I finally got to read the whole study about the cost of eating health food. It just confirmed the quandary I'm facing. I find my self approaching the problem of food from three different, and sometimes irreconcilable perspectives. As a local food activist I'm working to promote buy local even if it costs more. As a producer I'm trying to produce great food and make enough profit that I am able to continue producing and expanding my business. As a wage earner near the bottom of the wage scale I'm looking for the best food I can get for the limited money I have. My $9.00 chicken sits right in the middle of this. It costs to much for people like me (most of my county) to buy. If I sell for less I don't make any money so what's the point of offering it as part of my food business. The easiest way to balance this all is to scale up. Tyson and co. can sell chickens for what they do because they pay a lot less for feed and processing than I do, and because when you sell millions of chickens you can afford a much smaller profit margin. I'm looking for creative ways to solve these problems while staying true to my vision.
I'd love to hear what you think. Maybe together we can plot a course forward.
We still have some openings for our summer and fall chicken CSA at our Local Harvest Store.
Showing posts with label Alan's Soapbox. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alan's Soapbox. Show all posts
Monday, April 7, 2014
Friday, April 4, 2014
Back to the discussion about a $9.00 chicken
I read an article in the Harvard Review (my mother-in-law is an alum...not me) about the cost of eating "healthy" vs "non-healthy" food. It was a review of research (which I haven't read yet, but will on my day off), so it was less specific on some things than I would have liked, but it did highlight some things that I have also found in my daily life. First, the cost of eating "healthy" food is not as great as most of us think. It is only about $1.50 per person per day more. Second, that cost may be insignificant to most of the readers of the Harvard Review, but it is a big deal to the people at the bottom end of the income scale. Third, the food production and distribution system is heavily subsidized to favor "non-healthy" food, so it is less expensive.
There are many things that were not addressed in the review (which may be in the research...) that I have found impact my food choices. I've recently had the eye opening experience of living (as a family of 4) on a $9.00 an hour income. Changed some of my assumptions about why people make the food choices they make. For me, $1.50 per person per day is huge. That is almost a whole week (after taxes and all the other "benefits" they take) worth of work. Some how I can't fit an extra week in every month to pay for "healthy" food. The cost also doesn't address the fact that "healthy" food is either more perishable, so I cant buy it once or twice a month when I shop, or only available in bulk quantities that cost a lot up front but will last me for months. I don't have the upfront cost, so those are out. and I cant afford to buy stuff every week. We shop twice a month. That's it. We are lucky. We have a big garden, and animals, and we have been putting food up for years. We have the equipment and the skills to do that. But, when jobs went south, we found that our pantry was not as well stocked as we thought, and the run-up to spring has been grim. Most people at my wage level don't have the space, equipment, skills, or existing storage to make it. That's why the $4.50 chicken at Walmart, or the cheap bread, or other cheap "food" is the option they choose. It isnt because they are stupid and cant make a good choice. It is because they only have a few $ for the days food and they chose the most BANG for the $.
What's your experience with the cost for eating well?
There are many things that were not addressed in the review (which may be in the research...) that I have found impact my food choices. I've recently had the eye opening experience of living (as a family of 4) on a $9.00 an hour income. Changed some of my assumptions about why people make the food choices they make. For me, $1.50 per person per day is huge. That is almost a whole week (after taxes and all the other "benefits" they take) worth of work. Some how I can't fit an extra week in every month to pay for "healthy" food. The cost also doesn't address the fact that "healthy" food is either more perishable, so I cant buy it once or twice a month when I shop, or only available in bulk quantities that cost a lot up front but will last me for months. I don't have the upfront cost, so those are out. and I cant afford to buy stuff every week. We shop twice a month. That's it. We are lucky. We have a big garden, and animals, and we have been putting food up for years. We have the equipment and the skills to do that. But, when jobs went south, we found that our pantry was not as well stocked as we thought, and the run-up to spring has been grim. Most people at my wage level don't have the space, equipment, skills, or existing storage to make it. That's why the $4.50 chicken at Walmart, or the cheap bread, or other cheap "food" is the option they choose. It isnt because they are stupid and cant make a good choice. It is because they only have a few $ for the days food and they chose the most BANG for the $.
What's your experience with the cost for eating well?
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
OWS needs a new home.
I've been thinking about OWS a lot lately. I'm excited that people are finally standing up and saying "the system is broken!" and demanding something change. The changes seem to be coming pretty fast and hard right now. All over the country the 1% and those who work for them or aspire to be them have said, "ENOUGH!" and shut down the protests. It seems that the message must be working somewhat. But, it also points out a weakness with OWS. Philosophy and righteous indignation can only get you so far. What has happened is OWS has become an annoyance. It has caused Big Money to flex its muscle a bit, but it hasn't caused change. Annoyance may change the public stance of some people or institutions, but not the base behaviors. The truth is, THEY have no reason to change. We can shout all we want about how unfair the system is, but at the end of the day we support it when we turn on the light, or the TV or the generator we bought to power our protest camp. When we eat food from the grocery store we support the Big Money system. They get their money and their power from the fact that we have ceded our responsibility for meeting our basic needs to the system. The system doesn't have to change because without it, as things are right now, most of us would die of hunger, or cold, or sickness. If OWS wants to change the system, they need a new home. That home has to be in the weak points of the system, and it has to be directed at creating a new way for people to meet their basic needs outside the Big Money system. What needs to happen is we, the 99% need to band together and start getting our food, and out power, and our clothes, and everything from sources outside the current structure. Then the system will change, or it will die of starvation.
So, all you OWS activists and want-n-be activists, keep drumming, keep protesting, but start acting by meeting your needs from outside the system, or doing without. Tell us what you are doing and how we can support that. Like I've said in other posts, Occupy the Food System, or some other part of machine that supports Big Money. Then we will win.
So, all you OWS activists and want-n-be activists, keep drumming, keep protesting, but start acting by meeting your needs from outside the system, or doing without. Tell us what you are doing and how we can support that. Like I've said in other posts, Occupy the Food System, or some other part of machine that supports Big Money. Then we will win.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Occupying the Food System
I've posted about the food economy a few times and told a little about our local food co-op. As I gear up to push Occupy into the food system, I thought it would be wise to update our progress with the co-op. The co-op idea came out of a need to have better access to local food for consumers, and better access to local markets for producers. Our little town has 4 grocery stores, Buehlers (a regional chain), Aldis, an IGA, and a Super Walmart. None of these stores sell locally produced food. Buehlers makes some effort to buy a bit of fresh produce from a regional produce auction, but that's it. We also have 3 good farmers markets that run from May through October. They have been growing every year. The problem for us is two-fold. First, access to local food. The market times don't work for many people in our community, and they are closed for 6 months. That's a long time to do without. Second, producers can't afford to grow because they can't access the market for half the year. No local producer had enough product to capture a contract with one of the local groceries. None had enough product to open a year round retail space. Without more income and market access, the producers couldn't grow. Without more production, they couldn't break into the local grocery market. Catch 22. So a group of us banded together and started a producer/consumer co-op. We each chipped in some money ($100 for producers and $50 for consumers) to fund the start-up. The co-op takes a % of the sales to keep the lights on and pay the rent (we hope). Members work a few hours a month to provide the sales labor and meet other needs. So far it is working.
Some things we learned.
1. Start before August. Winter production takes some advanced planning, and August is pretty late to start that.
2. Don't wait. You don't need a grant, or lots of money (Some money is helpful!!!). This is an idea you can talk about forever, plan for, and never get off the ground because there are too many unanswerables. Just Do It.
3. Tell the story. Get community members to buy into the idea. They need to be part of it. This isn't a traditional business. People need to change how they think, what they do, and where they spend their money. If they become members, buy into the idea, they will change. That is worth more than any number of grants.
4. You need a leader, or leaders, but you have to let all the members participate. This only works as a co-op. That means everyone has ownership and what they have to offer, including their ideas, is valuable.
So, GO FOR IT!!! The food system is the easies to take back. See what you can do in your community.
I'll be happy to answer questions and share what we are doing and resources I know of.
Some things we learned.
1. Start before August. Winter production takes some advanced planning, and August is pretty late to start that.
2. Don't wait. You don't need a grant, or lots of money (Some money is helpful!!!). This is an idea you can talk about forever, plan for, and never get off the ground because there are too many unanswerables. Just Do It.
3. Tell the story. Get community members to buy into the idea. They need to be part of it. This isn't a traditional business. People need to change how they think, what they do, and where they spend their money. If they become members, buy into the idea, they will change. That is worth more than any number of grants.
4. You need a leader, or leaders, but you have to let all the members participate. This only works as a co-op. That means everyone has ownership and what they have to offer, including their ideas, is valuable.
So, GO FOR IT!!! The food system is the easies to take back. See what you can do in your community.
I'll be happy to answer questions and share what we are doing and resources I know of.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Occupy
I've been busy with the local food co-op and haven't taken time to put thoughts to paper, or virtual paper... but the Occupy movement has captivated me. I love the public rising up to point out just how broken the system is. I wish there was someplace close I could "occupy". But where I live, small town, dying, leaves me in the spectator seat.
One of my frustrations with Occupy is the WHO. When you protest against the system by occupying the bastions of the system, you make a statement. That is great. But, what you are asking is for the system to change it's self. Big money may notice you taking up space in their green space, or causing public concern, but they are not going to change. There is NO motive for them to change. Occupy might make the news (less and less it seems...) but they can't motivate big money to change. The reason is that we (the rest of the 99% who don't get out to protest) are all dependant on the system. It pays our wages (pathetic as they may be), provides our energy, our technology, our water, our food, everything... so we may protest actively, or in our hearts, but at the end of the day we support the system. They win.
But, what if there was a way to change the system? What if we could occupy something that we could actually change?
Here's a part that you can occupy. The food system. It isn't fast, but it can be done in less than a year. If you push for locally produced food, buy local first, support local farmers, etc. we can change the system in one area. The rest will follow. In my tiny county FOOD is huge. 31000 people spend more than $64,000,000 a year on food. Most of it could be produced by local, small scale producers. But right now we buy all of it from a few big producers. Food is a system we can OCCUPY! Seek out local producers and buy from them. Find ways to help local producers get more market access. STOP supporting the system.
OCCUPY THE FOOD SYSTEM. You might not be able to camp out on Wall Street, but you can choose to not support big money.
One of my frustrations with Occupy is the WHO. When you protest against the system by occupying the bastions of the system, you make a statement. That is great. But, what you are asking is for the system to change it's self. Big money may notice you taking up space in their green space, or causing public concern, but they are not going to change. There is NO motive for them to change. Occupy might make the news (less and less it seems...) but they can't motivate big money to change. The reason is that we (the rest of the 99% who don't get out to protest) are all dependant on the system. It pays our wages (pathetic as they may be), provides our energy, our technology, our water, our food, everything... so we may protest actively, or in our hearts, but at the end of the day we support the system. They win.
But, what if there was a way to change the system? What if we could occupy something that we could actually change?
Here's a part that you can occupy. The food system. It isn't fast, but it can be done in less than a year. If you push for locally produced food, buy local first, support local farmers, etc. we can change the system in one area. The rest will follow. In my tiny county FOOD is huge. 31000 people spend more than $64,000,000 a year on food. Most of it could be produced by local, small scale producers. But right now we buy all of it from a few big producers. Food is a system we can OCCUPY! Seek out local producers and buy from them. Find ways to help local producers get more market access. STOP supporting the system.
OCCUPY THE FOOD SYSTEM. You might not be able to camp out on Wall Street, but you can choose to not support big money.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Local Food Economics - part 2
A few weeks ago I posted about Local Food Economics and the economic power of a local food system.
So, here is what we are DOING in our community to change the system.
The first thing we did is gather a group of interested people and start a Slow Food chapter. Why? Instant non-profit status, national support, and a platform for addressing the myriad food issues in our community.
The second thing we did is tackle the accessibility issue. In our community, local food is only available direct from the farm (if you can find it) or at the farmers market (we have three open from May - October). Local food is not available for 6 months. Hard to promote eating local, and a local food system if you have to starve half the year. Our answer, a co-op. When we looked at our community we found that we had a good pool of farmers market customers who would love access to local food for the whole year. We also had a core group of local producers who had products that were not seasonal, or had greenhouses that were mostly unused in the winter. We brought this group together and formed a producer/consumer co-op. Each co-op member made a small investment in the form of membership. This, combined with a great deal on a space from the local park district (who had a building that had been sitting empty for the past two years) let us start a year-round, indoor market. The co-op members will provide the labor, keeping costs down. It will be a single point check-out so we won't have to have all 20 producers there all the time. That lets us have the market open more hours and lets the producers have time to do what they do best, produce. We expect that for the first 6 months (when the local markets are traditionally closed) we will average about $2500 per week in sales. Tiny, in the grand scope of food sales even in our small community, but that will be a boost to the local producers, allowing them to do more, and it will keep an additional $45000.00 in the community. Game changer? Maybe not instantly, but over time, as things grow??? I say yes.
And the REALLY COOL THING is that we didn't raise any ones taxes, or pass a spending bill, or ask for a grant, or fund this in any way that makes us dependant on or beholden to any outside group or institution. This is local people addressing a local problem with local resources. That's a revolution in the making.
So, here is what we are DOING in our community to change the system.
The first thing we did is gather a group of interested people and start a Slow Food chapter. Why? Instant non-profit status, national support, and a platform for addressing the myriad food issues in our community.
The second thing we did is tackle the accessibility issue. In our community, local food is only available direct from the farm (if you can find it) or at the farmers market (we have three open from May - October). Local food is not available for 6 months. Hard to promote eating local, and a local food system if you have to starve half the year. Our answer, a co-op. When we looked at our community we found that we had a good pool of farmers market customers who would love access to local food for the whole year. We also had a core group of local producers who had products that were not seasonal, or had greenhouses that were mostly unused in the winter. We brought this group together and formed a producer/consumer co-op. Each co-op member made a small investment in the form of membership. This, combined with a great deal on a space from the local park district (who had a building that had been sitting empty for the past two years) let us start a year-round, indoor market. The co-op members will provide the labor, keeping costs down. It will be a single point check-out so we won't have to have all 20 producers there all the time. That lets us have the market open more hours and lets the producers have time to do what they do best, produce. We expect that for the first 6 months (when the local markets are traditionally closed) we will average about $2500 per week in sales. Tiny, in the grand scope of food sales even in our small community, but that will be a boost to the local producers, allowing them to do more, and it will keep an additional $45000.00 in the community. Game changer? Maybe not instantly, but over time, as things grow??? I say yes.
And the REALLY COOL THING is that we didn't raise any ones taxes, or pass a spending bill, or ask for a grant, or fund this in any way that makes us dependant on or beholden to any outside group or institution. This is local people addressing a local problem with local resources. That's a revolution in the making.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
B.A.D. is coming! OCTOBER 16th!
ARE YOU READY?
B.A.D. Blog Action Day. A day where bloggers around the world all write about the same thing. It is a great way to connect people and ideas. This year the topic is FOOD. I'll be writing! I may do multiple posts. So, here's the challenge. If you eat this should be important to you. If you blog you should get linked up and post on the day. If you don't blog, follow along anyway (or start a blog just so you can tell your food story... its easy!)
Here's the link http://blogactionday.org/ See you there!
B.A.D. Blog Action Day. A day where bloggers around the world all write about the same thing. It is a great way to connect people and ideas. This year the topic is FOOD. I'll be writing! I may do multiple posts. So, here's the challenge. If you eat this should be important to you. If you blog you should get linked up and post on the day. If you don't blog, follow along anyway (or start a blog just so you can tell your food story... its easy!)
Here's the link http://blogactionday.org/ See you there!
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
The Lost Sheep - part 2
We have all heard the story of the shepherd who was out with his flock and noticed that one of the sheep was missing. So he left the ninety and nine and went off searching for and rescuing the lost one. What you probably haven’t heard is what happened after that.
Well, the shepherd was overjoyed to find his lost sheep. He gathered the poor sheep up and returned to the flock. But the poor lost sheep was weak and needed special care. So he took it home and created a special place for it. It got special protection, special attention, and all the best food. The ninety and nine stayed in the pasture as they always had, eating grass and doing what sheep do. Soon the lost sheep had recovered and was thriving. The shepherd was proud of this sheep and its recovery and showed it to all his friends. They were impressed with the health and strength of the sheep, so the shepherd started taking this sheep around to all the fairs and contests. It quickly became a star. Fame and glory, as well as rich rewards flowed to the shepherd. The shepherd was pleased with the bounty he reaped from this sheep, so he rewarded it with better food, better housing, and better care. This continued for many years. The one got more and more famous, and larger and larger from all the excellent care and good food. The shepherd got more and more famous and richer and richer too. Once a year he would go to the ninety and nine and shear them, selling their wool and their offspring to pay for his farm. But most of his time and effort went to caring for the one who had been lost but now was found and was making him rich and famous.
After many years of this the one had grown so large it couldn’t compete any more. But the shepherd didn’t mind. He was the most famous shepherd in the land, and was richer than any other. Besides, he still had the ninety and nine he could shear and sell their fleece and their young. All was well with the world
Except, while the shepherd was busy caring for the one, the ninety and nine had been neglected. The pasture was degraded, their health was declining, they were hungry, and angry. When the shepherd came once more to the pasture to take their fleeces and their young the ninety and nine rose up and …
Well, you can imagine what they did to the poor shepherd.
Fomenting Revolution
In a surprising change of direction Jack-of-all-thumbs, one of my favorite bloggers, has shifted his political commentary from encouraging participation in the system to fomenting revolution. I’ve really enjoyed his last few posts. As you know if you’ve read much of this blog, I’m all for revolution. The system is broken and can’t be fixed from within. Therein lies the problem. The system has become so much bigger than politics.
Here’s what I see. There is HUGE dissatisfaction with the was things are. The politicians will probably all be out on their ears except for the radical fringe folks from the right and the left (if you go far enough either way you end up in the same place (fascism from the right or communism from the left.) BUT, nothing will change. Why? Because the system is driven by money not by ideas. Money gets elected, not ideas. And once it is elected it puts the money people into the drivers seat of the myriad bureaucracies that really set policy and control the system.
So, using the system to change the system will not work because you have to become a “player” in order to play. In doing so you become the problem you were trying to solve. REVOLUTION seems like the only way! That’s where I’ve been for a while, but now… here’s a problem I’ve noticed. FOOD. Jack’s FISH post made me think a lot about food (I think about food most of the time,… it’s what I do.) in the revolutionary sense. And it is a problem. See, the folks who are a big chunk of the money that runs the system also control 99.99% of the food. Go to your pantry and take out everything made by Kraft (or it’s subsidiaries) or ADM, or Con-Agra, or… It’s not a huge list but it’s worth exploring. Not only do these and other mega-corporations control the political process by funding it, they control our access to basic necessities. As we push to change the system, this access will be used against us. When that happens they will win. We have no alternative system.
Here’s what I see. There is HUGE dissatisfaction with the was things are. The politicians will probably all be out on their ears except for the radical fringe folks from the right and the left (if you go far enough either way you end up in the same place (fascism from the right or communism from the left.) BUT, nothing will change. Why? Because the system is driven by money not by ideas. Money gets elected, not ideas. And once it is elected it puts the money people into the drivers seat of the myriad bureaucracies that really set policy and control the system.
So, using the system to change the system will not work because you have to become a “player” in order to play. In doing so you become the problem you were trying to solve. REVOLUTION seems like the only way! That’s where I’ve been for a while, but now… here’s a problem I’ve noticed. FOOD. Jack’s FISH post made me think a lot about food (I think about food most of the time,… it’s what I do.) in the revolutionary sense. And it is a problem. See, the folks who are a big chunk of the money that runs the system also control 99.99% of the food. Go to your pantry and take out everything made by Kraft (or it’s subsidiaries) or ADM, or Con-Agra, or… It’s not a huge list but it’s worth exploring. Not only do these and other mega-corporations control the political process by funding it, they control our access to basic necessities. As we push to change the system, this access will be used against us. When that happens they will win. We have no alternative system.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
After the silence,.....politics?
So, it's been a LONG TIME since I wrote. Not that I didn't have anything to talk about, its just that ideas, time, and a functional brain didn't really come together at the same time.... (BE GLAD YOU ARE NOT ME...)
So, here I am blogging again. BUT, rather than catching you up on all the cool things happening around the Roost, or with LOCAL FOODS, I'm going to rant (isn't that really why we blog?????)
I went to the farmers market today. The LOCAL market, 2 minutes from my house where I have been selling stuff to my neighbors for the past three months. The INSPECTOR ( cue Inspector Gadget Music...) showed up as I was setting up my table. He wanted to look at my labels. Not my products, just the labels. My labels tell who I am, where I am located, and how to contact me. My signs tell buyers that the products are home made and what they are and what is in them.
I didn't pass inspection, and I was asked to leave. (he said I could stay and sell my 5 bags of greens, but not my bread, but IF he had seen that the bags were closed, he would have fined me for not having processed them in a licenced facility. Been down that road before... I went home. It is 96 degrees F and 100% humidity... greens will not hold for 4 hours in an open container.)
So, I've come home. I'll fix my labels, and be back next week.
On my way home I stopped at the local store for some wine (seemed like a good idea...) They sell bread, but no one there could tell me what was in it, who made it, when it was made, where it was made, or anything about it other than "read the label, and it costs $1.95 a loaf." I don't know how that is safer than my neighbors buying bread from me, knowing where I live, how to get in touch with me, what I put in the bread, when it was made, etc.
I don't blame the drone at the bottom who showed up to inspect. He was just doing his job and trying to survive in the hive. I am frustrated that we keep throwing money into such a STUPID system.
I've formed a group to work on local food issues. We are doing LOTS. It is a slow process, but we are moving. I'm spitting nails, throwing stuff, mad that Big Brother is treading on our progress.
So, here I am blogging again. BUT, rather than catching you up on all the cool things happening around the Roost, or with LOCAL FOODS, I'm going to rant (isn't that really why we blog?????)
I went to the farmers market today. The LOCAL market, 2 minutes from my house where I have been selling stuff to my neighbors for the past three months. The INSPECTOR ( cue Inspector Gadget Music...) showed up as I was setting up my table. He wanted to look at my labels. Not my products, just the labels. My labels tell who I am, where I am located, and how to contact me. My signs tell buyers that the products are home made and what they are and what is in them.
I didn't pass inspection, and I was asked to leave. (he said I could stay and sell my 5 bags of greens, but not my bread, but IF he had seen that the bags were closed, he would have fined me for not having processed them in a licenced facility. Been down that road before... I went home. It is 96 degrees F and 100% humidity... greens will not hold for 4 hours in an open container.)
So, I've come home. I'll fix my labels, and be back next week.
On my way home I stopped at the local store for some wine (seemed like a good idea...) They sell bread, but no one there could tell me what was in it, who made it, when it was made, where it was made, or anything about it other than "read the label, and it costs $1.95 a loaf." I don't know how that is safer than my neighbors buying bread from me, knowing where I live, how to get in touch with me, what I put in the bread, when it was made, etc.
I don't blame the drone at the bottom who showed up to inspect. He was just doing his job and trying to survive in the hive. I am frustrated that we keep throwing money into such a STUPID system.
I've formed a group to work on local food issues. We are doing LOTS. It is a slow process, but we are moving. I'm spitting nails, throwing stuff, mad that Big Brother is treading on our progress.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Change
Spring is here. It's a time of change. Today it was almost 70 degrees out. Tomorrow they are predicting 19 for a low. Radical change in temperature. Normal for spring in OHIO. Change is happening all around me. The ground has thawed and the millions of soil creatures are ramping up. The lawn is rough with the work of worms cleaning out their winter homes. (and with moles and voles making mountians...) Plants are breaking their dormancy and pushing through the soil, or the hard winter bark. Life is ready to burst forth at a moments notice.
Around the world change is happening too. The earth shifts and shrugs. Life changes for millions, or billions of creatures living in that place.
Humans rise up and demand change. Life changes across the globe for humans everywhere (and for billions of others living here too...)
So, I've been thinking about change.
I once worked for a person who described their own job as "inflicting change on others". It was a very accurate discription. I think that is a standard human approach to change. We eithere inflict it, or have it inflicted on us. It is a VERY ineffective method. The inflictor can't possibly know enough to impliment the right kind of change, an never stays around long enough to see the consequences anyway. Those inflicted automatically resist, even it it is a good change (check your speed next time you hit a 55 mph zone... or see a trooper parked in the median...) Logic has no part in this, we RESIST... that's what we do.
The other option is Gandhi's approach "be the change..." Sounds great, but it's a hard way to live.
So, since I can't be King Of The World and inflict change where I will, I've been trying to be the change.
Two ways I've found. Change me, and live (like a weird polyp, walled off from society), or be a catalyst. Cause change by mixing with others. It's a radical approach. If you remember high school chemistry, catalysts were the key in making all kinds of cool stuff. Some of it was green, some of it exploded, or gave off a great stink, or made light, or fire. Catalysts were COOL!
Of course, the catalyst ALWAYS gets consumed in the process. Great Change. Great Personal Sacrifice.
It's Lent now. Thoughts of catalysts seem to run through the week.
Do we dare BE the change???
(more normal thoughts tomorrow... Local Food, Baby Goats, Kids, Cars, Etc...)
Around the world change is happening too. The earth shifts and shrugs. Life changes for millions, or billions of creatures living in that place.
Humans rise up and demand change. Life changes across the globe for humans everywhere (and for billions of others living here too...)
So, I've been thinking about change.
I once worked for a person who described their own job as "inflicting change on others". It was a very accurate discription. I think that is a standard human approach to change. We eithere inflict it, or have it inflicted on us. It is a VERY ineffective method. The inflictor can't possibly know enough to impliment the right kind of change, an never stays around long enough to see the consequences anyway. Those inflicted automatically resist, even it it is a good change (check your speed next time you hit a 55 mph zone... or see a trooper parked in the median...) Logic has no part in this, we RESIST... that's what we do.
The other option is Gandhi's approach "be the change..." Sounds great, but it's a hard way to live.
So, since I can't be King Of The World and inflict change where I will, I've been trying to be the change.
Two ways I've found. Change me, and live (like a weird polyp, walled off from society), or be a catalyst. Cause change by mixing with others. It's a radical approach. If you remember high school chemistry, catalysts were the key in making all kinds of cool stuff. Some of it was green, some of it exploded, or gave off a great stink, or made light, or fire. Catalysts were COOL!
Of course, the catalyst ALWAYS gets consumed in the process. Great Change. Great Personal Sacrifice.
It's Lent now. Thoughts of catalysts seem to run through the week.
Do we dare BE the change???
(more normal thoughts tomorrow... Local Food, Baby Goats, Kids, Cars, Etc...)
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Some thoughts from Jamie Oliver about food, health, and our future.
John, over at Will Bike For Food clued me in to this great vid on TED.com. It's AWESOME!
I'll let Jamie speak for himself.
Enjoy!
I'll let Jamie speak for himself.
Enjoy!
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Taking a break
It’s the weekend. Time to (theoretically) unwind. (Weekend isn’t a concept that people who live in-sync with the rest of the planet really understand. Life doesn’t stop. The activities that support life don’t stop.) Where did this arbitrary rest two days in every seven come from? Not resting. Girls are off taking care of Grandma. Boys are home trying to get ahead of Winter. Losing!
I am taking a break from my didactic exploration of sustainable agriculture. Taking care of Penelope
(JJ’s hedgehog) doesn’t leave one much time to perseverate about obscure ideas.
We are having a taste of winter to come… 25 deg. temps in the morning; cars to warm, ice to chip, fires to revive. I’m learning to wake myself at 1:30 and at 4:30 to stoke the fire. If I could learn to use the hour after 4:30 to write until the coffee is done I’d be brilliant. Instead I sneak back to bed for another hour of sleep.
We’ve a cord of wood stacked, and 6 more cut in the forest at M&G’s. We will be bringing it out to spilt and stack this next week.
The greenhouse is switched into winter mode. All the hot weather plants are out (except one corner where we are burning energy to keep them warm at night…) all else is spinach, kale, chard, arugula, and other cold weather crops. We will see how long we can keep it going. We are moving the rabbits to the greenhouse this week. One big pen for the four of them. We should be overrun with baby rabbits in the next month or so…
Glad the election is over. No one we believed in ran for office this round. Voted mostly for people whose names we didn’t know. Didn’t like the ones we knew, or had seen ads about/from. Hate politics. Ours is a terrible system. It’s better than all the others, but still a terrible system.
Have a nice weekend. I've got fudge to make... Chocolate, Chili Chocolate, Lemon Chocolate, and Peanut Butter, 3 lbs each, before Monday. Orders to fill and a Holiday Show to prep for...
I am taking a break from my didactic exploration of sustainable agriculture. Taking care of Penelope
We are having a taste of winter to come… 25 deg. temps in the morning; cars to warm, ice to chip, fires to revive. I’m learning to wake myself at 1:30 and at 4:30 to stoke the fire. If I could learn to use the hour after 4:30 to write until the coffee is done I’d be brilliant. Instead I sneak back to bed for another hour of sleep.
We’ve a cord of wood stacked, and 6 more cut in the forest at M&G’s. We will be bringing it out to spilt and stack this next week.
The greenhouse is switched into winter mode. All the hot weather plants are out (except one corner where we are burning energy to keep them warm at night…) all else is spinach, kale, chard, arugula, and other cold weather crops. We will see how long we can keep it going. We are moving the rabbits to the greenhouse this week. One big pen for the four of them. We should be overrun with baby rabbits in the next month or so…
Glad the election is over. No one we believed in ran for office this round. Voted mostly for people whose names we didn’t know. Didn’t like the ones we knew, or had seen ads about/from. Hate politics. Ours is a terrible system. It’s better than all the others, but still a terrible system.
Have a nice weekend. I've got fudge to make... Chocolate, Chili Chocolate, Lemon Chocolate, and Peanut Butter, 3 lbs each, before Monday. Orders to fill and a Holiday Show to prep for...
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Agriculture and a new mind
What would agriculture look like if was governed by the same fundamental rules that govern the rest of the living things on this planet?
• The process of growing food would build topsoil.
• Everything needed to produce food would come from that place – nutrients, water, energy, etc.
• Everything would be returned to that place – all the “waste” from producing the food, and all the “waste” from consuming the food would be returned in a way that it continued the soil building/life building process.
It seems pretty simple, until you test current agriculture/food production/waste management systems against these rules. Then it’s not so simple.
My neighbor farms. I farm. When I look out the window I can see bits of both as well as the wooded hillside on the other side of the neighbor’s field. For my part of the world this pretty much sums up the current agricultural practices.
Neighbor farms about 1000 acres. He grows corn and soy beans in rotation. He produces about 150 tons of corn per acre (that’s 150000 tons of corn) or about 47 tons of soybeans per acre (47000 tons of soy). Right now his farm looks like this…
Our Farm % Neighbor Farm %
Next post - Farming that builds soil.
Another post- Diet for a dying planet.
• The process of growing food would build topsoil.
• Everything needed to produce food would come from that place – nutrients, water, energy, etc.
• Everything would be returned to that place – all the “waste” from producing the food, and all the “waste” from consuming the food would be returned in a way that it continued the soil building/life building process.
It seems pretty simple, until you test current agriculture/food production/waste management systems against these rules. Then it’s not so simple.
My neighbor farms. I farm. When I look out the window I can see bits of both as well as the wooded hillside on the other side of the neighbor’s field. For my part of the world this pretty much sums up the current agricultural practices.
Neighbor farms about 1000 acres. He grows corn and soy beans in rotation. He produces about 150 tons of corn per acre (that’s 150000 tons of corn) or about 47 tons of soybeans per acre (47000 tons of soy). Right now his farm looks like this…
 |
| acres of desolation |
My farm is 5 acres. We have about 3 ½ acres in production. Each year we produce about 6400 lbs of milk, 1000 dozen eggs, 825 lbs of meat, and 780 lbs of salad greens, and enough fruit and vegetables for our family and to give away to our friends. We produce no grain. Right now our farm looks like this…
NOW THE TEST…
Build topsoil 90 % 2%
Own Nutrients 80% 0
Own Water 70% 100%
Own Energy 20% 0Production Waste 90% 90%
Utilization Waste 50% 0
So, my farm's sustainable and the neighbor’s farm is not? Could be, but 10% of the things I do don’t build topsoil (that means they destroy topsoil…) and 20% of our nutrients are imported from somewhere else, and 30% of our water and 80% of our energy are also imported, and 60% of the resources tied up in waste walk away every year. We are MORE sustainable than a conventional farm, but still losing ground.
There are things I know I can do to improve what I am doing, especially in the water, energy, and waste areas. (Exploring those will take more than one post…) What I'm doing kind of works here. I'll be exploring why and how addaptable some of these ideas might be. Also, there are a bunch of things I haven't got figured out for my little farm. I'll be exploring them too.
Here’s another thing…
Right now the American diet is more than 70% grain based. We produce no grain, ZERO. That means that we are not touching 70% of what we currently eat. You’d get a bit hungry if I cut your diet by 70%.
I can’t find a way to make annual grain production fit any kind of naturally sustainable model. That means we need to change what we eat. Radically!
Next post - Farming that builds soil.
Another post- Diet for a dying planet.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Learning to fly – part 2
For the past 30 years or so I’ve been looking for an ecologically sustainable way to live. I’ve explored Organic Farming, Permaculture, Biodynamic Methods, Indigenous Lifestyles, Holistic Living, and farming/gardening in various places around the world. I’ve read about, poked at, tried, and experimented with these methods on various scales in different parts of the world, and talked with people from all over who have done the same. So far I’ve found a boat load of great techniques for doing less damage and no model of sustainability.
There is a feeling among people searching for a way to survive what we are doing to the planet that if we all would just adopt (vegetarianism, or permaculture, or organics, or green living, or Gaia worship, becoming hunter-gatherers, or whatever) that everything will be OK. There is another group that thinks that if we can just overthrow our oppressors (the government, the corporations, the CEO’s, civilization, technology, etc.), if we can crash the system we will be able to rise from the ashes and live better.
They are all wrong.
Our lives are an expression of a set of fundamental rules/default ways of acting. They get cluttered up with culture, beliefs, education, etc., but we act in ways that stay true to those fundamental rules. Acting differently takes great conscious effort. Gravity is one of those rules we accept at a fundamental level. Even before Newton and company started defining the “Law of Gravity”, we didn’t act in opposition to it. We may not have understood the math, or the mechanics of gravity (not sure we do now…) but we didn’t willingly fling ourselves from high places, and we when we did that with other things or people we expected them to crash to the ground, not float off into space. We don’t think about gravity. We have no committees to explore how we live in a more gravity acknowledging way. We just live in ways that accept gravity as a constant. We also live in ways that produce the results we now see. The fundamental rules exist below the surface of conscious thought and shape our every action are what has given rise to the problems we now blame on technology, civilization, over population, greedy corporations, etc. They are not the cause. They are just expressions of the rules we live by.
I’ll not attempt to list all the fundamental rules that shape us. I won’t even pretend to know them all. But there are a few I keep running into as I explore sustainable ways of living.
One big one is -
WE ARE SEPARATE FROM NATURE. We may have started life there, as part of nature, but we have moved beyond that now. This means we are not subject to the “laws of nature”. Laws like natural selection, death, resource limitations, natural population controls, etc. You see this in the way we fight to extend life, the way we don’t even consider the relationship between food and population growth (a population will increase to the limits of its food supply. EVERY TIME. Increase food, the population increases. This rush to grow more because the population is going to expand only results in the population expanding…) as we try to solve the overpopulation problem. We see this in our linier thinking about the food chain, in the way we deal with waste, etc. It permeates our language, our religions, and science. And it is FALSE. It is fundamental to how we live right now, and it is completely false.
Another big one is –
GROWTH IS THE ONLY REAL MEASURE OF SUCCESS. This only applies to human endeavors. When we see unending growth anywhere else we recognize it as unsustainable, life threatening, dangerous, etc. We call it cancer, disease, system breakdown. We try to eliminate it, slow it, and prevent it, to restore equilibrium and balance. But in the human realm (separate from Nature…) it is the thing we strive for; more business, more dollars, more stuff, bigger house, better car, more growth.
These two fundamental rules are why we keep doing the same stupid things over and over. They are why we instantly set out to rebuild civilization when it crashes and make the exact same mistakes that caused the crash in the first place. They are why, despite years of effort and billions of dollars, we have not solved even one of the problems of civilization. We haven’t conquered disease, eliminated hunger, or controlled the population growth.
All other living things on this planet live by a different set of rules, and they only run into major problems when some catastrophic event occurs (like a giant meteor crashing into the planet), or when we muck up the system.
The difference between how we live and how the rest of the living things on the planet live is simple. They live locally. They draw everything they need for their life from their local resource pool, and return everything to that pool. Growth is limited by the local resources. Equilibrium is the measure of success.
For example, a tree draws all it needs from its local and sheds its leaves, bark, branches and eventually it whole self in that place, returning everything. Same with a mouse (its local range is bigger than the tree, but it lives, poops, eats, dies in that range. Taking in resources for a while and then returning them. There is only a finite amount of mouse food available, so there are only a finite number of mice in the area. Same with the tree. There is only a finite amount of tree food and water available to the tree. That limits how many trees can exist in that space. This is how all the living things on the planet live. The size of the local range varies, the pool of resources varies, but the rule doesn’t change. There is no organization to prevent any living thing from expanding outside it’s local range. Such an organization is not needed. Those creatures are quickly eliminated. Drawing resources from outside the local pool changes the population, and that results in less food, or more predation, and balance is restored.
WE DO NOT LIVE THIS WAY. We take resources from one place to fuel growth in another place. We ship the waste from living, and from production to yet another place. All these actions break the balance. The result of living this way is what you see around you, environmental destruction, pollution, over population, hunger, disease.
We can’t hope to find a sustainable way of living without changing the fundamental rules we live by.
"If the world is saved, it will not be saved by old minds with new programs but by new minds with no programs at all."
— Daniel Quinn (The Story of B: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit)
This is why permaculture, or organics, or even crashing the system and becoming hunter/gatherers won’t work. If we still operate by the same flawed rules, we will just produce the same flawed results.
Next post – Agriculture and a new mind.
There is a feeling among people searching for a way to survive what we are doing to the planet that if we all would just adopt (vegetarianism, or permaculture, or organics, or green living, or Gaia worship, becoming hunter-gatherers, or whatever) that everything will be OK. There is another group that thinks that if we can just overthrow our oppressors (the government, the corporations, the CEO’s, civilization, technology, etc.), if we can crash the system we will be able to rise from the ashes and live better.
They are all wrong.
Our lives are an expression of a set of fundamental rules/default ways of acting. They get cluttered up with culture, beliefs, education, etc., but we act in ways that stay true to those fundamental rules. Acting differently takes great conscious effort. Gravity is one of those rules we accept at a fundamental level. Even before Newton and company started defining the “Law of Gravity”, we didn’t act in opposition to it. We may not have understood the math, or the mechanics of gravity (not sure we do now…) but we didn’t willingly fling ourselves from high places, and we when we did that with other things or people we expected them to crash to the ground, not float off into space. We don’t think about gravity. We have no committees to explore how we live in a more gravity acknowledging way. We just live in ways that accept gravity as a constant. We also live in ways that produce the results we now see. The fundamental rules exist below the surface of conscious thought and shape our every action are what has given rise to the problems we now blame on technology, civilization, over population, greedy corporations, etc. They are not the cause. They are just expressions of the rules we live by.
I’ll not attempt to list all the fundamental rules that shape us. I won’t even pretend to know them all. But there are a few I keep running into as I explore sustainable ways of living.
One big one is -
WE ARE SEPARATE FROM NATURE. We may have started life there, as part of nature, but we have moved beyond that now. This means we are not subject to the “laws of nature”. Laws like natural selection, death, resource limitations, natural population controls, etc. You see this in the way we fight to extend life, the way we don’t even consider the relationship between food and population growth (a population will increase to the limits of its food supply. EVERY TIME. Increase food, the population increases. This rush to grow more because the population is going to expand only results in the population expanding…) as we try to solve the overpopulation problem. We see this in our linier thinking about the food chain, in the way we deal with waste, etc. It permeates our language, our religions, and science. And it is FALSE. It is fundamental to how we live right now, and it is completely false.
Another big one is –
GROWTH IS THE ONLY REAL MEASURE OF SUCCESS. This only applies to human endeavors. When we see unending growth anywhere else we recognize it as unsustainable, life threatening, dangerous, etc. We call it cancer, disease, system breakdown. We try to eliminate it, slow it, and prevent it, to restore equilibrium and balance. But in the human realm (separate from Nature…) it is the thing we strive for; more business, more dollars, more stuff, bigger house, better car, more growth.
These two fundamental rules are why we keep doing the same stupid things over and over. They are why we instantly set out to rebuild civilization when it crashes and make the exact same mistakes that caused the crash in the first place. They are why, despite years of effort and billions of dollars, we have not solved even one of the problems of civilization. We haven’t conquered disease, eliminated hunger, or controlled the population growth.
All other living things on this planet live by a different set of rules, and they only run into major problems when some catastrophic event occurs (like a giant meteor crashing into the planet), or when we muck up the system.
The difference between how we live and how the rest of the living things on the planet live is simple. They live locally. They draw everything they need for their life from their local resource pool, and return everything to that pool. Growth is limited by the local resources. Equilibrium is the measure of success.
For example, a tree draws all it needs from its local and sheds its leaves, bark, branches and eventually it whole self in that place, returning everything. Same with a mouse (its local range is bigger than the tree, but it lives, poops, eats, dies in that range. Taking in resources for a while and then returning them. There is only a finite amount of mouse food available, so there are only a finite number of mice in the area. Same with the tree. There is only a finite amount of tree food and water available to the tree. That limits how many trees can exist in that space. This is how all the living things on the planet live. The size of the local range varies, the pool of resources varies, but the rule doesn’t change. There is no organization to prevent any living thing from expanding outside it’s local range. Such an organization is not needed. Those creatures are quickly eliminated. Drawing resources from outside the local pool changes the population, and that results in less food, or more predation, and balance is restored.
WE DO NOT LIVE THIS WAY. We take resources from one place to fuel growth in another place. We ship the waste from living, and from production to yet another place. All these actions break the balance. The result of living this way is what you see around you, environmental destruction, pollution, over population, hunger, disease.
We can’t hope to find a sustainable way of living without changing the fundamental rules we live by.
"If the world is saved, it will not be saved by old minds with new programs but by new minds with no programs at all."
— Daniel Quinn (The Story of B: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit)
This is why permaculture, or organics, or even crashing the system and becoming hunter/gatherers won’t work. If we still operate by the same flawed rules, we will just produce the same flawed results.
Next post – Agriculture and a new mind.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Learning To Fly
In the comments to my last post I found some interesting thoughts from Leon. He said, “I more and more think that our weird desire "to feed the world" is actually part of the problem.” And I have to agree. “Feeding the world” is and always has been a nice front for economic/political expansion and control. I feel no need to “feed the world”, but I know I must find a way to feed myself, my family, and help feed my community that doesn’t destroy the place I depend on for life. If I find a way that works here, I also feel obligated to share that with others around the world so that they might adapt it to their own place. That way the world feeds itself.
In her book The Vegetarian Myth: Food, Justice, and Sustainability
, Lierre Keith says, “Agriculture (as we have been practicing it for the past 10000 years) is the most destructive thing humans have done to the planet, and more of the same won’t save us. The truth is that agriculture requires the wholesale destruction of entire ecosystems.”
Allan Savory once said that Organic Agriculture was responsible for the downfall of more civilizations than all the wars combined.
Agriculture, as we have been doing it for the past 10000 years is built on the idea that we MUST produce more. Having more keeps us safe. It gives us power. It has become our one measure of success and worth. (Imagine a CEO saying, “Let’s just produce as much this year as we did last year…” That business would be thought of as stagnant, and if the trend continued… failing. Even though that level of production might provide a comfortable living for all the people involved and keep the business functioning indefinitely, WITHOUT CONSTANT GROWTH WE ARE FAILURES!) Continual growth requires continual increases in resources. Initially we found those resources by eliminating other things that were using them. (Take a good look at a farm field. The only thing that lives there is what the farmer wants there, the crop. Everything else has been displaced or killed.) We quickly used up those resources. So we started taking resources from elsewhere. First we expanded so we had more area to use. Then we conquered, so we could make others produce for us. Then we pushed back in time to take resources that were removed from the system millions of years ago (coal, oil, natural gas…), Now we are out of places to find more resources to continue our growth so we alter what we grow so it will produce more from less. We modify the very structure of life to get more production.
Along the way we have hit limits. When that happens civilization crashes. Those who survive, regroup and try again. They try harder and smarter, develop new methods and new technologies, and get bigger. They crash again and again. The Anasazi, the Maya, the Mesopotamians, the Romans, etc… Every time we rise from the dust of the crash and learn to reach farther, dig deeper, make more from what we take.
We BELIEVE a story where this works. It defines our style of civilization. Kind of like those folks who didn’t believe in gravity. Or, more like the folks who believed they were exempt from or above the limits of gravity. They spent their lives in the sure knowledge that if they walked off a cliff they would not fall. Right up to the day they walked off the edge. CRASH! We are not walking, we are running full tilt, and we will crash yet again. We’ve been doing this for the last 10000 years, running at the edge of the cliff as fast as we can with as much as we can and believing we can fly. We crash and die. Somewhere else someone picks up the bits and does it again, bigger and better. Civilization! CRASH! AGAIN! CRASH! AGAIN! THIS TIME WE’VE GATHERED THE WHOLE GLOBE, EVERY LIVING PERSON, AND EVERY LIVING CREATURE (BY DEFAULT…) WE ARE RUNNING FULL TILT TOWARD THE EDGE….
Time to learn to fly…
Flight only happens when you understand gravity and the rest of the laws that, by limiting, make flight possible.
Let’s learn to fly… or better yet, lets learn to farm in a way that doesn’t lead yet again to a massive crash.
In her book The Vegetarian Myth: Food, Justice, and Sustainability
, Lierre Keith says, “Agriculture (as we have been practicing it for the past 10000 years) is the most destructive thing humans have done to the planet, and more of the same won’t save us. The truth is that agriculture requires the wholesale destruction of entire ecosystems.” Allan Savory once said that Organic Agriculture was responsible for the downfall of more civilizations than all the wars combined.
Agriculture, as we have been doing it for the past 10000 years is built on the idea that we MUST produce more. Having more keeps us safe. It gives us power. It has become our one measure of success and worth. (Imagine a CEO saying, “Let’s just produce as much this year as we did last year…” That business would be thought of as stagnant, and if the trend continued… failing. Even though that level of production might provide a comfortable living for all the people involved and keep the business functioning indefinitely, WITHOUT CONSTANT GROWTH WE ARE FAILURES!) Continual growth requires continual increases in resources. Initially we found those resources by eliminating other things that were using them. (Take a good look at a farm field. The only thing that lives there is what the farmer wants there, the crop. Everything else has been displaced or killed.) We quickly used up those resources. So we started taking resources from elsewhere. First we expanded so we had more area to use. Then we conquered, so we could make others produce for us. Then we pushed back in time to take resources that were removed from the system millions of years ago (coal, oil, natural gas…), Now we are out of places to find more resources to continue our growth so we alter what we grow so it will produce more from less. We modify the very structure of life to get more production.
Along the way we have hit limits. When that happens civilization crashes. Those who survive, regroup and try again. They try harder and smarter, develop new methods and new technologies, and get bigger. They crash again and again. The Anasazi, the Maya, the Mesopotamians, the Romans, etc… Every time we rise from the dust of the crash and learn to reach farther, dig deeper, make more from what we take.
We BELIEVE a story where this works. It defines our style of civilization. Kind of like those folks who didn’t believe in gravity. Or, more like the folks who believed they were exempt from or above the limits of gravity. They spent their lives in the sure knowledge that if they walked off a cliff they would not fall. Right up to the day they walked off the edge. CRASH! We are not walking, we are running full tilt, and we will crash yet again. We’ve been doing this for the last 10000 years, running at the edge of the cliff as fast as we can with as much as we can and believing we can fly. We crash and die. Somewhere else someone picks up the bits and does it again, bigger and better. Civilization! CRASH! AGAIN! CRASH! AGAIN! THIS TIME WE’VE GATHERED THE WHOLE GLOBE, EVERY LIVING PERSON, AND EVERY LIVING CREATURE (BY DEFAULT…) WE ARE RUNNING FULL TILT TOWARD THE EDGE….
Time to learn to fly…
Flight only happens when you understand gravity and the rest of the laws that, by limiting, make flight possible.
Let’s learn to fly… or better yet, lets learn to farm in a way that doesn’t lead yet again to a massive crash.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Joel Salatin – So right and yet so VERY, VERY WRONG
I’m finally catching up on my reading. The other day I picked up the September issue of one of my magazines, Acres USA, and found Joel Salatin had written the feature article.
I like reading Joel’s books and articles. He has tons of great ideas, and I usually find something I can adapt to our little farm. His Polyface Farm, and his work as an advocate for ‘eco-agriculture’ are inspiring. So I was excited to see what Joel had written for ACRES. Wow, was I disappointed. He’s gotten so much right, how could he be so wrong about feeding the world.
Doing it right.
At Polyface farm (and many other small eco-farms around the world including mine) farming is based on well managed animals on perennial pasture. Those animals, or products from those animals go to feed people locally. Almost all the resources (minerals , water, energy, etc.) stay on the farm and support more diverse life. The small amounts that leave the farm stay in the local area, and can be easily returned to the local resource pool to support life in that area. Well managed, multi-species rotational grazing builds topsoil faster than any other method, so the farm becomes more productive over time without needing imported resources. This kind of farming can produce food for people in that area forever. It can also be adapted to almost any climate. There are a few issues that still need some fine tuning, but it’s pretty close to a perfect system. This is the content I expected to find in Joel’s article.
What I found was an article about how unfair the comparisons between eco-ag and conventional ag have been, how under-funded eco-ag research has been, and how we are as good as conventional ag because we have developed techniques and products that produce the same kind of harvest results. All of this is true, but it leaves out one important thing. Feeding the world, at least feeding the people of the world the type of food they now eat, requires a lot of grain. Grain is an annual and it requires a different production system than multi-species pasture farming. Nothing about annual grain production builds soil, even using organic fertilizer inputs. To grow grain efficiently, you have to eliminate the other things living in that space. All other plants have to be eliminated. Eliminating those plants removes the structure that holds the soil together. It breaks the symbiotic relationships that exist between microbes and plants that create humus. The animals, insects, microbes etc. that lived on those plants, on the plant waste, or on the waste of other creatures living in that space are also eliminated. They either die or go away because there is no longer a food source in that place or we kill them because they use the grain as a food source. This further depletes the resource pool in that area. This kind of farming quickly requires inputs from elsewhere. This depletes the resource pool in another place and doesn’t replenish the resources on the farm. There are a few places in the world where soil type, precipitation, and temperature combine in a way that might make it possible to grow annual grains in rotation with long term perennial pasture and animals. These places are very small niches around the globe, and even there the best you can hope is to maintain the topsoil, not build it.
Joel says, “The advertisers in Acres U.S.A. and kindred publications have already solved the pathogen, erosion and fertility problems that the chemical Neanderthals (to use the late iconic Charles Walters’ term) are still scratching their heads about.” I’ve looked at the products advertised in Acres and other publications. They are great. They let you grow your annual grains and do less harm to the environment. But they don’t solve the fundamental problem. Growing annuals destroys the system that builds soil and maintains the local resource pool. Using these products is a way to slow one kind of environmental damage and to produce better quality food, but it isn’t ecologically sustainable.
Joel is right, eco-agriculture can feed the world. But to do that we will have to radically change what we eat, more animal protein and fat, more perennial fruits, and little or no grain. We will also have to change how food and waste are distributed. Ecologically sustainable food is local food. It maintains a local, diverse population, and all the “waste” from the production and use of that food is returned to the local resource pool to continue to grow food. It is a closed loop. That’s the only way eco-agriculture can feed the world.
I like reading Joel’s books and articles. He has tons of great ideas, and I usually find something I can adapt to our little farm. His Polyface Farm, and his work as an advocate for ‘eco-agriculture’ are inspiring. So I was excited to see what Joel had written for ACRES. Wow, was I disappointed. He’s gotten so much right, how could he be so wrong about feeding the world.
Doing it right.
At Polyface farm (and many other small eco-farms around the world including mine) farming is based on well managed animals on perennial pasture. Those animals, or products from those animals go to feed people locally. Almost all the resources (minerals , water, energy, etc.) stay on the farm and support more diverse life. The small amounts that leave the farm stay in the local area, and can be easily returned to the local resource pool to support life in that area. Well managed, multi-species rotational grazing builds topsoil faster than any other method, so the farm becomes more productive over time without needing imported resources. This kind of farming can produce food for people in that area forever. It can also be adapted to almost any climate. There are a few issues that still need some fine tuning, but it’s pretty close to a perfect system. This is the content I expected to find in Joel’s article.
What I found was an article about how unfair the comparisons between eco-ag and conventional ag have been, how under-funded eco-ag research has been, and how we are as good as conventional ag because we have developed techniques and products that produce the same kind of harvest results. All of this is true, but it leaves out one important thing. Feeding the world, at least feeding the people of the world the type of food they now eat, requires a lot of grain. Grain is an annual and it requires a different production system than multi-species pasture farming. Nothing about annual grain production builds soil, even using organic fertilizer inputs. To grow grain efficiently, you have to eliminate the other things living in that space. All other plants have to be eliminated. Eliminating those plants removes the structure that holds the soil together. It breaks the symbiotic relationships that exist between microbes and plants that create humus. The animals, insects, microbes etc. that lived on those plants, on the plant waste, or on the waste of other creatures living in that space are also eliminated. They either die or go away because there is no longer a food source in that place or we kill them because they use the grain as a food source. This further depletes the resource pool in that area. This kind of farming quickly requires inputs from elsewhere. This depletes the resource pool in another place and doesn’t replenish the resources on the farm. There are a few places in the world where soil type, precipitation, and temperature combine in a way that might make it possible to grow annual grains in rotation with long term perennial pasture and animals. These places are very small niches around the globe, and even there the best you can hope is to maintain the topsoil, not build it.
Joel says, “The advertisers in Acres U.S.A. and kindred publications have already solved the pathogen, erosion and fertility problems that the chemical Neanderthals (to use the late iconic Charles Walters’ term) are still scratching their heads about.” I’ve looked at the products advertised in Acres and other publications. They are great. They let you grow your annual grains and do less harm to the environment. But they don’t solve the fundamental problem. Growing annuals destroys the system that builds soil and maintains the local resource pool. Using these products is a way to slow one kind of environmental damage and to produce better quality food, but it isn’t ecologically sustainable.
Joel is right, eco-agriculture can feed the world. But to do that we will have to radically change what we eat, more animal protein and fat, more perennial fruits, and little or no grain. We will also have to change how food and waste are distributed. Ecologically sustainable food is local food. It maintains a local, diverse population, and all the “waste” from the production and use of that food is returned to the local resource pool to continue to grow food. It is a closed loop. That’s the only way eco-agriculture can feed the world.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
"Why do they call it the fair if it is NOT FAIR?" - lessons in civics, multi-valence, and life.
Sometimes you get asked hard questions. Or at least questions that are hard to answer with your usual glib responses. I love having kids. They constantly make me evaluate what I really mean by what I say. This week has had a number of those. Evolution came up in science, and a lot of behavior got blamed on our early ancestors, the monkeys and the fish... (I'll have to post about that, but not today.) We also had a bad week at the fair which gave rise to our title question. Here's the story...
Last year JJ took Angel to the fair. Angel wasn't in perfect condition, and she hadn't been worked with very much. Angel won Grand Champion Dairy Doe, and Best of Show.
This year JJ took Angel to the fair. Angel was in great condition. She was filled our nicely, had a great udder, had been clipped 3 weeks in advance so her coat looked great, almost perfect. She was still a slightly grumpy, alpha goat, who just tolerated being shown. JJ was spot on. Angel looked great, but fidgeted a bit.
This year Angel finished dead last.
Everyone showing, and most of the audience had her placed first. But the judge, a pygmy goat specialist (@##$^&&) placed her last. The worst goat in the show placed second. A nice, but thin, doe placed first. A dairy judge would have flipped the whole field except the first (should be last) two.
JJ was crushed.
On the way home she asked me the "WHY" question.
What do you say? I thought " you lost because the judge was a brainless git..."
So we talked about politics. We have two judges running for office right now. One (the under-funded, former county prosecutor) goes to our church, but beyond that we know nothing about him. The other, has spent lot of money on adds and events telling us "who he is". In my head it doesn't matter. The law is the law, who cares who the judge is. BUT... (here is where the multi-valence kicks in...) the law only defines the end points. A and NOT A. Real life is somewhere in-between. (See Bart Kosko's brilliant book Fuzzy Thinking: The New Science of Fuzzy Logic for more on this idea!!!
) JUDGES DRAW THE LINE. They decide where the break point between A and Not A lies. That's what happened in the goat show ring. Last year's judge drew the line one place, this years judge drew it in a very different place. Both of them were "right". Fair is a mater of perspective...
Life is about where you draw the line, and where you allow it to be drawn for you. Where are your lines?
Last year JJ took Angel to the fair. Angel wasn't in perfect condition, and she hadn't been worked with very much. Angel won Grand Champion Dairy Doe, and Best of Show.
This year JJ took Angel to the fair. Angel was in great condition. She was filled our nicely, had a great udder, had been clipped 3 weeks in advance so her coat looked great, almost perfect. She was still a slightly grumpy, alpha goat, who just tolerated being shown. JJ was spot on. Angel looked great, but fidgeted a bit.
This year Angel finished dead last.
Everyone showing, and most of the audience had her placed first. But the judge, a pygmy goat specialist (@##$^&&) placed her last. The worst goat in the show placed second. A nice, but thin, doe placed first. A dairy judge would have flipped the whole field except the first (should be last) two.
JJ was crushed.
On the way home she asked me the "WHY" question.
What do you say? I thought " you lost because the judge was a brainless git..."
So we talked about politics. We have two judges running for office right now. One (the under-funded, former county prosecutor) goes to our church, but beyond that we know nothing about him. The other, has spent lot of money on adds and events telling us "who he is". In my head it doesn't matter. The law is the law, who cares who the judge is. BUT... (here is where the multi-valence kicks in...) the law only defines the end points. A and NOT A. Real life is somewhere in-between. (See Bart Kosko's brilliant book Fuzzy Thinking: The New Science of Fuzzy Logic for more on this idea!!!
) JUDGES DRAW THE LINE. They decide where the break point between A and Not A lies. That's what happened in the goat show ring. Last year's judge drew the line one place, this years judge drew it in a very different place. Both of them were "right". Fair is a mater of perspective...Life is about where you draw the line, and where you allow it to be drawn for you. Where are your lines?
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Alan's Soap Box - After Food Inc.- First Steps
I wasn't very satisfied with my last post. It only covered part of my response. The angry, hopeless, frustrated part. But, I can't live that way. So, here is the first of a series of post about ACTION!
First steps
1. USE your anger. Let is spur you into doing something. Make it something constructive. Here are some things we will be doing.
- Planting more food. Our paper garden just got bigger and more complex. If we want an alternative to the Industrial Food System WE have to create it. We have the space and the skills at our farm to be part of the solution, so we are going to do that, for our selves and for our community.
- Sharing. We will be sharing more of what we have. More of what we grow, more of what we know how to do, more of what we think. We will share the movie with others. We will have discussions. We will share the food we create, even with those who want nothing to do with alternative food systems. (I've gotten quite a few people interested in local food issues by using fudge. Probably more people that way than by talking about the problems.)
- Supporting. We can't do it all. So we will support others in our community who are doing things too. Some of the support will be buying things from them. Some of it will be spreading the word about what they are doing. And some will be in the form of smiles, encouragement, and help. It is not an easy road to take, and connecting with others on the same path makes it more likely we will all make it.
- Connecting to the wider world. While our focus will be local, the story needs to be told on a much wider scale. We will do that here. We will also participate in some of the blogging activities that support this kind of action. One we will join is the NDiN Food Inc Challenge. (More on this later.)
These are some of the First Steps we are taking.
What are YOU going to do?
First steps
1. USE your anger. Let is spur you into doing something. Make it something constructive. Here are some things we will be doing.
- Planting more food. Our paper garden just got bigger and more complex. If we want an alternative to the Industrial Food System WE have to create it. We have the space and the skills at our farm to be part of the solution, so we are going to do that, for our selves and for our community.
- Sharing. We will be sharing more of what we have. More of what we grow, more of what we know how to do, more of what we think. We will share the movie with others. We will have discussions. We will share the food we create, even with those who want nothing to do with alternative food systems. (I've gotten quite a few people interested in local food issues by using fudge. Probably more people that way than by talking about the problems.)
- Supporting. We can't do it all. So we will support others in our community who are doing things too. Some of the support will be buying things from them. Some of it will be spreading the word about what they are doing. And some will be in the form of smiles, encouragement, and help. It is not an easy road to take, and connecting with others on the same path makes it more likely we will all make it.
- Connecting to the wider world. While our focus will be local, the story needs to be told on a much wider scale. We will do that here. We will also participate in some of the blogging activities that support this kind of action. One we will join is the NDiN Food Inc Challenge. (More on this later.)
These are some of the First Steps we are taking.
What are YOU going to do?
Monday, January 25, 2010
Alan's Soapbox - Saving the World
The devastation in Haiti has left me pretty stunned. I'm not usually a "save the world" kind of guy. I believe in acting locally and helping others act locally in their area. But sometimes a massive tragedy happens that overwhelms a community's ability to cope and it is time for the world to lend a helping hand. This is one of those times, but I felt at a loss as to how I could help. My going to Haiti right now would only add to the problems, not help solve them. The things I have that they need are not in an easily transportable form (sending some goats and chickens might help in the long run, but this isn't the time.) Money, we have given to local organizations who are pooling resources to add to the global effort. But money can't fix everything, and it is so easily misused or misdirected. So I am putting my effort into encouraging my community to support groups that are making a difference in Haiti.
My friends at World Hunger Relief have been working in Haiti and around the world for years. They train people to help communities develop locally sustainable agriculture. They have been doing this in Haiti for quite a few years and have a strong network there. You can see what they are doing and how you can support them on their website.
World Hunger Relief
On a more local note, my cub scout assistant den leader, Josh, left for Florida yesterday. He will be gone for at least two weeks. Josh works for MMS Aviation repairing and servicing airplanes for missionaries around the world. He will be working on the planes used by Missionary Flights International to fly supplies and people to Haiti. You can find out more about Josh and his family, and how to support what they do with MMS at Adelsbergers in Aviation.
These are some of the ways we are supporting efforts in Haiti. Check them out. Also check out your local community and find ways you can help either at home or around the world.
My friends at World Hunger Relief have been working in Haiti and around the world for years. They train people to help communities develop locally sustainable agriculture. They have been doing this in Haiti for quite a few years and have a strong network there. You can see what they are doing and how you can support them on their website.
World Hunger Relief
On a more local note, my cub scout assistant den leader, Josh, left for Florida yesterday. He will be gone for at least two weeks. Josh works for MMS Aviation repairing and servicing airplanes for missionaries around the world. He will be working on the planes used by Missionary Flights International to fly supplies and people to Haiti. You can find out more about Josh and his family, and how to support what they do with MMS at Adelsbergers in Aviation.
These are some of the ways we are supporting efforts in Haiti. Check them out. Also check out your local community and find ways you can help either at home or around the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
