Weather Forecast: Tuesday, high of 88 degrees F, 40% chance of rain. Wednesday, high of 81 degrees F, 100% chance of thunderstorms.
Well, frankly, we've had better weeks on the farm. My Dad is still in the hospital in Ann Arbor, our dog Sunny died on Friday, and this heat is stressing out the plants and making planting a challenge. I would just as soon go back in time about a week and have a do-over. This is a critical point in our season, when the majority of our crops need to get into the ground and so once again this year we find ourselves in a position of wondering whether we are going to be able to fulfill our responsibilities to our CSA members with my family needing so much extra of our time and energy than we'd planned for.
This weekend we began soil preparations on one of our larger garden areas by mowing off the cover crop and tilling the cover crop residue into the soil as a green manure. If you aren't familiar with these terms, a "cover crop" is a crop that you plant to cover the soil rather than to harvest. Cover crops are used for weed suppression and when they are tilled green into the soil they are called "green manures" because they add organic matter and nutrients to the soil like manure does (they just haven't been processed through an animal's intestines first).
Tuesday folks, we are hoping that we will have this garden ready for planting by the time you get here and you can help us get our main potato crop in the ground. Wednesday folks, you've already helped us out with potatoes and it sounds like it's going to be a rainy afternoon. We need to clean up some of our bee equipment and get some new hive components ready for the new bees, so that's something you could help us with indoors if it is raining.
Please keep an eye on the weather for this week, especially Tuesday people! It has been HOT and you will be out during the hottest part of the day. This will be an opportunity for you to feel what it's like to work outdoors in the heat if you haven't had that experience; however, we want you to be safe. Dress in clothing that will protect you from the sun and bring water bottles.
Potatoes are another one of those crops whose history is so intimately
connected with human history that it's difficult to say which one of us
(the potato or the human) has been more changed by our interactions. For
a quick (30 min) summary of this history, watch the potato segment of
Michael Pollan's "The Botany of Desire." It's from 1:23:30 to about
1:53: http://naturedocumentaries.org/126/the-botany-of-desire/.
Then, for a more in-depth look at how climate change is affecting
Peruvian potato farmers and how they are using their traditional farming
methods to adapt, check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLI2KySC9-U.
The questions I have for you stem from a comment made by the former
Monsanto potato engineer near the end of "The Botany of Desire": "I
think some of the methods they've developed in Peru to use genetic
diversity by planting a whole range of varieties within one field is a
very good strategy, but I just don't see how we readily adapt that to a
production system that not only has to feed people in the U.S., but feed
a worldwide system with a product that's a certain quality."
In this comment, I hear echoes of a familiar rationale that I see
frequently used to reinforce the status quo. There's an innuendo that
the Peruvian farmers' methods may be nice for the environment and
healthier for people (less chemical toxins), but that they are
"outdated" methods that simply don't work in "modern" production
systems. But if we really look at each system, which population is most
likely to survive climatic changes? The one that is relying on
monoculture to "feed a worldwide system" or one that is actively
stewarding genetic diversity in order to feed its local community, while
sharing information and resources to help other communities around the
global increase their food sovereignty and security?
And what, exactly, does "has to . . . feed a worldwide system with a
product that's a certain quality" mean? First of all, since potatoes are
super-versatile and can be grown around the globe, why should U.S.
potato growers need to feed a worldwide system? Second, I'm pretty sure
that those Peruvian potatoes aren't lacking in quality. So, does
"certain quality" translate to "will fit through McDonald's automatic
french fry cutter machine"? And does "feeding the world" really mean
"supply the world's McDonald's with fries"? In which case, perhaps
"feeding the world" really equals "giving the world heart disease"?
What are your thoughts about this? Are there ways that you see that we
might be able to incorporate traditional ecological knowledge and
methods such as those practiced by the Peruvian farmers into currently
dominant, yet unsustainable agricultural systems? The former Monsanto
potato breeder couldn't envision such a thing. But the lessons of the
Irish potato famine might indicate that our future depends on just such
creative visioning.
More broadly, as we move toward the end of our time together in this course, I'm wondering what your visions are for how we might transform our food and farming systems to make them more resilient, just, and
joyful? What are actions that you might take in your life to be a part of this transformation?
Oh man do I love potatoes. I was first introduced to the productivity of the potato by my friend Owen, who, as a teenager enthused about farming, did just what Micheal Pollen talked about and planted half an acre to feed his family. Owen, the sort of guy who sews himself kilts to wear and crafts bagpipes (certifiably the worst instrument to hear someone learn to play), plants potatoes both for their productivity and to connect with his Irish heritage. While the potato has been harsh on the Irish in past, it is still a major food source in Ireland, and is the cornerstone of many Irish dishes. While backpacking across Ireland, I had the good luck to stay with a friend who lived quite close the the Irish Potato Famine Museum and was able to spend an afternoon strolling through the repurposed colonial British manor learning about the effects of the famine. Predictably, the story the museum told was not only one of crop failure, but also social failure. Tenet farmers who were unable to pay their rent were kicked off their land and sent to exploitative labor camps where they were given meagre rations to survive. This break-down of the connection between people's livelihood and the land was capitalized on by landowners and property sizes grew to facilitate increasingly centralized control. All of this was overseen by British politicians who justified their lack of adequate response to the famine with racist ideologies that claimed the potato blight was a sign of the Irish's lack of good character.
ReplyDeleteI think that the stories of how the potato changed our social structure and how the horrors of the famine were accentuated by a lack of equity in landownership show that to transform our food and farming systems we must transform our society, and that to transform our society we must transform our food and farming systems. How do we do so? I don't know. Do I focus on policy reform? Do I start farming and produce a microcosm of the world I want to see? Do I march the streets and design posters and try to build awareness about these issues? I'm not sure what the most effective strategy is and I don't really want to shape the course of my life around effectiveness, since it is most certainly short-sighted. Instead I plan to let effectiveness stand alongside other factors, such as, what I feel called to do and what makes me feel most fully alive in light of what I know about social and ecological issues. As for now, I just try to be resilient, just, and joyful with myself and others, and hope that my interest in and willingness to talk about food and farming systems helps spark similar interest and concern in those around me.
I think incorporating traditional ecological knowledge is critical to a sustainable agricultural system. From the knowledge that I observed and learned a little bit about in Thailand, it seems to me that the traditional ways of farming are more in harmony with the land, or work with the land rather than against it. Also, they have worked for hundreds of years. I think if farmers only took the sentence "working with instead of against the land" into consideration our food production system would be a lot more sustainable, and Earth health conscious. I think rather than trying to separate ourselves and our systems from the biosphere/natural ecosystem we have to work to re-integrate, and embrace and fit into the natural ecosystem.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what actions I'm taking in my life to transform our food system. I try to buy local when I can, to support the smaller, ecologically friendly farms. I'm also trying to grow my own tiny garden right now. I think conversation is also a huge part of transforming a system in a very small way. Having conversation with parents or friends about food, cooking local food with them, and appreciating the labor that went into the food on the table is a small way to get people thinking about the food they are consuming. I think so often we eat out of necessity and habit, and don't appreciate or realize what we are putting in our bodies.
ReplyDeleteIn the video “Guardians of Diversity,” I found it interesting how these indigenous communities from different parts of the world are learning from one another. These ethnic minorities all live in high altitudes ecosystems, which one may think that farming in high mountain tops is impossible. This fact connects back to Kiavanne’s presentation where they comment on the agriculture in Samoa. For that reason, I believe that populations that are most likely to survive climatic changes are the people who were raise with these old practices of agriculture. We live in a world where monocultures have taken part of our food distribution, that our connection of food is lost. Some people who have been surrounded by growing their food, have the beauty to taste and understand what their plants need. In the video, it is interesting to learn about the Inca cultivation and how they would test which soils will be best for certain crops. The aim of the Amaru and the Pampallaqta communities are to preserve their traditional crop harvest and to work within their food adapting to new climate environments. These Peru communities note that climate change brings more disease than pests. One of the native of these Peru communities mention on how having more varieties in their crops ensures their food security. The Monsanto’s idea on monoculture with generic diversity in the crop stain, does not ensure food security for the whole nation. After learning about McDonald’s fries so good, it saddens me that, I am hurting myself due to the overexpose of chemicals to ensure this crop of potato is sold and serve to individuals.
I also found the ex-Monsanto employee’s comment semantically confusing and ethically misguided. Firstly, his comment rings of American nationalism—the superiority of American agricultural systems, capitalist frameworks, and lifestyles/thinking—which of course, is false. Western/American farming methods and philosophies are not superior, as they kill our connection with the earth and sacrifice health, sustainability, and human prosperity for greed/material gain. What the Andean famers have figured out, and which we have yet to, is that successful agriculture comes from adapting to nature, rather than controlling it. As the “Botany of Desire” documentary explains, our strategies to overcome nature, such as establishing monocultures and then engineering solutions to the problems that arise from them (ex. genetic and chemical engineering) is a perpetual, futile cycle. In order to create sustainable agriculture, must shift our farming methods and cultural thinking to value diversity. We must model nature’s infinite wisdom. Michael Pollan summarizes this well at the end of the documentary when he says: “In the end, the logic of nature will win out against the logic of capitalism and factory efficiency. Nature is stronger than any of our designs, and nature resists our control.”
ReplyDeleteI do not have enough knowledge about agriculture to judge whether we could incorporate traditional ecological methods into our current system. I have a feeling that we could; however, I’m not sure that this will significantly change our fate. Is is possible to fix a system that is pervasively, inherently broken just by tinkering with a few parts, or do we have to create a new system altogether? This is a question that I’ve been examining as I read a book for my Critical Ethnic Studies class: Leanne Betasamosake Simpson’s As We Have Always Done: Indigenous Freedom through Radical Resistance. Simpson asserts that indigenous freedom cannot be achieved through existing in the Western world dominated by the effects of colonization—heteropatriarchy, white supremacy, and capitalist exploitation). The best way to ensure the continuation and fullness of their existence, she claims, is by building an alternate, Native life.
Broadly speaking, my biggest take away from this course is how personalized, intimate, tender farming is and how detrimental it is to do on a mass industrialized scale. It seems obvious that more people need to take a more active role in agriculture, but this is a difficult to accomplish on top of all the expectations that have been foisted on us as modern citizens. Further complicating this is the fact that so many of us have been divorced entirely from the process of food creation, and with that, comes a definite loss in independence and freedom. Being able to withdraw from society entirely and grow your own food and be self-sufficient; how many people can do that? And yet, without a viable alternative, we are subject to the vicissitudes of our institutions. For myself, I would like to take a more active route in self-education and exploration of food growth; keeping a small garden, or maybe even just some herbs, in order to stay in touch with the Earth
ReplyDeleteI think we absolutely need to reevaluate our current methods of farming, the ecological impacts across different scales of analysis aren't exactly subtle. Extensive monoculture methods are, I think, a consequence of taking our hyper-specialized economy to an extreme. While specialization is good if done correctly, I have to wonder if maybe we have gone too far. The fact that so much of the world is dependent on such a relatively small set of people and land should be much more terrifying than we are lead to believe it is. I think this post in particular is a great time to reflect on the course as well. I think the class has bolstered my own resolve to develop a garden at my own home to reclaim a piece of my food system. If enough people do the same, it may even be possible to reclaim a significant part of community food systems, which would alleviate not only the problems of specialization but also the need for transportation of food.
ReplyDeleteI was honestly blown away when I saw the beautiful 'laboratory' of the Incan civilization, and it gave me hope that specialized experiments of those forms (comparing crops grown in various soils and altitudes) can help to determine which crops grow best in which conditions. I believe in the importance of buying local, especially because transportation (of food especially) is such a huge contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and subsequently climate change, so I think that the transport of foods would be best done within and between communities living in a particular area. However, with the globalization of commerce today, I do not expect that people would be happy if the broad range of food that we can access in our society was reduced to the crops that can best be grown in the local area. I think a compromise, for now, could look like the small-scale farming of many different types of crops (i.e. not monocultures) by many different farmers in many different areas, and a more organized approach to facilitate the sharing of information that those farmers discover/record.
ReplyDeleteI further think that access to land should absolutely be a human right, and that every family/individual should have access to a plot of land in which they can grow their own produce. Not only would this cut down on the mass-scale backbreaking labor through which so many farmers are mistreated (such as for strawberries), but it would also hopefully provide an incentive for folks to connect/reconnect to the earth and begin to relearn the relationship between soil, plants, humans, and the rest of the ecosystem. I personally plan to continue thinking about the problems inherent in the agricultural system today and writing about those through ecological satire, with which I have recently become rather obsessed. I also plan to be more engaged with community gardens and supporting educational agricultural opportunities for children, but I'm not yet sure what form that will take. I think joy is super powerful in making a system sustainable, so I also hope to continue learning and loving the concept of working with the land and extending that passion in conversations with friends, family, and acquaintances that I have the opportunity to discuss these issues with.
I believe the incorporation of traditional ecological knowledge is important in trying to make our current dominant agricultural systems more sustainable. I feel like the comment made by the Monsanto potato engineer was honestly a bunch of nonsense to justify their growing practices and keep things the way they are. He presents U.S. agricultural practices as if they are superior and modern, and by doing so lessens the value of traditional ways of farming that are actually more connected to the earth and maintain a healthier relationship between the earth and ourselves. The methods used by the Peruvian farmers in the videos that are provided show multiple ways in which they not only grow potatoes without the use of harmful chemicals and toxins, but also allow there to be diversity in potatoes by growing many varieties. Dominant U.S. agricultural systems, however, rely on the use of these chemicals that not only negatively affect the food they are being used on, but harm those near where these practices take place. Moreover, our current systems also rely greatly on monocultures, and as we have seen with instances such as the Irish Potato Famine, this is a rather risky and unsustainable way to grow the crop. Thus, even though the Monsanto engineer presents the U.S. as superior and as a savior that needs to supply the world with potatoes, even though potatoes can grow in all kinds of soil including the more inhospitable ones, it is evident from the quality of our food and health in the U.S. that our current food systems are failing us. I think we need to take steps now, especially with the ever growing presence of climate change, to change the way in which our agricultural systems operate. I think the only way to do this is to honestly change the social structure of our country and its dependence on capitalism and making profits, therefore placing wealth over actual human lives, and thinking about how these ideals severely effect the way we grow our food and how that food has become detrimental to the health and wellbeing of the country.
ReplyDeleteIncorporating traditional ecological knowledge and farming practices is essential in becoming more sustainable. It only makes sense to utilize the reliable, traditional practices that have sustained various cultures for centuries. The argument that these methods are "outdated" and they just won't work in modern production systems just makes no sense when in fact these methods have been working well for centuries and have even proven to be healthier for both people and the environment than our more "current," "modern" practices. I think the current practices most people (companies/corporations) in the United States utilize are being used to make the largest profit. The reason these more traditional ecological practices are able to sustain these cultures and countries is because their communities are not as focused on and dependent upon capitalism as is the United States. Like Logan said, the only way to change this is to change the social structure of the United States that currently values wealth over human beings. If we are able to do this, I believe it is clear which practices are detrimental and which are beneficial for the wellbeing of our nation as a whole.
ReplyDelete