HP in Australia #4: The ethics of kangaroo meat

Posted on January 20, 2014 by hautepasture

Fun facts about kangaroos:

Their long back legs cannot operate independently. That’s why they hop. When they are moving slowly (can’t really call it a “walk”) they pitch forward onto their T-Rex arms and use their thick tails as support as they swing their legs forward. Here’s a video.
A joey stays with his momma for up to 18 months, and in the meantime Mom can have new baby tucked away in her pouch. Kangaroos are the only mammal who can produce two different variations of milk at once, targeting the specific developmental stage of each joey. Here’s more about joeys.

When we went on our Wild Kangaroo Odyssey last week (see #4 in my Perth Favorites list–they are not in any particular order btw), the ever astute Mr. HP asked our gracious tour guide where kangaroo meat comes from–are there kangaroo farms in Australia? We were pleased to hear that no, kangaroos are not farmed; kangaroo meat comes from wild kangaroos shot by licensed hunters. Seemed ethical to us. But as I read more, I learned it’s not that simple.

Kangaroos are recognized worldwide as Australia’s mascot. They are protected by state and federal law, and appear on the federal coat of arms. They are also a nuisance to farmers, gardeners, and drivers, and lack natural predators in an urbanized environment, similar to white-tailed deer on the East coast of the US (watching the kangaroos, they reminded us a bit of deer). As with deer back home, hunting helps to keep the kangaroo population in check. The Australian government has strict regulations regarding hunter licensing and kill quotas, and only permits hunting in areas where kangaroos have been declared a nuisance. The quotas are reviewed yearly, based on population trends and climate predictions, with conservation of the species the most important objective. Kangaroo meat is touted as a leaner, hormone- and antibiotic-free alternative to beef, and more environmental: wild kangaroos require far less water and release much less methane than farmed livestock.

However:

Apparently unlicensed hunting is rampant (and unregulated) and quotas are often ignored.
Killing a doe counts for one kill against the quota, but commonly leads to the death of up to three kangaroos: the doe, the joey at her side who cannot yet fend for himself, and the joey in her pouch who is obviously dependent on his mother.
Pouch joeys are commonly bludgeoned to death.
Alpha males tend to stand their ground to defend their group and are therefore likely to be killed by hunters, leaving the lesser males to dilute the gene pool.
Kangaroo meat is often not handled hygienically and can carry disease and toxins. For these reasons, some countries, including Canada, have banned its importation.

For people who are not against kangaroo meat, there is a movement called kangatarianism, which prescribes following a vegetarian diet with the addition of kangaroo meat, since “Australian kangaroos live natural lives, eat organic food, and are killed humanely.” There’s also a similar cameltarianism movement! Bonus points for great names–and who knew there are feral camels in Australia?

So, as with everything, it’s up to the consumer to understand the issue and make an informed decision for herself on the ethics of kangaroo meat. What are your thoughts?

References
http://thinkkangaroos.uts.edu.au/ethics
http://envirorhi.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/kangaroo-meat-environmentally-sustainable-or-australias-shame/
http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/kangaroos.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_meat
http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/05/02/is-it-ethical-to-eat-kangaroo-meat
http://www.awpc.org.au/kangaroos/eating2.htm
http://candobetter.net/?q=node/908

HP visits Australia: Sydney

Posted on January 2, 2014 by hautepasture

Favorite things about Sydney:

The Opera House. I cannot get enough of the Opera House. Well, I guess I’m not enamored enough to do a tour or go to a performance there, but I’ve taken 10000 pictures of it and I do plan to hit the Opera Bar.

Surry Hills. We’ve been escaping the tourists, camping out at cafes, drinking in hipster bars, and eating at nice restaurants without reservations. (The restaurants in the CBD we’ve tried have been overpriced with long waits, terrible service and average food.)

Baxter Inn. It’s a dark bar in a basement with more types of whisky than you’ve ever seen. And really good non-whisky drinks. Sit at the bar and watch the bartenders work.

Running through the Botanical Gardens and over the Sydney Harbour Bridge. See “The Opera House” above.

Rainford Street Social, our office away from home. The breakfasts are hearty and delicious, the coffee is fabulous (coffee here is not like coffee at home), they have decent, reliable wifi (good wifi is hard to find around here), and don’t seem to mind that we stay for hours upon hours. We do make an effort to keep ordering more coffees and fresh juices while we work so we’re not total deadbeats.

More relevant to this blog’s theme is the prevalence of free range eggs at cafes and groceries in Sydney. Stopping at a grocery, all the eggs we could find were labelled free range, and they are what was offered at the cafes we’ve breakfasted at–an improvement over what we typically see at home in the States. Are the pro-chicken laws stricter in Australia? Is societal pressure for happier hens greater here?

Now might be a good time to remind us all that “free range” just means the hens must have access to the outdoors; they can still be kept at high density in a barn, and the label doesn’t have anything to do with what they’re fed.

Currently in the state of Queensland, Australia, for a farm to use the free range eggs label, the maximum number of hens per hectare (1 hectare is approximately 2.5 acres) is 10,000, with a density of 12 hens per square meter within a barn [cite]. Contrast that with the EU, where free range hen density is 2500 birds per hectare, with each hen getting at least four square meters of space in a barn [cite]. As bad as the Queensland limits seem, they’re better than the other Australian states, which have no legal definition at all for free range [cite]. Slightly better than the majority of Australia is the US: the USDA definition of free range is that the hens have access to the outdoors. There are no maximum density regulations [cite].

So, it seems Australia and the US are way behind the EU in terms of the legal requirements of the free range label. Fortunately, consumers in all three places are exerting increasing pressure on producers and legislators to improve the quality of life of laying hens. Kudos to the cafes in Surry Hills like Rainford Street Social that use only free range eggs! And, as always, it’s important to keep pushing for change using your dollars. According to Compassion in World Farming, the leading farm animal welfare charity:

The simplest thing you can do to help the hens that lay your eggs is to buy free-range.

We’re off to Perth tomorrow to inspect the egg situation there!

Foodopoly reading and signing with Wenonah Hauter

Posted on February 27, 2013 by hautepasture

Author and activist Wenonah Hauter visited New Dominion Bookshop in Charlottesville on February 13 for a discussion and signing of her new book Foodopoly: The Battle Over the Future of Food and Farming in America. Ms. Hauter, the executive director of Food and Water Watch, comes from a farming family, and is a long-time strategist and organizer for sustainable energy and food production.

Foodopoly reveals the behind-the-scenes lobbying, politics, and corporate power directing our food systems, and argues that consumers and farmers alone cannot fix the problem; a fundamental shift in food politics is required, as well. From the Foodopoly site:

In Foodopoly, she takes aim at the real culprit: the control of food production by a handful of large corporations—backed by political clout—that prevents farmers from raising healthy crops and limits the choices that people can make in the grocery store.

This talk was also timely for me, as I just got an overview of US food and farm policy from my Intro to the US Food System course. Read my notes here.

Wenonah Hauter signing copies of Foodopoly

What I learned from Wenonah Hauter

The Past:

The Reagan administration changed antitrust laws, made it easier for monopolies to form
In 1996 US joined WTO and NAFTA; those partnerships lead to pressure to deregulate farm policy
The 1996 farm bill led to drop in corn and soy prices, saving the big food producers billions
’98 price collapse
- Congress began subsidies for commodity crops to support farmers
- Half of small/medium farmer income is from subsidies, so if we get rid of them, we need to fix antitrust policies that keep prices low
Subsidies are a symptom of a dysfunctional system, not a cause of it

The Present:

About 20 food production companies control most of the grocery store brands
They need cheap ingredients, so lobby strongly for reducing and maintaining the low price of inputs
Big 4 groceries: Wal-Mart, Costco, Kroger, Target
1/3 of our grocery money goes to Wal-Mart. They may be making an effort to work with smaller, local producers, but logistically, it’s difficult for any suppliers but the very large ones to work them
United Natural Foods, Inc is largest US distributor of organic foods
- Since corp went public, it has focused mostly on Whole Foods and no longer delivers to small buying clubs and co-ops
- Possibly colluding w/ Whole Foods to drive consumers there?
We need to vote with our forks, but also with our votes: keep elected officials accountable

The Future:

Need to stop the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement
- US would “harmonize” laws with other (less-regulated) countries, like the EU did when the US and the EU made trade agreement, and the EU’s laws were weakened to harmonize w/ the US’s
Tyson and Perdue are trying to change the rules: to raise poultry in Asia, and increase speed of slaughter to 200 birds/min
Can’t fix food system without fixing our democracy
Need to undo Citizens United (Read more about that here: Overturning Citizens United)
Need to be citizens, not consumers

Local Food Hub supplied local apples from Crown Orchard to thank guests for coming

Ms. Hauter was an excellent speaker (even with laryngitis); passionate, knowledgeable, and fluent in the topics discussed. If she comes to your area, I highly recommend you see her. I look forward to reading Foodopoly, and will surely post lessons learned from it on this blog.

For more information, visit the sites below:

Food and Water Watch

Food and Water Watch’s page about Foodopoly

Foodopoly site

Buy the book (or better, go to your local bookstore and buy it)

An Introduction to the US Food System, Week 4: Food and Farm Policy

Posted on February 21, 2013 by hautepasture

Here are my notes from Week 4 of the free, online course I’m taking on US Food Systems from Johns Hopkins. I cleaned them up a bit, but they’re still pretty raw: just for my reference and your education. Read previous weeks’ notes here: Week 1, Week 2, Week 3. This week, I particularly enjoyed the TEDxManhattan lecture, From Fables to Labels, which is only 13 minutes long. Check it out!

This week’s lectures and readings cover the past, present, and future of the Farm Bill and US food policy.

Farm Bill History

Overview
Many policies affect food at federal, state, local levels. State and local levels a “laboratory” for policies that might be able to be scaled up to a federal level

It’s a public health bill; it affects:

What we eat
Environmental health/sustainability
Food security
Equity
Rural public health

We need government in agriculture. Why?

Farmers need security in order to go into business. Weather unpredictable; market unpredictable.
Protect environment: Farmers tend to overproduce and use unsustainable practices
Ensure food supply: Consumers need to be able to afford and access food

Farm policy over the years

1800s western expansion of farming. Homestead act, railroads
1914 extension system through university partnerships to increase use of technology, productivity
Tearing up prairies to put in crops, leave fields open w/out cover crops. Topsoil blew away. Droughts + wind -> erosion -> dustbowl
30s: Farmers hungry and demonstrating, consumers hungry and demonstrating -> first Farm Bill
New Deal brought first Farm Bill in 1933 to stabilize prices
- Ever-normal Granary: store crops to stabilize prices
- Mandatory idling of land to limit overproduction and keep prices up
- Land and water conservation
- Subsidized school lunches
1938, 49 bills are permanent legislation–if we can’t pass a farm bill we return here!
- 1949 started donating surplus food overseas
1970 some stuff in the bill became voluntary instead of mandatory
1973 big changes
- Wetlands drained, forests cut down to increase farmland (“Fencerow to fencerow”)
- Maximize yield rather than manage supply
- Trend towards big farms
- Processes industrialized
- Foodstamps introduced
1985 and 1990 more environmental programs–maybe because of problems from 1973 changes?
- Conservation
- Wetlands preservation
- Research into sustainability
1996 “Freedom to Farm”
- High commodity prices, high incomes
- Aim to end govt intervention in commodities (land idling, reserves, prices support policies)
- Ending govt intervention led to price drop, more govt payouts -> dropped plan to end subsidies
Subsidy levels currently high following bill having purpose of ending subsidies!

2008 Farm Bill Policy
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act

800+ pages
about 2/3 of it is Nutrition section, then Commodities, then Conservation
Most money spent on SNAP program

What Farm Bill supports does not look like what govt recommends we eat!

Fruits and veg have become more expensive, junk less expensive over the years. Based on subsidies for commodities?

Commodities: where all individual items interchangeable: corn, wheat; and can be stored or processed

Commodity subsidies:

Direct payments
Countercyclical payments
Lots of other assistance
$5.2B/yr per 2008 bill
More than 80% of $ goes to corn, wheat, cotton, soybeans, rice
20% of recipients get 90% of the money
Crops sold at lower-than-production prices, so subsidies are safety nets and keep farmers farming
Do subsidies drive overproduction, or does lack of price stability drive overproduction? Seems to be lack of price stability
Do subsidies drive obesity? Unclear:
- Yes: processed food crops, marketing, concentrate power in food industry
- No: see our same obesity trajectory in other countries, farm price has small impact on food price

Current food supply would not allow for everyone in US to follow govt’s nutritional guidelines

How can Farm Bill increase fruit/veg production?

Research to build yields
Provide growers insurance and loans (like other growers get)
Marketing funds

How can Farm Bill increase access to healthy food?

Bring free healthy snacks into schools
Support farmers’ markets
Support community initiatives
Allow schools to say they want their food to come from local/regional sources
Incentives for SNAP program to buy fresh fruit/veg

How can Farm Bill improve environmental health/sustainability?

Address problems from incentive to overproduce
- Gulf of Mexico deadzone from areas where most subsidies are given (fertilizer)
- CAFOs, pesticides, decreased biodiversity
Conservation compliance
- If you’re farming on conservation land, you must meet minimum reqs. Possibly has improved erosion
Conservation reserve
- Pays farmers rent to take land out of production to restore groundcover
- Farmers taking land out of program as they realize they can make more $ farming it
Conservation stewardship
- Rewards for conservations initiatives across entire farm
EQIP
- Assistance for sustainable practices
  - Switching to organic
  - Energy conservation
  - Forest/water conservation
- Might be misused by big livestock corps: 60% of $ goes to livestock producers
Organics support
Renewable energy
- Shift away from ethanol

Other Farm Bill programs:

Hunger and food security: SNAP, food banks, incentives to buy fresh fruit/veg, research
US Food aid internationally: ocean shipping takes 4-6 months to arrive. Undermines local farmers. Profits to Big Ag and shippers. 2008 FB tries giving cash instead.
Equity provisions: Livestock growers given more power to promote competition

Rural healthcare: telemedicine

Research: healthy/sustainable production methods, climate change, peak oil, nutrition, food safety, obesity, food security

Farm Bill Today

Farm Bill Politics
Ag committees in house and senate: senators and reps from farming states, mostly commodity production areas.

Stakeholders: Agriculture, agribusiness. Anti-hunger community becoming stronger player. Sustainable ag, environment community, int’l development, community food security, public health, cities

Public health’s involvement:

Success with priorities in 2008 bill
2012 how to be most effective?
- Ally with agriculture, nutrition, other groups

2012 Farm Bill
Marker bills hoping to get into bill:

Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act
Healthy Food Financing Initiative

Money devoted to 37 programs due to expire–many public health and conservation

Republicans wanted to change SNAP; farmers wanted to end direct payments program to be replaced by crop insurance. Taking away direct payments removes requirement to adhere to conservation policies.

Budget problems: focus on low-cost programs.

Election year: extra political shenanigans in 2012

Sequestration could cut $7B from FB
Senate wrote and passed a FB cutting $23B
House Ag committee passed a FB cutting $35B; didn’t make it to the floor. Why?
- Repubs cut SNAP benefits; Dems didn’t like
- Debates could harm candidates
- Spending so much $ could harm candidates
- Removing benefits could harm candidates

Drought: worst in 25 years impacts farmers, increases need for farmer help in bill

Farm Bill expired Oct 1, 2012. Revert to 1938, 1949 Farm Bills–expensive, unrealistic to apply to modern times. Extension to end of Sept 2013 agreed upon by House and Senate Ag Committees, but full Congress didn’t like it–would threaten fiscal cliff legislation. McConnell and Biden came up with their own extension and put it into fiscal cliff legislation, and it passed. Committee leadership furious. What was it?

Prevents dairy price increase–BUT–
No input from committee leadership
No reforms
- No changes to SNAP
- Direct payments kept
No deficit reduction
The 37 programs due to expire expired
Probably no new enrollment in conservation stewardship
No disaster protection for most farmers
Many mandatory conservation programs became discretionary

Challenges upcoming: sequestration, debt ceiling, new committee members. Need to pass a better FB soon.

Important things missing from discussion:

Climate change
Industrial farm animal production
Commodity program reform
Competition
Worker health

Need expansion:

Support for farmers who are new, sustainable, diversified, transitioning to better practices, fruit/veg producers, small/mid-sized, or socially disadvantaged
Increase local/regional, healthy food demand
Local/regional food infrastructure improvements
Research for healthier food system

TEDxManhattan lecture: From Fables to Labels

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mZ2KQ9iB_8&feature=player_embedded

Consumers will pay more for labels that they think add value
Consumers are misled to believe that some labels are meaningful
That dilutes consumer demand, and dilutes moving the marketplace forward

Labels need to be truthful:

Natural: manufacturers can use it to mean whatever they want. Polls show consumers confuse this with organic, which has 600p of standards, is a regulated program
Fresh: can use it on frozen chicken!?
Free range: means animals have option to go outdoors for undefined period of time. Doesn’t mean they actually went out.

… transparent:

GMOs: not enough science behind it, most people want labelling
Mad cow tested: govt left some loopholes in animal feed in place, so Japan said they didn’t want our beef. A farm wanted to test themselves and give themselves this label, but gov’t said no, the test isn’t good enough–even though it’s the same test the gov’t uses to test for mad cow.
Carbon monoxide added: to improve red color in meat. Considered a food additive by FDA, so no labelling required
Country of origin labelling: animals often born, raised, slaughtered in different countries. Int’l complaining that it’s not good for trade so this label is in peril.

… trustworthy:

Redefinition of HFCS. Calling it corn sugar. Shouldn’t be allowed to change name to confuse consumers.
Cold-pasturized: meat producers don’t want to call it irradiation. Irradiation isn’t held to same health standards as pasturization
No nitrates: natural nitrates same as synthetics, but gov’t allows labels to say no nitrates if natural nitrates are used.

Good labels: organic, grass fed, Animal Welfare Approved

Reading: Principles for Framing a Healthy Food System

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19320240903321219

Principles for moving toward a healthy food system:

Principle 1: It would insure community food security for all residents
Principle 2: It would be community-based
Principle 3: It would be locally integrated
–Not reasonable to expect all food to be grown locally
Principle 4: It would be reasonably seasonal in nature
Principle 5: Present primarily opportunities rather than problems
Principle 6: Connect “healthy” across the layers of the system
–Soil to plants (to animals) to people to communities
Principle 7: Be diverse

Reading: A 50-Year Farm Bill

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/opinion/05berry.html?emc=eta1&_r=2&

Soil is abused and non-renewable. More valuable than oil but no lobby.

Erosion
Polluted by fertilizers, pesticides

Industrial agriculture relies on fossil fuels

We’re headed for disaster. Need to:

Rotate crops for year-round soil coverage
Develop grain-bearing perennials

“We need a 50-year farm bill that addresses forthrightly the problems of soil loss and degradation, toxic pollution, fossil-fuel dependency and the destruction of rural communities.”

Reading: Do Farm Subsidies Cause Obesity

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/tools-and-resources/do-farm-subsidies-cause-obesity/

Deregulation of commodities, not subsidies, has impacted commodity crop prices, incentives to businesses leading to more processed food consumption

Recommendations:

Reform commodity policies by developing responsible federal supply management
Increase consumption of fruits, veg, whole grains, especially in underserved communities
Help farmers diversify crops and supply local/regional markets
Improve infrastructure of healthy food delivery

Findings:

Removing subsidies would not curb overproduction of commodity crops
- Because farmers collectively tend to overproduce without some sort of government intervention, the academic literature finds that subsidies themselves do not cause overproduction
- If subsidies were removed, farmers’ income would drop, causing smaller farms to be sold to larger farms. Overproduction would not decrease.
Low commodity prices offer savings to the food industry, but not to consumers at the grocery
- Low feed prices for animals, low corn prices for HFCS
- Over the last 3 decades, grocery prices have gone steadily up, but corn prices have fluctuated wildly
- Commodity prices make up tiny percent of retail cost of food. Most $ goes to makers, retail, marketers
The food industry has been the main driver of commodity policy, not farmers
- Livestock industry wants high production and low prices for feed
Removing subsidies before commodity supply and prices have been managed will not stop overproduction, but could harm small/mid-sized farms
- 82% of small/mid-sized farms receive subsidies
- Need to support small/mid-sized farms as they are able to diversify and supply local/regional markets

Plane reading

Posted on August 15, 2012 by hautepasture

Haute Pasture is on the road again, this time to Halifax, Nova Scotia, where we are doing as much eating as possible in order to report back to you guys. It’s a hard job.

On the plane, I caught up on some newsletters and articles that have been collecting dust on my desk. Here are some highlights:

ASPCA 2011 Annual Report, page 27

The ASPCA helped prevent the passage of “ag-gag” laws in Florida, Iowa, Minnesota, and New York last year. Ag-gag laws seek to prevent the leaking of graphic videos taken by undercover workers at factory farms by criminalizing the investigation of farm animal abuse. Exposing ethical and environmental violations on industrial farms would become much more difficult, to the benefit of the violating farms. Much more information about ag-gag laws is available on the ASPCA site.

Animal Welfare Institute Quarterly, Summer 2012, Vol 61 No 3

Did you know the USDA “organic” label does not guarantee anything about animal treatment? AWI has been working to help improve the recommendations given to the USDA by the National Organic Standards Board regarding minimum space allowances for poultry, vegetation availability for poultry and pigs, tail docking bans for pigs and cattle, and pain medication requirements for cattle dehorning.

Do you get confused by food labels? Who doesn’t! AWI has a downloadable guide to help you navigate the grocery store. Find out which labels actually indicate humane treatment, and which are meaningless. (I took a stab at deciphering egg labels last year; AWI’s guide is, ah, a bit more user-friendly.)

“The Globalization of Animal Welfare,” Foreign Affairs, March/April 2012, pp 122-133

About 2/3 of the poultry, meat, and eggs, and over half of the pork produced in the world come from factory farms, but no international regulations exist for farm animal treatment. Meat, dairy, and egg exports have exploded since 1980, while footage depicting cruel animal treatment has become easier to distribute, leading to increased pressure on Western governments to crack down on animal abuse internationally. The European Union leads the US in enacting laws to protect farm animals, having banned barren battery cages for hens and gestation crates for sows. In the US, agricultural lobbies continue to successfully prevent the creation of federally mandated animal welfare protections, despite increasing public interest. Developing countries in Latin America and Asia, seeking efficiency and economies of scale, lag behind the US and EU in animal protections, but in China, a law offering basic protections to animals has been proposed, and public awareness is growing. Multinational organizations such as the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations are leading the animal welfare effort at a global level, emphasizing not only ethics, but also the importance of food security and sustainability in developing countries. The FAO’s Gateway to Farm Animal Welfare provides easy access to animal welfare information to international users, explaining that “(b)y giving less economically developed country governments, professionals and producers online access to the latest information and the opportunity to contribute information relevant to their own situation, the portal will help to improve livestock welfare, health and productivity worldwide.” The private sector is beginning to recognize the importance of animal welfare to business sustainability and social responsibility, and groups such as Global Animal Partnership seek to unite the public and private sectors to form strategies that will benefit the stakeholders while progressing animal welfare improvement initiatives worldwide.

The GAP page for consumers is worth a read. The important point is:

We don’t need to work for a multi-lateral institution or be a world-famous chef or be part of the leadership of an international corporation to make a difference.

Each one of us, in our daily lives and in our own homes, can improve the lives of animals simply by choosing to support those farmers and ranchers who have a commitment to providing higher welfare to the animals they raise.

Know where your food comes from! Shop responsibly! Sound familiar?

Cheenius fights the law: Urban Chicken Keepers vs County Planning Commission

Posted on July 25, 2012 by hautepasture

Guest post from dear friend Cheenius, who got political last night to fight for the right to keep chickens in her backyard. Go Cheenius!

Cheenius likes to stay active politically from time to time, and this evening she made it to Albemarle County’s Planning Commission meeting. Why? Because the topic was urban agriculture, and like all HP readers, she knows that favorable zoning is crucial to the local food and sustainability movements. Andy Sorrell, Senior Planner for Albemarle County, gave a thorough report to the 10 commissioners on pros and cons and how other cities and counties are handling this issue. Then the commissioners gave some initial thoughts before opening it up to the public. Cheenius, as a gardener, beekeeper, AND chicken-keeper, felt compelled to get up in front of the microphone and shout out: “MAKE LOVE, NOT WAR!” Well, actually, not quite. She thanked the planners and the commissioners for moving urban agriculture forward, and said that they seemed fully capable of hashing out the details, but that they should keep in mind that if they want to impose maximum hen numbers, chickens are flock animals so they should really keep the number at 4 or more. Also, since the county is strained for staffing, requiring permits seems like a waste of time, when you can just have reasonable regulations that can be enforced as needed. After the standing ovation (I can’t rule out that that was only in Cheenius’ head), she sat down and realized that if there isn’t a clear zoning mandate now, then possibly she’s currently in violation on all three counts of gardening, beekeeping and chicken-keeping. She considered running for the door, but decided that would draw even more attention to her lawlessness. Instead, she’s confident the commissioners will ultimately do the right thing when it comes to letting county residents grow their own food. Initial language they’re looking at adding to the County’s Comprehensive Plan:

“Urban Agriculture Objective: Support local food production and consumption through the use of urban agricultural practices as a means for increasing access to healthy, local, and affordable foods and encouraging the productive use of vacant land.”

Cheenius gives it two eggs up!

More random news from the interwebs

Posted on January 23, 2012 by hautepasture

Here’s what I’m reading while working on my next real posts:

The latest Edible Blue Ridge, featuring an article about our favorite fancy local-food restaurant, Brookville. Also exciting: a blurb about a new book called Reclaiming Our Food: How the Grassroots Food Movement Is Changing the Way We Eat, by UVA professor Tanya Denckla Cobb.
We’re Eating Less Meat. Why?, a NYT blog post by Mark Bittman, which examines the reasons that Americans are eating less meat, despite federal subsidies, lax environmental regulations, and lack of support for smaller farms in competition with the giant factory farms, all of which aid the meat industry.
Five Easy Ways to Eat Local: Tips on finding and incorporating into your diet more local foods, and a nice description of the health and flavor advantages of local, seasonal food.
The end of ethanol subsidies? Demand for the corn product will remain high as the government increases the required percentage of ethanol in gasoline.

In the news

Posted on October 10, 2011 by hautepasture

Haute Pasture has been busy preparing for a trip to Asia. While we are slacking on the real posts, here are some headlines:

‘We Support Agriculture’ combats animal rights initiatives in Nebraska: A new political action group, formed by the Nebraska Cattlemen, Nebraska Farm Bureau, Nebraska Poultry Industries, Nebraska Pork Producers Association and the Nebraska State Dairy Association, is organizing to protect themselves from regulations, such as the banning of gestation crates.

Kaparot: Jewish leaders want to end animal killing: Some Jewish leaders are calling for the end of the kaparot tradition, in which chickens are ritually slaughtered. Jewish law is strict about the care of animals, and many feel kaparot is abusive.

‘Food, Inc.’ Wins News and Documentary Emmy Award: Good review of the documentary from Audubon Magazine’s blog.

Hoping to learn and post some insights about farm animal rights in Asia over the next couple weeks!

Rainy day movie: Food, Inc.

Posted on August 27, 2011 by hautepasture

Food, Inc. is a chilling documentary full of disturbing facts about the huge corporations that run the American food system.

Hooray for local hero Joel Salatin of Polyface Farms, a featured “good guy” farmer.

Quotes from the movie:

When we run an item past the supermarket scanner, we’re voting: for local not organic or not.

You can vote to change this system. Three times a day.

Buy from companies that treat workers, animals, and the environment with respect.

When you go to the supermarket, choose foods that are in season. Buy foods that are organic. Know what’s in your food. Read labels. Know what you buy.

The average meal travels 1500 miles from the farm to the supermarket. Buy foods that are grown locally. Shop at farmers’ markets. Plant a garden (even a small one).

Everyone has a right to healthy food. Make sure your farmers’ market takes food stamps. Ask your school board to provide healthy school lunches. The FDA and USDA are supposed to protect you and your family. Tell Congress to enforce food safety standards and re-introduce Kevin’s Law.

To learn more, go to http://www.takepart.com/foodinc

Interactive map of factory farming investigations

Posted on July 24, 2011 by hautepasture

This is a very cool tool from Animal Visuals:

Factory Farm Investigations Mapped

The map was created to bring attention to the laws preventing filming inside factory farms, by showing the pattern of abuses within factory farms across the country. It’s a great tool for learning about specific investigations, and for demonstrating how widespread the problem of animal abuse on factory farms in the U.S. really is.

Haute Pasture

raising awareness of farm animal welfare

Tag Archives: laws