The character of a practice as a part of the agricultural activity
or as a distinct business activity must be determined by examination and
evaluation of all the relevant facts and circumstances in the light of
the pertinent language and intent of the Act. The result will not depend
on any mechanical application of isolated factors or tests. Rather, the
total situation will control (Maneja v. Waialua, 349 U.S. 254; Mitchell
v. Budd, 350 U.S. 473). Due weight should be given to any available
criteria which may indicate whether performance of such a practice may
properly be considered an incident to farming within the intent of the
Act. Thus, the general relationship, if any, of the practice to farming
as evidenced by common understanding, competitive factors, and the
prevalence of its performance by farmers (see Sec. 780.146), and similar
pertinent matters should be considered. Other factors to be considered
in determining whether a practice may be properly regarded as incidental
to or in conjunction with the farming operations of a particular farmer
or farm include the size of the operations and respective sums invested
in land, buildings and equipment for the regular farming operations and
in plant and equipment for performance of the practice, the amount of
the payroll for each type of work, the number of employees and the
amount of time they spend in each of the activities, the extent to which
the practice is performed by ordinary farm employees and the amount of
interchange of employees between the operations, the amount of revenue
derived from each activity, the degree of industrialization involved,
and the degree of separation established between the activities. With
respect to practices performed on farm products (see Sec. 780.147)
and in the consideration of any specific practices (see Secs. 780.148-
780.158 and 780.205-780.214), there may be special factors in addition
to those above mentioned which may aid in the determination.
