New farm aid program

[wilagro]

The amount of GROSS Sales is NOT the whole indicator of Net profitability. It is only one indicator and not the end all or be all.

I know of farmer/ranchers with gross incomes of well over 100 thousand who are skating close to bankruptcy. Circumstances of weather, market conditions and international trade can turn things around rather quickly.

Also know small (half-section) farmers who turn a profit every year. Like my Dad always said: "It isn't what you make but what you spend."

In other words, good management is as important as good fortune.

[rook]

kpb you raise a good point about what is a farmer. On the one hand farmers have more political clout when everyone who grosses 10K is called a farmer. However, if you look at policy, personally I don't want and I don't think taxpayers want policy that treats all farmers the same. We need to ensure farm policy is directed at commercial farmers to help them compete rather than win votes from hobby farmers. Unfortunately, politics comes into play and what is good for the industry doesn't necessarily win you votes for the next election.

[Ron]

this is the link to the program


http://www.agr.gc.ca/policy/income/options/main_e.html

if i did it right?

[kpb]

I think rook has hit the nail on the head. I do not dispute that small farmers can make money. Good on them I say. But if your farm grosses less than $50,000 I don't care how good your managment is, you are not going to be able to raise a family in a reasonable way, or receive a decent return on capital, on whatever you are able to net out.


My point is exactly what rook described quite well. If as an industry we want to be treated seriously by the government and the people of Canada we cannot include as bona fide farmers everyone who has two mules and a goat. There has to be a reasonable expectation of a viable self-sustaining business or we'll just get laughed at. I think the $50,000 threshold is more than fair and very attainable to anyone who is serious about full-time farming.

kpb

[ProFarmer]

My opinion would be any farmer with a gross income below 50000 should be considered just a hobby farmer and not a full time farmer. With todays imputs you have to have a mimimun net income of 30000 just for a family of four to survive. At a 25% margin you would need minimun of 120,000 gross. In conclusion to get involved in these programs and not just just holding the hand of the hobby farmer. You would need the income of 640 acres of land and minimum of 100cows or 500 ewes before Iwould call you a hardworking fulltime farmer with today's tecnology.You may think that you are busy with 200 crop or a hundred ewes but realistly that is not full time!

[WoolyBear]

A family with 200 ewes or 50 to 100 cows, and a section of pasture and hay would be very busy and it could very well be full time. Many of them are doing the work without fancy new machinery, or elaborate facilites that we see in some farm yards.

Big acres, and big machinery doesn't make one a good farmer. Most of them might also put in more hours per year, than some huge grain farmers, given that these small "HOBBY FARMERS" as you call them do it all with their OWN labour! Livestock, in combination with a little crop land is also a YEAR ROUND job.

Take a big farm, and divide their gross by either hours worked, or # of hired hands and see what happens.

[coppertop]

Good points WoolyBear. There are many farmers who have chosen to do without all the fancy gadgets, bells and whistles etc., to remain debt free, and certainly aren't hobby farmers. I agree that there are many involved in agriculture that look to government programs to help them that aren't really full time farmers. Some are working off the farm to keep afloat and there are those that have good off farm income and line up for every government program they can.

[Rodjam]

I remember reading the average number of cattle on a farm is somewhere near 30 head. It would be interesting to see the percentage of cattle on farms under this 80-100 number mentioned. This program may end up seeing all the money go to the guys with big cow numbers, sorta reminds me of where all the BSE money went.........packers! Seems to me there are will be alot of farmers that drive new pickups collecting most of the money. Lets face it, there will not be a program that will meet everyones needs or expectations.

[kpb]

I'm sorry woolybear but running 200 ewes and getting a gross income of 20 or $30,000 a year is not a full time job. Just like running 50 cows is not a full-time job.

There are many places in the world where one person runs 1,000 head of sheep. If you think that running 200 keeps you busy than I would suggest to you that you are not managing your time very well or you are fooling yourself. I mean what do you spend your day doing, for goodness sake unless you're scything your hay by hand?

As far as gross income per hour of machinery goes or whatever other bizarre system of measurement you are using, it does not matter. What I am saying is that if your farm does not have a hope of generating enough gross income to be considered a full-time business than please either get bigger or do not ask for government help. No other hobbyist around asks for government help to let them do their hobby so why should someone with 200 sheep and a gross income of 25 or $30,000? As ProFarmer pointed out so well, with a 25% margin you are netting out about $6,000 or $7,000 per year.

I don't care if you think the commercial farmers with lots of machinery are wasting money, I don't care if you think the government money just goes to the big guys. These are the full-timers who are trying to make a decent full-time living from the land. And yes we can debate how much machinery is enough and how we can get our cows to do more of the work for us.

But that debate has to be between farmers who actually have viable operations with a hope of making economic returns. Because there is a world of difference between hobby farming and farming for a living. And unless you think we should all go back to farming with 40 acres, a plow and a mule, which I do not, please do not expect to get any government support for your hobby. And please do not tell me that having 200 sheep or 50 head of cattle qualifies you as a full-time farmer.

kpb

[coppertop]

Rodjam, I agree with you, there are some very large operators in my community driving fancy pickups, huge farm equipment etc., interestingly enough the wife of one holds down three jobs off the farm, and has applied for another one !! I wonder if she stayed at home and he had several off farm jobs if he would be called a 'hobby farmer' !!!

Regardless of the number of acres or livestock an operator has we are all faced with high input costs, utilities, land prices etc.

[kpb]

coppertop, you're right--we're all faced with the same input issues. But for some of us, those issues result in questions about the future of our businesses. And for others--those with the hobby farms--those issues are largely academic since it doesn't really matter if they make a profit or not.

That difference is why one group should speak for our industry and the other should just enjoy their hobby. And why one group warrants government support and the other does not.



kpb

[coppertop]

kpb, I have never had a huge herd of cattle. The highest number of cows I have had were 50 purebred mother cows, and yet I feel I have been a spokesperson for the cattle industry for years within my own community and through the province by virtue of my involvement with my local municipality and by volunteering my time on various provincial organizations. I made a few thousand dollars a year serving on my local council but I can assure you I counted on every penny my cows brought in.

I think you should ask your local machinery dealer, feed supply store, vet clinic etc., just how much these so called 'hobby farmers' inject into their businesses on an annual basis.

For some, owning a few cows, horses, donkeys, chickens, rabbits or what have you is just a hobby, but for anyone that is running a cattle operations of 30 or 50 cows it is work, and if they do it in conjunction with an off farm job it doesn't mean they are any less committed to the agricultural industry.

We hear numerous complaints on this site about ABP, and from what I have seen it is the larger producers that make up a significant percentage of the delegates to ABP. I know numerous 'hobby farmers' that could have done an excellent job representing our interests, but likely they would not get the support necessary to be elected.

The point I am trying to make is that owning a bigger operation does not necessarily equate to being smarter or more committed to the industry we are involved in.