From: samodena@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu (S. A. Modena)
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: Re: INFORMATION-BASED FARMING
Date: 15 Sep 92 04:39:50 GMT
Organization: Crop Science Dept., NCSU, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620


In article <1992Sep14.174208.29970@spruce.pfc.forestry.ca> rwinder@PFC.Forestry.CA writes:
>>
>>
>>I'd never say "forget the philosophy."  I'd just say: "It a high tech
>>world out there and *ignoring* that is a death sentence to your way of life."
>>etc.
>
>Oh yeah?  So how are the Amish surviving?  And why is soil erosion from their
>fields in Pa. so much less than even nearby no-till situations?

I left Philadelphia (for Israel) in 1971.  By direct observation, the Amish
in Lancaster Co. were under financial pressure with respect to land taxes.
Solution?  In some communities, they laid out 1/4 acres lots from the
periphry of their holdings along the paved, numbered highways.  These
were sold as homesite lots for "city folks" who then paid residental
taxes while the farm lands continued to pay reduced tax rates for
agricultural zoning.  Very, very smart way to increase tax rolls while
minimizing encroachment on life style.

The Amish, of course, are different from the farm communities in NC in the
*degree* of self-imposed social segregation.  Some communities control
the degree to which they allow open choice.  To counter your point,
tell me your projection of Amish ag style to the entire US farm land
and it's ability to provide the flow of *commodity* ag products needed to
sustain a 95% non-ag-based U.S. population?

>
>I think we better delineate Agribusiness as a lifestyle from farming in general
>as a lifestyle.

Fair enough!

>
>Many people, self included, run small farms to reduce their food budget and
>perhaps supplement their income.  There are even a few of us that manage to do
>it without pesticides.

This is a growing trend right here in NC: life on a farm with main income
from off-farm work (though sometimes still in ag) and lower level ag
activity on farm for non-cash budget suppliment.  Was true in my home town
in Massachusetts even before I left there over 30 years ago.

High School friends giving up dairy herds to work at Digital in Westfield,
but staying on their farm property as a life style.

>                   The small farm, as a way of life, is not going to die-
>relax!  I spent about 6 years getting my grad degrees in Botany/Plant Path. at
>N.C.S.U., so I've had a fair bit of exposure to the N.C.S.U. scene.  It's not
>a typical pattern.  N.C.'s central location permits a wide variety of crops and
>has permitted access to a large market since time out of mind- small farms
>never were an *important* form of land use in that state, except near towns. 

Well, you're leaving out certain aspects of the social structure of
NC, aren't you?  There are 15,000 families that depend on the tobacco
allotment.  Many, many might have 5 or 10 acres of tobacco and that is a
*big* factor in their income.  And of course, the level of their economic
status is fairly low and is not going to change anytime soon.  NC moved
up to #10 in population in the last census.  Guess NC is above 6 million
people. 

My impression is: NC farm holdings cover quite a range.  And, yes, NC is
a ag power house by climate, water resources, and market location.


>Check out the field sizes the next time you fly into RDU, and compare with what
>you see north of, say Virginia (and away from urban centers).  Most of the
>alarm being raised here is regarding the merger of farms that are already
>fairly large anyway.

Yes, I think I'd agree...and little of what I've posted would be true of
Massacusetts, but might be true of NY.

There is consolidation of various forms occuring.  With land set-aside,
the total acerage under the plow is going down.  Hopefully, there will
be a continuing trend to remove from cultivation marginal lands which
*never* should have been brought into cultivation.

On that point, top soil loss and water table damage is *easiest* to occur
on land under cultivation that *really* should not be farmed.  And I'll
bet you agree with that.

>
>If technology is so great, why are small organic farms consistently turning a
>greater profit?  It's not a huge profit, but its there (about 1% greater in
>some stats I've seen from Rodale in Pa., California citrus farms,  and from 
>Murray Pronc in Ontario).  I won't start ranting and raving about the other 
>benefits, and I know organic produce has an unfair advantage in some markets-
>I just want to point out that there used to be a thing known as `plant 
>husbandry', and that large scale operations, of the type banks seem to prefer
>to finance, inevitably lead to poor management practices.  

My sojourn in Israel taught me that there are styles of production /
community organization / marketing and market development, etc, suited
to small holder (not talking kibbutzim here ) economics.  I continue to
shake my head at small holders here who persist in growing soybeans and
such (volume commodity stuff).  The path is specialty crops, coops
for know-how-development, market development, shifting production to
track nearby megatropolist preferences, quality, product differentation.
There is money to be made from megatropolis (as the Amish do with
"fresh and natural and quality") as some even in New Hampshire do
with respect to the Boston market.

>                                                    (I'll start another
>hot potato here and say that this also applies to forestry).  

You'll not get an  argument from me on that one.  In the long term,
small holder tree production (quality hardwoods, nut trees for
ultimate tree harvest, etc.) is a solid long term investment for those
will will remain personally involved in management (and a sinkhole for
your investment dollars when you buy "shares" in distant holdings). 

>                                                         Ultimately,
>agribusiness will have to return full circle to sustainable practices if it
>wants to remain competitive.  So, I say, compete your hearts out!  Buy spy-sat
>photos!  Just don't lose all our soil or water tables in the process.

You are certainly right: for example, when Brazil finally gets up to
speed in soybean production, they will run everyone else out (remember
folks, we are talking an internationally traded commodity....and that
also means international sources of the commodity).

My whole thesis (sharpened by refering to info gathering by satellite)
is: pick your nitche (can't spell that word).  Know what the market
forces are; what affects prices; how fast they can fluctuate.  Look
at your financing, the knowledge needed, the infrastructure costs,
etc.

I contend that to make a living *mainly* from agriculture (crops,
animals, floriculture, aquacultre, forestry, etc)  is deadly to anyone
centering on *commodity* items who is not up to speed for the sustained
demands of commodity production......especially capitalization.

And that there are tremendous opportunities (especially for savey
small holders) who opt to "specialty" or differentiated ag products
that bring abovce average or premium prices.

But in either case: information processing and management competence are
critical.......

In the Spring I gave a presentation of some software to a group of
outstanding seniors (male & female) from ag vocational high schools. I talked
with one fellow at length who told me:  "Management is really important.
You have to think about your situation 365 days a year."  Then he blushed,
and added: "Well, of course, not on Sundays."  So I asked: "Are you saying
that you think one of the main reasons why your family's farm is
profitable, compared to some of your neighbors, is how much thought goes
into managing?"  "Yes, that's the most important thing: some don't
pay close enough attention as much as they should, and some don't know
how to do it."

Ag is a knowledge-intensive business.  The knowledge needed extends
beyond knowing to check the oil before starting the tractor each day.

Commodity scale or specialty-oriented: knowledge, know-how, and information
processing is it!  Hell, in 1968, an English woman told me that the biggest
problem in her dad's farm operation was deciding *when* and *what* to
market, not how to grow it!  Open and shut, as far as she was concerned.

>
>Do you take advantage of the free gardening space the City of Raleigh makes
>available to anyone, Steve?  It's one thing I regret not doing- everyone
>should try preserve this way of life- even if you're a 9-5er, it doesn't take
>all that much effort to plant a cover crop, raise a few chickens, etc.  I've
>only got 2.5 hectares (O.K., so things grow well in rainforest), but I'm 
>managing to bring in about $100/week and eliminate most of my grocery bill.  
>That's profit inanyone's book.


Walking to campus each day, I pass one of those common plots.  But I
don't grow anything now....but that's another story. :^)

And, yep, $100 x 52 is $5200...then assuming it's US income, divide it
by 0.6 to account for Gross Income-TAX SKIMOFF ==> $8667 is a pretty
healty income suppliment.  :^)

>
>  RICHARD WINDER                    Title: Visiting Fellow
>  Forestry Canada                   Phone: (604) 363-0600
>  Victoria, B.C.                    Internet: RWINDER@A1.PFC.Forestry.CA

Nice post, nice contribution, Richard.

Steve
---
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|     In person:  Steve Modena     AB4EL                           |
|     On phone:   (919) 515-5328                                   |
|     At e-mail:  nmodena@unity.ncsu.edu                           | 
|                 samodena@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu                |
|                 [ either email address is read each day ]        |
|     By snail:   Crop Sci Dept, Box 7620, NCSU, Raleigh, NC 27695 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
         Lighten UP!  It's just a computer doing that to you.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
         
Newsgroups: bionet.plants