Clarkmore Farm Planning

[clarkmorefarm]

Hi all,

Figured I would come here and ask for some help as I'm planning a few things at the farm. I've just got info that I was awarded TAEP money from the state for livestock equipment. I get a max of $2,000 if I spend $4,000. I believe I desperately need a corral and a load out chute/head gate.

When I bought my cattle, I loaded out of this setup and actually liked it a lot. It would be mobile and let me put it anywhere I needed it with some work.

All American Panel, LLC

www.allamericanpanel.com

I could either order from them or go to my local co-op and see what they would price a similar system at.

So, first thing it where to actually put a corral. I could put it in one paddock for now but would like to get a place for it long term that is covered.

I had my local soil conservation help with a rotational graze plan and fund the project for waterers and cross fences. They came up with the map I've attached.

I only made one slight change by taking the cross fence that connects to the barn and moving it back about 30 ft, this fence has the waterer in it as well.

The map is slightly outdated as I've built a metal garage where the orange box is and I plan on taking the other two outbuildings down at some point and rebuilding them.

So, the orange lines that intersect the barn is where I am thinking I will build another interior fence for a weaning pen or when I want to keep an eye on something close to the house. I will likely add another waterer there and soil conservation said they would likely fund it. That will be a later 2025 or even 2026 project. I would probably do a cattle panel fence or woven wire just to be a little better fence than the rest of my 5 strand barbed wire around the farm.

Another thing I need help with is what to do with this old barn. It was built in the 40's and has a nice large loft in it with a drive through that I'm sure hay wagons drove through. It had two large sliding doors, one was rotted on the ground and the other side the tracks were broken, so it is just lying in the barn behind the hay. I currently have hay storage on one end where the shed roof is, but I would like to build a new hay storage barn later where one of the other old outbuildings is. The barn is on concrete block and footers, so it is fairly stable, it had some water washout issues, and I am working on fixing that. Had a buddy cut a swell so the water goes around the barn instead of through it.

Below the loft there are two pens that would need new doors, but I could utilize them to pen up any livestock if needed. I added a water hydrant by the barn, so I have access to water there if needed. I've been working on cleaning out the barn a little as I go, it was a catch all for the family that lived on the farm since 1967 before I bought the place.

Sorry to be long winded but just trying to spitball and make some plans as I go for the place. The cross fences will be done in the next couple of weeks, no hurry on the rest, just trying to think ahead.

 

[RDFF]

I'm curious, and don't mean to be "harsh"... but I have to be honest... you've got a total of 20 acres, with an effective grazing area of 12 acres. From what you've indicated, it appears that you're planning on "grazing" all of these acres, rather than building a "CAFO" (Confined Animal Feeding Operation).

You're asking about what you consider to be necessary..., or perhaps rather desired "infrastructure investments", in order to operate your vision of a "successful grazing operation".

But have you taken the time to calculate what your potential for growing "pounds of meat" might be from your grazing operation, and contrasted that with what you are considering making as "infrastructure investments"? 12 acres as an effective grazing area... but at what kind of potential yield for forages? Is this expected to be "exceptionally high yielding" ground, or might it be classified more as exceptionally poor yielding"? Ground can vary... ALOT! Rain forest vs. Sahara Desert variance. Are you being realistically objective in your expectations?

I'm in SE Minnesota... very good "cropland soils" and yield potential area, with about 35-40" annual rainfall, plus normally strong snow through the winter for moisture as well. I operate on about 400 acres of "converted cropland" that I pasture or make hay on, and I am able to run about 400 head of cattle/year (mostly adults, but yearlings and calves at side as well). And I don't have hardly any more "infrastructure" than what you seem to be considering (portable corral panels, functional home built portable alley system, and a used squeeze chute, four permanent continuous flow frost free waterers with plumbed into my well system). I walk my cattle over a mile to water sometimes, depending on where they are on the farm. You don't NEED to have water on every paddock. Though my corral system is "portable" (I have the big 24' freestanding panels for the corral itself, I built a really nice double alley system that's "portable", and my squeeze chute is "portable"), I generally will avoid "moving" the corral as much as possible, preferring to walk the cattle to it wherever it's set up, even if it's a mile or more away from where they are at the time. On 20 acres, I would NEVER consider moving it to the cattle, EVER... so it doesn't NEED to be portable then... not that it's foolish to have it BE portable. In fact, I wouldn't likely consider building another permanently installed corral system again! If it's portable, it has resale value. A "posts in the ground" corral only has value on the place it's installed on... and you can't change things about it without incurring major costs in time, materials, and labor. Put your "corral", if you're going to have one, so that it can be accessed easily by your haul vehicles.

With a very small operation, you simply can't afford to have much for "infrastructure"... and there are ways that you can operate without it... it's just "easier" if you can have all the nice stuff to work with... but it can't be justified. You HAVE TO keep your fixed overhead costs as low as possible. You don't need a trailer... plenty of guys willing to come and "haul for hire"... MUCH cheaper than you can own that infrastructure, unless you need it consistently and regularly. Do everything and anything you can, particularly at the scale you're looking at, to AVOID any and every overhead cost that you can, while still doing what IS essential. How much "infrastructure" do you really need to be invested in (particularly PER ANIMAL CARRYING CAPACITY), assuming you're an exceptionally good and experienced operator/manager, to where you're going to be able to run similar (or maybe even a little heavier) density than I am? With 12 acres, let's assume you'd be able to run 15,000# of cattle (15 AU's... that'd be a pretty strong stocking density... not likely, unless you're intending to be buying in a high percentage of your required feed for a majority of the year).

What's the profit left over per year on this operation, that you can then use to "reinvest" into your infrastructure costs? Unless you're expecting to be getting some kind of unrealistically "exotic" prices for your grazed animals, you'd better do some pretty smart figuring with a very sharp pencil, to justify anything beyond a trough filled with a hydrant for water and some high tensile fences.

 

[clarkmorefarm]

I'm curious, and don't mean to be "harsh"... but I have to be honest... you've got a total of 20 acres, with an effective grazing area of 12 acres. From what you've indicated, it appears that you're planning on "grazing" all of these acres, rather than building a "CAFO" (Confined Animal Feeding Operation).

You're asking about what you consider to be necessary..., or perhaps rather desired "infrastructure investments", in order to operate your vision of a "successful grazing operation".

But have you taken the time to calculate what your potential for growing "pounds of meat" might be from your grazing operation, and contrasted that with what you are considering making as "infrastructure investments"? 12 acres as an effective grazing area... but at what kind of potential yield for forages? Is this expected to be "exceptionally high yielding" ground, or might it be classified more as exceptionally poor yielding"? Ground can vary... ALOT! Rain forest vs. Sahara Desert variance. Are you being realistically objective in your expectations?

I'm in SE Minnesota... very good "cropland soils" and yield potential area, with about 35-40" annual rainfall, plus normally strong snow through the winter for moisture as well. I operate on about 400 acres of "converted cropland" that I pasture or make hay on, and I am able to run about 400 head of cattle/year (mostly adults, but yearlings and calves at side as well). And I don't have hardly any more "infrastructure" than what you seem to be considering (portable corral panels, functional home built portable alley system, and a used squeeze chute, four permanent continuous flow frost free waterers with plumbed into my well system). I walk my cattle over a mile to water sometimes, depending on where they are on the farm. You don't NEED to have water on every paddock. Though my corral system is "portable" (I have the big 24' freestanding panels for the corral itself, I built a really nice double alley system that's "portable", and my squeeze chute is "portable"), I generally will avoid "moving" the corral as much as possible, preferring to walk the cattle to it wherever it's set up, even if it's a mile or more away from where they are at the time. On 20 acres, I would NEVER consider moving it to the cattle, EVER... so it doesn't NEED to be portable then... not that it's foolish to have it BE portable. In fact, I wouldn't likely consider building another permanently installed corral system again! If it's portable, it has resale value. A "posts in the ground" corral only has value on the place it's installed on... and you can't change things about it without incurring major costs in time, materials, and labor. Put your "corral", if you're going to have one, so that it can be accessed easily by your haul vehicles.

With a very small operation, you simply can't afford to have much for "infrastructure"... and there are ways that you can operate without it... it's just "easier" if you can have all the nice stuff to work with... but it can't be justified. You HAVE TO keep your fixed overhead costs as low as possible. You don't need a trailer... plenty of guys willing to come and "haul for hire"... MUCH cheaper than you can own that infrastructure, unless you need it consistently and regularly. Do everything and anything you can, particularly at the scale you're looking at, to AVOID any and every overhead cost that you can, while still doing what IS essential. How much "infrastructure" do you really need to be invested in (particularly PER ANIMAL CARRYING CAPACITY), assuming you're an exceptionally good and experienced operator/manager, to where you're going to be able to run similar (or maybe even a little heavier) density than I am? With 12 acres, let's assume you'd be able to run 15,000# of cattle (15 AU's... that'd be a pretty strong stocking density... not likely, unless you're intending to be buying in a high percentage of your required feed for a majority of the year).

What's the profit left over per year on this operation, that you can then use to "reinvest" into your infrastructure costs? Unless you're expecting to be getting some kind of unrealistically "exotic" prices for your grazed animals, you'd better do some pretty smart figuring with a very sharp pencil, to justify anything beyond a trough filled with a hydrant for water and some high tensile fences.

Thanks for your input.

This is a hobby farm by all meaning of the words. A yearly loss will likely be better for us than a profit in a lot of ways. Our W2 jobs pays the bills.

You're right on necessities, but not being in my area you have no idea how much acreage brings plus being setup as a cattle farm. All the infrastructure add values to the farm that already appraised for over $30k an acre not including the house last year.

Yes it's small, and it will mostly be a grazing operation, but I likely finish some cattle for slaughter on my place.

I do have access to the 10 acres next to me for hay. I cut it twice last year. With a little work it can likely feed my herd through the winter if I graze well.

Back to the inputs, soil conservation paid me $15k to put the water lines in and the waterers, they'll pay close to another $10k for the cross fences when I'm done. If I would have done all the work on the waterers and not hire it out I likely would have broken even, but I'll be out less than $5k to have all my interior fencing and waters setup. Also with the funding from the state I'll have at least $32k of infrastructure put on my small acreage that I'm out of pocket less than $7k for. That definitely pencils out in my book.

For a cattle trailer I just rent it from the CO-OP for $75 a day or I'll get my buddy to haul for me local. Can't keep tires on one for that.

I have a lot of options I can use the TAEP money for, I just felt like a working pin would make the most sense.

Here is TAEP to review if anyone has any other ideas.

Livestock Equipment

Livestock Equipment

www.tn.gov

TN is very friendly to keeping farmland farmland and helping small producers like myself.

 

[RDFF]

Yeah, I get it... and I'm sorry for being so blunt... (well, maybe not...). You like the "idea" of "farming" (and who wouldn't, IMO)... You'll just run a few head of cattle on your few acres of heaven with a "starter mansion" on it, and with some "pretty decent livestock infrastructure in place" so it looks like a "real functional and thriving farm/ranch" (maybe even have a horse or two, with some of those nice Priefert box stalls, with the pretty urethaned boards) all justified on the basis that somebody else (taxpayers) paid for it, ... "improvements" that would in any sensible reality take at least a several hundred head operation to even begin to justify. Pretty cool! So "YOU TOO can be a cowboy" or "successful rancher"! Awesome!

The problem with this production model, and these "subsidy programs" that you're taking advantage of, is you're going to be one of many other "producers" of beef (so supplying beef to the consumer, including yourself, right along with all the many other "hobby farmers" doing likewise, using "off farm income/wealth" and "government subsidies", which then take opportunity (by providing supply of beef below the cost of production) away from actual "farming to make a living farmers". You're competing with them for land (when you purchase a beautiful little "hobby farm" in the country), paying FAR more for that property (like the mentioned $30,000/acre) than ever could begin to be "farmed out of it", and then selling your animals "at a loss", with those other farmers then HAVING TO somehow try to figure out a way to "pencil it out" in the real world, while competing with you. In other words, these are government programs that you're (legally) taking advantage of, in a self-described "loss leader operation", with that program then by design causing other "farming to make a living" producers to have to sell their product at a price lower than it honestly costs to produce... all done at the taxpayers expense. They keep "losing money" and watching their "hobby farm neighbors" with off-farm income/wealth "living so much better" than they're able to by "farming it out of the land". Eventually, they realize that "the farm itself" is their only wealth... because it's become "so valuable"... FAR more valuable than could ever be "farmed out of it" obviously. So they "sell out" to development too, and move on. And what had been described and zoned as "Agricultural Protection Districts" eventually he become "agricultural subdivisions"... full of "hobby farms"..., and agriculture is literally lost for good. Once it's gone, you can never get it back, unless some "disaster" happens to sweep through and destroy it.

This is 100% a welfare handout program (particularly as you've described it and are taking advantage of it) pure and simple, and though it's well intentioned (meaning it is primarily INTENDED to help and encourage "farming to make a living from the land" farmers to "farm better"), it's HURTING the farm economy as a whole, and it thereby ends up allowing corporate entities (large corporate processors of commodity components, be it meat, or grains, or....) to take advantage of producers, because the product, through these "programs", is DESIGNED to be continued to be produced below the true cost of production. Those producing the food are expected to do that at a subsistence level. Those who are actually attempting to compete with this kind of production, on a "farming to make a living farm business scale", have no way to stay in the running, and are then expected to sell their product below the cost of production, and then get in line for their subsidy handout welfare check, just to scrape by at below poverty levels. The land valuation gets jacked up, because "off-farm wealth" is buying up all of the land as an "investment", not at a value that can be justified based on the production capability of the land... but based on what "off-farm wealth" buyers will purchase it for.

And THAT is why farmers are going broke... being forced to always be producing their "raw material" below the cost of production , for "food processors" and "food marketers" to use, benefit from, and make a profit on... and where those processors and marketers ALWAYS base their selling price to the consumer on THEIR cost of production plus margin. No "commercial farming operation" has that luxury. They/we are always at the mercy of the commodity markets, which we have no control over.

 

[Rancher]

Amen.....and well explained

 

[mwj]

Yeah, I get it... and I'm sorry for being so blunt... (well, maybe not...). You like the "idea" of "farming" (and who wouldn't, IMO)... You'll just run a few head of cattle on your few acres of heaven with a "starter mansion" on it, and with some "pretty decent livestock infrastructure in place" so it looks like a "real functional and thriving farm/ranch" (maybe even have a horse or two, with some of those nice Priefert box stalls, with the pretty urethaned boards) all justified on the basis that somebody else (taxpayers) paid for it, ... "improvements" that would in any sensible reality take at least a several hundred head operation to even begin to justify. Pretty cool! So "YOU TOO can be a cowboy" or "successful rancher"! Awesome!

The problem with this production model, and these "subsidy programs" that you're taking advantage of, is you're going to be one of many other "producers" of beef (so supplying beef to the consumer, including yourself, right along with all the many other "hobby farmers" doing likewise, using "off farm income/wealth" and "government subsidies", which then take opportunity (by providing supply of beef below the cost of production) away from actual "farming to make a living farmers". You're competing with them for land (when you purchase a beautiful little "hobby farm" in the country), paying FAR more for that property (like the mentioned $30,000/acre) than ever could begin to be "farmed out of it", and then selling your animals "at a loss", with those other farmers then HAVING TO somehow try to figure out a way to "pencil it out" in the real world, while competing with you. In other words, these are government programs that you're (legally) taking advantage of, in a self-described "loss leader operation", with that program then by design causing other "farming to make a living" producers to have to sell their product at a price lower than it honestly costs to produce... all done at the taxpayers expense. They keep "losing money" and watching their "hobby farm neighbors" with off-farm income/wealth "living so much better" than they're able to by "farming it out of the land". Eventually, they realize that "the farm itself" is their only wealth... because it's become "so valuable"... FAR more valuable than could ever be "farmed out of it" obviously. So they "sell out" to development too, and move on. And what had been described and zoned as "Agricultural Protection Districts" eventually he become "agricultural subdivisions"... full of "hobby farms"..., and agriculture is literally lost for good. Once it's gone, you can never get it back, unless some "disaster" happens to sweep through and destroy it.

This is 100% a welfare handout program (particularly as you've described it and are taking advantage of it) pure and simple, and though it's well intentioned (meaning it is primarily INTENDED to help and encourage "farming to make a living from the land" farmers to "farm better"), it's HURTING the farm economy as a whole, and it thereby ends up allowing corporate entities (large corporate processors of commodity components, be it meat, or grains, or....) to take advantage of producers, because the product, through these "programs", is DESIGNED to be continued to be produced below the true cost of production. Those producing the food are expected to do that at a subsistence level. Those who are actually attempting to compete with this kind of production, on a "farming to make a living farm business scale", have no way to stay in the running, and are then expected to sell their product below the cost of production, and then get in line for their subsidy handout welfare check, just to scrape by at below poverty levels. The land valuation gets jacked up, because "off-farm wealth" is buying up all of the land as an "investment", not at a value that can be justified based on the production capability of the land... but based on what "off-farm wealth" buyers will purchase it for.

And THAT is why farmers are going broke... being forced to always be producing their "raw material" below the cost of production , for "food processors" and "food marketers" to use, benefit from, and make a profit on... and where those processors and marketers ALWAYS base their selling price to the consumer on THEIR cost of production plus margin. No "commercial farming operation" has that luxury. They/we are always at the mercy of the commodity markets, which we have no control over.

The thing is we can only make our choice in life and it does not have to be fair. Rest assured there are others that are large enough producers to consider any of us hobby producers!

 

[TCRanch]

Those panels are fine if you have a flat surface, so the pins align, and relatively calm cattle. They can bend them in a heartbeat!

 

[clarkmorefarm]

Yeah, I get it... and I'm sorry for being so blunt... (well, maybe not...). You like the "idea" of "farming" (and who wouldn't, IMO)... You'll just run a few head of cattle on your few acres of heaven with a "starter mansion" on it, and with some "pretty decent livestock infrastructure in place" so it looks like a "real functional and thriving farm/ranch" (maybe even have a horse or two, with some of those nice Priefert box stalls, with the pretty urethaned boards) all justified on the basis that somebody else (taxpayers) paid for it, ... "improvements" that would in any sensible reality take at least a several hundred head operation to even begin to justify. Pretty cool! So "YOU TOO can be a cowboy" or "successful rancher"! Awesome!

The problem with this production model, and these "subsidy programs" that you're taking advantage of, is you're going to be one of many other "producers" of beef (so supplying beef to the consumer, including yourself, right along with all the many other "hobby farmers" doing likewise, using "off farm income/wealth" and "government subsidies", which then take opportunity (by providing supply of beef below the cost of production) away from actual "farming to make a living farmers". You're competing with them for land (when you purchase a beautiful little "hobby farm" in the country), paying FAR more for that property (like the mentioned $30,000/acre) than ever could begin to be "farmed out of it", and then selling your animals "at a loss", with those other farmers then HAVING TO somehow try to figure out a way to "pencil it out" in the real world, while competing with you. In other words, these are government programs that you're (legally) taking advantage of, in a self-described "loss leader operation", with that program then by design causing other "farming to make a living" producers to have to sell their product at a price lower than it honestly costs to produce... all done at the taxpayers expense. They keep "losing money" and watching their "hobby farm neighbors" with off-farm income/wealth "living so much better" than they're able to by "farming it out of the land". Eventually, they realize that "the farm itself" is their only wealth... because it's become "so valuable"... FAR more valuable than could ever be "farmed out of it" obviously. So they "sell out" to development too, and move on. And what had been described and zoned as "Agricultural Protection Districts" eventually he become "agricultural subdivisions"... full of "hobby farms"..., and agriculture is literally lost for good. Once it's gone, you can never get it back, unless some "disaster" happens to sweep through and destroy it.

This is 100% a welfare handout program (particularly as you've described it and are taking advantage of it) pure and simple, and though it's well intentioned (meaning it is primarily INTENDED to help and encourage "farming to make a living from the land" farmers to "farm better"), it's HURTING the farm economy as a whole, and it thereby ends up allowing corporate entities (large corporate processors of commodity components, be it meat, or grains, or....) to take advantage of producers, because the product, through these "programs", is DESIGNED to be continued to be produced below the true cost of production. Those producing the food are expected to do that at a subsistence level. Those who are actually attempting to compete with this kind of production, on a "farming to make a living farm business scale", have no way to stay in the running, and are then expected to sell their product below the cost of production, and then get in line for their subsidy handout welfare check, just to scrape by at below poverty levels. The land valuation gets jacked up, because "off-farm wealth" is buying up all of the land as an "investment", not at a value that can be justified based on the production capability of the land... but based on what "off-farm wealth" buyers will purchase it for.

And THAT is why farmers are going broke... being forced to always be producing their "raw material" below the cost of production , for "food processors" and "food marketers" to use, benefit from, and make a profit on... and where those processors and marketers ALWAYS base their selling price to the consumer on THEIR cost of production plus margin. No "commercial farming operation" has that luxury. They/we are always at the mercy of the commodity markets, which we have no control over.

Must have struck a nerve, sorry you're hating on the hobby crowd which is the majority of the producers in TN.

I get it, the world isn't fair, but I'm playing well within the rules. You really don't know anything about me or my background. The mansion you described is a 2000 square ft rancher built in 1967 with a carport .

I actually saved this place from being developed. Kept it in the greenbelt program in TN.

Would love to just farm full time. Not in the cards, I was sent to college and got a degree. Going into cattle wasn't in the cards for me. Grandad's farm in KY was sold and I didn't see a dime of it. Any farming I wanted to do I had to start from scratch. I don't know another person starting out without full time job to support it.

The TAEP funding is for 5 head minimum with a max of 29. Can only qualify for it for two years. It's designed to help with some of the cost burden of starting out.

The way I see it the US beef herd is shrinking, we need more producers no matter the size. If the funding is out there why wouldn't I take advantage of it?

If you don't have anything to contribute on farm planning, you don't have to respond.

So, back to my original thread intent, any tips or ideas?

 

[simme]

Those panels look to be manufactured by Allen Gate and Panel in Arkansas. I have a 15 acre hobby pasture with a system put together with their products. Here is a link to a list of dealers of their products in Tennessee. Probably can get everything you need in state.

Allen Gate & Panel Dealers - allengateandpanel.com

Offering a wide variety of cattle working equipment, from panels and gates to feeders and sweep systems.

www.allengateandpanel.com

There is no such thing as "free" money from the government. Just a redistribution of money with a very inefficient organization in charge of that redistribution. My hobby operation is completely self funded. I just feel better that way. Wouldn't it be better if the government took an attitude to try to be frugal with "their" money instead of having paid employees pushing people to take "their" money. I don't have any hate for the hobby people, I am one.

 

[clarkmorefarm]

Those panels look to be manufactured by Allen Gate and Panel in Arkansas. I have a 15 acre hobby pasture with a system put together with their products. Here is a link to a list of dealers of their products in Tennessee. Probably can get everything you need in state.

Allen Gate & Panel Dealers - allengateandpanel.com

Offering a wide variety of cattle working equipment, from panels and gates to feeders and sweep systems.

www.allengateandpanel.com

There is no such thing as "free" money from the government. Just a redistribution of money with a very inefficient organization in charge of that redistribution. My hobby operation is completely self funded. I just feel better that way. Wouldn't it be better if the government took an attitude to try to be frugal with "their" money instead of having paid employees pushing people to take "their" money. I don't have any hate for the hobby people, I am one.

Ag Central on the list for Allen is my local co-op, I will definitely check with them.

I get the self funded stuff. We all have to find our own way. I couldn't do a lot of what I'm doing without Soil Conservation and I'm glad to take advantage of begging farmer funding.

 

[Travlr]

The thing is we can only make our choice in life and it does not have to be fair. Rest assured there are others that are large enough producers to consider any of us hobby producers!

Funny... the only time I was ever eligible for financial assistance was after a weather event and declared a disaster area... and the $500 I applied for to get my fences back up was continuously denied as the rules changed every time I applied for more than a year. They didn't require photos of dead livestock until several months had passed, so anyone with animal losses had nothing to photograph.
But I gotta admit, this guy has figured it out if he's getting all this money for a hobby farm. I just wish he was large enough to justify the infrastructure he's going to have.

 

[clarkmorefarm]

Funny... the only time I was ever eligible for financial assistance was after a weather event and declared a disaster area... and the $500 I applied for to get my fences back up was continuously denied as the rules changed every time I applied for more than a year. They didn't require photos of dead livestock until several months had passed, so anyone with animal losses had nothing to photograph.
But I gotta admit, this guy has figured it out if he's getting all this money for a hobby farm. I just wish he was large enough to justify the infrastructure he's going to have.

What's the size that justifies it? Is it a money thing, number of head, have to break even or make a profit?

I'm just asking, I know you can do a lot with barley any infrastructure, and have before, but I don't see anything wrong with having the right tools for the job.

 

[bird dog]

This has nothing to do with the subject of this thread but do yourself a favor and move all of those round bales that are underneath the roof line of the barn. Rain running off the barn will cause significant damage to them. Set them out in a row (not stacked) and butt them end to end. Keep a couple feet between he rows so they will get some sun and dry out.

 

[clarkmorefarm]

This has nothing to do with the subject of this thread but do yourself a favor and move all of those round bales that are underneath the roof line of the barn. Rain running off the barn will cause significant damage to them. Set them out in a row (not stacked) and butt them end to end. Keep a couple feet between he rows so they will get some sun and dry out.

That's already been done. Only had them stacked that way for a week or so and saw how much runoff they would catch. Plus I replaced those poles with 3 6x6's and a new beam so I had better access to the hay. I moved them out when I did the beam work. They've been in a row like you describe for months. I've fed about half of them so far.

 

[Travlr]

What's the size that justifies it? Is it a money thing, number of head, have to break even or make a profit?

I'm just asking, I know you can do a lot with barley any infrastructure, and have before, but I don't see anything wrong with having the right tools for the job.

Yeah, it's nice to have the right tools. I think I and others here see it as strange that there are programs paid for by public taxes that benefit someone that isn't in it to make a living.
And don't get me wrong, I'd love to see government programs for new people coming into agriculture, but again, to make a living.

 

[kenny thomas]

What classifies as making a living? Do the food stamps we give from the farm program constitute making a living? And yes a huge part of the farm program is for food stamps and almost none of them have ever farmed.
I have kept as many as 100 cows when younger but worked a full time job to make a living.

 

[clarkmorefarm]

Yeah, it's nice to have the right tools. I think I and others here see it as strange that there are programs paid for by public taxes that benefit someone that isn't in it to make a living.
And don't get me wrong, I'd love to see government programs for new people coming into agriculture, but again, to make a living.

I contribute my fair share to the taxes you speak of, surely I can get the benefits of that as well?

I get the hand outs, but AG funding and money has been going on like this for decades. No one wants to do the work anymore. Better make some incentives so the ones that want to, are able to.

What do y'all think about tobacco buy outs? Lol I knew many a farmers paid an allotment to NOT grow tobacco.

 

[RDFF]

We all (farmers, and society as a whole) would be better off if our government wasn't messing with it at all, with its socialist "redistribution of wealth" programs, and if it all had to fly on a basis of its own merits. We'd all have to make smarter decisions and be prudent managers, and the world would be better for it! The subsidy programs incentivize the growing of low priced commodities because the subsidy is [specifically and directly] intended to reduce and avoid the potential risk of complete failure (no... they do NOT reduce the risk so that you can always, or even typically, make a profit... and in the end, they reduce the potential for profit ... which always REQUIRES the potential risk of failure...) so that there is generally always a stronger supply than there is demand. That manipulates the commodity price to "static lows"... from the "good times" of just at, to more often the normal and "bad times" of below the cost of production... BUT farm managers will keep growing that commodity at those levels, because the "risk" of complete failure has been removed through "guaranteed" bailout programs. Can't make this or that "investment" pay for itself? That's OK... We've got a program that'll "redistribute" some wealth in your direction, so that you CAN put in something that otherwise just doesn't make any economic sense whatsoever. And then you can and will grow us this commodity that we want to buy cheap... always... and forever. And if you find that you still can't make a profit at it, even though we bought you infrastructure that you otherwise couldn't have justified and paid for on its own merits, well, don't worry, we'll redistribute even more wealth, so that you will at least come in somewhere close to poverty level subsistence. In government you can trust! After all, it's all just "funny money" anyway. We'll just add it onto the national debt, and your grandkids and their kids can worry about how to pay it all back. No problem!

You know the old joke... "Why do they always bury a farmer in a shallow grave? ......So he can get his hand-out". Do we want to be working for a minimal subsistence welfare check, or do we want to be working smartly, and economically efficiently... for ourselves, and receiving a paycheck equal in equity to the real societal value of the product that we're producing? What's more "valuable", good high-quality food on the table, or "SquishMellows" (or any of the other ridiculous material vanity goods of the day that people are clamoring over... like "designer handbags" or "designer clothes", etc.). Obviously, much of our society currently values those kinds of things much more than they do their food, because it's reflected in the fact that they're not willing to pay the true cost of production for their food, but they're completely willing to pay WAY more than the true value of the cost of production for so many other goods... So the government has to step in, and take some of their (and our) $$$ and then "pay them out" (redistribution of wealth) to the commodity producers, just to keep them willing to produce, at farm-gate prices below the cost of production... "We'll give you a [small] carrot, if you'll just keep working for nothing for us, OK?" And now the farmer becomes dependent upon and beholden to those who will continue sending them a welfare check. Great way to keep control over you!

Struck a nerve? Yup, sure did.

Do we want to always HAVE TO have a job in town in addition to working full time on the farm, and be taking a welfare check besides, because our society has been conditioned to not have to actually pay producers what their true cost of production is for their food? This is a messed up world we are living in!

 

[Rancher]

Ag Central on the list for Allen is my local co-op, I will definitely check with them.

I get the self funded stuff. We all have to find our own way. I couldn't do a lot of what I'm doing without Soil Conservation and I'm glad to take advantage of begging farmer funding.

could try a "go fund me" keeps the gov. out of things

 

[mwj]

It sounds like no one on this board has ever taken advantage of a tax break or any other ''help'' that the government has available to all that qualify. Does Ky. still help pay for a better bull from the tobacco
settlement money?


Look back and see how many times we advise new folks to have a way to confine there animals safely! What do we now believe is suitable? More power to the folks starting out and I hope they enjoy and they learn plenty along the way. I am glad they do not have to snub there stock to a tree for health care.