Farming Help Charities

(Wibberley, 2001).

FCN developed Local Support Groups from the outset, with the vision to cover each county where there

was no existing provision for farming help. Already, there was Kent Farm Helpline, from 1989 there was

Gloucestershire Farming Friends started by farmer Malcolm Whitaker, and Shropshire Rural Stress Network.

FCN did not wish to replicate their good work but to link with and point to them in those counties.

Elsewhere, as suitable people emerged Local FCN Support Groups were set up, covering some 250

volunteers by 2005 and some 350 by 2015. ‘Suitable’ means people in agreement with FCN’s ethos who are

agriculturally knowledgeable and aware, pastorally sensitive to others in farming, and not currently in a crisis

of their own. However, if they have survived their own crisis they may empathise more with others in crises,

either acute or chronic.

Many UK farmers have been so affected by financial difficulties during the past two decades of FCN’s

existence that FCN has found debt referral and assistance is crucial to stress relief among farming families.

FARMING HELP

RABI

Addington

Local Charities: GFF;KFH;SRSN

Samaritans

RSIN





From 1995-2010, the UK national personal debt level (not including mortgages and secured loans) rose from

£50 billion to £230 billion. Savings declined and debt-addiction increased. Under half of consumers save

regularly; almost 25% never at all. Many smaller farmers neither prepare budgets nor save for their pension.

Overall, the number of people in the UK who spend more than they earn each month rose to some 5.3

million. Meanwhile, the UK and France lost 71% of their dairy farmers between 1989 and 2014, while

England & Wales lost 7,000 of 17,000 dairy farmers between 2003 and 2013. Wider social impacts also

included family labour being substituted for paid non-family labour, extensification – especially in Cumbria’s

uplands, enterprise & whole farm contracting increasing, particularly on predominantly arable farms, and

more part-time farming.

3. FARMS Groups in Devon

Farm Asset Resource Management Study (FARMS) Groups have been described elsewhere (Wibberley,

1999; Kyamuwendo & Wibberley, 2011). It is an approach to farmer-interactive mutual learning and support.

FARMS Groups can be outsider ‘sparked’ only but should never be imposed nor coerced into existence. FCN

catalysed formation of 18 such groups in Devon. They are autonomous, farmer-owned and locally led with

spouses involved too. They have typically between 12-25 members, hold on-farm/field meetings with

practical discussions as well as winter events, include taking a meal together during the meeting, and promote

the fun element of meeting together. They promote 'belonging' but welcome newcomers (community-

inclusive) and foster an outward-looking group culture and, crucially, encourage problem-sharing to stimulate

solution-seeking. The aim is to become more resource and market conscious and astute together. Not all such

groups persist; each must be given time to gel (if it is going to do) – which tends to occur after around 20

meetings. Members need to be able to access such groups within a maximum travel time of some 20-30

minutes, and successful groups meet ten times per year, avoiding busiest months but keeping continuity.

A survey completed by 48 farmers in the Devon FARMS Groups (Viney & Wibberley, 2004) after an

average membership of 3 years, had an average farm size of 68 ha, and 65% were owner-occupiers.

Additional income sources included agricultural supply sales, shopwork, contracting, wife’s job,

tourism/B&B, catering, cleaning, nursing, lettings, livery, training horses, consultancy, bagged manure sales,

market garden produce, rent from let land; in only 1 out of 6 cases was another income source listed ahead of

farming. Some 60% were in other Farmer Groups – though interpreting this widely to include Farmer

Associations such as NFU, CLA, TFA, WFU, Mole Valley Farmers, ACT, Soil Association, Family Farmers

Association, NSA, Devon Organic Growers; of comparable Farmer Groups, was a Dairy Discussion Group

and a SWARD Group. FARMS Group membership was the preferred choice of three-quarters of respondents

if they could only retain one of their memberships.

Of these 48 farmers, 62% had been Young Farmers Club (YFC) members, 23% had attended

Agricultural College; 13% went to University; 21% had farm apprenticeships. Asked to rank their preferred

ways of learning about farming [relative scores, 100 = best], the following emerged:-

1. From other Farmers = 100 [notably confirming experience elsewhere, worldwide]

2. Farming Magazines/Newspapers = 119

3. Agricultural Shows/Demonstrations = 146

4. Agricultural Books = 160

5. College/University (but only one-third had attended) = 162

6. Advisory Visits = 165

7. Farmers’ Leaflets = 168

8. Commercial Sources = 170

9. Agricultural Radio/TV = 183

Other preferred or actual ways of learning about farming cited were: ‘born into it’; ‘from father/family’;

‘distance learning’; ‘doing it’; ‘hands-on courses’; ‘from son at university’





On ‘value to YOU of your FARMS Group membership so far’, responses were ranked:-

10. Friendship within the group [94% score]

11. Enjoyment [86%]

12. Meeting others in the same ‘boat’;

13. Problem-sharing [81% each]

14. Exposure to the ‘drive’ of others [71%]

15. Feeling my farming is worthwhile [70%]

16. Confidence boost to our own ways [68%]

17. Encouragement to farm better [66%]

18. Business information and ideas source [65%]

19. Half day respite from farm work [64%]

20. Aid to decision-making; Sustainable livelihood hope [60% each]

21. Confirming my existing farming [59%]

22. Competition to ‘succeed’ [58%]

23. Technical information source; Yield-boosting ideas [57% each]

24. Stimulus to attend to detail; Quality-boosting ideas [56% each]

25. Courage to change farming [54%]

26. Cost-saving information [51%]

27. Stimulus to diversify income [50%]

The above data were from deliberately randomised questions. If these are grouped into categories under

four key headings, an interesting and striking distinction is shown (Fig.2.) for what might be called ‘cohesive’

factors (friendship, enjoyment, meeting others in the same ‘boat’ and problem-sharing) which score an

average of 85.5%, well clear of other categories. By contrast, ‘confidence’ factors (feeling my farming is

worthwhile; confidence boost to own ways; encouragement to farm better; aid to decision-making;

confirming my existing farming; courage to change farming) scored an average of 62.8 %. Below these,

‘motivational’ factors (exposure to the drive of others; half-day respite from farm work; sustainable

livelihood hope; competition to succeed; stimulus to attend to detail; stimulus to diversify income) scored

59.8%. Finally, the ‘performance’ factors (business information & ideas source; technical information source;

yield-boosting ideas; quality-boosting ideas; cost-saving information) averaged only 57.2%. Of course, one

might argue that propensity to answer these points positively differs between choices offered. Furthermore,

the measurement was only in five bands from very low to very high. However, the findings show the clear

importance of cohesive factors for group success but they also indicate that important value is placed on all

other factors offered to respondents as potentially derived from FARMS Group membership. Once trust has

been established and such a group has ‘gelled’, then it becomes a potential vehicle for concerted advice-

seeking, input-purchasing, resource-sharing and product-marketing, as well as for joint action in other ways

for environmental and community benefit. Devon FARMS groups members commented: ‘we want to see our

group grow’; ‘we enjoy meeting like-minded people’; ‘everyone seems to value the group’.





Fig.2. Factors rated by Farmers in FARMS Groups, Devon UK (Viney & Wibberley, 2004)

4. Market Chaplaincy

After the Foot and Mouth outbreak of 2001, it was realised that there were many farmers who not only

were under extreme stress, but also in great need to be able to share some of their worries with a listening ear.

Clergy that had a livestock market within their community were encouraged to attend and just `be there`.

Many found this very challenging, and a number soon gave up. Market chaplaincy is difficult for some who

struggle to ‘just be there’ and at times feel ‘very spare’. If a badge or a clerical collar is worn, some will speak

but a lot will look the other way. They perhaps don’t wish their peers to see them talking to a chaplain, they

may well have that hidden question: `I wonder why he is talking to the chaplain?`; ‘Is she going bankrupt?’

It takes several months, or even longer, to be a part of the market scene. However, very often within the

year many come to accept an FCN Chaplain’s presence in the market. A smile to those you pass, a helping

hand to pen sheep [more difficult with cattle], time spent in the canteen, chatting to the market traders who

are there every week, are all ways of becoming accepted as part of the market scene. For Exeter market

chaplaincy team, two are on duty each week at the main market. The Fatstock market is not usually covered

since farmers tend to deliver their livestock and leave; no time for a chat!

FCN was approached by the auctioneers to run a chaplaincy team, so we have had full backing from

those who run the business. That is an important issue rather than just turning up and hoping someone notices

you! Having been there several months we were asked to hold a Christmas celebration. Over 500 people

came which was a shock to all of us, we have now held 3 celebrations, and it continues to be a way farmers

and their families like to begin to appreciate the birth of Christ. Apart from carols, readings, a Gospel talk,

and Salvation Army Band, we also provide entertainment in the form of an auction. The auctioneer knows

most people there so the banter provides some hilarious moments. Of course, all for a good cause. In 2014,

FCN raised enough to purchase a Defibrillator for the market and those who work nearby. We have found

that prayer before we start the session is of immense value. Farmers love to tell you about their farms and

how they run them. Questions are always welcome it seems. After all, farming is a lonely life and if someone

shows an interest, you have begun to make a friend in the market. They soon grow and we have encouraging

stories of answered prayers and changed lives!

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Cohesive Confidence Motivational Performance





5. Devon Case-Work

All FCN’s work is confidential so only an overview is possible of the issues facing farming communities

there. Above all, financial issues top the list of main reasons why people contact FCN – in half of all cases.

This is followed by depression and mental health, then physical health issues, bureaucratic problems – often

with government agencies, and notably family problems, sometimes flowing directly from the financial

stresses. Legal matters, tenancy and land tenure matters, succession and retirement also feature increasingly.

Devon FCN work began slowly with just a few cases of issues with government bureaucracy issues

(MAFF, later Defra), with Dairy Inspectors, and a few welfare issues. However, in 2001 the FMD outbreak

in Devon, set the team into full flight. We had got a bit established particularly with MAFF (later Defra) and

we worked quite closely with them during the FMD outbreak, and with the Police. This gave FCN a great

boost in Devon and the South West of England, and the work increased greatly after the disease was over, it

has continued right up until today. There are anything from 80 to 100 new cases a year with at least 200 plus

cases ongoing, which need pastoral care. Bovine Tuberculosis (bTB) has been a major problem with the

restrictions causing financial issues far greater than FMD but less visibly so – especially to the public. Where

there had been tragic accidents, suicides, and many families with family squabbles, FCN Devon played a

mediation role to try to get the family to work together, and in one case, one son was given notice to quit the

partnership with a payment, so he could purchase another farm in a neighbouring county. Mental health is

another problem FCN Devon has had to deal with, one where the farmer, as his wife was going out to work,

was left home all day on his own to run the farm. Loneliness can lead to depression, depression leads to

mental illness and possibly suicides. We work alongside the Community Mental Health Teams to give

support to some farmers. Succession is becoming an ever increasing problem. Father and Mother may be

reluctant to hand the farm over in case the son gets divorced and may lose half the farm. One farmer aged

over 90 is still trying to farm, and his son aged over 50 is unable to make decisions or change anything. The

management is deteriorating and there has been an animal welfare issue because father is not up to coping

with the day to day issues. There are some children who don't want to take the farm on because they are not

prepared to work seven days a week for little return; they prefer to work for another farmer, or outside

agriculture altogether.

6. Conclusions

FCN is being more proactive now, particularly with the Market Chaplaincy Teams in Devon, and also

offering physical health checks to farmers while they visit market. We need to revive some of our Devon

FARMS Groups, and seek to catalyse more to start so that farmers help themselves more and hopefully enjoy

these meetings together. The increased emphasis on proactive work among farming communities is beneficial

not only to farming families but to the wider rural economy and thus for public benefit at large.

As FCN was inspired by work elsewhere, it is hoped that this short Paper may encourage others to

address the needs of farming communities in other countries where provision of help may not yet be

forthcoming

7. References & further reading

www.fcn.org.uk

Carruthers, S.P. & Miller, F.A. (1996) Crisis on the Family Farm: Ethics or Economics? (CAS Paper 28,

University of Reading, 284 pp.)

Jones, C.R. (1991) Biblical Signposts for Agricultural Policy. ACF, 69 pp.

Jones, C.R. & Jones, I. (1996) Winner Takes All & Families Lose All: a nightmare for farming in the US.

(ACF/UCCF, Leicester, 48 pp).





Kyamuwendo, E & Wibberley, E.J. (2011) Farmer Collaboration through FARMS (Farm Asset Resource

Management Study) Groups. pp. 235-244 (Vol.1) In Thriving in a Global Market: Innovation, Co-

operation and Leadership. International Farm Management Association (IFMA) 18th World

Congress, New Zealand, March 2011 (eds. Gardner, J. & Shadbolt, N.). ISBN: 978-92-990056-4-4

Nagaraj, K. (2010) http://beta.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article94324.ece

Viney, N. & Wibberley, E.J. (2004) FCN-Farm Business Advisory Service (FBAS) Pilot Project Survey

& Final Report. (4 pp., April 2004).

Wibberley, E.J. (1999) Farmers Together. Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England 160, 106-

112.

Wibberley, E.J. (2001) - (compiler) Farming Fun & Wisdom: quotes, jokes and anecdotes. ACORA

(Archbishops’ Commission on Rural Areas) Publishing, 100 pp. (2nd

impr., 2002).

Wibberley, E.J. (2014) Family Farms and Farmer Managerial Sovereignty at the heart of Ecosystem

Security on a Pan-African and international basis. In Africa Farm Management Association

9th Congress, Cape Town, RSA – www.afma9.org




http://www.afma9.org/

Documents

Jones, C.R., Jones, J., Ursell, D.J., Warren, B ...ifmaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/15_NPR_Jones_etal_P113-1201.pdfJONES, C.R., JONES, J., URSELL, D.J., WARREN, B., WIBBERLEY,