Posted By Ken October 29, 2009
It’s ironic that the editors of The Wall Street Journal titled today’s editorial “Sins of Emission.” After all, the newspaper managed to omit a few important points. Why talk about increased corn yields and production per acre when we can pretend growing more corn means planting more acres? Why talk about energy security and the dangers of dependence on foreign oil when we can side with the environmental extremists we attack every other day of the week?
The Journal is a great paper and I often enjoy their editorial page. But these NYC elites need to get out to the farm more.
NCGA’s official response is here.
Posted By Ken October 27, 2009
I always find it strange when consumer product companies use their advertising dollars to support media that attack them. A colleague sent over a complaint about Friday’s episode of The Martha Stewart Show, where she had professional food nag Michael Pollan on as a guest, and they spent a good deal of time complaining about how evil corn was. Did you know that cows are force-fed corn? You can watch the episode online if you wish.
What is disturbing is that when I went to Martha’s eponymous Web site I was confronted with ads for M&Ms. Now, I like M&Ms, especially Peanut M&Ms. But the darn things do have corn starch and corn syrup in them. Martha should be ashamed to be taking dollars from them, and MARS Inc. should be ashamed for paying her to attack one of their most popular products.
And then there are the banner ads for Purina ONE pet foods that we humans force-feed to our dogs and cats. Visit the Web site and you learn these dangerous pet foods contain corn bran. And corn gluten meal. And ground yellow corn. And whole grain corn.
Should we boycott these and the other advertisers until they boycott Martha?
Posted By Mark October 22, 2009
Europe is sitting on a ticking time bomb. The ticking began when the European Union decided to cave in to its squeaky wheel minority that believes biotechnology is a mistake. The resulting zero tolerance policy regarding even minute levels of genetically modified crops now has the EU looking at a bare cupboard.
European food, trade and agriculture groups say that without a clear and effective response the EU faces a crisis in the food and livestock feed chain, with a total cost impact of roughly 4 billion Euros.
“I have a suggestion for Ms. Vassiliou (EU Ag Commissioner Androulla Vassiliou), stop staring into the headlights like the proverbial deer and open up Europe,” said one trader at the Chicago Board of Trade. “Once she does, even if it’s for a limited time or amount, this will have a huge impact for corn, DDGS, and soybeans. The toothpaste will be out of the tube!”
The E.U. Agricultural sector has been in a precarious position for years as they become increasingly less competitive globally due to being denied access to the latest seed technology. But now the looming shadow of scarcity has hit home.
“Every day, millions of people in the United States and around the world consume GM food. It’s no less healthy or nutritious than non-GM food,” says Iowa farmer Tim Burrack in recent comments written for Truth About Trade and Technology. “We know this from years of experience as well as extensive scientific and regulatory testing. GM foods have never so much as caused anyone to sneeze.”
Making your stomach growl…..that’s another matter!
Posted By Mark October 21, 2009
Since when did CSI Miami become a science fiction offering? The only crime on last night’s episode titled “Bad Seed” was a poor script and even worse research. The last time I saw this much misinformation in one place it was a political convention.
Apparently the creative well of ideas on novel ways to send people to the great beyond must have dried up in season 8. With more versions of CSI than there are television networks, I guess this was bound to happen.
The convoluted plot line did no less than trying to link together E-coli, water pollution from a cattle feedlot, botulism and genetic engineering in corn into a single plot line that came off looking like a spoof of a bad ‘70’s cop show.
If you watched this episode as a blank slate you would walk away thinking farms today are big/corporate, cold and uncaring (hey, we don’t mind killing a few of you if it is for the greater good), technology is bad, and there is no oversight what so ever over food quality or how it is produced.
Rather than rehash all the implausible points in last night’s story line let’s just say there are four big reasons why this CSI train wreck would never happen: 1. The Food and Drug Administration 2. The Environmental Protection Agency 3. The U.S. Department of Agriculture 4. Family farmers who are the best in the world at what they do.
A couple of words of advice in closing: If you want to do a story on corn, try any place but Florida. They grow a whopping 160,000 acres of field corn all of which is fed to cattle, not people. Think CSI Des Moines!
Posted By Cindy October 21, 2009
The concept of taxing sodas seems to have hit a sweet spot with some as a means to pay for health care.
Always the leader in ideas like this, California plans to hold hearings in the state legislature next month that may lead to taxes or fees on soda as a way of addressing obesity and healthcare problems in the state. A hearing of the Select Committee on Obesity and Diabetes will “hear from experts regarding the growing scientific evidence of links between soda consumption and obesity.” Senator Alex Padilla (D-Pacoima) says they need “to do more to educate the public about the health effects of drinking too much soda and consider options for reducing soda consumption among children.”
That sounds all well and good. From the federal level all the way down to the local level there is increasing emphasis on educating people to make healthier food choices, which would includes drinking more water or milk and less sugary drinks. But, whether taxes on soda would be used for better education or to pay for health care costs associated with obesity, the losers will be consumers – especially those with the lowest incomes. An additional tax on beverages would most heavily impact the people who are struggling the most in the current economy. A tax of a penny an ounce would add 12 to 20 cents on the average soda.
You may have seen the ads that Americans Against Food Taxes (AAFT) has been running opposing the concept of taxing food or beverages. AAFT notes that the food and beverage industry has already been working to reduce childhood obesity through innovation, nutrition education, and encouraging physical activity. Many, if not most, schools have removed soda machines and have limited the amount of high sugar, high fat foods and beverages in school lunch programs.
The biggest problem with the whole taxing concept is that it will probably not do anything to deter consumption, which is allegedly the goal, especially among the lower income groups. Proof of this is cigarette taxes. The prevalence of smoking is higher in those who have spent less time in school (9-11 years – incidence 38%) and those who are living on the poverty line (33%). It is very likely that a soda tax would have little impact – probably none at all – on the people who are most at risk for obesity-related illnesses.
You can join the fight and support AAFT’s efforts by going to www.nofoodtaxes.com.
Posted By Ken October 20, 2009
Time magazine’s August 31 attack on conventional American agriculture featured Niman Ranch in Bolinas, Calif., which the writer praised heavily for its organic practices. The article states:
“Niman’s cows eat only grass, along with a smattering of hay. That’s the normal diet for cattle. Their rumen, a digestive organ, can break down grasses we’d find inedible.” Source.
The big debate right now is between corn-fed beef and grass-fed beef, and Niman falls into the second category, according to Time.
However …
In a tweet discusssion today, Niman Ranch had this to say …
they’re raised on open pastures so they eat alot of natural grasses. They’re finished on a mix of corn, alfalfa & other veggies
UPDATE:
A commenter below points out that Niman Ranch is “no longer associated” with Bill Niman. The Niman Ranch Web site clearly stats their beef feed policy, and we thank the commenter for the information.
Unfortunately for readers of Time, this distinction between feed practices was not made clear in the magazine article, which is featured on the Niman Ranch Web site. The Time writer speaks of Niman Ranch as a good sustainable agriculture and business model, which appears to be the case (good for them!), but does not mention that Niman Ranch beef is fed corn.
Posted By Mark October 19, 2009
We live in a new media age where online sources from videos to blogs can carry as much credibility as traditional news sources. Online communications carry the big benefit of having the potential to reach a targeted community with lightning speed, do so in a cost effective way, and it gives you more control over content.
The National Corn Growers Association is making a conscious effort to embrace this revolution with the most recent example being two new videos exposing two common myths: 1. Family farmers have been replaced by corporate Ag and 2. Sustainable farming practices are the purview of organic farmers exclusively.
Actually 98% of the nation’s corn is grown by America’s family farmers which are the most productive in the world. These operations are also more sustainable each year, getting bigger crops with fewer resources and less environmental impact. Instead of being proud of these entrepreneurs and the generations of invaluable knowledge they possess, some misguided folks seek to vilify them and make the masses fear their food and the farmers who produce it.
NCGA is fighting back and you can help. The latest effort is a fun and attention getting email with a Halloween theme and links to the two videos that tell people they shouldn’t be afraid of their food. We have a great story to tell.
If you would like to spread the word send the link above to your friends, family, neighbors, leaders and decision makers…pretty much anybody since we all eat and have a stake in the future of our food and the people who produce it! The effect of this compounding email could be significant. If you are interested in receiving an email with the poster pictured here and an appropriate message you can forward to your contacts, please send a request to lambert@ncga.com and we’ll send it right to you.
Posted By Mark October 13, 2009
Recent surveying shows U.S. consumers say the number one reason to use more ethanol is energy security. The facts back up their concern. Data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows we now depend on foreign sources for 65% of our petroleum needs, growing to 70% by 2030.
Considering much of this oil originates in destinations where tourists fear to tread and diplomats tread lightly, this is a critical issue for our nation as we decide the look of our energy future.
The accompanying chart show this disturbing trend line with the Blue line representing Domestic Oil Production and the Green line showing oil imports.
The good news is that we are already replacing hundreds of millions of barrels of imported oil and the increasing reliance on domestically-produced ethanol is making available billions of dollars for investment in domestic renewable energy technologies.
If you are sitting on the fence regarding how you feel about ethanol the following facts may help you take a position:
FACT: Two-thirds of the world’s known oil reserves are located in the volatile Middle East.
FACT: According to the Government Accounting Office, the U.S. has spent more than $130 billion over 32 years in government subsidies to the oil industry.
FACT: The production and use of 9 billion gallons of ethanol in 2008 displaced the need for 321.4 million barrels of oil. It also saved American consumers and taxpayers $32 billion, an average of more than $87 million a day.
Posted By Cindy October 12, 2009
Fall is the time when people go crazy for corn mazes, which get bigger and more elaborate every year.
This year, the media has taken a liking to the “Family Guy” TV show corn maze created by Massachusetts farmer Bob Connors, who reportedly received permission from the Fox network to use the characters from the program. He has invited Seth MacFarlane, the creator of the “Family Guy” series to visit the corn maze and as a result has generated quite a bit of publicity for the project.
Mazes date back at least 4000 years to the time of Greek myths. In Roman times, mazes and labyrinths were found in artwork, in the design of floors in homes, public buildings and in the pavement of streets. Somewhere around the 15th century, the idea of growing shrubbery into a pattern of a maze became a popular way to entertain European nobility.
In the 1970′s, some pumpkin farms and fall festivals began developing small, simple mazes from hay bales or corn to entertain families, but the current maze craze of huge, elaborate designs in corn fields is only about 15 years old. More than 600 corn mazes can be found from coast to coast, according to the Corn Maze Directory, many with different themes each year. The complexity varies but some can take hours to navigate with cell phone help available to those who get lost.
The American Maze Company takes credit for bringing the art of the maze to America and to the cornfield. According to their website, they created and produced the first ever cornfield maze for private or public entertainment in 1993 at Lebanon Valley College in Annville, Pennsylvania. The Maize claims to be the World’s Largest Cornfield Maze Company in the world, which provides information on how to create your own maze.
It appears that the current trend coincides nicely with the use of GPS for planters and harvesters to map the designs in the field. The largest official corn maze (at more than 40 acres) is in Dixon, Calif., but a Nebraska farmer is looking to break that Guinness Book record this year with his 54-acre maze.
Posted By Ken October 9, 2009
We’ve written here and on NCGA.com and on Twitter about the deplorable Time magazine cover story last month on food, so I’m not going to rehash it a lot, but kudos to Sen. Chuck Grassley for taking up the cudgel for farmers yet again with a recent floor speech and video.
Technology has allowed farmers to apply the exact amount of fertilizer in the right way so there isn’t excess. However, even organic farming (which the author seems to hold in high esteem) uses manure for fertilizer which contains nitrogen, and soil naturally contains nitrogen that washes into streams. Farmers have been employing conservation practices like no-till, buffer strips, and wetlands just like I have on my own farm to prevent soil erosion and keep runoff from going directly into waterways for years. And I anticipate these practices to grow.
He also makes a good point about using acreage wisely and efficiently:
In 1915, 90 million acres of cropland in America was simply used to “fuel” our agricultural production. That’s right – it took 90 million acres of crops just to feed all the horses and mules that provided the work on agricultural lands. If you add up all the land in the United States being used to produce corn, wheat, and soybeans it about 224 billion acres in 2009. So, less than 100 years ago we would have been using nearly half of the acres in the U.S. just to feed our work animals.
Read more here …
