The Voice of Reason

I was recently enjoying a picnic with friends and family when I suddenly found myself in the middle of a very interesting conversation. On one side of me was the executive director of a well known provincial environmental organization. On the other side was a former Malancthon town councilor and farmer. The farmer, a long-time family friend, is about as traditional a rural citizen as you can find. Traditions of family, small economically sustainable agriculture, and property rights are top concerns for him. For my environmentalist friend, preserving the commons (water, resources, healthy ecosystems) for the future are of critical importance.

As one might expect, the conversation started out a little rocky. My farmer friend was feeling threatened by increased environmental, and other regulation in a business that is less & less profitable by the year. My environmentalist friend was insisting that such regulation and monitoring is essential to the future health and wellbeing of Ontarians, urban and rural alike.

After listening for a while (the conversation had captured the attention of about a dozen others as well), I decide to wade into the rough waters.
We discussed things like the Alternative Land Use Services program which, if applied to all of Ontario, will pay for ecological services provided by farmers. We discussed ways to restore profitability to agriculture thereby creating food security for Ontario, and making projects such as the Greenbelt less painful for the farmer’s bottom line.

Before long everyone had found many things to agree upon, including the need for a greater understanding of the critical connections between urban and rural Ontarians, the need for greater accountability in government, and the need for a renewal of locally based economics.

Welcome to the Green Party of Ontario. In this age of uncertainty, we are rapidly emerging as the voice of reason in Ontario. Gone are the days when the Green Party was viewed as a one issue party. With any success we will also see the end of the days of partisan left-right politics, as we push forward pragmatic solutions based on solid values of social, economic, and ecological sustainability.

We have much work to do to prepare for the next provincial election in 2011. Your continued membership and support is important as we continue to build consensus among Ontarians and unite people in the goal of a better future for all.

Which brings me to one final observation from my weekend picnic. Both my environmentalist friend and my farmer friend are Green Party voters, one in Dufferin - Caledon, and the other in Hamilton Centre. The fact that these two voters are on the same page politically means we are definitely moving in the right direction. With your continued involvement we can become the voice of reason for all thoughtful Ontarians.

Is "Big Organic" an Oxymoron?

Last week I began speculating as to how the inevitable ‘scaling up of organics’ would affect the craft here in Ontario (note I did not call it an industry – perhaps a sign of things to come…?!) with the entry of the Norfolk Organic Growers Association into the marketplace headed by 1000 acre conventional grower Nightingale Farms of Delhi, ON.

Perhaps now I will briefly wade into the debate over the Scaling up of Organics, waters which are about as murky as they come. To begin with, don’t even bother taking your socks off here and wading in yourself if you are expecting to come away from the discussion with a clear cut answer – one does not exist and it is very difficult to draw lines in this sand.

Looking at this from a consumers standpoint in the present, clearly reliable, affordable access to an organically produced pepper/tomato/eggplant/etc from an Ontario farm is a good thing – very good in fact because these nightshades in particular are hard to come by domestically and if southern Ontario has the right conditions to grow them by the thousands then so be it. But has anyone been down to the tomato belt these days in the extreme southwest of the province?

Huge conventional greenhouse operations dominate the landscape while seasonal workers toil by the hundreds in the hot dusty fields. Conservation lands, treed fence lines and wetlands are few and far between, perhaps a situation that more organically minded farmers might be able to remedy. But what if the conventional organic grower is only organically minded in terms of inputs and not in their respect for and regeneration of nature?

From a producer point of view, I am encouraged by the Norfolk Organic Growers joining others like the Bay of Quinte Growers Coop, the HOPE Collective and other large organic growers like Pfenning Organic Vegetables – it will mean greater food security for organically minded Ontarians. From experience I know how hard it is to manage the complexities of seeding, weeding, watering and harvesting a four acre market garden and I can appreciate that by narrowing the range and increasing the scale of crops under cultivation (as most of these large growers do) a farm can do better with their bottom line. In this sense I think that the cooperative approach – you grow the carrots, I’ll grow the beets and we’ll piggy back each other on our marketing and administration expenses – shows real promise.

Normatively speaking, however, I wonder if we want ALL of our organic growers going large? Will the increase in scale result in a loss of biodiversity; will the absence of chemical inputs offset the cost of closer agro-ecological links (not to mention farmer-consumer contact) that come with more intimate market gardens? I remember having a conversation with a lady from Germany at the market recently who was describing how her country is going gangbusters for organics, but at the same time the balance between large farms and small market gardens has remained relatively stable. Which is to say that there has proven to be enough room in the ‘growing’ marketplace for both.. Apparently farmer’s markets are still very strong and organically oriented, farmers are still selling their veggies from small roadside stands and farm stores, but grocery stores also now carry much wider selections of ‘mainstream’ organic produce at slightly lower prices. “Where do you shop?” I nosily asked. “At both,” she said. “We like buying direct from our local farmer, but if he doesn’t have something I need I am usually at the supermarket once a week anyway so I can pick it up there.” The greatest benefit, she said, of organics becoming more commonplace is that it has brought prices down and brought even more organic consumers & producers into the fold.

Now to the downside. A reliance on mechanized systems, plastic intensive horticulture and imported labour are hallmarks to me of an unsustainable system, but just as much as packaging, imported foods and long distance food transportation are as well on the consumption side – so what do you do?!

Large scale vegetable farms will also necessarily gravitate to sandier, looser soils due to the need for these soils to be extremely workable and tractor friendly. Not only will this compaction impact the soil health, but sandier soils require greater ongoing fertility amendments as sandy soil does not hold up nutrients as well as heavier silty or clay-loam soils. Thinking ecological footprint wise, most of this fertility will come from livestock operations, either composted horse or cattle manure, fish meal or perhaps pelletized chicken manure. Nice eh? Sandier soils also don’t hold water as well either, thus making irrigation demands even greater. Furthermore, recent taste tests have show that vegetables grown in sand are not as nutrient dense or as tasty as those grown in silt, loam or clay soils – all other variables being equal.

In the absence of a community oriented operational agenda, one wonders what impacts the scaling up of organics will have on rural communities, our food supply and our environment. Does 200 acres of plastic covered monoculture even count as organic, given that it is still clearly an assault on nature? Do we want to continue to funnel our food through the large scale grocery store chains, even if lower prices come with higher packaging, more food miles and more consumer dollars exiting the local economy? If the scaling up of conventional agriculture is any indication, corporate organics may run contrary to the foundations of the organic movement, which in this farmers eyes stem from our connections with nature and require thinking holistically and inclusively about our relationship with ecological, economic and social systems. What it is likely to do, however, is bring organics further into the mainstream for all consumers to enjoy – if you like your peppers in plastic packaging that is.

Perhaps the most important lesson to be found in what Norfolk Organic Growers are doing is that here we have an agricultural region that had formerly been dependent on growing tobacco and ginseng, both at great expense to the environment, but rather than go down with the ship this group of farmers have shown vision and courage by banding together and moving into the growing organic niche. Perhaps as our own region assesses its agricultural future, we might want to consider what cooperation in the field of organics could do for the future of our farmers and our environment if we strive to maintain a sustainable balance of small and large farms, artisan market gardens and diversified mixed family farms.

Thinking outside the box –

Posted by Farmer Ryan

Moving Forward in an Age of Uncertainty

We’ve all heard the saying, “When the going gets tough, the tough get going”. Unfortunately this piece of machismo advice is not often true. History demonstrates that in most cases when the going gets tough, without exceptional leadership, society becomes paralyzed.

We are now facing not just one challenge, but the triple whammy of climate change, energy cost, and the approaching bankruptcy of our growth based economic system. In the face of this, the traditional big three political parties have little to offer other than the status quo. Indeed, they know no other way of approaching politics or economics. In fact, since the 1950’s, our traditional parties have been promoting the very economic system that is now proving fatal to our planet, our health, and our societal wellbeing. Under the circumstance, we can expect little else than band-aid solutions to patch up the ailing patient, based on the inflexible and failing ideologies of left-right politics.

There is however a fourth option; one that brings economics to the service of people and planet, not vice-versa. The Green Party, of which you can be valuable part, uses a different value system upon which to base political decision making. In fact we are the only political party to base our policies on any value system at all!

Our values will keep us on track and position us as the only viable option in this era of uncertainty. We can lead Ontario through the critical challenges we now face and onward to a sustainable future; socially, economically, and ecologically.

At times I find it unsettling that we as a society must endure significant pain before we will acknowledge the need for a change in direction and act on that need. I believe we, as a society, are very near that tipping point. It is for this reason that we must seize the opportunity to show Ontarians a better way. To this end, the council and functionaries of the Green Party of Ontario are moving forward aggressively in preparation for our most successful election campaign ever in 2011. This will mean new approaches to everything from membership building to policy development.

In an uncertain age, we need your involvement and support more than ever to help guide the Green Party of Ontario to success in building a better future in Ontario.

So here’s to opportunity and a brighter tomorrow based on respect for people and planet.

Prophets

“A prophet is not without honour except in his own country.” A rather awkward grammatical construction, but a true statement nonetheless. We've had some true prophets in our community, and their wisdom has been met too often with eye rolling and mutters of “here he goes again”.

A prophet is not so much a person who foretells the future as someone who holds up a mirror to the present situation and lets us draw our own conclusions. When we don't like the reflection, we tend to dismiss the prophet.

Lately we've been receiving reports from consultants hired to tell us about the economic possibilities and best investments for the future of our region. Whenever rail is mentioned, there are nodding heads as if this were just the brilliant innovation the nodders had had themselves recently, and they relay nostalgic memories of the simple, train-based communities of yesteryear.

Where were these nodders when the decisions were made, in the oh so recent past , to rip up the rails and pave over the right of ways?

When work was being done on Highway 26 between Owen Sound and Meaford a few years ago, John Harrison was making the case for accommodating and retaining the railway overpass for future use. In the end that relatively small cost was saved, for the moment, by simply removing it. Grey County demonstrated healthy foresight when it held on to ownership of the rail lands, but the province made a very short-sighted decision to save a few bucks in the road reconstruction budget. When (and I believe it will be when, not if) rail is returned to Owen Sound, that road will need to be rebuilt and an overpass added at a cost of millions of dollars.

Another example of not wanting to look at the evidence in front of us.

We have conferences and studies and piles of reports from the World Health Organization down to our local health unit on the social determinants of health. They all clearly indicate that we are making community decisions that are resulting in huge costs to our health care system.

Again, the province theoretically pays for health care, but decisions about child care, housing, health clinics and public recreation spaces are made at the county or municipal level. They are often made on the basis of how much money can be wheedled out of higher levels of government, and the scale of the vision is reduced to fit the grant.

We have a current pilot project in Grey-Bruce called PLAY. It's funded by the provincial government to encourage free neighbourhood play to reduce obesity and increase fitness. At the same time, we are nickle-and-diming recreation spaces for teenagers to death. (Exception – Port Elgin's skate park – what do they know or have that Owen Sound does not?)

Appropriate affordable housing – something we are still tearing down much faster than we are building – is another determinant of health. The level of nutrition, security and stimulation in early childhood are important predictors of health in adulthood, yet we still have no level of government putting consistent resources into pre-school children and their families.

And of course, all of the things necessary for the health of our residents depends on having the financial resources to pay in a community that is increasingly pay-for-what-you-get. For those on social assistance, the cuts of the former Conservative government have never been replaced. Although our own member of provincial parliament says concern for poverty reduction in Ontario is “a McGuinty thing”, there's no evidence so far in his second mandate that the premier is prepared make the first and most necessary move – raise the rates.

And are people with jobs secure in their ability to pay for what they will need in the future? Those laid off at Tenneco are just the first and most predictable casualties of an economy built on cheap oil.

We're entering a new era say the prophets. Climate change, peak oil, poor health and politics. It won't be business as usual for long.

I laugh when I hear “who could have predicted....?” I know who, and believe me, they take no pleasure in saying “I told you so”. Perhaps it's not in our nature to apologize for or even admit to past sighs and eye-rolling. But for me, I'm taking these prophets in our community out for coffee. I want to hear what they're thinking about now.

I think there is plenty of hope for new ways of doing things. And I know just who might have an idea where they lie.

Posted by AnneFS

Food Politics

I assume it is safe to say you’re sitting down and likely familiar with what ‘Farmer Ryan’s Rants’ are all about. Well, this one should be true to character, but as it has been brewing for well over a week now you’ll have to excuse me if it has more buzz than usual. That said, this diatribe is not intended to be an attack on any one in particular, especially not your average conventional farmer – the good natured folk that have been growing our food for generations and who are largely well-meaning. Problem is that this group, like all too many us, have not thought critically enough about the pesticide paradigm that our food system and environmental health has fallen pray too. Furthermore, the conventional farmers that I have had contact with continue to laugh in when I inquire about ‘change’ – citing the fact that they are either too old to change or just plain disinterested in looking at the issue through a new lens.
I personally am not aware of any significant public debate that has taken place now that it appears we are moving full-speed ahead into the GMO era and those that read the frighteningly pro-GMO article in this weekend’s Globe & Mail business section may have come away from it as I did – steaming mad that agribusiness seems content to manipulate nature for monetary gains and disregard negative environmental externalities. In fact, I was so steamed about this over the weekend that Laura has suggested I should no longer be alowed to read the paper. Oh well…

First of all, let's evaluate some of the most frightening statements from this scary bit of business journalism, whose GMO optimism flies in the face of other news stories from the same paper (See Globe Focus, June 14, 2008, pg. F8 – An Amphibious Assault) among other evidence:
"If we're going to have another agricultural revolution, it will need herbicides, pesticides and improved seeds," says Peter Hazell, an agricultural development economist and a former economist with both the World Bank and the International Food Policy Research Institute.

Gotta love this narrow mindset, eh? Of course, we’ve come to expect this from the Bretton Woods Institutions and the like. The first agricultural revolution was, of course, that which began in the 1940’s when wartime chemical/industrial companies spun off agricultural divisions and began apply the ‘increased yields is all that matters’ logic. In return we now have a culture of cheap food in North America along with a host of other social, health and environmental problems.

Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought a revolution was something that was lead by the people for the people, not something that was imposed upon us by multi-billion dollar corporations and their government lackies – I believe the word for that is globalization. Of course, without more people involved in growing their own food and reconnecting with the land, the pesticide laden GMO foods are likely to continue to infest our food system and wreak havoc on our environment.

The rise of GMO farming is already quite staggering:
“Last year, 91 per cent of U.S. soybeans and 73 per cent of corn was GM, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, a non-profit group that promotes the use of biotech seeds in developing countries, says 12 million farmers in 23 countries grew 114 million hectares of GM crops in 2007 - the equivalent of 220 Delawares. Canada had seven million GM hectares, mostly canola, corn and soybeans.”

The worst, however, is probably yet to come. Dolly the Sheep and growth hormone supported dairy aside, the Monsanto’s of the world are developing a full range of GMO vegetables as well and they’ve already found their way onto the market in the US (sugar beets, papaya, tomatoes, etc.). Lobbying is intense to get Canada on board as well, with both U.S. farm groups and government lobbyist pressing for Canada to adopt them and make the pro-U.S. stance on GMO appear more legitimate. ‘Developing’ countries are of course being given even less say in the mater with food-short and debt laden governments throughout Asia, Latin America and Africa grasping at anything to distance themselves from starvation.

And although it sometimes feels like it, apparently I am not the only one concerned about GMOs as even the Globe was unable to entirely mask the other side of the story:

"Like many others, I do not think the potential long-term effects of GM crops has been adequately tested," Rosemary Stanton, an Australian nutritionist, wrote in the May issue of Australian Doctor. "The GM genie is not something that can be put back in the bottle if future research uncovers problems."

“Bill Freese, a science policy analyst for the Center for Food Safety in Washington, is concerned about the alacrity in which GM foods have been approved, in spite of the lack of long-term research on the foods' potential risks, or lack thereof, on human and animal health, plant life and the environment.”

Even Prince Charles, long standing organic advocate, was able to get his two cents in as the article quotes him ten years ago of accusing genetic engineers of taking us into "realms that belong to God and God alone."

In fact, the more I learn about Charlie, the more I like him. As many of you may know his ‘Dutchy’ brand of organic foods is not-for profit and is supporting the growth in both the supply and demand for organic foods in a number of countries. Furthermore, the Prince has been and outspoken advocate for small-scale organic farming, knowing full well as I do that aside from wild-harvesting, there is no other way to produce food in a truly sustainable, social just and environmentally beneficial manner.

I could obviously go on and on berating the agribusiness industry and the fact that our own government is not doing enough to protect us, let alone study the long-term cumulative impacts of large scale, genetically modified, chemical dependent agriculture. The fact is it doesn’t surprise me because our nation, whether we want to admit it or not, is a culture based on taking profits from extracting the vast resource of our naturally abundant land mass in a manner that our First Nations have always considered blasphemous. Hey, people gotta make a living, right?

Up until now I might have had some sympathy, to a degree. But now that Laura and I are on the cusp of bringing another generation into the world (decode this and you’ll discover our family’s big news!), I am even more adamant than ever that more people need to become more fully aware of the dangers of conventional agriculture around the world, starting right here in our own community. And the mountain of evidence that suggests we are already in the midst of serious health and environmental catastrophes continues to build.

New research reported last week by the Rodale Institute could come as a shock to many and may scare more than a few, considering that we live in an intense agriculture region where chemical sprays are routinely released and are finding their way into our water, air and food supply. The full report can be found at www.rodaleinstitute.org, but in summary, lead author Dr. Warren Porter professor of zoology and environmental toxicology at the University of Madison, Wisconsin, in this cross-disciplinary 10 year study looked at the effects common pesticides (used in conventional orchards, cash cropping and vegetable production) have on the health and well-being of our communities. According to Porter, “normal” exposures in food, water and air at levels considered “safe” by current regulatory bodies the U.S. may be creating many of the serious long-term health problems emerging in humans and wildlife.

“National and international research projects show that pesticides contribute to an increase in aggressive behaviour, birth defects, developmental roadblocks, failing immune function and sexual disorders. And evidence is just surfacing that our fundamental genetic constitution could be in jeopardy.”

While I could go on to report more of the chilling details, needless to say they scared the crap out of me (dad to be) because reportedly the most vulnerable cohort to even (and especially low-levels of exposure – again, read the full article to undertand the science) are children. Ecologically, amphibians, which form a vital link in the web of life, are equally in jeopardy because of their thin, moist skin that has the ability to quickly absorb environmental toxins (again check out the June 14th article in the Globe Focus section that suggests if amphibian numbers continue to decline, insect populations will explode and mammal populations will plummet – sounds great eh?!).

Let’s also consider for a second the costs to our health and education systems for a second if rates of disease and developmental disorders continue to rise (not to mention the aforementioned amphibian issue) For starters, big $$$. Anyone else heard rumours of higher than average cancer levels in our area? My wife certainly thinks she saw more developmental disorders during here year at Meaford Community School than she has in any school previously. So right away we are looking at increased health and education costs, not to mention costs associated with trying to reverse the problem if that were even possible.

So call me an alarmist if you must, but these are the realities that sooner or later we’ll all need to come to terms with and I suggest we do so before it’s too late. When you think about it, the costs of doing nothing will be far greater than taking action now from health, environment and educational perspectives...heck, even from a property value, tourism and economy point of view we could take a big hit if our region is found to be unsafe for us to live in (we’ve got to get property owners attention somehow!).

Fortunately, change is happening, but is it happening fast enough in our area? Europe is of course well ahead of the game with a Union wide ban on GMOs, entire bioregions declaring themselves organic only and rates of organic acreage pushing 30-40% in some countries. Here at home consumer consciousness is certainly on the rise with consumption of organic goods increasing in most centres and farmer’s markets exploding across the country. Yet still, organic farms still make up far less than 5% of the total and the current biofuels boom is pushing more and more land into GMO corn, soy and canola. High grain prices and not encouraging farmers to bring more diversity onto their farms and in fact more marginal lands that should be left to naturalize and reforest are being brought under the plough. We are clearly not heading in the right direction.

So what can you do, how can we make a difference?

Personally I have little faith that environmental health will ever reach the top of the political agenda (that is, unless the Green Party is in power...) with more people concerned about how much their gas is going to cost them to get to the cottage or how many manufacturing jobs have been lost. That said, I have always been a believer that meaningful change can happen on the ground at the local level, which is why I got into farming in the first place. However, one farmer will not win a war and if we care about the health of our community, our children and the ecological systems that support our life than action needs to be taken.

My suggestion, do as I have done and contact your local councilor and suggest to them that this will be a local election issue in the near future. Encourage them to bring the issue to the attention of council and perhaps even a cross-disciplinary committee could be struck to study the issue. We then need funding to complete baseline environmental toxicology studies and money to support farmers progressive enough to begin making the transition to organic methods. A marketing strategy may follow to bill our region as being at the forefront of the organic revolution and pretty soon we might actually be able to back up our claim that the Georgian Triangle is a safe place to live, work and play.

We have so much to gain if we work together to get this right; everything to lose if we continue to get it wrong. Let’s make it happen!

Pursuing a pesticide free future -

Farmer Ryan

GPO Summer Summit - August 21-23, 2009

Seventh Annual GPO Summer Summit

Cost: $25 - includes two nights camping on site, two suppers, campfire, forest trails.

Host: Peter and Patti Ellis' Farm, 705‑458‑4852, Site #4615,
One km west of highway 27 (Newton-Robinson) on Road #10, just north of Bond Head.

All welcome.

The Summer Summit is where Green Party members (GPO and GPC) and interested folks come to talk green policy, economics, strategy, campaigning, political theory in a relaxed atmosphere. The Summit is a structured but casual forum for idea sharing, green theorizing, and brainstorming. It is a low cost, non-decision making event.