Some, not all, final thoughts

A writer from Lancaster Farming reached out to our group asking if anyone wanted to be interviewed for an article about us. I chose to send an email with my responses to his questions, and it was a great opportunity to reflect on the journey and what I'd learned. I thought I'd share my answers to some of the questions:

What have been some of the highlights on this tour for you so far? What specifically about the classroom instruction to date has made this worth your while so far? What about the farm stops? What particular visit sticks out for you at this point, and why?
The extreme diversity of places we've seen and people we've spoken with really stands out to me. We're visiting every corner of the food system in Vermont, as we visit the physical corners of Vermont as a state. We've met with state organizations, nonprofits, professors, masters candidates, researchers, school garden coordinators, co-op grocery markets, dairy farms, cheesemakers, agroecologists, carbon experts, book publishers like Chelsea Green - the list goes on. It's truly amazing that we've had access to such busy, important people who have been instrumental in advancing Vermont's food system to the point where it is today.

In the classroom, we hear lectures from people who are so knowledgeable about their subjects, and who are so excited to be talking to us. Everyone is so interested in knowing who we are, where we come from, and why we're interested in what they have to say. I think everyone in VT involved with food is so excited that other people from outside VT want to learn about food and make a difference in food systems, and that shows through when they give their presentations. Our instructors also do a great job of debriefing, making connections across lectures/visits, and bringing us back to big-picture perspectives.

My favorite farm visit was Cedar Circle Farm. We visited after 5 days on dairy farms - I had never been to a dairy farm before this trip, so those visits were really eye-opening, but after so many days, I was sick of the smell of manure and ready to talk about produce and policy again. Cedar Circle was such a beautiful place - the greenhouses and produce fields boasted such perfect flowers, greens, and strawberries. They have so many great programs - a farm stand, a CSA, direct sales at 4 different farmers' markets, education programs for both community members and their employees, a commercial kitchen, pick-your-own, and two annual festivals. It was inspiring to see how many different initiatives they take on, and I can't stress enough how beautiful their kale, spinach, and other greens were (I've attached a photo).

What are you learning about VT agriculture that you hope to return and apply to your studies? And how do you feel this trip benefit you and your work in the future?
I'm definitely learning a lot about the production side of food. I grew up in the suburbs of NYC, very disconnected from agriculture or where my food came from, so seeing dairy and vegetable farms has been eye-opening. I've always known that I would need to learn more about production or spend time working on a farm to really understand how to design food policy, so the visits have been really helpful. We're also talking a lot about the importance of support from the VT Legislature, Agency of Ag, and other government organizations and elected officials - if I do work in food policy, I know I will need to be working for or with people who value sustainable food systems, want to support producers, and care about food access for low-income or marginalized populations.

Why is this experience important to you? Why do you believe programs like this generally benefit agriculture in the U.S.
I have a few scattered answers to this one:

• Vermont is doing a great job figuring out the true meaning of collaboration. This program is proof that partnerships among higher education institutions can lead to valuable experiences, relationship-building, and innovative thinking. It's also awesome to have experiential learning available to the general public outside of those institutions. 
• It's been amazing spending so much time with the 9 other people participating in this study tour with me. We learn so much from each other, and we all have such different backgrounds that we bring interesting perspectives to the table and have such rich conversations, whether about food or our lectures or anything not related to food. 
• We're learning a lot about what's working in VT, and many of us have plans bring ideas back to where we live. One participant who's particularly interested in agricultural education has been asking very specific questions and taking note of the most effective ag education programs we've seen so she can teach classes or maybe start a program or organization in her county in Virginia. 
• I think the key here is information sharing. The universities/colleges involved with the consortium are sharing information and best practices with each other, as well as with us. Then we have this innovative information and take it outside of VT - to NY, Philadelphia, Virginia, New Hampshire, Boston, Ohio, and wherever we may end up in the future.

Days 19-20: Cidermaking with Woodchuck and concluding at Shelburne Farms

On our last day of class, we learned about cidermaking at Woodchuck, winemaking at Lincoln Peak, and convenient gardening at Cloud Farm. It was a relaxing, winding-down kind of day, with hard cider and wine tastings leading to a beautiful concluding dinner at Shelburne Farms, where everyone we met with along the way was invited to join us and hear our reflective thoughts on our journey.

We toured Sunrise Orchard and Woodchuck Cidery with Ben Calvi, a cidermaker at Woodchuck. He showed us Sunrise, the 600-acre apple orchard that sells 1/3 of their apples wholesale, 1/3 direct to consumer, and 1/3 to processing for things like hard cider. VT apples are great for hard cider because their high acidity allows them to grow in cold climates, and the acidity is also important for high quality cider. Woodchuck is helping Sunrise finance a new block of planting specifically for cider apples, because there simply are not enough apples in VT to supply Woodchuck's demand for 6 million gallons of cider per year. Touring an apple orchard was important for us in learning about the food system because hard cider is the fastest growing sector of the alcohol industry, as well as a huge aspect of VT's food and beverage industry. Ben also made an interesting point about consumers wanting craft ciders at the same price point as beer, because of similar flavoring and packaging. In reality though, cider is much more similar to wine because of the fruit juice pressing and fermentation process, versus fermenting grains. Yet still, consumers expect low prices for cider, which has proved challenging for the industry. More on Woodchuck - they were established in 1991 as the first commercial-size cider to bring cider to market in VT. They have a staff of 150 - 100 of whom work at the factory we toured in VT. They export to all 50 states, Europe, Canada, and Australia.

On Friday night we stayed in a cabin at Shelburne Farms, and toured the property on Saturday with Megan Camp, Vice President and Program Director of the nonprofit entity of Shelburne Farms. Shelburne is on an incredibly beautiful 1,400 acres alongside Lake Champlain. They focus on agricultural education and connecting people to the land, through children's summer camps, courses and workshops in sugaring and vegetable gardening education, pick-your-own produce, and generally opening their land for families to visit. We met with Josh Carter, Market Gardener, who showed us their vegetable farm and talked about his passion for taking care of natural and agricultural resources, and teaching people to think farming is a good way to live. They also have a solar orchard that produces 33% of their overall energy, as well as a compost operation. We walked through their creamery, where they make their own cheese and send some off to Jasper Hill for aging. Lastly, Megan talked about Shelburne's role in creating and supporting VT FEED, which partners with NOFA and Food Works to promote farm to school programming in VT.

Day 18: Real Food at Middlebury College, and bees as roving indicators of healthy ecosystems

Last night we arrived at Middlebury College, and today we learned about their commitment to carbon neutrality by 2016, their dining services and the Real Food Challenge (RFC), and their educational campus farm. It's obvious that Middlebury students promote an activist culture, and have the potential to make serious changes if they demand it from the administration and Board of Trustees. The students were instrumental in proposing a carbon reduction goal back in 2004, and in 2006 proposed carbon neutrality by 2016. They are also involved with promoting sustainable living habits and a campus-wide energy literacy campaign.

Ross Dining Hall at Middlebury College, which serves about 

7,500 meals per day and generates over $1 million per year.

Beyond sustainability, students play a vital role in real food procurement in their dining halls. Dan Detora of Middlebury Dining Services led us through two of their dining halls, Proctor and Ross, and described their commitments to purchasing local, reducing waste, and working with the Real Food Challenge calculator. They're a self-operated facility, which means they are in control of all their sourcing and food preparation, unlike schools who contract out to companies like Sodexo, Aramark, or Bon-Appetit. From what I can tell on this trip, self-operating facilities like Middlebury and Sterling are significantly superior and tend to prioritize real food, care more about their students' preferences, and support local farmers way, way more than schools that contract out. In terms of the RFC, they currently source about 26-28% real food, and are aiming for 30% by 2016 and 50% by 2020. Those are huge aspirations, but it seems like their values and infrastructure are in place to come close to those goals. They receive deliveries from 50-60 local farms every day, as well as from Black River Produce, a VT wholesale and distribution company. It's clear that as a self-operating facility, they want to and do go beyond the national goals of the RFC.

From left: Dara Scott, Bill McKibben, Helen Youn, Kirk Webster.

Tonight we heard from a panel of four on the impact of climate change on bees and beekeeping: Bill McKibben, leading climate change activist, Kirk Webster, beekeeper who breeds disease-resistant bees, Helen Young, evolutionary biologist and professor, and Dara Scott, an Irish bee expert. Bees and beekeeping is something I had previously thought of as part of the system, but not as essential as our panelists described it. Bill talked about bees as roving indicators of the health of our plants. We don't know why the number of bees has been collapsing, but it's obviously a sign that big shifts in climate are happening and impacting our ecosystem. This is especially important because Kirk described bees as incredible adaptable creatures, but now we see extreme weather changes definitely affecting them. Dara worded the crisis quite well by saying, "I consider the bee as a sort of canary in the coal mine at this stage." The bee decline deeply affects us as humans, as according to Helen, 75% of all flowering plants rely on pollinators like bees to help them with sexual reproduction. Although the other 25% are wind pollinators, which includes plants we rely heavily on like corn and wheat, the majority of our food crops will not survive if the bees disappear, and we won't be able to rely on the animals that eat those food crops. Pollination is thus critical for human survival, and we are indirectly dependent upon bee pollinators and the health of their colonies.

This conversation was yet another indicator of the incredible interconnectivity of food systems, as well as the importance of agroecology and doing our part in maintaining healthy ecosystems.

Day 17: How agroecology promotes food sovereignty and the right to food

The conversation surrounding food as a human right continued today at the second day of the UVM Food Systems Summit. We heard several presentations, but I want to reflect on the following speakers, who were the most noteworthy to me: Claire Kremen, conservation biologist and ecologist, Anastasia Telesetsky, professor at the University of Idaho College of Law, and Raj Patel, author and activist. As I'll mention at the end of this post, it's important to note that there's no one-size-fits-all solution to the food systems problems we're talking about and hearing about.

Claire reminded us that industrial agriculture is so fundamentally unsustainable - ecologically, economically, and socially. It's not possible to feed the world of the future with industrial agriculture, because it takes fertility out of the soils, produces the wrong mix of foods (too many grains), distributes food poorly, and depopulates farmland. Instead, we need a farming and food system that is regenerative, resilient, and sustainable. Agroecology is a science, movement, and practice that has the potential to transform our agricultural systems. It's knowledge-intensive, rather than input-intensive, and promotes ecological and social interactions. She showed us statistics that proved that biologically-diversified farms are more environmentally friendly, resilient, and efficient than conventional farms, and can sustain ecosystem services and recover unproductive lands. In terms of policies and implementation, we need to promote food sovereignty and right-to-food movements, break, get money of out politics and break the corporate control of food policy, and provide economic incentives for agroecological practices on our country's farms.

Anastasia discussed the intersection of our right to adequate food and our right to a clean and healthy environment. She challenged us to think about the environmental costs of producing enough food to meet basic needs (quantity, calories, commodities) versus high quality, real food. She also mentioned that in 2014, Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Olivier De Schutter acknowledged the role of the environment and production methods in achieving a right to food, and recommended the support of agro-biodiversity, subsidies to sustainability, and increased budgets for agroecological research. Goal 2 of the 2015 Sustainable Development Goals is to end hunger, achieve food security, and promote sustainable agriculture. This can be done through De Schutter's recommendations, as well as tax credits to landowners and farmers to transform industries, encouragement of creative use of underutilized land, and targeted government assistance for incremental implementation of agroecological practices. The "access to food cannot simply be a dream deferred." 

Raj is an incredible speaker. Seriously, if I am ever half as good at public speaking as he is, I'll consider my life a successful one. He engaged the audience well and provided witty soundbites, such as, "Diet Coke Plus says you can have zero calories and drink something that takes like a chemistry set, and flourish as a result," which had the audience roaring with laughter. His presentation was grounded in the fact that our food system is currently in an era of cheap food, cheap nature, cheap workers, cheap fuel, and cheap care. Our global food industry makes $89 billion in profits per year, while its environmental externalities are estimated at 224% of those profits. He urged us that no industrial agriculture model can internalize those costs (echoing Claire).

Raj spoke about the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, a commitment of international governments, donors, the private sector, research institutions, and other development partners to address agriculture-led growth and malnutrition in Africa. They essentially aim to beat hunger through business and science by providing private sector solutions that limit African countries' food sovereignty, promote dependence on the World Bank and Western corporations, and prioritize nutrition over the right to food through nutrient fortification. Raj described the New Alliance as a model that "premises itself on an investment, on something that provides a return, and it's a very slippery and dangerous slope." He used Malawi as an example, and showed us their three major commitments: improving their score on the Doing Business Index to top 100 countries, increasing the dollar value of private sector investment in agriculture and value-added agro-processing, and increased private investment in commercial production, sale of inputs, and produce and value addition. Raj pointed to this slide, and said, "You might say: Where's the nutrition? Where's the food?"

Well, the Soils, Food and Healthy Communities Project (SFHC) is a farmer-led organization in Ekwendeni, northern Malawi, which uses agroecological methods to answer that very question. Through farmer research groups, information sharing, growth of plants other than staple crops like corn, and Family Recipe Days, where men and boys learn about cooking and food preparation from women in the community, SFHC has shown improvements in child nutrition, food security, healthcare, and soil management for smallholder farming families. They have many peer-reviewed scientific publications about their work, which result from a participatory research model in which farmers do their own experiments and teach other farmers about their findings.

So anyway, if there's anything I've learned since arriving in Vermont it's that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to food production, food security, and food sovereignty. Every region has varying climates, types of soil, and lengths of growing seasons. Every region also has different demands from the people, different levels of interest from policymakers, different median levels of income, and most importantly, different values. SFHC seemed to do a great job of approaching food security from a community level, using agroecological methods, real relationships, and hard work.

Day 16: Valuing food as a human right, and why we need to transform our food system

Today was the first day of the UVM Food Systems Summit, and keynote speaker Smita Narula did an excellent job introducing us to the summit's theme, "The Right to Food: Power, Policy, and Politics in the 21st Century." She provided us with a big-picture perspective on transforming the food system, particularly through a human rights-based approach to food. By thinking about food as a human right, not a privilege, we can shift the conversation and drive policy toward a sustainable, nourishing, just food system. Though I must admit her 75-minute presentation was somewhat vague in what actual action we can take to create changes, she did a damn good job of summarizing what's wrong with our current food system and why it needs to be transformed, using incredibly powerful and inspiring language.

With the "right to food" as the theme of the summit, Smita defined this term as a concept with four main tenets: accessibility, adequacy, availability, and sustainable production. (1) Accessibility to food is nondiscriminatory and takes into account both physical access, which means proximity to food and access to transportation, and economic access, which means affordability without tradeoffs. (2) Adequacy means food that is nutritious, safe, culturally appropriate, and meets dietary needs. (3) Availability refers to both having adequate food in nearby stores, but also availability of the resources necessary for producing food, including land, seed, water, and basic equipment. (4) Lastly, the food to which we all have a right must be produced and sourced sustainably.

http://www.uvm.edu/foodsystems/?Page=summit.html&SM=summitmenu.html

Smita described food insecurity as a daily, perpetual struggle that connects hunger to obesity, and our food system to poverty, racism, classism, and gender inequality. People are impoverished by the design of our system, not by chance, and a gross imbalance of power embeds injustices and dispossession of resources into our society. Instead, we need a political and economic system where people can provide for themselves in dignified, healthy, sustainable ways. Rather than allowing markets and corporations to control the center of food conversations, we need to focus on farmers, foodmakers, distributors, and laborers, while prioritizing local production of real food, not commodities.

My biggest takeaway from Smita's speech is that our food system is not the only system that needs a radical transformation, if we want to live in a world where every human being has the right to consume (and produce) healthy, nourishing, good food. This relates well to the conversations we've had on this trip surrounding values, going back to the very first day with Paul Costello at the VT Council on Rural Development and Chuck Ross at the VT Agency of Agriculture. Although in those conversations we talked about VT's traditional values, such as community, local economies, and conserving nature, Smita's frame of food as a right also boils down to values. If we want to think about food as an essential human right that everyone in the world must be able to enjoy, we have to place food at a higher value than corporate power, profits, growth, efficiency, and cheap labor.

Day 15: VT land conservation, big picture systems terms, and food hub viability

Paul Foteyn's house on Lake Bomoseen.

I didn't post last night because we had our second "down day" (and so we weren't required to post). The President of GMC, Paul Fonteyn, invited us to his house on Lake Bomoseen, and it was a beautiful, relaxing day filled with boating, paddle boarding, swimming, and a delicious local/organic barbecue. We left GMC this morning and are back at UVM, ready for the VT Food Systems Summit tomorrow, which will bring together several hundred people to discuss the right to food.

This morning we chatted with Philip at GMC's farmhouse about Vermont's history through a land conservation lens. We talked about the conversion of New England woodlands to agricultural land during colonial times, which led to a history of soil loss, intense resource expansion, and water pollution/depletion. He told us about George Perkins Marsh, Sir Albert Howard, Lady Eve Balfour, and others who explored other landscapes, such as in Europe, to help them understand the "travesty to the landscape" back in New England. These discoveries, along with the Morrell Act of 1863 that established land grants and land grant institutions and the introduction of county fairs, helped lead to agricultural improvement in the mid-1800s. Philip also talked about the significance of the Soil Conservation Service (now known as the National Resource Conservation Service), land trusts, organic organizations, the back-to-the-land movement of the 1970s, and the Clean Water Act of 2008 in conserving VT resources, particularly soil and water.

GMC's Campus Farmhouse and front garden.

We then switched to a bigger picture conversation, in which we identified key terms from the last two weeks and tried to group them together to better understand the "systems" aspect of food systems, as well as how to make proper connections among the places we've seen and people we've spoken to. I enjoyed this activity primarily because it'll help me flush out what's important and be able talk about food systems and food policy with people who are unfamiliar with most of the terms. Some examples include food insecurity, food sovereignty, nutrient-dense, local/regional economies, rural revitalization, value-added, farm-to-institution, food hub, cooperatives, food justice, sustainable agriculture, diversified farming, organic practices, waste management, carbon sequestration, genetic engineering, labeling, social capital, and food miles.

For tonight's post we were asked to expand on one term and tease out where we've discussed it so far on our study tour. Food hub stands out to me the most, as it is a term that is becoming more and more critical in food systems conversations. According to the USDA, the National Food Hub Collaboration defines a regional food hub as:

"a business or organization that actively manages the aggregation, distribution, and marketing of source-identified food products primarily from local and regional producers to strengthen their ability to satisfy wholesale, retail, and institutional demand."

Intervale Food Hub baskets.

I want to talk about regional food hubs through the frame of scale, as we've seen a wide variety of food hubs so far. Vern Grubinger discussed the market aspect of food hubs, as they can deliver local food at lower costs than farms would sell on their own, because of the aggregation. Further, they allow small-scale farms to compete with large-scale farms, because in the aggregation they act as a single large-scale operation. Hubs work with a variety of different farmers and types of products, so they can provide different types of consumers with a wide variety of products.

Intervale Food Hub truck, which distributes food 2x/week to
community delivery sites.

The VT Food Venture Center (VFVC) discussed food hubs broadly as operations that aggregate, process, distribute, and sell food. Examples include online farmers' markets and multi-farm CSAs, especially if there's a central location for aggregation and distribution, such as a warehouse or truck. VFVC was unique because they connect people who want to start food hubs, do market research on the supply and demand in a certain region, and help build relationships. They also mentioned VT examples, including the Mad River Food Hub, Green Mountain Farm Direct, Rutland Area Farm Food Link, and the Intervale Center Food Hub, which we visited as well.

The Intervale Food Hub (IFH) is a multi-farm year-round weekly food share that aggregates products from 30 local producers and distributes to customers at community delivery sites, such as workplaces, college and corporate campuses, schools, or churches. Their prices are comparable to local, organic products at a grocery store, and they distribute mainly produce, staple foods, and some value-added products. Their producers range in size from 1/2-acre greenhouses to 50-acre vegetable farms. The food hub is unique compared to other CSAs because it aggregates products from several producers and appeals to new types of customers through a convenience factor - the products are thoroughly washed and small quantities are packed in bags so the food is ready to cook/eat. The packages also include menu planning, recipe development, and cooking tips to attract the average consumer who might not normally be knowledgeable about CSAs or farm-fresh food.

A mural at VFVC depicting food systems: production,
aggregation, processing, delivery, and consumption.

In terms of scale, the IFH delivers small packages from a variety of small farms twice a week to 20-25 delivery sites for customers up to 30 miles away. Clearly, this is a very local/regional model that probably wouldn't work for more than a couple hundred customers or much more than their 30 small producers. It's an excellent way to open up new markets for their local producers, as well as a way to introduce new customers to local farmers, but the profit margins are small and subsidies are needed to keep it running. 

Day 13: The true meaning of "outdoorsy" and "down-to-earth"

Philip Ackerman-Leist's home, courtesy of Natalie Bekkouche.

Yesterday we traveled to Green Mountain College (GMC), toured their campus farm (Cerridwen Farm), had dinner with some students, and met Philip Ackerman-Leist, Director of the GMC Masters in Sustainable Food Systems and an instrumental leader in the VT Higher Education Food Systems Consortium and planning this study tour. For today's blog post, we were tasked with reflecting on the farmers' lifestyles we've seen and comparing them to our own.

As we've visited farms and gardens over the last two weeks, we've seen a wide array of lifestyles and models of farming. We've seen family-run dairy farms where the family lives on the farm and wakes up at 4am to milk and feed the cows, we've seen college farms where students live on campus and wake up at 6am to do morning farm chores and professors or farm managers come from off campus at sunrise, we've seen school gardens or vegetable farms carefully tended to during the days, and today, we had the wonderful opportunity to harvest wild greens and eat dinner at Philip's homestead.

Philip and his wife Erin live in a remote house that they built on Tunket Road in Pawlet, VT with their three children. Though I haven't spoken to him about his experiences as a homesteader, I know he wrote a whole book about it called Up Tunket Road. From what I can tell, he writes about the complexities of living a simple life somewhat separated from modern life in terms of its economic systems, food systems, social systems, electr(on)ic systems, and water systems, among others. After driving up a long, bumpy road and spending a few hours at his house, it's clear that he and his family grow and harvest an overwhelming amount of their own food and use a herd of devon cattle that provide milk, beef, and manual labor. Their house is definitely untraditional and I could tell almost all of the structures and systems were built by hand. I had a lovely time at Philip's, enjoying the beautiful early summer weather, wildcrafting and learning about plants I previously thought of as inedible weeds, and chatting with his family, neighbors, and our group, knowing my phone was on Airplane mode and that I was in a space independent of the technology I am essentially attached to most of the time.

I've thought a lot about my own lifestyle over the last two weeks, and the lifestyle to which I grew up accustomed. I've definitely been in a sort of culture shock, and am forced to think about the different kinds of lives people lead. I believe 100% that the farmers we've met are connected to their land and surroundings in a way I've never experienced and am not sure I ever will experience. They lead sustainable lives in many ways, using renewable energies, being aware of their carbon footprints, eating food either they cultivated or from neighbors they know well, and supporting their local economy when buying what they can't provide for themselves. In the house I grew up in, we ate processed foods, relied on gas for hot running water and electricity, had lots of technological gadgets, boasted a bright green, manicured lawn complete with white fertilizer every few weeks, and drove our gas-guzzling Chevy Suburban down the road and all over town to buy groceries and other goods from people we didn't know. Growing up in a NYC suburb, I always considered myself more outdoorsy and/or down-to-earth than my friends - we'd go hiking and camping a few times a year, we always took more adventurous vacations than my friends (who'd sit on a beach somewhere), like skiing or ranching and hiking in Montana, and we paid attention to food labels and cooked vegetables often.

I'm realizing it's incredibly hard to write down a description of my own upbringing in a way that any reader will truly understand, and compare it to the farming lifestyles we've seen, but I can admit that my definition of outdoorsy and down-to-earth has changed. The word "sustainable" hardly crossed my path before my siblings and I went to college and learned about environmental issues, and as we talk about sustainable food systems and sustainable agriculture, I know I must lead a more sustainable lifestyle that is more connected to our land than the one I've known all my life.

Day 11: Learning to understand GMOs and the importance of labeling

We spent today at Vermont Law School (VLS) learning about genetically engineered (GE) foods from Carrie Scrufari, an LLM Fellow with VLS' Center for Agriculture and Food Systems. Just to clarify, genetically modified organism (GMO) and GE are often used interchangeably, but they are technically different. GMOs have been around for decades through plant cross-breeding, while GE is the issue people are concerned with now, which includes practices such as splicing genes, crossing genes within different types of organisms (think flounder genes in a tomato to prevent it from freezing in the winter), or inserting pesticides in seeds through bacteria, among others. (Here's a more detailed explanation if you want it). I'm going to refer to this issue in terms of GE foods (because that's what the issue is), even though we usually hear about GMO labeling or non-GMO. 

http://visual.ly/gmo-genetically-modified-organism

Between Carrie's presentation today and various conversations we've had about GE over the course of this trip, I still don't know how I feel about them. There are definitely pros and cons, but the main issue is a gross lack of transparency and extremely biased "scientific" facts in both directions. Some purposes of GE foods include: enhanced nutritional quality of seeds/crops, drought resistance, increased growth rate, enhanced ripening, altered freezing properties, and prevented spoilage. Arguments for GE claim that the US government's regulatory system evaluates safety sufficiently, that pesticide use has gone down since more GE products have entered the market (because the pesticides are inserted in the seed, less needs to be sprayed), and that GE foods are equivalent to their non-GE versions, so there's no reason to label them and provide unnecessary misleading information to consumers.

Rather than arguing that GE foods are bad and should be banned, I want to talk about the importance of labeling. In a country that values freedom of choice and freedom of knowledge, why are consumers being denied the opportunity to know what's in their food? Europe, unlike the US, follows the precautionary principle, which states that if evidence points toward potential of harm to public health and/or the environment, we should pursue options that avoid harm, even if the harm isn't yet fully understood or proven. In this case, we don't have the scientific evidence to make concrete, unbiased conclusions about GE foods' safety, so the least we can do is let consumers decide for themselves. There are huge conflicts of interest among the three regulatory agencies and major biotechnology and agricultural companies, such as Monsanto, DuPont, and Syngenta (which collectively control 53% of global proprietary seed sales), which has also prevented the passage of GE labeling laws all over the country. Currently, 32 states have introduced GE labeling bills, but only Vermont, Maine, and Connecticut have passed laws. With so much corporate control over lawmaking, passing GE labeling laws has proved a real challenge, but I truly don't believe labels will increase costs, impede international trade, confuse consumers any more than they already are, or even deter the majority of Americans to stop buying from the Big Food and Big Ag companies that already control their respective industries. You can read more about the nationwide Right to Know GMO coalition and campaign for mandatory GE food labeling at their website: http://www.righttoknow-gmo.org/. 

A significant part of Carrie's presentation also dealt with major gaps in the US government's regulation of GE foods. There are three federal agencies that have regulatory power over GE foods: the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) decides if a GE plant is safe to grow or poses a plant pest risk to the environment or interstate commerce; the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decides if GE food, feed, and additives are safe to eat; and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decides if GE seeds (and pesticides) are safe for the environment. 

This is an incredibly loaded issue. I feel like it's almost impossible to get educated about it in an unbiased way, but I am definitely accumulating knowledge. One concept that is clear, however, is the significance of GE foods on so many parts of the food system - the environment, the global food supply, the economics of food and agriculture, soil and plant biodiversity, human health, animal health (through their feed but also in animal testing), government agency regulation, state and federal labeling bills/laws, the organic industry and pollen drift, and corporate America, among so many other moving parts. Kristi Marsh said it best in this article (that you should definitely read, by the way), "In the end, I feel no one knows the full answer."

Day 10: Eat your (organic) vegetables

The Farm Stand at Cedar Circle Farm.

This morning we toured Cedar Circle Farm, a gorgeous organic fruit and vegetable farm that's motivated by sustainable agriculture, community health, education, well-paid laborers, and environmental values. Cedar Circle was established on this 40-acre property in 2000, and has several programs for getting farm-fresh, organic fruits and vegetables to Vermont customers. They have an education program run by our tour guide Eric Tadlock, a retail flower department, and a farm kitchen managed by Alison Baker, which supplies their cafe, farm stand, and a small amount of prepared foods and value-added products that are sold elsewhere. Their produce and value-added products are sold in four direct ways: direct sales to customers in their farm stand (where we ate lunch today), direct sales at four Vermont farmers' markets, a CSA with about 180 shares per year on average over the last 12 years, and pick-your-own strawberries and flowers. They also have two festivals every year that attract 1,500-2,000 people each: a strawberry festival in June and a pumpkin festival in October.

Beautiful greens on Cedar Circle Farm's vegetable farm.

All their produce is certified organic, which proves challenging. However, like every other organization we have met with, they make organic work because they are loyal to their values and truly believe in the benefits of organic practices. I want to take this moment to explain what I've absorbed from our conversations about organic. Despite what you may think (and what I thought before this trip), organic is not just about consumer health. It's about farmers producing food using practices that recycle resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity, without chemical fertilizers, pesticides, genetic modification, or other synthetic additives. A really important aspect is soil health, letting plots lay fallow, and keeping nutrients at balanced levels in soil. Operations Manager Luke Joanis told us that they need to scale up and accumulate more land, but not increase production. In order to keep maintain their soil and grow great crops, they need time and space to let the soil retain its nutrients.

Grace Gershuny, an organic inspector who was deeply involved with the local and organic food movement of the 1970s, spoke to us about perceptions of organic. She emphasized that people who complain about organic standards being watered down when the USDA took charge of the federal organic certification are only thinking of consumers as the end all be all. Organically grown or produced food is inherently healthier than conventional foods, but we need to understand the importance of organic in environmental and farm viability.

Strawberry stand at Cedar Circle Farm, which is open when
customers pick their own strawberries at per-pound prices.

In the afternoon we stopped by Chelsea Green Publishing, the leading publisher of books on the politics and practices of sustainable living, in areas such as organic farming, food/nutrition/cooking, gardening, permaculture, ecology, the environment, simple living, renewable energy, economics, food politics, etc. We learned a lot about the writing and publishing process, but I was impressed by how well our conversation with Co-Founder and Publisher Margo Baldwin and Communications Director Shay Totten fit into our food systems focus. Releasing books about sustainability and food is incredibly important in raising awareness of the issues I'm spending these 3 weeks learning about, and sparking conversations among people who wouldn't normally think about food systems as a critical matter.

Day 9: The 3 C's: Cattle, Carbon, Capital

Sosten's food/energy pyramid.

Over the last 5 or 6 days, we learned a whole lot about food production, through a wide variety of lenses, such as chemistry, efficiency, sustainability, vegetables and plants, cows, soil health, and economics, among others. Sosten Lungu, a VTC agronomy professor, drew a food/energy pyramid on the blackboard for us, showing the relationship between soil, plants, cows or other ruminants, and people. Soil, which is made of water, minerals, organic matter, and microbes, supports plants. Plants produce energy. Cows' digest plant energy - bacteria in the rumen break down plant carbohydrates, such as hemicellulose and cellulose, to create milk, sugars, and proteins. This allows people to take in plant energy in a digestible form - through milk or beef. It's important to note that as we move up the pyramid, carbon (energy) is lost to the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide (CO2). This pyramid clearly showed the importance of maintaining nutrients in soil (through practices like cover cropping and crop rotation), photosynthesis in plants, and careful planning around what types of plants, how often, and how much cows eat.

VTC's vegetable farm, which supplies Sodexo for the
5 Vermont State Colleges. 

At all the farms we've visited so far, whether dairy or vegetable, there's been a focus on healthy soil, and we've heard slightly different variations of the same practices: nutrient management, composting, crop rotation, and cover cropping. At the dairy farms, the focus depended more on the purpose of the cows' milk - artisan cheese and milk vs. commodity milk. At farms like Sweet Rowen and Jasper Hill, where the quality of the milk may be more important than the quality, the scale is on the smaller side (Paul at Sweet Rowen has about 30 cows), and they focus on soil techniques and let the cows graze on high quality pasture and eat high quality hay. On the other hand, dairy farms like Laggis Brothers and the VTC farm produce commodity milk, and thus focus more on efficient cows that produce as much milk as possible. Both these farms were larger scale (Laggis has about 500 cows and VTC has about 200) and feed their cows different combinations of grass, corn, hay, and grain. According to Louise from Sterling, corn gives cows 4 times more energy/bulk than grass, so I assume that partially explains why Laggis and VTC cows (commodity milk) got more corn and grains than Jasper Hill cows (cheese).

I also want to mention other topics we discussed with Dr. Dutton and Sosten over the last two days, to make clear how broad this food systems issue is, and how so many other areas of knowledge are impacted by food and agriculture:

• The incredible importance of carbon in everything!
• The significant role of bacteria in soil--plant--cow--people--soil processes
• The nitrogen cycle
• Balancing nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium levels in soil
• Comparing C-3 (perform well in 46-78 degrees) and C-4 plants (perform well in 85-105 degrees)
• Methane digesters' use of manure and other waste to create methane, which then creates electricity and heat
• The need to control compost to slow down the release of methane into the atmosphere - methane emissions from dairy cattle, per cow per day, increased 175% from 1944 to 2007 (Chase).
• Money in vegetables and animals - how to quantify budgets to cover costs, decide on scale, and figure out the best marketing practices
• Cross-breeding corn and genetically modifying seeds 
• Pros and cons of organic
• And finally, the future of agriculture: local/regional distribution, the role of the information age, the resurgence of small farms, microorganisms as fertilizer replacements, water resources, and consumer interest

Chase, L.E. "Reducing Greenhouse Gases Can also Reduce Feed Costs." Cornell University Dept. of Animal Science. Accessed June 7, 2015.

Day 8: Back to the basics: biology, chemistry, methane, and poop

Today was our first day at Vermont Technical College (VTC). Dr. Chris Dutton is our lead instructor, and he is a man passionate about the scientific processes around food production. In basic terms, he spent the day speed-teaching us this cycle: Plants take nutrients (elements of the periodic table) and water from the soil --> Plants transform the nutrients into carbohydrates, fats, and proteins --> Plants take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen via photosynthesis to produce glucose, while they also take in oxygen and release carbon dioxide during respiration to fuel their own functional processes --> Animals eat plants, while digesting hemicellulose, cellulose, and lignin, to make plant nutrients more digestible for human consumption (when we eat animals) --> Food waste and manure go back to the soil.

Methane digester tanks, which are filled
with manure/waste and methane gas.

He then taught us about VTC's methane digester, which takes cow poop, beer waste, and pre-consumer food waste, among other wastes, and aggregates it in a stable environment (giant tanks) where bacteria feeds on it and breaks the bonds of the carbs, fats, and proteins. The bacteria leaves behind methane gas (CH4), which goes through a process to create electricity and give off heat. We literally were learning about and witnessing poop becoming electricity. Talk about renewable energy! But actually, I asked Dr. Dutton why methane digesters aren't more common, and the essential answer is the same as why solar and wind technologies aren't more mainstream - they're expensive, there aren't enough critical policy conversations, and our country is too committed to what it knows: oil.

Nicolle feeding young cows their dinner.

Later in the day, we did farm chores with a great group of VTC summer students. I have to admit that even though the first time I touched a cow was only two days ago, I had so much fun milking cows, feeding calves, and driving a skid-steer. It was definitely smelly and messy - I had my fair share of cow poop on my shoes and hands/arms. Milking was my favorite part, but the cows could tell I was not an experienced milker. I'd say three out of the eight cows I milked kicked me, which is probably not a great ratio. The girls in the parlor were incredibly patient with us, though, and I could tell they loved being in such an educational farming environment.

In typical VTC student-to-student
fashion, I attempted to teach Chantal 
how to maneuver the skid steer.

Even though I don't think I'll ever be a farmer, I really enjoyed the hands-on experiences VTC loves to offer, and as VTC President Dan Smith explained, there are real people and real work that goes on behind food and agriculture upper-level policy conversations.

Day 6: Simple dairy facts for urban folk like me

Maple and me at Sweet Rowen Farmstead.
She is probably around 2 months old
 and likes sucking on fingers.

Our time in the Northeast Kingdom has definitely opened my eyes to parts of dairy and agriculture that I've never learned about or even heard about. While I'm certainly not an expert at this point, I do have a basic understanding of how dairy production works, and there are several dairy/agriculture buzzwords whose meaning I now understand. For all you city folk out there who would have also asked, "What's the difference between dairy and beef cows?" here is a list of "simple" terms/concepts I've learned over the last two days.

Jersey cows at Laggis Brothers Farm.

• Bovines are a species that includes cattle, while Jersey, Holstein, etc. are specific dairy cow breeds (think canine vs. beagle).
• The keys to a great dairy operation are cleanliness, consistency (in feeding, milking, and cleaning), proper food, and proper ventilation.
• There are 8.6 pounds of milk in a gallon. 
• Cows need to be milked at least twice a day.
• Managing a dairy farm for commodity milk (Laggis) is very different from one for artisan cheeses (Sweet Rowen and Jasper Hill). I think commodity farms are usually bigger and don't do as many direct sales.
• There are many different types of systems at dairy farms for manure management, ventilation, feeding, and milking.
• The Jersey cows we saw at Laggis Brothers Farm (female dairy cows) give birth for the first time at around 13 months, and then ideally are pregnant again within 90 days.
• "Pre-fresh" or "springer" means a cow that will give birth within 2 weeks, and needs to be given a different diets and stay in a separate barn (at Laggis).
• Bigger dairy farms typically produce commodity milk, which gets picked up from distributors or co-ops and dropped off at a processor to be made into liquid, bottled milk. This bottled milk usually has a new label and can be sold outside of VT.
• The goal is to have cows on a high forage (grass) diet - our theme for today was "Profit from Pasture" but could have also been "Funds from Forage," according to Louise. I'm pretty sure forage is fresh grasses, while silage is fermented, dried grass or corn residue, but the nuances of differences in definition are still unclear to me. I now know that VT cows at Laggis, Jasper Hill, and Sweet Rowen Farmstead eat silage and forage (and soy, grain, corn, hay?) - make of that what you will.
• Farmers grow corn because it yields 4 times more energy than grass, but they feed their cows both grass and corn (among other grains?) because there's public concern about corn, and almost all corn in VT is GMO.
• Cows' milk straight out of their udder is 102 degrees!
• Sand bedding is super comfortable for cows - "the gold standard of cow bedding" - especially if you keep it clean. There's less opportunity for bacteria growth and it's cost-effective.
• A healthy cow has a really strong, straight back and a tight udder that's parallel to the ground.

Prime example of a great udder,
according to Louise.

Me standing in front of a
large pile of corn silage,
confused by what I was seeing.

My apologies if this information isn't totally correct, but I'd say I'm generally more knowledgeable than I was two days ago!

Day 5: "We educate versus sell, and that's expensive" - Andrew Meyer, VT Soy

Steer at Sterling Farm, where we did 6:30am farm chores.

Of everything we've learned so far (which is a LOT, for only 5 days), today's material was definitely the most different from my background, both in terms of my food studies education and living experiences. Before coming to Vermont, I spent much more time thinking and reading about the consumer side of food systems than the producer side, as well as more about fruits and vegetables than about dairy and livestock. I've certainly been pulled out of my comfort zone, but I've always known that a basic understanding of rural, agricultural communities and how food is produced (whether produce, milk, cheese, or meat) would be vital for a career in food policy.

Clothbound Cabot cheddar, which
ages in this cellar for 9-13 months.

This part of the course, in Sterling, has caused me to think more about where my food comes from than I have before. I have to admit I was slightly disconcerted by the idea of Cabot cheddar cheese wheels sitting in a basement cellar (that smelled so strongly of ammonia) for 9-13 months at Jasper Hill Cellars. There's also something inherently sad about seeing pigs, lambs and goats, cows, and rabbits at Sterling Farm that you know will be slaughtered soon for meat. Additionally, at Jasper Hill Cellars, the VT Food Venture Center, and Jasper Hill barn, we had to be very careful about washing our hands, cleaning our boots, and keeping our hair in hairnets because of food safety issues. This is another aspect of the food system I haven't thought much about, especially when I'm eating, but I am learning to see how challenging food safety can be from both a policy/administrative level and boots-on-the-ground (literally, boots) production level.

To expand on the title of this post, Andrew Meyer, the owner of Vermont Soy, discussed the challenges of selling organic, sustainably grown/raised food, and the need to educate consumers before they'll buy such products. When asked why he and other small VT producers sell their product to supposed "bad guys" like Walmart, he claimed that he's fine with selling his soy products to Walmart or Whole Foods, because that brings money back to his local community. Small companies like Vermont Soy, and the majority of VT food companies, need to sell outside VT's small co-ops to increase their volume, lower costs, increase profits, hire more employees, give more back to the local community, grow/produce more product, etc etc. This was an interesting perspective on small-town, rural economic development, and I'm sure opinions on selling to such huge corporations vary widely. This article in Civil Eats, for example, discusses Wal-Mart's greenwashing, misleading sustainability claims, and control over supply markets (Holt 2015). But as we start to see huge connections across food systems, that conversation becomes a whole different animal.

Day 4: Community-based agriculture and Sterling College

This morning we visited the Intervale Center, a 350-acre agricultural nonprofit that offers several programs for mostly vegetable farming in Burlington. While most of the land is owned by Intervale, some is government-owned and managed by Intervale, and some is owned by the Calkins Family. Eleven individual farm businesses rent land plots from Intervale, and they each enjoy shared equipment, resources, space, support, and ideas. Intervale also offers a 5-year incubator farm program, recreation such as bike paths and an events barn, Summervale - a July and August community food and music festival on Thursdays, and a gleaning and food rescue program for families below 200% of the poverty line.

The Intervale Center houses two distribution models: The Intervale Community Farm and the Intervale Food Hub. The Community Farm, established in 1990, is the oldest CSA in Vermont! It's the largest farm in the Intervale, and offers year-round shares. The Food Hub was an interesting idea to me - it seemed like a cross of a multi-farm CSA and an online farmers' market. When asked if there's competition between the Food Hub and Community Farm, our tour guide Chelsea Frisbee explained that the two services appeal to very different types of customers. The Food Hub attempts to reach new markets - people who otherwise wouldn't be involved with CSAs or shopping at farmers' markets, because their products are more conveniently cleaned, packaged, and ready to eat/cook.

Next, we drove over to City Market Onion River Co-op for a tour and lunch in their prepared foods section. We learned about the history of cooperatives and their commitment to 7 principles: voluntary and open membership, democratic member control (equal shares by all members), member economic participation ($200 each), autonomy and independence, education/training/information (events and classes for community, CM members, and staff), cooperation among co-ops, and concern for the community (Rally for Change program at cash registers - rounding up to the next dollar). They have over 11,000 members. As part of an agreement with the City of Burlington, because they're the only grocery store, they have to offer at least 25% conventional food in order to appeal to the average customer and remain affordable. In 2014, 35% of their sales were Local or Made in VT. They focus strongly on their producers and farmers, with picture posters of their suppliers all over the store. They get deliveries from hundreds of farms every day, in addition to big distributors. They are the largest co-op in the state in terms of sales, and probably in terms of membership as well (but not in square feet). As part of their community engagement department and focus on farmers, local producers set up samples and demos inside the story daily.

Around 4:30pm, we arrived in Sterling College. It's super rural. There are 120 students total at Sterling, and everyone knows each other and the staff/faculty so well. We had dinner in their tiny dining hall, strictly at 5:30pm, and it was over by 6:15. Louise Calderwood, Professor of Sustainable Ag and Special Assistant to the President, spoke to us about our itinerary here, then gave us a presentation on the history of agriculture in Vermont and dairy/livestock production and feeding the planet. The next few days are going to be focused on dairy and animals -- definitely new territory for me.