USDA Organic Production Survey Tells the Story

The USDA recently published a 160-page report on the results of their Certified Organic Production Survey (COPS).  Questionnaires were sent to 9140 certified farms with an impressive 76% response rate. The bottom line? The biggest certified farms are getting bigger.

The report placed the value of organic products at $3.53 billion with 10% of farms generating 70% of sales. A total of 8 mega-dairies in Texas produce 15% of the nation's milk supply - more than the 465 dairies in New York, Vermont and Maine combined and 50% more than the 397 dairies in Wisconsin.

143 certified organic farms produced nearly 20 million broilers in 2011. 60% of those sales come from only 9 farms in California.

In egg production, 375 certified organic layer farms had sales exceeding $275, 000,000. Missouri ranked second with only 7 layer operations while Indiana ranked fifth with only four.  [Blank spots in the numbers obscure the examples of extreme concentration in the state of Michigan].

It only takes a trip to the grocery store to see California's 60% domination of the organic vegetable and fruit market. If you add Arizona, Oregon and Washington it represents 4/5 of all the organic vegetables grown in the United States. The only state east of the Mississippi that comes close to approaching the production of these western states is Florida, with New York a distant second.  California and Washington state combined produce 90% of the national organic fruit market.

So what does this story tell? To me, it says that there is a lot of monoculture going on.  Organic "inputs" are being substituted but we're still contributing to loss of soil, water and diversity - in other words,  the natural resource base on which life on earth depends.

What's the moral of this story?  Get busy producing, preserving and purchasing local food from small, diversified farms with closed loop systems.  "Industrial organic" is there to serve in the interim and as an entry point for newbies. But it is part of the journey, not the destination. It can never measure up to the quality, flavor and connection ensouled in consciously-raised local food. I purposely avoided the o-word (organic) here because I believe that inputs purchased from conscious local vendors are preferable to outsourced organic inputs.  It's the "slow food" way of growing the infrastructure necessary for a sustainable, local food economy and an incremental move in the right direction that keeps pace with consumer education, rising fuel costs and demand.

Organic certification and outsourced food will never out-perform local food's biggest output: connection. This is where the power to restore land, health and community lives.

Acres USA & a Cup of Coffee

Acres USA and a cup of coffee always get me going. In the November 2012 issue I read that according to the 2007 census, (the 2012 census won't be out until 2014) the number of farms in the U.S. in the 1-9 acre and 1-49 acre categories grew by 53,000 and 56,000 respectively since 2002. In spite of the slow economy, America’s Farmers Markets have been growing by nearly 10% in the past year alone. With access to these markets, small farmers are opting out of relying on unpredictable commodity prices that may not offset expenses. If we’ve learned anything, it’s that sustainable and transparent pricing and practices go hand in hand.

The USDA defines a small farm as one grossing under $250,000 per year. Because farms are defined in terms of income, growing one’s own food isn’t included in these statistics. Yet increasing numbers of people are trading in the treadmill for a rural lifestyle and a chance at self-sufficiency. 

The Smart Growth movement has much to say about what urban areas will look like but is rather silent about those places in between. In Whatcom County, Washington,  the very same folks who support CSA’s are imposing assaults and limitations on rural areas. In urban-centric circles, rural life is just another word for sprawl. And large-scale farming is preferable because it doesn’t intrude on the view shed. Yet large scale farming of monoculture crops are detrimental to healthy soil life and the watershed.  

It seems as if the back-to-the-land and Smart Growth movements are in conflict with each other. One group strives for land-based economics while the other seeks to preserve ‘open space’ that can be observed and admired from afar.  This is preservation of views, not farmland. 

39% of the nation’s small farms are smaller than 49 acres. An unknown percentage of families supplement their incomes by producing and consuming several thousands of dollars worth of farm products each year. Small scale farming within a few miles of a city can perform an important task in the overall preservation of agriculture by providing a buffer between city residents and the nuisances of larger-scale farms and by providing a wide variety of specialty foods to those residents.

In Whatcom County and others like it, high land prices for smaller parcels, a stagnant economy, and lending restrictions are taking their toll. The idea that large farms have always dominated the country is a modern artifice. And if urban areas get too populated, residents will look to areas outside the city to call home. 

What might Rural Smart Growth look like? Simon Fairlie, an author and farmer paints a picture in his essay; “Can Britain feed itself?” Fairlie proposes that re-ruralization would free up space for market gardens inside or on the periphery of cities and reconnect city dwellers with their food. It would break up large mechanized farms into small farms and hamlets and result in more people working from home. Polycultural income streams from land-based enterprises would link local needs with local resources.  Landscapes would look like mosaics and provide employment.

Using a basic diet, Fairlie compared Chemical Ag with and without livestock with Organic Ag with and without livestock and Permaculture with and without livestock on 100 acres.  Chemical Ag without livestock fed the most people - 20 -  but at what cost to the environment and health? Organic Ag and Permaculture were about equal with feeding 8 because of the need for cover crops, fallow fields, fodder and pastures.  However 100 acres of Permaculture-based Ag provided food, textiles for clothing, animal feed, fuel for tractors, heating fuel and timber for the home. With all of these land-based enterprises providing for all these needs, the countryside would become more, not less populated and provide employment. This is Rural Smart Growth.

But will people even want this type of employment? There seems to be a disdain for farmers and employment that requires physical labor. This is rather odd when you consider how much money and time is spent at gyms. Think of all those calories being burned without accomplishing anything productive whatsoever! Personally, I think there are worse occupations one could choose than a land-based enterprise that works in cooperation with nature and contributes to community resilience.