Does news of rising farm sector prices offer a lifeline for the improvement of farmers' mental health? Or will media literally repeat the gloom and doom of past reports, some based on a redacted CDC report in which farmworkers, lumberjacks and others were mistaken for farmers?
We were encouraged to read this news from the USDA's Economic Research Service Highlights from the September 2022 Farm Income Forecast:
Farm Sector Profits Forecast to Remain Above Average in 2022
Net farm income, a broad measure of profits, is forecast at $147.7 billion in calendar year 2022, an increase of $7.3 billion (5.2 percent) in 2022 relative to 2021. The 2021 value is an increase of $45.9 billion (48.5 percent) relative to 2020. When prior years are adjusted for inflation, net farm income in 2021 was at its highest level since 2013. Net farm income in 2022 would be $0.9 billion (0.6 percent) lower than in 2021 yet 42.1 percent above its 20-year average (2002–21) of $104.0 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars.
Net cash farm income is forecast at $168.5 billion in 2022, an increase of $22.1 billion (15.1 percent) relative to 2021. The 2021 value was $29.6 billion (25.4 percent) above 2020. When adjusted for inflation, 2022 net cash farm income is forecast to increase by $13.5 billion (8.7 percent) from 2021 and be at its highest level since 2012. Net cash farm income in 2022 would be 34.5 percent above its 2002–21 average of $125.3 billion. Net cash farm income encompasses cash receipts from farming as well as farm-related income (including Government payments) minus cash expenses. It does not include noncash items—including changes in inventories, economic depreciation, and gross imputed rental income of operator dwellings—reflected in the net farm income measure above.
Cash receipts from the sale of agricultural commodities are forecast to increase by $91.7 billion (21.2 percent, in nominal terms) from 2021 levels to $525.3 billion in 2022. Total crop receipts are expected to increase by $36.4 billion (15.3 percent) from their 2021 level following higher receipts for soybeans, corn, and wheat. Total animal/animal product receipts are expected to increase even more from the previous year, by $55.3 billion (28.3 percent), following increases in receipts for all categories of animal/animal products. These increases would put total cash receipts in 2022 at their highest level on record, even after adjusting prior years for inflation.
While cash receipts overall are expected to increase in 2022, lower direct Government payments and higher production expenses are expected to moderate income growth. Direct Government payments are forecast to fall by $12.8 billion (49.7 percent) from 2021 to $13.0 billion in 2022. The decrease is expected largely because of lower supplemental and ad hoc disaster assistance for COVID-19 relief in 2022 compared with 2021. Meanwhile, total production expenses, including operator dwelling expenses, are forecast to increase by $66.2 billion (17.8 percent) to $437.3 billion (in nominal terms) in 2022. Spending on all categories of expenses is expected to rise with the largest increase in fertilizer-lime-soil conditioner expenditures, up 44 percent.
Average net cash farm income for farm businesses is forecast to fall 3.3 percent from 2021 to $98,200 per farm in 2022 (in nominal terms). However, the regional average net cash farm income outlook is mixed. For farm businesses located in the Northern Crescent region, average net cash farm income is forecast to increase in 2022, but it is forecast to decline for farm businesses in all other regions when adjusted for inflation. Farm businesses specializing in dairy are expected to see the largest growth in average net cash farm income in 2022, while those specializing in wheat, cotton, and specialty crops are expected to see the largest declines in 2022.
Farm sector equity is expected to increase by $315.6 billion (10.4 percent) in 2022 to $3.34 trillion in nominal terms. Farm sector assets are forecast to increase $337.5 billion (9.7 percent) in 2022 to $3.84 trillion following expected increases in the value of farm real estate assets. Farm sector debt is forecast to increase by $21.9 billion (4.6 percent) in 2022 to $496.0 billion in nominal terms but it is forecast to fall by 1.2 percent when adjusted for inflation. Debt-to-asset levels for the sector are forecast to improve from 13.56 percent in 2021 to 12.93 percent in 2022. Working capital, which measures the amount of cash available to fund operating expenses after paying off debt due within 12 months, is forecast to fall by 2.6 percent in 2022.
That information sounded like good news for farmers. It echoed stories we read in rural and farm media. Back in May, Farm Forum carried this column by MinnStar Bank senior vice president Kent Thiesse, Focus on Ag: Farm income levels improved in 2021:
The University of Minnesota recently reported that the average net farm income for Southern Minnesota farmers in 2021 was $280,900, which was at the highest level since 2012. The very positive 2020 and 2021 net farm income levels followed seven consecutive years of sup-par net farm income levels in the region.
The 2021 net farm income levels in Southern and West Central Minnesota were enhanced by robust crop profits that resulted from average to above average crop yields and the highest grain market prices since 2013. Livestock profit margins in 2021 in Southern Minnesota were also mainly positive; however, the profit levels were at much more modest levels than the crop profits.
The Farm Business Management (FBM) Summary for Southern and West Central Minnesota is prepared by the Farm Business Management Instructors. This summary includes an analysis of the farm business records from farm businesses of all types and sizes in Southern and Western Minnesota.
This annual farm business summary is probably one of the best gauges of the profitability and financial health of farm businesses in the region on an annual basis. . . . .
Given that upbeat financial news for farmers, we were surprised to read a passage in Susie Jones' story at WCCO radio, State offering mental health training for rural faith leaders:
The Minnesota Department of Health and Department of Agriculture are teaming up to offer suicide prevention training for rural faith leaders.
The organizations have announced two conferences later this month – September 17 in Bemidji and September 29th in Mankato – with the goal of increasing suicide prevention.
The conferences aim to grow faith leaders’ understanding of suicide and provide resources to help those leaders prevent suicide in their community.
And the two conferences come at a fitting time for farmers, as they enter a busy stretch of the season.They are working long hours in the field and are constantly worrying about their yields. It can be stressful, and sometimes too much.
“Thoughts of suicide are spinning in their heads,” said Glen Bloomstrom, a retired Army chaplain and suicide prevention trainer with LivingWorks Education.
He said farmers are dying by suicide in staggering numbers, largely due to financial stress.
Many have thoughts of “I don’t belong. I am a burden. I’d be worth more dead than alive,” Bloomstrom said.
Training clergy to be able to help farmers going through tough times is the goal of two workshops scheduled later this month.
“We don’t want to offend people by asking them anymore than how are you and I’m fine,” he said.
Minnesota farmers are often characterized as being stoic and self-reliant, sometimes making it tough for them to reach out for help when facing difficult times.
“There is a reluctance to admit to when life just becomes too much,” said Meg Monihan, a farmer and advisor for the Minnesota Department of Agriculture.
There are also some misconceptions about suicide, she said.
“When someone is struggling, talking about suicide does not plant the idea in their head. It can actually help them to know you are willing to talk about it, and create a safe opportunity to share their thoughts,” she said.
Rural communities tend to be close-knit and suicides touch many people when they happen.
“Faith often plays a big role in the lives of farm families,” said Agriculture Commissioner Thom Peterson. “So pastors and lay leaders can play a critical role in preventing these deaths.”
The conference is free but pre-registration is required. Anyone interested should call 218-308-2148 for the Bemidji conference on September [27],2022 and 507-344-2747 for the Mankato conference on September 29, 2022.
We highlighted this sentence in the story: "He said farmers are dying by suicide in staggering numbers, largely due to financial stress."
That certainly sounds awful, but doesn't match up with the positive news from the ERS and Thiesse. We have wondered about assertions about farmer suicide in the past, but thought we'd see if could learn where that notion of staggering numbers came from. A simple google search using "farmers," suicide" and "staggering numbers," brought a 2019 Minnesota Public Radio story by Kirsti Marohn, Farmer suicides are on the rise; here’s how to help, to the top of the heap.
Marohn reported in part:
Farmers, known for being stoic and self-reliant, might consider asking a friend or neighbor for help getting a tractor unstuck from a muddy field.
But when they're facing crop failure or foreclosure — or losing the family farm — that independent streak can make it tough for farmers to ask for help. They often bear their stress and anxiety alone.
At worst, some take their own lives. . . .
A new program is training people in the agricultural community to reach out when they see a farmer struggling.
The state agriculture and health departments teamed up to offer the sessions, which have been held around Minnesota. They use a suicide prevention training program, safeTALK, tailored for people who work with farmers on a daily basis — lenders, insurance agents, veterinarians, health care providers and clergy, among others. . . .
At a recent session in dairy-rich Stearns County, about 30 people listened as Glen Bloomstrom, a retired Army chaplain and suicide prevention trainer with LivingWorks Education, said farmers are dying by suicide in staggering numbers, largely due to financial stress. Many are living on the same income as 15 years ago, he said. . . .
Same source, same phrasing.
Let's hope Minnesota's media does better this round. Mental health care is important for all people, but framing farmers as far more at risk than all others--based on years-old misreading of job categories--doesn't address this broad-based problem.
The CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Disparities in Suicide: Some groups are at greater risk for suicide page notes:
Veterans, people who live in rural areas, sexual and gender minorities, middle-aged adults, and tribal populations may disproportionately experience factors linked to suicide. These factors include substance misuse, job or financial problems, relationship problems, physical or mental health problems, and/or easy access to lethal means. Additionally, people who have experienced violence, including adverse childhood experiences (such as physical abuse), bullying, or sexual violence, have a higher suicide risk.1
The page includes a section on how Suicide rates differ by industry and occupation:
CDC researchers have studied suicide rates by industry and occupation. Industry is the type of activity at a person’s place of work and occupation is the kind of work a person does to earn a living. A 2020 CDC study found that the suicide rate among workers in certain industries was significantly greater than the general U.S. population.11 The industry groups that had the highest suicide rates are:
- Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction (males: 54.2 per 100,000)
- Construction (males: 45.3 per 100,000)
- Other Services (such as automotive repair; males: 39.1 per 100,000)
- Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting* (males: 36.1 per 100,000)
- Transportation and Warehousing (males: 29.8 per 100,000; females: 10.1 per 100,000)
The suicide rate was also greater than the general population for the following major
occupation groups:
- Construction and Extraction (males: 49.4 per 100,000; females: 25.5 per 100,000)**
- Installation, Maintenance, and Repair (males: 36.9 per 100,000)
- Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media (males: 32.0 per 100,000)
- Transportation and Material Moving (males: 30.4 per 100,000; females: 12.5 per 100,000)
- Protective Service (females: 14.0 per 100,000)
- Healthcare Support (females: 10.6 per 100,000)
*Note "Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting" is an industry group, not an occupation.
In 2018, the Counter's Nathan Rosenberg and Bryan Wilson Stucki reported in NEWS: CDC retracts finding that farmers have the highest suicide rate in the country:
It's a narrative that was widely reported based on incorrect data. Policy efforts followed. But CDC has confirmed it was wrong.
On Friday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed that a widely cited result on farmer suicides was wrong. Over the past several months, numerous writers and reporters have relied on the finding, originally from a 2016 CDC report, to argue that farmers have the highest suicide rate in the country. That report found that workers in the “farming, fishing, and forestry,” job category killed themselves at over four times the national average, far and away the highest in the study.
But on Friday, Courtney Lenard, a public relations official, confirmed to us in an email that CDC had misclassified farmers as farming, fishing, and forestry, or “Triple-F,” workers. This error inflated the suicide rate for Triple-F workers and made any conclusions about farmer suicides impossible to determine. The revised rate for Triple-F workers is now third among occupational groups in the study, while CDC has yet to release a suicide rate for farmers.
We showed, in an article published last Thursday, that the study never justified the way reporters have covered it. The headline result was that farmers had the highest suicide rate, even though farmers do not belong in the Triple-F category, a federal occupational category that is almost entirely composed of agricultural workers. Working under the assumption that CDC had erroneously classified farmers with agricultural workers, we demonstrated that the agency divided the number of farmer and Triple-F worker suicides by Triple-F workers only, which doubled the rate researchers should have reported.
Although the study suggested it was agricultural workers, not farmers, who had a high suicide rate, the media focused relentlessly on farmers. As politicians began to write the 2018 Farm Bill, they referenced the high rate of farmer suicide, assertions that rested on CDC’s research. The original draft of the Senate farm bill included language that would have restricted, if not excluded, agricultural workers from access to a program designed to boost mental health services to all agriculture-related occupations. The Senate has since amended the bill to include agricultural workers, but legislators could still remove that expansive language or even kill the program.
None of this is to say that farmers do not have a high suicide rate. Lenard wrote us that CDC misclassified 90 farmers into the Triple-F category: if we divide them by our estimate of the total number of farmers (using the same survey as CDC did) we get a rate that could be as high as fourth in the study.
But that rate would still fall below the rate for Triple-F workers. While we cannot know how many of the suicides classified as Triple-F were agricultural workers, the fact that they comprise between 80 and 90 percent of the category is highly suggestive. And since there is little research on agricultural worker suicides—or farmer suicides for that matter—these results should spur further research.
Agricultural workers are 80 percent Hispanic and have household incomes around $23,000 a year. Their employers, farmers, are almost entirely white and have household incomes around $79,000 per year. When a study came out that ostensibly had nothing to do with farmers and everything to do with farm workers, journalists chose to omit the latter group from their reporting almost entirely. Politicians may now do the same in the farm bill. Researchers make mistakes, as do reporters and politicians. But what is much less certain is whether they will do right by some of the most exploited workers in the country.
UPDATE: This story was updated at 11:12 a.m., EST on June 28, to reflect that the Senate had adjusted language to include agricultural workers in its farm bill language on mental health support. You can find that text on page 656 of the farm bill.
The information now on the CDC page is drawn from a 2020 study of data through 2016.
Will those served by faith leaders trained by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and Minnesota Department of Health include farm workers? The press release from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture noted the following funding sources:
This event is partially underwritten by Farm and Ranch Stress Assistance Program award #2021-70035461 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture [this program?]. Other sponsors include Alluma, Minnesota State/AgCentric, Jackson Roeder Memorial Fund, LivingWorks Faith, Minnesota Corn Growers Association, Minnesota Farmers Union, Minnesota Soybean Growers Association, and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service – Minnesota.
Why not include farmworkers in publicity for this program? And why frame farmers as such victims? Have years of education and outreach produced no change in attitudes about mental health care in farming communities?
Chart: From Highlights from the September 2022 Farm Income Forecast, Farm Sector Profits Forecast to Remain Above Average in 2022.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6
Comments