Soil and Food, Post Election

On this day, November seventh, 2012, we know who our president and political leaders will be in America for the next four years. We know that we will have the same cast of characters that we've had since the last election two years ago plus and minus a few faces and we know that Californians' barely declined to endorse a proposition that would label GMO foods. What does this mean for soil and food?

Though I am happy with the results of the national election, we will be carefully watching congresses' ability to make positive change in the fate of our food system. Will they begin to pay attention to the growing call for a healthy, more localized food supply? While there are some who may be inclined to be negative about this prospect, we have some reason to hope.

At a recent screening of Symphony of the Soil in Tokyo, inquisitive citizens asked me what I thought of the Obama administrations' agricultural policies. My answer to them mimics my feelings today.

We live in a nation where monied interests have caught hold of the political system. Though they have not yet figured out how to rule the game in it's entirety, they do enough to damage the functioning of the machine. To this end we live in the only industrialized nation that hasn't labeled GMOs and where the food system is so opaque it's hard for even those of us who study it full time to make heads or tails of it. We have soil loss, nitrogen pollution of our streams and rivers, farm workers who get paid nothing and are poisoned by the chemicals we spray on our food. Birds that sit in cages too small for them to turn around, and cows that have never seen the light of day. A nation that has lost touch of where food comes from and what real food is, and a food system that wants to keep it that way.

But for all of the darkness and suffering in our food system, this election today reaffirms some small signs of hope.

The Obama family has planted an organic garden on the White House lawn, and encouraged the nations' families to do the same. Michelle Obama has traveled the country encouraging school kids to eat more healthily and avoid processed foods in order to avert diabetes and obesity. Kathleen Merigan is the assistant Secretary of Agriculture and has presided over a marked increased in USDA attention to organic and local food- including the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food campaign. There's a cost-share program in the Farm Bill that helps farmers pay the price of transition to organic and government funding for beginner farmers and ranchers. In California, the majority of citizens have now heard the phrase 'GMO'. And though Prop 37 was outspent 5 to 1 by corporate interests who want to keep the veil of secrecy over the industrial food supply- we, the consumers, almost won.

Our office received an email from the Prop 37 organizers this morning that said it perfectly, 'we may have lost the skirmish, but we will win the war'. That's the way we here feel about the election. We didn't get everything that we wanted out of this election, but the nation's direction, given Newtons' first law of motion, will continue to propel us towards a more just, fair, clean, and soil friendly food system if we just keep pushing away.

Link to Original Post

Why I want you to Vote Yes on Prop 37

For all of you who remain undecided on PROP 37 on this years' California ballot. May I strongly encourage you to support it.  

I could go on about my personal feelings about GMOs and the harm they may do, but that's not what Prop 37 is about. Simply put, Prop 37 will allow us to know what is in our food. Period. It's not anti-GMO, it is pro-consumer. It is pro-knowledge. 

Please talk to your neighbors and your friends about it. Find out how it's one of the biggest grass roots efforts on the Ballot for years. I myself was one of the thousands of un-paid volunteers who stood on corners and gathered signatures for it. 

Ignore the adds on TV paid for by the 34 million dollars donated to the anti-Prop 37 campaign by the likes of MONSANTO, DUEPONT, and DOW CHEMICAL. They are only meant to confuse the issue. 

This is a citizen effort, where all government regulation and common sense have failed us. We are THE ONLY industrialized nation that hasn't labeled GMOs. It will not cost the government nor the people of California anything, and it will cost companies very little to actually change their labeling. It's just ink. The only entities that will loose from Prop 37 passing are the companies that sell GMO seeds, the companies that sell pesticides, and the companies that profit from the undemocratic industrial food system and have no interest in change.

What we as the public seek to gain is: knowledge about our food supply and the ability to track how it will effect us and our children. We currently have no way to know what the long term effects of GMOs are- because we don't know where they are. Also: if California passes Prop 37, it is likely the entire US will label GMOs. This is why companies are campaigning so hard against it. Our small window for affecting great change on the nation's food supply is Prop 37. 

Lastly, if Monsanto et. al. are so proud of their GMOs, why wouldn't they want them labeled so people can go out and find them?

Enough said. Please stand with me, send an email or a text to everyone you know, and collectively, let's VOTE YES ON PROP 37.

For promotional materials like bumper stickers, go here.

We are such things as dreams are made on

The Biggest Thing

I had the realization the other day, that I never wanted to be one of those women where the biggest thing they had in their life was getting married. Darned if I didn't damn myself to fate.

The biggest thing I have in my life today is that I'm getting married. My feminista identity is being rocked to the core.

Least ways it's going to be an awesome wedding.

Canning Nerds

Just steamed through another Barbara Kingsolver tome. When I told my girlfriends at a recent dinner that I was finally reading 'Animal, Vegetable, Miracle'- one retorted that I could have written it. As if! (Though I did glow a bit from the compliment on lifestyle.)

I remembered her comment in particular when I got to this quote last night.

"Some moment of every summer finds me all out of canning jars. So I go to town and stand in line at the hardware store carrying one or two boxes of canning jars and lids, renewing my membership in a secret society. Elderly women and some men, too, will smile their approval or ask outright, 'What are you canning?' These folks must see me as an anomaly of my generation, an earnest holdout, while the younger clientele see me as a primordial nerdhead, if they even notice. I suppose I'm both. If I even notice."

Barbara Kingsolver! If you and I weren't twins in some life past- I don't know what. I'm pretty sure though, that I qualify for a bigger primordial nerdhead because you're definitely old enough to be my mom.

Symphony of the Soil: Drought Warnings: Missing the POint

I'm writing for a blog on the Symphony of the Soil (the film I helped produce) website. Here's one of my latest posts... 

For the last ten days all eyes have been on the US corn belt, which has been experiencing a massive drought. Now, don't get me wrong, drought is a big deal, it absolutely effects agricultural livelihoods and waterways, not to mention crops and animals that depend on water. This being said, the commentary that's been raging on about drought bringing higher food prices like today's piece in The Guardian, misses the point.

Will some types of food prices be affected? Yes. This drought will push up the price of chicken, pork, and beef- animals who, when industrially grown, are primarily fed on corn, the principle victim of the drought. The drought will also push up the price of corn oil and corn syrup, which, when chemically re-configured, are found in most processed food.

This is where commentators are failing to take the next step in their analysis. Which types of food prices are going to be affected by this drought? Animal products and processed foods.

The newspapers act as if Americans won't be able to feed themselves without hamburger, sodas (rich in corn-syrup), and a bag of Cheetos. In times of crisis, the talk of the obesity scare and worries about diabetes go straight out the window.

Crisis like these are a one of the few times that we as a society have the chance to re-evaluate our nations' agricultural priorities. What if The Guardian stopped shouting about the growing food crisis and started promoting alternatives? How about heading down to your local farmers' market- which, for the most part won't have been affected by the drought, and buying some carrots- which are probably better for animal health, your health, and the planet in the long run anyway.

-by Jessy Beckett

Farm Bill 2012: Remembering the Soil

Every five years congress debates and reauthorizes a piece of legislation known as the Farm Bill. More aptly nicknamed the Farm and Food Bill by many food activists, this legislation pays for everything from food stamps, to conservation programs, to agricultural research priorities. Originally authorized during the Dust Bowl, and pushed by Hugh Hammond Bennett- the man who started the Soil Conservation Service (known in its present form is known as the NRCS)- the Farm Bill was enacted to serve two primary purposes. First, to support farms across the country in times of economic depression, so that farmers wouldn't starve when prices hit bottom and, secondly (and most important to our cause) to mandate that farmers who received government aid enacted simple soil conservation techniques that would prevent the likes of the dust bowl from happening again.

While we as a nation have clung mightily to the concept of supporting farmers in times of need- we have forgotten Bennett's impetus that saving our soil should be a national priority. Congress has since unlinked the direct payment (commodity-crop subsidy) program from the necessity to conserve the soil- thereby allowing egregious soil mismanagement by farmers who are simultaneously being subsidized by tax payer dollars.

Instead of a hand in glove approach, soil conservation practices have since the mid 80's been encouraged through the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)- which pays farmers to put marginal land out of production, and gives grants to growers to plant hedgerows, wildlife corridors, and beneficiary insect habitat.

This year, everything is set to change. As congress is trying to slim down anything that could be construed as wasteful fat off of the national budget, the direct payment program is on the chopping block- backed by an odd mix of environmentalists and large corn-belt farmers. Good Food movement activists who have, for decades, tried to eliminate the subsidies to the nations largest (and primarily conventional) farms are thrilled the direct payment program looks to be going the way of the Dodo.

However- there's a back door to this years farm bill that will continue the system of subsidizing large conventional farming operations with an increased reckless abandon in terms of conservation. The farm bill that Senate Agricultural Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow has put forth- axes the direct payment plan in favor of a crop insurance subsidy for farmers called the Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) program.  In an open letter from a litany of Food Leaders to congress this week, some of the nation's leading food and farming advocates came together to daylight the bait and switch technique that will serve the same large conventional farming interests as every other farm bill of the past several decades. They write that the proposed $9 billion-a-year crop insurance program comes with minimal societal obligations. Growers collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars in insurance premium subsidies should at least be required to take simple measures to protect wetlands, grassland and soil. Instead, the unlimited subsidies will encourage growers to plow up fragile areas and intensify fencerow-to-fencerow cultivation of environmentally sensitive land, erasing decades of conservation gains.

We agree with them that, It doesn't have to be this way. Any type of subsidy program- whether direct payment or through the form of the back door Agricultural Risk Coverage program needs to mandate soil conservation practices. We need to keep in mind that we are blessed with great soil in this country- and we need to respect that it is the basis of our very productive agricultural system. The internet news and commentary site Politico reported that  There is strong pressure...for Congress to reverse a 1996 law and again require farmers to comply with soil conservation rules or lose the premium subsidies so important to insuring their crop revenues. Stabenow said she has added “sod busting” protections for native prairie grasslands but would oppose any amendment to establish a broader link between crop insurance assistance and the soil conservation rules.

This is an appeal to Ms Stabenow and the rest of congress. Heed Hugh Hammond Bennett's almost century old warning that  “Too many people have lost sight of the fact that productive soil is essential to the production of food” and include stringent soil conservation practices in the design of the ARC program. We disagree with the shift from one type of subsidies to another- but if you are to follow through with subsidizing the crop insurance of famers- please remember the soil!

KUSP Reports: Land Trusts Partner with Farmers to Conserve Agricultural Land

Interviewed for the local radio station about land trusts leasing land to farmers.

KUSP Reports: Environment » Blog Archive » Land Trusts Partner with Farmers to Conserve Agricultural Land

KUSP Reports: Environment » Blog Archive » Making Open Space Leases Work for Farmers

Dogwood Farm on Peninsula Open Space Trust Land

Live Real Farm Bill Video

My sister Hillary and I recently worked with Live Real- a national youth food and farming organization- to produce this video.

The Feminist Bride: The Dress Take 3

Given that my first two stabs at dress shopping were not successful- and stressful to boot- I did not go out of my way to schedule any more dress shopping adventures. I was discouraged by a perceived lack of options. Vintage stuff didn't fit me, retail dresses were  expensive and probably made out of crap from China. I was ready to throw in the towel.

My third dress shopping experience was therefore an accident.

I was having breakfast with my aunt and my cousin in Oakland. My aunt commented that she had recently located my grandmother's wedding dress and asked if I wanted to give it a go. I, rather sheepishly, replied I was game to try anything at this point.

Minutes later she re-appeared, silk dress from 1950s in hand. My grandmother was a practical bride. She wore a short dress, not even white- but a silvery grey color, so that she could wear it again. Of course, as all brides with similar objectives, she never did- and thus it ended up in the dress-up box of my childhood. The next person to wear it was a much younger version of yours-truly, sometime in the late eighties, roughly forty years later. Many times my aunt has told the story of how she salvaged the dress one afternoon after I had spent the day wearing it in my manzanita treehouse.

Although she might have saved it from further disrepair that day, the dress was in pretty bad shape. The lace along the neck was torn in many places, the hem had become undone and was beginning to fray, and there were a myriad of stains covering every major piece of the skirt and bodice. Even if it had fit me it would have needed almost total reconstruction.

What happens next was predictable- given the findings of earlier dress shopping trips. Remember how no dress manufactured before 1960 fit? Same deal. I managed to get my arms and shoulders into the dress, and, delicately, the rest of my body smoshed into it. Seams busting- my aunt and I looked on in her full length mirror. If I had breathed, the dress would have clearly lost its stitching. Fail. I said. My aunt chirped something about it having been a long-shot anyway. We both laughed.

After she had assisted me in smooshing myself back out of the family heirloom, she hung it up, and as we were returning to the breakfast table, she had another inspiration.

Jessy- she buzzed- what about The White Elephant Sale? To which, like any non East Bay native- I replied, the what? The White Elephant Sale she said- it's the Bay Area's largest garage-sale, it's happening today and I have some things to donate.

For those of you who don't know- The White Elephant sale is a huge fundraiser put on by the Oakland Museum Women's Board, a bunch of bad-ass chicks who are in their 60's. It's been put on for decades to support the Oakland Museum. They throw a month long, super organized garage sale in a building larger than the size of your average Costco. It takes a staff of hundreds of volunteers and thousands of people come every year. This year it grossed 1.8 million. Impressive.

An hour later we were in the building. First impression: slightly overwhelming for any second hand goods enthusiast. My aunt and cousin made a bee line for the women's apparel section, breezing past inquisitive volunteers- they clearly new exactly where the rack of wedding dresses was located.

The first dress I saw was just about the most heavenly piece of fabric and string I've come across. I delicately removed it from the end of the rack, along with a couple of other dresses for good measure and entered the large communal fitting room with my cousin and aunt.

Amongst 15 gawking women of all shapes and sizes, all in various states of undress, I began to try on the wedding dresses. Saving the best for last. One was too small by a mile, one made me look like the dreaded cupcake, and another made me look like an 18th century bride- way too many buttons. The heavenly piece came last.

When I put it on, all the chatter in the communal dressing room fell silent. A few women gasped. One matronly looking woman in her 60s in nothing but her bra and panties whispered-  you have to buy that. Others nodded their heads in agreement. Everyone was moved. The choice was made. Me, my aunt, my cousin, and 15 half naked strangers were sure that this was the one.

I left Oakland with a silk and satin hand made wedding dress from who knows when, with embellishments of satin roses, that fits me perfectly. I left Oakland with a wedding dress in a recycled plastic shopping bag, having donated just over a hundred dollars to a cause that I feel good about. I left Oakland with a wedding dress that I'll wear proudly and look great in- values still in tact.