Comments on: New site for de-bunking myths http://downtoearthblog.com/foodproduction/new-site-for-de-bunking-myths/archives/126 Facts, opinions and reflections on being a techno-geek granolarancher Mom Sun, 01 Aug 2010 08:56:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Sara http://downtoearthblog.com/foodproduction/new-site-for-de-bunking-myths/archives/126#comment-1155 Sara Thu, 17 Jul 2008 03:48:32 +0000 http://downtoearthblog.com/foodproduction/new-site-for-de-bunking-myths/archives/126#comment-1155 Bill: You make a very valid point. In fact, one of my frustrations in writing for this blog is the lack of good, UNBIASED data. Often, I find the frequently quoted statistics on both sides to be more or less true, but they are presented piecemeal and therefor distort the true picture. Thanks for the additional numbers. Even as I posted, I was wondering what percent of production was from family farms. Bill:

You make a very valid point. In fact, one of my frustrations in writing for this blog is the lack of good, UNBIASED data. Often, I find the frequently quoted statistics on both sides to be more or less true, but they are presented piecemeal and therefor distort the true picture.

Thanks for the additional numbers. Even as I posted, I was wondering what percent of production was from family farms.

]]> By: Suzanne http://downtoearthblog.com/foodproduction/new-site-for-de-bunking-myths/archives/126#comment-1144 Suzanne Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:33:17 +0000 http://downtoearthblog.com/foodproduction/new-site-for-de-bunking-myths/archives/126#comment-1144 Sara -- thanks for pointing out this website! Sara — thanks for pointing out this website!

]]> By: Bill Harshaw http://downtoearthblog.com/foodproduction/new-site-for-de-bunking-myths/archives/126#comment-1143 Bill Harshaw Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:54:51 +0000 http://downtoearthblog.com/foodproduction/new-site-for-de-bunking-myths/archives/126#comment-1143 Some useful correctives to some myths, but beware the fine print. Using percentages can mask the reality that big commercial farms dominate the production, even though the farms may be owned by a family. And citing "percentage points" for the increase in contract farming is a bit misleading. ERS says: "Marketing and production contracts covered 41 percent of the value of U.S. agricultural production in 2005, up from 39 percent in 2003, 36 percent in 2001, and a substantial increase over 28 percent in 1991 and 11 percent in 1969." (Economic Information Bulletin EIB35). Another way to say that is that contract farming increased by 14 percent in 4 years:-) Some useful correctives to some myths, but beware the fine print. Using percentages can mask the reality that big commercial farms dominate the production, even though the farms may be owned by a family. And citing “percentage points” for the increase in contract farming is a bit misleading. ERS says: “Marketing and production contracts covered 41 percent of the value of U.S. agricultural production in 2005, up from 39 percent in 2003, 36 percent in 2001, and a substantial increase over 28 percent in 1991 and 11 percent in 1969.” (Economic Information Bulletin EIB35). Another way to say that is that contract farming increased by 14 percent in 4 years:-)

]]>