Make This Year's Farm Bill Count - Support Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act 2013

The Farm Bill. You know, that large (about $300 billion large) legislative package that rolls around every 5 years or so, intended to shape the future of our food system by setting standards for food production, food cost, nutrition, environmental health and rural development? Oh yeah, that one.

Five years have passed since 2008 when the last Farm Bill was implemented and while it was largely geared towards supporting industrial agriculture, progress was made to add new provisions that supported local and regional food systems in the United States. But like every Farm Bill, this one came with an expiration date of September 30th, 2012 and when Congress failed to agree on a new Farm Bill before that date (no surprise here) the bill was extended, returning the bill to it's permanent legislation and erasing those new provisions supporting healthy food and farms. Battle lost.

That is why supporting the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act is so important. It is a proposal to improve the upcoming 2013 Farm Bill and implement legislation that will allow for greater sustainable production of fruits, vegetables, and meats, expand access to healthy foods to consumers, and further improve the infrastructure and markets of regional and local food systems.

The Union of Concerned Scientists is one of the many organizations that is supporting this Act and is providing ways for you to take action as well. You can click here to show your support and tell Congress to cosponsor the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act of 2013!

Best,

Katie

Stop the Biotech Rider!

The biotech, or "Monsanto" rider is back!  Originally in legislation last summer, this industry-driven rider would not only allow, but require the Secretary of Agriculture to grant a temporary permit for the planting or cultivation of a genetically engineered crop, even if a federal court has ordered the planting be halted until an Environmental Impact Statement is completed. This means that biotech companies would be able to temporarily override a federal court ruling, effectively placing them in a position of greater power than the court itself. All they have to do is ask.

If passed, this provision will undermine the fundamental safeguards of our judicial system, and will negatively effect farmers, the environment, and public health across America. The rider will give the biotech industry a way to circumvent federal court orders and serves to give the industry assurances that aren't needed.

Tell your Senators to demand that Appropriations Chairwoman Mikulski pull this dangerous and unconstitutional rider, and support Senator Tester's amendment  (#74), co-sponsored by Senators Boxer (D-CA), Gillibrand (D-NY), and Leahy (D-VT), that would strike the rider from the Continuing Resolution.

We can't allow the biotech industry to subvert our judicial and political system. Thank you for taking time from your busy day to make this important call!

Find your Senator's number here

 

You can also call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202)224-3121 and ask for your Senator's Office, or send a letter telling your Senator to support the Tester amendment by filling out the online letter here. Learn more about the biotech rider and the Tester amendment on the Beyond Pesticides website here.

GMOs, Industry Involvement, and Preemption - A Word of Caution

Photo via: planetmattersandmore.com

I read an interesting take on possible federal GMO labeling legislation today that cautioned against a potentially dangerous and irreversible situation known as preemption. This comes after a flurry of other articles like this one came out that discuss the possibility of big food supporting GMO labeling.  It might be hard to believe that conventional food retailers would support a federal labeling initiative, but when you look at it from the perspective of money, ease, and stability, it makes more sense.  After all, it's a lot easier for a multinational corporation like Walmart to have one labeling law to deal with in the United States rather than a host of different state laws, and putting an end to grassroots organizing helps their bottom line, reduces the possibility of PR trouble, and generally creates a more stable situation for their business to operate in.  Big food isn't supporting labeling to protect the consumer, however, and big ag isn't about to let the GMO labeling bill of our dreams get written up. That's where compromise and preemption come into play.  An excerpt from the article I first mentioned reads:

[There is an] ominous potential downside of federal GMO labeling: a sneaky legal concept known as preemption. Most advocates don’t find out about it before it’s too late.

Preemption simply means that a higher law trumps a lower law: so federal trumps state, and state trumps local. But in practice, it’s industry’s way of ensuring uniformity and stopping grassroots efforts. How I do know this? From years of experience of seeing it happen in various public health issues. It’s such a huge problem that the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation funded an entire project called “Preemption and Movement Building in Public Health” to educate advocates about how to handle it.

Here is the pattern: a grassroots effort builds over time to enact local or state laws (such as gun control, indoor-smoking laws, or restricting alcohol sales), and industry fights these efforts for years, until they can no longer win. At that point, industry lobbyists turn around and either get their own weak bill passed, or work with advocates to pass a compromise version. In exchange, this law will preempt or prevent any state or city from passing a different or stronger law. Forever.

So if industry and grassroots efforts come to a compromise sometime in the future and produce a federal GMO labeling bill, preemption could prevent stronger legislation from being passed on the state level.  This effectively transforms the federal initiative from being a foundation for stronger more effective legislation into being a watered down action plan that stifles and oppresses future progressive initiatives.  That's not to say that a federal GMO labeling bill is a bad idea - it's a great idea if accomplished through care and caution.  Let's make sure that when a labeling bill is passed, whether at the state or federal level, it does what we want it to do.

Have a great evening!
-Melissa

GMO Labeling Movement Pushes On Despite Prop 37 Defeat

Former Fairfax, CA Mayor Frank Eggar campaigning. Photo: S. Bates

Yesterday Californians voted on Proposition 37, a GMO labeling initiative that we've been following for many months now.  Unfortunately, the initiative lost by 6 percentage points, with the no on 37 vote at 53.7% and the yes vote at 46.3% as of early this morning.  This is certainly discouraging news, since labeling only seeks to give consumers the basic right to know what is in their food, and the initiative was favored by a large majority of California voters up until recently.  Agribusiness giants have been able to sway public opinion on GMO labeling by wielding huge sums of money used to advertise the no on 37 campaign.  With such wealthy opposition, the fight to label genetically modified foods in this country might seem like an impossible dream, but in the wake of the Prop 37 defeat, I want to share with you a quote from the San Francisco Chronicle's article written today:

Stacy Melken, a spokeswoman for the Prop, 37 campaign, said supporters believe they will win the labeling debate over the long term. She noted that proponents were outspent by a five to one margin and still managed to capture more than 4.2 million votes.

"We showed that there is a food movement in the United States, and it is strong, vibrant and too powerful to stop," she said. "We always knew we were the underdogs."

That quote helped to put things in perspective for me, and I don't feel nearly as discouraged now as I did this morning.  The fact that the yes on 37 campaign was outspent five to one and still managed to rally nearly half the California vote is really impressive, and proves that money is powerful, but a strong movement is more powerful.  It often takes time to build a movement, and even more time to push the values of that movement through government, so although feeling discouraged is natural and understandable in the wake of a defeat, the truth is that the loss of Prop 37 is really just one part of a much larger picture.

The GMO labeling movement isn't going away.   The issue of labeling will continue to be brought up in the political sphere, forcing agribusiness to spend its money each time to quell it until finally enough people who won't be swayed by costly marketing exist to pass a labeling law.  Proposition 37 shows us how far we have come as Americans who want the right to know what is in our food.  It shows how resourceful and resilient the movement is, and it shows that we really can pass labeling legislation if we keep working toward it.  In the meantime, know what's in your food by knowing where your food comes from.  Buy whole, local, organic, and in season whenever possible, and get to know farmers near you.  Ask your grocery store to stock more local items, and start a garden in your yard, or in containers if you don't have a yard.  And talk to your friends and family about GMOs and why it's important to label them.  Check out justlabelit.org and sign the federal petition, and if you still feel a bit discouraged, read this article.  Labeling initiatives are currently being brought up in other states and nationally.  Gary Hirshberg, co-founder of Stonyfield Farm organic yogurt company, and chairman of the "Just Label It" campaign, puts it very succinctly:

Labeling of GE (genetically engineered) foods is not a question of whether, but when.

Have a great evening!
-Melissa

Urge Congress to Pass a Farm Bill This Year

From the National Center for Appropriate Technology:

As of this month, our nation’s food and farm policy in the form of the 2008 Farm Bill has officially expired, with no workable replacement moving forward in Congress. This has left critical low-cost but very high-value programs high and dry with no funding— and it means Congress missed the chance to make real reforms and an investment in an equitable, sustainable future for food and farms in America.

With no new farm bill or extension of the 2008 Farm Bill, the programs that address rural and urban job creation, training opportunities for beginning farmers, natural resource conservation, and access to healthy food are in big trouble. These are programs that NCAT has been part of and support our work to assist farmers and ranchers in building a more sustainable future.

Can Congress still finish a farm bill this year? YES!

There is a short window of time for Congress to finish the bill after Election Day. So when Congress returns to Washington, we’ll need YOU and other farmers and advocates across the country to tell them loud and clear: we need an equitable, sustainable 2012 Farm Bill!

Sign your name and tell Congress we need a 2012 Farm Bill that:
• Invests in the future of healthy farms, food, and people
• Protects our precious air, soil, and water
• Reforms farm subsidies and levels the playing field

Without a working Farm Bill, funding for many of the resources CT NOFA promotes to farmers will be in jeopardy.  The farm bill is one of the most important and influential pieces of legislation the United States government is in charge of.  Please sign the petition urging Congress to pass a farm bill by the end of the year.

Click here to sign the petition

You can Help the Honeybee!

Since 2006, Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) has been killing honeybees at an alarming rate.  According to USDA, beekeepers have been losing an average 30% of their honey bee colonies each year since 2006, and little has been done on the federal level to prevent further losses.  Although it is a commonly held belief that the causes of CCD are a complete mystery, there are actually many known causes of the disorder which often link the situation to certain systemic pesticides.

Government policy might be stuck when it comes to dealing with this problem, but that doesn't mean you need to be stuck too.  You can help honeybees at home and in your community using this bee protecting toolkit.  The Honey Bee Toolkit provides action items to promote a safe space at your home for honeybees to gather food and perform essential pollinating duties, and for educating and rallying others in your community to affect change on a larger scale.  Here are some examples of what is listed in the Toolkit:

Write an OpEd or letter to the editor
Short of face to face visits with politicians, getting into the habit of writing to your editor is one of the most effective things you can do.

According to a study by Pew, Americans are spending more time following the news today than over much of the past decade.  Newspapers, while in decline, are still authoritative; this is where most Americans still get their knowledge of public affairs.

OpEd columns and letters to the editor give you the opportunity to communicate directly to the public, including influential decision-makers, and to shape or frame a debate in your own words.

One well placed OpEd or Letter to the Editor can make a decisionmaker think again.  Take 15 minutes to change the conversation

The toolkit then goes on to detail how to properly draft a letter or OpEd and successfully submit it to a news provider.  Another community-based example reads:

Host a film screening
Invite neighbors and friends over for a film screening at your house, or coordinate a film screening at your local community center.  Not sure what to watch?  Here are some suggestions:
The Vanishing of the Bees (2011)
Queen of the Sun (2011)
Colony (2009)
Nature:Silence of the Bees (2008)

And for those who would like to help out on their property at home, there are native plant lists and tips for building a bee haven in your yard or around your home.  There is also a section devoted to introductory beekeeping if you want to take the next step into colony ownership!

Check out the toolkit here.

 Have a wonderful week!

-Melissa

Roundup's Toxicity Goes Beyond Glyphosate

If you've been to this blog before, you've probably heard of Roundup - Monsanto's herbicide widely used to spray lawns, yards, and crops, especially those crops that have been genetically modified to resist Roundup's active ingredient, Glyphosate.  You've probably also heard of the health dangers of Glyphosate as shown in numerous laboratory tests.  What you may not know, however, is that one of the supposedly inert ingredients in Roundup, called polyethoxylated tallowamine, or POEA, has been shown to not only be more dangerous on its own than Glyphosate, but also increase the damage Glyphosate can do to cells on its own by combining with it to more effectively penetrate clothing, safety equipment, and cell walls in the body.  

This article in Scientific American describes how a French team of scientists came to this conclusion after testing POEA and Roundup on human cells.  An excerpt reads:

POEA, was more deadly to human embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells than the herbicide itself – a finding the researchers call “astonishing.” 

“This clearly confirms that the [inert ingredients] in Roundup formulations are not inert,” wrote the study authors from France’s University of Caen. “Moreover, the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death [at the] residual levels” found on Roundup-treated crops, such as soybeans, alfalfa and corn, or lawns and gardens. 

The research team suspects that Roundup might cause pregnancy problems by interfering with hormone production, possibly leading to abnormal fetal development, low birth weights or miscarriages.

The article then goes on to explain why an ingredient that causes more harm than the active ingredient can be  labeled as inert:

The term “inert ingredient” is often misleading, according to Caroline Cox, research director of the Center for Environmental Health, an Oakland-based environmental organization. Federal law classifies all pesticide ingredients that don’t harm pests as “inert,” she said. Inert compounds, therefore, aren’t necessarily biologically or toxicologically harmless – they simply don’t kill insects or weeds.

If you want to avoid POEA and Glyphosate, buying more organic food, and more generally, avoiding Genetically Modified Organisms - a primary use of Roundup -  are great options.  Support mandatory labeling for GE foods, and add your voice to those advocating for the passage of Prop 37 in California.  Here in Connecticut, purchase groceries from a farmers market and get to know the farmer you're buying from.  If you know the farmers who grow your food, and ask them questions, you will know your food as well.

Have a great weekend!
-Melissa

Oppositiion to California's GMO Labeling Initiative

Yesterday's blog post about the California GMO Labeling Ballot Initiative showcases a very important potential step toward eventual GMO labeling across the country.  California has the highest GDP of any state in the nation, a GDP higher than many countries, so passing a labeling initiative there is likely to cause a domino effect culminating in mandatory labeling across the US.  Because of this, one of the nation's largest food lobbies, the Grocery Manufacturer's Association, has made defeating the initiative - called Prop 37 - their "single-highest priority".

According to an editorial on Food Safety News,

In a recent speech to the American Soybean Association (most soy grown in the U.S. is genetically modified), Grocery Manufacturers Association President Pamela Bailey said that defeating the initiative "is the single-highest priority for GMA this year."

You may not know the Grocery Manufacturers Association, but its members represent the nation's largest food makers -- those with the most at stake in the battle over GMO labeling; for example, soft drink and snack giant PepsiCo, cereal makers Kellogg and General Mills, and of course, biotech behemoth Monsanto.

According to state filing reports, so far GMA has spent $375,000 on its efforts to oppose the labeling measure, with its members adding additional out-of-state lobbying power in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Since Prop 37 poses a significant threat to many of the nation's largest food makers, corporations that make a lot of money from the production and sale of Genetically Modified foods, it makes sense that the lobbying group that represents those interests would be fiercely fighting back.  This backlash, however, is promising because it shows just how powerful Prop 37 really is. Lobbying groups might have a lot of money on their side, but no amount of money can compete with a large group of voices speaking out in unison.

Here in Connecticut we might not be able to vote on Prop 37, but that doesn't mean that we can't speak out in support of it.  The more people nationwide who show their support of mandatory GMO labeling, both publicly and to their friends and neighbors, the more likely those in California who can vote on it are to hear us.  After all, the Grocery Manufacturer's Association is a giant national lobbying firm that is currently influencing the outcome of the vote, regardless of whether or not it's employees can actually vote on the ballot itself.  So talk to those around you and be outspoken, because your voice makes a difference.  Let's show California that we support their right to know what's in their food!

Have an outspoken day!
-Melissa

Upcoming GMO Activism Events

Jeffrey Smith and Tara Cook-Littman from Right to Know CT

On August 8, 2012 save the date for a day packed with GMO activism and some of the most renowned people in the non-GMO movement!

 

The day starts out with a Legislative Meeting in Hartford where Jeffrey Smith will be speaking, and continues with a Right to Know Coalition meeting:
GMO Public Meeting
August 8, 2012
10am: public meeting at the Capitol with Jeffrey Smith
12pm: Right to Know Coalition meeting
Hartford, CT

Later on, the Institute for Responsible Technology will be holding a benefit celebrating non-GMO food from around Connecticut:
an Evening Benefiting The Institute for Responsible Technology
Wednesday August 8, 2012
7:30PM
Greenwich Audubon
613 Riversville Road
Greenwich, CT
Celebrate the Non-GMO food offerings available in CT from organic chefs and restaurants from around the state such as Catch A Healthy Habit, Health in A Hurry, Bakery on Main, Du Soleil, Just Food, Green & Tonic, Double L Market, and Natures Temptations!

Still can't get enough Jeffrey Smith?  You're in luck!  He is also one of the keynote speakers at the NOFA Summer Conference on August 10-12.  Jeffrey will also be holding a pre-conference training on fighing GMOs on Thursday, August 9, 1pm-5pm and Friday 8am-12 noon. You can learn more about the fantastic speakers and workshops at the Summer Conference and register for the event here.

Have a great Wednesday!
-Melissa

NOFA Summer Conference Keynote Spotlight

Get ready for two amazing keynote addresses at the 2012 NOFA Summer Conference!

On Friday August 10 and Saturday August 11, NOFA Summer Conference keynote speakers Chellie Pingree and Jeffrey Smith will be delivering speeches that are sure to impress.  Both keynotes have extensive experience in their fields, and are renowned for their accomplishments. Below is a brief description of each speaker.  To read full bios, please visit the NOFA Summer Conference website.

Representative Chellie Pingree is an organic farmer and a member of the Agriculture Committee in the U.S. Congress. Chellie is committed to helping reform farm policy with interests of small farmers and consumers in mind. Last year, Chellie introduced the Local Farms, Food and Jobs Act-a comprehensive package of reforms to agriculture policy that will expand opportunities for local and regional farmers and make it easier for consumers to have access to healthy foods. Rep. Pingree will be speaking on Friday August 10 at 7:30pm

Jeffrey Smith is a consumer advocate promoting healthier non-GMO choices and author of the world's bestselling and #1 rated book on the health dangers genetically modified organisms (GMOs). His meticulous research documents how biotech companies continue to mislead legislators and safety officials to put the health of society at risk, and the environment in peril. Jeffrey Smith will be speaking on Saturday August 11 at 7:00pm

Additionally, Jeffrey Smith will also be holding an 8-hour training on GMO organizing as a pre-conference event on Thursday, August 9, 1pm-5pm and Friday 8am-12 noon. Titled Fighting GMO's: a Pre-Conference Training for Consumers, Community Leaders, Activists, and Organizers, this training will teach participants how to speak about genetically modified organisms and how to organize effective activism. The seminar will include the five components of a GMO presentation, resources and materials documenting why genetically engineered foods are dangerous, instructions on how to customize PowerPoint slides (provided), and examples of proven organizing techniques to motivate people. Graduates of this Pre-Conference Training with Jeffrey Smith will be invited to join a GMO Speakers Bureau, participate in ongoing webinars, and join the network of active campaigners reclaiming a non-GMO food supply.  Learn more and sign up for this and other pre-conference events here.

Excited? Click here to register for the conference!

 

DEADLINE TOMORROW: Sign up to Support Key Amendments to the Farm Bill

The Senate Food and Farm Bill Needs Your Help!

Please call your Senators - It's easy! The Food and Farm Bill is on the floor of the US Senate and your action is needed to make it better! Right now they are lining up support for amendments that are sorely needed in this bill. Please take action!

Please call your Senators and tell them what you want. If you are with an organization, please make calls and also sign on to letters.

Phone Calls: Just dial the Senate switchboard: (202) 224-3121 Ask to be connected with one Senator from your state, and then call back and ask to speak with the other Senator. Once connected, introduce yourself and ask to speak with the agriculture staffer. Tell that staffer (or leave a message) what you support or opposes from the amendments, or other key points.

Key Senate Farm Bill Amendments:
Pick your issues and make the call! SUPPORT:

• Brown- (SA 2362) The amendment includes important programs to farmers and local food infrastructure, beginning and socially disadvantaged farmer programs, including: Value-Added Producer Grants, Rural Microentrepeneur Assistance Program, Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program, Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers Program (Section 2501)

• Tester (SA 2234)- This amendment will set aside 5% of annual funding for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative for public cultivar and breed development.

• Grassley-Conrad (SA 2170) - This amendment will make it unlawful for a meatpacker to own, feed or control livestock intended for slaughter for more than 14 days before slaughter. This will reduce vertical integration of the livestock market and help independent and family growers compete.

• Merkley-Feinstein-Sanders-Kerry (SA 2382) - This amendment will address barriers to make crop insurance more accessible to organic farmers.

• Durbin-Coburn (SA2186) - reduces the federal premium support for farmers with Adjusted Gross Income of more than $750,000.

• Cardin -(SA2219) This amendment would ensure that farmers receiving taxpayer-subsidized premium subsidies for crop insurance do not drain wetlands or farm erosion-prone soil without conservation measures (eligibility only for the crop insurance federal premium subsidy and it only applies to highly erodible land.)

• Gillibrand (SA 2156) - This amendment restores the $4.49 billion cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). (Cuts made in the Committee Bill that is going to the Senate floor) The SNAP funding would be paid for by a cut to the amount the federal government pays to insurance companies to provide crop insurance to farmers. Gillibrand’s amendment will also provide an additional $500 million over 10 years to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP). This program provides fresh produce snacks to schoolchildren. The bill also grants authority to USDA to make bonus purchases for The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP). Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) has submitted an amendment that would eliminate the fresh-only requirement in the FFVP by expanding this program to include frozen, dried, or canned fruits and vegetables.

• Sanders-Leahy (SA 2386)- Enables schools to purchase from local and regional producers.

• Udall (NM) (SA 2417)– Disadvantaged Producer Training – This amendment would restore funding for the Outreach and Assistance Program for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers and Veteran Farmers and Rancher (also known as the 2501 Program).

• Harkin (SA 2239) – Beginning Producer Training – This amendment would increase funding for the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program.

• Harkin-Casey (SA 2245) – Microloans to Beginning and Veteran Producers – This amendment would allow FSA to make smaller "microloans" of up to $35,000, tailored to meet the needs of small, young, beginning, and veteran farmers and ranchers, streamline the application process, and provide discretionary authority to FSA to establish intermediary lender pilot projects. This amendment would also give FSA discretionary authority to establish a new pilot program to support micro-credit programs administered by non-governmental or community-based organizations.

Please call your senators or sign on to the letter by tomorrow to give these amendments a chance in the Senate!

Farm Bill Call to Action

As you know from reading the last blog post, the 2012 Farm Bill will soon be debated on by the Senate.

NOW is a crucial time to advocate for key priorities including funding to ensure rural economic development and the next generation of farmers.

As cuts to the Farm Bill are being discussed, many programs that benefit small scale farming operations and local sustainable agriculture are threatened.

Please sign this letter to ensure that the needs of our hardworking and valuable farming community are met!

Farm Subsidies and the Farm Bill

The new 2012 Farm Bill could move onto the Senate floor as early as this week, promising to shape federal agricultural policy for the next 5 years.  The bill allocates nearly a trillion dollars of funds into farm subsidies, conservation programs, and food stamp aid, with the vast majority of the funds that are directed to subsidies going into the pockets of large farms growing commodity crops.  When you think of farm subsidies, your initial reaction might be a negative one, conjuring up visions of large corporations draining taxpayer dollars into unsafe and unsustainable farming practices that hurt workers, the environment, and the health of the nation, while simultaneously diverting funds away from small growers who need the money the most.  But the thing is, farm subsidies were originally meant to help those same small farmers that are hurt by them today.  An editorial by Robert B. Semple Jr. in the New York Times explains:

The subsidies have always been controversial. A mix of direct payments, price supports, loans, subsidized insurance and disaster relief, these subsidies provided protection for millions of farmers in the New Deal and afterward against the vicissitudes of the weather and the market. But in recent years, they have mainly lined the pockets of big farmers of big row crops who don’t need help, while ignoring the little guys who do.

So the original intent of farm subsidies was to help small farmers to make a living in order to ensure that enough food was produced in any given year to adequately feed the nation.  But as a multitude of small growing operations began to merge into a few drastically larger ones, subsidies began to undermine the very goals they had been put in place to achieve.

The story of modern agriculture in this country is a story of concentration, of huge subsidies flowing to relatively few farmers who grow a handful of row crops — corn, wheat, soybeans, cotton and rice — in a dozen or so Midwestern and Southern states. Because farm subsidies, old and new, have been tied to production, those cultivating the largest acreage get the biggest payouts. The top 20 percent of recipients from 1995 to 2010 got 90 percent of the subsidies; the bottom 80 percent just 10 percent. Many farmers — well over half the total, by some estimates — get no help at all.

It's time we made a concerted effort to promote local small scale production of the nutritious fruits and vegetables we need rather than siphoning our tax dollars into the hands of a small number of giants growing less nutritious commodities.  It's time we remembered as a nation what farm subsidies were originally put in place to do.  Please do your part to shift agriculture back to sustainability.

What You Can Do

• Buy Local - Check out our website for listings of farms, farmers markets, and CSA programs across the state.  Support a small scale farmer near you. 
• Grow Your Own -  Every year, we have many workshops designed for new gardeners and farmers.  Check our website often, and sign up for our eNewsletters to learn more helpful tips about growing food yourself.
• Learn More - Check out the American Farmland Trust website for information about the farm bill and how it affects you.
• Tell Your Friends -  No movement can exist in isolation.  Talk to those around you about the Farm Bill and what it means to them, because what happens on the Congressional floor affects all of us.

Managing the Non-GMO Message

If you are reading this there is a pretty good chance that you already know what a GMO is and it is likely that you also know the disastrous potential genetically engineered foods have for our food system, our economy, the environment, and our health.  You might have also found that it's relatively easy to talk about GMOs with other people who know about them, but it is much harder to discuss the issue with people who don't.  Educational groups like CT NOFA are always trying to avoid preaching to the choir, but with so much information to disseminate, trying to be concise when introducing the GMO issue to people who haven't been involved before can be overwhelming.

That's why the Non-GMO Project has developed a new Non-GMO Communications Toolkit.  This soon-to-be downloadable PDF describes how to communicate the non-GMO message effectively in order to maximize awareness and understanding, and push the non-GMO movement forward as a result.  The Toolkit will be available online this month, and also comes with supplemental webinars, the first of which is available now.  The Project writes:

Consumer concern about GMOs is increasing rapidly in the United States and Canada. As awareness grows, it’s essential for leaders of the Non-GMO movement to communicate effectively. Research shows that for the Non-GMO message to be successful, simplicity and consistency in communications are essential.

Every great movement in history has required a clear, concise, and compelling message in order to succeed.  Use this tool to help inform yourself and those around you as a means to making more informed food choices. After all, knowledge is power, but only if it can be understood.

Have an informed weekend,
Melissa

Join Right to Know CT for a GMO town hall meeting May 23

An important message from our Executive Director, Bill Duesing:  

Friends,

We can't let Monsanto keep control of our legislative process through threats and disinformation.
 
90 percent of Americans want to know if GMOs are in their food.  A pré vote tally of CT representatives indicated that 85 percent of them supported the labeling legislation.
 
Monsanto (and its biotech buddies) don't support labeling.
 
Look at the results in CT and VT (no labeling) and compare that to what you'd expect in a democracy.
 
Did you see the latest damnation of industrial food?
 
KPMG, a major accounting firm says that the food industry produces over $2 worth of environmental and resource damage for each $1 in profits.
 
Other information indicates that the industrial food system produces at least $1.50 in medical costs for each dollar of profit, just for the big three diet related diseases-obesity, diabetes and heart disease. We've been told that one in three children born in this century will develop diabetes and that currently many teenagers are developing this expensive and dangerous disease.
 
So just these two categories, which likely miss some things-like the cost of food related cancers and allergies-indicate that for each $1 for food system profits, humans and the environment pay $3.50 in costs.
 
The profits of the food industry are literally coming from destruction of the health of people and the environment.
 
It is time to get serious about our food system. Little else is so important.
 
Our food choices are powerful tools for change. Eating locally, organically and lower on the food chain are ways each of us can make a difference.

You are invited to join us at a Right To Know CT town hall-style meeting. 

Wednesday, May 23

Church of the Redeemer, UCC

185 Cold Spring Street, New Haven, CT 06511

10:20 am – 12:00 noon 

We will discuss a number of key campaigns and initiatives we will be undertaking over the next few months to educate and influence Right to Know CT's three main constituent groups: farmers, consumers and legislators. Leaders spearheading these efforts will briefly present them to the group and welcome members to volunteer to help. We will also discuss strategic partnerships and invite members to take ownership of and manage these relationships on behalf of Right to Know CT. During the communal share, members will have an opportunity to share with the group any program, event, initiative, project, etc. they are involved with and invite others to participate. We will also be organizing groups by geographical areas and encouraging attendees to sign up for Jeffrey Smith's Tipping Point Network. Representative Richard Roy, the original sponsor of the GMO labeling bill will be in attendance. We hope to see you there.

30th Annual Winter Conference Recap and Call to Action

Our Winter Conference last Saturday the 3rd had nearly 600 attendees, our biggest turnout yet!  It was a wonderful event, packed with workshops, vendors, and a great keynote speech by Jeffrey M. Smith.  This week we've been reviewing incoming evaluations from the event, and have had overwhelmingly positive feedback.  If you attended the conference we'd like to give you our most heartfelt thanks for being a part of our largest event of the year and helping to make it really special and momentous. And if you volunteered with us, we want you to know that this event could not have run so smoothly without you.  Thanks to everyone for your continued commitment to local sustainable food and to our mission to provide reliable access to that food for our communities.

Jeffrey M. Smith during his keynote

The big issues discussed at this year's conference are very important.  It is critical that everyone take action and make their voice heard in order to pass legislation currently being discussed in Hartford.  Preventing the repeal of the school pesticide ban and passing the GMO labeling bill are two initiatives that we need your support on in order to succeed.

You have the opportunity to let your state and Federal legislators know that you want to know what is in your food.  

There are at least three levels of GMO labeling initiatives you can be a part of:

1. A Letter from Congress to ask the FDA to label GMOs. Ask your Representative and Senators to sign on.
Click here for an easy pre-written way to let congress know that you want to know what's in your food. Senator Barbara Boxer (CA) and Representative Peter DeFazio (OR) have authored a bicameral Congressional letter and will be urging their fellow Members on Capitol Hill to sign onto their letter.

2. A petition to FDA asking them to label GMOs.
A legal petition (Docket # FDA-2011-P-0723-0001/CP) has been filed with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) calling on the FDA to label genetically engineered (GE) foods. Visit JustLabelIt.org to learn more and to sign!

3. The Connecticut Bill to label GMOs which is closest to home.
The Bill, Officially called HB 5117: An Act Concerning Genetically Engineered Foods, is picking up momentum! Representative Roy first introduced the bill in mid-February and since then several legislators from both parties have expressed support, and Jeffrey Smith was invited to speak on the issue at the Capitol Building on March 2. Now we need Connecticut's consumers and voters to show their support! To find your legislator, click here. You can write your own letter to them, or send ours.

And for those who want to attend something in person:
CT GMO Labeling Bill Informational Meeting and Q&A
What Are GMOs and What Does the Bill Mean for Consumers?
Saturday, March 10, 10-12 noon
Pequot Library, Southport, CT
free and open to the public

Please also contact your state representatives to let them know that you want your children to play on school grounds that are free of chemicals, and that overturning the school pesticide ban is therefore unacceptable.  Working together we can turn the tide of sentiment in our favor.

Two volunteers in yellow participate
in the potluck lunch

If you are working up an appetite from contacting your state representative, check out some recipes from the Winter Conference's potluck lunch we've posted here.  These recipes are centered around winter food, specifically greens, and are a great way to tide yourself over before the heart of planting season begins.  Thanks to Chef John Turenne, farmer Wayne Hansen and Dr. Leigh White for providing these delicious ideas!

Don't forget to check out the pictures of our conference online!

Have a wonderful day!

HB 5155 in Connecticut is a Really Big Deal

"With so many unknowns and with plausible evidence of harm to children it makes no sense for our children to be involuntarily exposed to the unnecessary use of these toxic chemicals especially when there are safe, effective affordable alternatives." - Bill Duesing as quoted in the Connecticut Post


Hi All,

I know you must be tired of us only discussing GMO-Labeling and the potential reversal of the pesticide ban.  But these are really, really important issues.  Connecticut has the opportunity to either take big steps in the right direction towards toxics safety in foods and school grounds, or taking ten steps backwards.

Healthy soil yields pest-
resistant plants!

Lets focus on the pesticide bill. The NOFA Organic Land Care Program has just concluded two of our three accreditation courses, and we've accredited about 65 new professionals (if you're interested, there's one more course in Rhode Island!)  Since I am a new employee, this is the first time I've sat through the course (though I did have the pleasure of coordinating it), and this comprehensive thirty hour course focuses on plant health, because the best pesticide (for people, the environment, pests and plants) seems to be prevention.  We also celebrated some of our landscapers who have been accredited for ten years this past December.  Organic has worked for these landscapers for ten years - it just needs to be done right!

There was a public hearing about HB 5155, an Act Modifying the Ban on Pesticide Applications on School Grounds on Wednesday, February 22.  I was unable to go because it was the last day of our Accreditation Course, and I needed to moderate the Accreditation Exam (which everyone did very well on, by the way). Yes, it's a little bit ironic that our program accredited 36 new professionals prepared to offer the services that school groundskeepers and pesticide lobbyists claim are too difficult, too expensive, or simply impossible on the same day as this hearing.  

Since I couldn't go, I submitted the following testimony:

What kind of chemicals should children really be exposed to?

I am writing from the classroom of the Accreditation Course in Organic Land Care, overseen by the Northeast Organic Farming Association’s Organic Land Care Program.  We are in the fourth day of the course, and the students have learned about turf management, planting, mulching, fertilizing and pest management all without the chemicals that the NOFA Standards for Organic Land Care have found to be both harmful and unnecessary. 

Connecticut took the lead on toxics safety and child health regulations with the pesticide ban.  The pesticides banned by P.A. 09-56 have been linked to serious health issues including, but not limited to, birth defects, behavior disorders, respiratory disease like asthma and potentially cancer.  Children are especially vulnerable to these dangerous chemicals because they play in the grass and because of their smaller, developing bodies. 
The pesticide ban is a law that Connecticut should be proud of.  Our state has prioritized the health of children over the importance of bright green grass, and the profits of chemical companies. 
Widespread non-compliance must be addressed by education and training support from programs similar to the NOFA Organic Land Care’s Accreditation.  More parents and families are choosing organic landscapers for their homes.   To then expose their children to these harmful chemicals at school disrespects these parents’ values.  As awareness grows about the potential threats of lawn chemicals, one can only expect greater support for the pesticide ban in Connecticut schools.

NOFA has the only internationally approved
land care standards

The alternative to pesticides exists. Organic land care has been applied to sports fields, turf grass, parks, homes, and many types of grounds. NOFA's Accreditation Program is in its twelfth year and we have a number of accredited organic professionals with decades of experience and many successful years offering organic services. As with every sustainable practice, at first it is more difficult. Organic land care requires that land care professionals develop an understanding of the ecology of the systems they are working with, and apply these lessons to the grounds. 
To address non-compliance with a law by simply eliminating the law is unthinkable.  Using this standard, most new laws would need to be reversed in the first couple years that new regulations take effect.  To move backwards in regards to laws protecting the health of children would be an embarrassment for Connecticut.
Sincerely,
Kristiane Huber

Bill Duesing, our Executive Director also submitted an eloquent testimony which you can read here, you can read all the testimonies on this page.  Want to comment on the bill? Beyond Pesticides has set up this online petition which will help you contact your legislator directly. 

Best,
Kristiane

OSGATA et al v. Monsanto In Depth

The following is an excerpt from our Executive Director, Bill Duesing's, article in our newest edition of the Gleanings eNewsletter that was released today.  In the article, Bill details his visit to Manhattan on Tuesday to support farmers who are trying to prevent Monsanto from suing them for patent infringement.  If you would like to read the full newsletter, click here.  If you'd like to sign up to receive our monthly eNews, click here.

A GMO Hearing and Wingnuts
February 1, 2012

activists outside the courthouse

Yesterday I had the honor of representing CT NOFA and its members at a hearing, in the Southern District Court in lower Manhattan, on Monsanto's motion to dismiss our suit asking the court to prevent Monsanto from suing farmers whose crops are contaminated by Monsanto's modified genes. (See this document for more information on the lawsuit, including a list and descriptions of our co-plaintiffs.)
 
I joined 54 other organic and non-GMO farmers, representatives of organic farming organizations and organic seed producers before 7 AM in order to get a seat in the courtroom. We came from 20 different states and one Canadian province. Although there was no opportunity for us to speak, our attorney felt it was important to show the judge that there are real people behind the law suit. There was standing room only in the courtroom. Monsanto's only supporters were its four attorneys.
 
After about three hours of waiting... Read more here!

In the following video, Dan Ravicher explains what OSGATA et al v. Monsanto is all about.  The video is a little long, but gives a really good explanation that's easy to understand for those of us who aren't familiar with legalese. 


These resources help to explain why this lawsuit is important, and give an idea of what the outcome will mean for both farmers and consumers.  If you want to learn more about activism surrounding this case, check out the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association's website.

You can also read two articles in the news about Tuesday's event here and here.

Update: A Citizen's Assembly of Support for Family Farmers vs. Monsanto

Community members assembled early this morning.

At 9:00 am this morning community members and stakeholders assembled outside of the Southern District Court in New York City to announce a public message that they stand behind family farmers as they go to court with Monsanto.  The lead plaintiffs in the case stated, " In the past two decades, Monsanto’s seed monopoly has grown so powerful that they control the genetics of nearly 90% of five major commodity crops including corn, soybeans, cotton, canola and sugar beets. This has resulted in onerous costs to farmers through high technology patent fees for seeds as well as burdensome litigation costs in defending themselves against lawsuits asserted by Monsanto.  In many cases organic and conventional farmers are forced to stop growing certain crops in order to avoid genetic contamination and potential lawsuits."  In response to the injustice leveraged on farmers by Monsanto, the Organic Seed Growers and Traders Association has filed suit against Monsanto.

Activists rallied after the court hearing.

The lawsuit OSGATA (Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association) et al vs. Monsanto was filed on behalf of 300,000 organic and non-GMO farmers and citizens to seek judicial relief in "protect[ing] themselves from ever being accused of infringing patents on transgenic (GMO) seed". The judge has requested and agreed to hear oral argument in orders to make a decision of whether or not to allow the farmers’ case to move forward in the courts after Monsanto filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Supporters of farmers’ rights to grow food without fear and intimidation assembled outside the courtroom today to support the farmers in their claims, recognizing that these injustices affect us all and that this case is deserving of the court’s time and attention.

We won't know the results of the hearing for a few weeks, but are taking a stand and are committed to seeing this through. 

Have a great afternoon!

Monsanto's Take on GMO Testing

A recent post in the Natural News highlights a claim made by Monsanto Corporation that "there is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans".  Despite many studies pointing to the dangers of GMO foods, Monsanto has taken the stance that GMOs are not substantially different from natural crops.  Here is a selection of text from the article that details a bit of Monsanto's argument:

In the "Why aren't you running human clinical trials on GM crops?" section of Monsanto's Food Safety page, the biotechnology giant explains its opinion that GMOs are "substantially equivalent" to natural organisms. According to Monsanto, since concentrations of proteins, carbohydrates, and other nutrient factors vary among natural crops, as well as among natural and GM crops, then these differences are unimportant in light of GMO safety.

Furthermore, Monsanto claims that its injection of foreign DNA into its GM crops is also safe because DNA is present in natural crops as well. Never mind that the injected DNA is foreign and unnatural, and is used to alter the entire genetic structure of GM crops -- according to Monsanto, its unnatural DNA is non-toxic because every other plant also has DNA.

It's time that we learn the truth about what's in our food, so that we can make more informed decisions as consumers about what goes into (and potentially harms) our bodies.  We are building a list of members interested in anti-GMO activism who can help send letters to the FDA or locally organize to advocate for state labeling regulation in which Rep. Roy and the Ledgelight Health District have led the way. Please e-mail Kristiane if you'd like to be added to the list as we coordinate more GMO activism activities.

Additionally, if you want to learn more about the Dangers of GMOs, register today for our Winter Conference!  With over 40 workshops, potluck lunch, vendors, live music, cooking demos, exhibits, expert panels, and a keynote by Jeffrey M. Smith, the leading spokesperson on the dangers of GMOs, this is an event you don't want to miss!

Have a great week!
-Melissa