Viable ag on small pieces of land

[JohnS]

Aloha,

I have heard it said that anything smaller than three or maybe five acres is not viable or useful for actual agricultural activities.

However if you look at CSAs (community supported agriculture, booming all over N. America in the last 5-10 years), and at options like Bio-intensive mini-farming (high-quality beyond-organic production on 1/8th acre and up) and so on, it's clear that very small-scale ag is quite viable.

It's not ag like kama'aina are used to historically, of course, and IMO that's a good thing. It's forms of ag that make direct connections between growers and their communities, both in people terms and in money terms.

I'm not making a case for more small ag lot subdivisions, by the way. Separate topic on that in a moment.

I'm saying that ag is viable - and indeed essential - on very small pieces of land.

John S.




Edited by - johns on 12/05/2006 14:21:02

[peteadams]

Hats off to anyone creating a viable agricultural activity on small plots of land. But when we speak of agriculture in the context of land use and growth management "viable agriculture" has to mean someone making all or part of their income from their agricultural activities. I would be in favor of conferring whatever tax or other governmental benefits agricultural classification yields to anyone who can provide a business license and a 1040 Part C showing significant agriculture investment and return. Otherwise it's backyard gardening, even if they sell their produce. However great that is it can't be considered, from our working group point of view, a long term effort in retaining an agricultural character in Puna.

[wax]

I agree with Pete. From a policy standpoint there needs to be a real showing that agriculture is being pursued on the property. If not we get the continuation of urban sprawl and loss of agricultural lands that we now see accelerating.