There are a lot of actions undertaken by PETA of which most people are unaware.  One of them is buying stock in publicly traded meat companies, such as Tyson. 

According to a story on Meatingplace, PETA owns stock in several companies as part of a campaign to influence these companies through stockholder’s meetings.  As stock prices plunge, PETA has been forced to buy more stock in these companies to maintain the minimum level of at $2000 worth to participate in the meetings.

I’m all for stockholders having a say and holding public companies accountable for their actions.  I’m adamant about humane treatment for all God’s creatures (our ranch’s founding principle is “respect for all life”).  I’m not a fan of PETA.  PETA doesn’t want animals treated humanely, they want to abolish all use of animals and their environment for human sustenance, comfort or entertainment.  I put no trust in an organization that will use any ends to their means, including causing harm to animals and people.

PETA’s participation in these companies will not be primarily for reform, but publicity. 

One of the meta-issues that impacts my life in a surprisingly large number of ways is the growing disconnect between food consumers and food producers. 

As a producer, my business is affected by the views and beliefs of politicians, activist groups and consumers; the vast majority of whom don’t have a realistic idea of what life is like for a typical American farmer or rancher.  Legislation such as California’s Proposition 2 and the EPA’s proposed ‘cow tax’ can have huge impact on food production and producer’s lives. 

As a farmer’s market vendor, I come fact to face with the reality of the  gulf between consumers and producers every week.  Although I am sometimes discouraged by the misconceptions I hear, I am also  heartened by the sincere interest many of my customers have in knowing about their food and in hearing the “real story” of how their food is produced.  

Dan Rather, who came from a ranching background, once told me that he would love to see a series of “farm Disney Lands”; not with rides and cutesified animals, but where people could actually come see how food is produced and that there are real people, real families, producing it. 

Information is out there; encouraging outreach, taking a hard look at activist groups, and presenting the producer’s viewpiont on issues.  I suspect that much of the what is written ends up preaching to the choir, as pro-ag articles tend to be in agricultural-focused, not consumer-oriented venues. 

If you are a producer, be an ag ambassador, know the issues and be willing to discuss them.   If you are a consumer, reach out and ask questions, visit a farmer, keep an open mind.   The best way to bridge the gap is person-to-person.

I don’t have the answer, but it’s an interesting debate.  I’m going to paraphrase heavily from Dot.Earth, because frankly, this is way out of my area of expertise. 

George Washington Carver was of the opinion (back when there were only 2 billion people on earth) that as we depleted the energy stores from ores and oil, we could fully replace them with energy produced on our farms.  But, now that we are pushing 7 billion people, it is unlikely that we can grow enough biofuel AND food to provide our needs without developing every inch of land possible. 

Ultimately, it is sunlight that provides our energy.  It seems logical that the more directly we harvest that sunlight, the more efficient we will be.  Looked at in that way, solar (and wind) power, followed by the stored solar energy in oil and other fossil fuels are arguably more efficient than using plants to convert sunlight to carbon. 

The debate continues:  Some argue that intensified agriculture can cut land use; concentrated agriculture leads to increases in production efficiencies.  Others argue that as more of our crops go to ethanol, more land is pushed into row-crop production that is best left to other uses. 

As a biologist (and therefor completely unqualified to offer an opinion), I believe that any system that has built-in redundancies in its abilities to meet its needs is inherently healthier and better able to adapt to changing circumstances than a system that has only one source.  In other words, as long as we don’t go overboard and become completely dependent on biofuels, having additional options for our energy is probably a good thing.

Happy Cow-loween:  Visit Cattle4Kids.com for some fun pictures, games and information about cattle, 4-H and related topics.  (picture courtesy of Beef Daily’s “Halloween Cowboy Style“)

Halloween Junk Food at Whole Foods: My friend, Dr. Rita-Marie, is fired up (read that po’d) that Whole Foods is pimping white flour, white sugar, food coloring-frosted cookies as Halloween Treats.  So much for “nutrients intact, as nature created” (the supposed Whole Foods motto).

Food Safety Gone Astray: A November ‘teach-in’ about how recent changes in agri-business practices implemented in the name of “food safety” have had harmful environmental effects.  In particular, changes in production after the e-coli-in-spinach outbreak may have negative effect on wildlife with dubious value to food safety.

Field Guide to Organic Labels:  An op-ed piece from Kansas puts organic labels and the decision to buy in perspective.

One of the issues that people often bring up to me as a beef producer is the “footrprint” of eating meat versus a strictly vegetarian diet.  I know that my cattle are raised on land that could not be (or should not be) used for any sort of cultivation, but I’ve been looking for some good research reports on the subject.   I got some leads from friends at the American Farmland Trust.

A study at Cornell University looked at a range of diets in terms of how much of New York’s population could be fed by food produced within the state.  Although a strictly vegetarian diet uses the least total land mass, a diet that includes some meat and dairy is more efficient in terms of total land use and sustainability.  The reason is that fruits, vegetables and grains must be grown on high-quality cropland. Meat and dairy products from ruminant animals are supported by lower quality, but more widely available, land that can support pasture and hay.

The Delta Farm Press cites the same study, but also points out that biotechnology can further reduce the footprint through less chemicals (i.e. bt Cotton) or getting more production from fewer animals (i.e. rBST).

I’ll let you in on a special Halloween secret that has saved many a tussle over too much Halloween candy at our house:  The Tooth Fairy is the Great Pumpkin’s sister. Not many people know this, but the weekend before Thanksgiving, if children leave their uneaten Halloween candy outside the bedroom door, the Tooth Fairy will come take it and replace it with a coin for each piece.  She usually leaves bigger coins for the big stuff! [note of guilty admission; she leaves the most for the stuff Mom especially likes]

Let your kids know ahead of time, and you’d be surprised how much easier limiting their sweet intake is!  My kids make candy cities and candy castles with their haul, but they show remarkable self-control over how much they eat, because they also compete on who has the most savings in their savings accounts.

The New York Times recently published an open letter by Michael Pollan to the next “Farmer in Chief”.  It begins:

It may surprise you to learn that among the issues that will occupy much of your time in the coming years is one you barely mentioned during the campaign: food.

Although we don’t think about it too often, our food production system is inextricably linked with health, climate change, use/dependence on fossil fuels and economics.

Some of my favorite points in the letter:

• Cheap food  that is highly processed, high fat and/or highly sweetened has hidden costs in an increase in partially preventable  illnesses, such as obesity, heart disease, type II diabetes.
• New policies in food subsidies should promote healthy food choices, local economies, diversity and quality over quantity (as measured in calories).
• Conservation is not an either/or proposition relative to food production.  We can produce food in ways that have minimal, or even beneficial effects on the environment.
• Farmland preservation and support of more of our population making a living at agriculture are critical to a healthy food system.  This means training and incentivising young farmers.
• Decentralizing food production will get more people in touch with where their food comes from.  Consumers that really understand food production are less likely to make unreasonable legislative demands and more reasonable diet choices.
• The new first family should establish their own “Victory Garden” on the South lawn of the White House.
• Lunch needs to be an educational part of the school day.  We need to raise kids that can make good food choices and  know how to cook.

We touched on this same topic earlier in this blog.  Most of all, I agree with Pollan that the food crisis paired with our energy costs presents an exceptional opportunity for real reform.

Kids cereals still too sugary.  According to Consumer Reports, 11 top kids cereals have as much sugar as a glazed donut, and two are more than 50% sugar by weight.  Best bets for fiber and low sugar? Cheerios, Kix, Honey Nut Cheerios (all General Mills), and Life (Quaker Oats).

 The Organic Milk Debate: Is big the same as bad? Consumers and activist groups are saying yes.  Do industrial-scale organic farms violate the intentions of the organic laber, or is it the next step in bringing organic to the masses?

Eating Healthy on a Budget:  Lots of links and tips in this post from BlogHer.  I’m still a fan of more fresh, less processed, more home-grown and home-cooked.

Bill of Rights for Young Athletes.  From Arizona Mama.  Not food-safety related, but relevant to all of us who have school-age children involved in athletics or any other myriad of activities.  Hitting home for me in particular is every child’s right (athlete or not) to be treated with dignity.

Yo-Yo powered i-phone charger.  From Ecogeek.  Several times cooler, more convenient, and better for the environment than a solar powered charger.  Not sure you’ll be seeing this one the market any time soon, but it’s a fun idea!

Organic production standards are based on principles such as sustainability, reducing off-farm inputs and environmental impact and minimizing the use of synthetic materials.

Buying food labelled organic would seem to be an easy way to feed your family more healthy food, right?

Many of health benefits of buying organic are not necessarily due to the product being organic itself.  The diet of those for whom organic is a priority is generally healthier than the average American’s.  I speculate that the typical organoisseur’s daily fare contains much less processed food, less sugars (HCFS, cane or otherwise) and more fresh produce and meat.

Misconceptions about organic abound, such as the quote “organic food has no additives or preservatives“.  Organic food is made with organic ingredients, but there are exceptions for ingredients that cannot be sourced organically.  Organic cheese puffs can quite easily contain additives and/or preservatives.

Organic food is not necessarily more nutritious because it is organic.  Organic junk food is still nutrient-poor.  Organic candy is still sugar-laden.  A person can shop at exclusively Whole Foods and still end up with a really poor diet.

I believe fresh traditionally grown food is usually better than processed food of any kind, organic or otherwise.

Organic has its value and its place, but “organic” is not a substitute for healthy food choices.

Does Eating Local really do any good?  Economic Sense makes the case for increased efficiency of production as a viable way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, rather than eliminating whole types of food.  Revisit our earlier post on the same National Geographic article.

The case of the disappearing supermarket:  From Chow.  Critics argue that San Francisco’s trend away from big supermarkets and toward smaller groceries (like Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods) is harmful to those with lower incomes.  Chow maintains “The fact that, in general, high-calorie food is cheaper than fruits and vegetables is entirely unrelated to supermarkets”.

PETA asks Ben and Jerry’s to use human breast milk instead of cow’s milk .  From Barfblog.  Ben and Jerry’s responded by saying, “We applaud PETA’s novel approach to bringing attention to an issue, but we believe a mother’s milk is best used for her child.”

Lead warnings from SmartMama. One in 10 children in the United States has blood lead levels about 5 micrograms lead per deciliter of blood according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Here’s a good update on lead sources in children, including a cool device that tests for lead, cadmium and other heavy metals on toys and surfaces.

Make it a Green Halloween:  From Natural Family Online.  A grassroots movement to brand treats and other items that are child/environment/people friendly.  Think outside the candy-box.

Eco-choice:  Toilet Paper or Bidet?  I’m not going to spoil it by answering here.  You’ll have to go to Green Daily’s blog to find out.