Mispeceptions of Farming

[ZenGum]

The general gist of Nirvana's post is that farmers are not evil greed-heads who carelessly trash the planet for profit, and that is, IMHO, pretty much true. Well, 99% of the time.

However, they are often under awful financial risks and pressures. This will often force them to do things they'd rather not, else they face bankruptcy.

Some of the particular claims in Nirvana's post are supported by doubtful statistics. For example:

The entire U.S. agricultural sector accounts for only about 6% of total U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; livestock production is just over 2%. Fossil fuel combustion contributes to about 79% of all GHG emissions.

Is that per ton of GHG, or per ton of CO2 equivalent? Methane (produced, among other sources, by cows and pigs) is much more powerful than CO2 as a GHG. And in which category are the fossil fuels used for agricultural purposes counted?


Biotechs ... thanks Clod.

Antibiotics - strawman argument. The problem isn't antibiotic residue, but breeding anti biotic resistant bacteria through overuse.

Ah, you might reply, they use different antibiotics in animals than in humans.

Nay, I rejoin, they often differ by a single molecule -thus justifying the different name - but function by the same molecular pathways, and resistance to the animal antibiotic has been shown (in at least one case I've read about) to give automatic resistance to the human version too.

While it's true that less than 10% of all farms grow 62% of the U.S. crops, most are family farms. Specifically, 99% of U.S. farms and ranches are owned by individuals, family corporations or partnerships. More than 2 million farms are family owned compared with about 7,000 non-family-controlled corporate farms.

That first sentence ... does that "most are family farms" mean "most of all farms" or "most of the 10% that produce 62%..."? I suspect it is the first, but it is written to make us think it is the second.

And how do they count this? By registered farm business? Or by acreage? Imagine this scenario: 100 x 50-acre family farms, and one x 100,000 acre agri-business farm. Is that 99% family farms, or 33% of acreage farmed by family-farmers?

Cropland soil erosion from rainfall, field runoff and wind has declined more than 40% since 1982, representing a yearly savings of more than 1.2 billion tons of soil.

Which means that farming does cause erosion, only less so than it did in 1982. I'm too busy lazy to look it up, but I wonder if 1982 was a bad year - drought, dust-bowl type conditions. Measuring from a known high-point is a well-known trick to twist statistics. Wasn't that when Farm aid was going, John Cougar Mellencamp singing Rain on the Scarecrow, that stuff?

Well, all that said, thanks to the farmers who feed me. The only food of my own I produce is coriander (cilantro) and a little spinach. And if there is a problem with the way we feed ourselves, the solution lies with consumers and their purchasing power.

[xoxoxoBruce]

But don't forget, without farmers there would be no farmer's daughters.