Eliminating the Emotional
by Randy Jonjak, Wisconsin

Editor's Note: This posting was too lengthy to appear on the form, so it is posted as an Op-Ed page. However, you may respond through the forum by clicking below.

8/6/99  -  I see that postings have trickled down to a pre-crisis pace. What submissions there are come from the same very few individuals. I got tired of seeing my own name on these two web sites, and stopped contributing. But I see the prevailing wisdom of those still posting is that anyone wanting to preserve the co-op structure (like me) is being emotional. Rather than let my silence appear to be a surrender, I am preparing this submission.

Frantic is a word two posters have used to describe their current emotions. The word I would use for myself is resigned. Resigned to the fact that our small farms could very well be out of business as soon as next year. While I haven't been able to come up with what my plan B career will be if I quit farming, I already know that I'm not in love with this way of life enough to continue to raise cranberries under that same profit structure that dairy farmers here in Wisconsin have labored under for so long.

I presume the reason two of you feel a hero on a white horse can no longer save us is that our debt level is so high. I still think a new CEO could make a hell of a difference, if we get the right person. But right now, our future is supposedly being charted by a few individuals on a white horse, in the form of our consultants. My current state of being braced for the worst comes from my recent realization that I was hoping for too much from our consulting group. These are just people after all, and no amount of their own hype about what gurus they are can change that. The Anderson consulting group proved how human gurus can be by talking us in to closing down too many bottling lines. Result? We have a surplus in the freezer and can't bring it to market. Isn't it shocking how much money a strong CEO could have saved us by being able to make good decisions on his own instead of being forced to rely on expensive consulting firms to give us bad answers? I am also resigned to the fact that when the consulting firm makes their rounds, they will identify with management as "their kind of people" (MBA's). They will mistrust the directors (farmers masquerading as business men, from the consultant's perspective). And if they talk to a grower, they will pat him on the head and say "Isn't he cute?"

So I have come to the conclusion that there is no way the current consultant is going to look at our current situation from the eyes of the farmer. What profession does an MBA have more contempt for than farming? I am resigned to the fact that the recommendation of the consultants will be to sell the co-op to a proprietary company. And no matter how I rack my brain, I can't think of any family farm size operation that is in a proud, productive partnership with a Pepsi or Coke. Which reminds me of another point. In my former ongoing discussions with Tom Gelsthorpe, I divulged the fact that I am on a 54 acre farm here in Wisconsin, and hoped to continue farming it. I thought this might elicit a response from Tom as to what his operation and perspective were. Unless I missed it, I don't believe this information was forthcoming. I suppose you people in Mass., the inner circle of cranberry web posters, all know each other. But I don't know who you are, which makes it difficult to fully comprehend your arguments. I want to point out that I don't consider Tom an enemy. While we disagree on some points, I have appreciated many of his recent comments. There is a big tendency among posters to be too catty with each other, which hurts the overall discussion.

Anyway, we just built a house on the farm I grew up on two years ago. Tore down my parents house to put this one in the same place, between the oldest beds and the beach on a small lake for the kids. Now let's say we quit farming. Could I stand to live here and watch the beds grow into willows 15 feet high? Pretty tough. Especially tough knowing how much all the new lake neighbors from Minnesota would relish watching a cranberry farm die a slow death. Too gloomy a prognosis? There is no doubt in my mind that if Ocean Spray sells to a beverage giant, the small farms will eventually give way to the larger, newer, more efficient farms with low debt. Is that not the way of agriculture in the 21st century? Is that not the vision for agriculture held by the business world? Don't they say give up your emotional attachment to the family farm and realize they are a remnant of the past?

But most of all, I am resigned to the fact that the majority of the growers are going to remain silent through the whole disaster. In Wisconsin, we have no discretion as to where politeness ends and timidity begins. Not only do we lack the guts to defend ourselves, we even lack the guts to holler rape.

A small subset of the growers, the directors, apparently refuses to reexamine their convictions on how the company should be run, even though our decks are awash. I understand now that the call for outside directors comes out of desperation for change in the makeup of our board of directors. I still believe the result of outside directors would be cronies for management rather than champions for the growers. But I understand the grower's frustration of trying to demand representation from directors who are safe in their closed ranks.

The analogy of the sinking ship is inescapable. Captain, officers, and crew are going to meekly watch the whole ship sink. The only action we have taken is to "boldly" hire yet another consulting firm to tell us how to drown.