Reason to believe S.510 is scary.

I keep meaning to post this, and I keep putting it off, because I KNOW that you probably care more about what is going on at the farm (weeding, the last rain kick started the Canadian Thistle) and not more blabbing on the Food Safety Bill.


But I found this article last week about a farmer being raided for suspected interstate sale of raw milk.
"Stockton warned the requirement now is for federal agents to claim they have "credible evidence" regarding a case, but a proposed federal change would strike those words in the law and replace them with "reason to believe."
"The phrase 'reason to believe' would be inserted 14 times into the code with S. 510," she said. "If this bill goes through, the FDA will have control of farms. They will not need 'credible evidence' to act. They will essentially be given a free hand to act as they want. And look at how they already act, even with the existing constraints in place." "

How much less is "reason to believe" then "credible evidence," a world it seems to me... a constitutional world...

For milk?

Some of you may remember my post last year about Manna Storehouse and a private home raided by a swat team for the accusation of selling mislabeled meat through their co-op.

Well, a new story is coming to light, which is no less scary. A 5am raid on an Amish farmer, legally producing a product in his state, but being accused of some of his highly dangerous (raw milk) product being transported across state lines. Here it is.

I wonder how long it will be that we can legally eat veggies that actually touched the ground, and were not kept safe by huge wildlife exclusions zones, and piles of paperwork and regulation.

How long will our freedom of choice to buy veggies from who we like, drink milk we want (already gone in 21 states), or put salt on on dinner last? We need to stand up for our right to choose our food. (as sad as that is)

Call - tell them to support the Tester Ammendment!

Senate Bill 510 is going to pass, but a series of amendments look like they are going to be included! However, it is my understanding that the Tester amendment is not included in the amendments which will definatly make it in. It will be debated separately and voted on alone.

According to food safety news "The most contentious amendment in consideration, proposed by Senator John Tester (D-MT), to exempt food facilities with under $500,000 gross sales from preventative control plan requirements, and traceback and recordkeeping provisions, will not be part of the manager's amendment, but will be debated separately when the bill is brought to the floor. "

Please note that Food Safety news is on the separate side of the issue from me and thinks this amendment is "asking for trouble." But their article outlines the amendments made and pending clearly so here is the link: http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2010/04/farmers-make-gains-in-senate-battle/

I would ask you to call your senators and ask them to support the Tester Amendment and support your local farms.

YOU ARE GOING TO DIE!!!

Got your attention? But according to some you are putting your life at risk with every salad (or veggie) until the government steps in.

I was reading an article from the Chicago Tribune today, and came across this great quote in reference to leafy greens (lettuce, spinach, ect):

• "These items are grown outdoors in fields with dirt. It's probably impossible to grow them without contact with a food-borne pathogen," said Craig Hedberg, a professor at the University of Minnesota's School of Public Health."

Mr. Craig Hedberg may not realize this since he is in the School of Public Health and not the Agriculture College but the following items in addition to greens also are grown with contact with the ground: potatoes, garlic, radishes, turnips, beets, cucumbers, summer squash, winter squash, melons, many tomatoes, and lots more!

FARMERS GROW IN THE DIRT. Dirt, by it's very nature is not clean, it is dirty. It is dirt.

The article goes on to say "Greens are especially vulnerable for several reasons, including that they are grown so close to the ground -- unlike, say, fruit from trees ."

So I suggest we stop eating all veggies and switch to fruit. But the question is can we still eat berries, they are kind of in the middle.

Bad growing and handling practices are a problem. But regulation which imposes the same rules on me, who grows 1000' of lettuce a year, cuts fresh heads, washes them with clean fresh water, and gets it to my end user in less then 24 hours as someone who grows a 100+ acres of lettuce, processes in factory like conditions and sends it for distribution to wholesalers where we hope it will be sold within a week-ish is silly. I mean STUPID! MORONIC!

(deep breath)

Let's take the same train of thought into your kitchen. We know restaurant fires used to be a bad thing, that is why we now have code imposed hood systems, with major ventilation and fire suppression built in. These are expensive units, expensive to buy, install, and maintain. But these units save lots of lives (and buildings) each year. They are such a good idea I think that we should mandate every home to have one over their stove (and microwave.) After all, you do the same thing, you cook food. Also you need to install NSF surfaces, 3 bowl sinks, grease traps, and let the health department inspect you every few months. It is for your own safety!

That is pretty ridiculous, you probably agree (or else you would not be reading my blog.) And imposing the same rules on small farmers as on large agri-businesses is equally as ridiculous.

Info from Cornucopia Institute here.

Issue 2

I know, I know. You want me to blog about the farm and not silly legislation! But here is one you get to actually vote for, YOURSELF. Here is one you get to tell your friends and neighbors about, to educate those around you. And we can make a real difference.

On the ballot this November 3rd you will see Issue 2. It will say:

• "2 PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT: TO CREATE THE OHIO LIVESTOCK CARE STANDARDS BOARD TO ESTABLISH AND IMPLEMENT STANDARDS OF CARE FOR LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY"

And you will think to yourself. "Why, yeah! I support the care and health of livestock animals!" And you will reach for the "Yes" ____ (button, lever, chad, scantron bubble (however, we are voting this time!))

A yes vote is a mistake, in my opinion. You are voting to create a board, primarily of industry insiders (the ones who run CAFOs and Battery Chicken houses now) who will set standards that every farmer will have to follow. Rules that are probably not even applicable to people like me with 24 chickens...

The Humane Society of the United States says "It’s designed to favor large factory farms, not family farmers, Issue 2 is opposed by the Ohio Farmers Union, the Ohio Environmental Stewardship Alliance, League of Women Voters of Ohio, the Ohio League of Humane Voters, and the Ohio Sierra Club. The editorial boards of Ohio’s major newspapers—including the Columbus Dispatch, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Akron Beacon Journal, and Dayton Daily News—all oppose this effort to enshrine the agribusiness lobby’s favored oversight system in the state’s constitution."

Other groups which oppose Issue 2 are the Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association (the certifying organization for Organic in Ohio), Northeast Ohio's chapter of Slow Food, and the Innovative Farmers of Ohio (an organization for small, sustainable growers).

The Journal of Whole Food and Nutritional Health says "Factory Farmers are promoting this constitutional amendment as a way to protect them from criticism by the Humane Society and PETA and other people who may question their treatment of animals.... Do not be fooled by the misleading language of this proposal. It protects large, industrial farms that confine hundreds and even thousands of animals for rapid growth using antibiotics, hormones, and unnatural habitats. Vote NO on Issue 2"

We have about a month to make sure everyone we know knows about this issue, so I will try to talk about it about once a week until then, interspersed with lots of farm photos and news.

Until then, think about this. Many of us are doing what we can to limit how much meat we eat from CAFOs or Battery Chicken Houses. So why would we support a bill which puts that very industry in charge of animal care regulations in our state, in our state constitution?

Why?

Section 105

Section 105 of the food saftey bill now waiting in the wings to be voted upon when everyone is busy elsewhere...

'(1) In general - Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and representatives of State departments of agriculture, sall publish a notice of proposed rulemaking to establish science based minimum standards for the safe productionad harvesting of those types of fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities for which the Secretary has determined that such standards minimize the risk of serious adverse health consequences or death."

So in other words when people tell you that the law will have no impact on farmers they are not lieing. Because really who knows what those rules will be? But if they take as a model some of the rules coming out of grocrey store requirements for greens, many small farms will be unable to meet those requirements, if for no other reason then they do not have enough land for the buffer zones, which are a couple hundred feet deep. I posted about this in July.

You can probably tick off any item which has recently had recalls as the first targets, these will include at a minumum greens, spinach, cilantro, peppers, and tomatoes... That list includes some of the higher value items to a small farm, and more will certainly follow. Just something to think about.

S 510

The new bill to oppose is Senete Bill 510, the sister to HB 2749 The Food Safety Modernization Act. Fight for your right to artesional cheeses and pastas, and home produced bakery goods, jams, and jellies.

Check out this from the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

Here are the main talking points they outline...

• Talking Points (note: these same problems are also found in HR 2749)
  Food safety problems lie with the industrial food processors and food imports, not with local producers. FDA should not be given any additional regulatory power over the local food system than what the agency has at present.
• S.510 calls for federal regulation of how farmers grow and harvest product. Farmers selling food directly to local markets are inherently transparent and accountable to their customers, and there is no reason to impose these regulations on them. Based on FDA's track record, it is likely that such rules will also discriminate against diversified sustainable farms that produce animals and crops in complementary systems.
• S.510 expands FDA's powers over food processors, regardless of their size, scale, or distribution. FDA oversight of small, local food processors is overreaching and unnecessary. Small processors selling into local markets do not need federal oversight, unlike the large, industrial, multi-sourced supply chains that are the cause of most foodborne illnesses and food recalls.
• S.510 applies a complex Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system to even the smallest local processors, imposing onerous paperwork and record-keeping on these small businesses. Applying a HACCP system to local foods facilities processing for local markets, as well as farmers making value-added products, could undermine and extinguish these emerging small businesses attempting to bring healthy local foods to American consumers.
  
• In fact, when HAACP was applied to the meat packing industry, it was instrumental in reducing the number of smaller regional and local meat packers, yet failed to increase the number of independent, objective inspectors in giant meat slaughtering and packing facilities.
• Bottom line: One size does not fit all when considering food safety bills! Local foods businesses are not the same as animal factories or mega-farms that sell products into industrial scale national and international markets, and should not be regulated the same way!

Bottom line... I will post more on my thoughts on the real bottom line of this law later this week. We still have time to help oppose this, but they will try to push it through while they think no one is paying attention, and everyone is looking at healthcare, cap&trade, and immigration.

I am putting your health at risk...

We are very sorry! After reading this article "Crops, ponds destroyed in quest for food safety" I have seen the error of my ways. We are, I suppose, lucky that members can come to the farm at all to pick up, racked as they must be illness caused by our violations of food safety standards required by many super markets for their greens growers. Fine, I suppose, until those large growers push to make these rules apply to everyone!

Should these rules apply to me? If so, it was nice being your farmer because as of today we are out of business.

















For example, there is a requirement for 450 foot dirt buffer zones around fields. These no-man lands are to have no vegetation, to prevent animals from straying into the fields and contaminating my crops. The aerial photo shows 12 acres of our fields. The area in the center that does not have a colored overlay is the "safe" area to grow...

Wait a minute???

I am also very sorry to say to those of you whose children sweetly ask if they may feed a carrot to the chickens or who bug you all week about when they get to come back to the farm to visit the chickens, children, under 5 are no longer allowed on the farm. At all. You know they are a "diaper risk." Even if they never touch a growing veggie, never step foot in the garden, even if they never see the veggies in the field they are a safety risk (as are their parents if they are not wearing an official farm ID badge.) It is truly amazing that those of us who enjoy cooking with young children have survived meals where they MIX THE DOUGH, WITH THEIR HANDS!!!) Personally, I am wondering how my own children will feel, not being able to live on the farm with us until they are 5, but all in the name of food safety...

Then there are the deer and rabbits. Any place we see evidence of animals be it a footprint or a toad, we are to destroy all crops in a 30' wide swath through the garden. I am telling you now, we will have no garden. Personally, I see an occasional toad and frog as a sign that we have a healthy garden, but I guess it is not so healthy for you! I suppose the park will be OK with us poisoning all our animal friends! After all, we must be safe.

So (on the unlikely case) that any of our members are still alive to read this, please accept my apologies! The facts are according to Seattle trial lawyer Bill Marler, who represented many of the plaintiffs in the 2006 E. coli outbreak in "In 16 years of handling nearly every major food-borne illness outbreak in America, I can tell you I've never had a case where it's been linked to a farmers' market, could it happen? Absolutely. But the big problem has been the mass-produced product. What you're seeing is this rub between trying to make it as clean as possible so they don't poison anybody, but still not wanting to come to the reality that it may be the industrialized process that's making it all so risky."

I stand by the statement that their may come a day when doing what we do - growing food on a small scale using natural and sustainable methods - will be illegal...

HR 875- Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009

If you thought my post yesterday was long, boring, and over the top you may want to stop reading now. Fair Warning!

HR 875- Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009

I received an email from MetroFarm this week that said:

House Bill 875, which is sponsored by Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), seeks to reduce or eliminate the danger of distance by establishing a new federal Food Safety Administration (FSA) that would superintend and regulate all food production facilities, from the smallest farms to the biggest processors. In other words, HB 875 would give the federal government dictatorial authority over the entire food chain of the USA.HB 875 and its Food Safety Administration (FSA)
• Binds all State and County Departments of Agriculture to federal authority
• Criminalizes alternative farming methods, such as “organic.”
• Superintends everyone who grows food, whether they sell it or not.
• Superintends the production of meat of any kind.
• Allows the FSA, or its agents, physical access to all farms.
• Allows the FSA, or its agents, to copy all farm documents.
• Forces farmers who sell direct to consumers to make their customer lists available to FSA, or its agents.
• Grants FSA, or its agents, authority to punish rule-breakers with fines of up to $1 million per day.
• Allows FSA to hire industry leaders to decide how program would be administered.

I have been reading a lot of people talking about this Bill and one of the comments I have heard is that lots of weird and extreme bills float around congress that does not mean they will pass. That is true, once people KNOW they are there and what they say and make a fuss to their congress people they are unlikely to pass. Unnoticed and unheeded, however, they can slip through and we end up with bills like Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 which have "unintended" consequences which might not be so unintended after all.

So I actually read HB 875 it says the following in it's 30 pages.

"Sec2.a.2 - Congress finds that lapses in the protection of the food supply... are damaging to consumers and the food industry, and place a burden on interstate commerce and international trade. " I really did not know my little CSA was that powerful!

"Sec2.a.4 - Congress finds that lapses in the protection of the food supply... the safety and security of the food supply require a systemwidde approach to preventing food born illness... and intensive, effective and efficient management of the Nation's food safety program. "Basically what the Bill aims to do (at least my understanding I am an farmer not a lawyer) is to create a new Agency "the Food Safety Amininistration" and give it control of regulating and policing our nations food supply.

The purpose of the act being, among others, to "regulate food safety and labeling to strengthen the protection of public health."

My reading of the bill seems to lead me to believe that it will make the "Home Produced" items allowed under Ohio law illegal. So say goodbye to breads, cookies, jams, jellies, and honey at your farmers market. In fact, you may have to say goodbye to the farmer's market itself. But I really want to focus this post on its impact on FARMS growing veggies so I will do that.

It seems to me that our farm will be regulated under the bill (sec 3.14) as a Food Production Facility "any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal feeding operation." In case you missed that let me restate. FARMS AND ORCHARDS are regulated the same as CAFOs! Nice.

Sec 206.a.1 gives the "Administrator" of the new FSA the right to visit and inspect food production facilities, set "good practice" standards, require records of food safety reports, conduct monitoring of plants, and collect information relevant to public health. Some say this would include a list of our customers and members.

They have the right to create regulations that (206.c.1) "consider all relevant hazards,including those occurring naturally." Read that as NO compost. And include regulations on (206.c.3) "growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packing, temperature controls, animal encroachments, and water." Of course what these regulations will be are not yet developed. but you can put money on it that our procedure of pulling them out of the ground, washing the most dirty ones with a garden hose, and sorting them on a picnic table will not meet the requirements which will be designed for a full blown sorting house. Joe Salatin has written a lot about how similar regulations have effected small scale livestock producers. Will we, for instance, be required to have a bathroom in the "sorting house" and a separate one for the FSA inspector.

Failure to abide by any of the regulations could result in a fine of up to $1,000,000! (405.a.1.A) for each "act" that is not in compliance...

It is hard to say how this bill if passed would effect us. But many are suggesting that it would put most of the countries small farms out of business. I dare say it would.

There are three other bills also in congress right now... H.R. 814, S.R. 425 and H.B. 759 all of which will impact our food choices. I hope to discuss each of them in turn in the coming days...

(Sorry, I guess my farm blog is turning a bit political...)

Would you like melamine with that?

The FDA sets limits on melamine in baby formula... 1 part in a million is OK...

When I first saw this article my attitude was "How horrible! The only allowable level of poisons in our children's food should be zero!" And that may be true. But what does that really mean?

I found this article when doing some more research, an opinion piece from the New York Times.

Like so many issues, it is more complicated then it may first seems...

One more thing... Canned foods...

Confession time: Personally, one of my most used "quick" meals to make when I am in a hurry is enchiladas...

Over the past few years my consumption of processed and canned foods has dropped a ton, but occasionally they are so easy, like this meal... Cook up some ground beef , mix with spices and some shredded cheese, roll in a tortilla, put in a baking dish then open a can of enchilada sauce, pour some on the bottom of the pan and the rest on top. Serve with low fat canned refried beans...

This is my most canned of our regular meals... And as of today I need to stop eating it (at least in this quick form), and with it most foods in cans... Why?

Bisphenol A... Just one to three servings a day can put you over the "safe limit"... My quick enchilada blow those numbers away.

Read this article from Treehuggers...

And review these charts...

In the past few years one after another "normal" foods no longer find their way into our shopping carts (and market bags) now most canned foods will go the way of HFCS, artificial flavorings, bottled watter, artificial sweeteners, transfats, artificial coloring, ....

Eating healthier is taking one step at a time and day by day getting closer to our goals...

((Now to figure out how to make refried beans and enchilada sauce from scratch! I doubt it will still be considered a quick meal...))

Milk Labeling update...

Well, it's not a victory but it is not a total defeat. The governor of Ohio issued an executive order which allows milk to be labeled as recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST) free BUT (and this is a big but) the label must also contain a FDA disclaimer that “no significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rbST-supplemented and non-rbST supplemented cows.”

Also the milk is no longer allowed to say “no hormone,” “hormone-free,” “rbST-free” or “bST-free” instead the label will read “this milk is from cows not supplemented with rbST." I wonder if they are thinking Ohio consumers will never read an entire sentence. Little do they know that we who regularly read entire ingredient lists are out here! The dairy will have to take steps to prove it did not give it's cows rbST and this is what worries me, what form will this take? The state of Ohio has a tendency to be very hard handed with small diaries...

This emergency order is in effect for 90 days while the state writes up the final rules which are expected to mirror these.

Thanks to everyone who took the time to write or call about this issue. Your voice was heard, kind of. But in all reality if those who cared had not raised a stink when they tried to push this threw the week between Christmas and New Years we would (in all likelihood) be looking at a flat out ban on labeling.

Walking a dangourous line?

I was reading last night in "The Revolution will not be Microwaved" about laws against food disparagement. According to Ohio law ... "Disparagement" means the dissemination to the public in any manner of any false information that a perishable agricultural or aquacultural food product is not safe for human consumption."

And I am prohibited from disparaging any perishable agricultural product upon penalty of civil action. I wonder if any of my blog posts would be taken that way?

I am not saying that any FDA approved food product is unsafe, but rather that there may be safer options... I point readers back to this blog post where I discussed the Precautionary Principle and ask to reframe the question to what is the safest option, for us, our children, and the world we live in.

Will GMO foods hurt you? Probably not, most defiantly not in any short term, but might they harm bees or contaminate our native species on a genetic basis? Possibly, and once the harm is done it is irrevocable.

So the question is for you. Does that constitute disparagement?

Recall...

The countries largest beef recall is underway... (news story) and the great thing about it is that much of the meat went to feed children in schools!

If you have a strong stomach here is the video...

I guess I am always worried when I hear these stories. On one level I am worried about my food, although I often personally know the producers of my meat that is not always the case. On another level I am worried about our farm and other small producers.

Major food recalls often cause pressure for "ACTION!" meaning government action, meaning regulation. And this is scary because, typically, there were regulations in place that were ignored by the perpertrators. You already are NOT supposed to use "downer" cows for the human food supply, as happened in this case. Thinking back to the spinach recall you were already NOT supposed to sell from flooded feilds (flooding lets contaiminates like e-coli into the feild).

So regulataion becomes stricter - read more expensive - especially for small producers. Will a small butcher still be able to process a small farmers 10 or 20 cows a year, without going through a huge "regulated" slaughterhouse. Will a small produce grower be able to grow 1000 pounds of greens a year without "inspection." ((Don't even get me started on the National Animal Identification Program.))

Much of this regulation is cheaper for bigger producers who already have plants and can spend an extra $0.001 a pound, instead of hiring someone for $30 an hour to do that same inspection for 30 pounds.

I fear that some day, doing what I do will be illegal, or so regulated it's impossible for a small farmer. All of you who support local food need to be aware that the next 10-20 years will be battle against the further industrilization of our food supply.

Any battle needs warriors...

Random passage of the day...

Since, I often am at a loss of what to post when farm activities are lulling, I decided why not post an interesting passage from a book I am reading. Now that book is "The Revolution will Not be Microwaved - Inside America's Underground Food Movements" by Sandor Ellix Katz.

I personally, love technologies which turn hazardous industrial waste into a useful purpose for our food supply. So I had to admire our government when I read this passage...

• "In 2002, as part of its massive "Farm Bill," the U.S. Congress explicitly granted the U.S. Food and Drug Administration the power to approve any technology capable of killing pathogens as a form of "pasteurization," not requiring special labeling. Irradiation, one such process, uses high doses of radiation - "seven million times more irradiation then a single chest x-ray," according to the Centers for Disease Control - to kill pathogens and extend shelf life. This technology, developed in the 1970s by the U.S. Department of Energy as part of its Byproduct Utilization Program, uses cobolt 60 and cesium 137, both nuclear industry by-products. Irradiation, sometimes referred to as "cold-pasteurization," is often applied to fruit juices, fruits, vegetables, spices, meats, and seafood. Yet irradiation has been shown to diminish the nutritional value of food. Irradiation also alters the molecular structure of the food and generates free radicals and radiolytic products including benzene, formaldehyde, and other know mutagens and carcinogens, as well as "unique radiolyic byproducts" for which no rigorous safety testing has ever been preformed.
  

Yet a couple studies touted by the FDA shows that consumers are willing to pay more for irradiated meat!

So the question remains, will one day they ask you at a fast food place... "Do you want any Colbolt 60 with that hamburger?"