^ NDP Fisheries and Oceans Critic, Fin Donnelly, launches shark fin import ban petition at C Restaurant. (L to r, Claudia Li, Dr. Chris Harvey-Clark, Fin Donnelly, Rob Stewart, Cécile Yuen, Robert Clark)

Sharks are sublime creatures. For 400 million years they have survived on Earth, evolving to become the oceans’ supreme hunters and shaping the evolution of other marine species. However, surging demand for their fins for use in shark fin soup and traditional medicine is decimating global shark populations.

With up to 73 million sharks slaughtered annually, we may see the total collapse of worldwide shark species within the decade. This will significantly disrupt ocean ecosystems that a large number of people depend on for much of their protein. Already in the last 15 years shark numbers in the Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean have plummeted by 90%, and by 75% in the northwestern Atlantic.

Despite the potentially grave ecological consequences, it will be challenging to end shark finning. Not only is it a multi-billion dollar industry in which organized crime is involved, people’s view of sharks is very different from that of elephants, rhinoceros, and even tigers. Media sensationalism has created a deep-seated anxiety in humans that is wildly out of proportion to the actual threat posed by sharks.

^ Wedding Campaigner, Cécile Yuen, as Harry the Shark Truth mascot.

While shark protection doesn’t have the same public appeal as panda conservation, measures are starting to be taken. Shark finning at sea has already been banned in jurisdictions such as the Bahamas, Chile, Ecuador, Guam, Hawai’i, Honduras, and the US West Coast. However, without a broad international ban on the practice, backed by an effective enforcement mechanism, the shark’s future looks grim.

What can you do to help stop shark finning?

• Don’t eat shark fin soup; adopt a substitute.
• Sign the National Shark Fin Import Ban petition.
• Call or write your Member of Parliament to tell them to support Bill C-380, Fin Donnelly’s Ban on Shark Fin Importation Act.
• Host a screening of Sharkwater.

For more information on shark finning, visit:

• Shark Truth
• Sharkwater

~ RG

^ Ecological Services Initiative launches at Granville Island.

A significant flaw in our economic system is how natural capital is not assigned any direct monetary value. This means, for example, that while a wetland produces clean water and controls flooding, the only economic value is seen in converting it to agricultural or industrial use. However, the total value of benefits provided by ecosystems is actually considerable. In Natural Capital in BC’s Lower Mainland, a study produced by the David Suzuki Foundation for the Pacific Parklands Foundation, the total value of all benefits provided by the area’s natural capital was estimated at $5.4 billion annually or $2,462 per person.

When natural processes are taken into account in the formal economy, decisions and outcomes can be quite different. A landmark agreement in New York City in 1997 saw 165 stream miles in the Catskill/Delaware watershed protected to improve the quality of the city’s drinking water. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was about to mandate the City build a water treatment plant at a cost of up to $8 billion, with $250 million in annual operating expenses. However, by investing $1.5 billion in watershed protection, including paying farmers to remove sensitive lands from production, they were able to keep drinking water at a sufficient quality to avoid the need for a filtration facility.

In contrast, the smaller neighbouring Croton watershed was given up for development. Consequently, the EPA and the New York State Department of Health decreed that the City must filter this water by May 2012. Originally estimated at $800 million, the cost of the Croton Water Treatment Plant has ballooned to $3.4 billion since construction began in 2004.

Thanks to a new research consortium of farmers, ranchers, academics and conservationists, incorporating the value of natural capital in land use decisions is now being tested in BC. The Ecological Services Initiative will provide producers with financial incentives to adopt management practices that maintain or enhance the production of natural services, such as clean air and water, while growing our food. Participants will be compensated according to the land area they set aside and the loss of agricultural productivity. This will be to a maximum of $2,000 for measures such as erecting livestock fencing around sensitive areas, increasing the buffer zone between waterways and crops, planting trees to shade salmon spawning streams, or replanting native plant species to sustain indigenous wildlife.

ESI is endorsed by the BC Agriculture Council and the BC Cattlemen’s Association. It is funded by the Agriculture Environment and Wildlife Fund, BC Ministry of Agriculture, Columbia Basin Trust, Ducks Unlimited Canada, East Kootenay Conservation Fund, Sustainable Prosperity, and the University of Alberta’s Institute for Land Use Innovation. Thirteen demonstration farms and ranches, spanning a variety of different commodities and regions, are being monitored for biological and economic results. The viability of the concept will then be evaluated to see if a broader program with longer term application can be developed as a part of provincial agricultural policy.

~ RG

Recently I was given a review copy of Simon Fairlie’s new book entitled Meat: A Benign Extravagance, published by Chelsea Green (2010), right around the same time I wrote what some might consider a rather controversial blog on the subject of meat here on Urban Diner. The issue of eating meat is a touchy one, especially here in Vancouver – a trend-setting city that has more than it’s share of anti-meat advocates, who inspired by films such as Forks Over Knives, have come to equate meat-eating with everything that’s bad in the world: from agricultural run-off and global warming, to cardiovascular disease and cancer.

And it is a media campaign they seem to be winning, as everywhere one looks the idea of eating meat and especially red meat is thoroughly denounced. The problem with these claims however is that when they are examined more closely, they begin to fall apart. For example: the much promulgated but nonetheless erroneous notion that saturated fat consumption is associated with an increased risk of heart disease. Refuting each one of these arguments however, often with people that have a pre-existing bias or claim the moral high ground, can be a rather tiring enterprise. How refreshing it was then to receive Mr. Fairlie’s well-researched exegesis on the subject of meat.

As a farmer passionately invested in the concept and practice of permaculture, Simon Fairlie brings a kind of holism to the subject of his inquiry that can only be borne from experience. Fortified by hundreds of references he meticulously examines the issue of meat, not from a health or ethical perspective, but by looking at the issue of environmental impact and sustainability. And in the process Fairlie invariably encounters more than a few sacred cows. For example, most people familiar with the anti-meat argument have heard that it takes at least ten times more energy to produce meat than cereals. The conventional logic is that if we switched out animal protein for vegetable protein we could feed ten times more people. Simon Fairlie shows us however that the assumptions of this 10:1 ratio are highly simplistic. For one thing, most livestock are fed otherwise inedible food crops and forage on inedible wild grasses and plants. The 10:1 ratio also doesn’t take into account factors such as the difference in nutrient bioavailability between meat and cereals, nor the economic value of non-food animal products such as manure, leather, soap, pharmaceuticals, glue and fertilizer. Contrary to what we have been told in the media, Fairlie show us that the 10:1 ratio usually cited for the conversion of edible cereals to meat is actually more like 1.4:1 (p.32) – which is a big difference. This is only one example of the many facts that Fairlie uses to undermine the assumption that livestock and meat production necessarily promotes waste and inefficiency. In Meat, Fairlie weaves a compelling argument that livestock farming actually adds value to the land, and is an integral component of sustainable agriculture. Fairlie shows us that meat production in essence is a secondary function of holistic farming: a gift of land, and is at the very worst, a “benign extravagance”.

While Fairlie tackles the most inflated arguments against meat production, his strongest critique is reserved for industrial agriculture, which leverages the use of petroleum to produce a kind of meat that is by any measure non-sustainable. Thus when Fairlie talks about meat as a “benign extravagance” this is not the kind of meat he refers to. Perhaps because he is a former vegan, in his arguments we find a nuanced and sophisticated position: someone who has truly looked at both sides of the issue. As a herbalist clinician I too appreciate the importance of a balanced perspective, seeing the value of plenty of vegetation in the diet, but also the utility of meat and animal products: in the health of children, women, during pregnancy, in the aging, and in specific health conditions such as anemia, osteoporosis, immunodeficiency and diabetes. As I discuss in my book, Food As Medicine, meat and animal products have always been a part of the human diet, and in many ways is the one food that defines us as a species. What else allowed for the evolution of our large brains, much larger than our primate cousins, if not for the high-density nutrition of animal products? Like Fairlie, I appreciate where vegans are going with some of their arguments, but I also understand that there is no eating without some sacrifice. We are born from food and we return to food. In the end, all we have in the vegan argument is the idea that eating meat is inherently wrong, which is less of a scientific or rational conclusion than something more akin to religion. For too long eating meat has been synonymous with not caring about the environment, of not being a good citizen of the earth. For those who are made to feel guilty for eating meat, Simon Fairlie’s book is a welcome and insightful resource in a debate that often suffers from too much prejudice, confusion, and outright error.

~ Todd Caldecott

ToddCaldecott.com

On Wednesday, November 2nd at 9 am there will be a rally for Food Freedom outside the New Westminster Supreme Court (651 Carnarvon Street) in support of dairy farmer Michael Schmidt who has been on a hunger strike for the past 33 days fighting contempt of court charges imposed upon him for distributing raw milk to members of his farm’s cow sharing program. He has already lost over 40 lbs in his protest, demanding to meet with Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty to discuss the issues, who to this point has refused to speak with him.

Here is the current state of affairs:

• In January 2010, after many years of legal wrangling, Michael Schmidt finally got his day in court where he represented himself (having lost the ability to pay the mounting legal fees over the years). After a dramatic proceeding, he was acquitted on all charges by Justice Kowarsky.

• On September 28, 2011 Justice Tetley reversed the decision against the Province of Ontario and found Michael Schmidt guilty on 15 of the 19 charges.

• Michael Schmidt also faces another contempt of court charge here in BC for his role in aiding the former Home on the Range dairy farm cooperative in Chilliwack continue their cow-share operation, which carries a fine of up to $55,000. A court date is expected to be set and confirmed for early December 2011.

Why this is Important

The ability to choose what food we consume is a fundamental right.

Michael Schmidt has fought for decades to make safe raw milk available to informed consumers. He has offered many times to work co-operatively with government agencies to develop a raw milk certification program similar to those that exist in many European countries as well as many U.S. states.

But the Ontario government and its agencies, including the milk marketing board known as Dairy Farmers of Ontario, have rebuffed all attempts at co-operation. Instead, they have declared all-out war.

The government has unlimited resources—provided by you, the taxpayer — to continue prosecuting Michael through the courts. We don’t know yet how many levels of court they will drag him through before the case is finally resolved.

Hundreds of millions around the world have been drinking raw milk for thousands of years, yet today, it is illegal to sell it in Canada. However, raw milk is legal to sell in every other G8 country as they have a second set of dairy production standards of sufficiently high caliber to ensure the raw milk comes from healthy animals and is safe to consume.

Pasteurization was instituted in the 1900’s to combat various diseases caused by the unsanitary production of milk. How can the milk be safe to drink if the cows are sick, covered in manure, and fed anything but their natural diet of grass? Pasteurization is indeed necessary for unhealthy animals. But milk from healthy animals can be consumed in its natural state as it has been done for millenia.

Raw milk is legal in many places around the world. Canadians should have the same right to choose their food.

~ PK

(Full disclosure: the author is a member of the Chilliwack cooperative and a supporter of Food Freedom)

(Images by: Mette-Marie Hansen)

Our climate is changing. This might not be shocking news to you over your morning coffee, but as a coffee buyer, I get to meet farmers and producers who are facing the difficulties of a changing climate year round.

It is the small business’ job to rant about the big guys, but this week, I am praising Starbucks and an initiative they’re a part of – a business coalition that has been trying to push Congress and the Obama administration to act on climate change. The coalition, including companies like Starbucks and Gap, are launching a new campaign for awareness about climate changes next month, ahead of the release of a UN report addressing these issues.

This Friday, one of Starbucks directors of sustainability, Jim Hanna, is traveling to Washington to brief members of Congress on climate change threatening the world’s coffee supply. Coffee thrives only around the equatorial line, in a very specific range of temperatures. One of the most important changes in the climate is that it is getting warmer – warmer temperatures bringing heavier rainfalls, unpredictable seasons overall and extremes like hurricanes, mudslides and erosion. Just the increased average temperature and humidity is bringing problems like coffee rust, a fungus attacking the leaves of the coffee tree. As a plant getting it’s nutrition mainly through the leaves, this causes severe crop loss in many places – and for the small coffee farmer a loss in crop means severe poverty.

In addition, pests attacking coffee flowers or cherry is increasingly common, and too high temperatures and insufficient differences between seasons also commonly causes starflowers – sterile coffee flowers where pollination can not take place.

As carbon emissions are commonly linked to climate changes, we need to look at the long term perspective of lost crops – we already have coffee processing mills like Helsar in Costa Rica, who are zero emission certified. A good wake up call for all coffee drinkers to live a more eco-friendly life.

~ Mette-Marie Hansen

“Is Your Coffee Fair Trade and Sustainable and Organic?”

I just got this question from a concerned consumer, and she was raising valid questions about well known certifications and buzz-words. The question is simple, and doesn’t require more than a yes-or-no, but as much as I love coffee, I love the opportunity to discuss and explore the perspectives. These days, coffee certified as Organic, Fair Trade, Rainforest Alliance and many others, is everywhere. It has become mainstream, making its way from mass merchandisers to college dining halls, high-end restaurants and almost every place in between. British Columbians account for 13% of the Canadian population, but is buying a majority of the organic food products sold in the country.

Coffee thrives in a narrow belt around the equatorial line, meaning for the most part growing in less economically developed countries. Most coffee farmers in the specialty coffee niche are small holder farmers. Going through the process of becoming certified – Organic, Rainforest Alliance, Utz and many others – is expensive and out of reach for many of these farmers, not only because of the intensified labor required, but also because they actually have to buy the certificate.

For small holder farmers trying to achieve a substantial premium by producing high quality coffees, Fair Trade is out of the question because only cooperatives can be certified. Even if the premium recently went from $0.10 to $0.20 cents per pound above the commodity market prices, it is a very small premium compared to the premiums paid for specialty coffee, which can be well above $1 per pound. The commodity market for coffee has more than doubled since June 2010, but coffee is still the most affordable luxury, taken how labour intensive producing it is.

On the farm where the coffee is growing, organic practices are making a big difference for the people working with the product. It is better for the soil, for the people picking it and for the waste from coffee processing. Even though the certification has been criticized for not taking quality into the equation, some organic certified coffee farmers are performing state-of-the-art farming techniques, resulting in some of the best coffees in the market. The expenses are still there, though, and often farms produce with no chemical inputs, simply because they can’t afford any sort of treatment for soil or plants.

As much as it is clearly a wise choice to choose organic, there’s another piece missing in the equation – the relationship and distance between producer and consumer. And not necessarily distance measured in kilometers – also proximity in the chain of custody and the opportunity to gain in-depth knowledge about the product for those who wishes to seek these answers. Investigate what sustainable means, and how producers have attempted to do what they do in a best possible way. I would argue, that even if all kinds of certifications are good for some things, you really need to look into the overall picture – how, where and when was it produced? When you count stickers or distance in kilometers, you tweak the focus and end up loosing sight of what truly is the most exciting part of your consumer power and the art of eating and drinking.

~ Mette-Marie Hansen

Fungi, particularly mushrooms, offer some powerful, practical solutions to many of the forces of environmental degradation facing the biosphere. The central premise is that habitats have immune systems, just like people, and our close evolutionary relationship to fungi can be the basis for novel pairings that lead to greater sustainability and better health. Paul Stamets will discuss the evolution of mushrooms in ecosystems and how fungi can help heal the environment and its inhabitants. Paul’s work with mycelium shows how these largely untapped organisms can replace chemical insecticides; break down toxic wastes, including petroleum-based products such as diesel, dioxins, and numerous other toxins into non-toxic forms. Farmers, gardeners, green architects and ecological designers all can use these emerging mycotechnologies.

Saturday evening, June 11th, 7:00pm – 9:30pm
Sunday, June 12th, 2011, 8:30am – 4:30pm
Instructor: Paul Stamets
Cost: $175 + HST (includes lunch)
Registration: www.foxglovefarmbc.ca
Contact: 1-250-931-5336 or programs@foxglovefarmbc.ca

Watch Paul’s TED talk here:
http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_stamets_on_6_ways_mushrooms_can_save_the_world.html

Paul Stamets has written six mushroom-related books, most recently Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World. Paul is an advisor to the Program of Integrative Medicine at the University of Arizona Medical School, Tucson; on the Editorial Board of The International Journal of Medicinal Mushrooms. He has supplied mushrooms for a breast cancer clinical study and worked with BioShield BioDefense Program since 2005 to develop new defenses against bioterrorism.

In 2008, Paul received the National Geographic Adventure’s Magazine’s Green-O-vator and the Argosy Foundation’s E-chievement Awards. In November of 2008, Utne Reader recognized Paul as one of the 50 Visionaries of the Year. In February of 2010, Paul received the President’s Award from the Society of Ecological Restoration.

I caught this recent retweet from Vancouver City mayor, Gregor Robertson, of councillor Andrea Reimer’s post about a tool co-op starting up in East Van. Sounds like a great idea!

The Vancouver Tool Library (VTL) is a cooperative tool lending library currently being established in East Vancouver. The VTL will be equipped with a wide variety of tools for home repair and renovation, gardening work, and bicycle maintenance, and will loan these tools to its members free of charge. The VTL tool library will become a community resource that fosters resilience, sustainability, and community pride, as well as directly benefits Vancouver residents by reducing the costs of maintaining, improving, and greening the places in which they live, work, and play.

More info: vancouvertoollibrary.com

~ PK

At the epicenter of the raw milk controversy, Alice Jongerden, a mother of five, commits herself to defend our country’s food security and individual food rights.

Alice, the founder of Chilliwack-based Home On The Range cow-sharing co-op, is mounting a constitutional challenge of a 2010 court order that bars her from producing or distributing unpasteurized milk, which B.C. law deems a public health hazard.

Event Details

Lecture/Movie : 3PM to 5 PM (Doors open at 2PM, includes discussion), live music by David Blair and a talk with former raw dairy farmer, Alice Jongerden

Date: Sunday, Feb. 6, 2011

Lecture Fee: $20.00 per person at door

Location: Rio Theatre (1660 E. Broadway @Commercial Drive)

Ticket Info

• MilkWarTix@gmail.com (contact Noriko)

• White Rock, BC Ticket Location : Awakening Heart, 14899 Marine Drive, White Rock, British Columbia. V4B 1C2
(Phone: 604-535-6603 )

• North Vancouver, BC Ticket Location : Organics At Home, 1479 Hunter Street, North Van. V7J 1H3. (Thurs 2-6, Sat 9-4, Sun 10-2)
(Phone: 604-983-6657)

• Reflections Bookstore : 1111D Austin Ave., Coquitlam, BC V3K 3P4
(Phone: 604-939-6000)

e) People’s Co-op Bookstore : 1391 Commercial Dr. , Vancouver, BC V5L 3X5
(Phone : 604-253-6442)

I stumbled across this fascinating TED talk by Mycologist Paul Stamets, where he shares his research and theories on mycelium — and lists 6 ways that fungus can help save the world. Brilliant!

BONUS COMMENTARY: Dave Chapelle about mushrooms

COOL PRODUCT: Paul Stamets The Tree Life Box™, which contains a selection of tree seeds and their mycorrhizal fungal partners that have the potential to grow into a forest ecosystem.

~ PK

Details and trailer inside.

Vancouver Screening of “Milk War”

When? Feburary 6th, 2011 from 3-5 pm
Where? Rio Theatre (Commercial Drive at East Broadway)
Why? to raise funds for the Raw Milk Legal Defense Fund, protecting your right to nutritious food
Who? live music by David Blair and a talk with former raw dairy farmer, Alice Jongerden

Cost? advance tickets are $15 and will be $20 at the door

Email MilkWarTix@gmail.com

I remember one time, when buying tomatoes at a Vancouver farmers market, a young woman asked the vendor if they had any tomatoes for sandwiches, “like the ones you find in the supermarket.” Before her lay a cornucopia of heirloom tomatoes in various shapes and sizes, in hues of yellow, green, orange, pink, purple, black, and red. It was her introduction to the rest of the 7,500 varieties of tomato that are invisible to most people.

That the woman did not believe any of the heirloom tomatoes would be suitable for her sandwich speaks to how narrowly we’ve been conditioned by agribusiness in our expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, not to mention that they should be available throughout the year. That uniformity is not accidental. It is driven by commercial considerations, such as resistance to pests and disease, durability for mechanized picking and shipping, and ability to be picked before fully ripening. The latter is important because over 50% of the fresh food British Columbians consume is not produced here.

Cheap fossil fuels have allowed us to transcend our geographical limitations and benefit from the economies of scale of global industrialized farming. However, with peak oil looming, we cannot expect to continue to afford relying on places like California and Mexico for so much of our produce. Our most reliable option is to maximize self-sufficiency.

As Alisa Smith and James Mackinnon discovered when they tried going on a 100-mile diet for a year, food self-reliance is easier said than done. Most of our local food production is small-scale and, thus, falls outside of our large-scale food distribution system. Farmers markets are an attempt to fill in the gap, but aren’t sufficiently meeting the growing needs of both consumers and farmers. More is required.

According to Metro Vancouver’s Draft Regional Food System Strategy [1], local policies and programs will be necessary to:

• increase local capacity to produce food
• improve financial viability of farmers and others in the food supply chain
• encourage people to eat healthier diets
• ensure more equitable access to food
• reduce waste in the food system
• protect the ecological health of our region and surrounding waters

Efforts by various agencies and groups in the Lower Mainland to work towards these objectives, however, may be in jeopardy. The Canadian federal government is currently negotiating a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union that seeks to, amongst its numerous aims, “achieve a substantial reduction of production and trade distorting domestic support.”[2] This also includes procurement policies that would bar any public institution from seeking food services favouring a domestic provider or requiring a vendor to source local food.[3]

NAFTA’s Most-Favored Nation clause[4] obligates Canada to extend to the United States and Mexico treatment no less favorable than all other countries we trade with. Therefore, any rights we give up to the Europeans that we have not already surrendered to our NAFTA co-signatories, will be immediately extended to them.

Of even greater concern are CETA’s articles concerning intellectual property rights. These not only cover pharmaceuticals or creative works, such as books or music, but include patented genetically modified organisms (GMO). According to Article 19, any farmer that is alleged to have infringed a seed company’s patent can be prevented from planting a crop; have their crops, equipment, land, or other assets seized; or their bank accounts blocked before the case is even heard in court.[5]

To get a sense of how draconian CETA’s Article 19 is, GMO contamination from a neighbouring field is all that would be necessary for the likes of Monsanto to accuse a farmer of patent infringement. Most farmers would not be able to afford a legal challenge from the world’s largest seed company under such provisions. They would either be forced to buy GMO seeds or go out of business. Such power is becoming concentrated into fewer hands. The world’s 10 largest seed companies control 67% of the global proprietary seed market. Eight-two percent of all commercial seed sales are proprietary. [6]

Climate change and peak oil are fundamental issues that demand local solutions to achieve food security. In the name of free trade, CETA in its current form will surrender our food sovereignty to the corporate interests driving this agreement. It will then be much more difficult to put in place the necessary conditions to improve our self-sufficiency in food production.

~ RG

Footnotes:
1. Metro Vancouver Draft Regional Food System Strategy, pg. 7.
2. Article X-10:6, Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement draft consolidated text, pg. 20.
3. Article IV:1, Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement draft consolidated text, pg. 206.
5. Article 1103, North American Free Trade Agreement.
4. Article 19, Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement draft consolidated text, pg. 252.
6. Who Owns Nature, ETC Group, pg. 46.

UPDATE: The winner of the Ocean Wise Cookbook is L. Davis. Congratulations!

In celebration of the recent launch of  “The Ocean Wise Cookbook: Seafood Recipes That Are Good for the Planet“, I am thrilled to have an extra copy of this most beautiful book to give away to one of our lucky UD readers. Featuring over 135 unique sustainable seafood recipes from some of the top chefs in Canada, not to mention some stunning photography by Tracey Kusiewicz (foodiephotography.com) and wine pairing suggestions by Tom Firth (wineaccess.ca), this book is a wonderful and inspired addition to one’s kitchen library.

^ Vancouver Aquarium president John Nightingale, editor Jane Mundy, Chef Robert Clark, and Ocean Wise program manager, Michael McDermid proudly show off the new Ocean Wise Cookbook

Enter to WIN a copy of the Ocean Wise Cookbook by correctly answering the following questions in the comments field below:

1) What year was the Ocean Wise program founded?

2) In 2009, Ocean Wise received which prestigious award?

3) Name 3 sustainable seafood choices…

4) Name 3 unsustainable seafood choices…

5) What supermarket is now featuring Ocean Wise seafood?

NOTE: a winner will be randomly drawn from all the collected correct submissions and revealed at 12 noon on Friday, November 5th, 2010.

Good luck!

A very timely report was released today entitled “Every Bite Counts: Climate Justice and BC’s Food System”. This document is part of the Climate Justice Project, a five-year research initiative led by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and the University of British Columbia. This is a must read for anyone concerned about food security and climate change in this province. ~ PK

The official press release:

Every bite counts: Government must set menu for BC’s food system in face of climate change

(Vancouver) A new report is calling on the BC government to take action to make BC’s food system work better for farmers, eliminate hunger, shift away from imported products, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The report, Every Bite Counts: Climate Justice and BC’s Food System, released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA), calls for a rethink of BC’s food system in light of climate change. The report acknowledges grassroots efforts to move to local, sustainable agriculture have found support at the local government level. Largely missing, it says, are actions by the provincial government to accelerate change.

The report argues that climate impacts will undermine the abundance of the modern supermarket. “BC imports about half of its food, leaving the province vulnerable to supply disruptions and price shocks,” says report co-author and CCPA-BC Senior Economist Marc Lee. “Our food system is also a contributor to climate change.”

Leadership from the provincial government for a “made in BC” strategy is essential, through a more coherent planning framework. Says Lee, “this is not a task that can be left to market forces alone.”

A key recommendation of the paper is to link local food to the purchasing power of large public and non-profit institutions such as schools, hospitals, universities, prisons, and social housing units. “If a growing portion of food budgets in the public sector were dedicated to local food sources, it would provide a huge boost towards creating a more localized food system,” says Lee.

“BC needs to develop a more just distribution of food, better support farmers, farm workers and fishers, and seek healthier nutritional outcomes from our food system,” says Herb Barbolet, report co-author and Associate with the Centre for Sustainable Community Development. “At a deeper level, this is more about an ongoing cultural transformation in how we think about food, waste, the economy, labour, health and education.”

Alejandro Rojas, Principal Investigator of the UBC-based community-university research alliance Think & Eat Green @ School Project, notes, “Schools have tremendous potential for addressing hunger, improving nutrition and teaching kids where food comes from, through meal programs, school gardens and curriculum development.” The Think & Eat Green @ School Project involves 25 community partners and works to connect Vancouver K–12 students to food and sustainability issues while helping schools lighten their ecological footprint and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Other recommendations include:

• Shift to 80% food self-reliance by 2030: To be more resilient to climate change, BC needs to reduce the amount of food we export and focus on meeting domestic consumption needs. Getting to 80% self-reliance will also require a doubling of our current food production capacity.

• Take hunger off the table: To eliminate hunger, BC needs to raise the incomes of low-income households, beginning with a provincial poverty reduction plan. Ensuring workers can earn a living wage and funding adequate income support programs are essential if we are to reduce hunger.

• Support integrated food, housing and health programming for vulnerable populations: Housing programs should build in flexible food options and infrastructure that meet the nutritional needs of their residents.

“These ingredients point towards a food system that could be, with strong public policy actions, just and sustainable. BC is starting in an excellent position to move forward,” says Barbolet. “But we need strong leadership from our provincial government.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD A COPY OF THE REPORT

Ok, a share of hands please.  How many of you have ever suckled a baby?  Maybe a few of you…? Ok then, how many of you were breastfed?  In a place I call Happy Fantasy Boob Land, I imagine that 100% of you got breast-fed.  But, like me, I know for a fact that a lot of you didn’t, and that maybe even some of you haven’t seen a baby breast feeding either.  But whatever boob hang-ups we all have, I think we can all agree that breast is best.  Years of research and public campaigning have finally shifted the preposterous albeit prosperous medical opinion that we could improve upon nature by synthesizing a substitute.  Yes, almost every doctor will tell you that boobs are pretty great.  And not only is breast-feeding good for you, it’s a quite a handy thing too.  Here we have a whining crying screaming baby going on and On AND ON and all you need to do is stick a boob in it to shut it up.  It’s a miracle.   You don’t even need to wash the boob before using it.  No sterilizing bottles and nipples and discarding plastic bags.  It’s the ultimate in convenience, and 100% green.  Breast milk is so totally hip.

But what if I told you that breast milk was a health hazard?  What if I told you that your baby’s milk needed to be packed into huge vats and blended with other mother’s milk and taken to a factory to be industrially processed?  First we’d skim off the fat and then add butter fat back to the milk to achieve the desired percentage of fat (e.g. 1%, 2%, 3% etc).  After this we’d pasteurize the whole lot of it, and then run it through a high pressure nozzle upwards of 17,000 kPa in a process called homogenization, changing the physiochemical properties of the milk, turning it into a very different substance.   Then we’d pack it up in cardboard boxes lined with polyethylene or high density polyethylene (HDPE) containers, and about a week after it had been expressed, you could finally give it to your baby.  Does this make any sense to you?

And yet this is what modern milk has become.  The very same substance that comes from a mother’s breast is the same thing that comes from a cow or any other mammal.  Sure, the ratio of fats, proteins and sugars are different depending on the animal, but milk is milk, and real milk is always raw.  Let’s make no mistake here.  Any type of milk that is no longer raw cannot be said to be milk.  In fact milk that is no longer raw is usually yogurt, a process that more or less happens on its own.  But milk isn’t yogurt.  And neither is skim, 2% or homo.

What ‘milk’ has become in modern society is an artifact of milk, a replica of the farm fresh product that the marketing only alludes to.  But it’s about as close to real milk as an Egg McMuffin is to a real breakfast.   And because it’s not milk, but another product that the body doesn’t recognize as food, it is one of the most allergenic and problematic foods in today’s diet.  Not just me but legions of health practitioners including herbalists, naturopaths and medical doctors will all tell you that avoiding milk will improve your health.  By avoiding milk health problems seem to resolve out of thin air – chronic mucus and sinus issues, asthma, joint pain, skin rashes and even anxiety and depression – all these and more just seem to get better.  It is so common to hear that milk causes health issues that I’ve heard comedians make jokes about it.  It’s become a cultural meme, despite all the marketing that “milk does the body good”.  It seems that milk is bad for you after all.  But let’s be perfectly clear.  What we are referring to here isn’t really milk.

According to Ayurveda, milk is best consumed fresh and warm, right out of the milk bucket.  Taken in this way, milk is among the most nourishing of foods, helping to overcome deficiency states, weight loss and a lack of vitality.  In ancient India all traditional hospitals had a couple cows on the grounds, providing fresh raw milk and other milk products for the patients.  But regardless of its virtues, raw milk doesn’t stay that way forever.  As I indicated earlier, if the milk is brought inside, filtered and put into a jar, within a 24 hour period it usually turns to yogurt, or what they call “dahi” in India.  This is a natural function of the lactic acid bacteria that are pretty much everywhere in our environment.  And thank goodness, because if it wasn’t for them, other putrefying bacteria would soon turn that fresh milk into something quite nasty and rather toxic.   Although still a nutritive substance, due to its sour taste yogurt is said to be different than milk in its properties and effects.  For one thing, fresh raw milk is a mild laxative, but fresh yogurt is slightly constipating, which is why it’s good for traveler’s diarrhea.  Milk is a little heavy and hard to digest, whereas yogurt is easier to digest.  Milk is cooling and antiinflammatory, but yogurt is heat producing, and can promote rashes and other skin issues.  I talk about these and other issues on my website.

By the time the milk is turning into yogurt the cream has risen to the top.  The farmer scoops this soured cream off the yogurt and sets it aside, and then after a few days of accumulating it, the sour cream is churned to produce butter and buttermilk.  This type of real cultured butter which is hard to find nowadays is stated in Ayurveda to have nourishing and aphrodisiac properties, and then when clarified into ghee, turns into a heat-stable cooking fat that potentiates the medicinal properties of the herbs it’s mixed with.  And what’s left over from churning butter is real buttermilk, a thin sour liquid with very little fat.  In Ayurveda buttermilk is an excellent remedy for diarrhea and dysentery when prepared with rice and herbs such as curry leaf, hing, cumin and salt.  But what exactly you can do with that thick fatty glop in the grocery store figuratively called “buttermilk” I have no idea.

I provide this basic run down of traditional dairy processing to provide some context.  And hopefully the context should be clear enough: for the vast majority of the time we have been consuming milk as a species, we have observed a fairly basic set of farming practices, processing methods and consumption patterns.  The problem is that none of us are living on the farm anymore.  Most of us don’t even live close enough to a farmer to get it locally.  We hear that we need milk, that it’s replete with calcium that we supposedly need to prevent osteoporosis, and so we are compelled to buy it.

When people began to migrate into the cities to find work, still hankering for those farm fresh foods, local dairies were only too happy to oblige.  Funded by growing demand, these home-run dairies quickly became businesses supplying a commodity, and dairy production went from simple family run operations to dairy mega corps in a single generation.  But there were some major hiccups in the beginning, especially before we had adequate refrigeration, before we had really figured out the level of hygiene that needs to be followed when you operate on such a level.  Very often the product would curdle or otherwise spoil from contamination somewhere in chain of production.  Enter Louis Pasteur and his concept of pasteurization.

Before pasteurization, there were natural limits upon how big a dairy operation could get, but Mr. Pasteur’s process allowed the dairy farm to become a huge operation and still maintain a “reliable” product.  Remember how raw milk becomes yogurt due to the ubiquitous presence of lactic acid bacteria?  Well, pasteurization is an effective method to kill these bacteria and prevent lactic acid fermentation.  It allows for the continued appearance and taste of milk weeks after it has been expressed, but in fact pasteurization doesn’t kill all the bacteria.  In particular, pasteurization leaves some degree of putrefying bacteria more or less intact, which is why after a week or so your milk smells like sweaty biker armpits instead of yogurt.  The gross thing is that you have been drinking it this whole time, and it’s only when it finally gets too gross that you toss it out.

I guess it goes without saying, but real milk comes from real cows.  Fortunately in Canada we have laws that prohibit the use of hormones like recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST) to boost milk production, but in the US there are no such restrictions, as well as no specific laws that require labeling this fact.  Antibiotics, herbicide and pesticide residues and even the presence of heavy metals such as cadmium are also worrisome components of commercial milk production. Real cows of course spend their time walking in the fields eating grass, herbs and lots of bugs in the process, and feeding on silage and hay over the winter months.  Real cows are cared for and loved and respected as the true mothers that they are, their teats lovingly pulled by farmers whose joy it is to receive their milky abundance.  Some might think this a pastoral fantasy, but the horror show of the modern dairy cow is very real.

It should be clear by now that the only way to get milk, real milk, is to get it from real dairy farmers that have relatively small operations.  On this level, dairy farming is a small home-based business with a small herd that produces a relatively small volume of milk that can be distributed to the community following simple methods of hygiene.  It’s not that complicated, but for some reason it gets very complicated for government bureaucrats.  Just ask Alice Jongerden of Home on the Range cowshare farm in Chilliwack B.C.  For the past several years, Ms. Jongerden and her family have been providing fresh raw milk to local people who want it.  It’s a very small family-run operation, and if you passed it on the highway it would fly by in a blip.  People who want real milk invest in their cow-share program, and owning a share of the cow entitles them to receive some of its milk.  You can even go out there and say hi to your cow, scratch her neck and feed her some grass.  But according to Fraser Health, Alice Jongerden is committing a crime.  For providing real milk in a way that any real farmer would feel comfortable with it, Home on the Range is under court order to suspend its operations.  And Alice isn’t the only one.  Although having recently won his case in court, Ontario dairy farmer Michael Schmidt is preparing to meet the government’s appeal, and finally strike down the law against real people drinking real milk.  And a similar movement is afoot in the US, where laws depending on the state can be just as draconian as they are in Canada.  Take a look at this recent news report on a police raid on an organic grocery store in California.

In the interest of fairness however, I don’t want to come across completely one-sided.  I understand that the regulatory agencies are mostly just trying to save their butts and protect the public interest.  I will suspend the thought that their actions may just be the result of pressure from the milk industry and milk marketing boards, who would hate to see consumers start to choose real milk instead of the industrial product.   But I too, have some concerns about milk.  For one thing, it’s clearly not a food for everyone, and even raw milk will give some people problems with their health.  And I am also concerned about storing raw milk under refrigeration for an extended period of time, with people drinking it cold right out of the fridge.  Research shows that under refrigeration the lactic acid bacteria don’t out-compete other cold-insensitive bacteria, including potentially pathogenic organisms.  Remember what I said about real milk being fresh, straight from the cow?   Yes, raw milk is a natural product, but the extended preservation of raw milk under refrigeration is not.  As such, I recommend that people who buy raw milk introduce a culture to ferment it, such as a little yogurt culture or kefir granules, or if it’s more than 2 days old, warm the raw milk up to 100C before consuming it.  Drinking cold milk right out the fridge is a 20th century phenomena, and in my experience, gives rise to a number of health issues including weak digestion, chronic mucus congestion and depressed immunity.  According to Ayurveda, boiled milk prepared with herbs and spices such as ginger, cinnamon, cardamom and clove helps to improve the digestibility of the milk, and this is a practice that has been followed in India for thousands of years.

In the same way that I recommend we all buy our meat from local producers, so too should we get our milk from local dairies.  I am confident that if health boards limited the herd size and operations for raw milk dairies, that a high quality and safe product could be easily supplied.  Just ask the farmers – they know how to do it already.  Concerns over spoilage and infection would be easily allayed.  And then we would see the rise of a hundred local dairy farms, maybe even some in the city as they do out at the UBC farm.  Local farms and local milk for local people.  The real thing.

~ Todd Caldecott

toddcaldecott.com