KH were you in Newport Beach recently?

[Jon Miller]

I intend to, once I get my life more together, start a garden.

At least in europe you can get a little plot pretty easily, evenin large cities, and can grow veggies.

JM

[MikeH]

Local food doesn't need any those thing assuming the local food is native crops, cropped seasonally.

If they are producing locally, things that don't naturally grow locally then HC would be correct. But generally places aiming at local food will also be focussed on seasonality and low intervention production. A place billed as "Local food" that only sells high intervention, unseasonal, non-native foods will not do good business.


And Fair Trade doesn't suggest paying 1st world wages, obviously not. Just paying prices for food that make farming sustainable to enable small producers to grow their businesses and make profits. Which allows them to send their kids to get edumakated etc. Really it's only the stuff that the big companies should be doing anyway.

[Jon Miller]

In Sweden the cheap veggies were really limited because it was so far north.

Lots of cabbage, potatoes, and carrots.

Mostly Strawberries, Lingon Berries, and Apples too.

JM

[MOBIUS]

Local food does not necessarily require more fertilizers and soil amendments. It may in some limited cases, but even in those cases it would be at most a one crop difference. By and large, whatever you take out you have to put back in. This doesn't magically change if you go somewhere else. The exception would be some soils may have enough of the micro nutrients to last for a long time, while others will need amendments to even grow the first crops. In most cases, micro nutrients are not significant environmentally as so little of those nutrients is necessary, and they are not harmful when in run-off in those quantities. Also, they are not aligned to local or not as they can vary from field to field.

Using current farmland for production is generally preferable to using new farmland for production. This is true even in cases where you might benefit from not having to amend the soil the first crop. New farmland at this point essentially means slash and burn (or other drastic environmental modifications like creating reservoirs) and is almost invariably going to harm the environment more than using current farmland. Usually new farmland (slash and burn) doesn't even give any nutrient benefit as the soil is actually worse than the farmland we pay farmers to let go fallow.

In general, imported (to the US) food requires (or at least uses) more fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, other soil amendments, and labor (in hours). This is due to most of our food imports being from warmer climates and poorer countries (those being the two "advantages" they have inproduction). At best a modern farming operation in such areas will have to use more of all of those things, simply because of environmental pressures. At worst, the operation isn't as modern and is using more of all those things, and doing so inefficiently to boot.

In warmer climates organic matter in the soil breaks down faster than in temperate climates. This means there needs to be more soil amendments, and nutrients such as nitrogen are shorter lived in the soil as well. It also means that unless you're continually adding organic mater to the soil (which is not always possible as you'd damage the roots), the soil structure is less conducive to nutrient uptake, meaning that you have to apply even more nutrients to compensate.

In warmer climates pest populations don't have a "reset" called winter. This means that more pesticides need to be used to control the pest populations because the pest populations are always building. Not only that, but in temperate climates you can better time sprays for many pests because you know when the start date for the next generation will be, as the first generation is calculable based on daily temperatures. This allows very targeted sprays that are more effective per volume of pesticide used.

That's only half of it though, because in poorer countries there are generally fewer pesticides available (for various reasons ranging from corruption to misguided environmentalism to simply not having enough demand). Because of this, broad spectrum sprays are relied upon more, rather than less harmful and more pest specific sprays. This means more damage to beneficial insects that would otherwise help control the pest populations not only in that particular farm/crop, but in surrounding areas and later crops.

Warm/Humid climates are even worse, as they tend to have more weed problems, more and better places for pests to be harbored in neighboring areas to move right back in, and in general have heavier clay soils which negatively affect nutrient uptake. They also require more sprays as almost all plant diseases favor warm moist environments. Again, the year round warmth keeps diseases from being reset by winter as well. Plus you have more runoff due to more rain, meaning more erosion and more lost nutrients that have to be replaced.

Cultivating is more energy (and/or labor) intensive as well as the soils tend to be heavier, and there's no winter reset/easy timing for the weeds either.

---------------------------

Local food may require more energy in other ways though, such as heating in greenhouses, construction of greenhouses, and at least in some cases the cost of trucking over shipping. (Though trucking from California/Texas to Nebraska is going to happen whether the food is from California/Texas or Chile.)

Building greenhouses is almost surely environmentally friendly when looked at though. It virtually eliminates agricultural run-off and erosion. It allows for greatly increased production per unit of area. It eliminates the need for most pesticides. And it is an efficient method of benefiting from solar power that would otherwise go unused.

Now that's what I'm talking about!

[MOBIUS]

Local food doesn't need any those thing assuming the local food is native crops, cropped seasonally.

If they are producing locally, things that don't naturally grow locally then HC would be correct. But generally places aiming at local food will also be focussed on seasonality and low intervention production. A place billed as "Local food" that only sells high intervention, unseasonal, non-native foods will not do good business.


And Fair Trade doesn't suggest paying 1st world wages, obviously not. Just paying prices for food that make farming sustainable to enable small producers to grow their businesses and make profits. Which allows them to send their kids to get edumakated etc. Really it's only the stuff that the big companies should be doing anyway.

Also

There's loads of local food initiatives here in South Wales, focussed in exactly the way Mike describes. I have a garden that produces a modest amount of things, which is chiefly restricted by my massive laziness. Despite that I do end up growing quite a bit of stuff and it is always very satisfying eating the fruits of your labour. As for inputs, I've always got plenty of stuff for my wormery which does it all for me - did I say I was lazy?

[Dinner]

In Sweden the cheap veggies were really limited because it was so far north.

Lots of cabbage, potatoes, and carrots.

Mostly Strawberries, Lingon Berries, and Apples too.

JM

That may not be very diverse but what is there sounds pretty good. It's hard to find lingon berries around here.

[notyoueither]

In Sweden the cheap veggies were really limited because it was so far north.

Lots of cabbage, potatoes, and carrots.

Mostly Strawberries, Lingon Berries, and Apples too.

JM

You should be able to grow radishes, onions, and tomatoes among other things.

[Jon Miller]

They do and they have them, but it doesn't seem to be as common as cabbage, potatoes, and carrots.

JM

[notyoueither]

Those are staples of diet. Most of the rest are enhancements for cooking.

[The Mad Monk]

High tunnels and bed covers are your friend!

[The Mad Monk]

This seems really appropriate here, somehow.

Art project destined to end in slaughter of chickens
By JESSIE BLAKEBOROUGH
The Kansas City Star
Updated: 2012-02-20T13:45:10Z

Rich Sugg


Artist Amber Hansen works in her studio in Lawrence.

In April, five live chickens will go on display in a coop in downtown Lawrence, where residents will have a chance to get to know them, perhaps even care for them.

Then the chickens will be slaughtered at a public event. The next day, they will be served in a community potluck.

That’s the artistic vision of a Lawrence artist named Amber Hansen who wants to establish a connection between people and the animals that they eat.

“There is something to be gained through experiential knowledge,” Hansen said. “This is an art form that creates a real life situation and a situation that exists and happens every day.”

Hansen, artist in residence at the University of Kansas, hopes the project, “The Story of Chickens: A Revolution,” will transform public opinion of the birds from simply “livestock” to unique creatures.

Not everyone shares Hansen’s vision.

JoAnn Farb sees the project as a cultural injustice that will negatively affect the arts as well as Kansas’ reputation.

“When people in other states think of Kansas, they will think that we don’t teach evolution in our schools and we do those gruesome, public slaughters of chickens and call it art,” said Farb, who has written a book about social reform and compassion toward animals. “This is just backward.”

Lawrence officials also question whether the slaughter of the chickens follows city code.

“The city code does not permit the willful killing of animals within city limits,” said Megan Gilliland, communications manager for the city. “There are exceptions in the ordinance for some activities, but butchering animals for food is not one of the excepted activities.”

But Hansen has backers.

Her project is funded by the Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts’ Rocket Grants program in collaboration with the Charlotte Street Foundation and the University of Kansas’ Spencer Museum of Art. Launched in 2009, the Rocket Grants attempt to encourage innovative, public-oriented work in nontraditional spaces. The Warhol foundation’s website says that the grant amounts are $4,000

The director of the Spencer Museum, Saralyn Reece Hardy, believes the most important aspect of the grant is that the artists’ work takes place outside the walls of museums and art galleries.

Hardy acknowledges that “The Story of Chickens” may be controversial, but says contemporary art has a function of raising awareness of issues in the public eye.

“Sometimes they are unpopular and risk-taking, but they are designed to stimulate public conversation about art in the public sphere,” Hardy said.

Kate Lawrence, a Denver blogger, has contacted the Spencer Museum to object to the project.

“It’s as though a bloodstain has been cast on the otherwise good reputation of the university,” Lawrence, a Topeka native, said in an interview.

Hansen, who grew up in Iowa, said she constantly witnessed the cycle of life and death on her family’s farm. She thinks people aren’t aware of the change from small farms to the industrial process of factory farms.

“The project imitates life, where the animals are well cared-for and treated with respect, as well as providing … people with nutrients they require,” she said.

Hansen is still hammering out the project’s details and dates. Currently the coop is scheduled to be unveiled March 30 during Lawrence’s Final Fridays, a re-creation of Kansas City’s popular art attraction First Fridays.

The chickens will then be on display in grassy areas with specific times set aside for the public to interact with them. There will be someone with the chickens at all times to look after them.

Hansen, who plans on spending a lot of time with the chickens, says she is looking forward to the discourse that the chickens create.

“A very important part of this project is the voices of local community and now that the dialogue is online, that’s important too,” Hansen said. “This affects everyone because everybody eats.”

The coop is tentatively scheduled to close April 21, and then the birds will be slaughtered at the Lawrence Percolator, a nonprofit project space of the Lawrence Corporation for the Advancement of Visual Arts. The public may attend the slaughter.

Originally, according to the Rocket Grants website, Lawrence restaurant 715 was intended to prepare the birds, but Hansen said the restaurant has withdrawn its involvement. Hansen says she respects all participants’ decisions on whether or not to partake in the project.

The restaurant’s owner and chef did not return phone calls for this story.

Megan Willsen, co-founder of Animal Outreach of Kansas in Lawrence, says she has reached out to Hansen to find another way to conclude the project without the slaughter of chickens.

“The dialogue has been introduced, there has been discussion and public outcry online, the project has raised awareness, and there is no need for this to end in the betrayal, torture and slaughter of the chickens,” Willsen said.

Hansen has heard the criticism.

“I don’t want to say anything to anyone specifically,” Hansen said. “I just want to hear their voices.”

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/02/17/3436536/art-project-destined-to-end-in.html

[DaShi]

Excellent commentary.

[The Mad Monk]

Yes, but sadly it appears she will not be allowed to make it.

[Aeson]

Chickens are annoying creatures. The more I've been around them, the more happy I am to eat them.

[Dinner]

I read this and thought it was hilarious. It reads like an article out of The Onion.

Bonus Withdrawal Puts Bankers in "Malaise"

Andrew Schiff was sitting in a traffic jam in California this month after giving a speech at an investment conference about gold. He turned off the satellite radio, got out of the car and screamed a profanity.

"I'm not Zen at all, and when I'm freaking out about the situation, where I'm stuck like a rat in a trap on a highway with no way to get out, it's very hard," Schiff, director of marketing for broker-dealer Euro Pacific Capital Inc., said in an interview.

Schiff, 46, is facing another kind of jam this year: Paid a lower bonus, he said the $350,000 he earns, enough to put him in the country's top 1 percent by income, doesn't cover his family's private-school tuition, a Kent, Connecticut, summer rental and the upgrade they would like from their 1,200-square- foot Brooklyn duplex.

"I feel stuck," Schiff said. "The New York that I wanted to have is still just beyond my reach."

The smaller bonus checks that hit accounts across the financial-services industry this month are making it difficult to maintain the lifestyles that Wall Street workers expect, according to interviews with bankers and their accountants, therapists, advisers and headhunters.

"People who don't have money don't understand the stress," said Alan Dlugash, a partner at accounting firm Marks Paneth & Shron LLP in New York who specializes in financial planning for the wealthy. "Could you imagine what it's like to say I got three kids in private school, I have to think about pulling them out? How do you do that?"

The rest of the article goes on much the same with the same self centered whining.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bonus-withdrawal-puts-bankers-malaise-050100338.html