I weaved through gorgeous farm country this past weekend to go mountain biking just north of Columbus. Unlike the Amish country of last week, the landscape here was bordered by magnificent forests and ground that undulated with slopes and valleys. It had just rained so the green was exceptionally vibrant. Big corn country! Stakes stood proudly like soldiers at the end of rows to indicate where a different variety of GMO seed had been planted.I glanced from side to side. Fields alternated between corn and soy bean. From afar it looked beautiful, but the soil could tell a different story. Cruising along, I did a double take. Amidst all the GMO signs was one, lone, little sign that squeaked, "Don't Spray - Organic!" I slowed down on the way home to get a closer look. It was an organic dairy. Most of the acreage was pasture with other fields growing hay. Holstein cows speckled the green slope. Matching red barns and a white farm house sat on the hill. An oasis in a desert.

It got me thinking more about this whole pasture-raised vs grain-fed thing. It's not just about what's better for the cow and the environment. It's also about land management. A lot of land is used to raise cattle conventionally. Land that could be sequestering carbon while raising happier cows. On a CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations), livestock are designated to a dirt feedlot while their feed is grown on a different field perhaps a few hundred miles away. So big is that field that over 55% of the corn produced in the US is for animal feed. Not only are the animals concentrated but so is there waste which creates air and water pollution. And the field that grew their food is GMO and uses buckets of chemicals. The soil quality erodes so more chemicals are needed. In the case of nitrogen fertilizer, soil and plants can only absorb about 30%. The other 70% leeches into ground water. Season after season, these fields are tilled further reducing the soil's potential to sequester carbon.

In pasture-raised, the cows get a diet they were designed to digest, mixed grasses plus loads of room to roam. And barrels of oil didn't need to be used to truck in their feed. Instead, they grow their own food. Talk about "farm to table." The farmer rotates them between fields not letting them overgraze. In their path, they leave manure to fertilize the grass. Soil is kept in tact and never needs to be tilled allowing the soil to reach its full carbon storing potential. Pasture-raised is way less land intensive both in scale and impact. Cattle share the same land upon which their food was grown and it requires no chemical fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides. Keep it simple and manage the land wisely. We might just eat better and mitigate climate change in the process.

My Dad handed me a receipt the other day with the price of two milks circled...one was organic at $4.69/half-gallon and the other was a non-organic brand at $2.39/half-gallon. It demonstrated the dilemma consumers have every day...which do you buy? It's easy to guess that organic is better for you (and better tasting) but at twice the price, is it worth it?

One price wasn't listed, organic milk produced locally. It can be a little harder to source and costs a little extra but it is worth it. It's not Gucci-milk. And it shouldn't necessarily be cheaper because it is local. It's what milk should cost. Getting the lowest price may be okay for what fuels our cars but not what fuels our bodies. Whether it is milk or cookies, we need to be okay with spending a little more on our food. There is a lot of truth in the saying, "you are what you eat." and in the case of cheap food, "you get what you paid for."

Stapled to the receipt was an article my Dad had clipped from the Cleveland Plain Dealer about how conventional, dairy farmers where being impacted by the increase in feed costs, a.k.a. grains, like corn and soy. Higher feed costs drives up the price of milk and other food. If all dairy cows were pasture-raised, farmers wouldn't be as vulnerable to the fluctuations in feed prices. But more importantly, the cows would be eating a diet they were designed for...grass. Cows' digestive systems - with their five stomachs - weren't designed to eat corn and other grains but that's what they are fed because it's typically the cheapest option. Unfortunately, when corn prices go up, it's not as simple as just switching to grass. Farmers are tied to a corn-based system. Converting to a grass-based diet would mean a major capital investment in their operation. Conventional dairy farms don't have ample pasture-land like they use too where cows would graze in one field and be rotated to another to let the grass regenerate. What is ironic about the article is they provided their own solution. They talk about the olden-times when milk was supplied locally from small-scale producers. Hhmmm? Maybe it's time to repeat the past. Not only would local production be fresher but cows could be raised accordingly and the dairy market would support a regional, resilient economy.

Diet and living conditions all play a role in producing a better cup of milk. So it makes sense that grass-fed and pasture-raised cows would produce milk with healthier fat content and more nutrients than their conventionally raised cousins. After all, they have five stomachs for a reason. Studies show that grass-fed cows produce milk that is 60% higher in beneficial fatty acids than conventional milk - fatty acids like linoleic that help to reduce heart disease. And by munching on a diverse variety of field grasses, cows get a mouth-full of nutrients. Each grass is a like a vitamin providing a different nutrient. Strip that diet down to grain and you take away all those vital nutrients. If the cow doesn't get the nutrients, then our milk doesn't get them either. One of the reasons grass-fed cows don't need antibiotics is because they get the antibodies they need from a complex diet of different grasses. Dairy farmers are actually grass farmers first. Or at least they should be.

Here is where it gets tricky, however...it's not as simple as just looking for the organic label. As demand for organic milk has increased, larger, organic dairies have emerged. They are starting to resemble conventional operations where cows get little or no access to pasture which leads to diets supplemented with grain, but organic grain. Rest easy though, the cows are treated humanely and without the use of antibiotics or bovine growth hormones. Phew! Fortunately, the USDA has begun to tighten the guidelines and require that all organic, dairy cows receive a minimum of 120 pasture-days/year.

So while organic milk is better for you, you still need to ask the question, "where did my milk come from?" Advocating for small-scale food production that supplies a regional system will make it easier for farmers to use organic methods like rotational grazing and easier for consumers to have a closer relationship to their farmers. It makes both parties more accountable. Doing a little research does require that consumers take a more active role in their food purchases. We wouldn't buy a car without researching it first or shopping around to make sure we get the best price. Why should our food be any different.

See the August 3rd post for the introduction to the book blog.

The essay by Gene Logsdon, “What Comes Around,” is the reason I wanted to do the book blog. When I first picked up the book, "The New Agrarianism," I opened right to Gene’s chapter. One word in particular jumped off the page, “Malabar.” I immediately recognized the name. As I scanned the paragraph, the context confirmed it was the same Malabar I remembered from my childhood. Malabar is a the Ohio farm of 20th century, Pulitzer Prize winning novelist, Louis Bloomfield, who wrote of pastoral life and land stewardship. I visited this idyllic farm as a child with my family. It was in the height of my horse infatuation where all I wanted to do was ride horses and have one of my own. I must have been 13 or 14 years old at the time and the place reminded me of something out of Little House on the Prairie. I decided if I ever got a horse, I would name it Malabar. Seeing that word again for the first time in over 25 years, hooked me and I began to read.

Gene’s essay is a reminder that, "what comes around, goes around." In the case of large-scale, industrial agriculture, there is a reason they call it unsustainable…because it cannot endure. As Gene describes, its cumbersome and rigid operations cannot adapt fast enough to climate change, consumer demand and economic fluctuations. It will eventually give way to smaller scale farming which can. Old, and new, farming practices are being refined which enables a farm to invest in sustainability.

Helping us to transition are the “new” agrarians…hybrid households where one spouse works a subsistence farm while the other works an urban job as the main bread winner. People are gaining a sense of place and an understanding for food sovereignty. They want to become better connected to the land by taking an active role in where their food comes from and its secured availability. These backyard farms could turn into small-scale community farms producing enough meat, dairy and vegetables for area neighbors and perhaps a region.

Parting Thought…Gene really made me sit up with this statistic. Get this…If just 40% of Americans significantly reduced their meat consumption, the factory farm system would cease. It would be put out-of-business. Out-of-business!!! We can do this people!!!

Using "organic" as a buying guideline is definitely smart but is not a panacea. Many foods are grown or raised using organic practices but lack certification due to cost, a single criteria or principle. Yet another reason to ask questions about your food and where it comes from. You could be missing out on some really tasty food. Here is a story of some happy cows who are better than organic but don't get the fancy name...

I love when you are talking with someone and you unexpectedly learn something about them you never knew. Yesterday, I was talking to one of my former clients with the Wild & Scenic Film Festival. Up till then, Mary was just the executive director of the organization hosting the tour venue in Salmon, ID. Now, I know her as a cattle rancher growing pasture-raised beef. I picked her brain for about 30-minutes...

Mary and her husband, Lowell, are part of a 120-ranch cooperative called Country Natural Beef. It is one of the nation's leaders in "natural" beef production and is widely available in most Whole Foods in the western United States as well as several, independent, food stores. Find a store near you, click here. Country Natural Beef ranchers truly own the meaning of "natural." Where otherwise, the term has been sadly diluted by giant food marketers trying to capitalize on this word's wholesome disposition. Ranchers of Country Natural Beef (CNB) collectively agree on a set of guiding principles which ensure all members raise their cattle humanely - start to finish, using no hormones or antibiotics and with respect to the environment. A big hurdle for most beef producers is finding a feedyard and slaughterhouse where their cattle can live out their lives with the same core values in which they were raised. As a cooperative, CNB can pull their buying power and select the best finishing practices for their cattle. Most cattle get sold to a feedlot at 9-months of age. CNB cows stay in pasture until they are 14-18 months reducing their feedyard time to only 90-days. During those final days, conditions are clean and spacious with access to fresh water and a balanced diet of grain, alfalfa, hay, potatoes and peas versus corn and soy. The night before they are harvested, they enjoy a good nights rest and are put down with as little stress as possible extending them the honor they deserve for the life they are offering.

Back on the farm, the average acreage for one CNB cow and its calf is 70 acres of grassy fields. It is just one indication of how happy these lives are. And here is where Country Natural Beef misses the "organic" mark...In summer, cattle graze on miles of Forest Service land in the high mountains. Mary and Lowell's cattle splendor on 200,000 acres making it nearly impossible to verify that much acreage for organic certification. With certification comes compromise. And Country Natural Beef isn't willing to compromise by limiting their cattle's range. Only the best!

Parting Note...While on my way to a bike ride this morning, I was listening to a NPR report about the salmonella outbreak in Cargill's ground turkey. It was interesting to learn that antibiotics served in conventional ranching are not prescribed as much to ward off disease and keep our food safe as they are to help the cows grow faster. Yikes! Why so many food born disease then?...Strains of salmonella, like Heidelberg in the Cargill case, are becoming resistance to antibiotics. But here's the real scary part...proponents of continued antibiotic use suggest that livestock take one type of antibiotic and humans another so people don't become immune to antibiotics when we need them. Am I the only one who thinks this sounds crazy? How about we look at the way we are raising the cattle instead of slapping band-aids?

Skull & Crossbones aren't what I really picture when I think of sweet strawberries or any happy field of green for that matter.

I snapped this photo last week while on my agroecology course at UCSC. We were passing a monocrop of conventioanly grown strawberries in Salinas, CA. We were laughing at the absurdity but really, there isn't anything funny at all about this picture. And it's not just strawberries that we need to be worried about when it comes the synthetic pesticides and chemical fertilizers used in conventional farming methods.

At no point in my food's life cycle should I be told that I can not touch it. Even if it could be proven safe by the time it reaches my plate, what about all the environmental impacts like soil degradation and water quality including the field workers, farmers and applicators who are are subjected to these chemicals. Not to mention the amount of fossil fuels used to create these pesticides and fertilizers. It's bad enough we put fossil fuels in car, it has no business being applied to my food. Ick!

A friend forwarded me an article from The New York Times this weekend by Mark Bittman entitled, "Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables." Then today, Grist.org's Tom Laskawy commented on the article in his blog post. Thought I would chime in with my two cents...

The title pretty much sums it up...tax junk food and use the money to subsidize "healthy" food, namely vegetables. We need more people thinking along these lines so we can have a serious discussion about all the ways we can get out of the food fight we're in. But...I've got a few questions for Mark and Tom. Let's start with the term, "healthy." Its meaning is pretty broad. Does it mean just more fruits and vegetables or does it mean fruits and vegetables grown sustainably? Big difference, because one uses the current industrial model of growing food conventionally and the other requires supporting more small-mid sized farms to grow food organically.

It seems that taxing and cutting taxes is the solution to just about every economics discussion. That's an arm-chair economists opinion but probably not too far off. And whenever the word "tax" gets thrown on the table, people freak out and start a tug-of-war...tax good, tax bad, tax good, etc... All I know is, the conversation to change how we grow and produce food should not start with "tax." It just gets everyone hot and bothered and they forget what it is we are really trying to do...make healthy, quality food accessible and available which will improve not only one's personal health but that of their community. Taxing could raise some serious coin for the food movement but it should be a tactic not a strategy. A tax discussion will just bring out the boxing gloves making it a political debate when it is really one of food justice and social justice otherwise known as food sovereignty. My other thought is...would the tax be charged to the consumer or would the manufacturer be taxed thus increase the price of the product to cover the tax? When consumers are asked to pay more, like with gas prices, there is an initial slump but after enough times goes by, people just get use to the new price and go about their business. We could tax the food but would it really change buying behavior?

Finally, by the time a bill was passed which allowed a tax on sugary and processed foods, we could have redesigned the entire food system and begun to be implement real change. Let's take a whole systems approach versus using old politics to solve the problem.

As we are enlightened to the things wrong in our food system, it is easy to get discouraged. Each time we learn something new - the life of battery caged hens, excess nitrogen fertilizer in the soil - we realize how many others need to learn the same thing. You start feeling like no one is doing anything when there is so much to be done. If you just read the food books and watch ag movies, your despair will fester and you'll be that person in the corner at the party who can't talk about anything else but how messed up everything is spewing facts and figures to prove a point. Most of those statistics are probably accurate and we really do have a long way to go before major progress is made but noticeable dents are being made and most are right under our nose...

I would wager to say that in most US cities there is some food movement afoot whether bubbling below the radar in backyard gardens or fully fledged farm coalitions, outdoor markets and festivals. We foodies aren't alone. There are many of us. To start making a difference, you often don't have too look much further than in your own community. It might be a core group of gardeners sharing ideas or regional publications promoting local farms, food artisans and other area resources. In many areas, there is a franchise publication called Edible which uses the surname of its region like Edible Reno/Tahoe, Edible Austin, etc...They profile food producers, restaurants, classes, farmers markets, etc... It is a great resource for getting connected to your foodshed and it's FREE! Some areas are branding their growing region to generate interest in local and organic, i.e. Nevada County Grown. Start poking around. The more folks who participate, the more vibrant each local food movement will become. Let's work from the inside out to change things (local to state to national) and soon one food movement will be bumping up against a food movement in another town. Access to quality, ethical food will become the rule not the exception.