Farmer Janet’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Foodprovider: If I am not mistaken, PVP protected plants (like certified oats and wheat varieties) can be saved by the farmer growing them for reseeding. Only PATENTED seeds (RR corn, etc.) cannot be saved by the farmer. Certified seeds cannot be SOLD without permission or without paying a royalty to the owner of the variety, but they can be reseeded by the person who grew them. Percy Schmeiser was initially accused of "brown-bagging" (buying and seeding patented seed without signing a contract with Monsanto or paying them their royalty or "technology fee"). However, even Monsanto could not substantiate that claim and those charges were dropped. The court ruled he either "knew or should have known" that his field contained Monsanto's genetic material. If you carefully read the account of how he supposedly harvested the surviving plants after spraying them with round up, stored them in a pickup over winter and then reseeded an entire field with a pickup full of seed, you can understand that was pretty silly as a pickup full of canola seed will not seed as many acres as were alleged. Interestingly, the judges also did not award Monsanto any damages. The problem, it seems, is that the law has not quite caught up to the technology of patenting life forms that can spread and duplicate on their own. The Supreme Court of Canada had to make their ruling based on the laws that were on the books at the time and there was no legal precedence to help them other than infringements on patents on such things as can openers and mouse traps. To maintain there has been a decrease in the use of pesticides because of transgenic varieties does not take into account the fact that BT crops are the single largest release of pesticides into the environment ever. The BT gene in those crops is not a naturally occurring gene, it is a recombinant gene that has been altered (made more active) to produce higher levels of toxin in plant cells, that is how Monsanto is able to patent it. A representative of Pioneer seed once admitted to me that the bt toxin does indeed exude into the soil. He assured me that it really wasn't a problem because the bt toxin in the soil really only could be found in a one square foot area around the corn plant. When I asked how many corn plants there were per square food in a field, he wouldn't talk to me any more. No earthworm damage? Are you sure?On Bill Gates reveals support for GMO ag posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago 44 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  It is obvious that you are working very hard. You are fortunate to be able to do all of those things yourself. My question would be, are you paying yourself for that work? The dilemma for me always is knowing what my own time is worth. Perhaps that is the difference between your prices and the other grassfed prices you cite. They are hiring some of that work done (web site designers dont–and shouldn't–work for minimum wage) that you are doing yourself. I admire your simple living efforts and practice many of them myself, but not everyone has the resources nor the ability to be as self-sufficient as you. Thanks for sharing your insights.On Warning: This product may cause sickness, paralysis, and death posted 1 month ago 51 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I would guess that demand for all kinds of things are at a low, not just organics. The statistics I have read is that growth in demand has slowed to a 5 year low, but demand is still growing. No, my reference to being called "elitist" has to do with a current mode of disparagement of alternative food sources by conventional food supporters that grassfed, organic, local are an elitist fad. Certainly, there are segments of the market that are milking the grassfed label for all they can get while meeting the minimum definition. The same is true for organics. I don't know how they are justifying their prices except that is what someone is willing to pay. A sustainable system has to provide not only a fair living for the producer, but a fair price for the buyer as well. If it's not fair for either, the transaction will not be repeated. Capitalism as we currently define it (highest quality/lowest price) ignores relationship and community in the transaction. Sometimes the fact that we trust the person we are doing business with and we have security in their remaining in business to serve us again is also a factor in the sale. I'm wondering how you are able to sell ground beef for $3/lb? IBP, carbon monoxide infused, plastic sealed lean ground beef from who knows where in my grocery store sells for nearly $4. Are you paying yourself for the cost of marketing your product?On Warning: This product may cause sickness, paralysis, and death posted 1 month ago 51 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Good point. You are right about inaccuracies undercutting critics' arguments, but my point is that there is a connection between corn feeding and use of antibiotics, at least indirectly. While Laskawy is "technically" inaccurate and it is not the corn that is causing the need for antibiotics, the fact is that corn makes it possible to fatten cattle in feedlots (cheap, easy to dump in a feed bunk, produces quick results) where they are crowded together with animals from all over. These practices do require that animals be fed subtherapeutic levels of antibiotics and treated with drugs for acute illnesses more frequently. The Swedes banned feeding subtherapeutic antibiotics in 1986 and found that confined feeding systems similar to what we use in this country no longer worked. The way we feed animals and the need for antibiotics IS connected. Maybe my customers don't read Grist, but I have had them ask us on more than one occasion if we are charging enough. They like knowing we'll be able to feed them again next year I guess. You are absolutely right, sustainability has to include a fair wage for farm workers and a fair profit for farmers as well as humane treatment for the animals we raise. Consumers who buy local organic food and grassfed beef are doing just what you suggest. They are putting their money where their values are. Sadly, they are now being accused of being elitist.On Warning: This product may cause sickness, paralysis, and death posted 1 month ago 51 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  JohnnyAppleseed, You are right, while feeding corn itself may or may not directly cause acute infection and the need for an injection of antibiotics. Animals will adapt to eating all kinds of foods, that doesn't mean it is good for them. Corn, along with hormone implants, subtherapeutic antibiotics in feeds, overcrowded feedlots, slaughtering of downed cows, feeding animal proteins and poultry litter are all part of a system that places cheapness above the well-being of animals. Animals can be fed out faster and cheaper if you use these inputs. These efficiencies come at a cost. If everybody produces beef faster and cheaper the value of your calves goes down so you need produce them even cheaper and faster to stay in business. Somehow we always seem to think that we will be the ones that survive. So did our neighbors who have gone out of business. You are right that the economic model is at fault, but as producers we can also choose not to play the game. My veterinarian is very concerned about antibiotic resistance and is always reminding me that these drugs need to be used carefully. I know far too many cattle people who do not understand how antibiotic resistance happens and regularly misuse these valuable tools. Good intentions are not enough.On Warning: This product may cause sickness, paralysis, and death posted 1 month, 1 week ago 51 Responses