I’ve seen a number of articles, blogs, etc. lately in the animal ag press encouraging producers to stand up verbally to attacks on the industry by animal rights groups.  At the extreme, some of these groups are calling for conversion to veganism.   The vast majority of Americans are not going to become vegans or vegetarians.  When the animal ag industry focuses on fighting the extremes, it tends to allow us to avoid the more pertinent and difficult issues relating to the way large-scale animal agriculture has evolved.

In the name of “efficiency”, many sectors of the industry have gone down a slippery slope of incremental changes in animal husbandry.  Like the frog heated slowly to boiling that will die rather than jump out of the pot, our industry has slowly adopted practices that my agricultural ancestors would be horrified with. 

In many cases, a practice is put into place that incrementally improves “animal welfare” over the existing condition, given the current production situation.  An example is de-beaking chickens:  Through a combination of changes in genetics (commercial chicken strains are more agressive than their flock-living ancestors) and living conditions (higher densities of chickens per square foot), chickens will peck at each other.  It is better to remove the chicks beak than to let them peck each other to death.  And so welfare studies will report that chickens are better off with de-beaking than intact.

If the industry’s current mass-production practices are so defensible, why is it that they are not routinely pictured in educational or promotional material from the very industries that use them?  The egg industry uses images of hens on nests.  The chicken industry pictures chickens that still have their beaks, the milk industry uses images of cows out on pasture. 

Temple Grandin makes a statement in her most recent book (Animals Make Us Human) about why she is still in animal ag.  She also states that if her career had started now, as opposed to when it did, she is not sure she could have seen past the current welfare situation present in many large-scale chicken, hog and feedlot operations.

We, as an industry, have lost the middle ground between animal stewardship and ag-business.  Individual producers are, as a whole, conscientious caretakers of the animals in their charge.  Somehow, in the translation to larger and more efficient production, however, we’ve lost our connection to the subjects of our stewardship, and often to the employees who are involved in that production.  IMHO, this is what our industry needs to address more urgently than preventing a mass conversion to veganism.

 N.B. This post was prompted by “The sin of animal agriculture“, a blog post to which I felt compelled to reply.   

One of the “perks” of participating in farmer’s markets is that I get a healthy dose of contemplation time on the drives to and from the markets several times a week.  Lately, I’ve been thinking about my life’s purpose and how the dream for Wild Type Ranch arose out of a pledge to myself to live life with integrity. 

Early in life, I had very clear career goals, and most would call a success what I did and where I got to before Ralph and I started the ranch together in 2005.  It seems to me now, a greater success is being able to go through daily life inspired and enthused.  The roots of those words; “in spirit” and “in theos” (or “in God”) speak to a way of living where all aspects of life resonate with one’s “life purpose”.  In other words, integrity.

The more I do in a spirit of being “meant” to be doing whatever it is I am doing now, the more gratifying each activity is and the more my daily existance come into alignment with my values.   I am realizing that integrity has a lot more to do with the inspiration and enthusiasm than just being totally honest and up front.

I’ve experienced lots of inspiration and enthusiasm lately; spending time with my extended family, a new horse at our house, a pair of locavore/meet the farmer dinners and increasing demand for what we produce.   

My boys often say that they can “taste the love” in the food we eat, when it is grown or prepared ourselves or by someone we know.  I think there is truth in that:  If your food is produced with inspiration and enthusiasm, how can it not taste better?

 One of the most common questions our ranch gets from new customers is “Is your beef grass-fed?”  We are proud to raise our cattle entirely on pasture with a diet that is always primarily grass and hay.  But, we do not fit the USDA definition of “grass-fed”.  This is a conscious decision on our part.

 The guiding principle behind our management practices at the ranch is a dedication to the welfare of our animals and the quality of our product.  It is a fact of life in our region of Texas that we do not grow lush, green grass year round, year-in and year-out.  We are working hard at the ranch to build our soil and balance our cattle numbers so that we become relatively immune to our increasingly frequent droughts. 

In the meanwhile, we don’t feel it is in the best interest of our cattle, or our beef quality, to allow our cattle to lose weight or suffer due to poor quality or insufficient home-raised forage.  Consequently, we sometimes supplement our cattle with alfalfa hay or a minimal amount of feed that contains grain.  Ironically, the “grass-fed” rules allow supplementation with feeds such as cotton seed hulls and beet pulp but not oats and corn, which cattle would seek out and eat naturally if given the chance.  The problem with feeding grain comes when cattle are fed a diet that is primarily high-energy grain (such as corn) which changes the pH and natural flora of the cow’s digestive system.  This is not the way our pasture-raised cattle are fed.  We give our cattle the best quality of life possible and produce a healthy, high-quality product.

Yes, we have lost an occasional customer because of our philosophy.  It is a small price to pay for the quality of our beef and the welfare of the animals in our care.

Our home ranch is featured in this month’s Edible Austin magazine.  If you like the photos, they are a credit to my husband and partner, Ralph Mitchell.  He’s also the one responsible for doing the steak grilling for the taste-testing we do of each harvest of beef, not to mention the bulk of the ranch work.

This article presents an idyllic view of our life.  In reality, it is hard work almost every day.  It is also the most rewarding thing I’ve ever done in my life.

While I was in Washington D.C. last week, a cab driver from Mauritius, upon hearing that I ranched for a living, asked how many hours a week we worked and what we did for a vacation.  He seemed surprised when I explained we pretty much worked  while the sun was up and that time off the ranch was only by necessity.

I found myself explaining that although we work really hard almost every day, our “vacations” come in small moments that don’t happen during most people’s work life.   Often, in the midst of a stressful event, I’ll be caught by the beauty of a nighthawk chasing insects in the morning sun, or the smell of clover in bloom.  As it mentions in the article, we sometimes turn a routine chore like checking on the cows into a mini romantic interlude.  Honestly, if I had a week with no responsibilities or duties, I wouldn’t want to be anywhere but here on our home ranch.

I wonder how much different the world would be if most people were able to find the same kind of reward in their daily labor.

Now that spring is fully upon us and the produce is really starting to come in, many folks are beginning to think about finding or joining a CSA.  CSA stands for Community Supported Agriculture, and is basically a way of sharing in the farmer’s production year.   The basic idea is that one enrolls or purchases a share in the production of a farm for a year or a season.  In return, you are first in line for the production, but you also share in the risk of crop failures and the ups and downs of the season.  CSAs aren’t for everyone.  Typically you pay an enrollment fee and then receive either a weekly (in the case of produce) or monthly box of products.

We run one of the few meat CSAs in our area of the country.  Our CSAs enable our customers to get their beef at nearly the same price as purchasing an entire half beef, but they get it in 20 pound increments each month.  Since we need to estimate our beef needs 18 months ahead, having a core of CSA members really helps us to plan.  It is also much more efficient for us to divide a beef into 12 equal shares than to sell by the individual cut at the markets (although at least half of our business is still done by the cut).

Local Harvest had a great article on finding and choosing a more traditional garden produce CSA.   When considering whether or not to join a CSA,  there are a few questions that you might ask yourself.

• Do I like to cook and does my schedule allow me to make homemade meals most evenings?
• Will it be fun to vegetables that are new to me?
• How will I handle excess produce? (Do you have a neighbor who would like to get some if you get “behind”?) Feeling bad about wasting food is one of the top reasons former CSA members site for not renewing.
• Am I willing to accept the unknowns involved in “shared risk”?

Shopping around for a CSA is also a good idea.  It might be a good idea to ask if you can talk to some of the existing customers.  Also find out how long the farmer has been doing CSAs.  They can be a bit tricky to manage until the farmer gets the hang of planning.  It’s great to help out someone just starting out, but that should be an informed decision.CSAs can be a great fit and can benefit consumer and producer.

At Wild Type Ranch, our CSA customers usually get the best beef, and are the first ones in line when the supply gets tight.  Good luck and bon appetit!

How can we feed our world healthily, responsibly, ethically and economically?  That question could start many a heated debate.  It’s going to take some creative problem solving and a willingness to take a hard and realistic look at alternatives and the real (including environmental and social) costs of many production systems to create tomorrow’s agriculture.  Russ Parsons of the LA Times voiced many of my thoughts.  I’m going to quote liberally.

On the one side, the hard-line aggies seem convinced that a bunch of know-nothing urbanites want to send them back to Stone Age farming techniques. On the other side, there’s a tendency by agricultural reformers to lump together all farms (or at least those that aren’t purely organic, hemp-clad mom-and-pop operations) as thoughtless ravagers of the environment

I operate on both sides of this debate because we raise and sell registered breeding stock and sell pasture-raised beef and veal at local farmer’s markets.  I hear more than my share of biases and accusations. Here’s some things I think we all need to remember:

Agriculture is a business. Farming without a financial motive is gardening. …Not only do farmers have expenses to meet just like any other business, but they also need to be rewarded when they do good work.

…we also have to keep in mind that our first obligation is to make sure that healthful, fresh food remains plentiful and inexpensive enough that anyone can afford it.

The world is changing, and those who can adapt are the ones who will be successful.

What’s political is also personal. If you believe in something, you should be willing to make sacrifices to support it, even if it’s expensive or inconvenient. Wailing about farmers who use pesticides and then balking at paying extra for organic produce is hypocritical because the yields in organic farming are almost always lower.

Don’t assume that those who disagree with you are evil, stupid or greedy.

It is good to hear a voice for tolerance and moderation.  Consumers have legitimate desires and concerns, even when they don’t have all the facts.  Individual producers, as a whole, are producing our food in the best way they know and really do care about their animals and the environment.  Let’s fix the problem, not the blame.

There was a very nice article about Joel Salatin (made famous to many in The Ominvore’s Dilemma).  There are lots of nice articles about Joel, but what made this one news-worthy to me is that it was picked up in the daily news feed of BEEF magazine.  BEEF is a mainstream beef industry publication. 

The beef industry, as does much of mainstream agriculture, often takes an atagonistic position relative to us “alternative production” types.  I found it encouraging that BEEF posted the article.  One of the things that frustrates me as a agriculturalist is this “either-or” tension between farmers growing for the local market and farmers growing for larger, more mainstream outlets.  Even though we raise registered Angus and Red Angus breeding stock, for sale to mainstream producers, we have on occasion been accused of “damaging the beef industry” because we also sell pasture-raised beef locally.

Kudos to BEEF magazine.  I’ll be interested in watching the comments.

Why does it come as a surprise to the beef industry that consumers are losing faith in products from the big packers?

Through a trade e-newsletter, I came across Tyson’s new Open Prairie Natural Angus branded beef, whose promise “is to produce wholesome beef the natural way”. 

We are obsessed with providing food that is as good as nature intended. We are devoted to our relationships with a passionate generation of farmers and ranchers who raise animals without added hormones or antibiotics while fulfilling an uncompromising commitment to quality and a healthy environment.

We are grateful for the land, and we’re here to pass along the best things it has to offer. We are committed to responsible management of our resources and are hopeful that our practices, from sustainable farming to smart packaging methods, will make a positive difference for years to come.

All this is obviously intended to give the impression of free-roaming cattle, sustainably produced by family farmers.  From the product specifications, however, the only real requirements that make this beef any different than generic are that is is nominally angus (i.e. black-hided) and that it received no antibiotics and apparently no hormone injections.  As far as I can see (and I have e-mailed Tyson for clarification, in case I am mistaken), there are no “sustainable farming” practices required.  In addition, while the cattle may be born and grown for part of their lives on farms and ranches (as are virtually all beef cattle), these cattle are finished in feedlots, just the same as most mainstream beef is.

Given the current structure of costs, subsidies and infrastructure, feedlot production is the cheapest way to produce beef.  My point is not that Tyson shouldn’t be selling feedlot-finished beef, natural or otherwise.  I resent the purposely misleading brand name and promotional material that implies that their feedlot beef is a viable (and lower price) alternative to truly pasture-raised beef produced by ranchers such as ourselves, for whom “respect for all life” and “sustainability” are more than just marketing gambits.

Dear Mom:

At Thanksgiving, it is appropriate to be, well, thankful.  All this past month I’ve tried to start each day with gratitude for some part of my life.  A group of my friends have been sharing their thanks online with each other.

It occurred to me that I ought to be sharing my thanks with the person responsible, in one way or another, for everything for which I have to be thankful: You!

As I prepare for tomorrow’s dinner, I am particularly thankful for the sense of tradition and love of family, with roots reaching deep into my childhood.  This year, it is just Ralph, Esther and I out at the ranch for Thanksgiving dinner.  With both of them being Aussies, the traditions fall completely to me.

There was a time when it would have made me sad to be without my children, siblings and parents tomorrow.  As I’ve gotten older and our family has matured, I know I am surrounded by my family, even across the miles.  As I knead Anita’s crescent rolls, wash cranberries and go out to pick tomatoes and greens from the garden, I can feel the spirits of generations around me.

Tomorrow’s dinner will be all home-grown, home-made or harvested in Texas within the last month.  I particularly want to thank you and Dad for making it possible for us to live the life we are living.  Thank you for developing in me an open mind and encouraging my curiosity.  Thank you for believing in me and for fostering the drive to succeed.  Thank you for helping me to grow up convinced that I could do almost anything if I wanted to do it and worked hard enough.  Thanks for being there when that belief in myself faltered.

Thanks for being a Mom, a Grandma, a role model, an artist, a naturalist and occasionally a goofball.

Although we won’t be together in person to raise a toast tomorrow, I hope you can feel our love as we toast you and all we have to be thankful here in Texas .

THANKS MOM!

n.b. My husband Ralph has been in Australia the last three weeks.  His niece, Esther, and I, have been holding down the fort.  Since I haven’t had the spare time for posting, I thought my letter to Mum might be a good way to get back on track.

Encouraging news (via the American Farmland Trust):  The USDA-ARS (Ag Research Service) is actively researching and supporting on the feasibility and actuality of eating local on the East Coast.

The idea is to ultimately build a map that shows where, along the nation’s East Coast, people would have the opportunity to buy locally produced food — and where they wouldn’t. After all, between 2002 and 2007, some 911,000 acres of farmland along the Eastern Seaboard was taken out of agricultural production to make way for housing, shops and other development.

The reasons for supporting local are many.  (and I’m probably preaching to the choir here); fresher food, supporting local communities and rural ag development,  less dependence on foreign food supplies, less volatility due to fluctuating fuel (transportation) costs.  Not to mention the more intangible support of quality of life through keeping agriculture more local.  I even heard a historical theory recently that the demise of most great civilizations was precipitated by massive urbanization and loss of the ability to be self sufficient in producing food.

One more encouraging sign out of Obama’s ag administration.