Why should you go organic? Here are 10 compelling reasons to put down the conventional products...
1. Keep chemicals off your plate. Pesticides are poisons designed to kill living organisms and thus are harmful to humans. Many EPA-approved pesticides were registered long before extensive research linked these chemicals to cancer, autoimmune diseases and a host of other malfunctions in the body. Want to know the EXACT chemicals on your foods? Search whatsonmyfood.com for your favorite fruits and vegetables.
2. Help lose weight. Toxins in the body make it diffcult for our metabolism to function optimally from interupting the thryoid function to affecting hormone levels.
3. Protect future generations. Children are four times more sensitive to exposure to cancer-causing pesticides in foods than adults.
4. Protect water quality. The EPA estimates that pesticides pollute the public’s primary source of drinking water for more than half the country's population.
5. Organic farmers work in harmony with nature. Three billion tons of topsoil is eroded from croplands in the U.S. each year, and much of it is due to conventional farming practices, which often ignore the health of the soil. Organic agriculture respects the balance necessary for a healthy ecosystem; wildlife is encouraged by including forage crops in rotation and by retaining fencerows, wetlands and other natural areas.
5. Save energy. More energy is now used to produce synthetic fertilizers than to till, cultivate and harvest all the crops in the US.
7. Support a true economy. Organic foods might seem expensive at first. However, your tax dollars pay for hazardous waste clean-up and environmental damage caused by conventional farming.
8. Mineral Rich Soil. Planting large plots of land with the same crop year after year tripled farm production between 1950 and 1970, but the lack of natural diversity of plant life has negatively affected soil quality, leaving mineral levels extremely low. MInerals are crucial for the body to function optimally.
9. Nourishment. Organic farming starts with the nourishment of the soil, in turn producing nourishing plants. Well-balanced soil produces strong, healthy plants that have more nutrients than conventionally grown produce.
10. Flavor. Organic produce simply tastes better. Conduct your own taste test!
Check out Urban Organics, a New York organic produce and grocery delivery service
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Should Rochester parents feed their kids organic or locally grown foods?
In Rochester, thankfully, you don't have to choose.
Wegmans has announced their brand new blog. Its purpose is to "share our experiment with organic farming." It also provides news from local growers. A lot of the organic foods you find in Wegmans come straight from their organic farm near Canandaigua Lake.
This is community whose major supermarket retailer is dedicated to providing the community with fresh, nutritious, organic foods. There are also a plethora of farms dedicated to producing organic food: organic dairy farms, fruit farms, etc. However, organic produce can be hard on the wallet. Local farmers who do not farm organically provide wonderful, tasty and nutritious foods as well. NO consumer should feel bad about purchasing from their neighborhood farmer.
What exactly IS organic food?
Simply put, it is food that was grown without the assistance of chemicals or pesticides.
What qualifies as "locally grown" food?
Food that was harvested within a 50 to 100 mile radius from where you live.
Which is better for my family?
The debate is out on that. Some argue that local produce, even if not organically grown, holds onto more of its nutritional value because it is fresher. Also, the environmental impact of transporting food across the country is more significant than spraying crops with chemicals. Locally grown food tastes better and scientists have not proven that chemicals sprayed on crop have any negative long-term effects on people.
However, if it comes out that chemical and pesticides have long-term, negative side-effects, organic foods win hands down! In the meantime, what to feed your kids?
If you can afford it, buy local organic foods. If that just seems out of your price range, buy from your local farmer. Always wash your fruits and veggies thoroughly with water to remove chemical residue. If local consumers continue to buy from local farmers, they will have a greater impact on the local economy AND will have significant impact in help farmers decide to go organic.
It's strawberry season, people. Go buy some strawberries!!!
Further reading on the subject:
Wegmans Farm Blog
Eating Better than Organic
This or that: Local vs. Organic Food
Wegmans has announced their brand new blog. Its purpose is to "share our experiment with organic farming." It also provides news from local growers. A lot of the organic foods you find in Wegmans come straight from their organic farm near Canandaigua Lake.
This is community whose major supermarket retailer is dedicated to providing the community with fresh, nutritious, organic foods. There are also a plethora of farms dedicated to producing organic food: organic dairy farms, fruit farms, etc. However, organic produce can be hard on the wallet. Local farmers who do not farm organically provide wonderful, tasty and nutritious foods as well. NO consumer should feel bad about purchasing from their neighborhood farmer.
What exactly IS organic food?
Simply put, it is food that was grown without the assistance of chemicals or pesticides.
What qualifies as "locally grown" food?
Food that was harvested within a 50 to 100 mile radius from where you live.
Which is better for my family?
The debate is out on that. Some argue that local produce, even if not organically grown, holds onto more of its nutritional value because it is fresher. Also, the environmental impact of transporting food across the country is more significant than spraying crops with chemicals. Locally grown food tastes better and scientists have not proven that chemicals sprayed on crop have any negative long-term effects on people.
However, if it comes out that chemical and pesticides have long-term, negative side-effects, organic foods win hands down! In the meantime, what to feed your kids?
If you can afford it, buy local organic foods. If that just seems out of your price range, buy from your local farmer. Always wash your fruits and veggies thoroughly with water to remove chemical residue. If local consumers continue to buy from local farmers, they will have a greater impact on the local economy AND will have significant impact in help farmers decide to go organic.
It's strawberry season, people. Go buy some strawberries!!!
Further reading on the subject:
Wegmans Farm Blog
Eating Better than Organic
This or that: Local vs. Organic Food
A Voice of Echo Agriculture
Acres U.S.A., the monthly magazine
Acres U.S.A. is North America's oldest, largest magazine covering commercial-scale organic and sustainable farming ... subscribe now and receive Acres U.S.A. monthly by mail. Read some of our current issue below.
Subscribe to Acres U.S.A.
Free Sample Issue
Give a Gift SubscriptionChange Your Mailing AddressBulk IssuesAdvertise in Acres U.S.A.Write a Letter to the EditorFeature Article Archives
June 2009Featured Articles
Use Lime to Correct Calcium Needs, Not to Correct pHA top soil consultant shares key considerations that can make the difference between effective and ineffective — or even damaging — lime applications.
Increasing Winter Stockpiles & ProfitsHow holistic high density mob grazing allows this grass farmer to build healthy soil and winter graze at the same time.
Weed the Soil, Not the CropThese experienced organic growers explain in detail how changing the soil environment will in itself reduce weeds and the need for tillage.
Sustainable Hog Breeds: The WhitesSome venerable heritage breeds are examined for their suitability to today's natural, range-based hog grower.
Don't Believe the Hype!A renowned cowman explains why the use of line-breeding to create a predictable paternal gene pool is crucial to our national — and international — cattle herds.
Sustainable Sorghum Syrup Production in Mid-OhioThis Ohio sorghum grower produces a great niche crop every October and an excellent value-added product every March.
The Biochemical Sequence of Plant NutritionAfter being taken up by plants, minerals set up a kind of nutritional chain reaction, with each element in the sequence activating an element that follows.
Seeds: More Precious than Gold or OilWhy saving seed has become critical in an age of GMOs and industrial agriculture.
June 2009Columns
Interview — Charles Benbrook: Policy, Science & Organic AgricultureThe chief scientist for the Organic Center shares stories from behind the scenes in his longtime quest to win hearts and minds in the battle for a healthy, sustainable food system.
Eco-UpdateEco-ag news from around the world.
OpinionCommentary on vital issues affecting organic and sustainable farmers.
Transitions"Certified Organic Industry News"
Eco-Gardener"A 'Recycled' Greenhouse!" by Anne Van Nest
Health & Healing"Pandemics & Swine Flu" by Dr. Michael W. Fox
The Natural Vet"Staying out of Trouble" by C. Edgar Sheaffer, V.M.D. & Bonnie M. Sheaffer, R.N.
Books & InformationReviews of new eco-farming literature
Acres U.S.A. ZipsLetters to the editor
Eco-ResourcesA roundup of eco-suppliers
Eco-MeetingsEco-farming meetings and events across North America
The Last WordEssays and parting shots
Acres U.S.A. is North America's oldest, largest magazine covering commercial-scale organic and sustainable farming ... subscribe now and receive Acres U.S.A. monthly by mail. Read some of our current issue below.
Subscribe to Acres U.S.A.
Free Sample Issue
Give a Gift SubscriptionChange Your Mailing AddressBulk IssuesAdvertise in Acres U.S.A.Write a Letter to the EditorFeature Article Archives
June 2009Featured Articles
Use Lime to Correct Calcium Needs, Not to Correct pHA top soil consultant shares key considerations that can make the difference between effective and ineffective — or even damaging — lime applications.
Increasing Winter Stockpiles & ProfitsHow holistic high density mob grazing allows this grass farmer to build healthy soil and winter graze at the same time.
Weed the Soil, Not the CropThese experienced organic growers explain in detail how changing the soil environment will in itself reduce weeds and the need for tillage.
Sustainable Hog Breeds: The WhitesSome venerable heritage breeds are examined for their suitability to today's natural, range-based hog grower.
Don't Believe the Hype!A renowned cowman explains why the use of line-breeding to create a predictable paternal gene pool is crucial to our national — and international — cattle herds.
Sustainable Sorghum Syrup Production in Mid-OhioThis Ohio sorghum grower produces a great niche crop every October and an excellent value-added product every March.
The Biochemical Sequence of Plant NutritionAfter being taken up by plants, minerals set up a kind of nutritional chain reaction, with each element in the sequence activating an element that follows.
Seeds: More Precious than Gold or OilWhy saving seed has become critical in an age of GMOs and industrial agriculture.
June 2009Columns
Interview — Charles Benbrook: Policy, Science & Organic AgricultureThe chief scientist for the Organic Center shares stories from behind the scenes in his longtime quest to win hearts and minds in the battle for a healthy, sustainable food system.
Eco-UpdateEco-ag news from around the world.
OpinionCommentary on vital issues affecting organic and sustainable farmers.
Transitions"Certified Organic Industry News"
Eco-Gardener"A 'Recycled' Greenhouse!" by Anne Van Nest
Health & Healing"Pandemics & Swine Flu" by Dr. Michael W. Fox
The Natural Vet"Staying out of Trouble" by C. Edgar Sheaffer, V.M.D. & Bonnie M. Sheaffer, R.N.
Books & InformationReviews of new eco-farming literature
Acres U.S.A. ZipsLetters to the editor
Eco-ResourcesA roundup of eco-suppliers
Eco-MeetingsEco-farming meetings and events across North America
The Last WordEssays and parting shots
Sustainable Harvest International
For $25 you can plant a forest and feed a family.
Sustainable Harvest International provides struggling families in Central America with the technical assistance and materials they need to plant a variety of trees together with other crops such as coffee, cocoa, bananas, vanilla and ginger in an integrated system that provides food and income while protecting the environment. You can support a family's ongoing participation in the SHI program by clicking here and making a donation of $25 per month. If you would like to know more, keep reading.
The Problem: The world's tropical forests are being lost at an alarming rate, largely due to agricultural expansion. This loss is resulting in the extinction of native plant and animal species, a net increase in greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change, increased soil erosion, drought and flooding. This environmental degradation forces farmers to clear even more land to grow food for their families.The Solution: Sustainable Harvest InternationalA $25 donation to SHI provides a family with the training, tools and support to plant 100 trees!
Founded in 1997 by Returned Peace Corps Volunteer Florence Reed, Sustainable Harvest International (SHI) addresses the tropical deforestation crisis by providing farmers with sustainable alternatives to slash-and-burnagriculture. SHI facilitates long-term collaboration among trained local staff, farmers and communities to implement sustainable land-use practices that alleviate poverty by restoring ecological stability.
SHI works with local farmers, cooperatives, environmental organizations and indigenous groups that invite us into their communities. We provide these groups with long-term assistance adopting sustainable land-use practices such as reforestation, agro-forestry and organic farming. These practices allow rural people to raise their standard of living while planting trees, rather than clearing forest.
The more than 1,100 families working with SHI have planted more than two million trees and converted thousands of acres of degraded land to sustainable land-use practices, thereby saving tens of thousands of acres of tropical forest from slash-and-burn farming. Participating families enjoy increased income (up to 800%) from alternative cash crops as well as better health due to greater and more varied food crop production.
Rather than contributing to rainforest destruction, SHI participants are preserving forests and planting trees on degraded land. They are taking control of their environmental and economic destinies.
The vital work of Sustainable Harvest International must continue. Although SHI has accomplished a great deal, more remains to be done.
SHI constantly receives requests from new families, communities and organizations in other countries asking us to help them make their hope for a sustainable future a reality. We would love to help them, but we need increased financial support to make their dreams a reality.
Sustainable Harvest International's success has been made possible by a growing number of friends around the world who provide the funding to carry out our work. In order to keep our commitments to our existing participants and to reach new ones, however, Sustainable Harvest International urgently needs new financial support.
Working with SHI, you can change a desert into an oasis and hunger into plenty. I hope you will accept my offer to help create sustainable forests, food and income for some of the world's most economically disadvantaged people.
Sustainable Harvest International provides struggling families in Central America with the technical assistance and materials they need to plant a variety of trees together with other crops such as coffee, cocoa, bananas, vanilla and ginger in an integrated system that provides food and income while protecting the environment. You can support a family's ongoing participation in the SHI program by clicking here and making a donation of $25 per month. If you would like to know more, keep reading.
The Problem: The world's tropical forests are being lost at an alarming rate, largely due to agricultural expansion. This loss is resulting in the extinction of native plant and animal species, a net increase in greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change, increased soil erosion, drought and flooding. This environmental degradation forces farmers to clear even more land to grow food for their families.The Solution: Sustainable Harvest InternationalA $25 donation to SHI provides a family with the training, tools and support to plant 100 trees!
Founded in 1997 by Returned Peace Corps Volunteer Florence Reed, Sustainable Harvest International (SHI) addresses the tropical deforestation crisis by providing farmers with sustainable alternatives to slash-and-burnagriculture. SHI facilitates long-term collaboration among trained local staff, farmers and communities to implement sustainable land-use practices that alleviate poverty by restoring ecological stability.
SHI works with local farmers, cooperatives, environmental organizations and indigenous groups that invite us into their communities. We provide these groups with long-term assistance adopting sustainable land-use practices such as reforestation, agro-forestry and organic farming. These practices allow rural people to raise their standard of living while planting trees, rather than clearing forest.
The more than 1,100 families working with SHI have planted more than two million trees and converted thousands of acres of degraded land to sustainable land-use practices, thereby saving tens of thousands of acres of tropical forest from slash-and-burn farming. Participating families enjoy increased income (up to 800%) from alternative cash crops as well as better health due to greater and more varied food crop production.
Rather than contributing to rainforest destruction, SHI participants are preserving forests and planting trees on degraded land. They are taking control of their environmental and economic destinies.
The vital work of Sustainable Harvest International must continue. Although SHI has accomplished a great deal, more remains to be done.
SHI constantly receives requests from new families, communities and organizations in other countries asking us to help them make their hope for a sustainable future a reality. We would love to help them, but we need increased financial support to make their dreams a reality.
Sustainable Harvest International's success has been made possible by a growing number of friends around the world who provide the funding to carry out our work. In order to keep our commitments to our existing participants and to reach new ones, however, Sustainable Harvest International urgently needs new financial support.
Working with SHI, you can change a desert into an oasis and hunger into plenty. I hope you will accept my offer to help create sustainable forests, food and income for some of the world's most economically disadvantaged people.
The Common Sense Environmental Fund
Sustainable Agriculture
The environmental costs incurred through modern, chemical- intensive farming are no longer acceptable. Rampant pesticide use, soil depletion and genetic homogenization of crops threaten the air we breathe, the water we drink and the land we and other depend on for food and habitat. Organic, sustainable agriculture is a realistic and necessary alternative to those practices.Soil Erosion
Soil erosion is an urgent problem because new soil forms very slowly; 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) of topsoil may take anywhere from 20 to 1200 years to form. Soil erosion also has a number of serious environmental impacts. For instance, soil particles attach to pesticides. Transported to nearby waterways, these pesticide-laden particles may contaminate fish and other aquatic organisms, which, in turn, may be passed to birds and human consumers in the food chain. Sediment deposited in waterways also increases flooding, destroys breeding grounds of fish and other wildlife, and increases the need for dredging harbors and rivers. The World Resources Institute estimates the offsite damage from soil erosion in the United States is over $10 billion a year.
Since 1880 one third of the top soil in the United States has been lost to erosion, according to the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. Unfortunately, soil erosion continues today. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates about 1 billion metric tons of topsoil were lost from U.S. farmland in 2000. Although, that is less than the 1.45 billion metric tons lost in 1985, the current rate of erosion remains too high. The average rate of erosion on U.S. farmland is approximately seven times greater than soil formation, a situation that is clearly unsustainable. Should erosion continue, the U.S. agricultural system could experience substantial declines in productivity.
Unfortunately, little information is available on soil erosion rates throughout the world. Scientists currently estimate that approximately one-third of the world's cropland topsoil is being eroded faster than it is being regenerated.
Soil erosion is especially rapid in many developing nations. In China, for example, the Yellow River annually transports 1.6 billion metric tons of soil from badly eroded farmland to the sea. In India, the Ganges carries two times that amount. Overall, the Worldwatch Institute estimates that 24 billion metric tons of topsoil are eroded from the world's cropland each year. At this rate, the world loses about 7% of its cropland topsoil every ten years.
Livestock
In many countries, cattle and other livestock are raised in confined quarters for at least a part of their life cycle. Although this does not affect grasslands directly, it does have a tremendous environmental impact. For example, pen-raised cattle produce incredible amounts of manure in limited spaces and at one time, farmers applied the
mountains of manure their animals produced to nearby cropland. Today, however, many livestock operations are specialized, that is, not combined with crop production. Thus, their manure creates a huge waste disposal problem. Often after rainstorms the waste washes into nearby streams and rivers causing serious environmental problems. Ironically, farmers who now supply grain to feed cattle use artificial fertilizer on their land. This linear system disrupts one of nature's vital loops - nutrient cycles - and is clearly unsustainable
Another problem with livestock raised in enclosures is that they require enormous quantities of grain, mostly corn and sorghum. In developing nations, meat primarily feeds the wealthy class. Because livestock are fed grains or are sometimes produced on land that could grow food crops, meat production reduces overall
supplies and makes food more costly for the poor. In Egypt, for example, corn to feed animals is now grown on cropland previously used to grow staple grains, such as wheat and rice. The percentage of that nation's grain fed to livestock has increased from 5% in 1960 to 36% over the past quarter century. In Mexico, the share of grain fed to livestock has increased from 5% in 1960 to 30% today, despite the fact that 22% of the nation's people are malnourished.
Livestock production on rangeland and in confined spaces can be sustainable, but it must be scaled back, according to the Worldwatch Institute. To downsize this activity, rich countries have to reduce their meat consumption. A sustainable system also requires a reintegration of livestock and crop production. Rangelands need to be managed with an ecosystem approach, one that adjusts herd size to the carrying capacity of the land. Efforts are also needed to restore damaged grasslands.
The environmental costs incurred through modern, chemical- intensive farming are no longer acceptable. Rampant pesticide use, soil depletion and genetic homogenization of crops threaten the air we breathe, the water we drink and the land we and other depend on for food and habitat. Organic, sustainable agriculture is a realistic and necessary alternative to those practices.Soil Erosion
Soil erosion is an urgent problem because new soil forms very slowly; 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) of topsoil may take anywhere from 20 to 1200 years to form. Soil erosion also has a number of serious environmental impacts. For instance, soil particles attach to pesticides. Transported to nearby waterways, these pesticide-laden particles may contaminate fish and other aquatic organisms, which, in turn, may be passed to birds and human consumers in the food chain. Sediment deposited in waterways also increases flooding, destroys breeding grounds of fish and other wildlife, and increases the need for dredging harbors and rivers. The World Resources Institute estimates the offsite damage from soil erosion in the United States is over $10 billion a year.
Since 1880 one third of the top soil in the United States has been lost to erosion, according to the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. Unfortunately, soil erosion continues today. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates about 1 billion metric tons of topsoil were lost from U.S. farmland in 2000. Although, that is less than the 1.45 billion metric tons lost in 1985, the current rate of erosion remains too high. The average rate of erosion on U.S. farmland is approximately seven times greater than soil formation, a situation that is clearly unsustainable. Should erosion continue, the U.S. agricultural system could experience substantial declines in productivity.
Unfortunately, little information is available on soil erosion rates throughout the world. Scientists currently estimate that approximately one-third of the world's cropland topsoil is being eroded faster than it is being regenerated.
Soil erosion is especially rapid in many developing nations. In China, for example, the Yellow River annually transports 1.6 billion metric tons of soil from badly eroded farmland to the sea. In India, the Ganges carries two times that amount. Overall, the Worldwatch Institute estimates that 24 billion metric tons of topsoil are eroded from the world's cropland each year. At this rate, the world loses about 7% of its cropland topsoil every ten years.
Livestock
In many countries, cattle and other livestock are raised in confined quarters for at least a part of their life cycle. Although this does not affect grasslands directly, it does have a tremendous environmental impact. For example, pen-raised cattle produce incredible amounts of manure in limited spaces and at one time, farmers applied the
mountains of manure their animals produced to nearby cropland. Today, however, many livestock operations are specialized, that is, not combined with crop production. Thus, their manure creates a huge waste disposal problem. Often after rainstorms the waste washes into nearby streams and rivers causing serious environmental problems. Ironically, farmers who now supply grain to feed cattle use artificial fertilizer on their land. This linear system disrupts one of nature's vital loops - nutrient cycles - and is clearly unsustainable
Another problem with livestock raised in enclosures is that they require enormous quantities of grain, mostly corn and sorghum. In developing nations, meat primarily feeds the wealthy class. Because livestock are fed grains or are sometimes produced on land that could grow food crops, meat production reduces overall
supplies and makes food more costly for the poor. In Egypt, for example, corn to feed animals is now grown on cropland previously used to grow staple grains, such as wheat and rice. The percentage of that nation's grain fed to livestock has increased from 5% in 1960 to 36% over the past quarter century. In Mexico, the share of grain fed to livestock has increased from 5% in 1960 to 30% today, despite the fact that 22% of the nation's people are malnourished.
Livestock production on rangeland and in confined spaces can be sustainable, but it must be scaled back, according to the Worldwatch Institute. To downsize this activity, rich countries have to reduce their meat consumption. A sustainable system also requires a reintegration of livestock and crop production. Rangelands need to be managed with an ecosystem approach, one that adjusts herd size to the carrying capacity of the land. Efforts are also needed to restore damaged grasslands.
The Environmental Quality Incentives Program Organic Initiative
General InformationUSDA is allocating $50 million of funds through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to be set aside for a new Organics Initiative to assist organic farmers and those transitioning to organic. Current organic producers and those transitioning to organic will be eligible to receive contracts for implementing conservation practices and conservation planning under the program, but they’ll have to act fast. Applications will be accepted beginning Monday, May 11, 2009.To ensure consideration for assistance from this pool of funds, producers must file an EQIP Organic Initiative application no later than May 29.
The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) is administering the EQIP Organic Initiative. To apply, producers should visit their local NRCS Service Center. Use the NRCS Service Center locator to find the one closest to you - offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs.
Update: NRCS has required each state office to appoint an organic point person. To find out your state's organic point person and his/her contact info, download the NRCS Organic State Contact list (PDF).
The NRCS has created a webpage with information about the Organic Initiative. The site explains the eligibility requirements and provides guidance on how to participate and resources on organic production - www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/eqip/organic/
According to the NRCS, the states in the chart below have extended the deadline to apply for the EQIP Organic Initiative past May 29th. States not listed in this chart will still continue to accept applications, but may not be able to fund them in 2009. This chart is continually being updated, so please check back.
State
New Deadline
State
New Deadline
Alabama
6/5/09
Mississippi
6/12/09
Alaska
6/12/09
Montana
6/12/09
Arkansas
6/26/09
Nebraska
6/12/09
California
6/26/09
Nevada
6/12/09
Colorado
6/12/09
New York
6/12/09
Connecticut
6/12/09
North Carolina
6/5/09
Delaware
6/26/09
North Dakota
6/15/09
Florida
6/12/09
Ohio
6/12/09
Georgia
6/5/09
Oklahoma
6/12/09
Hawaii
6/15/09
Oregon
6/12/09
Indiana
continuous
Pacific Basin
6/15/09
Iowa
6/13/09
Pennsylvania
6/12/09
Kentucky
6/12/09
South Carolina
6/5/09
Louisiana
6/12/09
South Dakota
6/12/09
Maine
6/12/09
Utah
6/12/09
Maryland
6/26/09
West Virginia
6/12/09
Massachusetts
6/12/09
Virginia
6/30/09
Minnesota
6/30/09
Wisconsin
6/12/09
The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) is administering the EQIP Organic Initiative. To apply, producers should visit their local NRCS Service Center. Use the NRCS Service Center locator to find the one closest to you - offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs.
Update: NRCS has required each state office to appoint an organic point person. To find out your state's organic point person and his/her contact info, download the NRCS Organic State Contact list (PDF).
The NRCS has created a webpage with information about the Organic Initiative. The site explains the eligibility requirements and provides guidance on how to participate and resources on organic production - www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/eqip/organic/
According to the NRCS, the states in the chart below have extended the deadline to apply for the EQIP Organic Initiative past May 29th. States not listed in this chart will still continue to accept applications, but may not be able to fund them in 2009. This chart is continually being updated, so please check back.
State
New Deadline
State
New Deadline
Alabama
6/5/09
Mississippi
6/12/09
Alaska
6/12/09
Montana
6/12/09
Arkansas
6/26/09
Nebraska
6/12/09
California
6/26/09
Nevada
6/12/09
Colorado
6/12/09
New York
6/12/09
Connecticut
6/12/09
North Carolina
6/5/09
Delaware
6/26/09
North Dakota
6/15/09
Florida
6/12/09
Ohio
6/12/09
Georgia
6/5/09
Oklahoma
6/12/09
Hawaii
6/15/09
Oregon
6/12/09
Indiana
continuous
Pacific Basin
6/15/09
Iowa
6/13/09
Pennsylvania
6/12/09
Kentucky
6/12/09
South Carolina
6/5/09
Louisiana
6/12/09
South Dakota
6/12/09
Maine
6/12/09
Utah
6/12/09
Maryland
6/26/09
West Virginia
6/12/09
Massachusetts
6/12/09
Virginia
6/30/09
Minnesota
6/30/09
Wisconsin
6/12/09
A strong, stable Congress government may be good for business, but can it contend with the real, looming threat of environmental catastrophe
Business and financial communities reacted with outright euphoria to the recent landslide victory of India’s National Congress Party. Mumbai’s stock exchange soared. Foreign investment poured in. Pundits at what used to be known as investment banks trumpeted the results as nothing less than India finally throwing off the shackles that have held it back from greatness: the limitations of a weak coalition government beholden to Communists. India, we are told, is free at last to embark on a project of wealth creation that the rest of the world will be hard-pressed to imitate. India is expected to recover smartly from the current global recession, hitting an annual economic growth rate of 6.9 percent by next year. Meanwhile, bearish economists are warning that structural weaknesses will delay the recovery of the US economy until well into 2011. The icing on this cake: General Motors is soothing investors rattled by its recent bankruptcy in the United States with the assurance that its India operations will not be affected. Charles Wilson, a former GM CEO, once quipped that “what’s good for General Motors is good for the country.” That quaint, 20th century line now begs only one question: which country? The world’s financial press buzzes that India could be the “new China”; capital (at least some of it) is stampeding from Shenzhen to Bangalore; and the US dollar is in free-fall.After a few terms in the wilderness of coalition dependencies, Congress has, to use a favorite euphemism of recessionary America, “right sized” the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party down to a mere hundred or so seats. It has utterly ham-strung the Left, which held onto a mere 26 seats. Congress need no more worry about the Communists spoiling its new friendship with the United States or its own version of GM’s old dictum: “what’s good for India Inc. is good for India.”Knowing that half the country’s population - and most of tomorrow’s voters - is under the age of 25, Congress has put fresh faces in ministries, including some in their twenties. Thirty-seven-year-old Rahul Gandhi is the heralded heir apparent of the Congress dynasty that stretches back to his great-grandfather, India’s founding prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. At 63 years of age, the Republic of India is young again. The impending supernovaWhat could possibly hold India back now? Surely Congress’s substantial mandate gives it the power to enact the bold policy measures India requires to overcome the many obstacles in its path to greatness. The list is long: laughably poor infrastructure, desperate farmers committing suicide in droves, peasants and so-called tribals or Adivasis dispossessed of their lands by aggressive resource extraction and industrial expansion (and a related Maoist insurgency), overloaded cities, water shortages, energy deficits, high rates of illiteracy, and a notoriously bad national health care system. Add to these a wealth gap that has widened, not narrowed, in globalization’s wake; the fact that the majority of the world’s malnourished children live in India; the fact that, while 250,000 Indians may qualify as USD millionaires, 800 million live on less than 2 US dollars per day.As staggering as these challenges are, they pale in comparison to the one supernova on track to blow them (along with the rest of us) off the navigable charts of human reckoning: climate change. As every major report on climate change has alarmingly pointed out, the impact of global warming will be most felt by developing countries. In a final injustice of geography and imperial history, the world’s developing countries are by and large also the world’s warmest and most densely populated. Of all the emerging economies whose fortunes are rising, India is one of the most vulnerable to climate change.A weapon of mass destructionIndia has one of the world’s longest coastlines. Rising sea levels are already swallowing up the Sunderbans at the mouth of West Bengal’s mighty Hooghly River. Next door in Bangladesh, 15 percent of whose land mass will be under water if sea levels rise as predicted, things are even worse. Little wonder India is building a fence along its border with Bangladesh in anticipation of a wave of climate-change refugees. At 4,000 kilometers in length, the Indo-Bangladeshi Barrier will rival the Great Wall of China. One can only imagine what rising sea levels will do to the millions crammed onto reclaimed land in Mumbai or in India’s new auto manufacturing hub of Chennai, around which one trusts the government of India has no plans to build fences.Climate change is also already causing the glaciers of the Himalayas to melt at an alarming rate, the rivers they feed are receding. Some scientists are predicting that the sacred Ganga, whose waters have nourished the great grain-producing Gangetic plains as well as the souls of untold millions of Hindu faithful through millennia, is in danger of simply drying up. Three billion people - half the world’s current population - depend on the Himalayas for water. The impact of that water dwindling away is terrifying.If temperatures rise in India by even a couple of degrees Celsius, which they are already well on track to do, the very viability of food plants will be threatened. Yields will plummet in plants simply not evolved to thrive in higher temperatures. More immediately, climate change causes predictable weather patterns to become unpredictable. This is not good news for a country where the vast majority of agricultural production depends on the regular arrival, duration, and bounty of the monsoon rains. No wonder William Cline, in his meticulously researched book Global Warming and Agriculture: Impact Estimates by Country (Center for Global Development 2007) projects that agricultural production in India will decline by as much as 38 percent over current levels by 2080 as a direct result of climate change alone. By that year, India will have added 450 million more people to its population.Shifting prioritiesClimate change is a weapon of mass destruction. Mitigating global warming by whatever means necessary should be the new Indian government’s priority number one. The government should make a major push to develop low-cost alternative energy technologies that don’t require finite, toxic fuel sources (which means both fossil and fissile energy sources).It should help India’s small-scale farmers return to the cultivation of traditional hardy (and higher in protein) food plants such as millet and buckwheat, and install low-cost, highly effective micro-irrigation systems to get the biggest plant-growing benefit for every drop of precious water. It should require all new construction across the country to be green construction, naturally cooler with little or no air conditioning, and with roofs that collect and channel rain when during monsoons.It should recognize that the infrastructure India so desperately needs is green infrastructure that encourages public transportation and the use of bicycles, a realization at long last sweeping cities in richer nations. India cannot afford to do as the west did: get dirty to get rich, then start to think about cleaning up the mess. It also cannot expect wealthier countries to push the hardest to deal with climate change, the global menace that will devastate India far more than it will them.A new pathThe new Congress-led government should hitch its strong mandate to India’s emerging economic power to force the west - sorely tempted by the current economic crisis to ratchet down its efforts - to do the right thing and pay for its share of not only reducing current carbon emissions, but accounting for the carbon accumulated over centuries of western industrial expansion. It should provide incentives to investors willing to put capital behind green technology ventures, especially small-scale technologies quickly scalable among India’s still largely poor population, and it should identify and support the untold number of locally-adapted, grass-roots, inexpensive solutions that business is simply never going to be interested in because they cannot be made into profit-making ventures.India has momentum and history on its side. The new government should propose a new bilateral pact focused on climate change to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she visits India in July. And it should do so in a spirit very different from that of the nuclear deal where, at least on the US side, billions of dollars in corporate profits and arms sales were major drivers.To grapple with climate change, a different approach is required. The new Congress government needs to bring to this task the real spirit of “young India”, the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi who warned decades ago that the “earth has enough to satisfy man’s need but not every man’s greed.”A climate-change pact between the governments of two of the world’s great democracies should include agreement on bold commitments that would anticipate real progress when the nations of the world gather in Copenhagen later this year to address this rapidly worsening calamity. There is no better way for two nations so key to our collective survival to address the challenge that imperils us all. India must embrace a new path to equity and sustainability, without which democracy will merely be one casualty among many too terrible to imagine
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)