How to keep the younger generation involved in farming...

[ohio jones]

It would be interesting to see data on this. I suspect the percentage goes down each year.

Amongst the constituencies that have high birthrates (and thus end up being the majority of plain Anabaptists), farming is alive and well and indeed it seems to be what the vast majority of them do. I would expect the percentage to keep going up each year.

As a reminder, groups like Scottsville-type churches or Swartzentrubers average around 10 children per woman. They are basically all that is relevant when talking about the future of where things will be in 50 years.

Assuming 5 boys and 5 girls per woman, each generation would require 6 times the acreage in order to keep the percentage of farmers constant. That's not happening. Even if the size of each farm shrinks a bit and some become "farmers" with side businesses, the rest will need to find other occupations. Already in most Amish communities there are few full-time farmers and most have jobs in construction or factory work.

[JohnH]

Assuming 5 boys and 5 girls per woman, each generation would require 6 times the acreage in order to keep the percentage of farmers constant. That's not happening. Even if the size of each farm shrinks a bit and some become "farmers" with side businesses, the rest will need to find other occupations.

It most certainly is happening; if other farmers are abandoning farming, then it follows there is land for sale.

These groups usually stick to produce farming which requires far less acreage (around 5 to 10 for a typical family) compared to row crop farming, including enough pasture for a horse and possibly a cow or two.

Already in most Amish communities there are few full-time farmers and most have jobs in construction or factory work.

Well, the Swartzentrubers and Scottsville-type churches are different than "most Amish communities", although I expect the Amish as we know them today won't exist in 20 years outside of Swartzentruber and other traditionalist forms; they have already decided to adopt cars/trucks in this area, for example. (As I enjoy retelling, my wife's cousin helped a young couple out who ran out of fuel in their new diesel truck.)

[barnhart]

The average age of farmers is on the increase.
See green and blue chart. https://www.terrainag.com/insights/issu ... n-farmers/

I wonder how this compares with Plain Anabaptists. It seems to me there is never enough farms. Does that result in the age being older as well. Or does migration to other areas make up for that.

Interestingly, only a small percentage of FFA members actually farm. https://jae-online.org/index.php/jae/ar ... /1098/1543

Anabaptists have not needed FFA to keep interest in farming. It is discussed at school, at family gatherings, at church, and on Sunday afternoons.

It might be illustrative to approach the question from the other way around, why was farming so pervasive 150 years ago. Some of the reasons are surely economic, as a society we have lowered the relative cost of food until the threat is more from obesity than hunger. When the settlers were ripping up the great plains to plant wheat it was because of economic incentives more than a desire to perpetuate a rustic lifestyle. One good harvest in that era was a fortune enough to pay for land or buy a house.

Another factor was the availability of land that one could hope to pay for relatively quickly. It's less enticing to sign up for hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt (or more) that will consume the rest of your life to pay off. Part of the reason Anabaptist farming flourished in PA, then western PA, then Ohio, then Indiana, then Iowa and also on the Russian steps was because land was being converted to a market commodity as the frontier extended and Native people were driven off. This cannot be replicate except in places like south America.

The land availability problem has another angle, high value crops like direct to market produce require land close to population density which makes it unaffordable. This explains why the Amish stayed with Tobacco as it is high value yet it stores and transports.

This is just my opinion but I think at least as much thought and effort should go into the question of creating Anabaptist communities that don't need the fragile combination of land, weather, cash crop and proximity as to making the agriculture system work in a world that increasingly doesn't need it.

[Ernie]

There are reasons for having agrarian based Christian communities that go beyond economic reasons.

The only reason I can think of for doing something different has to do with the great commission and wanting to see Christians have more influence in other spheres. I'm certainly open to thinking about such things but only for those who can handle it.

And lastly, I think the jury is still out on whether the world can thrive without small farmers.

[Anthony]

The average age of farmers is on the increase.
See green and blue chart. https://www.terrainag.com/insights/issu ... n-farmers/

I wonder how this compares with Plain Anabaptists. It seems to me there is never enough farms. Does that result in the age being older as well. Or does migration to other areas make up for that.

Interestingly, only a small percentage of FFA members actually farm. https://jae-online.org/index.php/jae/ar ... /1098/1543

Anabaptists have not needed FFA to keep interest in farming. It is discussed at school, at family gatherings, at church, and on Sunday afternoons.

It might be illustrative to approach the question from the other way around, why was farming so pervasive 150 years ago. Some of the reasons are surely economic, as a society we have lowered the relative cost of food until the threat is more from obesity than hunger. When the settlers were ripping up the great plains to plant wheat it was because of economic incentives more than a desire to perpetuate a rustic lifestyle. One good harvest in that era was a fortune enough to pay for land or buy a house.

Another factor was the availability of land that one could hope to pay for relatively quickly. It's less enticing to sign up for hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt (or more) that will consume the rest of your life to pay off. Part of the reason Anabaptist farming flourished in PA, then western PA, then Ohio, then Indiana, then Iowa and also on the Russian steps was because land was being converted to a market commodity as the frontier extended and Native people were driven off. This cannot be replicate except in places like south America.

The land availability problem has another angle, high value crops like direct to market produce require land close to population density which makes it unaffordable. This explains why the Amish stayed with Tobacco as it is high value yet it stores and transports.

This is just my opinion but I think at least as much thought and effort should go into the question of creating Anabaptist communities that don't need the fragile combination of land, weather, cash crop and proximity as to making the agriculture system work in a world that increasingly doesn't need it.

Only other successful example is hasidic jews, who live primarily in urban areas. Not too sure how drift affects them though, i do know they are more accepting of technology than anabaptists

[barnhart]

The average age of farmers is on the increase.
See green and blue chart. https://www.terrainag.com/insights/issu ... n-farmers/

I wonder how this compares with Plain Anabaptists. It seems to me there is never enough farms. Does that result in the age being older as well. Or does migration to other areas make up for that.

Interestingly, only a small percentage of FFA members actually farm. https://jae-online.org/index.php/jae/ar ... /1098/1543

Anabaptists have not needed FFA to keep interest in farming. It is discussed at school, at family gatherings, at church, and on Sunday afternoons.

It might be illustrative to approach the question from the other way around, why was farming so pervasive 150 years ago. Some of the reasons are surely economic, as a society we have lowered the relative cost of food until the threat is more from obesity than hunger. When the settlers were ripping up the great plains to plant wheat it was because of economic incentives more than a desire to perpetuate a rustic lifestyle. One good harvest in that era was a fortune enough to pay for land or buy a house.

Another factor was the availability of land that one could hope to pay for relatively quickly. It's less enticing to sign up for hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt (or more) that will consume the rest of your life to pay off. Part of the reason Anabaptist farming flourished in PA, then western PA, then Ohio, then Indiana, then Iowa and also on the Russian steps was because land was being converted to a market commodity as the frontier extended and Native people were driven off. This cannot be replicate except in places like south America.

The land availability problem has another angle, high value crops like direct to market produce require land close to population density which makes it unaffordable. This explains why the Amish stayed with Tobacco as it is high value yet it stores and transports.

This is just my opinion but I think at least as much thought and effort should go into the question of creating Anabaptist communities that don't need the fragile combination of land, weather, cash crop and proximity as to making the agriculture system work in a world that increasingly doesn't need it.

Only other successful example is hasidic jews, who live primarily in urban areas. Not too sure how drift affects them though, i do know they are more accepting of technology than anabaptists

From my perspective, culture is their religion. I don't like that as a role model for people inclined to the kingdom of Jesus.

[JohnH]

that don't need the fragile combination of land, weather, cash crop and proximity as to making the agriculture system work in a world that increasingly doesn't need it.

I think the world needs wholesome, healthful food more than ever.

Growing produce locally is far more sustainable than importing it or trucking it halfway across the country.

[JohnH]

There are reasons for having agrarian based Christian communities that go beyond economic reasons.

The only reason I can think of for doing something different has to do with the great commission and wanting to see Christians have more influence in other spheres. I'm certainly open to thinking about such things but only for those who can handle it.

So far, conservative Anabaptists have proven themselves nearly-useless in that sphere.

[barnhart]

The average age of farmers is on the increase.
See green and blue chart. https://www.terrainag.com/insights/issu ... n-farmers/

I wonder how this compares with Plain Anabaptists. It seems to me there is never enough farms. Does that result in the age being older as well. Or does migration to other areas make up for that.

Interestingly, only a small percentage of FFA members actually farm. https://jae-online.org/index.php/jae/ar ... /1098/1543

Anabaptists have not needed FFA to keep interest in farming. It is discussed at school, at family gatherings, at church, and on Sunday afternoons.

What percentage of the early Anabaptists in Europe do you suppose were farmers. Do you feel farming is somehow essential or that an important essence is lost with it.

[ken_sylvania]

This is just my opinion but I think at least as much thought and effort should go into the question of creating Anabaptist communities that don't need the fragile combination of land, weather, cash crop and proximity as to making the agriculture system work in a world that increasingly doesn't need it.

Good point. We don't need farmers - just get your food at the grocery store.