Latest News

Winnipeg Free Press - ONLINE EDITION

Farmers' gross income steady but net income down

By: Murray McNeill

23/11/2009 11:15 AM | Comments: 4

MARC GALLANT / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS ARCHIVE Enlarge Image

Farm family near Brandon.

WINNIPEG -- Manitoba farmers' gross income held steady over the first nine months of this year despite a three per cent decline in the third quarter alone, according to new Statistics Canada figures released today.

The agency said Manitoba farmers recorded $3.6 billion in farm cash receipts for the January to September period in both 2008 and 2009.

For the third quarter alone, cash receipts dropped to $1.10 billion from $1.14 billion in 2008.

At the national level, the numbers were even less encouraging, with farm cash receipts dropping by 4.2 per cent for the first nine months and 11.8 per cent for the third quarter alone.

Farm cash receipts include income from crop and livestock sales and from government programs. They do not represent the bottom line for producers, who still have to deduct their expenses, loan costs, and depreciation to arrive at their net income.

The preliminary net income figures for 2009 won't be available until next May. However, Statistics Canada released the final net income figures for 2008 today, and they showed that Manitoba farmers' saw their net income fall by $24 million, or 7.1 per cent, to $312 million from $336 million in 2007.

That bucked the national trend which saw farmers' net income in Canada climb by $79.2 million to $3.6 billion in 2008.

murray.mcneill@freepress.mb.ca

Rate this
This article has not yet been rated.

We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high. If you thought it was well written, do the same. If it doesn’t meet your standards, mark it accordingly.

You can also register and/or login to the site and join the conversation by leaving a comment.

Rate it yourself by rolling over the stars and clicking when you reach your desired rating. We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high.

4 Comments

Posted by: formerwpg

November 23, 2009 at 11:20 PM

So....then maybe they should go do something else so that they can earn a decent living. I grew up in small town/rural area, and the farmers were about the only ones that had motor homes, boats, snowmobiles, ATV's, etc in their yards. They also went away every winter for 4-6 months---the rest of us couldn't afford to do it. In fact my family got turkeys, Christmas hampers and used clothing from the local Elks and/or Legion.

If a farmer's crop failed, he still got paid from insurance or govt; I can remember in the 1970's when farmers in Alberta were paid (by the Govt) not to raise hogs. They didn't have to do anything--just not raise hogs. If anyone else had a business failure--that was just too bad--they had to find something else to do. Farming is like running an airlines now adays--they get money no matter what happens or how poorly they run their business.

Report abusive comment

Posted by: Limegirl

November 23, 2009 at 6:16 PM

Are you serious...where did these facts come from??? I think if you want a clear picture of where farmers stand you should do a story on gross income and expenses from 2002 (before BSE) compared to 2009. Income has dropped and expenses have skyrocketed. That would be a story worth reporting!!!

P.S. Moral of the story....behind every successful farmer is the wife who works in town!!!!!

Report abusive comment

Posted by: double nickel

November 23, 2009 at 6:08 PM

@Stefan..family farmers haven't been able to earn a decent living for at least the last decade. Successive government bungling and outright bad policy making has ensured that only the large corporate farms will survive. Your average farmer nowadays is usually a tenant on his own land.

Report abusive comment

Posted by: Stefan M. Jonasson

November 23, 2009 at 2:03 PM

While these statistics may be interesting to some, I find them so broad and sweeping as to be almost meaningless. It would be much more useful to have these numbers distilled to the point where we had some indication of how the "typical" farmer is doing. Is she or he earning enough to provide a family with a decent standard of living? Are livestock producers doing better than grain growers, or are they doing worse? Is the average farmer's return on investment worthwhile, or would she or he be better off investing in a convenience store? Are older farmers positioned to retire comfortably? Is it feasible for young, aspiring farmers to enter the field? How is the family farm doing in relation to the corporate farm? Should I be paying more for groceries so that farm families can enjoy a decent lifestyle.

These are the statistics the public needs in order to determine whether or not agricultural policy is sound or out of balance. Vague statistics about megatrends tell us much less than we need to know about the state of the farm economy, which consists of individual producers and their families, not to mention the industries and workers who depend upon a strong farm economy. This news story is fine as far as it goes, but it doesn't go nearly far enough.