Why small farms can not feed the world anymore...

I am not a large scale farmer. Not for here at least, it is all relative. Some places 10 acres is large, some place 5 000 is medium.

I know that small ag and big ag can coexist. They always have, and always will.

small ag and big ag have coexisted only for about a century. I'm not talking simply numbers of acres, but big ag as in industrialized, mass produced, mass shipped, mass processed, chain that gets it to large stores. Before the late 19th or early 20th century, the genetic and mechanical tech and infrastructure simply did not exist for the big ag concept. Even if you could have produced a 20 kajillion tons of GMO wheat, corn, oats, or humingbirds in Nebraska, but there was not storage facilities, transport, processing, or a market to profitably get rid of it more than a few decades ago.

This is a long thread and I haven't read all the posts, but has anyone noted that this is primarily a North American question in re big Ag? The world does not feed itself with big Ag. Sure China and Soviet Russia tried their version of big Ag and failed. Now that they have introduced more small ag, they are producing a greater percentage (but not a surplus last I heard) of their own food.

There may be some huge acreage ranches in Africa and Australia, huge numbers of sheep in NZ, but it is the smaller operations that are producing the foods needed for a well rounded diet.

That is very, very correct but for a different reason than one might expect, fuel. 100 years ago, a quarter of all cropland was devoted to producing hay for horses. Tractors replaced the horses and supplied power to run threshing machinery. Grain could then be grown in large fields and in great quantity. It required a lot of people to harvest it but labor was cheap and a lot of willing manpower was available. Such machines were too expensive for most small farmers so a number of them would combine their money to buy both the tractor and thresher. Wagons and binder were usually pulled by teams. That life changed when tractors replaced horses and combines replaced threshing and shredding machines. The tractors permitted combines and corn pickers to be pulled. Those changes have taken place just within living memory of some members here. Though considerable differences in the machinery in 2013, it's still basically the same as it was in 1950 but bigger and requires bigger "horses". I doubt if 25% of the nations farmland would even begin feed the harvest machinery now.

Martin

My general "take" on a discussion of fuel costs and living configurations of Europe, in general, versus the US, in general, is that the suburban development in the US is a disaster just waiting for upward-forced petroleum costs to precipitate. Even if the US has a lot of 1/2-acre to 1-acre home plots where families could learn to plant basic crops, the access to everything else is often remote and dependent on auto travel for reasonable access. A lot of European population is in smallish towns with high population density but easy access all around to agricultural lands; another key is that there isn't often zoning restrictions keeping small shopowners from living in the rooms directly above their business space. The guy who fixes appliances can step out of his bedroom, check over his downstairs workshop, walk a half block to the best breakfast pastries in town, then another short distance to the coffee place, sit by the curb and visit with others from a distance around, pick up some cheese then visit a produce stand on the way home. Bicycles are practical already, cars often discouraged by medieval-age narrow roads. Here in the US, if you're close to a business development as a suburbanite, it's space mostly filled by big box stores, chains of places like Starbucks and Ace Hardware, all generally dependent on cheap-petroleum manufacture and shipment, too. Factor in plunging property values from the simple impracticality of the lifestyle we've built ourselves into and there'll be a serious time of readjustment and relocation. Insisting on staying put will in many cases mean living in really isolated and depressing circumstances.

Excellent observations, Dryheat.

__________________
“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater.
III

The concept of feeding ones family, shortages, lack of fuel or fuel costs, etc. is nothing new. We tend to think that our grandparents and great grandparents grew their own food and were so better off than we are today. But in reality it wasn't like that.

In fact, the same problems existed then as they do today in that people don't either know how to do it, don't want to take the time to do it, or just would rather have someone else produce their food for them. So much so that during WWII the government had to spend millions of dollars in promoting, teaching and funding the the concept of the "Victory Garden" programs.

It ended up being very successful, mostly because it promoted everyone helping themselves, which in turn helped the war effort, and people wanted to help out in that manner. But aside from the war effort, the best thing it did was make people aware of how they can help themselves, save money, not waste resources, and get them to realize where their food comes from and the effort it takes to feed America. So perhaps what we really need is not so much big Ag from the government, but some sort of new, updated and improved Victory Garden-type campaign.

__________________
"Challenges are what make life interesting -- overcoming them is what makes life meaningful."

I agree in so many ways, but not with your conclusion. the last thing we need is another gov't program to try to get people to do the right thing. Currently, there is not sufficient incentive for most people to garden. I would hate to see what monstrosity and pain would result from the gov't trying to manufacture that incentive.

First a "noob" question... What is the definition of a "small" farm here?

In my head, a small farm, would be one you can walk around and inspect in an afternoon, and tend with minimal outside help, possibly with the help of family, or some seasonal help, just to make sure everyone understands what I'm thinking here. I'm the optimist, whose glass is always 2/3 full, so forgive me my musings.

I live in WA, within a reasonable drive (in some cases, a reasonable bike ride, or walk) from various small farms, CSAs, vineyards, and orchards, and most of them are highly successful small farm operations. I could pick up a pig on my way home, if I wanted to. They can't feed the city of Seattle, necessarily, but us living in the smaller urban communities in the area can source most of our produce locally, pumping more money into our local economy. Having small farms competing against each other locally, means I have a wider selection of produce at my fingertips, as they are experimenting in producing something other farmers haven't found yet. I studied economics, among other subjects, so I spend time looking at the incentive and return of investment patterns in how the cash flows in a local economy as my idea of "fun". And small farmers are the ones who revitalize almost lost varieties and breeds, keeping them for future generations. I can't say they will be able to feed everyone, but they will be able to provide greater variety, and subsequently better nutrition to people.

I have strong hopes for small farms to be able to grow at least a majority of the local food supply, if there is enough variation in what they're growing. I read a brief article just this morning, that suggests that sustainable agricultural practices can increase farm yields. Now, with smaller farmers knowing sustainability is a selling point, I can see them taking over that niche before large monocrop farming operations even know what hit them.

Then off to the other thing I latched onto.

I have to disagree on the statement that all European farms are like this. It's like comparing American apples to oranges, without realizing that parts of Europe are altogether too cold for citrus, and grow apples, too.

To me, this, as well as most of the other comparisons of Europe vs. American farming I've read here sounds like a romanticized description of mostly Mediterranean areas, where small family farms paying taxes to a liege lord yielded the small farm landscape. My great grandmother's neighborhood in the farmland of Southern France looks like these descriptions, as if they've gotten preserved in an older time, and grocery shopping still involves butcher shops, fish mongers, vegetable stalls (or a jaunt to the potager in your backyard), and bakeries.

Despite this, Europe is a large continent, and has a lot of cultures and there are great variations in the farming styles throughout the continent, and through the ages. There are of course big cities with just the same issues as American Suburbia has. Outside these metropolitan areas, especially in northern parts of Europe, you end up with population densities, where you still need fuel to get to stores, or take your produce to market.

In my native Finland, according to Wikipedia, the current population density is 41/sq mile. If you discount the 84.6% of the roughly 5.4 million population that live in urban settings on just 2.4% of the whole country's area, you end up with a rural population density similar to Alaska's. Farms are scattered, and most of them are larger operations, and their fields have pretty much remained in the same layout for centuries in Scandinavia.

A pretty typical medium sized farm has a couple hundred hectares of forest, a few fields for rye, a few fields "resting" with legume crops, and a few fields of wheat or 'taters. With some farm equipment, a majority of these medium farms are still run by a couple of guys, often the farmer and a couple of hired hands. Most towns and farms were, and still are, situated with access to waterways, as those were the easiest way to transport goods. If you deviate from waterways, you can still find untouched forests in places.

My maternal grandparents' cabin is a former tenant farmer's house on the land of a farm that's been on maps and tax rolls in the same spot since the 13th century, the farm still spans square miles rather than acres, and the easiest way to get to town would be by boat, along the waterways, if they couldn't drive.

Another grandmother's cabin is a 400 year old "duplex" farm laborer's house (she punched a door through the log dividing wall, and added to it. It used to be two one room living units), and again, if you couldn't drive, or ride to town, the easiest way is to get off that estate, and to town for market on the waterways, as most rural settlements depended on lakes and rivers for transport. Heck, the farm that cabin used to belong to still spans 57 square miles (less than a quarter of what it started at four centuries ago), so just to get off the property takes a while without a car. It's actually very typical of the farms in Scandinavia.

Scandinavian farms were large operations, granted to the lord by a king, and the work was done by landless tenant farmers, who eked out an existance on a couple of wimpy acres of sub-par land. Hardly the glamorous small farms of Southern France, Italy, or Spain. Without a food culture emphasizing foraged, fished and hunted resources to fill out the otherwise meager crops, Finnish small farmers through history would barely have made a living in bygone eras.

What makes a farmer? My 6 year old planted his first bush beans this spring, & last week when we went out to harvest them for dinner he said "Well Mama, I guess that makes me Farmer Gavin!" There have been so many already that we have shared with 3 relatives. IMO, every little bit counts.
I am intrigued by the greenhouses/hydroponics operations because they eliminate the dreaded pesticides/herbicides that I don't want in my family's food. Maybe this type of "farming" will free up more land for chickens,cows,turkeys,etc. to run free in the grass like nature intended, & not be factory farmed. One can hope, can't they?

__________________
Please take the time to watch this video about Cerebral Palsy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0mrs4fpRv8

I used to live and own a home in Bremerton Wa. Washington is a very nice area.

How you describe the 'Local Food' movement in your area [small farms, CSAs, vineyards, and orchards, and most of them are highly successful small farm operations]; also describes this area [Maine].



I can see that

__________________
http://www.mofga.org/

http://www.mofga.org/Programs/FarmAp...2/Default.aspx

If everyone made the effort to grow at least some of their own, it would be a step in the right direction. Apartment dwellers have porches and patios and roofs to do containers - suburbanites have their fancy status symbol front lawns - I have my own 18 acres.
We are not growing everything we eat, but we hope to keep moving a lot closer to that in the next 5 years.

We have a 1,000 foot garden in this year, and I hope to get enough tomatoes and corn to can and freeze, cucumbers to pickle, carrots to cold store. We have two apple trees. We put in berry bushes this year, and plan on adding more berry bushes and fruit trees and nut trees in the future. We have hens in the coop, meat birds in the pasture, two goats, 4 pigs in a wooded pen, and two beef calves. By 2015 we should be able to eat mostly our own meat. We buy regional and local grain for them, hay that is grown at local farms, etc.

If everyone made the effort to think and buy locally and seasonally, there could be some incredible changes.

You are absolutely correct! Not only are they receiving help from the government, they are receiving top tier pricing from their suppliers because of the volume of sales.
My father, who farmed for 50+ years, got out of the milking business in the early 90's. He still has nightmares about the health inspector.

And Paris, France has a totally different climate produced by the ocean currents, proximity to the sea, altitude, etc. For another odd comparision, commentators often use Burlington, VT to represent Vermont. It doesn't. Burlington is in a low flat fertile valley down by a great big lake and it stays very tempered. Burlington does not get the deep cold of places further to the middle of Vermont and much higher in the mountains. We're right on the divide. It's a very different climate here than in Burlington, France, or even our nearby city of Montpelier/Barre which is down in the valley.

Thus local climate is critical, along with local slope, altitude, soils, native species, etc.

__________________
SugarMtnFarm.com -- Pastured Pigs, Poultry, Sheep, Dogs and Kids

I think the only reason behind people selling of their farm, is increasing maintenance and taxes. For an ordinary farmer, the ratio of money invested to income, is very important. In my opinion, gone are the days when a farmers son or daughter would also be a farmer.

On a tightly related note, we still have snow April 26th, 2014. That's pretty normal. Burlington has long lost their snow. Paris never got much of any snow. Both Paris and Burlington have green growth. We don't and won't for a while. North south comparison doesn't tell one all that much about actual climate although it does work well for comparing hours of light per day (but not intensity due to cloud cover).

__________________
SugarMtnFarm.com -- Pastured Pigs, Poultry, Sheep, Dogs and Kids

I didn't read all the post but the reason small farms are gone until things fall apart is economy of scale. Which do you think is more efficient (mechanically and economically) to have a generator for each house in a town or one large power plant supplying them all? Now which do you think is more efficient one tractor working 1,000 acres or 10 tractors working 100 acres each? Also if you have 1,000 acres and make $100/acre you have an income of $100,000 but if you have 100 acres and make $100/acre you only have $10,000 . Not many people can live on $10K/year.

__________________
Remember, when seconds count. . .
the police are just MINUTES away!

Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. . .Davy Crockett

Rather depends on the acreage. Not every land can be worked the same. Not evey where is flat deep soiled Kansas - Praise the Lord.

You say small farms are gone yet we're very successful and I know many other small farmers who are very successful. Not all customers want the bland sameness of the commodity crops. Fortunately it is a fairly free market.

__________________
SugarMtnFarm.com -- Pastured Pigs, Poultry, Sheep, Dogs and Kids

I know I read your blog daily (sometimes more) and the wife loves the pics of the piglets.

With that said. . .there are still companies out there which make buggy whips but does that mean we are going to see buggy whip companies popping up all over the nation? My point is just because a few small farms can make it that does not mean small farming as a whole will work today.

Again its all economically driven. If the economy is going good more people have and/or are willing to spend more money on better cuts or better quality meat. But if the economy takes a bad turn those people are going to start cutting spending and start buying cheaper cuts or lower quality meats.

And yes I know there will almost always be a market for high end items, be it pasture raised pork loin or filet mignon or Faberge eggs.

__________________
Remember, when seconds count. . .
the police are just MINUTES away!

Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. . .Davy Crockett

You all do know that this is a thread from 2013, and only the last 4 or 5 posts are from today?

__________________
"Live your life, and forget your age." Norman Vincent Peale

Seems to me it can't ever work out when a few are expected to be responsible for the many. It's a problem not unique to farming.