MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
WHOLE FARM PLANNING PROGRAM FARMER FORUMS
Whole farm planning is being touted by farm groups and governmental agencies throughout the nation as a way to simultaneously address economic and environmental problems in agriculture. Several good whole farm planning tools are being reviewed and tested in Minnesota. These include the Ontario Environmental Farm Plan, the NRCS's SWAPA + H, the Pennsylvania One Plan, and Holistic Resource Management. The winter of 1995/96, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture Energy and Sustainable Agriculture Program (ESAP) staff involved farmers across Minnesota in the dialogue on whole farm planning.
Why are we at ESAP involved? We feel that whole farm planning has a tremendous potential to move farm systems toward a dynamic sustainability. We feel that synergy can occur when farm families look at what they want and how they might get there. Broad farm goals can be a primary driver of management decisions, largely replacing piecemeal problem solving. Whole farm planning can highlight relationships between components of the farm that were previously considered unrelated. Understanding how the farm functions as an ecological "whole" can lead to farm health, including economic, family, soil, animal and landscape well being.
We feel that whole farm planning can only be successful if we tap into the creative potential of each farmer. There will be no single recipe. We need to respect the fact that farmers know their capabilities and interests and that, in the end, they must be the ones doing the planning. Developing whole farm planning tools will require the inclusion of farmer input from the outset.
In order to highlight the farmer's perspectives on planning, ESAP held a series of seven regional forums in the winter and spring of 1996. A diversity of farming philosophy and farm enterprise were represented at the forums. The farm families were asked to respond to the following very personal questions:
The participating farmers generally found it very stimulating to visit this important but not often talked about part of their lives. The following trends emerged from these discussions that apply directly to the whole farm planning debate.
Current Comprehensive Planning: Planning is an ongoing process. It can be divided into creative planning and structured planning. Creative planning is happening all year long and is stimulated by observation of yield variation, weed pressure and overall field performance. Structured planning happens in reaction to specific deadlines with professionals such as the banker or the fertilizer dealer.
Ideal Farm: When asked about their ideal farm, farmers shared a desire for manageable debt and reduced stress so that they could enjoy farming more. They crave respect from their community, to be seen as professionals who are caring for the land. There is a desire to engage in land stewardship practices (soil building, complex rotations) but the ability and desire to do so is absolutely linked to their ability to pass on the farm.
Connection Between Planning and Vision: The farmers generally felt that their farm vision was related to their planning process but that they need to work to clarify their long-range goals. They feel isolated and desire to do more networking with other farmers. A sense of powerlessness hinders realization of their vision. They want to be more proactive with respect to the marketplace and farm profitability.
Environmental stewardship was not mentioned once during the discussions about current comprehensive planning practices. However, there was extensive discussion of stewardship when the farmers were asked where they wanted their farms to go. This sense of stewardship appears to be inseparable from the ability to pass on the farm and the ability to secure stable, long-term profitability.
The results of these forums raise several important questions for the whole farm planning debate:
Energy and Sustainable Agriculture Program • Minnesota Department of Agriculture