Looking Back to Look Forward - Independence in America

Back in 1976, Robert Rodale wrote an editorial for the September issue of Organic Farming and Gardening about personal independence.  Almost 36 years later, the relationship between personal independence and sustainability is a major issue in current social and political movements, regardless of whether those movements are conservative or liberal, and related concerns about food, energy, and healthcare are some of the most hotly debated topics in the United States today. Case in point: the images in this post are not from the 70's; they're part of the current shift in mindset from reliance on outside groups to a more local and holistic approach to living, an approach Rodale discusses in his editorial:

The garden is the best place to start looking for ways to help people become more independent. A garden is both the symbol and reality of self-sufficiency—especially an organic garden, which recycles organic wastes of the yard and household, permits the production of significant amounts of food with only minimal reliance on outside resources. Any campaign to boost personal independence should start by helping people become gardeners—teaching, motivating, and making land available.

Liberty doesn't end at the border of the garden, though. Home production of a variety of goods and services extends the idea of gardening. Both gardeners and non-gardeners can also grow their own bean sprouts, make some of their own clothes, become proficient at crafts, improve insulation of their home, and do similar home production tasks. Each such activity you learn makes you less dependent on others.

Even treatment of disease could be improved by fostering a greater spirit of personal independence. We need to learn more about how to take care of ourselves during illness. Any doctor will tell you that an intelligent patient, who knows how to observe and evaluate symptoms, can be treated with fewer drugs, and is therefore less likely to have side effects and will probably recover faster. Being totally dependent on the doctor is the worst way to act when sick.

As of yesterday our nation is one year older.  As you take time to be with friends and family and celebrate our country's independence, take a moment to think about your own independence and what that means to you. Think about all the ways you can take charge of your life and live more independently, and save money be healthier and happier as a result. Whether your goal is to start your own garden, replace some of your driving with bicycling, or buy goods and services from people in your town, every step you take toward sustaining yourself is also a step toward making us more sustainable as a nation.  What better way to show your patriotism than by advocating for one of the most fundamental ideals of our country?

Happy Belated Independence Day!
-Melissa

Borrowing Against the Future for the Present

Yield isn't the issue.  The issue is sustainability.

As an addendum to yesterday's blog post about the organic -vs- conventional debate, let's talk a little about our societal perspective on how to go about feeding ourselves.  Although we might not want to think about it, it's no secret that in the United States we often lack a forward thinking mentality, and that focus on the present has negatively manifested itself a lot in the last few years - the Bush-era tax cuts, the social security crisis, the medical emphasis on expensive treatment rather than preventative care, the list goes on.  And because this is a systemic problem, you might guess that it also makes itself apparent in our food system.  Well, you're right.

As Kristiane mentioned yesterday, the debate about whether organic can outperform conventional or vice versa is really beside the point.  During a really good growing season, conventional agriculture might increase your yields for a year or two, while simultaneously:

• degrading your soil and water
• producing less nutrient dense (and therefore less nutritious) food
• running the risk of failure should the affects of climate change rear it's head
• pumping tons of fossil fuels into the air to accelerate the risk of failure from climate change
• poisoning the wildlife (and people) of the surrounding ecosystems

You might get a few exceptionally good harvests, but at what cost? Is it really worth it in the long run, and when you look at it with that broader perspective, can you really consider it a success? Probably not.  In this way we have taken out a loan against the future of our food system in order to sustain an expensive, wasteful, unhealthy, and wholly unsustainable present-day food system.

And it's not just the environmental effects of conventional farming that show a consistent lack of forward thinking. An editorial response to yesterday's mentioned study about conventional -vs- organic yields begins,

A new a study from McGill University and the University of Minnesota published in the journal Nature compared organic and conventional yields from 66 studies and over 300 trials. Researchers found that on average, conventional systems out-yielded organic farms by 25%—mostly for grains, and depending on conditions.

Embracing the current conventional wisdom, the authors argue for a combination of conventional and organic farming to meet “the twin challenge of feeding a growing population, with rising demand for meat and high-calorie diets, while simultaneously minimizing its global environmental impacts."

This statement assumes that it's reasonable to expect and tolerate an ever increasing demand for meat and high calorie foods, even though a diet high in meat and animal products is both less cost effective and less healthy than consuming mostly plants.  It takes more energy, both in fossil fuels and in feed, to produce enough meat to feed one person than it does to produce enough plants to feed that same person, and the person who ate the plant-based diet is much less likely to develop (and cause everyone to spend a lot more on healthcare to treat) lifestyle diseases like diabetes and heart disease. By continuing to emphasize a diet loaded with animal products, we are indulging in an unsustainable present at the expense of our economic and medical future.  This system is also exclusionary:

In reality, the bulk of industrially produced grain crops goes to biofuels and confined animal feedlots rather than food for the 1 billion hungry. The call to double food production by 2050 only applies if we continue to prioritize the growing population of livestock and automobiles over hungry people.

So we are also taking out a loan against the future of the many in order to provide an expensive and unhealthy lifestyle for the few, an action that ultimately will adversely affect us all, regardless of our socioeconomic status. Continuing with a conventional food system affords us the possibility of a few years of questionably higher yields at the expense of our climate, our farmland, our money, and our health.  That's a tradeoff that isn't in anyone's best interest, so lets try to eat more plants and buy food that was produced sustainably and closer to home in order to promote a better future for us all.

Have a healthy afternoon!
-Melissa

10 Things You Should Know About GMOs

A new article by Care2 provides a concise and well-written outline of topics you can use in the event of a Genetically Modified Organism debate, courtesy of Jeffrey Smith, the Keynote speaker at our upcoming Winter Conference.  Advocates for GMO use have a lot to say about why GMOs are great for humanity, but numerous studies argue otherwise.  Here are some of the highlights:

1. GMOs are unhealthy.
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) urges doctors to prescribe non-GMO diets for all patients. They cite animal studies showing organ damage, gastrointestinal and immune system disorders, accelerated aging, and infertility. Human studies show how genetically modified (GM) food can leave material behind inside us, possibly causing long-term problems. Genes inserted into GM soy, for example, can transfer into the DNA of bacteria living inside us, and that the toxic insecticide produced by GM corn was found in the blood of pregnant women and their unborn fetuses.

3. GMOs increase herbicide use.
Most GM crops are engineered to be “herbicide tolerant”―they defy deadly weed killer. Monsanto, for example, sells Roundup Ready crops, designed to survive applications of their Roundup herbicide.
Between 1996 and 2008, US farmers sprayed an extra 383 million pounds of herbicide on GMOs. Overuse of Roundup results in “superweeds,” resistant to the herbicide. This is causing farmers to use even more toxic herbicides every year. Not only does this create environmental harm, GM foods contain higher residues of toxic herbicides. Roundup, for example, is linked with sterility, hormone disruption, birth defects, and cancer.

5. Government oversight is dangerously lax.
Most of the health and environmental risks of GMOs are ignored by governments’ superficial regulations and safety assessments. The reason for this tragedy is largely political. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for example, doesn’t require a single safety study, does not mandate labeling of GMOs, and allows companies to put their GM foods onto the market without even notifying the agency. Their justification was the claim that they had no information showing that GM foods were substantially different. But this was a lie. Secret agency memos made public by a lawsuit show that the overwhelming consensus even among the FDA’s own scientists was that GMOs can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects. They urged long-term safety studies. But the White House had instructed the FDA to promote biotechnology, and the agency official in charge of policy was Michael Taylor, Monsanto’s former attorney, later their vice president. He’s now the US Food Safety Czar.

8. GMOs harm the environment.
GM crops and their associated herbicides can harm birds, insects, amphibians, marine ecosystems, and soil organisms. They reduce bio-diversity, pollute water resources, and are unsustainable. For example, GM crops are eliminating habitat for monarch butterflies, whose populations are down 50% in the US. Roundup herbicide has been shown to cause birth defects in amphibians, embryonic deaths and endocrine disruptions, and organ damage in animals even at very low doses. GM canola has been found growing wild in North Dakota and California, threatening to pass on its herbicide tolerant genes on to weeds.

9. GMOs do not increase yields, and work against feeding a hungry world.
Whereas sustainable non-GMO agricultural methods used in developing countries have conclusively resulted in yield increases of 79% and higher, GMOs do not, on average, increase yields at all. This was evident in the Union of Concerned Scientists’ 2009 report Failure to Yield―the definitive study to date on GM crops and yield.

And that's only half of the list!  To read the full list, go here.  If you want to hear Jeffrey Smith speak in person about the dangers of GMOs, register for our Winter Conference being held on March 3, 2012 in Manchester, CT.  To learn more and to register, click here.

Have a great afternoon!
-Melissa

Farmer Dan and Maine Food Sovereignty

Food sovereignty has been a steadily growing movement in the state of Maine, with many towns adopting ordinances that legalize small scale food production and sales without the need for costly and time-consuming state and federal permits.  As could be expected, the state is none too happy with these recent developments, and along with the FDA, has spearheaded a recent effort to push back against the rising food sovereignty movement. 

Farmer Dan Brown is a resident of Blue Hill, Maine, who owns a single dairy cow.  Dan uses much of what the cow produces to feed himself and his family, but also has an on-farm farm stand where locals go to buy bottles of the surplus milk.  Dan isn't a food distributor, and the notion of getting permits and facilities to be in line with state law is nonsensical in his case, but the state is cracking down on his operation nonetheless. According to the state and the FDA, his farm is breaking the law by selling supposedly dangerous unpasteurized milk to consumers without getting necessary inspections and permits.  Dan, his family, and his purchasers have never had health problems with his milk, while legalized large-scale factory milk producers have had countless issues over the years with their product, but this irony seems lost on state officials who want to see Dan's farm closed to consumers.  In response to Dan's refusal to shut down his operation, the state of Maine is filing suit against him.  It is up to the community and those of us who care about local small-scale food production to convince the state to drop the lawsuit against Dan Brown and respect the authority of Blue Hill's local food sovereignty laws.

Food Renegade recently wrote up a nicely articulated post on farmer Dan's plight that includes two informative videos on the subject, the more concise of which can be found here.  If you'd like to read the full post, check here.  The post also contains information on how you can do your part to end the lawsuit against Dan Brown and support the hard work of small-scale local farmers.

Hoping your Thanksgiving was a good one,
-Melissa

How to Stop Useless Food Destruction

The Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund is a legal institution in place to defend the rights and broaden the freedoms of family farms and protect consumer access to raw milk and nutrient dense foods.  It's a valuable resource for any farmer or organization that deals with small farms and locally produced whole food, and their 24/7 hotline can help out if you are in a legal pinch.  If you are concerned that government regulators may be putting your rights and your food at risk, they are an organization to contact. 

Here's the story of Monte and Laura Bledso, owners of Quail Hollow Farm in Nevada's Moapa Valley.  On Friday, October 21, they began their farm to fork dinner with paying guests and locally produced food and music.  As their guests were arriving, farm tours were wrapping up, and the final dinner preparation was beginning, the Southern Nevada Health District showed up demanding an inspection.  They declared that the food was unfit for not only human consumption at a public event, but also consumption at a private event or even by animals.  Let me make it clear that there was nothing wrong with the food they prepared, with the sanitation of the facility, or with the farm's legal standing.  Laura and Monte had complied with all regulations up until the event, most of the food preparation was done at a certified facility offsite and a certified food trailer had been rented for the onsite preparation, and they had a special use permit from the US Health Department for the event.  Despite all if their efforts, and regardless of the fact that their food was, indeed, entirely safe for consumption, the inspector gave Laura and Monte no choice but to throw their lovingly prepared dinner that guests had paid for in the garbage.  And to add insult to injury, they were not only required to throw all the food away but were also told to pour bleach on it, thus rendering it completely useless, even for composting.  This story speaks to how out of touch with reality our national food priorities are.  Our government is willing and motivated to crack down on the small farmer who's never had an incident of illness from his or her food, but are unable or unwilling to adequately regulate large-scale factory farms that cause thousands of food recalls, illnesses, and deaths.

Fortunately, Laura and Monte's story has a happy ending.  As the inspector was forcing them to bleach and trash their dinner, they thought to call the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, that then let them know about their right to demand a search or arrest warrant from the inspector in order for them to continue operating on their property.  When the inspector was unable to provide such a warrant, the Health District had no legal recourse but to leave the premises.  Laura and Monte were able to salvage their event, and the guests felt a greater sense of bonding and motivation to enact change as a result of the incident. 

You can go to the Fund's website to read more about Laura and Monte's experience, and to get involved yourself. 

Have a great Monday!
-Melissa

How to Buy a Delicious and Ecologically Sustainable Turkey

Photo: Brandon Siedel/ Shutterstock

With Thanksgiving only a few weeks away, the time has come for many Americans to start searching for the perfect bird.  If it's your turn to cook this year, and you want to make sure you can compete with Aunt Janice the chef and Uncle John who's been cooking turkeys for 30 years, consider choosing a sustainably raised turkey from a farm near you.  You'll be boosting your local economy, helping the environment, and your turkey will taste better than its factory farm-bred cousins.  The Mother Nature Network lists a few tips on getting a bird that will wow your guests and promote sustainable healthy living:

If you're part of the majority of Americans who don't shoot their own turkey, be aware of where the bird you're buying comes from.  If you get your poultry from a farm, farmer's market, or CSA, talk to the farmer and find out how the bird was raised.  If you're buying from a grocery store, talk to the butcher or store manager, or carefully read the labels on the bird's packaging.  Some labels are more reliable than others, so make sure you're informed.  For instance, a label claiming a bird was "free range" realistically means almost nothing since an animal that's only been allowed outside for five minutes a day can be considered free range, and even that rule is not enforced by any organization other than the manufacturer.  A great resource to check the reliability of labels for all kinds of foods can be found here.

If you are looking for superior flavor, buy either a heritage, organic, or sustainably produced turkey. Sustainable agriculture isn't just good for the environment and for livestock; it's also good for your taste buds.  Ninety-nine percent of all turkeys raised in the United States are Broadbreasted White, a variety that has been bread to have abnormally large amounts of breast meat.  This means that the birds can't walk or breed properly, and, according to the UN, without artificial insemination by humans the entire species would go extinct within one generation.  Raised in confinement in extremely crowded conditions, they are fed a steady diet of grain and antibiotics rather than the grubs, bugs and grasses they should eat and could eat if they were allowed outdoors.  It's no wonder that in blind taste tests, factory-farmed Broadbreasted White turkey proved to be inferior in flavor to sustainably produced, organic, and heritage breeds of turkey, but conventional wisdom still dictates the false notion that Broadbreasted White turkeys raised on large factory farms taste the best.  Heritage turkeys are breeds that were around before Broadbreasted White existed, and many of them originated in America.  Organic birds are raised without growth enhancers or antibiotics, and eat organic feed.  Sustainable is a term that's a bit harder to pin down, but basically refers to farmers who treat their land, animals, and workers with respect, so that the farm will remain sustainable for generations to come, hence the name.  Although sustainable has no legal regulations like Certified Organic, sustainable farms often exceed USDA Organic guidelines.

In the end, the key is to buy local.  The best way to know for sure how your turkey was raised is to buy it from a local source, where you can literally see the conditions that the birds are living in.  Buying local is good for your regional economy and it's easier than you think.  Local Harvest and the Eat Well Guide are both great resources to search for a farm near you.

Happy Hunting!

-Melissa

Legal Loophole for Buying and Selling Raw Milk

NPR posted an article on the 13th explaining how raw milk lovers can buy unpasteurized dairy products even in states where its sale is banned for human consumption.  The secret is selling it as pet food.  Farmers in several states have adopted this technique, registering to sell raw milk and milk products as "commercial feed".  However, since federal law prohibits the interstate sale of raw dairy, the government has cracked down on some farmers who have been skirting the ban by selling their products as pet food across state lines.  According to the FDA, pasteurization is necessary to kill harmful bacteria like E. coli, Salmonella and listeria that might linger in raw milk.  Advocates for raw milk consumption disagree, pointing out that factory farming processes produce many more disease outbreaks and are thus a greater risk to public health than the consumption of raw diary.  As a result, the game of cat and mouse with the law continues.  Such subterfuge is necessary in a "dysfunctional" legal landscape, argues Pete Kennedy, the president of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, which represents some 2,000 individual farmers across the U.S. who sell raw milk, and some 3,000 members of raw milk-buying clubs.  "The consumption of raw milk is legal in every state in the country," Kennedy says. "But you have 20 states where the sale is illegal. So you have this right with some people unable to exercise it."

Check out the full article here.

Food Independence Day!

It’s Nearly Independence Day Weekend! This Fourth of July, try declaring your Food Independence.  Kitchen Gardeners International started an initiative a couple years ago to encourage “first families” or governor’s families to “eat by example” by sourcing their meals locally.  You can find out more information here http://www.facebook.com/FoodIndependenceDay and petition your first family here: http://apps.facebook.com/causes/petitions/153. 

Purchase your Fourth of July feast locally, it's patriotic!  The editorial “Dangerous Imports" in the New York Times on June 24, highlighted the dangers of importing food from abroad.  Nearly two-thirds of the fruits and vegetables and 80% of the sea food we eat here in the US is from abroad.  These concerns are mainly in response to the E Coli infections in Europe and North America which were first blamed on organic growing methods.  It has become clear, as more E. Coli cases are discovered, that the international, unregulated nature of global food imports and exports is to blame. 

Buying local supports the American economy, buying local organic improves environmental quality where you live, and both benefit you and your families’ health.   

Having trouble planning a local July fourth meal? Think about local brews instead of imported beer, local grass-fed beef if you eat meat, local potatoes for your potato salad and Mother Nature Network can provide you with a couple more ideas: http://www.mnn.com/local-reports/connecticut/local-blog/best-july-4th-recipes

Happy Independence Day!

Maine State Legislature Highlights Food Sovereignty

Maine has passed a joint resolution declaring Maine State Food Sovereignty.  State representative Aaron Libby writes that while a Joint Resolution has no political power, it “can and will send a message to the Federal government that we disapprove of their over regulation.” 

JOINT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SENTIMENT OF THE LEGISLATURE FOR FOOD SOVEREIGNTY
WHEREAS, according to the Declaration of Independence, all people "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"; and
WHEREAS, food is human sustenance and is the fundamental prerequisite to life; and
WHEREAS, the basis of human sustenance rests on the ability of all people to save seed and grow, process, consume and exchange food and farm products; and
WHEREAS, it is our obligation as elected representatives of the people of Maine to protect the fundamental freedoms as enshrined by the Constitution of Maine and the United States Constitution and to protect agricultural, ecological and economic diversity and sustainability for a free and healthy society; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: That We, the Members of the One Hundred and Twenty-fifth Legislature now assembled in the First Regular Session, on behalf of the people we represent, and in recognition of our State's proud agricultural heritage, take this opportunity to oppose any federal statute, law or regulation that attempts to threaten our basic human right to save seed and grow, process, consume and exchange food and farm products within the State of Maine.

 The FDA is in the process of creating food safety regulations for the Food Safety Modernization Act, which will go into effect gradually.  The joint resolution is a response to the US Senate’s passage of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (See the CT NOFA blog entry from June 1, 2011). Maine has taken a proactive stance to preserve local food regulations, with four towns first passing local food sovereignty laws.  This joint resolution raises the question of local and state power in determining their own agricultural and food policy.