Why a Salad Costs More Than a Big Mac

Because there are no lettuce lobbyists, that's why.  (Chart courtesy of Physicians' Committee for Responsible Medicine.)

Food Safety Enhancement Act HR 2749

What appears to be an extremely silly law is now before Congress.

HR 2749, the Food Safety Enhancement Act (FSEA) treats every food producer from Blue Oven Bakery, a small artisan bakery that sells at many local farmers' markets, to food industry giant Kraft as if they're the same: as if the food they produce presents the same risks of adulteration and as if the same preventive measures are necessary for both. This just isn't the case; small artisan producers are providing safe, healthy, sustainably-produced foods made by hand, often using traditional methods that have been in use for centuries and sourcing local ingredients from small farmers. Such foods are already safe, and in fact are the solution to our country's food safety problems. We should be encouraging these producers into the market, not erecting more barriers for them. This new bill will erect barriers, possibly insurmountable ones, to local artisan food producers.

For example: the bill requires every food producer to pay a $500 fee and undertake a "hazard analysis" to prevent their food from presenting a safety hazard to the public. So Blue Oven and other local artisan food producers such as Fab Ferments (which make fermented sauerkrauts and sells them at local farmers' markets) and Linwood Sausage Co. (which makes artisan sausages and sells them at Hyde Park FM) will pay the same fee as Nestle or Kellogg's and be saddled with the same paperwork burden. I'm thinking Nestle and Kellogg's won't miss the $500 and can probably absorb the costs of developing their "hazard analysis." I don't think the same can be said for Blue Oven Bakery.

Here's another example: Food producers engaging in "interstate shipping" must develop a "Food Safety Plan." Again, it doesn't matter how small or new a producer is or how they produce their food product. Capriole, a small goat cheese maker in Indiana who might want to sell at Ohio or Kentucky farmers' markets, is treated the same as Tyson, which ships tons of factory-farmed chicken to all fifty states. Under HR 2749, both will be required to develop a food safety plan including these elements:

1. preventive controls being implemented;
2. procedure for monitoring preventive controls;
3. procedures for taking corrective action;
4. verification activities for the preventive controls, including validation, review of monitoring and corrective action records, and procedures for determining whether the preventive controls are effectively preventing, eliminating, or reducing to an acceptable level the occurrence of identified hazards or conditions;
5. recordkeeping procedures;
6. procedures for the recall of articles of food, whether voluntarily or when required;
7. procedures for the trace back of articles of food, whether voluntarily or when required;
8. procedures to ensure a safe and secure supply chain for the ingredients or components used in making the food manufactured, processed, packed, transported or held by such facility; and
9. procedures to implement the science-based performance standards issued.

I'm thinking this will put some of our artisan producers out of business.

It's always difficult to parse out the various reasons people are against any new law to figure out whether it's hysteria from those who simply distrust the government (though I have a lot of sympathy for these folks, too) or whether the provisions in a certain law are really as alarming as some would have us believe. For instance, I've seen headlines trumpeting that this law would "control home breadmaking." Uh, no, it won't, and such headlines just make those opposing this bill look like hysterical alarmists. It's easy to dismiss alarmists; let's dial down the hysteria. However, this bill, if passed in its current form, will make it significantly more difficult for small and artisan food producers to start and maintain a viable business. This will make it harder to find such foods. This bill, if passed as written, will actually make the food safety problem worse by eliminating sources of good, healthy, locally-produced artisan food products.

I believe small, new, and artisan food producers should be exempted from this law. At the very least, I believe that the compliance requirements should be as reasonable for Just Cured, who source and smoke sustainably-produced salmon, as it is for Hormel -- which means that Just Cured probably ought to pay $25 to register and be required simply to maintain records of purchases so that if a food safety issue arises, those records can be used to figure out what happened. But to require Just Cured or Blue Oven or Fab Ferments to jump through the same hoops as Pepsico and Heinz is not only silly but doesn't address the fact that Fab Ferments, which uses traditional fermenting methods to produce sauerkraut the same way it's been produced for centuries, isn't the source of the food safety problems we've seen over the past ten years. Artisans don't cause e.coli outbreaks. Industrial food giants do. Artisan food producers are the solution, not the problem. Let's ask our lawmakers to recognize that.

I'm not sure the answer is to ask our lawmakers to simply vote against this bill. We do need to address food safety issues in our industrial food supply. But we don't need to behave as if those same problems are inherent in all food production. They aren't.

Ask your congressperson to change this bill to exempt small, new, and artisan food producers. To email your congressperson, visit the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund's petition page, which takes you to a handy form where you can enter your address. Enter your message in the blank box, and it will be sent to your congressional representative. The message I'm recommending you send is this:

I believe small, new, and artisan food producers should be exempted from this bill. They are not the problem. They are the SOLUTION to our food safety problems. We should not be creating new barriers to entry and new compliance burdens for these small producers of healthy food.

Cincinnati Farms Motion Before City Council Feb 4th

Next Wednesday (February 4th) the Cincinnati City Council will vote on the Cincinnati Farms motion, which will allow farmers to lease city-owned lots for urban agricultural production.  If you'd like to show your support for this idea, you can sign the petition.   If you really want to show your support, come to City Hall no later than 1:15 pm on February 4th (be sure to allow time for parking and to pass through security) and fill out a speaker card, which will allow you to address City Council for up to 2 minutes. 

Factory Farming Subsidized by Environmental Quality Incentives Program

A report (pdf) released yesterday by the Campaign for Family Farms and the Environment (CFFE) exposes how industrial hog and dairy operations are subsidized through the federal Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). The report, Industrial Livestock at the Taxpayer Trough, estimates that between 2003 and 2007, roughly 1,000 industrial hog and dairy operations have captured at least $35 million per year in taxpayer support through EQIP.

“This report demonstrates what family farmers have known for years—this corporate-controlled, industrial model of livestock production can’t survive without taxpayer support,” said Rhonda Perry, a livestock farmer with the Missouri Rural Crisis Center from Howard County, Missouri. “Taxpayers should not have to foot-the-bill for this corporate welfare that is fueling the industrialization of the livestock industry at the expense of family farmers, rural communities and the environment.”

EQIP was established in the 1996 Farm Bill as a cost-share program targeted at family farmers to help them incorporate conservation practices into their farming operations. However, the 2002 Farm Bill opened the program to factory farms, allowing them to use EQIP to help them expand their operations.

CFFE is leading the fight against the corporate takeover of the hog industry and working for policies supporting independent family farmers. Member groups include: Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, the Land Stewardship Project (MN), and the Missouri Rural Crisis Center.

Asparagus: the movie

A new documentary explores the importance of asparagus in Oceana County, MI and how policy changes of the U.S. government's war on drugs caused unintended results that area threatening the community.

According to Media that Matters:

This is the story of one rural American community scrambling to keep its proud identity and source of survival against impossible odds. Asparagus! Stalking the American Life journeys to the heart of asparagus country to discover why one little vegetable matters so much.

The film has won awards at various film festivals and is now available on DVD with a portion of the proceeds going to help Oceana County farmers. You can also watch a trailer on the site.

President Bush: Eat Local Foods

In yesterday's press conference, George W. Bush recommended Americans and the world eat more locally:

One thing I think that would be -- I know would be very creative policy is if we -- is if we would buy food from local farmers as a way to help deal with scarcity, but also as a way to put in place an infrastructure so that nations can be self-sustaining and self-supporting. It's a proposal I put forth that Congress hasn't responded to yet, and I sincerely hope they do.

Wow! I agree with the President. That's a new experience for me.

Still harping on Monsanto

Sorry to keep going on and on about Monsanto, but I had to call attention to a great article in Vanity Fair this month (thanks, Lucy, for the heads up) about Monsanto's long history of dirty tricks.

From the article:

Monsanto already dominates America’s food chain with its genetically modified seeds. Now it has targeted milk production. Just as frightening as the corporation’s tactics–ruthless legal battles against small farmers–is its decades-long history of toxic contamination.

Well worth reading.

Monsanto vs. farmers

Monsanto has recently settled with Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser, whom they'd sued for patent infringement when it was discovered that their Roundup Ready canola seed had crosspollinated with his own plants. They've agreed to pay clean-up costs of removing any Roundup Ready canola in Schmeiser's fields. Schmeiser believes "this precedent setting agreement ensures that farmers will be entitled to reimbursement when their fields become contaminated with unwanted Roundup Ready plants."

Monsanto has spent years suing small farmers across North America for 'patent infringement' in cases in which Monsant's genetically-modified and patented 'Roundup Ready' canola seeds had been found to have cross-pollinated with local farmers' crops without those farmers' knowledge or permission. Monsanto's argument has been that whether or not the farmer knew of or wanted such cross-pollination, the resulting plants and their seeds belonged to Monsanto, thanks to its patent on the Roundup Ready seed. (For excellent and compelling background on this story, watch The Future of Food, the award-winning 2004 documentary by Deborah Koons Garcia (widow of Jerry Garcia) which is available from the Cincinnati Public Library.) Thousands of small farmers across North America have been sued by Monsanto for patent infringement because they'd inadvertently (and involuntarily) ended up with Monsanto seed in their fields.

Monsanto's solution? Buy all your seeds from Monsanto. Then you're safe. Oh, and pay Monsanto $15 an acre in royalties on the patented seed.

At the time of filming, Schmeiser, who had saved his canola seed for replanting for decades, carefully selecting over a progression of years that seed which was best adapted to his Saskatchewan growing conditions, was being forced to destroy the product of his life's work because it had become contaminated by the Monsanto gene and Monsanto was claiming ownership of the seed. And the courts have backed Monsanto up on the ownership question -- the genes are patented, and if a farmer knowingly replants seed that has been crosspollinated with Roundup Ready seed, even against his will, he is guilty of patent infringement.

Monsanto grows its research GMO seed in thousands of confidential locations. For all any farmer knows, the about-to-be-patented pollen from plants in the next field could be blowing into his fields right now and crosspollinating with his crop. It is the nature of genetics that once a gene enters the gene pool, it's nearly impossible to get it back out again unless it's both dominant and fatal before reproductive maturity. It is quite possible that hundreds of years from now every canola, corn, soy, and cotton seed in North America will have a Monsanto GMO seed as an ancestor. (Monsanto has discontinued its Roundup Ready wheat project.)

Monsanto, by patenting seeds and then using their wealth to aggressively protect those patents, is attempting to completely control the world's commodity crop production. Many will remember their plans to develop the truly evil "Terminator Technology," which produced seeds with the Terminator gene which rendered second-generation seeds sterile -- thereby ensuring the farmer couldn't save seed from one year to the next. The repercussions of such a gene escaping into the broader gene pool were horrifying, with visions of third-world farmers innocently planting their saved seed and waiting...and waiting. Monsanto did acquire Delta & Pine Land, the developer of Terminator, but after a public outcry at the technology's potential for causing disastrous crop failures and resulting starvation, they announced they will not use the technology. (The USDA is a co-patent holder on the technology, retains the right to develop it, and so far has refused to commit to not developing it in the future. Our government at work for you.)

Monsanto continues to aggressively market their Roundup Ready cotton, soybean, canola, and corn seed, including with disastrous results to developing-world farmers who can't provide the necessary irrigation to be successful with such crops. And even diversified farms aren't safe. Monsanto already owns Seminis, the largest producer of fruit and vegetable seeds in the world, and a few weeks ago Monsanto finalized plans to acquire De Ruiter Seeds, a producer of seeds for the greenhouse vegetable market.

Percy Schmeiser, in the meantime, is happy with his win but estimates his legal bills top $400,000 Canadian. And even if he could get his destroyed seeds back, they'd still contain the Roundup Ready gene and be the property of Monsanto.

Indiana dairy labelling

Monsanto is at it again. Their rBGH product, Posilac, which artificially increases milk production in dairy cows, has seen declining sales. They think the solution is to prevent consumers from knowing how their milk was produced, and to that end they've been systematically influencing legislators in dairying states to prevent farmers who don't use the hormone from saying so on their labels. Pennsylvania and Ohio are dealing with this issue right now, and this week Indiana joined the fray.

Indiana HB 1300 would ban the use of labeling that "contains compositional claims that cannot be confirmed through laboratory analysis or can only be supported by sworn statements, affidavits, or testimonials." Monsanto's argument is that milk produced using their growth hormone can't be distinguished in a laboratory from milk produced without the hormone, and therefore labelling milk 'hormone-free' is misleading to consumers because it implies there's a difference.

If you are in Indiana want your representatives working for you instead of for Monsanto, contact your representative.

Victory in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania has rescinded the ban on 'anti-rBGH' labelling. This is great news for small dairy farmers in Pennsylvania and represents a significant win for consumers' right to know. However, a similar fight is still going on in Ohio. If you are in Ohio and want to know whether your milk is produced using rBGH, an email or phone call to Governor Ted Strickland and/or Ohio Agriculture Director Boggs would be timely and helpful. It doesn't have to be long or take a lot of time -- just a couple of lines telling Strickland/Boggs that you prefer to know how your milk is produced and don't want Ohio banning rGBH labelling.

To contact Governor Ted Strickland:
Phone: the Governor's Office at (614) 466-3555
FAX: a letter to the Governor at: (614) 466-9354
Email: click here to be taken to the contact form to send an email to the Governor.

To contact Director Boggs:
Phone: (614) 466-2732
Email: Send an email to Director Boggs

And why is local eating so popular these days?

We've been hearing a lot over the past few months about the FDA deciding whether or not to approve cloning of food animals, and according to the Washington Post they've decided to approve it. Whether or not they'll require labelling of such animals is not yet decided, but is unlikely as the FDA only requires food labelling when the use of a new biotechnology introduces an allergen.

Which leaves us with a further question: will farmers who choose not to use cloned animals be allowed to label their products as uncloned? It seems a silly question -- shouldn't it be a farmer's right to point this out? Shouldn't it be a consumer's right to know? But in light of Monsanto's campaign to get lawmakers to make such labels illegal (and lawmakers' inability to resist such campaigns), obviously it's not silly at all. The USDA has said it agrees with the FDA that cloned animals pose no safety concerns and that they'll be

"...working closely with stakeholders to ensure a smooth and seamless transition into the marketplace for these products."

For 'stakeholders' read Big Ag. And when it comes to making decisions about our food, money talks and Big Ag generally wins. Your best bet? Buy your meat from a small farmer who is raising his cows the old-fashioned way. If he is using artificial insemination (and even many small farmers do, because keeping a bull is no easy task) ask him whether the semen is from cloned animals.

USDA steals "Certified Naturally Grown" from small farmers

Walter Jeffries in his excellent blog Sugar Mountain Farm reports that his new label design has been rejected by the USDA for using the term Certified Naturally Grown. Trouble is, that's what his last label design used, also, and that design was approved by the USDA less than one year ago -- which as Walter points out, represents a policy change. And all this despite the fact that the term Certified Naturally Grown was developed by small farmers in reaction to the USDA stealing the term 'organic' -- which had also been developed by small farmers -- and selling it to Big Ag.

There's really no getting around it. The USDA is bought and paid for by Big Ag. Everything they do, they do with the interests of Monsanto, Cargill, ADM, and other major industrial agriculture corporations firmly in mind.

NPR on the demand for hormone-free milk

National Public Radio's Morning Edition included a story this morning on the demand for milk produced without use of artificial hormones which the government insists are harmless to humans.

Reuters' Top Health Issues of 2008

Reuters has released their predictions for the top health issues of 2008. Topping the list: Raw Milk. According to Reuters,

1. Raw Milk

People will go to extreme lengths to get it, farmers will risk their businesses to sell it, and most state governments want nothing to do with legalizing it. Raw milk -- milk that hasn't been pasteurized or homogenized -- was one of the most talked-about foods of the year.

Its fans say that pasteurization removes proteins, enzymes and healthy bacteria from milk, making it less nutritious, and that the taste of raw milk is incomparable. Those opposed to raw milk consumption -- including health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control -- argue that the harmful bacteria are of primary concern, and that the dangers posed by E. coli, salmonella and listeria are not worth the risk.

The debate is sure to continue in 2008 as raw milk goes mainstream, governments try to make it unappealing and people find more creative ways to get their hands on it.

Also on the list: the 2007 Farm Bill, Food labelling, Michael Pollan, The End of Cheap Food, and Fixing the FDA/USDA. Pretty much an all-star lineup from the Local Eating team.

Ohio Dairy Labelling

The folks up in Columbus who feel compelled to protect us from things we want to do by making them illegal have sunk to a new low: now they want to protect us from knowledge.

Up for consideration: a bill that would make it illegal for Ohio dairy farmers who don't use hormones on their cows to label their product 'hormone-free.' It seems all the dairy farmers who do use hormones on their dairy cows think such labels might make consumers think there was something wrong with milk produced when dairy cows are injected with hormones to make them produce more milk than nature intended. And, not coincidentally, farmers using hormones tend to be the ones with the most money to spend on lobbying government officials.

This letter to Governor Strickland, signed by many notables in the food safety, consumer protection, and dairy industry (including, strangely, Aurora Organic Dairy who have been in the news lately for playing fast-and-loose with the term 'organic') asks Ohio's governor not to interfere with our right to know.

US Senate commits 'Act of Cowardice'

The excellent Blog for Rural America calls the Senate's refusal to pass the Dorgan-Grassley amendment (limiting payments to farmers to $250,000) to the 2007 Farm Bill 'an act of cowardice.' It's hard to argue with them. This decision all by itself continues a systematic exclusion of new young farmers into the industry and protects the wealthiest farmers from competition. Once again when it comes to decisions made by those we've elected, money talks.

Ohio Milk Labeling: if it's us vs. them, why are we being represented by one of them?

Oh, that's nice. According to Saturday's Columbus Dispatch, on the Ohio Department of Agriculture's advisory committee to investigate whether Ohio dairymen should be allowed to label their milk as "hormone-free," the consumer point of view is being represented by Robin Steiner. Ms. Steiner once worked for Monsanto (which markets the synthetic growth hormone given to cows to increase milk production) and is married to a dairyman who uses the hormones in his herds. She's the only member of the committee with "consumer" listed as her affiliation.

Her point of view? Her elderly mom

...lives on a limited income and doesn’t have extra money to spend on milk that isn’t compositionally different from less-expensive types.

So clearly the solution is not to tell mom what’s in the milk. Ignorance being bliss, and all.

Uh, do you think maybe she’s already made up her mind about this one?

Joel Salatin on technology, science, and belief systems

From the excellent blog Food Democracy, Joel Salatin's article Sound Science is Killing Us is a bit on the long-and-dense side but worth plowing through.

From the article:

A diesel tractor can either pull an anhydrous-ammonia-fertilizer injector, or it can pull a manure spreader full of compost. It is the heart, the soul, the belief system that determines how technology will be used. Electricity can be used to power feed augers and ventilation fans, medication timers and artificial lights in a confinement poultry house, or it can power an energizer hooked to high-tech, information-dense, polyethylene-stainless-steel-threaded poultry netting in a pasture setting. The belief system defines the use.

2007 Farm Bill -- this time with feeling.

I know I've already mentioned this, but it's important, and here are three really easy links you can click to and send a message to your Senators and the Senate leadership. It's really important, and you can do it in about three minutes. Please do it. If you truly want local sustainable foods, this is one of the easiest ways you can help.

Issue: Leadership Support for Farm Bill Reform
Sign your name to an already-written message to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid today. Or edit the letter any way you like -- it's up to you. Urge him to support the efforts of reform-minded Senators to bring meaningful payment limits, and increased resources for conservation, rural development, and beginning farmer programs to the Farm Bill. Click to write now It really will take 2 minutes! I promise.

Issue: Your Senators' Support for REAL Payment Limits
Whether or not the Senate Farm Bill includes real payment limit reform that finally brings an end to the million-dollar payments to the nation's largest farms could very well come down to an important vote on the Senate floor. Every single Senator will cast a key vote, and every single one will be important. Every. Single. One. And this year, there's an Ohio Senator on the committee. Write to your Senators today.

Issue: Support Rural Development in the Farm Bill
The Farm Bill should support all of rural America, and one way it can do this is by putting more resources into rural microenterprice development that will help entrepreneurs start and maintain businesses up and down main streets across rural America. This kind of help encourages young people to go into farming. Urge your Senators to support this legislation today!

Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN) thinks we're just dumb.

Rep. Collin Peterson, Chair of the House Agricultural Committee, doesn't think farmers raising organic produce and grass-fed beef for local consumers needs any federal help. ‘It is growing, and it has nothing to do with the government, and that is good,’ he told a reporter for Financial Times. ‘For whatever reason, people are willing to pay two or three times as much for something that says ‘organic’ or ‘local’. Far be it from me to understand what that’s about, but that’s reality. And if people are dumb enough to pay that much then hallelujah.’

I went to Rep. Peterson's website to explain in words of two or fewer syllables that when we eat local and organic, we're supporting local small farmers and sustainable ethical food production, which in turn helps our community thrive and helps protect the environment. But he doesn't take mail from nonconstituents so I guess he'll just have to keep on thinking we're dumb.