Last week, the University of Exeter published the results of a survey for North Wales Wildlife Trust about the re-introduction of beavers in Wales. Around 80% were in favour. But the survey also asked people how much they knew about beavers. 10% responded with ‘nothing’, but that hadn’t apparently deterred them taking part in a voluntary survey (some in favour, some against) on the subject!

Such is human nature it seems. Lack of knowledge doesn’t prevent some of us having strong opinions, and sometimes voicing them very loudly.

In Wales right now, the Sustainable Farming Scheme, the Welsh Government’s proposed new farming subsidy scheme, is currently igniting opinions, and hogging the country’s 6 o’clock news programmes on a nightly basis.

Wales is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. There’s a number of reasons for that, but one of the key factors has been the way that farming subsidy schemes since the second world war have pushed farmers to maximise production. It worked, and the UK is the 6^th in the world for food security, but it’s taken a toll on the extent, and health, of our wildlife habitats.

So the need for change is obvious. Not a wholesale change; we still need to produce food to eat. And we need to support the rural economy and the lifestyle and culture that goes with it. But we need to find a way of being kinder to the environment in the process.

Included in the Welsh Government’s proposals (now at final consultation stage, but with the financial details not yet known) are requirements that farmers set aside 10% of their land for tree cover, and that they manage 10% as habitat for wildlife, in return for their subsidy payment. Farmers are up in arms at those two requirements in particular, and the First Minister has today poured a bit of fuel on the fire by reminding famers, in an answer to a Tory question, that many of them voted for Brexit (about half, in line with the overall population, from what I can see) and in doing so, opted out of the EU’s subsidy systems, and voted for change.

For what it’s worth, as I have no say anyway, I find myself somewhere in the middle ground on it all. I worked in agricultural finance for about 15 years, have visited a few hundred farms, and have a lot of time for farmers – they’re hard-working, salt-of-the-earth people, and I’ve got some sympathy for the external pressures they find themselves facing. But I’ve also spent the last 12 months or so trying to educate myself (via Isabella Tree’s books, Lee Schofield’s Wild Fell, and quite a few more) on the biodiversity crisis, and its possible solutions, and can see that the status quo isn’t an option.

That middle ground isn’t a popular place to be. Will Penri Evans, the Farmer’s Weekly columnist, was lambasted on Facebook, just for saying in his column that he was open-minded and wanted to see the full detail of the scheme before passing final judgement. And of the opposition politicians, Llŷr Gruffydd of Plaid Cymru seemed to talk the most sense initially (recognising the need for a new scheme, but questioning the ‘one size fits all approach’) but you’re unlikely to have heard his views reported much.

As with pretty much every debate these days it seems, this one has rapidly become polarised.

The Welsh Labour Government, having spent 7 years developing this are unlikely to U-Turn (though hinted today that there would be some more tweaks yet). But their communication could be better, and right now is more likely to push farmers away than win them over.

On the other side, polarisation is boosted by the dog-whistling of some high profile farmers like Gareth Wyn Jones, who are seemingly more interested in Facebook likes than solutions, and will happily share misinformation to get them, including the statement that it’ll lead to a ‘20 percent plus’ reduction in production. (It won’t, for a number of reasons, but mainly that farmers will put their least-productive land into the scheme).

Following the farmers’ protests last week, some of the public are joining in too –and there’s an element of ‘beaver syndrome’ in that – a scant understanding of the issues isn’t stopping people from taking a side!

I suspect the Government will push it through, with only minor changes. We’ll see. But if that’s Labour’s approach, and if there’s a determination to drive change through regardless of opposition, where’s that bravery when it comes to better access rights? In England, Labour have said that they’ll introduce a Scottish-style right to roam (allowing wild camping, and for us to be able to walk almost anywhere, as long as it’s done responsibly). So why haven’t they introduced that in Wales, where they’re already in power? Is it still to come, under separate legislation? Or is it an opportunity lost?