Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Here at the local level, we can’t do much to change the fanner’s profit-loss picture. We can’t put the bottom back into the pork market, cut the middleman’s share of the beef industry or weaken the strangle grip that the big canneries have on apple prices. The one thing we can do is give the farmer a break on local taxes.
We realise that there’s not a farmer in Rappahannock who’s had to sell land in order to pay local levies. With real estate taxes among the lowest in the state, any farmer who can’t pay the county’s bill should get out of the business because no matter what happens with the markets, he’s not going to be able to make a profit.
If that’s the case, then why land use? Because it’s a message loud and clear that Rappahannock appreciates and wants to keep its farmers.
The overwhelming majority of farmers aren’t in the business for the money. If they were, they’d have sold out long ago to land-hungry developers and put their cash into some type of tax shelter. With property in Rappahannock going at $3,000 an acre, they could be living off the interest and never have to slog through knee deep snow to break ice on a frozen pond or swelter under a blistering sun as they race their tractors to beat the rain to the hay crop. Everyone needs a little appreciation. Farmers are no exception. Their contributions in preserving the treasure that is Rappahannock County should be recognized. Land use taxation isn’t an iron clad guarantee that acres of precious farmland, orchards and open space won’t, b* turned ****** wMiii***--* ba it s a signal that the county is doing all it ‘can until state law allows wider options for seeking an answer. With a little appreciation, maybe our fanners will bold on until we find that answer.
67.9%