By Jessica De La CruzThe Huffington PostA few years ago, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) began testing out a new method of farming for its supply of grain.
Called “Café” (pronounced “calf”), the system uses a small tractor to cut and pack corn, soybeans, cotton, or other grains for sale at a farmers market.
Farmers get paid a flat fee for their time and labor to pack the grains into the truck, and a portion of the harvest goes to feed the farmers who are raising the crops.
The program has been in place since 2007, but only now is it being tested in real-world applications.
The results are pretty encouraging.
The Farm Bill passed by Congress in 2010 was intended to increase farm productivity, and with the new crop season looming, it appears that the system is getting a boost.
But a closer look at the new system, as well as what the farmers and their advocates are saying, raises concerns.
First, the term “café.”
The program is called “Coffee Roasting and Crop Storage,” or CRS (pronunciation of the word “crow”).
It is a term that’s been in the headlines a lot lately.
The government started a program called “Farm Bully,” in which farmers are required to roast their own beans and sell the resulting product at farmers markets.
And in a recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the agency highlighted how many farmers are refusing to use the new program.
According to GAO, more than 3,000 farmers have already left the program, and there are at least two other complaints that have been filed against the USDA.
So what is this new system?
Coffees and coffees are made from soybeans.
The beans are then ground and ground again and blended with other grains.
The grains are packed into the tractor, then loaded onto a truck that is then driven around a small, open-air market.
The farmers are given a flat, one-time fee of $20 per hour for their work, plus the rest of the crop is sold.
The fee is then reduced to $25 per hour when the farmers harvest the harvest.
Farmers who do not have enough space in their tractor to store their grain or sell it on the market are allowed to harvest the crop themselves and then sell it.
If they sell it for less than they paid, they can buy back the crop for $50.
The system works by reducing the need for labor by increasing the size of the tractor and the number of workers, and by allowing farmers to use their own land, rather than having to dig a ditch or build a new tractor, said Jeff Johnson, an agronomist at the University of Georgia who studies the Coffees & Co. program.
It is similar to what the U-Haul program does in terms of the amount of land needed to store grains in the field.
But the program is far more efficient and efficient at reducing labor costs than the UHaul, Johnson said.
“It’s not as labor intensive as we’d like it to be,” he said.
Johnson is an enthusiastic proponent of the system, even though it has raised some eyebrows.
“The first time I saw it in person, I thought it was a joke,” he told The Huffington Posts.
“I thought it would be a waste of money.”
Johnson’s concern is that farmers will not be able to sell their grain at the market.
“You’ll have to drive back and forth between the fields,” he explained.
“And you’re just going to be stuck with the tractor.”
This is a very popular concept among farmers and ranchers, Johnson explained.
But in reality, farmers and consumers will not see much difference between the new plan and the UHHan.
The farmer will still be responsible for transportation of their crops, and they will be required to have an open-access parking lot, Johnson pointed out.
The system does have some advantages, he said, including the ability to store more grain.
“A lot of people don’t understand the impact this has on the environment,” he pointed out, “because it’s just a bunch of people parking in a parking lot for months at a time.
There’s not a lot of space left in the lot.”
The problem is that the process is labor intensive, and farmers are going to have to cut back on their hours and reduce their work.
The more work that goes into the process, the more labor costs they’ll have, said Johnson.
Johnson also pointed out that farmers who have to harvest more grains will have to be more productive than farmers who don’t.
“Farmers who harvest a lot more grains are going be very inefficient,” he added.
Johnson also expressed concerns that some of the farmers will lose their land.
“We’re going to lose our farms and they’ll be in the weeds, and