In co-sponsoring a bill to exempt agricultural pesticides sprayed over water from the Clean Water Act, Senator Blanche Lincoln had this to say: “Congress never intended for agricultural chemicals to be regulated under the Clean Water Act.” (NYT). Oh, of course not. Everybody knows agricultural chemicals are completely safe, and spraying them over water is really no big deal. On this issue, as on so many, many others, the Senator has sided with her Republican counterparts. The bill is co-sponsored by Saxby-Chambliss, Rep, Ga. One begins to wonder which of the two is really leading the Senate ag committee.
The bipartisan duo argues that regulating pesticides sprayed over water places an undue burden on farmers. Pesticide residues in drinking water place an undue health burden on the men, women, and children who drink water (everyone, last I looked), but who’s counting? Maybe if we don’t look for pesticide residues in drinking water, we won’t find them, and the problem will just go away. Out of sight, out of mind.
Growing food is expensive. Continuing to ignore the very real human health and environmental problems associated with pesticide use may keep food prices artificially low, but it only delays the inevitable.
Even as the FDA announces new guidance for the “judicious use of medically important antibiotics in food-producing animals,” an acknowledgment that routine use of antibiotics as growth promoters or as prophylactics is not “in the best interest” of public health, resistance to change remains strong in farm and veterinary circles.
Nowhere is the entrenchment of the status quo more evident than in the veterinary profession itself. I was disappointed to come across a recent article co-authored by a former, and respected, professor. The article examined factors associated with isolation of mutiple antibiotic resistant (MAR) E. coli infections on cattle farms in the Western US. One of the findings of the study was that organic dairies have fewer cases of this type of infection than conventional dairy farms. Age of animals and geographic location, among other factors, were also examined and had varying affects on development of resistance.
The fact that organic dairies experience fewer multiple antibiotic resistant E. coli isolates is great news for both producers and consumers of organic products. Unbelievably, the authors chose to downplay this result. Their conclusion?
MAR in fecal E coli isolates from cattle was influenced by factors not directly associated with the use of antimicrobials, including geographic region, animal age, and purpose (beef vs dairy). (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2010;236:1338–1344)
I think there is a glaring omission here. Organic farms use no antibiotics . If they do, they are not certified organic. Therefore, organic farming can not be said to be unrelated to antibiotic use. I’m not saying other factors on organic farms don’t contribute to the findings. It’s likely that better management practices and cleaner facilities also play a role. After all, farms that don’t use antibiotics must keep their cows from developing disease. It’s simply outrageous that the authors do not discuss the findings on organic farms at all.
Change is coming to animal agriculture. Consumers have demanded it, and science demonstrates that it is necessary.
Congratulations to all who weighed in on the West Little Rock Farmer’s Market issue last week. Thanks to an outpouring of support from local citizens, the city has decided to allow farmers to continue to sell produce at PA on Mondays while the zoning variance is being approved. Let’s reward good behavior by thanking the city officials who have been so responsive on this issue. From the realfoodlittlerock blog:
I just received word from Sylvia Blain, Executive Director of Arkansas Local Foods Initiative that the city of Little Rock is going to allow the farm to school farmers’ market to continue on Mondays at Pulaski Academy while revisions are being proposed for city regulations regarding local farmers. You can stop writing and calling with the exception of thank you notes. The men to thank are Bryan Day, bday@littlerock.org, Dana Carney dcarney@littlerock.org, and Tony Bozynski, tbozynski@littlerock.org.
Realfoodlittlerock did a fantastic job getting this issue out to other bloggers. Keep up the good work!
A local foods blogger at http://realfoodlittlerock.blogspot.com/ has the full story on the farmers that were shut down in West Little Rock yesterday with a full load of freshly harvested food. Please join her in taking action to make it possible for the West Little Rock Market to continue. The botttom line is that the farmers must apply for a variance to city zoning ordinances in order to continue to market on Mondays at PA. This process can take quite some time, and, obviously, peak harvest season is already upon us. These farmers have much to lose, and so do the consumers who depend on them. You can help by urging the city to get this approval finished as quickly as possible. Write or call Mr. Dana Carvey, at 371-4844 or write dcarney@littlerock.org. Let him know you appreciate and support our local farmers, and that you believe a vibrant farmer’s market is an asset to the West Little Rock community.
I just got this unbelievable message about the West Little Rock Farmers’ Market. I don’t know anything about this group of farmers, but I do know West Little Rock needs some sort of local market, because people often won’t travel from WLR downtown on Saturday mornings. (That’s their loss.)
If you stopped by the farmers market at PA today, then you know that there has been trouble. A city code enforcement officer stopped the farmers from setting up. He informed them that they were in violation of city zoning laws. They were unaware of this problem because they had been invited by PA to sell on PA’s private property.
It seems to me that the reasonable thing to do would have been to let the farmers sell the produce they had picked and hauled to town with the warning that they could not return next week without a variance from the city. But they were sent packing with between $1,000 and $2,000 worth of some of the best food in Arkansas with no where to go to sell it. Instead of being given a little grace, they were told that they would be given a $1000 fine if they sold anything. This broke my heart for these guys who have been sweating in this heat to grow good food.
I have called all the farmers involved to see what can be done to support them and to continue a West Little Rock Market. We may need to make some phone calls to the city code enforcement office or find them a new location with different zoning. I’ll let you know as soon as I know more.
Genetically modified alfalfa, marketed by agri-giant Monsanto, will likely be planted in the near future, following a ruling by the Supreme Court that overturned a California-court ban on the plants pending a full environmental impact study. According to the AFP, the ball is now firmly in APHIS’ court. (APHIS = Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service).
“Until such time as the agency decides whether and how to exercise its regulatory authority, however, the courts have no cause to intervene,” the ruling said.
In the age of unbridled corporate influence in government, it’s fairly clear that the agency will not choose to exercise regulatory authority.
Proponents of further study prior to introducing such modified organisms point to the very real possibility of cross-contamination of the introduced gene into wild-type alfalfa stock. Because the gene makes the plant resistant to a proprietary Monsanto herbicide, use of the crop will promote heavier application of the chemical. That will likely lead to more environmental contamination as well as more chemical residues on alfalfa products.
Monsanto may have the Feds in their pocket, but consumers can still fight back. Refuse to buy GMO products, or meat products from animals fed GMOs. This means buying organic or from local, trusted growers. Consumer pressure can and does effect change.
The Enviromental Working Group has kept a searchable database of information about crop subsidies in the US since 2002. According to updated data for 2009, the situation for small farmers and growers of produce has not improved. In 2009, fruit and vegetable farmers received just 5.3% of total subidies ($825 million out of $15.4 billion). The vast majority of the remainder went to growers of just 5 commodity crops: corn, cotton, rice, soybeans and wheat.
Contrary to what many, including Senator Lincoln, would have you believe, small farmers are not receiving much help from these subsidies. The EWG reports that
“from 1995 to 2009, the largest and wealthiest top 10 percent of farm program subsidy recipients collected 74 percent of all farm subsidies, with an average total payment over 15 years of $445,127 per recipient — hardly a safety net for small struggling farmers. According to the USDA, 62 percent of farmers don’t even receive subsidies.”
The farm subsidy program is one of the major reasons that it is cheaper for working families to buy soft drinks and corn chips than apples and oranges. As the nation turns its attention, at long last, to the problems of inadequate school nutrition and epidemic obesity, it is time for legislators to revamp the subsidy program. Small farmers and farmers of high-nutritional value (overall nutrition, not just protein or carbohydrate calories, thank you) should be rewarded. Incentives for local production and distribution of produce should be introduced.
Senator Lincoln has had ample opportunity, as a member and now Chair of the Senate Agricultural Committee, to move the subsidy program in a new direction. She has chosen to side with Big Agriculture instead. The school lunch bill she touts in campaign speeches will provide $450 million per year over 10 years to lunches. That’s less than half what President Obama requested, and in the end schools that comply with the nutrition standards will only receive about 6 cents extra. Thanks to the 15.4 billion dollars in farm subsidies for commodities, that 6 cents is likely not even enough to buy a single carrot. (Full story here.)
Kudos to Jody Hardin, of the Certified Arkansas Farmers Market, Foodshed Farm Basket a Month Club, and the Argenta Market (among other endeavors). Jody has been fighting for local farmers for years, and one battle that still rages is the fight to keep local farmers markets local. Frustrated by wholesalers undercutting local growers at the Rivermarket, Jody started a source-verified market in Argenta three years ago and has never looked back. The debate over farmers markets is national, and recently, a town in Wisconsin took up the issue. Jody was among those interviewed by the New York Times for the story. Thanks to his work, Little Rock (and Hot Springs Village as well as Searcy) is ahead of the curve, and, our certified farmers’ markets provide truly local foods year round. Check out the Market this Saturday and support some great farmers. You’ll find the best in fresh and even organically grown local produce in Argenta.
(I’m a huge fan of local farmers, local foods, and organic foods. This is a spontaneous endorsement, and I have no financial interest in the markets to disclose!)
Even as the local food movement has entered an encouraging period of growth, significant roadblocks to local markets exist. One of the biggest issues facing local farmers markets is the influx of cheap produce that is not grown locally. A large percentage of this produce comes from shipments to large grocery chains that are rejected by the company for a variety of reasons, including temperature discrepancies and minor blemished incurred during shipping. These shipments are sold very cheaply to local wholesalers by truckers anxious to get back on the road for their next shipment. The wholesalers then put the produce up for sale on the roadside or at local farmers markets at a deep discount.
Selling such cheap produce at local farmers markets puts farmers at a disadvantage. The deep discounts wholesalers can offer on their produce cannot be met by local farmers without a loss, and, as a result, the local farmers lose money. The state may also lose money, because these wholesalers may unfairly take advantage of sales-tax exemptions given to local farmers. Consumers lose, too. Many consumers believe that foods offered at farmers markets are locally grown and fresh, rather than blemished goods rejected by the national grocery chains.
It is imperative that state lawmakers acknowledge this problem and that steps are taken to ensure that locally grown foods are given a fair chance at local markets. Jody Hardin has some ideas for what this policy might look like:
If we can persuade our policy makers to see we need this fairness to be mandated throughout the state as law: to provide designated, fair trade markets exclusively to our states farmers and only their produce be allowed, it would be an automatic game changer for the fresh market farmer! I’m thinking, perhaps, that we may propose to host a CAFM market on Saturday at the River Market, and ask all the other non farm vendors as well as farmers who want a second day to to sell on, to move to a Sunday market with a new distinction as “International Bazaar or Flea Market”, for example. This would help the merchants drive two big business days downtown and it would segregate the tax exempt farmers from those who are required to pay state sales taxes from re-selling, giving the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, and state a legitimate reason to make the distinction into a law and increase tax revenue. Mixing farmers with re-sellers will never be fair to local small farmers or the local food system.
I recently received an annual update from Jody Hardin, of Foodshed Farms, Basket-a-Month Community Supported Agriculture (BAM), and the Certified Arkansas Farmers’ Market (CAFM). With the help of people like Jody and his great support group at Foodshed Farms, fresh local foods are being made available to people all over the state, and consumers are spending money in their own communities to help local farmers.
Foodshed Farms’ Basket a Month CSA alone has put over $500,000 back into the local economy over the 4 years it has been running. When the local markets in Argenta, Hot Springs, and Searcy are added, total economic impact is estimated to reach $1,000,000 over the same 4-year period. The local foods movement is growing rapidly. Jody is in discussions with 3 additional Arkansas communities to start local affiliates of the CAFM.
Jody’s estimates do not include the economic impact of other local food clubs such as that provided by the Arkansas Sustainability Network, an organization that conducts a year-round, on-line only market. Many local growers produce for both markets, reaching different populations in the area.
Everyone can take advantage of the wonderful, fresh produce, meat, dairy, and other items grown and marketed locally. This spring will be a good time to plug into the local foods movement and find out how satisfying it can be to participate in the community.
Tomorrow’s post will deal with the obstacles still facing local agriculture.
Recent Comments