Less=More Coalition Offers Sustainable Livestock Farmers Easy Access to Subsidy Info

Media Contact: Gail Philbin, gail.philbin@sierraclub.org, 312-493-2384

Lansing, Mich.— As part of its effort to help level the playing field for sustainable livestock farmers in Michigan, the Less=More Coalition has made available information about taxpayer-funded Farm Bill conservation subsidies in one place online at http://tinyurl.com/EQIPsubsidies.

“Farmers are busy folks, and sustainable farmers often lack the kind of outreach and support for farm program applications that large-scale industrial farm operators receive,” said Sandy Nordmark, vice president of the Michigan Farmers Union, which is a member of Less=More. “We aim to make it as easy as possible for them to access funding possibilities for their conservation practices by putting all the information they need in one cyber-location.”

Less=More is a sustainable agriculture coalition launched earlier this year to address the inequity of Farm Bill subsidy distribution in Michigan and how the system favors polluting factory farms over safe, sustainable livestock farms at the expense of the environment and public health

The Less=More web link connects farmers with basic information about 2013 Farm Bill subsidies in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) in Michigan. It includes a listing of the more than 100 conservation practices funded by EQIP and the amount of money available for each practice as well as the most current EQIP application.

“This information is available on the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service Michigan website, but it can be tricky to find if you don’t know where to look,” said Lynn Henning, a Water Sentinel for the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter, another Less=More coalition member.  “We make it as simple as possible. A farmer can sit down and get an idea of what’s out there for him or her with a click or two of the mouse.”

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the agency that distributes taxpayer-funded subsidies through a State Conservationist in Michigan, is mandated to distribute 60 percent of the EQIP funds to livestock operations. Currently, most go to support Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), also known as factory farms, in Michigan.

Of the 104 EQIP subsidies available in 2013, 53 are practices identified by the NRCS as being applicable to farmers with organic certification, according to Henning. These include such activities as brush management, grassed waterways, fencing and filter strips.

Although about half of the practices are listed as organic, the reality is that the biggest EQIP subsidies go to support practices dealing with waste -- handling, storage, separators, transfer systems and biodigesters -- that are specific to large-scale operations with thousands of animals that generate millions of gallons of manure. For example, a factory farm can apply for and receive more than $43,000 for a solid/liquid waste separation facility, and anaerobic digesters fetch anywhere from roughly $300-$600 per animal unit, which translates to a substantial sum for an operation with thousands of animals.

“Essentially, factory farms take a perfectly good natural material – animal manure — and concentrate it until it becomes an environmental issue and then they receive federal money to address the problem they’ve created,” said Anne Woiwode, Sierra Club Michigan Chapter director. “Meanwhile, sustainable farmers who work with nature and have appropriate numbers of animals for the amount of land available have little need for funds to address such problems, but they—and consumers--would benefit greatly from receiving more support for their sustainable practices.”

In addition, this taxpayer money doesn’t always solve an operation’s underlying environmental problems, according to a recent report by Less=More, Restoring the Balance to Michigan’s Farming Landscape, which demonstrates that many polluting factory farms have continued to receive taxpayer money. The report found that 37 Michigan factory farms cited for environmental violations and unpermitted discharges over the 15 years ending in 2011 were awarded nearly $27 million in various Farm Bill subsidies between 1995 and 2011.  Of these operations, 26 jointly racked up fines and penalties of more than $1.3 million for their share of these violations.

“Taxpayers are providing millions of dollars in government subsidies to industrial mega-farms in Michigan that generate pollution and cause health risks while undermining sustainable farms at the same time,” said Woiwode. “This happens at a time when more and more Michigan consumers are seeking safe, healthy, local sources of meat, dairy, poultry and eggs at farmers markets, stores, restaurants and community supported agriculture.”

Less=More is a coalition of organizations engaged in various aspects of our food system that seek to level the playing field for sustainable farmers by addressing the inequity of how taxpayer subsidies are distributed in Michigan. It includes: Beery Farms of Michigan, LLC, the Center for Food Safety, Crane Dance Farm, LLC, Environmentally Concerned Citizens of South Central Michigan, Food & Water Watch, Greater Grand Rapids Food Systems Council, Groundswell Farm, Humane Society of the United States, Michigan Farmers Union, Michigan Voices for Good Food Policy, Michigan Young Farmers Coalition, Sierra Club Michigan Chapter and Socially Responsible Agricultural Project.

Restoring the Balance to Michigan’s Farming Landscape and other information about Less=More is available at www.MoreforMichigan.org.

LESS=MORE

Less=More seeks to level the playing field for sustainable humane livestock farmers by tackling the way taxpayer subsidies give an unfair advantage to polluting factory farms in Michigan.To learn more about this revolutionary new campaign, visit MoreforMichigan.org.

Now you can support Less=More with a secure online donation.  Simply click on the link below. 

CLICK HERE TO MAKE AN ONLINE DONATION TO Less=More!

Thank you!

Volunteers Needed for Less=More Farmers Market Blitz This Summer!

The Less=More Coalition Needs Your Help!

The Less=More Coalition is looking for volunteers to help collect petition signatures at farmers markets around the state this summer. We need help harnessing the voice of concerned consumers like you who want to help even the playing field for sustainable agriculture in Michigan by sending a message to Garry Lee, the Michigan State Conservationist for the Natural Resources Conservation Service, to stop using taxpayer subsidies to support polluting factory farms.

Lee has the power to reapportion how Farm Bill subsidies are distributed, and right now, they heavily favor massive animal factories that cram thousands of animals into warehouses and pollute our water and air. (If you haven't already, click here to send him an email.)

If you have an hour or two to spare this summer, spend it at your local farmers market getting signatures for our petition! A small amount of your time can yield big benefits for sustainable farming in Michigan. For details, contact gail.philbin@sierraclub.org. Thank you!

Consumer Reports finds superbugs in turkey

Consumer Reports finds superbugs in turkey Our new study found more evidence that raising food animals on antibiotics can impact the effectiveness of our life-saving drugs. If you want antibiotics to work when you need them, tell Congress to stop the mass feeding of drugs to animals.

Consumer Reports’ latest investigation confirms that all those antibiotics being fed to our food animals domatter.

Released today, our study found meat from conventionally raised turkeys – which can be routinely fed antibiotics –had bacteria resistant to more drugs than birds raised without antibiotics. Since one way superbugs can spread to people is through raw meat, it’s crucial you know these findings.

It's important to cook turkey thoroughly, and we have tips to help you avoid antibiotic-raised meat. But just avoiding the problem isn’t the solution. Industrial food producers must stop playing this dangerous game with our life-saving drugs – and a bill has been introduced to do just that!

Email Congress to stop mass feeding of antibiotics to food animals, and check out our new investigation and tips.

Eighty percent of antibiotics sold in the U.S. are used by beef, pork and poultry producers so healthy animals can plump up faster and tolerate crowded, unsanitary conditions. This daily use of antibiotics kills off those bacteria vulnerable to drugs, leaving immune ‘superbugs’ to flourish and spread to animals, the environment, and eventually, us.

We’re tackling this problem from every angle. Consumer Reports is testing food for these bacteria, and making sure labels mean what they say so you can shop smart. We’re backing a bill in Congress to end the routine use of antibiotics on food animals. It would preserve our antibiotics by phasing out mass-feeding of drugs to food animals, restricting their use to sick animals.

And we’re on the ground asking Trader Joe's – one of the nation’s most progressive grocers that has already demonstrated care for customers' health on other issues – to lead the way and stop selling meat raised on drugs.

Tell Congress to save our antibiotics for when we need them. Get this bill moving.

Ask your friends and family to join you in taking action – this is a problem we can fix if we all demand action.

Sincerely,
Jean Halloran, Consumers Union
Policy and Action from Consumer Reports

Less=More Provides Subsidy Info for Sustainable Farmers

Less=More is a coalition of advocacy groups, farmers and consumers that supports sustainable agriculture in Michigan. It seeks to level the playing field for sustainable livestock farmers so they can compete with factory farms by tackling inequitable farm subsidies in Michigan.

 

To this end, the Less=More coalition is making information available to sustainable farmers about Farm Bill subsidies that might be applicable to their needs. Below are links to information about the 2013 EQIP subsidies in Michigan.  For questions, contact lynn.henning@sierraclub.org.

 

Michigan EQIP General Information ( May 17th deadlines for some)

http://www.mi.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/eqip.html

Listing of all Michigan EQIP Practices Eligible for Funding in 2013

http://tinyurl.com/c9ss55o

EQIP Application Form

http://forms.sc.egov.usda.gov/efcommon/eFileServices/eForms/NRCS-CPA-1200NRCS-CPA-1200.PDF

Less support for polluting factory farms means a more sustainable Michigan. For details, visit MoreforMichigan.org.

Two stories in the news about factory farms that you need to see

Spring Rain, Then Foul Algae in Ailing Lake Erie--from the NY Times, an article about the runoff from industrial ag that is choking the life out of Lake Erie

 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/15/science/earth/algae-blooms-threaten-lake-erie.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Ag Gag': More States Move to Ban Hidden Cameras on Farms

---Mainstream TV news coverage of the vital issue of our right to know what goes on behind barn doors

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/states-move-ban-hidden-cameras-farms/story?id=18738108

Spring Rain, Then Foul Algae in Ailing Lake Erie

Algae blooms, like this one in 2011, are threatening Lake Erie.

By MICHAEL WINES

Published: March 14, 2013

TOLEDO, Ohio — For those who live and play on the shores of Lake Erie, the spring rains that will begin falling here soon are less a blessing than a portent. They could threaten the very future of the lake itself.

Lake Erie is sick. A thick and growing coat of toxic algae appears each summer, so vast that in 2011 it covered a sixth of its waters, contributing to an expanding dead zone on its bottom, reducing fish populations, fouling beaches and crippling a tourism industry that generates more than $10 billion in revenue annually.

The spring rains reliably predict how serious the summer algae bloom will be: the more frequent and heavy the downpours, the worse the outbreak. And this year the National Weather Service says there is a higher probability than elsewhere of above-normal spring rains along the lake’s west end, where the algae first appear. The private forecaster Accuweather predicts a wetter than usual March and April throughout the region.

It is perhaps the greatest peril the lake has faced since the 1960s, when relentless and unregulated dumping of sewage and industrial pollutants spawned similar algae blooms and earned it the nickname “North America’s Dead Sea.” Erie recovered then, thanks to a multibillion-dollar cleanup by the United States and Canada that became a legendary environmental success story.

But while the sewage and pollutants are vastly reduced, the blooms have returned, bigger than ever.

Once, fisheries and sports anglers pulled five million walleye from the rejuvenated lake every year. Today the catch is roughly one-fifth that, the Environmental Protection Agency says. Commercial fisheries’ smelt catch is three-fifths of past levels. The number of charter fishing companies has dropped 40 percent. Sport fish like walleye and yellow perch are deserting the lake’s center and moving shoreward in search of oxygen and food.

“We’ve seen this lake go from the poster child for pollution problems to the best example in the world of ecosystem recovery. Now it’s headed back again,” said Jeffrey M. Reutter, who directs the Sea Grant College Program at Ohio State University.

The algae problem is hardly isolated. Similar blooms are strangling other lakes in North America and elsewhere, including Lake Winnipeg, one of Canada’s largest, and some bays in Lake Huron.

The algae are fed by phosphorus, the same chemical that American and Canadian authorities spent billions to reduce — for good, they believed — in the 1970s and ‘80s. This time, new farming techniques, climate change and even a change in Lake Erie’s ecosystem make phosphorus pollution more intractable.

Like plants, algae thrive on a phosphorus diet. Decades ago, some 64 million pounds of phosphorus flowed into Lake Erie each year from industrial and sewer outfalls, leaky septic tanks and runoff from fertilized lawns and farms.

The United States and Canadian governments responded by capping household detergent phosphates, reining in factory pollutants and spending $8 billion to upgrade lakeside sewage plants. Phosphorus levels plunged by two thirds, and the algae subsided. But in the mid-1990s, it began creeping back.

“2002 was the last year that we didn’t have much of a bloom,” said Thomas Bridgeman, a professor at the Lake Erie Center at the University of Toledo. “2008, ’09 and ’10 were really bad years for algal blooms.

“And then we got 2011.”

2011 was the wettest spring on record. That summer’s algae bloom, mostly poisonous blue-green algae called Microcystis, sprawled nearly 120 miles, from Toledo to past Cleveland. It produced lake-water concentrations of microcystin, a liver toxin, that were 1,200 times World Health Organization limits, tainting the drinking water for 2.8 million consumers.

Dead algae sink to the lake bed, where bacteria that decompose the algae consume most of the oxygen. In central Lake Erie, a dead zone now covers up to a third of the entire lake bottom in bad years.

“The fact that it’s bigger and longer in duration is a bad thing,” said Peter Richards, a senior research scientist at the National Center for Water Quality Research at Heidelberg University in Ohio. “Fish that like to live in cold bottom waters have to move up in the thermocline, where it’s too warm for them. They get eaten, and that tends to decrease the growth rates of a lot of the fish.”

Last spring, the rains arrived amid a record drought, and the algae retreated to waters near Toledo. “We had two extremes in two years,” Mr. Bridgeman said. “The lake responded exactly the way we thought it would.”

But no one hopes for a drought. To cut phosphorus levels this time, scientists say, the habits — and the expensive equipment — of 70,000 farmers along the Erie shore must change. Most of the phosphorus that feeds algae these days comes from farmland.

Much of the phosphorus originates near Toledo, where the Maumee River completes a 137-mile journey and empties into the lake’s shallow western basin.

The Maumee watershed is Ohio’s breadbasket, two-thirds farmland, mostly corn and soybeans. Farming there is changing radically, said Steve Davis, a watershed specialist with the United States Agriculture Department’s Natural Resource Conservation Service.

Plowing is declining; 55 percent of farmland is planted using anti-erosion methods promoted by the Resource Conservation Service, like no-till farming, in which seeds are inserted into small holes in unplowed ground. Fertilizing is now contracted to companies that cast pellets onto the bare ground from trucks, or to “factory farms” that spray liquefied animal waste on their cropland.

Mr. Davis has analyzed his watershed almost to the last cornstalk. Animal waste makes up 14 percent of all fertilizer. The rest is fertilizer pellets, 48 pounds per acre. In past days, most pellets sank into plowed soil and stayed there. Now, rain and snowmelt wash an average 1.1 of those 48 pounds off unplowed soil. Much winds up in the Maumee, then in Lake Erie.

The Maumee supplies only about 5 percent of Erie’s water, but half its phosphorus. And while algae struggle to digest ordinary phosphorus — only about 30 percent gets taken up — fertilizer phosphorus is designed for plants to use instantly.

Two other recent changes make matters still worse.

One is the zebra mussel, a foreign invader that has dominated Erie since its discovery in 1988. Millions of mussels feast on nontoxic green algae, removing competitors to the toxic Microcystis algae and decimating the base of the food chain that supports Erie’s fish. Then in a vicious cycle, mussels excrete the algae’s phosphorus, providing the Microcystis a ready-made meal.

The other is climate change. Only heavy rains wash fertilizer off farmland, and since 1940, Mr. Richards said, heavy spring rainstorms have increased by 13 percent.

The Maumee’s phosphorus can be limited, Mr. Davis says, but only if farmers change their approach. More soil testing and new G.P.S.-guided machinery can ensure that crops receive the minimum fertilizer they need. Other new equipment can put fertilizer in the ground during planting instead of pellets being broadcast in the winter. Leaving land fallow beside streams reduces runoff.

The catch is that fertilizing is already efficient: that wasted 1.1 pounds is but 2 percent of all pellets spread on Maumee-area farms. “When you’re only losing a pound per acre,” Mr. Davis said, “how do you cut it to a half?”

Take the Crap Out of Farm Subsidies!

Want to help level the playing field so sustainable farmers can compete with factory farms? Join the Less=MoreCoalition and its fight to end subsidies to polluting factory farms! 

Show your support by signing up at: http://tinyurl.com/LessIsMoreCoalition

To learn more about Less=More, visit MoreforMichigan.org.

Last Call at the Oasis and Lynn Henning at Allegan Theater March 10

The 2nd Annual Allegan Green Film Fest runs throughout March, and on March 10, they're featuring Last Call at the Oasis, a documentary about our dwindling clean water resources that features the Michigan Chapter's Lynn Henning!  Details below.  Lynn will be at the screening to answer questions afterwards. Please join us!                           

Last Call at the Oasis
Sunday, March 10,  4 p.m.Allegan Regent Theatre, 211 Trowbridge St., Allegan
Admission: $5
RSVP to mary@honorhealnurture.com

Last Call at the Oasis presents a powerful argument for why the global water crisis will be the central issue facing our world this century. Illuminating the vital role water plays in our lives, the film exposes the defects in the current system and depicts communities struggling with its ill-effects. Featuring activist Erin Brockovich and such distinguished experts as Peter Gleick, Alex Prud’homme, Jay Famiglietti and Robert Glennon, it also showcases the work of Michigan farmer and Sierra club activist Lynn Henning.

For a complete listing of films in the Allegan Film Fest, visit www.honorhealnurture.com.

Panel Featuring Food Fight Author Dan Imhoff to Explore Disconnect in Our Food System Mar. 21

Michigan consumers seeking safe, locally-grown, healthy food at farmers markets and other outlets are currently forced to subsidize corporate agricultural giants through taxpayer subsidies. An expert panel sponsored by a new sustainable agriculture coalition, Less = More, will address the situation and opportunities to change the food system and the federal Farm Bill to better serve consumers.

Nationally known author and farmer Daniel Imhoff joins other farmers and experts to explore the disconnect in our food system and how to begin to create a fair playing field for sustainable livestock farmers in the discussion, Less=More: Restoring the Balance to Our Food System.  The event is free and open to the public.  RSVP by Mar. 18 to gail.philbin@sierraclub.org or 312-493-2384.

Most industrial livestock ‘farms’ operate like a factory and confine animals in warehouses or crowded feedlots with no vegetation. Although they generate millions of gallons of waste, these facilities receive substantial taxpayer subsidies even when they pollute the water, air and land through poor disposal of that waste, violating state and federal environmental laws. Meanwhile, farmers with good practices that produce healthy, clean food and don’t harm our natural resources struggle to survive.

Less=More: Restoring the Balance to Our Food System will look at the economic, environmental and health impacts of polluting livestock factories and how taxpayer subsidies perpetuate their existence. The panel, hosted by a new sustainable agriculture coalition called Less=More, will also look at ways to address the unfair advantage these subsidies give factory farms over sustainable livestock farms, including recommendations from the coalition’s recently released report, Restoring the Balance to Michigan’s Farming Landscape, available at www.MoreforMichigan.org.

          

Panelists

Daniel Imhoff, Co-founder of Watershed Media and an author and farmer—Imhoff will discuss the economics of factory farms and the Farm Bill. He is an author, publisher and small-scale farmer in California who has focused for more than 20 years on issues of food, agriculture and the environment. Co-founder of Watershed Media and Wild Farm Alliance, he has written many articles, essays, and books, including Food Fight: The Citizen's Guide to the Next Food and Farm Bill; CAFO: The Tragedy of Industrial Animal Factories, and Farming with the Wild.

Gail Hansen, Senior Officer and Staff Veterinarian, Pew Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming, Pew Charitable Trusts—Hansen looks at the role factory farms play in antibiotic resistance and other health impacts. Hansen served as the state epidemiologist and state public health veterinarian for 12 years with the Kansas Department of Health and Environment where her work centered on infectious diseases and developing public health policy. Prior to that, she was a principal investigator and coordinator of blood borne pathogen studies at the Seattle and King County Department of Public Health. She has served on or chaired numerous state and federal infectious disease committees, served as a scientific advisor for national and international conferences and is adjunct faculty at Kansas State University College of Veterinary Medicine. 

Joe Maxwell, President of Outreach and Engagement at The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)—Maxwell examines the lives of animals and farmers in the factory farm system. He grew up on a family farm in the small town of Rush Hill, Mo., the son of a hard-working family farmer. In his role at The HSUS, he works directly with family farmers, helping them organize into producer groups to open direct markets for their own products. Maxwell is a former president of the Association of Family Farmers, an organization associated with the Agriculture of the Middle Project, and a member of the Organization for Competitive Markets and the Missouri Farmers Union.

Lynn Henning, Sierra Club Water Sentinel—Henning will discuss the relationship between environmental pollution and farm subsidies in Michigan. She received the 2010 Goldman Environmental Prize for North America for more than a decade’s worth of work tracking environmental abuses at factory farms around her small family farm in south central Michigan. Her painstaking research is the basis of the Less=More report, Restoring the Balance to Michigan’s Farming Landscape. She’s been featured in O Magazine and the 2013 water documentary Last Call at the Oasis and appeared on Real Time with Bill Maher in 2012.

Maynard Beery, Beery Farms of Michigan-- Beery raises grass-fed beef and goats in Mason, MI and will give the perspective of a sustainable livestock farmer on how the lopsided subsidy system affects his ability to compete with industrial livestock operations. A former large-scale livestock confinement operator, he switched to humane, environmentally friendly farming more than a decade ago. He uses the Argentine grazing style of a diverse array of perennial grasses and summer-winter annuals to meet year-round forage needs of the animals, and his farm is in transition to organic certification.

##

The Less=More Coalition is a group of organizations engaged in various aspects of our food system who seek to level the farm field for sustainable farmers in Michigan. They include: Beery Farms of Michigan, LLC, the Center for Food Safety, Crane Dance Farm, LLC, Environmentally Concerned Citizens of South Central Michigan, Food & Water Watch, Greater Grand Rapids Food Systems Council, Groundswell Farm, Zeeland, The Humane Society of the United States, Michigan Farmers Union, Michigan Voices for Good Food Policy, Michigan Young Farmers Coalition, Sierra Club Michigan Chapter and Socially Responsible Agricultural Project.  Learn more at www.MoreforMichigan.org.

Eating less meat would benefit the nutrient cycle, Planet Earth Online, Feb 18, 2013

by Harriet Jarlett

A new report suggests that halving our consumption of animal products could benefit the environment by improving nutrient cycles. Eating fewer dairy products could reduce your impact on the environment

The report, commissioned by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), analysed the problems caused by human interference in the natural cycles of nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus.
'Just like the carbon cycle is disturbed, the nitrogen and phosphorus cycles are also disturbed. Except these are disturbed even more. We've doubled the nitrogen going into the environment over the past 100 years,' says Professor Mark Sutton, from the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, lead author of the report.

Although our atmosphere is around 80 per cent nitrogen, it's unreactive and stabilises the atmosphere. But plants can't use this unreactive form, so in order to be useful to plants and animals it needs to be converted to compounds like nitrate and ammonia in a process that also creates the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide.

Industrial processes convert atmospheric nitrogen into reactive nitrogen for making fertilisers. But there's also nitrogen we unintentially put into circulation; through electricity generation and car emissions. This converts some of the nitrogen in the atmosphere into nitrous oxide, which although useful for plants also causes pollution in the form of ozone - a chemical that can actually reduce plant growth.

'This was great from the perspective that we needed to feed a growing population so the fertiliser had an incredible benefit,' says Sutton. 'But what we didn't plan was leaking nitrogen out into the environment.'

'It's not about being vegetarian or not, but about how much meat you eat. It's about being demi-tarian'

Professor Mark Sutton - CEH

He explains that the more steps you have in the food chain the more opportunities you have for nutrients to be lost at each stage: from fertiliser to plant, plant to animal, a fraction of the nutrients leaks out each time. If people chose not to eat meat they would cut out one of these steps, and reduce the points in the food chain nutrients can be lost from.

Reducing personal meat consumption was just one of ten key actions the report suggested could reduce the amount of nitrogen going into the environment.

'If you analyse the numbers it's quite amazing that of the nitrogen taken up by plants, 80 per cent of the amount harvested goes to feed livestock. Only 20 per cent feeds people directly, showing the massive inefficiency.' Sutton urges, 'it's not about being vegetarian or not, but about how much meat you eat. It's about being demi-tarian.'

He explains that if you halve the amount of meat and dairy consumption, you are still a meat eater but you have reduced your impact on the environment by up to a half.

The report also showed that rapidly expanding countries like India and South-East Asia are currently raising their meat consumption as they increasingly adopt western diets. It's estimated there could be up to 50 per cent more pollution as consumption increases by 2050, and this will mostly be in developing countries. 'If Europe were to say 'hey we have a new relationship with animal products, we're eating less meat' you potentially get a feedback between continents. You affect aspirations across cultures and you might get people to aspire to this new way of thinking about animal products.'

Europe and the UK can lead the way in this. We need to challenge society to find out that it's in its own best interests not to over consume meat products. 'If we as Europe go for optimum consumption, not always the most of everything, it's going to improve health, and benefit the environment. There's an optimum to be found between what's on your plate and helping the environment.'

The report supports a 20 per cent improvement in nitrogen efficiency by 2020, which would reduce the use of nitrogen fertilizer by 20 million tonnes per year. They term this global aspiration, '20:20 for 2020'.

It's seven years and ten months until the 2020 deadline, but Sutton promises there's a lot you can do in this time. The measures listed in the report include actions which are already available, and could all make substantial contributions to nutrient management. 'There's already a big difference between countries achieving better nitrogen efficiency than others, like Denmark, where they're taking action that we in the UK haven't yet, but in principle, from a technical perspective, we can do it,' he concludes.

---

The report "Our Nutrient World" is published by the NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology [on behalf of the Global Programme on Nutrient Management and the International Nitrogen Initiative]. The report is available on line at: http://initrogen.org/index.php/publications/our-nutrient-world/

SAVE THE DATE!

Restoring the Balance to the Farm Landscape
Thurs., March 21, 6:30pm

B119 Wells Hall Auditorium, MSU, East Lansing

A panel discussion about factory farms and their impact on the environment, economy, public health and animals, and what we can do to change the system. Featuring:

• Daniel Imhoff, author of Food Fight: Citizens Guide to the Next Farm Bill and founder of Watershed Media
• Lynn Henning, Sierra Club Water Sentinel and winner of the 2010 Goldman Environmental Prize for North America
• Gail Hansen, Senior Officer, Pew Health Group, Pew Charitable Trust 
• Joe Maxwell, VP of Outreach and Engagement at Humane Society of the US  and former president of Association of Family Farmers.

Less=More and New Report about Taxpayer $$ Favoring Factory Farms over Sus Ag Covered by Michigan Radio

Michigan organic farmers want better access to federal farm subsidy money

Feb. 17, 2013, Michigan Radio

By Steve Carmody

Environmental and organic farming groups want a change in the way federal agriculture subsidies are handed out.

Anne Woiwode is the Sierra Club’s state director. She says a relatively small number of large animal feeding operations in Michigan have a big advantage over the state’s organic farmers.  
Woiwode says the big producers have better access to federal subsidies, in particular the Environmental Quality Incentive Program.

The Environmental Quality Incentives Program is a voluntary program that provides financial and technical assistance to agricultural producers.   The financial assistance helps agri-businesses plan and implement conservation practices that improve soil, water, plant, animal, air and related resources on agricultural land.

Woiwode says not having as much access to the program puts Michigan’s organic farmers at a disadvantage in the marketplace and forces consumers to pay more if they want organic products.
She says the aim of the campaign is to shift funding priorities away from polluting large animal feeding operations and towards organic Michigan farmers.

“There are 50,000 farmers in Michigan. 238 of them are these massive operations that are polluting and competing unfairly with the rest,” says Woiwode. “It’s about time we paid attention to the rest of the 50,000.”

A spokeswoman for the Michigan Farm Bureau says there is nothing new in the group’s complaints about the Environmental Quality Incentive Program.
Laura Campbell is the bureau’s Agricultural Ecology Manager.  She says the program’s limited funds are distributed as widely as possible.

Big news!  Less=More, a new coalition of groups supporting sustainable farming in Michigan, unveiled a new report about how taxpayer subsidies favor polluting factory farms in Michigan over the sustainable farms people like you go out of your way to support at farmers markets and CSAs.  Meanwhile, your tax dollars go to giant animal warehouses that poison the water, air, land and food. Less=More believes less support to factory farms means a more sustainable Michigan.

Check out the Less=More press release below announcing its new report, Restoring the Balance to Michigan's Farming Landscape.  And check out their website at www.MoreforMichigan.org.

New Sustainable Agriculture Coalition Calls for Reforms of Funding Priorities for Michigan Farm Subsidies

 

Feb. 15, 2013   Media Contact: Gail Philbin, 312-493-2384

Lansing, Mich.—Taxpayers are providing millions of dollars in government subsidies to industrial mega-farms in Michigan under policies that unfairly favor corporate agricultural giants while ignoring massive pollution and health risks, and undermining safe, sustainable farms that are growing in consumer popularity, according to a report released today by a new sustainable agriculture coalition.

Restoring the Balance to Michigan’s Farming Landscape, a report issued by Less=More, a new coalition supporting sustainable farming in Michigan, offers a window into the bias of one specific federal Farm Bill program, the Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP).  Since 1995, under this program Michigan factory farms (also known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations or CAFOs), have raked in millions of dollars of tax subsidies that are inaccessible to sustainable and organic livestock operations. This inequity keeps prices for factory farm products artificially low compared to healthier, locally grown meat, dairy and egg products, and increases threats to health and the environment by encouraging more massive, concentrated livestock facilities.

“Families and businesses that support local, sustainably grown foods deserve to know that millions of dollars of our federal taxes are supporting polluting factory farms here in Michigan,” said Anne Woiwode, Sierra Club Michigan Chapter director. “That hurts our environment, the public’s health and Michigan farmers who work hard to provide us with clean, healthy food,”

Most CAFOs look and operate more like a factory than a farm, confining livestock in warehouses often for their entire lives or in crowded, open feedlots with no vegetation. These mega “farms” receive substantial taxpayer subsidies even when poor disposal practices of the millions of gallons of chemical- and contaminant-filled wastes they generate lead to pollution of water, land and air, and violations of state and federal environmental laws.

“This lopsided support happens at a time when many independent, environmentally responsible farmers whose practices don’t pollute are struggling to make ends meet,” said Sandy Nordmark, vice president of the Michigan Farmers Union. “It’s also taking place at a time when Michigan consumers want more products from sustainable farmers, not less. Direct sales at farmers markets, local stores, restaurants and through community supported agriculture are one of the fastest growing sectors of the agricultural community.”

According to Restoring the Balance, 37 Michigan factory farms cited for environmental violations and unpermitted discharges over the 15 years ending in 2011 were awarded nearly $27 million in Farm Bill subsidies between 1995 and 2011.  Of these operations, 26 jointly racked up fines and penalties of more than $1.3 million for their share of these violations.

Under the Michigan EQIP program, administered by the USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service Michigan office, dramatic disparities in funding exist between practices used exclusively by CAFOs, such as waste lagoons, and those used by sustainable livestock operations to achieve similar goals.  The report also documents environmental problems and threats posed by factory farm practices and structures funded by EQIP, and provides case studies with real world examples of the problems.

“Michiganders should know that something can be done to fix this uneven playing field. Less support to factory farms means a more sustainable, greener Michigan,” said Sierra Club’s Woiwode. “We invite supporters of sustainable and organic, locally grown foods to join the Less=More Coalition to help bring that change about.”

Restoring the Balance explains that the State Conservationist of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in Michigan, with advice from a state Technical Committee, has the needed authority to correct the system that puts farmers devoted to sustainable rearing of animals at a disadvantage while rewarding polluting industrial operations that harm the environment and threaten public health.

In a meeting with NRCS State Conservationist Garry Lee on Feb. 14, the Less=More Coalition presented its finding and urged him to take action. The coalition recommendations include:

• Require CAFO applicants to list all citations for any environmental or health-related law violation;
• Require CAFO applicants to document compliance with state and federal environmental laws, including keeping up-to-date records and Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans, which guide handling of animal waste;
• Institute accountability into the system through:

          o  Requiring an independent verification of whether or not operators complete work as funded;
          o  Withhold funds until all prior subsidized work is documented;
          o  Require testing of the effectiveness of practices, both in general and at specific sites, with
              independent scientific committee to review and approve practices authorized for subsidies;
          o  Eliminate practices from EQIP funding that do not provide environmental benefits.

• Restructure the ranking system to invest the majority of EQIP funds into practices designed to achieve program’s environmental objectives, including fully funding planning based on practices for traditional sustainable livestock and certified organic livestock farms just as factory farm Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans are funded;
• Provide training to District and County Conservationists in sustainable practices so they can objectively assess proposed projects;
• Make it a priority for local and district conservationists to reach out to sustainable farmers in their region and educate them about the funding opportunities available through EQIP, and
• Streamline paperwork for organic farmers applying for EQIP by allowing use of some of their organic certification documentation in EQIP application.

An abstract of Restoring the Balance is attached and the full report is available at:  http://michigan.sierraclub.org//pdfs/moreformichigan/moreformichigan.htm.

For questions, contact Sandy Nordmark, Michigan Farmers Union, 269-979-3968; and Anne Woiwode, Sierra Club, anne.woiwode@sierraclub.org or 517-484-2372.

The Less=More Coalition is a group of organizations engaged in various aspects of our food system who seek to level the playing field for sustainable farmers in Michigan. They include: Beery Farms of Michigan, LLC, the Center for Food Safety, Crane Dance Farm, LLC, Environmentally Concerned Citizens of South Central Michigan, Food & Water Watch, Greater Grand Rapids Food Systems Council, Groundswell Farm, Zeeland, Humane Society of the United States, Michigan Farmers Union, Michigan Voices for Good Food Policy, Michigan Young Farmers Coalition, Sierra Club Michigan Chapter and Socially Responsible Agricultural Project.

Less support for factory farms means a more sustainable Michigan. Visit www.MoreforMichigan.org.                  
###

http://www.cbsnews.com/2102-505269_162-57554632.html

November 27, 2012 7:52 AM

Consumer Reports sounds alarm on pork safety

(CBS News) Consumer Reports is sounding the alarm over the safety of pork. A new study shows that chops and ground pork may be full of bad bacteria. A whole host of food-borne illnesses is caused by these bacteria, such as stomach aches, vomiting, diarrhea, fever -- and in the most extreme cases, even death.

But Consumer Reports, an independent, nonprofit organization that provides ratings and product comparisons, says bacteria are not the only thing pork eaters should be concerned about.

For years, pork has been promoted by the industry as healthy food option -- "the other white meat." But a new report suggests otherwise.

Urvashi Rangan, Consumer Reports director of consumer safety and sustainability, said, "We found potentially harmful bacteria on most of the samples of pork that we tested. One organism we looked at, enterococcus, is more a measure of filth indication, maybe fecal contamination."

Of nearly 200 pork samples tested by Consumer Reports, many tested positive for salmonella, listeria, staph bacteria. The magazine says a whopping 69 percent contained Yersinia, which infects nearly 100,000 Americans every year. Children are especially vulnerable.

Stephen Morse, of the Columbia University School of Public Health, said, "You always expect to find some bacteria in any meat product. But those are usually harmless. I think the real surprise here was to find so many potentially disease-causing bacteria."

Even more, 90 percent of the bacteria Consumer Reports found were said to be resistant to antibiotics. In other words, they were super-bugs.

Rangan said, "All of these things paint a very concerning picture about this indiscriminate use of antibiotics in meat production in this country, and what we believe are the resulting consequences of that."

Consumer Reports was also alarmed by traces of ractopamine in one-fifth of pork they tested. Farmers use the drug on their hogs to produce leaner cuts of meat. It was originally developed to treat asthma, but never approved for human use.

Scott Hurd, a former top food safety official at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, who has done consulting work for the pork industry, says Consumer Reports is "inflamed and used a small amount of data to frighten people." And he says the meat is safe.

Hurd, of the Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, said, "The average person would have to eat over 700 pounds of pork every day for their entire life in order to get enough ractopamine to be above that acceptable level by FDA."

Hurd says the sample size of the Consumer Reports study is too small to draw any broader conclusions. But he adds germs can be found in nearly everything we eat, so consumers should always be careful when handling meat. That means cooking meat thoroughly and washing your hands.

Consumer Reports study:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/pork0113.htm

Power to the People! Local Residents Kill Plans for Animal Factories in Iowa and Illinois!

The battle to transform the farming landscape to one that respects nature, people and animals can be disheartening at times, but then a news story comes along that gives us hope.  Below are links to articles about successful efforts by citizens in Illinois and Iowa to stop plans for animal factories in their communities. In Michigan, the local citizens group Environmentally Concerned Citizens of South Central Michigan (ECCSCM), have made over the last decade by documenting pollution from animal factories in that part of the state.  Check out their work at www.nocafos.org.

 

A.J. Bos Agrees to Abandon Traditions Megadairy Project Near Nora, IL

After Five Years of Controversy, Poorly Sited Animal Factory Being Cleaned Up for Sale

Warren, Illinois – On November 15, 2012, the Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB) announced a proposed settlement agreement between the Illinois Attorney General’s Office and Traditions megadairy owner/investor, A.J. Bos of Bakersfield, California. According to the terms of the settlement, Bos will abandon the site in Jo Daviess County, Illinois, where the Traditions facility was being constructed. Workers are already land-applying the remaining liquids contained in the partially constructed manure ponds and digester pit to prepare the land for sale.

“Stopping this dangerous project would not have been possible without the dedication and commitment of HOMES and their supporters.  Never before in my work in Illinois and across the country have I witnessed a community succeeding in halting the construction of an industrial livestock production facility after groundbreaking,” says Danielle Diamond, Attorney for the Illinois Citizens for Clean Air & Water and Executive Director of the Socially Responsible Agriculture Project.

This unprecedented achievement effectively ends a five-year, multi-million dollar battle between Bos and Jo Daviess County family farmers and residents, who were determined to evict the gigantic animal factory to protect their clean drinking water, clean air, and way of life. The megadairy operation was sited atop fragile karst bedrock, which could allow countless tons of waste and liquid manure to contaminate groundwater.

Click here for full story

Linn County factory farms under fire, The Gazette, Nov. 21, 2012

By Steve Gravelle

Unless you make an effort to buy from small local farmers, chances are your last meat purchase came not from a traditional farm, but from a large animal-confinement operation.

Confined animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, mean different things to different Iowans.

Farm groups see relentlessly efficient, high-density livestock operations as agriculture’s future, but to critics they’re symbolic of corporate-driven industrial agriculture hollowing out rural communities.
To would-be neighbors, they can be at best a nuisance, at worst a threat to their way of life. That’s how a group of rural Center Point residents undertook a crash course in CAFOs and the laws regulating them.

“You just learn really fast what the steps are,” said Regina Behmlander.

Behmlander, her husband Chris, and their three sons moved from Marion to a rural acreage about two years ago. The Behmlanders and neighbors launched a campaign this fall against an application by Matt Ditch of Center Point for a 5,661-hog CAFO two miles northwest of their home.

On Nov. 14, Ditch withdrew his application after neighbors convinced county supervisors to challenge several points on his master matrix, a score card of environmental and safety requirements the Iowa Department of Natural Resources uses to determine a proposed operation’s fitness.
It was the first successful challenge in Linn County since the state adopted the matrix process in 2003, said Les Beck, the county’s planning and development director. Livestock operations established before 2003 were “grandfathered” into the law.

The master matrix was adopted after legislative action in which lawmakers, stakeholders and the DNR tried to balance the interests of local government, rural residents and agriculture.
“A lot of different organizations, a lot of different individuals had input designing that matrix to be fair and to keep our environment safe,” said Brian Waddingham, executive director of the Coalition to Support Iowa Farmers, a consortium of commodity and livestock groups. “I personally think it’s worked very well.”

Matrix opposition

But not all groups agree the master matrix does enough.

“We did not feel that it went far enough and restored enough local power to counties,” said Dave Goodner, rural community organizer for Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement. “We’ve been very successful using it as tool to stop proposed factory farms, but our number-one priority is to increase oversight” of big feeding operations.

“I would say the (matrix) process doesn’t work at all,” said Behmlander. “It’s very much slanted in corporate farms’ favor, and the smaller farmer is left with very little recourse.”

The matrix process and DNR’s rules apply to all livestock operations of more than 1,000 cattle or 2,500 hogs. They also apply to large dairy and poultry farms.

Ditch, who didn’t return calls for comment, could resubmit his application after changes to address the matrix issues cited by county supervisors. Or he could establish a smaller feeding operation below the 2,500-hog standard.

Before the master matrix process, the state had issued 923 CAFO permits through the end of 2002, 49 of them to open feedlots, said Gene Tinker, the DNR’s animal feeding operations coordinator in the agency’s Manchester office. There are now 2,553 active permits, 243 of them held by open feedlots.
Economy woes cut new CAFO permits to just more than 100 in both 2009 and 2010, including new storage facilities required under new manure-disposal rules. But activity picked up last year when the state issued permits to 324 new operations. More than 800 permits were issued in 2006.

The matrix process could be changed as the state responds to a finding by the federal Environmental Protection Agency that its rules, specifically the CAFO permitting process, don’t adequately protect water quality. In 2003, 42 manure spills were reported to the DNR. There were 59 reported spills last year, but just 13 through July 31 this year.

Any changes will be the subject of public hearings across the state, “and we’ll be able to weigh in on that,” said Goodner. He said his group also plans to lobby in support of boosting the DNR’s budget $1.2 million to hire more CAFO inspectors.

Master matrix at a glance

Adopted by the Department of Natural Resources in 2003, the master matrix is an appendix, often 80 pages or more, submitted with an application to construct and operate a confined animal feeding operation. An application receives points for meeting standards of construction, waste storage, distance from occupied buildings and public spaces, manure management and safety plans, and other factors. An application must score at least 440 points to qualify for a permit. County supervisors may challenge an applicant’s matrix before it’s forwarded to the DNR.

Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about CAFOs but Were Afraid to Ask...

This is a really excellent article on everything about animal factories you ever wanted to know (and didn't)...

http://grist.org/food/confined-dining-a-primer-on-factory-farms-and-what-they-mean-for-your-meat/

Farmageddon Screening in Grand Rapids Oct. 16

Tuesday, Oct. 16, 7pm

Screening of Farmageddon

by Nourishing Ways of Grand Rapids at St. Mark's Episcopal Church, Grand Rapids

Details at: http://www.meetup.com/Nourishing-Ways-of-West-Michigan/events/84107072/

"Farmageddon tells the story of small, family farms that were providing safe, healthy foods to their communities and were forced to stop, sometimes through violent action, by agents of misguided government bureaucracies, and seeks to figure out why."

Watch the trailer here: http://farmageddonmovie.com/

An article in the New York Times about dairy farming the way it should be done--on a reasonable scale with respect for the animals. The farmer profiled is an Organic Valley farmer, by the way. Story below but link to story with pix is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/opinion/sunday/kristof-where-cows-are-happy-and-food-is-healthy.html

September 8, 2012

Where Cows Are Happy and Food Is Healthy

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

YAMHILL, Ore.

FOOD can be depressing. If it’s tasty, it’s carcinogenic. If it’s cheap, animals were tortured.

But this, miraculously, is a happy column about food! It’s about a farmer who names all his 230 milk cows, along with his 200 heifers and calves, and loves them like children.

      

Let me introduce Bob Bansen, a high school buddy of mine who is a third-generation dairyman raising Jersey cows on lovely green pastures here in Oregon beside the Yamhill River. Bob, 53, a lanky, self-deprecating man with an easy laugh, is an example of a farmer who has figured out how to make a good living running a farm that is efficient but also has soul.

      

As long as I’ve known him, Bob has had names for every one of his “girls,” as he calls his cows. Walk through the pasture with him, and he’ll introduce you to them.

      

“I spend every day with these girls,” Bob explained. “I know most of my cows both by the head and by the udder. You learn to recognize them from both directions.”

       

“This is Hosta,” he began, and then started pointing out the others nearby. “Jill. Sophia. This is Kimona. Edie would be the spotted one lying there. Pesto is the black one standing up. In front of her is Clare. Next to her is Pasta, who is Pesto’s daughter.”

      

I asked about Jill, and Bob rattled off her specs. She is now producing about eight gallons a day, with particularly high protein and butterfat content. Jill’s mother was Jolly, a favorite of Bob’s. When Jolly grew old and unproductive, he traded her to a small family farm in exchange for a ham so she could live out her retirement with dignity.

      

When I pushed for Bob’s secret to tell the cows apart, he explained: “They have family resemblances. They look like their mothers.”

      

Oh, that helps.

      

As a farmkid myself, growing up with Bob here in the rolling green hills of Yamhill, where the Willamette Valley meets the coastal range, I’ve been saddened to see American farms turn into food factories. Just this year, I’ve written about hens jammed in cages, with dead birds left to rot beside the survivors, and about industrial farms that try to gain a financial edge by pumping chickens full of arsenic, antibiotics, Tylenol and even Prozac.

      

Yet all is not lost. Family farms can still thrive, while caring for animals and producing safe and healthy food.

      

For Bob, a crucial step came when he switched to organic production eight years ago. A Stanford study has cast doubt on whether organic food is more nutritious, but it affirms that organic food does contain fewer pesticides and antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Bob’s big worry in switching to organic production was whether cows would stay healthy without routine use of antibiotics because pharmaceutical salesmen were always pushing them as essential. Indeed, about 80 percent of antibiotics in the United States go to farm animals — leading to the risk of more antibiotic-resistant microbes, which already cause infections that kill some 100,000 Americans annually.

      

Bob nervously began to experiment by withholding antibiotics. To his astonishment, the cows didn’t get infections; on the contrary, their health improved. He realized that by inserting antibiotics, he may have been introducing pathogens into the udder. As long as cows are kept clean and are given pasture rather than cooped up in filthy barns, there’s no need to shower them with antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals, he says.

      

Many cows in America now live out their lives in huge dairy barns, eating grain and hay and pumping out milk. But evidence is growing that cows don’t do well when locked up, so now many dairies are reverting to the traditional approach of sending cows out to pasture on grass.

“Pasture does wonders for cow health,” Bob said. “There’s so much evidence that they are much happier out there. You can extend their lives so much by keeping them off concrete, so the trend is going that way.”

      

Is it a soggy sentimentality for farmers to want their cows to be happy? Shouldn’t a businessman just worry about the bottom line?

      

Bob frowned. “For productivity, it’s important to have happy cows,” he said. “If a cow is at her maximum health and her maximum contentedness, she’s profitable. I don’t even really manage my farm so much from a fiscal standpoint as from a cow standpoint, because I know that, if I take care of those cows, the bottom line will take care of itself.”

   

This isn’t to say that Bob’s farm is a charity hostel. When cows age and their milk production drops, farmers slaughter them. Bob has always found that part of dairying tough, so, increasingly, he uses the older cows to suckle steers. That way the geriatric cows bring in revenue to cover their expenses and their day of reckoning can be postponed — indefinitely, in the case of his favorite cows.

I teased Bob about running a bovine retirement home, and he smiled unapologetically.

      

“I feel good about it,” he said simply. “They support me as much as I support them, so it’s easy to get attached to them. I want to work hard for them because they’ve taken good care of me.”

      

Like many farmers, Bob frets about regulations and reporting requirements, but he also sympathizes with recent animal rights laws meant to improve the treatment of livestock and poultry.

      

“You hate to have it go to legislation, but we need to protect the animals,” he said. “They’re living things, and you have to treat them right.”

      

Granted, such a humane attitude may be easier to apply to dairying than to poultry. It’s tough for cage-free poultry farms to compete economically with huge industrial operations that raise millions of birds jammed into cages, and healthy food that is good for humans and animals in some cases will cost more.

      

Moreover, we’re never going to revert to the kind of agriculture that existed a century ago. Bob’s 600 acres used to be farmed by five different families, and that consolidation won’t be undone. But neither is it inevitable that consolidation will continue indefinitely so that America’s farms end up as vast, industrial, soulless food factories.

  

I loved growing up on a sheep and cherry farm, even if that did mean getting up at 3 a.m. in the winter to check for newborn lambs, and I hope medium-size family farms remain a pillar of rural America. As Bob’s dairy shows, food need not come at the cost of animal or human health and welfare. We need not wince when we contemplate where our food comes from.

      

The next time you drink an Organic Valley glass of milk, it may have come from one of Bob’s cows. If so, you can bet it was a happy cow. And it has a name.

      

I invite you to comment on this column on my blog, On the Ground. Please also join me on Facebook and Google+, watch my YouTube videos and follow me on Twitter.

What is sustainable agriculture?

It's pretty easy to identify what's unsustainable about agriculture today: the cramming of thousands of animals in warehouses and keeping them alive in unnatural conditions with antibiotics and hormones; the storing of millions of gallons of waste generated by these animals in lagoons and then mixing this toxic brew with huge amounts of clean water in order to spray it on the land; and the many ways this waste makes its way into our water and poisons our air.

But what exactly is sustainable agriculture? As legally defined in U.S. Code Title 7, Section 3103, sustainable agriculture means "an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that will over the long term:

• Satisfy human food and fiber needs.
• Enhance environmental quality and the natural resource base upon which the agricultural economy depends.
• Make the most efficient use of nonrenewable resources and on-farm resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural biological cycles and controls.
• Sustain the economic viability of farm operations.
• Enhance the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole."

However, we don't think this definition goes far enough. We prefer our own, which is the result of input from farmers and diverse organizations working on the issue. Here it is:

Sustainable farming is a system that emphasizes stewardship of natural and human resources and is grounded in the principle that we must meet our present food needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own. It protects and improves the soil, conserves native biodiversity and habitats, and provides viable farm livelihoods as a consequence of food production. Sustainable farms are appropriate for the landscape and the local economy, and produce safe, healthy food while treating workers with respect and animals humanely and sustaining communities.

What do you think? What's your definition of sustainable agriculture?