Why are family farms unable to compete with larger industrilized farms? Should we be protecting family farmers in any way? I think if they can’t compete in the open market then they deserve to lose their farms. This land could be used for other purposes including more efficent farming. Is there any reason why people should support family farms other than it is sad to see a family lose their farm? Why are many people so against industrilized farms?
Well,many people are against agribusiness because they monocrop, use nasty chemicals, push small local farmers out of business, and other issues.
Monocrop - instead of having 30 types of apples to chose from, they only plant 3 or 4 types, ones bred specifically for storeage qualities, ease of transport and harvest, standardization of size and neutral flavor profile. Lowest common denomonater crops. Monocrop is why the potato famine was so deadly. If you only have a single breed of plant, the basic white potato and some virus springs up it has no resistance to, you are screwed. if you have a second type of potato, that is disease resistant you only lose part of your crop instead of most all of it. Monocrop is also bad because you lose heirloom species of plants that might just have some genetic portion that will be needed in the future to resist disease, or some similar reason. Also, monocrop doesnt give you much choice. If all that is availabl in the market is golden delicious and macintosh, and i want something tart like a 20 oz apple to bake with, I am screwed. If all there was was tart baking apples, and you want a nice juicy winesap to bite into , you are screwed=)
I wont bother discussing chemical use, that has probably been done on the boards already=)
Agribusiness can take over these vast tracts of land for the simple reason of capitol equipment investment. If to be efficient you need certain farm equipment, you have to go into debt to buy it, hope to join a co-op and lease the use of it from the co-op, or give up farming because you cant spend $300,000 on a harvester. If you are Montsano, and have billions of dollars of investment dollars in land, capitol equipment, rocessing facilities, a single harvester of $300.000 is piss in a bucket…
how can someone like the farmer down the road going to compete with that…
Mostly nostalgia. We all heard stories about the kindly, hard-working farmer as a kid.
Environmental regulations can be enacted if necessary to counter actions of agribusiness (and small farmers using the same methods). I’d also be the first one to support getting rid of any government subsidies that favor larger farming concerns. But preseving the family farm just because “it’s small”, makes no logical sense. You can form a co-op and privately subsidize such a farm if you really want.
While we’re at it, why not collective all farms?
Real reason? Same reason people protest Wal-Mart moving into town.
In addition to the other issue of nostalgia, there are a LOT of Americans who trace their family back to farmers. Both branches of my family still own small farms, in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and California. So there are a lot of personal ties to small family farms.
Agribusiness tends to focus on what’s most cost effective. This limits the variety of products that they will provide.
Consider that there are 7,000 varieties of apples, (compare to the number of varieties available at your supermarket), and that not all chickens taste the same. Tyson et al raise specfic breeds of chicken that’ve been bred to grow breast meat quickly.
This emphasis on profitability prevents large outfits from offering as wide of a variety as they otherwise would.
Also, large farms can produce more of whatever type of food they raise than those in the vicinity can eat. So necessarily, the produce must be shiped away. Commercially delivered in OK from CA will never be as fresh as what has come from the next county over.
There’s a growing movement of local farmers growing specialty and heirloom varieties of plants. Many chefs now seek out these sorts of things. Many are now basing menus on what’s fresh in season. To get them fresh it helps to go to farmers’ markets.
I think that quality and variety of produce are the reasons why people support family farms with their dollars.
Because 19th century Irish agriculture was dominated by agribusinesses, hence there was much monocropping to be exploited by the blight? If Irish agriculture was dominated by small, family farms, then your example is an argument against family farms. Arguably, agribusiness, not family farming, would have more resources to deal with a blight and plan/respond accordingly than family farms would.
Not to mention that family farms use plenty of chemicals. Lots of family farms in my township use lots of chemicals. In fact, the gov’t. has to subsidize family farms so that they can build chemical storage buildings—they’re either too cash poor or irresponsible to pay for it themselves.
I hear this “monolithic business decreases choice” argument quite a lot; often about Borders, who in similar manner apparently drive mom and pop bookstores out of business through volume. I disagree with it; it simply doesn’t fit the facts as I see them. Borders have a vast range of books, many more than you will generally find in all but the more specialist bookstores. Similarly, my local supermarket is stocked with produce the variety of which couldn’t even be guessed at, say, 30 years ago. This is what modern agriculture has given us, and I don’t think it’s too bad, personally. We may not have 30 varieties of apple, but frankly how many people actually want that sort of choice? I can still see granny smiths, golden delicious and at least 3 others in my supermarket, and that’s more than I’ll ever need. And unlike before, there’s pomegranates, ugli fruit (really), figs, pineapples, etc. etc. Locally, sure, the effect is homogeneity; it’s an efficient way to do things. But globally we’ve got access to just about anything man can grow.
Man, I’ve made myself hungry now.
js_africanus makes a good point regarding the myth that small farms are intrinsically less chemical-dependent. Indeed, even organic farms do not necessarily entail environmental cleanliness - many have reverted to “old-style” copper sulphate type chemicals and the like. These apparently are not sufficiently synthetic to make the produce non-organic, but are pollutants in their own right and have to be used in far greater quantities than modern chemicals, as they are simply less effective.
I don’t believe it is possible to support the world’s current population, even as badly as we do, using family farms. When the US was supported in food and fibers by family farms something like half the population was on farms. I don’t know what the percentage is now but I think it’s less than 10%.
In order to grow enough to support today’s population agriculture needs to be mechanized and the investment is just to big to be supported by a family farm of a few hundred acres at anything other than by a thin margin. So if anything at all goes wrong the farm goes bust because there is not reserve to ride out the storm.
Too bad, farms were fun to visit in summer when I was a kid. But those days are long fone.
I grew up on a family farm, and my parents and my brother and his family are still there.
In response to David Simmons comment, I’d just like to say that family farms don’t really lag behind big agribusiness in terms of food produced per acre. They just can’t exploit economies of scale to the same degree, is all.
I would agree that family farms aren’t guaranteed to be more environmentally friendly than agribusiness. They’re going to be a mixed bag in that regard. However, you can count on agribusiness to be environmentally friendly only if it’s profitable. Margins are thin in agriculture, even when you can exploit economies of scale, and from a business point of view there’s no room whatsoever in farming for namby-pamby concern for the environment if you’re going to turn a profit. Family farms, on the other hand, might - might, if they care - go the extra mile even though it makes for more work or a slightly lower yield, so long as they can still make a go of things.
That said, some recent developments in agriculture are reasonably environmentally friendly. Min-till and no-till techniques cut down substantially on erosion, GMO crops (much as I despise Monsanto) allow for use of glyphosphate to control weeds, which as herbicides go is pretty mild. One thing I will say, though, is that the modern corporate obsession with the next quarter rather than the next decade has potential for disaster in agriculture, where sustainability is of more concern than in most fields.
I won’t write an impassioned plea for the family farm here. I will merely express a bit of nostalgic regret should the family farm entirely die to be replaced by a lot of heartless corporations. I like it that farming is (or was) done by people who cared about the land, instead of by people punching a clock for the benefit of some guy in a suit. Yeah, I know I’m idealizing things - there were plenty of family farms run by people who didn’t want to be there (though most of those are long, long gone), and some big agribusinesses might be run by people who do care. Indulge me just a little, please.
And finally, I’d like to point out that the modern family farm might not look quite like you think it does. 
(photo taken last weekend, link not guaranteed to work forever)
sigh Do keep in mind the potato was not native to Ireland, they had the variety that was brought over, with no particular choice in the matter. I did not say that they did it on purpose, just used them as a very GOOD reason why monocropping is bad. Potatoes are actually a good plant for small croppers to grow for subsistance because one potato used as a set wil produce around a bushel of harvested potatos…just that ONLY using one type of potato is bad as everybodies crop will be affected.
Many small farmers as well as large farmers use chemicals, which is WHY i DIDNT discuss chemicals, as I am more than certain they have been discussed on this board sometime before. I will note however that because of farming techniques of the earlier parts of this century AND the costs of changing from chemical to green farming is exceptionally expensive from the standpoint of investment vs immediate recouperation of cost through sales. Given the poor prices paid to the original farming concern, it takes a large agribusiness to have the income to make changes. The only way that many farmers can make any change is through subsidies…and I really dont think the farmers who are trying to make a living should be called irresponsible for getting the shaft for the crappy mount they get paid for their product.
Maybe you had better go and talk to a local agricultural extension officer and get the real story on the poor ‘irresponsible’ farmers in your area.
FWIW, I may have a small ‘farm’ but I am in no way a farmer, I keep livestock for fun and food, and because I like animals. I have a greater understanding of what our local farmers go through because of it. Hang out at a working Agway some eary saturday morning…
I thought this is sort of my point in my second paragraph.
I have cousins who are still family farmers, or their children are and they are essentially working for the bank. They borrow money to put in the crop, usually sell it on the futures market and realize only wages at the end of the year. More and more they are coming to the conclusion that the big investment they have in land and machinery could be put to better use elsewhere.
You’re right, you did say that. Sorry for not reading more carefully.
And the story sounds very, very familiar. I don’t think there’s many other businesses where a million dollar investment will net you just enough to scrape by.
As a matter of fact, Irish agriculture was dominated by the 19th-Century version of agribusiness – that is, large estates owned by English absentee landlords, worked by hired hands, and growing wheat, etc., for export to England. And all the best farmland in the country was in those estates. The common people of Ireland lived on potatoes because that was all they could grow on the few scraps of land they had of their own. And when the potatoes died, the estates went right on exporting food to England while millions of the Irish starved to death. That’s agribiz for you.
I bow to no one in my dislike of the practices of many corporationst but …
In the US, even in the time of family farms, the produce was mostly sold to large companies, such as grain elevators, meat packers and the like, who then distributed it where is was profitable to them and not necessarily where it was needed.
Having many small and widely scattered producers isn’t necessarily the key to what might be thought of as suitably socially desirable distribution.
My girlfriend and her husband had a family farm. She said her best years were the years the government told them NOT to farm. They’d pay a fine sum to let the dirt just sit there. There is a lot of control over what is grown and when. I guess it keeps the prices in check.
I think a small farm has a place in today’s world. You can get produce cheap because they only sell to local grocers. Also, if those farmers go out of business, the land gets sold to some guy that will put up a strip mall or a mini industrial park. And we all know how much THOSE are needed!
Oops. Forgot to mention they grow feed corn, too. Gotta feed the critters!
More reasons to support the family farm:
The average piece of produce consumed in this country has travelled well over a thousand miles to reach the dinner table. Most fruits and vegetables cannot survive the trip across the country to distributor to supermarket cooler to supermarket display to shopping bag to home refrigerator to meal and still look good. So such highly perishable varieties are grown less and less often. Eventually no one grows them anymore and those varieties become extinct— dead as the dinosaurs. Unfortunately, many of those same highly perishable varieties were awesome tasting and especially nutritious. Without the small direct sale local farms to keep them going, we no longer have an option to eat those fruits and vegetables. It is with a profound sadness that we realize that we can never enjoy many of the varieties of fruits and vegetables that our grandparents so loved. It’s happened already to an amazing amount of produce. Hundreds of the fruits and vegetable varieties that were cataloged in 1900 are now gone forever. Many still survive, but only in the hands of a few regional growers. Small farmers preserve our agricultural heritage.
As a manager of a small store that deals directly with local farmers, I know that many of these people are what I like to call “agricultural craftspeople”. Years ago, when most in-season produce came from local farms and farmers, folks knew year after year who grew the best green beans, the sweetest apples, and the finest melons. A combination of the talent of the grower and the unique lay of their land created subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) differences between crops from one nearby place and another. Today if you go to the mega-supermarket and buy a delicious watermelon, your next trip to the same market will likely bring you completely different watermelons possibly not even from the same area as your previous one. Go to the farmer’s market and get a sweet melon, and you can go right back to the same grower. If you get a lousy melon from the mega-mart —well that’s the way it goes. But if you buy a tastelessy melon from a local grower you can go directly back and give him/her the what for. This more direct accountability gives you a much higher chance at finding good produce and an option for repeat when you succeed.
Local lettuce is in season now in Virginia. If you go to the average supermarket for lettuce in my area, you can get iceberg, green leaf, red leaf, romaine, butter, and a variety of packages salad mixes from California. These are the exact same varieties as when lettuce is out of season. Want deer-tongue, speckled, sierra, or oak leaf lettuces? Go to a local farmer or local farmer store and get these varieties and more same-day picked. Salad time!
As mentioned by others, local produce is fresher and more nutrtious. In many cases, it tastes a lot better. Can anyone seriously argue for the average supermarket tomato as compared to locally grown varieties? Heck no! The best tasting tomatoes are often the most highly perishable. They’re vine-ripened and brought ready to eat in a day or two. Want sweet corn that was just picked yesterday or today? Go to your local farmer or grow it yourself.
Local produce consumption can help put the consumer more in touch with their environment and the food supply. Several times I’ve had customers walk into our store in the dead of winter and ask if some produce item was local. I always patiently explain that zucchini and friends cannot be grown and harvested in sub-freezing weather, but that come late spring and summer… When we eat locally we can see the direct effects of draught, rain, warmth and cold. That knowledge of the connection between food and land may seem unimportant, but is it?
Few argue for the demise of agribusiness. Instead, the peaceful co-existence of both should be nurtured to give consumers the best options. A community loses something of tremendous value every time a local grower can’t stay afloat.
This is an argument for having farms close to markets. Your argument says nothing about the size of the farms close to the markets. Local large agribusiness can grow heirloom varieties just as well as local small farms.
Sua
True, but in practice few if any do. Heirlooms may be highly persishable or require extra individual TLC that agribusiness does not find desirable or profitable.