You are viewing the Center for Rural Affairs newsletter archive for 2002-2006.
Visit the current newsletter and recent archive pages.
Visit the Center for Rural Affairs Home Page.

Polling on public policy options is rarely as clear and convincing as in this study. But the story here is not about polling numbers. The story is that rural Americans already know that farm program payments that are unlimited are not just expensive; they are destructive to family farms and rural communities.

Mega farms use unlimited farm subsidies to bid up cash rents and land prices, driving smaller operations out of business and denying the next generation of family farmers access to the land they need to get started. As the number of farms decline, so does economic opportunity and every other measure of rural community well-being. This is not progress. We can do better than this.

If our Senators and Representatives stand up for rural America and implement effective payment limitations, rural America will stand with them. Americans, rural and urban alike, want to support family farms and rural communities. They want to invest in conservation and in making sure that children do not go hungry.

Martin Luther King said, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” When you read this Congress will be returning to Washington, preparing to make their stark choice about rural America. Call them, right now – 202.224.3121 – ask the operator to connect you, ask your Representative and Senators to stop the mega payments to mega farms and invest in family farmers, rural communities, and kids. If you’ve called before, call again. Stand up, speak out, and make your voice heard for rural America.

Contact: John Crabtree, johnc@cfra.org or 402.687.2103 x 1010 for more information.

New Study Shows Estate Tax Not a Burden to American Farmers
Only a very few farms would face the estate tax, according to a study of IRS data by the CBO

A new report by the Congressional Budget office (CBO) dispels the notion that the estate tax is a burden to the nation’s farms, forcing them to sell their farms to pay the tax. In fact, exceedingly few farms will face the tax under the new exemption levels established by law in 2001.

The study, “Effects of the Federal Estate Tax on Farms and Small Businesses” was published in July. Analysts used tax returns from 1999 and 2000 to examine the effects of freezing the exemption level at $1.5 million, $2.0 million, or $3.5 million.

They found that under the $1.5 million exemption level – the current level – only 300 farm estates nationwide would have owed any estate tax in 2000. At the $2 million exemption level scheduled to take effect in 2006, only 123 farm estates would have owed estate taxes. The number dropped to 65 taxable farm estates in 2000 under the 2009 exemption level of $3.5 million.

Not only were few farms effected by the estate tax, those that were generally had enough liquid assets in 2000 to pay the tax without selling the farm. At a $2 million exemption, only 15 farm estates would have owed more in taxes than they could cover through their liquid assets. At a $3.5 million exemption, 13 farms would have faced that situation.

CBO cautions that it may have overstated the number of farm estates with liquidity constraints because certain assets held in trusts, like life insurance, were not used to calculate available assets. Estates with liquidity problems would also have had other options for paying the estate tax, such as spreading their payments out over 14 years. These would have allowed them to pay the tax without having to sell off farm assets.

For the purposes of their study, the CBO analysts defined a farm estate as one where the primary occupation of the decedent was farmer or farm worker. You can view the study on the Congressional Budget Office website, http://www.cbo.gov 

With Congressional representatives back in Washington and faced with difficult budget cuts, these findings only strengthen the arguments in favor of keeping the estate tax. It brings in needed revenue that could help support programs that create opportunities for farmers, ranchers, small business owners, and rural communities. And that’s not money from those who can ill afford to pay it.

Contact: Chuck Hassebrook, chuckh@cfra.org or 402.687.2103 x 1018.

Local Culture Sets Blueprint for the Future
Diversity in history and culture defines our future in rural areas

Last month I wrote an article dealing with rural America. My analysis of communities and people concluded there was no such thing as rural America. Each rural community contributes to this great average we call rural America, but no one place fits the image we have made up.

I have also written extensively about rural culture, what it may look like, and how we must recognize the traits and assets that make up rural culture. There is really no such thing as one rural culture that describes rural people and their communities. Literally millions of local blueprints combine to make the composite of rural culture.

Wendell Berry wrote that local culture defines our existence. It is who we are. Local culture is the stories that are told and the memories that guide us through our future.

Communities must build upon these stories. The history of our communities describes how “place” was used and gives us knowledge to gain from our past. Lacking a local culture leaves rural communities wide open to be exploited and ultimately destroyed by economic and impersonal forces.

The county fairs during the month of August are a great reminder of the value of local culture. What is the purpose of these local fairs? The main intrinsic value is to tell our stories within our community. We even give ribbons to the best “storytellers.”

If this notion seems vague or hard to understand, look around you and the objects that surround you. Does each one of these objects tell a story of how it got there? I am willing to guess that they do and that there is meaning to them. The same is true for local cultures in a community.

Dr. Cornelia Flora has often written how important social capital is – progress and development cannot truly occur without it. We are only as good as our people. The only way that we are going to survive as a nation is to turn to the country and our rural roots to show us the way. It is not about bigger and better, rather it is all about defining what better actually means.

Contact: Michael L. Holton, michaellh@cfra.org or 402.687.2103 x 1015 for information.

Sign up for our new weekly “Rural Community Revitalization Conversation” with Michael Holton, premiering this month. The conversation will take place on the Center’s web log, http://www.cfra.blogspot.com  Send an email to michaellh@cfra.org to indicate your interest and/or visit the blog and participate.

Building Strong Communities with Environmental Partnerships
Environmental pioneers are transforming rural Appalachia through civic engagement and reclamation of local watersheds

The Appalachian coal country, a region stretching from Pennsylvania to Alabama and once bustling with prosperous coal company towns, is now too often the scene of environmental desolation and economically abandoned communities. Trains no longer bring commerce and people to the region: rail beds lay rusted and unused next to mountains of waste coal and orange-stained streams, acid mine drainage (AMD) seeping from abandoned mines.

This metals-laden water essentially smothers all life in a stream, emblematic of the slow death of too many rural coal communities. But while one can find much despair in the hills of Appalachia, one can also find hope in its communities; hope to restore watersheds and prosperity to the region.

Seeing this challenge and this opportunity, the Office of Surface Mining Clean Streams Program (OSM) formed a partnership with AmeriCorps/VISTA (Volunteers In Service To America) in 2001. In just three short years, the Appalachian Coal Country Watershed Team (ACCWT) expanded to 30 full-time OSM/VISTAs serving in 8 states.

They are pioneers in the environmental frontier, combining the science needed to clean up local streams with civic engagement to build strong community assets. The ACCWT strives to strengthen local watershed groups by recruiting volunteers and fostering public awareness about environmental issues.

These dedicated advocates work to build sustainable programs in rural communities, and they are succeeding. Since 2002, they have recruited over 5,000 volunteers who contributed 60,000 hours of time, raised nearly two million dollars of in-kind services, and secured one million dollars in grants. Recently, one OSM/VISTA negotiated an agreement between a railroad and her watershed group that will provide one million dollars for AMD reclamation.

For its efforts, the team was awarded the Department of the Interior Environmental Achievement Award (2004). As watersheds transition from orange creeks to sustainable watersheds, we begin to see the successes of the ACCWT and the transformation of rural Appalachia.

To find out more, see www.americorps.org/vista/index/html 

Contributed by: AMD&ART, Inc; for more information, see www.amdandart.org 

Corporate Farming Notes
Monsanto seeks pig patents; appeals court upholds captive supply decision; mad cow disease violations found by inspectors

>> The biotechnology corporation Monsanto recently filed patent applications for expansive patent rights to pigs. Monsanto spokesman Chris Horner was quoted as saying, “We applied for a patent ... for some specific reproductive processes in swine. Any pigs that would be produced using this reproductive technique would be covered by these patents.”

The patents would cover the identification of genes naturally found in pigs that result in desirable traits in swine, the breeding of animals to achieve those traits, and the use of a specialized device to inseminate sows.

Monsanto seeks to extend the patent to offspring in which the traits are found or which were bred using the specified techniques. Critics say that Monsanto is trying to lay claim to practices already used along with natural genetic selection to control a greater share of pork production.

>> On August 16, 2005, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a decision on the Pickett v. Tyson Fresh Meats appeal. A jury found for the cattle producers in February 2004, awarding $1.28 billion in damages in the class action. They found that Tyson (IBP) had used captive supplies to diminish competition and manipulate price in cattle markets.

The jury’s decision was subsequently overturned by the Alabama District Court that originally heard the case. That decision was appealed to the Eleventh Circuit, which affirmed the District Court in overturning the jury’s decision.

Tyson argued, and the Courts agreed, that they needed captive supplies to gain a consistent supply of cattle and that this need provided “justification” for their use of captive supplies. The Packers & Stockyards Act, under which this case was brought, prohibits price manipulation and other unfair practices but does not provide for justification of those practices.

>> From January through May 2004, inspectors found 1,036 violations of rules aimed at preventing mad cow disease from reaching humans. Meatpackers must remove brains, spinal cords, and other nerve parts – which can carry mad cow disease – from cows slaughtered at over 30 months of age. No contaminated meat went to consumers, and the number of violations was less than one percent of all meatpacker citations, the USDA stated.

Contact: John Crabtree at 402.687.2103 x 1010 or johnc@cfra.org 

Administrative Director Becomes College Professor

In August we bid farewell to Gerard Ras. Gerard came to the Center in 1999 and took over the position of Administrative Director from Center co-founder Don Ralston in 2000. Those were big shoes to fill, and Gerard was ever mindful of Don’s legacy at the Center.

A former auditor, Gerard performed outstanding work as the Center’s chief financial officer. Nonprofit accounting is his specialty, and he instituted numerous safeguards on our accounting procedures long before the Enron scandal made them universally required.

Gerard was active with the Granary board, which oversees the Center’s endowment fund. He worked with the board and other investment advisers to lead us into a more active role as shareholder advocates on behalf of the Center’s mission.

Perhaps as important, Gerard led his administrative team to greater professional recognition and achievements. Several of his responsibilities are being assumed by current administrative staff – Hayley Hallstrom is our new chief accountant and Tris Darnell is our chief technology officer. Amber Bridges and Kim Kaup have eagerly accepted new challenges as well.

We’re happy to say Gerard hasn’t gone far. He has joined the faculty of the Business and Technology School at Wayne State College in Wayne, Nebraska, fulfilling a dream to pass his knowledge on to other young minds. We wish him the best!

Advice on How to Find an Affordable Place on the Land
We were asked, “How do you to find good land at an affordable price?” This letter in response gives several options to explore

Dear Land Seeker,

Congratulations on trying to find a place on the land. It can be a good place to raise a family and a satisfying way to live. As you know, you can also expect a lot of work.

Land access is the biggest issue for beginning farmers, which you might be. I’m not familiar with the land issues around your area, but I can suggest some general ideas.

There are some land matching sources, such as our Land Link program, that put a retiring and beginning farmer together. If the landowner is properly motivated, a land contract can be developed that benefits both the buyer and seller. Our website has some examples: Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunities You’ll find a lot of information on that page and under Related Links.

You will want to look into the conventional sources of land, such as real estate listings in the area. If the realtors know what you’re looking for, they can keep you in mind. Check into the USDA Farm Service Agency for beginning farmer loans. If you qualify, the rates are reasonable.

Your state might also have an ‘aggie bond’ program that gives tax benefits to landowners or homeowners selling to beginners as an incentive to lower the price or take a risk on a beginner. Bankers and realtors should know of such a program in your area.

Another source of land may be defaulted farms. A while back, FSA had quite a few repossessed ‘inventory’ farms that were hard for them to sell. Some had restrictive wildlife easements that made the land unappealing to farmers, so the prices were low. But so was the earning power of the land since some of it could not be farmed.

Several analysts have suggested that you can be either a landowner or a farmer, but you can’t pay for both from the land’s earnings. They suggest that you either rent the land while you build equity or you buy the land with money made off-farm.

One option, if you can secure off-farm jobs, is to buy land enrolled in USDA reserve programs, such as Wetlands Reserve or Conservation Reserve. Those programs pay a rental fee for 10-15 years for land to be set aside, and the rent usually will make the land payments.

If you’re competing with city commuters for land an hour out, you’ll have to work /really/ hard to find something acceptable. But if the area is largely rural, you stand a better chance of getting onto land of your own. Or land to use as your own.

If your land acquisition involves moving, you’ll face other challenges. Neither my wife nor I are from this rural area, so we’re experiencing the nuances of building relationships in a close-knit rural area. The key for you will be relationships.

Most land in rural areas changes hands by word-of-mouth, and by the time a realtor is involved, it’s a done deal. Getting to know several people in the area you’re targeting, and letting people know you’re looking will net you some leads once people know a little about you.

One beginner who was successful at getting land put ads in the paper and treated each response as a job interview, finally nailing a farm lease that included all the machinery, land, facilities, and dairy cows while the owner was away for three years.

Along that vein, you might consider being a caretaker for a property. You would get paid something (if only free rent) but would have the run of the property and could have access to a portion for your own use. Search the Internet for caretaker opportunities; I recall a job-listing newsletter specifically for that some 15 years ago.

Some farms also want apprentices; some are more than a seasonal opportunity. ATTRA -- http://www.attra.org  800.346.9140 -- has a national listing of internships and apprenticeships.

You may well find land without a house. Unfortunately, as farms get larger, fewer farmhouses are needed on that land. The houses are often sold off or moved. You could locate a house that could be moved to your location for a fraction of the cost of a new house.

To help pay for whatever land you find, you might consider a market garden. There is a growing consumer demand for locally grown produce, meat, and other foods. Most cities now have thriving farmers’ markets and many are surrounded by ‘subscription’ farms or ‘Community Supported Ag’ farms where customers prepay early in the year for a guaranteed portion of the year’s harvest. Twenty-five to 100 subscribers can support a farmer in this way and share in the risk or bounty of the crop year. Ask ATTRA for more information on CSAs or farmers markets and direct marketing.

Best wishes on your search,

Wyatt Fraas, Center for Rural Affairs
402.254.6893, wyattf@cfra.org 

Military Injury Leads to New Career for this Veteran

Due to a back injury while serving in the military, Keri York finds CranioSacral massage therapy works for her. From her experience with chronic pain, she became interested in learning the skills of a therapist and going into business for herself in the small town of Fairbury, Nebraska.

After massage therapy school, Keri rented space for a salon from a chiropractor, and then tried working from home when her husband Shane was called into military duty to Bosnia. Operating this business from her home just didn’t pan out, and Keri took a job 80 miles away.

After about a year driving back and forth to work and trying to take care of her family and household, she was drawn back into the idea of having her own shop for massage therapy. It especially became more of a reality when she found an old building in town with a reasonable purchase price.

So in the fall of 2004, the Yorks gutted the old building and started making it into a new massage therapy office. Shane and Keri thought they would do most of the renovations themselves. After they got into the work, they learned that Shane would have to go to Iraq in early 2005.

With the help of his military company and friends, they completed the work on the shop with just a week to spare before Shane would leave again for at least a year. Since Therapeutic Dimensions opened the new doors for business, Keri has had only one day off in months!

REAP Women’s Business Center Director Glennis McClure assisted Keri with her business plan, and REAP made a loan to help fix up the building. In April, Keri received one of nine Women and Company Microenterprise Boost Program cash equity awards from REAP, the Center’s rural small business development program.

Keri is using part of the equity award to pay for continuing education hours in learning the next level of CranioSacral Therapy. She purchased Massage Office Pro software to help stay organized with client information, appointments, and inventory.

The greatest reward for Keri is the help and pain relief that some of her customers experience. Taking care of their little four-year-old Haley and running the business keeps Keri York busy most days. When Shane isn’t serving our country overseas, he’s a deputy sheriff.

Keri likes to read and was recently asked by the mayor to sit on the LB840 Citizen’s Advisory Committee. She volunteers as a massage therapy trainer during the Lincoln Marathon and presents programs for the local hospital wellness program.

Find more information about REAP and the Women’s Business Center 

Contact: Glennis McClure at 402.645.3296 or by email at reapwbc@diodecom.net with any questions.

Essay: Strong Leadership Can Refocus USDA Spending

U.S. House Agriculture Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte’s visit to Nebraska demonstrated the importance of strong, determined leadership from rural members of Congress.

Goodlatte said that the exodus of people from the rural heartland was beneficial in fueling the growth of the national economy. In a stunning twist of logic, he suggested free enterprise would be violated by limitations on government subsidies to mega farms. The Virginian proclaimed that the Midwest had lost the fight over payment limitations in the farm bill and should not attempt to reopen it.

There are two ways to respond to the Chairman – give up and go home or take it as a call to action. We choose the latter.

When Congress returns to Washington this month (September), the first order of business will be cutting $3 billion from the USDA budget. The outcome will affect all rural Americans.

Congress has two choices. It can cut programs that offer a future to rural America – rural development, family farm, and conservation programs – and programs that provide food to poor kids. Or it can cap payments to mega farms, a win-win solution that would both save money and strengthen family farms.

There is no doubt where citizens stand. A July Kellogg Foundation poll found that voters in Iowa, Kansas, and Minnesota favor farm program payment limitations by margins of more than two-to-one over cutting conservation, rural development, and nutrition programs or reducing payments to family farms. Those sentiments ran strongest among farmers and Republicans, who expressed a strong inclination to vote for supporters of payment limitations and against those who cut elsewhere.

Nonetheless, payment limitations have been blocked by southern policymakers willing to go to any extreme to get their way. To overcome that, policymakers from family farm regions must take an equally determined stand.

Chuck Grassley is providing determined leadership in the Senate. If an equally strong leader stepped forward in the House, the tide would turn. Many House members voice timid support but fail to demonstrate the courage of their convictions. Iowan Jim Nussle is in a particularly strong position to step forward as House Budget Committee Chair, but to date has joined Chairman Goodlatte in opposing “reopening the farm bill.”

Don’t be fooled by that line. Chairman Goodlatte explained that his definition of reopening the farm bill does not prohibit across-the-board cuts in payments to family farmers or cuts in rural development, conservation, and nutrition programs. It just precludes changing the rules of the farm program. Translation: Cut family farms, rural communities, poor kids, and conservation to keep the mega payments flowing to mega farms.

It’s time for those who want to represent us to do so – to say no, not now, not ever. It’s time for them to stop going along to get along with the destruction of family farming and our communities. It’s time for each of us to demand it.

Agree or disagree? Send your opinions or comments to Chuck Hassebrook, chuckh@cfra.org 

Editor: Marie Powell