A Farmer's Two Cents

With the salmonella tomato scare that's all over the press [link], the media is looking for someone or something to blame. This is understandable; because of the wide distribution inherent in our food system, such outbreaks are scary. Of course, the only conclusion has been a cry for more regulation, more funding for the FDA, and other such dull, ordinary solutions. I heard a lady interviewed on CNN state that at present, FDA officials are not allowed to go onto a farm's premises to test produce without the farmer's permission, and she said that this restriction should be removed to allow testing of potential problems before they reach the point of packaging and distribution. Is such an erosion of liberty a necessary (or practical) tactic to keep our food safe? I think there is a better solution.

Our food system has many inherent weak points. First and foremost, the customer has no knowledge of who grew their food or how it was grown. The farmer that grew the food has no accountability to his customers because he never sees them. Therefore, the customers must rely on the government to make sure that the food is safe. Would you trust the government to take care of your money? If not, can you trust it to keep your food safe?

Secondly, large amounts of produce are gathered and mixed at one point for distribution. Thus, even if 99% of the farmers growing the produce are using good management practices, the 1% who are taking shortcuts (or whose produce has been exposed to, say, chicken house runoff) can cause huge problems if their bad management results in dirty produce getting in with the rest, and one rotten apple spoils the whole barrel. Related to this is the fact that good wholesale farmers may be seriously harmed by negligent wholesale farmers (who create a food scare) if they can't sell their produce.

Note that Whole Foods is pulling their tomatoes off the shelves as well, although they are doing so voluntarily. The spinach scare a couple of years ago involved both organic and conventional spinach. Thus it seems that "organic" is not the solution to food safety; it has some of the same problems as conventional produce does. This is not to say that organic produce isn't higher quality. I'm just saying that the organic industry doesn't have all the problems of conventional production solved.

I've posed alot of questions, but what is the answer? I believe that in order to get the highest quality, cleanest, safest food, you must buy locally. Local farmers selling through farmers' markets, a CSA, or roadside stands have their customers in mind as they grow the food. Odds are, they're growing it in the manner that they would want it to be grown for themselves, because they are growing it for themselves.

Buying from local farmers helps to build a local and regional economy, which is much more secure than a national economy. If local farmers disappeared because of their inability to compete with the large farm corporations, where could the food come from in the event of a crisis in the economy? Both conventional and organic produce relies on transportation over long distance, and so creates a dependence on fuel. This, besides inflation, is what causes food prices to rise along with fuel prices. Local, sustainable farms can improve the quality of the soil, slow urban sprawl, as well as providing good food and the farmer's income.

This is the reason for a CSA- Community Supported Agriculture. The customers pay the farmer up front for a share in his crops so that he can pay for his planting expenses. If the farmer has a bad year, the customers ensure that the farmer can try again next year, because if the farmer goes out of business, his customers lose their good food supply. We are looking into starting a CSA, and it seems like a really good idea for farmer and customer alike.

In short, as Joel Salatin has often emphasized, the only way for the U.S. to ensure a safe, healthy food supply is to localize it. A local food system is a partnership that benefits all involved.


~Sherlock