9/17/02

By MARK POWELL

Grain and soybean farmers in Maryland are falling behind in yields to their counterparts in the Midwest.
And, that fact is “ominous for the future competitiveness of Maryland agriculture,” according to a $200,000 report given to the Maryland Agricultural Commission last week in Annapolis.
The yield fact was not a highlighted part of the study prepared by University of Maryland Center for Agricultural and Natural Resource Policy for the Maryland Department of Agriculture. The study was started two years ago in response to a request by Ron Guns, then-chairman of the House of Delegates Environmental Matters Committee.
Maryland Gov. Parris Glendening highlighted the report’s emphasis on the loss of farmland in a press release statement on the study: “The future of agriculture and the preservation of our remaining open space are directly related to each other. This is why our aggressive agricultural land preservation initiatives over the past eight years have been so important to every Maryland citizen. Our farmers and our environment, and thus all of our citizens are better off today because of our commitment to these Smart Growth policies.”
Authors of the report, presented to the Ag Commission by Dr. Bruce Gardner, obliquely point out that the governor’s view is countered by a whole other philosophy.
Referring to a general division of opinion among those consulted in preparing the report, the authors state: “One general view is that the best focal point for state-level and perhaps even national policy is a set of land preservation and conservation programs.
“A counter view is that these programs will accomplish little or nothing in the way of preserving agriculture as a commercial activity supporting traditional family farms.”
The 98-page report — welcomed by many on the Ag Commission as a good snapshot of what’s going on behind Maryland’s farm gates — says farmers and farmland are losing as the state population continues to climb. And, while the consensus was that farming will survive, as more than 600,000 additional people call Maryland home, the report’s authors point out that there is concern about the future. “These concerns are amplified by increased regulation of farming and potentially eroding support for policies needed to keep agriculture commercially viable. The costs of farming in this situation, along with the historically weak markets for major crop and livestock products, raise the issue of the economic sustainability of commercial agriculture in Maryland.”
In summarizing the trends in agriculture, the report offers eight elements.
• Farmland continues to be lost to development, but at a diminishing rate. “If we exclude the rapidly urbanizing counties of the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area, the loss of farmland is no worse than elsewhere in the Eastern United States.”
• Commercial agriculture is under increasing economic pressure, with low returns on investment. Most of the almost 80 percent of Maryland farms with sales of less than $100,000 have negative net cash income (expenses greater than receipts). Larger farms, on average, earn rates of return that are quite low — 4 to 6 percent on invested capital. But, Maryland farms are on average better off than farms in other parts of the country, with a lower incidence of bankruptcy.
• The increasing average age of farmers has many worried. About 3.2 percent of Maryland farmers were under the age of 35 in 1997.
• Maryland farms are relatively small in size and are not growing as fast in acreage as competitors in other parts of the United States.
• Farming is under pressure because of environmental issues. “Agriculture has been perceived as a being a contributor to environmental problems, most importantly as a source of nitrogen and phosphorus runoff that is held responsible for declines in water quality in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Beyond Maryland’s Water Quality Improvement Act of 1998, whose implementing regulations are now being introduced, prospective as well as existing regulations of farm practices, land use, hiring and management of workers, and quality-safety regulation involved in marketing perishable commodities are all adding to a widespread feeling in the agricultural community that farms and farmers are not appreciated or respected as they once were.
“This together with the low economic returns that characterize typical farm operations engenders a pessimism that could hasten the decline of the state’s agriculture.”
• Despite these problems and perceptions, the general public generally sees farmers in a positive light. But, “the non-farm public may be equally happy to see 300 acres devoted to several small recreational horse farms as to a working dairy farm.”
• Agriculture’s contributions to the state’s economy are not declining in real value over time, even though the share of the state’s economic activity considered “ag” is declining because other sectors are growing much faster.
• The situation for farmers in Maryland is similar to situations throughout the United States. However, Maryland farmers have the advantage that they may have alternatives for their farmland.
Gardner told the Ag Commission that the study strongly supports the widely held belief that the poultry industry is essential for the success of commodity crop farmers in Maryland.
Ag Commission member Mark Whalen, a Chestertown-based representative of the agricultural chemical industry, said, “poultry is driving the industry.” He said he hoped that those looking at the report would support the poultry industry.
Dairy farmer Glenn E. Eaves Sr. of Woodsboro said the report should have emphasized the negative impact environmental regulations have on farmers.
He said the state might be better off buying out those farmers with livestock than investing in environmental programs like CREP (Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program).
The dairy industry and hog farming have slipped in Maryland, according to the study. The report says deteriorating milk prices and larger scale dairy farming are speeding the demise of some dairy farms. Eaves pointed out that milk prices fluctuate and that the lower milk prices mentioned in the report are based upon dated statistical information.
Hog production has fallen from a value of $34 million in 1982 to $14 million in 1997. Meanwhile, hog farming has declined only slightly in Virginia and has increased dramatically in Pennsylvania.
Martha Clark, a Howard County farmer and agricultural education representative on the Ag Commission, said the report offers a good start at understanding the situation in farming. But, she added, “legislators reading this should ask about the regulations it mentions, ‘what’s this costing the farmer?’”
Roland Behnke of St. Inigoes represents direct farm marketing on the Ag Commission. He said the report offered no surprises, but he said it pointed out the need for state government to spend resources on helping farmers find alternatives to cash grain production.
Keith Rinehart of Salisbury represents the poultry industry on the Ag Commission. He said the report was accurate in its statistical study. But, he added, “it glamorizes alternative agriculture.” MDA officials said the report will be used to start planning for policy recommendations and a five-year plan.
The entire report is available at the Maryland Department of Agriculture’s Web site: http://www.mda.gov.md.us.