Counterpoint
Reading the Star Tribune last weekend ("Farm practices face a critical test in U.S.," editorial, Dec. 22; "Paying a price for fertilizer at faucet," article, Dec. 23), I realized that these writers really don't get it. Why is it the farmer's fault? Public policy, passed by politicians, determines how farmers are raising your food today.
Public policy is subsidizing corn, soybeans and wheat to a level where most farmers cannot afford to plant anything else. Public policy developed the ethanol industry at the expense of the livestock industry.
I am the fourth generation to work my family farm. I am also a veterinarian who was trained to help livestock producers. I have also worked on state and federal legislation to develop better farm policy.
I read article after article about those bad farmers who raise livestock in small pens. When I started practicing veterinary medicine in Carver County in 1973, livestock was raised in the environment you now describe as desirable. Public policy told those farmers they were doing it wrong.
I remember being told by a dairy expert at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture that if you are not milking 500 cows in five years, you will be toast. My 50-cow dairy farmer clients said they did not want to milk 500 cows, so they decided their only option was to quit.
For many years, corn was priced at less than the cost of production. Corporate farms took advantage of that and purchased corn rather than growing it. This put them at an advantage to the farmer who raised his feed. The subsidies we hear about farmers getting were actually subsidizing the corporate farms that are now said to be bad.
I read much about crop insurance. This is subsidized to a level where it is more profitable for farmers in Indiana to have a crop failure than a good crop. It also forces bankers to finance only farmers who can get high levels of crop insurance, so they will be assured of being repaid.