Tag Archives: published
Farms Are Gigantic Now. Even The “Family-Owned” Ones
By Lydia DePillis , Published: August 11 at 8:45 pm Picture your idea of a “family farm.” American Gothic ? Little House on the Prairie ? Maybe an idyllic 19th century life of cute cows and mowing hay? Yeah, everybody knows those don’t exist anymore, swept away by the forces of globalization and massive industrialized agribusiness. In one way that’s completely true–and in two other ways, it’s completely false, according to a new report out from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service. Let’s take the true part. Farms have gotten bigger, on average, when measured by the average number of acres under cultivation. The increase has been driven by several factors, including the development of high-tech equipment, seeds, and pesticides that made farming less labor intensive, increasing the returns to scale. Also, the rise of contracts means that farmers could lock in prices for their crops ahead of the harvest, allowing them to invest in that new technology (which may also have been accelerated by farm subsidies and the early-1990s disappearance of quotas that limited production). Farming got much more specialized, focusing on tremendous production of one commodity, rather than growing all kinds of veggies and livestock: But here’s the first untrue thing: Even while the average size of farms is going up, there are more small farms than ever, especially in small states with farmland preservation programs like Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Community-supported agriculture, plus the local and organic food movement, are starting to show up in the numbers. It’s the mid-sized farm, between 100 and 500 acres, that’s disappearing. And here’s the second thing that’s wrong about our understanding of the disappearance of family farms: 96.4 percent of the crop-producing farms in the U.S. are owned by families, and they represent 87 percent of all the agricultural value generated (non-family owned farms are defined as “those operated by cooperatives, by hired managers on behalf of non-operator owners, by large corporations with diverse ownership, and by small groups of unrelated people”). That hasn’t changed since about 1996. Part of the reason is that some mega-corporations have moved from direct ownership of cropland into a coordinating role, sourcing product from family-owned pieces of land that they’ve sold off. Also, families are just as capable of operating modern agricultural technology as agribusinesses are, as Chrystia Freeland described last year in the Atlantic. And finally, deep understanding of an area’s soil conditions and weather patterns– not to mention the local political landscape –are still valuable to productivity, which advantages families that pass such knowledge on through generations. That may not be the case forever. Ever-increasing size and specialization means that farms become riskier enterprises, able to be wiped out by a commodity price dip or unpredictable pathogen, which large corporations are better quipped to handle. And overseas, in places like Russia and Brazil, giant farms are developing monitoring techniques that could eventually make that local knowledge totally obsolete. In the mean time, though, just remember that when you say “family farm,” you might actually mean “small and relatively diversified farm,” though advocates for such operations might try to get you to think otherwise. Continue reading
Farmland Values Keep Rising
Published August 06, 2013 Farmland values keep rising GRAND FORKS, N.D. — The 2012 drought that devastated crops and pastures in much of the upper Midwest didn’t stop the price of farmland from shooting higher, especially in North Dakota. By: Jonathan Knutson , Forum News Service GRAND FORKS, N.D. — The 2012 drought that devastated crops and pastures in much of the upper Midwest didn’t stop the price of farmland from shooting higher, especially in North Dakota. The average per-acre price of cropland in 2013 in North Dakota soared to $1,910, a whopping 41.5 percent increase from the previous year, according to an annual report issued Aug. 2 by the National Agricultural Statistics Service, an arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Nationally, the average per-acre price of cropland rose 13 percent, NASS says. “I think North Dakota had some catching up to do,” says Dwight Aakre, farm management specialist with the North Dakota State University Extension Service in Fargo. Prices for North Dakota cropland had, in past years, risen slower than prices for cropland in many other states, leading to a “catch-up” this year, he notes. He also notes that much of North Dakota enjoyed good yields in 2012, despite the drought. Aakre says that while North Dakota cropland values undoubtedly rose sharply in the past year, he was surprised to see the NASS estimate of a 41.5 percent increase. “That’s a lot. But you don’t argue with USDA. It has the best numbers,” he says. The report is based on a survey of agricultural producers in the first two weeks of June. Most other states in the upper Midwest also saw substantial increases in cropland values in the past year, according to NASS. Cropland values in South Dakota shot to an average of $3,020 per acre, an increase of 30.2 percent. The average value of Minnesota cropland rose to $4,850 per acre, 19.8 percent more than a year earlier. In Montana, the average value of cropland rose 4 percent to $888. The state grows little corn, which experts say has contributed to rising land prices in the upper Midwest. Average cropland values rose sharply in 2013 in the drought-hammered Corn Belt. In Iowa, for instance, the average value of cropland increased 17.8 percent to $8,600 per acre, according to the report. Though drought hurt production, it also caused the price of corn to rise, encouraging farmers to pay more for land, Aakre says. Low interest rates, which reduce the appeal of competing investments such as CDs, also have contributed to rising land prices, though to a lesser extent than high crop prices, he says. Now, however, crop prices are slumping, and buying land is becoming less attractive, he says. “I think land prices have peaked,” Aakre says. Paying more for pasture NASS also found substantial increases in pasture prices. Nationally, the average value of pasture rose 4.3 percent to $1,200 per acre. North Dakota’s average pasture value rose 28.6 percent to $630 per acre. In Minnesota, the average pasture value rose 16.7 percent to $1,750 per acre. South Dakota’s average pasture value rose 20.3 percent to $710 per acre. High crop prices have encouraged some producers to begin raising crops on land that once was pastured. That reduces the supply of pasture and drives up its price, experts say. The average value of Montana pasture rose 1.8 percent to $580. NASS includes Montana in the report’s mountain region, which also consists of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. All the states in the region had small annual increases, or even small decreases, in their average pasture price. Cash rents rise, too In a separate report on Aug. 2, NASS released updated state-level statistics for cash rents. Here are average per-acre cash rents for nonirrigated farmland for 2013. – United States – $125 per acre, up from $115 a year ago. – North Dakota – $64 per acre, up from $57 per acre a year ago. – South Dakota – $104, up from $93 per acre last year. – Minnesota – $177, up from $150 per acre last year. – Montana – $23.50, up from $23 per acre a year ago. Strong crop prices in recent years have helped boost cash rents, Aakre says. – See more at: http://www.prairiebi…h.SMUTWfnp.dpuf Continue reading
UK ‘Off Track’ For 2020 Renewables Target
31 July 2013 Official energy statistics published today by the UK government report that the UK has missed its indicative renewable energy target for 2011-12. As a result the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) will have to submit an amended national renewable energy action plan to the European Commission by 30th June 2014, setting out measures to get the country back ‘on track’. The means that the UK is the only Member State which has failed to meet both 2011 and 2013 indicative targets and which is expected not to reach its 2020 target. “This is a near miss. Had government interfered less with its existing policies for biomass power, stuck to its timetable on the Renewable Heat Incentive, or laid out a clear framework for biofuels, then it would almost certainly have met its indicative target,” commented Renewable Energy Association (REA) chief executive Gaynor Hartnell. The 2011-12 UK figure shows that 3.94% of energy comes from renewables, 0.1% short of the indicative target of 4.04%. Meanwhile, the majority of the EU-27 had already met their 2011-12 indicative targets by the end of 2011. According to the latest EUROSTAT data, the UK remains 25th out of the 27 EU Member States on the share of renewables in its heating system, power supply and transport fuels. The UK’s 2020 target is one of the lowest across the EU-27 (15%), and requires one of the highest annual growth rates (16.5% year-on-year to 2020). The REA is the UK partner for the EU-wide ‘ Keep on Track! ’ project, which assesses Member States’ progress towards their 2020 targets. The first ‘Keep on Track’ Tracking Roadmap report was published last month and revealed that the UK had missed its indicative 2011 NREAP target. The REA estimates that if the renewables industry expands sufficiently to meet the UK’s 2020 target, it will sustain 400,000 jobs across the supply chain. Continue reading
