C. Realloc<strong>at</strong>ion e+"&( 0( B+0!/,!03( B'+$B'!/,*'( ,/( ,$( 1,.)!%3/E( ,.( #"/( ,&B"$$,23'E( /"( imagine converting land use of cropland in Erie County by this gre<strong>at</strong> of a degree. The percentages of total cropland area needed to provide the county’s popul<strong>at</strong>ion with the RDA of each food group is shown in the far right column of Table 7.6. These r<strong>at</strong>ios can be applied to the present extent of Erie County cropland, thereby realloc<strong>at</strong>ing land equally among food groups based on the demands given by RDA guidelines. In doing so, the amount of cropland devoted to raising feed for livestock decreases while the amount of land used to grow fruits and vegetables increases (See Table 7.7). If cropland were used in this manner, the total production on Erie County farms would increase to 199,684 tons of food product per year. This represents nearly a 76 percent increase in the amount of food products produced by county farms by weight. If the current extent of farmland were used in the manner described 02"*'E(/4'(.""1($5$/'&(".(N+,'(7"%#/5(H"%31(2'!"&'($,-#,)!0#/35(&"+'($'3.A reliant. According to this analysis, county farms would be able to provide 18 percent of the food needed for the county’s popul<strong>at</strong>ion to meet the RDA guidelines given for each food group. Therefore, by realloc<strong>at</strong>ing existing !+"B30#1(,#(N+,'(7"%#/5(/"(+'F'!/(0(#%/+,/,"#0335(2030#!'1(1,'/E(!"%#/5(.0+&$( would be able to provide 8 percent more of the food products the popul<strong>at</strong>ion of Erie County nutritionally requires than current conditions. Conclusion In order to meet nutritional requirements and support its popul<strong>at</strong>ion healthfully, the county needs to import nearly 90 percent of its food. We have demonstr<strong>at</strong>ed th<strong>at</strong> the most effective way for Erie County to improve its selfreliance in food, outside of expanding agricultural land, would be to distribute the use of its agricultural land more equitably to grow healthier crops. 85 Table 7.6 – Cropland Required for RDA Food Consumption in Erie County (per n<strong>at</strong>ional standards) Required Cropland Area Food Group Acreage % of Total Grain 35,056 6.39 Beef (feed for) 246,342 44.90 Fruits 59,816 10.90 Vegetables 93,440 17.03 Dairy (feed for) 46,710 8.51 Poultry (feed for) 30,388 5.54 Egg (feed for) 10,795 1.97 Total Cropland 548,194 100 (Source: Author Analysis) Table 7.7 – Cropland Area and Annual Production After Realloc<strong>at</strong>ing Land for More Healthful Food Production Based on RDA, Erie County Food Group Realloc<strong>at</strong>ed Cropland (Acreage) End Product Primary Weight (Tons) Grain 6,354 12,764 Beef (feed) 44,646 13,871 Fruits 10,841 53,484 Vegetables 16,935 62,439 Dairy (feed) 8,466 37,486 Poultry (feed) 5,507 10,014 Egg (feed) 1,956 2,933 Total Cropland 99,445 199,684 (Source: Author Analysis)
86 - 8 - Economic Viability of Agriculture As previously demonstr<strong>at</strong>ed, the food system is big business in Erie County. Businesses in agriculture, food processing, food wholesale and retail, and food disposal support Erie County’s economy by providing employment, purchasing goods and services from inside and outside of Erie County, and gener<strong>at</strong>ing sales and income throughout the county. The type of food residents buy and e<strong>at</strong>, and loc<strong>at</strong>ion from which the food was grown, is important not only for residents’ health but also for the county’s economic strength and future. With this in mind, this chapter describes the economic impact the food system has on Erie County.
- Page 1 and 2:
ROOM AT THE TABLE Food System Asses
- Page 3 and 4:
2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Darren Kempne
- Page 5 and 6:
List of Tables 1.1 Family & Nonfa
- Page 7 and 8:
Eating is an agricultural act, writ
- Page 9 and 10:
8 Introduction
- Page 11 and 12:
0#1($&033E(B%23,!(0#1(B+,*0/'E(/40/
- Page 13 and 14:
Assessment of Current Conditions
- Page 15 and 16:
the county’s urban area. The ates
- Page 17 and 18:
health and social services” secto
- Page 19 and 20:
FOOD AFFORDABILITY Food is not even
- Page 21 and 22:
C#(N+,'(7"%#/5E(OC7(40$(2''#("B'+0/
- Page 23 and 24:
22 Clinton Bailey Farmers’ Market
- Page 25 and 26:
time period (See Table 2.1). The st
- Page 27 and 28:
soil fertility. 7 Over 48 percent o
- Page 29 and 30:
percentage has stayed near or above
- Page 31 and 32:
I. Farm Expenditures In 2007, the a
- Page 33 and 34:
32 PROCESSING AND WHOLESALE - 3 - P
- Page 35 and 36: and oil seed crushers, were constru
- Page 37 and 38: food manufacturing—constituted le
- Page 39 and 40: 40/( /4'( ."33"H,#-( !"#1,/,"#$( 0+
- Page 41 and 42: 40 DISTRIBUTION - 4 - Distribution
- Page 43 and 44: generally purchase food individuall
- Page 45 and 46: Convenience stores and gas stations
- Page 47 and 48: more alarming, 21 of the total (46.
- Page 49 and 50: In 2007, there were 8,662 retail es
- Page 51 and 52: of these factors, variations exist
- Page 53 and 54: unwanted prepared and perishable fo
- Page 55 and 56: DISPOSAL 54 - 5 - Disposal Foodre
- Page 57 and 58: these private businesses, including
- Page 59 and 60: energy. Traditional methods include
- Page 61 and 62: of food processing facilities, manu
- Page 63 and 64: V0+I'/$(/"(+'*,'H(0#5($/0/'(0-'#!5(
- Page 65 and 66: further state environmental plans,
- Page 67 and 68: organizations for their preservatio
- Page 69 and 70: conducted in a manner which is not
- Page 71 and 72: +0#$.'+(/4'(B+0!/,!'$(0#1(2'#')/$("
- Page 73 and 74: a contract with American Farmland T
- Page 75 and 76: ".(,#!"&'E(/4'(!"#F%'#!'(".(/4'$'(.
- Page 77 and 78: funds directed towards planning, la
- Page 79 and 80: that met the Greenprint Plan object
- Page 81 and 82: Analysis
- Page 83 and 84: a certain type of food, divided by
- Page 85: land, clearly beyond the existing a
- Page 89 and 90: ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VARIOUS FOOD IND
- Page 91 and 92: SCENARIO 1: INCREASED DEMAND FOR HE
- Page 93 and 94: Synthesis
- Page 95 and 96: Consumption Production Processing &
- Page 97 and 98: Local Growing Capacity Analysis Eco
- Page 99 and 100: STRENGTHS ($ Strong farming traditi
- Page 101 and 102: OPPORTUNITIES ($ Access to urban an
- Page 103 and 104: A. Fiscal Incentive Policies 7"%#/,
- Page 105 and 106: prevent “leapfrog” development.
- Page 107 and 108: structures serving as disincentives
- Page 109 and 110: processes with which they may not b
- Page 111 and 112: Each recommendation is linked to a
- Page 113 and 114: seed banks have a positive economic
- Page 115 and 116: $5$/'&(/"($40+'(,#."+&0/,"#(/"(&0I'
- Page 117 and 118: County, one of the requirements sho
- Page 119 and 120: 8( DUa( B+"-+0&( H"%31( "..'+( 0( )
- Page 121 and 122: +'F'!/'1( ,#( 9",#/( V'&"+0#1%&$( "
- Page 123 and 124: Investigating possible federal a
- Page 125 and 126: First, the Legislature should autho
- Page 127 and 128: foods carry the advantage of being
- Page 129 and 130: No. Recommendation 1 Sponsor Agricu
- Page 131 and 132: Appendix A - Methodology This secti
- Page 133 and 134: 2007 Nonemployer Statistics are org
- Page 135 and 136: E. Estimating Poultry Production Fo
- Page 137 and 138:
Appendix B - Glossary of Terms !" A
- Page 139 and 140:
opposed to the use of such methods
- Page 141 and 142:
www.ersusda.gov/foodatlas. 43. “F
- Page 143 and 144:
35. NY AGM, Art 25AA, § 305(e).
- Page 145 and 146:
Appendix D - Bibliography A Albrigh
- Page 147 and 148:
December 2, 2011. URL: http://www.b
- Page 149 and 150:
Stern, Gloria. 1975. How to Start Y
- Page 151 and 152:
Appendix E - Resources 1. List of E
- Page 153 and 154:
iv. D4'(OMl(S0#1(7"#$'+*0#!5(,$(J0(
- Page 155 and 156:
AGRICULTURE!SURVEY!!!"!!!ERIE!COUNT
- Page 157 and 158:
156
- Page 159 and 160:
158
- Page 161 and 162:
III. Eligibility Requirements for N
- Page 163 and 164:
Table 2 - Weekly Food Cost per Pers
- Page 165 and 166:
Table 7 - Residence Within 10 Minut
- Page 167 and 168:
Table 10 - Food Service Retailing C
- Page 169 and 170:
Table 14 - Economic Characteristics
- Page 171 and 172:
All other food manufacturing 1.00 0