Impressive harvest action video - Monette Farms by EpicJib Aerial Media

Crop Production & Forage

Tools

Impressive harvest action video - Monette Farms by EpicJib Aerial Media

AgrivilleAdmin's Avatar Sep 14, 2017 | 16:44 1 Some terrific camera work and editing of a great time of year.
Enjoy. Have a safe harvest everyone.



Reply With Quote
SASKFARMER3's Avatar Sep 14, 2017 | 19:02 2 Real Nice video.

Crops look poor this year. Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2017 | 21:12 3
Quote Originally Posted by SASKFARMER3 View Post
Real Nice video.

Crops look poor this year.
Yep 70000 or is it 90000acres now X $100/acre loss. -$9million Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2017 | 21:29 4 Impressive operation to say the least .
Poor crops or not .
Looks like the grain was going in the grain tank more than well enough.
Awesome yard . Reply With Quote
iceman's Avatar Sep 14, 2017 | 22:42 5
Quote Originally Posted by biglentil View Post
Yep 70000 or is it 90000acres now X $100/acre loss. -$9million
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that chickpeas they are combining?
If so that grain cart load is worth 87k


Iceman Out Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 06:38 6 Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. I just see a bland, sterile, lifeless, chemical, industrial and mechanical scene.
What klause was talking about in another thread leads me to this image of a healthy, sustainable landscape in which we produce our food. You'll maybe have to google it to expand and read the detail.
Name:  Screen Shot 2017-09-15 at 7.20.18 AM.jpg
Views: 1102
Size:  21.1 KB Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 07:14 7 The interesting thing here is that this video is shot on the "smallest" part of the farm operation I believe. If you think that's impressive you haven't seen the rest of the operation. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 07:25 8
Quote Originally Posted by grassfarmer View Post
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. I just see a bland, sterile, lifeless, chemical, industrial and mechanical scene.
What klause was talking about in another thread leads me to this image of a healthy, sustainable landscape in which we produce our food. You'll maybe have to google it to expand and read the detail.
Name:  Screen Shot 2017-09-15 at 7.20.18 AM.jpg
Views: 1102
Size:  21.1 KB
Grass what a stupid jealous comment. Just because there is lots of combines in a field its lifeless and sterile. If there was 1 it's ok? You don't even know how they farm. Just can't see past them end of your nose. That comment really shows your character. Pathetic
As far as the video I assume they run everyone together for the video because it's so inefficient to run that big of a crew. Most of the big guys in southern Alberta have gone to splitting up the crews. Very seldom will you see more then 6 combines running together.
Last edited by vvalk; Sep 15, 2017 at 08:25.
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 07:28 9 Thought they were doing soybeans? Maybe not as I see there outta Swift.

Here's their website, http://www.monettefarms.ca/

What's bigger than a BTO? Need a new acronym. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 07:50 10 Bland, sterile and lifeless is kind of what John Palliser's take was on the area too Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 07:52 11 grasshat, "Bland, sterile and lifeless"

Just what I want,,, when I'm straight cutting! Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 08:10 12 Sort of explains why Trudeau wants a piece of the action.....

At one time all that land was farmed by many families that made a community where rinks were alive in the winter and baseball fields in the summer...along with full school enrollments adding additional people with full staff. ...

It's great to look at and not jealous but there is a bigger story than just 12 perfectly spaced GPS controlled combines....

Some are missing the point. ....

One thought....efficiency will make this a Bland, sterile and lifeless landscape as Captain John Palliser predicted. ....
Last edited by bucket; Sep 15, 2017 at 08:17.
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 08:25 13 That is a very impressive outfit. The only farms that run more then 2 combines around here are the huts.

I don't get the dramatic soundtrack though. Yes, we see you are a big show but the music seems like overkill. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 09:08 14 bucket, farmers didn't choose to get bigger and bigger. I'm an average sized farm(or maybe used to be), and we operate the land of 7-8 old farms.

Governments, both federally and globally, the U.N. etc have had a "cheap food policy" my whole 40 year farming career. The policy has continually forced the smallest of farms to give up and sell out, and anybody bigger to cannibalize them, simply to stay economically viable. For the longest time the EU and the USA had farm policy and programs to keep small farms going, but even that changed.

Equipment manufactures and chem suppliers et al have a business model that is not attached to the cheap food policy, hence if you want equipment, even used, you'll have to expand your land base to justify it. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 09:22 15 Good points dannyw1m....but isn't government policy dictating where farms go....this latest tax suggested by Trudeau will push more farms out....


Then think of your own operation...who could afford to buy you out if it was decided that way?


Not saying big or small farms are the right thing....it just seems trusted neighbors are farther apart.....and it leaves an uneasy feeling...


To be clear....trusted neighbors mean you can talk openly without them trying to buy you out the next day.... Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 10:03 16 It's like getting the finger from PET, all over again !

That's exactly what Trudeau's policy is aiming to due.
They don't want that mom and pop business anymore, too much shady stuff going on. They don't want you doing your own taxes, only professionals with arms length to do them. They trust accounts and lawyers more than farmers and businessmen/women.

Trudeau calls them loopholes, yet nobody, including media, is asking Trudeau about what tax loopholes his trust fund uses(or the fact the trust fund IS A LOOPHOLE).

Often, while driving around checking crop, I'll wonder to myself, how different things would have been back in the day when there were families living on all those farmsteads. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 10:09 17 Jealous of what vvalk? Having no vegetation growing outside a 90 day window, no birds, no trees and no diversity? I get more pleasure bringing an acre of my own land back to a healthy productive state through regenerative agriculture than owning thousands of the kind depicted here. When are farmers going to smarten up and realise that big doesn't equal success? Needing to farm more land each year or each generation to sustain the family is a sign on failure not success. What excites me is the growing number of new entrants proving that it's possible to make a decent living off a quarter section - that's the future and would regenerate rural communities that bucket commented on.

The type of fossil fuel farming depicted here doesn't impress me - it's just moving other people's money around versus creating wealth from the land by pure solar conversion. An example of how far removed from reality this is getting is the 2 page spread in Agdealer today from a JD dealer offering "combine wash packages" at $799. So you get done combining, send the combines away to be washed and jet off to Hawaii for the winter all the while bemoaning how you can't make a living with current prices and there is no hope for the next generation to take over the farm. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 10:13 18 Often, while driving around checking crop, I'll wonder to myself, how different things would have been back in the day when there were families living on all those farmsteads.


How is it any different for other business people. There used to be corner stores all across towns and cities everywhere until 7-11 showed up. Family run corner stores history.

Your downtown was most likely lined with family run small business outlets, possibly grocery stores, clothing stores, hardware stores, etc. Walmart comes to town and shut everyone down.
That's the way things are. Farmers are going to face the same fact. Nobody will be able to compete with these low commodity prices. It's an unfortunate reality but the powers that be will drive this industry onto the same road as the above mentioned business'. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 10:45 19
Quote Originally Posted by sk_wheatking View Post
Often, while driving around checking crop, I'll wonder to myself, how different things would have been back in the day when there were families living on all those farmsteads.


How is it any different for other business people. There used to be corner stores all across towns and cities everywhere until 7-11 showed up. Family run corner stores history.

Your downtown was most likely lined with family run small business outlets, possibly grocery stores, clothing stores, hardware stores, etc. Walmart comes to town and shut everyone down.
That's the way things are. Farmers are going to face the same fact. Nobody will be able to compete with these low commodity prices. It's an unfortunate reality but the powers that be will drive this industry onto the same road as the above mentioned business'.
True cause consumers want more and cheaper. Food, clothes, widgets etc. Efficiencies put more out of work and who pays to keep them? That is the problem I see coming. Maybe tax the piss out of the multinationals but give preferential treatment to smaller domestic corps and small businesses. They employ more people and create more wealth domestically. The tax changes stifle the mom and pop businessmen and do little to the Walmarts. Corporate fascism Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 11:25 20
Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
Sort of explains why Trudeau wants a piece of the action.....

At one time all that land was farmed by many families that made a community where rinks were alive in the winter and baseball fields in the summer...along with full school enrollments adding additional people with full staff. ...

It's great to look at and not jealous but there is a bigger story than just 12 perfectly spaced GPS controlled combines....

Some are missing the point. ....

One thought....efficiency will make this a Bland, sterile and lifeless landscape as Captain John Palliser predicted. ....

I agree, corporate farms have a different ring to the average Canadian. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 17:39 21
Quote Originally Posted by danny W1M View Post
Thought they were doing soybeans? Maybe not as I see there outta Swift.

Here's their website, http://www.monettefarms.ca/

What's bigger than a BTO? Need a new acronym.
looks like soybeans to me. maybe 30 bpa? Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 18:01 22
Quote Originally Posted by grassfarmer View Post
Jealous of what vvalk? Having no vegetation growing outside a 90 day window, no birds, no trees and no diversity? I get more pleasure bringing an acre of my own land back to a healthy productive state through regenerative agriculture than owning thousands of the kind depicted here. When are farmers going to smarten up and realise that big doesn't equal success? Needing to farm more land each year or each generation to sustain the family is a sign on failure not success. What excites me is the growing number of new entrants proving that it's possible to make a decent living off a quarter section - that's the future and would regenerate rural communities that bucket commented on.

The type of fossil fuel farming depicted here doesn't impress me - it's just moving other people's money around versus creating wealth from the land by pure solar conversion. An example of how far removed from reality this is getting is the 2 page spread in Agdealer today from a JD dealer offering "combine wash packages" at $799. So you get done combining, send the combines away to be washed and jet off to Hawaii for the winter all the while bemoaning how you can't make a living with current prices and there is no hope for the next generation to take over the farm.
So it's not for you. So be it. Just say that But your comments were negative and petty. "Fossil fuel" farming?!!! Really? Making a living off a 1/4 section? What if you kids want to farm? For sure need income over 3 generations minimum so now it's 50 acres. Now you have to expand right? Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 18:04 23
Quote Originally Posted by vvalk View Post
So it's not for you. So be it. Just say that But your comments were negative and petty. "Fossil fuel" farming?!!! Really? Making a living off a 1/4 section? What if you kids want to farm? For sure need income over 3 generations minimum so now it's 50 acres. Now you have to expand right?
And you think they use more fossil fuel per acre then you do? What's the footprint of 160 acre individual farms. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 18:43 24
Quote Originally Posted by vvalk View Post
So it's not for you. So be it. Just say that But your comments were negative and petty. "Fossil fuel" farming?!!! Really? Making a living off a 1/4 section? What if you kids want to farm? For sure need income over 3 generations minimum so now it's 50 acres. Now you have to expand right?
Go back and read my first two sentences in my original post and you'll see it was your interpretation that was off not my comments. You were the one springing the jealousy accusation which was negative and petty. Fossil fuel costs on the quarter section places? running a quad and putting a couple hundred hours annually on a $9000 tractor. Grossing north of a quarter million dollars a year. Sure these guys might expand but they can afford to buy the land with the money they are making - they might get another quarter or two in time but they'll never need 20 or 100 quarters because they are playing a smarter game. Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2017 | 21:02 25
Quote Originally Posted by grassfarmer View Post
Go back and read my first two sentences in my original post and you'll see it was your interpretation that was off not my comments. You were the one springing the jealousy accusation which was negative and petty. Fossil fuel costs on the quarter section places? running a quad and putting a couple hundred hours annually on a $9000 tractor. Grossing north of a quarter million dollars a year. Sure these guys might expand but they can afford to buy the land with the money they are making - they might get another quarter or two in time but they'll never need 20 or 100 quarters because they are playing a smarter game.
Have any examples of that type of farm that you could point out? Genuinely curious, not arguing. Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2017 | 07:03 26
Quote Originally Posted by Mjolnir View Post
Have any examples of that type of farm that you could point out? Genuinely curious, not arguing.
There are lots of examples - mostly new entrants to agriculture, direct marketing, livestock based, stacking enterprises. Usually based on the Joel Salatin model below.

http://https://vimeo.com/81468461 Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2017 | 12:17 27
Quote Originally Posted by grassfarmer View Post
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. I just see a bland, sterile, lifeless, chemical, industrial and mechanical scene.
What klause was talking about in another thread leads me to this image of a healthy, sustainable landscape in which we produce our food. You'll maybe have to google it to expand and read the detail.
Name:  Screen Shot 2017-09-15 at 7.20.18 AM.jpg
Views: 1102
Size:  21.1 KB
Thst doesnt impress local landlords. $124.00/acre cash rent and harvest my entire farm in 14 hours is the only way to go. Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2017 | 12:28 28
Quote Originally Posted by grassfarmer View Post
Jealous of what vvalk? Having no vegetation growing outside a 90 day window, no birds, no trees and no diversity? I get more pleasure bringing an acre of my own land back to a healthy productive state through regenerative agriculture than owning thousands of the kind depicted here. When are farmers going to smarten up and realise that big doesn't equal success? Needing to farm more land each year or each generation to sustain the family is a sign on failure not success. What excites me is the growing number of new entrants proving that it's possible to make a decent living off a quarter section - that's the future and would regenerate rural communities that bucket commented on.

The type of fossil fuel farming depicted here doesn't impress me - it's just moving other people's money around versus creating wealth from the land by pure solar conversion. An example of how far removed from reality this is getting is the 2 page spread in Agdealer today from a JD dealer offering "combine wash packages" at $799. So you get done combining, send the combines away to be washed and jet off to Hawaii for the winter all the while bemoaning how you can't make a living with current prices and there is no hope for the next generation to take over the farm.
There are other methods to make a living on rural properties but they require a lot of planning and effort and marketing. Nobody is going to make a drone video of that boring stuff.
It takes more than observation and philosophy to succeed alternatively and a strong character to stay with it. My helper is of the new generation and never farmed. He notes grain spills from swing auger, tipped over sample pails, old samples, leaky bin doors etc etc. He says he could make a living on spilled grain. I say, ok, start collecting the spills and show me.
He needs a "kicker" elevator office cleaner if anyone knows where to buy and a price. Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2017 | 12:29 29
Quote Originally Posted by biglentil View Post
Yep 70000 or is it 90000acres now X $100/acre loss. -$9million
This can go the other way, a gain of $9 million. Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2017 | 14:49 30 Those little store owners in room 101 now. If the 800 acre farms were still here, so would the store/restraints. Reply With Quote