Politicians are worried about a lack of opportunity for secondary school pupils to study horticulture and agriculture.
A member of Parliament's primary production select committee, Dunedin-based National Party list MP Katherine Rich, told the Otago Daily Times fewer pupils were studying the subjects, due in part to courses not being offered as widely as they once were.
The subjects no longer had scholarship level accreditation and new rules, under which the Correspondence School would not provide courses for schools with more than 600 pupils, meant pupils were missing out.
Such is the committee's concern, it has sought a briefing from the Ministry of Education on the health of agriculture as a secondary school subject, and requested data on the number of pupils studying agriculture, and where the subject fits in the new curriculum.
The committee has also asked the Correspondence School to give a presentation on the impact rule changes have had on the school's ability to provide for pupils wanting to study agriculture.
Ministry of Education figures show 1557 fewer pupils studying agriculture and horticulture between 2003 and 2007 and 55 fewer secondary schools offering the courses over the same period.
In 2007, 10,177 pupils studied horticulture and agriculture at 175 schools, compared with 11,734 pupils at 230 schools in 2003.
Mrs Rich said it appeared changes to the Correspondence School meant the courses were not available to those pupils who wanted to take them.
‘‘My personal belief is we should not let a bunch of rules stand in the way of pupils who want to study agriculture. Study at school forms the pathway towards a career,'' she said.
The dropping of the subject at scholarship level was also working against interest in it, as there was no incentive to study it through to year 13, despite there being careers in agriculture available.
‘‘Not having it at that level does affect the status of that option,'' she said.
Mrs Rich said it was National Party policy to reinstate agriculture as a scholarship subject.
Some people spoken to fear for the future of agriculture and horticulture at secondary school level, saying in the new curriculum it gets a brief mention as part of science, indicating it has become an applied science.
Brian Harrison, a PPTA executive member, a teacher at Waihi College and the former president of the Horticulture and Agriculture Teachers Association, said he was worried about the future of the courses for a number of reasons including the fact the course was no longer taught at teacher training colleges.
He said in an interview that horticulture and agriculture classes at secondary school had been ‘‘well resourced'' in the 1980s and early 1990s but that had since fallen away to the point some schools ‘‘did not even know horticulture and agriculture exists''.
That downgrading was accentuated when former education minister Trevor Mallard removed horticulture and agriculture as scholarship subjects.
‘‘That was an absolute catastrophe. It meant some schools with competent year-13 pupils suddenly found they could no longer take it,'' he said.
Te Puke High School, for example, went from a situation where a large number of pupils took the subjects to one where very few took them, as a result.
The course was now being used by some schools to place pupils with little drive or vision and some had behavioural problems.
Although there were few agriculture and horticulture teachers coming into the profession, Mr Harrison said those who were teaching the subjects were generally younger than those teaching other subjects.
Mr Harrison said pupils who were passionate about the subject were still attracted to it, in part because they could get jobs after school and there was a career path.
Other changes at the Correspondence School have made it difficult for individuals or small groups of pupils to study agriculture and horticulture and, in some cases, parents are having to pay $1200 in fees.
