What is your opinon on corporate/large farming operations?

As a grain farmer, I feel i may have some insight missed by several posters.

Where is the money coming from? Well, for most it came from the generations before them, or "old money". The difference between a succesful farm with larger acreage, new equipment, etc. has a lot to do with whether the land has been paid for long ago, whether the grandparents did well, and whether they young generation had to buy the land owned by their parents, or if they were gifted the land.

Another point, is that farm debt, at least in Canada is gigantic. As the generational shift has occured, the young punks are greedier, especially if they are given a good start and land, etc. So they want more land, and better machinery than daddy had. So they borrow against land daddy paid for, the debt is tremendous out there.

Lets face it it is not 1945 anymore. It costs way more money(bushels) of grain to buy just fuel let alone live on. So to feign surprise that farms are getting bigger, is strange, for if they didn't, and we all farmed 160 acres, it would not be possible to make enough income on a quarter section, to put fuel in our tanks.

The misunderstanding out there is immense, and shows like food inc. etc do NOTHING to help the perceprion of citified masses of people. when 99 percent of the population has hardly ever been past the pearly gates of the city, they are suckers for believeing anything, yes even food inc. type garbage.

Me and my farm? under 2000 acres. inheritted or purchased from previous generation? Unfortunately for me, i had to buy it. Therefore my machinery is 25 years old, but it works.

What will happen in the future? No one knows, but I do not appreciate foreign land buyers very much. If I was near retirement, i may be happy to sell at ridiculous prices.

I would love to educate anyone with questions, especially the people thinking gmo is all bad, monsanto is the devil, and that we are wrecking our soil! Where would wrecking our soil get us as farmers in the future? We need our soil. Our soil is often much better, and we work hard towards making it better than when we got it. The soil on my farm is improving dramatically, and yes i use fertilizer and herbicides. Surprised? If I was wrecking my soil, I may as well not farm...

If the economy turns south, farmers often do well. If the farm economy turns south, there will be guys quitting, just as there always have been when the farm economy sucks. Why would the government swoop in? Its not like all farms will suddenly cease to exist at once.

False. I don't even know what to say to that type of absolutely uninformed post.

There is a lot in this paragraph I certainly oppose. The main issue is the wild plants, animals, and insects, have been reduced to make room for your farm. Make room for all the farms. Although your soil will continue to grow crops using big horse-power, plant and critter killing poisons, and fossil fuel fertilizers, you will not leave it in better natural condition than when you started.

I have over 500 acres of wildlife rich forests, lakes, streams, and meadows on my farm. Elk, moose, two deer species, bears, hundreds of bird species, on down to amphibians, you know, those that are a measure of the health of an ecosystem, thrive. In spite of gmo and herbicides, and those terrible fertilizers!

My soil is getting better every year. There are earthworms where there were none, the crops keep getting better, the soil is alive where it was dying from tillage. I most certainly will leave it better than when I took over. The plant killing "poisons" are less necessry than ever. i use herbicides to kill specific weeds. Soil life is dynamic, terrestrial life is astounding, and aquatic life is massive. So no i am not killing life other than specific weeds on my farm. lol

Do you know the difference in nitrogen from nh3 and nitrogen from manure, or legume crops, once it is in the soil? Absolutely nothing. The soil and plants respond exactly the same as they would for any of these n sources. And I need to use less fertilizer as the soil gets better each year, not more, as those who have no clue are fed...

I once had a guy on these boards, telling me from michigan, that I had a different species of earthworm in my soil than I stated I have

And now you are stating that My land, soil and air is unhealthy because I spray a litre of herbicides on an acre of land each year?

Since I bought this farm, I have added 30 acres of wildlife habitat to it by letting some small fields that were hard to access, revert back to native condition. The 500 acres of woods and water, will stay that way forever. I have no intention to make it farmland, though it could be drained and stripped and made into excellent farmland...

Any other stuff you know about my operation others may want to know? Let them know more, and make yourself look more and more ridiculous if you wish. I refute your claims, they are false.

Good post farmerDale!

sevenmmm if everything was left in it's natural stage there would be no kelloggs cornflakes or twinkies to feed the city people.

It's a little late to feel this way - the early settlers of North America didn't leave everything natural by plowing up all the prairie and cutting down all the timber 150-300 years ago.
I'm sure you were taught in grade school that the early pilgrims almost starved themselves out before they started tilling the soil and growing their own crops.
In the last 30 years there have been major efforts made to conserve what land, water and soil we have after the mistakes of the early 20th century up here in Canada.

__________________
http://www.pinterest.com/sanza1/

A wise person speaks when they have something to say but a fool speaks just to say something

Actually we are giving it away. Several trillions of dollars every year. But hey, we have one heckuva hammock... erm safety net.

__________________
"Nothing so needs reforming as other peoples habits." Mark Twain

The mega farm was the natural evolution of the small family farm as profit margins got tighter and tighter. There were encouraged to take advantage of the "economies of scale". Back in the day of the ORIGINAL homesteaders, farms were already going from 160 acres to 320 acres to 480 as the ones who prospered aquired the land of those who went bust, or died untimely deaths, or went back east, or whatever. Even in the 1800's, you couldn't support a family most places with "40 acres and a mule".

Most farm products are commodities, the farmer doesn't get to set their price based on how much it cost to produce, plus a profit. The market sets the price they will get, and they have to produce it for less than that price if there is to be a profit at all. That is how the subsidies got started, to ensure an adequate supply for the times when the market price is less than the cost of production.

Obviously, I believe in small scale production with natural methods or I wouldn't be on this board. But I will never sit back and let the "real" farmers get thrown under the bus and painted as evil by mis-information. Farming is the original "family business". More farms get passed from one generation to the next than any other enterprise. So the last thing the modern farmer is out to do is destroy their land.

__________________
It is still best to be honest and truthful; to make the most of what we have; to be happy with the simple pleasures and to be cheerful and have courage when things go wrong.
Laura Ingalls Wilder

How do you define "mega farm"? Is it based on farm size? Or maybe by the use of the most high tech products available? If you define it by size, how many acres are required to be a "mega farm"? One thousand acres? Ten thousand acres? If your definition of "mega farm" is based on farm size, you sure can't say they were created for the fast food industry. There were quite a few farms of the size I mentioned and much larger, even 50,000 acres and more, in the later part of the 1800's. There weren't many McDonald's around back then.

It was not "mantra", it was common sense.

There was more and more people in the U.S. (and the rest of the world), who needed to eat and did not live on farms, themselves.

Besides, if you farmed 80 acres, why not 180? Why not 1800 acres? Why not 18,000?

Farmers are in business to make money, not simply maintain the "small farm life". If they wanted to, that's fine, as long as they did not want a lot of money.

Those that took the risk to buying more land and larger, more expensive, equipment, to farm that land, don't appears to be unhappy with their.

If I was a grain farmer, I'd rather be a wealthy one.

An impression I have, admittedly from very little actual knowledge or experience, is that a lot of big monoculture farmers are kinda stuck in a rut. They depend on a few buyers who may only be interested in certain crops, like grain or cotton. They can't diversify their crops because there is no market nearby for anything else. They specialize in certain crops, and become totally dependent on those crops and markets. They can do this because a minimum price is guaranteed by the government, and if bugs or disease or weather or the market goes bad, they have a taxpayer subsidized safety net. I've also heard that they must grow certain GM crops and buy their seed from the same companies that buy their crops. The goal of the government in running all this is cheap food for the masses, and profits for the farmers and agribusiness corporations. Not much wrong with all that, as long as it really pays for itself and doesn't do a lot of environmental damage. But it all depends on specialization, and the risks of this specialization are born by the taxpayers.

How accurate is this impression?

Somewhat and not necessarily, IMO.

Farmers grow crops to make money and they grow what buyers want, depenedant on location. If all they grow is cotton or corn, it does not matter, thats what they make money on. They take their "rut", to the bank, evey harvest.

Many farmers rotate between corn, soybeans and wheat, around here, but not all.

Farmer who love GM seeds, are fully aware, that they have to make a "deal with the devil" (Monsanto), but gladly plant GM seeds anyway, since they make money doing so.

The Government tries to control crops, but now its mostly the marketplace that determine who grows what, and that market place is global.

Farmers used to farm with abandon. If fertilizer or manure, ran into the creek, polluting it, oh well. Toxic pesticides were fine if they worked. Now farmers are being watched and regulated by the EPA and others, same as any factory or refinery.

Why are you so defensive? I made no claims that are false.

You do not add natural organic tilth back to your soil. You use fossil fuel derived pesticides and herbicides. You have big horse power to work your farm. Nothing untrue about any of these statements. These are all made by your own admission.

My statement that your farm has reduced what would be more wild things still stands. However, I am impressed you have worked in some room for wildlife. Very good.

Naw. Fully realize what I feel and think has little bearing on what is... Do you think there is something wrong with me for wanting more wild land for the trees, plants, and critters?

Besides, the whole corporate farming process has become too specialized and too dependent on mechanization and un-natural processes. Certainly subject to downfall if one link fails.

Then, woe be to those city folks!

Again, quote my post where I painted anyone as evil (although I could make a strong case against Monsanto), or mis-information. You are being way over the top sensitive to think such.

Go back and re-read the wikipedia Butz link. Spend time thinking about "Get big or get out". Doesn't matter if some of the land was passed down from a real family farm.

To be clear, a family farm fed the family with excess sold for cash. Mega farms contract to the fast food industry. And there are those in between.

I DIDN'T THROW ANYONE UNDER THE BUS!

I don't think so. The land was better off before Nixon changed the rules.

IMO as well then.

I think we could match and/or exceed stories about the corporate farm today. Here on Lake Michigan, the algae growth along the lakeshore out into 35 feet of water is downright horrible. Always nearest the creeks too. DNR here has already studied the situation and points to the manure from the dairy farms.

I never seen that kind of growth when I fished in the 1980's...

FarmerDale, you also make assumptions, Forerunner realy does know what he is talking about. He is a master composter, and knows how to ammend the soil to make it productive. Most soil down here in the states have been depleated of their trace minerals, from the continuous practices used in todays farming. Organic matter in the top soil has gone down drasticly over the last hundred years, and its not getting much better. Yes no till has reduced the top soil erosion, but the continued use of chemicals and herbecides are not going to improve the soil over time. Weeds are allready becomeing resistant to the sprays they use now days, and the day will come when we find out GMO seed is not great for you. But who am I to say, I`m a dumb ole farmer that trys to take care of my farm the best I can so if my children want to remain here they will be glad of what I have done. I never try and push my way of doing things on people and I will not and never have let anyone force their opinion on me. We have big farmer to make cheap food for the world, we need them. We also need level headed leaders that know we need all farmers, big and small, organic and commercial, grain and livestock, young and old, and above all else we all need to be good farmers. I may not make a bunch of extra money, but most days I enjoy what I do, and if you enjoy what you do , it`s never a job. > Thanks Marc

__________________
Our Diversified Stock Portfolio: cows and calves, alpacas, horses, pigs, chickens, goats, sheep, cats ... and a couple of dogs...
http://springvalleyfarm.4mg.com

No, there's nothing wrong with wanting more wild areas, but there's nothing stopping you from moving to such an area and leaving your toxic area behind.

I'm not saying this to run down your way of thinking seven, but unfortunately the world, and especially North America is the way it is because of the exploding population and the need to feed it.
Lets say the dairy farms are closed down.....where are the people especially the children to get their milk from? Oh, I guess......The milky way?
Or it should be trucked in from another state, adding to the price because you don't want the cows fouling up your water playground, but meanwhile the trucks are fouling up the lake and the air with their emmisions.
OTOH has anything been done to fence off the cattle from the creeks? Are you sure it's from the dairies and not from cities' or lake dwellers' sewages?
It's a no win situation but steps should be in motion to stop the destruction and minimize the damage already.

__________________
http://www.pinterest.com/sanza1/

A wise person speaks when they have something to say but a fool speaks just to say something

Imho, if everything collapses, there'll be no central govt., and the locals, if they have the wherewithal, and the fuel, will reclaim the land. The 20th Century is rife with failed govt acquisitions of farmland, putting non farmers, but ideologues, in 'control'.... starvation followed.

I'm all for a continuous wilderness from the Arctic Circle down to Patagonia... but until the 7 Billion or so folks 'leave this earthly realm', megafarms will be the rule. If megafarms went away overnight, that 7 billion would in a year turn into a billion, maybe less... and then some folks dreams would come true, as they freeze to death in the dark, dying of starvation.

__________________
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. Seneca
Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival. W. Edwards Deming