To bee or not to bee

Wednesday, May 07, 2008

We’ve been concerned about bee populations for a while now, since the minute the reports of colony collapses began to be reported.  Those of us who garden truly understand the benefit of bees, and by now I think most of us appreciate the impact of bees on our food sources.  It’s said that Einstein predicted the end of mankind within four years without bees.

A report out yesterday indicates that bee health in commercial colonies has declined even since last year.

A survey of bee health released Tuesday revealed a grim picture, with 36.1 percent of the nation’s commercially managed hives lost since last year.

Last year’s survey commissioned by the Apiary Inspectors of America found losses of about 32 percent.

As beekeepers travel with their hives this spring to pollinate crops around the country, it’s clear the insects are buckling under the weight of new diseases, pesticide drift and old enemies like the parasitic varroa mite, said Dennis vanEngelsdorp, president of the group.

This is the second year the association has measured colony deaths across the country. This means there aren’t enough numbers to show a trend, but clearly bees are dying at unsustainable levels and the situation is not improving, said vanEngelsdorp, also a bee expert with the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.

Pennsylvania has committed an additional $20,400 into Colony Collapse Disorder research at Penn State, bringing the total funds dedicated to investigating CCD to $86,000.  That doesn’t seem like nearly enough money to me to investigate something that could impact us all so radically.

Just last year Pennsylvania apple growers, as well as fruit growers throughout the region, had trouble getting enough bees to pollinate their acreage.  The cost of renting commercial bees increased by 60%.  With the greater decline, rental prices will likely increase again, and farmers will be forced to pass on the extra costs to consumers.

So what can you and I do?  No one really knows exactly what’s killing off the bees, but we can support wild bee habitats.  Honeybees are not the only good pollinators - bumblebees and Mason bees are also prized for pollination.  To make your yard or patio bee-friendly, grow plants that have plenty of nectar and pollen.  Feed the bees!  Avoid pesticides and other harsh chemicals.  And be sure to give bees a place to live.  You can purchase bee habitats, but you can just as easily build your own.

Making Philadelphia fruity!

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Philadelphia is not exactly known for its fantastic foraging, but things are changing thanks to the Philadelphia Orchard Project.  POP is out there planting fruit and nut trees and berries - they say doing so “provide[s] healthy food free or at low cost, create[s] jobs, stimulate[s] related business, reduce[s] crime, increase[s] summer cooling, make[s] space for beauty and play.” Whatever the reason, I think it’s a cool idea.

My friend Al was on hand for a recent POP outing to 8th & Poplar.  They planted prepped a lot for planting, and planted persimmons and berries and other things.

A new and very cool toy I found on the POP site is this Google map of public fruit!  I’ll definitely be adding some locations to the map as I discover new public fruit.

If you’re interested in getting involved with the Philadelphia Orchard Project or want to slip them a gift out of your economic stimulus check, be sure to head over to their website.

Photo with permission from Albert Yee

Milking the situtation

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

You may remember that January 1 was supposed to be the date on which dairies who produce milk from cows not injected with growth hormones officially had to stop labeling milk as hormone-free, etc..  Apparently, enough consumers voiced their concern - last Thursday there was...well, a change in attitude.

Due to consumer demand for continued labeling, this plan was revised and last Thursday the state announced new guidelines. Instead of standardizing labeling completely, the new plan requires milk labels be uniform, not be misleading, and that there be a paper trail to verify the claims.

For instance, instead of a label simply stating “No BST,” - which is short for bovine somatotropin and occurs naturally in cows — the label must read “from cows not treated with rbST” (the synthetic version of the hormone). Most importantly, it must also clearly state that no significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rbST-treated and non-rbST-treated cows.

This is a great victory for consumers!  However, the debate rages on in other states.  And not just for milk produced without rbST, but also for raw milk.  You might have heard that last year Georgia proposed dying raw milk gray so that people wouldn’t drink it, and there’s always someone arguing over the health risks or health benefits of consuming raw milk or raw milk products.

If you’re interested in learning more about raw milk consumption, I’d suggest you check out the Rutgers University seminar series on raw milk.  There are several upcoming events that are free and open to the public with no reservations required:

1) Raw Milk, Mother Nature’s Inconvenient Truth

Mark McAfee, Organic Pastures Dairy Mark McAfee is founder of Organic Pastures Dairy in California. He is internationally recognized as an expert in raw milk production, working closely with government officials and university researchers to demonstrate the superior quality and safety of raw milk. http://www.organicpastures.com

February 6, 2008 - two talks: 2:00-4:30 pm, Foran Hall, Room 138B, seating capacity 40 Rutgers University, 59 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, NJ

7:00 pm, Cook Student Center, Multi-purpose Room, seating capacity 350 Rutgers University, 59 Biel Road, New Brunswick, NJ Co-Sponsored by New Jersey Agriculture Experiment Station & Rutgers University Cook Organic Garden Club

2) Raw Milk Wars, Government’s Attempt to Dictate What Foods We Can Consume

David G. Cox, Attorney at Law, Lane, Alton & Horst LLC Gary Cox has been defending farmers and protecting consumers in their struggles to make raw milk and raw dairy products available all across the country. Gary has litigated cases on behalf of farmers in Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York, and recently filed suit against the state of California to overturn legislation that would effectively ban the sale of raw milk in that state. Gary is a former environmental prosecutor and former organic vegetable farmer who loves the land and all that it provides. http://www.lanealton.com

February 20, 2008: 1:00 pm, Marine Science Alampi Auditorium, seating capacity 95 Rutgers University, 71 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, NJ Sponsored by New Jersey Agriculture Experiment Station

For more information, please see the press release.

Eating Dolly

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

I’m sure many of us buy meat and poultry from local farmers, but there’s always going to be a time when you don’t have time to get to the farmer’s market or something and you have to buy meat from the grocery store.  That being the case, you might have been a little disturbed yesterday when the FDA announced they were OK-ing the sale of meat and dairy from cloned animals without proper labeling.

Food from healthy clones of cattle, swine and goats is as safe as food from non-cloned animals, the Food and Drug Administration said in a report released Tuesday.

“Extensive evaluation of the available data has not identified any subtle hazards that might indicate food-consumption risks in healthy clones of cattle, swine, or goats,” the 968-page “final risk assessment” concluded.

“Thus, edible products from healthy clones that meet existing requirements for meat and milk in commerce pose no increased food consumption risk(s) relative to comparable products from sexually-derived animals.”

[...] About half of the more than 30,500 comments from the public the FDA has received about the matter have dealt with labeling, he said.

But, he added, agency regulators cannot require cloned products be labeled as such if—as they assert—there is no material difference between them and food produced by conventional methods.

“There’s really nothing for us to label,” he said.

Well, then.

The good news here is that in the event you are compelled to purchase meat or milk from the grocery, you can always purchase organic: the Organic Trade Association has assured the public that meat and dairy from cloned animals cannot be sold as ‘organic’, since that would be prohibited under the National Organic Program regulations.

Look for sales of organic meat and dairy to skyrocket.

Of course, all this brouhaha is a bigger argument than ever to only purchase locally grown meat and dairy from a farmer you know and trust.

Cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Many of us have differing ideas about exactly what ‘local’ means, but I tend to think of ‘local’ as anything within 100 miles of my house.  As such, most of Maryland is included - including the Chesapeake Bay.  Chesapeake Bay seafood is pretty easy to find, but you have to think twice about whether or not it’s healthy for you.  The Bay has a ‘dead zone’ and is on the EPA’s ‘dirty waters’ list. 

The Bay is constantly being polluted with excess nitrogen, which is terrible for the health of the Bay.  The number one nitrogen polluter of the Bay is agricultural run-off, particularly manure and waste from chicken production.  I’m told that chickens outnumber people by just about 1,000 to 1 in the area.  Perdue Farms is based in Maryland.

New-ish governor of Maryland, Martin O’Malley, has proposed some new regulations that would finally let the state’s environmental agency police large chicken farms, which would - in turn - improve the quality of water in the Bay (and the quality of the seafood).  The regulations would require large chicken farms to get state permits, incorporate pollution controls, and allow inspections, or face some pretty hefty fines.  Of course, chicken industry spokespeople aren’t overly thrilled by the idea and say its unnecessary, saying that it might be cost prohibitive to family farmers.

Interestingly, federal law required Maryland to begin policing chicken farm pollution three years ago.

Dairy and pig farms have been regulated in Maryland for years, so it seems like a good idea to regulate poultry farms as well.  I have to wonder, though, if it might be more advantageous to require farmers to use more sustainable farming practices, rather than simple pollution prevention methods.  Even big corporate farms like Perdue could utilize at least some sustainable practices [like Rumbleway Farm does] without a huge cost, right?

Whatever the case, if this will significantly impact the quality of the Chesapeake Bay (and the food that comes from it), I’m all for it.

So you want to be a farmer?

Monday, January 14, 2008

Now here’s a great opportunity!  “My” farmers at Blooming Glen Farm in Perkasie are on the hunt for interns: 

Interns wanted for 2008 on Bucks County, PA farm

Blooming Glen Farm is seeking three full time, full season interns from April 1st to mid-November for 2008 (couples welcome). We are a diverse organic vegetable farm marketing to a 160 member CSA (all on farm pick-up), a weekly farmers market in Philadelphia, and local restaurants. We grow a large variety of field crops and devote the bulk of the space in our 5 greenhouses to intense tomato and heirloom tomato production. We are located in scenic Upper Bucks County, an hour from downtown Philadelphia.

We are a young ambitious farm looking for enthusiastic hard workers with a sincere interest in sustainable and organic agriculture. You will be an integral part of our team, and gain hands on experience in all aspects of the farm from seed to harvest. We provide a stipend and housing in a beautifully restored farmhouse.

Please see our website at www.bloomingglenfarm.com for more details about the internship and to apply.

Farmers Tricia and Tom are incredibly friendly, smart, creative and passionate and it shows in everything at the farm—from Tricia’s luscious food photography to the perfectly organized pick up days.  I love that they hold a work requirement for members, and the variety of produce they grow is unlike any CSA around.  As a member, I especially appreciate that they hold potluck events throughout the year, write a bi-weekly email newsletter, have an online calendar and educate us on the sometimes strange veggies we find each week. 

Clearly, I can’t say enough great things about Blooming Glen!  I’m willing to bet the internship program they offer is a pretty incredible, empowering and unique experience. 

Hmm.

I’m beginning to think I could be convinced to apply…

Plentiful

Friday, December 07, 2007

Somehow I missed that New Oxford American Dictionary word of the year was recently declared “locavore”.

“The word ‘locavore’ shows how food-lovers can enjoy what they eat while still appreciating the impact they have on the environment,” said Ben Zimmer, editor for American dictionaries at Oxford University Press. “It’s significant in that it brings together eating and ecology in a new way.”

Well, that’s nice to hear.  Apparently, those of us who strive to find and eat locally grown food, support local farms, etc. have arrived.  Kookookachoo. 

Of course, there’s nothing like media attention to muddy the waters.  Philadelphia Inquirer writer Rick Nichols wrote a column full of confusion and angst over what being a locavore means.  Bemoaning the fact that the Ardmore Farmer’s Market has stands that sell things that aren’t local in the slightest, Nichols feels overwrought.  “Do you quit them for organic apples from Washington state? Or what if you’re into heritage turkeys?” he wonders. “Do you snub ones from a top-rate Kansas farmer who needs to ship nationally to maintain old breeds?”

Who thinks this hard about what they eat?  I’m as committed as the next person who supports the local foodshed, but I don’t have these existential crises.  For starters, non-organic isn’t necessarily worse for you than certified organic. You only need to understand a little bit about sustainable growing practices to know that many small farmers can’t afford to go certified organic...but those same small farmers are practicing uncertified organic and sustainable growing practices.  And I’ll take those any day over an organic apple grown in Washington on a corporate organic farm.  Nichols really misses the point - it’s not about organic or even eating the most ethically: it’s about knowing where you’re getting your food from.  It’s about knowing something about the farmers and knowing what goes into your food’s production. 

I’m sure that there are some people who are in it for the holier than thou bragging rights it can generate.  Most of us are in it to support local farmers, or maybe because we’re concerned with food safety.

And then, finally, Nichols closes with this:

Which is of some solace. It can be lonely being a locavore, validated in word, tested in deed: The times may be ripe, but the local produce isn’t.

The locavore’s dilemma? Winter.

Well...maybe if you’re a locavore with poor planning skills.  He’s obviously never met any of Farm to Philly writers - most of us have a freezer and pantry full of local produce that’s been put up for the Winter.  Winter, a dilemma?  Hardly!  There’s plenty of ripe local produce if you take the time to look - apples, squash, parsnips, cabbage, brussels sprouts, carrots, collards...broccoli and cauliflower....celery and potatoes...mushrooms...spinach and leeks!  I would call that plentiful.  And when combined with what’s been put up in my freezer and pantry, I’m eating as well as I would in Summer.  And I’m certainly not eating any less local foods.

Thanks to reader Lauren for the tip on the editorial!

Help Markets Grow

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

The Food Trust sent out an email today announcing this op-ed piece that was recently run in the Philadelphia Inquirer.  The article, co-written by The Food Trust’s deputy executive director and a representative of the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, advocates for three measures to improve the state’s farmers’ markets:

1.  The PA state legislature should fund the grant program approved as part of the Farmers’ Market Development Act passed last year.  This would allow grants of up to $10,000 each for new or expanding markets.

2.  The voucher program that allows low-income senior citizens and mothers to buy produce at farmers’ markets should be expanded so that participants receive a greater amount per year (currently, they get a yearly $20 voucher redeemable for fresh fruits and veggies).

3.  The state should provide wireless card readers to allow markets to readily accept food stamps.

The Food Trust suggests contacting Governor Rendell and other elected officials to support these measures and including the op-ed piece if you want.  Beyond buying local, this is a great way to advocate for some tangible measures that support local farms and markets!

Local Vino Steps Up…

Saturday, November 24, 2007

...says this article in today’s Inquirer.  I’m still searching for some go-to wines from the region.  Any favorites that are must tries?

Mother’s milk

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Bad news from the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture: consumers will no longer be able to tell from looking at a milk label if the milk contains bovine growth hormones, antibiotics, or pesticides.  State Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolff says using labels that read ‘rBGH-free’ or ‘pesticide-free’ only confuse all of us hapless, idiotic consumers because we mistakenly think milk produced from cows who aren’t chock full of drugs is somehow better for us.

Some of the dairies imply their product is safer than others through absence labeling, telling consumers what is not present in the milk as opposed to what is, Wolff said.

Claims such as “antibiotic-free” and “pesticide-free” are misleading, because all processed milk sold in Pennsylvania is tested a minimum of 10 times to guarantee it is free of such substances, which are illegal for milk to contain, he said.

Consumers rely on product labels to decide what to buy and feed their families, Wolff said. The department must approve labels for milk sold in Pennsylvania and there has been more and more marketing that makes it hard for consumers to make informed decisions, he said.

Never mind that rBGH is banned in Canada and Europe, and even the U.S. General Accounting Office and the Consumer’s Union, publisher of Consumer Reports magazine, fully admit that drinking milk derived from rBGH-treated cows is potentially hazardous to humans.  Earlier this year, both the U.S. FDA and FTC ruled that rBGH- and antiobiotic-free milk labeling was appropriate and legal.  Who would possibly want to know that their milk is rBGH-free?

Sadly, Wawa only recently announced that they will process and sell milk that is free of artificial growth hormones.  One has to wonder how this will affect their Pennsylvania stores.

Under the new labeling ban, 16 Pennsylvania companies will have to ‘correct’ their labels by January 1.

Rumor has it that Monsanto, the drug giant that produces rBGH, has been working overtime to pressure Pennsylvania Ag heads to get rid of the ‘confusing’ labeling.

Local foods volunteer opportunity!

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Now that dragonboat season is almost over, I find myself with more free time than I’m used to.  I’ve been on the look out for ways to volunteer my time to organizations that I have a passion for.  Most recently, I signed up to be a clinic escort at Planned Parenthood (you walk patients into the clinic past the throngs of protesters).  And today another potential opportunity presented itself: volunteering at the Fair Food Farmstand.

FTP contributor Joanna has been volunteering there for quite some time, and today Sarah Cain, the supervisor for the Fair Food Farmstand, let me know they’re looking for more volunteers.

Volunteering at the ‘Stand is a 3-hour a week commitment, you get to work with all this great local product, and as we go into the busiest part of the year (with all these ‘food’ holidays), there’s the added bonus of getting a 30% discount at the ‘Stand once you’ve completed your training. As we’re open year-round, it also is a place where people can get their local food ‘fix’ once the farmers markets close down for the season.

I really think I may try to work this into my volunteering schedule, and I hope you’ll consider it, too.  I buy quite a bit of my food at the Farmstand - it’s an important resource for those of us who care about the quality of our food and care about supporting local farmers.

To download a volunteer application form or find out more about the Fair Food Farmstand, visit the Farmstand website.

How far will you go?

Monday, September 17, 2007

I sometimes fantasize about being able to raise livestock and grow more of what I eat on our little property in the burbs.  Growing fruit and veggies is one thing - it’s not hard.  Raising chickens or goats are quite another.  I’m poo-phobic to start with, and while I’ve seen pigs slaughtered and deer shot I’m not sure that I could bring myself to gut animals regularly.  It takes an intestinal fortitude I’m just not sure I have.

After reading this hilarious article article in New York Magazine, I’m pretty sure that I’m content to leave it to the experts.  The article chronicles one man’s attempt to provide for himself out of his back yard...in Brooklyn.  I especially loved his meal descriptions: maimed rabbit euthanasia stew and home-garroted roast rooster.  Tales abound of “bunny boot-knocking” (or lack thereof) and trying to outsmart a hen.

Few, if any, serious locavores would see my experience as having much to do with what they advocate: eating regionally and seasonally in order to save the planet. But I now better understand what will be needed to back up the slogans. Eating local is expensive and time-consuming, which is why this consumerist movement will not easily trickle down into mass society. It requires a willful abstinence from convenience and plenty, a core promise of the modern world. Our bountiful era is predicated on the division of labor: We don’t sew our own clothes, we don’t build our own houses - and we certainly don’t farm - because we’re too busy doing whatever it is we do for everyone else.

But locavores also preach the importance of valuing all the time and energy and care that go into producing good food, and there I’m with them. So, too, in the end, is Lisa. As I joined her and the kids for supper one night, after finishing my own, Lisa remarked that after seeing how hard I’d worked to put a simple plate of chicken on the table, she’d never shop the same way again. It wasn’t just a matter of buying regionally, or seasonally, or organically - the important thing was to consume responsibly. “I’ll never be as wasteful,” she said. “We throw away more food than we eat.”

I highly recommend giving the article a read.  It very much forces those of us who eat locally as much as possible to confront our limitations and our true intentions.

(Via Food Musings)

Federal money for PA organic farmers

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

Here’s something interesting to note - last Friday the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced the availability of $1 million to help farmers and processors pay for the cost of their organic certification costs.  15 states will share the $1 million proportionate to the number of organic producers in the state.  One of those states is Pennsylvania!

The states that will share the money do not traditionally receive as much crop assistance as the larger Midwestern states do in the federal farm bill. Leahy initiated the program to help deliver federal agriculture money to the farmers in the states in New England and the mid-Atlantic.

The money is specifically aimed at small farmers and will reimburse each eligible farmer 75% of certification costs up to $500. 

No doubt this will benefit all of us who enjoy eating locally grown, certified organic produce.

Digression from Tomatoes

Friday, August 31, 2007

Tuesday morning, parking and setup for the Rittenhouse Square farmers’ market went unusually smoothly, so I wandered into the Barnes & Noble across the street, contemplating the purchase of a news magazine to read over coffee.  My choice became easy once I noticed that the current issue of The New Yorker is the food issue!

(That morning, the first food-related article I came to was an amusing and tantalizing exploration of Singaporean street food, by Calvin Trillin.  If it’s feasible, I’d recommend buying the issue to read that article; sadly, only the abstract is available online.)

The full text of the article I read yesterday afternoon, however, is available online.  It’s entitled ‘New York Local’, by Adam Gopnik.  Needless to say, I was excited to read this article—localism, the word Gopnik seems to use frequently, is entering the zeitgeist as interpreted by such a venerable magazine as The New Yorker!  In the middle of the article, I texted a friend who is a geography professor, ‘I’m not sure what to think of [the article]’, and after I had a couple hours to ponder it, I think I’m annoyed.  Gopnik writes about his meetings with community chicken carers, rooftop beekeepers, a Central Park forager, and a Brooklyn College fish farmer—all people he encounters in his week-long experiment to eat only food ‘grown or raised within the five boroughs of New York City.’

OK, intriguing experiment.  But...I started to become dubious when Gopnik lists the following reasons he attempted this experiment: 1. to find out if it was possible, 2. to explore localism, and 3. ‘to see if perhaps the implicit anti-urban prejudices lurking in the localist movement could be leached away by some city-bred purposefulness’.  ...Huh?!  Is it just because I’ve become a locavore while living IN the city, taking advantage of co-ops and farmers’ markets and farm shares with other urban residents, that I am oblivious to this anti-urbanism he claims to sense in the movement?  It’s true that he mentions in the paragraph previous that the usual rules of localism allow for a 100-300 mile foodshed, but if the whole article is focused on a five-borough foodshed, will his readers remember that passing mention?  Am I just over-reacting?

He talked about interesting people and exciting projects, but I was a little sad that this article was the only perspective on localism in this issue of The New Yorker, a perspective so different from my own experience as a locavore.  Please do let me know your thoughts!  I know most of the blog entries so far have contained beautiful produce collections or tasty recipes [edited to add: and I love all of them!], but I am also interested in your help to become more conversant in the theory and advantages/objections to eating local. 

OK, intriguing experiment.  But...I started to become dubious when Gopnik lists the following reasons he attempted this experiment: 1. to find out if it was possible, 2. to explore localism, and 3. ‘to see if perhaps the implicit anti-urban prejudices lurking in the localist movement could be leached away by some city-bred purposefulness’.  ...Huh?!  Is it just because I’ve become a locavore while living IN the city, taking advantage of co-ops and farmers’ markets and farm shares with other urban residents, that I am oblivious to this anti-urbanism he claims to sense in the movement?  It’s true that he mentions in the paragraph previous that the usual rules of localism allow for a 100-300 mile foodshed, but if the whole article is focused on a five-borough foodshed, will his readers remember that passing mention?  Am I just over-reacting?

He talked about interesting people and exciting projects, but I was a little sad that this article was the only perspective on localism in this issue of The New Yorker, a perspective so different from my own experience as a locavore.  Please do let me know your thoughts!  I know most of the blog entries so far have contained beautiful produce collections or tasty recipes, but I am also interested in your help to become more conversant in the theory and advantages/objections to eating local. 

2007 Farm Bill Approved in House Ag Committee

Monday, July 23, 2007

The House Agriculture Committee unanimously passed the 2007 Farm Bill recently.  Like all federal legislation, there are some good things and some bad things.  Without doubt, many Pennsylvania farmers will be affected by the bill if it is approved.

Let’s talk about the bad part first.

• The new Farm Bill will allow farmers to earn an annual gross [net taxable income] of $1 million per year before becoming ineligible for government subsidies. Sadly, this really is a win - in the last farm bill, the cap was $2.5 million.  I don’t know many small farmers coming anywhere close to earning $1 million per year, so this seems primarily to benefit larger, corporate farms.
• The bill removes any cap on loan deficiency payments and increases the cap on direct payments by 50 percent to $120,000.  Many say the result will be higher land prices that lead to farm consolidation, fewer family farmers, and reduced farming opportunities for a new farmers.
• The bill does not fully restore the $4 billion cut to the Conservation Security Program and freezes program sign-ups until 2010.  This is a real shame - the program rewards and encourages environmental stewardship on working land.  A great program has basically been gutted.
• Leaves the big commodity programs intact for cotton, corn, wheat, rice, soybeans and a handful of other crops that are traditionally grown by corporate farms, and even threw in an export subsidy for tobacco.  This increases the rates at which the U.S. supports prices for subsidized crops.

• The bill creates a voluntary crop insurance program providing $1.8 billion to support farmers of fruits and vegetables and some specialty crops.
• $350 million will be given to promote healthy snacks in school, increase the maximum limit in direct subsidies to $60,000 from $40,000.  At least 35 schools in every state will be eligible for the program.
• A loophole that allowed some farmers to collect double on payments through partnerships with multiple farms has been closed.
• Allows for full implementation of mandatory country of origin labeling for meat.  The 2002 Farm Bill also called for such labeling, but the meat packing lobby blocked implementation.  Coincidentally, ground meat might be able to slide by with a label of where it might come from.  Thanks, but I’ll stick to buying meat from one of our awesome local farmers.  At least I really know where it came from!
• Creates an “open fields” grant program to help states pay landowners to open their land to hunting and fishing.
• The Wetlands Reserve Program, which pays for restoring and maintaining sloughs, prairie potholes and other wetlands, was expanded from 2.3 million to 3.6 million acres.
• Authorizes up to $10,000 per farm in cost-share payments per year to help farms convert to organic agriculture, as well as providing additional money for organic research and certification and it requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture to start collecting data on organic commodities.
• Creates a special subsidy for malting barley to encourage more farmers to grow the crop.  Woohoo! More beer!  With luck, that will equal more small scale brewers!
• Revives a special subsidy program that will help biodiesel plants cope with the rising price of soybeans and soybean oil.

There’s some noise from President Bush that he might veto the legislation, specifically because of the perks to millionaire farmers [i.e., corporate farms].  Considering President Bush never met a millionaire he didn’t like and supported the $2.5 million cap on subsidies in the last Farm Bill, that’s a little shocking.

Only time will tell what changes might be made to the bill by the time it [and if it does] reaches President Bush’s desk!