Today we went to the Henry Wallace Farm Center and got our first look at larger-scale organic farming. While I had found my experiences with conventional farming practices and policies to be enriching I am personally far more interested in alternatives. Dalona was a great example of a small subsistence operation that feeds her family, while the Wallace Center Farm was an example of a much larger scale operation. I really liked how there was both a farm that grew all the produce and a restaurant that served items made with some ingredients from the farm. The farm also had a “Community Supported Agriculture” program that local people can participate in and receive food from the farm. Diane explained to us how she believed that organic food in its true form is local. This is even implied in the word organic which suggests a closeness to the soil that leads to the kind of relationships, whether between food and consumer or consumer and farmer, that can only be experienced in a local food model. This explanation, which was obviously something Diane felt very strongly about, made a lot of sense to me and is something with which I agree.

The farm manager Mosa’s story really made an impression on me. He attended Simpson College (Indianola, IA), a liberal arts college, got a degree in philosophy and economics, did some construction work, and then got a job working at the farm before eventually becoming the farm manager. This story gave me hope that my political science degree (where I really only care about political philosophy or other random classes I take for fun outside of my major) at a liberal arts college would not impair me from doing something meaningful in my life. I could actually see myself doing something similar to what Mosa does and was very reluctant to have to leave the farm (although, I do suspect my attitude would have completely changed as soon as winter came around). But even if, while it’s tempting,  Even if I’m not cut out for some sort of farming job Mosa’s story still made me feel less stressed about the pressure to begin making future plans as I enter my senior year of college.

 

One of the recurring themes of our meetings with various groups, such as the Iowa Pork Association and the Iowa Corn Growers Association, have been regulation. The general consensus among these various groups have been very staunchly anti-regulation, particularly environmental regulations. That is not to say that these associations did not at least claim to consider environmental protection a priority, they just made it clear that they resented any sort of regulations. This theme continued with our appointment today with the Iowa Environmental Council which presented a different perspective. During the meeting with the IEC I learned the huge impact that non-point pollution run-off, run-off that does not come from one specific source (such as a factory or plant), has the greatest negative impact on water quality. Perhaps the most extreme example of the severity of this problem is the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico.

To resolve these issues Iowa has passed the “Nutrient Reduction Strategy” which sets a goal for a 45% reduction of nitrogen and phosphorous leaving Iowa. The issue with this legislation is that it is relying on the voluntary participation of farmers. While farmers do not want their water to be polluted any more than anyone else there still exists a strong rural culture that emphasizes individualism and autonomy that leads to the attitude of “It’s my land and I will do what I want with it.” This aspect of the culture is also seen in the disdain of regulations we have seen expressed by various groups. Another big barrier is farmers getting access to the technical and financial resources that some conservation practices require. I had never considered this particular aspect of agricultural conservation practices until today.

Despite these legitimate problems there are still some basic things that farmers can do to minimize their environmental impact. The issue then becomes how to convince them to voluntarily comply with standards such as the Nutrient Reduction Strategy. The game-plan of the IEC seems to be to focus on the impact water quality has on humans, particularly recreation that also has economic implications for the state. This also makes sense because often to convince people who are reluctant to change it is necessary to appeal to self-interests. The IEC suggested this when they pointed out that the Nutrient Reduction Strategy might be more effective if it included consideration of water quality inside Iowa rather than exclusively on the water leaving Iowa. It seems that the best strategy will be one that pushes better conservation practices through working with and listening to, rather than working against and talking at, farmers.

 

Coming from a home that placed an emphasis on the importance of organic products and being someone who is highly skeptical of industrialized agriculture, the question of the impact of  organic foods is one I know I need to research. This question is especially relevant in light of the growing popularity of these movements. I find the philosophical reasons alone behind eating organic to be appealing, and I always tend to favor the natural over the synthetic. But I also acknowledge that it is important to weigh the real effects that an organic food system would have on the world. The practical goals of the organic movement are to avoid chemicals involved in conventional farming (I know this was the case in my home) as well as to protect the environment. But Paarlberg makes it seem that it is uncertain whether organic food production fulfills these standards more than conventional farming.

Thinking practically it would seem that the best method of agriculture would exist in a balance with the environment, not cause any adverse health effects, and most importantly be sustainable in the long-term. These goals are all inter-related as no form of agriculture can be sustainable in the long-term without first meeting the first two standards. Paarlberg notes how organic farming is usually far more environmentally sustainable, as long as the farmers know what they are doing, but argues that the optimal method combines both conventional and organic practices. The trouble here comes with the need to feed 7-9 billion people while trying to responsibly use the least land possible. It is very clear that to grow enough grains to feed enough livestock to feed the world would already take a huge amount of land, an amount which is only greatly increased by organic farming methods. Paarlberg acknowledges that this option is environmentally and economically impossible. I personally dislike conventional agriculture but also do not find organic farming sustainable in the long-term for everyone. This issue is one of the reasons why I abstain from eating any animal products as I consider it an irresponsible use of resources.

 

When you begin to spend a significant amount of time looking into Iowa’s agricultural history it is not long before you run into the name Norman Borlaug. Considering how much of a big deal Borlaug is in the agriculture world I at first felt bad that I did not recognize his name. Today we went to the World Food Prize Museum which honors the winners of the World Food Prize, of which Borlaug is one of the most known partly because he is an Iowan. The building that the exhibit was in was just as interesting as the topic because it was an old public library that was far more elaborate and ostentatious than any library I’ve ever seen. I found it interesting that over 25 million dollars went to create a museum that memorialized people who had worked to solve world hunger and aid those in poverty.

Norman Borlaug is known to his supporters as working towards ending world hunger by creating a more productive breed of seed and introducing it to impoverished areas. His supporters, such as the World Food Prize folks consider him a hero. This is apparent from a quote on the wall when you walk into the World Food Prize laureate hall that credits Borlaug with saving more lives than anyone else. Before this visit I was more familiar with the controversies surrounding Borlaug’s work, particularly the Green Revolution, without knowing he was the man responsible for these developments. Paarlberg in “Food Politics” provides an overview of these controversies and helped me to begin to see both sides of the story.

While it is indisputable that the seeds Borlaug developed significantly increased yields and allowed more people to have access to affordable food than ever before, it seems unwise to not take into account the consequences. These include environmental damage from pesticides, fertilizers, and water run-off, as well as reduced biodiversity all of which are damaging to the land and unsustainable in the long-term. Paarlberg seems to consider these consequences to be preferable to the alternative, in which many regions total environmental degradation would have been the only option in a scramble to avoid massive famines. However, I do not think this a good enough justification for the continued practice of Green Revolution type agriculture if it is having all these negative impacts. I would be interested to learn more about alternative models such as the agroecology Paarlberg mentions in his book.

Since arriving in Iowa the most distinct impression I have is of vast stretches of farmland which are home to corn, and some soy, crops. Before I got to Iowa, while I knew about the prevalence of corn, I assumed that a place considered to provide a large amount of the food supply would have to grow more than just corn. My skepticism at this only grew when we went to one of the leading GMO seed producers, Dupont Pioneer, and they gave one of their founding principles as being “feeding the world”. This feeding the world theme was continued by the Iowa Corn Growers Association. They presented increasing the supply and demand for corn as being the solution to all our problems. I found this hard to digest in light of the knowledge that edible sweet corn only accounts for 1% of corn production and the rest is inedible before being processed. My next question was where does this seemingly useless crop go? The ICGA answered that of course the corn is being used to feed more livestock (hence “feeding the world”), exports, and ethanol.

I do not buy that corn is good for advancing the cause of “feeding the world.” I understand that the argument many proponents of corn domination of Iowa agriculture make is how perfect the Iowa soil is for corn yields. However, just because it works does not mean it is right or ideal. First of all, it seems inefficient to allocate such large amounts of land in to feed livestock that take up even more land and consume a huge amount of resources to produce food for humans far less than they end up consuming. It seems far more logical that if “feeding the world”, rather than making the most money, was the goal the land would be used to grow something actually directly edible such as a grain, starch, or even produce. After seeing yesterday how successful Dalona’s fruit trees and other garden yields have been (partly thanks to Iowa soil) it seems that other crops could fare just as well as corn.

Of course the numerous other uses that have been found for corn must also be taken into consideration. These include various biodegradable plastics, corn strarch and high-fructose corn syrup, and most notably ethanol. I found the ICGA representatives discussion of Ethanol to be extremely interesting. There seemed to be much conflict of interest between oil companies and corn/ethanol producers centering around, not surprisingly, profits. Except the difference is of course the environmental impact of ethanol use over oil. Considering the current various environmental crises we face anything that could potentially alleviate these concerns must be taken seriously. Ethanol seems to have the potential to do a lot of good to reduce CO2 and GHG emissions, although Dr. HN later pointed out that some information/perspectives had been left out of the presentation concerning the energy it takes to produce ethanol. After adding ethanol into the equation it becomes somewhat more difficult for me to take a strong position on the current rates of corn production. But I still think I can say that I remain highly skeptical of  the long-term effects this sort of exclusivist agriculture, particularly in the midwest, will have.

After a half-week of an overload of informational activities I was excited to have my first full day of truly hands-on tasks. I finally got to experience planting and got to ride with Denny in the planter while he planted soybeans in one of the neighbor’s fields. It was mind-boggling to see how easy Denny made steering the huge planter and how he managed to turn such a huge piece of machinery around in order to farm in perfectly-spaced rows. At one point the marker broke, and I thought we were going to have to stop but of course Denny just got out, took some tools out of his overalls, and fixed it up in less than 15 minutes. Overall the planting experience and the gigantic machinery involved was really overwhelming. My hands-on experience then continued back at the farm where I made some guacamole. I got to use the Vitamix and that was a new thing for me, it turned out so well that I think I might want to get a Vitamix one day in the future.

The highlight, and the dirtiest, of my hands-on experience was gardening back at Dalona’s house. I plan to one day have a small garden whenever I settle into my own home and grow fruits and vegetables and herbs. But I have absolutely zero experience doing any sort of yard work, let alone growing things. We planted some green beans, lettuce, zucchini, and tomatoes, which required some tilling and hoeing. I decided early on that this was a milestone event for me, and I abandoned my gardening gloves early on and dug my hands into the soil and compost as a symbolic gesture of my intentions. For the tomatoes we put down some of the compost that Dalona makes from the food scraps into the already fertile Iowa soil. Then we got to collect the eggs from the two chicken coops they have, feed cows, and play with a newborn kitten. I loved Dalona’s farm and really respected how most of what her family eats is from her garden and the few animals they keep.

I really respect subsistence farming, and in my ideal world I would one day have the time and resources to be able to do something similar. It was great to have Dalona explain to me all the hard work that goes into it and how knowing when to plant things can be a tough calculation. This made me realize how much work even such a small enterprise could be. She mentioned how there are a lot of sacrifices involved such as never being able to go on vacation and having to always be around at sunset to tend to the hens. But even if I can never have quite the set-up that her family has I hope to one day at least have a small garden for me to get my produce from and a few hens for eggs. I hope that I get to go back to Dalona’s place sometime in the next two weeks, so I can get some more experience gardening and learn more about how it is done.

I was super excited about today’s schedule because unlike the biodiesel and pork association my mind can easily engage with Farmer’s markets and the living history farm exhibit. When I first envisioned what the farmers market would be like I imagined an idyllic scene of roads lined by friendly farmers selling fresh produce and other products from their family farm. I was only half wrong. There were many Iowans selling their farms freshly harvested asparagus, which is apparently one of the only things in season right now. I found most interesting how nettles, a plant that seems very unfriendly due to its poisonous and stinging leaves, has been utilized by Iowans due to its growing in abundance. I talked to one man who was selling nettles he had picked who let me sample nettle tea. The most infamous example of the opposite of my expectations for the farmer’s market are the store bought Georgia blueberries one vendor was selling. Since I find it hard to resist blueberries I purchased them without asking the right questions only to find out later that they were repackaged store-bought blueberries from Georgia. I found it interesting that it could not be assumed that everything being sold there was genuinely local, and the store-bought detail made it seem especially deceptive. I still feel like I redeemed this experience by purchasing some radishes from a man’s Iowa Greenhouse and another woman’s grandmothers jam.

The highlight of my farmers market experience was by far the raw vegan tacos. I was perplexed at how the “meat” of the tacos was made from walnuts and sunflower seeds. And I was impressed by the “cheese” that was replaced by a “cashew cream” which was surprisingly cheese-like, add avocados, sun-dried tomatoes, and a romaine taco shell and you have me eager to make them myself. I was also excited about the barbecue spice pack I bought which I am going to use to make red potato barbeque fries sometime this week. This experience has just made me really eager to go to farmers markets every weekend I can when I get back to Greenville. I was never really concerned about the quality or safety of the foods being sold at the farmer’s market but the blueberry incident has taught me an important lesson. I now know that in the future I need to be more intentional about talking to farmers and learning where their products came from.

Our visit to Iowa Pork Producer Association today was very…informative. The presentation was overall very thorough and painted a very pretty picture of the future of America’s pork production (PEDv threat notwithstanding). I found the language used by Iowa Pork to be very interesting. It was fairly consistent among the presenter and other people in the room that pork is “grown” and is eventually “harvested”, as if it is almost no different than planting and harvesting a crop. The purpose of the association, as far as I understood it, is for efficiency by placing the various producers involved in the pork industry under a single power. After hearing all the complexities involved in pork production it is not hard to understand why this would be the preferable way to organize. I found the breadth of the IPPA’s influence very interesting. For one, they seemed to control much of the education curriculum’s that aspiring pork producers undergo. I found it particularly interesting that a profit earning organization had the power to control not only curriculum, but a large amount of scholarships and grants awarded to aspiring pork producers. It seems that this would make it very difficult for someone who disagreed with the practices or principles held by Iowa Pork to exist, let alone become successful. On the other hand, the presentation made it seem that Iowa Pork has worked to help family farmers, made environmental responsibility and “stewardship” a priority, and diligently followed food safety and animal welfare regulations. Needless to say I did not walk out of there entirely convinced but really appreciated the educationally enriching experience regardless.

One of our many van discussions today during our long commutes was about the other Furman Mayx programs with a bit more wide appeal, such as Slow Cooking, Italy. I too would absolutely love the opportunity to eat and prepare good foods let alone in Italy. But when else would I get the opportunity to learn as much as I have about our domestic and global food supply. And I think Iowa will still give me the chance to do some cooking and experimentation with foods. Tonight was my first chance to do so and I started small by learning how to pan fry tofu using the same batter our wonderful “cook”, Dalona, had used to make her fried chicken. This really just made me eager to do some more adventurous cooking. Hopefully tomorrow’s visit to the farmers market will serve as inspiration.

 

 

 

In case it wasn’t apparent from my last post, I have never had the patience or the mind for details or technical explanations of things. Stretching my mind in this way is actually something about the farm experience that I’ve been both looking forward to and dreading. That being said, today’s 5-6 hour farm safety session was very out of my comfort zone. But I really appreciated it especially since one side effect of my more abstract, non-detail oriented mind is that I tend to be a bit absent minded, and as a result clumsy. My parents have often half-jokingly said how this would get me killed or seriously injured some day, and after hearing some of the tractor accident horror stories I had to agree. The tip I found most interesting, and incidentally also related to my last post, was to “read the owners manual” of your equipment.

I have never read an owners manual in my life. I’m one of those many people who does not care how my “machinery” works as long as it does whatever its supposed to do in order to make my life easier or entertain me. But the idea of really understanding how things work, even if for the most part we no longer can work on our smartphones or laptops ourselves in a workshop (while the Denny’s of this world continue to push these limits) seems very appealing. This is true especially in light of my concerns, mentioned in the last post, about losing our ability to create things which has been such a defining characteristic of humanity throughout all of known history of civilization. I think that from now on I will try to make a conscious effort to read (or at least skim) the owner’s manuals of the various gadgets I own.

As the farm safety session progressed I was beginning to warm up to the world of practical concerns and technical explanations. When Kevin Butts began to talk about the ins and outs of Precision Agriculture my interest was piqued. I have always considered one of the most important questions agriculture must address to be how to go about feeding the 7 soon to be 9 billion people on earth. It makes sense that the answer to this would be to make farming as precise as possible in order to save time and money, use minimum amount of chemicals, and conserve product. While the technological innovations behind these advancements are something I find it easy to adjust to there are others that I found harder to accept. Particularly the idea of creating drones to kill individual weeds using a laser. While this would do something good in eliminating the need to spray chemicals on our food, I still am very skeptical of the creation of any technology with such capabilities. I am interested to see how the development of these new technologies play out and the ethical debates that will surround them.

 

During my flight to Iowa (or maybe Detroit?) when I wasn’t sleeping I was reading  a collection of short stories by the famous Sci-fi writer Philip K. Dick (aka.PKD). While sci-fi has never been my genre I have recently been drawn in by the profound philosophical and political themes of PDK’s stories. One story I read today (probably written in or before the 70s),“The Variable Man”, was set around the year 2132. In the story the inhabitants of planet Terra, the Terrans, are at war with the Centaurian Empire. The Terran governmental war machine is constantly working to create weapons to break through Centaura, so they can expand.They finally find the hope to do so with the new missile “Icarus.” The problem is that no one possesses the skill or knowledge to know how to fix this machinery at least until a man from the year 1914 is accidentally brought to the future in a “Time Bubble.” This man is a basic rural craftsman from the Midwest who lands in Terra with his horse and “Fixit” buggy and basic tools. Long story short the rural craftsman is shown to not  only be the sole  person capable of fixing Icarus, but also transforming it from a weapon into a shuttle to take the Terrans’ to new unexplored territories.
I’m pretty sure the main point of this story was to serve as a warning against over specialization in industry and to create a greater sense of respect for the mechanical arts. I was reminded of this story today when Denny was giving us his tour of the farm. Particularly in the way he talked about his tractors and his workshop. While Denny, and pretty much everyone else in society, have benefited greatly from various technological advancements, there is something to be said for retaining  a general holistic knowledge of how things work. Denny seemed to me to show a balance of adaptation to new technologies as well as the retention of basic mechanical skills that could still be said to qualify him as a craftsman of sorts. This gave me hope that maybe if more people could cultivate this balanced approach we could avoid the future that is so concerning to PKD. A warning echoing Tocqueville’s concern that  democratic society’s taste for material well-being and advancement of the practical arts (ie. “progress”) could lead us to become so enraptured in the enjoyment of these new arts that we entirely lose our ability to create them.  In the process, we lose a part of our humanity (Tocqueville outright says “brutes” so I’m being positive). This conflict between classic craftsmanship that looks at things holistically against the various shortcuts provided by technology which  lead to specialization is something I don’t entirely comprehend but find fascinating.