I get the food part.
Pure rodeo stock is not agriculture production. It's entertainment.
Same as cow dogs vs the mutts laying around the house.
Sustainable Agriculture?
- Thread starter Logan52
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Pure rodeo stock is not agriculture production. It's entertainment.
Same as cow dogs vs the mutts laying around the house.
greybeard
Well-known member
What????
No Whataburger in your county?
(I couldn't live like dat)
Travlr
Well-known member
Well maybe someone else will chime in. I'd like to know the differences and how they will affect all kinds of future markets.I don't have those answers. I've eaten some kind of Brahman X my whole life but it was ground beef to raise kids on, not really graded steaks.
From what I am seeing the American Brahman breeders are moving toward beef quality like every one else. They have feed programs, they scan animals, etc like every other breed. From what I see and hear, most the publications you see on Brahman cattle are not up to date and will become more and more out of date as each year passes.
Some thing to always remember, you can get most animals to grade with enough corn. It's not about will they grade... it's the cost to get them there. There is a big misconception that certain breeds will never grade. My understanding is that is not the case, they just require more to get there.
I would bet Brahman type cattle are feeding more people in the world than Angus.
RDFF
Well-known member
Yup... it's started in your county then too... and it will only continue to get worse, unless somebody does something to prevent it with regulations. Again... I HATE more regulation... but without them, there IS no way to prevent it... and maybe you just don't care... or don't really want to "prevent it"... Maybe it IS inevitable (or "bound to happen sooner or later" as you stated). But can you visualize what kind of a world we'll have left then in 40-50 years? You can't change that image THEN.... if you're going to change it, you have to do that NOW, before what we want it to be in the future is lost.
This is gonna take foresight............ not reaction in hindsight once we finally realize that we've already lost it. A society that no longer values its ability to produce its own food resource (preservation of the land resource for food production), is a society that is soon doomed to failure.
When the residents of a region think that their food comes from a store, and/or is grown "somewhere else" than in their backyard... and when they fail to VALUE preservation of the land in that region for food production, opting instead to place MORE value in it for housing developments and pure financial wealth.................... that is a people that are fast on their way to being that doomed society.
Last edited:
greybeard
Well-known member
Emphasis on 'pure', meaning that's all they raise.I get the food part.
Pure rodeo stock is not agriculture production. It's entertainment.
Same as cow dogs vs the mutts laying around the house.
And that's where the county CAD has to make a determination.
I know next to nothing about raising rodeo stock But, lets say a guy raises 20 rodeo bulls and only a few of them make the cut for bucking stock, and the rest go to sale for butcher. Is he predominantly producing an ag product?
TdJ
Well-known member
This might be one of my top 10 threads I've read on the forum, great discussion. I'm a number of years from having to figure the hobby/mid-size/pro question, should start dropping claves mid year with a goal to limit my ranch to 3 acres per cow. Great summary of how to differentiate btw!
As for developments and wind farms/solar, slowly happening in my county but far enough away that it'll take some time to get to my. Will hold on until my neighbors start selling then follow suite / move somewhere else, or may be dead before it happens. In the mean time I'm going to ranch, eat meat, drink beer and enjoy not having a television.
As for developments and wind farms/solar, slowly happening in my county but far enough away that it'll take some time to get to my. Will hold on until my neighbors start selling then follow suite / move somewhere else, or may be dead before it happens. In the mean time I'm going to ranch, eat meat, drink beer and enjoy not having a television.
greybeard
Well-known member
I'm gonna get off in the weeds here a little.
The title of this thread is "sustainable agriculture'...
A farmer raises his own beef, his own pork, his own poultry and eggs and a big garden that thru home canning produces enough vegs for the year, plus has his own water well and he takes good care of the little plot of land that does all this. And he has done so most of his adult life.
Is that 'sustainable farming'?
I know 2 families that do this.
Neither quals in Texas for an ag exemption because it falls under consumption, (and too little acreage) yet just a couple/3 decades before I was born, a great % of American farms were just like this..
If they can show revenue from selling bulls for beef I would say they are good.
I see it a lot more with these horses that are never allowed in a pasture.
Most the bull people and probably even roping steers sell some back in to the beef market.
That's another example of a faulty system, imo, but I bet the huge farming lobby got a hold of that one.
You may starve to death but at least you will save a farmer.
Rafter S
Well-known member
Speaking of ag exemption, I lost a good rent pasture because the owner found out he could get the same tax advantage by letting it go wild and designating it a wildlife habitat.
Ouachita
Well-known member
My wife designated our place wildlife habitat years ago, in a "I'm Gonna Hire a Wino" sorta way. I don't think we get an advantage on our taxes unless we have Bible study at our house.
RDFF
Well-known member
Well, I'd say that THAT SHOULD qualify as "sustainable farming" personally. As far as taxes go, here in MN we get taxed on "house + 1 acre" the same as other residential property. The rest of the building site in the country, if your qualified ag, is taxed at the ag rate.
My concern isn't nearly so much with that small "sustain my own household" kind of individual use, as much as it is with all the "sell off a bunch of 5 acre plots, put .75 mil houses on it with a 4+ car garage and a big pole shed/shop that you fill with 4 wheelers and a couple SxS's, a boat, several snowmobiles, new little toy tractor with AC'd cab and loader, belly mower, rear end finishing mower, too big a brush hog, and a play dig backhoe as ornaments... and maybe a pasture ornament horse or two kept in a white vinyl board fence.
That's not "ag use", it's high end residential subdivision use, and subdividing "ag protection disctrict land" to sell for this kind of stuff shouldn't be the way we go, IMO. Not sure just how one would properly go about differentiating between the two though, if they're both on "small plots"....
Thing is, what's done to date is done... we need to be concerned about further subdividing for residential uses. That won't happen if we agree to stop or further restrict by "ordinance" (regulation) the number of "NEW subdivisions of land that can qualify for residential development" in the ag district. Existing residences can (and in all likelihood would be) "grandfathered in".... so the small farmer that you described, if he was looking to find a place to START farming in the way you described, would have to find an already existing building site to locate on... he wouldn't be able to "set up shop that way" by buying a newly subdivided parcel off of a larger "ag parcel" to create his NEW building site. THAT would prevent the FURTHER encroachment of residential uses, and more residences and an increasing residential density/sq. mi., into the ag protection district.
For all those farmers/ranchers that have been counting on this "PROPERTY VALUE because of potential residential uses" of their property though as they approach retirement (or who currently use it as equity to borrow against to further their agricultural business), enacting a change in policy and placing laws like this into effect would "devalue" their land asset... is that "fair" to them?
My opinion... but then, my opinion doesn't really count for much..........
Last edited:
I go on some of the places designated for wildlife and conservation. If it's going to be a park I understand but otherwise it's a lot of upkeep and truthfully it hurts it more than it helps. At no point in our planets history were animals not grazing across the grass. I understand having super conservative numbers but not zero. From what I have seen the wildlife is worse for it.
callmefence
Keyboard cowboy
I agree with brute on this.
Enough corn will fix almost anything.
RDFF
Well-known member
Tdj... it's that "moving somewhere else" after selling out that becomes the problem... not intending to "slam" you for it though... it's what it is right now... can't hold it against you for taking advantage of the "opportunities" that lie in front of you. Why though would you choose to move somewhere else? Most likely because as an agriculturalist, you wouldn't want to have to live in the very conditions that YOU have just created/contributed to. Too many people, too many houses, too much traffic, TOO HARD TO FARM, too..............
So you take advantage of what is being allowed, and then get the heck out of there, taking your "advantage of opportunity" with you (residential development $$$ value from what was ag property), and use those advantage $$$ to be able to "outbid" the farmer next door that has to farm the value out of the land to justify it and make it pay its way. Fair enough, right? Who could fault you for it, right? It's a free country, right?
So what's to prevent that same thing from happening everywhere, including where you might want to buy your next farm, when you sell out here and move 'cause you no longer "like the neighborhood"? This country is only getting smaller.... commutes for workers are only getting longer... and already, we've got to expand rural WI-FI into the rural areas because people have moved out there that want to work from home, etc. This technology will only serve to exacerbate this issue of residential land use in the ag zone.
We each have to ask ourselves, "Are we going to be a part of the problem, or are we going to be willing to be a part of the solution"? BOTH CHOICES HAVE SERIOUS LONG TERM CONSEQUENCES.
TdJ
Well-known member
Fair point and you hit the nail on the head. There's a lot to consider. I'm going to see how things play out, focus on what I can control and hope that I bought in the one place far enough away from the city that only country folks like me want to live!
hurleyjd
Well-known member
Definitions: Sustainability and Food Systems
Sustainability There are many definitions of sustainable development, most of which incorporate the notion that true sustainability must balance economic, social and environmental dimensions. USDA bases its approach to agricultural sustainability on two definitions, both of which incorporate the...
www.usda.gov
greybeard
Well-known member
That's sure me now. I buy everything I eat.
I'm supporting 'somebody somewhere'....
BFE
Well-known member
Whew doggies! I've found the advantage to living in Illinois, finally. Well, the southern end at least. We don't have the ag exemption tax problems to deal with, even though taxes are going up. Nobody is moving into Illinois, only problem we have with out of staters is during deer season, and so far that's been no problem here locally.
I guess there are advantages to living in communities that are drying up and blowing away! Heck, even the meth problem is better than it was 20 years ago.
Ground is getting so high it's hard to pay for unless you have quite a bit already to back it with. The big farmers will make it nearly impossible for everyone else within 10 more years.
I guess there are advantages to living in communities that are drying up and blowing away! Heck, even the meth problem is better than it was 20 years ago.
Ground is getting so high it's hard to pay for unless you have quite a bit already to back it with. The big farmers will make it nearly impossible for everyone else within 10 more years.
crossbreed
Well-known member
Not sure about the Brahma but we use longhorn/char cross for all our beef. Feed out 110 days and try to process at 24 months. Not as much marbling as you would expect but everything else is excellent and burgers you throw on come out same size. We won't do different
