Rural west bubbles with positive attitude

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Published: March 28, 2002

NISKU, Alta. – Despite falling incomes and greater distances to schools

and services, 98 percent of rural residents in the four western

provinces think they have a good life, a survey of people in rural

communities shows.

Philippe Ricard, with Socio-Graphic Studies in Quebec, said he has

never seen such an overwhelming show of support for quality of life.

In the survey of 1,968 farmers and non-farmers who lived in rural areas

of the four western provinces, 43.2 percent rated their quality of life

Read Also

Man charged after assault at grain elevator

RCMP have charged a 51-year-old Weyburn man after an altercation at the Pioneer elevator at Corinne, Sask. July 22.

as good and 54.9 percent rated it very good.

“I survey quite a bit in urban areas and you don’t get such good

results for quality of life,” said Ricard, who conducted the survey for

the Western Agri-Food Institute, a group set up with funding from

western provinces to research and promote western agriculture and rural

development.

“As you can see, it is a good place to live,” said Ricard, as he

unveiled the research to the members.

Manitoba farmer Owen McAuley, chair of the institute, said the positive

attitude is a sign that life in rural areas is good.

“I think that speaks well for us. It’s a significant difference than

you would have got in urban areas,” said McAuley.

Former federal agriculture minister Charlie Mayer said he’s not

surprised by the results.

“I think people live in the country by choice,” said Mayer who lives in

St. Francois Xavier, about 20 minutes outside Winnipeg.

The study was commissioned by the Western Agri-Food Institute to find

the similarities and differences between farmers and non-farmers in

rural areas of the Prairies and British Columbia.

By understanding the attitudes toward agriculture, the group hoped to

better understand where agriculture would fit into the rural economy of

the future.

Instead of highlighting the differences between farmers and non-farmers

in rural areas, the study pointed out their similarities. Both groups

of rural residents said there was a need for good health care, roads

and education.

There was also little difference among attitudes toward intensive

livestock operations, genetically modified crops, pesticide use or

economic development.

When the rural residents were asked what they would do if a project

with economic benefit to their community had a negative impact on the

environment, 58 percent said they would try to find a compromise.

Eight percent said they would accept or defend the project and 34

percent said they would disagree with or oppose the project.

Gaye Lenderbeck of the Manitoba Rural Adaptation Council said she was

surprised by the willingness of people to co-operate on major projects.

“We tend to get a little hot about hog barn development. I think there

really are 58 percent who are willing to compromise but you don’t hear

that message,” said Lenderbeck.

Ricard said if the opposition is weighed slightly against large

projects, it’s because the people have chosen to live in rural areas

for the quality of life.

“The compromise leans more towards nature,” he said.

Jeff Turple of Target Ag-Ventures in Calgary said the survey shows

governments must realize agriculture policy isn’t necessarily rural

development policy.

While there is little difference in attitudes between farmers and

non-farmers, the survey showed there are clear differences in attitudes

among provinces.

The survey conducted in December and January showed 63.3 percent of the

people in Manitoba feel hog barns and intensive livestock have had a

negative impact on the environment, significantly higher than the 33.8

percent of people in Saskatchewan, the 25.5 percent in Alberta and 2.4

percent in B.C.

The Alberta residents said oil and gas activity and garbage and waste

disposal had the most negative impact on the environment.

Canadian Wheat Board support is greatest in Manitoba and Saskatchewan,

while the majority of Alberta and B.C. residents thinks the board

hinders producers.

For the prairie sample the study’s margin of error is 3.8 percent for

farmers and 3.7 percent for non-farmers.

Across the West, the margin is 3.1 percent for farmers and non-farmers.

explore

Stories from our other publications