
Spring 2008
MLT Newsletter
This
being a lengthy issue, I won't waste space, and will start with an
article by Ken Asmus founder and operator of Oikos Tree Crops. I
have to admit I feel somewhat embarrassed now, a couple of years after
"successfully" eradicating a garlic mustard patch that appeared behind
the barn.
The New Edible Wild
About 30 years ago Euell Gibbons came to WMU to speak on foraging
edible wild plants. I missed that talk on purpose. For some reason I
thought Mr. Gibbons had commercialized something that was better left
undisturbed. The commercials he made and the late night appearances
seemed too much for me. Plus I was a big fan of Bradford Angier and had
all of his writings. I didn’t want the commercial guy. Looking back I
wish I had attended and got a hickory nut signed. (That was his
trademark.) He really was just writing about his personal experiences
with these plants. Today this is something I can never seem to get
enough of. Today the edible wild takes on many forms and even has
become the living library for many new agricultural products.
Like it or not commercialization is taking the edible wild to the store
shelves. It’s not yet a massive front like the organic movement and I
don’t mean to complain. I think it’s a good start. At least we are
beginning to touch base with a form of food that has long been thought
of as “survival”. Even television shows extol the virtues
of the edible wild with the Discovery Channel leading the way
with “Survivorman” and “Man vs. Wild”. I think if Euell was
alive he would be chuckling at all the over dramatizations. Don’t be
too surprised. It is called acting.
We are
still missing some fantastic foods and the rate of which these are
introduced in any real quantity is very very slow. There are thousands
of things to choose from. It’s true some may not be widely appreciated
but given the right processing, recipe and ultimate end use we may find
more of these wild weeds on the average American dinner plate. Here are
a few:
Autumn Olive-Dried
fruits may be a possibility if you could find a way to separate the
stems from the berry. Harvesting is tedious by hand but yields can be
very high. As an addition to a fruit drink their tart flavor blends
well with apple juice. They have as much as 20 times the lycopene as
tomatoes. Some varieties may have up to 50 times the lycopene as
tomatoes. The seeds are high in phenol compounds said to be
anti-cancer. Food For Thought carries a nice fruit spread with this
species. I see Go-Ji (Lycium) in with the dried fruits but no autumn
olive. The flavor is similar in my opinion.
Rose Hips and Petals-
Why don’t we have farms just for rose hips? Like Autumn olive,
rose hips are a high-energy food with real potential as an additive to
drinks and sauces. I’ve grown and tried over 20 species and some taste
very poor and others are rather pasty in texture with lots of seeds in
the middle. Some native species are light in the yield department. It
is better to make a paste out of the hips and process it to preserve
the vitamin C and keep the subtle flavor. Possibly a fruit leather
could be made or the hips can be dried without the seeds so you could
use them in tea or candies. I like the crosses I have with
multiflora rose and Canine Rose. The fruits are larger and more
favorable to eat directly from the bush. The petals are a laxative if
taken in quantity. I love adding the petals to green tea. Rosa canina
is the commercial species where the petals are harvested. Michigan’s
swamp rose and wild prickly rose have nice tasting petals.
Leeks-Ramps-I
am surprised that the native wild leeks are not found in any seed
catalogs and plants are not readily available. Almost everyone loves
these. There is even a ramp festival. They are strong but have a
rich onion flavor that is much more pronounced than the cultivated
leek. I guess if you have a patch in the woods there is no need to
plant it but I am surprised no one has commercialized this species.
It’s easy to grow from seeds and they spread to form dense colonies.
Rita Bober made a soup from these at her edible wild class that was to
die for. The college students loved it. According to some
references, over eating these can cause major bloating on some people.
Hmm, maybe that’s why you don’t see it. Liability issues.
Garlic Mustard-This
is the plant that has turned ecologists into exterminators. I would
love to find a selection with a low garlic flavor. It’s a little over
powering and I think a mild form would be more universally appreciated.
Under cultivation with compost I was able to double the leaf size
compared to the wild forms along the road. I keep taste testing them
wherever I go but so far the mild form remains elusive. I have one
strain that has larger leaves but I doubt it would win any culinary
awards. I am sure it won’t win any environmental awards. High in iron.
Never very popular until recently when its weed status has made it a
legend. Can you believe it someone wrote a cookbook with just this one
plant? (Kind of in the same league as the dandelion for many people.)
Wild Strawberry-
I hired a teenager at my farm a few years ago whose breakfast consisted
of Pepsi and Skittles. Lunch was not much better. I had him taste
a variety of wild strawberry I am cultivating. His response was, “My
god that is good. What is it?” This is the point. Even someone way on
the fringes of knowing any “real” fruit flavor will immediately
recognize something good. Can the wild strawberry be improved? What if
it was bigger? Bigger fruit may equal less richness in the world of
strawberries. The flavor becomes less intense. That may be good for
commercialization but wild strawberries are the standard other
strawberries are judged against. In Europe wild forms of the alpine
strawberry are grown. They are small too but have good flavor and are
grown commercially for specialty markets. Why can’t we do that? I asked
a commercial producer in the U.S. why and he said, “They are too
small.” Hmmm.
The edible wild today is
as much alive today as it was when Euell Gibbons was signing hickory
nuts. It may be luck or destiny but if something crosses the path of
human awareness someone may find a use for it. The question is: Is it
really going to be the next food that is consumed in mass quantities by
society as a whole, a novelty food item or something you need to have
to survive? Maybe commercialization will tell us that.
Personally, I don’t know but that weed over there in the corner of my
awareness looks pretty good. It’s edible and wild.
By Ken Asmus December 5, 2007
oak24@aol.com www.oikostreecrops.com
Michigan’s Right to Farm Act-Protections and Issues
“I’m
calling it in-we need to shut those *&%$*!! down!” Fighting
words as the aroma of freshly spread manure danced in the breeze.
“But,” the neighbor said “that land has been farmed since the Civil
War, and in my thirty years living here I know the odor only lasts for
a few hours, and besides….” “I don’t care. I
did not spend half-a-mil for this house and land to not be able to
enjoy it. And besides you’ll be next if your stupid rooster keeps
screaming at 5 am Sunday morning.” With that, he strapped on his
Thor Force Carbon Helmet®, and mounted his Honda TRX700XX, the biggest
and baddest 686cc SOHC-liquid cooled fuel injected, 4-valve,
4-stroke ATV on the market. He worked his corpulent hams into the
foam mesh contour seat, revved the engine and, with a flurry of
repressed manhood, spun his wheels, sprayed gravel and flew off in a
cloud of dust to join his family racing around the dirt track carved
into his back five acres for a Saturday evening of family fun and
bonding. Ahhh, the country life.
This is the first article in a
three part series about Michigan’s Right-to-Farm Act (P.A. 93 of 1981).
It could prove a boring ride-unless your farm or your property is under
siege, please bear with me. In this first article I will discuss the
legislative history of Right-to-Farm Acts (RTFA), the intent and
purpose of RTFAs, explain several of the critical provisions of
Michigan’s RTFA (MRTFA), enforcement and compliance through evolving
Generally Accepted Agricultural Manufacturing Practices (GAAMPs),
and the consequences of a failure to comply with GAAMPs. I will share
our experiences of satisfying GAAMPs as part of our farm’s verification
under the Michigan Agricultural Environmental Assurance Program
(MAEAP). In the second article I will focus on Federal and
state case law, Constitutional challenges and illustrate how RTF and
the enforcement regulations provide a mechanism for preserving farm
land and promoting sustainable agricultural practices. The final
article will address issues involving the critical impact of RTF on the
locavore movement, (local food production, distribution and
consumption), energy issues, Animal Feeding Operations (AFO’s), zoning
and preemption issues, and finally illustrate how other modifications
of the enforcement guidelines in other states have accomplished
environmental and animal welfare goals-providing a model for civic
action to achieve quality standards and promote future diversified farm
usage while protecting agricultural lands from predatory urban
development.
RTF laws are the children of conflict.
All
agricultural practices involve a spectrum of unavoidable conditions,
which are repugnant too many. This is becoming a vexing problem in a
society that is becoming increasingly fixated on “sanitation” and
hygiene. Our “flush and forget” attitude is further complicated
by our lost contact with the soil upon which our existence
depends. Farm conditions include manure, flies, odors, dust,
noise, and drifting pesticide applications, as well as other things
associated with agricultural practices. Concern with agricultural
operations prior to 1950 was minimal. For those who lived in rural
areas there were no issues, since most people were associated in some
manner with agriculture. However, commercial and residential
(nonagricultural) land use started growing dramatically in the mid1950s
with significant consequences. Many of the new residents objected
to agricultural practices and initiated large numbers of nuisance
lawsuits. Township boards, influenced and in many cases dominated
by development interests, enacted numerous local ordinances that were
adverse to standard agricultural practices. This process began
before the significant transformation of America’s diverse agrarian
culture to what is now a highly industrialized (and deleterious)
system, promoted and extended by the USDA under Secretary Earl Butz
during the Nixon administration.
During the
pre-RTFA era, the threat urbanization posed to American agricultural
productivity and the communities and states that were economically
dependent on agriculture were significant. Local ordinances
adversely affected agricultural operations, with many operations being
driven out of business. Nuisance lawsuits took their toll.
A successful nuisance complaint resulted in monetary damages against
farmers, or court rulings would enjoin (prevent) specific practices
such as plowing and planting after 7pm in the evening ( too bad for a
farmer with a town job). These threats caused uncertainty
resulting in farmers’ neither improving nor expanding operations and
provided an incentive for farmers to sell farmlands for nonagricultural
purposes. The USDA promoted policies that favored larger
integrated operations, plowing from fence row to fence row and an
attitude of “get big or get out.” The USDA and state
agricultural departments noted the catastrophic consequences associated
with urbanization-there was growing tension. States
enacted “Right to Farm” acts throughout the 1970s and 1980s. It
is important to note that RTFA laws were enacted before the extensive
industrialization of American agriculture, the farm animal welfare
movement, and many state and federal environmental laws (e.g. the Clean
Air Act).
All RTFAs have a common goal-to protect agricultural producers and operations from nuisance lawsuits.
In
general, an RTFA ensures that an agricultural operation or activity
will not be deemed a nuisance IF the operation was established during a
particular period of time before land use conditions changed (e.g.
zoning from agriculture to residential), conforms to generally accepted
farming practices, complies with federal, state and local laws and does
not have a substantial adverse effect on public health and safety.
Historically, RTFAs are a mere extension of common law.
Specific
issues arise in regard to the application of RTFAs. The federal
and state constitutionality of RTFAs has been challenged under Fifth
Amendment Liberty and Takings provisions as well as Constitutional Due
Process Clauses. Numerous litigation has ensued as to whether an RTFA
did or did not preempt state law or local laws. Large numbers of
courts have had to determine whether an RTFA applied or did not apply
while keeping in mind legislative intent and purpose of RTFAs-to
protect agricultural operations and processes from nuisance litigation
and preserve agricultural lands.
Michigan’s RTFA
Michigan’s RTFA (MRTFA) was enacted in 1981 and
amended in 1999. Michigan Circuit Court (Kalamazoo County) Judge,
Richard Lamb has described the MRTFA as having, “ . . .the most clear
language I’ve seen in a legislative act.” To be actionable, a law
must be clear on its intent and purpose in order to provide guidelines
for appropriate compliance and place all citizens on notice. As
with all RTFAs, Michigan’s RTFA was born of legal battles.
Michigan’s RTFA was enacted to provide farmers with protection from
nuisance lawsuits, and authorized the Michigan Commission on
Agriculture to develop and adopt Generally Accepted Agricultural and
Management Practices (GAAMPs) for compliance under the
MRTFA. Local governments are prohibited from passing
laws more restrictive that MRTFA. As long as farmers comply with
GAAMPs they are protected. The GAAMPs continue to evolve to
include an increasing number of state and federal environmental,
health, and water protection standards.
The MRTFA broadly
defines “farm,” “farm operation,” “farm product” and GAAMPs. If
qualified, there is no size restriction on a farm, and, local
ordinances attempting to limit the size of a farm have been
consistently invalidated by Michigan courts.
Specific Provisions
The protection afforded Michigan farms is clearly stated:
A
farm or farm operation shall not be found to be a public or private
nuisance if the farm or farm operation alleged to be a nuisance
conforms to generally accepted agricultural and management practices.
MCL 286.473, sec 3 (1)
In response to nuisance lawsuits the
MRTFA has included additional provisions such that any farm that
conforms with MCL 286.473, sec 3 (1) cannot be held as a public
nuisance as the result of any of the following:
(a) A change in ownership or size.
(b) Temporary cessation or interpretation of farming.
(c) Enrollment in government programs.
(d) Adoption of new technology.
(e) A change in type of farm product produced.
MCL 286.473, sec 3 (3)
The MRTFA was amended in 1999 to address challenges as to the intent of Michigan’s legislature in enacting MRTFA:
“.
. . it is the express legislative intent that this act preempt any
local ordinance, regulation, or resolution that purports to extend or
revive in any manner the provisions of this act or generally accepted
agricultural and management practices. . . MCL286.474 section (6).
The
MRTFA goes on to describe a system under the Michigan Department of
Agriculture (MDA) to review proposed local ordinances to determine if
they are in compliance with the MRTFA.
In response to serial
complaints, the MRTFA provides that if there is a nuisance action
brought against a farm and if the farm defendant in the lawsuit wins,
the farm may recover costs from the plaintiff. To avoid numerous
nuisance lawsuits, the MRTA also provides that if a complaining party
brings more than 3 unverified complaints against the same farm within
three years that the complaining party will pay the full costs of the
investigation of subsequent and unverified complaints against the same
farm. An unverified complaint is one where the Michigan
Department of Agriculture determines that the farm is complying with
all GAAMPs.
Enforcement and investigation.
The
Director of the MDA is mandated to investigate all complaints involving
a farm or farm operation. Complaints dealing with, but not
limited to odor, fumes, noise, pollution and care of farm animals are
forwarded to the MDA. A legal notice is immediately sent to the
farmer. By law, the MDA must conduct an on site investigation
within 7 days of receiving a complaint with notice sent to the city,
village, or township and county in which the farm is
located. The MDA inspector determines whether the complaint
is verified or not, i.e. the farm is in or not in compliance with
GAAMPs. The inspection must include any potential violations of
the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act and all rules
that have been promulgated under the Act in addition to any other
farm-related complaints.
If the complaint is verified the farmer
is given 30 days to conform to GAAMPs. If the farmer cannot
conform within 30 days the farmer must submit a detailed implementation
plan included a schedule for completion. The MDA then
conducts numerous follow-up inspections.
If changes have not
been implemented or there is no acceptable management plan, the matter
is turned over to the Department of Environment Quality to take
enforcement action and the farm may be deemed non compliant with GAAMPs.
Conforming to GAAMPs is critical. If a farm operation does not conform, protection under MRTFA is denied.
Our adventure with GAAMPs.
The MTRFA defines GAAMPs as practices that are defined by the Michigan
Commission of Agriculture and posted on the MDA website, thus serving
legal notice to all Michigan citizens. GAAMPs regulations are
continually reviewed. Specific consideration is given to the MDA,
recommendations from MSU’s College of Agriculture, MSU Extension
Service, agricultural experimental stations, the USDA, the USDA-Natural
Resources Conservation Service, EPA, DNR, DEQ and other professional,
citizen and industrial organizations. GAAMPs are currently
divided into six broad categories that include:
1) manure management,
2) pesticide utilization and pest control,
3) nutrient utilization,
4) care of farm animals,
5) cranberry production,
6) irrigated water use, and
7) site selection of new and expanding livestock facilities.
When
we decided to establish a microdairy we applied to the Michigan
Agricultural Environmental Assurance Program (MAEAP) for farmstead
verification. MAEAP is a proactive, voluntary program to assure that
farmers are complying with all state and federal environmental laws,
controlling pollution, effectively managing crops and soils to assure
sustainable agricultural practices, and comply with all current GAAMPs
standards. If verified, the farm is reviewed every three years
for continuing compliance with evolving GAAMPs standards.
The verification process has three phases divided into education,
on-farm risk assessment, and finally, a third party inspection for
verification of compliance. Education consists of attendance at
classes that deal with all phases of soil fertility management, manure
management and emergency planning. The on farm risk assessment
involves inspectors from a number of agencies who carefully inspect all
aspects of farming operations.
Our
ten acre farm was inspected by the Michigan Farm Ground Water
Stewardship Program, the Michigan Home Ground Water Stewardship
Program, four visits from the MSU Extension Service reviewing grazing
plans, security, safety and manure management; an interview with the
USDA, farm registration with the Farm Services Agency, and a site visit
from the USDA’s regional grazing –land use
specialist.. Queries and issues were identified
regarding recycling rain water, channeling run off, establishing
better composting facilities, keeping water use records, manure
records, livestock records tracking, carbon brought onto the farm, the
care and feeding of septic systems, well isolation distances and
protection, containment of odors and disposal on trash, and energy
conservation and alternative energy options. We walked every foot
of the property identifying old rolls of fence wiring, had an
archeological dig through fence rows removing not the one tire I
noticed, but 20. A 43 page, detailed risk
assessment check list had to be filled out in the presence of the
investigators regarding: soil evaluations, water well conditions (3 ˝
pages), pesticide storage and handling (5 ˝ pages), fertilizer
storage and handling (4 pages), petroleum product storage and
management (7 pages), waste management (3 pages), septic system
management (3 pages), livestock management (3 pages), manure storage (4
pages), livestock yard management (2 pages), silage management (2
pages), milk waste management (3 pages); pages regarding federal, state
and local environmental requirements and finally a discussion of legal
citations and consequences for environmental risks. In addition,
we needed a grazing plan with an emphasis on rotational grazing and
encouragement to produce milk from grass fed-pastured
animals. We were educated as to the health and
environmental hazards associated with large scale confinement
operations. We then drafted an improvement action plan.
`We went to work the summer of 2007 to assure GAAMPs compliance.
The day of our third party inspection was eagerly anticipated as I lead
an entourage on a tour of our farm. After 27 years or organic
gardening, wildlife preservation, careful land stewardship and a deep
love of nature-we failed the inspection. Potential erosion was
noted near our barn requiring my building an 88 x 3-4 foot retaining
wall (the goats love it), the barn had to be guttered, the areas
around the barn regraded and special erosion control grass planted to
contain run off. Compost had to be covered to eliminate potential
odors. We passed the second inspection and are proud of the MAEAP
sign at our entrance. We are now GAAMPs compliant.
GAAMPs verification is not trivial. The regulations are
evolving in response to a growing awareness of our environment and the
problems associated with various agricultural practices. The
changes required by MAEAP were consistent with our stewardship
philosophy and dedication to sustainable agricultural practices.
I
advise any land holder-regardless of the size of property, who has any
interest in any aspect of agriculture and who is zoned AG to volunteer
for MAEAP. If you are verified, you will serve notice to all that you
are compliant under GAAMPs and thus protected under MTRFA.
Remember the intent and purpose of MRTFA is to protect
agriculture. The critical key to the nature of that protection
and responsible land use is GAAMPs.
Without MRTF there
is no protection from predatory development and the trivializing impact
of a culture that has too much concrete between its children’s feet and
the soil to understand that its’ own existence depends on such a thin
layer of Mother Earth’s skin.
In following articles I will
focus on Constitutional challenges to RTFAs, rural preservation, state
responses to modifying GAAMPs to be consistent with federal
legislation passed after RTFAs were enacted such as the Clean Air
Act and Animal Welfare Act, and discuss how modification of
GAAMPs provide a platform for civic action supporting the goals of the
locavore movement. This article is provided for education
purposes only, and not as legal advice.
Ron Klein
Ron
is a retired Senior Research Scientist and attorney, working with
Suzanne Klein to establish a microdairy on their farm, Dancing
Turtle, to produce quality aged goat cheeses. He is a
member of the American Association of Small Ruminant
Practitioners, Michigan Dairy Goat Society, American Dairy Goat
Association, Michigan Bee Keepers Association, Tillers
International, Michigan Bar Association, Farm to Consumer Legal
Defense Fund and Board member of MLT. He was recently elected as a
member of the Board of Directors of the Kalamazoo Conservation
District.
References:
Michigan Right to Farm Act, Act 93 of 1981. See www. Legislature.mi.gov
Susan Adams, Legal Rights of Farm Animals, Maryland Bar Journal, September/October 2007.
Harrison
M. Pittman, Validity, Construction, and Application of Right-to-Farm
Acts. 8 A.L.R., 6th, 465 (2005)
Published Michigan Cases:
Northville Twp. v Coyne, 170 Mich App 446 (1988)
Jerome Township v Melchi, 185 Mich App 228 (1990)
Steffens v Keeler, 200 Mich App 179 (1992)
Richmond Twp v Erbes, 195 Mich App 210 (1992)
Travis v Preston, 249 Mich App 338 (2001)
Shekby Twp v Papesh, 267 Mich App 92 (2005)
Unpublished Michigan Cases:
Milan Twp v Jaworski, Michigan Court of Appeals 24044, December 4, 2003
Village of Rothbury v Double JJ Resort Ranch, Inc, Michigan Court of Appeals 246596, August 17, 2004
King
of the Wind Farms, Inc. v Michigan Commission of Agriculture and
Michigan Department of Agriculture, Michigan Court
of Appeals 257097, December 29, 2005
Vasko v Department of Agriculture, Michigan Court of Claims, 03-000181.
Papadelis v City of Troy, Michigan Court of Appeals, September 19, 2006
Township of Armada v Maha, Michigan Court of Appeals September 26, 2006.
Websites:
There are many internet sources regarding RTFAs, those listed below are for general background information and sources.
http://www.soilandhealth.org/
http://www.maeap.org/
http://www.legislature.mi.gov
http://www.michigan.gov/mda/0,1607,7-125-1567_1599_1605---,00.html (All MDA GAAMPs)
http://www.michigan.gov/mda (Michigan Department of Agriculture)
http://www.law.msu.edu/library/substantive/local.html (Michigan codes and ordinances)
Books and background materials:
Logsdon, Gene, All Flesh is Grass, Swallow Press, 2004
Voisin, Andre’, Grass Productivity, Island Press, 1959
Pollan, Michael-
-The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Penguin Press, 2006
-In Defense of Food, Penguin Press, 2008
Soil-the
1957 Yearbook of Agriculture, USDA, Government Printing Office, 1957.
(For sustainable agricultural practices see
Soils and Men-1938 Yearbook of Agriculture.
Hillel, Daniel, Out of the Earth-Civilization and the Life of the Soil, University of Californai Press, 1991.
I
am a passive member of this listserv but appreciate the wealth of
practical info that magically materializes in front of me through email!
EatLocalSWMich Listserv
The internet has brought us some very powerful ways to connect with
other people of like mind and people curious about new ideas! After the
Harvest Festival finished so successfully last September, I really
wanted a way to continue the dialog about local foods throughout the
year. It seemed that progress would continue to be slow if there were
only a few isolated events throughout the year to bring people
together. So, knowing that I have been learning a great deal about
other topics in which I’m interested through on-line email lists, I
decided to start one of my own here in southwest Michigan. I wanted,
also, to encompass a wide area geographically to have the best
opportunity to find all the food products needed to have a healthy and
complete local diet. After learning how another local foods list
through Yahoo Groups worked and the kinds of conversations taking place
there, I set up my list, EatLocalSWMich at the Yahoo groups site
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EatLocalSWMich/).
We were approaching the holidays and I was thinking of holding off
sending out invitations to join the list until after that busy period
was over when I received a call from Donna McClurkan, best known at the
moment as Kalamazoo’s representative on The Splendid Table’s Locavore
Nation, a yearlong experiment of local eating.
(http://www.publicradio.org/columns/splendidtable/locavore_nation_east/)
I had been referred to her by Chris Dilley as someone she HAD to talk
to if she were going to embark on a local foods lifestyle! I felt
famous!
After talking to Donna, it was
looking like 2008 was going to be a fabulous year for learning about
and promoting local foods in SW Michigan. In late December, I started
inviting people to join the group. Things moved slowly until early
January. As of March 13, there are 119 members from all over the area.
Two members have opened their homes for open house events as meeting
places for members and we have had our first potluck, the “100 Member
Potluck”. We reached the 100-member mark 2 days before the event.
We were only in the midst of winter, not a time when most people even
think about local foods but we have been having some fabulous
discussions. Some of the topics discussed so far include: keeping
poultry and local zoning laws, finding local grains (successful! Archie
Jennings in Nashville has organic grains.), questions about the kinds
of local foods people are looking for, local food conferences, nitrates
and smoked meats, raw milk, counter-arguments to local eating, the Fair
Food Matters Community Kitchen, what to do with beets and other late
winter veggies, CSA’s, and the Farm Bureau and many more. We aren’t
even to spring yet!
I am looking forward to
the discussions we are going to see in the coming months as well as the
issues we will be bringing up. It is my hope that by bringing people
together from many perspectives, we can move the dialog about local
foods along and find ways to improve, expand, and enrich our local food
system in Michigan.
Lori Evesque 3/13/08
Owner and Moderator of EatLocalSWMich
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EatLocalSWMich
Our Honey Bees: Update on Colony Collapse Disorder
In
the last issue of the MLT Newsletter I discussed current understanding
of Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). The symptoms of CCD are worker
bees “abandoning” their hive; flying off and never returning. CCD
hives have a healthy queen and many young bees, but not enough to care
for eggs or brood. The hive eventually dies off. Large
commercial hive operations have reported 50-90% looses.
As of
our last Newsletter, research was focusing in on the Israeli Acute
Paralysis Virus (IAPV) imported with Australian bees as a possible
cause for CCD. Recent studies have shown that IAPV has been in
the US since 2002, at least two years before Australian imports.
Though IAPV is not the primary cause of CCD it is one of several
pathogens that have been found in all CCD hives that have been
tested. The other pathogens include the Kashmir Bee Virus and two
strains of pathogenic bacteria. The presence of these pathogens
may be a symptom of broader husbandry issues that are
compromising bees' resistance to microbial, viral and parasite
sensitivity.
Research is now centering on general commercial
management practices that are placing significant stress on honey
bees. Stressors include extensive transportation, feeding of high
fructose corn syrup (HFCS), chemical treatments and even the dimensions
of commercially available wax foundation used to aid bees in comb
building.
Initial studies indicate that bees fed HFCS have a
lower life expectancy than bees fed with supplemental beet or cane
sugar. Additional efforts are being placed in breeding bees that
are more resistant to parasitic mites. The general trend seems to
be moving in the direction of creating a more healthful environment for
bees. One major issue remains; there are insufficient numbers of
local or resident bees to pollinate our agricultural crops.
Pollination of large commodity crops still requires long distance
transport of tens of thousands of bee hives..
Since wild bees
are now extinct in Michigan, there is increased emphasis on encouraging
people with an interest in bees to explore having one or more
backyard hives. A hive or two will allow people to connect with
nature, benefit the environment, and enjoy the gift of
honey.
Ron Klein
Spring Wild Salad Greens
By Rita Bober
Ah,
March 21st has come and gone so spring is here, right!!!! As I
glance out the window and see the snow falling, I must think positive –
yes spring is here and this snow has only temporarily covered my
crocuses and snow drops. I have started some vegetable and flower
seeds in the house and greenhouse. I know spring is around the
corner. So-oo-on I will be able to gather wild greens for
my salad. So, today I want to share with you three of my favorite
spring wild salad greens:
Chickweed – stellaria media.
It’s in the Carnation family; some other names are starweed, tongue
grass, adder’s mouth, starwort, and stitchwort and is found in
your mineral rich greenhouse and garden soil. It is best
identified by many very small starry white flowers, with five petals so
deeply divided they appear to be ten petals; growing in low, dense,
vibrant-green mats; single line of hairs on smooth stalk. Use
chickweed, the whole fresh herb before and during flowering, as a
nourishing, strengthening food. It is high in many vitamins and
minerals such as magnesium, calcium, potassium, and vitamin C. It
is a powerful nourisher to the glandular and lymphatic systems.
Cut the tops to add to your salad.
Purslane – portulaca oleracea.
It’s in the Purslane Family. Purslane is a prostrate spreading
annual with thick, fleshy, alternate leaves shaped like little
paddles. The stems are reddish and the seeds, which are almost
always present on some part of the plant, are small and black little
open vase-like pods. The leaves are often grouped into flattened
clusters. The plant is a frequent garden or greenhouse
“weed”. Its season extends from early summer through the
fall. Cut the stems with a sharp knife. If more shoots are
desired, leave the root in the ground and more stems will grow within a
week. The shoots can be eaten raw in salads or mixed with cheese
or sour cream dips. Purslane is low in calories and contains some
vitamin A and C. It’s a great source of omega-3 fatty
acids. The stems and leaves have a wonderful sweet-sour
flavor.
Common Blue Violet – viola papilionacea.
It’s in the Violet family; some other names are pansy, heart’s ease,
wild pansy, garden violet. The common blue violet grows as a
cultivated ornamental in gardens but is also found wild in meadows,
damp woods, rich soil and along the edges of trails and paths. A
basal rosette of stalked, shallow-toothed, heart-shaped leaves, each up
to 5 inches across, first appears in early spring. The flowers
have five petals, are bilaterally symmetrical and roughly
butterfly-shaped. It is one of the best-tasting, most abundant
wild foods of spring. The leaves are mild, sweet, and slightly
peppery. The flowers have less flavor than the leaves, take
longer to collect, but they beautify any dish. Both the flowers
and leaves are considered blood purifiers or detoxifiers. They
contain rutin, which strengthens the capillaries as well as vitamin
C. Caution: the rhizome of the common blue violet is poisonous to
humans, so don’t eat that part of the plant, it will make you throw
up. Collect the leaves themselves without stems and a handful of
flowers to add to your salad.
Gather these three wild green plants to add to your early lettuce greens, include some salad dressing and enjoy!
References:
Identifying and Harvesting Edible and Medicinal Plants in Wild (and Not So Wild) Places. Brill, Steve with Evelyn Dean, William Morrow, N.Y. 1994.
Edible Wild Plants: A Guide to Collecting and Cooking. Weatherbee, Ellen Elliott and James Garnett Bruce. Self-published, 1982.
Healing Wise. Weed, Susun S. Ash Tree Publishing, Woodstock, N.Y., 1989.
Another Great Year of Gardening with Fair Food Matters' Growing Matters Garden
by Heather Crull, Garden Manager
Wow, what a year of growth for our urban educational gardening program!
In 2007, the Growing Matters Garden program expanded in almost every
imaginable way – more classes offered, students served, volunteers
involved, space used for organic gardening, and fresh produce
sold. Thank you to everyone who made it such a success. We could
not have done it without your help!
During
2007, the Growing Matters Garden program continued to utilize
sustainable, organic practices at its two garden sites – the main
garden on North Westnedge and the school garden of Woodward Elementary
School (WSTaR). In the cold early months of 2007, we completed
important program evaluation, investigated long-term fundraising
strategies for our program, and worked to help compile a garden-based
curriculum and cookbook for WSTaR teachers and staff. Once it was
a little warmer, we started seeds, helped with spring planning and
planting at WSTaR, and gathered needed materials to ensure a successful
growing season.
In mid-June, we offered our
10-week summer educational program at both garden sites. We
served 81 students with seven morning classes and an evening class as
well. Students from Family and Children Services, WSTaR, the ARK, and
the Eastside Urban Garden project had a great time working, playing,
and learning in the fresh air, sunshine, and rich soil of the
garden! Of those surveyed, 95% showed an increase in garden
knowledge, 84% felt the garden helped them to understand how to eat
healthier, and 84% said they would like to return again next year.
In an effort to be more self-sustaining, we decided to divide our main
garden into designated areas for our educational programs and for
production. This allowed us to provide our community with a
larger amount of sustainably grown, chemical-free produce.
We continued to participate on a weekly basis at the Bank Street
Farmer’s Market, but also expanded to include produce for sale at the
People’s Food Co-op and at a (student staffed) portable market stand at
two local senior centers. This market expansion doubled our
produce sales from the previous year, generating close to $1000 to help
fund our program.
In 2007, we
continued to have outstanding community support for our program!
We hosted fourteen well-attended community events with 79 volunteers
donating over 650 hours of labor. In addition, our community
showed great support of our program by contributing more than $7000 in
monetary and material donations!
Fall
came quickly to the garden with an early, severe frost in
mid-September. Half of our crops were damaged in just one night
when temperatures dipped to near 31 degrees. Undeterred, we still
hosted a community open house and reception for the guest speakers of
the “Eat Local, Kalamazoo!” celebration a week later. We
continued to work through October and November to clean up the gardens,
lay down a nice cover of mulch, and start up several large-scale
composting bins that will continue to “cook” through the winter.
The Growing Matters Garden program is proud to serve our community as
an educational gardening resource, as a gathering place to work, learn,
and play, and as a source of fresh, healthy food. In 2008, we
will continue to offer our summer educational programs and will offer a
new series of garden related community workshops at our garden
sites. We will have produce available for sale at the farmers'
market and at the People's Food Co-op.
We welcome and
encourage you to become involved with our gardens – as a student,
volunteer, sponsor, or as someone who just wants to learn more.
If you would like more information about our program or upcoming
events, feel free to visit our website at
www.fairfoodmatters.org/garden.html, email the garden manager at
heather@fairfoodmatters.org, or give us a call at
269.903.9765. Thanks again (MLT) for your continued
support of our program!
Herd Share Agreements are legal in Michigan
We had the pleasure of attending the Michigan Dairy Goat Society
meeting held at MSU March 8, 2008. A highlight was a presentation
by Steve Bemis from the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund
(FTCLDF). Steve discussed the current status of herd share
agreements (or cow or goat shares) in Michigan.
In general, herd share agreements are contracts between producers and
consumers where the consumer, whether an individual or a cooperative,
leases a portion of an animal or a herd, and has a legal right to an
amount of milk from the animal or the herd. These types of
agreements are tolerated in Michigan because they fall outside of
Michigan’s current dairy laws. Michigan’s dairy laws focus on
Grade A and Grade B dairy production, distribution and processing-not
milk from an animal owned by an individual and used for that owner’s
consumption. A person who leases property has an ownership interest in
that property. In Michigan, under law, animals are considered
property. The person who is leasing the animal is entitled to the
animal’s milk and pays the dairyman a fee for boarding and caring for
the animal, as well as additional expenses such as milking. Since
the person who leases the animal owns the animal and the product of
that animal, that person is not purchasing milk. In other words, one
cannot sell milk to a consumer who already has an ownership interest in
the animal-but fees may be paid for the materials and labor necessary
for caring for the animal. This is an important distinction since
the sale of unpasteurized milk to a consumer is illegal-herd or cow
share agreements are not based on selling milk to a consumer.
Share agreements are governed by Michigan contract law, that is, the mutual agreement between two parties.
From
a regulatory perspective the agreements are helpful since the person
who is leasing the herd or animal clearly assumes any risk posed by
consuming unpasteurized milk from the animal. The assumption of
risk must be clearly stated in the agreement. In the agreements I
have reviewed the person leasing the animal has insisted that the
highest standards of sanitation and animal care are assured by the
dairyman. Thus, not only may Grade A dairy standards be met and
even exceeded, the element of humane care and handling of farm animals
may be insisted upon. The latter can include the standards required
under Certified Humane: Raised and Handled ™, supported by the
ASPCA. In addition, because of the ownership interest, the person
leasing the animal can have a legal right to “visit” her animal,
inspect the farm and confirm that her animal is being properly cared
for. This contractual obligation serves both an educational
purpose and, I believe, provides another level of regulation
(self-regulation in this case) to assure compliance with appropriate
dairy and farm practices. Having a personal ownership and health
interest provides significant motivation to assure (or enforce) higher
agricultural standards and practices consistent with the intent and
purpose of having formal standards.
It is
important to note that the efforts to help farmers and consumers deal
with regulatory issues is spearheaded by the Farm to Consumer Legal
Defense Fund (FTCLDF). I urge those interested in having access
to wholesome, nutritious food and supporting diversified and humane
farming practices join FTCLDF.
Ron Klein - attorney, member and contributor to FTCLDF and on the
MLT Board, and thanks Steve Bemis of FTCLDF for his critical review.
Back to MLT Newsletter Page