Satish Kumar to Keynote - Northeast Organic Farming ...

Winter, 2004-05 Vol. 2, No. 63 Publication of the Northeast Organic Farming Association ISSN 1077-2294

Inside This IssueFeatures

Praise for NOFA Manuals 3Local News and Events 42-434th Annual Organic Land Care Course 43

Supplement onOrganic Meat

Food From Thought 9Sheep in the Northeast 10Mad Cow in the USA 12Organic Meat at Woodbridge Farm 14Automating chicken Coop Security 18Organic Pork Production 19Industrial vs. Organic Livestock 23Selling Meat and Poultry 27Standard vs. Industrial Turkey Breeds 28Raising Grass-fed Meat 30Farm Animal Production Standards 32Grass Fed at Rocky Top Acres 34Irradiated Meat for Lunch? 38

DepartmentsEditorial 2NOFA Exchange 4News Notes 6Book Reviews 44NOFA Contact People 46Calendar 47NOFA Membership Information 47

For the last several years, the NOFA SummerConference has been able to send people to theConference free of charge, thanks to fundingfrom the Pond Foundation based in Santa Fe,New Mexico. Over three years, the Pond Foun-dation donated $7,200 with which conferenceregistrar Dennis Cronin awarded scholarships toa specific population, as per Pond Foundation‚srequirements. These were people of color andurban youth.

This year, the Pond Foundation has alerted usthat they can no longer help support the NOFASummer Conference financially, although theircontributions have helped close to 150 peopleto broaden their horizons and their life experi-ences by attending the Summer Conference. Ithas also broadened NOFA’s reach to include

Scholarships more young people, minorities and urbandwellers. This deepening of our membershipbase is a plus for all.

The only way that the NOFA Summer Confer-ence can continue to provide scholarships tothis special population and to other people inneed who want to attend the conference isthrough your donations. We would love to self-fund this scholarship program but we need yourhelp.

Donations can be sent to: NOFA SummerConference Scholarship Fund, c/o JulieRawson, 411 Sheldon Road, Barre, MA 01005.Donations may also be made online atwww.nofa.org - click on the Summer Confer-ence link and follow the instructions.

Thank you for your support! Your contributionsare tax deductible

by Kathleen Litchfield, Summer ConferencePublicity Coordinator

The results are in, but it goes without sayingthat the 2004 summer conference was biggerand better than ever. A grand total of 1,447people attended August’s grand event and allenjoyed a diverse array of informative work-shops for adults, teens and children, deliciousorganic meals, music and dancing, the enter-taining festivities of the Saturday fair and somuch more.

Following the stellar 2004 lineup of EliotColeman, Dr. Vandana Shiva, Ralph Nader andTexas Congressman Ron Paul in the slots ofpre-conference presenter, keynote speaker anddebaters, the delectable soup of the four-day31st Annual NOFA Summer Conference isalready stewing.

The Northeast Organic Farming Associationwill hold its 31st Annual Summer Conferencefrom August 11-14, 2005 at Hampshire College

Save August 11-14, 2005 for 31st Annual NOFA Summer Conference

in Amherst, Massachusetts. For the last threedecades, the workshops at this conference haveinspired and brought together new and experi-enced farmers, gardeners, activists, landowners,homesteaders, home-schoolers, and all sorts ofinteresting folks from the Northeast and wellbeyond. Many people plan their summersaround the conference dates, so join them andmark your 2005 calendars now!

The 31st Annual NOFA Summer Conferencepromises to instill in us even more deeply thesense that growing healthy, nutritious food thathelps sustain our community, our environmentand our world as well as our children andourselves, is of utmost importance.

In the ever-changing landscape of farming andhomesteading, organic standards, the politicalenvironment, alternative energy, nutrition andhealth care, civil rights and all of the fibers thatcomprise our day-to-day web of life, it is nice toknow we can count on NOFA’s summer confer-ence for stimulating discussions and workshops

on both intellectual and highly practical topics,while we congregate with a diverse populationof all ages.

During our October summer conference meet-ing, committee members reviewed evaluationsfrom the 2004 event, in order to most effec-tively and proactively plan for yet anotherstellar conference. While munching diverse,homemade potluck fare in a cozy living room,we were delighted to read the following, andadded these fabulous testimonials to the NOFAwebsite, at www.nofa.org.

“This was a fantastic weekend! Verystress-free because everything was meticulouslyorganized.”

“It’s a daunting task to plan and executea conference the size of NOFA and I trulyappreciate all of your efforts. The folks I’ve metand the knowledge I’ve gained have made me abetter farmer and hopefully a better person.Thank you all for a job very well done.”And, “This was our first conference. We reallyhadn’t a clue as to what to expect but weregreatly pleased with every aspect of the confer-ence. My teens have already decided that thiswill be on our agenda next year. When teensand adults are on the same wavelength thatsomething is fun, has good food, wonderfulpeople, is informative, then you have a magicalrecipe for something beyond success. Thankyou!”

Satish Kumar to Keynote

(continued on page 41)

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e r Winter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 52

Advertisements not only bring in TNF revenue, whichmeans less must come from membership dues, they alsomake a paper interesting and helpful to those looking forspecific goods or services. We carry 2 kinds of ads:

The NOFA Exchange - this is a free bulletin boardservice for NOFA members and TNF subscribers. Sendin up to 100 words (business or personal) and we’ll printit free in the next issue. Include a price (if selling) and anaddress or phone number so readers can contact youdirectly. If you’re not a NOFA member, you can still sendin an ad - just send $5 along too! Send NOFA Exchangeads directly to The Natural Farmer, 411 Sheldon Rd.,Barre, MA 01005 or (preferably) E-mail [email protected].

Display Ads - this is for those offering products orservices on a regular basis! You can get real attentionwith display ads. Send camera ready copy to DanRosenberg, PO Box 40, Montague, MA 01351 (413) 863-9063 and enclose a check for the appropriate size. Thesizes and rates are: Full page (15" tall by 10" wide) $300 Half page (7 1/2" tall by 10" wide) $155 One-third page (7 1/2" tall by 6 1/2" wide) $105 One-quarter page (7 1/2" tall by 4 7/8" wide) $80 One-sixth page (7 1/2" tall by 3 1/8" wide), or

(3 3/4" tall by 6 1/2" wide) $55 Business card size (1 1/2" tall by 3 1/8" wide) $15

Note: These prices are for camera ready copy. If youwant any changes we will be glad to make them - or totypeset a display ad for you - for $10 extra. Just send usthe text, any graphics, and a sketch of how you want it tolook. Include a check for the space charge plus $10.

Advertise in or Sponsor The Natural FarmerFrequency discounts: if you buy space in several issuesyou can qualify for substantial discounts off these rates.Pay for two consecutive issues and get 10% off each, payfor 3 and get 20% off, or pay for 4 and get 25% off. Anad in the NOFA Summer Conference Program Bookcounts as a TNF ad for purposes of this discount.

Deadlines: We need your ad copy one month before thepublication date of each issue. The deadlines are:

January 31 for the Spring issue (mails Mar. 1)April 30 for the Summer issue (mails Jun. 1)July 31 for the Fall issue (mails Sep. 1)October 31 for the Winter issue (mails Dec. 1)

Disclaimer: Advertisers are helping support the paper soplease support them. We cannot investigate the claims ofadvertisers, of course, so please exercise due cautionwhen considering any product or service. If you learn ofany misrepresentation in one of our ads please inform usand we will take appropriate action. We don’t want adsthat mislead.

Sponsorships: Individuals or organizations wishing tosponsor The Natural Farmer may do so with a payment of$200 for one year (4 issues). In return, we will thank thesponsor in a special area of page 3 of each issue, andfeature the sponsor’s logo or other small insignia.

Contact for Display Ads or Sponsors: Send display adsor sponsorships with payment to our advertising managerDan Rosenberg, PO Box 40, Montague, MA 01351. Ifyou have questions, or want to reserve space, contact Danat (413) 863-9063 or [email protected].

The Natural Farmer is the newspaper of the NortheastOrganic Farming Association (NOFA). Regular membersreceive a subscription as part of their dues, and othersmay subscribe for $10 (in the US or $18 outside the US).It is published four times a year at 411 Sheldon Rd.,Barre, MA 01005. The editors are Jack Kittredge andJulie Rawson, but most of the material is either written bymembers or summarized by us from information peoplesend us.

Upcoming Issue Topics - We plan a year in advance sothat folks who want to write on a topic can have a lot oflead time. The next 3 issues will be:

Winter 2004-05 Organic MeatSpring 2005 Youth and AgricultureSummer 2005 CucurbitsFall 2005 Alternative On-Farm Energy

Moving or missed an issue? The Natural Farmer will notbe forwarded by the post office, so you need to make sureyour address is up-to-date if you move. You get yoursubscription to this paper in one of two ways. Directsubscribers who send us $10 are put on our database here.These folks should send address changes to us. Most ofyou, however, get this paper as a NOFA member benefitfor paying your chapter dues. Each quarter every NOFAchapter sends us address labels for their paid members,which we use to mail out the issue. If you moved ordidn’t get the paper, your beef is with your state chapter,not us. Every issue we print an updated list of “NOFAContact People” on the last page, for a handy reference toall the chapter names and addresses.

As a membership paper, we count on you for articles, artand graphics, news and interviews, photos on rural ororganic themes, ads, letters, etc. Almost everybody has aspecial talent or knows someone who does. If you can’twrite, find someone who can to interview you. We’d liketo keep the paper lively and interesting to members, andwe need your help to do it.

We appreciate a submission in any form, but are lesslikely to make mistakes with something typed than hand-written. To be a real gem, send it via electronic mail([email protected]) or enclose a computer disk (MacIntoshor PC in Microsoft Word ideally.) Also, any graphics,photos, charts, etc. you can enclose will almost certainlymake your submission more readable and informative. Ifyou have any ideas or questions, one of us is usually nearthe phone - (978) 355-2853, fax: (978) 355-4046. TheNOFA Interstate Council website is www.nofa.org.

ISSN 1077-2294copyright 2004,

Northeast Organic Farming Association

The Natural FarmerNeeds You!

by Jack Kittredge

Julie and I have always felt that raising our ownfood – including meat — was important. Shortlyafter we met, in Dorchester, we began keepingrabbits. The kids, as they came along, had to shareour tenement’s miniscule back yard with a consider-able vegetable garden and three rabbit hutches. Themanure went on the garden and when the youngrabbits were old enough we all killed and cleanedthem for the table. Since moving to our farm inBarre, we have raised lots of animals: chickens,turkeys, ducks, geese, sheep, pigs and cattle. Evenfish in our pond, come to think of it.

Neither of us has much trouble with the ethics ofeating meat. I guess we take a “what goes aroundcomes around” point of view. We try to give theanimals a good life, respecting their needs andwishes. When their time comes we do it as pain-lessly as possible.

What seems more difficult to justify, to my mind, ishaving no relationship at all to the meat you eat –not raising it, not even knowing who raised it orhow it was raised. That distance must necessarilyobjectify the relationship, taking the connections ofpersonality or spirit away. What is left is a consumerand a commodity.

Making food into a commodity is what factoryfarming is all about. Monocropping, standardiza-tion, mechanization, confinement housing, use ofchemicals and drugs – all these are ways of strip-ping away natural complexities and replacing themwith simplification and control. The organic move-ment has rejected that approach and tried to workwith nature instead of controlling it.

Such a management approach may be most evidentwhen it comes to animal care. Rare and heritagebreeds, rotational grazing, chicken tractors andrange houses, nursing sick animals with personalcare and attention – all these are common featuresof organic animal husbandry and would be anath-ema to “rational” factory livestock operations.

It has always seemed thoughtless to me to presumethat because big livestock operations are destructiveof resources, small ones must be as well. We several

times had apprentices here who adopted such anideology without ever stopping to think. A feedlotthat trucks in grain and water from distant sources,stockpiles manure lest it pollute, and routinelyadministers parasiticides and antibiotics to keepdisease manageable is not the only model. There arehumane and environmentally sound ways to raisemeat. A small New England farm can make verygood ruminant pasture of grassy hillsides whichshould not be plowed, can thrive using the manureso naturally produced in the process, and is blessedwith healthy dairy products and an annual gift of acalf or lamb each spring.

Throughout the Northeast there are livestock farmswhere the animals are raised with love, care and tothe highest organic standards. Consumers who wishto become a little more connected with their meatcan find such farms easily through their local NOFAchapter, CSA or farmers market. Here in CentralMassachusetts we have the Heifer Project farm inRutland and the Natick Community Organic Farm.Both are happy to have volunteers help with farmchores and involve themselves in every aspect ofanimal care. Many private farms are also willing toaccept regular volunteer help from customers.

We hope that this issue of The Natural Farmermakes it clear how organic animal managementdiffers from conventional. We feature farmers, aswell as animal and consumer advocates. Theirpassion and love for the creatures with whom theywork is evident, and their practical strategies forsustaining small-scale livestock production in thisage of commodities are invaluable.

On Raising and Eating Organic Meat

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 3

by Jonathan von Ranson

In the first review the NOFA Organic Principles andPractices Handbooks Series received, Greg and PatWilliams of the monthly newsletter HortIdeasoffered NOFA highest compliments:“We have nothing but praise for NOFA’s wonderfulidea of making available compact and inexpensiveguides to organic techniques, written by experiencedpractitioners. We predict that these books will gain‘classic’ status—and we hope they will be updatedperiodically to reflect the latest developments!”The handbooks also sold well, retail and wholesale,at the SARE national conference held in October inBurlington, Vt.

Work on the series is in the final stages. All tenvolumes are scheduled to be printed by earlyFebruary, 2005. The authors, the artist and I haveput great effort into this project; many of the re-viewers likewise! Now it moves into promotion andsales time for the new, expert, easy-to-read manuals.All NOFA chapters and other organic associations inthe Northeast have been invited to purchase thehandbooks for resale, individually or as a series.They can do so by contacting Elaine Peterson [email protected] or calling her at 978 355-2853.Promotional materials have also gone out to a fewseed catalogues.

As always, state chapters can sell the books atconferences and events. They also have the opportu-nity for online credit card sales—of the books andother items—as CT NOFA and NOFA/Mass arealready doing. A new manuals page on the InterstateCouncil website describes the books (http://www.nofa.org/pubs/index.php) and gives buyers achoice of which participating state’s web page toorder through. Members of chapters not yet tied inmay want to quickly contact their chapter officialsabout joining the on-line ordering system. (Inquiriesfrom chapters go to Paul Kittredge [email protected]).

Individuals interested in purchasing them can go towww.nofa.org or write Elaine Peterson, Dep’t IC,411 Sheldon Rd., Barre MA 01005. All titles are$7.95 plus $2 shipping and handling per book.

The Latest Entry

Crop Rotation and Cover Cropping is the latest

Reviewers Praise NOFA Handbooks for Quality

book printed. It joins Vegetable Crop Health, byBrian Caldwell, Whole Farm Planning, by ElizabethHenderson and Karl North, and Compost,Vermicompost and Compost Tea, by GraceGershuny, all SARE-funded handbooks. WeedManagement and Soil Fertility Management, bothby Steve Gilman, were published in a similar formatin 2000 and 2002 by NOFA/Mass and are being soldas part of the series.

In Crop Rotation and Cover Cropping, author SethKroek, an up-and-coming Maine farmer, describesthe benefits of planning crop rotations with covercrops: they help control insect pests and disease,improve soil fertility and health, and controlweeds…and free-up the farmer’s time and attentionduring the growing season. Kroek clearly lays outthe principles of crop rotation and takes some of theintimidation factor out by grouping crops accordingto various relevant categories in handy lists. He addsthat the rules are often bent in real life—a service in

this sometimes confusing and intimidating aspect offarming. The manual offers three sample rotationplans with cover crops for a fictional 12-acre farm,simple to complex and detailed (“the Cadillac”),that include a semi-perennial crop: strawberries.Seth has worked and managed organic farms in theNortheast and California for the past eight years. Henow operates his own farm, Crystal Spring Commu-nity Farm in Brunswick, ME with his wife, Maura.Handbooks in the SARE-assisted series to bepublished in the next month or two are Marketingand Community Relations, by Rebecca Bosch,Humane and Healthy Production of Eggs andPoultry, by Karma Glos, Organic Seed Productionand Saving, by Bryan Connolly, and Making Milkand Dairy Products Organically, by Sarah Flack.Besides the authors and myself, the people mostdeeply involved in this project have been artistJocelyn Langer and NOFA President Bill Duesing,who is serving double duty as reviewer and sharp-eyed proofreader.

photo by Bill Duesing

NOFA Manuals Editor Jonathan von Ranson accepts compliments from Cornell Professorand NEON project director Anu Rangarajan (holding copy), at a recent SARE conference.

Please help us thank theseFriends of Organic Farmingfor their generous support!


Blow YourOwn Horn!

New intentional community in Central Mass:LandARC (Land Activists Reclaiming Community)is a group of families and individuals planning topurchase land in central Massachusetts. Our aim isto live together with 10-15 families in private homesand to share a common house where commonmeals, meetings, and projects happen. We arecommitted to farming, alternative education, andactivism. Seeking new members. 508-579-9093 orwww.landarcvillege.org

Farm Internship - The Natick Community OrganicFarm located in Natick, Massachusetts is lookingfor a one-year intern. Housing (one room studiowith shared kitchen and bath facilities) is offered inexchange for 10 hours of farm-related work and 5hours of office work. Additional teaching opportuni-ties are available for pay. For further informationsee www.natickfarm.org. If interested please contact508-655-2204 or email [email protected].

Job Opportunity: Managing Director of RegionalFarm & Food Project, Albany-Troy, New York. Willbe responsible for creating and managing thebusiness infrastructure essential to support theorganization’s mission. Responsibilities includemanaging office operations, financial administra-tion, database administration, marketing and com-munications, membership programs and specialevents. This fulltime position requires excellentsmall business management skills, a high degree ofcomputer literacy, event management experience,and knowledge of fundraising and grant writing.The Managing Director will report to the Board ofDirectors and attend monthly Board Meetings.Contact RFFP Board Co-Chair Annie Brody at(518) 781-0446 or email her [email protected]

NOFAExchange

2005 Position Available: Assistant Farm Managerfor two acre certified organic farm which serves as atherapeutic and vocational training site for homelessmen and women. Assist farm manager in all aspectsof seedling and crop production, local sales, andsupervision of client workers. 25 weeks position,from mid-April through mid-October 2004. Previ-ous experience in agriculture needed and workingwith special needs populations preferred. $500 perweek salary. Valid drivers license. Send resume andcover letter to: Jean-Claude Bourrut, Long IslandShelter, P.O. Box 158, Boston, MA 02122. 617-534-2526 x304. [email protected]

Angelic Organics, a Wisconsin community sup-ported organic vegetable farm (www.angelicorganics.com) 8 mi SE of Beloit, 12 mi N ofBelvidere, seeks a Soil and Machinery Managerwho will be responsible for tillage, fertility, spraying(with organic sprays), and machinery management.Must be highly qualified with at least 5 years offarming experience. Full time, year round positionstarts in April, 2005. $32,000 per year plus benefits.Three yr. commitment preferred. (Please - nounscheduled farm visits.) For job overview, reviewmaterials at www.homepage.mac.com/angelicorganics/job.html

The Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance(NODPA) will be hiring a coordinator and admin-istrator this winter. Tasks will include some or allof the following: setting up and running a newoffice, database development, book keeping, eventorganizing, grant writing, supervising part timestaff, and maintaining regular phone and emailcorrespondence with organic dairy farmer represen-tatives, industry and service sector people. Pleasesend a resume and letter of interest to Enid atNOFA-VT, PO box 697 Richmond VT 05477 [email protected].

Organic Crops Production positions for 2005season May-October at Heifer International’sOverlook Farm in Rutland, MA. Seewww.heifer.org for details about Heifer. Overlook isa working farm and educational center that teachesabout hunger and poverty issues. Garden volunteersgrow on 3 acres, lead work groups and educationalprograms. Also small-scale aquaculture, crops fromaround the world, and horse power—come learnwith us! 50 hour week; stipend starts at $250/month, then increases by $50 every 3 months.Americorps credit usually available. $600 bonus for6-month stay! Housing/veggies provided. CallDave or Carolyn at (508) 886-2221, or [email protected]

Sustainable Ag/Education positions at HeiferInternational’s Overlook Farm in Rutland, MA: Seewww.heifer.org for details about Heifer. Live andwork on our farm for 1-12 months. Stipend starts at$250/month, increases by $50 every 3 months. Americorps credit usually available. Housing/somefood provided. Work 6 days a week with livestock,leading group tours and education sessions abouthunger/poverty, and special events. To inquire abouta volunteer position, call or email Sue Collette at(508) 886-2221, or [email protected].

Seeking Urban Farm and Community GardensCoordinator. Be part of growing the urban agricul-ture and environmental justice movement inWorcester, Massachusetts! This position drawsconcrete links between community empowermentand building a just food system. Work with 15community gardens, and manage the YouthGROWurban farm. The farm hosts an organic farmingprogram for teens. Applicants must have enthusiasmfor urban agriculture and working with youth,experience with organic agriculture, events organiz-ing, Spanish proficiency. Send resumes by Decem-ber 20 to Regional Environmental Council, PO Box255, Worcester, MA 01613, or email,[email protected]. Info (508) 799-9139 orvisit www.recworcester.org.

Certified Organic Laying Hens For Sale. 1 1/2years old. Silver Laced Wyandottes, Black Austral-orps, New Hampshire Reds. Experience the delightof fresh eggs. Egg-xactly what every home needs!Call The HERB FARMacy, Salisbury, MA978.834.7879 or email: [email protected].

Assistant Farm Manager – Holcomb Farm CSA,Granby, CT. 20-acre non-profit organic vegetablefarm. Exact responsibilities depend on interests andexperience, but could include field crew leader,tractor work and maintenance, CSA marketing andadministration, selling at a farmers market, andgreenhouse management. Two seasons of produc-tion vegetable farming required. Year round, $425/week, medical insurance, pension, housing. Alsoseeking Apprentices April – Nov, $350/week,housing.Contact Sam Hammer, (860) 653-5554,[email protected]. Pictures and info atwww.holcombfarmcsa.org.

Two hardy perennials, 22 and 23, looking forplace to overwinter. Like brassicas, we’re self-sufficient and highly productive guys, with fifteenyears combined experience in organic farming.Seeking place in Amherst/Pioneer Valley area to setroots during winter and possibly into spring. Idealgrowing conditions are a small farm, estate or grouphouse, where we would caretake/nitrogen-fix/live,in exchange for low rent. Also interested in paidwinter work, including greenhouse, animal andmaple syrup operations. References, pH require-ments, and crop rotation history available uponrequest. Please contact Chuk Kittredge [email protected] by Dec. 20th.

Project Associate, 50% time, for SustainableAgriculture Research and Education ProfessionalDevelopment Program (PDP), Northeast Region.Provide support for day-to-day functions of office atUniversity of Connecticut. Minimum: B.S. inagriculture, biology, related field, or equivalent, andknowledge of sustainable agriculture; willing totravel in Northeast; motivated, self-starter withability to follow through with attention to detail;excellent office skills; experienced with Word,Excel, FileMaker Pro, Power Point. Position fundedfor one year with expected continued funding.Available immediately. Competitive salary, univer-sity benefits. Contact Tom Morris, University ofConnecticut, 1376 Storrs Rd, Plant Science, Unit4067, Storrs, CT, 06269; [email protected]

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 5Seeking community members. Currently 5 house-holds reside on this 275 acre land trust in SW NewHampshire. A community dedicated tosustainability, conservation, and making land andhousing accessible to low and moderate incomepeople who have interest in farming. FormerlyDavis Family Farm, we have grown to become ColdPond Community Farm. Activities at the farminclude: a cooperative CSA, apprenticeship andeducational opportunities, seasonal celebrations andcommunity dinners. There are a few available housesites left in our cluster arrangement and plenty offarm work to do. For more info: Barb or Steve 603-835-2403 [email protected]

Three Apprenticeships available on certifiedorganic vegetable farm in western CT for the 2005season, April 1 through October. Help plant,cultivate, harvest, and market produce through a 200share CSA and farmer’s markets. Opportunity tolearn agricultural and business skills you will needto run an organic farm. Compensation includes aprivate room in the apprentice house, farm produceand eggs, and $700 monthly stipend with opportu-nity for scheduled raises. To apply, send a letter andresume to Paul Bucciaglia, Fort Hill Farm, 18 FortHill Rd., New Milford, CT 06776. For more info,see www.forthillfarm.com, or call 860-350-3158.

Editor sought for Quarterly Journal BIODYNAM-ICS. Applicants should have basic understanding ofbiodynamic agriculture; experience with writing,editing, and marketing of print journals necessary;knowledge of print design, layout, and productionwork desirable. Position description atwww.biodynamics.com. Send letter of interest,résumé, and references to Biodynamic Farming andGardening Association, 25844 Butler Road, Junc-tion City OR 97448; [email protected].

I am in need of land to rent from Nov.-April. Ihave a 30' Camper, quiet generator, portable toilet,and access to shower facilities. I work f/t inNorthampton. Please consider...Thank you fortaking the time to read this. Pamelah (413) 585-0853, [email protected]

Wayne’s Organic Garden is offering certifiedorganic vegetable transplants for the 2005season, including tomatoes, peppers, eggplant,parsley, basil, onions, shallots and possible more.Pre-order only by January 31. Pick-up at farm midto late May. For list, prices, options, write or callWayne’s Organic Garden, PO Box 154, Oneco, CT06373, 860-564-7987.

Start your own diversified organic farm. 50 acres ofbeautiful low cost farm land for serious organicfarmers. Call Morze Tree Farm for details at 802-265-3512.

Red Fire Farm is now hiring apprentices for the2005 growing season. We seek highly motivatedpeople who want to spend one or more seasonsworking on a commercial certified organic veg-etable farm. We grow 15+acres of crops on 40 acresof prime farmland and sell produce via farmersmarkets, a CSA, farm stands and wholesale. Sti-pend is provided and housing is available. Pleasecontact Ryan at 413-467-7645 [email protected] for more information.

Internship opportunities and CSA shares avail-able for 2005 season. 85-family CSA, located in thepicturesque Monadnock region, in Sullivan, NHlooking for intern to work alongside farmer withplanting, weeding, harvesting, washing, packing,deliveries, and farmers market. We are in ourseventh year of diversified organic vegetableproduction and looking for hardworking enthusiasticindividuals, who want to get hands on experiencefarming. Working shares available as well. Formore information contact Tracie, 603-209-1851


compiled by Jack Kittredge

GE NewsState of Massachusetts to Help FarmersPurchase GE Seed Corn.In a program recently announced by the Massachu-setts Department of Agricultural Resources, the statewill pay for 1/3 of the cost of genetically engineeredcorn seed for participating farmers. GE seed pur-chases are subsidized along with “best managementpractices” for air, soil and water conservation suchas water conserving irrigation equipment, contain-ment structures for fuel or hazardous chemicals, orenergy-efficient motors. Farmers applying for theGE aid will be asked to participate in a study todetermine how use of the GE corn seed impactstheir use of herbicides and pesticides (see belowstory on recent 9-year study on exactly this issue).Funding for this program (AEEP or AgriculturalEnvironmental Enhancement Program) comes froma state bond issue. source: http://mass.gov/agr andpersonal conversations with Mass DAR

GM Increasing Pesticide UseAs a former Executive Director of the Board onAgriculture of the US National Academy of Sciencefor seven years, Dr. Charles Benbrook represents anauthoritative voice on agricultural science. His latesttechnical report, drawing on 9 years of US Dept ofAgriculture data, confirms that the claim of GMproponents that the use of GM crops in the US hasled to a major reduction in pesticide use is quitesimply a lie. The data shows that overall GM cropshave led to an increase in pesticide use amounting tomillions of pounds per year. GE corn, soybeans andcotton have led to a 122 million pound increase inpesticide use since 1996. While Bt crops havereduced insecticide use by about 15.6 millionpounds over this period, herbicide tolerant (HT)crops have increased herbicide use 138 millionpounds. The increase in herbicide use on HT cropacres should come as no surprise. Weed scientistshave warned for about a decade that heavy relianceon HT crops would trigger changes in weed commu-nities and resistance, in turn forcing farmers toapply additional herbicides and/or increase herbi-cide rates of application. source: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4572

Hawaii Growing Hostile to Ag BiotechHawaii has been at the epicenter of the biotechonslaught in the US with more field tests takingplace there than in any other State. But as the costhas become clearer, in the wake of a scandal involv-ing massive GMO contamination of supposedlynon-GM papaya seeds at the University, Hawaii isturning into an increasingly hostile environment forthe industry. A recent report on an upcoming elec-tion in Hawaii noted that of the candidates from allpolitical parties, including Democratic and Republi-can, “Regarding the controversial geneticallymodified organisms (GMOs), no one supportedopen-air testing”. source: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4517, Acres, USA, November,2004

NewsNotes

Vermont: Labels Will Be Required On GMSeedsCompanies selling GM seeds in Vermont will haveto include a “plain English disclosure” on labels,says Agriculture Secretary Steve Kerr. He says thewords, “these seeds have been genetically engi-neered,” will have to appear on the label. Compa-nies will have to specify what traits have beenconferred through biotechnology. The law went intoeffect in October. Kerr decided on the specific rulesafter Monsanto Corporation and Dow AgroSciencesrefused to use the words “genetically engineered”on their seed labels next year. source: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4585

Mexican Farmers Protest Biotech Corn AtAg Research MeetingSome 300 Mexican environmentalists and farmactivists opposed to biotech crops demonstratedOctober 28 outside a Mexico City hotel to protest ameeting there of agricultural researchers fromaround the world. The demonstrators tossed tortillasand ears of corn painted with fluorescent colors andskulls at a line of riot police guarding the hotel, anddemanded the government halt the importation ofgenetically modified corn, which they claim hascontaminated local varieties of the crop. In March,the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, aNAFTA watchdog panel, found genetically engi-neered corn in Mexico despite the country’s six-year-old biotechnology ban. It said modified genesspread by imported U.S. biotech corn threaten todisplace or contaminate native varieties in Mexico,the birthplace of corn. Scientists say wild ancestralgenes of corn might one day be needed to helpcommercial crops overcome diseases or adverseconditions. source: http://www.soyatech.com/bluebook/news/viewarticle.ldml?a=20041029-5

Nobel Prize For Opponent of GMOs andPatents On LifeThis year’s Nobel Peace Prize is to be awarded toWangari Mathai, leader of the Green Belt Move-ment in Kenya. A biologist by training, Mathai is thefirst African woman to win the prize. She has woninternational recognition for her campaign fordemocracy, human rights and environmental conser-vation. She has also been among the African scien-tists who’ve drawn attention to the dangers ofgenetic engineering and of patents on life. source:http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4501

Pharma Corn Scattered in Tornado?In May Iowa State University researcher Kan Wanggot permission to plant biopharm corn in a Coloradofield near Sterling, in Logan County. The cornproduces a protein which could be active in thehuman immune system. On June 9 a tornado hitSterling. Now organic growers are wondering ifsome of that seed has been scattered and could begrowing in their fields. Doug Wiley, president of theColorado Organic Producers Association, said:“Extreme weather events bring home the fact thatfood crops shouldn’t be used for these experiments.”source: Growing for Market, September, 2004

Brazilian Farmers Can Legally Grow GMSoy This Season - President Lula Da SilvaSigns Executive OrderBrazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva hassigned an executive order to allow the planting andtrade of genetically modified soy for the 2004-2005season only. The order allows farmers to plant theGM beans until December 31st, 2004. The resultingcrop may be sold until January 31st, 2006, but thatdeadline may be extended another 60 days. “Thepresident had no way out,” affirms Leon Klein ofKlein Commodities in Sao Paulo, “The way it looksnow, every state in Brazil is growing GM beans.About 20% of Brazil’s soy crop is expected to begenetically modified. I see it as something inevi-table that the farmers will grow GM.” Since thatwas the case, Lula da Silva had to find a solutionthat would allow Brazil to legally sell its crop. Sinceno option was immediately apparent from thelegislature, he reinstituted the temporary fix heinitiated last fall, legalizing GM soy only for theimmediate future. “It’s like making rain where itwas already wet,” says Mr. Klein. source: http://www.soyatech.com/bluebook/news/viewarticle.ldml?a=20041015-1

California: Marin County Passes GM CropBanMonths after Mendocino County voters passed thenation’s first ban on GM crops, voters in MarinCounty,California, have enacted a similar ban, with61 percent for and 39 percent against. Marin joinsTrinity as well as Mendocino counties in havingsimilar laws banning GMOs. Voters in Humboldt,San Luis Obispo and Butte counties rejected similarballot measures. The Humboldt County loss wasexpected because supporters dropped their cam-paign after complaints that the ballot languagecontained inaccurate scientific descriptions and alsocalled for the jailing of farmers growing GM crops.Butte GM-farm interests raised approximately$190,000 for the Vote No campaign - more thanthree times the money collected by the ban’s sup-porters. It was one of the most expensive ballotmeasures in recent county history. source: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4597

WHO Urges Further Research on GM FoodAfter Thai Papaya DebacleApparently the Thai Department of Agriculture’sKhon Kaen research station was selling geneticallyengineered papaya seeds in violation of nationallaw. The World Health Organization suggested inearly October that Thailand conduct further researchon genetically modified organisms (GMOs) so thatan early action plan can be implemented to copewith possible health risks posed by transgenic food.“At this point, we have no evidence to say that it isdangerous to consume food products that containGMOs, but at the same time we also don’t know itsnegative side. So, we have to say that we do notknow the adverse health effects of GM food,” WHOassistant director-general Kerstin Leitner said.source: Bangkok Post, October 13, 2004 and TheNon-GMO Source, September, 2004

Bush Suppresses GM Crop WarningsMonsanto and the US government have been tellingthe world that GM crops pose no contaminationthreat to natural indigenous species. But Greenpeacehas learned from a leaked report that NAFTAdisagrees and is recommending steps to avoid agenetic threat to natural maize in Mexico. Surprise,surprise: the Bush Administration is attempting tosuppress the report. The report, written by theCommission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC)of the North American Free Trade Agreement (US,Canada and Mexico) recommends that all GE maizeimports be labelled as such and that all US maizeentering Mexico should be milled upon entry, toprevent living seeds from being planted. The BushAdministration has intervened several times to delaythe publication of the report - completed threemonths ago - and there is still no official date for itspublication. source: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4547

Bentgrass: The Long Distance Travels of aBioengineered GeneA study shows that genes from a type of geneticallyengineered grass migrated much farther than anyonehad thought possible. The grass, a creepingbentgrass developed by Monsanto and Scotts, hasbeen modified genetically so it can tolerateRoundup herbicide, making it useful on golfcourses. But the bentgrass at issue could be difficultto control: it is a perennial that does not have to beplanted every year, its pollen is small and light andthus easily carried by the wind, and it has a dozen orso wild relatives that it can cross-pollinate. Environ-mental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists studyinggene dispersal of this grass found that some genesreached sentinel plants of the same species as far as13 miles away and wild relatives almost 9 milesaway. source: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/opinion/30thu3.html?ex=1097550717&ei=1&en=414d4c93cb609d54


Other NewsDemand Soars for Organic Beef, Poultry,Fish and EggsThe Organic Trade Association (OTA) says thatdemand for organic beef is growing at 30% a yearover last year’s $10 million national total. OrganicValley’s subsidiary the Organic Meat Co. expectsits sales to triple this year, but could do far more ifthe supply were available. Safeway has introducedorganic beef in its California stores and reportsbooming business for the $4 to $6 a pound (retail)meat. The popularity of low carbohydrate diets aswell as the concern over mad cow are posited toexplain the strong demand. Also benefiting from thelow-carb interest are poultry, fish and eggs. Thecategory as a whole jumped 78% in sales in 2004.source: In Good Tilth, August 15, 2004 and OrganicBusiness News, July, 2004

US Farm Trade Surplus Lowest Since Rus-sian Grain DealFalling exports and rising imports next year willgive the US the smallest farm trade surplus since1972, the year before the big Russian grain purchasereoriented American food policy. The USDAestimates that exports will be down about $4.5billion from last year’s record $62 billion. Exportsaccount for about 25¢ of every dollar in farmreceipts. source: Acres, USA, November, 2004

Analysing the Organic Benefit Part IAlyson Mitchell, food chemist at the University ofCalifornia at Davis, reports finding that organictomatoes have a higher level of secondary plantmetabolites and vitamin C than conventionaltomatoes. She also found higher levels of flavonoidsin organic broccoli. She says: “High-intensityagricultural practices can disrupt the natural produc-tion of secondary metabolites involved in plantdefense mechanisms.” A fact sheet discussing recentresearch on the health benefits of eating organic isat: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=10587.source: The Non-GMO Source, September, 2004

Analysing the Organic Benefit Part IIThe USDA’s Pesticide Data Program (PDP) annu-ally tests thousands of samples of fruits and veg-etables for pesticide residues. An analysis of thatdata from 1993 to 2002, comparing residues bymarket claim (organic, pesticide-free, and no claim)shows a significant advantage for the organicproduce. The below graph illustrates the numbers.source: Organic Processing, July – September, 2004

Personal Care Organic Standards BeingDevelopedOrganic certifier NSF International has announcedcreation of a committee to finalize work on organicstandards for personal care products. The industry’sexperience in this field is checkered. In 2001 theOTA set up a task force to develop such standards,and in 2002 the NOP announced that such standardswould be allowed. But in April of 2004 the NOPreversed itself. In response to industry protests, Ag.Secretary Ann Veneman rescinded that reversal amonth later. The NSF committee will build on theOTA task force’s work and solicits expertise throughJane Wilson at 800-NSF-MARK ex. 6835. source:Acres, USA, November, 2004

Will NOSB Resist Industry Pressure onMethionine?The amino acid methionine is essential to mammalsand poultry, but we cannot synthesize it fromsimpler metabolites and it is not present in signifi-cant amounts in soy. For economic reasons commer-cial poultry operations have long added a syntheticform of it to their feed, rather than purchasingnatural sources. The NOSB, however, has ruled thatafter October, 2005 synthetic methionine will not beallowed in organic production. The OTA has set upa task force to find alternatives, but co-chair BobBuresh of Tyson Foods is suggesting an extensionmay be necessary before it can report. Alternativesinclude fishmeal, potato protein, corn gluten,sasame meal, sunflower meal, field peas, casein,whey, yeast, alfalfa, flax, hemp, green forages,,quinoa and, interestingly, earthworms. Seems theycould solve the feed problem by solving the accessto pasture problem? source: Organic BusinessNews, July, 2004 and October, 2004.

Industry Move In Canada Threatens Farm-ers’ Rights To Save SeedCanadian farmers’ traditional right to save, use,exchange and sell farm-saved seed is being threat-ened by proposals to collect royalties on virtually allseed. A recent review of Canada’s seed productionand regulatory system looked at ways to collectroyalties on seed the growers save from their owncrops, to link crop insurance to the use of purchasedcertified seed, and to increase intellectual propertyprotection for seed companies. “It’s a fundamentalshift in agriculture to the privatisation of seeds,”says Terry Pugh, executive secretary of Canada’sNational Farmers’ Union (NFU). “There are nobenefits for farmers.” Pugh described the process,known as the Seed Sector Review, as an industry-driven restructuring of Canada’s seed productionsystem. Companies such as Monsanto, Syngenta,Bayer and Dupont are pushing for “deregulation”and increased profitability, he said. The aim of thereview is to turn growers from producers of seed toconsumers of seed. sources: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4484, http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4502

(continued on next page)

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e r Winter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 58US Declares War on Iraqi FarmersNew legislation in Iraq has been carefully put in place by the US that preventsfarmers from saving their seeds and effectively hands over the seed market totransnational corporations. Food sovereignty for the Iraqi people has beenmade near impossible by these new regulations. The new law in questionheralds the entry into Iraqi law of patents on life forms - this first one affectingplants and seeds. When the new law - on plant variety protection (PVP) - is putinto effect, seed saving will be illegal and the market will only offer proprietary“PVP-protected” planting material “invented” by transnational agribusinesscorporations. The new law totally ignores all the contributions Iraqi farmershave made to development of important crops like wheat, barley, date andpulses. Its consequences are the loss of farmers’ freedoms and a grave threat tofood sovereignty in Iraq. source: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4538

The Pause That Refreshes: Things Grow Better With CokeIndian farmers have come up with what they think is the real thing to keepcrops free of bugs. Instead of paying hefty fees for patented pesticides, they arereportedly spraying their cotton and chilli fields with Coca-Cola. In the pastmonth there have been reports of hundreds of farmers turning to Coke inAndhra Pradesh and Chattisgarh states. Gotu Laxmaiah, a farmer fromRamakrishnapuram in Andra Pradesh, said he was delighted with his new colaspray, which he applied this year to several hectares of cotton. “I observed thatthe pests began to die after the soft drink was sprayed on my cotton,” he toldthe Deccan Herald newspaper. A leading Indian agriculture analyst, DevinderSharma, commented: “I think Coke has found its right use. Farmers havetraditionally used sugary solutions to attract red ants to feed on insect larvae.”source: The Guardian, November 2, 2004

Teflon Trouble Sticking to DuPontThe EPA filed a complaint last month charging chemical/biotech giant DuPontwith withholding evidence of its own health and environmental concerns aboutan important chemical used to manufacture Teflon. That would be a violationof US federal environmental law, compounded by the possibility that DuPontcovered up the evidence for two decades. Teflon has been hugely successful forDuPont, which over the last half-century has made the material almost ubiqui-tous, putting it not just on frying pans but also on ‘stain resistant’ carpets, fast-food packaging, clothing, eyeglasses and electrical wires - even the fabric roofscovering football stadiums. But Teflon constituents have found their way intorivers, soil, wild animals and humans, and some are known to cause cancer andother problems in animals. One, PFOA, has turned up in the blood of morethan 90 per cent of Americans. John Bowman, a company lawyer, in an internalmemo warned that: “Our story is not a good one…We continue to increase ouremissions despite internal commitments.”source: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4212

USDA Criticized on Mad Cow Surveillance SystemAccording to a Government Accountability Project (GAP) report, the USDAnew BSE testing program has many critical flaws. The USDA says that it hasscientific protocols for collecting brain samples from suspect animals. Yet thebrain samples are not randomly collected and the animals being tested do notmeet the USDA’s own protocols. Meat inspectors on the frontline of the BSEtesting program continue to lack adequate training. While it’s an inspector’s jobto spot symptomatic animals, GAP has yet to hear from inspectors who feelthey are adequately trained. The USDA disallows independent BSE testing,which would be helpful to domestic beef importers. And if allowed, the USDAseemingly fears the impact of “real” testing by small producers. Felicia Nestor,a Food Safety Policy Analyst for the GAP, offered blunt criticism of theUSDA‚s long plagued BSE surveillance program: “The USDA has carefullychosen an ill-advised campaign to cover up the flaws of a system that endan-gers the both the American public and the American beef industry.”source: Agribusiness Examiner, July 22, 2004

Court Ends FDA Ban on Hemp in FoodA San Francisco appeals court has ruled that the Drug Enforcement Adminis-tration (DEA), not the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), has jurisdictionover marijuana and its active ingredient THC. The ruling came as a result of asuit by the Hemp Industries Association against the Bush administration’sefforts to ban foods containing hemp. The industry argued that the amount ofTHC in foods is insignificant, while hemp is a good source of protein, fiber,and omega-3 and omega-3 fatty acids.source: The Germinator, October, 2004

Corn Screams for HelpCorn plants, when attacked by insects, send out chemical signals to stimulateearly defensive responses report researchers for the Agricultural ResearchService. The signals, called green leafy volatiles, seem to attract caterpillarpredators and parasitoids, natural enemies of the insect predators.source: The Germinator, October, 2004

US Food Not So Safe or Cheap as Claimed?The above PDP study, by Charles Benbrook, also disputes the claim that USfood is the safest in the world. Based not only on levels of residues but otherfactors such as microbial contamination, Benbrook argues that a reasonableconclusion would be that France, the Netherlands, Great Britain and Japan allhave safer food than we do. To evaluate affordability, Benbrook calculatesincome spent per 1000 calories. Using this method, the US average pays $2.28per 1000 calories, while in Sierra Leone the average is 39¢. “Some 90% ofhumanity spends less per calorie of food than Americans,” he says. source:Organic Broadcaster, September – October, 2004

Wonder Bread, Twinkies Baker, Files For Bankruptcy ProtectionInterstate Bakeries Corp., the maker of Hostess Twinkies and Wonder Bread,filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection today. The baker cited the popularityof low-carbohydrate diets for some of its problems. But that was just thefrosting on several layers of recent troubles: high labor costs, unused bakerycapacity and rising costs for ingredients and energy. Still, turnaround expertshired to help Interstate reorganize insisted the company and its brands will bearound for some time. “IBC has some of the most recognizable and popularbaked breads and sweet goods brands in the nation,’’ Tony Alvarez, the newchief executive, said in a statement. Alvarez is the head of a New York-basedturnaround management firm. source: Chicago Tribune, September 22, 2004 Organic farming boosts biodiversityOrganic farming increases biodiversity at every level of the food chain – all theway from lowly bacteria to mammals. This is the conclusion of the largestreview ever done of studies from around the world comparing organic andconventional agriculture. Previous studies have shown that organic farmingmethods can benefit the wildlife around farms. But “the fact that the message issimilar all the way up the food chain is new information”, says agriculturalscientist Martin Entz of the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada. Thestudy reviewed data from Europe, Canada, New Zealand and the US. Neither ofthe two groups of researchers who did the study – one from English Nature, agovernment agency which champions wildlife conservation, and one from theRoyal Society for the Protection of Birds – has a vested interest in organicfarming. source: New Scientist, 11 October 04

Two More Chains Adopt Organic LinesGiant Foods, and Stop & Shop have both started carrying the “Nature’s Prom-ise” line of private label foods, about 60% of which are organic. They arestarting with 25 items, including milk, soy milk, butter, eggs, cookies, juicesand chips. They expect to expand to 200 items by early 2005. Although pricedover conventional items, the organic products sell for 15% to 20% below otherorganic lines. source: Organic Business News, October, 2004

Surprising Truths about Organic ConsumersA study of organic consumers finds that generalizations are quite difficult aboutthis group. Contrary to popular opinion, they are not largely highly educated,high income white females. In fact Asians and Native Americans are a littlemore likely to be organic consumers than Caucasians. The accompanying tableshows the “user index” for consumers who “at least occasionally” purchaseorganic products. The index is a measure of how likely that group is to buyorganic compared to the general population (index of 100). source: OrganicProcessing, October – December, 2004


Special Supplementon Organic Meat

by Carl B. Russell

When I was a teenager I participated in a group offriends who were enthusiastic about our outdooradventures. Fishing, hunting, hiking, and camping,we immersed ourselves in natural experience. Likemany of our kind, during summer we would seekdeep cool water to recharge our spirits. One favoriteswimming hole was in an abandoned copper mineon the side of a mountain, several miles from town.A jeep trail led there through challenging terrain,enhancing the adventure.

During mining operations copper ore had beenblasted out of the bedrock, leaving long narrowravine-like shafts. Once abandoned they had be-come filled with water. The steep rock ledges wereburnt-orange, almost red in color. The water wasbright aqua-blue, and milky with suspended sedi-ment. The contrast between green forest, red earth,and brilliant blue water created an exotic visualeffect.

Upon arrival we would race over the barren groundto the edge of the cliffs, and plunge one behind theother into the cold blue water. Once we calmeddown from the initial rush, we would engage in themain purpose for our coming, cliff jumping. Therewas an increasing gradient along one side of themine where we could jump from spots ranging inheight from ten, to as high as sixty feet. We wouldfreely charge out into the air from the lower cliffs,demonstrating different styles of cannon balls anddives. The approach at the highest place was moresubdued. The cliff walls of the ravine were onlythirty feet apart, and from a height of sixty feet anaggressive jump could end dangerously close to theopposite side.

I never found it easy to jump from the high cliff. Iknew that I didn’t have to make the jump, butsomething inside me encouraged me to try. I wouldtake my time ascending, and once on the rockplatform, I would adjust to the challenge in front ofme. From above, the chasm seemed deceptivelynarrow, and as I looked down I would lose my depthperception. I could not see beyond the surface of themilky-blue water, so the view took on a two-dimensional appearance. Light reflecting fromripples would shimmer hypnotically, making thewater level seem to rise and fall, like ocean swells.

Finally, I would be compelled to step off into thinair. The step was my last conscious act. The descentwas so rapid that there was no time to think. I wascompletely dependent upon my instincts to keepupright and prepared for submersion. I can stillremember the sound of the air ripping past my ears,and the sensation of my body tearing through thewater. Gradually slowing down, then regaining

Food FromThought

buoyancy, I had a sense of exhilaration as my mindcaught up with my body, mentally absorbing theexperience.

I found myself recalling these memories as I stoodoutside the pen where I raised my first pigs forslaughter. I had decided to move ahead with achallenge that had been rising within me for years. Ifelt the need to raise and slaughter animals for myown meat consumption. My parents had insistedthat as a young hunter I eat everything I killed. Thishelped in part to shape the current motivation, but ithad also tempered my desire to kill things. A bird onthe wing, or a white-tail deer at fifty yards, is quitedifferent than a pig at hand, and I needed to adjust tothe challenge in front of me.

As I readied myself to enter the pigs’ pen, I couldsee the shimmering in their eyes, too close, too far,too narrow. I was standing at the cliff’s-edge of a setof experiences, the depth and breadth of which Icould not fathom. Even though I knew that I didn’tneed to make the choice to kill my pigs, I wascompelled to. To this day, I have no idea why Itrusted myself to take that step, but I entered the penand did what needed to be done.

I had started this endeavor because I firmly believedthat if I was going to enjoy animal flesh for food,then I had to take responsibility for the killing. Theact of killing became complicated when I realizedhow important the pigs’ lives were to me. These twodistinctly different feelings were difficult for me towrap my mind around. I faced an intellectual chasm,and I could sense the uncertainty that eddied there.After sixteen years I am still in awe of the worldthat opened up around me as I tumbled over thatprecipice.

Killing animals requires skill and commitment. Istarted out with some skill, but more commitment.There are many aspects of slaughtering and butcher-ing that can only be learned through experience, andafter several years slaughtering chickens, cows, andpigs, I started to feel comfortable with the process. Ifelt myself regaining buoyancy, and I began torealize how fast my life had been changing. I hadbeen acting more from instinct than from consciousthought, and I had become submerged in experi-ences that my mind was only beginning to absorb.

There are many emotional issues surrounding thecare and consumption of animals. Because theymove, breathe, and make noise, we can relate to allanimals on a most basic level. Whether cat, deer,chipmunk, draft horse, or milk-cow, we can empa-thize with their life experience. It is enjoyable tohusband farm animals because we can createrelationships with them, which enhance our ownemotional lives. The recognition of the value ofthese relationships to my life is what compelled meto start raising a diversity of animals on my smallfarm.

Beyond feeding, and cleaning pens, I involve myselfin the lives of my animals. I spend time with them,scratching their itches, encouraging them to play,looking into their eyes, and touching them compas-sionately with friendship. They respond positively,

becoming enjoyable, engaging creatures. When theyare alive, it is important to me that they are relaxedand comfortable, and that I have taken time to haverelationships with these living beings.

I know many people who would rather not know theanimals whose meat they may eat. It is common forthem to acknowledge that they would become tooemotionally attached. Often the result is that themeat they do eat comes from animals raised inconfinement and ignored by humans until their meatis processed. This choice is right for a lot of familiesbecause it is convenient, and many people don’thave the space to raise animals, but I am concernedabout the loss of the value of the relationship.

To me food is more than calories or culinary prefer-ence. Food is the energy of life, and life is aboutrelationships. Life is the flow of energy from theEarth through all things. It is the relationshipsbetween all things that keep the energy flowing.Like everything else, humans gather energy, thenexpend it, and eventually we return in totality to thesource. Along the way, it is the relationships that wemake that define our participation.

Once I recognized the significance of my need tohave relationships with the animals whose flesh Ieat, I began to truly feel my connection to Lifeenergy. I feel the same relationship to the trees inthe forest where I work, to the soil that I cultivate,and to the plants in my garden. It is clear to me nowthat energy does not leave an animal when it dies,nor does it leave a bean picked from a vine. Theenergy is always there. By involving myself physi-cally and emotionally in the production of my food,I can strengthen my relationship to that energy. Ialso believe that my involvement can help theseanimals to have vital lives, enhancing the value thatthe food, in turn, brings to my life.

The food that we raise on our small farm rechargesmy body, and my spirit. I am proud of the lovingrelationships we have with our animals. Being theperson responsible for taking their lives is part ofdemonstrating my commitment to them. Acknowl-edging emotional investment substantiates the valuethat I place on their existence. The relationships tomy family, to our community, and to the Earth arestrengthened every day through this connection tofood. These animals and plants that we raise fuel ourefforts to deepen our involvement in the energy ofLife from one season to the next.

While I write this, I am overwhelmed by emotion,and I feel exhilarated as I float in the realization ofpersonal experiences, absorbing the meaning. Thereare many people who, for one reason or another,cannot engage in these experiences, but I encouragethose who think that they can, to try. It is the fear ofuncertainty that causes discomfort, not uncertaintyitself. I have found that I can be afraid, or I can trustmyself, but uncertainty will always exist. Uncer-tainty is what fills the gap where relationships grow.By diving into that abyss I have found a pool ofsignificant reward, and I feel recharged as I watchthe ripples form from my wake and spread acrossthe life around me.


by Sarah Flack

“Quality of life begins on the dinner table” statedDavid Kline at a farm conference in Vermont a fewyears ago. And that quality is readily apparent whenI sit down to a dinner that includes lamb raised hereon the farm. Quality is also part of what is continu-ing to create demand for locally raised lamb.

The hillsides and mountains I see from the windowsof my house are now covered in forests, but 150years ago they were open pastures, grazed bythousands of sheep. The market then was mostly forwool, although the per capita consumption of lamb(and mutton) was higher. Then, as now, the demandand price paid for wool produced in our area isinadequate to sustain production. Today, whilesome farmers have found or developed a market forwool, many have shifted their focus to meat produc-tion.

The good news is that the demand for lamb, at leastlocally, seems to be increasing - particularly forfarmers who are direct marketing. Restaurants,farmers markets, local coops and stores, ethnicmarkets, and direct sales from the farm are a fewavailable markets. For sheep farmers, the choices ofhow to raise and market the meat can be dizzying.Should it be 100% grass fed, fed a little grain,“natural”, or certified organic? A sheep farm notonly produces lamb (generally under a year old).The farm might also produce Hogget (lambs in theirsecond summer), and Mutton (older sheep) whichcan either be sold as is or made into sausage, as wellas fiber products and hides.

Opportunities available for today’s sheep farm-ers: There are a growing number of consumersinterested in buying organic, natural and grass-fed

Sheep In The Northeast:Organic, Natural Or Grassfed?

lamb. Consumers looking for grass fed meats areaware that research has shown that grass-fed meatscontain higher amounts of omega-3 fatty acids,conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), carotenoids, andvitamin E. Lamb seems to accumulate more CLAthan other red meats. Some research also indicatesthat animals fed a high forage diet have a lower riskof carrying certain types of food borne illnesses.

While some consumers are looking for lamb fedzero grain, many others are happy to buy “natural”lamb which is raised on pasture and fed a smallamount of grain. The “natural” label is also a way

for an organic farm to market lambs which must betreated with a synthetic de-wormer. Some consum-ers want the “organic” label on the meat they buy,and are less concerned with the amount of grain fedto the lambs.

Whatever market is chosen, if the flock is intendedto be managed as a business, it is important to lookat the costs of production. This information isessential in keeping costs low, and also in setting aprice for meat sales which returns enough to thefarmer.

photo by Sarah Flack

Doug Flack herding ewes and lambs to a new spring pasture on the Flack Farm

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 11Challenges facing today’s sheep farmers: Para-site management is the largest challenge whichorganic sheep producers face. For this reason asection at the end of this article focuses on thatsubject. If any direct marketing is to be done, thereare regulations to meet, labels to make, deliveries,sausage recipes to develop, customer relations andmore. Depending on location, finding a nearbyslaughterhouse and processing facility which canprovide good quality services when needed may bedifficult. For the farmer choosing to raise grass fedlamb, they will need to find sheep with the geneticpotential to do well and create very high qualitypastures. Then they must decide if they will be100% grass fed, or if they will include a smallamount of grain in the ration.

Genetics: Wes Jackson wrote that “Every placeneeds genotypes (cattle, grass…) that are tuned tothat farm. The industrialization of agriculture hashomogenized the genotypes.” Finding sheep whichare resistant, or at least resilient to parasites isessential for an organic sheep farmer. For a farmerinterested in grass feeding, finding sheep which dowell on a high forage diet is needed. For any sheepfarmer, finding healthy animals which require littleassistance at lambing and do well in the localclimate is important. As farmers bring new live-stock to their farms, they must search for the rightanimals which will best fit their farm, and in thisage, they must often look hard to find these idealanimals. Then, once the livestock are living as partof the farm organism, it may take several genera-tions before the livestock on the farm are what isideally suited. Selection and culling choices can bedesigned to create a flock best suited for the farm.

Pastures can be a key way to cut costs on youroperation. They can also be a source of parasites.Sheep are very well adapted to grazing, and can beone of the least expensive ways to improve yourpastures. Sheep can be used to clear brush, tochange plant species composition of a pasture, toincrease plant density, and sheep manure makesgreat fertilizer. Some farmers have figured out waysto get paid to graze their sheep on other peoplesland to clear brush and improve pastures. The useof modern electric fence technology can decrease oreliminate predator problems, and is what makesmanagement intensive grazing possible. For farmsin locations where fence alone isn’t enough to keepout the coyotes or neighborhood dogs, guardiandogs or llamas may be necessary.

Parasites are a concern for all sheep farmers,particularly in a wet growing season. For thecertified organic producer, parasite managementremains the biggest challenges to production. Thisarticle only has room for an overview of thissubject, and additional reading, research and experi-mentation is needed.

To treat internal parasites with herbs or other naturalremedies will require more than just switching frompharmaceutical dewormers to a natural de-wormer.Most natural products work differently and willrequire a more holistic approach with a focus onprevention of infection and creating a healthyanimal with a highly developed immune system.Once infection loads are high, don’t count on“natural” treatments alone.

All farms and all livestock have parasites, so it is amatter of managing the animals in such a way thatthe parasites do not create health problems. It isuseful to learn about the life cycle of the parasites,how they infect livestock, and at what stage of theirlifecycle they are most vulnerable. There are manydifferent types of internal parasites, each withdifferent host organisms and differing life cycles. Itis also interesting to consider what the role ofparasites is, on a farm and in wild animal popula-tions.

Resistance too, or tolerance of parasites varies withbreed, age, previous exposure, selection, immunefunction, soil quality and feed quality. Lambs, withtheir not yet fully developed immune system, aremore susceptible to parasites than mature animals.Grazing management to provide clean (non infec-tive) pastures to the most susceptible livestock,good sanitation, good nutrition, not allowinganimals to get too thin, providing ample colostrum

soon after birth, and selection of hardy animals areall basic in prevention.

Fecal egg counts can be a useful tool in parasitemanagement, but don’t rely on them to tell every-thing about the parasite loads livestock have. Not allparasite species produce many eggs, and there areseasonal variations in egg production. If you dodecide to use fecal egg counts, use them at criticaltimes of the year, the same time each year, andconsider them just part of the overall managementplan.

There is a review of literature on parasite treatmentsin Dr. Hubert Karreman’s book Treating Dairy CowsNaturally. There is also a chapter on parasites in theCanadian Organic Growers Organic LivestockHandbook, and an ATTRA publication on parasitemanagement by Ann Wells D.V.M. Some of thenatural remedies being used on organic farmsinclude: pumpkin seed, black walnut, wormwoodand other Artemesia species, male fern, garlic,cloves, a variety of plants with high tannin contentincluding woody species & brambles, and otherplant species.

Prevention: Pasture management is probably themost important part of the prevention strategy.Minimize or eliminate infection from pasture bykeeping the most susceptible animals out of infectedpastures. Parasites will live and continue to beinfective for about a year (longer in warmer areas)after they are shed in manure on the pasture. Ani-mals which shed the most eggs are usually mothersafter birthing, or lambs. Sheep and goats have(mostly) different parasites than cows, so multispecies grazing can be part of the strategy to createclean pastures. But this requires precise planning,not just a leader follower system or mixed grazing.Not allowing animals to graze the pasture downshorter than 2 inches, particularly in wet weather andon more heavily infected pastures, can also reduceinfection. Other ways to decrease parasite load in a

pasture include harvesting hay, fallowing an area,and rotating with an annual crop. Grazing hightannin plants in hedgerows and pastures seems toreduce parasite loads. (Birdsfoot trefoil, brambles,many woody species). It is also important to notethat farms with a lower stocking rate generally havelower parasite loads.

Sheep can be integrated into a diversified farmorganism to produce wool, meat, sausages, andhides. They can be raised on a larger commercialscale, or as a small backyard flock which can becared for by the whole family. When managed well,they can improve pasture quality, clear brush, andimprove soil fertility. Raising them for your ownfamily or as a business can be rewarding work. Itcan be both spiritually and nutritionally fulfilling,putting you directly in touch with the seasonalnature of producing your own food.

Sarah Flack works part time for NOFA VT, she is anindependent organic and biodynamic farm andprocessor inspector, she consults with individualsand organization, and does public speaking andwriting on a wide array of agricultural subjects.

photo by Sarah Flack

Pasture finished lambs in midsummer.


by Tamiko Thomas

The December 2003 discovery of a WashingtonState dairy cow suffering from Bovine SpongiformEncephalopathy (BSE) or Mad Cow Disease wasthe first confirmed American case of this devastat-ing disease. This disease causes its victim’s brain tobecome spongy and ultimately leads to death. It isthought to be transmissible to humans via meatcontaminated with the abnormal prions associatedwith this disease. The human version is calledvariant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) and therehave been nearly 150 cases of it to date. The humanhealth implications of this disease meant the almostimmediate closure of the borders of more than 40nations to American cattle and cattle products. Closeto a year later a substantial number of these bordersare still closed with countries like Japan, one of thetop importers, just now moving towards acceptingAmerican beef imports. In response to all this, thegovernment has announced a series of steps de-signed to address concerns about the safety of thehuman and animal food supply.

Human Food

Within a week of the BSE positive case the UnitedStates Department of Agriculture (USDA) an-nounced a series of interim changes to cattle slaugh-tering procedures in order to safeguard publichealth. Most of the requirements centered aroundreducing the possibility of contamination of beefwith the abnormal prions. In infected animals theseprions are concentrated in certain tissues such as thebrain, eyes, spinal cord, tonsils and parts of thesmall intestine that are therefore considered highrisk. The government has therefore banned tonsils(tonsils have always been considered inedible) andparts of the small intestine from cattle of any age,and the rest of the high risk materials from cattleolder than 30 months of age, from the human foodsupply. In addition, these high risk tissues must alsobe excluded from meat obtained using AdvancedMeat Recovery (AMR) systems. AMR uses pressureto remove muscle tissue from the bone of beefcarcasses. Mechanically separated beef was alsoprohibited because the process involved in making it

Mad Cowin the USA

photo by University of Nebraska

Feedlot raising conditions may be the key to enabling Mad Cow Disease.may result in high risk tissues like spinal cord beingincorporated into the end product. Air injection stunguns, a gun used to render animals unconscious forslaughter, were banned under this ruling. Althoughnot commonly used they were banned because ofconcerns that they could contaminate meat withhigh risk-tissue.

Perhaps the most prudent step taken in response tothe Mad Cow Disease case in terms of protectingfood safety and animal welfare is the USDA’s banon non-ambulatory disabled cattle (downers). Non-ambulatory disabled cattle are understood to be atheightened risk for BSE. All three of the NorthAmerican cattle found to have BSE (one in Americaand two in Canada) have been downers. A Swissstudy (one of several that have established this link)found that downer cattle are about 50 times morelikely to have BSE than cattle identified throughpassive surveillance (i.e., those reported to veteri-nary authorities as BSE-suspect based on clinicalobservation). Animals unable to stand or walk arenot only at a higher risk of suffering from BSE butalso have been shown to have a higher prevalence ofE. coli, Salmonella, and other dangerous pathogensthat can transmit disease to consumers.

Animal advocates have been pressing for this banfor over a decade. Downed animals suffer terribly.Firstly, they suffer as a result of the illness and orinjury that incapacitates them. Secondly, investiga-tions by The Humane Society of the U.S. and otheranimal protection organizations have revealed thatanimals too sick or injured to stand or walk areroutinely kicked, dragged with chains, shocked withelectric prods, and pushed by bulldozers in efforts tomove them at auction and slaughter facilities. Whenthe USDA announced its interim ruling prohibitingthe processing of non-ambulatory disabled cattle forthe human food supply, there was an outpouring ofpublic support. Major retailers, consumer groupsand other nonprofits, and some agricultural organi-zations and individual ranchers expressed strongsupport for the ban as well. In fact, of approximately22,000 comments submitted to the USDA, morethan 99 percent strongly supported the ban.

Another important element is testing for BSE todetermine its prevalence. In March of 2004 Agricul-ture Secretary Ann Veneman announced that theUSDA would expand its BSE surveillance. Theirgoal is to test as many cattle as possible in the high-risk cattle population (cattle exhibiting central

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 13nervous system disorders, downers, dead animals)and to test a sampling of normal, older cattle overthe subsequent year. While the testing regime doesmeet international standards it has come under firefor not being rigorous enough. The USDA’s Officeof the Inspector General had a number of concernsabout the surveillance plan. It criticized the USDA’sassumption that BSE is confined to the high-riskcattle population because BSE has been found inapparently healthy-looking animals. It also felt thatdetermining the number of cattle that are actuallyinfected within the U.S. herd would be problematicbecause the USDA’s sampling program is notrandom as participation is voluntary. Consumergroups are also concerned with the focus being puton only testing high risk populations meaningoccurrence of the disease in the population ofapparently healthy cattle would be unknown. TheUSDA’s assertion that their testing regime would beable to detect BSE with a high confidence level ifthe prevalence is just one positive cow in 10 millionadult cattle has been called misleading because it isbased on the department’s assumption that allanimals that test positive will come from the highrisk population.

Animal Food

BSE is thought to have arisen from a similar diseasein sheep called scrapie and subsequently spread bythe feeding of meat and bone meal from BSE-infected cattle to non-infected cattle. Therefore, toprevent the spread of the disease the focus has beenon cattle feeding practices. Since 1997 the Food andDrug Administration (FDA), which regulates farmanimal feed and pet food, has banned the feeding ofmost mammalian protein to ruminant animals,which includes cattle. However, the FDA feed banhas loopholes. It allows the feeding of ruminantblood despite the fact that there is some scientificevidence that blood has some BSE infectivity. Italso allows the feeding of poultry litter, whichincludes spilled feed that could contain bovine meatand bone meal. Plate waste, uneaten meat and othermeat scraps are also exempt. Furthermore, the FDAdoes not prohibit equipment, facilities, or produc-tion lines that handle ruminant feed from handlingnon-ruminant feed that may contain prohibitedruminant proteins. This can result in contamination

of the ruminant feed with the infective prions ifpresent in the non-ruminant feed.

The FDA initially announced it would strengthen itsanimal feed rules with respect to the aforementionedloopholes but has yet to follow through with thesechanges. Its last ruling merely asked for publiccomment on a number of actions being consideredby the agency. The animal and human healthimplications as well as the impact on consumerconfidence of another BSE case are too serious to bemerely reactive; rather a proactive approach isneeded. The FDA should close the loopholes andprohibit high risk materials, dead stock, downers,and cattle showing signs of a central nervous systemdisorder from animal feed, as is being done in thehuman food supply. This is an important measurefor pet food too, because cats are susceptible to thedisease and there have been approximately 100confirmed cases of Feline Spongiform Encephalopa-thy in Europe. Ultimately though, because the aboveban on high risk materials, etc. from animal foodmay not be enforceable or achievable, and mayallow feed cross contamination, the FDA should banall mammalian and poultry proteins with the excep-tion of milk immediately from ruminant feed, and assoon as possible from all other farm animal feed.Such a blanket rule would help prevent crosscontamination and allow better enforcement. Thereis a well-documented risk of cross contamination atfeedmills and on farms in countries where meat andbone meal (MBM) is fed exclusively to pigs andpoultry.

In conclusion, allowing downers into the humanfood chain and allowing potentially risky feeds to befed to animals are cost cutting practices that ulti-mately threaten the safety of the food supply andshould be prohibited. The government is takingimportant steps to ensure the safety of the humanand animal food supply. However, there is still moreto be done as BSE continues to loom as a problemworldwide. Experience worldwide illustrates thatprevention is better than a cure with regards to thisdeadly disease.

Tamiko Thomas is Animal Scientist for the FarmAnimal & Sustainable Agriculture Section of The

Humane Society of the United States


by Jack Kittredge

The gently rolling hills of southeastern Connecticutare about equidistant from the teeming cities ofHartford, New Haven, and Providence, RI. The areahas a history of settlement that goes back to earlycolonial days and still sports open land, wood lots,and some gorgeous farms.

One of these is Woodbridge Farm, in Salem, CT.The stately 1792 center chimney farm house, largebarns, and massively beautiful stone walls givetestimony to having been managed with care andpurpose.

Tony and Ann Bingham, who own the property,have a long-term commitment to biodynamics.Tony, a former Waldorf School teacher, is with aventure capital firm that invests in sustainableenergy and other enterprises that have amoral basis.Ann is an Eurythmist. Now in their sixties, theyacquired the farm six years ago after it had been inTony’s family for a while.

The Binghams live in Greenwich, however, and canvisit only on weekends. They hired Steven Bibula,with his wife and two little children, to live on thefarm and manage it in a biodynamic manner.Steven gets a salary and his job is to build up thehealth of the farm and, eventually, to bring it toprofitability.

Besides the house and outbuildings, the farm has 15acres of open land and 28 of woods. Despite thegrandeur of the buildings and the palpable air ofhistory there, Steven is a pragmatist about farming.“This soil is not suitable for anything but pasture

Organic Meat atWoodbridge Farm

and orchard,” he sighs. “It’s ledgy glacial uplandCanton /Charlton thin topsoil. It’s not going to bevery productive. My wife and I have a personalgarden, but we don’t raise any crops here – justshiitake mushrooms in the woods.”

Given the limited potential of the soil, Bibula hasoriented Woodbridge Farm toward raising livestockand poultry in ways similar to those used byVirginia’s Joel Salatin. Unlike Salatin, however, hedoesn’t believe in adding value to his meat.

photo by Jack Kittredge

Steven enjoys a moment with his curious and friendly pigs in their woodland home.


“We want to produce foods that people are going tomake a basic part of their lives – staples,” heaffirms. “We don’t want to make little baby sau-sages that we sell through the mail for a highermargin. We don’t feel that that is in harmony withour biodynamic goals. On the other hand, farmingshould pay for itself. People should pay what itreally costs to produce the food.”

In trying to thread his way through these conflictingrealities and visions, Steven has guided WoodbridgeFarm toward the breeding of fully functionalpasture-based livestock. They currently have cattle –steers plus cows and a bull – as well as hogs andpoultry.

For ease of management, Steven runs all his poultrytogether: layers, broilers, turkeys, and a few orna-mentals. The broilers are Buff Silvers cockerels. Heused to raise Cornish crosses and tried a Cornishcrossed with Delaware, but settled on the BuffSilvers. These take two weeks longer to grow out –about ten weeks total — but have better flavor andmore vitality. He feels it’s worth the extra feed andcare. For turkeys he is running the broad-breastedwhites and broad-breasted bronze. He says he isinterested in expanding into Bourbons or otherheritage breeds.

The birds have shelter in 10-foot by 11-foot penswhich he moves within electrically fenced yards. Hemoves the pen every other day, and the entire yardgets moved every 6 or 7 days. The field on whichthe poultry are rotated is such that by late July thebirds are once again on ground they occupied earlyin the season.

Bibula’s birds have free range within the fencedyard, entering and exiting their pens at will, and hehas added security measures only as necessary. Atfirst he had no perimeter fence and had problemswith a raccoon reaching under the pens at night.With the electric fence, that has now stopped. He istroubled now, however, by nocturnal visits from anowl. Hi birds liked to sleep out and were gettingpicked off. He has been forced to go out and put thebirds into their pens each evening, which means hehas to be there earlier in the morning to let them out.He has had no problems yet with hawks or otherraptors during the day.

To fence the yard Steven was using 42-inch highpoultry net. He has recently switched to 28-inch net,however. “Layers can fly over it no matter what theheight,” he explains. “Layers will stay in if you givethem an enticing reason to stay. Broilers and turkeywould be kept in by something even shorter thanthis I have now. So it didn’t make sense to have atall net. Anyway, I want to be able to easily stepover the fence.”He has had no problems with dogs or other creaturesleaping into the yard.

Since the field in which he rotates his poultry andcattle has no power to it, Bibula uses a battery-powered energizer for the fencing. He has to re-charge it every 3 days if the fence is on fast speed,half as often on slow speed. He uses the highershock power when the birds are small, but whenthey get larger he drops it.

The bird pens are cleverly designed. “I have a slightbuild and I want to keep the whole thing light formoving,” Steven stresses. “I use 3/4 inch conduit forthe vertical hoops. I buy it in 10-foot lengths andbend it in a conduit bender. The design was devel-oped by Aaron Silverman, in Oregon.

“I had used the Salitan design for awhile,” hecontinues, “but was frustrated by the low ceiling. Iwant something that is airier and lighter, and I liketo go inside. I build them even lighter than Aaron.Instead of 2 x 6s at the base I use 1 x 5s. I chose tenfeet by eleven feet because I can get inexpensivetarps the right size to fit that.”

Bibula had a dolly to lift the back end of the penspecially fabricated. Once inserted under the pen,bending it down lifts the back wall a couple ofinches. Laying the dolly down on the ground keepsthe wall at that height so one person dragging fromthe front can easily move the house. Some systemsuse a dolly with a second set of wheels to keep thedolly handle from dragging on the ground andsnagging on a rock or other obstruction when thehouse is moved. Instead of putting a second axle onthe dolly to lift the handle off the grass, however,Steven had the handle bent by a hydraulic press toangle up off the ground. The dolly is also muchwider than a standard one, so the back end of thehouse is stable when moved.

The pen baseboards are braced in the corners, andare made of spruce, which flexes very well. Thewalls are poultry wired covered with a tarp. Steveframes a simple door into the front, and attaches acable to the front baseboard for pulling.

For nighttime water Bibula fills a bucket and hangsit on the back of the house. A small tube runningthrough the poultry wire wall feeds a waterer in thehouse by gravity. The bucket is mounted on the backwall so that the dolly will carry that weight duringmoves. For daytime water and feed he sets outdevices also designed by Aaron Silverman. They’resix-inch sewer pipes (not Schedule 40 – that willwarp in the sun) cut to about 4 feet in length. Hejigsaws out an 8’ opening in the top and puts on endcaps and a handle across the top for carrying. Theyhold about 4 gallons of feed or water.

His egg boxes are also intriguing. He cuts achicken-sized hole out of the side of a plasticbucket, a few inches above the bottom. A little litterin the bottom and hung on a hoop, it makes awonderful laying box.

“I’ve found that only leaves are an acceptable litterfor the layers,” Steven says. “Everything else theypull out. Then they’ll jump the fence and lay in thewoods. But on leaves they’ll lay!”

The feed for all the birds is organic starter/growerfeed (19% protein) from Lighting Tree Farm in NewYork, which he praises highly. Being organic, it hasno parasiticide. But Bibula has never had troublewith blackhead in his turkeys.

“I’ve raised chickens and turkeys together since1996,” he claims. “I’ve heard of blackhead, butnever seen it. I think the trouble is, if you have it

around and have weak birds, you will have trouble.Salmonella is everywhere, but my birds don’t haveit.”

Woodbridge Farm gets $3.79 a pound for thebroilers, dressed. The white turkeys are $4.05 apound, and the bronze are $5.89. “The bronze onesare more expensive to buy,” explains Steven, “and ittakes more labor to clean them because they havedark pinfeathers and you have to get every one toget a clean pluck. I figure it costs me about $12 abird to process a turkey, about $4 a bird for achicken. That’s labor plus the bag, utilities, andamortization of the equipment. So that’s why I saythe prices we charge are fair.”

Even at $4.25 a dozen, he finds, eggs are not areasonable source of farm income.

Bibula has a dozen or so cattle, mostly steers, whichhe rotates as frequently as 2 or 3 times a day. “Itdepends on the conditions,” he explains. “In thespring lush I move them very frequently in verytight, small areas. That way I get a uniform lowgraze. I want to discourage bolting to seed, and tofavor the legumes like clovers. Then in the slowperiod, like now in late July, I want to graze morelightly so that the grasses have enough leaf torecover. Midsummer growth isn’t too palatable. Redclover lignifies very easily in the heat. Orchardgrass lignifies as well. There are a lot of plants thatthey avoid. I don’t want to cancel out the fall lush,because that’s what I’m depending on to fatten mysteers.

“The health of the land is foremost,” he continues.“In grazing, that’s reflected in the health of thepasture. In the spring we want a lot of mouths to eatthe grass down efficiently. Then it is good to reduceyour stocking rate somehow, either by feeding themhay or selling off some animals, right after thespring slump. That’s when the pasture is producingless and needs more rest. Observe the rules of thepasture and it will reward you later with healthierforage and more of it. We fed hay for three weekswhen we had a drought here recently. Now they’reback on pasture. In the fall, with cooler weather,more grass will grow and these steers will fatten.They’re pretty fat now.”

Steven makes compost with manure from a localdairy. He uses leaves and woodchips from a locallandscaper and a little scrap hay for carbon. He addsthe biodynamic preparations to it, as well. But allhis efforts at soil improvement through biodynamicmanagement and compost have not been able tobring the land to what he feels is necessary toproduce good hay, so he buys that in from localfarmers.

Both the cattle and the birds are watered with a“Python” equipment system from New Zealand.One of its features is that it requires no tools to use.A supply hose of black plastic has a series of valvedslots along its length. When a slot is not it use, thevalve shuts it off. But when you want to draw waterat that location, you fit a length of pipe into the slot,give it a quarter turn, and the water is flowing.When you’re done, you just pull it out. (The USsupplier is Dailey Fence, in Ohio. Bibula also uses a


Steven’s poultry pen dolly is extra wide anddesigned so that one person can move the

pen. Here Bibula slips the dolly’s forks underthe pen back wall. Note the water bucket

hanging on the back wall, where its weightwill be carried by the dolly.


When the dolly is inserted under the backpen wall and laid down, the wall will sit 2 to

3 inches above the ground. Note also thebend in the handle to keep it above the

ground to avoid snagging on a rock when thehouse is dragged forward.


Although of a slight build, Bibula easily pullspoultry pen single-handedly using cable

attached to the front baseboard on eitherside of the door. Note homemade feeders and

waterers in the foreground.

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e r Winter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 516python stock tank. It’s very heavy duty and has afast flow, but is easy to dump and roll to a newlocation to refill.

Woodbridge Farm is breeding Milking Devons forfarms that want to produce both meat and milk. “Webelieve they are the very best multi-purpose cattlefor a temperate climate,” Steven states. “Even so,within the breed there is some refinement to gobecause for many decades people haven’t focusedon the multi-purpose aspect of them. The herds havegotten more toward just oxen, or more just forpreservation. So we are trying to recapture some ofthat. We’re breeding them for fast growing –meaning finished in 16 to 18 months – and for highcomponent and moderate volume milk.

“There are other breeds,” he continues, “that can dosome of those things, such as the Belted Gallowayand the British White and the Scottish Highlander,but none can do all of those well except for theDevons. They also have a very tender meat. Usuallysteers won’t marble until they are bigger than theirmother is. With this breed there is uncharacteristicearly marbling.”

Bibula is interested in helping bring about a fullypredictable, functional genetic pool to share withother farmers who are interested in producing rawmilk and pasture based beef for seasonal, localcustomer demand. He feels his bull, Rufus, maypossible be the best Milking Devon bull alive from amulti-function standpoint.

“Having top quality breeding stock,” he points out,“goes hand in hand with having top quality beef. Wewant to be able to say to another farm: ‘You’ve gotgreat cows and we have a great bull’, or vice versa.‘Lets help each other out.’ You can’t do that if youranimals aren’t predictable.

Steven is also excited about a variety of MilkingDevons that has been identified in New Zealand.Some animals are now being brought from it to theUS. “Those Rotokawas,” he enthuses, “have beenbred to a consistent high standard of performance onjust grass. They have been line bred to cement theirqualities. That means breeding the good bull to hisdaughters. And then doing it again to granddaugh-ters until you have a line that will reproduce hisqualities again and again consistently. Then you cantake another good bull, breed it with those daugh-ters, and improve them even further. If you sell bullsout of those cows for breeding, their genetics areconsistent.”

Woodbridge Farm sells its beef at variable prices, bythe cut. Hamburger and stew beef are $7 a pound.Steaks are $20 a pound; fillets are $33. Right now,because of their limited amount of pasture, demandfar outpaces production. This year they will slaugh-ter just 4 steers. The animals are processed atStafford Enterprises, and come home vacuum-packed by the cut, to be put in several freezers.Most of the meat is pre-sold, and picked up byappointment.

The farm’s pigs are raised in the woods. This year’swere sisters; Tamworth crossed with Yorkshire/Hampshire, bought in early May for slaughter inAugust. But one of them will be kept for breedingwith a Tamworth boar for a cross that Bibula feels isthe most desirable for an outdoor pig.

About a week before slaughter he will bring in atrailer and feed them on it. Once they get used tothat, he’ll just close them in when it’s time to go. Heuses a standard gravity-operated hog feeder to savelabor in daily feeding, but tries to bring them treatslike broken eggs so they will associate him withtheir food.

The farm charges $14 a pound for smoked andcured cuts. Chops and roasts at $12; sausage is $7. Agood amount has already been pre-sold in July.

“We ask for a $100 deposit on beef and porkorders,” Steven says. “We offer a 5% discount onorders over 20 pounds. People are welcome to comeon slaughter day to pick up a turkey or chicken, butmostly they get it frozen. Some of our buyers arelocal; often those are people who knew the farmlong before I came, when it was used for horse

boarding. But most of our buyers find us on theInternet through the eatwild.com site, or thelocalharvest.com site.

“We get calls from people all over,” he continues,“some from far away who just can’t find healthyanimal products. That is especially true when thereare hot button times like before Thanksgiving or lastDecember when there was the big Mad Cow scare.People were crazy. But of course we were sold outlong since. We took a lot of pre-orders. All our beeffor this November sold out by last mid-winter.”

Bibula is originally from New York City. He hadsome early childhood agricultural experiences thatclued him in that farming was his passion. “Myparents were professionals,” he recounts. “My fatherwas a teacher so we were able to go away summersinto the country and I had little glimpses intogardening and farming. My parents did everythingnormal city parents do to discourage me fromthinking that my destiny would be anything but awhite-collar profession. But it kept welling up inme, and I was unable to find direction unless it wasthis one. I went to college and skipped classes towork in the garden!”

He eventually ended up as a cook on a tall shipgoing up and down the Hudson. Every time hewould get off he would go apprentice somewhere orstart a farm. Of course he couldn’t make any moneyand would have to go back to being a cook again.

Steven got interested in biodynamics after readingJohn Jeavon’s ‘How to Grow More Vegetables’. “Iliked it,” he recalls, “but there was somethingunsettling about it. Jeavons called his method bio-intensive, and mentioned that there was this thingcalled biodynamics. So I went and got RudolfSteiner’s book of lectures. When I read it I wasstunned. This is someone who was making all theconnections I wanted. That was in 1992. I started alittle biodynamic commercial garden and went toHawthorne Valley to get some preparations to useon it.

“Rudolf Steiner,” he continues, “recognized thatpeople have been unable to develop the will forcesnecessary to take action against the problems of theworld because of inadequate nutrition. Our food isnot supplying us the will forces to form the bridgefrom will to thinking to action. Biodynamics sayswe need more than a materialistic solution to that.It’s more than just replacing synthetic fertilizerswith natural ones. You have to understand andrebalance the underlying forces to truly produce ahealed land — which can produce food worthy ofeating. It’s essentially a moral impulse.”

Bibula has several hives of bees on the farm.Although he doesn’t raise crops, he feels they havean important role to play in farm ecology. As antsspread formic acid throughout the soil, he explains,so bees do it through the air. Formic acid is veryimportant for the growth and health of plants. Thebees also bring a kind of enlivening to the farm.From the biodynamic point of view, the contactbetween bee and flower results in a spiritual andenergetic blossoming.

“As a biodynamic farm,” he stresses, “we’re inter-ested in using the life forces that underlie substancesto create true vitality and fertility. Not by applyingfertilizers, but by using compost preparations andfield sprays and the sensitivity of the farmer toenliven and awaken the plants. So rather than beingthe passive recipients of whatever comes near them,they can be enabled to be self-aware and go out andget what they need, even if it’s from a neighboringmeadow. Not by using roots, but by using the lifeforces which are there but that we don’t perceive ona day-to-day basis. The dandelion preparation thatwe put in compost enables plants to perceive whatthey need in distant places and reach out for it.”

Although Woodbridge Farm would meet organiccertification standards, it is not certified. Stevenopposes third-party certification as enabling con-sumerism and detachment from one’s food. Thefarm would not qualify for Demeter’s biodynamiccertification as it does not produce enough of itsfertility and feed on-farm. He also feels that compo-nent certification (what can go into the growing) isnot as valuable as results certification (what is in thefood itself). He feels there needs to be research intohow such results could be quantified.

“No one has devoted enough effort to measuringtrue nourishment value in food,” he says. “Sensitivecrystallization and chromatography can be used toassay the difference between plants and plantproducts that have been treated with preps and thosethat have not. One could also measure the stablehumic acid content of the soil and see if it is increas-ing over the previous year. Brix and dry matter arealso helpful analyses of food’s quality. And tastingitself can detect good food. Perhaps not if someoneeats a lot of sugar, but generally the human palettecan detect vitality in food.

“Animal preference studies are also good,” hecontinues. “We already have studies showinganimals preferring hay raised with biodynamicsprays. Lets listen to the organisms that have stillretained sensitivity to the world. Another thing weshould develop is professional clairvoyance. RudolfSteiner was able to live simultaneously here and inthe spiritual world. He wrote back in the 1920s that


Bibula collects eggs right from under the current (unflustered) occupant of the egg pail.Note appropriate use of recycled materials.

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 17if you feed birds to cattle they will go mad. Nowwe’re feeding chicken parts to cows and they’regoing mad. Is this a source of useful knowledge?Could we have double or triple-blind studies withclairvoyants doing assays the way other businesseshave tasters?”

The future of Woodbridge Farm is clouded, Bibulaworries, by political forces that oppose a vibranteconomy of small farms. Some of the most encour-aging animal product lines are facing stricter andstricter regulation. A case is point is poultry process-ing. There is no approved processing plant he canuse in the state, so right now he slaughters andcleans his birds on farm with modern equipment hebought or built. But state regulators are pressing himto build a poultry-processing plant.

“Poultry has the potential to be the true centerpieceof a small family farm,” he argues. “But withoutprocessing it can’t happen. Now the state wants meto build a plant to process them that would meetfederal requirements. They want a building and aHACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical ControlPoints) plan. If I had to build a poultry-processingplant, in order to justify it I’d have to raise myproduction past the productive capacity of my land.

“The problem,” he continues, “ is that the HACCPplans that are out there aren’t keeping contaminatedbirds from entering the market. There is a regulatoryvacuum for small processors, and I know they aregetting ready to fill the vacuum by saying: ‘no!’What the regulators are really saying is that theydon’t want us in this business. Those regulationsreally serve the big commodity producers only.Look at raw milk. The same thing happened there —commodity economics drove pasteurization todominate. So people have missed out on the value ofraw milk and suffered the health woes of pasteurizedmilk for most of the last century. Only now are westarting to see a revival of interest in it.”

Use of biodynamic techniques is also increasinglythreatened, Steven feels. There is already a move inEurope to limit use of the essential cow parts —skulls, intestines, mesenteries, and horns — neededfor the preparations.


Milking Devons are not only striking creatures,they are also a multi-purpose breed well suited to a grass diet.

He also cites the 30-month rule recently establishedby the USDA. It requires that any beef over 30months old not contain any bone or nerve tissue. Soyou can’t have T-bone or Porterhouse or Sirloinsteak. It might make sense, he says, if it were aprotection from Mad Cow Disease. But animalshave been found with BSE who are 26 months oldor younger. The USDA knew that when they madethe rule. He feels they are just trying to give theappearance of doing something.

To help small farms survive in this environment,Woodbridge Farm is looking to develop associativeeconomic relationships with people. “I mean bythat,” says Bibula, “that the relationship shouldencompass spiritual and political considerations aswell as economic ones. We want to commit tofarming in a way that satisfies someone’s moral,political and nutritional values and needs. And inturn we want that person not just to buy from us butalso help defend us in the political arena and supportus spiritually. A CSA has that potential, but mostdon’t go that far, really.

“We’re considering ways,” he continues, “legalstructures such as shares, events like on-farmcelebrations, and other ideas, to make this a membersupported farm. If we did that we would no longersell to the public. We would expect members to helpwith things like local regulations. I think that whendirect sale is involved, the government has nobusiness getting involved. That’s what I mean bypolitics. People who are interested in that relation-ship should get together and tell the government tobutt out!”


by Ron Skinner(reprinted, with permission, fromGrowing for Market, May, 2004)

Our New Year’s resolution last year was to try tohave a life outside of farming. So when somefriends we were visiting in town invited us to stayfor dinner we jumped at the opportunity.

“What about your chickens?” they asked.

“The hens will be okay,” I replied. “We’ll close uptheir coop when we get home. It won’t be too longafter dark. Besides, I’m sick and tired of beingmarried to that chicken coop!”

I wouldn’t have been too upset if the coyote thatattacked that night had taken only one bird. A smallprice to pay for our evening out. But instead, itkilled eight hens and had begun eating one when theheadlights of our approaching car scared it away.

We raise a small flock of laying hens in a valley fullof predators. Owls, hawks, raccoons, coyotes,weasels, foxes, skunks, and stray dogs all have ataste for our hens or their eggs. The only way for usto keep our girls safe is a complete lockdown fromdusk until dawn.

During the day our hens are free to roam. Theyclean a field of insects and weed seeds while tillingand fertilizing and produce a high value crop ofdelicious eggs. We contain their range with portableelectric poultry net fencing and rotate them betweenfields of vegetable crop residues, cover crops, andgrass/clover pasture. As long as they have adequatefood the fence contains them without beingenergized. We do energize it when the hens areadjacent to a field of succulent lettuce!

Mobile chicken coops allow us to move the henswhere we want them. Our coops are made from thecheapest thing we could find – horse trailers. Whena trailer becomes unsafe for the transport of a horseit loses value. We picked up a four-horse trailerwith a rusted roof and rotten floor for free.

Our first two-horse trailer with a good floor and newtires cost $100. We added a tarp on the rusted roofto keep the rain out and chicken wire over the openareas to keep predators out. Next we built plywoodlay boxes and attached them above the fenders sothat eggs could be collected from outside the trailer.We set roosts high up in the trailer and built a 1square foot sheet metal door for the hens to go inand out. This mobile coop cost under $150, housed50 hens, and worked beautifully - except that wehad to open and close the door like clockwork.

I was lamenting the fact that I was married to achicken coop one day while talking with myagricultural engineer father-in-law. I mentioned thatsomeday I wanted to automate the door and divorcemyself from that darn chicken coop. It didn’t takelong for him to draw up a simple circuit while Ifound a linear actuator to open and close the door.

Thanks to the millions of channel surfers addicted totheir satellite TVs, there is a good supply of cheap,weatherproof linear actuators used to tune satellitedishes. The Rick’s Satellite website lead me to a 36volt linear actuator that cost $59.50 includingshipping. Running the linear actuator at 12 voltsslows it down, giving the straggler hens more timeto get inside while the door is closing (1.5 minutes).

The 12 volt power supply on our first coopconsisted of a used car battery and a small solarpanel salvaged off a boat. It was cheap and worked

reliably. A small 12 volt/12 amp-hour sealed lead-acid battery and a 15 volt/13 watt solar panelprovide ample power and are cost effective. Bothare available from Real Goods and Radio Shack. Ifyou live in a cloudy area you may want to opt for adeep-cycle RV/marine battery with more amp-hoursand a larger solar panel. Contact Real Goods forhelp in sizing a power system to meet your needs.

The controlling circuit is shown in theaccompanying diagram.

As it gets dark the resistance of the photoconductingcell (PC1) goes up, causing current to flow into thetransistor (T1). The transistor amplifies this weakcurrent through the relay coil (C1) turning on themotor (M) of the linear actuator in the extension(closing) mode. The linear actuator’s adjustableinternal limit switch (LS1) opens upon closing ofthe door, causing the motor (M) to stop and the lightemitting diode (LED) to illuminate, signaling thatthe door has closed. A glance from my home on thehill reveals a faint red glow in the darkness,reassuring me that the coop has power and the doorhas closed properly

As it gets light the resistance of the photoconductingcell (PC1) goes down and current ceases to flowinto the transistor (T1). The diode (D1) ensures thatthe transistor turns off. With the transistor (T1) off,the relay coil (C1) returns to its normally openposition, which reverses the current through thelinear actuator, causing it to retract (open). Thelinear actuator’s adjustable internal limit switch(LS2) opens upon opening of the door, causing themotor (M) to stop.

In our sunny California climate the coop hasperformed almost flawlessly. There have been afew cloudy and dark days when the door closed a

little earlier than usual, leaving a few hens outsidefor the night. Also on very warm evenings a fewhens prefer to stay out until after dark, missingclosing time at dusk.

To deal with these problems, we replaced the relay(C1) with an adjustable time delay relay so that thedoor closes a pre-set time after the photoconductivecell tells it to.

Although the time delay relay adds about $17 to thecost and draws twice as much power, it gives thesystem flexibility to adjust to seasonal and climaticconditions.

The circuit is straightforward to assemble. If you’venever soldered electronic components from a circuitdiagram find someone in your community to do itfor you. I soldered components on a small general-purpose printed circuit board (available from RadioShack) and mounted it along with the relay in itssocket, the linear actuator, and the battery in a sheetmetal housing with a plexiglass cover to let in light.Mounting the photoconducting cell on the roof ofthe coop would give it full exposure to the sun andsimplify the housing needed to protect the electroniccomponents and battery. The Light Emitting Diode(LED) and resistor (R2) must be soldered across thelimit switch (LS1) within the housing of the linearactuator and mounted on the coop where it is easilyvisible. I used a 12V LED from Radio Shack thatcame with an internal resistor in a ready to mounthousing.

I also installed a switch (S1) in order to manuallydisable the coop door. The night before I plan tomove the chicken coop, I disable the door after darkonce it has closed. First thing in the morning Imove the coop while the hens are still inside and re-enable the door. In this way I can relocate the hensto a new field easily and without them losing theircoop.

All told the automatic chicken coop door costsabout $250 to build. A cheap divorce by Californiastandards and money well spent towards sanity inthe insane world of farming.

Ron Skinner farms with his wife, Jenn, in theHuasna Valley on the California Central Coast. Hecan be reached at [email protected].

Automatingthe Chicken

Coop SecuritySystem


by Karma Glos, Kingbird Farm

Introduction

During the days I intended to prepare for this articleI ended up being totally absorbed in the life of oneof my sows. My hours spent helping her live gaveme time to ponder my intentions behind organicpork production. Maude is a sow of unknown ageand ambiguous breeding. She was one of our firstsows, purchased mature and bred, an “easy” intro-duction to farrowing. The “hog operation” wepurchased her from was the dark, muddy basementof a decrepit old dairy barn. We needed flashlightsto navigate the crowded pens constructed of palletslashed together with baling twine. The mud on thebarn floor measured three feet deep in some areasand there were plank bridges to traverse from pen topen. The mud was a result of a broken water pipeand a complete lack of bedding. Ironically, despitethe flowing mud there was no water provided to thesows or the feeder pigs. Nor was there currentlyfood. Feeding time consisted of backing a truckloadof rotten produce up to the pens and throwing boxesinto the mud. There were two pens of 10-15 sows,each with a boar. There were also small pens offeeder pigs and a slightly dryer farrowing pen.When we arrived to look at these sows the farmer(and I use that word loosely) had just returned fromchasing a group of escaped hogs down Rt. 79. Hewas cursing and beating the hogs back into a smallpen with a 2 x 4. Now I’m no shrinking violet. Iam a livestock farmer and I’ve seen a lot of manage-ment techniques, but this was a dungeon. It was nothog farming in any way. It was unabashed slavery,cruelty, and neglect.

Our intention that day was to purchase two bredsows whose farrowing dates would correspond tothat of the Tamworth gilt we already had. When Ientered that barn, however, I wanted to save the

Organic Pork Production

whole herd. The farmer was moving soon and soselling the whole lot of them at auction the next day.We had cash for only two. In the first pen I chose astrong looking white Yorkshire sow that expertlyavoided the sorting panel. I liked her attitudedespite the horrid conditions. In the next pen Ichose Maude. She greeted me through the palletswith a snort. She was a bizarre looking flop-earedsow with an enormous turned up snout. Now that’sno way to chose breeding stock, on looks and

personality, but I didn’t have much to go on since allthe sows were chest deep in mud and indistinguish-able due to filth. We easily loaded the new sows andpaid our $400.

Upon returning home we released the sows ontopasture and watched with amazement. The minutethey left the trailer their snouts hit the ground. Theywere rooting and grunting with contentment withinseconds. Soon after they had a good roll and a long

photo courtesy Karma Glos

Scarlet is ready to wean her piglets.


4 8 $80.00 $640.00 $875.17 -$235.17 61 -$3.864.5 9 $80.00 $720.00 $875.17 -$155.17 61 -$2.545 10 $80.00 $800.00 $875.17 -$75.17 61 -$1.235.5 11 $80.00 $880.00 $875.17 $4.83 61 $0.086 12 $80.00 $960.00 $875.17 $84.83 61 $1.396.5 13 $80.00 $1,040.00 $875.17 $164.83 61 $2.707 14 $80.00 $1,120.00 $875.17 $244.83 61 $4.017.5 15 $80.00 $1,200.00 $875.17 $324.83 61 $5.338 16 $80.00 $1,280.00 $875.17 $404.83 61 $6.648.5 17 $80.00 $1,360.00 $875.17 $484.83 61 $7.959 18 $80.00 $1,440.00 $875.17 $564.83 61 $9.269.5 19 $80.00 $1,520.00 $875.17 $644.83 61 $10.5710 20 $80.00 $1,600.00 $875.17 $724.83 61 $11.8810.5 21 $80.00 $1,680.00 $875.17 $804.83 61 $13.1911 22 $80.00 $1,760.00 $875.17 $884.83 61 $14.5111.5 23 $80.00 $1,840.00 $875.17 $964.83 61 $15.8212 24 $80.00 $1,920.00 $875.17 $1,044.83 61 $17.13

Income If the Sow Cannot be Processed For Meat When CulledFor example if she dies on the farm or has to be treated with antibiotics.

Pigs per litter

Pigs per year

*There is the assumption that all pigs can be sold at an organic premium.**Meat from Sow at Culling. A 400 pound sow may have 280 pounds ofsausage (at $6.50 a pound) is $1820 minus process charges of $450 *= $1370prorated over 4 breeding year is $342.50 per year. The value of this sow canreally affect the end profitability of keeping sows.

***At an average estimate of 1 hr per day *365 days, I’d have 365 hrsinvolved divided by 6 sows = 60.83 hrs per sow. Some days you spend 10-15minutes while other you spend 2 hours. Estimating actual time is difficult.

Price per pig*

Income per sow

Expenses**

Profit Hours of labor***

Hourly rate

Income If the Sow is Processed For Meat When Culled

4 8 $80.00 $640.00 $532.00 $108.00 61 $1.774.5 9 $80.00 $720.00 $532.00 $188.00 61 $3.085 10 $80.00 $800.00 $532.00 $268.00 61 $4.395.5 11 $80.00 $880.00 $532.00 $348.00 61 $5.706 12 $80.00 $960.00 $532.00 $428.00 61 $7.026.5 13 $80.00 $1,040.00 $532.00 $508.00 61 $8.337 14 $80.00 $1,120.00 $532.00 $588.00 61 $9.647.5 15 $80.00 $1,200.00 $532.00 $668.00 61 $10.958 16 $80.00 $1,280.00 $532.00 $748.00 61 $12.268.5 17 $80.00 $1,360.00 $532.00 $828.00 61 $13.579 18 $80.00 $1,440.00 $532.00 $908.00 61 $14.899.5 19 $80.00 $1,520.00 $532.00 $988.00 61 $16.2010 20 $80.00 $1,600.00 $532.00 $1,068.00 61 $17.5110.5 21 $80.00 $1,680.00 $532.00 $1,148.00 61 $18.8211 22 $80.00 $1,760.00 $532.00 $1,228.00 61 $20.1311.5 23 $80.00 $1,840.00 $532.00 $1,308.00 61 $21.4412 24 $80.00 $1,920.00 $532.00 $1,388.00 61 $22.75

Pigs per litter

Pigs per year

Price per pig*

Income per sow

Expenses**

ProfitHours o

f labor***

Hourly rate

Sample Budget for 6-sow operation with 1 boarExpenses Feed for one sow 90 days * 10 pounds per day = 900 pounds * .21 per pound $189.00 275 day * 5 pounds per day = 1375 pounds * .21 per pound $288.75 Straw (bedding) $75 $3000 hoop structure with water, hog panels, feeders, Outdoor access, pro-rated over 8 years and 6 pig use $3000/8/6 $62.5 Misc supplements $20 One vet visit per year/6 animals $100/6 $16.67 Incidental expenses $30 Cost to raise sow to breeding age prorated for 4 yrs of breeding Feed 1500# @ .21= $315 Piglet (purebred) = $100.00 $415/4= = $103.75Expense of keeping a boar for 1year split amongst 6 sows 1 year feed (365*5= 1825# @ .21 per pound= $383.25) Cost to raise boar to breeding age prorated over

4 years of breeding life = $103.75 Incidental expense = $30 Misc supplements = $20 Total = $537 / 6 sows= $89.5 Total expense = $875.17 per year for one sow

(Overhead expenses like insurance, organic certification, truck, main barn, etc are not included)

drink. A few days later, after a cleansing rain, wediscovered their color. Maude was pure white withappaloosa spotting on her hams and a fine curly tail.These sows went on to farrow good litters for us,particularly when bred to our Tamworth boar. Sincethey are of unknown age, we assist their deliveriesjust to be safe.

This will be Maude’s last litter. Yesterday, afterfarrowing 9 fine piglets (and 3 others that didn’tlive) she continued to lie there in distress. Thepiglets went about their business learning to walkand fighting over teat space while Maude pantedand spiked a fever. I stayed with her all day, clean-ing up her diarrhea and managing the piglets whenshe flopped over in pain. During this time shedelivered 3 more piglets bringing her grand total to15. When the vet arrived she pulled another deadpiglet from Maude and said she could feel anotherone far at the end of the uterine horn. The horn wastwisted and circumstances did not look good forMaude or her brood. She was treated with oxytocinand penicillin and the vet left us with little hope. Icontinued to stay with her well into the night,expecting to lose her at any moment. Before finallygoing to bed I sponged off her hot ears and mistedher face and snout with water containing homeo-pathic remedies (Ars., Arnica, Puls., and Caul.).The following morning I found her sitting up. Herfever had subsided and her breathing was normal.She took a good long drink of water with molassesand electrolytes and lay down again for the hungrypiglets. And so there she lies. She feels much betterand is even attempting to deliver some placenta, butthe piglet remains in her twisted horn. Meanwhile Iam teaching the piglets to drink warm cow milkfrom a pan and trying to keep Maude comfortable. Icheck on her every hour or so to clean her bedding,give her a drink, and spritz her snout with remedy.So, if this article seems to lack depth and properresearch, I apologize. I was busy raising pigs.

Raising Hogs In the Beginning

We began with pigs like many others have, justkeeping a few feeder pigs to turn our compost andfill our freezer. Ann and Eric Nordell’s compostingmethod originally inspired us and since we too haddraft horses it seemed a perfect fit. With horses asour only source of power, our front-end loader formoving and turning compost was my husband’s twoarms. In order to use pigs for compost turning webuilt three 10’X12’ compost “middens” with a shedroof, cement floor and adjustable walls. These

middens served as a composting facility for ourhorse and cow manure and rooting bonanza for twofeeder pigs. The three middens fulfilled threepurposes. One was for fresh manure and bedding,one was for older composting manure and bedding,and the third was for fresh bedding. The pigs sleptand ate in the third midden while working in theother two. We alternated their work between pack-ing and turning the pack, depending on its stage ofcomposting. This was and still is a marvelousmethod of making large amounts of compost. If thecompost is working properly (good carbon to nitro-gen ratio and moisture content) it provides endlessrooting opportunities and a warm bed in the winter.Plus, at the end of six months we had fat hogs. Afterselling some of our pork to our egg customers thedemand quickly grew. Increased production lead usto moving the hogs out to pasture and on to a slightlymore complicated production model.

Raising or Purchasing Piglets

Since our hog management facilities started and haveremained very simple and low cost, our biggestchallenges were purchasing piglets and buying

organic feed. Initially we purchased back yardpiglets from any farmer who had them available.These were the $35-40 Heinz 57 weaner pigs withdubious beginnings. After trying our firstTamworths from High Meadows farm we beganpurchasing higher quality piglets and liked what wesaw as they grew on pasture. What we didn’t have,however, was a good source for Certified Organicpiglets. After much number crunching and headscratching it was decided that we might actually beable to farrow our own pigs economically if wewere very careful and moderately successful. Eventhough it was a financial risk to put so much organicfeed into sows, it gave us control of our pigs’management from day one. Not only did I want toproduce strapping organic piglets for my ownproduction, but also I wanted to provide high qualitystock for others. This has led us to our current herdof five sows (3 Tamworth and 2 Yorkshire X), areplacement gilt, and a boar (Tamworth). Theseanimals are on certified organic feed 100% of thetime and on pasture when not farrowing. We weanan average of eight piglets per sow twice a year.Half of these piglets are raised on our farm and theothers are sold as weaners (6-8 weeks)


The economics of raising certified organic sows isvery tight. We must carefully monitor how muchfeed we put into them when they’re gestating, andwe must manage them for good litters. Each andevery piglet is very valuable to us. If a sow fails tohave an adequate sized litter we must cull her, wecannot feed her for a small litter. Success is evenmore important for the boar since we are putting vastamounts of organic feed into animal we cannotmarket (although some do) for food when he is done.Due to these restrictions we have chosen to keep theherd small so we can focus on guaranteeing good-sized healthy litters. In our simple set up thisrequires good husbandry and lots of attention. Thisonly works because I love working with sows(except the mean one) and helping to bring pigletsinto the world.

Managing Sows

Our current sow set up uses only our existinginfrastructure, but we intend to build dedicated sowhousing this fall. During the summer the sows andboar forage on rotated paddocks with access to arun-in shed and an automatic drinker. When apaddock has been hogged down I move the animalsand seed it to some sort of forage (oats, peas, corn,alfalfa, or clover). When a sow is within a week offarrowing I move her into a box stall in the barn (12’x 12’) or one of the compost middens that has beencleaned out. There she has a nipple drinker andreceives more feed. After weaning I move the sowback out to pasture with the boar where she willbreed within a week or two of weaning. The weanedpiglets are then sold or moved out to pasture to beraised by us.

In the winter we have housed our sows in a 14’ x 48’hoop house that houses our hens in the summer. Welined the inside of the hoop house with hog panelsand put down a deep bedding of straw. Duringgestation they live together with the boar. As theyapproach farrowing time we divide the space intoseparate pens with hog panels and plywood so wecan feed the sows separately and more easily man-age their piglets. This set up worked fine, butwithout a cement floor we battled moisture allwinter, and we did not have a frost-free automaticdrinker. The new sow house will be designed withthese issues in mind.

Raising Hogs

Regardless of whether you farrow or purchase yourpiglets, raising them on pasture is a very economicalmethod for growing organic pork. Our hog raising“facilities” are low-tech, low cost, and low mainte-nance. After weaning piglets are moved out topasture in a group of 20-30. We initially confinethem to a small paddock of hog panels with twostrands of electric polywire running along the inside.

This familiarizes them with not only foraging, butalso the fencing to which they will be confined forthe next four months. Once we observe that theyfully respect the polywire (with 4-6000 volts) weremove the hog panels and allow them access to hogpasture. I say hog pasture because this is its solepurpose. We do not ring the noses of our hogs sohogging down the pasture means rooting up therocks. This creates a very lumpy, uneven groundthat cannot really be mowed. It also creates a mixedforage base that is more suited to hogs than cows.

The hogs remain in each paddock for roughly twoweeks depending on their size, the weather, andforage growth. After they move on to the nextpaddock we seed down the previous to oats or ryedepending on the season. A paddock is formedsimply by two strands of polywire at 6-12” and 12-24” on fiberglass posts with a solar charger. Eachpaddock is planned to have a large pine tree forshelter. A 1” over land water line gravity feeds fromour pond to nipple drinkers secured to a t-post. Ourfeeders are stainless steal self feeders picked up at anauction which we fill daily with feed stored in 55gallon barrels. When it’s time to load hogs for thebutcher we set up a simple chute with hog panels,back the trailer up to the fence, and feed the hogs inthe trailer. Once we have the number of hogs weneed in the trailer the door is closed and the chute is

dismantled. We load patiently and quietly. This iskey to having contented hogs while trucking andunloading at the butcher.

Winter hog production varies only slightly. Sincewe typically have a snow pack all winter and weonly raise a dozen hogs, we confine them to onepaddock near the barn. This paddock is woven wirewith a single offset hot wire and contains calfhutches and porta huts for shelter. We use the sameself-feeders and a heated stock tank for water. Wealso keep a pair of hogs in the compost middens tokeep the winter bedding worked. These animalsmay be replacement gilts we are taming or otheranimals that may need a little extra attention.

Processing

While feed may be the most expensive part of ourhog operation, processing is the most complicated.Finding and keeping a good butcher is a challengeand finding a Certified Organic one is nearlyimpossible. We have used four USDA butchers andnumerous custom butchers (for pre-sold halves) andhave never been totally satisfied with any of them.Since currently the nearest Certified Organicbutcher is in New Jersey, we chose the highestquality we could find within 2 hours of our farm.So although our Certified Organic piglets from ourCertified Organic sows are raised on certifiedpasture and feeds, once they walk through thebutcher’s doors they can no longer be called or-ganic. Fortunately for us we direct market only andhave no trouble explaining this disjunct to ourcustomers. We have persuaded our butcher to makelow nitrate smoked meats (just sea salt and honey)and are in the process of providing him with certi-fied organic herbs and spices for our sausages. It’simportant to keep in mind that good USDA in-spected butchers are few and far between and do nottypically need our business, particularly if we haveextra needs and demands.

Our particular needs and demands are not obscene,but they do make extra work for the processor. Firstthe processor must be flexible. Sometimes we can’tget the trailer into our pastures and we may have towait for a dryer day. Second they must have aclean, comfortable unloading and holding facility.They must have a separate well-bedded pen to keepour animals separate from others and feed them onlyour organic feed. They must not use electric prods.Third, they must have a well-managed, non-stressfulkill area. I don’t like my animals to be able to seeother hogs being killed. Fourth, they must have aclean cutting area. This is probably taken care of byvirtue of being USDA inspected, but we like to seefor ourselves. Fifth, they must not bulk our meatwith anyone else’s. This is a common practice,especially with ground meat. Sixth, they must do anice job cutting and wrapping and not add any


Nipple drinker on pasture.


A well bedded litter in the middens.

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e r Winter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 522nitrates, MSG, or other chemicals to the sausages.This can actually be a tough bill to fill, but we take itvery seriously because we’ve put a lot of hard workand money into getting those hogs to market.

At market is where the economic viability of raisingorganic hogs really comes to a head. Organicgrowers of all kinds chronically undervalue theirproducts and meat is commonly the worst. Wejuggle this economic reality with wanting to providea high quality product that everyone can afford. Ourcompromise on this is to charge appropriately acrossthe board, especially for high end smoked sausagesand hams, and yet have a few basic cuts like chopsand breakfast sausage that are reasonably priced foranyone. Organic meat is not just for the well off, butthere will also be no local organic meat if farmersdon’t make a living wage.

Closing

Well I’ve just returned from checking on Maude.She drank some water and ate a slice of apple. Someof the remaining placenta is emerging, but not thepiglets in the twisted horn. I administered her 20ccof Penicillin, spritzed her nose with homeopathicremedies, and gave her a little raspberry leaf tea.She seemed calm and the piglets were busy nursing.They’ve begun to drink the cow milk too. If theysurvive I will need to find a buyer for a dozenuncertifiable piglets that were very honestly caredfor by this dedicated organic hog farmer.


Our 2 year old Tamworth Boar (Brutus)


Interior of the hoop house set up for farrowing sows in the winter.


by Robert Hadad

Introduction

Sustainable agriculture has been defined by Gips(1984) as being ecologically sound, economicallyviable, socially just, and humane. In this context,organic farming must be inextricably linked tosustainability. Organic farming is not organic if it isnot sustainable. Without sustainability, there isfundamentally little difference between organic andconventional agriculture.

The industrial model of conventional livestockproduction is to streamline raising animals intoalmost a manufacturing process. The end productneeds to come out as cheaply made as possiblethrough standardization of process and animal,efficiency of scale, and integrated control from theraising of the animal to the processing of the meat tothe marketing of the product. A large percentage ofthe cost of this system is often externalized.

Sustainable organic farmers raising livestock havetraditionally been more hands-on with managementrelying on stockmanship and an ecological systemsapproach. Livestock farming is more labor intensivewith greater management decisions made by thefarmer based on experience. The scale of productionis smaller to match the availability of labor. Live-stock management is conducted as much for theneeds of the individual animal within the herd orflock as for the whole herd. Farmers know theiranimals individually and more of the costs areinternalized.

The numbers (USDA-NASS & ERS)

In 1945 there were 366 million broiler chickensraised in this country. Today that number is around 8billion per year.

The number of farms raising less than 1400 broilerswas over 10,800 in 2002 totalling 1.1 million birds.There were 406 farms selling between 2000 and16,000 birds totaling 2.8 million broilers. Therewere only 650 farms raising between 16,000 and99,999 birds totaling over 104 million birds. Thenumber of farms raising over 100,000 broilers wasover 24,300 but with a total number of birds over 7billion.

For laying poultry, there were 15,825 farms raising9,999 or less birds totaling around 5.2 million hens.The number of farms raising over 10,000 birds wasjust under 2800 but the total number of hens raisedwas over 195 million.

Farms raising less than 100 hogs in 2003 numberedslightly more than 42,700 accounting for only 1% ofthe hogs produced nationally. Farms raising from100 to 1000 hogs totaled just under 20,000 andaccounted for 12% of the total national figures. Thenumber of farms producing more than 1000 hogswas about 12,600 and accounted for 67% of all thehogs produced in 2003. The total number of hogsproduced for slaughter in the US is over 50 million.

The purpose of this outline is to show the dynamicsof size in livestock farming. A small number offarms raise the large majority of animals. There arefar more livestock products produced than areconsumed domestically. The remainder is sold forexport. To be able to create a product on a very largescale, economic “efficiencies” have been put inplace. These could be degrees of automation,reduced labor costs, reduced input supply costs,lower sales to profit ratios where volume makes upfor low price, or passing on external costs to others.

Livestock on the Farm –Comparisons with Industrialized Agriculture

and the Implication for Organic Farming

In comparison:According to ERS data (US Organic Farming in2000-2001)Organic dairy cows totaled almost 42,000Organic dairy farms totaled nearly 500Organic pigs totaled 3100Organic sheep and lambs totaled 4000Organic beef cattle totaled over 15,000Organic laying hens totaled 1.6 millionOrganic broiler chickens totaled over 3.29 million.

Industrial Agriculture

With industrial-scale livestock production all of theabove factors must be taken into account to somedegree. However, at least one of these factors bearsmore weight than the others. The most important isthe low cost of inputs. The inputs, in this case, arecheap feed costs. Commodity farmers across theMidwest raising corn and soybeans are paid artifi-cially low prices for their grain. It is not a competi-tion-driven market. The grain prices are so low thatthe prices cannot cover the costs of production.Only through government subsidies that come out ofthe pocket of the American taxpayer can thesefarmers make a profit (provided they have enoughacreage). On average, corn and soybean farmersmake in the neighborhood of only $40-$75 an acre.Without this source of subsidized cheap feed,intensive confinement factory farming wouldprobably be too expensive to compete. One thing isfor sure, this system is not sustainable.

The industrial agricultural system is based on themanufacturing model of the assembly line. If youstart out with a bunch of inputs, parts that make up awhole, then as these parts go through the assemblyline, more are added and they are put together all thesame way. At the end of the assembly line, you haveidentical finished products.

On paper, it would seem that if the process simplyinvolved starting with young animals, all fed thesame diet at the same rate over the same number ofdays, the end product would be efficiently andeconomically produced. Low cost supplies of feed,easy waste disposal, climate controlled buildings,and automated labor-saving mechanisms are all theoperation needs.

Unfortunately, when dealing with living creatureslike farm animals, the “parts” don’t always fit. Inthis system all animals are not created equal. In thecase of ruminants, substituting the natural diet offorages with an “artificial” one comprised of grainsand other products can cause disorders. Disease canbecome more rampant with the concentrated num-bers of animals that are in such close proximity. Sojust as machines are oiled to keep things runningsmoothly, antibiotics and medications are routinelyincluded in the animals feed. Ignoring the naturalbehaviors of animals, stress, injury, and “cuttingcorners” also contribute to real problems with thistype of enterprise.

When dealing with the ecological balances of theenvironment, all the impacts must be taken intoconsideration. Huge monocultures of corn andsoybeans grown with vast amounts of petro-chemi-cal fertilizers and pesticides require a great deal ofenergy from nonrenewable sources. Waste disposalfrom manure lagoons, runoff from over fertilizedfields, contamination of air and water-ways, anddetrimental effects on communities are excessivecosts associated with the industrialized system ofagriculture. As Albert Einstein once said, “It’sbecome appallingly clear that our technology hassurpassed our humanity”.

Organic Livestock Farming

Productivity is often held up by the proponents ofindustrialized agriculture as the ultimate measure ofa system that works and also as a yardstick foranimal welfare. If yields are high, then nothing canbe wrong according to these proponents. This is notthe philosophy of organic family farmers. In organicfarming building healthy soils and maintainingbalance in ecological systems is critical. For organiclivestock farming this also includes providing forthe natural behaviors and well being of the animals.

Good livestock welfare involves animals living in astate of physical and psychological harmony withtheir environment where an animal is able to copewith or adapt to its environment allowing forpositive emotions and experiences. The emphasis toachieve good livestock welfare comes from theability of the animals to express their species-specific natural behavior by being exposed to a

Most broiler chickens never see the out-of-doors andseldom have more than one square foot of space.

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e r Winter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 524natural environment or an environment with keyfeatures to aid in these natural behaviors. Difficultiesin coping result in negative emotions, stress, prob-lems with behavior, and possibly in physical healthproblems. The possibility of performing naturalbehavior is linked both to the animal’s ability tocope with the environment and to positive experi-ences impacting the animal’s quality of life.

Animal behavior scientists (Fraser et al. 1997) oftendefine welfare based on three complementaryapproaches. The definitions are distinguisheddepending on the context of what is considered mostimportant for the well-being of the animal.• The natural living approach: the welfare of ananimal depends on its being allowed to perform itsnatural behavior and live a life as natural as possible.• The biological functioning approach: animalwelfare is related to the normal functioning ofphysiological and behavioral processes and is oftenexpressed as the animal’s ability to cope with itsenvironment.• The subjective experience approach: the feelingsof the animal such as suffering, pain, and pleasuredetermine the welfare of the animal.

How livestock welfare fits into the context oforganic farming depends on how a farmer chooses tobe “organic”. Organic farming could also be catego-rized into three different approaches (Verhoog et al.2003). The no-chemicals approach is basically thepath following legal standards. It would be likefollowing a cookbook and making sure that therecipe didn’t allow restricted practices or inputs. Theagro-ecological approach is based on the belief thatorganic farming requires a more fundamental way ofthinking about natural systems, how they are interre-lated and balanced. Agriculture must fit into thesystem without fouling things up. The integrityapproach integrates nature into the agriculturalsystem. Nature or natural refers to the characteristicnature of plants, animals, humans, and ecosystems.The focus is respect for the integrity of life, for theagricultural/ecosystem interactions, and for humanneeds. Organic farming is more than a complexecological mechanism. It is the respect for the livingentities that makes ‘organic’ important. The combi-nation of the natural, biological and subjectiveexperience approaches of livestock welfare is mostclosely related to the philosophy of organic farming.

As Verhoog et al (2003) stated, the value of natural-ness can be an important guiding value for the futureof organic farming only when a broad conception ofthe natural is taken, including the no-chemicalsapproach, the agro-ecological approach, and theintegrity approach. With respect to animal welfare,this means that it is not enough that the animals getorganic feed and can fulfill their needs in a minimalfashion. The animals should also be able to expresstheir natural behavior in a balanced ecosystem, withplants, animals, and human beings living in it.Together they are the ‘ethos’ of organic farming notto be interpreted by strict standards but ethically as asource of inspiration and self-reflection. This shouldbe an ideal that is continually reflected upon withinthe organic movement.

Species specific behavior, outdoor access, andorganic farming

PoultryChickens, under “natural” outdoor conditions willspend up to two-thirds of the daylight hours feeding.Pecking, scratching, foraging make up the feedingbehavior. The diet of chickens is omnivorous andmade up of seeds, leaves, grasses, insects, and fruits.More than 60% of their time is spent walking. Beingadapted to the outdoor environment, preening offeathers and dust bathing are important behaviors forkeeping the feathers in good condition.

Chickens are highly social birds forming flocks ofup to 30 individuals. They tend to live in a territorymade up of wooded to brushy areas with small openareas, centering their territory around a perching site.A flock is based on a hierarchy of around fivebreeding females and a dominant male. The femalesform a dominance hierarchy amongst themselvesand status can be affected by age, breed, comb sizeand color, and body size (Mench and Keeling 2001).The activities of the flock are synchronized through-out the day.

One of the more serious issues facing organic live-stock farming centers on access to the outdoors forlivestock. Right from the beginning, in October 2002,access to outdoors for animals has been challenged.In large-scale livestock production, what has beentermed ‘industrial’ farming has been in place forseveral decades. Confining large groups of animalsunder one roof has occurred in order to create greaterefficiency and to reduce operating costs. It is basedloosely on the auto assembly line model of manufac-turing whereby goods are made cheaply with smallprofit margins but profit is made up by volume.

In the industrial system, welfare is measured byproductivity with little or no real considerations madefor natural behavior, sustainability, or ecologicalbalances. Uniformity, feed to gain ratios, and havingan end product that fits into the marketing scheme ofthe integrating corporation are the primary concerns.Keeping livestock under one roof makes the systemmore suitable for automation of feeding, watering,and waste removal. Husbandry skills are of little usewhen corporate control dictates production. Seem-ingly cost efficient manufacturing steps replacefarming practices and the art and science ofstockmanship.

Large-scale broiler chicken operations are most oftenworking under contract with a major poultry corpora-tion. Broiler houses can be 60 or more feet wide andas long as 500 ft. with as many as 30,000 birds ormore raised at one time. Floors are covered withsawdust or sand. Periodically, new material is addedover the manure that quickly builds up. The housesare ventilated with large fans. There may be windowsalong with artificial light. Feeders and watering areautomated. The birds generally have little more thanone square foot of space each. The hybridization ofthe broiler breeds produced a bird that has quick rateof gain. It usually takes only 6-7 weeks to reachmarket weight. As many as eight cycles of productionin one year can occur in each building producingmore than 100,000 chickens.

This type of large-scale poultry production deals withhealth issues as biosecurity problems and attempts aremade to avoid diseases by preventive routine medica-tions, vaccinations, and environmental controls. Dueto the high stocking rates, diseases are always athreat. A disease introduced into the facility can easilyspread to tens of thousands of birds very quickly. Inthe case of an outbreak such as Avian Influenza orExotic Newcastle’s Disease, often millions of birdsare destroyed in order to curb the spread.

Organic farmers raising poultry on a smaller scalewith an eye on direct marketing of their birds have agreater investment per bird which is mirrored in thehigher selling price. For example, if the mortality rateof broilers is 6% for both conventional and organicand the conventional producer has two large poultrybuildings producing 420,000 birds a year, they wouldlose 25,200 birds. An organic farmer with 3000 birdswould lose 180. On average, conventional poultryproducers on contract receive about 20 cents per birddelivered to the processor. Total yearly sales would be$78,960. The money lost because of the dead birdswould be $5040. For the organic farmer selling directto consumers, an average bird might go for $7. He/she would have lost $1260 from dead birds whilemaking $19,740.In both cases, the loss is still 6% but the impact onthe organic farmer is greater in terms of total moneymade. On the flip-side, the organic farmer is making25% of what the conventional operator does in a yearbut is only raising 0.7% the number of birds.

Wherein a large-scale conventional operation sick orinjured birds are culled, in an organic poultry farm itcan be worth it to the farmer to spend the time tonurse the bird back to health. Large-scale operationsuse hybrid poultry breeds that gain weight quickly. Agrowth rate of this magnitude often leads to weak legbones and difficulty in walking. Birds may starve todeath simply because they were too weak to get to thefeeders. Smaller scale farmers can choose poultrybreeds that are heartier and less prone to bone prob-lems. Adding more minerals to the diet can some-times reverse leg problems. This can only be done iffarmers have the time to look over their flocksclosely, segregate, and nurse back to health theseanimals.

Chickens raised under the industrial model neverhave access to the outdoors. Broilers are on the floorinside large buildings. The stocking density oftengives these birds little room. Egg-laying hens arecaged, several levels high, with between 4 and 7birds per cage. Each bird has space equivalent to astandard sized piece of computer paper. These birdsdon’t have enough room to flap their wings. Neitherthe broilers nor the layers have perches, sand baths,exposure to sun, or opportunities to scratch andsearch for insects/seeds, or other typical naturalbehaviors.

For organic farmers raising poultry, providingaccess to the outdoors is a foundation block oforganic livestock production. Just as any sort ofcrop production requires three years of chemical-free status to be considered for organic farming,livestock must have the ability to access the out-doors as needed. Regardless of the national programambiguity, true organic farmers respect livestock’snatural behaviors and strive to give their animalsconditions to live out their lives as naturally aspossible while still maintaining ecological sound-ness. This means management must conform toecological principles while still considering whatthe animals require.

Common sense as well as the NOP regulationsallow for care of animals based on their age – stageof development. Stage of development means thatpoultry shouldn’t be exposed to adverse conditionswhile they are very young. Access to outdoorsdoesn’t mean they have to be kept outdoors all thetime without the ability of coming in. It doesn’tmean the birds are forced outside in the dead ofwinter in a blizzard with temperatures below zero. Ihave raised chickens that wouldn’t go outdoorswhen it was cold and windy, rainy, or snowing butwould go outdoors on sunny days even in freezingtemperatures. Leaving the door open allowed themto make the choice of going out or not in less thanideal weather.

Arguments have been made concerning the welfareof poultry going outdoors versus total confinement.Confinement, it is claimed, reduces stress andprevents diseases like Avian Influenza and Salmo-nella. Stress can be caused from overcrowdingthrough insufficient space/high stocking densities,insufficient hiding space from aggressors, poornutrition, and predators. Through capable manage-ment, good planning and layout of facilities, andhigh-quality sanitation practices stress can bereduced to minimal levels for chickens givenoutdoor access. Daily evaluation of how the birdsinteract with their environment is absolutely neces-sary to keep stress reduced.

Diseases in relation to access to the outdoors do nothave to be an overwhelming issue. Good solidmanagement and sanitation can keep diseasepressures low. Being organic doesn’t mean lettingthe chickens fend for themselves and not provideproper management. Allowing poultry out in abarren dirt lot month after month and flock afterflock, for example, would be asking for trouble.

When chickens are indoors, plan for enough roomfor them to stay in case of bad weather or otherproblems. Be sure there is enough perch space.Perching is a natural behavior. Have sufficient floorspace that includes enough space for indoor feedingand access to water. Try for 2-3 square feet of floorspace per bird. Use deep bedding. Have some hidingroom to avoid aggressive flock mates such as usingone or more bales of hay positioned on the floor.

Feather pecking and cannibalism are problems oftencited as reasons for beak trimming chickens. Featherpecking in extreme cases can lead to cannibalism.This can become a learned behavior spreading toothers in the flock and hard to control once it starts.Beak trimming is a routine practice in the poultryindustry. Beak tissue is sensitive and removal ispainful. Prevention of the problems is the bestapproach. Feather pecking can be related to stress,boredom, poor conditions, or nutritional deficienciessuch as methionine.

Proper management of outdoor areas must includerotations taking into account nutrient cycling andpredator control. Having diversified forages, having

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 25the best breeds of birds to match the environmentalconditions, understanding the behaviors of the birdsto better provide for their needs, having propernutritional diets and good clean water, and provid-ing sufficient space for feeding and drinking are justsome of the necessary practices to be taken intoconsideration. Once followed, an organic farmingsystem can work effectively meeting the needs ofthe birds and the expectations of the organic con-sumer.

CattleThe same principles and comparisons can be madefor other livestock. Cattle are very social animalsthat under “natural” conditions would live in mixedherds of different ages and sexes. The animalswould live in several cow-centered groups consist-ing of adult cows and their male and female calvesor young adults. Less than 50 animals can make upa herd. At 2-4 years of age, males move out but canlive near a herd and co-mingle for most of theirlives.

Cattle have a social organization that is based onstable dominant-subordinate relationship and evenmore on relationships of affiliation. This affiliativebehavior can strengthen the cohesion of the herdthrough cooperation and tolerance rather thancompetition. Individuals have roles within the herdand these roles can change based on the circum-stances. Daily activities of the herd are synchronous.

Cattle are specialized for browsing and grazinghaving evolved from living on the edge of forests.This type of diet consisted mainly of grasses,ground level herbage, and tree leaves. The differentplants available to them have made cattle used to avaried diet high in fiber. It is the rumination processthat allows for this type of varied diet to be wellsuited physiologically.

Organic farming with full access to pasture canprovide cattle with the greatest opportunity to fulfilltheir natural behavior. With proper overall manage-ment that includes following ecological principlesof pasture forage production, following goodgrazing management, and reducing stress, many

health and welfare problems can be avoided.Disease and pests can be reduced through intensiverotation of pastures, reducing stress and building upthe immune system, running a closed herd, andbreeding for selected traits.

When management is poor or when the size of thegroups of animals are too big to be social unit herds,or when other natural behaviors are suppressed,stress increases - putting a strain on the immunesystem. With beef cattle in feedlots, large milkingherds, or calves weaned early and grouped together,stress levels can allow for the right atmosphere fordisease to gain a foothold. The use of antibiotics andother medications can become routine practice.Rather than managing practices using ecologicalprinciples and using the animal’s natural behavior toprevent problems, large-scale or poorly managedproduction rely on controlling nature artificially andmechanistically.

So, again, an organic farmer providing the necessarymanagement and practicing good stockmanship on ascale-appropriate level can combine ecologicalprinciples with the understanding of livestockbehavior to create an environment – a productionsystem – that is sustainable under the definition ofGips (1984). This differentiates itself from theconventional confinement system model.

PigsThe majority of hog production in this country hasfollowed the lead of the poultry industry. Most ofthe hogs are produced in confinement inside build-ings with the vast majority of those having slattedfloors and a liquid manure disposal system includ-ing lagoons. Sows spend most of their lives ingestation and farrowing crates. Processors andpackers seemingly dictate how the animals areraised in order to standardize the end product formarketing. Over the last decade, small and mediumsized hog farms have gone out of business mostlydue to low prices for hogs being sold and no accessto processing.

Pigs are very social, expressive, and intelligentanimals having evolved from the natural setting of

wooded areas and meadows. Their basic socialgroup consists of two to six sows, their most recentlitters, and juvenile offspring from previous litters.Within the group of sows and offspring, a stablelinear hierarchy is created based on age and size ofthe animals. The hierarchy exists by subordinatesavoiding dominants rather than dominants aggres-sively seeking out individuals. Aggressive behavioroccurs when subordinates cross a dominant’s space.

Individuals primarily recognize other individuals bysmell. Visual recognition is relatively unimportantafter a social order has been created. Excessivesmells can possibly mask recognition odors ofindividuals - which might lead to aggressive behav-ior by the dominant animals. In the natural setting,non-member females are seldom allowed to join thegroup. This is an important consideration to thinkabout when regrouping sows.

Under natural conditions of a home range, maternalgroups build communal nests for sleeping - prefer-ably at the border of forests or bush habitats.Following its natural instincts, a few days beforefarrowing, a pregnant sow leaves the maternal socialgroup to find a site to build a nest. Nest buildingbegins about a day before farrowing. Nests are builtwith whatever materials are at hand such as grasses,branches, or other plant material.

After farrowing the sow and her litter stay in or nearthe nest for up to 2 weeks where strong bondingoccurs using smells and vocal cues. After thisisolation period, the sow introduces her litter to thematernal group. Social integration can take severalweeks where jostling for hierarchical positions takesplace. With sufficient space and places to hide,aggressive behavior is greatly reduced.

The diet of pigs is naturally varied and omnivorous.Foraging behavior is closely linked with exploratorybehavior. Pigs, having very sensitive and well-adapted snouts, can spend 6-8 hours per day rooting,grazing, and browsing as a part of their naturalbehavior.

Sufficient space is necessary to allow for tempera-

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e r Winter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 526ture regulation. In cold weather, pigs like to huddletogether, while in hot weather they will sprawl out.Shade is necessary with access to the outdoors whenit is sunny and hot. Wallows are used when shade isunavailable. Mud coats the skin and reduces sunburning; however, wallows can have a build up ofparasites if not cleaned out thoroughly on a regularbasis.

Grouping and regrouping piglets from differentlitters after weaning by size, age, and sex often leadsto aggressive behavior, stress, and fighting. Newlyweaned piglets have more problems coping withunfamiliar housing than with unfamiliar piglets.Older piglets have far more trouble with regrouping.Mixing and regrouping of pigs from different socialgroups should be avoided whenever possible. Thefrequency and intensity of aggressive behavior andfighting can be decreased after mixing if there issufficient space, especially at feeding troughs, ifthere are places for piglets to escape to and hide,and if the pens are enriched with novel items likehay bales, walls, toys, etc. Out on pasture, havingplenty of room is critical.

Pigs require separate areas for sleeping, eating, anddunging. They need space for social interactions orto withdraw from or be out of sight of pen mates.Insufficient space increases antagonistic interactionsand the incidence of body lesions, reducing restingtime, mating rate, weight gain, and feed conversionefficiency.

Sows with proven good mothering skills should bekept for breeding. To enable sows to farrow under asnatural conditions as possible, farrowing crates aretoo confining. Open housing with deep bedding,farrowing pens or huts must have enough space forthe sows to turn around, perform nest buildingbehaviors, and to separate their dunging area fromtheir lying area. Anti-crushing rails around the wallsor other space considerations to prevent possiblecrushing of piglets by the sow are needed as well.Sows with poor mothering abilities or who crushpiglets over a period of time should be culled.Providing straw as nest-building material favorspiglet survival by affecting the timing and quality ofnest building, reducing the duration of the first partof farrowing, and reducing nest building andpostural changes during farrowing. After 10-14 dayssows and piglets can be introduced back into thematernal group herds where the sows came frombefore farrowing.

Weaning is a major cause of stress for piglets whenperformed too early causing aggression, and diges-tive disorders. Seven weeks is better than threeweeks but natural weaning by the sow provides forthe least amount of stress for the piglets.

A systems approach to hog rearing that aims tosatisfy the motivations and natural behavior require-ments of the animals is the family pen system. Thiscombines breeding, rearing, and fattening stages ofproduction. The sows are kept in stable groupsthroughout production. The piglets are weanednaturally by their mother and are not removed fromthe family group until they have reached marketweight. Sows are serviced during the lactation stageand by the time one litter has reached market weightand been removed, the sows are near farrowing timeagain. Farrowing occurs in straw bedded pens.Shelter is provided for during the wet or coldweather season while access to the outdoors onrotationally grazed pastures is offered during milderweather.

Pigs are quite adaptable to outdoor production. Theycan be trained to electric fencing at a young age.Pigs can also be trained to a managed grazingsystem much the same as grass-fed cattle. Moveableshelters, water, and feeders shifted to new electricfenced paddocks every one to three days fits neatlyin an organic pasturing system. A rotation plan canbe employed that breaks up parasite and diseasecycles while maintaining pasture quality. Keepingpigs on a single piece of pasture too long does leadto problems but once trained, pigs can easily movefrom paddock to paddock.

Conventionally raised hogs coming from confinedproduction and sold generally for pork products in

the average supermarket are basically very lean,grain-fed, and having all similar genetics for meatquality. Throughout their lives, the animals neverhave the opportunity to express their natural behav-iors.

When selecting a breeding program, farmers cantake advantage of a varied genetic background,particularly from heritage breeds that would standup better to organic farm practices. Allowing for aslightly increased fat content, pigs fed on a varieddiet will produce a more flavorful taste. Outdooraccess allows, for example, the grazing of grains inthe field, foraging under oak trees for acorns,cleaning off pumpkin fields or cleaning up underapple trees. These types of feed choices create adifferent flavor of the meat and allow the farmer toproduce a unique niche product. The consumer getsa more flavorful quality product, and the satisfactionthat the animal lived a better life while the farmingpractices used were environmentally friendly.

Livestock breeding for organic farming

Before the advent of modern agriculture, farmersselected for and bred livestock that fitted the farm-ers’ needs and responded to selection by environ-mental conditions. Farming organically requireslivestock that are similarly adapted for this type ofsystem. The conditions that must be taken intoaccount include climate, localized weather, vegeta-tion type, vegetation availability or seasonality, soilconditions that affect the nutritional makeup offorages, predator pressure, and type of use by thefarmer selecting animals to keep.

Breeding specifically for organic livestock farmingis just beginning and most of this early work hasbeen in Europe with dairy cattle but the concepts areapplicable to all livestock. Breeding for this type ofselection is based on genotype-environment interac-tions. Using the dairy example, this genetic aspectfits more closely in an organic farming system thanthe highly weighted traits of conventional dairyingthat focus primarily on production yields. Sincecows are kept mostly confined and generallyseparated from the local environment, genotype-environment interaction traits have been greatlyreduced or even lost. Milk production, for example,based on a diet exclusively of forages will not be thesame as milk production on a diet comprisedpredominantly of concentrates. When consideringthe well-being of animals, the interaction betweenthe animal and its environment can be considered acritical determinant of welfare and this then relatesto improvements in welfare as the match betweengenotype and environment increases.

With conventional dairy breeding, breeding valueshave been determined for sire bulls. The values arepredominately performance traits such as milkyields and composition with only minimal attentionpaid to functional traits. Functional traits must carrymore weight in an organic dairy breeding program.Breeding value traits such as longevity, mastitisresistance, and persistence of lactation are consid-ered quite important.

Other traits such as health, leg conformation andresistance to lameness, conformation of udders,milk quantity, milk fat, milk protein, increase inmilk production from the first to the third lactation,the rate of living calves at birth, and the amount oftime from calving to the next successful breeding(service period) are also very important. Withorganic dairy production relying on pasture feeding,finding animals that perform well and developing abreeding herd to meet the challenges of this systemare essential.

A similar approach can be taken with other live-stock. The poultry industry has created a hybrid birdthat is market-ready in 6-7 weeks. This type of birdmay not be appropriate for an organic poultrysystem where foraging and outdoor access are dailyactivities. Methionine is a limiting nutrient, espe-cially in fast growing birds. Breeding for birds thatcan utilize forages that can provide natural methion-ine might be necessary. Breeding birds for strongerlegs or better conversion of forage is also of interest.

Sustainability and manure

With confinement systems, whether for dairy cows,feedlot beef, hogs, or poultry, the considerations forenvironmental impact are significant. What shouldbe done about the waste? Whether it is a dry systemor liquid, how the waste is handled and where itgoes is a major issue. Manure treated as a disposalproblem rather than as a nutrient resource needed toreplenish the soil from where the feedstuffs camedoes not conform to sustainable agriculture.

The same considerations must be made for organiclivestock farming. How is manure handled andwhere does it go? The number of animals raised ona farm should be a function of the acreage availableto return the manure back to the soil. Ideally, anorganic farm should be a diversified operationencompassing a whole farm approach where live-stock are raised on feedstuffs fertilized by themanure of those animals. The manure and covercrops also provide nutrients for market crops andthe whole system needs to be in a rotation plan.

Since the ideal is not often planned ahead of time,then considerations about nutrient cycling of themanure really must be designed for. For example,recent research in nitrogen and phosphorus levels inpastures suggest that a grass-based grazing systemcan utilize the manure left by cattle as long asgrazing management strategies allow for proper andtimely pasture rejuvenation. Variables such asstocking density, weather conditions, and soil typeplay important roles in pastures so it becomes evenmore important that monitoring and evaluation ofthe pasture is undertaken to prevent nutrient runoff.

Relying on waste disposal on crops must involve abalanced management plan. “Too much of a goodthing” can cause problems, especially runoff ofnitrogen and phosphorus if these nutrients are notutilized or sequestered quickly. Organic farmers cantake advantage of composting when using drymanure handling. There is more labor involved butthe usable product is easily incorporated in the soiland can be less of a pollution hazard. Unfortunately,there are circumstances in large-scale productionwhen a liquid manure system uses a cropping fieldfor the disposal of wastes where high concentrationsof nutrients and salts accumulate and quicklyoverload the land and can more easily becomerunoff pollution.

Conclusion

There are clear and distinct differences betweenindustrially produced livestock and livestock thatare farmed organically, and too many to coveradequately in this article. With the introduction ofthe National Organic Program, misconceptions,poor interpretation, and loopholes have allowed forsome livestock to be labeled as organic withoutmeeting the intention of the rule. To keep organiclivestock farming from becoming indistinguishablefrom industrialized production, closer attention mustbe paid to the ecological principles and the naturalbehaviors of the animals. More consumer educationis needed to convey this message. People areconcerned about where and how their food iscreated and this includes welfare of the livestock.Food that is healthy, humane, and homegrown willconvey the right message to an educated consumer.

References:Gips, T. 1984. What is Sustainable Agriculture?Manna. July/August.Fraser, D., Weary, D.M., Pajor, E.A., and Milligan,B.N. 1997. A scientific conception of animalwelfare that reflects ethical concerns. AnimalWelfare 6 187-205.Verhoog, H, Matze, M., Lammerts van Bueren, E.,and Baurs, T. 2003. The role of the concept ofnatural (naturalness) in organic farming. Journal ofAgricultural and Environmental Ethics 16, 29-49.Mench, J.A., and Keeling, L.J. 2001. The socialbehavior of domestic birds. In: Social Behaviour ofFarm Animals. Keeling, L.J. and Gonyou, H.W.(eds). CAB pp. 177-209.

Robert Hadad is Director of Farming Systems forthe Farm Animals & Sustainable Agriculture

Section of The Humane Society of the United States


compiled by Jack Kittredge

Anyone interested in raising meat animals for sale isentering into a complex and sometimes Kafka-likeworld of government regulation. Julie and I vividlyremember the fall day, early in our farming career,when a badge-bearing officer in a state vehiclepulled into our driveway and informed us we hadbeen breaking the law by selling a few Thanksgiv-ing turkeys.

In order to save others from a similar fate, wechecked with several knowledgeable sources aroundthe region and herewith reprint their combinedwisdom. The bottom line seems to be that it ispractically impossible to meet all the legal require-ments and regulations of federal and state authori-ties without major investment in slaughter facilitiesand specialized training of staff. However, espe-cially for poultry, if you take care to sell yourproducts on-farm to customers who know you andwho understand how the animals have been raisedand killed, you may remain below the enforcementhorizon. But if you try to sell to the public - con-sumers who walk into a public market or restaurantand make a purchase without clearly understandingthe process of production and slaughter – you willbe on dangerous ground. This is, unfortunately,entirely independent of product quality. You can buycorporate meat raised in a box it’s whole life, fedgrain drenched in pesticide and herbicide, shot upwith hormones, cruelly slaughtered on a fast-pacedline and then irradiated for long shelf life. Noproblem. It’ll get the USDA stamp. But a free-rangecritter, raised on organic feed, petted and wateredand handled and talked to every day – that’s a threatto the public health. You go figure!

Selling Meats and Poultry in Vermont

The Vermont Agency of Agriculture defines “meat”to be from cows, sheep, pigs and goats. There areseparate regulations for poultry (turkey andchicken). Also note that if you want to sell rabbits

Keeping on the Right Side of the Law:Selling Meat and Poultry

and “game birds”, they are also regulated differentlythan “meats”.

To sell “meat” to a store or at a farmers market, youneed a retail license and the animal needs to beslaughtered and cut and wrapped at an inspectedfacility. Contact Meat Inspection (828-2426) at theAgency of Agriculture for information on how to geta retail license, a list of inspected slaughterhousesand details on how to go about getting a label foryour product.

To sell poultry, you can either have them processed atan inspected facility and have a retail license as with“meats”, or you can contact Meat Inspection and askfor a copy of the new “Handbook For ExemptPoultry Processors”. This describes what you needto do in order to be allowed to do on-farm processingof your poultry and be allowed to sell it at farmersmarket. Currently you can process a limited numberof birds on your own farm and sell directly from thefarm to the customer, but this additional step of anapproved on-farm facility allows you to also sellretail at farmers markets. This new handbookdescribes both the record keeping requirements, aswell as the facility requirements (including hot andcold running water, two separate rooms…).

Other states have mobile processing units to makeon-farm processing and access to markets easier, andAgency of Agriculture Staff have been talking with agroup of Vermont farmers about how to make asimilar unit possible in Vermont.

If you also want to label your products as certifiedorganic, contact the NOFA office for the organicmeat production and labeling standards.

Meat and Poultry Sales in Connecticut

There is a requirement under DCP regulations, 21a-101-7(e) that states that “All meat and meat productsand all poultry and poultry products held or sold infood establishments shall have been inspected for

wholesomeness under an official regulatory pro-gram. The temperature in meat storage rooms shallbe 45 Fahrenheit or lower. The temperature in meatcutting and wrapping rooms shall be maintained toinsure that the temperature of the meat shall be 45Fahrenheit or lower.” However the state has neverinterpreted that to include direct sales from a farmerto a customer. But if that farmer wholesaled thatproduct to a store, that practice would fall under theabove.

Direct sales of live poultry is regulated by DOA, asa preventative for avian diseases. There may be astate registration/grading program. One can callAlton Van Dyke at DOA with any questions,(860)713-2565.

There are Federal inspection requirements forpoultry slaughter operations under the Federal Meatand Poultry Act but there are exemptions, alsoreferred to as custom exempt slaughter, by sizeunder that regulation. Reportedly 20,000 and underbirds per year processed will qualify for the exemp-tion, and this product has to be marked “ExemptedPL90492.” It must also have the name and addressof the processor on the package. This type of sale isalso restricted to intra, not inter-state, and theprocessor can not deal in other poultry products.You can learn more by calling the USDA TechCenter at 1 800 233 3935 or the FSIS Meat andPoultry Hotline at 1 800 535 4555. The Tech Centeris probably the better resource.

Farmers Guide Available on Internet

There is a helpful book by John Berry from PennState on PA meat labeling and handling require-ments which may be helpful in getting a generalsense of the regulatory environment. Obviouslyeach state has it’s own rules, but the guide does agreat job of explaining the federal regs. It can befound online at: http://lehigh.extension.psu.edu/Agriculture/Farmers_Guide.pdf


by American Livestock Breeds Conservancy

New research confirms that several standard variet-ies of naturally mating turkeys are more diseaseresistant than industrial strains. These findings showthat standard turkeys, popularly known as “heritage”turkeys, are better suited for range production thantheir industrial Broad Breasted White counterparts.

What is a Standard Turkey?

The American Poultry Association (APA) hasrecognized standards for poultry, just as the Ameri-can Kennel Club has standards for dogs. The APArecognizes eight varieties of turkeys. These varietiesare naturally mating, not requiring artificial insemi-nation, have a specific body conformation andfeather pattern, and have names like Narragansett,Bronze, Black, Slate, and Bourbon Red. There areother color variations of naturally-mating turkeysthat have not been standardized.

As recently as 1997, standard varieties of turkeyswere nearly extinct. A census conducted by theAmerican Livestock Breeds Conservancy foundonly 1335 breeding birds remained. (Breeding stockproduces the next generation, passing their genes onto their offspring.) Once common on the Americanagricultural landscape, these turkeys had nearlyvanished. These colorful, inquisitive, and hardybirds seemed destined to become forgotten relics ofthe past. Fortunately, their fate has been turnedthrough some powerful partnerships.

Standard vs. IndustrialTurkey Breeds

The Study

The American Livestock Breeds Conservancy(ALBC), Virginia Polytechnic Institute & StateUniversity in Blacksburg (Virginia Tech), and eightbreeders and producers of standard turkeys collabo-

rated to compare standard turkey varieties and anindustrial strain for immune function and in range-based production systems. The hypothesis: Standardvarieties of turkeys have superior immuno-compe-tence and perform better in range-based productionsystems than industrial strains.

photo by Phil Sponenberg, courtesy of the American Livestock Breeds Conservancy.

Pair of Royal Palm Turkeys.

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 29The project began with field trials conducted oneight farms situated across the country. Each raisedtwo flocks of thirty birds: a mixed flock of malesand females of the standard variety known as theBourbon Red obtained from Privett Hatchery inPortales, New Mexico, and males only of mediumsized industrial line of broad-breasted white turkeysprovided by British United Turkeys of America(BUT), based in West Virginia. Birds had dailyaccess to outdoor range, forage, shelter, and roost-ing locations. The participants collected data onweather, health, feed consumption, morbidity,mortality, weekly weight gain, harvest weight, anddressed weight, behavioral observations and sales.

The farm participants reported some expectedresults: faster weight gain and improved feedconversion in the industrial line when comparedwith the Bourbon Red. The broad-breasted whitesattained market weight in an average of 131 days,compared to an average of 185 days for the Bour-bon Reds. Correspondingly, the commercial birdsconsumed an average of 5 pounds of feed per poundof weight gain, while the Bourbon Reds consumed6.08 pounds. Both flocks dressed out at about 75%of live weight. The average dressed weight of theBourbon Red hens was 7.4 pounds; Bourbon Redtoms 11.3 pounds; and commercial toms 17.5pounds.

The industrial line, however, experienced greatermortalities from shipping stress, heat, and disease.Mortalities for the industrial line ranged from 13 -93%, averaging 46%. The Bourbon Red mortalityrate ranged from 15 - 31%, averaging 21%. (Lossfrom predation is not included in these mortalitycalculations since it can be argued that such a deathis not related to a bird’s immune response.)

The more active standard turkeys needed slightlydifferent management techniques to keep them intheir pastures and closer to home. Lighter weightBourbon Red hens were well equipped to fly, oftenescaping the confines of the pens. Both BourbonRed hens and toms began roosting at an early age,while the industrial toms were not as inclined toroost, if at all. The Bourbon Reds were activeforagers, covering the pasture and readily eatingoffered treats of melon and vegetables. The indus-trial birds were more sedentary, especially as theygot heavier, primarily seeking the feed ration. Theindustrial birds suffered in the heat, panting andseeking relief in the cool soil in the shade of thebarn. While the Bourbon Reds sought shade, theydid not exhibit the same degree of discomfort andphysical stress from the heat.

Laboratory Evaluation

Dr. Robert Gogal, Jr., a veterinarian,immunotoxicologist at Virginia Tech, conducted aseries of laboratory tests to assess immune functionon five varieties of standard turkeys (Black, Bour-bon Red, Narragansett, Royal Palm and Slate) andan industrial line provided by BUT. Results fromlaboratory tests confirmed what the farmers wit-nessed.

Two measures of hematologic function were taken.Packed cell volume measures red blood cells, whichcarry oxygen to the cells of the body. Total proteinmeasure globulins and albumin, both of which arecritical to immune response. In both tests the higherthe measure, the healthier the bird. In all instancesthe standard varieties had higher packed cell volumeand total protein, and the industrial line had thelowest.

Two tests of immune response were conducted:non-specific T-cell stimulation and pan-lymphocytestimulation. In each instance the standard turkeys‚immune response was superior to that of the indus-trial line. Royal Palms performed best, followed byBourbon Reds, and Slates.

The standard varieties had significantly highersurvivability when directly exposed to disease.Royal Palm, Narragansett, Bourbon Red, Slate, andBlack turkeys, and a commercial line of BritishUnited Turkeys of America were challenged withHemorrhagic Enteritis Virus when they were six

weeks old. They were then exposed to E. coli sevendays later. All but two of the BUT died the first dayafter infection with E. coli. The remaining two diedwithin three days. In contrast, a majority of thestandard turkeys survived past three days of bacterialinfection, and lived to the study’s termination. Noneof the Black, Slate or Bourbon Red turkeys died. TheNarragansett and Royal Palm did not perform aswell: most of them died during the course of thestudy. (A paper is being prepared for submission tothe journal Avian Diseases.)

Unlike humans, most mammals and birds are able tosynthesize ascorbic acid, commonly known asvitamin C. Ascorbic acid has been shown to enhanceimmune function, modulate gene expression, act as aco-factor in enzymatic reactions, and protect organ-isms from free radical damage during oxidativestress. An assay measuring endogenous ascorbic acidlevels in tissue and plasma samples showed that theBlack turkeys had the highest average plasmaascorbic acid concentration overall. Bourbon Redswere a close second, followed by Slates and RoyalPalms. The Narragansett turkeys had the lowestaverage ascorbic acid concentration - approximatelyhalf that of the Blacks.

Virginia Tech’s physical evaluation confirmedweight change, with the industrial line being threetimes heavier than the standard varieties at nineweeks of age. Hatchability of all of the standardvarieties was excellent at 75 - 88%. The industrialline was not evaluated since only males were avail-able.

Dr. Ed Smith of the Comparative Genomics Lab,Department of Animal and Poultry Sciences atVirginia Tech, found DNA evidence indicating thatthe Royal Palm is genetically distinct from the otherfour varieties analyzed. It is most closely related tothe Narragansett. The Bourbon Red, Slate and Blackare more closely related to one another.

Conservation Justified

Each of these studies is interesting and valuable onits own. As a group, they are stunning. They clearlyindicate that the Slate, Black, and Bourbon Redturkeys, by virtue of their genetics, have morevigorous immune systems, making them obviouschoices for free range production. The only param-eters on which the industrial lines excel are feedconversion and rate of gain.

Standard turkey varieties offer a robust immunesystem and with it a lower mortality rate, the abilityto mate naturally, excellent hatchability, active

foraging, increased levels of endogenous vitamin C,intelligence and overall attractiveness.

These are very exciting findings. They demonstratethe value and importance of the genetic resourcesembodied in standard varieties of turkeys, support-ing claims long made by breeders, and justifyingturkey conservation.

Since 1997, standard turkeys are making a come-back. The powerful combination of ALBC’s re-search and census work, the Slow Food USA’sThanksgiving promotion in 2002 and 2003, and anincreasing number of breeders, has moved standardturkeys back from the brink of extinction. Pasture-raised standard turkeys are a superb treat worthy ofthe place of honor on America’s Thanksgivingtables.

While still endangered, the future of standardturkeys looks promising. ALBC conducted a censusduring the winter of 2002-2003. A population of4275 breeding birds was reported, a three-foldincrease since 1997. Hundreds of people have askedALBC for more information about how to raisestandard turkeys. This increased interest is translat-ing into demand for turkeys that, in turn, supportsturkey breeders.

Next Steps

ALBC and Virginia Tech will continue their col-laboration over the next year, evaluating severaladditional varieties not included in the initial study.Breeders can select for production attributes inbreeding flocks of standard turkeys, but care mustbe taken to retain their ability to mate naturally andpromote the health and hardiness that come withimmuno-competence. Thoughtful stewardship ofthese agricultural treasures by today’s breeders willensure their availability for generations to come.

For more information about the conservation ofstandard turkeys contact the American LivestockBreeds Conservancy. If you are not already amember, but would like to help save rare, endan-gered breeds of livestock and poultry, considerjoining! Membership is only $30. To learn more,send $2 for a sample issue of our bimonthly news-letter. To become a member, for information aboutbreed conservation, or to contribute to ALBC’sefforts, contact us at: PO Box 477, Pittsboro, NC27312 919-542-5704, [email protected],www.albc-usa.org

photo by Phil Sponenberg, courtesy of the American Livestock Breeds Conservancy.

Jersey Buff Turkeys.


by Bruce HennesseyMaple Wind Farm, Huntington, VT

For seven years I didn’t eat meat, not because Ididn’t like it or objected to the killing of animals forfood, but because the negative health and environ-mental evidence was overwhelmingly in favor ofleaving meat out of my diet entirely. But then Istarted reading about grass-fed meats that wereproduced using methods that built soil rather thandestroyed it and touted health benefits that reducedrisk of heart disease, cancer and diabetes. Theinformation touched off a long process of discoveryand learning that eventually led not only to eatingmeat again, but also to farming grass-fed andfinished meat products.

Deciding to Grass Farm

Like many life-changing journeys, our transitionfrom a non-agrarian lifestyle to grass farming camethrough unexpected circumstances. The truth is wenever dreamed we would farm at all. But caring fora piece of land has a way of changing and concen-trating your focus.

My wife, Beth, and I fell in love with the old dairyfarm at the end of our road. It had lain fallow forfive years, the pastures and hayfields sportingpoplar saplings and a healthy crop of goldenrod.The farm’s hilltop views, wildlife and easy access tothe Long and Catamount Trails first caught ourattention. When it went up for sale amidst rumorsof development, we made an offer. You might say itwas an impulse buy.Its amazing how different reality and fantasy can be.We’d given no serious thought to management, justvague ideas about keeping the meadows open. Sowe borrowed a tractor and brushogged eighty acresof rough, ledgy hilltop meadow that first fall. It wasa miserable experience with lots of broken parts,diesel bills, and scary passes on our higher angleground. We were miserable enough to decide neverto do it again.

Our decision left us with some questions. Howshould we keep the farm open? Could we do itwithout compromising our environmental ethic? …use the farm without abusing it? We did a lot oflearning that winter and settled on a strategy thatfocused on management-intensive grazing. Westarted with thirteen Angus cows and a few horses(not nearly enough animals to keep ahead of ourgrass). Six years later we’re raising 80 head ofAngus, 18 sheep, 20 pigs, 400 broiler chickens, 100

layer hens, 15 turkeys, and 9 horses all rotated overthe same pasture. Our ruminants (cows and sheep)are fed entirely on grass, while our poultry, pigs, andhorses receive supplemental organic grain. In theprocess our soils have increased in fertility andorganic matter without amendments.

Grass became the central part of our operation for anumber of reasons. We wanted to capitalize on thefact that ruminants hold the unique ability to extractsolar energy out of grass. We also wanted tominimize our use of fossil fuels by allowing theanimals to harvest their own feed. There is concreteevidence that management intensive grazing canincrease pasture production by as much as 40%, andincrease daily weight gains in ruminants by up to50%. Building fertility and eliminating erosion,reducing our chances of contributing to waterpollution, and eliminating the use of herbicides,pesticides and chemical fertilizers were also majorfactors. We also learned that relatively stress-freepasture-based systems produced healthier, happier,cows, a factor that has been correlated with tastiermore tender meat. The most important factor for us,however, was the growing volume of research thatpointed to the health benefits of grass-only meats.

The Practice of Intensive Grazing

During the grazing season we move our animalsdaily to fresh pasture. The paddocks are sized toaccommodate each group’s daily needs for feed.Depending on the time of year, we’ll let eachpaddock rest and recover anywhere from 14 to 30days before returning to it for another grazingsession. The idea is to graze each pasture when thegrass is at the height of its energy, its adolescentstage – well grown, but not to the seed head stage.This process allows the animals to gain the greatestbenefit from the grass, while allowing the grass thebest chance to recover fully before the next grazing.Many species of young weeds that are either eatenor trampled can’t seed out and are eventuallyovertaken by hardier grasses adapted to growingback quickly. Daily movement naturally distributesmanure and increases organic matter and fertility onthe farm.

The practice amounts to mimicking the naturalmethods of wild ruminants who eat intensely inclose herds for security, then move on as a group,allowing the previous ground to recover beforereturning. It also allows farmers to take advantageof high quality feeds and essentially free sun, soiland rain inputs without the added financial andenvironmental expense of tilling, harvesting andtransporting feed to animals using modern machin-ery. The animals benefit from the movement, freshair, and sunshine as they enjoy unrestricted access totheir natural food, and move away from areascontaminated by fresh manure.With a developed electric fence and water lineinfrastructure, the amount of labor needed tomanage our animals is far reduced over many othermethods. Temporary fences go up in minutes, andthe animals adapt quickly to moving from paddockto paddock. Our labor for basic cow care, forinstance, averages less than a half an hour a day forone person.

Benefits

“The consumer trend in this country has been to buyfood as cheaply as possible and pay for the healthconsequences later at any cost.” Ed Martsoff,innovative sheep producer

Most cattle and sheep (even those raised in naturaland organic programs) are fed grain as a primarydiet source for thirty days or more. The advantage tothis method is that animals can be fattened quicklyand brought to market faster. Unfortunately, rumi-nants are not evolved to eat such high-energy, easilydigested feeds without serious negative ramifica-tions for their health and the health of those whoconsume them for food. Grain diets raise the acidity

Raising Grass-fed Meat

picture courtesy of Bruce Hennessey

Angus grazing late fall on pasture previously grazed by other animals


The turkey tractor keeps the birds on range but out of harms way.


of the rumen, allowing unhealthy bacteria to flour-ish and often making the animals sick with a diseasecalled acidosis. This condition is so rampant inconventional feedlots that antibiotics are fed as aregular part of the daily diet.

Feeding grain also changes the fat make-up of meat.Much of the Omega-3 fatty acids and ConjugatedLinoleic Acids (CLA’s) found in balanced amountsin grassfed-only meats are missing in grain fedmeats. Omega –3’s and CLA’s in human diets havebeen linked to lower cholesterol levels, and reducedrisk of heart disease, some types of cancers, andadult-onset diabetes. By contrast, consumers havelong known that conventional red meat holdsincreased risk for these conditions. It used to be thatyour only source for these essential fats was wildfish or flaxseed oil. Now you can get the samebenefit from your local grass-fed meat producer.

There are also environmental benefits. While westill use tractors and other equipment to make hayand baleage for the winter months, we finish cattlefor market using about half the fossil fuel energy ofconfinement or feedlot methods. The naturaldistribution of manure alone saves hundreds ofgallons of fuel. Our farm remains a very low riskfor nutrient loading or polluting from manure runoff into the local watershed.

Perhaps the most sought after benefit for ourcustomers is the fact that grass-fed beef and lamb,with their naturally varied diets, have more robustflavor than other meats.

The benefits to our farm family are embedded in oureveryday life. Working outside within the naturalcycles of growth and orchestrating carefully timedmovement of five different animal groups on thesame piece of land has its own intrinsic rewards.

Challenges

With any farming method there are challenges andmanagement intensive grazing is no different.Currently it takes us twice as long to finish beefsteers on grass in Vermont as it does to finish steerson grain. This means we take our steers throughtwo winters before market - an expensive proposi-tion. It is also difficult to raise grass-fed beef andlamb with as much intramuscular fat (marbling) asconventional meats. The result can be toughness,though we’ve made great strides in this area boththrough rotation management, finish timing andgenetics.

Our methods sit outside the commodity marketnorm. It follows that our marketing is going to bedifferent as well. Obviously, we could not besustainable financially if we were paid at commod-ity prices. In addition to our increased time to


The “Egg Ark”, the portable layer house that is moved every three days or soon to new pasture, and is used to follow our cows,

promoting our layers to eat fly larvae to reduce our fly issues.


Sheep grazing is a perfect use of Vermont’s hilly pastures.

market, we do not have the unfair advantage ofhighly subsidized grain production enjoyed byconventional producers. Being outside the main-stream means that we have to market directly tohealth conscious consumers who are willing to paythe real cost of food. As tough and time consumingas direct marketing can be, it comes with a distinctbenefit. Our customers get to know us personally,and through that relationship, come to trust us andthe foods they eat.

What’s Next?

We’re not satisfied. We want to extend grass-farming and rotational grazing into new frontiers.Currently we’re looking seriously at developingenough stockpiled pasture to take all our animalsthrough the winter without making hay or baleage.Seeding high value, cold tolerant, winter annualsinto our pastures may be a part of this program.

Looking for the same health benefits from grass-feddairy products that we find in our meats, we’reconsidering seasonal, once-a-day milking of cows orsheep to offer high value, healthy milk, yogurt andcheese without using grain.

As we look to improve our pastures, we’ll beanalyzing our soil and searching for any natural

amendments that might increase our yields.

A livestock farm with grass as its foundation can beprofitable and relatively easy to operate, needinglittle in the way of expensive machinery and labor.The quality of life produced from a grass-basedoperation is excellent. We’ve learned that a success-ful operation comes primarily from knowing how tomesh your ruminants with the natural environment.Let the animals do what nature intended them to do!

Sources: Why Grass-fed is Best, by Jo Robinson.Eatwild.com. University of California – Chico Deptof Agriculture, University of Vermont Center forSustainable Agriculture.


by Tamiko Thomas

Since 1997 a wide array of farm animal produc-tion standards geared towards improving animalwelfare has been developed in the UnitedStates. Organizations ranging from large multi-national companies such as McDonald’s tosmaller non-profits such as Humane FarmAnimal Care have joined the movement that isbeginning to change the way farm animals areraised in the U.S. This has left a confusinglandscape for the growing number of peoplewho are interested in purchasing humanely andsustainably raised animal products to navigate.Many questions may arise. This analysis takes acloser look at what the various standards meanfor animal welfare and whether or not they offersubstantial enough improvements to garnersupport.

Are humane standards needed?

Perhaps the first question to ask is whether suchstandards are in fact needed. The answer wouldunequivocally be yes. Conventional agriculturalpractices in the U.S. often fail to ensure thatsome of the most basic needs of farm animalsare met, thereby compromising their welfare.One of the problems is cost cutting, for exampleskimping on ventilation in meat chicken (broil-ers) houses which can result in respiratorydisease and painful eye problems. Or anotherwould be the common practice of maximizinganimal stocking densities in order to reducebuilding overhead costs. This is done to theextent that some animals such as breeding sowsand laying hens are typically given no morespace than what their body would actuallyoccupy. Gestating sows spend the majority oftheir life in gestation crates which are 2 feet by7 feet allowing them only the space to stand upor lie down, but not enough room to turn aroundor engage in any other behaviors. Other prob-lems arise as a result of intense selection forever greater production, resulting in the socalled “production related diseases”. For ex-ample broilers have been so highly selectedover the years for high meat yields that oftentheir legs and organs can’t keep up. This canresult in painful leg problems and the strain onthe heart can result in sudden death, all thisbefore the birds are even 6 weeks old. Antibiot-ics and hormones are widely used to make upfor poor living conditions and poor treatmentand to further speed growth.

Slim profit margins and a focus on productivityabove all else have led to a concentration of theanimal production industry. For example, in theU.S. pork industry, while there has been a slightincrease in the number of hogs raised(57,563,000 in 1992 vs. 55,722,000 in 1950),there has been more than a 90% reduction in thenumber of farms raising them. More than 61%of U.S. hogs are on farms with more than 1,000animals. This trend is mirrored in most of theother farm species resulting in small familyfarms being replaced by Concentrated AnimalFeeding Operations (CAFOs) commonly calledfactory farms. This has resulted in practices andconditions that are increasingly seen as causinganimal suffering, environmental degradation,destruction of rural communities, and healthproblems for both consumers and the farmersthemselves.

There is growing public discontent, throughoutthe United States, with the concentration of

Farm Animal ProductionStandards in the USA

agriculture and its treatment of animals. All overthe countryside communities are rising up toprotest against new CAFOs being built in theirbackyards. Organizations like the AmericanPublic Health Association, the oldest and largestorganization of public health professionals, arebecoming concerned about CAFOs. In 2004they called for a moratorium on new CAFOsuntil more scientific data on the associated riskshas been collected. People are also votingagainst factory farm practices. In 2002, Florid-ians voted in favor of a constitutional amend-ment that outlawed the use of gestation crates inthe State. Polls on the subject of farm animalwelfare show a similar trend. A 2003 Gallup pollshowed that a majority of Americans (62%)support passing strict laws concerning thetreatment of farm animals. And when thepeople’s representatives vote, they vote againstinhumane farming practices as was the case inCalifornia in 2004 where Californian StateLegislators voted overwhelmingly in favor of abill that banned foie gras production and sale inthe state. Foie gras is fatty duck or goose liverrenowned for its cruel production method whichinvolves force feeding the birds substantiallymore than they would consume given the choice.This public dissent and the growing focus onfarm animal issues by animal advocates havemade conditions ripe for change for the betterwithin agriculture. The development of stan-dards by both big and small organizations is areflection of this.

Retailers

In the United States the drive towards the devel-opment of animal production standards began ina big way with McDonald’s in 1998. The chainrestaurant giant began to issue guidelines and doaudits of slaughterhouses developed by re-nowned behaviorist Dr. Temple Grandin. BurgerKing and Wendy’s quickly joined the movement.Perhaps these restaurants’ greatest contributiontowards improving animal welfare is their workto improve slaughterhouse conditions for ani-mals. Dr. Grandin’s work has found that thesechain restaurants have greatly improved theconditions in slaughterhouses. Prior to theintroduction of audits by restaurant companies, a1996 audit found that only 66% of pork plantshad acceptable standards and only 36% of cattleslaughterhouses met acceptable standards.Audits in 2003 for the restaurant chains found91% of both the beef plants and pork plantssurveyed had acceptable standards. It is esti-mated that 90% of all beef and pork slaughterplants (excluding some smaller operations suchas locker plants and custom-kill) are now part ofthe auditing program conducted by one or moreof the three leading restaurant chains. Therestaurants also prohibit their suppliers fromprocuring meat from downed cattle.

Slaughterhouse improvements are sorelyneeded; in early 2001 The Washington Post didan expose called “They Die Piece by Piece”which documented slaughterhouse atrocities.They cited instances in which conscious cattlewere hung upside down and cut apart, andconscious pigs were put into tanks of scaldinghot water, and concluded that there is inconsis-tent enforcement of the Humane Methods ofSlaughter Act by the U.S. Department of Agri-culture.

Other improvements were made in the treat-ment and housing of laying hens. The restau-rants required that their egg suppliers notwithhold food and water to cause molting andrenew the egg-laying cycle. This inhumanepractice commonly entails withdrawing feed for10-14 days. McDonald’s and Wendy’s alsorequire that laying hens have 72 square inchesper bird and Burger King requires that birdshave 75 square inches per bird, this is up fromthe industry average of around 53.4 squareinches per bird. Although the space increase iswelcome it does nothing to alleviate the barrenconditions of battery cages which prevent hensfrom expressing normal nesting behaviorresulting in frustration, manifesting itself asstereotyped pacing. Their publicized standardsalso do not address the barren and crampedconditions that are typical of other factoryfarms such as large scale pig production facili-ties. Furthermore, the aforementioned changesaddress only a very few of the many intensiveagricultural practices that need remedy.

Whole Foods Market, the world’s largestretailer of natural and organic foods, is alsojoining the standards game in a big way. Theyare in the process of developing what promiseto be stringent farm animal treatment standards.As a sign of things to come their October 2003press release about their upcoming standardstalked about the company’s belief “that theneeds of an animal should be the first criterionin the development of standards. The primaryfocus will be providing environments andconditions for each species that support theanimal’s natural physical needs, behavior, andwell-being.” Products meeting their standardsand passing annual third-party inspections toverify it will receive the Whole Foods Market’s“Animal Compassionate” label.

Trade organizations

In 2001, the Food Marketing Institute (FMI)and the National Council of Chain Restaurants(NCCR) joined efforts to develop a uniform setof standards. They prompted major producerorganizations to develop standards and havethus far agreed to endorse the guidelines of theNational Chicken Council, Milk and Dairy BeefQuality Assurance Center, the United EggProducers, and the American Meat Institute’sslaughter guidelines. However, the endorse-ments were not without exceptions and FMIand NCCR had some more stringent require-ments. For example FMI and NCCR recom-mended that egg producers have lower ammo-nia levels in their henhouses and phase outforced molting. For broiler producers theyrecommended birds receive at least four hoursof darkness per day (keeping broilers in near-continuous light is common), and more spaceper bird, and that when the birds are caught andinverted they be held by both legs.

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 33They have also created a third party, indepen-dent, animal welfare audit in collaboration withand for use by the animal food industry. Thesize of these organizations (FMI representsthree quarters of all retail stores in the U.S. andthe NCCR represents 40 of the nation’s largestchain restaurant companies) means they have amajor influence on the market place because ofthe amount of food they purchase. They coulduse this influence to improve the welfare of asubstantial number of farm animals. However,the standards have been described as “minimal”animal welfare standards and in many casesseem to do nothing more than codify commonagricultural practices. They also don’t provideinformation directly to consumers and becauseparticipation is completely voluntary it remainsto be seen how many of FMI and NCCR’smembers will actually participate in the pro-gram. However, it does open the door for largescale change and improvements to the way avast number of farm animals are raised.

Producer organization

United Egg Producers (UEP) is an egg producerorganization which has a membership basecontrolling approximately 90% of all egg typechickens in the United States. In 2002 theybegan a new certification program to designateeggs meeting their animal welfare guidelines asqualifying for their “Animal Care Certified”logo. The producers undergo a yearly thirdparty audit in order to qualify. The standards’main requirements are that by 2008 producersprovide 67 square inches for White Leghornhens (which make up the majority of the birdskept for egg production) and 76 square inchesfor Brown Egg Layers. They also encourageproducers and researchers to find alternatives toforce molting that don’t require food with-drawal.

UEP has been the most progressive producerorganization in this area and it has been esti-mated that almost 150 U.S. egg-producingcompanies have adopted the new standards,which represents 180 million egg-laying chick-ens or nearly two-thirds of all the egg producingchickens nationwide. Certainly having stan-dards is an improvement over no standards anda step toward improving animal welfare. How-ever, they don’t go nearly far enough for layinghens which are probably the most intenselyreared farm species. In fact, the UEP’s programhas come under fire, with the Better BusinessBureau asking federal regulators to investigatethe egg industry for misleading consumers. TheBetter Business Bureau had previously recom-mended that the UEP’s “Animal Care Certified”claim be discontinued because it was mislead-ing and did not accurately reflect the actuallevel of care provided under the program.

Niche marketers

In the early part of 2003 Humane Farm AnimalCare (HFAC), a non-profit organization whosemission is to improve the lives of farm animals,launched its “Certified Humane Raised andHandled” label. This program has a comprehen-sive set of guidelines developed with the wel-fare of the animal specifically in mind. It has awide range of requirements from on farmemergency preparedness, through housingrequirements, to proper management. Theguidelines require that animals have bedding,sufficient space, and environmental enrichment,and prohibit restrictive housing systems such asbattery cages and gestation crates. The programalso prohibits unnecessary antibiotic use andhormone use. Therefore, hormones like recom-binant bovine somatotropin (rBST), which isused by some dairy producers to boost milkproduction, are prohibited. This hormone can bedetrimental to animal welfare causing a de-

crease in life expectancy and an increase incertain illnesses, like mastitis, a painful udderinfection. The program has standards for beefcattle, dairy cows, pigs, laying hens, broilerchickens, sheep, and turkeys. It provides thirdparty annual assessments of participating farmsto ensure their compliance with the guidelines.On top of this, the USDA provides additionalverification and audits 25% of approved farms.

The organization American Humane, a nationalnonprofit organization dedicated to ensuring thewelfare of both children and animals, has aprogram similar to HFAC’s called “FreeFarmed”. It started this program in 2000.

In 1997 the Niman Ranch Pork Company, whichhas over 200 independent farm families, becamethe first marketing company to embrace thehumane pig husbandry standards of the AnimalWelfare Institute (AWI), a non-profit animaladvocacy organization. AWI has developedanimal care standards, for pigs, ducks, andrabbits, specifically intended to fit the naturalbehavior of the animals. Besides strict guide-lines that require humane treatment and housingconditions, the standards also require that theproducers be a family farm on which a family orindividual owns the animals; depends upon thefarm for its livelihood; participates in the dailyphysical labor to manage the animals and thefarm operation.

As of 2002 all organic food producers mustadhere to national standards if their products areto be considered organic. The National OrganicProgram established guidelines for the produc-tion and handling of organically producedproducts for this organic label. Organic produc-ers are monitored by private companies andsome state departments of agriculture that areaccredited by the USDA. Small producers thatmake less than $5,000 a year from an organic

enterprise are exempt from inspections but mustabide by the standards nonetheless. Aftercertification their product can carry the “USDAOrganic” label. The program has some generalanimal care requirements, such as preventativehealthcare, bedding, opportunity to exercise,and in particular access to the outdoors, includ-ing access to pasture for ruminants that can bebeneficial in terms of animal welfare. However,the requirements are somewhat vague and opento interpretation.

What humane standardsshould be supported?

Overall, the niche marketers offer the mostsubstantial benefits in terms of animal welfare.Humane Farm Animal Care, American Hu-mane, and Animal Welfare Institute’s standardsin particular deal with the major animal welfareconcerns that plague conventional productionand should be supported. Whole FoodsMarket’s standards look promising and consum-ers should look to them for good things tocome. The large scale movement being spear-headed by retailers, trade organizations, andproducer organizations is to be commended. Itis a move forward but still a great deal moreneeds to be done as a number of inhumanepractices still prevail. Intensive practices andfarm conditions, such as close confinement,barren housing, mutilations, poor air quality,inhumane feeding methods, to name a few, canand often do cause suffering. These practicesneed to be changed and the public needs to haveconcrete evidence of their change before thevast majority of conventional agriculture can beconsidered humane and ultimately for agricul-ture to be sustainable in the face of growingsocietal concern over factory farms.

Tamiko Thomas is Animal Scientist for theFarm Animal & Sustainable Agriculture Section

of The Humane Society of the United States


by Jack Kittredge

You wouldn’t call Central New York’s MadisonCounty hilly, but it has many rolling areas bettersuited to pasture and hay than to field crops. In oneof these sections Chuck Blood has carved out athriving grass-fed dairy and beef operation based onmanaging a large acreage of pasture and hay.

He was raised on a nearby dairy farm but left at theage of 20 to go to college. Chuck quickly found outhe wasn’t college material and worked constructionjobs until he then met his wife, Mary. Not wantingto be on the road all the time as a married man, hegot a job in a factory. But he wasn’t happy there andeventually went back to working on farms. In 1982he applied for a job as the hired man at the dairyfarm he now owns. He won out over 41 otherapplicants because he was the only one who askedto see the barn!

Not wanting to be ‘the hired man’ all his life, fiveyears later he and Mary leased the farm with anoption to buy, and ultimately bought it. The farmhas 483 acres, and Chuck manages about another500 acres of nearby leased land. He says he got a lotof his ideas about managing cattle on grass from hisupbringing.

“I’m asked a lot where my ideas come from,” hesays. “You know, there’s nothing new under the sun.When I was growing up my dad worked in town andmy mother milked the cows. We had rotationalgrazing before anyone had heard of that. We had 7pastures and Dad changed to a new one every day.All the fields had fences around them, and we flailchopped grass for feed. Dad would get a MilkingShorthorn bull every two years to keep with thecows. They had 350 acres and 33 cows, and raised 5kids that way.

Chuck currently runs a dairy and beef operation.Most of the milk from his 60 cows goes out throughHorizon, the national organic dairy brand. He saysrecently the market has opened up for organic milk.Prior to last summer only CROPP (Organic Valley)and Horizon were buying organic milk. But now H.P. Hood has started an organic line under theStonyfield label, so there is competition for supplyand it’s finally a producer’s market.

Although he and Mary have been using organicmethods for over two decades, they didn’t getcertified until they thought there was a marketdemand for organic products. “We were organicbefore there was an organic market,” he asserts. “Itwasn’t a case of deciding to go organic. In 1982 weplanted a field to corn for the cows. I called Agwayto spray it; I don’t know anything about spraying.Well, they came out and sprayed it, but said: ‘Welacked about a acre’s worth of spray. We’ll be backto finish up.’ I said: ‘Don’t worry about it!’ That fallthe jury came in. There was no difference betweenthe sprayed and unsprayed sections. We didn’tcertify until June of 1997, because there was no oneto buy it. But the market for milk was finally there.”

Blood sells his beef as grass-fed, natural or organic.It’s all raised the same, but if the customer wantsassurances it is organic he or she pays about 25%more for all the paperwork.

“If they come in and say they want a grass-fedbeef,” Chuck explains, “they will get the sameanimal as if they said they wanted an organic one.The difference is that I’m not going to hand them apiece of paper that says this animal is certifiedorganic. The people I sell to who ask for that want itbecause they don’t know me.”

Blood has just sold beef on the farm so far, not forresale. A lot of his customers are repeats who will

Grass Fed Beefat Rocky Top Acres

buy half an animal. He says he markets between 12and 20 head a year this way. He takes it to and froma local slaughterhouse as a service to his customers.

But he is investigating selling to a larger market.Originally he was going to get involved with acompany called “Organic Lands” to market his beef,but the owners had personal problems and went outof business. Now he is working with EstherBitterman of Massachusetts to develop a brand,“Esther’s Organics”. If that falls through as well,Chuck is thinking of going it alone under the brand“Rocky Top”, which is his farm name.

The market for grass-fed beef is strong and Chuckdoubts if he himself could supply more than 5% ofthe beef he could sell within a year. But he islooking to put together a network of local producers.

“I already have the supply contacts from the previ-ous business,” he says. “Culled dairy cows supplyyour ground beef and stew beef. That’s the market isthe one I want to go after. The primal cuts market isa tough one. Out of a thousand pound quality feedersteer, you’re going to get thirty-five pounds ofprimal cuts. What do you do with the other 500pounds of useable meat? You need to go after thatlower market – hamburgers, hot dogs, ground beef.

“A lot of people are looking at it,” he continues.“Coleman has started an organic line. They used tobe just ‘natural’. Acres, in Pennsylvania, got boughtout by Taylor. They were all organic primal cuts.Now they’re all stew meat and ground beef. Wethought maybe we could get schools to buy anorganic hotdog for school lunches. But the marketisn’t there yet. They’re still too sensitive to priceand won’t pay more. Things like mad cow diseaseare helping, though!”

As far as his sales territory, initially Blood wouldtarget the northeast region. He figures MadisonCounty, where he lives, can handle 5 animals a year.The immediately surrounding five counties couldhandle about 40 animals a year. The further out hegoes, the more the business would have to expand.Chuck sees it reaching easily to Boston.

But one of the complexities involved in this kind ofexpansion is shipping. “I’ve had customers all overwho want me to ship meat to them,” he relates. “Butto ship meat you have to have Styrofoam boxes. Ifit’s going more than 24 hours you need dry ice. Ifyou have dry ice and are going UPS you have tohave a special stamp and pay an extra fee. WhatI’m looking at is piggy-backing with a local dairysupplier. We can use the same refrigerated trucksand ship to the same stores throughout the region. Itwill cut our hauling costs in half.”

But an even larger challenge to such a business isgetting an approved slaughterhouse to do theprocessing. In New York you can have a USDAslaughterhouse, have one approved just by NewYork’s Department of Ag and Markets, or have acustom one. If it’s USDA inspected you can marketwherever you want. But if it’s only approved by Agand Markets, not the USDA, you can market only inNew York state. If it is a custom slaughterhouse, noteven approved by Ag and Markets, you can’tadvertise for resale, only process meat for theanimal’s owner.

The expenses involved in USDA inspection aresignificant. According to Blood, you have to pay$350 for every ‘profile’ you are producing. Such aprofile might be ‘sirloin steak’ or ‘chuck roast’. Ifyou have 10 product profiles, that’s $3500. Thenyou have to pay $40 an hour to have an inspectorpresent during processing so you can put the USDAlabel on the end product.

Ag and Markets approval is less burdensome thanthat of the USDA. They don’t send out inspectors tobe on hand while you’re processing. But you doneed an audit trail and a Hazard Analysis andCritical Control Point plan to assure product safety.

For his beef to be sold as organically certified, theslaughterhouse he uses has to go through the samesteps as any other organic processor. They have todocument their product profiles, show an audit trail,have separate tagging systems, logs, etc.

“The organic inspector comes once a year asrequired,” Chuck explains, “and up to three other


Chuck Blood stands by one of the round bales of hay he has just made. The green bale will be stuffed into a long plastic tube to ferment and become ‘baleage’.


times a year if the certifier deems it necessary. Yourpaper trail is the critical part. If an inspector picksup one of your hotdogs at a store and brings it withhim to the plant, you have to be able to follow thathot dog all the way to the source – the farm it camefrom.”

Right now there is no USDA-approved slaughter-house in the area, so Blood is contemplating build-ing one. Rather than accept conventionally-raisedanimals for processing and get involved in thelogistic and paperwork nightmares of a split facility,he plans to make it an organic-only plant. WithUSDA and organic approvals, he figures he canmarket to Bread and Circus or anyone else.

Of course, going into this kind of business doesinvolve major changes. “I run the farm and I canbuy and sell the beef,” Chuck muses. “I can put allthe beef anyone wants into the slaughterhouse. But Ican’t be both on the farm and run a slaughterhousefull time. I do, however, have a daughter who isUSDA trained in food inspection, so that’s a goodfit.”

He and Esther are looking at Madison Countylocations and talking with local towns about taxes.Such a facility would cost about $400,000, so thevariation in property tax rates is a significant factorin where to build.

“I want to build on the intersection of two goodroads,” Blood stresses. “You pay more for the land,but you have more options for truckers and routes -there’s a trade off. Of course if my name was Wal-Mart they’d pay me to build here!”

Chuck feels strongly about raising his animals in ahealthy environment. His mother’s family lives rightoutside Denver and he tells of visiting there andwatching the animals being brought into those hugeconfinement feedlots. “It was nothing unusual to see30,000 beef animals being crammed into thosestockyards,” he relates. “They would run 30,000beef for 6 weeks there. Then they would ship all thebeef and bring in 60,000 hogs. They’d feed them aquarter of what they would normally feed them, and

let them clean up the yards after the beef. Then theywould take those 60,000 hogs out and bring in300,000 birds. They never fed the birds! Healthissues? Man, I didn’t eat poultry for 20 years!”

He feels that he has plenty of options to treat anyhealth problem with organic alternatives. “I’m notstuck with tunnel vision – antibiotics, growthhormones, BST,” he laughs. “The diagnosis is thechallenge. And if you get that wrong, don’t worry. Ifyou don’t see a response, try something else. One ofthe mainstays that we’ve used since we wentorganic is garlic. It does so much! We worm all our

cows with garlic. And we use it as a natural antibi-otic. If they have an infection, feed them garlic! Weget whole bulb seconds from an organic farmer afew miles away. You peel off the husks, fill up theballing gun, and force it right down their throats.We’ve had a few cows who would eat it direct. Igenerally plant 25 pounds of garlic on the fencerows. The cows eat the greens. Kelp is anotherwonderful product. It gets the Iodine level up, andkeeps Vitamin E high.”

Blood steers his own calves, using a method theAmish taught him. He has tried an emasculator


Like a giant sausage maker, this piece of equipment stuffs a bale intoa long tube of stretchable plastic. A tube accommodates 50 bales, and

allows them an anaerobic environment in which to ferment.


bander, but feels that with that you have to catchthe animal’s development just right. Too soon andboth testicles haven’t dropped, too late and you getstags: animals that look like bulls and act like bulls.Chuck uses a razor and cuts off the tip of thescrotum, reaches up and pulls the testicles down,crimps them off and cuts them on the inside.

All Blood’s beef is from primary beef breeds:Milking Shorthorn, Angus, Hereford, ScotchHighlander or Dutch Belted. He has some of themall, but is slowly switching over to Milking Short-horns because he feels they are a little hardier andmore consistent when it comes to milk. “They give40 pounds of milk for 240 to 270 days,” he explains,“then dry off for 60 days and they’re back at it.They don’t vary. Holsteins will make 100 pounds ofmilk right after they freshen, then two months lateryou get a hot spell and they’re down to 40.”

He also raises all his cows on grass. “You acceleraterate of gain with grain, sure,” he scoffs. “Statisticssay that grain fed grows faster. The rate of gain for abeef animal would be 2.2 to 2.8 pounds per day aslong as you’re feeding grain. If you want a 1000-pound animal that starts at 100 pounds, in less than18 months you’re at your target.

“But if you are going grass-fed,” he continues, “andyour target is 1000 pounds, your situation is differ-ent. You can only grow grass from April to October,of course. But during the grazing season they willput on as high as 3 pounds per day of gain. SomeApril calves I have are already 650 pounds (in mid-September!) For the rest of the year you have tostimulate them to make them believe they aregetting grass. They key to that is grass baleage.They won’t even eat dry hay if they have that!During the winter more food goes to maintenance,so it might get down to a little over one pound ofgain then.”

Baleage is grass or other fodder cut long (notchopped) and bound into a large round bale. It isthen wrapped green (not allowed to dry) in a plasticcovering or forced into long plastic tubes, where it

ferments in the absence of oxygen and the acidsproduced preserve the fodder until the bale is usedfor feed. Baleage is a different product from roundbaled hay, which is allowed to dry in the field, orfrom haylage, which is chopped before fermenting.

Haylage has a higher fermentation temperature thanbaleage. Baleage never gets above 130 degrees,whereas with haylage you get up to 170. Thetheoretical cut on haylage is 1/2 inch, whereasbaleage is the length of the grass (unless you get around baler with knives in it, in which case thelength is 6 inches). Haylage isn’t baled, rather it’sstuffed in a silo or a bunker or a plastic ag bag.

Haylage requires more equipment: another tractor, asilage wagon, and a chopper. It is also harder on achopper than silage. If you do haylage with achopper, you’ll wear it out twice as fast as doingsilage since there’s not as much fiber in corn perunit of thickness.

Currently Chuck manages 1214 acres of hay, mostlyon rented land. He chose baleage for handling thisbecause of the labor and convenience of it. “Tenyears ago,” he explains, “I had four daughters whocould drive any tractor here. We put up 27,000 smallsquare bales. But when the first daughter leaves,there’s more for the rest to do. Then the next daugh-


This bale wagon picks up a round bale in the field, sets it on the wagon, shoves it to the rear,then picks up another. When the first rows are full, it can stack a third row on top of them!

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 37ter leaves, and there’s more yet. About that time weasked our neighbor, who had a round baler, to dosome round bales for us as dry hay. That opened myeyes!”

Four years ago Blood got tired of waiting forsomeone else to make his bales. He bit the bulletand invested $42,000 in the equipment necessary toput up baleage – a baler, a tuber and a bale wagon.Now his wife mows and he does the baling rightaway, leaving the bales in the field until he canreturn with the bale wagon to pick up the bales andbring them to the farm. There he spears each onewith an attachment on the tractor’s loader, and putsthem on the tuber, which actuates this trigger whichstarts two hydraulic cylinders that drive the baledown five feet, forcing it into the long tube.

“Each 78 inch wide tube costs $86 and holds 50bales,” Chuck says. “It’s very labor efficient for us.Mary mows and I bale and bag. That’s all we do inthe spring. When my neighbor and I were workingtogether with his 12-foot cutter and my 12-foothaybine, we did 360 acres. That’s a lot of hay.”

Blood has a lot of equipment, much of it old, whichhe maintains himself. When I visited him his roundbaler had just blown a bearing, but he was able toborrow another baler from a neighbor and continueuntil he had time to fix his. When equipment is welldesigned, however, he understands and appreciatesit.

“There’s the tool,” he enthuses, pointing to his balewagon. “This makes the whole thing work! This iswhat allows me to take that ancient tractor, which isalmost 40 years old, and load bales. This arm comesdown, the outside piece comes in, picks the bale upand loads it. Then this whole unit slides the baleback and makes room for more. It’s built to haul 18dry bales or 10 of baleage. I’ve only managed 17because it gets tippy on my hilly land.

“A new bale probably weighs 1500 pounds,” hecontinues. “If you pull up to it with this wagon andaim it right, it will spin the bale into the arm per-fectly every time. Especially if you are doing it right


One of the beef herds Chuck manages, these Herefords graze on a neighbor’s land. He runscows, calves and a bull together in a natural grouping. One of the cows in this herd is over

ten years old and still producing calves.

after baling. If you wait 12 hours the hay will settleand it gets harder. The next problem is that thiswagon weights only a little over 2 ton. But with theleverage of this arm out here, if the wagon is uphillof the bale, it is too heavy. So on the first few balesyou have to have the wagon downhill of the bale.There are tricks to it. But this is the epitome ofmodern technology and old-fashioned know-how.There’s a $2500 tractor pulling an $18,000 wagon.”

The fermentation of the sugars in the grass uses upthe air in the tube and gives off gas, which swells

the bag. After about a month to 6 weeks the fermen-tation is pretty well done. When it is ready to feed itout you just cut the bag, spear a bale, take it over tothe cows and stand it on end. Chuck allocates onebale for 25 head. It’s a lot quicker to feed than whenhe used to have to get 30 to 40 small square balesdown for the same cows.

Blood treats all of his grass hay with clover – bothpastures and hayfields - frost seeding it. When themaple sugar taps go out he starts seeding, reasoningthat the freezing and thawing action which drivesthe sap is also what causes the seed to set in the soil.He doesn’t have enough animals to get manure to allhis acres so he uses clover to fix nitrogen in the soilhe can’t get manure onto.


by Audrey Hill, Public Citizen On May 29, 2003, despite thousands of commentsfrom parents, teachers, students, and concerned citi-zens who overwhelmingly opposed the purchase ofirradiated food for the National School Lunch Pro-gram, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)chose to include irradiated ground beef on the list offoods purchased for federal nutrition programs. As ofSeptember 2004, irradiated ground beef is availableto school districts and costs 29-80 cents more perpound than non-irradiated ground beef. Yet at the startof the 2004-2005 school year, only Minnesota, Ne-braska, and Texas had ordered any irradiated meat forschool districts in their state. Ultimately, all three stateswithdrew their orders, citing the product’s high costand a lack of information on irradiated food.

Irradiated meat, particularly in schools, is a majorsource of controversy. On the one hand, the food in-dustry and federal government agencies are heartyproponents of the technology, advocating it as amethod to ensure food safety. On the other hand, tenschool districts have banned irradiated food, consum-ers have widely rejected it in grocery stores, and someadvocacy groups, including Public Citizen, are con-cerned with its negative implications for health andsustainable agriculture.

Why should organic farmers and consumers care aboutirradiated food, considering that organic food cannotbe irradiated? Because irradiation could further con-tribute to consolidation of the agriculture industry,enable cheap food imports, and serve as a disincen-tive for meat companies to fix unsanitary processesAnd, irradiated food served in schools does not haveto be labeled, taking away parents’ and students’ abil-ity to make an informed choice.

So what is irradiation and who wants it?

Irradiation exposes food to high doses of ionizing ra-diation to kill bacteria. Proponents of the technologytout its ability to kill bacteria like E. coli and Salmo-nella that cause food-borne illness (important for themeat industry) as well as the bacteria that make foodrot (important for global trade in fruits and vegetables.)Irradiation, which does not make food radioactive, hasbeen more aggressively promoted by the food indus-try following several high-profile outbreaks of food-borne illness in the last decade.

Ionizing radiation used on food comes from gammarays (produced by radioactive materials Cesium 137or Cobalt 60), X-rays, or electron beams (“e-beams”). In fact, food irradiation has its roots in thenuclear industry. In 1953, the “Atoms for Peace”program set out to find civilian uses of militarytechnology, and food irradiation is one of the fewtechnologies of that program that has remained inuse.

So why the controversy?Health Effects

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and theUSDA state that it is a safe process that reducesbacteria with only negligible effects on nutritionalcontent. But irradiation does more than just killbacteria. This technology works by exposing food toenergy waves that break apart molecular bonds,which kills bacteria, but also causes molecules to re-form new and sometimes unique bonds. “Treat-ment” by irradiation thus disrupts the chemicalcomposition of everything in its path, depletingvitamins and nutrients and causing the creation ofnew chemicals (often referred to as radiolyticproducts) — some of which do not naturally occurin food and that the FDA has never studied forsafety.

One class of chemicals created by irradiation, 2-alkylcyclobutanones (2-ACBs), has been shown inrecent studies to promote cancer development and

What’s for Lunch?Irradiated Meat for Kiddies

genetic damage in rats, as well as genetic damagein human cells. 2-ACBs have never been found tonaturally occur in food. Based on these results, theleader of the 2-ACBs study commented in a NewYork Times article, “It is perhaps too early to startirradiating beef to give to children.” Much moreresearch needs to be done to understand what risk 2-ACBs pose to humans that consume irradiated food,particularly as irradiated food has never beenconsumed long-term by a population. Yet neither theFDA nor the USDA have addressed these newresults, or reconsidered their blanket endorsement ofirradiated food.

Irradiation can also destroy significant nutrients andvitamins, for example, up to 80 percent of vitamin Ain eggs and 48 percent of beta carotene in orangejuice. Irradiation is particularly harmful to vitaminsA, B, C and E. While the food industry tries to playdown this nutrient loss by equating it to that fromcooking or storage, irradiated food still needs to becooked or stored, which thereby decreases itsnutritional value further. Moreover, some vitaminsexperience accelerated losses during storage andcooking after food has been irradiated, compound-ing vitamin depletion.

Underlying all this is the overlooked fact that theFDA’s approval for irradiated food was based on aflawed process, and that numerous studies thatfound negative health effects have been overlooked.Of the 400-odd studies done on food irradiation, allbut seven were labeled “deficient” as scientificstudies by the FDA, leaving the agency to base theirapproval of food irradiation on just a handful ofstudies, some of which were never translated intoEnglish as required. Moreover, many irradiationstudies took place in the 1960’s and 1970’s, whenour testing abilities were significantly weaker,particularly in terms of detecting subtle effects.Marcia van Gemert, the toxicologist at the FDA incharge of evaluating irradiation when the currentpush toward ever-more-vast irradiation was initi-ated, said “at the time we were not happy with thedata. The data was very poor. My constant concernwas for radiolytic products.” Ironically, some of the

studies FDA had previously classified as “deficient”were later used to justify approval of new foods forirradiation, such as eggs.

Moreover, within all the studies of food irradiation,a wide range of negative health effects were foundin at least one-third of the studies, which the FDAnever adequately acknowledged or investigated.Some of the research that has been conductedrevealed diverse health problems in laboratoryanimals that ate irradiated food, including prematuredeath, fatal internal bleeding, a rare form of cancer,stillbirths and other reproductive problems, geneticdamage, and organ malfunctions and nutritionaldeficiencies. Studies have also shown that irradia-tion increases concentrations of known and sus-pected carcinogens like benzene and formaldehyde.

Health effects from irradiated food are particularlyconcerning to children, as they are a uniquelyvulnerable population. There is little research intothe long-term health effects experienced by childrenwho are exposed to toxic chemicals in foods.Nowhere in the world has there been a mass feedingof irradiated food to children over a prolongedperiod of time. Dr. William Au, a toxicologist at theUniversity of Texas Medical Branch has argued that“the scientific community and regulatory agencieshave very little knowledge regarding how childrenrespond to insult from toxic chemicals. Theseconcerns also apply to toxicological risk withrespect to eating irradiated food.” This is significant,considering that children are more susceptible totoxic substances in their environment because theyeat, drink and breathe 2-3 times more than adults,pound for pound.

In short, there needs to be more comprehensive,sophisticated, and long-term research conducted onthe health of irradiated foods, before governmentagencies can claim they are safe. In 2001, Congress-man Duke Cunningham, whose district in SanDiego was home to leading food irradiation com-pany Surebeam, killed a provision that allocated$500,000 to FDA for research on the effects of foodirradiation. For irradiation proponents to eliminateresearch provisions seems contradictory, if theindustry is indeed confident about its product’ssafety.

Irradiation and the agriculture industryLarge meatpackers are interested in irradiation as aBand-Aid for preventable contamination problemscaused by unsanitary conditions on factory farmsand fast line speeds in slaughterhouses. And becauseirradiation extends the shelf life of fruits andvegetables, it could fuel the growth of corporate-driven global food trade. Irradiation is a vital toolfor the corporate giants that depend on production inthe developing world and on factory farms to maketheir profits. Thus, even though organics cannot beirradiated, organic farmers and consumers have astake in the success of irradiation.

Sanitation not Irradiation

Irradiation is unnecessary if protective food safetystandards are actually enforced. The meat industry,in particular, has fought to stop or weaken numeroussafety standards and constantly challenges theUSDA’s ability to enforce food safety rules. Froman expansion in the mad cow disease testing pro-gram (prions, the agent believed to cause thedisease, are not affected by irradiation) to salmo-nella testing to giving USDA the authority to ordermandatory recalls of contaminated meat, the meatindustry has fought almost every safety standardproposed. The result has been that over the lastdecade, while linespeeds in meat plants continue torise (in corporate beef slaughterhouses, linespeedsapproach 400 cattle per hour), the authority ofUSDA meat inspectors has shifted from inspectingmeat to inspecting paperwork.

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 39Hence, the interest of big meatpackers in irradiationis as an end-of-the-line quick fix to zap away thecontamination caused by deeper sanitation andsafety problems. Eric Schlosser’s book Fast FoodNation summed up the situation well:

Steven Bjerklie, the former editor of Meat & Poul-try… thinks it [irradiation] will reduce pressure onthe meatpacking industry to make fundamental and

necessary changes in their production methods,allowing unsanitary practices to continue. ‘I don’twant to be served irradiated feces along with my

meat,’ Bjerklie says.”

From increased pathogen testing to changing cattle’sdiets prior to slaughter in order to decrease E.coli,there are numerous methods to safeguard our foodsupply that do not involve irradiating it. Yet irradia-tion could serve as a disincentive for any changes tobe made in the meat industry.

It’s important to note that consumers do have a toolto use at home to protect themselves from thepathogens that cause food-borne illness — propercooking. Cooking ground beef to 160 degrees, forexample, kills E. coli. As a 2002 Consumer Reports’article notes, “There’s no reason to [buy irradiatedmeat] if you cook meat thoroughly. Irradiationactually destroys fewer bacteria than does propercooking.”

Finally, one last point about the drawbacks ofirradiating meat to increase food safety — irradiatedfood isn’t sterile, and it can be re-contaminatedthrough improper storage, handling, or cross con-tamination from other foods.

Market Consolidation

Irradiation machines aren’t cheap, costing at least amillion dollars for some types of machines. Becauseonly large agribusiness concerns are likely to takeon such high costs, irradiation also is likely toadvance the consolidation of the food system, andallow these giant corporations to further increasetheir stranglehold on the market. Legal in over 50countries, irradiation allows big agribusiness to shipfood farther because of extended shelf life. Familyfarmers and small producers cannot compete withoverseas production and the large “factory” farms inthe U.S. that drive prices below their cost of produc-tion. Irradiation is a vital tool for companies thatdepend on production in the developing world andon factory farms to make their profits.

Global Trade

The system being created by the World TradeOrganization and various “free trade” agreementscannot fully succeed without technologies likeirradiation. Arnold Foudin, a high-ranking USDAofficial, has said food irradiation is “absolutelynecessary” in order for food trade to become trulyglobal.

Agribusiness corporations want to grow more fruitsand vegetables in the developing world, where laboris cheap and environmental regulations are weak ornon-existent. Zapping this food with ionizingradiation would kill the invasive insects that areconsidered “barriers to trade” and allow food to beshipped over long distances because it increasesfood’s shelf life. Irradiation thus further enablescheap imports, which adds to the pressure on localfarmers.

Thus, two of the major purposes of irradiation,increasing shelf life and destroying barriers toimportation, subvert a locally-grown, sustainableethic.

Labels

If they don’t know what it is, they won’t avoid it.That seems to be the new ethic of many ofirradiation’s proponents as irradiated meat continuesto be unpopular with consumers. Currently, federalrules require whole foods sold in stores — such asapples, potatoes, ground beef and pork chops — tobe labeled “Treated by Irradiation” and carry theinternational symbol for irradiation, the radura. Butthere are numerous loopholes. Processed foodscontaining irradiated non-meat ingredients, such asapplesauce, are exempt. Even more egregious,irradiated foods served in schools, restaurants,nursing homes, day-care centers and hospitals, arenot required to be labeled.

Due to weak sales, the irradiation industry has beenpressuring the federal government to change label-ing rules to allow euphemisms such as “electronicpasteurization” and “cold pasteurization.” In numer-ous surveys — including those sponsored by thefederal government — consumers have repeatedlystated that such phrases are misleading and decep-tive, and that associating pasteurization with irradia-

tion could result in public mistrust of pasteurizeddairy products.

Even though it seems hard to believe, the USDAeven went so far as to allow irradiation, along withgenetically modified organisms and sewage sludge,in the standards for production of organic productsthat were proposed in 1997. These provisions wereeventually nixed after huge public outcry, and thecurrent organic rules do not allow irradiation.

But is Irradiated Food Yummy?

Past studies have cited the “off-odors” and “off-flavors” created by irradiation. One study evendescribed the results as resembling a wet dog. Morerecently, some largely industry-funded taste testshave shown no discernable taste effect with irradi-ated food. However, Consumer Reports’ extensivetaste test on irradiated meat found “a slight butdistinct off-taste and smell in most of the irradiatedbeef and chicken we cooked and sampled, likeningit to singed hair.”

Irradiated Food in Grocery Stores

A year ago, irradiated meat was reportedly availablein 5,000 stores and restaurants. But a lot haschanged since then. Irradiated ground beef (the mostcommon irradiated product in the U.S.) has sincebeen pulled from the shelves at more than 15 major

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e r Winter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 540supermarket chains, following poor sales and thebankruptcy of a major food irradiator, the SureBeamCorporation.

While the disappearance of irradiated ground beeffrom many grocery store shelves illustrates consum-ers’ lack of interest, the irradiation industry isn’tgiving up yet. The January 2004 announcement thatthe leading irradiation company SureBeam had filedfor bankruptcy did create a void in the market forirradiated foods. But new companies are scramblingto fill that void, and they are counting on weakeningfederal labeling rules as well as continuing topressure schools to buy irradiated meat as keys toavoiding the same fate as SureBeam.

Irradiated Meat in School Lunches

The possibility of serving irradiated food in schoolsbegan with the 2002 Farm Bill that was passed byCongress. The food irradiation industry was success-ful in inserting language into the bill that directs theSecretary of Agriculture not to prohibit the use of ir-radiated food in the National School Lunch Program.Previously, irradiated food had been prohibited fromthe program.

To date, no state in the U.S. has ordered irradiatedground beef through the National School LunchProgram. (In this program, state departments ofeducation purchase commodity products in bulkfrom the USDA and offer it through their statewidedistribution system to individual school districts.) The best deal the USDA could get for the 2004-2005 school year was 29 to 80 cents per pound morethan non-irradiated product, a potentially budget-busting cost for cash-strapped schools. It is possiblefor schools to get irradiated food without using theNational School Lunch Program — they couldpurchase it from another source.

Recently, there have been a few bright spots in theeffort against irradiated foods being pushed ontoschool children. In June 2004, Congress passed theChild Nutrition Act (CNA), which restricts schoollunch use of irradiated food. Specifically, the CNAstates that irradiated food may be made available to

school children only at the request of state and localschool systems and that its use in schoollunches cannot be mandated by the USDA; that irra-diated food cannot be subsidized by the federal gov-ernment; and that state and school food authorities areto be provided with factual information about irradia-tion, including notice that irradiation is not a substi-tute for safe food handling.

A number of states and schools are taking measuresto keep irradiated food out of school lunches. As ofSeptember 2004, ten school districts, including LosAngeles and Washington D.C., have outright bannedirradiated food. Others, notably Seattle, have adoptedstrong directives discouraging the use of irradiatedfoods as part of a comprehensive “buy local, buy or-ganic” school nutrition policy.

School nutrition is an important part of children’s de-velopment and learning. At a time when there is agrowing school nutrition movement, with an empha-sis on healthy, fresh, and local food for students, irra-diated food has no place in our schools. Fans of irra-diation (including the USDA) have been disappointedthat irradiated ground beef has been so slow to catchon in school lunches — and they will continue to pro-mote it to schools across the country.

What Can You Do?

There are many ways to stop the spread of irradiatedfood.

1. School Lunches — Public Citizen has talkingpoints for letters to the editor, as well as a sampleletter to send to your state’s food service director,asking them not to purchase irradiated beef forschools. It is important to work in your communityto get your local school district to adopt a resolutionbanning irradiated food. Take a few minutes of yourday to find out how to keep irradiated foods out ofschools! See www.safelunch.org.

2. Grocery Stores — Make sure your grocery storedoes not serve irradiated meat, and tell them youdon’t want it! Check out www.foodactivist.org formore information on retail sales of irradiated food.

3. Labeling — Write to the FDA opposing their planto allow euphemisms such as “cold pasteurization”and “electronic pasteurization” for irradiated food.Write to:Felicia SatchellRm4D045Mail Stop HFS-820Harvey W. Wiley Federal Building5100 Paint Branch ParkwayCollege Park, MD [email protected]

4. Join our irradiated food listserve throughwww.foodactivist.org.

5. For More Information — contact Audrey Hill [email protected] or 202-454-5185.

Irradiated Foods in grocery stores must be sold withthis symbol, the “radura,” and the words “Treatedwith Irradiation.”

What Foods Can Be Irradiated:

Beef (most common item)Poultry, pork, lamb, horsemeat, and byproductsWheat flourGarlic powder, onion powder, dried spaces, herbsand vegetable seasoningsDry and hydrated enzymesFruit and vegetablesFresh shell eggsSprouting seedsFruit and vegetable juicesImported fruit and vegetables

Approval to Irradiate Pending on:

Ready-to-Eat Foods (i.e. deli meats, frozen dinners,packaged salads)Molluscan shellfish (i.e. clams, oysters, mussels)Crustacean shellfish (i.e. shrimp, crabs, lobster)


Kumar to Keynote

Satish Kumar has graciously accepted our invita-tion to keynote the 2005 Conference. In additionto being the founder of the Small School and theDirector of Programmes at Schumacher College,Satish Kumar is currently the editor of Resurgence(an international magazine promoting peace, non-violence, ecology, sustainability, organic agricul-ture, appropriate technology and holistic philoso-phy). He has, in turn, been a Jain Monk (until age18), a campaigner for land reform in the Bhoodanmovement with Vinoba Bhave (until age 26), and apilgrim for peace, walking from India to Americawithout any money, from 1962-1964. In 1968,Satish established the London School of Non-violence in order to teach the Gandhian way ofpassive resistance to the youth of Europe. Hisautobiography ‘No Destination’ was published in1992 by Green Books. In November 2001, Satishwas presented with the Jamnalal Bajaj Interna-tional Award for “Promoting Gandhian ValuesAbroad.” His new book ‘You Are, Therefore, IAm’ was published by Green Books in September2002.

Several conference participants requested moreinformation on home schooling, an ever-populartopic of discussion that tends to bring forthpassionate views on education, politics and childdevelopment. We are considering hosting a debateon this topic for Saturday night, August 13, 2005.

Another topic that is hot, hot, hot (!) right now isbiodiesel, and conference co-coordinator JulieRawson is presently researching experts and thosein-the-know to stack up a diversity of people toshare their knowledge of options, methods and thepracticality of this broad source of alternativeenergy for next summer’s pre-conference, to beheld Thursday night of August 11 and Fridaymorning of August 12.

Watch The Natural Farmer and your NOFAchapter newsletters for updates on the 31st AnnualNOFA Summer Conference’s offerings, all ofwhich will be finalized by January 16.

Workshops

Workshops are the foundation of the NOFASummer Conference. Each year we try to cast awide net to catch new presenters and ideas whileat the same time featuring our old standbys andlong-term presenters who are so beloved by all.Here is a summarized list of workshops thatparticipants at the 2004 conference said theywould like to see. If you or someone you knowcould do a good workshop on one of these topics,please contact Julie Rawson by email or phone byDecember 31. This is a firm deadline. The confer-ence coordinating team of Jack Kittredge and JulieRawson are going to India to see son Dan in lateJanuary and will have the workshop selectionprocess all wrapped up by January 16. You cancontact Julie Rawson at [email protected] or(978) 355-2853 by December 31, 2004 to suggesta workshop or a presenter.

ANIMALSBeef & lamb qualityFencing (non-electric)Heritage turkey managementAdvanced poultry workshopsYear round grazingMore in-depth animal husbandry (ex. Goat nutri-tion)Guard dogs (workshops for grazing)

CROPSSeason extension in bramble productionHow to defeat wild mustard in the grain fieldGrowing fall brassicasHow to over-winter biennials for seed productionFlowers (especially cold frames & greenhouses)Single crops – how to grow carrots or brassicas ormanaging a blueberry patch

FARMING & THE COMMUNITYAlternative energy: photovoltaics for farmsGreen building (especially straw bale house and

(continued from page 1) earth, brick oven construction)Farming for non-profit organizationsSomething on our sewage treatment systemsWater quality: finding, maintaining, correctingproblemsGrey water: how to treat & useMore peer to peer discussions for farmers with20+ years experienceAfrican American work songsTheater workshops

FARM ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENTFarm business management/budgeting/incomeprojections/insuranceAssociative economics (building 3-fold relation-ships with customers)How can farmers and farm workers make moremoney?Measuring results: farm health, farmer health,product nourishment valueStewardship: morals and the farm economyWhole homestead planning (crops/animals/children/tools/time management/etc.)Sources of government funding for farmers

FOOD & FAMILYCleaning your house naturally (inside & out)Women’s IssuesHome schooling/educationHome birthingSchools: gardening, cafeteria composting pro-gramsCreating play spaces in a yard for childrenPart-time farming (i.e. a single person farming)

FOOD SAFETY/POLITICS & POLICYDiscussion about the direction and consequencesrelating to organic standardsEnvironmental consciousnessLocal politicsProducer cooperative action: purchasing, market-ing, political actionIntro to GE (how it works, genetically andpharmacrops in the field)Food policyStrategy and movement building, especially urbanagriculture

INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTUREInternational movements toward organicMore on international cooperativesRadical cheerleading

LAND CAREOrganic land care (fertilizers, practicality)

MARKETINGValue-added products

NUTRITION & HEALTHCAREHealth service issuesOrganic & whole food nutrition quality

OF THE SPIRITNature spirituality or eco-psychology

PRACTICAL SKILLSHome brewingSourdough bakingSeed savingNatural fibers: spinning, weaving, producingfibersVegetable storage (canning, pickling, cold storage,freezing)Garlic braidingTractor workshops (repair & maintenance, smallerattachments)Developing a small sawmillWeavingSheep shearingCheese making

RESEARCH & EDUCATIONNanotechnologyMethane digestionMore on raw milk campaign

SOILPreparations for soil treatment & foliar sprayingScience of compost teas: seaweed concentrate(from fresh weed), fish concentrate (from waste),nettle, comfrey, etc., teas for trace elements

WEEDS, INSECTS & DISEASEInternal parasitic identification using microscopes(vet or professor)Disease and insect problems

The 2005 Summer Conference Committee iscomprised of:Julie Rawson & Jack Kittredge, ConferenceCoordinators/Debate/Video ProjectDeb Pouech, RegistrationEron Sandler, Children’s ConferenceSteve and Justine Lorenz, PublicationsRichard Murphy, Ads, Exhibits, SponsorsChad Skinner, Audio-VideoBarbara Cohen, Helping HandsTricia Cooper, Fair and Food DonationsJocelyn Langer, Graphics and Teen ConferenceRandy Buck, NOFA NibblesRandall Shaw, EntertainmentMaria Skinner, MenuAbby Morgan, Local MealElaine Peterson, Office SupportKathleen Litchfield, PublicityMaureen Doyle - GeneralistMary Lou and Ted Conna - - Generalists


The Northeast Organic Farming Association ofVermont’s (NOFA-VT) 23rd Annual WinterConference will be held on Saturday, February12th at the Vermont Technical College inRandolph, Vermont.Peter Forbes, co-founder of The Center for WholeCommunities in Waitsfield, VT, and creator of TheGood Life Center in Harborside, Maine, will givethe keynote. Forbes is a photographer, writer,farmer, and conservationist, and has been a lifelong student of the relationship between land andpeople. Through the success of more than onehundred conservation projects, Peter has earned anational reputation as being a champion of bring-ing people and the land together. He is the editorof Our Land, Ourselves: Readings on People andPlace and the author of The Great Remembering:

23rd Annual NOFA-VT Winter Conference:“Community Relationships with the Land for a Broader Social Change”

further thoughts on land, soul and society. Hiskeynote address will focus on how individual andcommunity relationships with the land canbecome the seeds for broader social change.Experienced farmers, gardeners, educators andauthors will offer more than 30 workshops ofinterest to home gardeners, commercial growers,dairy farmers and concerned consumers. Topicswill include: ecology of agriculture, berry produc-tion, community supported agriculture, biofuels,homestead cheeses, family herbs, organic apples,biodynamic gardening, soil health and more.

Presenters include Bill MacKently from St.Lawrence Nurseries, Michael Phillips author ofThe Apple Grower, Nancy Phillips author of TheVillage Herbalist, Vern Grubinger from the UVM

Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Ron Kruppauthor of The Woodchuck’s Guide to Gardening,Paul Sachs from North Country Organics, andAnna Edey author of How to Grow $500,000 onone Acre, and Peace on Earth.

A special children’s conference is available foryoung farmers ages 6-13 which will offer farm-related workshops, games and crafts. A colorfulfarmers market with educational materials, organicproducts, crafts, and associated businesses andnon- profit organizations will be ongoing all day.

For more information on registration or volunteer-ing the day of the conference contact the NOFA-VT office: Northeast Organic Farming Associationof Vermont (802) 434-4122 or [email protected].

Organic Valley Press Release

Organic Valley, the nation’s leading organicfarmers’ cooperative and the only independentnational dairy, has appointed organic industryveteran Peter Miller as its East Region PoolCoordinator for dairy farm procurement activitiesand educational outreach.

Miller comes to Organic Valley with extensiveexperience in the organic industry. Most recentlyhe served with Oregon Tilth, an Oregon-basednational accredited organic certifier. His expertiseincludes organic dairy inspection, educationaloutreach for organic production systems, andorganic certification requirements for the NationalOrganic Program (NOP).

In his new post, which is based in New England,Miller will manage the procurement and evalua-tion of organic dairy farms in the greater NewEngland area. This includes Maine, Vermont, NewYork and Pennsylvania, where the cooperativealready has production pools established. In NewHampshire, Massachusetts and Connecticut,Organic Valley will host procurement meetings inthe near future for dairy farmers interested inmaking the transition to certified organic andbecoming a cooperative member.

Miller welcomes producers’ inquiries about thecooperative’s membership opportunities, includingthe organic price program, or about managing thetransition to organic and certification require-ments. To contact Peter Miller directly, leave avoice message at (888)-444-6455 at extension 407,or email him at [email protected] also will represent Organic Valley atregional agricultural meetings and will hostneighborhood procurement programs and indi-vidual farm visits.

The recruitment of organic beef producers, bothcertified organic cull cows & meat steers, as wellas hogs for The Organic Meat Company, a subsid-iary of Organic Valley, will be among Miller’spriorities. The Organic Meat Company will bedeveloping a meat production pool in the NewEngland region and in New York and Pennsylvaniaover the next year. That branded meat product islabeled under Organic Prairie Family of Farms.

Organized in 1988, Organic Valley representsmore than 633 farmers in 17 states. It owes itssuccess to staying independent and true to itsmission: keeping small and mid-sized farmersfarming. It’s the only national organic brand that is100-percent farmer-owned and proudly the onlyindependent national organic dairy in the UnitedStates. In the last year alone, the cooperativeachieved record success both in sales (up 25% to

Organic Valley Family of Farms AppointsPeter Miller East Region Pool Coordinator

photo courtesy Organic Valley

Peter Miller,Eastern Region Pool Coordinator

$156 million) and in farmer recruitment (up 23%to 633 farmers), and it is expected to realize an all-time high of $206 million in sales this year. Itsincreased number of acres and cows brought intothe organic system was equally strong (up to95,000 acres and 20,500 cows). Additionally, theOrganic Valley brand is now the top-sellingorganic milk in both mainstream supermarkets andnatural foods outlets along the entire Easternseaboard.

Organic Valley makes more than 130 organic soy,milk, cheese, butter, spreads, creams, eggs, pro-duce, juice and meats sold in food cooperatives,natural foods stores and supermarkets throughoutthe country. For further information, contactOrganic Valley at 608-625-2606 or visitwww.organicvalley.coop <http://www.organicvalley.coop/> .

Saturday, March 5, 2005Merrimack Valley High School,

Concord, NHAll day conference featuring over 28 workshops in4 sessions, on food, farming, gardening and relatedtopics. All farmers, gardeners, food enthusiasts,homesteaders and friends of the earth welcome.Keynote Speaker: Lindsey Ketchel, Director ofAgricultural Programs for the Intervale Founda-tion in Burlington, VT.For more information and registration formscontact: NOFA NH at [email protected], (603)224-5022, www.nofanh.org

NOFA NH’s Third AnnualWinter Conference:

“Land as Our Heritage”

The Sustainable Agriculture Research and Educa-tion (SARE) program is pleased to announce thatJean-Paul Courtens, Peter Kenagy and RonMacher are the winners of SARE’s 2004 PatrickMadden Award contest, a biannual prize forproducers who are not only profitable, but alsovalue the environment and their communities.SARE is funded by the Cooperative State Re-search, Education, and Extension Service(CSREES), USDA, and works with producers,researchers, and educators to promote farmingsystems that are profitable, environmentallysound, and good for communities.

Jean-Paul Courtens, of Kinderhook, N.Y, runs oneof the largest, most innovative community-supported agriculture farms in the country, raisingmore than 50 organic vegetables and distributingthem to residents through an arrangement thatallows people to buy “shares” in the farm inexchange for weekly deliveries of fresh produce.

Albany, Ore., vegetable grower Peter Kenagysafeguards his land and the Willamette Riverthrough ambitious stewardship measures, such asconservation tillage, soil-saving cover crops andriverside buffers.

Diversified vegetable and livestock producer RonMacher of Clark, Mo., earns profits with his value-added meat, feed and open-pollinated corn andsells commodities like katahdin lamb, heirloomchicken and vegetables through diverse outlets.

SARE’s judging panel also recommended thatmore than 30 producers be recognized as honor-able mentions in the contest. Visit http://www.sare.org/coreinfo/madden2004_winners.htmfor a complete list of award winners, honorablemention recipients, and more information abouteach recipient’s farming operation. Printed awardbooklets with profiles of award recipients areavailable for distribution at workshops, field days,or conferences. For a copy of this publication,send your name, shipping address, and the numberof copies you would like to Mandy Rodrigues [email protected].

CourtensWins 2004MaddenAward


by Bill Duesing & Kathy Litchfield

Learn how to design and maintain ecologicallandscapes. Build your business on the health ofthe earth. Meet a growing consumer demand.

The 4th Annual NOFA Course in Organic LandCare will be held in Massachusetts on January 18,19, 20, 24 and 25, 2005 at the MassachusettsHorticultural Society’s Elm Bank Center inWellesley and in Connecticut on February 8, 9, 10,15 and 16, 2005 at Connecticut AgriculturalExperiment Station in New Haven. The course issponsored by the CT-Mass Organic Land CareProgram of the Northeast Organic FarmingAssociation.

The demand for organic landscaping services hasnever been greater. Growing public awareness ofthe hazards associated with the use of pesticidesand fertilizers, plus new legislation mandatingleast toxic and nontoxic alternatives to conven-tional land care, are fueling a new market opportu-nity for professionals with knowledge of organicland care.

This 5-day, 32.5-hour course for professionals willprovide the education needed for an understandingof organic land care- from design to maintenance. Instructors include experienced organic land carepractitioners and respected scientists. The curricu-lum is based on Standards for Organic Land Care:Practices for Design and Maintenance of Ecologi-cal Landscapes, written by NOFA’s CT-MAOrganic Land Care Committee. These Standards,first published in 2001 and revised annually,extend the vision of organic agriculture to the careof the entire landscape and are the first of theirkind in the country.

4th Annual NOFA Course inOrganic Land Care

The following classes will be offered: Principlesand Procedures; Site Analysis, Design, andMaintenance; Rain Gardens/Storm Water Infiltra-tion; Soil Health; Soil Foodweb; Fertilizer andSoil Amendments; Composting; Lawns; LawnAlternatives; Planting and Plant Care; Wetlands;Pest Management; Wildlife Management; DiseaseControl; Weeds; Mulches; Invasive Plants; andClient Relations. Four case studies are included inthe course.At the end of the course attendees will be able toincorporate methods and materials that respectnatural ecology and the long-term health of theenvironment into the care of their own landscapesor ones that they manage. Those who pass theoptional exam offered at the conclusion of thecourse become NOFA accredited organic land careprofessionals, able to use the NOFA Organic LandCare Logo.

Over 200 land care professionals from eight stateshave taken the course in the last three years inConnecticut or Massachusetts. These professionalsinclude landscapers from large and small firms,landscape architects, garden center employees,municipal groundskeepers and property managers.

Sarah Little, Ph.D., Coordinator, MA PesticideAwareness Collaborative, author of PesticideReduction Resource Guide for Citizens andMunicipalities of Massachusetts, believes:“The NOFA Standards for Organic Land Careprovides the foundation for a trusting relationshipbetween the landscaper and the client who are

working together to create a healthy and sustain-able property. We have found these Standards,along with the NOFA course which teaches them,to be an absolutely essential base for our state-wide efforts to move the public towards healthierand more ecologically sound suburban practices.”

The cost of the course is $350. The course feeincludes the 2004 edition of the Standards, anextensive course notebook and organic lunches. The optional accreditation exam and fee is anadditional $150 and can be paid at the time of thecourse.

For more information about the Massachusettscourse in January, contact Kathy Litchfield,NOFA/Mass. Organic Land Care Course Coordi-nator, at (978) 724-0108,[email protected] or visitwww.organiclandcare.net.

For more information about the Connecticutcourse in February, contact Bill Duesing, CTNOFA Organic Land Care Program Coordinator, at(203) 888-5146 or [email protected] or visitwww.organiclandcare.net.

NOFA is a community including farmers, garden-ers, landscapers and consumers working to edu-cate members and the general public about thebenefits of local organic systems based on com-plete cycles, natural materials, and minimal wastefor the health of individual beings, communitiesand the living planet.

Milton, Vermont. Willow Smart and husband,David Phinney, win big at the World CheeseAwards held in London, England on Sept. 2,2004....Receiving a gold, two silvers and a bronze,this husband and wife team started making cheesejust 8 years ago. All cheese recipes developed on-farm, thru much trial and error their hard work hasfinally paid off. Competing against small compa-nies as well as large industrial cheese operations,the World Cheese Awards Competition is open toall countries of the globe. Taking advantage ofinternational shipping/customs offered by the USDairy Export Council, the couple entered this yearfor the first time and was awarded 4 medals- themost of any US company! Other recent awardsinclude two this summer at the prestigious Ameri-can Cheese Society’s annual competition inWisconsin, July 2004. Willow Hill Farm is a smalland diverse organic farm raising dairy sheep,cows, vegetables and berries.

For more info, please contact:Willow Hill Farm, LLCWillow Smart/David Phinney313 Hardscrabble RdMilton, VT [email protected]

Willow Hill OrganicFarm Wins Gold at

InternationalCheese Awards!


Holy Cows and Hog Heaven: The FoodBuyer’s Guide to Farm Friendly Foodby Joel Salatinpublished by Polyface, Inc., distributed by ChelseaGreen, White River Junction, VT. 800-639-4099,www.chelseagreen.com2004, 134 pages, paperback, $14.00

reviewed by Jack Kittredge

This is another of Joel’s wonderful shoot-from-the-hip bibles. Pigeonholing himself as a Christianlibertarian environmental capitalist, he explainshow anyone can take action against the myriad illsbesetting American agriculture: subsidies, con-tamination, cloning, genetic engineering, corporatecontrol, toxic chemicals, global hegemony… Justmake the change to buying farm friendly food!

What Salatin means by farm friendly food is prettymuch what he is doing on his farm in Virginia, orwhat NOFA people do at farmers markets and

CSAs. He characterizes the farm friendly produc-ers as those who have the integrity to maintainhigh quality and not to be tempted to grow beyondwhat the land base and owner-management cansupport. Additionally, they are willing to be open— answer questions honestly and let customerswander around — and have a neighbor-friendlyoperation that sounds, looks and smells attractive.

Farm friendly food is raised on fertile soils,teeming with life. It is picked or slaughtered at thepeak of health and made available to the customerwithout delay, with minimal processing or packag-ing. It is produced in a manner that values thewhole over the parts, which looks first to naturalsystems for guidance, and asks science to solveonly the problems it should.

In return, farm friendly food patrons need todeserve to eat well. They need to put energy intolooking for the food they want, and talking to the

farmers. They need to be willing to spend time inthe kitchen, cleaning vegetables, cutting upchickens, making meals from simple, unprocessed(decidedly inconvenient) food. They need to bewilling to eat what is locally fresh (or preserve itduring the season for later enjoyment), and use allthe parts (pigs have more than loins and chops –their feet make excellent soup and their fat greatcooking lard.) They usually need a freezer andwould do well with something akin to a root cellaras well. Lastly, they need to be appreciative of thefood they get, and forgiving if it doesn’t measureup to the cosmetically perfect but dead andtasteless stuff they can get at the supermarket.

Salatin sees farm friendly food as the answer tomany of society’s ills today. He believes that thepoor health so many of our people are in is a directresult of America’s cheap food policy. Returningto vital, local food would not only restore vigor toour people, it would enable farmers around theglobe, who have been driven off their land by aflood of low-cost American ag imports, to returnto their land and begin to feed their own people.

To do all this, Joel says, we need to deal rationallywith the issue of food safety. In it’s name areenforced a myriad of regulations which make itexceedingly difficult to produce healthy food inthis country. Things like pasteurization, irradia-tion, mass slaughters for avian influenza or hoofand mouth disease, $100,000 slaughter facilitiesfor killing a few hundred birds a year. Look at thereal dangers, he says, and make regulationssensible and appropriate to scale. Allow entrepre-neurs to develop new products and new farmingsystems that improve on things, not continue torepeat the old, accepted mistakes.

The basic message in all Salatin’s books is a goodone: you have to take responsibility for your life.That means the food you eat, the way you educateyour children, the kind of work you do. It may beeasier to go along; to do it like everybody else. Butyou will pay for that in the end. The consumersociety, and the corporations and bureaucratswhich control it, do not have your best interests atheart. Only you can decide what they are.

Book Reviews

T h e N a t u r a l F a r m e rWinter , 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 45Microhydro: Clean Power from Waterby Scott Davispublished by New Society Publishers, P.O Box 189, Gabriola Island, BC VORIXO, Canada, www.newsociety.com2003, 156 pages, US$22.95

reviewed by Ciaran Murphy

By now you are probably tired of how high energy prices are getting. Theykeep going up, with no end in sight. How much longer will everyone be able toafford power? Are you thinking about alternative energy sources? You haveseveral options, including: solar, wind, and the somewhat unpopular water-power.

In Microhydro, author Scott Davis tries to tell us about the advantages of usinghydroelectric power, and the disadvantages of other forms of energy. Theadvantages do seem very nice: constant, uninterrupted power, day or night, andwhether the wind is blowing or not. Unfortunately, building a Microhydro(small hydropower station) is much more difficult and expensive than any ofthe other systems.

A Microhydro has more requirements than any of the other systems. First ofall, you need flowing water on or near your property. I think half of the peoplereading this have stopped reading. The next requirement is a need for electric-ity, but not too much. Appliances like clothes dryers and freezers use too muchpower (although you can modify them), and your system won’t be able tohandle it. The third major requirement is money, and not a little. Once youdecide you meet the requirements, you can read this guide and get building!Hurry too, because this looks like it will take a while.

The book begins with an introduction to electricity and hydro concepts. Thenthe author moves on to comparing Microhydro systems to the alternatives.After that, Mr. Davis asks us to rate our power consumption, anywhere from“The Basics” (a light or two, or a recreational vehicle), to “Full Service House-hold” or “More Power than You Know What to Do With” (everything youneed). Then you rate your capacity, or the largest load you will really need,from “Just the tiniest bit of power” (maybe enough to charge a laptop), to“Enough to spare”, which is pretty self-explanatory.

When you have decided how much power you will need, it is time to go outsideand take a look at your stream or other moving body of water. You need to testthe speed of your stream; Mr. Davis provides several different ways of figuringthat out. Then you measure your stream’s pressure. There are several othermeasurements to be taken. These measurements determine what equipmentyou will need; unfortunately, the author doesn’t spend a lot of time explainingsome of them.

Once you have figured out your flow, pressure, and loss, it is time to buybatteries. Why would you need batteries in a water system when water flowsall the time? If you have batteries and a fairly slow stream, you can runappliances that need more power. The author recommends golf cart batteriesbecause they last so long.

Then we are told what will go in the box that is the powerhouse. Mr. Davispresents us with a list of recommended turbines. Each one has an impressivedescription. After that there are a few paragraphs on power transmission.

Now the real fun begins! The next chapter is on all the digging and all the realwork you need to do. Mr. Davis tells us about which types of pipe we can useto connect to the powerhouse. Unless you live right next to your stream, it isrecommended that you bury the pipe for its protection. That sounds easy; justbury a few hundred feet of pipe! Frost levels can be over six feet in certainareas. Oh boy! Get ready to dig deep. Mr. Davis makes it look very easy, andputs in relatively little time explaining it. Then he explains a few more parts ofthe system, like plumbing in the powerhouse and intake screens, before endingthe chapter abruptly. I assume this means you are done. After that, there is achapter on regulations, and one on examples of systems in use.

Obviously this book is in its first version. Scott Davis seems a little biasedwhen it comes to energy. In the beginning, he takes the opportunity to telleveryone how great hydropower is compared to solar. A little later he says thatsolar may be good for just a few lights. Is that completely true? Solar power isthe most popular type of renewable energy out there. It must be good for morethan that. I don’t think Mr. Davis should criticize solar so much just becausehe is writing about water. The book seems a little thin for what it is trying tocover. Maybe the author could have added a little more detail concerningcertain parts, such as a few more comparisons between Microhydro and thealternatives, so we really know if hydropower is as good as he says. Every-thing else was great though, and I look forward to reading future versions.


ConnecticutCT NOFA Office: P O Box 386, Northford, CT06472, phone (203) 888-5146, FAX (203) 888-9280, Email: [email protected], website:www.ctnofa.orgPresident: Peter Rothenberg, 53 Lanes Pond Rd.,Northford, CT 06472-1125 (203) 484-9570(home), [email protected] President: Kimberly A. Stoner, 498 Oak Ave.#27, Cheshire, CT 06410-3021, (203) 271-1732(home), Email: [email protected]: Ron Capozzi, 69R Meetinghouse HillRd., Durham, CT 06422-2808, (860) 349-1417,[email protected]: Mary Tyrrell, 124 Mather St. Hamden,CT 06517, (203) 287-0368, Email:[email protected]: Rob Durgy, P.O. Box 17, Chaplin CT06235-0288, (860) 455-0881, Email:[email protected] Coordinator: Bill Duesing, Box 135,Stevenson, CT, 06491, (203) 888-5146, fax, (203)888- 9280, [email protected]

MassachusettsPresident: Frank Albani Jr., 17 Vinal Avenue,Plymouth, MA 02360, (508) 224-3088, email:[email protected] President: Sharon Gensler, 87b BullardPasture Rd. Wendell, MA 01379, (978) 544-6347,email: [email protected]: Leslie Chaison, 84 Lockes Village Rd.Wendell, MA 01379, (978) 544-2590, email:[email protected] and Executive Coordinator: JulieRawson, 411 Sheldon Rd., Barre, MA 01005 (978)355-2853, Fax: (978) 355-4046, Email:[email protected] Assistant/Fiscal Manager: ElaineM. Peterson, 411 Sheldon Rd, Barre, MA 01005(Tuesdays & Fridays, 9:00 am - 4:00 pm), email:[email protected]: Paul Kittredge, 1884 Columbia Rd.NW, Washington, D.C. 20009, (202) 667-3425,[email protected] Organic Certifiers Administrator: DonFranczyk, 683 River St., Winchendon, MA 01475,(978) 297- 4171, Email: [email protected] Educator: Ed Stockman, 131 SummitSt. Plainfield, MA 01070, (413) 634- 5024,[email protected] Editor: Jonathan von Ranson, 6 LockesVillage Rd., Wendell, MA 01379, (978) 544-3758,Email: [email protected]: www.nofamass.org Email:[email protected]

NOFA Contact PeopleNew HampshirePresident: Larry Pletcher, PO Box 204, Warner,NH 03278, (603) [email protected] President: Essie Hull, 115 Baptist Rd. Canter-bury, NH 03224 (603) 224-2448,[email protected]: Paul Mercier, Jr., 39 Cambridge Drive,Canterbury, NH 03224, (603) 783-0036,[email protected]/Program & Membership Coordinator:Elizabeth Obelenus, NOFA/NH Office, 4 Park St.,Suite 208, Concord, NH 03301, (603) 224-5022,[email protected]: Craig Federhen, 50 Little River Rd.,Kingston, NH 03848, (603) 642-5497,[email protected] Certification: Vickie Smith, NHDABureau of Markets, Caller Box 2042, Concord,NH 03301 (603) 271-3685,[email protected]: www.nofanh.org,

New JerseyPresident: Stephanie Harris, 163 Hopewell-Wertsville Rd., Hopewell, NJ 08525, (609) 466-0194, [email protected] President: Pam Flory, PO Box 85, Hopewell,NJ 08534 (609) 466-4217, [email protected]: William D. Bridgers, c/o Zon Partners,5 Vaughn Dr., Suite 104, Princeton, NJ 08540,(609) 452-1653, [email protected]: Olga Wickerhauser, NJ Ag. ExperimentStation, 88 Lipman Dr., New Brunswick, NJ08901 (732) 932-1000 x564,[email protected] Editor: Mikey Azzara, PO Box 886,Pennington, NJ 08534-0886, (609) 737-6848, fax:(609) 737-2366, Email: [email protected] Director: Karen Anderson, 60 S. MainSt., PO Box 886, Pennington, NJ 08534-0886,(609) 737-6848, fax: (609) 737-2366, Email:[email protected] Administrator: Erich V. Bremer, 60S. Main St., PO Box 886, Pennington, NJ 08534-0886, (609) 737-6848, [email protected]: www.nofanj.org

New YorkPresident: Alton Earnhart, 1408 Clove Valley Rd.,Hopewell Junction, NY12533, (845) 677-9507,[email protected] President: Scott Chaskey, Peconic LandTrust/Quail Hill Farm, PO Box 1268, Amagansett,NY 11930-1268, H (631) 725-9228 W (631) 267-8942, [email protected]

Secretary: Mary Racinowski, 58 Marion St,Rochester, NY 14610, (716) 482-8697,[email protected]: Maureen Knapp, Cobblestone ValleyEnterprises, LLC, Box 121, 2023 Preble Rd,Preble, NY 13141, (607) 749-4032,[email protected] Liaison: Mary Jo Long, 534 ChaseRd, Afton, NY 13730, H (607) 967-8274, W (607)639-2783 F (607) 639-2768,[email protected] Editor: Stu McCarty, PO Box 70, 632Tunnel Rd., Tunnel, NY 13848 (607) 693-1572,fax: (607) 693-4415, [email protected] Director: Sarah Johnston, 591 LansingRd. #A, Fultonville, NY 12072-2628, (518) 922-7937, fax: (518) 922-7646,[email protected] Manager: Mayra Richter, PO Box 880,Cobleskill, NY 12043-0880, (518) 734-5495, fax:(518) 734-4641, [email protected] Certified Organic, LLC, 840 FrontStreet, Binghamton, NY 13905, (607) 724-9851,fax: (607) 724-9853, [email protected] Education Coordinator: Brian Caldwell,Hemlock Grove Farm, 180 Walding Ln, Spencer,NY 14883-9609, (607) 564-1060,[email protected] Seed Initiative Project Coordinator:Michael Glos, Kingbird Farm, 9398 West CreekRd, Berkshire, NY 13736-1329, (607) 657-2860,[email protected]: www.nofany.org

Rhode IslandPresident: Fritz Vohr, In the Woods Farm, 51Edwards Lane, Charlestown, RI 02813 (401) 364-0050, [email protected]: Isabel Barten, 69 Lenox Ave.,Providence, RI 02907, (401) 941-8684Secretary: Jeanne Chapman, 25 Yates Ave.,Coventry, RI 02816 (401) 828-3229,[email protected]/RI : 51 Edwards Lane, Charlestown, RI02813, Fax (401) 364-1699, [email protected],www.nofari.org

VermontNOFA-VT Office, P. O. Box 697, Bridge St.,Richmond, VT 05477 (802) 434-4122, Fax: (802)434-4154, website: www.nofavt.org,[email protected] Director: Enid Wonnacott,[email protected] Financial Manager: Kirsten Novak Bower,[email protected] Conference & Summer Workshops Coordi-nator: Olga Boshart, [email protected] Certification Administrator & TechnicalAssistance Coordinator: John Cleary,[email protected]


Saturday, December 4 — Sunday, December5: Restoring Our Seed Conference, School forInternational Training, Brattleboro, VT. formore info: http://growseed.org/conference04.html

Saturday, December 11: Seminar on DirectMarketing Farm-Raised Meats, Albany, NY. formore info: 518-271-0744 [email protected]

Saturday, December 11: Winter GreenhouseProduction of Organic Vegetables, PocanticoHills, NY. for more info: 914-366-6200 x112 [email protected]

Saturday, January 15, 2005: CT NOFA’sTransition to Organic Conference, ExperimentStation in Windsor, CT. for more info seewww.ctnofa.org or call 203-888-5146

Tuesday, January 18 to Thursday, January20, 2005 and again Monday, January 24 toTuesday, January 25: 4th Annual NOFACourse in Organic Land Care, Wellesley, MA.for more info: Kathy Litchfield, (978) 724-0108, [email protected] or visitwww.organiclandcare.net.

Saturday, January 22, 2005: 18th AnnualNOFA/Mass Winter Conference & AnnualMeeting, Keynote by Andrew Kimbrell.Quabbin Regional High School, Barre, MA. formore info: Kate Harris, [email protected] or (413) 586-5516.

Saturday, January 22, 2005: Ninth AnnualVermont Grazing Conference. Keynote byHolistic Management founder Allan Savory.Vermont Technical College, Randolph Center,VT. for more info: (802) 656-5459.

Friday, January 28 to Sunday, January 30,2005: NOFA-NY’s 23rd Annual Conference,Syracuse, NY. Organic Community - Diversityfrom Soil to PlateFeatured speakers: Diane Whealey, Seed SaversExchange; Tom Frantzen, Practical Farmers ofIowa; E. Ann Clark, University of GuelphOntario. for more info: Mayra at (607) 652-NOFA or [email protected]

CalendarSaturday, January 29, 2005: NOFA-NJ’s 14thAnnual Winter Conference, “Greener Fields:Embracing the Diversity of Organic”, CookCollege Campus Center, Rutgers University, NewBrunswick, NJ. for more info, contact (609) 737-6848 or www.nofanj.org

Mondays January 31, February 28 and March28 2005: Marketing Your Livestock Products:Meat, Dairy and Fiber, Vermont College, Mont-pelier, VT for more information, 802-434-4122 oremail [email protected] [email protected].

Tuesday, February 8 to Thursday, February10, 2005 and again Tuesday, February 15 toWednesday, February 16: 4th Annual NOFACourse in Organic Land Care, New Haven, CT.for more info: Bill Duesing, (203) 888-5146 [email protected] or visitwww.organiclandcare.net. Saturday, February 12, 2005: 23rd AnnualNOFA-VT Winter Conference, “CommunityRelationships with the Land for a Broader SocialChange”, Vermont Technical College inRandolph, Vermont. Peter Forbes will give thekeynote. for more info: (802) 434-4122 [email protected]. Saturday, March 5, 2005: NOFA-NH’s ThirdAnnual Winter Conference, “Land as Our Heri-tage,” Concord, NH. for more info,[email protected], (603) 224-5022,www.nofanh.org

Saturday, March 5, 2005: CT NOFA’s End ofWinter Conference. Keynote address fromRussell Libby, Executive Director of the MaineOrganic Farmers and Gardeners Association.Windsor High School in Windsor, CT. for moreinfo see www.ctnofa.org or call 203-888-5146

Friday April 29, 2005: Organic BeekeepingWorkshop, Gunther Hauk, presenter. The PfeifferCenter for Biodynamics and the Environment,Chestnut Ridge, NY. for more info: 845-352-5020ext. 20; [email protected]; orwww.pfeiffercenter.org

You may join NOFA by joining one of the sevenstate chapters. Contact the person listed below foryour state. Dues, which help pay for the importantwork of the organization, vary from chapter tochapter. Unless noted, membership includes asubscription to The Natural Farmer.

Give a NOFA Membership! Send dues for a friendor relative to his or her state chapter and give amembership in one of the most active grassrootsorganizations in the state.

Connecticut: Individual/Family: $35 to $50,Business/Institution: $100, Supporting $150,Student (full-time, please supply school name) $25Contact: Join on the web at www.ctnofa.org or mailto CT NOFA, Box 135, Stevenson, CT 06491,Contact Bill Duesing at (203) 888-5146 [email protected]

Massachusetts: Individual $30, Family $40.Supporting $100, Low-Income $20Contact: Membership, 411 Sheldon Road, Barre,MA 01005, (978) 355-2853, (Tuesdays and Fri-days, 9:00 am – 4:00 pm) or email:[email protected]

New Hampshire: Individual: $25, Student: $18,Family: $35, Supporting: $100, Basic* $15,Contact: Elizabeth Obelenus, 4 Park St., Suite 208,Concord, NH 03301, (603) 224-5022,[email protected]

New Jersey: Individual $35, Family/Organiza-tional $50, Business/Organization $100, LowIncome: $15*Contact: P O Box 886, Pennington, NJ 08534-0886,(609) 737-6848 or join at www.nofanj.org

New York*: Student/Senior/Limited Income $15,Individual $30, Family/Farm/Nonprofit Organiza-tion $40, Business/Patron $100. Add $10 to abovemembership rates to include subscription to TheNatural Farmer.Contact: Mayra Richter, NOFA-NY, P O Box 880,Cobleskill, NY 12043, Voice (607)-652-NOFA,Fax: (607)-652-2290, Email: [email protected],www.nofany.org

Rhode Island: Student/Senior: $20, Individual:$25, Family $35, Business $50Contact: Membership, NOFA RI, 51 EdwardsLane, Charlestown, RI 02813 (401) 364-0050,[email protected]

Vermont: Individual $30, Farm/Family $40,Business $50, Sponsor $100, Sustainer $250,Basic $15-25*Contact: NOFA-VT, PO Box 697, Richmond, VT05477, (802) 434-4122, [email protected]

*does not include a subscription to The NaturalFarmer

NOFA Membership

VOF Certification Assistant: Nicole Dehne,[email protected] Coordinator: Sarah Flack,[email protected] and Livestock Advisor: Nat Bacon,[email protected] and Livestock Advisor: Lisa McCrory,[email protected] Manager: Kim Cleary, [email protected] Education & VT FEED Coordinator: AbbieNelson, [email protected]

NOFA Interstate Council* indicates voting representative* Bill Duesing, Staff, Box 135, Stevenson, CT,06491, (203) 888-5146, fax, (203) 888- 9280,[email protected] A. Stoner, 498 Oak Ave. #27, Cheshire,CT 06410-3021, (203) 271-1732 (home), Email:[email protected]* Tom Johnson, Whole Foods Liaison, 87 WellsRd., Lincoln, MA 01773 (781) 259-0070,[email protected]* Mary Blake, P O Box 52 Charlton Depot, MA01509 (508)-248-5496 email:[email protected]* Larry Pletcher, PO Box 204, Warner, NH 03278,(603) 456-3121, [email protected] Obelenus, 22 Keyser Road, Meredith.NH 03253, (603) 279-6146, [email protected]* Karen Anderson, PO Box 886, Pennington, NJ08534, (609) 737-6848, [email protected]* Stephanie Harris, 163 Hopewell-Wertsville Rd.,Hopewell, NJ 08525, (609) 466-0194,[email protected]* Steve Gilman, 130 Ruckytucks Road, Stillwater,NY 12170 (518) 583-4613,[email protected]* Alton Earnhart, 1408 Clove Valley Rd., HopewellJunction, NY12533, (845) 677-9507,[email protected] Johnston, 591 Lansing Rd. #A, Fultonville,NY 12072-2630, (518) 922-7937, fax: (518) 922-7646, [email protected] Henderson, 2218 Welcher Rd., Newark,NY 14513 (315) [email protected]* Fritz & Pat Vohr, In the Woods Farm, 51Edwards Lane, Charlestown,RI 02813 (401) 364-0050, [email protected]* Enid Wonnacott, 478 Salvas Rd., Huntington, VT05462 (802) 434-4435 [email protected]* Camilla Roberts, 35 Sleepy Valley Rd., Athens,VT 05143 (802) 869-1388, [email protected] Novak Bower, 65 Wortheim Ln., Rich-mond, VT 05477 (802) 434-5420,[email protected] Cleary, 407 Rt. 15, Underhill, VT 05489,(802) 899-3808. [email protected] Magilavy, Virtual Rep, 212 18th St., UnionCity, NJ 07087, (201) 863-1741Jonathan von Ranson, Manuals Project, 6 LocksVillage Rd., Wendell, MA 01379, (978) 544-3758,Email: [email protected] Kittredge, Webmaster, 1884 Columbia Rd.NW #415, Washington DC, 20009, 202-667-3425,

[email protected] Kittredge and Julie Rawson, The NaturalFarmer, NOFA Summer Conference, 411 SheldonRd., Barre, MA 01005 (978) 355-2853,[email protected], [email protected] Peterson, Manuals Support, 411 SheldonRd., Barre, MA 01005 (978) 355-2853, Email:[email protected]

Interstate Certification ContactsJohn Cleary, 407 Rt. 15, Underhill, VT 05489,(802) 899-3808 [email protected] King & Lisa Engelbert, 840 Front Street,Binghamton, NY 13905, (607) 724-9851, fax:(607)724-9853, [email protected] V. Bremer, PO Box 886, Pennington, NJ08534-0886, (609) 737-6848, [email protected]

NOFA Membership

phot

o by

Jack

Kitt

redg

e

Con

nect

icut

farm

er S

teve

n B

ibul

a’s g

rass

-fed

Dev

ons b

olt f

or th

e a

new

pad

dock

once

he

take

s dow

n a

sing

le st

rand

of e

lect

rifie

d w

ire.

New

s, fe

atur

es a

nd a

rtic

les a

bout

org

anic

gro

win

g in

the

Nor

thea

st,

plus

a S

peci

al S

uppl

emen

t on

Org

anic

Mea

t

Win

ter,

2004

- 20

05$3

.00

NO

FA E

duca

tion

Fund

411

Shel

don

Rd.

Bar

re, M

A 0

1005

Non

-Pro

fit O

rgan

izat

ion

U. S

. Pos

tage

Pai

dB

arre

, MA

010

05Pe

rmit

No.

28

Satish Kumar to Keynote - Northeast Organic Farming ...

Documents

Transcript of Satish Kumar to Keynote - Northeast Organic Farming ...