Comparing Campaigns – Political and Food

We are deep into election season. Many of us are weary of the relentless negativity, name-calling, and stretching of the truth (no, let’s just call it what it is – lying) that fills television, radio and print media, social media and some of our everyday personal conversations.  This year seems to be especially nasty with candidates reaching new lows in terms of angry, destructive, irresponsible speech.  To differentiate themselves and shut out their competition, candidates at the national, state, and local level are mercilessly attacking not only their opponents of competing parties, but members of their own parties.  I’m not sure if those responsible for the attacks realize the depth of damage that is occurring due to this tactic. There’s now increasingly widespread distrust of anyone involved in government at any level, regardless of party affiliation.  As an elected representative at the county level, I can attest to increased skepticism and contempt toward elected and appointed officials. The majority (true, there are bad apples in any group) of people serving are doing so to try to make our communities better, not for personal gain or with a sinister agenda. But due to the current trend, this negative generalization unfortunately paints everyone with the same brush.

There’s a comparison to be made between what’s happening now in the political arena and the current movement in the food industry. To differentiate themselves, with the goal of increased market share and to shut out the competition, food growers, manufacturers, and retailers are employing manipulative tactics similar to those in use by the politicians. The result of this intentionally misleading, fear-based marketing has been an increasingly widespread distrust of farming practices and our food supply.  As a farmer, I find myself forced to defend myself, other farmers, and agriculture in general, due to the spread of misinformation.

It’s nearly impossible to check out social media or traditional media sources without hearing or seeing a promotional message for a food item with a negative or misleading slant, disguised as fact. In order to increase sales of a food product (or related product such as a book), drive traffic to a website, or charge an inflated price, sellers are utilizing a negative, emotional advertising style.  What bothers me most is that some farmers are using these tactics against each other.  Food packaging bearing trendy adjectives has grown in popularity by placing doubt about conventional foods and some technologies in agriculture.  Unwarranted demonization of certain food ingredients and production methods is rampant in marketing.  Because 98% of the population does not live or work on a farm, has no real connection to farming, and lacks fundamental first-hand knowledge of agriculture, fear-based marketing with no factual basis and only emotional appeal has been quite effective.

Take a look at the recent advertising campaigns by Chipotle and Panera using emotional imaging and romantic idealism and one would think that the only “good” farmers are those with quaint 1940s-style red barns, wearing bib overalls and driving antique tractors. On social media and the internet, savvy marketers like the “Food Babe” prey on emotion and fear to drive business to their affiliated retailers. Stroll the farmers market and you’ll find alarming messaging stating that “food in the grocery store in poison”. Check out labels in the grocery store that bear manipulative statements such as “antibiotic-free” milk, when ALL milk is free of antibiotics, “non-GMO” wheat products, when ALL wheat in the marketplace is non-GMO, or chicken with “no hormones added”, when ALL poultry is free of added hormones.  Messages like these may be effective sales drivers in the short-term for the seller, but have a long-lasting impact by creating a lingering confusion and doubt toward an entire industry that can be quite difficult to overcome.

The fact is: we have the safest food supply in the world, enjoy relatively affordable food prices, and have a wide array of choices in our grocery stores and farmers markets to suit the budget and personal preferences of most everyone. Because of the destruction of trust due to widespread misinformation, what we are so fortunate to have could be threatened.

How about trying something different? Politicians could advertise their experience and vision – stay out of the mud.  Food marketers could promote the attributes and benefits of their product, if it’s delicious and nutritious it should be easy to sell – no need to bash the competition or instill fear.

To me, the parallel between political campaign messaging and food marketing campaigns is evident. To my friends in the agriculture industry, I wish that we’d stop the use of anti-scientific, fear-based, irresponsible marketing.  There are plenty of challenges in farming without having to defend against the myriad of false claims.  To my non-farm friends, both rural and urban, I ask that you think about the messages, the motivation behind them, and realize that not all sources have the same level of credibility.  Please be rational rather than emotional, ask questions of those with first-hand experience and not take a sales pitch as fact.  I’d like to put this election season behind me just as soon as possible, let’s do the same with negative food marketing.

 

Understanding “Humane” Treatment of Animals

I’m having trouble wrapping my head around something.  Yesterday, Larry (my husband’s cousin who works full-time with us) was checking fence before moving the cows and calves to a new lot.  He came upon a large black plastic bag a few feet in from the fence on the side of the pasture nearest the road.  He opened the bag and found a new Havahart trap with a very dead and decomposing opossum inside.

I’ve been thinking a lot about this since Larry told me about his discovery.  I understand that these creatures can be destructive.   I don’t understand why anyone would purchase a live trap to catch an opossum, and then allow the animal to starve to death.  Logic says that the purpose of buying a humane live trap is to relocate what is caught, as opposed to killing it, right?  If the intention is to kill the unwanted animal, then wouldn’t there be quicker and more humane ways to go about that?  I can certainly think of a few.  And those traps aren’t cheap, costing around $100.

Let’s not get into the aspect of respect for private property, especially when it is used by a family to make their living.

So many people complain about farmers raising livestock, and perceived “inhumane” practices.  As I’ve said many times before, the farmers I know are dedicated to providing excellent care to their animals.  There is respect shown to livestock, from birth to the time of death, by those of us who make our living raising them.  When I hear comments to the contrary by the uninformed, it makes me sad and sometimes angry.  I don’t know any farmer that would treat an animal under his or her care in the manner shown this opossum.  It sickens me.  One thing I know is that whoever tossed this trap into our pasture was not a farmer. Guaranteed.

Celebrity Sighting

Last week I was fortunate to be able to travel to a warmer climate for a Farm Bureau conference. I missed out on the sub-zero temps, frigid wind chills, and snow that moved through the Midwest, and instead enjoyed lots of sunshine and warmth in San Diego.

In addition to the beautiful weather, one of the best parts of this annual meeting is the opportunity to connect with farmers and ranchers from across the country. It’s great to catch up with friends I’ve met along the way who I may see only once a year, as well as meet new folks in the ag industry.

Upon my return home, I was asked by an acquaintance if I ran into any celebrities in California. I did see Jay Leno there, as he was the comedic entertainment for the closing session, but I didn’t meet him, or even get up close and personal.

I did, however, personally meet, for the first time, several people who definitely qualify for “celebrity” status in the world of agriculture. And there were plenty in attendance who would qualify as a “star” in our industry.

First on the list of those who I was able to meet for the first time was Dr. Temple Grandin of Colorado State University, who was awarded the Distinguished Service to Agriculture Award at the conference. She’s an animal behavioral scientist and researcher who has had a major impact on the livestock industry; specifically on how animals are worked and handled. We’ve taken her ideas and utilized them on our own farm, setting up our equipment in suggested formation; we’ve noted greater efficiency and less stress among our cattle. Calmer cattle translate into happier humans who work with them!

I also was able to meet Blake Hurst and his wife, Julie. Blake serves as the President of Missouri Farm Bureau, and is a talented writer. I’ve been a fan since 2009 when I read a piece he wrote in response to a book that was anti-agriculture. Thanks to social media I’ve been able to follow the advocacy efforts of Mr. and Mrs. Hurst, and it was a pleasure to meet them both in person.

Two more smart and impressive leaders I met during the course of the conference were Charlie Arnot, CEO of the Center for Food Integrity, who works to build consumer trust in our food system, and Paul Wenger, President of California Farm Bureau. I had an interesting conversation with Paul about current challenges to agriculture.

Are any of them typical celebrities? No. They’re not actors, musicians, or whatever-the-Kardashians-are; but they’re accomplished, significant, and influential in the ag world, one that’s vastly more important to me than Hollywood.

Refusing to take part in the “Food Fight”

Last night a woman who I like and respect quite a bit posted a rather lengthy Facebook status.  Tammy and I met several years ago at the farmers market where I’m a vendor and she is a regular customer.  Her status bothered me so much that it’s now 3:00 AM, about 5 hours after I read the post, and I’ve given up trying to sleep, gotten out of bed, and am at the computer in our farm office, trying to regurgitate the thoughts I’ve had since the initial read.

She’s a mom of two, and is making all of the food choices for her family.  Her post centered around her feelings of being torn between “seemingly opposing sides” of the “local, heirloom, organic, grass-fed, humanely raised, sustainable, non-GMO, antibiotic-free, free-range” farmers and those who farm using conventional methods.

I’ve left the comfort of my warm bed to try to explain that, Tammy, you don’t have to choose a side.

The recent round of fear-based marketing, most prominently displayed by Chipotle’s new advertising campaign introduced this week, will have you believe that there is only one correct choice and that it must be the one with the most adjectives attached.  I’m troubled by the increasing prevalence of emotionally charged fear mongering in food marketing and am especially bothered by how it’s affecting people like Tammy.  It’s beyond annoying to me when one method of production is misrepresented and put down to make another look good.  This tactic is being used not only by major food retailers like the burrito purveyor, but by farmers against one another.  It is this particular practice that makes me saddest, as the rift is non-productive and dangerous.  I would suggest that there is room for all types of production methods in today’s agriculture and that they can peacefully co-exist.  The reality is that there are plenty of markets for farmers today.  Consumers have a variety of desires and demands, from budget to niche related.  We also can’t overlook the fact that we’re facing a very real global population explosion and it will take all farmers, large and small, organic and conventional, doing what they do best, to feed it.

A farmer makes the decision on what kind of crop to grow and how to grow it based on a multitude of factors, which include location, facilities, resources, market opportunities, availability of labor, personal preference, etc.  I’ll give some examples beginning with my own farm.  Here we have a herd of 60 beef cows.  It’s that size because of the amount of land, and the quality of land, that we have available.  The land where my cattle graze during the spring, summer and fall has been in my husband’s family since the 1840’s.  Because of the soil type and terrain (gravel in some spots, too wet in others) it’s not really suitable for growing a crop but makes a great pasture.  That reason, coupled with the fact that both my husband and I enjoy working with cattle, is the reason that we raise beef, and are the size that we are.  If there was more of the same type of land available we might choose to increase our herd size, but would have to consider other factors such as the need to hire more help to care for the additional animals.  Sixty cows is the size that works for us.

The decision about how to market our beef, which is directly to consumers, was made based on the fact that here in McHenry County we’re physically located in a fairly populous and prosperous area between two major population centers, Chicago and Rockford.  Because of that proximity we can market our products direct, or choose to sell through traditional markets.  I have friends who raise cattle in North Dakota.  They’re in a remote rural area literally 100 miles from the nearest Starbucks and 80 miles from a McDonalds.  Marketing direct to consumers is not an option for them simply because the population is not there to draw from, the market simply doesn’t exist for them.  They also have about ten times the number of cows that I have.  They are that size because they have more land and more labor available; there are actually 3 generations of their family working together.  That’s the size that works for them.  It’s not better or worse than what we’re doing here.

I choose to not use growth promotants in my beef.  It’s because my customers tell me that they want it that way.  As a consequence of that choice, my cattle grow a little slower than cattle from herds where they are used, so mine will require more feed.  The cost of that feed is passed along to the consumer, thus my beef is more expensive than the more efficiently raised alternative.  I’m very aware that there are people who can’t afford my beef.  That’s OK and I’m happy that there is more affordable beef in large retail stores available to them since I believe that beef is a terrific source of necessary protein (not to mention iron and zinc), and it’s great tasting, too!  I would never suggest that there’s anything wrong with the less expensive beef that is raised in a different manner.  Growth promotants have been used for decades and are completely safe.  I personally would not hesitate to buy beef from the grocery store if I did not have my own home-grown supply.  Similarly, I do not have a problem feeding my own beef to my family or selling it to others even though it does not carry the “organic” certification.  The bottom line is that I have found a market for my beef, while other farmers have a market for less expensive, efficiently-raised beef, and yet another group finds buyers who are willing to pay extra for the organic label.  We find what works best for our own farms.

I also market my beef as “natural”.  This term on a label means (by USDA definition) that it’s minimally processed with no artificial additives.  There are no preservatives or food coloring in my beef.  Again, I’m not suggesting that there is anything wrong with either of these, just going along with the preferences of my customers.  In fact, the absence or presence of a growth promotant, a preservative, or food coloring has absolutely no effect on the nutritional value, taste, or safety of beef.  And remember that all beef, regardless of the number of adjectives used to describe it, must always be handled and cooked properly.  A person can become ill from improperly prepared food, whether it’s organic, sustainable, free-range or not.   Getting back to the customer…I’m able to fit my production methods to the demands of my clientele.  These days, they tell me that “local” and “natural” are important to them, they don’t have strong feelings one way or the other about “organic”. They do like know that the money they’re spending is staying in the county.  They want to have a relationship with their farmer and know how and where their food is raised.  I’m happy to comply.  If things change and price, or something else, should become the priority, I will have to adapt my production methods accordingly.

I have neighbors who grow vegetables.  Their farm is located on a state highway, perfect for a farm stand, given the amount of traffic in our suburban county.  They can market a large amount of a wide variety of their vegetables directly to consumers right from home.  I have other friends who also grow vegetables but their farm is off the beaten path, actually on a gravel road.  A farm stand at home is not an option for them (they like their quiet location, and admit that they would not enjoy hosting the public at their home on a daily basis as others do), so they’ve chosen to load a truck several times a week during the growing season and sell at farmers markets, or sell to the wholesale market in Chicago.  Another friend from the farmers market has a very small amount of acreage and grows heirloom (and other varieties of veggies that you don’t see everywhere) using organic methods.  She chooses this because it’s what her customers want; the “organic” label is important to them and they are willing to pay for it.  She’s able to comply because her small scale is manageable for her without much extra help.  Her veggies do cost more due to the cost of organic certification and market expenses, but she’s found a niche for herself and gets a premium for her products.  The neighbors with the farm stand have a large amount of land with fertile soil types.  They choose to raise their veggies using conventional methods and fairly large equipment.  They don’t believe there’s anything wrong with organic, but their choice is based on the fact that organic production requires more labor which is not readily available to them, and more importantly, their customers are happy with the variety, quality, and quantity of what they produce.  It’s the size and method that works for them.  Each has chosen what works best, not necessarily “a side”.

So for Tammy, and other consumers who are struggling with food choices amidst overwhelming labels, adjectives, and headline-grabbing, myth-based marketing campaigns, I say pick whatever works best for YOU.  Don’t be mislead by fear-mongers and unjustified guilt.  Ask questions of those who are actually growing the food, and discount the opinions of those who must tear down someone else’s choice to make theirs look most appealing.  Buy what you want given your own budget and preferences.  And remember that it doesn’t have to be all or nothing; there is no rule against buying conventional one day and organic the next.  Whether you’re buying food for your family at a small farm stand, the local farmers market, Jewel, Trader Joe’s, Target, or Costco – with no adjectives or a list of adjectives as long as your arm – know that there’s a farmer at the other end who made choices too.  There’s no wrong answer.

Okay, glad I’ve gotten that off my chest.  The day is now beginning, time to start my day the same way farmers and ranchers all across the country do, regardless of the number of acres they own, animals in their care, or method of production they’ve chosen for their farm.  We’re all getting up and checking our animals; making sure they’re comfortable and secure, that they have plenty of feed, water, and a dry place to rest.  Our livestock comes first no matter the adjectives attached to the label.  No choice there.

Day Thirty – Challenge Complete!

Frankly, I’m amazed that I was able to post something every day for thirty days in a row! I’ll admit to cutting corners, taking advantage of each “Wordless Wednesday”, “Throwback Thursday”, and “Flashback Friday” whenever possible to avoid time consuming creativity. The majority of my writing was consisted of little more than glorified Facebook posts.

But in light of all that was happening this month, and reviewing the daily blog posts provides a reminder of the craziness, I’m OK with my inconsistent output. My excuses include the pressures and time constraints of harvest, a family medical emergency, the destructive storms, calving, holidays, etc.

Having said that, I’d like to thank Holly Spangler for providing the challenge of daily blogging. This month, I tried to read as many posts as possible from the other bloggers taking part, and discovered some great new blogs to enjoy. I still have a list of potential blog topics, I just need to find time to get them written. Taking part in the challenge was an interesting experience and I feel relieved and happy to be at the finish line.

Interested in learning who else participated in the 30 days blog challenge this month? Head over to Prairie Farmer to find out!

Day Twenty-Nine – Flashback Friday: Farm Family Fun

Here’s a cute one for Flashback Friday…going all the way back to the fall of 1965. Yes, my husband’s family had a donkey on the farm at that time, a gift from the children’s grandparents. The donkey was not stupid, apparently it would frequently take the rider to an area with trees with particularly low branches, just low enough to knock off whomever was atop!

As is the case with so many of these old photos, one has to wonder what’s the “rest of the story”. Why is my husband at the “wrong” end of the donkey, and why is Cousin Andrew riding high in style? Will JoAnn be able to pedal away in time? Are those guns loaded, Gary? I also get the feeling that something unpleasant was about to happen, something that might quickly wipe that squinty smile from my future husband’s face (and possible dirty those clean clothes)! The possible captions to this one are endless!

Interested in learning who else is participating in the 30 days blog challenge or the five things Holly Spangler will be talking about this month? Head over to Prairie Farmer to find out!

Day Twenty-Eight – Throwback Thursday – Thanksgiving Gratitude

Most of what I’ve read this week falls under the theme of gratitude. And on this Thanksgiving Day people everywhere are especially thoughtful and expressive. Here are my two cents:

Once all of the chores are completed this morning, we’ll be traveling about a mile to my in-laws for the annual get-together at their farm. There will be a houseful of extended relations and friends, and an incredible home-cooked feast. I’ll get to spend time with some of my favorite people. It will be a very pleasant, fun, and relaxing day. Tomorrow we’ll be venturing a little farther away to a gathering of my dad’s family. It will be wonderful to see everyone, some are travelling here from South Dakota and Kansas. I’m looking forward to catching up with those we don’t see often enough and a chance to marvel at how much the kids have grown. There are no “drunk uncles” or drama at either place; we manage to keep it light and avoid any controversial conversations. Yes, it’s somewhat predictable. And I like it that way.

My family and friends are right at the top of the incredibly long list of things for which I am most grateful. The picture to accompany this post is not exactly a traditional Thanksgiving photo, but to me it expresses “family”. The people in the image are my father’s maternal side of our family, circa 1930-something. I never knew them – my grandmother died when I was very small (she’s the one at the farthest right) – but they look like people I would have gotten along with well. They seem to be having a great time and enjoying each others company. I will think about them today and will try to carry on the tradition on this Thanksgiving Day.

Interested in learning who else is participating in the 30 days blog challenge or the five things Holly Spangler will be talking about this month? Head over to Prairie Farmer to find out!

Day Twenty-Seven – Wordless Wednesday

Day Twenty-Six – Something Different

It’s another cold, frosty morning so I thought It would be good to post a photo from a warmer, sunnier time this past summer. We’re also recovering from corn harvest here (while many friends and neighbors are still working to finish up), the harvest season dragging on because of the cold and rainy weather, so I’m ready to look at something other than corn. We haven’t seen much blue sky lately either, so here ya go.

This is one of our wheat fields – I took the photo in early June. This crop was harvested in late July. Next spring it will be planted to corn. We have 3 main crops here; corn, soybeans, and wheat. Corn and beans are planted in the Spring and harvested in the Fall, however, the variety of wheat that we grow here is Soft Red Winter Wheat; it’s planted in the Fall and harvested in Summer. Many of the fields that were planted to soybeans this year now have wheat growing there. Right now the wheat is short and green, the fields almost resemble a lawn.

Rotating the crops is just one way that we take care of the land. Everything is a cycle here. I know the cold weather has only just begun, but I’m already looking forward to Spring, and the warmer part of that cycle!

Interested in learning who else is participating in the 30 days blog challenge or the five things Holly Spangler will be talking about this month? Head over to Prairie Farmer to find out!

Day Twenty-Five – “Field Moms” Wanted

If you know me, you know that I’m all about sharing what’s happening on our farm and I enjoy connecting people with little or no agriculture background to those directly involved in growing or raising our food, fuel and fiber. Illinois Farm Bureau helps run a program that makes this happen, it’s called “Illinois Farm Families“. This program facilitates conversations between farmers and consumers, provides opportunities for non-farm folks to have their questions answered about food, farmers and farming, and also shares the reality of what actually happens on today’s Illinois family farms.

I was fortunate to be asked to accompany the current group of the Illinois Farm Families’ “Field Moms” on an outing a couple of weeks ago. This was the final tour for this group of Chicago-area mothers that has been meeting periodically for the past year. We met in the morning at a large grocery store in Wheaton for a back-of-the-house tour, and an enlightening discussion about retail food marketing with store management.

We then spent the afternoon at the Northern Illinois Food Bank in St. Charles, volunteering our time to sort and package food for the hungry. Last year, The Food Bank fed 500,000 people in 13 counties by distributing 50 million pounds of food. Our group was assigned to the meat department. My task was to inspect the donated packages to make sure that there were no rips, holes, or tears in the packaging, then send the meat on to other volunteers for labeling and sorting. Pallet after pallet of beef, pork, poultry, lamb and fish products were brought from the freezer warehouse, reassembled into 20 lb. boxes, to be distributed to food pantries, schools, and shelters. At the end of the day, our group was responsible for getting about 8,000 lbs. of meat ready to go. The Food Bank is a huge structure and on this particular Saturday was bustling with volunteers working to help those less fortunate. It was great to be a part of such a worthwhile group effort. I really enjoyed meeting the “Field Moms”, too, and having a chance to get to know a few of them as we worked side by side.

The Field Moms have visited a variety of Illinois family farms over the past year. The farm tours are planned for Saturdays in March, May, October and November; timed to show the cycle from planting to harvest. They have seen farms of all types and sizes, and have met farmers who raise crops like corn and soybeans, as well as those who make a living raising livestock such as dairy cows, beef cattle and hogs. The Field Moms share their firsthand accounts by submitting photos and a short blog about their experiences.

As the 2013 Field Moms wrap up their year of interaction and learning, plans are being made for 2014. A new group will be selected soon. If the program sounds interesting, I’d encourage you to apply at http://www.WatchUsGrow.org – applications are due by December 15. Let me know if you have any questions.

Interested in learning who else is participating in the 30 days blog challenge or the five things Holly Spangler will be talking about this month? Head over to Prairie Farmer to find out!