# Big Ag Unsustainable?



## Bgriffin856 (Nov 13, 2013)

Read this real quick today. Seems a bit controversial to me

http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/guebert-tells-oeffa-members-big-ag-unsustainable/241399.html


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

It is hard not to agree with Guebert on several of his stances....and I really don't think that big Ag is substainable either without a government teat to nurse it along.

Regards, Mike


----------



## NDVA HAYMAN (Nov 24, 2009)

Unfortunately, most of my friends "farm the government" and still just survive year to year. Wish I knew the answer.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

NDVA HAYMAN said:


> Unfortunately, most of my friends "farm the government" and still just survive year to year. Wish I knew the answer.


Free market. Never fails if allowed to go on.


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

deadmoose said:


> Free market. Never fails if allowed to go on.


But free market has too many ups and downs so governments thinks its their right to try and smooth things out. Or at least keep themselves employed trying or failing. Which ever. Who cares as long as they are employed.


----------



## aawhite (Jan 16, 2012)

Government programs have had a lot of unintended consequences. When I was still with Cargill, used to sit down with producers and go over their marketing plans based on next years planting. I can't count how many times the producers told me his crop rotation (or lack of) was based on better payouts from crop and revenue insurance, even thought it was worse for yields and soil health.

On the other hand...9 billion people by 2050 means we have to get even better at ptoducing. Organic, non-gmo, etc will not get us to the food production required. Yield advances have come from hard science and research. Doesn't mean its profitable with input costs/land costs/equipment costs, but it is how we get big yields. Are we ready to shift our production practices and watch a continent starve to death? I'm glad I don't have to write policy that answers that question.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

aawhite said:


> Organic, non-gmo, etc will not get us to the food production required. Yield advances have come from hard science and research.


Try explaining that to the majority of the voting population though.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

There is such a thing though as economics of scale, the more fertilizer we buy, the less per ton we can buy it for. Of course though, in years with adverse weather conditions, the bigger you are, the less the chance of doing it all right and getting done on time.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

Agree with Marty the economics of scale are huge.Save a extra 10-15% or more on seed,fertilizer,chemicals.MUD discounts on machinery.By fuel by transport load get it for .30-60 cents less.Spread machinery costs over more acres,that works to a point,then they need another combine,etc.Add it all up and it's a huge savings per acre.The thing is most of these BTO's will just push the rent higher with the savings.Small guy has a hard time compete ing in rental ground or buying ground.

HERE a wet spring can be a limiting factor but now with patern Tileing it also makes it easier to get more acres in quicker in a wet spring.


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

mlappin said:


> There is such a thing though as economics of scale, the more fertilizer we buy, the less per ton we can buy it for. Of course though, in years with adverse weather conditions, the bigger you are, the less the chance of doing it all right and getting done on time.


Economis of scale is what everyone wants. Its what everyone talks about and what you will learn about in college. But. By doing that and becoming very very large the small things get over looked. By being smaller the micro management can take place. Just because they have time. The big guy might save 10-15% on fertilizer. But the smaller guy has the potential to increase his yield by 10-15% just by knowing his fields and doing things on time. In the long run your better off and will make more money becoming 10% better than 10% bigger. The problem is a lot of smaller guys never realize this and instead just whine and complain about how much better the big guys have it.


----------



## aawhite (Jan 16, 2012)

Iowa State did a study on farm size and efficiency, leveraging economies of scale. If I remember correctly, the peak size advantage was under 5,000 acres. Beyond that size the leveraging scale flattened out to no advantage, and loss of efficiency in other areas actually made for a disadvantage.

Moral of the study: size is beneficial...to a point.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

I have seen studies that suggested that the ideal size farm would be about 2500 acres....but I surely do not know.

Regards, Mike


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

Vol said:


> I have seen studies that suggested that the ideal size farm would be about 2500 acres....but I surely do Regards, Mike


I think it depends on location and what crops are grown.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

The combine is the limiting factor here. Most people max out the first combine at 3500 to 5000 acres depending on header size. Once the farm breaks past the one combine threshholds, I think the efficiencies start to go backwards in a hurry. One local BTO had 7000 acres last year with two class 8 CaseIH combines with 40 ft drapers and 12 row corn heads. Most of the time in corn, they would get more done with one combine, because the grain cart could not keep up. Nothing like seeing two $500K machines sitting still because of poor management.


----------



## cypull (May 15, 2012)

aawhite said:


> Iowa State did a study on farm size and efficiency, leveraging economies of scale. If I remember correctly, the peak size advantage was under 5,000 acres. Beyond that size the leveraging scale flattened out to no advantage, and loss of efficiency in other areas actually made for a disadvantage.
> 
> Moral of the study: size is beneficial...to a point.


Saw a similar study, but I'm thinking it came out of the U of Minn. Focus was on corn-soybean operations. Efficiency peaked at around 5k A. Was interesting to see that efficiency, and financial success, eroded when approaching 20k A. One of the reasons given was staffing/compensation burden became inflexible and difficult to manage at a larger size. In other words, while your smaller operators can almost "live for free" when margins get skinny, you can't ask a hired staff of personnel to do the same.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

I recall a older study from 20-25 yrs ago I think from U of M also.It said around 1500 acres at that time.A big planter was 12 row and 6 row combine at that time.Now know a couple guys running 1 36 row with 1 12 row combine in the 7-10 acre range.They both push the limit and have mudded in corn to just get it in.I've seen them take 100 bu hits on corn just because of that.They just figure their average on all the acres I guess.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

swmnhay said:


> I recall a older study from 20-25 yrs ago I think from U of M also.It said around 1500 acres at that time.A big planter was 12 row and 6 row combine at that time.Now know a couple guys running 1 36 row with 1 12 row combine in the 7-10 acre range.They both push the limit and have mudded in corn to just get it in.I've seen them take 100 bu hits on corn just because of that.They just figure their average on all the acres I guess.


Thats all fine and dandy, except they also need to figure in yield hits in the following years, compaction is a b*tch to get rid of and usually goes much deeper than most realize.

Local BTO has tried everything from deep ripping to adding large amounts of gypsum to try to loosen their ground up just to turn around and either mud it in, mud it out or both. Now their latest craze is to plant 200-300 acres of wheat in the rotation then plow it to help control weeds by burying the weed seeds. Pretty funny when they leave it and then by fall they have a fresh crop of weeds on the plowed ground that have gone to seed.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

On the subject of big Ag, a huge BTO in SW IN farms 200 acres across the county road from my home farm. They farm 22,000 acres in 9 counties and 2 states and have had a couple of articles printed in the national Ag press and the Howard Buffett club on what great conservationist and environmentalist they are. Well here is my latest issue with them, they have been applying turkey manure next to me the last two days. I don't have a problem with turkey manure as I raise 75,000 birds a year and cover 400 acres a year myself. The problem is they are applying it on HEL ground with more than 6% slope that is frozen and snow covered and drains directly into a large watershed. And it looks like they are also applying on the heavy side as well. Indiana is supposed to have manure regulations in place to prohibit all of this. This action is occurring 25 miles from their home farm and they will leave and when IDEM rolls in, they will be looking at me cause the turkey barns are next door, must be where the shit came from. Oh, and I didn't mention, this is not an emergency situation for them, they do not raise a single turkey, they buy all of the manure.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

I believe I would being doing some video and still documentation with witnesses if you haven't done so already.....because you are right, you will be in the crosshairs if there is a enforcement issue on down the road.

Regards, Mike


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

haybaler101 said:


> On the subject of big Ag, a huge BTO in SW IN farms 200 acres across the county road from my home farm. They farm 22,000 acres in 9 counties and 2 states and have had a couple of articles printed in the national Ag press and the Howard Buffett club on what great conservationist and environmentalist they are. Well here is my latest issue with them, they have been applying turkey manure next to me the last two days. I don't have a problem with turkey manure as I raise 75,000 birds a year and cover 400 acres a year myself. The problem is they are applying it on HEL ground with more than 6% slope that is frozen and snow covered and drains directly into a large watershed. And it looks like they are also applying on the heavy side as well. Indiana is supposed to have manure regulations in place to prohibit all of this. This action is occurring 25 miles from their home farm and they will leave and when IDEM rolls in, they will be looking at me cause the turkey barns are next door, must be where the shit came from. Oh, and I didn't mention, this is not an emergency situation for them, they do not raise a single turkey, they buy all of the manure.


The amish do that kind of crap all the time in the next county over. Even have one guy that has a ditch (thats almost is wide enough to call a creek) that runs right thru his pasture, cows are standing in it all the time doing their business.

Instead of cracking down on people like Haybaler mentioned or the amishman I mentioned they'll just tighten the regulations up some more and punish those that have always followed the guidelines/law.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

Yes, our amish next county over spread regardless of soil conditions and to be honest, when we milked we spread every day the ground was frozen and a lot of days when it wasn't. Did not have a choice, not near enough storage. What is ticking me off is these guys are going national publicity and probably big $$$ proclaiming how great they are but then go into somebody else's backyard and undo everything. Just one word, HIPPOCRATES!


----------



## Bgriffin856 (Nov 13, 2013)

Depends on your area. For example in this area there are guys milking 20-70 in tiestalls that have enough land close to the farm. Or 200-1000+ that can economically farm ground 10-30+ miles from the farm. Very few in between. If your a crop farmer and have a couple hundred acres your a big operation. Just don't have the large areas of farmable ground like other areas. Basically just hilltops/sides and valley bottoms


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

Dairy seems to be somewhat of an exception to the economies of scale. I have been told that many studies have found that 100 cow operations have about the same profit per cow as 1000+ cow operations.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

Gearclash said:


> Dairy seems to be somewhat of an exception to the economies of scale. I have been told that many studies have found that 100 cow operations have about the same profit per cow as 1000+ cow operations.


I would guess the big reason is not much hired labor.Probably some part time relief milkers and harvest help.Dealing with all the labor on a larger operation has to be a nightmare which can be very costly.

About 15-20 yrs ago the farm papers were full of articles from U of M? saying you had to milk 300 cows so you could hire help and therefore have more time off.I think they forgot of all the other headaches that come with hired help.I seen quite a few guys do the expansion,new parlor and free stall barn.Buy more cows to fill it.Take on another million in debt.Quite a few of them are sitting empty now.


----------



## aawhite (Jan 16, 2012)

Used to be you had to be above 300 cows to get the banks to lend you money, as well. For us in SE Iowa, we milked 300 head. My dad and uncle were partners, mom and aunt worked on farm, I ran a field crew of 3, 1 full time milker, 2 part time milkers. The labor was mostly needed for planting and harvesting, but it was hard to get seasonal help, so we hired full time.

For us, we kept the crew busy by doing all of our own facility and equipment repairs, finished bui9ldings our barns, poured our own concrete, etc.

In terms of efficiency, for the vast majority of big dairies, they are definitely quantity over quality. Our farm was the top producing farm with over 100 cows in the state of Iowa for about 20 years running. Our rolling herd average was just over 31,000 pounds, and we had not missed a quality bonus for 25 years in a row.

The big dairies I've spoken with are the exact opposite. Rolling herd averages closer to 25,000 pounds, sometimes less, and they have never even heard of a quality bonus. They are about getting their huge numbers of cows thru the parlor.

I always thought of Braums Dairy in Oklahoma as an example. We were invited to a tour of the facility years ago. The thing that struck me most was that their parlor milked 200 at a time. The started when a light kicked on, milked for so long, then milkers were pulled and they were moved out. There were always cows that didn't get milked out, but to wait on them cut down their parlor efficiency. These are the cows that are likely dragging down their quality (high somatic cell counts). This is what "efficiency" means to production on a dairy. And it has cost a lot of big dairies. I can name a dozen in the Midwest that milk well over 1,000 head, and are on their 3rd and 4th owner. It's the guy that buys the facility for 25 cents on the dollar that makes it work well. Read an article not long ago that 75% of the big dairies in Tulare, CA are on the verge of bankruptcy.


----------



## IH 1586 (Oct 16, 2014)

When I was milking I milked 60 head. Had several part time help with milking and morning chores. Tried to keep labor at a minimum as it gets very expensive. Several things I learned: 60 Head is a odd number to be at. It's too many to really do it yourself and not enough to pay for the labor. My dad and uncle owned the chopping equipment together so I inherited that mess. Its fun when your younger but when I had to work with him all the rumors that I heard were true and I was the one getting screwed. Sold my half and went to custom. 60 head doesn't support custom work. Did milk 80 one summer switching out 20 and at the end of summer when I got rid of them. I made more milk per head at 60 than 80 due to the shed not being set up for cows. The old tiestall would max out at 85 lbs. per cow which was pretty good. I always felt that the herd had the genetics and just needed the facilities to produce, but what bank is going to loan a twenty year old money to build a barn on land he didn't own and had a $250,000 loan buying the cattle and equipment. When I leased my herd out I had 80 head on one farm that had freestalls and sand bedding. My prediction was right, the cows were averaging 100lbs. per head.

Looking back, I wished I had sold off half the herd, dropped the land I didn't need, and paid down some debt, maybe I would have made it a little longer.


----------



## aawhite (Jan 16, 2012)

I ran into some of the same things. IU left the operation in 2000 and went to work fopr Cargill. I felt the only way for me to buy out both dad and uncle was to cut down the herd, expand acres to more row crop for cash, and try to get the labor down, since I was gogin to lose 4 "employees" at some point. We knew it would be tough with none of my uncles kids wanting into the operation. Briefly looked at going back in 2008, but same issues: too much debt (even with dad and uncle cuttign me a hell of a deal) for an operation that was gogin tto have to cut the number of cows, lookign at around 150. The farm was not set up to go bigger than the 300 milking, which equals almost 700 head total with calves and replacements. Banks were not real thrilled at the prospect of lending to a dairy oiperation that was going to get smaller. Farm went to auction. And I'm setting myself up to farm on the side here in Kansas.


----------



## discbinedr (Mar 4, 2013)

haybaler101 said:


> Yes, our amish next county over spread regardless of soil conditions and to be honest, when we milked we spread every day the ground was frozen and a lot of days when it wasn't. Did not have a choice, not near enough storage. What is ticking me off is these guys are going national publicity and probably big $$$ proclaiming how great they are but then go into somebody else's backyard and undo everything. Just one word, HIPPOCRATES!


I hear he was a great doctor......


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

discbinedr said:


> I hear he was a great doctor......


Hey, give me a break, I quit trying to spell once all these automatic spell checkers came along. iPad did not know exactly what I wanted and I wasn't quite close enough.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Have a guy in the area spreading chicken poop, $40/ton and they haul and spread, claims it's no problem to spread on snow covered ground and we don't have to work it in.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

Huh? You might want to check with IDEM on that one, Marty. All manure must be incorporated with in 24 hours and no spreading on frozen ground if I read correctly.


----------



## aawhite (Jan 16, 2012)

Dad told me Iowa jsut passed a law againjst spreading on frozen ground. Dad and uncle sold the dairy at the right time. We could not hold a winters worth of manure with no spreading on frozen ground. This law would have shut us down.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

haybaler101 said:


> Huh? You might want to check with IDEM on that one, Marty. All manure must be incorporated with in 24 hours and no spreading on frozen ground if I read correctly.


Thats how I've always understood it, so the BTO that is doing this as a sideline is either ignorant of the laws or chooses to ignore them to promote sales of chicken poo.

Now for the funny part, new farm bill promotes conservation tillage with no-till being preferred, IDEM literally says no-till is a no-no if you spread manure.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

mlappin said:


> Thats how I've always understood it, so the BTO that is doing this as a sideline is either ignorant of the laws or chooses to ignore them to promote sales of chicken poo.
> 
> Now for the funny part, new farm bill promotes conservation tillage with no-till being preferred, IDEM literally says no-till is a no-no if you spread manure.


That is why I bought a Great Plains turbo till. Want to be no till but need to work in poo. This machine is supposed to satisfy both sides.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

haybaler101 said:


> That is why I bought a Great Plains turbo till. Want to be no till but need to work in poo. This machine is supposed to satisfy both sides.


Standard Turbo Till or the one with the adjustable angle for the gangs?


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

mlappin said:


> Standard Turbo Till or the one with the adjustable angle for the gangs?


Standard, could not afford a new one.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

haybaler101 said:


> Standard, could not afford a new one.


Right on, they get crazy money for the adjustable gang one with all the bells and whistles.

I'd like to get away completely away from doing anything including running a coulter cart. Some years that's not possible though on our heavier ground. Need to do a little something to open it up to dry faster. On the lighter ground though doesn't work to bad to plant between the rows with the Hiniker, would work much better with a forty foot toolbar instead of a thirty since we plant 16 rows.


----------

