This has been said before, but it bears saying again: they don't have "fields." They've got 36 acres. In places where farming is actually practiced, that is "a field," and a small one, at that. I understand why people keep thinking this, because they call themselves a "ranch," which evokes images of giant tracts of shortgrass prairie or desert scrub over which cattle freely roam, and the long shots of their property with no real visible fencing and the mountains rising in the background contribute tot the illusion.
General Sherman famously promised freed slaves "40 acres and a mule" at the end of the Civil War, so think of it like that: 40 acres of farmland in an area with ample rain and a long growing season, like Georgia or Mississippi, is enough to keep a poor farmer and his family going at a mid-19th century standard of living. And not fancy living, even by mid-19th century standards. The tranchers, though, are trying to keep themselves going at an upper-middle-class standard of 21st century living off of 36 acres - again, one single field - of arid, unirrigated property with an extremely short growing season, "manned" (lol) by a bunch of eunuchs and cripples. In terms of agricultural economics, it makes Stalinist collectivization look downright sensible. No wonder they needed to grift $100k just to keep body and soul together.