“The New Food Puritans” is a fascinating article on a website I just found called “Truth in Food.” The post is great, but the full interview with author Mary Eberstadt is even better and well worth 22 minutes of your listening time. Besides being an author, Eberstadt is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and consulting editor to the Institution’s bimonthly Policy Review

The post and interview are based on an essay Eberstadt wrote last year called “Is Food the New Sex?” which puts forth the premise that while modern society places no restrictions on sexual behaviors – anything goes because it is just “personal choice” – today’s new moralists are instead judgmental about the food choices people make. That is, we have mindless sex but mindful eating. “I find it really interesting that these two codes, one about food and one about sex, seem to be existing in this inverse relationship, where as one gets stricter the other gets more lenient,” she says in the interview.

Very interesting theory put forth by a very intelligent lady with strong conservative Christian values. There is some other great stuff on the “Truth in Food” website worth a read – like “The Ten Reasons Why They Hate You So” – They being the anti-production agriculture movement and You being – farmers. Be sure to read the comments on that one too – seemed to touch a pretty raw nerve with some folks! You can also find Truth in Food on Facebook. Thanks to my friend Ray Bowman with the Kentucky Sheep and Goat Development Office for pointing me in their direction!

 He doesn’t have a farming background and isn’t invested in the ethanol industry so he is a neutral and somewhat uninformed observer. He is also one of the busiest guys I know so for him to notice it means the anti-ethanol crowd are now officially pervasive. Apparently, it’s not just me feeling paranoid.

 The conversation came back to me in a hurry this week with the latest “ethanol is evil” Tsunami rolling across the country once again. It started with the Wall Street Journal  (No link here because you have to pay for this tripe) and the Washington Post and worked its way across the country hitting the Chicago Tribune and Des Moines Register yesterday and likely making its way for the West Coast like some cheap traveling circus.

 And like the aforementioned Circus the anti-ethanol gang leave a trail behind much like Barnum and Bailey’s elephants only there is no guy with a shovel and bucket cleaning up in their wake. They leave their load of “misinformation” to fester in the road in full knowledge that most people are also too busy to check the veracity of their propaganda.

 The public lynching of ethanol began with the bogus food vs. fuel charade in 2008 and since then has continued to resurface over and over again in several different guises that get trotted out and recycled whenever opportunity presents itself.

 Several things remain consistent as the attacks continue. The noxious cocktail they serve up is made with equal parts of the best bad science money can buy and poor logic. And the olive on the toothpick seems to be just plain old avarice.

 That’s greed, materialism, or covetousness with a Capital “C.” The people fanning the fires of these attacks have rationale and motivation that are simple if not transparent. They are the folks that want the cheapest corn possible because it boosts their profits; want ethanol to be made from another source; or want ethanol crippled forever because the market share just got too big.

 So, for the next couple of days come back here and you will get a sneak peak each day of some of these players and the Machiavellian games they play and fund all to snuff out the only real competition that imported petroleum faces in the marketplace today…ethanol.

According to the latest USDA report out this week, 72 percent of the crop is rated good to excellent, with a few more percentage points moving over to the excellent side. On the progress side, 84 percent of the crop is silking – compared to 70 percent average and 52 percent last year, and 17 percent is in the dough stage already, which is 10 points ahead of this time last year and a few points ahead of normal.

Only two of the major corn production states – Colorado and South Dakota – have not yet reached the halfway point in silking, according to USDA meteorologist Brad Rippey. “If you’re looking for problems with the corn, you’ll have to go to the fringes of the corn belt, well outside the major production zone,” he said. “In North Carolina, where it’s been very hot and dry, for example – 38 percent of the crop rated very poor to poor.”

The good-looking corn pictured here is growing near Bloomington – a photo taken recently by Tricia Braid-Terry of the Illinois Corn Growers’ staff. The good-looking young man in the the photo is her son, Ian. Thanks, Tricia!

In our society we will spend ludicrous sums on money on things like cars, cell phones, or even a cup of trendy coffee, yet we continue to demand access to all the bounty Mother Nature has to offer at discount prices.

It is a modern miracle that the largest consumptive offenders on the planet – Americans – also have the cheapest food supply on terra firma. We spend less than 10% of our disposable income on actual food items compared to other developed nations that spend as much as 15% to 50% of what they earn to put food on the table.

There are numerous factors that make this access to cheap and abundant food possible including a wildly productive agricultural core that produces key crops like wheat, corn, and soybeans. These staple crops provide the very foundation of the “real” food pyramid. These are crops that we have learned to grow fairly predictably on a large scale even when Mother Nature hits us with challenging weather. In the worst-case scenario when weather, insects or disease reduces the size of these crops we have a certain amount in reserve.

However, with a growing emphasis on more fruits and vegetable in our diet, there are also those calling for more and more taxpayers dollars to shift from existing farm programs to encourage and expand farmers markets and produce production. Striking a reasonable balance won’t be easy but it will be critical.

While many produce items have a shelf life of weeks or months at best, corn, soybeans and wheat can be transported more readily and stored for years.  The authors of the original farm bill understood this and chose to put their emphasis and limited budget into programs that help growers of these keystone crops make it through tough times.

Times have changed and the farm bill is antiquated in many ways, but the importance of these key crops has not waned. The farm bill in the U.S. is not a perfect piece of legislation, few are that have become this big and cumbersome.

But today’s “farm bill” is a misnomer since the lion’s share of the expenditures go to social programs like women, infant and children, school lunches, food stamps and even forestry. Yet critics like to cultivate the illusion that it all goes to farmers.

As we continue to analyze and discuss these consumer support programs – yes, it is a consumer program that helps guarantees you the aforementioned cheap food over the long haul – it is important we do a little homework before making wholesale changes.

In the interim keep this in mind; if we stopped growing green beans or carrots tomorrow the world would not end. But if we see big reductions in crops like corn, soybeans or wheat the loss of essential oils, protein and other precious calories would change the food universe as you know it. Likely wouldn’t do our economy or our balance of trade much good either.

Given the extreme stories, messages and views that pound us every day from dozens of information sources in this wired world, I think we all need a reprieve. We all need places to go for perspective and this is particularly true regarding livestock production. Given the antics of lobbying groups like the Humane Society of the U.S., that disguise themselves as an animal welfare group, journalists like Michael Pollan  giving advice on feeding cattle, and chef’s promoting specific crop and livestock rearing practices with no real education on the subject..it makes me want to scream.

Type the letters “Mi” into Google and Pollan’s name pops up and this crank – possibly well-meaning but still a crank – comes up immediately showing the influence he is having on society via the New York Times Best Seller List, rather than logging years nurturing cows or sweating in a cattle feedlot.

All of the above scenarios are roughly equivalent to going to a plumber for advice on brain surgery. I would certainly prefer to know my meat/protein comes from well managed family operations like David Fremark’s in St. Lawrence, South Dakota or Jamie Willret of Malta, Illinois referenced in the above blog. You will find farmers and ranchers outside the city limits of most any town or city. In fact these days you can find many of them as close as your laptop or smart phone via social media. #agchat on twitter is a great place to ask a question on almost anything related to farming and food production. I encourage you to start a dialogue.

Lack of knowledge on how livestock specifically and agriculture in general works is a huge risk for society today. Uniformed people make bad decisions and in this case potentially decisions that are irreparable as family farms don’t come back once they are gone.

According to University of Chicago economist Don Coursey, a ban on the herbicide would cost between 21,000 and 48,000 jobs from corn production losses alone. His findings were presented today at a National Press Club briefing sponsored by the Triazine Network in Washington. Coursey estimates atrazine’s annual production value to corn alone to be between $2.3 billion and $5 billion. Atrazine’s additional value to sorghum, sugar cane and other uses increases these totals.

Coursey says his estimate of job losses would be primarily in the agriculture and rural sectors of the economy, where unemployment is currently about 12 percent. A ban on atrazine he says would increase that to about 14.6 percent. Another way of looking at it, says Coursey, is assuming that all the job losses would occur in the corn-growing sector of the nation. “Starting from the current unemployment rate of about 11%, you double that either to 10.9 plus 11, or as much as an increase of 25% more. That is, 11 plus 25 or into the high 30% unemployment rate in the corn sector. That’s why I feel justified in using the word devastating,” he said. Most of that would be felt by small family farmers.

The Triazine Network is made up of groups representing crops as diverse as citrus, grapes, grain sorghum, nuts, corn, nursery crops, fruits, vegetables, Christmas trees, soybeans and sugarcane that have banded together to respond to the special review of triazine herbicides by the EPA. Kansas Corn Growers executive director Jere White serves as chairman of the group. “No one cares more about the safety of agricultural pesticides than farmers who use them on their farms. It’s where we live and where we raise our children,” said White. “If sound scientific research finds that atrazine, or any agricultural pesticide, cannot be used safely we will be the first to agree with increased regulation. But sound scientific research has found repeatedly that atrazine is safe.” White says the current re-review of atrazine has been prompted by activist-fed media reports and shoddy science.

EPA re-registered atrazine in 2006 based on the evidence of nearly 6,000 studies and more than 80,000 public comments. However, the agency began an additional, unscheduled review of atrazine in late 2009. Atrazine is the second most-used herbicide in the United States, controlling a broad range of weeds in corn, sorghum and sugar cane for over 50 years. No suitable replacement for it currently exists in terms of efficacy and affordability.

Find out more about the study here.

You can download (mp3) and listen to opening statements from the press conference here:

Critics of corn – whether it be ethanol, sweetener, or just farming in general – can sometimes sound like the constant droning of vuvuzelas, churning out the same old tired arguments in a loud, distinctive monotone. Looking through my Google alerts for ethanol over the holiday weekend I found a number of articles and blog postings that use those vuvuzela-type arguments. When the stories offer a place for comments, I always look to see what is being said and may offer some comment of my own to try and break through that monotony.

About a dozen corn grower states recently got some social media training by AgChat expert Michele Payn-Knoper. While much of that training focuses on how you can use social media tools like Facebook, YouTube and Twitter to tell the positive story of agriculture to the general public, it also involves taking the initiative to set the record straight when you see agriculture being attacked in on-line stories. It has never been any easier to provide your own editorial comments than it is today with stories found on-line. No printing or stamps involved, no letters to mail, no gatekeeper (in most cases) to edit or silence your point of view. There may be moderation for some comments (which is highly encouraged, if you have or want to start your own blog) but usually comments are approved. The moderation is mainly to prevent spam comments from getting through.

My point is – make some of your own noise! The articles I saw had NO opposing viewpoints from corn growers or their advocates. Take some time once a week to browse through on-line articles that are critical of farming or ethanol or corn products and make your voice heard. Sign up for Google alerts for corn, farming or ethanol so you know what is being said and respond. The forum is there, we need to utilize it.

Here are just a few articles crying out for your comments:
Ethanol Industry Wants Same Rubber Stamp BP Got - Baltimore Sun editorial
Not For Consumption - Motley Fool
Age of Ethanol – The Economist
Food Offers Fast Facts not Frills – Centre Daily Times review
Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone Jealous of Gulf Oil Spill - Huffington Post

Agronomists and farmers know that this is the most critical stage in the development of a corn plant, the reproductive stage, where the silk serves to catch falling pollen grains to fertilize the eggs in the ear that become kernels of corn. But, did you know that corn silk also has health benefits when made into an herbal tea and can cure a variety of maladies, from bed-wetting to obesity? I am not making this up.

According to phytochemicals.info, cornsilk has detoxifying, relaxing and diuretic activity and is used to treat infections of the urinary and genital system, such as cystitis, prostatitis and urethritis. “Cornsilk helps to reduce frequent urination caused by irritation of the bladder and is used to treat bed wetting problems. In China, cornsilk is traditionally used to treat edema and jaundice. Studies indicate that cornsilk can reduces blood clotting time and reduce high blood pressure.”

Corn never fails to a-maize!

Guest Blog from Jennifer Elwell and her “Food, Mommy” Blog  (More on the author at the bottom of the page)

Back when I was a kid (we’ll say 20 to 30 years ago), vegetarians were few and far between and were often thought of as a little strange. Now, it seems, being a vegetarian or vegan is the “stylish” thing to do. More and more people of all ages are making the choice not to eat meat for reasons that make sense to them.

The majority of the population continues to eat meat because that’s what they have always done, as their parents did before them. As our ancestors figured out, eating meat is an easy way to get protein, and most of it just tastes good.

I put myself in a different meat-eating category. I have a made a very conscious decision, and I “choose” to eat meat. I know it comes from animals, and I realize those animals’ lives were cut short for my sustenance. This is something I think about each time I sit down to a meal, and I am grateful.

As a true lover of animals, I will admit that going meatless crossed my mind a couple times. I am the kind of person who never kills a spider, carefully removes creepy-crawlies from my home, and stops traffic to see a turtle or family of ducks safely cross the road. My taste buds and feeling of hunger satisfaction, however, quickly transformed me back into the omnivore that I am.

Now, one could ask how I can eat meat when animals are being mistreated (recent Conklin Dairy video would be a good example) or are forced to live in confined conditions. In my good opinion, acts of such mistreatment are few and far between, and I believe that anyone who abuses animals in this way should be punished as if they had assaulted a fellow human. Confinement, or as I like to think of it has a more controlled habitat, has become a necessary practice to meet demand. There are more people, less farmers and less land to produce these animals.

Do the animals like their confined conditions? Would they rather be running free? While I don’t have cows or chickens at the moment, I do have horses. It has been 90 degrees or higher the last several days. They have free run of the barn and a five acre pasture with lots of shade trees. I CANNOT MAKE them leave the confinement of their stalls. Why? The barn has a large fan and is generally free of all the blood-sucking bugs. They also know that I come to feed them twice a day.

I also have to think about the many times I have watched the animal shows on TV. Prey animals are free game for the not-so-nice hunting practices of their predators. I have seen animals being eaten while they are still alive. If I were the prey, I’d say “sign me up for farm life any day!” And on the flip side, I wonder if animal activists want to tell lions, tigers, eagles, crocodiles, sharks, etc. that they should not eat other animals because it’s not the “nice” thing to do.

And when I hear, “I don’t want to eat anything with a face,” or even most recently, “I don’t like to eat things with eyelashes” (you’ve got to be kidding me), it saddens me. WARNING, I’M GOING INTO PHILOSOPHER MODE – Who is to say the cow with long eyelashes and a calf by her side is any more important than the clam that quietly crawls across the ocean floor, or the tomato plant. I don’t think of even myself as more worthy of a life on earth than any other living creature, be it plant, animal or fungus. We all WANT to survive.

The fact is, if one organism eats, another organism is sacrificed for its survival. What we can do as humans is to provide the animals we consume with the utmost respect that we can. I truly believe that most all livestock farmers are doing this today. They have to… it is their livelihood.

While I think the ideal situation – the most natural situation for which we were born to do – would be for us to produce, raise or hunt for our own food, those days are long gone. A lot of us are more worried about getting to our air-conditioned home to view the latest episode of “Glee” while tweeting our tweeps and planning our island vacations. Therefore, I place the care of my food, be animal or vegetable, in the hands of our farmers. The farmers that produce with compassion and heart are my heroes. The animals that give their lives so that I can be a part of this world are my saviors.

My omnivore diet provides me and my family the nutrients we need without having to load up on supplements or come up with creative diet plans. As long as I recognize the fact that hamburgers don’t magically appear in the meat case, and our farmers are taking good, responsible care of their animals, I will continue to “choose” to eat meat.

 Jennifer Elwell is from Louisville, KY.  She is a mom of two “who cares about where my food comes from. I am an advocate of modern agriculture and am very appreciative of what farmers provide for us. In my opinion, they are doing an excellent job, and I want to share that with the world.”

One good barometer of the success of an advertising campaign is to generate buzz, cultivate conversation and even attract the attention of the occasional rock thrower. Based on this yardstick the new Corn Farmers Coalition campaign in Washington, DC is a raging success.

It has attracted positive attention from the media, the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, and several key societal thought leaders. On the negative side several environmental bloggers have taken exception to the campaign labeling it “hilarious, calling it “greenwashing” and “pro-corn propaganda. Since when did publicly displaying USDA and EPA facts become a subversive pursuit? Feel free to go to these sites and comment.

CFC  efforts have also surfaced the old traditional tactic used by these detractors to label family corn farmers as “industrial corn” (whatever the heck that is)  or one of my personal favorites….”King Corn.”  Anyone who actually knows one of the 300,000 family farmers in the U.S. already knows the proper term is “industrious” as this is a prerequisite to surviving in the low profit margin world that is modern agriculture. If you want to see what these fourth and fifth generation farmers look like click here.

The basic idea of using terms like industrial and factory farms is to play upon the public misconception that agriculture is some mega-corporation built on the same model as say global petroleum. Hinting that a handful of major agribusinesses are controlling agriculture and today’s corn farms are massive plantation-like operations. Would somebody please take these people for a fieldtrip outside the concrete jungle?

(And for the record CFC is completely funded by dollars directly from the aforementioned family farmers. There is no funding from Agribusiness).

It is exactly these kinds of tactics that have made it necessary for the hundreds of thousands of family farmers who produce most of this nation’s food, fiber and even a growing amount of fuel to invest in this campaign. The goal is simply to reflect a true picture of who is farming, how they farm, and how technology and innovation are making farmers environmental leaders.

Focus group research clearly shows that much of the Washington community from lobbyists to agency employees to Congressional staffers to environmental groups clearly don’t understand the wonderful mixture of family business and technological marvel that is modern farming.

This is not about any specific issue as some would have you think. The goals of the CFC campaign started in 2008 long before the current issues were before Congress and will likely still be relevant years from now when we move on to other policy debates. Keeping the campaign purely educational and keeping a degree of separation is part of the reason the Coalition was formed initially.

For farmers and other supporters of this campaign, please take the critics comments for what they are worth….feedback that shows the campaign is getting traction and for every negative comments there are hundreds, maybe even thousands of people in the nation’s capitol who are learning and beginning to understand this critical business of farming.