Farming Propaganda ...

The other day I happened to be making a delivery during 1040 WHO's "Big Show" (that's the agricultural show if you're scoring at home). It was a rare occurrence because usually I'm safe and sound inside the store or eating lunch during that show, but the other day I was able to catch just a tiny tidbit of it while they were broadcasting from the "Commodity Classic" or something like that and using it as an opportunity to share their disagreement and possible dislike of Michael Pollan, Food, Inc., and other things along those lines. I would consider myself a fan of the "Big Show" even though I may disagree with them from time to time. And, I really have no problem with them refuting things from Food Inc. or Mr. Pollan ... I mean that is the beauty of our country right ... opinions ...


What really struck me though is that each side of the "battle" is accusing the other of spreading propaganda. Which lead me to the definition of propaganda ... according to Merriam-Webster ::

• the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
• ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect

The crazy thing about that definition is that whether or not something is truth is not a part of propaganda. It is all about using a certain set of facts or information in order to sway people to your way of think. With that definition of propaganda one could say that every issue in the world right now has propaganda on both sides of that issue. That is why the Corn Refiners Association is putting out this commercial and my King Corn friends have made this spoof. It is why Mr. Pollan has written The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals and The Center for Consumer Freedom has published articles like this, this, and this.

Do you know what I think of all that? I think I enjoy reading Mr. Pollan's books and articles. I think I enjoy listening to "The Big Show" even when I disagree with them ... even when I disagree strongly with them. I think that there is probably some problem with High Fructose Corn Syrup and that I probably eat too much of it with out thinking about it. At the same time I think it's funny that the spoof by my "King Corn" friends uses tobacco to prove their point ... some would say that their commercial was also an anti-tobacco spoof (I think that is ironic). I think that we should be paying more for food and I think that those that argue for the need of industrial agriculture because of starvation worldwide should be spending more time overseas helping feed people instead of writing about it or fighting for a system that may or may not be helping those really in need ... (I think a lot as you can see) ...

But, do you really want to know what I think? I think I raise great pork chops, bacon, roasts, burgers, and all sorts of other goodies. I think I raise food that has a taste that you won't find at your local box store. I think I love when I hear former conventional confinement hog farmers lament that the pork chops that they were raising tasted nothing like the beauties they ate when they were a kid ... his honest to goodness description of the pork chops he was raising ... "cardboard" ... that's what he said! Basically I think I raise some great tasting pork and beef (and eventually lamb and poultry) and I think everyone should buy some because they will love the way it tastes and will find out that meat does have taste that makes your mouth water. 

How about that for your daily dose of propaganda. What do You think? Does this farm propaganda frustrate you? Make you think? Or maybe make you tune it out? I know that I just want to continue raising great food in a great way as long as there are people that appreciate it and love it!

Joel Salatin Goes to Washington

I have seen this kicking around on a few different blogs and thought it would be good to draw attention to it again because I think it says a lot about the current state of our political class and of course agriculture. On June, 17th Joel Salatin was invited to Washington D.C. to be a part of the Green Jobs Leadership Summit. The event didn't turn out exactly as it was advertised, but what would you expect. By the end of the meeting Mr. Salatin had not been asked to say or do anything when he happened upon a comment line. Here is what he had to say (as best as he can remember):

"I'm amazed that after half a day of talk about green jobs and energy, I have not heard the word food, the word farm, or the word agriculture. I represent the local food movement and the pastured livestock movement, and we are tried of being marginalized, criminalized, and demonized by the USDA and this government. I'm a bioterrorist for letting my chickens run in the pasture. What good is it to have the freedom to own a gun, assemble, or worship if I can't choose the fuel to feed my internal 3 trillion member community of bacteria to give me the energy to go shoot, pray, or preach? I propose that we have a Constitutional Amendment that allows every American citizen the right to choose their food. Government bureaucrats should not come between my mouth and my 3 trillion member internal community."

I guess it is not exactly what they wanted to hear at the meeting (you can read Mr. Salatin's post here), and he was eventually cut off. But, since they invited him and told him that he would have a chance to speak I think they should have listened. I do love the passion with which Mr. Salatin speaks. He does not mince words and he likes to paint a pretty impressive picture of this very important topic.

I agree with him that we want to be talking about "green jobs" (I have a feeling "green jobs" are kind of a feel good term more than anything else) we need to start with our agricultural industry because you can't get much closer to "green" things than that. At the end of his post Mr. Salatin says, "Thus endeth Mr. Salatin going to Washington." While that may be true for a time, I think he can continue to grow his voice in the agricultural world and that he will be more and more influential as time passes by.

You Don't Always Get What You Pay For

That could be the title of the post I read over on Allan Nation's "Stockman Grassfarmer Blog". You can check the post out for yourself, but this little bit really says it all:

"The Truthful Labeling Coalition estimates that American consumers annually spend an estimated $2 billion for added salt water in commercial grade chickens, The Wall Street Journal reported. Currently, roughly one-third of fresh chicken sold in the USA is "plumped" with water, salt and sometimes a seaweed extract that helps the meat retain the water."

The poultry companies claim that they have been forced to go this route (have no reason to doubt them) because the large chains want a uniform product and by adding as much as 400 mgs of salt per 4-ounce serving they can get that uniformity. The rub for some people is that the companies are still allowed to call these "plumped" chickens 100% natural or all natural.

I suppose you could say that salt is a "natural" thing, but finding it in such high amounts in a serving of chicken is pretty unnatural I would think...

Efficiency...

"This culture is on an extraordinary pace toward needing things to be more efficient. But that is a value that is ultimately antithetical to the gospel. I've never heard of efficient wisdom, efficient love, efficient suffering, or efficient compassion. So what does it mean that we inhabit a world that is so dominated by this ideology of efficiency? That's my interest in asking, what does it actually mean? How is it shaping you without your knowledge or permission right now?"

I came across this quote today while reading one of the blogs that I make sure to hit each day. This particular quote comes from pastor and author Shane Hipps, and while it is clearly a quote based on the subject of Christianity it really hit me from an agricultural point of view.

I wholeheartedly agree that our culture is running at a breakneck speed towards even greater efficiency and that is just as true in the agricultural world as it is anywhere else. If you don't believe me than just read my post about the new John Deere planter (it is all about speed and efficiency). But, just like Mr. Hipp I at times question the importance of efficiency because I think we don't always look at the consequences.

While I understand that efficiency has allowed us to do more than we have ever done before I often find myself thinking about whether or not that is a good thing. Do we need to continually be doing more and creating more (and getting rid of more)? In fact it reminds me of a Joel Salatin interview that I saw on Youtube where he questioned the idea that we even need big cities...

Maybe there is something that could be said about doing things inefficiently? Maybe we would be a little better off if we just had to do things the old fashioned hard way from time to time? Just a thought.

I Overheard a Converstaion

Last Friday I stopped at the tail end of an auction just to see what a few things were bringing and because I was in the area. I wish I had been there the whole time because some of the stuff selling would have come in really handy, but really it is probably for the best because then I didn't spend any more money. There was one very interesting thing though that happened at this particular auction. As I was standing next to a small 12 foot tandem Case disc I overheard a conversation between two farmers ... I found the conversation very sad. Here is what I heard:

Farmer #1: "This is a nice old disc, it reminds me of the old days of farming"
Farmer #2: "Yep, this probably came to the farm the same time as that (John Deere) 530 along with that three bottom plow and two-row picker."
Farmer #1: "Those were the good days when a guy could get started in farming with this smaller equipment."
Farmer #2: "It would probably be better if it was still like that, especially for the younger guys. The young guys can't even get into farming now because it costs so much."

What are your thoughts on that conversation? Whenever I hear things like that I am always amazed at that there are so many farmers out there that realize our system isn't the best, but it is like we are so deep into it now that there is no hope of digging out. I for one do think a guy could do it with a small line of machinery if only they had the land base paid for ... but, therein lies the problem.

Conventional vs. Organic ... An Article and a Debate

Recently on the Homesteading Today message board there was a THREAD debating (or possibly arguing about) an article titled, "Africa: Organic Agriculture Can Contribute to Fighting Hunger, But Chemical Fertilizers Needed to Feed the World." It appears the article comes from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and discusses exactly what the title implies (pretty creative title huh?). I'm not sure how many of the posters over on the forum took time to read the article or if they just jumped into to the debate/arguing because it is such a hot button issue.

One quote that was mentioned in the original post is this one from Dr. Diouf, "We should use organic agriculture and promote it. It produces wholesome, nutritious food and represents a growing source of income for developed and developing countries. But you cannot feed six billion people today and nine billion in 2050 without judicious use of chemical fertilizers." It is an interesting paradox that he throws out there. Basically it seems that organic is good for those that can afford to do it because you can possibly make more money, but for feeding the world chemicals are the key. I'm sure scholars, farmers, and wanna-be scholar/farmers (like myself) will be going round and round on this issue for quite a while. But, after reading the article and the comments on the message board there are a few thoughts that I had that didn't really come up. I will readily admit that I don't have much of a dog in this fight right now ... I don't have much knowledge ... and to be perfectly honest I don't really care from a moral standpoint whether people choose to use chemicals or not.

#1. One thing that Joel Salatin has mentioned in his books is that part of the research used to justify comments such as those from Dr. Diouf is flawed. Mr. Salatin asserts that their organic research means planting one field conventionally and then one field near it organically and comparing the results. There are two main problems with this type of experiment. First of all, most organic farmers will admit that it takes time to condition the soil and bring it back from all the chemical inputs it has become dependent upon so my just taking a conventional field and planting it "organically" you won't have taken the time to rebuild the needed organic matter in the soil. And secondly, sometimes organic farming is seen as leave alone farming and that just won't work. You still need to work the crops and do creative farming in order to produce your crop. So, there is one thought I had.

#2. In the debate/argument nobody seems to be citing real world examples. If you are a regular reader of my blog you may remember a post titled, "A Quick Saturday Morning Post..." from December, 1st. In that post I linked to an article about and gave a quick summary of Goldmine Farm which is a 2,000 acre organic farm in Illinois. Maybe that is the guy that we should be talking to?

#3. Now, I don't want to get in over my head here because I eat grain fed beef almost every week, eat lots of corn products, and fill up my vehicles with ethanol (because the word contains my name) every time they need gas ... But, could the problem be that we are trying to use grains like corn and soybeans for to many things that they aren't needed for? Would we need to farm with chemicals in order to get higher yields if we weren't feeding our ruminants corn and we weren't feeding our cars corn? I don't really want to go too deep in this subject because I could easily be shouted down by my own family ... but what if the only grain we grew was for human use? Not cattle use, not car use... Maybe the guy from King Corn who commented earlier on my blog will find this post and chime in on the subject.

Let me point out again ... I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying I have answers, I'm not saying I have experience, I'm not saying much at all ... What I am doing is throwing out a few thoughts for myself and other readers...

What if?

A Quick Saturday Morning Post...

A busy day is ahead so I just thought I would through up a quick little post. Yesterday we finished getting the yard, garden, and shed ready for winter. We did a last little bit of cleaning up in the garden and then rearranged the shed so that we could get to our winter shovels and put up the garden fence and tomato cages. Also, we spent a few minutes doing a last minute upgrade to the chicken pen. We knew a potential ice/freezing rain storm was on the way and we wanted to give them a bit more cover ... so we added a nice blue tarp! Ahh, the wonders of blue tarps. So, as I type this now I look out on the sleet/ice/freezing rain coming down and I'm glad we got the work done yesterday.

I did come across an interesting article yesterday about Jack Erisman and Goldmine Farm in Illinois. It is a case study from the New Farm website that chronicles the farms transition to organic crops. It is a pretty interesting article because the transition spanned quite a few years practically starting in the early 1970's and coming to completion around seventeen years ago. It is a fairly long article, but I encourage you to check it out because it tells about a 2,000 acre family farm that moved from conventional chemical crops to a seven year organic rotation along with a cow/calf herd.

Here are a few interesting excerpts from the article to pique your interest:

• Ultimately, Jack’s education and life experiences had an impact on the way he approached farming. By the end of 1969, he had come to realize more fertilizer and chemicals didn’t necessarily mean more profit. He also began to consider human and agricultural history, and came to realize that humans grew their food for thousands of years without the benefit of synthetic chemicals.


• To this day Jack has never collected a single government payment.


• Indeed, the first years were difficult, but he had a business plan, stuck with it and made a profit.


• Jack talks to many beginning organic farmers, and recommends they put fields going into organic into a small grain—wheat or oats—then into grass/legume cover crop, let the land rest in this state for a couple years and take a hay cutting or graze if some income is needed from the field.


• Jack does not participate in government programs for philosophical reasons. He has built waterways and terraces on his farm without financial assistance from the Soil Conservation Service. “Why should I ask the government to help me with something on my own land that will bring me benefit?" He has gone to government agencies for information, but he would consider it hypocritical to accept money from a program that he doesn’t believe is right.

There is a lot to think about in these little excerpts so I hope you check out the entire article!

Conventional Wisdom...

From Wikipedia:
Conventional wisdom (CW) is a term coined by the economist John Kenneth Galbraith in The Affluent Society, used to describe certain ideas or explanations that are generally accepted as true by the public.

Conventional wisdom is not necessarily true. Many urban legends, for example, are accepted on the basis of being "conventional wisdom". Conventional wisdom is also often seen as an obstacle to introducing new theories, explanations, and as an obstacle that must be overcome by such revisionism. This is to say, that despite new information to the contrary, conventional wisdom has a property analogous to inertia, a momentum, that opposes the introduction of contrary belief; sometimes to the point of absurd denial of the new information set by persons strongly holding an outdated (conventional wisdom) view.

Sometimes I feel like this is the toughest battle a beginning farmer will face. I realize that it probably is not the case because I really haven't experienced very much, but it is an obstacle that needs to be overcome.

While I have not really grown up on a farm, I did spend my weekends on the farm with my dad as a child and have been surrounded with farmers my entire life. As I begin to take steps towards creating a farm and a farm business I am running smack dab into the brick wall of conventional wisdom. In my search to create a farm that is profitable for my family and that will provide an income that we can live on, I kept coming back to alternative/outside-the-box types of agriculture. You know, things like grass-finishing beef, pastured poultry, agri-tourism, u-pick berries, premium priced meats, etc. I was encouraged about what I have read and the conversations that I have had with people that I have talked with. I have had talked with people who are making it work, I have seen toured farms that are doing it or that are almost there, and I have read many success stories.

Yet, whenever I talk with my family I run straight into the conventional wisdom brick wall, and it is starting to hurt. In not as many words this is the answer, "It works for some people, but that is not going to work here." That just kills me! And, what kills me even more is then people suggest doing conventional farming as the answer.

I need to prove that it will be able to work. I have tried passing along books with hi-lighted sections so people don't have to read the whole thing. I have related experiences I have had farm tours. And, I have passed along articles from and about people that are farming outside of "conventional wisdom". But, that is just regarded as "propaganda"!!!!

I am not broken, but I am frustrated. It is obvious that there are farms out there not making money, yet they aren't willing to try something different. I thought that these alternative farming methods and relational direct marketing were really starting to take hold ... in fact I was worried that I had missed the boat. I guess that not everyone is convinced yet, so maybe there is still room for me.

What do you think?