Define "Speculator" and "Land Baron"

The Mister really is the one that should write this post, but he is unavailable, so I'll do my best.

The East Valley Tribune is running a 3 day series called "The Speculators" which details some of the facts about the land owners and developers in the East Valley. There were a few paragraphs referencing Morrison Ranch and quoting Bias For Action in the first installment, titled "Land Barons Have Locked Up Empty Fields From Mesa To Florence." Here is the excerpt, though to get the full flavor, you should read the very long article in its entirety:

CASH CROP
Aside from Merrill and Levine, most owners of the largest blocks of land in the south East Valley are the families that have farmed the area for generations. Almost all of them have formed investment companies to manage their real estate holdings.

Some are content managing the sell-off of their family farms. Most have all but abandoned raising crops and are building their fortunes on pure real estate speculation.

Howard Morrison was one of those who saw the boom coming. Morrison’s family had farmed about 3,000 acres at Elliott and Higley roads since World War II.

But like other longtime farmers turned land brokers, Morrison knew his family’s lifestyle was quickly drawing to an end.

By the mid-1990s it was clear to the Morrisons that they could either be poor farmers or rich land sellers. They split the difference, forming their own land investment companies that allowed them to cash in on the boom while controlling how their family farm is transformed.

"You can’t really make a living farming here," Morrison says. "We needed to be the ones to make the decisions rather than just have the growth happen to us."

The Morrisons have largely confined themselves to managing the sell-off of their family’s holdings as development encroaches.

One of the definitions of baron is:

1. One having great wealth, power, and influence in a specified sphere of activity: an oil baron.

And the dictionary definition of speculator:

2: someone who risks losses for the possibility of considerable gains.

I presume this is the definition for land baron that the reporter is using as he refers to landowners. And there is definitely wealth in the land, for whoever owns it. And you can surely use the term speculator to define a typical farmer, although most farmers would tell you they aren't risking losses, they are planning on them, and that the considerable gains that are possible are usually of the satisfaction in good crop variety as opposed to the monetary variety.

I take offense, however, at the tone of the article and the negative connotations associated with the term "land baron." I can assure you, when The Mister's family arrived here in the early 1900's and cleared desert land with horses (before air conditioning), they didn't think of themselves or their future offspring as potential land barons. And they didn't plan together how they would "lock up" all the fields between Mesa and Florence so that someday they could sell them at astronomical prices and wield great power and influence. Truly, their thought was to farm, to provide a living for their families (especially in light of the Great Depression), and perhaps to leave a legacy.

There are two issues I have with this article. The first involves a generalized view of wealth that the reporter seems to hold. When I read this article, it feels like these landowners are bad people, and probably very greedy, just because the numbers involved are so large. What is the difference between these landowners and my neighbors who buy fixer-upper houses, fix them up and then sell them? The only difference is the number of zeros in the deals. What makes one scenario bad, and the other scenario good? There are landowners who are honest and upright, and there are those that are dishonest and fraudulent, just like there are small businessmen of both stripes. But owning the land and then selling it for a profit isn't wrong on the face of it.

My second issue is the feeling that the reporter greatly misunderstands the farm families with large holdings. He does not say anything about their intent, and the implication is that they came here and hoarded all this land so that someday they could make a fortune. Sure, the wealth is nice, but most of these families would rather still be farming, just like the old days. The land has been accumulated over many years, and usually is owned by lots of family members, rather than a single landholder. The decision to sell is excruciating, and not all family members agree on the timing or means of selling, or whether to start over again in another remote area. The Morrison family is greatly blessed and we don't take that blessing lightly, nor that responsibility. I don't want a reporter to paint us with the brushstroke of some feudal lord overseeing his many acres with no thought for others.

I would have to say that the reporter is accurate in his factual reporting, which is admirable. But his use of loaded words such as "land baron" and other inferences (I don't recall the family coming to the conclusion that we could either be "poor farmers or rich land sellers") leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Read the series, but please read it thoughtfully.