Challenges faced by the Agricutural industry

[ladycat]

Sorry I can't post a weblink to this. I'm going to post a few relevant lines from a hard copy story out of a food animal trade magazine (a factory farming publication).

-------

<SNIP>

I'm not sure how we will ever convince Congress or the president-elect and his associates that there must be a shift in the way we regulate and look at agriculture in this country. All of us involved in agriculture are aware of the problems. We've got issues like Proposition 2 in California, 30-year-old ethanol subsidies directed at a primary feedstuff and increasing pressure from USDA, not to mention pressure from special interest groups.

<SNIP>

Agriculture in general is losing its clout in Washington, and that is very frightening. There is likely to be more legislation that drives the cost of producing food up even further. Without a thorough understanding of the system, we may be heading toward moving our food supply out of the country.

<SNIP>

There has been a suggested change in the Clean Water Act to remove the word "navigable" from the regulated waters. This opens the door for completely contained farm ponds to fall under the regulations.

<SNIP>

------

I don't care for factory farms. However, laws and regulations are threatening the existence of the small farmer, and if things don't change, the factory farms will be moving offshore.

If it came down to getting most of our food from factory farms in the US, or factory farms in 3rd world countries, I would opt for those here.

All the more reason to at least protect the small farmer, and our right to grow our own food.

[haypoint]

I am glad you posted part of that article. While you are clear in your bias against large farming operations, the loss of these operations to other countries is sure to drive the small farmer off the land, too.

When this country had 80% of the people on farms or other rural locations, we had clout in Washington. We controlled the votes.
That has changed. Due to the economies of scale, making a living on a farm often requires farming in a larger scale than in past generations. With larger farms comes fewer farms.

Huge corporate farming operations can hire lobbyists, but it is those large voting blocks that catch the attention of the politicians. The urban population wants cheap food. They have the votes. That leaves us nursing back near the hams.

When we applaud laws that hamstring factory farms, we divide the agricultural community, further diminishing our voice in Washington.

[ladycat]

You're right, haypoint. Washington is hurting ALL agricultural enterprises in this country. If the big farms are hurt, you can bet your bottom dollar the little ones will be crushed from the fallout.

BTW, I have no objection at all to large farms. I don't care how big they are. I just don't like some of their methods.

But I will still stand behind them if it means keeping food production in our own country.

[haypoint]

It does.

[CamM]

To save agriculture here farmers need to supply a lot of crops rather than one. Depending on one crop to bring in the money isn't the right way to do it, and getting rid of the middleman is much better. Corporations need to go. Agriculture is something the city/suburban dwellers need to learn something about so they can make the right choices.
In fact, I saw a show a couple of days ago defending the small farmer in south american coffee farms. Companies like starbucks paid them reasonably so they could live off that income instead of growing cocoa for cocaine. It was amazing how they talked about the family farmer and all that, but the same thing is happening in THIS country and nobody really seems to care.
When farmers farm more and more land they supply too much and the price goes down. The industrial approach feeds everybody but the farmer gets almost nothing.
This whole concept sickens me and very few people realize the implications of what we're doing to the environment and the family farmer.

[haypoint]

It would be lovely if every farmer could raise a variety of animals and crops.
Just ain't going to happen. Specialization has allowed farmers to gain expertise in just a few products best suited to his soil/climate.

I could invest the same inputs as an Iowa corn farmer, but extract half the yield. That yield would likely sell for less than my investment.

I could put up a broiler house and raise chickens. But I'm too far from a processor and it is too cold most of the year. The Arkansas poultry farmer can make money where I can't.

Temper your criticism of the factory farm. A 30,000 sow hog operation is likely to have a few manure lagoons that stink to high heaven. But if you checked out a thousand 30 sow family farm operations, the total pollution is far worse. I'm not talking about some petting zoo set up to display a diverse group of farm animals. I'm talking about your average struggling small farm where one or both couples work full time off the farm.

I'd like to think that the folks that operate small poultry operations, some that visit this Homesteadingtoday site, are excellent stewards of their flocks. But they lack any sort of bio-security plan and are generally underfunded. If you inspected, at random, 10,000 farms with 100 chickens in each, you'd find more disease and inhumane shelter/housing than your average million hen Mega operation.

That's not how I wish that it is. But no matter how much I wish, it just isn't and Lassie isn't waiting at the end of everyone's driveway.

I've tried to educate people about where that processed beef in those high-class prepared meals comes from. Those folks that can afford to spend a lot on food don't want to know they are eating worn out dairy cows. They are the same average consumer that feels good about buying brown eggs from WalMart, but won't answer the door when a local guy is marketing local beef, door to door.

If American big time farmers can't go toe to toe with the foreign competition, what makes you think you can?
If you decide to cultivate vegetables to sell, you'd better be cultivating the "buy local" mentality with just as much energy. That's one of the few niches we've got left.

[ksfarmer]

Haypoint, that is one of the best thoughtout statements I have read on here lately. I only wish I could express my thoughts as well. Keep up the good work.

[MariaAZ]

Originally Posted by haypoint

The urban population wants cheap food. They have the votes.

You hit the nail smack on the head as far as I'm concerned. There is so much criticism about "ignorant city folks" but little acknowledgment that we are every bit an important part of the food chain as the farmer is. Our contribution is the cash we spend that is used by farmers to buy and repair equipment, purchase land, seed and fertilizer, and to pay the bills for their own families.

Animal activist and environmental groups haven't forgotten our role. They may pay big bucks for lobbyists in Washington, but they keep their names and causes in front of us as well because they know we wield power with our collective votes. And they don't just ply us with their information during elections; they're doing it all the time. Whether it's "good" or "bad" information isn't the point; the fact is, they know how to keep their cause in the public eye and mind all year 'round and not just in November.

I can think of several ads run by animal activist groups but not ONE by an agricultural group outside of an election when agricultural interests would be affected. In fact, I can name several animal activist and environmental groups but not ONE non-government ag group outside of FFA & 4H.

In my opinion, if American agriculture wants to save itself (and there are plenty of hungry city folks that need to buy food) it needs to realize that education isn't only something lobbyists do for elected officials; it's even MORE important to turn that attention to the masses. The "other side" is already doing it with increasing detriment to our agriculture system.