February 2004

For years, South Dakota legislative as well as other elected and oppointed state leaders have cried about how the people of South Dakota have slowed or stopped the development of large factory-style livestock facilities. You would think they would eventually get the message sent by the voter. “Develop agriculture, but not that way!!”

Today the legislature is trying again with SB 163, a incidious bill that takes away zoning authority from the counties and removes the right of referral for county citizens not happy with local decisions.

South Dakotans have a strong viseral connection with the family farms and ranches still dotting the country side. We will give these families every chance to continue farming and provide quality food and fiber to the state.

Proponents of the state believe the strong advocates of family agriculture are living in the past and want to turn back the clock 50 or 100 years. While they think we should abondon our heritage and forge forward into the environmental cesspool of corporate agriculture.

Family farm and ranch advocates want progress that moves us forward while honoring the heritage of the farmers who came before us. Many young, progressive family farmers and ranchers are moving forward in spite of our leaders to experiment with:

** Rotational grazing – this allows beef and dairy producers to use the native and introduced grasses of South Dakota to produce a healthy product for their customers without negatively affecting the environment. In fact, grassbased dairies are economically more efficient than the mega-dairies being promoted by the S.D. Department of Agriculture.

** Direct marketing – by using the latest digital and internet technology, family farmers and ranchers can reach consumers directly. Providing exactly what the consumer wants and forming a new relationship between those who consome the food and those producing it.

Our leaders complain there isn't enough capitol in agriculture for young people develop the mega-farms they need to survive. However, capitol means debt and you don't find debt without a loss of control. Young farmers and who fall for this argument are destined for a future of servitude to those who control the money.

South Dakota's leaders should dedicate themselves to finding solutions that increase farm and ranch profits without an increase in debt.

Instead they introduce legislation like SB 163 that remove local control and try to push the state down the path of corporate-style agriculture.

(Earlier thoughts after Amendment E had passed but before HB 1281 and SB 163 had reared their ugly heads)

Many state leaders have chastised the voters of this state for passing Amendment E and defending it last year by defeating Amendment A.

They pontificated that we need to allow for the development of agriculture business. That’s pretty easy to say and they must believe it’s pretty easy to do.

Apparently all South Dakota has to do is remove of our constitutional protections and our local zoning authority and let anyone with money develop agriculture in this state.

Just what have family farmers and ranchers been doing in this state for the past four generations? This kind of easily spouted logic insults me and even worse it insults my Grandfather and those farmers who came before him.

I believe that this state needs to pay closer attention to the investment we already have in agriculture instead of chasing new, carpetbagger money. The South Dakota Statistics Service reports that South Dakota has 44 million acres of land in agriculture. Those acres represent an investment worth over $17.6 billion using USDA’s estimates of agricultural land values.

Farmers and ranchers are not rubes slowly chewing on a piece of straw. We are third and forth generation businesses with a blood connection to this land. The future of this state is important to us because we own a good portion of it.

We have seen the devastation suffered by common people in other states at the hands of corporate controlled agriculture. The water and air in parts of Missouri, Idaho and North Carolina will never be the same. The owners of this new money look at our state as another place they can extract the natural wealth and place it in their wallets. We should not we trust them. We should fight tooth and nail for the laws our voters passed. I would not be here if earlier South Dakotans didn’t fight hard for what’s important.

Let us instead focus on the agricultural investment we already have. If we could increase profits by just $10 an acre, the state’s economy would benefit by $440 million. That’s real money in this state and it doesn’t even count the economic multiplier effect. Schools, local business and communities would benefit from this economic strategy.

Improving agriculture while staying true to our history won’t be easy and there’s a lot left to discuss. If we dedicate ourselves to achieving this $10 an acre it will take creative thinking and we will have to take a few risks.

However, the voters of this state have already taken the biggest and bravest step by sticking with the family farmers and ranchers. I want to say thank you.

Frank James
RR3 Box 605
Lily, SD 57274
Fourth Generation South Dakota Family Farmer