Monopoly hurts farmers the most

Published 9:00 pm Thursday, September 22, 2005

I’m uncomfortable with the emphasis on environmental regulations as causing Snohomish farms to disappear in the Herald’s recent agriculture articles. It’s like looking at the straw that broke the camel’s back and ignoring the total load.

The problem is that farmers can’t pass on to the consumer the increased costs of environmental regulations and other increased costs of energy, land, labor, etc., like the manufacturing sector does. This is because food is governed by near-monopolies on a global scale. Your articles stated that processors are consolidating and giving producers fewer places to sell their milk or other commodities. Processors are in the same boat as farmers. With just four or five grocery retailers handling over half the food, they dictate how much they’ll pay for the milk and other commodities. Processors are then squeezed and have to deal in volume in order to survive. Thus they either sell themselves to a larger company or consolidate their own operations, often putting farmers out of reach. We saw it when Vita Milk was sold to Wilcox Family Farms and then Darigold merged with WestFarm Foods.

This 800-pound gorilla of a near-monopoly is sitting on the entire food chain and farmers are at the bottom with the least ability to dictate prices. That’s what is the major problem for farmers in Snohomish County and everywhere. Farmers can eliminate the dominance of processors and retailers by direct marketing. They can also create other income streams such as green energy production via anaerobic digesters. Recreational agriculture has been another option. Consumers can help by buying food that is as locally produced as possible.

Alan Shank

Mukilteo