The Ruminant: Audio Candy for Farmers, Gardeners and Food Lovers - Big Chicken, Indebted Farmers

Episode Date: September 17, 2022

The US chicken industry is dominated by just a few very large, vertically integrated companies. They directly control every stage of chicken production from hatching to distribution, except that they outsource the riskiest stage--raising the birds from chick to mature bird--to independent farmers. In this episode, guest Patti Anderson of the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future describes this system, explains how it traps many farmers in debt, and tells us about the most recent effort to make the system more just for farmers.After that: the farmer questionnaire!Some links related to the chicken conversation and the proposed rule changes:Patti suggests this blog post for a summary of the rule changesA recent op-ed in Civil Eats about the tournament systemHere's an official summary of the proposed rule-changes

I'm Jordan Marr, and this is The Ruminant, a podcast about food politics and food security and the cultural and practical aspects of farming. You can find out more at theruminant.ca or email me, editor at theruminant.ca. I'm on Twitter at ruminantblog or find me on Facebook. All right, let's do a show. blog, or find me on Facebook. All right, let's do a show. Hey everyone, it's Jordan. Today we're going to take a look at the chicken industry in the United States. My guest for this episode is Patti Anderson. My name is Patti Anderson, and I'm the Senior Program Officer in Food Systems Policy at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. I also teach a course at the Johns Hopkins

Bloomberg School of Health on public health communication. And I see my career as being at the intersection of translating research into better public health policy and better communication about why public health is important. Lately, one way I've been producing episodes of this show is to search for people doing interesting work in the food and farming realm and invite them on the show to talk about whatever they like. This is how I connected with Patty, and when she accepted the invitation, she suggested we discuss unfair practices in the chicken contracting industry in the U.S. and how this system hurts many farmers. And that's just what we did. Coming right up, you'll hear our conversation. After that, the ruminant segment you've been thinking about taking home to meet your parents. It's the farmer questionnaire.

All right, here's my conversation with Patti Anderson. Patti Anderson, thanks a lot for joining me on the ruminant podcast. Thanks so much for having me, Jordan. Patti, could you start by telling us about the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future and your specific role there? Sure. So the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future and your specific role there? Sure. So the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future is an academic center based at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore. And we apply science and systems thinking to help build healthy and equitable and resilient food systems. So we've been around since 1996, and we've studied the environmental and public health impacts of food animal production practices in particular. And my role here is as a senior program officer in our food systems policy program.

And to dwell on the Center for a Livable Future for just another moment or two, can you give us an example or an idea of like some work that those folks have done in the recent past or, you know, that kind of got you excited about that organization or just that was felt particularly meaningful or effective as far as like policy changes or other work that they've pursued? Absolutely. I think that CLF has done work at the local level in Baltimore all the way up to kind of global involvement with the United Nations and the climate change work of the United Nations. So CLF has really kind of tackled some of the most pressing issues

in the food system, whether it be the way we raise animals for food, the impacts of seafood, the different types of diets that people eat around the world and potential impacts on climate change associated with those. And, you know, part of what the center was founded on is not just doing research for the sake of research, but helping to translate and implement the findings of those research into evidence-based policies. Very cool. Very cool. All right. Well, Patty, you and I are going to talk about the poultry production sector in the United States and some rule changes that the USDA is currently considering that would affect how the contracts between poultry producers and poultry processors are structured. And I'd like to start our conversation by asking you to just describe the mainstream chicken sector in the United States. Can you tell us how it's currently structured, who the main players are, and maybe summarize the chain of production from start to finish? Sure, absolutely.

So in the United States, the chicken industry has become really highly consolidated. So just four companies, JBS, Tyson, Purdue, and Sanderson comprise more than half of the chicken market in the United States. And about 95% of chicken production in the U.S. from broiler chicken is produced via the contract farming model. So essentially, these companies are contracting out to farmers around the country, and the farmers sign on to contracts with these companies to raise the chicken. So essentially the integrators or the large poultry companies will supply the farmers with certain inputs.

They supply them with the feed for the chickens. They supply them with the chicks themselves. And they set standards for how the chicken houses must be constructed and various aspects of that. And so the farmer's job is to raise the chicks for about six to seven weeks. And then the integrators will come and pick up the full grown chickens and process them into the chicken that you will find at the grocery store. and process them into the chicken that you will find at the grocery store. And so the farmers around the country, the chicken contract farmers,

are people who see opportunity in this process, but we've really seen that the integrators have really set up this system to give themselves control for every aspect of the process that has value and leave the farmers, leave the contract farmers responsible for the debt, maintaining the chicken houses, maintaining, getting rid of the land and taking out mortgages on those things. And they're responsible for doing any upgrades that the company dictates. So that's an overall summary of kind of what the system looks like. like classic vertical integration where these large companies control and own every single aspect of the production chain except the raising from chicks to mature they've they've they've they've sliced out that one part and perhaps you know perhaps because it's one of the riskiest parts of the chain. Absolutely. It's risky and it's not as profitable. So they've managed to control their costs by really integrating, vertically integrating this system. But from what we've heard from a lot of farmers and a lot of the complaints that we've seen over the years, it often does not work out very well for the farmers themselves. Right. And just to really zoom in for a second. So for example, they own

the hatcheries that breed and hatch the chicks that get sent to their contractor farms. They own the feed mills that purchase and process the feed that goes out to those farms. And then they own the processing, slaughter, and distribution all the way to the retail shelves. It's just the raising. These contract farmers receive these chicks. They raise them for six, seven, eight weeks. And then these big companies that we'll be referring to often as integrators come and pick up the birds, and that closes off a contract. Absolutely. So in our email exchange, Patty, like ahead of

this interview, you described a chicken contracting industry that traps farmers in debt. Can you expand on that a little bit? Can you expand on that a little bit? Absolutely. So as I mentioned before, and as you really summarized very well, you know, the chicken companies, the integrators, they own most of the aspects of the process that have value. And so if a farmer is wanting to get into chicken contract farming and sign on, they're required to invest a lot of money into this. We know that creating a chicken house costs hundreds of thousands of dollars, just one house, and they may often build three or four or five or six houses on their property. So they're investing likely upwards of a million dollars plus whatever they owe on the property themselves or itself.

They also have to maintain any upgrades that the company demands that they may not really have much heads up on. So they get into the system and the integrators don't really give them a lot of guarantees to work with in terms of what their income is going to be. And they don't, you know, give them much of a basis to work off of to ensure that they're going to be able to pay off that debt. So, you know, it sounds good in the beginning to all the chicken farmers and they get into it and they realize that it's not really as it was sold to them. And so they kind of have to keep up on this treadmill of getting more and more chickens because they're not making much money off of each round of chickens that they raise. But yet if they don't have as many chicks or as many cycles of raising the chickens as they expect, then they're going to be out of luck and not be able to pay their bills. So from what we've heard from a lot of farmers who have been in this industry, that it's not what they intended when they got into it. And once they invest all this money in building the chicken houses and getting

everything up to standards, if they want to get out, they often have a really hard time getting out because these chicken houses are not really well suited to do anything else with. And so we find that when the chicken farmers get into this industry, they may not want to stay in, but then they're kind of stuck due to the debt cycle and the fact that there's a lot of costs and not a lot of profits on their end. Okay. So a farmer who perhaps has not been a contract chicken farmer in the past learns about this as an opportunity to make farm income. And on the surface, it can look like a good deal, you build a chicken house to the specifications of these large companies, and the companies are

holding out the promise of these these contracts. So you spend the hundreds of thousands of dollars it takes to build one house, one chicken house, and we can assume that a lot of times, that's going to be debt financed, Then they get involved in these contracts. And then here's a, you know, I'm just going to share a few of the things I read in preparation for this interview. The contracts are often not long-term. They're short-term contracts. Sometimes even the contract is just the duration of one hatch of chicks.

So it's not like the companies are committing to support long term which is one way that that um there's a power imbalance i guess in the relationship uh and they're not always there are aspects of the contracts that we're going to get into in a moment that that aren't very transparent but i guess the main idea is that because of the size of these companies, they hold a lot of the cards and a lot of the power. Like one thing I read is that it's estimated that about a quarter of contract cards only have one company to deal with in their area. So it's not like they can go to another chicken integrator and say, hey, can we work together? Does that all sound about right? Yes. And even if there is another integrator,

there are some areas where there might be two or three integrators. They're often going to be pretty similar terms. And, you know, we've seen a lot of lawsuits around manipulative behavior that the industry is engaged in. Last year, Tyson and Purdue had a $35 million settlement to a lawsuit alleging that the companies pushed farmers into debt and they locked in their compensation at unprofitably low rates. And so we've seen a lot of lawsuits that have come out around kind of collusion to keep prices low for the farmers themselves. And so, low for the farmers themselves. And so, you know, one, one thing we've also noted recently is from the chicken farmers we've talked to, they, they gross about 24 cents for each four pound bird they raise. That's just such a possibly tiny amount, but it has to cover their

labor, maintenance, fuel, electricity. Okay. So yeah, let's stop there. Let's stop there. I was just about to raise that so it's around six six cents a pound is the you know is the is the average now i think it's important to make one thing clear um i guess for for both chicken producers and non-chicken producers alike who are listening under these arrangements the companies the integrators they're supplying the chicks at their own cost and they're supplying the feed. And that's important because the feed makes up a very, very large percentage of the cost of raising a bird. So it's important to include that when we talk about the farmers only getting 24 cents a bird.

However, I just can't see anyone hearing 24 cents a bird, hearing that they don't have to pay for their feed and thinking, oh, that seems fair. It seems crazy to think that that's what raising a bird for one of these large companies is worth to a farmer or what they can expect. And as you point out, just about all the other costs they have to cover, including getting rid of the huge amount of waste that this type of production produces. Absolutely. It's really kind of unimaginable when you think about that, that you're raising these birds for, you know, maybe close to two months and 24 cents for each four pound bird, or however many pounds they end up being, you know, a sixth sense a pound. It's really unimaginable. Even when, you know, the chick themselves and the feed is not included in that price. We also know that even the industry group representing the integrators, the National Chicken Council,

they put out a report about chicken farmers, the chicken industry and the farmer's pay. And even they noted that the farmer's pay per pound of chicken went down 3% between 1990 and 2020 when it's adjusted for inflation. because the size of the number of chickens that you're raising has increased and you're kind of packing more chickens into a house that it makes up for that. But we've seen that in actuality, their pay per pound of chicken is going down over the past 30 years. So it's gotten tougher and tougher to be a chicken farmer. it's gotten tougher and tougher to be a chicken farmer. So, okay. So Patty, we're, we, we're going to zoom in even further on one aspect of these contracts and,

and it has to, that relates to how farmers are paid. It's something called tournament pricing, but I think I just want to do a little tangent or sidebar and say what sparked us to have this conversation. You, you suggested this topic. I reached out to you and said, it looks like you're doing lots of interesting work. Could we talk? And what would you like to talk about? And you suggested this topic. And it seems like one reason is currently the USDA via one of its agencies called the Agricultural Marketing Service is considering some rule changes to how these relationships and contracts work between these contract farmers and these large companies. And so there's currently an opportunity for the public to make comments via this agency

as they consider some rule changes. Do you want to talk a little bit about what's being considered at that agency? Sure. So there's a few things that are being considered by USDA and its Agriculture Marketing Service that's really been a long time coming. You know, we've heard that chicken farmers have really been talking about this for decades. There was a big meeting in 2010 with the Attorney General at that time where a lot of chicken farmers came out and talked about some of the issues that they were facing. So it's kind of circled back now where we've seen some action, and I think there's been momentum with some of the lawsuits that I mentioned around unfair practices, accusing the integrators of unfair practices.

So the USDA is starting to take this on and start to develop some rules that fall within the Packers and Stockyards Act, which was passed 100 years ago to ensure kind of fair markets in agriculture and in the meat sector. So I think that that's what the USDA is trying to do. They're trying to make some more rulemaking specific to the poultry industry under the Packards and Stockyards Act. And so the first thing they're doing is a proposed rule that they put out that's open for comment through August 23rd that's about transparency in poultry growing contracts and tournaments.

And so it essentially would require the poultry corporations and the integrators to more transparently and truthfully disclose information that growers need to make informed decisions about their contracts and better advocate for themselves. So we know it's kind of an imbalanced information system as it is now. The integrators will give information that's in their interest, but they have access to a lot of information about the inputs, like the feed and the chicks and other aspects of the business that essentially these are small business owners, the farmers themselves, and they don't have access to a lot of information that business owners in any other industry would have access to. And they have to make serious business decisions that affect their debt based on really incomplete information that the industry is purposefully not sharing with them.

And so that's a major problem that a lot of poultry growers have brought up. And last week I heard a poultry grower talk about this on a Facebook Live event that the Socially Responsible Agriculture Project held. And he got out of raising chickens, but he said if we knew what we know now or if this rule were in place when I was getting into the chicken industry and chicken farming, I would not have signed on the dotted line. There's no way I would have signed on the dotted line if I knew the information that they would have to disclose in this rule. And I can give you a little bit on specifically what they would have to share, if that's helpful. Yeah, but I think now let's dive over into tournament pricing, because I think it's going to relate to that part, you know, to what, what, what they're looking at. So, so this is just one other aspect of these contracts that can be really hard on these contract farmers. So can you describe what, how the tournament pricing model works, which is fairly common in these arrangements? Sure. So the tournament system

is a process for paying the chicken farmers that the industry came up with. And essentially what they do is they dock pay for farmers who had the most chickens that turned that feed into pounds of chicken. And instead of giving a bonus to the ones who did really well or giving them extra pay, they dock that pay from the farmers that rank low for that cycle. The problem with that is that the farmers don't control these inputs. They don't control the health and the quality of the chicks that they get or the quality of the feed or how sickly the chickens are. So there's a lot of inputs and a lot of factors that are totally outside the farmer's control. And even if they're a wonderful farmer who's doing all the right things,

they may still end up at the bottom of that tournament system and get pay docked and not be making the money that they thought they would be making because this is really set up as a cost control mechanism for the industry. And it's really something that's not, I haven't seen it in any other industry. And so it's something that's been a source of a lot of concern from folks watching the industry and farmers within the industry have kind of spoken out about it. Right. So just to review, if the average pay that a farmer's contract says they can expect is

$0.06 per pound, but they fall in the bottom three out of a group of 10 that are all from one region and all receive chicks at the same time, then they might get the bottom three out of a group of 10 that have, that are all from one region and all receive chicks at the same time, then they might get those bottom three. So, so the middle four might get 6 cents a pound. The bottom three might get 4.5 cents a pound. And the top three might get 7.5 cents a pound. That's how this,

that's how the tournament pricing works. And, and I think like on the surface, it, it doesn't have to be a bad system. If it's a fair playing field, like if I think about it, if it's, if it's really, truly just meant if, if, if you can really ensure that everyone's got the same type of feed and the same chicks and everyone feels they have the same conditions and it's just meant to be, I mean, it feels, I don't know, I guess it feels a bit harsh

instead of just paying a bonus to the best performers to take it from the worst performers. But I can see that it can also be viewed as a sort of incentive to be really good at producing chickens. But I would also think that as soon as you have an uneven playing field and you have these integrators with so much more power and control, it could be it could be used inappropriately. It could become a real cudgel. What if you've got what if you've got a contractor who complains too much or, you know, is is is trying to make change in the industry? is it possible i mean am i being is it a little far-fetched patty to think that oh maybe maybe they're going to get some poor feed on their unbeknownst to them on their next on their next batch or or like unhealthy chicks like is anyone accusing the integrators of that level of kind of

i don't know that's definitely been a common concern that there's been retaliation when farmers have spoken out about this. And if they don't keep quiet, that they might get inferior feed. They might not get a round of chickens. They may, because sometimes you mentioned the contracts are kind of cycle to cycle for flocks. They might not be given as many rounds of chicks. And so that affects their bottom line. And so certainly there's been a lot of concerns about intimidation and retaliation for farmers who speak out about this system. So even we've seen with this USDA comment period for these new rules,

the USDA even went so far as setting up an anonymous website where folks can enter in information. They can also enter information in the Federal Register anonymously. But a lot of farmers are still very concerned with this process and are afraid to speak out. And you can't really blame them because their bottom line and all their livelihood is really tied up in raising chickens, and they don't want to do anything a lot of times that's going to put that at risk, even if they know that the industry is not working in their best interest and actually actively working against them. So there's certainly a lot of concerns about the behavior of the integrators, concerns about the behavior of the integrators, both in the tournament system and, you know,

just overall in this contract farming system. All right. So I want to kind of summarize and then go back over to these proposed rule changes. So I'm a farmer who became convinced that building a chicken house and working with these large companies is a nice predictable source of income. building a chicken house and working with these large companies is a nice predictable source of income. Um, geez, I've got to make a big investment, but once I do, I'm going to have a guaranteed, uh, source of sales because it's the same company that's going to keep coming and picking up my birds, uh, batch after batch, after batch, after batch. So I invest, I spend the multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars to build one chicken house or more. Um, but then I discover once I spend the multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars to build one chicken house or more. But then I discover once I get in that I don't have a lot of security because these are very

short term contracts. There's not a lot of transparency. I don't have control over the chicks that the companies are sending or the feed they're sending. I now realize I'm in this tournament pricing model where if I can't compete with the best in my group, I'm going to be shorted. And, and also we didn't mention, um, I've read that like, if you place in the bottom too much, so they can just drop you as a contract farmer. Um, so there's, there's just like a lack of security, a lack of transparency and possible kind of bad faith behavior on these

large companies. Um, but meanwhile, I am absolutely trapped in debt. I have no other choice. And as, as one, as one chicken farmer was quoted in one of the papers that you sent for me to read, you know, chicken houses are good for one thing, raising chickens. Um, if you happen to be in an area with, with only one or two of the big companies, you don't have a lot of options. So it all just adds up to what sounds to me like a pretty unfair system. Absolutely. And that's what the hope is that the USDA is going to shed some more light on this and take some more steps to protect chicken farmers under the law and under the Packards and Stockyards Act. You know, I actually spoke to a former chicken farmer this morning, and he said that he has, I asked him if he was hopeful about this,

that things would finally be changing after being involved in this for a long time. And he said, you know, you got to have, you got to have hope. And he is hopeful this time that, that there will be more leverage for the, the chicken growers themselves, because, um, you know, it will level the playing field a bit more if the poultry companies have to do some of the things that this rule, uh, would require, like disclosing the number of flocks and the minimum number of chicks that they're going to get that they will get each year to raise so that they they don't have these promises that are unmet about about the income that they're going to have. So, you know, it's not this rule is not going to completely transform the system, but it will give some more leverage points and more transparency back to the chicken growers, which they really desperately need.

And it's something that they've been calling for for a long time. And so, in addition, we've also called for USDA to create a contract library. So we've seen this idea of a contract library used in cattle and in hog production. And essentially, it would just be a publicly available resource where farmers or anybody could go look and see what are the terms of the contracts, because the contract terms themselves are, they differ, they differ a bit and by the company or by the location. And if farmers could see what other contracts look like, they'd have a better leverage point for kind of getting themselves a fair deal. So more transparency around what these contracts look like would be a step in the right direction. If I read right, another part of these rule changes being considered is to make it easier

for these contract farmers to band together for perhaps group negotiation and other such things, just to give them a little more power as a group. Yeah, that's something we actually felt like they could go a little bit farther on to really explicitly state freedom of association, freedom to talk to their business representatives or contacts about the contracts because there's been fear in the past that they can't even talk to their family members or their accountant or others that they work with about the terms of their contract. So that was something that they were trying to address. But I think they could go further in guaranteeing freedom of association to join Poultry Growers Association and speak more publicly about their contracts. Because we do know there's a lot of legitimate fears about doing that due to financial repercussions and retaliation. Patty, I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time that rule changes have been considered

to make the playing field more fair for contract farmers. Why is there hope that this time we could see some real change? Because I imagine the integrators are fighting like heck to keep these changes from... Yeah, they certainly are, you know, that's one, they certainly are. They actually just extended the deadline for comments on this. And in part, it was because they found out that some of the integrators were pressuring growers to submit a letter advocating against any of the changes. wanted the opportunity to look into that a little bit more. So they certainly are fighting against the transparency and saying that it would, it would raise costs, but I, you know, I can't speak to all the, the windows of opportunity that have, that make this time, maybe, maybe a time that there's going to be some change, but, you know, I do think that there's been a lot more attention on, on how we, uh, you know, the, the meat sector and food prices lately with, you know, everything from COVID to inflation to the war in Ukraine. And, you know, we've seen, particularly over the last few months, that some of these chicken companies, these poultry companies and the integrators have posted really record high profits. And the price of

chicken, you know, has been at a high over the past year or so. And so, you know, something's got to give there, you know, they're, they want to blame everything under the sun, other than the fact that they're, they're raising prices on, on consumers. So, you know, the lawsuits, the profits, you know, some of these rules, like everything's kind of coming, seems to be coming to a head right now with increased attention. So, you know, maybe that will lead to some of these changes. I think that the USDA has been very thoughtful about how they are approaching this. And if you take a look at their proposed rule, it's extremely detailed. And everything you'd want to know about this issue is in that proposed rule. They really did

a really thorough job kind of giving an overview of some of the concerns and what the history has been with trying to make changes here. So, you know, I do think that there's hope and there's momentum behind this right now. Yeah, I'll add that for a bureaucratic document, very well written, I'm going to post to that, I'll post to that, that summary, um, from the agricultural marketing service, um, or from the USDA, uh, I'll post to that in the show notes because, uh, I used it to, to compile notes for this interview and I was, I couldn't believe how readable it was. Me too. I had that same reaction. Yeah. And it's very thorough. So if people are interested to, to delve into this a lot more, um, I will post to that.

Okay. Yeah. There's also a, um, um, a link I can send you from the group Rafi Rural Advancement Foundation International. They did a blog post on the transparency rule and kind of just like broke down exactly what, you know, what the issue is, what the role would do in a pretty digestible, readable format as well. So I'll send that to you. Cool. Thank you. Patty Anderson, thanks so much for taking the time to join me

to tell my listeners all about this. I really appreciate it. Absolutely. Thanks so much for being willing to talk about this issue, and I hope that people found it interesting and want to learn more. I mean, I feel like for consumers who are buying chicken at the grocery store or out at restaurants, this is something that affects you as well because, as I mentioned earlier, this is how the vast majority,

about 95% of the chicken in this country is grown in this model. And if you care about the well-being of the farmers that raise the chickens, this is, I think, an issue that's worthy of attention. Thanks again. All right. Well, we're just about done. But before we go, here's the farmer questionnaire. This time, we'll hear from George Wright of Castor River Farm in Metcalfe, Ontario. Who are you and where do you farm?

Hi, my name's George Wright. I farm near Ottawa, just south of Ottawa, Castor River Farm. We mostly grow oats, and we clean them and process them on the farm into rolled oats. And the main reason I like farming is because it's outside. Whatever I had to be, I had to be outside. Why do you farm? I farm. I went to school and I took geology because it was the most outdoor thing I could take at school. And I've been farming my whole life. Even when

I was a kid, my dad had a hobby farm and I just whatever I do I have to be outside. Name a farming mentor and something they taught you. It would have to be my first ever employer. I worked on a raspberry farm when I was about 13 and he was a retired PhD marine engineer who farmed his whole life. And he taught me, he had a big conventional farm, but he still cultivated. And the main thing he taught me was good bookkeeping. But mostly in taxes, but also in record keeping. I'm a little more lax on the record keeping. But I do all my own taxes and I credit him completely

for all that. He taught me the efficiency of real production farming. Something I sometimes am critical of the vegetable guys for not learning more from the real production grain crops and row crops in terms of the efficiency and not staying with the big guys, but just behind them. So you learn from them, you got their speed and you're just a little bit more efficient than them. What tool or practice do you use regularly that you'd have a hard time giving up?

that you'd have a hard time giving up? Without a doubt, it's my Massey Ferguson 1960 Massey 35. It was my first tractor. It's my go-to tractor for everything I do. I have bigger ones now, but if I can do it with a 35, there's no better tractor. And I'm critical of people who spend a lot of money buying a brand new Kubota when there's such beautiful, well-kept, restored Massey 35s around. There's no better tractor.

Anything can break on it, and I can get the new part that day. Even though it's a 1960 tractor, there's a scrap yard about 20 miles away. I can get whatever I need there. I can get parts from anywhere in North America or the UK. I even ordered an engine head on a Friday and I had it installed on a Monday. It is just a part network support for old Massey tractors. It's just incredible. Now that's just the parts side. In terms of being able to turn on a dime, it's incredible. I can go down the end of a row cultivating a row crop and I can turn right back and go on the next one, put the brake on and spin right around. Much more maneuverable than any four-wheel drive tractor.

What's one of your favorite breeds or cultivars? So my favorite crop to grow is the hollis oat. It was developed in Ottawa by Dr. Vern Burrows and accompanied by the name of Semican near Quebec City. They're the breeder for it. And it's called Gale, G-E-H-L. Just happens to be the same as the farm machinery, Gale. It is a beautiful variety. Unfortunately, Semican had a problem a few years ago.

They didn't grow enough seeds, so there's a shortage on it. And I've tried a few of their other varieties, and they're okay. But Gale, Hulless Oats, or also called Naked Oats, is absolutely my favorite. Developed in Ottawa. Are there any do-overs you'd like for your farm business? So I started farming 4-H when I was 14 and I started farming conventionally, row crops and stuff when I was about 20.

But I didn't start retailing until I was about 35 or 40. And I should have started retailing back when I was 20. I lost 15 years of not retailing back when I was 20. I lost 15 years of not retailing. Now, retailing, everybody automatically thinks of, oh, the more money, you know, you get the top dollar and all that. But for me, it was the connection with the customer. I just, most farmers doing row crop grain and row crop soybeans and corn, they do not ever get that relationship with the farmer. What's the best decision you ever made on your farm? Back again, retailing, retailing, selling direct to the consumer,

learning the consumer, knowing what the consumer wants. We started out mostly growing wheat thinking milling flour would be our our business model and within one day I realized rolled oats was our ticket and so the very first year we had to start growing rolled oats we ran out in a month and and now rolled oats are probably 90 percent of our our grain sales and be another nine percent would be a wheat flour and then we grow several other grains but so by retailing I learned what the customer wants what's one skill set or knowledge set that you lack in your farming that you wish you had or that has vexed or befuddled you um i'd have to go back to high school it's welding i learned how to weld in

high school i've even taken courses on welding i can do excellent welding in the classroom in perfect conditions but real world out in the field welding, I'm just terrible at it. I've tried my best and I can't get any better at it. Talk about a recent moment of zen or serenity or peace you've experienced while farming. So I would say it happens every week. I send out a weekly newsletter and I write a story. every week. I send out a weekly newsletter and I write a story. I'd have to kind of take off Wendell Berry's my favorite author and just I can go get into a zone Monday morning at five in the morning. I spend an hour writing a story and sometimes I don't know what story I'm going to

write, you know, at five to five. But but I a list, kind of, I call it a quiver of story topics I could write about. But I really have to write about what's concerning me or what I'm thinking about that week. And if I'm really organized, I can get my topic in my head all week and I can get some real thinking done on it. Keep in mind, I spend a lot of time on the tractor by myself. So it has to be writing and writing a story for my newsletter, for my customers. Who is someone you'd be most interested to interview about their life and or work? Wendell Berry, without a doubt. Wendell Berry, without a doubt.

His writing, his turn of a phrase when he writes, the history of his fighting for small agriculture has just been an incredible lifelong journey. What do you consider a great success in your farming career? Okay. It has to be my kids. Our kids grew up in the farmer's market and they were all kind of shy at first. And so for many years, they were with me at the market or beside me. But we tried as quickly as we could, if we could find farmers market to go to especially our little hometown market art we'd set our kids up with their own booths and that allowed them to blossom like far beyond their

personalities but but in even into like learning how to hustle. And I'm just so proud of them. The oldest bought a house at 21. The other one bought a house at 20 or 19. And our youngest, the girl, she bought it at 18 as well. And it's all because they ran their own markets and they hustled. Now, I have to confess, we didn't always make money because we paid them. It was always a 50% royalty.

That was their commission or that was their percentage of sales. And that would be after the booth price. So, without a doubt, my wife and I, the proudest thing we've done is raising our kids in the farmer's market. All right. That's about it, everyone. little old you. I've met a whole lot. All right, that's about it, everyone. You can check out the show notes of this episode for links to different articles and resources that Patty and I discussed. Thanks very much to Patty and George for contributing to this episode. I'm Jordan Marr, and I will talk to you again soon. this world of thieves live life like it was meant to be

ah don't fret honey i've got a plan to make our final escape all we'll need is each other a hundred dollars and maybe a roll of duct tape and we'll run right outside of the city's reaches we'll live off chestnuts spring water and peaches we'll own nothing to this world of thieves and live life like it was meant to be Because why would we live in a place that don't want us A place that is trying to bleed us dry We could be happy with life in the country With salt on our skin and the dirt on our hands

I've been doing a lot of thinking Some real soul searching And here's my final resolve I don't need a big old house or some fancy car to keep my love going strong so we'll

run right out into the wilds and braces we'll keep close quarters with gentle faces and live next door to the birds and the bees And live life like it was meant to be Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah,