As of today, they intend to spearhead the local food movement and sustainability on a global scale.

Even though Wal-Mart can never emulate the farmer’s market experience (in time I’m sure they will try,) their investment in local food production will immensely affect the production and distribution of local food. The plan released today has three major components, including:

- Support farmers and their communities
- Produce more food with fewer resources and less waste
- Sustainable source key agriculture products

I will be the first to say, don’t let the encouraging headline suggest a perfect reality because many people, myself included, distrust Wal-Mart. They are a blessing and a curse. For now, let me mention how they may be seen as a blessing for the food movement.

1. In “emerging markets” (outside the U.S.) by 2015, Wal-Mart will sell $1 billion in food sourced from 1 million small and medium farmers (these are defined as farms that are smaller than 50 acres.)
2. In the U.S. Wal-Mart will double its sale of locally sourced produce
3. Wal-Mart will include an agriculture element to its Sustainability Index. The index will ask suppliers about the water, energy, fertilizer and pesticide they use per unit of food produced.
4. For the stores in Brazil, they will only source beef that comes from ranches that do not contribute to deforestation in the Amazon

Each of these “blessings” will impact the industrial food systems in a positive way. The boost in locally sourced produce will incentivize American farmers to grow fruits and vegetables, not just commodity crops (soy, corn, cotton, wheat.) Not only will Wal-Mart seek local producers, but they also want to limit the environmental impact of distribution. Therefore, there will be more of an effort to distribute the food in more sustainable ways. This does not translate to electric trucks, rather finding farms that are closer to a given store.

The Sustainability Index is also of major significance. It’s one thing for consumers to want organic produce, but when the world’s largest store wants to source local food who meet a certain standard of sustainability, the ‘trickle down’ idea takes real form. Sadly, Wal-Mart speaks louder than many of us; and in this case, maybe it’s for the better?

*

Okay, so now let me divulge some of the curses that Wal-Mart manifests. Primarily, the physical size of a Wal-Mart store – its sprawling parking lot and thousands of gas-guzzling 18-wheeled trucks do that pare well for the environment. Consider where these stores develop, suburbs and urban sprawl. A store this big and invasive in a given community, not only brings in thousands of people from outside the community (increasing traffic, noise, pollution), but the construction of these spaces incentivize developers to build new communities around or nearby the store. The long-term impacts of sprawl are related to places like Wal-Mart, retailers that thrive on open space and lots of cars and trucks driving near and far to shop.

Another massive problem with Wal-Marts as well as other mega-retail chains, is their impact on local, independent, “mom and pop” stores. There is no competition with Wal-Mart. The prices are too low, the selection too great and the centralization of so many products makes it hard for people to run multiple errands when they could just shop at Wal-Mart. In other words, Wal-Mart destroys community. It digs up and paves over the land and removes local businesses.

Lastly, and maybe most importantly, Wal-Mart is very anti-union. They are notorious for how they treat workers – paltry pay, poor benefits, did I mention that they are staunchly anti-union? Many employees rely on food stamps, Medicare and subsidized housing to make ends meet. (Check out this study for more.) Between the poor treatment of workers, the physical environment and independent businesses, it can be difficult to promote Wal-Mart.

*

Today’s news pushes Wal-Mart in a great direction; at the same time, the bane of their existence is a problem unto itself. I don’t shop at Wal-Mart and I never will, but for those that must, now they will also have a source of fresh, local food to enjoy.

Hopefully they will purchase it.

Related posts:

1. Critical Food Literacy and a Sustainable Food Movement
2. Good-Bye Grocery Store (part 1)
3. Buy Local (or) We are “the market”

Mobile poultry processing on Martha's Vineyard

Two weeks ago I was visiting one of my closest friends who lives on Martha’s Vineyard. Unlike the Kennedy’s, Wall Street Executives and Barack Obama, my friend and his lovely family are not millionaires living it up on the island. It turns out that most of the people that live there year-round are middle class families trying to survive in a community that inflates its cost for the summer crowds. The cost of living there is so high that local folks get an “Island Discount Card” that provides a 10% discount at the grocery stores and other daily amenities.

Therefore, it should come as no surprise that I did not visit Martha’s Vineyard to wine and dine with hollywood celebrities. In fact, beside spending time with my friend, his wife and their one-year old son, I traveled east to see his farm and kill his chickens.

When I learned that my trip would overlap with slaughtering chickens, I was overcome with joy. It’s not that I seek blood upon my hands. Rather, in my pursuit of being a conscious meat eater, I wanted the experience of killing and preparing an animal, one that I take for granted at the grocery store. And so begins the story of processing poultry on Martha’s Vineyard.

According to the Organic Consumers Association, an organization working on social justice and sustainability issues in the food system, factory farming kills 14,000 birds a minute. Over the course of one day, 20,160,000 birds are killed. Now I could definitely turn this into a rant on the evils of industrial agriculture, but I will not. I will try to keep this civil so as to maintain the perspective I seek to share. Whether or not you eat chicken, this number is incredible. We can only begin to imagine how an industry kills more than 20 million birds in a single day.

On the other side, the small scale farmer has little to hide. “Small” is a relative term. So let me clarify the smallness of the operation I attended. Looking at the image above, the total slaughtering operation took up about 900 square feet in total. The equipment needed to kill 40 chickens (aka cornish rock crosses) and 20 pekin ducks fits onto a small trailer that is hauled behind a standard pick-up truck.

Unlike the 18-wheelers hauling hundreds, if not thousands of birds to be processed, the 40 chickens fit into 3 crates:

40 chickens - 3 crates.

Although you cannot see it in this image, the chickens had roamed about in Salatin-esque pens and traveled about 40 feet (roughly) from pen to crate. I mention this to emphasize the levels of stress animals experience in factory farming. Unlike birds that live in small quarters with no sunlight and suffer many other ills, these ladies lived a good life on the open pasture and did not experience the same levels of stress in their brief transportation.

From the crates, the birds are handled one by one. The man weilding the knife removes a bird from the crate. The bird is held horizontal with its neck resting in his hand. There are no cries of fear. The bird is calm and the sharpened knife slides easily across the jugular. Within moments the bird is dead.

With 2 simple slices, a chicken is killed.

I do think there is room for debate as to when the bird is dead. Does the bird feel pain? Is the bird conscious at the moment? Does it know it is dying? Ultimately I cannot provide those answers. The birds do convulse for a few minutes once they are in the cones, but my understanding is that their nerves are sending messages and the body shakes. Again, no crying or shrieking from the dead/dying birds. The birds lay upside down in the cones for several minutes, bleeding.

Bleeding in the cones.

Once the bird is bled it is transferred to a hot, soapy bath that must be kept at 150 degrees. If it’s too hot the birds will cook and it it’s too cold the birds will not remain sanitized. The metal basket rotates the birds for about 45 seconds.

A sanitized death for sure.

From the bath the birds are the places into a giant metal cylinder that has large plastic knobs protruding from its sides. The purpose of this machine is to remove any remaining feathers from the body of the bird. Interestingly, the variety bred by the industry, a breed not so dissimilar from the one seen here, loses its feathers easier than most. (Think genetically modified poultry.)

And then the feathers are gone.

I suppose we could call this a half-way point in the processing. At this point the bird is tossed into a giant tub of ice water and proceeding requires that the temperature of the bird be lowered (to a degree I do not remember.) One birds have cooled down a bit, they are placed on a sanitized metal table and butchered. Though, unlike the chicken at the grocery store, these birds are not cut up into different parts (i.e. leg, wing, breast, etc). These birds will be packaged whole, minus the feet and the head.

In the hands of the butchers, first the feet and head are removed. The feet are placed in a bucket of cold water to be saved (great for stock.) The heads are thrown out. *Note, all blood, offal and other waste created by the process is collected and often absorbed by hay and placed in the compost. Small scale processing enables the farmers to return inedible parts of the bird back into the soil.

Once the head and feet are removed, the organs follow. Beside the feet, the liver, heart and gizzard are placed in a bucket.

The chickens are gutted.

The removal of the innards must be quick as there are more birds to follow. At the same time, while removing organs they must be incredibly careful not to tear the gull bladder. The little greenish-black sac in the bird’s intestinal track is filled with neon green bile. If the sac is torn it releases bile everywhere inside the carcass and will ruin the quality of the bird for the consumer.

Once the birds are properly gutted they return to ice water baths. The end of the process is packaging. Sadly, I did not take any pictures because I was helping them with the procedure.

Basically, a table sits with plastic tubes jutting towards the sky. The birds are placed on the tube through the excavated carcass. A bag is placed over it, the bird slips off with the bag, the bag is twisted and sealed at the top with a pinched metal staple. Then the bag is slightly cut open and the bird is soaked in a steaming pot of water (again around 150 degrees.) The hot water sucks out the air in the bag, creating a vacuum seal. A sticker is placed over the small hole and the bird is thrown in the fridge.

The bird that spent its life roaming on open pasture eating bugs, grass and a bit of grain, had its one bad day.

Related posts:

1. Chicken Stock
2. Simple, healthy and delicious
3. Head Cheese (part I)

Last week I boarded a bus with 30 professionals, grad students and other food politic wonks to explore the pieceses of an ever-increasing sustainable food system here in Oregon. Coined “The Oregon Sustainability Experience,” the week-long adventure drove us all over, visiting multiple participants and benefactors to the evolving sustainable food systems across Oregon. From Portland to Hillsboro to Monmouth to Corvallis to Philomath to Tangent to Junction City to Salem to Brooks to Woodburn and then back to Portland, we invested 40+ hours to investigation, analysis, reflection and immense discussion on the various topics that be.

Over the next several weeks and maybe months, I will post entries on each of our visits. We dined with plant breeders, toured small, medium and large organic farms, geared up in white gowns to see processing facilities, and of course ventured among heritage breed pigs and chickens, and at one point blew our minds in an dialogue with migrant farm workers. Suffice to say, we ran the gambit on sustainable agriculture in the Northwest.

You will be happy to know that I also took loads of pictures! I know that this blog lacks the creative efforts of my photo-friendly eye, and so I intend on showing the reader some of the sites we saw on our trip. Aside from the informative lens of who, what, where, when and how, I look forward to divulging some of the why questions that rang deep inside throughout this experience. Some of the thoughts that still linger in my brain include:

• Do we want to sustain a global food system, or move towards a sustainable localized food system?
• Is ‘sustainability’ an inherently liberal issue?
• The battle between local and organic in the context of sustainability
• Peak oil, climate change and the future of sustainable trends
• Sustainability – a class concern?

With so much to share, I’m still weighing the idea of posting regularly on this trip, i.e. several times a week or once every couple weeks, etc. At the same time, with so much to say and the desire to write more often, I can see posting many entries in the near future. As I mentioned a moment ago, beyond a news report, I really aim to engage some of the deeper issues I uncovered during the week-long conference.

For all my previous posts on food politics and eating seasonally and teaching food literacy, I think the theme of sustainability loomed in the background. Here is an opportunity to go that much deeper into an increasingly important issue.

Related posts:

1. Good Man Eats Takes a Break
2. Burgerville – Fast Food for Ethical Foodies
3. Local Food Movement Gains Serious Support

From the very beginning I wanted this public space as separate from my life. Yet the problems I face during the day will inevitably trickle down to this site. The most direct influence is the absence of writing. If I am distracted I am less likely to write. Over time this tendency inflates and the next thing I know I have not written in days, weeks, a month?!

In this short post of reflection, let me say this:

I am rebuilding myself and redefining my relationship with the food movement and my career. I am in the process of rediscovering my passion and potential. I am finding my voice (again.) I appreciate your patience during this process. If you like what I have to say you will come back. If you are tired of waiting, maybe it will be awhile. But I promise that this lapse is almost over.

Good Man Eats is making a comeback.

Related posts:

1. Good-Man-Eats Goes “Food Publisher!”
2. A Bad Blogger
3. Reality Check – where is weekly menu 25?

The overlapping interests of a just food system.

Over the weekend I attended the very first, Multnomah County Food Summit. Gathering 250 people into a conference hall for an all-day event on a sunny day, was no easy feat. Luckily, all I had to do was show-up.

A first of its kind for sure, the food summit brought both grandiose ideals and a diverse selection of committed activists to the table. As the mini image shows above, the goal of the summit is to integrate 4 main principals into the pillars of a movement. Now we all know the movement had begun far before last Saturday. And yet, no one in Oregon (as far as I know) has initiated a project of such size and impact.

If this were to succeed, the food summit hopes to develop a thorough action plan for the county, one that stretches into the next 15 years. From all the qualitative data collected at the event – from worksheets to discussion groups – the event facilitators will extract the big ideas and common interests of the attendees. Thereafter, four groups will form to develop individual plans in their specific subject area. As the image shows above, the 4 main objectives include:

1. Economic Vitality: promote a thriving local economy
2. Healthy Eating: make the healthy choice an easier choice for all
3. Social Equity: build systemic justice, health and food security
4. Local Food: increase viable local options in our food system

As much as these principles guided the discussion for the day, much time was devoted to uncovering those voices not at the table. All the while, various speakers informed the audience of projects happening across the country with similar goals.

The event was both overwhelming and inspirational. To see so many engaged citizens all sharing the same passion was a real boost for me. As the lone educator on Monday nights trying to influence the lives of those not attending the summit, this opportunity let me leave my little vacuum of a classroom. If anything, the event reminded me that the local food movement is really just beginning. There will be funding (eventually) to promote projects like my own. There will be top-down and bottom-up approaches to tackling healthy food disparities and mighty corporate interests. There will be a collective movement of diverse people joining in.

This is clearly the beginning of the food revolution. (post-Jamie Oliver)

Related posts:

1. A Future Food Project (or) An Idea is Born
2. Pro-Food Anti-Foodie
3. I Thought I was Starting the Food Revolution!?

The premise is simple: Our nation suffers from rampant poverty. This historically complex dilemma causes a vast multitude of problems. Think institutional racism, and a whole lot of concerns come to mind: housing, employment, education, crime, pollution and even food. It’s not that Clinton started the program to overcome poverty, per se. The opportunity to participate in AmeriCorps enables young and old to directly serve the populations in need. From this well-intentioned need for public service, there is news of an emerging potential on the food front.

A breakthrough idea rumbles beneath the layers of sluggish USDA policies. As many activists believe, sustainable movements begin from the bottom, the grassroots. In the case of AmeriCorps there is a certain irony to the situation. Since a strong grassroots movement requires resources (i.e. money) here comes the government to fund the movement. The irony is that if other branches of power changed certain policies, this grassroots effort would be unnecessary. In the end, it’s rather absurd actually.

But. On a happier note, let us consider this emerging proposal - Food Corps. If the problem of healthy food choices is affordability and accessibility, it follows that school food could rightly tackle the issue. When thousands of schools start demanding locally grown foods – fruits and vegetables no less – there will be more incentive to support local farms growing real food. Beside the economic boosts to rural communities and regional family farms, there is the added benefit of long-term community health, i.e. lower medical bills and healthier families.

The affordability of healthy food choices comes at a steep cost. As any viewer of Jamie Olver’s Food Revolution will know, the time it takes to prepare whole foods is expensive in and of itself. But again, this can be overcome with an increased school budget – just hire more experienced cooks! The issue of accessibility is where Food Corps enters the scene.

Food Corps volunteers will serve three different roles (or maybe just one of these):

1. School Garden Coordinator
2. Farm-to-School Coordinator
3. Healthy Food Educator

To bring healthy food choices to public school, a healthy food culture must be introduced. Parents, students, teachers, kitchen staff and administrators must stand behind healthy food. With the support staff to alleviate the pressure and navigate the local food politics, a Food Corps member could establish a new and sustainable system for the school and the farming community.

I think this idea is rather excellent. But it should be noted – this is still an idea. The proposal came forth this past January, and the hope is to hash out the kinks of the program so that it can begin next year, January 2011. If I hadn’t done the AmeriCorps VISTA program myself (several years ago,) I would definitely jump on this wagon. Ultimately, be in an idea or a reality, the Food Corps shows just how strong and meaningful the food movement has become.

Related posts:

1. Critical Food Literacy and a Sustainable Food Movement
2. A Future Food Project (or) An Idea is Born
3. News to Be Proud Of (if you live in Oregon)

Looks like blogging isn't the only way or the best way to to start a revolution!

If only I were British, wealthy, studly and a super talented chef – then, and only then could I have my face on the image above.

Well it turns out that other people – lots of folks – want to earn the grand recognition Mr. Oliver will receive for his new TV show, “Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution.” America’s love for over-the-top sensationalism will push the local food movement to the masses like never before. As a food activist in my own right, I take no offense by Mr. Oliver’s good intention. That said, my role in the food movement is puny compared to the powerful forces of food movement celebrities, i.e. Michael Pollan, Alice Waters, Joel Salatin, etc.

In fact, I see this show as an opportunity to exploit the realities of America’s addiction to junk food. Yes, the show has some faults but ultimately, I think this sort of media frenzy could be a good thing. The problem for other people, individuals and groups whose participation in the food movement far precedes Mr. Olver, is the lack of recognition for the hard work that has been done thus far across the nation.

For example, the National Farm to School Network has spent tons of energy and lobbying to change the way school food is budgeted and served to school children every day. Thus, it comes as no surprise that Debra Eschmeyer would be frustrated with Mr. Oliver’s rather cocky attitude on the show. Debra, director of the National Farm to School Network, is all to familiar with the challenges put forth by our bureaucratic governement and its endless umbrellas of institutions, associations and organizations. She is one of many people deserving recognition for the food revolution.

At one point during the first episode, Mr. Oliver discovers that the USDA’s nutritional standards are the backbone of junky lunch food in schools; he is incredibly shocked and dismayed (as he should be.) And though the average parent will share this discomfort, many people have known this issue and fought it for many years.

Unlike the numerous organizations that are fighting for healthier and more just food policies, Mr. Oliver is actually (in my opinion) more grassroots. The show is an opportunity for him to impact the food policies in America. And yet to make this possible, he’s exposing the diets of everyday people to the larger public. One person’s sensationalism is another man’s (or woman’s) reality. He wants to teach people to cook for themselves and to improve school food. The goals overlap and are worthwhile in their own right.

As someone who wants to participate in the revolution, specifically by empowering families with skills, knowledge and resources, I too want to help American families eat healthier. Any of my reader’s want to put me on the cover of Time magazine?!

Related posts:

1. Food Corps
2. The Food Revolution (has begun)
3. An Intentional Local Food System

In the neighborhood, down the street or across town? Maybe the nearby countryside fits the bill or the afternoon cruise to the mountainous or oceanic regions? Once we determine the meaning of the term, then we can talk about the owner of locality. For example, does the farmer determine her blueberries to be local or does the family at the farmers market? Clearly, both the consumer and producer have a stake in the word and its ambiguous meanings. That being the case, who are we to trust?

After the apocalypse we may find ourselves in a world of genuine transparency. Until peak oil arrives and the overly cheap costs of production and distribution cease to exist, we must continue to challenge the barriers between producer and consumer. This takes the best form when we wear both hats, i.e. growing food in our yards, community gardens and apartment balconies. The link between the making of a good and the consumption of that good will hopefully grow smaller in time. This is to say that the process of making, transporting, packaging, distributing and selling will one day shrink in steps.

To further this potential I am happy to share with you an excellent new resource for food buyers in the state of Oregon. If you own a grocery store or a neighborhood bodega, a boutique restaurant or a local food chain, here is the coolest tool for your business. I introduce to you, Food Hub.

The good people of EcoTrust have brought the food-conscience citizens of Oregon an awesome way to source local food. In this context, local means regional. The website (membership required) provides a craigslist-like formula for buyers and sellers to communicate their needs. For all of us consumers that ask and ask for more local food, this is a great suggestion for the establishment that responds dumbfounded or even frustrated at the request.

There is some bad news though. The goal of the project is to connect producers and sellers, not individuals. Aside from the farmers market and sites like Eat Wild, there is no food hub for households and individuals. For a place like Portland, where large swaths of the population seek local foods, this is clearly a resource in demand. Not all farmer’s markets are equal, therefore it is of greater desire to centralize the local food sources available to people like you and me. Though I’m sure there are some foodie types out there working on a project like this (at least I hope so.)

Withe Spring upon us and the excitement for more sun, more warmth and the fresh foods of the coming seasons, I am eager to source local (Oregon is the line for me) food. In my attempt to write more on local food sources in Portland, consider this the beginning of something meaningful and practical for Good Man Eats!

Related posts:

1. Urban Foraging
2. Immersed in the Northwest (weekly menu 8)
3. “The Portland Meat Collective” (or) The Grass-Fed Manifesto (part 4)

A couple weeks ago Tara Parker-Pope, who writes for the Times’ blog on wellness, published “Switching to Grass-Fed Beef.” The short and informative article explains the position for consuming grass-fed or pastured animals. The argument in-favor of has two solid points: 1. the meat is healthier and 2. the animals are more-often raised in an ethical way. I would take the position a step further and say that eating such animals sourced from small, family farms will ensure a greater transparency is the slaughter and packaging of the animal.

As I have said before and will continue to argue today, for the sake of our family’s health, a strong local economy and the future of our environment, we must eat less meat. AND the meat we eat, must come from small, family farms that raise their animals on open pasture and employ the best sustainable grazing methods we have to offer. (See Joel Salatin.) For information on finding this sustenance in your area, check out Eat Wild for farms near you.

If you live in Portland, I highly recommend Afton Field Farm.

Related posts:

1. The Grass-Fed Manifesto (part 3)
2. The Grass-Fed Manifesto (Part I)
3. “The Portland Meat Collective” (or) The Grass-Fed Manifesto (part 4)

For all you cynics out there, you will be happy to know that costs will increase and will affect the district’s budget. At the same time, the seemingly abstract idea of healthier kids will take precedent over cheap food. No more pizza for breakfast or french fries as vegetables. Now the kids will get the chance to eat real food on a daily basis.

To read the original text, go here.

Related posts:

1. Guess Who Received a $4,000 Grant?!
2. School Gardens are All the Rage – Resources to Join the Movement
3. Buy Local (or) We are “the market”