Ecology and Farming

More documents

Recommendations

Info

a joint operation since we moved out here in 1978. It’s just the way it is. There’s darn few things that I do that my wife can’t do, and I can’t say that about me, because there’s things she does that I flat can’t do. It’s part of what I consider to be the definition of a family farm, which is that partners move the operation forward together. When we made the conversion to organics, we sat down and talked about it. When we sell the grain or lentils or peas or whatever, we talk about it. Is this the right thing to be doing, selling to this person or that person, or is this price adequate to pay the bills? It’s a joint effort. What is the importance of having organic farming become more institutionalized in the Farm Bill, and do you have any specific plans in that regard? I think that where we’re at in Organic Agriculture is just to make that the Farm Bill includes the flexibility to let people farm organically. On a personal basis, I just hope we can encourage the kind of markets in conventional agriculture that we have in Organic Agriculture, and I hope we can maintain the kind of markets and improve upon them so we have competition in the marketplace. I think that it is critically important for the Farm Bill from the conventional and the organic standpoint. Ultimately, I want a farm program that helps encourage financial sustainability that increases long-term competition in the marketplace. All of these elements apply to both conventional and Organic Agriculture . I want a farm program that really focuses on energy policy for this country that will help it achieve energy independence. I think we have tremendous opportunity in renewables here in the United States, which helps agriculture across the board, organic and conventional. Traditionally, people in production agriculture have gotten there money from the marketplace. I want to keep it that way in organics and encourage it in conventional agriculture, too. How do you feel about the dumping of US products due to subsidies on developing countries? Well, I think we need to have trade agreements that work for people here in the United States and for our trading partners abroad. Subsidies are an interesting argument, because there are different levels of subsidies all over the world, and they come in all different forms . Some are actual cash payments, others are subsidies to transportation industries, and the savings are passed on to people in agriculture. Here’s my focus is that we have to have trade agreements that work. You can’t be driving your trading partners’ people into poverty; that’s not a good trade agreement. But by the same token, trade agreements shouldn’t drive your own people into poverty or out of business and into bankruptcy either. You need to make sure you’re looking at both sides of the equation. Quite frankly, a lot of these trade agreements right now help out the selected few. I don’t think they’re in production agriculture, and they’re probably not in developing countries either. In the end, what needs to be protected, preserved and enhanced in this country is family farm agriculture. I think it’s critically important from a United States standpoint for food security and food availability throughout the world. When our agricultural base starts becoming more corporatized, and it’s becoming that way more and more, I think that’s a risky situation both economically and from the perspective of food security. There are subsidies all over the place. I know what it costs to raise a bushel of grain and a lentil. I can tell you if there weren’t subsidies right now (because there’s no competition in the marketplace), that there would be a mass exodus from the land. It’s a two-sided coin. I hate subsidies with a passion. I’d love to have all our income come from the marketplace. I think that if there’s good competition in the marketplace it could be that way. You know as well as I do that there’s too much monopolization in the food industry right now, as with a lot of other industries. There’s been a lot of criticism throughout the world about organic products from China and some developing countries, entering the marketplace, it being suggested that there are not adequate controls. How do you feel about that? I’ve never been to mainland China. I don’t know the challenges that they face. I know that they are many, but I do feel strongly in strong standards that are verifiable and transparent. If the transparency isn’t there, I don’t think the certification should take place. There are games that can be played and 1 Feature Interview Ecology & Farming | SEptEmbEr - DEcEmbEr 2006
games that have been played with certification over the years, and that’s one of the challenges that we have in the organic industry, where peer-review is so important. If there’s not peer-review to help with the transparency, then it puts our whole industry at risk. I can’t tell you if it has a high probability of being bogus, because I haven’t been there and I don’t know, I do know that if the inspection and certification process is not open, transparent and meets the standards, then it has to change. How do you feel credibility can best be maintained through organic certification? I think you have to maintain the standards. You can’t have any erosion of standards that are significant. There’s always going to be some changes to standards, but ultimately we have to adhere to that grassroots vision for organics that was there 30 years ago. If you improve the inspection, you improve the product through the number of eyes that watch the process, and I’ll give you an example. When we first started organics and made the conversion, we found that there needs to be more eyes on the conversion process, especially because of parallel production. Quite frankly, I’ve got some ideas about parallel production that a lot of people in the industry wouldn’t like. I don’t think it’s the right thing to be doing in organics, because it opens the door for problems. When we started the conversion, we had tours of the farm, and everybody we sold grain to came out and took a look around. Of course we had the inspection process, which I think helps ensure the quality of the product, but I also think that people who buy products from farms need to make a concerted effort to get out to those farms and take a look around. As a farmer in production agriculture, I’m always honored when somebody who’s buying my product comes to see what we have going on. I think that helps along with traditional inspections and audit trails. It’s been a little more difficult since I’ve been in the Montana Senate for eight years, but we always used to get together with neighbors once a month and visit about our successes and defeats, and talk about organic production. I think all that helps, getting together and talking about challenges we face and how we can meet those challenges. All those things go together. I think to have a good organic system, farmers need to feel like they’re in partnership with the processor, and they both need to feel like they’re in partnership with the consumer. How do you feel about the entrance of organic discounters and big corporations onto the scene? It’s a two-edged sword. Anytime you open up the market to have organics be more accessible to more people, that’s a positive. I think that if they’re getting into it for cheap food, to cheapen up the process, to cheapen the standards and to cheapen the products - if it’s all about cheap - I think it’s the wrong business. What enticed me into organics is food quality, soil health and improving the environment that our next generation has to do business in. Those are the important things, and there’s a cost to doing that. You can’t do that kind of stuff on the cheap. The cost of course to doing that is that you give up some things when those become the most important thing. If massive production becomes your most important driver, then you can do a lot of things on the cheap. The retailers that are out there putting more organic food out for the consumers, I think Feature Interview 1
Page 1 and 2: Ecology & Farming Ecology and Farmi
Page 3 and 4: RAPUNZEL has more than 30 years of
Page 5 and 6: Editorial Truly Sustainable After a
Page 7 and 8: 1 ST IFOAM INTErNATIONAL CONFErENCE
Page 9 and 10: Call for nomination of candidates f
Page 11 and 12: Organic Day(s) in the Mediterranean
Page 13 and 14: BE PART OF ThE SOLuTION! Apply for
Page 15: handled. Combined with that fact, o
Page 19 and 20: same vision for healthy soils and a
Page 21 and 22: Survey of Organic Livestock Researc
Page 23 and 24: of the index score, it tended to we
Page 25 and 26: cattle. Concerning bees and beekeep
Page 27 and 28: uminant animals be raised in grazin
Page 29 and 30: the effects of environmental degrad
Page 31 and 32: The milk from Thicke’s cows is bo
Page 33 and 34: Animals in Translation by Dr. Templ
Page 35 and 36: Contribution of Farmer Participatio
Page 37 and 38: that the intangible benefits accrue
Page 39 and 40: Effect of Conventional and Organic
Page 41 and 42: table 1: Prevalence of c. jejuni an
Page 43 and 44: gentamicin, while more that 80% of
Page 45 and 46: 20. 21. antimicrobial resistance in
Page 47 and 48: Finally the Principle of Ecology st
Page 49 and 50: Stakeholder involvement In keeping
Page 51 and 52: Ongoing Trends, New Institutions an
Page 53 and 54: operation support wildness and stil
Page 55 and 56: IFOAM Publications assurance that b
Page 57: Calendar of Events 1st IFOAM Confer

Ecology and Farming

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?