Thursday, August 6, 2009

The Bottom Lines of Farming


The “bottom line” refers to the net income of a business or, more broadly, the profitability of a business. I once heard an individual make the claim that farming has numerous bottom lines, with profitability being only one. In this case, a bottom line is a factor or value that we consider in our farming enterprise.

Most professions probably have more bottom lines than simply profitability ranging from personal satisfaction, to ambition, to social responsibility. However, I would argue that farming has and should have more bottom lines than most professions. Farming should always keep profitability as an important bottom line, but most farmers would admit that you have to be in agriculture for more than just the money.

Lifestyle is often stated as a reason for farming. Raising a family in a rural environment and living close to the land is a noble bottom line. Being one’s own boss is another reason stated for farming. However, I would question whether modern farmers who have such enormous debt burdens to manage are truly independent. Cultural and family responsibility can be a bottom line that brings individuals back to the farm. I know this has come into play for me as I feel the responsibility to return to the home place as a 4th generation farmer on the same land. I am excited about the prospect, but have to admit there are easier climates and cultures for starting a grazing dairy than in the middle of Kansas.

I tend to diverge somewhat from some of the conventional bottom lines that I perceive many farmers adhering to. First, some bottom lines that I perceive, but do not agree with:

· Get big or get out: This bottom line is easily understood from the perspective that equipment continues to get bigger and more expensive and commodity prices do not adjust for inflation. Thus, as expenses continue to rise, profit margins become narrower requiring more production to theoretical maintain a similar income. Unfortunately, this also means that in a money losing year, big farms lose lots of money. More theoretically, I would argue that our SUV, Big Mac culture is obsessed with size. From a rural community perspective, get big or get out is a death sentence requiring ever fewer farmers and local business. What if we would focus on reducing costs and increasing profitability on a per acre basis rather than on a whole farm basis? What if we would hold quality of life and the environment on equal footing as the profitability bottom line? Would the “get big” mentality pass all three of these bottom lines?

· New technology is always good: I think many conventional farmers are more in love with their new tractors and GPS devices than they are with the land that grows their crops. Farmers have the very unique and important responsibility of being stewards of the land. I may be old fashioned, but I believe technology tends to separate us from being able to listen to the land. With our ever larger tractors, on-board computers, and chemicals, we become conquerors rather than stewards of the land. There is no possible way to see how many earthworms there are in the soil (which is a basic indicator of the health of our soil) from atop our huge machines that require us to move across huge tracts of land. Technology allows us to ignore biological processes and efficiencies within nature. Of course, my favorite example is grazing versus putting up hay. Putting up hay tends to maximize yield, but does not maximize forage quality and robs the land of nutrients. Also, with even the most optimistic numbers, hay production rarely breaks even when actual equipment costs, labor costs, fuel costs, and fertilizers costs are taken into account. In most regions of the United States, cattle can graze at least 10 months out of the year with good management, recycle the vast majority of all the nutrients removed through grazing, and harvest their food for free. I will conclude my technology rant, by admitting that new technology can have its rightful place on a farm as long as the environmental, quality of life and profitability bottom lines are valued above technology.

Now, here are a couple of bottom lines I hope to adhere to as a farmer:

· Environment: Valuing the health of the land and animals, I believe, is one of the primary responsibilities of farmers. Maintaining the health of the land will ensure the sustainability of farming generations to come. I believe, only the best farmers will be good stewards of their natural resources, which can be measured through the health of their soils, the quality of the water the passes through the land they farm, the health of their livestock, and hopefully, eventually we can measure how farming practices contribute to the quality of the air.

· Quality of Life: Valuing how the farming enterprise impacts the quality of life of farm families would seem to be important, but is all too often overlooked in the quest for profitability and increased production. I believe asking how quality of life will be impacted should be a leading question when making any large decisions about the farm.

Many more bottom lines could and should be discussed. This is only a start to a discussion critiquing current bottom lines and establishing which bottom lines I hope to value as a farmer.

No comments:

Post a Comment