Jane Ransom wrote:

In article , Larry
Stoter writes

I also understand perfectly well why some farmers do apply expensive
poisons - which are often more toxic than those available to the general
public. The molluscides are applied to increase yield and profit. These
molluscides are at least implicated, directly or indirectly, in the
decline of various bird species.

Aye, but is that because they poison the birds directly or because they
decimate the food chain so that the birds go elsewhere?

Probably both. Certainly also some suggestions that molluscides lead to
a reduction in fertility in certain bird species.

You could apply
your same reasoning to our obsession with hygiene. This obsession means
there are fewer flies around and therefore fewer birds that eat the
flies. It's not just farmers who are depriving birds of their food.

Indeed - but hygiene on farms. And, in many areas, monocultures of wheat
or oil seed rape. Farmland occupies most of lowland Britain and how it
is managed is critical for wildlife. I've also read (and seen) that some
farmers sow poppies along the edges of fields to improve the appearance.
But I'm really not having a go at farmers (or perhaps only a few).
Farmers are responding to what politicians and the public want. And many
farmers do have a real interest in and concern with wildlife.

What is really worrying us is the rate at which barns are being
converted into housing as more and more farmers are pushed out of
farming (why shouldn't a farmer have a decent standard of living?)
The nesting places for swallows are disappearing rapidly.
Not just swallows - Barn Owls are also critically affected. And while
some of it is barns being converted, farms are also being 'tidied' -
often to meet requirements handed down from government or supermarkets.

--
Larry Stoter