 |
|||
 |
" I heard it |
||
October 29, 2009
· Rebuilding farm roots yields a growing reward
· Thousands seek funds from farm subsidy program
· Affluent consumers will pay more for healthy food
· California water legislation mired in legal mud
· John Deere to recall 452 workers at Iowa plant
Rebuilding farm roots yields a growing reward
(AP
via RockyMountTelegram.com) –
But one other statistic caught the newcomer's eye: the county's 6,000 small plots of land, much of it overgrown former farmland.
What if played-out cotton fields, Will wondered, grew fruits
and vegetables again? And what if the produce was marketed online to
The Charlotte Observer reported that the result is Farmers
Fresh Market, now ending its third year.
This year, 87
A
That's why Tim Will is now $100,000 richer.
As you might expect from a former Peace Corps volunteer, affordable-housing advocate and inner-city teacher, Will shrugs off his role, crediting the community's effort.
"What's happened to them, they didn't cause this," he said of the boom and bust of the county's textile and furniture industries. "Over four decades, these people forgot how to grow stuff."
Purpose Prize director Alexandra Kent said Will, 61, was chosen as "an inspiring role model" from among 1,200 nominations.
Will won, she said, "for his innovative approach to solving important and timely issues: job creation, ecological sustainability and the preservation of family farms."
"Putting people back to work is as important as the product they sell," Brown said. "And the straw that stirs the drink here is Tim Will."
The pairing happened by luck. A few
years ago, Will watched "The Last of the Mohicans," filmed partly in
He and his wife Eleanor pulled up stakes in 2006, leaving
his teaching job at a
Will fell into a job at Foothills Connect, where previous experience as a system integrator — analyzing what industrial processes can be automated — paid off.
The technology for Farmers Fresh Market fell into place. A $1.4 million grant from the N.C. Golden Leaf Foundation paid for 100 miles of fiber-optic cable that spread broadband service across the county, including all schools, police and fire departments.
It took time to convince Rutherford growers that their small
bits of land could profit in a market 74 miles away in
Steadily, borlotti beans, Bull's Blood beets and Lacinato kale sprouted in the red clay. Garden-variety tomatoes were replaced by heirloom varieties so flavorful, market manager Kirk Wilson said, that 20 minutes after eating one "you can still taste it in your mouth."
Jean-Pierre Marechal, executive
chef at the
"The possibility to have vegetables picked in the morning and have it in your kitchen that afternoon, it's a new world," he said.
Foothills hopes to show the county's young people, many of whom leave for jobs elsewhere, that they might again make a living from farming.
The agency began a small-farm sustainable agriculture
course, emphasizing business aspects, that has graduated 120 students.
"We're not just losing our farms and our families, we're losing our heritage," said Jill Maner, one of the farm-school graduates. "We have to show that they don't need 160 acres of land and a $140,000 tractor."
Tim Will says
"Getting change, getting things done, that's what's important to me and my wife," he said. "It's not my money. The community has earned it."
So he will give his $100,000 prize to the farm program.
Thousands seek funds from farm subsidy program
(DesMoinesRegister.com) Minburn, Ia. - Rick Hartmann's organic vegetable farm did not produce a single bushel of corn or soybeans, which account for the bulk of the federal crop subsidies paid to farmers in Iowa and across the Midwest.
In fact, he has never signed up for a single farm program - until now.
Hartmann is one of more than 21,000 farmers and ranchers who have signed up this fall for the new Conservation Stewardship Program, which aims to reward producers for how they farm rather than what they produce.
The program would create a new class of government subsidy recipient, but it also responds to criticism that traditional subsidies harm the environment.
Hartmann's squash, lettuce and other crops do not qualify for normal crop subsidies.
But, if the U.S. Department of Agriculture accepts his applications, he could get payments for measures he has taken to improve the fertility of the soil and to produce ladybugs and other insects that will prey on the pests that could harm his vegetables. The farm is rimmed with 20-foot strips of grasses and flowers - various mixes of native prairie plants - that are designed to harbor the beneficial insects.
In a recent e-mail to his customers, Hartmann joked that he was "putting the farm on the dole."
Grain and cotton farmers have dominated traditional subsidy
programs, but the Conservation Stewardship Program is available to producers in
all 50 states no matter what kind of crop they grow, and farmers in every state
except
Producers applied for payments on an estimated 32.9 million acres, far more than the 12.9 million acres the USDA can accept under the 2008 farm bill.
The agriculture department doesn't have a breakdown yet of the types of farms that make up the total, and officials are unsure of the exact acreages included in many contracts. The total includes at least 12 million acres of grazing lands and pasture and 1.9 million acres of forest.
Some 1,099 farmers in
The outpouring of applications shows there is interest in this type of program. That will in turn help build political support for eventually expanding it, said Ferd Hoefner, policy director for the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.
"You're going to see political support for this from exactly those areas of the country where there's not high participation in commodity programs," Hoefner said. "That's going to be very significant over time."
But in a vast country where more than 300 million acres are planted to crops each year, the money will go only so far.
While the Conservation Stewardship Program is an improvement
over conventional commodity subsidies, it will be tough to get Congress to
increase its funding, given the size of the federal budget deficit, said Craig
Cox,
Exactly how big the payments will be will be determined by how much grazing land and cropland the USDA puts in the program. Nationally, the payments are supposed to average $18 an acre, but payments will be larger for crops than for grazing land.
The applications will be ranked according to the environmental benefits the farmers' practices will provide. Farmers picked for the program will get payments for five years. There will be a chance to continue the payments after that, but the producer would have to take some additional conservation measures.
The applicants include conventional farmers such as Bart
Schott, who grows corn, soybeans and wheat near
He's trying to get 1,200 acres of land in the program. He already reduces soil erosion on his land by limiting his tillage, but he has proposed to do more if the conservation payments will cover his extra costs.
He has offered to plant grassy strips around the wetlands on his land, a move that provide wildlife habitat but cost him some crop revenue. He also is proposing to install new nozzles on his pesticide sprayer to prevent the chemicals from drifting.
"The main thing I've got to worry about is that I don't cut my revenue stream too close," he said. "We want to be good stewards and all that, but it has to make sense, too."
Hartmann grew up on a conventional farm, but he and his wife, Stacy, tried a decidedly different approach, making a farm out of an old farmstead, the type that's often razed.
The hay barn that was once falling apart has been turned
into a packing shed, complete with a large walk-in cooler. In the barn they
pack the boxes of produce they deliver to customers in the
The barn is flanked by the vegetable patches, which is separated by grass strips that prevent soil from washing away.
He thinks the Conservation Stewardship Program could help farms like his.
"There's a lot of tax money that goes to support farming in this country," he said.
"I'm hoping we might evolve a little bit more toward the European model where the consuming public really wants to support local agriculture, small and mid-size farms and keep that farming and food culture an important part of their national heritage."
Affluent consumers will pay more for healthy food
(The Gourmet Retailer) – A new national survey of more affluent consumers from strategic marketing communications firm Context Marketing, "Beyond Organic -- How Evolving Consumer Concerns Influence Food Purchases," has found that most respondents are highly concerned about the safety of the food they buy and would pay more for food they believe to be safer or healthier. The research also found that assurances about what a food doesn't contain, such as pesticides or antibiotics, matter a great deal to these consumers, along with ethical claims that reinforce quality and safety perceptions.
Containing research recently conducted by Context Marketing and Doylestown, Pa.-based MRops, Inc. among consumers who fit the demographics for specialty grocery shoppers, "Beyond Organic" spotlights which food quality claims are most important to these shoppers.
According to the report, 57 percent of respondents said they
were "definitely" or "very concerned" about the safety of
the
When asked to evaluate a range of food quality claims often found on food packages or at point of sale, respondents said that the claims they found most meaningful had to do with items not found in the foods, including pesticides, antibiotics, mercury and artificial hormones. Consumers rated claims such as "organic," "free-range" and "grass-fed" as less important. The survey didn't ask about nutritional claims.
While respondents confirmed that low price is a major influence on most food purchases, 60 percent said they would pay up to 10 percent more for food they think is healthier, safer or produced according to higher ethical standards; and 14 percent said they would pay a premium greater than 10 percent.
Ethical claims are also important, although, alone, they may
not impel most shoppers to buy a food product, according to Bob Kenney,
principal of Context Marketing, which is located in the
He added that 70 percent of respondents said that whether a company or brand acts ethically influences their decision to buy a product, and 48 percent said they stopped buying a brand when they found out the supplier acted in a way they deemed socially irresponsible or unethical.
The September 2009 online survey included 600 working adults
between the ages of 20 and 64, equally representing women and men living in
major
A copy of the report can be downloaded at www.contextmarketing.com.
California
(Los Angeles Times) – Lawmakers have been chewing over water legislation for weeks, unable to seal a final deal despite threats from the governor, weekend negotiating sessions and their own deep desire to disprove the widespread perception that they can't get anything done.
Many of the choking points involve often arcane details of water policy and regional self-interests that haven't always followed the usual partisan lines.
"It's fear of losing water, fear of having to pay for stuff," said Ellen Hanak of the Public Policy Institute. "It's the same old interests," she added, that have for decades impeded any kind of overhaul of California's complicated and increasingly troubled water system.
The Democrats' proposal is broad-ranging, but far from revolutionary. It takes what many water experts have characterized as modest steps in regard to groundwater, urban water conservation and state enforcement of water rights.
It eases the way for a re-plumbing of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the state's water hub. But it does not authorize a controversial delta bypass canal. The accompanying, roughly $9-billion bond proposal sets aside money for new storage, but does not dedicate money for any specific dams or reservoirs.
"This is not a radical package. This is not a major change," said Ron Gastelum, interim executive director of the Southern California Water Committee, a nonprofit group of local government, water agencies and businesses.
But it is enough of a change to rattle a lot of people.
Some Bay Area Democrats, who could be expected to back a leadership proposal, have withheld support over delta provisions they fear could ultimately cost local districts water.
Republicans, fiercely fighting some of the fine-print details, rolled out their own version of the bill Tuesday, frustrating Democrats who say they've already compromised enough.
The endorsement of some of the biggest players in delta and water politics has not even assured passage.
In some ways, the split over the bill represents two competing philosophies.
One believes
The other camp, represented largely by Democrats, argues that the answer is more sweeping than infrastructure: The state should start monitoring groundwater use, do a better job of enforcing water rights and crack down on illegal water diversions in the all-important delta watershed. It needs to mandate urban water conservation and force agriculture -- the state's biggest user of water -- to do a better job of measuring and pricing its supplies to promote efficient irrigation.
The conservation provision, which requires the state to cut urban per capita water use by 20% overall, exemplifies the word-by-word back-and-forth that has bogged down talks.
Republicans want to insert language protecting districts that fail to comply with the conservation targets: They could not be sued under the California Constitution's prohibition on waste and unreasonable water use.
But adding that line would undermine a century-old pillar of
state water doctrine, insist Democrats and environmentalists. "It's a big
deal," said Assemblyman Jared Huffman of
There is a similar fight over the bill's call for the state
to determine how much water the delta needs to regain some ecological health.
An influential
"It's a little bit like the Balkans. There's a lot of history and distrust going back," said Richard Frank, executive director of the Center for Law, Energy and the Environment at UC Berkeley Law School.
It's a fight as old as statehood, he added.
"There's not enough water to go around. . . . Something's gotta give. There are going to be winners and losers here."
John Deere to recall 452 workers at Iowa
(AP
via SFGate.com) – Farm equipment maker Deere & Co. said Wednesday it
will recall most of the workers it laid off from an
Deere, based in
But 78 other workers will remain laid off until market conditions improve enough to warrant their return, the company said.
In June, Deere said it would temporarily lay off 494 of the factory's workers due to weak demand amid the global economic slowdown. That followed a layoff of 40 employees in April.
The Ottumwa Works, which makes equipment such as balers and pull-type forage harvesters used by hay and livestock producers, employed about 260 salaried employees and 720 wage employees, including those who remain laid off.
Deere, the world's largest maker of farm machinery, has faced diminished demand amid the economic downturn and lower commodity prices, which affect the buying habits of farmers. In August, the company trimmed its sales projections for 2009, saying it expects the biggest single-year sales drop in at least 50 years, but reiterated an annual profit forecast of $1.1 billion.
In response, Deere has cut costs and laid
off hundreds of workers, though many have since been recalled. The
End Transmission