Throughout our history, there have been many who have sought to undermine these principles for their private gain.

Today, the major threat to these agrarian principles lies in the growth of agribusiness which has brought about the decline of the American farmer. National policies have been shaped to serve the interests of the large corporations and have seriously undermined the agrarian foundation of our national traditions. The ultimate effect on the people of Boone county, of Missouri, and of the United States will be a profound one. It is essential that we reevaluate our policies and reformulate them if we are to preserve American values. This is a matter that should be of direct concern to every working farmer in America. It is, as I said at the outset, your

concern.

Table 2. Comparison between a family farm and agribusiness community in California

Footnotes

1. Those sentiments are expressed in Max R. White, Douglas Ensminger, and Cecil L. Gregory Rich Land Poor People, Indianapolis, Ind. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Security Administration, Region III, 1938, and in C. T. Pihlblad, Arthur W. Nebel, and Joseph H. Stokes and Melvin W. Sneed and Cecil L. Gregory, The Rural Almshouse Population in Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin, No. 3, University of Missouri, 1938.

2. This has been thoroughly documented by Varden Fuller in The Supply of Agricultural Labor as a Factor in the Evolution of Farm Organization, Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor, United States Senate, ("LaFollette Committee') 76th Congress, 3rd Session, part 54, Exhibit 8762A, 1940.

3. Walter Goldschmidt, As You Sow The Free Press, 1947. Republished as Part 1 of As You Sow: Three Studies in the Social Consequences of Agribusiness. Allenheld, Osmun, 1978.

4. Walter Goldschmidt, Small Business and the Community: A Study in Central Valley of California on Effects of Scale of Farm Operations. Report of the Special Committee to Study Problems of American Small Business, 79th Congress, 2nd Session, Senate Committee Print No. 13, 1946. Republished as Part 2 of As You Sow: Three Studies in the Social Consequences of Agribusiness.

5. T. Lynn Smith, The Study of Social Stratification in the Agricultural Sections of the U.S.: Nature, Data, Procedures, and Preliminary Results. Rural Sociology vol. 34, 1969.

6. Radoje Nikolitch, Our 31,000 Largest Farms. Agricultural Economics Report No. 175, Economic Research Service, USDA, 1970. 7. Walter Goldschmidt, Large Scale Agriculture and the Rural Social Structure, Rural Sociology, Vol. 43, 1978.

8. William D. Heffernan, Sociological Dimensions of Agricultural Structure in the United States. Sociologia Ruralis, Vol. 12, 1972. 9. William D. Heffernan and Paul Lasley, Agricultural Structure and Interaction in the Local Community: A Case Study. Rural Sociology, Vol. 43, 1978; Paul Lasley and William D. Heffernan, Structural Changes in Central Missouri's Grape Industry. Paper presented to the Rural Sociological Society (mimeographed), 1976.

10. Lester L. Moore, pastor of the United Methodist Church of Corning, Iowa, before the Senate Committee on Small Business, U.S. Senate ("Corporate Farming") 90th Congress, 2nd Session, May 21 p. 173, 1968.

11. Center for Rural Affairs, Wheels of Fortune (A Report on the Impact of Center Pivot Irrigation on the Ownership of Land in Nebraska). Walthill, Nebraska, (mimeographed), 1976.

12. Ralph H. Desmerais, Revolution and Response: The Rural Community in Arkansas. MS.

13. Walter Goldschmidt, Agribusiness and Political Power, Part 3 of As You Sow: Three Studies in the Social Consequences of Agribusiness.