Given the importance of the food sector to society, the need for some level of government support for it never seems to have been called into question. There have long been subsidies for Big Ag to compensate for weather and market uncertainty. As farm reform advocacy expanded and became more effective over the past quarter century, Small Ag got in on the flow of money too. Behind some of the thinking was, “The industry is subsidized, and we should get our fair share.” Now that fair share is bringing a fair bit of trouble. What we’re hearing in the news lately contains some cautionary words.
“We’re looking back at the government and saying, ‘Where the hell are you?”
“Our direct connection to our federal government and what it means for farming has started to disappear.”
“Losing a government contract wasn’t on my bingo card.”
Somewhere along the line aid took on political overtones. The two main funding categories that are causing problems for farmers now are those that can be linked to climate initiatives or help for particular groups.
USDA conservation grants were created in the 1930’s to prevent another Dust Bowl in which a massive drought turned cropland to dust. Their main purpose was to promote cover cropping that holds soil in place and crop rotation to keep it healthy. Every decade since has brought its own brand of conservation. More parties started influencing how farming should be done. Advocates and activists started enlisting small farmers to help right environmental wrongs. As the number and types of reform movements expanded the amount of government aid did too. There are now navigators to help identify the most relevant types of funding and recommend the right words to use to get an edge on grant applications. Some of those words are now causing grants to be paused or cancelled.
Over the years we’ve often been asked if SPIN is organic/sustainable/regenerative. Lately questions have been about climate smart farming. We’re not sure what the difference is between climate smart and just good agricultural practices. We explain that SPIN is based on organic methods because they are cheaper and more appropriate for densely populated areas, where most SPIN farmers set up their operations. Organic growing is also easier to implement on the small plots SPIN farmers use than on larger farms. We’ve never dictated how farmers should grow. A SPIN farmer can be as organic/sustainable/regenerative/climate smart as they want to be.
Another question we’ve gotten over the years is whether SPIN-Farming can be used by non-profits. It’s not a natural fit. Sure, SPIN’s farm designs and planting plans can be used to maximize yields in a minimum amount of space and its workflow protocols increase efficiency. But SPIN is primarily designed for those wanting to generate income and become self-employed business owners. They are just as passionate about their work as mission-driven non-profit growers. At the end of the day their mission is to serve customers and pay the bills and themselves.
SPIN-Farming has always de-emphasized government support, especially during the startup phase. SPIN farms don’t require costly investment to equip or operate. They can be upgraded over time once a customer base has been established and cash flow is steady. Many farmers are undercapitalized, and it’s true for SPIN farmers too. That means they can’t make improvements in their operations that will make them more efficient and profitable. Getting a grant for some basic infrastructure like coolers or tillers or irrigation can help provide stability and make success more likely in the long term.
For some SPIN farmers there comes a time to grow beyond bootstrapping and backyard-size scale. That can mean buying some greenhouses or high tunnels to extend the season. Others need commercial grade facilities to produce value-added products. Others want to diversify into livestock or poultry production or cheese making. Still others want to expand by acquiring increased acreage. USDA grants and Farm Credit Service Agency are useful financing sources.
The key is to use debt strategically and don’t over-equip or expand before the business can support it. A trap to avoid is a variation on the old “get big or get out mantra.” Having stretch goals is good, but the old model based on ever-increasing expansion can lead to burnout, when the farmer might otherwise have succeeded if they weren’t overburdened financially by debt and operationally by too much land and overhead. Staying small can be a smart strategic decision.
Given today’s news, another trap to avoid is overreliance on government support. Political favor is usually short-lived and can bring pressure to use limited time and effort to fit and shape a farm into something just to receive grants. Grants and loans that have measurable ROI can be used to increase the value of the farm and strengthen the business. They’re not a lifeline. Looking for a useful lesson in all this, it might be this: when it comes to government aid, getting your fair share sometimes comes with a fair amount of trouble.
Be sure you learn how to make your own money along the way for when the government funding stops.
SPIN-FARMING TEACHES YOU HOW TO MAKE MONEY FARMING. GET STARTED HERE.