I so enjoy receiving comments from readers, especially when they are passionate about their point of view. The following letter was one such response to a column I wrote about a ranting vegan on Facebook.

This man has researched his facts and I believe has written a letter worth  publishing. So, let’s open the mailbag!

I want to challenge your column in the June 23rd issue of Farm World. We farmers have been told forever how important we are because of our efficiency in feeding people. Having served for over a decade with state and national soybean boards, we too have embraced this premise.

However, we farmers are the targets of ever-increasing attacks by consumer groups, environmentalists, anti-capitalists, HSUS, PETA and now even our counterparts the organic food groups. With these assaults and the rosy picture we fondly embrace of ourselves, I pondered a few months ago as to why we are so ineffective in countering these adversaries. I did some research. Much was derived from USDA statistics gleaned through the Internet.

First, the total farm gate production value of our crops is about $350 billion. This year it is forecast to be less. That sounds like a bunch of money until you compare it to Walmart sales, which are in the $400 billion area. The total GDP is near $13.5 trillion.

Now on the net side. Farm net income is about $70 billion-$80 billion. The top year for bonuses alone, not counting salary, for Wall Street bankers was $40B and they didn’t keep any back for seed and fertilizer for the next year. It went immediately for second homes, Lamborghinis and trips to exotic locations. Farmers still had to make the principal payments from their net.

If the animal rights groups, EPA, Cass Sunstien and others shut down our livestock industry, which three states will remain to produce the gruel or glorified silage we will be relegated to consume? Yeh, I may be a little melodramatic but there will be states that will not support an agriculture economy. The attacks against the use of fertilizer and pesticides will shrink production to where we may not be able to produce or compete for exports either.

No one talks about this in this manner. The 50 million acres environmentalists, including our current Agriculture Secretary, want to plant in trees will jeopardize the infrastructure necessary to continue to be efficient. No market, no innovation, no investment = decline.

When 80 percent of farm household income is derived off the farm and the average farm household shows income of between $70,000-$80,000 a year, it means the average farm net earnings contributes $14,000-$16,000 a year. Theoretically, every farm family would be eligible for food stamps. Who is subsidizing whom?
I don’t want to just paint a gloomy scene but this is becoming reality. I’ve been to Michael Pollan’s presentations and seen his film, “Food, Inc.,” and these professionals are not being actively challenged by our farm community. Oprah has a huge following and not on our side of the road.

The foundations that support NPR have millions at their disposal to further their agenda in opposition to modern agriculture. I do listen to Diana Rehm and “All Things Considered” on NPR and as long as it is liberal “things,” it is considered. It is for the same reason I no longer support Public Television. Bill Moyers has glasses with only one lens.

Thank you for enduring my rants. I hope I have stirred your thoughts.

-Joe Meyer, Indiana

The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of Farm World. Readers with questions or comments for Melissa Hart may write to her in care of this publication.