Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture

From the Director: Lessons from our farming past

Back to Leopold Letter Winter 2012

By MARK RASMUSSEN, Leopold Center Director

I believe that sustainable agriculture looks forward, not backward, but this does not mean that we can’t learn from our agricultural history. My family’s farming history offers a look at the changes in livestock and crop production and the effects of long-term agricultural cycles.

An October 1904 newspaper article about my great grandfather’s farming partnership near Luton, Iowa (“Making Money on a Farm of Ten Thousand Acres,” The Farmers’ Tribune), reflected the turmoil of the times. President Theodore Roosevelt led the country in what became known as the “Progressive Era.” His administration pursued anti-trust enforcement actions to end industrial concentration by large companies such as Standard Oil. Roosevelt, an avid outdoorsman, sparked a conservation movement to preserve natural resources which had been over-exploited for decades. He set aside more land for national parks and forests than all his predecessors combined and established the U.S. Forest Service to oversee much of this land. Aldo Leopold began working for this new Forest Service in 1909.

The early 20th century was a time of relative prosperity and growth for agriculture. Post-Civil War settlers on homesteaded land built farms and communities throughout the Midwest. Exploitation of the western region’s resources by large, investor-driven cattle and wheat production operations in the late 1800s led to financial woes and collapse. By the 1900s, these large units were replaced by operations devoted to better farming practices and resource management. Farmers were beginning to employ new mechanized technology, although the classic row-crop tractor, industrial nitrogen fertilizer and plant hybridization were not yet available. The national corn crop in 1903 was estimated at 2.2 billion bushels selling for $0.35-$0.40 per bushel.

Against that background, my great-grandfather’s farming operation was large both by latter-day and modern standards. Family lore is unclear how this much capital and land (initially in Iowa and Nebraska) was accumulated, other than through mortgage debt, and operational leverage perhaps combined with some speculative intent. The primary cash enterprise was cattle production (about 5,000 head fed and marketed per year in 1904) and these cattle were driven north to the Sioux City Stockyards at the mouth of the Floyd River. The main operation near Luton produced forages, hay and grain for the cattle feeding operation. It included farmland in the Missouri River flood plain and the adjacent loess hills. Crop rotations on the farm were not ideal by any measure because much of “bottom” land (which had been tile drained at a cost of $7-8 per acre) was planted in continuous corn for 7-10 years. Cattle manure was applied as the primary means of soil fertility management. The hill land was used primarily for pasture and forage crops.

Realizing that his intensive cropping plan presented problems, my great-grandfather was reported by the paper to be an advocate of alfalfa and clover combined with shorter rotation intervals. Multipurpose legumes were useful for crop rotation, building soil fertility and cattle feed. “One thing is the striking success obtained on this farm with alfalfa and clover,” the report noted.

My purpose in sharing this story is not to bore you with my family history, but to emphasize several interesting points about farming. First, corn production has been important to Iowa agriculture for many generations and its cultivation has extensively altered the landscape. Little thought was given to the prairie ecosystems that were being plowed and Ada Hayden, who was 20 at the time, would not become influential in prairie preservation until after returning to teach at Iowa State in 1910. The challenge to maintain productivity and soil fertility using technology of the day required manure, legumes and crop rotations. Crop rotations worked, and I suspect my great-grandfather became a proponent for the very practical reason that they proved profitable.  

The other key observation is the cyclic nature of agriculture. My great-grandfather’s farming operation grew to 80,000 acres in five states by 1916, but the operation was fragile, over-leveraged and financially at risk. When farm prices (especially beef) collapsed after World War I, his operation was vulnerable and the existing mortgage debt and operational leverage overwhelmed him. After several years of dealing with declining economic conditions, he died in 1922 at the age of 61. Most of the land went into receivership and was dispersed to satisfy creditors. The great American tradition of “boom and bust” prevailed.

American agriculture finds itself in yet another cycle of aggregation and concentration. “Get big or get out” has been a common refrain for decades. Technology, weather, credit, labor, regulations, law and government intervention contribute to the ebb and flow of economic trends of aggregation or disaggregation. At times being large offers an advantage while under different conditions being small and flexible is favored. One never knows when key factors might change, alter the economic landscape and put the status quo at risk. My great-grandfather probably never fully appreciated the threat that leverage, weather, the European market and falling domestic commodity prices posed to his business until it was too late.

The lesson I’ve learned is to be watchful and vigilant – to live and design my living with the potential for change in mind.  I think about this as I work on sustainable agriculture. We should never assume that tomorrow will be just like today, because change happens. Let’s be ready for it.

Back to Leopold Letter Winter 2012