ReallyGoodWriter | Food • Writing • Poetry Iambic Cafe

food & poetry, but mostly the poetry of food

Food • Writing • Poetry

In scrambling to finish reading a library book (The Art of the Commonplace: The Agrarian Essays of Wendell Berry) I came upon an essay called The Pleasures of Eating, which I was happy to find as well at the Center for Ecoliteracy website, which has a cornucopia of great Writings Online. (Scroll down to the Thinking Outside the Lunchbox heading to find lots of food articles.)

The nuggets in this essay include guidance for today’s consumer of industrial food, who as Berry says

is one who does not know that eating is an agricultural act, who no longer knows or imagines the connections between eating and the land, and who is, therefore, necessarily passive and uncritical – in short, a victim. When food, in the minds of eaters, is no longer associated with farming and with the land, then the eaters are suffering a kind of cultural amnesia that is misleading and dangerous.

This happens because, in the interests of those who make money – a great deal of it – producing, selling and marketing industrial food to us, regardless of the damage it does to the land, the community and the body,

…The consumer… must be kept from discovering that, in the food industry – as in any other industry – the overriding concerns are not quality and health, but volume and price.

Suggestions to help us repair this cultural amnesia include:

1. Participate in food production: grow something.
2. Prepare your own food.
3. Learn the origin of the food you buy and buy the food produced closest to your home.
4. Whenever possible, deal direct with local farmers, gardeners and orchardists.
5. Learn in self-defence as much as possible of the economy and technology of industrial food production.
6. Learn what is involved in the best farming and gardening.
7. Learn as much as you can, by direct observation and experience if possible, of the life histories of the food species (plants & animals).

In another of the essays in this book, Feminism, the Body & the Machine, I was most interested in his views on technology. It was his public decision not to use a word processor, and the public response to this decision, that brought the essay about. Here is what he thinks, overall, of technological progress:

…apart from its own highly specialized standards of quantity and efficiency, “technological progress” has produced a social and ecological decline. Industrial war, except by the most fanatically narrow standards, is worse than war used to be. Industrial agriculture, except by the standards of quantity and mechanical efficiency, diminishes everything it affects. Industrial workmanship is certainly worse than traditional workmanship and is getting shoddier every day. After forty odd years, the evidence is everywhere that television, far from proving a great tool of education, is a tool of stupefaction and disintegration. Industrial education has abandoned the old duty of passing on the culture and intelligence inheritance in favor of baby sitting and career preparation.

And the point of all this damage:

The higher aims of “technological progress” are money and ease. And this exalted greed for money and ease is disguised and justified by an obscure, cultish faith in “the future”. We do as we do, we say, “for the sake of the future: or “to make a better future for our children”. How we can hope to make a good future by doing badly in the present we do not say… A good future is implicit in the soils, forests, grasslands, marshes, deserts, mountains, rivers, lakes, and oceans that we have now, and in the good things of human culture that we have now; the only valid “futurology” available to is is to take care of those things.

A perceptive point about “ease” – we’ve been sold such a bill of goods about ‘labour saving devices’ and the efficiency of technology. How many hours have we all wasted waiting for computers to reboot, projectors to connect with laptops, video recorders to be set up, engines to be repaired? And still we find with all this mechanical help, we’re working more and more hours in dreadful soul-destroying jobs in order to pay for consuming all this disposable and destructive technology.

By the way, I found a couple of links to people and agencies mentioned in A Farm for the Future:
Agroforestry Research Trust (Martin Crawford)
Richard Heinberg and the Post Carbon Institute (whose Food and Farming Transition: Toward a post carbon food system document will have served as some of the source material for the film script, I reckon).
Colin Campbell and ASPO Ireland (Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas Ireland) and ASPO International

All this rain and cold must have been getting to me and I’ve got a bit behind with postings, so here’s a grab-bag of things.

The herons are nesting in a nearby park which makes for great spectator sport… if you are very careful which tree you stand beneath.

Our local community association had its AGM on a food security theme which made for interesting talks and – if I do say so myself – excellent snacks, since our urban farming group brought the food, which included local grape and apple juices; what I am pretty sure are very local devilled eggs; some fabulous pizza; some of my own squash, caramelised garlic and goat cheese tart, and molasses brownies. Some of our members brought some interesting gadgets with them, including a solar oven and a hand-cranked blender; as well as some vegetable seedlings to give away.

I was up-island a couple of weeks ago and watched some amazing sockeye salmon go into this beautiful old Moffat stove. Check out the dials on this beauty…

Meanwhile, back on the poetry trail, I was lucky enough to get to Planet Earth Poetry in time to grab a seat for an excellent double bill: Jan Zwicky and Robert Bringhurst.

And – although we’ve been blessed by a few days of spring sunshine – it’s been a hard slog this spring through the puddles and gloom, which have delayed all kinds of things.

I spent one chilly afternoon at Haliburton, doing various things including spreading wood chips on the paths. They have a partnership going with a local tree-topping company that trims branches away from electricity lines, high enough that the foliage would not have been sprayed and therefore ok to throw around an organic farm.

A Farm for the Future is an excellent documentary (shown on BBC last month) by farmer-film maker Rebecca Hosking, on how farmers can overcome total dependence on fossil fuels.

It does a great job of explaining what the problem is with current farming methods, and what the fuel crisis will do to them and to our food supply, and how biodiversity, low-energy methods and good planning rather than back-breaking labour can increase food production enough to feed the world.

The picture’s pretty choppy in places (at least on my screen) but the sound is good, and the story it tells, of alternatives to fuel-heavy farming, and hope for a truly sustainable future of food production, is more encouraging than almost anything I’ve seen lately.

The solution offered is, of course, an English one, suited to an English climate. Cuba’s success story in dealing with a fuel-less agriculture is that of another small country with a different climate from our own. The bigger question is how large countries with more extreme climates – Canada, the US, Australia – and well-entrenched and protected industrial fuel-based agricultures can adapt to the loss of fuel.

…or: what I learned in my last class at Dunsmuir. I had signed up for three linked courses on local agricultural issues. The first was a talk by local organic farmer Brian Hughes, who described a typical year’s activities.

The second, last week, was a talk by Brent Warner about the state of play in agriculture these days, with much discussion about the effects of poor nutrition (whether from bad food choices or from poorly nourished plant or animal sources) on health: obesity and its related health costs through type 2 diabetes and other diseases (one in three BC children are now deemed clinically obese). There was as well talk about farmers’ markets and new opportunities in food retailing and agricultural diversification, if the market and issues such as food traceability and food safety (particularly for older, younger and immune-compromised populations) are properly understood.

Tuesday’s final class was a sobering talk about the Agricultural Land Reserve, and its governing body, the Agricultural Land Commission, by Bob Maxwell, an agrologist and farmer, and Ivan Mishchenko, an organic blueberry farmer. Maxwell walked us through the soil and climate categories – the agriculture capability measures – that are used to determine agricultural land values, preparing the ground as it were for Mischenko to tell us about uses and abuses of the ALR in its current form.

Established in 1974 from various campaign promises made by competing political parties (thank heavens in this case for election rivalries!), the ALR sets aside agricultural land so that it can either be preserved as farmland or farmed. In a time when the planet is facing unprecedented loss of arable farmland through soil degradation, deforestation and population growth, this has saved a lot of good quality land in British Columbia which would otherwise have been paved over long ago.

Statistics familiar to me from the Farmlands conference explain the extreme competition for three percent of the province’s land, where 80 percent of the population lives and which also produces 80 percent of the gross agricultural receipts.

What has happened is that in these two much-desired areas (the Okanagan and the lower mainland/south-eastern Vancouver Island – retirement meccas for Canada because of mild climates and pretty scenery) developers and speculators have managed to make money and do deals to get their way in too many (but not all) cases. There are a number of ways of dodging the rules.

Firstly, there is a mechanism whereby land can be traded out of one area and into another, which is why 90% of the ALR land traded out of the ALR is in northern BC, and not in those two more desirable (climate and soil quality) areas. Some 72% of land has been taken out of ALR protection in the south of the province since 1974.

Put another way, for every acre (.404 ha) of prime farmland added to the ALR, 2.8 acres (1.13) have been taken out for urban development. This matters if the world is to feed itself, since we need .5 ha (1.2 acres) per person for a nutritious and diverse diet that includes both plant and animal foods. At present in BC, where the population is 4 million, we have .63 ha/capita land (not all of it being farmed); the population is estimated to be 6 million by 2035, at which point our ALR land will work out to .42 ha/capita.

A second way land gets removed from the ALR is to make it unusable for farming. Owners can apply for soil fill permits, which sound harmless enough. But this is tied to urban development: undesirable fill from excavation sites (which may include clay, gravel, rock and concrete) is being dumped on top of arable land. Disposal sites for this kind of rubble are very scarce, which makes buying land and getting people to pay you for dumping a lucrative sideline. But this activity covers and makes unusable the agricultural land beneath, and it also damages the drainage in surrounding farmland, making the neighbouring lands less productive as well. Once the land is unusable for farmland, you have good reason for removing it from the ALR and building another development on top.

Good growing soil takes centuries to develop, but can be destroyed in days by this kind of activity; even low-grade agricultural land is useful and necessary to farming, whether for placing farm buildings or pasturing unlikely animals like llamas. And yet we live in a short-sighted society that allows people to profit from this kind of activity, which robs our own future of the ability to feed itself, instead of charging its perpetrators with crimes against humanity.

We were offered some ways to work to preserve the ALR and agricultural land:

1. Support local food systems by buying and growing locally.
2. Advocate to the ALC and local government: do not allow them to say they heard no community concern when they made decisions.
3. Organize your community to protect farmland.
4. Encourage local government to form an agricultural advocacy committee and an agricultural area plan.
5. Ask your local government to develop buffer policies, to provide green strips between urban developments and agricultural land, to allow the sometimes dusty and smelly work of agriculture to go on without conflict.
6. Ask food retailers to carry locally grown food.

On Sunday I attended a meeting of more than 100 local residents who squeezed into a meeting room to learn more about the closure of Dunsmuir Lodge which is scheduled for this Saturday. The facility has long been a venue for continuing studies as well as a conference centre boasting one of the most reliably good restaurants around, not coasting on its unparalleled views of the Saanich Peninsula or its proximity to John Dean Park.

The University of Victoria had been left this property in 1985 and decided to close it last October, but without any discussion with the local residents; and it was clear from the tone of the meeting that the university has sucker-punched its own fortunes through its handling of this and other legacies which it had sold off in the past.

Though the university says it’s not selling Dunsmuir, at least not right now, it is certainly costing a bundle to close the doors and put its 70 employees out of work. A meeting had been planned for earlier this month but the university said it was ‘not ready’ to answer questions yet, so it waited until six days before the closure to face the music. A fact sheet was distributed which said

“While the facility is covering day-to-day costs, it does not generate enough income for much needed upgrades…UVic has made significant upgrades to the facility over the past few years but it cannot continue to divert resources from its core educational mission to operate the lodge to make it viable for the long term.”

I think one woman – an adult course-taker – spoke for almost all those present when she said “we too are your core educational mission”. Other points made included the observation that North Saanich had waived property taxes on the facility because of its educational status; what would happen now? And residents were livid that no local consultation had been taken on ways of raising the estimated $2million upgrading bill; the costs of closure are about $100,000 to close the doors and another $100,000 per year to keep it on mothballs – that is assuming no tax bill suddenly lands on the doorstep.

The attendees got downright angry when the spokeswoman described Dunsmuir as “remote” – as was pointed out, the airport is practically on its doorstep, with the ferry terminal some ten minutes up the road; any replacement venue – and facilities of this size and suitability to purpose simply do not exist – is unlikely to be any closer to UVic, if that is the measure of remote. The spokeswomen declined to say where they’d been looking for replacements, but I gather everything from theatres to church halls have been looked at.

The staff who lose their jobs, many of them after 20 years, were told that the timing was arranged just for them, so they could jack in boring old job security and seek exciting new seasonal work in the tourism industry.