Choices farmers have to make, you chose

[seedcorn]

Cheap food requires mass production so........

Do you want.....

--10# of insecticide/acre or RW technology?
--insecticide apply over the top of crops or Bt to stop corn borer? organic producers stopped farmers from using dry Bt
--RR technology where you use 1pt/acre or conventional crops where you will use gallons of herbicides------or let weeds go unchecked and have about 1/3 of a crop?
--use oil ran equipment or go back to horses?

Farmers are the healthiest people in world but because of the chemicals used, they have the highest cancer rates in the world. They prefer to NOT use chemicals.

OR, would you be happy to pay 3X more for your food and Ag goes back to 1950 type farming--used chems in 60's.

 

[Ridgerunner]

In my opinion, farmers are like any other businessmen trying to support their families, especially in a business with razor thin operating margins. They are going to use whatever they think gives them the best chance to make a profit or, as a minimum, survive. Some can find a niche and find a specific market, but most are going to go for the mass production market.

Idealism is fine as long as you can support it for yourself, but don't expect me and my children to go hungry because of your idealism. I'd much prefer to see sustainable methods used but, still my opinion, not much is going to change until it is clearly demonstrated by example that you can make a better profit meeting the mass market instead of just finding a niche. And, probably the part of my response that will upset the most people, I don't consider someone who makes a living giving speeches and writing articles about how he does it as providing cheap food to a mass market.

 

[Rosalind]

Farmers are the healthiest people in world but because of the chemicals used, they have the highest cancer rates in the world.

Umm... What? Do you mean "would be" rather than "are" in that first bit? Because one of the saddest things I have seen has been self-employed farmers lose the farms they have inherited for centuries due to medical expenses--even after insurance has paid a percentage.

Think you are setting up a false dichotomy here. There are certainly other food production techniques to consider that involve the farmers themselves taking on less risk (e.g. polyculture farms), that conserve water and require no plowing & very minimal spraying (hydroponics systems), and these methods also have very acceptable outputs in terms of calories/acre as well as the all-important $$/acre. These techniques have been successful even in subsistence-farming regions (Y. Zhu et al. Nature 2000, issue 406).

The very reasonable question is then, "Seeing as how hydroponics farms have yields several times that of traditional dirt farms, how come not everyone uses hydroponics?" and "If polyculture farms don't suffer from the ups and downs of monoculture farms, why doesn't everyone do polyculture?" which is a long discussion about how farms are financed, how seed purchases work, sales regulations and contract law...

 

[seedcorn]

The very reasonable question is then, "Seeing as how hydroponics farms have yields several times that of traditional dirt farms, how come not everyone uses hydroponics?" and "If polyculture farms don't suffer from the ups and downs of monoculture farms, why doesn't everyone do polyculture?" which is a long discussion about how farms are financed, how seed purchases work, sales regulations and contract law...

not hard to answer, doesn't pay/work. If it did, farmers would do it.

Hydroponic farming will not work for corn/soybeans. You will not increase corn yields from 200 bu/acres we're seeing now to even 400 bu/acre. Sounds great on an intellectual, college students sitting around drinking coffee, but holds no validity.

Polyculture farming--we try all the time but corn, soybeans, alfalfa, wheat are the only ones that you can "mass" grow to pay bills. Try to grow vegetables in mass and sell them, you'll be broke before the year goes out.

Now back to the question asked as they are the only real answers ag has.

 

[seedcorn]

Umm... What? Do you mean "would be" rather than "are"

no, except for cancer have many few health issues. Doesn't mean we don't get sick (wish that were true) but as an AVERAGE we are healthier--at least according to the survey's I've seen. Maybe they were tainted by Monsanto to get us to work in Ag??????

Health issues (cost of drugs, doctors, nurses, hospitals) break all of us. Now if you are implying that workers in the health industry should work for minimum wage and companies make only 3%, I'm OK with that as I don't work in that industry altho my daughter will object to that.

 

[Rosalind]

not hard to answer, doesn't pay/work. If it did, farmers would do it.

I provided a citation with data, so now it's your turn to show me evidence. There are many, many commercial hydroponics farms currently in operation: Eurofresh Farms in Arizona is one of the biggest, but heck, there's an aquaponics farm about an hour down the road from me--they're even hiring to expand, since they're doing so well! There are polyculture farms all around me that have been in business for decades and are expanding. I grew up in a region (Lancaster, PA) chock-full of polyculture farms, and they are all doing quite well for themselves, so well that they are buying up their neighbors' monoculture farms after the corn/soy farmers are foreclosed upon. Of course, I've been told many times by the academic farm extension bureau folks, the coffee-sipping intellectuals you talk about, that my cousins' farms will go under any day now, that it is Not Possible to generate that much yield on mere cow poop, that they are not big enough to survive etc. etc. Somehow they are not only surviving, they are flourishing. So I have to ask myself: Do I believe the evidence of my experience and observations, and critique more seriously the yield/acre calculations and experiments of the extension folks? Or do I assume they know what they are talking about, relative to the suicides, lost farms, ghost towns and crummy economic indicators of ex-farming communities?

Now if you are implying that workers in the health industry should work for minimum wage and companies make only 3%

I can think of many folks in my industry who do not need to make their current salary. You're telling me you can't think of a single employee of Big Ag who could stand to take a pay cut? Heck, I personally would take a pay cut if it meant that someone who needed treatment would get it. I've donated a good portion of my income to charities that provide medical care for the needy. I'd be happy to pay more taxes if it would provide medical care for people. Strangely, all my tax money seems to go towards other stuff, though...

 

[wifezilla]

Think you are setting up a false dichotomy here

Exactly. Ever heard of Polyface farm?

 

[seedcorn]

So far, I've read no answers to the question unless your answer is Ag doesn't need hybrid seed, pesticides, fertilizer, etc.......if that's your stance, wow. go back to the 50's when average yields on corn were 60 bu/acre, try to feed the world on that. Talk about wars. But again, doesn't answer the question.

much yield on mere cow poop

So they use NO commercial fertilizer, pesticides? They use open pollinated seed? They use horse's instead of petroleum products? They bought their ground and did not inherit it?

If they USE no commercial fertilizer or pesticides at all..I'd love to visit w/them as to how they do it. I'm old but not so old I can't learn.

For those that promote hydroponics in the mid-west, tell us how, with the financial numbers. We can't grow rice--wrong environment as w/other specialty products. For those that have orchards, that is government controlled as to how much you can sell at what price. Just because it works in Washington, AZ, CA, doesn't mean it will work in Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, etc. Why do you think traditionally non-corn/soybean areas are now growing corn/soybeans.....because the other crops didn't pay.

 

[wifezilla]

Why do you think traditionally non-corn/soybean areas are now growing corn/soybeans.....because the other crops didn't pay.

Because corn and soybeans are heavily subsidized.

 

[seedcorn]

In my opinion, farmers are like any other businessmen trying to support their families, especially in a business with razor thin operating margins. They are going to use whatever they think gives them the best chance to make a profit or, as a minimum, survive. Some can find a niche and find a specific market, but most are going to go for the mass production market.

Idealism is fine as long as you can support it for yourself, but don't expect me and my children to go hungry because of your idealism. I'd much prefer to see sustainable methods used but, still my opinion, not much is going to change until it is clearly demonstrated by example that you can make a better profit meeting the mass market instead of just finding a niche. And, probably the part of my response that will upset the most people, I don't consider someone who makes a living giving speeches and writing articles about how he does it as providing cheap food to a mass market.

You are correct. niche markets are called that because they are. The masses can't live on niches. Even those go out of business because of lack of margins.