Farm Land

The Missus posted yesterday about the series of articles in the East Valley Tribune, and I wanted to add my two cents to her thoughts.

The notion that the Cooleys or the Morrisons set up in Gilbert in anticipation of development is just ridiculous. That is because both families, and others, started farming here before the invention of air conditioning. At that time, this place had lots of sunshine, lots of aluvial flood plains, and some water, with the potential for more as more lakes were added. But there was no way to imagine a million people dumb enough to move here and work in an office, much less the nearly 4 million people we have now. Then times and technologies changed. Phoenix started to grow. And throughout the valley, farm families had to begin to deal with that growth. There have been many responses. There are many valid responses. And most of them involved farmers losing the opportunity to continue to farm here, but also getting a lot more for their land than they paid for it. That is certainly a blessing. It is not something they connived. There were actually a bunch of other people (developers, home builders, and home buyers) who pretty much decided for the farmers what their future would be.

Some of us Morrisons decided that this part of Gilbert needed to feel like Gilbert after the transition. That is why we got involved. It required a career change for several of us. It required dealing with a whole set of problems we would rather avoid. But we think it is worth it. We think Gilbert has been a great community, and should still be identifible as a community, and a great one at that, once it is part of the Phoenix metroplex. Look around. I think we are getting it done!

Others seem to think it is a good idea, too. The Johnstons and the Cooleys are involved in the planning of their farms. I think the Sossamans are doing something of the sort. Now, we may have to develop some of the same skills and knowledge as "developers" like John Graham of Sunbelt Holdings. I get called a developer now, and I suppose the way I spend my day justifies that. But we came by this involvement for different reasons. Not necessarily better, but clearly different. It seems to me that the Tribune, especially in its first part of its latest series, glosses over this fact.

In today's article, they seem to catch some of the notion of our attachment to the land. Of course, unless you have been part of it, you can't even come close. I have crawled 100 yards uncovering little cotton plants a half inch high that got covered with a cultivator by accident. It makes no sense economically. But I was growing those little guys. I wanted the plants to make it. However, the article doesn't explain why we are involved with the change. It leaves it to the only motive listed in earlier articles - profit. Well, unless things change drastically, we are going to make a profit on this land, whatever we do. I think the Tribune should acknowledge that some farming families really want to help preserve Gilbert, and the East Valley, as a great place to live.