Unlike the specifically enumerated operations, the phrase ``farming
in all its branches'' does not clearly indicate its scope. In
determining whether an operation constitutes ``farming in all its
branches,'' it may be necessary to consider various circumstances such
as the nature and purpose of the operations of the employer, the
character of the place where the employee performs his duties, the
general types of activities there conducted, and the purpose and
function of such activities with respect to the operations carried on by
the employer. The determination may involve a consideration of the
principles contained in Sec. 780.104. For example, fish farming
activities fall within the scope of the meaning of ``farming in all its
branches'' and employers engaged in such operations would be employed in
agriculture. On the other hand, so-called ``bird dog'' operations of the
citrus fruit industry consisting of the purchase of fruit unsuitable for
packing and of the transportation and sale of the fruit to canning
plants do not qualify as ``farming'' and, consequently, employees
engaged in such operations are not employed in agriculture. (See Chapman
v. Durkin, 214 F. 2d 360 cert. denied 348 U.S. 897; Fort Mason Fruit Co.
v. Durkin, 214 F. 2d 363 cert. denied, 348 U.S. 897.) However, employees
gathering the fruit at the groves are considered agricultural workers
because they are engaged in harvesting operations. (For exempt
transportation, see subpart J of this part.)
