Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:06:54.474Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Profitability of coupled potato and dairy farms in Maine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2007

Aaron K. Hoshide ,
Timothy J. Dalton  and
Smith N. Stewart
Aaron K. Hoshide*
Affiliation:
Department of Resource Economics and Policy, University of Maine, Orono, ME, USA.
Timothy J. Dalton
Affiliation:
Department of Resource Economics and Policy, University of Maine, Orono, ME, USA.
Smith N. Stewart
Affiliation:
Department of Resource Economics and Policy, University of Maine, Orono, ME, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: aaron.hoshide@umit.maine.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

After decades of farm specialization, re-integrating crop and livestock farming systems is being reconsidered as a key step toward sustainable agriculture. The relative profitability of Maine farms integrating crops and livestock is compared to non-integrated or conventional farms. Crop and livestock integration in Maine occurs through either diversified on-farm integration or, more commonly, through coupled interactions between specialized crop and livestock producers. Potato and dairy systems coupled for only 2 years (short-term) had greater profitability compared to conventional systems. Profitability increased in the short term in two ways. First, potato farms grew more of their primary cash crop. Secondly, dairy farms expanded cow numbers, increasing profitability assuming increasing returns to scale. Coupled systems integrated for more than 10 years (long-term) had more favorable profitability than short-term couplers since greater manure-nutrient credits were taken for potatoes and silage corn. The advantages of potato–dairy integration were even greater if potato yields increased in the long term, as suggested by long-term rotation plot studies in Maine. Even if coupling is more profitable than non-integrated systems, it requires that farms be in close proximity and for farmers to have adequate working relationships and management skills. Despite these challenges to re-integrating crops and livestock, short- and long-term economic benefits may encourage farmers in appropriate areas to consider coupling with other producers.

Keywords

crop and livestock integrationdairyenterprise budgetsMainenet farm incomepotatoprofitabilitywhole-farm budgets
Type
Research Article
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , December 2006 , pp. 261 - 272
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Magdoff, F., Lanyon, L., and Liebhardt, B. 1997. Nutrient cycling, transformations, and flows: implications for a more sustainable agriculture. Advances in Agronomy 60:1–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Cutforth, L.B., Francis, C.A., Lynne, G.D., Mortensen, D.A., and Eskridge, K.M. 2001. Factors affecting farmers' crop diversity decisions: an integrated approach. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 16(4):168–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Taylor, D.C. and Dobbs, T.L. 1991. Integration of crop and livestock enterprises: South Dakota sustainable case farms. Economics Commentator, South Dakota State University 293:1–4.Google Scholar
4 Edwards, C.A., Grove, T.L., Harwood, R.R., and Colfer, C.J.P. 1993. The role of agroecology and integrated farming systems in agricultural sustainability. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 46:99–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Jongbloed, A.W. and Lenis, N.P. 1998. Environmental concerns about animal manure. Journal of Animal Science 76:2641–2648.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6 Tilman, D. 1999. Global environmental impacts of agricultural expansion: the need for sustainable and efficient practices. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96(11):5995–6000.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
07 Keith, I.F. 1952. An economic analysis of the integration of crops and livestock production in southern Minnesota. PhD thesis, The Graduate School, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities.Google Scholar
8 Bender, J. 1994. Future Harvest: Pesticide-Free Farming. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar
9 Krall, J.M. and Schuman, G.E. 1996. Integrated dryland crop and livestock production systems on the Great Plains: extent and outlook. Journal of Production Agriculture 9(2):187–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10 Hardesty, L.H. and Tiedeman, J.A. 1996. Integrated crop and livestock production in inland Northwest farming systems. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 11(2&3):121–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11 DeLuca, T.H. and DeLuca, D.K. 1997. Composting for feedlot manure management and soil quality. Journal of Production Agriculture 10(2):235–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12 Hinrichs, C.C. and Welsh, R. 2003. The effects of the industrialization of US livestock agriculture on promoting sustainable production practices. Agriculture and Human Values 20:125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 Files, A.C. and Smith, S.N. 2001. Agricultural Integration: Systems in Action. Maine Agricultural Center, University of Maine, Orono. Available at Web site: http://www.mac.umaine.edu/publications/AgIntegration%20Systems.pdf.Google Scholar
14 Porter, G.A. and McBurnie, J.C. 1996. Crop and soil research. In The ecology, economics, and management of potato cropping systems: a report of the first four years of the Maine Potato Ecosystem Project. Maine Agricultural and Forest Experiment Station Bulletin 843, University of Maine, Orono.Google Scholar
15 Gallandt, E.R., Mallory, E.B., Alford, A.R., Drummond, F.A., Groden, E., Liebman, M., Marra, M.C., McBurnie, J.C., and Porter, G.A. 1998. Comparison of alternative pest and soil management strategies for Maine potato production systems. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 13(4):146–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16 Porter, G.A. 2003. Progress to date, ecosystem component of IFAFS from University of Maine Potato Ecosystem Project. In Re-integrating crop and livestock enterprises in three northern states: updated project report. Resource Economics and Policy, University of Maine, Orono. p. 43–47.Google Scholar
17 U.S. Department of Agriculture 1997. National Agricultural Statistics Service. 1997 census of agriculture. Available at Web site: http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/volume1/me-19/me1_01.pdf (verified 31 August 2005).Google Scholar
18 Maine State Planning Office. 2003. Maine's dairy industry: assessment of the current situation and economic impact of the industry. Augusta, ME.Google Scholar
19 Hoshide, A.K. and Dalton, T.J. 2003. Cooperating producers in Maine: a summary report of the characteristics of participants in the re-integrating crop and livestock systems in three northern states project. Resource Economics and Policy Staff Paper 523, University of Maine, Orono.Google Scholar
20 Dalton, T.J., Porter, G.A., and Winslow, N. 2003. Profitability and risk management benefits of supplemental irrigation on northern potatoes. Resource Economics and Policy Staff Paper 515, University of Maine, Orono.Google Scholar
21 Dalton, T.J., Porter, G.A., and Winslow, N. 2004. Risk management strategies in humid production regions: a comparison of supplemental irrigation and crop insurance. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 33:173–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22 Dalton, T.J. and Bragg, L. 2003. The cost of producing milk in Maine: a report based upon the 2002 dairy cost of production survey. Maine Agricultural and Forest Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 189, University of Maine, Orono.Google Scholar
23 Kay, R.D. 1986. Farm Management: Planning, Control, and Implementation. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
24 Stafford, D., Zweigbaum, B., and Hermonot, R. 2001. The Northeast dairy farm summary, 2000. Farm Credit of Western New York and First Pioneer Farm Credit, A Joint Project of Northeast Farm Credit, Batavia, NY, and Enfield, CT.Google Scholar
25 Westra, J.V. and Boyle, K.J. 1991. An economic analysis of crops grown in rotation with potatoes in Aroostook County, Maine. Maine Agricultural and Forest Experiment Station Bulletin 834, University of Maine, Orono.Google Scholar
26 Pennsylvania State University. 2004. The Agronomy Guide 2004. Available at Web site: http://agguide.agronomy.psu.edu/CM/Sec12/Sec12toc.html (verified 21 July 2004).Google Scholar
27 Hoshide, A.K., Dalton, T.J., and Smith, S.N. 2004. Representative farm budgets and performance indicators for integrated farming practices in Maine. Maine Agricultural and Forest Experiment Station Bulletin 850, University of Maine, Orono.Google Scholar
28 Hoshide, A.K. 2005. Re-integrating crops and livestock in Maine: an economic analysis of the potential for and profitability of integrated agricultural production. PhD thesis, The Graduate School, University of Maine, Orono.Google Scholar