 |
|

05/11/08, 11:53 AM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: South Central Wisconsin
Posts: 14,801
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patt
I have no idea what your point is here? 
|
What we've managed to do here is confirm that it's useless to look for that big multimillion acre ag company. That disappoints me since I would have loved to know how such an operation could be managed.
We've also confirmed that forestry and agriculture are two separate fields. Using the word "farm" as a means of justifying calling both "agribusiness" is no less wrong than including tank farms, wind farms, and worm farms as part of agribusiness.
And we've confirmed what monoculture is in both agriculture and forestry and that most here SHOULD know the difference.
The only thing not confirmed is exactly what agribusiness constitutes since I've never heard any two definitions which agree.
Martin
|

05/11/08, 12:01 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: South Central Wisconsin
Posts: 14,801
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fantasymaker
Even though no single entity may be over a million acres collectively they do. Besides your statistics are inaccurate. The ultimate Ownership of lots of places are hidden. A company that owns 10 companies each with a half million acres would show up as owning none while in reality it owned 5 million
|
The only statistics presented are the published acreage owned by Ted Turner and the King Ranch. Both are listed as the highest total acreage in their classifications.
I might also add that you're not going to find a great number of half-million acre farms. If it takes 500,000 acres to be classified as an agribusiness, that shoots down the "thousands of acres" suggestion.
Now if you can come up with a company which owns 10 other companies with 500,000 acres each, I think that we'd all be interested in finding that out as well. Fact or fantasy?
Martin
|

05/11/08, 12:23 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: IL, right smack dab in the middle
Posts: 6,787
|
|
|
False
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paquebot
What we've managed to do here is confirm that it's useless to look for that big multimillion acre ag company. That disappoints me since I would have loved to know how such an operation could be managed.
TRUE
We've also confirmed that forestry and agriculture are two separate fields. Using the word "farm" as a means of justifying calling both "agribusiness" is no less wrong than including tank farms, wind farms, and worm farms as part of agribusiness.
FALSE
And we've confirmed what monoculture is in both agriculture and forestry and that most here SHOULD know the difference.
FALSE
The only thing not confirmed is exactly what agribusiness constitutes since I've never heard any two definitions which agree.
Martin
|
Better keep trying if you have something to prove.
|

05/11/08, 12:27 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: South Central Wisconsin
Posts: 14,801
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fantasymaker
Besides your statistics are inaccurate.
|
If you are impressed with figures, you might want to know where the 10 biggest North American landowners are and what they do. Discounting, of course, the 624,000,000 acres owned by the US Government.
#1, Ted Turner in 10 states
#2, Canada, 1,600,000, timber
#3, CA, 1,500,000, timber
#4, CA/NM, 1,200,000, cattle
#5, ME, 960,000, timber
#6, TX, 900,000, cattle
#7, WA, 770,000, timber
#8, OR, 750,000, timber
#9, FL, 640,000, cattle & citrus
#10, TX, 560,000, cattle
Martin
|

05/11/08, 12:27 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ouachitas, AR
Posts: 6,049
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paquebot
What we've managed to do here is confirm that it's useless to look for that big multimillion acre ag company. That disappoints me since I would have loved to know how such an operation could be managed.
We've also confirmed that forestry and agriculture are two separate fields. Using the word "farm" as a means of justifying calling both "agribusiness" is no less wrong than including tank farms, wind farms, and worm farms as part of agribusiness.
And we've confirmed what monoculture is in both agriculture and forestry and that most here SHOULD know the difference.
The only thing not confirmed is exactly what agribusiness constitutes since I've never heard any two definitions which agree.
Martin
|
Ok your first sentence explains a lot. Thanks.
So according to you everyone with the title of tree farm on their land needs to change it correct? Maybe you can define farm for us please? Worms and trees don't count I take it, so what makes a farm?
|

05/11/08, 12:31 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: South Central Wisconsin
Posts: 14,801
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patt
Ok your first sentence explains a lot. Thanks.
So according to you everyone with the title of tree farm on their land needs to change it correct? Maybe you can define farm for us please? Worms and trees don't count I take it, so what makes a farm?
|
Dunno! You're asking the wrong person. I wasn't the one who brought the Christmas tree farm into the thread!
Marin
|

05/11/08, 12:37 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: IL, right smack dab in the middle
Posts: 6,787
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paquebot
Now if you can come up with a company which owns 10 other companies with 500,000 acres each, I think that we'd all be interested in finding that out as well. Fact or fantasy?
Martin
|
My point is that you wont be able to find these companies.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that a couple of railroad companies own enormous amounts of land does anyone here got the numbers on that?
|

05/11/08, 12:44 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: South Central Wisconsin
Posts: 14,801
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fantasymaker
My point is that you wont be able to find these companies.
|
You're not going to find them since they don't exist. Every square inch of land on this continent is owned and there's a record of it and who owns it. And anything that big is a little difficult to hide!
Martin
|

05/11/08, 12:49 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Right Here
Posts: 3,280
|
|
|
|

05/11/08, 12:52 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: IL, right smack dab in the middle
Posts: 6,787
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paquebot
If you are impressed with figures, you might want to know where the 10 biggest North American landowners are and what they do. Discounting, of course, the 624,000,000 acres owned by the US Government.
#1, Ted Turner in 10 states
#2, Canada, 1,600,000, timber
#3, CA, 1,500,000, timber
#4, CA/NM, 1,200,000, cattle
#5, ME, 960,000, timber
#6, TX, 900,000, cattle
#7, WA, 770,000, timber
#8, OR, 750,000, timber
#9, FL, 640,000, cattle & citrus
#10, TX, 560,000, cattle
Martin
|
What we have here is a faliure to communicate,  I simply dont put much faith in this kind of satistics
|

05/11/08, 01:45 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ouachitas, AR
Posts: 6,049
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bumpus
|
Thanks! So what if we use the term corporate farming vs. family farming? That may be more understandable than agri-business that covers everything from farms to John Deere to the local feedstore.
|

05/11/08, 01:56 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ouachitas, AR
Posts: 6,049
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windy in Kansas
I often see posts which lead me to believe that many don't like the term agribusiness nor really think of farming as a true business.
There is a business in Kansas that is associated with Kansas State University that is called Kansas Farm Management Association. They don't manage farms, but they do provide a service which gives up to the minute information, book auditing, tax preparation, etc. for farms that choose to join. Most generally those that join tend to have pretty much average sized farm, at least from my past experience having used their services in the 1970s and early 1980s.
Having said that here is a newspaper blurb today giving some of the report for the year of 2007. With nearly record wheat yields in western Kansas and near record prices those figures somewhat offset the crops in other areas that weren't even harvested due to late freeze, etc.
My point is for you to look at the amount of money the average farm handled and you will see that farming is indeed a business, i.e. agribusiness. Well if I handled a half million per year I would sure want to do it business like. The farms are probably about 2,000 acres or less. Remember too that in Kansas much of the land has to be fallowed in order to gain enough moisture for a crop, meaning that there isn't a crop on the land every year and some of the acreage would be pasture land with a low stocking rate. We figured 8 acres per cow/calf pair for the county I used to live in.
The average value of farm production among its members statewide last year was pegged at $407,787, with average farm expenses of $292,752. The average government payment per farm was $24,000
http://www.hutchnews.com/Todaystop/farmincome
The net incomes look good per farm until you factor in all of the hours the farmer and family actually worked.
Yes, farming is indeed agribusiness. Also remember that expenses don't stop if there is a crop failure.
|
To get back to the original post.  I don't think anyone would disagree that farming is a business. The question is is it a home business run by a family or a corporate business run by a conglomerate? Financially speaking the smaller the farm the more money it makes per acre. Smaller farms that are integrated and sustainable are also for the most part not receiving any gov't subsidies.
It's a well known fact that farmers go in together and form corporations in order to double or triple dip from those gov't subsidies. That's why people have a problem with them.
|

05/11/08, 01:58 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York bordering Ontario
Posts: 4,786
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paquebot
You're not going to find them since they don't exist. Every square inch of land on this continent is owned and there's a record of it and who owns it. And anything that big is a little difficult to hide!
Martin
|
Martin, I think fantasymaker means that Corporation A can own Corporation B which owns Corporation C, and all three of those corporations can own land. On the title it will show Corporation A, B, or C, but in reality Corporation A own everything. So in fact Corportion A may own a whole lot more than it looks like on the deed.
Jennifer
__________________
-Northern NYS
|

05/11/08, 02:08 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: South Central Wisconsin
Posts: 14,801
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patt
Thanks! So what if we use the term corporate farming vs. family farming? That may be more understandable than agri-business that covers everything from farms to John Deere to the local feedstore. 
|
Corporate farming is often also family farming. Just saw one of the Baerwolf brothers at the local auto races Friday night. Both have their own separate farms but they've incorporated to sell their product. One of the herds is 400, one is 100. You decide if www.sassycowcreamery.com is a "lovable" family farm or a "hated" agribusiness.
Martin
|

05/11/08, 02:15 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: South Central Wisconsin
Posts: 14,801
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer L.
Martin, I think fantasymaker means that Corporation A can own Corporation B which owns Corporation C, and all three of those corporations can own land. On the title it will show Corporation A, B, or C, but in reality Corporation A own everything. So in fact Corportion A may own a whole lot more than it looks like on the deed.
Jennifer
|
Can and may mean nothing more than could or maybe. If I had wings, maybe I could fly. I don't have wings and I can't fly. Possibilities, implications, extrapolations, all have a way of becoming facts to many people here. Sorting out the facts and truths then becomes more difficult.
Martin
|

05/11/08, 02:18 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ouachitas, AR
Posts: 6,049
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paquebot
Corporate farming is often also family farming. Just saw one of the Baerwolf brothers at the local auto races Friday night. Both have their own separate farms but they've incorporated to sell their product. One of the herds is 400, one is 100. You decide if www.sassycowcreamery.com is a "lovable" family farm or a "hated" agribusiness.
Martin
|
I have another term for you: "deliberately obtuse".  I think you know what I mean. Just in case you really don't that is a family farm. 2 family farms raising dairy cows in a natural and organic way. They are also raising at least some of their feed. That makes them neither over sized nor a monoculture. I would assume they incorporated so that they can run their own creamery because value added products are the only way to really make money on a smaller sustainable family farm.
|

05/11/08, 02:33 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: South central Virgina
Posts: 2,137
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windy in Kansas
I often see posts which lead me to believe that many don't like the term agribusiness nor really think of farming as a true business.
There is a business in Kansas that is associated with Kansas State University that is called Kansas Farm Management Association. They don't manage farms, but they do provide a service which gives up to the minute information, book auditing, tax preparation, etc. for farms that choose to join. Most generally those that join tend to have pretty much average sized farm, at least from my past experience having used their services in the 1970s and early 1980s.
Having said that here is a newspaper blurb today giving some of the report for the year of 2007. With nearly record wheat yields in western Kansas and near record prices those figures somewhat offset the crops in other areas that weren't even harvested due to late freeze, etc.
My point is for you to look at the amount of money the average farm handled and you will see that farming is indeed a business, i.e. agribusiness. Well if I handled a half million per year I would sure want to do it business like. The farms are probably about 2,000 acres or less. Remember too that in Kansas much of the land has to be fallowed in order to gain enough moisture for a crop, meaning that there isn't a crop on the land every year and some of the acreage would be pasture land with a low stocking rate. We figured 8 acres per cow/calf pair for the county I used to live in.
The average value of farm production among its members statewide last year was pegged at $407,787, with average farm expenses of $292,752. The average government payment per farm was $24,000
http://www.hutchnews.com/Todaystop/farmincome
The net incomes look good per farm until you factor in all of the hours the farmer and family actually worked.
Yes, farming is indeed agribusiness. Also remember that expenses don't stop if there is a crop failure.
|
I don't understand the reason for the thread. If anyone don't think farming is a business, God help them. It sure as heck ain't no hobby. I'm disabled and still working my butt off trying to make the 20 acres I have turn into a mini farm and I have "BUSINESS" writen all over all my ideas to do so.
And you are sure right about expenses not stopping with crop failures. I lost my butt last year. Not to crop failures but to the wind blowing my green house away to start with, then came the deer, ground hogs, and rabbits.
Plus I have busted the transaxle in the mower turned tractor and the 5th, read that again, the 5th tiller in two years.
If you are lucky, it can be a business. If not,  away. I am going to try one more year anyway.
|

05/11/08, 02:44 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: South Central Wisconsin
Posts: 14,801
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patt
I would assume they incorporated so that they can run their own creamery because value added products are the only way to really make money on a smaller sustainable family farm.
|
Incorporation is a business move. If it involves a farm or farms, it can only be called an agribusiness by definition. It either is an agribusiness or is not a business. It is not limited in size, value, specific crop, or product. It's like being pregnant. There's no "just a little bit". You either are or you aren't!
I might also add that there are many on this forum who would consider a milking herd of 400 cattle to not exactly be a typical family farm. As far as I'm concerned, the Baerwolfs still qualify despite being incorporated.
Martin
|

05/11/08, 02:55 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: East Tenn.
Posts: 10,131
|
|
|
Maybe one should consider who "controls" how many acres. Considering the fact that a lot of these "owners" contract out to one company which controls what they raise. Even when I was a kid the farms were only 100-200 acres but DeKalb a corn company controlled a bunch of what they raised for seed corn. And I know thats abou the time that "agribusiness" began being used and even the farmers didn't like them. its just what you did to make a living.
See my thread on how many Indian farmers are killing themselves over the same thing.
__________________
Thinking is hard. Feeling and believing a storyline is easy.
FREEEEEEEDDDDDDDOOOOOOMMM!!!
Prof Kingsfield. Rules!!
http://tnwoodwright.blogspot.com/
|

05/13/08, 05:45 PM
|
 |
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: IL, right smack dab in the middle
Posts: 6,787
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paquebot
You're not going to find them since they don't exist. Every square inch of land on this continent is owned and there's a record of it and who owns it. And anything that big is a little difficult to hide!
Martin
|
Ok as you are so fond of saying prove it. All 5 asertions. I dont think you can and you are just bluffing.
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Rate This Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:23 AM.
|
|