The Myth of America’s Farming Landscape

The belief that America is home to an immense number of farms is a piece of misinformation that misguides policies on agriculture and food production.

Industries involved in meat and dairy, coupled with those cultivating corn and soy for livestock feed, rank among the top polluters in the United States. Yet, they often sidestep stringent environmental laws. A common narrative supported by political allies and industry lobbyists is the sheer number of farms, which are allegedly too vast to allow for effective regulation.

In 2022, when then-Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack was questioned about the absence of strict pollution constraints on farmers, he reasoned that imposing such policies on farms was more complex than it would be for a factory. He claimed there were 'millions of farms' in the country, which supposedly makes regulation challenging.

Simultaneously, as the Supreme Court was on the verge of debating a significant case about the Clean Water Act, industry representatives argued against stricter water pollution rules, suggesting it would heavily burden the nation's sizable farming populace. They began their address with the claim: “There are over 2 million farms and ranches in the U.S….”

The assertion of two million farms carries weight and is often used to block pollution regulations, support favorable taxation, and extend subsidy benefits to farmers. However, this statistic is misleading. The reality is that nearly half of these 'farms' do not contribute significant production nor profits and are erroneously categorized alongside the largest, most polluting agricultural entities—the true beneficiaries of lax regulations and advantageous policies.

Understanding True Farm Numbers

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's definition, a farm is any location where agricultural products worth $1,000 or more are sold, or which under typical circumstances would have been sold, within a year. In its 2022 census, the USDA noted 1.9 million farms.

The phrase 'or normally would have been sold' is crucial here. Even properties with zero sales can be termed as farms if they accrue enough 'points.' This scoring is based on potential income sources like land size or livestock numbers. Initially intended to account for legitimate farms facing economic setbacks, this method now includes properties with minimal or no agricultural activity.

Imagine suggesting that I might become a software developer just because I own a laptop and internet access, despite never writing or planning to write code.

Discrepancies in Farm Reporting

Over a quarter of all American farms report zero earnings annually, and this exposes the intense reliance on tax benefits as these operations do not represent the traditional farming image. These include small pastures, beehives, or family gardens, commonly leveraged for tax benefits rather than ongoing business.

Silvia Secchi, a natural resource economist at the University of Iowa, noted that many nominal farmers never intend to transition to commercial ventures, yet their presence bolsters the political safety net of large-scale polluting farms.

Adding to the figures, more than 30 percent of such farms report sales from $1,000 to $10,000, leading just to modest profits. By removing non-commercial ventures, America's farm count falls to approximately 800,000.

This statistical exaggeration doesn't apply elsewhere. It’s comparable to labeling home beer brewers as professional alcoholic beverage manufacturers. Secchi advocates re-evaluating farm categorizations, suggesting a starting point where farms with under $100,000 sales be excluded since many such operations aim to minimize tax burdens by incurring losses.

Redefining Farm Size and Impact

A realistic baseline would set a threshold reflecting that truly viable farms need substantial commercial activity to thrive. Most agricultural sales originate from farms selling over $100,000 annually, with a profit margin over 25 percent deemed sufficient for profitability. This translates to approximately 390,000 legitimated commercial farms, far from the claimed millions.

The USDA still classifies farms with as much as $350,000 in sales as 'small'. True environmental risks come largely from larger operations, therefore delineating between commercial, hobbyist, and tax-advantaged land would strip misleading narratives from agribusiness discussions.

Beyond mere symbolism, Secchi indicates federal funding for agricultural research and other supports interlink with the number of supposedly existing farms.

Clarifying Agricultural Concentration

The inclusion of negligible production operations distorts the agricultural lens, hiding the encroachment towards mega farms and diminishing visibility for small or medium entities to rival the big corporates.

Take poultry farming: The USDA records 240,530 egg farms. Averaging this suggests 1,600 hens per farm, yet the reality is dominance by a mere 347 farms, each boasting over 100,000 birds.

Similarly, the pork industry sees the top 6 percent of producers owning over 5,000 animals, contributing 75 percent of production, yet a misleading representational claim encompasses 60,000 pig farms with substantial numbers owning fewer than two dozen pigs.

The trajectory of agricultural consolidation reflects decades of policy favoring scale, absorbing smaller competitors, whilst overtly leaning on the imagery and rhetoric of small-scale farming.

Public engagement might seem detached from agricultural debates, yet these discussions substantively affect national food systems and economic landscapes. Recognizing misleading representations allows for policy evolution aligned with genuine agricultural dynamics, moving past the superficial invocation of '2 million farms.'