Agriculture and the Environment, It's Our Choice
Humans have never left a small footprint, we have always tried to shape the environment to suit our needs. Initially farming had one purpose, food; farming provided a more stable diet than the hunter-gatherer existence.
As we became more "civilized" our effect on the land became more pronounced and more devastating. We thought the oceans were too vast, the soil too deep and the forests so thick that we could never harm them and, of course, we were wrong.
We used to grow food and fiber, now we raise commodity crops and commodity livestock. Farmers, for the most part, no longer sell to the consumer, they sell to processors who slice, dice, mince, preserve, pasteurize, color, flavor, package and deliver what they call food.
Agricultural production is neither controlled by nor is it supportive of farmers or consumers. Farmers have no control over prices so they do what they must to survive. Consumers buy what the global market provides, is there a choice?
We produce more than enough to feed the world. Yet, not everyone shares the bounty. Not everyone has the money or the access. Equally as sad, by the time the processors are done with their slicing, dicing, coloring and flavoring much of the "food" they deliver assaults, rather than supports our health.
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) claims agriculture is one of the biggest threats to the environment. The National Cattleman's Beef Association (NCBA) says agriculture does not harm the environment.
The University of Minnesota cites a seven fold increase in use of nitrogen fertilizer, a three fold increase in phosphorous fertilizer and a near doubling of irrigated cropland between 1961 and 1996. Since the introduction of Genetically Modified crops in 1996, fertilizer and pesticide use have steadily increased.
WWF notes global agriculture uses 70% of the worlds water and threatens the oceans with agrochemicals and the atmosphere with greenhouse gases from livestock production.
The US Geological Survey
The United Nations
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO's) have a negative affect on our health as well. The 2004 outbreaks of avian flu in Laos and Nigeria occurred on CAFO's and the current swine flu epidemic has Mexican lawmakers pointing the finger at CAFO's while Mexican health officials back them up.
CAFO's, crop production, water, processing and transportation comprise an industrial agricultural system that is no friend of the environment. The argument supporting the system,"we need to feed the world", is a lie. As the system industrialized, world hunger increased.
In the end the question is, who will decide if agriculture will protect or destroy the environment?
We can continue to allow multinational agribusiness corporations and industrial agriculture to control our food system. We can continue to accept CAFO's, mono-culture cropping and the inherent environmental damage they cause. Or we can think about the environment and humanity when we make our food choices. We can, as Michael Pollan says, "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants".
We need to think before we eat.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
35 Comments so far
Show AllJim Goodman, thanks for the article. One quibble, seemingly minor but with ramifications: the standard view, offered early in your piece, that agriculture provided a more stable food supply than hunting and gathering, has been rejected by most archaeologists interested in this issue.
What agriculture provided was a larger but narrower-based supply of calories, concentrating on fewer, higher-calorie sources, mainly grains. Because the base was narrower as well as mostly carbohydrate, it produced not only deficiency diseases (e.g., the spread of maize cultivation in North American prehistory can be tracked by the spread of periodontal disease) but also periodic famine, almost unknown to hunter-gatherers excepting Arctic ones. It was adopted, in the current view of most archaeologists, not because it offered greater stability, better nutrition, or more ease, but because hunter-gatherer populations had grown, willy-nilly (most tried to discourage population growth) beyond the ability of wild foods to support them (see, e.g., Mark Nathan Cohen's The Food Crisis in Prehistory: Population Pressure and the Origins of Agriculture).
Stilldreaming has it right: we must control, or better yet reverse, population growth. Whether that's possible, given the epoch-making failure of hunter-gatherers to achieve it, is another matter.
[This should be an article on Commondreams]
The Monsanto Connection
From the Marketoracle.co.uk/Article10347.html
By: Robert_Singer
I recently published an article "Grandmother Scores Huge Victory over Monsanto".
The article was a magnet for controversy because I claimed the best way to fight Monsanto and HR 875 was by growing your own food and saving seeds.
Linn Cohen-Cole, the libertarian grandmother at the forefront of the anti-HR 875 campaign called me “dangerous” for fostering complacency by encouraging readers to grow their own food instead of send e-mails and faxes...that no one reads.
The Cornucopia Institute and the Organic Consumers Association has already assured organic advocates that HR 875, the Food Safety and Modernization Act, is only “trying to improve the safety of food products derived from large industrial processing facilities and does not intend to trample organic farmers, backyard gardeners or consumers of fresh local foods.”
Following the April 3 Cornucopia press release, “Family Farmers Fear Being Run over by Food Safety Juggernaut,” organic food activists received a mass e-mail exposing the role of Linn Cole in spreading disinformation about HR 875:
Subject: RETRACTION: URGENT! Monsanto Bill to Ban Organic Food:
“Monsanto, or one of their proxy groups, is actually feeding libertarian groups disinformation on this bill.
The bill doesn't ban organic. When you make that misinformed, but well-intentioned call to your Congressman, you are doing exactly what Monsanto wants—coming across as an ill-informed and hysterical extremist. Monsanto is making a last-ditch effort in this PR war, but they have already really lost it.”
Monsanto lost it because 43 million Americans, including First Lady Michelle Obama, have risked going to jail for growing their own food!
This will help you understand what really happened:
1. Monsanto is one of the most powerful multi-national corporations in the world. The Global One-World Government New World Order conspiracy, of which Monsanto is a part, is aimed at controlling millions via the food they eat. "Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people," said Henry Kissinger in 1970.
2. Monsanto uses overt and covert strategies to accomplish their goals. Monsanto is behind both sides of the battle over HR 875. They don’t leave important matters like these to chance.
3. Monsanto’s tentacles reach into every aspect of our society: government, private industry, the military, law enforcement and, of course, agriculture. Large, small, organic and non-organic farmers—and don’t forget libertarian grass roots activists—are all influenced directly and indirectly by Monsanto. The company that rose to power in the 20th century as a leading chemical giant now focuses on agriculture. In Monsanto’s world, there is no room for the family farmer. The company’s well-known corporate bullying tactics have made this clear. Just ask Percy Schmeiser, the brave Canola farmer who dared to take on Monsanto.
4. HR 875’s vague wording was intentional.
5. Family Farmers (organic and non-organic) are under attack, but not by Congresswoman DeLauro, the author of HR 875 whose husband was a political consultant to Monsanto 10 years ago.
6. The timing of HR 875 coincides with the slow food, Locavore, and urban gardening movements in the United States and, for that matter, any slow food movement anywhere in the world.
7. The E-coli and salmonella outbreaks related to spinach, tomatoes and peanuts are the work of Monsanto’s agents: Things don’t happen; they’re made to happen.
8. Healthy Family Farm owner Sharon Palmer was arrested for selling raw goat milk, and the Ohio food co-op raided Gestapo-style was obviously instigated by Monsanto agents in a move designed to intimidate urban gardeners.
It doesn’t matter if libertarian grandmother Linn Cohen-Cole, or Paul, a farmer from Wisconsin, were accidental dupes or knowing agents of Monsanto’s disinformation campaign. It only matters that the disinformation campaign was discovered before it wounded the health freedom movement.
Spreading misinformation, misleading or outright false information is not the way to defeat “food safety” legislation, because when you make that misinformed but well-intentioned call to your Congressman, you are doing exactly what Monsanto wants—coming across as an ill-informed and hysterical extremist.
The very clear and present danger is that our “unelected representatives” will be forced to sit down and actually read HR 875. But when they do, they won’t find a ban on heirloom seeds, farmers markets or backyard gardening, because it isn’t there. Does anyone think Monsanto would actually put in writing that we are going to arrest Michelle Obama for planting a garden?
If they did, our representatives wouldn’t need a flood of frantic messages hollering that HR 875 is the bill that will “kill all farms and eat your babies." No, believe it or not, our representatives eat and go to farmers markets just like we do.
So who is behind this disinformation campaign?
The Natural Solutions Foundation (NSF) originated the Linn Cole articles.
The Organic Consumers Association and other legitimate heath advocates have been questioning the NSF for several years, and the criticism is universally the same:
Why does the NSF keep turning out factually inaccurate, hysterically grim articles such as Linn Cole’s?
The answers start with the NSF founders, husband-wife team Albert Stubblebine and Rima Laibow. Now, when I accuse these people of being disinformation professionals, let me explain. I'm not saying they're doing sloppy research, and I'm not saying they're being overzealous. What I am saying is that they are working, for pay, to spread false information and to make their organization look like a legitimate activist group.
My conclusion is Stubblebine and Laibow are using the Natural Solutions Foundation—and Linn Cole—to undermine the health freedom community by spreading disinformation about HR 875.
Stubblebine is a retired U.S. Army major general who designed AEGIS, "a major Homeland Security private initiative." Given this background and his ties to the U.S. intelligence community, eyebrows were raised in the health freedom community in early 2005 when, along with Laibow, Stubblebine launched the NSF website and began to promote his wife as an expert on Codex Alimentarius, the commission working to adopt strict new guidelines for vitamin and mineral supplements.
Read full article...
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article10347.html
The dispossession of the small farmer and the loss of our soul-connection to the land parallels the growth of corporate agriculture and the explosion of population.
The Founders were yeoman farmers, and the farmer was a cultural ideal, a way of life, a weltanschuang. Then it was monetized and mechanized and industrialized to be more efficient and productive and responsive to changing market demand. Regular deflations allowed the richest farmers and ag-moguls to buy up the foreclosures and return many farmers to mere tenancy. Agribusiness took over as people left the land to concentrate in cities and reproduce like rabbits.
Now agribusiness is the only means to support a mass consumer population. Sustainable methods ( organic ) cannot feed the voracious urban areas. Sustainable retailers like Whole Foods ( Earth Fare & Green Life in my area, plus cooperatives ) cannot replace the agribusiness outlets. Organic, sustainable agriculture is not scalable.
Huge numbers of small organic farmers might feed the nation, but to sustain themselves, these small farmers must charge more for smaller volumes of production and the population couldn't pay for it. Trying to make agriculture a high profit industry destroys its sustainability. A farm is not a factory. Natue is not a factory.
The American population is screwed right now because it is nutritionally starved by agribusiness food and can't afford organic food. Americans are dying of diabetes, cancers, and a host of degenerative conditions resulting from bankrupt food. We are vulnerable to pandemics to sweep in and cull the human herd considerably. The huge cost of health care is largely a result of an agribusiness diet. Chronically ill and obese people are everywhere you turn.
We have made agribusiness necessary, though. "Or we can think about the environment and humanity when we make our food choices." Thinking about it only exposes the monumental dilemma we face. Humanity does not actually have "food choices". It's agribusiness and GMO or global famine.
"We produce more than enough to feed the world." Right now, maybe. Productivity is falling, however, which is why GMO is gaining in compensation. We are not smart enough to re-engineer nature.
There are 350,000,000 Americans demanding eggs @ 99 cents a dozen as they swill litres of Mountain Dew and cannot afford treatment for diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, heart disease, etc etc. Is it possible to supply them with nutritious food from a sustainable agriculture at a cheap price they can afford?
No.
When the American people left the land and moved to the cities, they forgot how to live in harmony with nature. The 1% of people who actually farm are more attentive to the futures market than the needs of their land and they are largely ignorant concerning the nutritional content of their nitrogen-pumped produce. "Harmony with nature" is a cliche, of course, like "love thy neighbor".
We are not so different from the benighted animals jammed together in factory farms. We require constant pharmaceutical inputs. Fat people are often anemic.
When the British ecologist, James Lovelock, howls in anguish about the billions that will die because we have abused Gaia, he is not just whistling Dixie...
"The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) claims agriculture is one of the biggest threats to the environment"
It seems time that we start recognizing that the problems are not the tools we wield but our intent in wielding them. A hammer can break things or build things depending on our intent. We tried regulating the tool and it doesn't work. So let's try regulating the intent.
One may argue that we we can't regulate intent, but we know how to discover intent. Ask any lawyer. So when we discover that Monosonto's shareholders intend to turn a profit at any cost, we impose penalties. When elites argue in court that the profit motive benefits society, the prosecutor pulls out the facts and presents them to the judge/jury, which rules that the elites failed to better inform their intents, which they are legally required to do. So, the lies are exposed and the society moves toward production that is truly in the public interests.
Liked your comment, ezeflyer...it's the reality...
Best Regards from Brazil,
Luiz Soares. About Me
People love to go places where there is scenic, natural beauty. Then they move in and destroy it.
Mr. Goodman -- we need to make a CHOICE for global birth control and to voluntarily reduce both the growth rate and the total number of humans.
Articles such as this one are pointless unless the population factor is mentioned -- no matter how we change our ag systems, we're doomed, like our environment, unless we choose to stabilize and reduce our numbers.
I presume you are volunteering yourself in the goal to reduce the total number of humans?
It is not our choice. It is the likes of Monsanto and Archer-Daniels Midland who rule the farmlands of this country.
I help those I can as I am able, but I am not some kind of magician who can wave my hands, & solve other people's problems or the problems of this world.
Life is good. What an experience! It's always best to forgive.
Myself, I am happy today to be a part of Creator's creation. Love getting out in nature with Creator's critters & other life forms. Enjoyed my visit to the Hopi Rez sometime ago in a thing called the past. My the story of the journey to their Rezm & meeting a Hopi family before I even got to their Rez. They invited me to stay with them.
Loved sitting on top of the mesa's where the Hopi dwell upon Creator's earth, & watching Creator's sunrises & sunsets. It was a wonderful journey.
Life good. What an experience! It's always best to forgive.
Glad you're happy, glad life is good for you. Life is far too complicated and hard for far too many today. Remember them and do what you can.
thanks,
nedlud
avian flu, swine flu.... CAFOs...
let's not forget about "chronic wasting disease" and where its first signs came from..
"first recognized by biologists in the 1960s as a disease syndrome of captive deer held in wildlife research facilities in Ft. Collins, CO, but was not recognized as a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) until 1978. CWD was subsequently recognized in captive deer, and later in captive elk, at other wildlife research facilities in Colorado (Ft. Collins, Kremmling, and Meeker) and Wyoming (Wheatland), as well as in at least two zoological collections. More recently, CWD has been diagnosed in privately-owned elk residing in game ranches in seven states (Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and South Dakota) and two provinces (Saskatchewan and Alberta, Canada). In August 2002, CWD was diagnosed in a captive white-tailed deer on a hunting preserve in Wisconsin. Although CWD was first diagnosed in captive research cervids, the original source of CWD in either captive cervids or free-ranging cervids is unknown. There is no known relationship between CWD and any other TSE...."
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/hunting/deer/cwd/
Captive deer programs, free range deer, and farmed deer.... now impacting wild deer and elk and moose populations. but, CWD doesn't transfer to any other TSE --as far as we know at this point....
As a vegetarian, I doubt I'll ever read Michael Pollan's book (though I've liked what he's said on the radio so far, looking over this review - http://www.powells.com/review/2007_08_28.html reduces my interest). However, if Pollan's advice of eat mostly plants is followed, doesn't this lead to a lot less dairy farming - thus hitting Jim Goodman's chosen profession?
It's been a long time since I've studied the numbers, but I recall that though dairy is better than beef for the environment (though the two processes are somewhat connected, people give separate numbers anyway), they are both still quite a bit worse than growing a plant-only based diet.
Two peculiar things about humans that have always puzzled me are: why so many of us crave animal products and why so many get so excited about motorized recreation. In the long run, I'm not sure we'll be able to keep either of these the way our population is growing and our resources not.
Dara Parsavand
Well, first of all, I'm gonna say I'm biased because I really like both cows and horses. For me, its really a special thing working around and having a bond with a large animal. I can understand though, why some people would just prefer plants. Just like some would never want to get married and have kids...
Dairy cows are wonderful because they (the old-fashioned type, now nearly extinct) can convert rougher land into very nutritious and healthy food via pasture and hay. Land that shouldn't be cultivated. So there is a place for dairy animals, also including goats. Horses can perform farm labors, in a much more eco-friendly way than internal combustion engines usually do. And again they are friends to me. How much do you value 'friendship'?
On the milk, I'm talking about unpasteurized, non-homogenized, right from the cow type stuff as by far the best and most healthy. You can't trust any of the marketeers or processors, I've learned that. I wish you could, but you can't. Because they're not friends, they're commodities brokers and swindlers. Out to maximize THEIR profits.
nedlud
Just curious, what happens to the male calves that are born on your dairy farm?
I keep one every year or two for a bull, a sire. Sell the rest, to either the auction barn or to a local grower, who will of course sell them when the time comes for slaughter. This year it has been ALL heifers. Like nine in a row. I have a very small herd.
What do you do with your cows once they stop producing? I was told by a friend who grew up on dairy farm in Wisconsin that after three years his family's cows are slaughtered.
Does the no-answer mean that all the dairy cattle that are so well loved are slaughtered for meat eventually?
The answer is yes. I guess the word "friendship" has different meanings for different people.
a few years ago i couldn't stomach what was happening in the american culture and so went on a walkabout of sorts to try my hand at living off-grid in a community with at least a notch above the average consciousness about 'sustainability' issues. i found it both tremendously encouraging and terribly disheartening by turns. what was encouraging was to meet so many people involved in creative ways to live outside the lock-step dysfunctional system of competition and egoic nonsense....and what was disheartening was the tendency to fall into the traps of that system (for lack of another way to put it) of learned helplessness & of enabling one another's addictions to convenience or abdication of responsibility out of habit. i believe the human drama on this planet is at a point where we need to achieve a tipping point in consciousness and release the entrenched views of power-over through violence and economic dominance.... especially the view of 'natural resources' as commodities to be bought and sold, enriching existing wealth and slowly strangling the rest of humanity, and indeed, all other life forms for the sake of maintaining and growing that so-called wealth. we see giant agri-business (what else could we expect from corporate personhood? conscience? compassion?) running roughshod over the small farmer, bank bailouts, wars on many fronts- some utilizing military violence, and others the institutional economic violence that increases the disparity of rights, access advantage, and solidifies the illusion of our separateness and the 'threat' of competition from the 'other'. i have returned to the city of my birth and, though the asphalting over of the soil is almost physically painful to be around day in and day out, i am much encouraged by all the networking at the grassroots to reclaim our humanity and turn away from the siren song of advertising, fear (esp of the type engendered during the bush regime) and entertainment... by all the informal meetups to learn about seed saving, canning, vermiculture, sharing resources and information and less dependence upon the private car. i think we humans naturally want to work cooperatively together and to get tuned into the land beneath our feet.... we've simply grown very rusty in that area, hypnotized as we've been by the allure of the marketplace which disconnects us from the marvelous earth and rhythms of nature that sustain us. rethinking capitalism is happening at many levels and none too soon. assigning blame doesn't seem to help.... what helps is reconnecting.... spending time with plants and stillness. it's an inside job which ultimately effects the outside.
WHEN WE TRULY DISCOVER LOVE, CAPITALISM WILL NOT BE POSSIBLE AND MARXISM WILL NOT BE NECESSARY
-WILL O'BRIEN
Thank you for your comment Matangicita! Without falling into magical thinking, I think we should err on the side that people tend towards cooperation. That was the Russian Anarchist Peter Kropotkin's conclusion, and formulation for his principle of mutual aide. Also, staying attuned to the rhythms of nature.
Jim___You list many serious problems with modern agricultural practices but I do not see any solutions in the article. What do you suggest we do to take agriculture back 75 years when we did "food farming"? Should we "nationalize" farmers and ranchers and the large companies that are involved in order to force a return to the old methods? Most people will not be interested in the hard work required without modern developments.
I grew up farming the old way, before hybrid seed, fertilizers, irrigation, modern machinery, and computers. Believe me, it is not something I wish to return to or wish on my children. There is absolutely no reason for pesticides to increase with use of GM seed as they do the job without using dangerous and polluting products. The only reason fertilizer use has increased is because farmers are raising 250 bu corn instead of 25 bu with the old methods.
You did not mention that increased yields are also a soil conserving feature as with more residue there is much less land lost to erosion by wind and water. The Soil Conservation Service will confirm this and that is my experience also.
Farmers are not entirely at the mercy of others as was the case years ago. With the use of computers and all the developments of selling and purchasing, there is a much better chance of stable income than before.
I agree with your statement that we should think before we eat. In my opinion that means be thankful that nearly all of our population has plenty of food at a reasonable price and modern agriculture has made that possible. Are you also going to insist that the rest of our businesses return to mom and pop operations instead of superstores and give up all of their conveniences? If you want to see another 1930 depression, wrecking the agribusiness sector would certainly accomplish that.
I do most of my shopping at a very small neighborhood food cooperative. Most of the produce is delivered direct by local farmers. All of it is organic. And guess what? I consistently find the prices to be lower than those found at the chain stores, even the "natural" chains.
Most of the packaged/canned/jarred goods could be grown and prepared locally as well; more and more local mom and pop entrepreneurs are doing just that. The local coops and mom and pops could learn some things from Trader Joe's in how to buy cooperatively to increase their purchasing power, but nevertheless the eventual rise in fuel costs will make local more competitive than that brought in by "free" trade.
Many many ways can be employed to cut costs and relocalize and rescale the vast majority of the agricultural/food industry. Those who believe that the vast corporate hierarchical system is the way to continue providing comfort and food security just aren't paying attention.
Kernelz,
It's going to be hard to accept the transition we have to make, because it's completely reversed from the transition you described, from the old way to this current way. That transition was based on an overly-simple idea: Almost exclusive focus on yields while practically ignoring all other factors. There is a much steeper "learning curve" for all of us in this next transition because we can no longer afford to ignore everything else in favor of yields.
This means we'll have to reduce our yields as we cut off the petro-fertilizers/pesticides, irrigation water and fabulous monosonto profit-seed. But there are many factors that will compensate for this reduced yield. Here are a few:
1.) Massive research/infrastructure resources were sunk into maximizing petro-yields that could have instead been spent on sustainable methods. Let's demand that public policy immediate shift resources to sustainable methods.
2.) Petro-fueled weight yield doesn't translate into nutrition yield. Let's demand public policy that exposes the facts about nutrition, and produce for better nutrition. You may in fact find yourself managing an army of suburban gardeners who daily pick the ripe stuff out of people's back yards, wash it, and put it on the back porch for dinner.
3.) We can afford to allocate a greater percent of our personal budgets for food if we demand public policy that takes control of resource allocation out of the hands of elites and put it back in the hands of the people where it belongs. Currently, we pay double or triple for healthcare what we should, triple, or quadruple for education, triple or quadruple for shelter, and five to ten times more for transport and defense than we should. We need to shift the economy around so that 50 bu corn/acre on ten acres provides the farmer a decent living.
4.) Cut the volume of meat/dairy by ten for nearly a ten-fold boost in nutritional value per acre of production. All of these things should make it feasible to make a decent living on ten acres, feeding 60 people. Also push for all food, fuels and materials to be grown by the ten-acre farmer (supplying 20 to 30 people). This farmer will become the society's "most valuable player".
Good explanation, kernelz. My great grandfather started our family farm. over the years it grew to be fairly large. A couple of years ago I sold out my interest to my business partner. I continue to farm 240 acres, which is small by today's standards. I believe my operation is quite financially viable and I hope others will consider doing something similar. I slice all my fertilizer into the ground while no-til planting. This avoids run-off into rivers and ultimately the Gulf of Mexico. This also avoids the volitization loss of N fertilizer into the air. I spray herbicides judiciously and use a much lower volume of chemicals than I did years ago. I use gm seed because it yields very well, the grain dries down well, and it stands in the field where it must, because I no longer own a propane-fired grain dryer. I always disliked using propane and extra fuel to till the soil. It seemed like such a waste of energy. I need only a modest amount of mostly older equipment. I have plenty of time to tinker with my equipment, grow vegetables and flowers, and read articles on this web site.
'..it grew to be fairly large..'
How many farms and farm families did you leverage out, to get to your comfortable present existence and mindset? Have you kept track? Are they all doing well now too? Is everybody well and good on this planet? Or just some, those who best and most faithfully followed the fascist corporate legend?
'And then they came for me.'
It's impossible for me to know the answers to any of your questions. All I can say is this: One time we bid up the rent on a 160 acre farm and got it away from another reasonably large farmer. Afterwards I was ashamed of our decision and we never did that again. For quite a few years there were 4 family owner/operators working together. When viewed that way, our farm was only a little bigger than average. I know dairy farmers are having a difficult time lately. It seems that dairy/livestock has more cyclical ups and downs than government price supported grains. For us, 1985 was our stressful time. Our banker told us to have a sale and get lost. I ultimately came up with a plan to cut expenses to the bone, while still spending just enough to achieve decent yields, and I found a banker who trusted my judgement. I've always been grateful.
Good honest man. Thank you for your courteous reply. Yes, it is an awful time for dairy farmers right now. I can't do it anymore and I am sad.
your friend,
nedlud
Kernelz~
I think you've read too many 1960's era Farm Journals. Are you real? Peasant farming, using intensive yet harmonious, interested and loving human labor is BY FAR the most productive agriculture EVER invented. It just doesn't get paid accordingly by the monopolies that control money.
So, get off of my cloud. Find another planet. Your kind are killing this one with your ignorance...
nedlud
kernelz - i appreciate your very relevant life-perspective on this issue...while I agree with your last paragraph's statement 'our population has plenty of food', etc., I caution everyone not to use what you see going on aound you at the moment as a barometer for what might come in the near future...I may have access to food today, but not food that is growing where I and my family sleep and live...if any of a number of key pieces to the current food-delivery scenario are compromised, and the shelf in my store is not filled with product, I will be in a very hard way...
Based on my observations of current human thinking and behavior, with rampant destruction and toxification of the natural world showing no signs of stopping (yet), this type of disruption to the food supply seems like a foregone conclusion...this is why I would advocate for some kind of local farming in every possible space, including removing existing infrastructure to create more space, to be engaged in by all peoples living around there...to continue to use valuable (should I say invaluable?) Earth surface for transportation and parking, for example, can hardly be seen as wise anymore, can it?
Your comments regarding farming methods are illustrative, as you hit several nails with it: what do humans do when the 'wiser', long-term, ecologically-friendly choice is not as pleasant as the current, ecolgically-destructive one? Is distasteful, is painful, is sacrificial?
Will the horrific certainties of our industrialized, radiated, filled-with-garbage-and-baked, arid world be enough to persuade people that working and living, yes, physically working and living, in concert with nature is better than not?
I'm about to end my life-long eco-friendly intimate and caring relationship with dairy cows and dairy farming, well before I wanted to; and also I am losing a large percentage of my investment because of unfair policies towards small family farms and because of cowardice and stupidity in people that should know better...
...I am frustrated, angry and fearful for my future. And that of my precious 3 children and good wife.
Thanks for nothing, Amerika.
nedlud
I am sorry. Big agribusiness forced me to leave farming years ago, but it never left me. If you still want to farm, start over, start small, start sustainably. And you'll need some good work to support you until you figure out how to farm outside the box. And maybe that will take a long time. But it's a worthy pursuit. Read. Talk to others. Dream. Keep your hands in the soil.
The stranglehold of corporate agriculture on America’s food supply must be broken. The way the current market operates the farmer must play the game according to the rules of companies like Monsanto, Dupont, Pfizer and the United States Department of Agriculture. The only choice the farmer has is which giant corporation to give his money to when it comes time to put out a crop or tend his livestock. Given the structure of the market, small scale, sustainable, agriculture that does not depend of genetically modified inputs, massive amounts of fertilizers and pesticides and vastly oversized agriculture operations is not financially viable.
A second pox upon the American farmer is the conversion of food crops into fuels. Over subsidizing of ethanol caused massive overproduction of ethanol distilling capacity in the Midwest. Enough ethanol production capacity was built to turn every bushel of corn the U.S. exported into ethanol. Just a couple of years ago the United States accounted for more than 70% of the world’s corn exports.
VeraSun, the second largest producer of corn from ethanol went bankrupt last October, the company had such huge debts that reorganization was not possible and the assets of the company were auctioned off to partially pay off the company’s creditors. Velero energy, the largest independent oil refiner in the United States, recently bought at bankruptcy auction 7 of VearSun’s plants at a substantial discount below the cost of building them.
The byproducts of converting food crops into energy are livestock feeds. Every drop of fuel created this way creates additional livestock feed that, due to the massive volume, creates more food to supply more Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations.
Currently American and much of the world’s agriculture is out of control spiraling toward the increasing concentration of food production into the hands of a handful of giant agri-businesses. This trend must be stopped.
i agree. it's really impossible to pronounce an intelligent sentence with "the farmer" as the subject. Because a farmer could be a really hip, really cool organic all natural smll family farmer. Or on the other hand the "farmer" might be the ceo of some agribusiness monnster, looking out the window of his corner office on the 16th floor, waiting for his farm bill subsidy check to arrive.