Our newest additions to the herd:
Showing posts with label farms. Show all posts
Showing posts with label farms. Show all posts
Monday, September 19, 2011
BRIGHTNESS IN A DARK TIME
Well, the drought continues, hardship abounds...out of the darkness comes BRIGHTNESS!!
Our newest additions to the herd:
Our newest additions to the herd:
Thursday, July 28, 2011
GROW! the Movie
THIS is why I write...because there is a "Growing" movement, slowly, surely, spreading across this great land. The Renaissance of our heritage. A heritage, though bruised and battered, is healing...there is real hope that the family farm and ranch will rise again!
GROW!
is a documentary profiling a group of young farmers in Georgia
A new 50 minute documentary that captures the energy and independence of a fresh crop of young farmers.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
It's not just 'Old MacDonald' on the farm anymore. All across the U.S. there is a growing movement of educated young people who are leaving the cities to take up an agrarian life. Armed with college degrees, some are unable to find jobs in the current economic slump. Fed up with corporate America and its influence on a broken food system, they aim to solve some of the current system's inequities by growing clean, fair food. Mostly landless, they borrow, rent or manage farmland in order to fulfill their dreams of doing something meaningful with their lives.
GROW! takes a look at this new generation of sustainable farmers through the eyes, hearts and minds of 20 passionate, idealistic and fiercely independent young growers. In the film they speak of both the joys and the challenges involved in tending the land.
Filmed on 12 farms throughout the state of Georgia during an entire growing season, GROW! provides an honest and inspiring look at this next generation of farmers.
Anybody who appreciates the value of good, wholesome food grown close to home, who cares about our food supply and the future of farming will want to see GROW!
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
"LET THEM EAT GRASS!" - Cattle and the GREENHOUSE GAS MYTH
**Warning! This is a "SMOKEY" Rant and an exercise in Self Indulgent Pontification**
This Book is quite possibly a "CROCK", especially about GRASS FED BEEF.
It appears to be another example of manipulating data in order to profit from the use of scare tactics.
From the Website CIVIL EATS:
I am FED UP with the yammering about cow burps and "farts" having some kind of huge impact on green house gas. It’s Bull s__ (no pun intended, well, maybe)! The stated impact by the “Global Warming” crowd is nothing short of...hyperbole.
Using the “greenie” method of carbon offsets, bovines more than offset their gas emissions with what they return to the environment.
-They “harvest grass” and poop the seeds, thus propagating the spread of oxygen emitting grass/plants.
-Their poop/urine is a fantastic source of nitrogen, one of the essentials of life itself, and is a natural fertilizer as well.
-Their weight and hoofs act as “plows” scraping, tilling, and mashing the soil thus allowing seeds to germinate faster
(In fact, an ancient method of planting was to spread seed on the ground and then herd the cows back and forth to mash the seed into the soil)
Just to name A FEW!
Furthermore, your statements on unhealthy fat is flat WRONG when talking Grass Fed.
The beef that is unhealthy is the feedlot beef that has been fed grains (either conventional or organic)…over use of grain in a ruminant animal changes the chemical structure of the fat content to an unhealthy fat (not to mention the havoc it wrecks on animal health)…Grass fed fat has certain levels of Omega 3 and cancer fighting CLA.
Oh, and you trust the findings of the USDA, “Really? I beg to differ! The jury is not “out” on grass fed vs grain fed….Many independent studies have proven GRAIN FED IS BAD, Grass fed is NATURES NATURALLY PREFERRED METHOD and better for you.
Well, done! This book will help to drive yet another nail into their coffins by driving more people away from beef.
For "the REAL FACTS" Read a previous Smokey Rant:
"Healthy Beef - It's In the Grass"
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
USDA GETS IT RIGHT WITH "KNOW YOUR FARMER" PROGRAM
"Today, there is too much distance between the average American and their farmer and we are marshaling resources from across USDA to help create the link between local production and local consumption" - Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food
The USDA is getting this one right. The Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative emphasizes the need to create a "reconnection" of U.S. farmers to the consumer. Some 50+ years back, the majority of our food came from farms within a days driving distance. Today, most of the grocery market offerings have traveled from California to New York, Florida to Texas...not to mention the fruits, vegetables, and meats that are imported from Mexico and South America in the "off season". Now, under the auspices of the 2008 Farm Bill, the USDA has launched a program to promote local farmers to the consumer.
The following, from the "Know Your Farmer" web page, actually states the program mission very clearly:
I heartily applaud the USDA for this initiative and have high hopes that this is a "turning point" in government recognition of the plight of the family farm in America.
The USDA is getting this one right. The Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative emphasizes the need to create a "reconnection" of U.S. farmers to the consumer. Some 50+ years back, the majority of our food came from farms within a days driving distance. Today, most of the grocery market offerings have traveled from California to New York, Florida to Texas...not to mention the fruits, vegetables, and meats that are imported from Mexico and South America in the "off season". Now, under the auspices of the 2008 Farm Bill, the USDA has launched a program to promote local farmers to the consumer.The following, from the "Know Your Farmer" web page, actually states the program mission very clearly:
_Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food (KYF2) is a USDA-wide effort to carry out President Obama's commitment to strengthening local and regional food systems.
_We know that demand for local and regional foods is strong, as consumers across the country are looking to connect with their food and the people who grow and raise it:
_The number of farmers markets has more than tripled in the past 15 years and there are now more than 6,100 around the country;
_In 1986 there were two community supported agriculture operations, today there are over 4,000;
_There are farm to school programs in 48 states, totaling more than 2,200 and up from two in 1996;
_All 50 states in the U.S. have agricultural branding programs, such as "Jersey Fresh" or "Simply Kansas;"
_And the National Restaurant Association declared "locally sourced meats and seafood" and "locally grown produce" as the top two trends for 2011.
Local and regional markets often provide farmers with a higher share of the food dollar, and money spent at a local business often continues to circulate within community, creating a multiplier effect and providing greater economic benefits to the area.
An Economic Research Service Study (May 2010) identified barriers to local food market entry and expansion, including capacity constraints for farms, a lack of infrastructure for moving local food into mainstream markets, and regulatory uncertainties. This is the work of the Initiative.
Our mission is to strengthen the critical connection between farmers and consumers and supports local and regional food systems. Through this initiative, USDA integrates programs and policies that:
_Stimulate food- and agriculturally-based community economic development;
_Foster new opportunities for farmers and ranchers;
_Promote locally and regionally produced and processed foods;
_Cultivate healthy eating habits and educated, empowered consumers;
_Expand access to affordable fresh and local food; and
_Demonstrate the connection between food, agriculture, community and the environment.
Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food also leads a national conversation about food and agriculture to strengthen the connection between consumers and farmers.
"The largest 12.4 percent of farms in terms of gross receipts received 62.4 percent of all government payments in 2008." - Farm Commodity Policy
_We know that demand for local and regional foods is strong, as consumers across the country are looking to connect with their food and the people who grow and raise it:
_The number of farmers markets has more than tripled in the past 15 years and there are now more than 6,100 around the country;
_In 1986 there were two community supported agriculture operations, today there are over 4,000;
_There are farm to school programs in 48 states, totaling more than 2,200 and up from two in 1996;
_All 50 states in the U.S. have agricultural branding programs, such as "Jersey Fresh" or "Simply Kansas;"
_And the National Restaurant Association declared "locally sourced meats and seafood" and "locally grown produce" as the top two trends for 2011.
Local and regional markets often provide farmers with a higher share of the food dollar, and money spent at a local business often continues to circulate within community, creating a multiplier effect and providing greater economic benefits to the area.
An Economic Research Service Study (May 2010) identified barriers to local food market entry and expansion, including capacity constraints for farms, a lack of infrastructure for moving local food into mainstream markets, and regulatory uncertainties. This is the work of the Initiative.
Our mission is to strengthen the critical connection between farmers and consumers and supports local and regional food systems. Through this initiative, USDA integrates programs and policies that:
_Stimulate food- and agriculturally-based community economic development;
_Foster new opportunities for farmers and ranchers;
_Promote locally and regionally produced and processed foods;
_Cultivate healthy eating habits and educated, empowered consumers;
_Expand access to affordable fresh and local food; and
_Demonstrate the connection between food, agriculture, community and the environment.
Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food also leads a national conversation about food and agriculture to strengthen the connection between consumers and farmers.
"The largest 12.4 percent of farms in terms of gross receipts received 62.4 percent of all government payments in 2008." - Farm Commodity Policy
I heartily applaud the USDA for this initiative and have high hopes that this is a "turning point" in government recognition of the plight of the family farm in America.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
TEXAS DROUGHT THREATENS NATIONAL BEEF SUPPLY
AUTHOR'S NOTE - All of the premises presented in this series of posts are solely based on personal experience as a livestock producer and strictly as a cattleman (I have a basic understanding of farm commodities markets, but no real experience with such, and cannot speak with much authority from the farm side of things; Though I would think there are going to be some similarities). The information represents my opinion and is based on personal experiences. Any factual information may or may not be referenced, but be aware, the majority of the content is personal conjecture. Dialogue and comment are welcome.
Beef is the No.1 selling protein in the United States. Last year, consumer spending on beef totaled $74.3 billion. Per capita consumption of beef in 2010 was 59.6 pounds while per capita spending for beef was $240, according to industry research firm CattleFax.
In the state that gave birth to the cowboy and spawned the culture of cattle drives, modern-day ranchers are fighting for survival. Severe drought (the worst in 44 years) and several million charred acres from wildfires have delivered a devastating "gut" punch, forcing ranchers to take drastic measures to save ranches across Texas. The state's livestock industry has lost $1.2 billion under withering conditions, according to the Texas Agrilife Extension Service, a service branch of Texas A&M University.
Beef is the No.1 selling protein in the United States. Last year, consumer spending on beef totaled $74.3 billion. Per capita consumption of beef in 2010 was 59.6 pounds while per capita spending for beef was $240, according to industry research firm CattleFax.
In the state that gave birth to the cowboy and spawned the culture of cattle drives, modern-day ranchers are fighting for survival. Severe drought (the worst in 44 years) and several million charred acres from wildfires have delivered a devastating "gut" punch, forcing ranchers to take drastic measures to save ranches across Texas. The state's livestock industry has lost $1.2 billion under withering conditions, according to the Texas Agrilife Extension Service, a service branch of Texas A&M University.In Texas and other states with large cattle herds, the beef supply chain starts at the ranch. Ranchers own a herd of beef cows, each of which gives birth to a calf once a year. The mother nurses the calf and the pair graze on grass through the summer and into the fall, whereupon the fattened calf is sent to market.
This year, ranchers should be reaping the benefits of high prices, low supplies and high demand for their beef. The demand for calves from feedlots, where cattle add hundreds of pounds before slaughter, seems insatiable. Without rangelands full of nutritional forage, cows will struggle for nutrients. The herd will lose interest in breeding and cows may not provide enough milk for their calves, bringing the critical first step of America's beef cycle to a halt.
Among all meat production, beef producers typically incur some of the highest production costs. For example, costs for raising cattle are much higher than for poultry farming. Cattle producers pay more for each animal, grazing lands, fertilizers, feed and processing systems versus poultry farmers. Also the time it takes to prepare cattle for sale is much longer compared to other meats. It takes just 46 days for chicken to be market ready, but can take up to two years for beef.
Exacerbating the situation further is the shrinking number of cattle available for consumption. As beef producers struggle with the escalating drought, rising business costs, and mounting debt, more of them are selling their heifers for meat production, instead of breeding them to expand the herd. In Texas, the largest producer of cattle in the U.S., the "state herd" is down nearly 18% since 2008. In fact, ranchers and farmers across the country are shrinking their herd sizes bringing the nation's cattle herd count to it's lowest since 1958.
ADDING SALT TO THE WOUND:
The outlook for more rain looks grim. The National Weather Service's Climate Prediction Center forecast below-normal rainfall for Texas over the next month at least.
Among all meat production, beef producers typically incur some of the highest production costs. For example, costs for raising cattle are much higher than for poultry farming. Cattle producers pay more for each animal, grazing lands, fertilizers, feed and processing systems versus poultry farmers. Also the time it takes to prepare cattle for sale is much longer compared to other meats. It takes just 46 days for chicken to be market ready, but can take up to two years for beef.
Exacerbating the situation further is the shrinking number of cattle available for consumption. As beef producers struggle with the escalating drought, rising business costs, and mounting debt, more of them are selling their heifers for meat production, instead of breeding them to expand the herd. In Texas, the largest producer of cattle in the U.S., the "state herd" is down nearly 18% since 2008. In fact, ranchers and farmers across the country are shrinking their herd sizes bringing the nation's cattle herd count to it's lowest since 1958.
ADDING SALT TO THE WOUND:
The outlook for more rain looks grim. The National Weather Service's Climate Prediction Center forecast below-normal rainfall for Texas over the next month at least.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
CORN - The GOOD, The BAD, The UGLY
Corn…Just the thought of it makes my taste buds tingle. Eating fresh roasted corn on the cob, (swimming in butter!) is one of my most vivid childhood memories. I used to accompany my grandfather (a “black land” farmer in central Texas) to pick those golden ears of corn, right from the cornstalk. I still love a roasted ear of corn. But, in the current health climate, corn stirs many to 
thoughts of villainy and hatred. So, I have decided to pull down my sombrero and throw my serape over my shoulder as we take a look at the “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly” surrounding corn. (Hopefully, there are a few Clint Eastwood fans out there)
THE GOOD
Corn, in its natural form, actually has a lot of nutritional as well as health benefits.
For starters, it is high in fiber which fosters lower cholesterol and is beneficial to a healthy colon thus, helping to fight colon cancer. That golden ear is also rich in folate, providing B12 and B6 vitamin compounds, integral to the generation of new cells, a big deal before and during pregnancy. Eating moderate amounts of corn has shown to be helpul in the treatment of diabetes, renal dysfunction, constipation, and hemorrhoids.
Also, it contains beta-cryptoxanthin, which helps promote healthy lungs and may even assist in the prevention of lung cancer…
THE BAD
As we have learned, corn, in and of itself can be very beneficial. The “bad” is how the crop has invaded nearly every part of our life through the use of its many chemical properties…or, actually, the chemical change of the inherent properties.
“Big Ag” is synonymous with large scale food production. In the last 50+ years, chemists have discovered literally hundreds of uses for the chemical compounds found in corn and few of them are healthy for us. We have already learned that our meat industry relies heavily on corn as a quick fattening feed for livestock and that a diet of corn is unhealthy for the animal and thus, humans. It doesn’t stop there. High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is used in nearly any packaged or processed food product you can name. But, it doesn't stop there. As an example, let’s grab a cheeseburger, fries, and a soda…remember, every ingredient listed has some form of corn in it:
THE BUN: HFCS, WHEAT GLUTEN, MONOGLYCERIDES, CALCIUM STEAROYL LACTYLATE, CALCIUM SULFATE, ASCORBIC ACID, CALCIUM PROPIONATE (PRESERVATIVE)
THE CHEESE: HFCS, MONOGLYCERIDES, CALCIUM STEAROYL LACTYLATE, CALCIUM SULFATE, ASCORBIC ACID
THE MEAT: GRAIN FED, IRRIDATED, and possibly treated with a variation of CHLORINE
THE FRIES: HFCS, not to mention the oil used in deep frying
THE SODA: HFCS, DEXTROSE, CARAMEL COLORING, SACCHARIN, GLUCOSE
Nearly every one of these products, especially HFCS have shown the potential for causing severe health risks in laboratory testing.
THE UGLY
Where to begin? Let’s start with corn seed. Over the past 20 years, corn has become a genetically modified and engineered crop. The largest producer of GE seed is the Monsanto Company with an estimated 90% market share. Genetically Engineered seeds are resistant to bugs and various crop diseases. While it is true that these advances in seed genetics have radically boosted harvest yields, it is the murky veil of secrecy and heavy handed tactics they use for corporate protection that are disturbing.
The non-profit Center for Food Safety listed 112 lawsuits by Monsanto against farmers for claims of seed patent violations.. The Center for Food Safety's analyst stated that many innocent farmers settle with Monsanto because they cannot afford a time consuming lawsuit. Monsanto is frequently described by farmers as "Gestapo" and "Mafia" both because of these lawsuits and because of the questionable means they use to collect evidence of patent infringement.
As of May 2008, Monsanto is currently engaged in a campaign to prohibit dairies, which do not inject their cows with artificial bovine growth hormone from advertising this fact on their milk cartons.
When the Federal Trade Commission did not side with Monsanto on this issue, the company started lobbying state lawmakers to implement a similar ban. Pennsylvania Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolfe attempted to prohibit dairies from using labels stating that their milk does not contain artificial bovine growth hormone, but public outcry led the Governor to step in and reverse his secretary's position, stating: "The public has a right to complete information about how the milk they buy is produced”. (SOURCE)
Monsanto has also been loathe to release the results of their ongoing lab studies on their products, saying only that both their seeds and the previously owned ARTIFICIAL BOVINE GROWTH HORMONE (rBGH) pose no risk in the food chain. However, independent research is beginning to show that genetically modified corn may be a leading cause of organ damage. (Huffington Post)
In closing, It is clear that an ear of corn has numerous nutritional as well as potential health benefits; that making chemical changes can be unhealthy; and that owning the monopoly on a product can lead to deceit and corruption.
Monsanto and the food giants should heed the warning made famous in a TV advertisement for one of
THEIR first corn by-products: “It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature!”
thoughts of villainy and hatred. So, I have decided to pull down my sombrero and throw my serape over my shoulder as we take a look at the “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly” surrounding corn. (Hopefully, there are a few Clint Eastwood fans out there) THE GOOD
Corn, in its natural form, actually has a lot of nutritional as well as health benefits.
Also, it contains beta-cryptoxanthin, which helps promote healthy lungs and may even assist in the prevention of lung cancer…
THE BAD
As we have learned, corn, in and of itself can be very beneficial. The “bad” is how the crop has invaded nearly every part of our life through the use of its many chemical properties…or, actually, the chemical change of the inherent properties.
“Big Ag” is synonymous with large scale food production. In the last 50+ years, chemists have discovered literally hundreds of uses for the chemical compounds found in corn and few of them are healthy for us. We have already learned that our meat industry relies heavily on corn as a quick fattening feed for livestock and that a diet of corn is unhealthy for the animal and thus, humans. It doesn’t stop there. High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is used in nearly any packaged or processed food product you can name. But, it doesn't stop there. As an example, let’s grab a cheeseburger, fries, and a soda…remember, every ingredient listed has some form of corn in it:
THE BUN: HFCS, WHEAT GLUTEN, MONOGLYCERIDES, CALCIUM STEAROYL LACTYLATE, CALCIUM SULFATE, ASCORBIC ACID, CALCIUM PROPIONATE (PRESERVATIVE)
THE CHEESE: HFCS, MONOGLYCERIDES, CALCIUM STEAROYL LACTYLATE, CALCIUM SULFATE, ASCORBIC ACID
THE MEAT: GRAIN FED, IRRIDATED, and possibly treated with a variation of CHLORINE
THE FRIES: HFCS, not to mention the oil used in deep frying
THE SODA: HFCS, DEXTROSE, CARAMEL COLORING, SACCHARIN, GLUCOSE
Nearly every one of these products, especially HFCS have shown the potential for causing severe health risks in laboratory testing.
THE UGLY
Where to begin? Let’s start with corn seed. Over the past 20 years, corn has become a genetically modified and engineered crop. The largest producer of GE seed is the Monsanto Company with an estimated 90% market share. Genetically Engineered seeds are resistant to bugs and various crop diseases. While it is true that these advances in seed genetics have radically boosted harvest yields, it is the murky veil of secrecy and heavy handed tactics they use for corporate protection that are disturbing.
The non-profit Center for Food Safety listed 112 lawsuits by Monsanto against farmers for claims of seed patent violations.. The Center for Food Safety's analyst stated that many innocent farmers settle with Monsanto because they cannot afford a time consuming lawsuit. Monsanto is frequently described by farmers as "Gestapo" and "Mafia" both because of these lawsuits and because of the questionable means they use to collect evidence of patent infringement.
As of May 2008, Monsanto is currently engaged in a campaign to prohibit dairies, which do not inject their cows with artificial bovine growth hormone from advertising this fact on their milk cartons.
When the Federal Trade Commission did not side with Monsanto on this issue, the company started lobbying state lawmakers to implement a similar ban. Pennsylvania Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolfe attempted to prohibit dairies from using labels stating that their milk does not contain artificial bovine growth hormone, but public outcry led the Governor to step in and reverse his secretary's position, stating: "The public has a right to complete information about how the milk they buy is produced”. (SOURCE)
Monsanto has also been loathe to release the results of their ongoing lab studies on their products, saying only that both their seeds and the previously owned ARTIFICIAL BOVINE GROWTH HORMONE (rBGH) pose no risk in the food chain. However, independent research is beginning to show that genetically modified corn may be a leading cause of organ damage. (Huffington Post)
In closing, It is clear that an ear of corn has numerous nutritional as well as potential health benefits; that making chemical changes can be unhealthy; and that owning the monopoly on a product can lead to deceit and corruption.
Monsanto and the food giants should heed the warning made famous in a TV advertisement for one of
Thursday, January 21, 2010
BUYING LOCAL IS THE "DIFFERENCE"
Back in July of 2009, a major study comparing the nutritional value of organic food to conventional food was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. The study conclusion was that organic food, was “no healthier” than ordinary food. They also decided there were "no significant differences in nutrient content,” and "there is currently no evidence to support the selection of organic over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority."
Surprised? Don’t be. The real differences and reasons for eating organic are not wholly based on nutrition. You should actually consider the "who, what and where from" when selecting your food.
Sure, we instinctively know that organically grown food is better than conventionally grown, if only because it is free of potentially harmful chemical residue. But, for the sake of argument, lets accept the study findings at face value. The fact that produce or meat is organic doesn’t change the basic make-up of a food item. A rib eye steak, organic or not, is still beef and broccoli, despite the use of artificial pesticides or fertilizers, is still broccoli. The nutritional value of the food item is still inherent regardless of how it is grown.
The real issue is large scale or corporate farming.
The “Big Boys” have figured out that they can command a premium price for the organic label and now, most of the major corporate producers have either created or acquired an organic division. Up until the last fifteen or so years, organic produce and beef was a small niche market deemed worthy only to "health nuts" and "hippies". Anyone who wanted organic had to buy at specialty health food stores or visit a farmers market that featured locally grown organic crops and commodities. Now, because of growing public awareness that conventionally produced food may have certain health risks, everyone from Walmart to the large regional grocery chains carry organic food. Furthermore, these large retailers don’t get their organics from small, local farmers who take great pride in providing healthy and delicious tasting food. Instead, they buy from large industrial organic farms, many of which are owned by the same "name brands" that deliver the conventionally produced foods . These large scale organic farms aren’t concerned with growing the richest, best tasting products. What they want are products that meet organic certification, can be grown on a large scale, and survive mechanical harvesting. Because of the lead time required for shipping, organically produced foods (just as conventionally produced items) must be harvested before it is truly ripe, which causes it to decline in nutritional value.
Finally, and most importantly, is what society and civilization are losing because of the advent of large corporate farms…..the family farm. It’s a rich part of the American heritage and it is being pushed to the brink of extinction by corporate farm entities and big box food retailers. Local farms are operated by people dedicated to providing high quality foods. They are stewards of the land, that squeeze out a significant part of their income from local markets or direct sales. They pick the crop when it is ripe, ready to eat, and at its nutritional peak).
When you buy local, you are helping to keep a part of history alive while also rewarding a true craftsman for his or her work.
Surprised? Don’t be. The real differences and reasons for eating organic are not wholly based on nutrition. You should actually consider the "who, what and where from" when selecting your food.
Sure, we instinctively know that organically grown food is better than conventionally grown, if only because it is free of potentially harmful chemical residue. But, for the sake of argument, lets accept the study findings at face value. The fact that produce or meat is organic doesn’t change the basic make-up of a food item. A rib eye steak, organic or not, is still beef and broccoli, despite the use of artificial pesticides or fertilizers, is still broccoli. The nutritional value of the food item is still inherent regardless of how it is grown.
The real issue is large scale or corporate farming.
The “Big Boys” have figured out that they can command a premium price for the organic label and now, most of the major corporate producers have either created or acquired an organic division. Up until the last fifteen or so years, organic produce and beef was a small niche market deemed worthy only to "health nuts" and "hippies". Anyone who wanted organic had to buy at specialty health food stores or visit a farmers market that featured locally grown organic crops and commodities. Now, because of growing public awareness that conventionally produced food may have certain health risks, everyone from Walmart to the large regional grocery chains carry organic food. Furthermore, these large retailers don’t get their organics from small, local farmers who take great pride in providing healthy and delicious tasting food. Instead, they buy from large industrial organic farms, many of which are owned by the same "name brands" that deliver the conventionally produced foods . These large scale organic farms aren’t concerned with growing the richest, best tasting products. What they want are products that meet organic certification, can be grown on a large scale, and survive mechanical harvesting. Because of the lead time required for shipping, organically produced foods (just as conventionally produced items) must be harvested before it is truly ripe, which causes it to decline in nutritional value.
Finally, and most importantly, is what society and civilization are losing because of the advent of large corporate farms…..the family farm. It’s a rich part of the American heritage and it is being pushed to the brink of extinction by corporate farm entities and big box food retailers. Local farms are operated by people dedicated to providing high quality foods. They are stewards of the land, that squeeze out a significant part of their income from local markets or direct sales. They pick the crop when it is ripe, ready to eat, and at its nutritional peak).When you buy local, you are helping to keep a part of history alive while also rewarding a true craftsman for his or her work.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
ONE BAD APPLE
Warning: Author’s Opinion and Self Indulgent Pontification
Okay, it is time to step back and take a deep breath. So far, I have written several pieces that take a rather scathing approach to our current food industry. However, I would like to clarify my stance and hopefully, try to limit collateral damage caused by trying to effect change.
It is pretty much a fact that the buying public is being mislead by food labels (a topic coming to these pages soon). It is common knowledge that highly compensated food lobbyists can influence safety regulations, chemical giants continue to promote questionable use of their products for farm production AND giant agri-business continues to push small local (read family) farming to the brink of extinction. We still must look at the big picture.
Whenever I feel my anger over our food production practices I am reminded of the song by the OSMONDS: “One bad apple don’t spoil the whole bunch...” (Yeah, I know, I’m showing my age). The point here is that “green activism” often uses “carpet bombing” tactics to try to literally shut down whatever is perceived as an antagonist. Protest, in its varying forms from extreme to non-aggressive, often have a domino effect that may cause unintended harm.
When I write about health dangers in feedlots, the use of chemicals on crops, or “rage against” industrial farming, I have to remember against “whom” I am ranting. The truth is that all the bending of rules or regulations, the promotion of various production methods, as well as the ambiguities in marketing and labeling can be blamed, basically, on the very few…AND therein lies my point.
Industry means employment and employment means economic health. A lot of fine, hard working folks work in industries that many find objectionable. The fact that a person is a meat plant worker, a lumberjack, works on a whaling boat or any potentially objectionable job does not make them evil, cruel, or unjust. Most likely he/she is someone who is a member of the community, feels fortunate to have a job and is just trying to make ends meet while supporting a family. No, our rath should be reserved for the “bean counters and politcal wonks”. Our methods should be geared toward change that is manageable and measured…not radical or extremist.
So, when trying to effect change, aim at the “one bad apple” not “the whole bunch”.
.
.
Okay, it is time to step back and take a deep breath. So far, I have written several pieces that take a rather scathing approach to our current food industry. However, I would like to clarify my stance and hopefully, try to limit collateral damage caused by trying to effect change.
It is pretty much a fact that the buying public is being mislead by food labels (a topic coming to these pages soon). It is common knowledge that highly compensated food lobbyists can influence safety regulations, chemical giants continue to promote questionable use of their products for farm production AND giant agri-business continues to push small local (read family) farming to the brink of extinction. We still must look at the big picture.
Whenever I feel my anger over our food production practices I am reminded of the song by the OSMONDS: “One bad apple don’t spoil the whole bunch...” (Yeah, I know, I’m showing my age). The point here is that “green activism” often uses “carpet bombing” tactics to try to literally shut down whatever is perceived as an antagonist. Protest, in its varying forms from extreme to non-aggressive, often have a domino effect that may cause unintended harm.
When I write about health dangers in feedlots, the use of chemicals on crops, or “rage against” industrial farming, I have to remember against “whom” I am ranting. The truth is that all the bending of rules or regulations, the promotion of various production methods, as well as the ambiguities in marketing and labeling can be blamed, basically, on the very few…AND therein lies my point.
Industry means employment and employment means economic health. A lot of fine, hard working folks work in industries that many find objectionable. The fact that a person is a meat plant worker, a lumberjack, works on a whaling boat or any potentially objectionable job does not make them evil, cruel, or unjust. Most likely he/she is someone who is a member of the community, feels fortunate to have a job and is just trying to make ends meet while supporting a family. No, our rath should be reserved for the “bean counters and politcal wonks”. Our methods should be geared toward change that is manageable and measured…not radical or extremist.
So, when trying to effect change, aim at the “one bad apple” not “the whole bunch”.
.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)