Disputes over farming of any kind are likely to involve some version of “Big Ag” versus small family farms, each asserting their attention to the environment, their stewardship of the land and the benefits and costs of their products for consumers.

“Go big or go broke” was how a number of large dairy farmers and poultry growers saw their choices when they testified at the Oregon Legislature last March. They were defending industrial-scale livestock operations, known as “confined animal feeding operations,” or CAFOs. But other farmers and environmentalists argued that, when it comes to CAFOs, going big means going bad — causing overuse of scarce groundwater, degradation of high-value farmland and increased air pollution for neighboring communities.

So how do Oregonians view these conflicts?

In a recent statewide survey that reached more than 2,300 Oregonians, the Oregon Values and Beliefs Center ground-tested many of the arguments one hears in these disputes over farming practices and general perceptions of big and small farms in our economy.

Not surprisingly, the survey found that Oregonians like our farms. And, more than half of respondents reported visiting a farm during the past year, most often for buying fresh fruits and vegetables at a small family operation. For these and other reasons, It’s the iconic family farm that has captured hearts and minds. But mention “large-scale” or “industrial” farming, and we’re wary at best.

The survey found that 83% of Oregonians have a positive view of “small-scale farms,” while most (46%) aren’t sure of what they think of “large-scale commercial or industrial farms” and those who have an opinion are more negative (29%) than positive (25%) about them.

Digging deeper, the survey found that support for small farms stems from far more than a sentimental attachment to a bygone era. Topping the list of what Oregonians think are the most important values to support in our farming economy are “soil, water and air quality protections” (83% very important), “high level of employee satisfaction and safety” (70%), “animal quality of life” (69%) and “locally grown food close to markets and customers” (68%) — all of which contribute to “small-scale farms” outpolling “large-scale commercial or industrial farms” by 71% to 26% in the survey’s “very important” category.

Large farms have some advantages in the minds of Oregonians. Their contributions to food security, low-cost products, financial viability and resilience (“better prepared for crises”) all scored highly among respondents.

But the role of industrial farms in our food economy can seem abstract and remote, while family farms are seen as connected to our communities in more tangible and personal ways. Respondents overwhelmingly favored small farms over large farms for sustaining local communities (43% to 8%), citing their multigenerational ties to the land, jobs and opportunities for youth to develop habits of work effort and responsibility.

Discomfort with “Big Ag” was most notable in regard to the favored treatment that large farms receive in federal subsidy programs. As would be expected from its earlier findings, the Oregon Values and Beliefs Center survey registered strong support for extending federal subsidy programs to small farms (79% in favor, 7% opposed). In particular, Oregonians like the idea of providing subsidies to small farms so that “their eggs, produce, etc., can be sold at the same prices as eggs, produce, etc., from large-scale commercial or industrial farms” (72% in favor, 11% opposed).

In my experience as an apple orchard owner during the past decade, the debate over big and small farms is a surrogate — sometimes useful, sometimes not — for more consequential concerns about sustainable practices and the viability of farms of any size in today’s economy.

One small-farm neighbor of mine, who calls himself a “money farmer,” had a warning for farmers who resist change in this environment. “If you’re farming the way your father did,” he told me, “you’ll be the last in your family to do so.” Each generation of farmers faces new challenges, not least now the pressure to go big or at least do better in managing one’s land and resources, meeting market demands (including increasing demands for environmentally sustainable products) and making money.

After hearing arguments that touched on all of these issues, legislators decided that some CAFOs are getting too big for the preservation of local resources and the quality of life in farming communities. With Senate Bill 85, they decided to limit what had been the unregulated access to groundwater by large livestock operations, enact other mechanisms for monitoring water usage and apply stronger environmental protections to such projects in the future.

Based on the results of the survey, I think most Oregonians would agree that, in this case, lawmakers made the right call.