Two words are sure to come up whenever some anti-agriculture group looks to belittle the folks who produce our nation’s food and fiber.

Factory farms.

More often than not, the term is used in stark contrast to those wholesome “family farms” most anyone can adore, complete with their rustic windmills, pastoral landscapes and fluffy animals roaming somewhere about the place.

Let’s ignore the fact that I have yet to set foot on any farm or ranch, no matter its size, that wasn’t owned or operated by a hard-working family.

No wonder those who earn their living off the land get perturbed every time the phrase “factory farms” is used.

But as my colleague Gene Hall recently noted, perhaps we overreact. Maybe factory farms aren’t the demons they’re made out to be.

He made a fine case in a recent blog post on Texas Agriculture Talks, which he co-authors with Texas Farm Bureau publications director Mike Barnett.

Hall, the bureau’s public relations chief, armed himself with a trusty dictionary and went in search of meaning.

A factory is:

*  A building where goods are manufactured or assembled chiefly by machine.

“Agriculture, including animal agriculture, fits this to some degree,” Hall said. “There are machines that plant and harvest crops. There are machines that milk cows and provide clean food and water to chickens and other livestock.”

*  A place or organization that produces a particular thing regularly and in some quantity.

“This one fits, too,” he said. “U.S. agriculture feeds much of the world — regularly and in quantities that other parts of the world can only imagine. A productive place? Darn right — productivity unmatched anywhere in the world.”

*  A building or set of buildings with facilities for manufacturing where manufacturing takes place.

“I won’t argue with this one, either,” Hall said. “Some parts of animal agriculture, especially, need buildings to protect animals from the elements and predators and to keep the feed and water clean.

“To be fair, there were mentions of ‘industrial’ in some of the definitions. This is another of the bad words by which agriculture is often attacked, but it also hints at efficiency and cost control.”

Admittedly, all these words — factory, industrial and others — can be used in various ways to suit whatever purpose one pursues. But calling a modern agriculture operation a factory definitely is not all bad.

Why? Hall offered a succinct answer.

“A great big chunk of the American population decided about 100 years ago they wanted to leave the farm and lead a new and different life,” he said. “They did so in droves to work in places that fit the conventional definition of factories, which led to lower costs and ready availability of a wide range of goods.

“The farmers who were left had to get more efficient or go out of business. All this happened. The result is now evidenced in grocery stores where Americans spend, on average, less than 10 percent of their income to feed themselves.

“They create jobs — about 20 percent of the jobs in the United States.”

I tend to agree with Hall. Perhaps factory farms aren’t so bad after all.

It sure beats the alternative.

We could all keep some chickens, a milk cow and grow a garden. Some people do, but not all can or even want to.

And we could pay more — a lot more — and learn to live with shortages.

But I would rather not.

Read more of Hall and Barnett’s weekly blogs at the Web site www.txfb.org/TxAgTalks.

Bobby Horecka lives in China Spring with his wife and three children. He writes for the Texas Farm Bureau’s print publications, online news service and video projects.