Valuable pictures

The Union of Concerned Scientists Plant the Plate infographic is pretty nifty.  You can download it here, though I have pasted it in below.
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/food_and_agriculture/plant-the-plate.pdf

It explains how we might grow enough fruit and vegetables in this country to meet the needs of people for good health.

I thought it was just Sonoma County where we had so little acreage in fruit and vegetables.   Not so - it's just that our mono-crop is grapes, not wheat or corn or soy or rice.  And, of course, the grapes are not eaten as fruit!

The story in pictures.  That last frame identifies where our Farm Bill advocacy needs to be.

Tiny farmers unite!

The largest farmers, we have learned, will have their commodity subsidies cut in the Obama proposed budget.

When I heard "the largest farmers" I had visions of inflated figures - like Macy's parade balloons - in blue overalls, straw hat and red bandanna - all puffed up and looming over a landscape of rice, corn or cotton.

Whyever do we speak of big farmers and small farmers - when what we mean is farmers working a lot of acreage, versus farmers working on a small scale. Would a small farmer be like a Lego figure down on the farm? I'm surprised that farmers don't protest these adjectives of scale.

I recall when some of us realized in the 80s that we weren't working with small congregations, but tiny ones - since ours were smaller that what most people think of when they think small. But is there really any such thing as a small congregation? There are some with an attendance of 20 or 30 on Sundays who make a real difference in their communities, and would be sorely missed. And there are some who see 100 or 200 on Sunday who think small.

Surely a farmer's size is irrelevant to the quality of the farming s/he does.

But I am glad about the proposed subsidy change. I hope the Pres succeeds with this.

A brief for agricultural change

I've been carrying around a paper by Lim Li Ching posted on the Oakland Institute web site, "Sustainable Agriculture: Meeting Food Security Needs, Addressing Climate Change Challenges" which advocates for a transition to sustainability to deal with both.

http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/?q=node/view/494

The paper includes startling statistics on increasing food prices, a critique of the Green Revolution, a summary of research about the gains to be had from using sustainable agricultural methods, and some ideas about how to get there.

The most striking thing to me was the evidence for high gains in both crop yields and farm income in the developing world when switching to sustainable practices. Just a little gain in developed countries, compared with 50-100% gains in the 2/3 world.

The paper also led me to conclude that if we wish to decrease the degradation of our agricultural lands and lower other environmental impacts of industrial agriculture in this country we would shift our subsidy system to 1) reward farmers for carbon sequestration, and 2) help support them during the several years of transition back to diversified, sustainable farming.

Farm Bill update - sort of

I keep getting distracted by more information about the Farm Bill and failing to make contact with my congressmember's office about it. Turns out tomorrow is the deadline to get urban and suburban representatives to sign on to a "dear colleague" letter urging an emphasis on programs that meet the needs of folks for local fresh healthful food.

Last year, for example, I noticed that there were programs in place so that older persons with low incomes, and folks with food stamps could shop at the farmers' market in Crescent City. But I've not seen that sort of thing around here. (I'm gradually touring the farmers' markets.)

Today's alert on the Bill from the California Coalition for Food and Farming also directed me to the web site of Earl Blumenauer, of Oregon's Third District. His Food and Farm Bill of Rights (link posted on the right) blends economic justice and sustainability values nicely. If he had his way, availability of fresh local produce to the poor would increase.

And Earl's site led me to the Farm Subsidy Database of the Environmental Working Group. If you like wallowing in statistics and seeing what you can learn, you might spend almost as much time there as I did. No surprise that cotton and rice are the biggies in California - but I was interested to see that some grains other than rice are grown here - much more wheat than I would have guessed if the subsidies are any clue - and of course they are. But where does it go? Is any of it milled here?

I've added "Call Woolsey's office" to my list of things to do tomorrow. Finally.

why vegetables seem expensive

All the talk of subsidies on the UC Berkeley panel last evening reminded me of Marion Nestle's response to why people balk at food prices:

"Or perhaps produce seems expensive in comparison to meat. If this is the case, it is not because produce is artificially expensive; it is because meat is artificially cheap. The government subsidizes its cost by supporting farmers who produce feed for animals."

And, as reported last evening, the reimbursable school lunch is chicken nuggets, tater tots, chocolate milk, and canned fruit cocktail. There are no subsidies for serving our children fresh vegetables.