Wink’s Blog

Wednesday evening, October 28, 2009.  The pregnant moon found a hole in the clouds as Max & I trudged up from the barn in deep twilight.  Clearing would give credence to the overnight forecast lows in the 20s.  On the other hand, there is an 80% chance of more snow tonight.  So take your pick.  We awoke this morning to 6″ new snow on the orchards; our first of the season, and it continued to flurry most of the day.  The Wilson boys and I were grateful for work indoors in the barn although it was pretty darn chilly for gripping tools and pounding nails.  The present tasks are to complete the ceiling in the first floor (and other details) in preparation for blowing-in cellulose insulation tomorrow.  The wind still blows through missing windows and doors — but all in due course.

At least we now have a space tempered from the elements for a myriad of farm tasks.  As our readers know, we were grateful for the cool space in which to pack our peaches and apples.  We also crushed and fermented a half-bin of our pinot munier and chambourcin grapes to make our ‘09 vintage wine.  We were, in fact, returning to the house from pressing these grapes when tonight’s moon peered over my shoulder, 78% full.  We had just pressed 70 gallons of wine into a barrel and carboys.

First snow denotes the return of winter.  October, even late October, seems early for winter around here.  True, the snow-level has been creeping down the slopes of Mt Lamborn and the high peaks are well-blanketed.  And, we’ve had a few cold nights, two of which gave rise to the urgent need to pick the grapes before they were truly ready.  With help from our neighbors we managed to pick over six tons of grapes in three days and the chemistry of the juice turned out to be just fine.  We were pleased with this yield for our first commercial wine-grape harvest.  Still, I’m unprepared for winter.  My fire wood supply is meager, there’s holes to be dug and trellis repairs to be affected before the ground freezes.  The trees and vines, though, appreciate a little snow on the ground and if this melts off, as we expect, it’ll help to moisten the soil going into winter.  An all-too-brief Indian Summer enabled us to almost complete the roof on the barn and siding on the East gable end.  Windows are due to be delivered next week.  And, since I am building the doors, I’d better get moving on that part of the project.

A highlight of our post-harvest season was a four-day visit from nine Colorado College students who camped in the orchard and helped us take-in bird netting from the grapes and muck out silt from the pond.  They also helped a friend put his farm to bed for the winter.

So, with snow, cold, and shortened daylight, we wind down the season.  And I have time to write and reflect.  Another harbinger of the coming months of hibernation is the filling of our freezers and shelves of preserves.  Last Friday I picked-up our annual side of locally-grown, grass-finished beef from our friend, neighbor, and rancher, Cynthia Houseweart (see princessbeef.com), for the freezer.  This yearly occasion is a social event as well as nutritional one.  Parked haphazardly in the shade of cottonwoods, cars and pickups clog the ranch driveway.  We’re supposed to load our flats of paper-wrapped frozen beef cuts and get them expeditiously to our home freezer.  But there’s Shirley and Bill and Margaret and Philip and Pam and Steve; folks we haven’t seen since last year’s pick-up or, at least, since the irrigation water was turned-on back in the Spring, all picking-up theirs.  And we finally have a little time to visit with one another; to compare stories on the crop-year just past.

Along with meat, Cynthia customarily hands-out literature intended to remind us that the benefits of local, organic, healthy, nutritious food outweighs the modest additional cost.  We, of course, don’t need to be coached on this.  This year’s handout was a reprint from the Aug 31, 2009 Time magazine.  The sustainable ag conversation has gone mainstream.  The author went to lengths to underscore the hidden costs of “cheap” food and to reinforce the value of food that’s raised in harmony with the natural world.

While I applaud the message and its significance, I want to echo the complaint of our friend, John Cooley, the organic potato farmer:  Why should the crops we raise, and their cost, be compared in any way with what conventional ag produces?  Why indeed?  Ecological farmers cherish and nurture our soils as the first essential of healthy food.  We build soil health and support the intricate web of organisms in the soil using compost, cover crops, and natural fertilizers.  Healthy, well-fed soils produce healthy plants which produce healthy, nutritious, and delicious food which is our passion and our mission.  Industrial ag regards the soil as expendable: kill the life in it along with the weeds and pests, degrade it, mine it, erode it, and when it can no longer provide what the plants need, then apply synthetic fertilizers.  We control pests by supporting a balanced agricultural ecology so that bugs, birds, and the plants themselves are able to combat bad bugs.  I could go on: we support local businesses, a vibrant rural community while industrial ag trades in a national, even global arena.

Really, there is no comparison in the nutritional value of the food produced sustainably vs industrially just as there is no comparison in the way its produced.  There is no separation.  Wouldn’t you rather feed your family food that builds and supports their health and development?  Wouldn’t you rather support vibrant local communities and open, agricultural landscapes?  For all these values, to spend a little more at your local farm stand, farmers market, or locally-oriented grocery, is a small price to pay.  Especially when you understand that, on average, we spend the smallest share of our disposable income on food of any developed economy and that it’s close to half what US families spent in the 1960s.  Let’s put our money where our mouth (and health) is!

April 12, 2009

Dear Mark,

It was good to see you Tuesday night at Talbott’s.  I appreciate very much you reaching out to the western Colorado agriculture community through the Western Colorado Horticulture Society.  No doubt you already knew that you’d encounter a pretty conservative audience.  I found it instructive that the big issues were taxation and immigration; plus an aside about regulation (food safety).  Three traditional right-wing whipping boys that are used to distract and obstruct discussion on issues of real importance.  Please know that not all of the Western Slope or the ag community here are so narrowly focused.  I especially appreciated your defense of President Obama’s economic recovery plan.  Thank you.

I recently received an email from your office in which you made the point that you are trying to bridge the divide that separates the parties and that has produced gridlock in Washington.  As a mediator, I appreciate the willingness of a party to reach out.  I also realize that resolution requires that both parties be motivated to settle. The Republicans demonstrate time and again that they are not so motivated.  They make no secret that the only thing they can agree on is obstruction.  The party of “No”.

The vast majority of Americans, including your constituents, reject the Republican Party, their ideas, and their tactics.  We need look no further than their behavior on the stimulus package to recognize their game plan: exact concessions, such as the middle-class tax cut, and then vote against it anyway.  With such an adversary it is a mistake, even dangerous, to try to find compromise.  And “adversary” they clearly are as they show no interest whatever in collaborating to solve the problems that their ideas created.  They are intent on seeing us fail regardless of the pain and cost to the Nation.

Thus, while continuing to seek a collaborative outcome remains a worthy and ethical effort, please be careful not to surrender the values that got you elected.  Max and I urge you to focus on getting the important work done and forget about trying to work with the other side.

We also want to weigh-in on the issue of food safety:  Certainly there is reason to be concerned when people die or are sickened by the food they eat.  The appropriate legislative response, however, is not to create new regulations which shift the cost of enforcement to farmers.  Rather, the FDA should be adequately funded to perform the inspections and enforcement that it is already empowered to do.  The recent rash of food-related scares can be linked to the trend to deregulation and “starving the beast” that has brought calamity on so
many levels.  Let’s restore a more responsible level of utilization of existing regulation before creating a whole new bureaucracy.

At the dedication of the Jerry Ahlberg Outdoor Education Center at CC, you enjoyed one of our delicious certified organic Gala apples. Remember?  As organic, small farm operators Max and I feel that the true threat to food safety comes from the industrialization of agriculture; from the concentration of market power in the hands of just a few large corporations, who are intent on extending their control by monopolizing access to seeds, and subjecting us to GMOs. It is important to remember that their overriding reason to exist is to produce ever-increasing returns for their shareholders.  This is in stark contrast to the small farm community that values diversity, quality, cooperation, and sustainability in addition to a reasonable return for our labors.  Our customers buy directly from us; they know we care about their health and well-being, we care about the health and well-being of our soils and of our rural communities, and we care about our workers and their families.  And our customers reciprocate the connection.

This is what Dr John Ikerd calls “The New American Agricultural Economy” (http://web.missouri.edu/ikerdj/). We urge you to pay attention to his ideas because we consider it a model for how the US can move beyond the collapsing unsustainable corporatist system toward a sustainable future; a future that values community, cooperation, health, peace, nutrition as opposed to just corporate profits.  This movement is well underway right here in western Colorado’s North Fork Valley.  If you’d like to experience it first-hand, we invite you (and Maggie) to pay us a visit here at Mesa Winds Farm.  We’ll show you models of the New American Agriculture, and I can assure you that we’ll turn out a bigger crowd, and actual supporters to boot, than last Tuesday.  In the mean time, please check out what we’re up to by visiting our web site at www.mesawindsfarm.com.  We’re looking forward to it.

With best wishes,

Wink & Max

This morning the mercury stands at 17 F.  Four or five warm days in a row and it feels like Spring.  Likely just a January thaw but with the rattle of orchard ladders in the apples next door and the voices of workers, the orchards are reawakening after an all-too-brief rest.  I’m restless to get back outside myself after two days indoors at the annual convention of the Western Colorado Horticultural Society in Grand Junction while the snows melted.

The highlight of the WCHS conference was three impassioned addresses by Dr John Ikerd on the “New American Agriculture” and the “New American Farmer” both of which could be summarized by the term “sustainable agriculture.”  The kick-off was a showing of the new film “Broken Limbs” (which Max and I have ordered for the Farm library; www.brokenlimbs.org); the story of a farm family who are struggling to keep farming despite devastating competition from China and South America as they raise apples in Washington’s fertile Columbia River Valley.  With the smoke from the decimation of their neighbors’ razed orchards as the back drop, the film depicts how these folks apply Dr Ikerd’s message in their effort to continue in the way of life they love.

In person, Dr Ikerd told us that the days of industrial agriculture, including industrial organic, are over.  That the New American Agriculture produces food ethically, for local communities, that is nutritious, delicious, and healthy.  In order to be “sustainable” the New American Farmer stewards the land and preserves and improves the soil; (s)he treats workers and the community alike with respect, kindness, and equitably; and, equally important, finds ways to produce reasonable profits.

This is not a new message to our friends who have been following this blog and web site and who have been purchasing our fruit.  You know that we are working on improving our soils and stewarding our farm ecology.  We acknowledge that we have room for improvement in paying our workers a living wage — a priority for us.  So much of what we can put back into the farm and our workers depends on securing an adequate income.  It is a process of continual improvement.  We have declared this to be the year that we will see if we, and the farm, together can realize the promise of the New American Farm economy.

It was on this last point that we heard Dr Ikerd’s message most powerfully.  And this is where you, the “eater” of food comes in.  He works with sustainable ag groups all over the country and he sees that people want to know where there food comes from; want to know and trust their farmers; and want to know that their food dollar is going to support farmers who care about the land, the quality of the food they produce, and the ethics they live while growing it.  They understand that by supporting local farmers they are supporting rural communities and the health of the society to which they belong.  Through this wholistic understanding, they are willing to pay more for food grown in this way because they know where those dollars are going and that they are supporting values that they respect.

We came away not only reinvigorated in our commitment to making this happen but with references and resources to help turn the vision into food on your table.  So, if you’re in our “food-shed” and want to be part of this movement, don’t hesitate to email (wink@mesawindsfarm.com).  If you’re already part of our network, you’ll be hearing from us directly.  If you’re in another local food region, look for farmers markets, CSAs, farm stands, and u-picks.  Make friends with a farmer who cares about you, your family, and your community.

In the last year, the major TV networks asked the presidential candidates 2,679 questions. Pop quiz: How many were about global warming?

A) 514—after all, it’s one of the top issues facing the country
B) 165—as many as were asked about illegal immigration
C) 3—the same number asked about UFOs

If you guessed 3, you’re right: Reporters asked as many questions about UFOs as they did about the climate crisis—the biggest threat to our planet.

I signed a petition urging top TV reporters to ask the presidential candidates about global warming. Can you join me at the link below?

http://pol.moveon.org/climatequestions/?r_by=11909-5268052-opw8VA&rc=paste

Thanks!

I strongly recommend you try the new interactive game at: http://sustainability.publicradio.org/consumerconsequences/. It’s an entertaining and simplified spin on the “ecological footprint“  which has been used to evaluate the sustainability of individuals, cities, and nations (see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_footprint).

In this “consumer consequences” version we can answer the question: “What would the world look like if everyone lived like me?” Interesting and disturbing. I found that it would take two Earths to support the population of the globe in my lifestyle. This, despite Max and my relatively low-impact lifestyle: small home, no commuting, no airplane flights, significant renewable energy. This, too, not including the impact of our farming activities. The sustainability of the our lives and of the Farm is a major goal for us. But we hope to build a more comfortable, spacious, and energy efficient home some day which will only increase the size of our footprint.

For comparison: According to Wikipedia, “in 2003, the average biologically productive area per person worldwide was approximately 1.8 global hectares (gha) per capita. The U.S. footprint per capita was 9.6 gha, and that of Switzerland was 5.1 gha per person, whilst China’s was 1.6 gha per person.” Which means that, for the global population to live the way the US lives would require 5.3 Earths; and for the world’s capacity to be equally distributed we’d all have to live more or less as the average Chinese does. This is indeed dismal!

But we’re a more advanced, not to mention more powerful, society and therefore we deserve to consume more than an equal share. Right? How ethical is that? Does inequitable consumption necessarily indicate exploitation? How can we know what is fair? What is ethical? (Forget for the purposes of this discussion that China is rapidly buying up our largest financial institutions and financing our war. “The times they are a-changing…”)

But seriously, once we know the extent of the unsustainability of our life-style, how do we feel then? Because we have to know that who’s really paying for our careless luxury is our children and our grandchildren and their children. They will bear the consequences. They will deal with climate changes that mean rising sea levels, more violent weather events, reduced agricultural productivity, and resulting mass migrations of disrupted peoples. They will inheret the violent clashes between civilizations, between the haves and have-nots, between the placed and the dis-placed. They will live with increasing insecurities. It is hard to conjure a positive result from the inequities that we have come to regard as our right. Our right, it turns out, to exploit our own children.

Do we have the curiosity and courage to confront a cold numerical appraisal of the sustainability of our lives? It’s a private undertaking that doesn’t have to be shared with anyone; no one else needs to know. Do we have the courage to begin, with determination, to change the way we live, to begin to live more in harmony with the carrying capacity of our Earth. Let us begin now.

With the upcoming Iowa Caucuses, Morning Edition is asking just-plain-folks to express their top issues. Maybe its that I don’t live along a sun belt interstate but for whatever reason they haven’t asked ME. Those they do ask are concerned about their taxes or the prospects for their auto-industry-dependent businesses. Pretty personal and individual concerns that resonate only marginally for me. This morning, though, the just-plain-folks seemed to agree that we need to break the lock that corporate interests have on our so-called democratic process; I agree.

Just in case anyone cares to ask, I’m ready with my top issues:
> The Iraq War.
> Global Climate Crisis.
> Renewable Energy.
> Food and agriculture policy, organics, sustainable food systems, GMOs.
> Universal, single-payer health care.
> The federal deficit, debt, and the financial burden we’re leaving future generations.
> Foreign policy.
> Tax inequities — the rich and corporations don’t pay their fair share.

Taxes and corporate influence are sub sets of these issues. If, for instance, I agreed with the country’s spending priorities, I’d feel better about paying taxes. But as long as we spend hundreds and hundreds of billions on Bush’s War and even more by reducing the taxes paid by the rich and corporations and subsidize oil companies to rape our pristine places and spend in support of developing a corn-based ethanol industry while failing to renew incentives for renewable energy, failing to adopt a Renewable Energy Standard, and failing to provide health care for all our citizens (and on and on), I can’t conger much support for taxes either.

Our federal spending priorities express corporate priorities. The Bush War is a boon for weapons manufacturers and dealers, Cheney’s friends in the oil patch, and other war profiteers including so-called “contractors” (who we used to disparage as “mercenaries”) — surprise: they’re one and the same: Haliburton’s KBR and the others. Ethanol is a sop to Big Ag (and by extension the ag chemical and GMO producers), and Detroit dinosaur car companies (who won’t have to do any real innovation).

My late grandmother used to say that it’s a privilege to pay taxes. Presumably she was thinking that the duty to pay taxes means that the family had income; a privilege that not everyone enjoyed during the depression. As a New Englander she also appreciated that those with the privilege of income have a duty to share, through taxes, her good fortune with those less advantaged in our society. Furthermore, she understood that a society has shared priorities and infrastructure to which it is a privilege to contribute and help bring to fruition. The knee-jerk anti tax crowd thinks of us not as a society but rather as a collection of individuals bent on each maximizing our individual self interest. I strongly believe they couldn’t be more wrong. We need to understand and pursue our common interests if we are going to successfully address the complex challenges ahead — and the sooner the better.