I'm well aware that there are many other factors in the economic equation that makes citrus farming unprofitable in Florida; however in many cases, land prices are the most prohibitive factor: If a developer comes along and offers you $750,000 for 50 acres of Orange groves, and you can expect to earn only $25,000/year from that same grove by leaving it in Orange production, many (not all, but many) farmers will take the $750,000 and walk away from the orange grove. The Risk inherant in farming for x number of years is often not worth the immediate value of "selling out" to a land developer.

Note in such a case, the land cannot be sold to another farmer, because nobody is willing to pay $750,000 for a $25,000/yr income stream (especially if it is risky, and requires additional work and investment to maintain its earnings capacity).

There isn't an easy answer, but the government response is usually to ofter farm subsidies that partially fill in the gap between "farming value" and "developer's value". It soulds like your Ad Valorum tax is set up as a perfect example: it "subsidizes" the farmer by giving him a lower tax than a developer. And while such subsidies might "protect the family farm" in the short run, it does nothing for those who are not already landowners, and it will penalize those who already their own farms but who might like to expand their operation. This is because the farm subsidy itself keeps the price of farmland artificially inflated (how many people maintain groves just for the tax break? How many out of state landowners reap the subsidies on groves that they might never have seen?). The subsidy does nothing to stop urban sprawl, because the subsidy can only make a a fraction of the difference in percieved value.

Farming is messed up for a lot of reasons, and subsidies are a big part of the problem.

Go ahead and vote for Kerry. Maybe a return to the 17%+ interest rates of the Jimmy Carter years will help you and your farming operation.

In the meantime, I'll stay a Republican

Scott Evil