Page 14 RAIN January 1982 tremendous rate of attrition of small farmers, many of them are operating in the jaws of a cost-price squeeze from which they may not emerge. DO WE NEED MORE FOOD? The market itself creates another squeeze on small farmers. Many existing farmers are contending with chronic problems of oversupply and depressed commodity prices. Potatoes, one of the region's major irrigated crops, have been in serious trouble in the last several years, and literally mountains of spuds have been dumped, burned or sold to the government for animal feed. Recently, potato growers in Idaho have succeeded in reducing their acreage by about 10%, with the result that prices have again gone up to a reasonable level. Recognizing this situation, potato farmers in eastern Idaho have organized to try to discourage any further irrigation development in the Columbia basin. Since there is little market locally or nationally for increased production of major commodities, developing new markets overseas is the key to future agricultural expansion in the Northwest. Experts predict that Northwest wheat exports will double by the end of the century and that exports of french fried potatoes and other processed fruits and vegetables will also increase considerably. Basing an agricultural system on export, however, has its problems. In a recent report, the U.S. General Accounting Office warns that "Policies to foster foreign sales have put agriculture in a precarious position. Agriculture's new role in the economy has made U.S. farmers vulnerable to the uncertainties of world market conditions and as a result has placed the U.S. in a position which may demand increased government activity to help buffer fluctuations in supply and demand." Furthermore, there is serious doubt whether expanded agricultural production will actually have a positive effect in balancing our foreign trade deficit (incurred through energy imports) if all costs are taken into account. According to University of Idaho agricultural economist Joel Hamilton, when a crop such as irrigated grain in the Snake/Columbia Basin is produced through a massive energy subsidy, that production is not something for which the United States enjoys a comparative advantage. Instead, Hamilton suggests that new irrigated land development "has far more potential for damaging the balance of payments that it does for helping." WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM NEW IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT? Irrigation development in the Pacific Northwest over the last ten years has been almost exclusively in the form of large-scale, mechanized farms, and there is no reason to believe that this will not continue. The establishment of large agribusiness enterprises has only served to make times harder for struggling family farmers. According to University of Idaho economist Leroy Blakeslee, if 100,000 acres of prime desert land proposed for development in south Idaho were irrigated and used to grow potatoes, 80 to 90% of the new production would simply replace potato production on existing land. Existing farmers would have to figure out something else to grow, or go out of business; there would be little net increase in potato supply, only a change in the supplier. Given the fact that public resources—water and energy—go into the development of irrigated agriculture, the public deserves to be aware of the direction of this development and should be involved in decisions about it. Should we be subsidizing, through our electricity rate and through provision of our public waters, the establishment of large agribusiness, when these same resources, well- managed, could be used to encourage family farming? Should our resources be used for new production which is headed primarily for an export market? Should they be used to open up new lands which by creating competition and higher electricity prices will simply force existing land out of production? The answers to these questions concerning our most basic industry—food production—will have an impact on us all. □ □ ACCESS AGRICULTURE Endangered Harvest: The Future Bay Area Farmland, by People for Open Space, 1980, 80 pp., $5.00 from: People for Open Space 46 Kearny San Francisco, CA 94108 The accelerated loss of agricultural land is gradually gaining national attention. California, the major produce exporter in the nation, is no exception to this trend. The nine counties of the Bay Area region produced an annual crop value of $750 million in 1980, fully half as much as Oregon. Yet of 2.8 million acres in production in 1949, 708,000 have been pulled out of production, with a chunk two-thirds the size of San Francisco shut down annually. While a variety of reasons account for the loss of farmland, urban sprawl is one of the key factors. Generously illustrated with photographs. Endangered Harvest creates an intimate portrayal of its subject matter—the living farmbelt. It is a portrait particularly useful for urbanites. Who are these farmers and what do they grow? What is the value of the farmbelt—economically, culturally, environmentally—and what is the effect of its loss? Who loses and how? The book concludes with a chapter on strategies. The authors suggest an approach that deals with the issue on a regional level—a method that has been used successfully for other Bay Area issus such as mass transit. Regardless of the specific method used. Endangered Harvest provides a useful backdrop to the issue, fostering the mutual ties between urban and rural dwellers. —LS
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz