The Way To The Farm

 

At no time in recent history have so many young people expressed an interest in becoming farmers, and not just any kind of farmer. They want a hands-on life amidst biological diversity, health and splendor. If you haven’t anything to offer them in their pursuit of this dream best get out of the way because they are coming through!

 

PLOWING ON CAMPUS

Lise Hubbe of Scio, Oregon travelled to Evergreen State College and did a couple of days worth of demonstrations with her Belgian team. Many people were enthralled to hear her speak and watch her work. The Sustainable Farming at Evergreen features the oldest organic farm existing on a college campus. Photo by Paul Hunter

AQUAPONICS RESEARCH

On August 1st Lynn Miller went to Evergreen State College in Olympia and visited the aquaponics research project of Jessica Schilke. The experiment entails recycling water through fish tanks and into a long tank featuring floating plant trays. Yellow Perch will be used. Miller is expecting to use parts of the interview in an upcoming installment of Farm Drum Radio as well as a transcription in an upcoming issue of SFJ. Photo by Paul Hunter. For more information visit Jessica Schilke’s website at www.greenaquaponics.org

WE ARE THE LANDSCAPE

To say we are small farmers is to say something very important. We are not miners. We are stewards. We are not users. We are husbands. We practise farming methods which retain water and build soils. We embrace low impact approaches to working because of the smaller ‘footprint’ but also because it suits our economy. We don’t poison. We refresh. We harvest with hand and eye and we distribute the same way. We walk our fields and gardens and ‘look’ at them and into them because we want to know them. And we want to know that land because from the knowledge come the right answers to problems and opportunities. We are not factory workers. We are shepherds. We are not tacticians or economists or efficiency experts. We are parents, lovers, artists, and gardeners. We are not landscape architects. We are the landscape. We are not theologians. We are the religion. We are not destroying the planet we are healing her. We are small farmers. – LM

BREATHERS:

Diversified small farming offers breathing spaces, days and weeks that may serve to set the blossoms and sweeten the rhythms of the year. Waiting times between one crop and another, one planting, tilling or harvest and the next. Times you might depend on to get the mower lubed and sharpened, times when you’ll find the leisure to do a good job on that head gasket or those brakes. Times you might remember to scout that other path which is why you craved to be your own boss in the first place. Time to bang out that next chapter on the novel, or locate a source for those calves you’ll want to feed in the fall, or find a few odd moments to work out the harmonies to that new tune on the fiddle. Every life needs such quiet interludes, such way stations at intervals that may expand or contract, yet help keep us afloat, complete and at ease with our larger fuller selves. Farming is not in competition with those other impulses, and allows us to mingle meaningful work and occasional play without worrying the process overmuch. Paul Hunter

 

 

PULLING SPLINTERS:

Remove a splinter easily (especially on small kids) by applying a paste of baking soda and water to the spot, then waiting ten to twenty minutes for the splinter to begin pushing its way out of the skin. Till you can grab its “handle” with your tweezers. With kids you can use a bandaid to help them leave it alone while the baking soda works. Often this will do the trick without undue digging and pain. — PH

“If farming were to be organised like the stock market, a farmer would sell his farm in the morning when it was raining, only to buy it back in the afternoon when the sun came out.” –John Maynard Keynes

 

PLEASE have a look at our many books and products and see if there’s something there to suit you. When you shop on this site you help to keep this publication and community vital and alive. Thanks. LM

 

NO STARVING CHILDREN!

Everyone should have a piece of land to care for.

news bits and squirming crumbles

from Lynn Miller and Paul Hunter

6-24

The news trickles down to us in a predictably confusing warp and weave: the latest incarnation of a federal farm bill has been “hot-potatoed” into something the US senate passed. Now the Congress is asked to get it through its mill before mid September – this on the heals of a House leadership which says, openly, that it wants to see how it fits in the shifting winds of this political season. On the surface, people we normally side with say this bill is a good thing. Deeper down, we have enough experience with this process to know it is nigh on impossible even for the experts to assess how such complicated legislative stuff can ever be fully understood until its seen in messy action.

Meanwhile the consequences of inaction are millions of starving children worldwide and lost opportunities to get good, prepared and willing people back on productive small farms. It is hard not to be ashamed of what humanity has made of political expediency. This “stuff” , the very workings of government, doesn’t work.

You’d never be able to harvest the broccoli or the hay or milk the cows or make the cheese if it were subject to government process. Not only are our industrial farms too big, so also are our governments and our committee-molested collective assumptions.  Get small real soon. LRM

 

 

 

6-20-12

PLANET EARTH does not belong to corporate interests, nor to governments, nor to the fashionable collective conscience of the moment. She belongs to herself, with a delicate but critical nod to biological life – all of it! Humans have taken for themselves a temporary leasehold on the planet. Somehow that was allowed over these last 100 years to slough off to the corporate boardrooms. This is not a good thing.

To earn the right to continue living on this planet, we need to find simple, direct solutions to human interaction with all other forms of biological life. We need to find ways that our time on this planet is beneficial for all. Wresting control of the land, air and sea from corporate interests is vitally important. It can start by accepting as axiomatic that every one should have a piece of land to care for. And by ‘every one’ we are speaking of individual human beings. LRM

 “There is so much war in the world, evil has so many faces, the plough has so little honor, the laborers are taken, the fields untended and the curving sickle is beaten into the sword that yields not.” – Vergil, the Georgics

 

 

Another bedrock proposition is that farmland is open, vulnerable, so needs protection against human marauders and predators. Farming on a sustainable, caring scale presupposes a society that does not let bandits and paramilitary groups roam at large, taking what they please. And farming needs protection from upwind and upstream influences that pollute soil and water. PH

 

6-18-2012

Nature’s balance shuffles in predation and disaster to hold the mix. Since the inception of the industrial age, man falsely believed he had no predator to fear save other men but such has not been the case. Man created artificial lives we know as corporations and computers and both have been eating away at the hearts and souls of people for a very long while. Corporations have all but dissolved human culpability. Within the next few decades we will no longer be at immediate fault. And computers have eaten away the range and elasticity of the human mind. Soon “thought” will be a curiosity of the past. Humans are devolving into a vegetable form. The question of the age? Can we put those two, computers and corporations, back in the can?

The planet is trying not to die. It is struggling against the destructive and denuding human foot print. There are horrible paradoxes  in all of this. There are also magical and healing paradoxes plain to see.

Wresting the control of the land, sea and air from industry and placing it all in the “care” of individuals to steward this environment with a goal of increasing fertility, biological diversity, and healthfulness – this is what can and will save the earth. Sweet paradox: taking a step backwards towards the empowerment of the individual WILL result in the only sure step forward to save human life on earth. LRM

 

6-15-2012

Some would argue that the U.S. is slipping into a third world status, forfeiting its position as world leader. We might reasonably ask “world leader” in what regard? When it comes to questions of world hunger, environmental degradation, and appropriate farming the U.S.A. has been woefully behind the curve for decades.

What the world needs NOW, today, are millions of new small farmers enjoying independence of operation and having the opportunity to employ the full range of intriguing, exciting, vital and fertile new approaches to intensive agricultural pursuit. YES, you can farm. YES, you should farm. YES, we need you farming TODAY! LRM

A Matter of a Raincoat 

The difference between farmers and other people is not just a matter of a raincoat. It’s not just how they watch the weather reports and seasonal changes with care. Farmers have to act on the conditions they see, and live with the consequences of their actions. You could say they don’t have to if they have crop insurance, which the large-scale operators do, courtesy of the federal government, but in the long run there is no crop insurance. The big picture is made up of accumulated good guesses and bad guesses. Like the hot dog vendor outside the ballpark, who has to know how many hot dogs to have on hand, and how many to cook in time to make any difference when the rush comes, before and after the game. That’s how you make a living. Inside the ball park with a captive audience forced to wait in line to buy a dog at inflated prices, or curb their hunger, with the game blaring all around, it’s a different story, with less risk and more profit to be shared more ways with a large and assertive management. One thing about scale: it makes you either an insider or an outsider, and defines how you get to play the game. – PH

 

 

6-14-2012

By most informed estimates there are in excess of one billion disenfranchised people on this planet who would jump at the chance to join the ranks of small farmers. As for the natural resources required? Industrial agriculture and suburban development are “wasting” millions of acres of the most productive farmlands. While The U.S. government (to name but one failed example) is paying out billions of dollars to agribusiness to NOT grow certain commodities, this ostensibly to protect prices. Meanwhile children starve and capable grownups are at a loss for what to do without work and purpose. Shame on us. Time to right the ship. LRM

 

“Once plants and animals were raised together on the same farm—which therefore neither produced unmanageable surpluses of manure, to be wasted and to pollute the water supply, nor depended on such quantities of commercial fertilizer. The genius of American farm experts is very well demonstrated here: they can take a solution and divide it neatly into two problems.” — Wendell Berry

 

 

Ethics of Farming

The psychology of raising a monocrop seems to be that with only one thing to look at, the farmer becomes a specialist, and presumably with fewer different things to watch will get more efficient, will become more like an executive as he tweaks the inputs of GMO seed, herbicides and pesticides, synthetic fertilizers and sophisticated irrigation, and the fuel and maintenance for massive planting and harvest equipment. Yet what happens to such an agribusinessman is often stultifying and frustrating in the extreme. Again the “efficiencies” are invoked, and again the farmer is led to work in a narrowly accepted way, largely to optimize a monocrop for which he receives an artificially low price at season’s end. We refer to this as the “commodification” of crops, the removal from thinking of corn or soybeans as foods to be eaten, where these crops become part of an industrial process that can as easily create fast foods or fuels or lampshades or seatcovers out of what is essentially treated as an anonymous raw material produced for the absolute least cost to the industries that depend on it. In this scenario the farmer has no standing except as he negotiates the tight squeeze between “inputs” and “outcomes”—between what it costs him in seed, fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, fuel and equipment, and his yield per acre.

What is left out of the equation is what we might call the aesthetics and ethics of farming. How to do it sustainably and well, without passing on the costs of fertilizer runoff or soil degradation to the surrounding watershed community that we loosely refer to as the environment and to future generations, of not just our species but of all living species. It is the nature of economics as practiced by American business to try to externalize as many costs as possible, to dump undesirable byproducts and waste onto the commons, into the waters and lands downstream and downwind, where the tab will be picked up by the public. Yet increasingly there is no “away” to throw undesirable leftovers. These byproducts need to be accepted and paid for as part of the cost of doing business. PH

 

6-13-2012

Yes it is confusing…

People on every side of the food equation, good people, all disagreeing about what is happening, what needs protecting, what needs to cease, what needs to be done. And most all of those folks base their beliefs on some sort of ground zero premise or axiom, something they see as indisputable, a starting point that they believe we must all agree on. Such as; small farms CAN feed the world –  or  - small farms CANNOT feed the world. I say we need to go back further, back to something no feeling caring human being can dispute. I say we go to a true ground zero premise. Here’s my vote; I say we can and must agree on this…

No More Starving Children!

Now, let’s take that premise and work up from there. Today, Industrial agriculture is NOT feeding all the children of the world. Small independent farms spred across the entire populated blanket of the planet can and will feed all of those children, and they’ll do it while restoring the environment and rebuilding biological diversity. But we’ll have to find ways to help. Here’s another premise as goal…

No One Should Be Without a Piece of Land to Care For.

Now our job is to find the ways to make those two points stick and all else will follow suit. LRM

The Essence of Sustainability

What do quinoa, hazelnuts, amaranth, asparagus, artichokes and apples have in common? They’re all perennials-which means you don’t have to plant them each year, you don’t have to disturb the soil so much, or risk losing nutrients. Such crops need vigilance and care of a different kind, since they’re stuck in place season after season. There are plant biologists who have long been working on perennial varieties of wheat, rice, rye and other staple crops, (ask Wes Jackson!) not to beat industrial agriculture’s astonishing yields, which are pumped up by synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, but to strike a lasting balance with the soil’s fertility. The essence of sustainability. If you don’t grow any perennials, it may be time to try some, to round out your knowledge of different plant strategies for dealing with pests and seasonal variables. Your toolkit will include pruning and mulching and planting certain varieties near each other, to keep the pollinators coming around. PH

What Small Means

Small farming means small fields and more variety, means more edges and more ’tooth’ for other lives, means more sharing or competition, depending on how you choose to look at it. Means an enforced modesty of expectations and outcomes. Means paradoxically a lower cost of living for everyone in the neighborhood, spread more widely around. PH

“We have assumed that there is no obligation to an inanimate thing, as we

consider the earth to be: but man should respect the conditions in which he

is placed; the earth yields the living creature; man is a living creature;

science constantly narrows the gulf between the animate and the inanimate,

between the organized and the unorganized; evolution derives the creatures

from the earth; the creation is one creation. I must accept all or reject

all.” – Liberty Hyde Bailey (circa 1913)

 

6-12-2012

We got the word just a few days ago that the World Bank and aspects of the United Nations agriculture projects are embracing the notion that the ONLY way to feed the world in the immediate and distant future is with a global network of healthy small independent farms. ‘Bout time. Next thing they need to realize is that the way forward requires we unearth that mountain of accumulated agrarian wisdom and knowledge which governments and industry have worked so hard to burn and bury. We need to unearth it, dust it off, round those corners that need rounding and allow farmers to get their hands on it. People are going to need to know how their particular soil and weather will work with the chosen crops and livestock. And they need that information RIGHT NOW. That’s our job here, with Small Farmer’s Journal. LRM

“Every event that a man would master must be mounted on the run, and no man ever caught the reins of a thought except as it galloped past him.” — Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

 

 

Home Grown

We cover three or four miles a day in the neighborhood.  I call it walking the dog, but we walk each other, take turns as we dawdle, mope and gawk.  For weeks I’ve been watching some raised beds go in on a planter strip alongside a church.  They’re on a side street and I don’t know what denomination it is, what the sign says out front, who attends there, what their socio-economic status might be.  I don’t know because I never looked.  The one thing I know is that whoever put in these raised beds did it right, and that this vegetable growing enterprise, these walled patches of dirt, speak well of them.  Like that bumper sticker of the Mormons back in the late 60s, that asked “Have you hugged your kid today?”

These boxes of dirt are not overcrowded, yet there is diversity.  Four kinds of tomatoes, several varieties of peppers, two different kinds of cabbages, a row of beets and a couple of artichokes.  There is no lettuce, no greens, so the gardener will probably not be tending and picking every day.  And one other clue: the beds are heavily mulched with old grass clippings, to hold and save water around the plants.

Studying how it’s coming together, I never catch anyone working there, and don’t know who to thank, but feel the urge to thank someone anyhow.  Maybe it’s the custodian, maybe the minister, maybe the Sunday School teacher and her class, maybe it’s a project of the board of governors for this parish, or some parish volunteers.  Whoever is responsible, they didn’t bother to put up a sign or take credit.  Yet the people coming to church or just passing by all know that local food is important to one neighbor here, and has found a home. PH

 

Hi Lynn and SFJ crew,

We had a great time at the auction 2012.

I am sending these photos to put in a plug for Marvin Brisk in Halfway Or.

He built the cultimulcher that you see here.  The implement is especially

good at tilling up a very nice seed bed, fallowing for weed control, and

breaking up clods.  The undercut front roller set up allows you to turn on a

dime, which is great for working in hoop houses.  We pull it with two to

three horses depending on the conditions.  If you are farming, you have to

have one!

Walt Bernard, Dorena Or

 

TICK REMOVAL: especially good for places where it’s hard to get tweezers—between toes, in the middle of your hair or the middle of your back.  Apply a glob of liquid soap to a cotton ball.  Cover the tick with the soap-soaked cotton ball, and swab it for 15-20 seconds.  The tick will come away on its own and be stuck to the cotton ball when you lift it off.  Just be sure you’re not allergic to the kind of liquid soap you’re using. PH

 

 

 

FARM TO SCHOOL PROGRAMS TAKE ROOT

The farm to school movement is taking root all across the US. From simple beginnings with just a dozen or so programs in the early 90’s, there are now farm to school programs in almost 10,000 schools in 48 states – with new efforts sprouting up each month.  These programs take different forms in different places. Some focus on sourcing local farm food for the school cafeteria, some on nutrition, garden and food education, and others on building strong community connections between local farmers and producers and the school community. However, all aim to re-connect school kids with healthy local food to improve their diets, strengthen their understanding of where their food comes from, and support local agriculture.

Vermont has been a farm to school pioneer, with a long history of engagement and partnership by farmers, school leaders, non-profit organizations, state agencies and local businesses. Farm to school in Vermont often advances a comprehensive agenda, working to integrate local food and farms into the cafeteria, classroom and community – or the “three C’s.” Around Vermont, various regional groups have emerged to work together around these goals and support the more than 200 schools (out of 320 in the state) with farm to school efforts.

Following is a series of three articles that describe farm to school efforts from different vantage points. All three authors live in Hartland, Vermont.

 

PARTNERING KIDS WITH HORSES

By Stephen Leslie—Horse-powered market gardener and dairy farmer from Hartland, Vermont

At Cedar Mountain Farm we have been hosting school groups for more than a decade. In recent years many of these visits have been under the auspices of the Farm to School Program. As a farm that utilizes work horses we have the opportunity to bring a unique aspect to these visits. Over the years we have come up with a list of practical tasks suitable for third grade students. Several of the projects we have developed are centered on the theme of partnering the kids with our work horses. We feel that the students will have a meaningful and memorable experience on the farm if they are engaged in getting a real job done and especially so when horses are involved. We have created a few scenarios in which the kids and the work horses each carry a piece of the same task.

 

We begin by introducing the children to the horses and letting them have an opportunity to help groom them and pick out their feet. We then answer questions and discuss the reasons we have work horses on our farm to do jobs that are normally done these days with a tractor. Often these discussions touch on such issues as the growing scarcity of oil and the environmental costs of relying on fossil fuel powered farm machinery. We present our use of horses in positive terms as an enjoyable alternative to farming with tractors, but I am often surprised at how remarkably conscious even the third graders already are of the challenges we face to live more sustainably on the planet.

In the fall the children help us to harvest and box up the winter squash. We talk beforehand about how long the squash will need to keep and the importance of handling it gently (no tossing) and carefully sorting it into the wax boxes according to kind. The teachers and volunteer parents and the farmers all handle the nippers and the children shuttle the fruits. They seem to delight in the hide and seek game of finding the squash amid all the foliage and they are amazed at the quantity of boxed fruits we have at the end of the morning’s session. Estimating the number of pieces and weight for each and all the boxes makes for some fine honing of math skills in the field.

On the next visit we have the kids help to broadcast winter rye over the now empty squash field. Each child receives a 2 gallon pail full of seed. A farm worker shows them how to throw out the seed in a wide swath. They start in a line at one end and work their way down the field. Next the kids return their buckets to the barn and gather round to watch the work horses getting harnessed and hitched to the disc harrows. Everyone then proceeds back to the field, where the children stand with the adults in a designated area and watch as the horses pull the disc to cover the seed that they have sown. Often, many of the students will have taken riding lessons, and some even have saddle horses at home, most of the kids will have been to a fair or farm that offers wagon rides. But for the majority of these kids this will be the first time they will have seen horses doing real work on a farm. When the students return for a farm visit in the spring we show them the verdant stand of rye that they helped to grow with the work horses.

As spring time rolls around we get the children involved in planting the market garden. When it is a question of having a school bus full of eight year olds helping to plant—a seed potato proves to be just about the right size.  For the past several years the two third grade classes from our local elementary school have helped us to plant potatoes. Keeping the kids focused and engaged is always the challenge and a big part of that is giving them a job that is fun. It is also important that the task be something they can reasonably handle and see through to completion.

Before the school bus arrives we already have the rows marked out; 18 rows at 200’ with 32” spacing between the rows. As the kids watch from a safe distance, we hitch our trusty old mare to an antique single horse plow with a 10” bottom and we open up the furrows. Once we have the first several furrows established we set the kids up with planting. Each child is given a 1’ measure stick and a 2 gallon pail full of seed potatoes. Then all are instructed on how to set the seed in a straight line in the bottom of the furrow so that the stick fits in between each spud. An adult stands ready at the end of the rows with the sacks of seed potatoes ready to give the kids refills as needed. Other adults work alongside the children. Once all the seed potatoes are set out, the kids, the farmers, the teachers, and the attendant parents, all pitch in with rakes and hoes to make sure all the seed gets covered with soil.

Once the potatoes are up a good six to eight inches the kids come back to help with the first hilling. We start out by hitching up the mare to a single-horse cultivator to loosen up the soil in the rows. As soon as we have a few rows worked up, the kids come in with the hoes and begin to draw the dirt in towards the bases of the plants. This is a big job. A few of these children are farm kids and no strangers to hard work, but most others of them may never have been asked to do a tough physical job before in their young lives. By pulling together in partnership; the kids and the horses, the teachers, parents and farmers, we all get the task done.

The following school year these same kids will return to the farm as fourth graders to help harvest some of the potatoes that they planted with their own hands. They are accompanied in this task by the classes of new third graders who are just beginning their own Farm to School experience. Some of the potatoes that the children harvest will be served in the school cafeteria. And so a cycle is completed and we hope that these seeds which have been planted will last a lifetime.

Building Bridges with Farm to School

By Amy Richardson; dairy farmer, mother, agricultural education consultant and advocate from Hartland, VT.

My kids began their lives on our farm.  From babyhood my sons have been alongside my husband and me throughout each farm year.  Much of their early schooling has happened here.  We witness birth, death, and growing up between.  We work on the land as different seasons allow for various agricultural pursuits.  My husband and I have farmed together for nearly twenty years, on his family place of more than a century.  As we raise our family here, we continue to see the multitude of opportunities a farm can provide as an educational resource.

The farm to school movement has been growing in popularity and momentum here in my home state of Vermont, for more than a decade. My involvement began in my county also over ten years ago, after our eldest son began attending elementary school. At that time it became apparent to me that there were only a few minor connections between the local school and local farming sector.  I joined NOFA (Northeast Organic Farming Association) VT as a farm to school and community consultant in my county.  Presently there are nine such individuals working across the fourteen counties of Vermont.  The farm to school resources, interests, and possibilities vary among the regions of the state.  Some of our programs are offered statewide, while others grow out of  specific requests and desires of certain people and communities.

Today, Vermont is in the midst (perhaps even in the forefront) of a growing movement to reinvigorate farm to school connections in the northeast.  This renaissance is taking numerous forms.  Many schools across the Green Mountain State are purchasing locally grown, seasonal foods to serve in cafeterias.  Furthermore, some schools and community groups are growing, harvesting, processing, and serving food from gardens on school grounds, nearby farms, or community maintained plots.  A number of VT schools have built and use greenhouses as classrooms.  Many also have composting programs that have been proven as successful tools for education, and production of useable soil, for years.

In my own county where agriculture was once one of the most common livelihoods, the dwindling number of farmers are very often eager to develop a relationship with students, and community groups.  Many farmers that I work with have been willing to host student visits to their farms, or come to a school to share their own knowledge and stories through structured Farm Day celebrations.  Farmers in my region have been instrumental in supporting taste tests of seasonal foods in schools, hands on farm related activities, as well as composting, greenhouse, and sugarhouse projects.

One specific program that NOFA VT has instituted statewide over the last five years, is a pen pal arrangement between farmers and classrooms. The farmers writes actual letters every other month throughout an entire school year. The program only requires the farmer write/type on paper and send via postal service.  Otherwise the content, length, and any enclosures are of the farmers choice. The classroom is required to write back once – as a group, or individually. The feedback has been overwhelmingly positive from both sides.  Farmers are appreciative of a forum to share their expertise, and personal style.  Students are eager to ask questions, offer ideas, and appreciate the intimate connection to a real farmer.  In recent years NOFA VT has used grant funding to support field trips to the farms participating as pen pals, so students can meet the farmer who has been writing to them.  The last school year involved several dozen farmers and several hundred students across most of Vermont.

Another enriching program found here in Windsor county has been a farm to school partnership between Hartland third and fourth graders and Cedar Mountain Farm. This relationship is somewhat unique, and is a great example of the variety of ways that farmers and schools show interest in working together.  Two years ago when my youngest son was in third grade, the class visited this local farm every month of the school year.  In the fall students harvested root crops, and planted cover crops.  They washed the veggies then brought them back for the cafeteria to use.  During the winter the kids focused on animal care, by assisting with cow, horse, chicken, sheep, and pig chores.   Come spring the class was back out in the fields watching the horses plow, then planting alongside the farmers.   At the beginning of fourth grade my son’s class was able to show the new third grade what was planted, how to harvest, and help with livestock for the school year to come.  My son was thrilled with the whole experience.  As a farm kid, he had a rare chance to show his familiarity with all the goings on around a farm.  This gave him great pride and made his parents laugh to hear his enthusiastic stories of completing similar chores to those on our farm, but somehow better on a different farm! This arrangement between farm and specific grades has been successful because of teacher interest and input, connection to curriculum structure, and accessibility and interest of the farmers.

There must be some truth to the notion that time flies when you are having fun.  Whether farming or raising a family, my time is spent doing work, and interacting with people that I find inspiring, enriching, fulfilling, and fun.  The farm to school ideas feel natural to me.  In some ways it is like getting back to basics, while taking steps toward simplicity and sustainability.  Children are the ideal ambassadors of progress.  Our state is small but determined.  Data now shows that roughly 2/3 of Vermont schools have some sort of farm to school program in place.  Young people can get excited about eating local, seasonal food; meeting and interacting with farmers; and visiting farms to see a vibrant, wholesome career choice.  Farming is a way to share lessons about life-cycles and family, seasons and land use, with students of all ages who will likely remember these for a long time to come.

 

Growing a Farm to School Network

By Peter Allison, Director of the Upper Valley Farm to School Network (www.uvfts.org)

Unlike Amy and Stephen, my farm to school (FTS) roots are not that deep. I am not a farmer and I didn’t grow up on farms. Nor am I a teacher or a food service professional, which are other common points of entry into this field.

My start with FTS began in 2007 when the Hartland Elementary School received one of the first FTS grants from the Vermont Agency of Agriculture. I had moved to the state a couple years earlier with my wife and two sons, and was working as an independent environmental consultant. Someone forwarded me a notice for a part-time position to coordinate the new farm to school program at our local school. I applied for the position thinking it would be a good way to create a connection with my kid’s school, and learn more about farms. I got the position, really enjoyed the work and saw lots of potential for how it can help kids and farms, and I’ve been hooked on FTS ever since.

I should note that since moving to Vermont I do now live on a farm, or collection of farming enterprises, at Cobb Hill co-housing (www.cobbhill.org). Cobb Hill is home to Cedar Mountain Farm (the dairy and vegetable market garden run by Stephen and his wife Kerry, with help from their four-year old daughter), and other operations that make cheese, raise sheep, pigs and chickens, keep bees and make maple syrup. I participate in some of these operations as a volunteer or “partner”, but I cannot claim to be a farmer. I don’t depend on the farm for my income and there are (thankfully for them) no animals that depend on me for their care and survival.

 

My charge as FTS coordinator was to identify monthly agricultural themes, and build a program that involved farm visits, displays in the school foyer, classroom activities, taste tests and cafeteria offerings related to those themes. Some of the themes were maple syrup, early greens, dairy products, root vegetables, grains, berries, fall harvest and so on.

We visited local farms, cheese makers and sugar houses, tasted raw carrots, celeriac and beets (with and without ranch dressing!), made our own granola, installed gardens and a small hand-me-down hoop house, grew some crops at the new community garden in town, made bicycle-powered smoothies with local yogurt and berries, and made lots and lots of salsa. (See www.hartlandfarm2school.org for the story of the World Famous HES Salsa!)

During that first year of working with teachers, farmers and our food service staff I realized that there were a lot of great opportunities to connect local food with our school, and also a lot of interest on the part of all participants. But there were also a lot of challenges. It can be difficult for farmers to take time out of their long day to host a group of kids, questions about liability insurance in case a student got hurt, and a challenge to arrange transportation. Teachers are under tremendous demands to make sure they fulfill all their curricular requirements and get kids ready for “the tests” – given our national obsession with not leaving kids behind! And, food and farm education doesn’t always seem relevant to the three R’s at first glance. Food service staff often have tight budgets, over-worked staff, inadequate equipment to process local food (rather than the pre-packed stuff that can be opened and warmed), limited storage space and sometimes are not familiar using odd-size funny looking seasonal produce – with dirt on it. Oh, and the staff in charge of keeping the school yard neat are quick to point out that schools are not in session when school gardens need the most care (water and weeding), an ironic vestige of the days when kids were needed on the farm during the summer.

I ran across a few other FTS coordinators in our region and around Vermont at a forum for other grant recipients. We soon realized that we were all facing similar challenges, and could benefit from ongoing communication and support. Looking for a way to scale-up my new found passion, and drawing on my past experiences in community organizing, consulting and project management, I launched the Upper Valley Farm to School Network (www.uvfts.org) in 2008. The Upper Valley region includes about 70 communities along the Connecticut River, half in Vermont and the remainder in New Hampshire. While Vermont has been a national FTS leader, New Hampshire efforts have lagged for a variety of cultural and political reasons. Part of the mission of UVFTS is to help spread the farm to school lessons to our neighbors across the river.

I was able to get some seed funding from a local health foundation, and started looking for parents, administrators, teachers, food service staff and parents in surrounding communities that were interested in advancing farm to school programs in their school communities. I met with people in the schools to identify their interests, and also take time to recognize current efforts and assets at the schools around which a farm to school program could be built.

Some schools already had gardens, and one had an indoor greenhouse (that was used to store books). Others had teachers, parents or other staff that were very interested in farming or had farming backgrounds. Some schools took regular farm field trips or conducted class activities related to food and farm themes. And there were a number of cafeteria staff who already bought some local corn, or potatoes or greens in season from local farmers – often unbeknown to the staff and kids who ate them. The goal was to celebrate and promote what was already working and build on that base to take the next step.

 

Given my lack of knowledge of farming, teaching and the complex world of school food service, it was imperative to create forums where peers in these professions could meet, share information and support each other. The UVFTS does this through regular workshops and other forums on topics of interest to teachers, FTS leaders and food service, an email newsletter and website that highlight successes in member schools, and opportunities and resources that we want to know about.

As we enter our fourth school year, we are excited about the growing number of schools with FTS programs, farms interested in selling food to schools and helping demonstrate farming work and life to students, teachers open to integrating food and farm themes into their classrooms – because they see the connection with local food and farms as a means of moving our kids forward and not so worried about keeping them from being left behind.

 

 

 

 

 

National Animal ID Wont Go Away

by Lynn Miller

Under many guises, titles, mutations, and bill-riders continues the evidence that architects of a mandatory animal identification system just will not give it up. Here at the SFJ offices we have received word via press releases and frightened readers of myriad insanities all pressed forward under the toga of food safety and traceability in livestock production. There is even word that the USDA is feeling the need to formally and legally end the recognition of hot branding of cattle in preference for ‘ear tags’ and micro chips. You can guess how that is going over across ranch-lands. Follow the money trail and it has long been easy to see that a couple of companies stand to make a fortune if we farmers and ranchers are required to purchase specialty identification markers and equipment. And these things will not prevent food-born illness nor will they clearly and regularly point out culpability. In our current system many if not most of the meat animals change hands several times before appearing in pieces on the dining table. The lion’s share of food safety issues come from processing, storage and shipping where traceability becomes difficult if not impossible.

National Animal Identification Systems will not work and should not be implemented.

Food Safety Bill Status

UPDATE from Margaret E. MacDonald, Western Organization of Resource Councils

and Judith McGeary, Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance

Dear Friends and Allies,

We are pleased that the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act currently on its way to the President contains the amendment proposed by Sen. Jon Tester (MT) and Sen. Kay Hagan (NC) that protects thousands of small farms and small processing facilities from onerous and expensive new federal regulations

We know that different people have different views on the Federal Food Safety Modernization Act as a whole – some supported it, some opposed it, and others stayed neutral. Regardless of these differences, however, the Tester-Hagan amendment provides important protections for local producers. This victory is thanks to the thousands of emails, phone calls, sign on letters to Senators, letters to the editor, and other grassroots actions that you took part in.

The protections for small producers provoked an 11th hour flip flop on the part of the large industrial scale produce growers and processors. United Fresh and other large commodity groups that had supported the bill for over a year turned around and opposed it due to the Tester-Hagan amendment, underscoring how exceptional this victory is. Because of the industry opposition, we will need to be vigilant against attempts to strip out the small-farm protections in the next Congress or to weaken them through the rulemaking or enforcement processes.

Since there has been confusion about the Tester-Hagan amendment, below is a brief summary. This summary obviously does not cover all of the various scenarios that food producers will face in determining what is, and is not, required of them under the bill; it is intended only as a brief overview.

We plan to work on fact sheets to help producers, as well as proposals for how the FDA should interpret and implement the portions of the bill that have been left to the agency’s rulemaking process. If your organization would like to be involved in an informal working group on this project, please let us know.

Summary:

I. Facilities: businesses that store, hold, manufacture or process food

All facilities must still register with the FDA, as has been the case since passage of the Bioterrorism Act of 2002. “Farms” and “retail food establishments” are exempt, but these were narrowly defined under the Bioterrorism Act.

The Tester-Hagan amendment clarifies that businesses that sell more than half of their products directly to individual consumers are exempt as “retail food establishments” even if they process the food at a different location than where the sale occurs, such as a farmers market or farm stand.

“Qualifying facilities,” while they must register, are exempt from the provisions of Sec. 103 of the food safety bill, the Hazard Analysis and Preventive Controls. Qualifying facilities are those that have gross sales of less than $500,000 (averaged over three years, and adjusted for inflation) and that sell more than half to qualifying end users. Qualifying facilities can either demonstrate compliance with state and local laws or submit a short summary of their plan to analyze hazards and prevention.

Qualifying end users are individual consumers (with no limitation on location) or restaurants and retail establishments that are either in-state or within 275 miles of the facility.

FDA is also directed to define very small facilities that are exempt from Section 103’s Hazard Analysis and Preventative Control requirements. The definition is to be based on the results of a study that looks at the incidence of foodborne illness in relation to food producers’ scale and type of operation.

II. Farms

Small-scale, direct-marketing farms are exempt from the provisions of Sec. 105, the produce safety standards in which FDA would regulate growing and harvesting practices. Exempt farms are those with sales of less than $500,000 (averaged over three years, and adjusted for inflation) and that sell more than half to qualifying end users. Qualifying end users are defined the same as in the facilities definition.

Wishing you a good, productive year in 2011!     Margie and Judith

Margaret E. MacDonald

Western Organization of Resource Councils

220 South 27th Street, Suite B

Billings, MT 59101

406.252.9672, ext. 208 | 406.252.1092 FAX|mmacdonald@worc.org

Judith McGeary

Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance

www.farmandranchfreedom.org

Office Phone: 254-697-2661

Cell Phone: 512-484-8821

Henpecked Compost and U-Mix Potting Soil

This material originally appeared in the Spring 1992 Small Farmer’s Journal

Copyright 2010 by the authors,  Anne and Eric Nordell

We have hesitated to go public with our potting mix, not because the formula is top secret, but because our greenhouse experience is limited in years and scale. Nevertheless, we would like to offer what we have learned in hopes of showing that something as seemingly insignificant as putting together a potting mix can be integrated into a systems approach to farming.

Like many growers, we raise our own plants so we can select varieties most suitable to our growing conditions and markets. Just as important is timeliness, that is, having starts ready in due season.

Along similar lines, we mix our own potting soil to match growing conditions in the fields. Plants started in a live medium seem to take off quickly when planted out in biologically active soils. To put it the other way around, we have tried to bring the concept of “feed the soil, not the plant” from the field into the greenhouse.

A more site specific reason has been to raise seedlings hardy enough for our unirrigated planting system. A compost-based potting mix helps us to grow the stocky plants with extensive root systems necessary to weather adverse conditions in the field.

It was not until we began to fine-tune manure management in the barn that we arrived at a way of making compost suitable for potting soil. So maybe a little compost history would be appropriate here.

Midwinter of ’89 we roughed together a chicken coop next to one of the composting pigpens in the barn (for details on this animal-powered system, see “Work Hogs and Horse Manure” in the Spring 1991 SFJ). We then filled the coop two and a half feet deep with the partially composted horse manure accumulated in the pigpen. The home laying flock took a genuine interest in this rich, rotted material, scratching and pecking away. Surprisingly enough, feed consumption dropped while egg production rose, the eggs developed the flavorful taste and firm texture associated with free range, and the hens seemed to appreciate warm ground under-claw during the winter months. At this point in the decomposition process the compost also seemed to prefer the lighter touch of the birds compared to the packing power of heavy hogs.

We encouraged the flock of 20 to shred and mix the compost by scattering shelled corn and sprouted oats. We did find it necessary to turn the materials by hand as the hens could only scratch six to eight inches deep. But digging a trench through the compost in the 9×9 foot coop was just a 5-10 minute job twice a week, easily absorbed into the routine of barn chores. Besides being a cheap way to make feed, this extra effort incorporated the chickens’ droppings into the compost, keeping the coop sweet smelling and moist.

According to the books, chicken manure is rich in calcium and phosphorus, two nutrients poorly represented in other manures. So apparently the hens helped to balance out the fertility supplied by the horses and the hogs. In addition, we provided the laying flock with a box of wood ashes tacked waist high in one corner of the coop. Not only did the dust-bath help to keep lice at bay, but when the birds flew out of the ash box they dusted the compost with a fine coat of readily available calcium, potash and trace minerals.

In two to three months the cooped up composts was already fine in texture and rich in color. At this point we layered in some soil, no more than one-half inch for every four inches of compost. Compared to trials without using soil, this addition seemed to help ripen the compost in the direction of humus, to keep the compost (and later the potting mix) more uniformly moist, and to re-inoculate the pile with beneficial bacteria possibly destroyed during the first heat cycles. (We like to use soil from a freshly plowed field of rye and hairy vetch where the good tilth and earthworm activity indicate an active and healthy soil life.) For the final round of heating and then curing, we shoveled the compost, now thoroughly mixed with soil by the hens, into a wooden bin built next to the coop in an unused corner of the barn.

Three advantages to making compost in the barn soon became clear: Under roof, there was no chance of losing nutrients due to leaching; weed seed could not blow in and infest the pile; and the moderated temperatures in the barn allowed for more biologically active months of the year. In fact, by the next winter the compost was mellow enough for use in a germinating mix.

More importantly to us, the resulting compost needed no further amending with fertilizers for strong, balanced plant growth. Because the nutrients had been completely digested and incorporated in this live composting process, we did not have to worry about uneven growth due to poor mixing or unexpected chemical/biological reactions as can sometimes happen when adding raw or soluble elements to a potting mix just before use.

We must admit that we may use larger cell sizes than would be affordable in a commercial nursery in order to provide enduring fertility from compost alone. For example, we grow lettuce in 72-cell pro-trays, and pot our peppers and tomatoes into 24’s. But we see the large plug size as an advantage, rather than a liability, when setting out plants in the field without irrigation. That is, we have been willing to sacrifice greenhouse space in an effort to drought-proof the farm. Despite four months of record hot, dry weather last year, we planted out over 800 lettuce starts every week from April through August. Although not every head reached market size, we lost virtually no plants either.

We have also learned there is a lot more to growing healthy plants than henpecked compost. First of all, finding the right blend of compost and peat moss to insure good drainage, moisture and aeration has been an ongoing trial-and-error process. We have settled on two basic mixes that so far have fared well under most conditions.

For a germinating mix, we combine two parts compost (sifted through a 3/8-inch screen), four parts peat moss, one part each of perlite and vermiculite. We also use this “lite” mix for lettuce seedlings to encourage root growth and discourage the root and stem rots that sometimes appear when the mix is made much heavier. On the other hand, we boost the percentage of sifted compost to six parts for potting on heavy feeders like tomatoes, peppers and coles.

Sunlight and heat seem to be critical ingredients for healthy seedling growth as well. In the cloudy, cool spring of ’90 we found removing the second layer of plastic glazing covering the greenhouse made all the difference in controlling damping off and spindly growth. From our limited experience, sacrificing insulation for light seems wise.

Besides, cool air temperatures seem to benefit most plants as long as the roots and soil are kept warm. The opposite, cold soil and warm air, we found, just about guaranteed weak, spindly growth. To get warmth where it was most needed, we buried a flue in a growing bench filled with gravel and stone. Burning a short, hot fire in the barrel stove attached to the flue each evening warmed the stones in the bench, which in turn, released gentle heat under the flats all night long. (We suspend foam insulation board over tomatoes, basil and peppers to hold heat around these sensitive plants on nights when the mercury threatens to drop below twenty.)

Not being engineers, this flue-in-a-bench design may not be the most efficient setup in the world, but does provide us with several advantages. Bottom heat creates the proper soil temperatures for a compost-based potting soil to come alive and release nutrients to the plants. Root growth is visibly more extensive and covered with fungal fuzz in warm soil as well. Because we fire the stove wide open, we can burn scrap lumber and soft woods cleanly. And we don’t have to get up in the middle of the night to stoke the stove as might be necessary if used in the conventional way for space heating.

If we have learned nothing else from mixing our own, it is that potting soils work best when integrated into the whole farm. For example, we needed a potting mix that would produce plants fit for our growing conditions and planting system. Compost suitable for such a potting mix came out of developing a conscientious manure management system in the barn. And we learned that a live potting soil is only as good as the greenhouse system.

Horsedrawn No-till Garlic

Horsedrawn No-Till Garlic

Photo essay by Eric & Anne Nordells

#1 No-tilling garlic in 1999, using an old pull-type subsoiler to open up the planting furrows. We were inspired to try no-tilling vegetables into cover crops after attending the Groffs’ field day* in 1996. No-tilling warm season vegetables has proved problematic at our site due to the mulch of cover crop residues keeping the soil too cool and attracting slugs. We thought that no-tilling garlic into this cover crop of oats and Canadian field peas might be the ticket as garlic seems to appreciate being mulched.

#2 We modified the subsoiler by attaching an old plow coulter to the beam and using a narrow tooth on the shank. The idea is the coulter slices through the cover crop just ahead of the tooth which rips a slit in the soil. This arrangement is similar in concept to the Groffs’ no-till transplanter except that…

 

#3 …we planted the garlic by hand. No-tilling the garlic turned out to be an advantage in 1999 as the hurricanes which blew through in September left the ground too wet for tilling at this ideal planting date in mid-October.

#4 The August seeded cover crop of oats and Canadian field peas died back at the onset of winter, protecting the two experimental rows of no-till garlic from frost heaving. This homegrown mulch also provided excellent erosion control despite all the rain we received last year.


#5 We used the same subsoiler, minus the coulter, to harvest the garlic. In the final analysis, the no-till garlic required less labor and produced larger bulbs than our clean-tilled -and-mulched garlic patch. The results were so encouraging that we expanded the trial to six rows in the fall of 2000, this time no-tilling the garlic into cover cropped ridges which made hand planting the cloves into the untilled soil much easier.

FOLLOW-UP ON PHOSPHORUS

Cultivating Questions

Concerning the Bioextensive Market Garden

by Anne and Eric Nordell

This material originally appeared in the Summer 2001 issue of Small Farmer’s Journal. Copyright 2001, 2010 Eric and Anne Nordell.

We thought, for sure, we had over cultivated The Phosphorus Question in the Winter 2000 issue (of SFJ). To our surprise, we received several follow-up questions on the topic as well as a few phone calls requesting details on the portable hoophouses shown in the Cover Cropping for Phosphorus photo essay.

We begin this column with a specific question about locating sources of rock phosphate, and follow this with an article looking at the bigger picture of nutrient management for organic vegetable growers. Then we conclude this installment of Cultivating Questions with another photo documentary, this time detailing the construction of the “portahoopies” and how they fit into a cover crop rotation designed to reduce the weed seed bank of purslane in the soil.

Follow-up On Phosphorus

Dear Nordells,

I have enjoyed your articles thoroughly and have learned a whole lot. The recent section on phosphorus prompted me to ask about fertilizer suppliers.

We (our family) have had difficulty locating soft rock phosphate, and frankly, any other organic rock fertilizers in quantity. Locally, we are aware of none; shipping from elsewhere usually is outrageously priced. Where do you get your phosphate? How about greensand? Do you have any ideas for finding a local or otherwise reasonable distributor?

Once again, your column is most informative. Any help you can give me regarding suppliers would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,

Stacy Gerry

Pleasant View, TN

The sources of rock phosphate that we use are actually closer to Tennessee than Pennsylvania. For instance, the black rock product which we applied directly to the fields for a few years is mined in North Carolina while the colloidal clay rock phosphate which we use in the composting pigpens is a byproduct of the phosphate mines in Florida.

The least expensive way we know of to purchase these minerals is to order a tractor trailer load direct from the sources. We have inquired about prices from wholesale distributors who advertize their services in Acres-USA (PO Box 91299, Austin, TX 78709 1-800-355-5313). For example, Hugh Paddock of Greenwood, IN (317-881-6143) quoted us a price in January 1998 of $72/ton for the Lonfosco brand of colloidal clay soft rock delivered to our farm from Minehead, Florida. We had intended to split a truckload with several dairy farmers in the area, but due to the low milk prices at the time we were unsuccessful at putting a group order together. Needless to say, we did not have a large enough storage area — or pocketbook — to take the whole 22 ton load!

Instead, we have relied on local distributors for rock mineral. In the 80’s, we purchased soft rock by the pickup load for $3.00/50 lbs bag from a farmer located 15 miles away. He became a distributor for Earth-Rite natural fertilizers (633 Quarry Rd., Gap, PA 17527 717-442-4171) in order to get their products delivered at discounted prices. Becoming a distributor would be one way to get these materials into your area without paying retail prices.

When this farmer retired in the early 90’s, we began purchasing rock phosphate from a Fertrell salesman who stops at the farm on his monthly route supplying feed minerals to dairy farmers in the area. This arrangement certainly is convenient, although the prices we are now paying for phosphorus have almost doubled over what we paid in the 80’s. (Fertrell is a national supplier of natural fertilizers and livestock supplements. Contact the main office at PO box 265, Bainbridge, PA 17502 #717-367-1566 for their closest distributor.

Now that the phosphorus levels in the market garden appear more than adequate, we no longer purchase rock phosphate for direct application to the vegetable fields. However, we continue to purchase rock minerals to add to the composting process and to slowly but surely upgrade our long neglected pastures. The payback for remineralizing these malnourished paddocks has been a significant increase in volunteer clover the year after applying this slow-release form of phosphorus.

Keep in mind that the rock phosphate products on the market have different analyses and physical characteristics. For example, the collodial clay products contain about 18% P and are very dusty. We think the black rock, containing over 30% P, is better suited for field application with the horse drawn fertilizer spreader pictured in the Winter 2000 photo essay. In fact, this fine, sandlike material is so free flowing we find it advantageous to mix in a coarser material, like gypsum, or some of our own screen compost. Mixing in these materials slows down the flow of the black rock and should make the phosphorus more available to the soil life and the plants.

On the other hand, we prefer the collodial clay type of soft rock for use in the composting pigpens because it does a better job of tying down the ammonia in the fresh additions of horse manure. Also, this is the only type of rock phosphate which we use as a mineral supplement for the horses and other farm animals for the important reason that it has been deflourinated. Likewise, the collodial clay products would be the safest material for continued applications to the fields in order to prevent the buildup of fluoride, cadmium, and other heavy metals.

We hope the message came through loud and clear in The Great Phosphate Debate that there are other ways to improve phosphorus availability in the soil than trucking in rock materials. Animal manures are a good source of phosphorus, particularly the droppings from poultry. Mulch materials and high carbon cover crops can promote fungal activity, in this way releasing the stores of locked up phosphorus in the soil.

Even better, from the standpoint of long-term sustainability, would be including a grass/legume sod in the rotation to increase overall biological activity and to extract the phosphorus reserves through the sod’s extensive root system. Legume cover crops and buckwheat have also earned the reputation of being natural extractors of phosphorus. In fact, recent research at Geneva, NY by Thomas Bjorkman indicates that a fall cover crop of buckwheat can provide a good bit of available phosphorus early the next spring when the soil is too cold to release this nutrient through biological activity.

In retrospect, we fear we may have done readers a disservice by focussing The Great Phosphate Debate entirely on the different ideas about building up and balancing phosphorus levels in the soil, we should also have emphasized the dangers of oversupplying phosphorus. Indeed, one of the peculiar challenges facing market gardeners is that vegetable crops use relatively small quantities of nutrients, like phosphorus, but return little in the way of organic matter to the soil. The temptation for growers of high value produce is to replenish the organic matter in the soil by applying manure or compost to the fields year after year.

Over the long run, this practice can lead to excessively high levels of nutrients, which is not the best for the crops or the environment. Although livestock producers have received the brunt of the blame for phosphate pollution here in the Northeast, several states are proposing to make vegetable growers next in line for mandatory nutrient management plans due to their role in saturating the soil with nutrients.

To provide a down-to-earth perspective on this issue, we offer the following article by Brian Caldwell on how organic growers can increase organic matter without overloading the soil with nutrients. His carefully considered arguments, and creative solutions, come from years of experience as an organic grower and Cooperative Extension agent in Tioga County, New York.

We like to think that the bio-extensive approach to market gardening minimizes the risk of overloading the soil with nutrients because the fallow lands make it possible to grow lots of cover crops to maintain soil structure and organic matter rather than relying on large quantities of manure and compost. However, we are now seeing the consequences of ignoring our own farm philosophy when we resorted to off-farm inputs to correct a phosphate deficiency.

To reverse the slow-but-steady decline in phosphorus levels showing up in our long-term, PASA sponsored soil quality trial, we initiated the all-out phosphorus building campaign described in the Winter 2000 column. This included the application of 500 lbs/acre of black rock in the market garden for three years in a row during the mid-90’s, followed by cultural methods, like adding cow manure to the compost mix, and including buckwheat and double-cut rye in the rotation of cover crops.

The impact of this “campaign for phosphorus” did not show up on the soil test reports until recently — a delayed reaction? or cumulative effect? we do not know. One thing is for sure, that when we replicated Klaas and Mary-Howell Martens’ monthly soil testing trial last year, P levels in our fields were all very high! In fact, the levels of available phosphate have risen from a low of 100 lbs of P205/acre in 1993 to over 200 lbs/acre in the last two years as measured by Brookside Lab. While these high levels are still well below the saturation point causing phosphate pollution, we clearly added more rock phosphate than necessary.

In hindsight, we wish we had waited a few years after the first application of black rock to assess the delayed reaction in P levels on the soil test reports before adding any more of this material. It might also have been more enlightening to have tried the monthly soil testing trial in the early 90’s before we applied the black rock. Then, we might have seen P levels rise during the course of the growing season following the seasonal increase in organic matter much like the results the Martens have obtained raising high yielding field crops at low nutrient levels.

To put it the other way around, now that we have boosted phosphorus levels and availability with the rock minerals, we can no longer discern the effect of the cultural methods on making the natural reserves of phosphorus more available. To the contrary, we may have inadvertently caused the fungi and bacteria in the soil to become lazy!

We hope that our misguided efforts in nutrient management might encourage other growers to rely on the soil biology first to improve phosphorus availability before resorting to lots of mined minerals or trucked-in manure. Developing ways to mobilize the low levels of native phosphate reserves may ultimately lead to the most diversified and resilient cropping systems with the least overall impact on the whole environment.

P.S.: We almost forgot the question about supplies of greensand! Most natural fertilizer companies carry this product. Even though greensand is mined right off the coast of New Jersey, we have not looked into wholesale distributors of this material because there are more reasonable sources of potash much closer to home.

Manures and mulch materials both contain a good bit of potassium. For that matter, alfalfa hay would probably supply as much potassium and trace elements as greensand plus a lot more of the organic matter so necessary for sustainable vegetable production. Our bias, of course, is the cover crops because they can turn the large soil reserves of potassium into plant available food right in the fields.

In terms of the overall nutrient management picture, excessively high levels of potassium may actually be even more of a problem than phosphorus under organic management. The reason we say this is that almost all organic materials contain a significant amount of this element. At the same time, these additions of organic matter stimulates biological activity which, in turn, makes available the large stores of potassium found in most soils.

For example, the lowest testing field at the start of our long-term soil quality trial showed less than 100 lbs of potassium/acre in 1993. By the year two thousand, this field had increased to over 500 lbs/acre of K. Over the same seven year period, the base saturation percentage of potassium had also doubled in this field, from a desirable 3.4% to almost 7%. The only potassium input was an annual application of 5 tons/acre of hog composted manure.

Although high levels of potassium are not considered a cause of water pollution right now, some crop consultants consider high levels a reason for concern. First of all, potassium acts like the big bully on the soil colloid, bumping off more important cations like calcium and magnesium. Secondly, high levels of K throw the nitrogen:potassium ration out of whack in the soil. Both situations, these consultants say, can make the crops — and the animals that eat them — more susceptible to insects and disease.

Whether or not this is the case, we do not see the reason to initiate a “campaign for potassium” based on greensand or other mined materials as this element seems to fend for itself quite well where compost, cover crops and crop rotation are routinely employed.

SIDE BAR: How Can Organic Vegetable Growers Increase Soil Organic Matter Without Overloading the Soil With Nutrients?

by Brian Caldwell of West Danby, New York

Part 1. The problem.

This is an issue that is just beginning to be recognized. It arises from a common practice among organic vegetable growers–that of applying compost or manure to vegetable fields nearly every year in order to fertilize crops and raise soil organic matter (OM) levels. While this is a beneficial practice in the short term, in the long run it can lead to over-fertilization and water pollution. The problem is similar to over-fertilization that occurs on livestock farms with sufficient land on which to properly spread their manure.

On most new land that is just being put into organic vegetable production, it is common and quite worthwhile to apply a big “shot” of nutrients and organic matter through heavy applications of compost and manure. After the first heavy application, amounts can be reduced in subsequent years. However, manure or compost is still usually applied at a rate that will supply at least the necessary nitrogen (N) needed for the next crop, which means that extra phosphorous (P) and potassium (K) beyond the crop requirements will be added to the soil. Over the years, soil P and K levels build to moderate, then high or excessive levels. The soil is out of balance. In fact, if manure or compost is added specifically to increase soil organic matter levels, which is a goal for many organic farmers, then usually all nutrients will be added beyond crop requirements.

Let’s look at an example from my own farm. “Field 1″ is a small field of about 1/5 acre which had been the farmstead garden for many years before I moved to Hemlock Grove Farm in 1977. It had higher nutrient levels than our other fields. I have soil test data (Table 1) from this field over a period of 21 years, starting in 1978. I also have records of the nutrient-carrying materials I added to this field for 16 years, which can be extrapolated for the 21 year period, as I used similar practices over the whole time.

Though the field is small, all data have been standardized on a per-acre basis for comparison.

Year      Soil P    Soil K       Soil pH        Soil OM

1              25         400           6.1               3.2

2              37         400          6.0               3.4

12            43          515          6.7               3.3

21            82          685          7.0               3.7

Table 1. Soil Test Data, Field 1

This data shows the problem. Soil nutrient levels are all in the high range after 21 years, which seems good, but if I continue the same practices, they will get too high.

Phosphorus levels are already very high, and going up faster than anything else. (Cornell test values are on a scale that reads lower than typical values, so my current P level would probably be measured at over 500# by most labs). High soil P does not hurt crop plants, but can contribute to water pollution. Note that soil organic matter levels have increased only slightly, from 3.2 to 3.7%. Soil nitrogen levels are so variable because of weather conditions that they are not routinely measured, but OM level gives an indication of how much is stored in the soil.

Using guestimates as to the nutrient composition of the applied compost, hay mulch, manures, etc (but not including N from cover crops) and of the amounts that typical mixed crop vegetable harvests may have removed over the period, I’ve made a rough nutrient budget for this field over the 21 years.

The field did not seemingly get heavy applications of organic fertilizers, averaging only 6 tons per acre per year of beef or sheep manure, with occasional additional applications of hay mulches, commercial and homemade compost, and wood ashes. (In retrospect, the 500#/A of rock phosphate we put on one year looks like a mistake.) Adding all this up, though, gives an estimated total N-P-K addition of 3500-2200-3650 to this field over 21 years. I further estimate crop removal at 1500-200-2000 over that time (note how little P is actually removed by vegetable crops). So, net additions to this field were around 2000-2000-1650 pounds per acre of N-P-K. No wonder test values went up!

Where do excess nutrients go? Extra added P and K are mostly held in the soil in unavailable forms, but most nitrogen is not. Some of the nitrogen is held in the increased amount of soil organic matter after 21 years- a .5% increase holds about 400# of N. But most (over 1500# /A or about 70#/A/year in this case) of the excess nitrogen will not be held in the soil, but will leach into groundwater or volatilize into the air. In many situations, such as typical home gardens, this is not a problem, since only a relatively small amount of nitrogen is in question. But if this practice is done on a widespread basis or on large farms, there is potential for significant groundwater pollution. The same situation occurs when excessive chemical fertilizer is applied.

I believe that there is no good reason to continue to increase these soil nutrient levels. The field produces good yields and quality. It has clearly reached a “mature” state in which heavy applications of brought-in organic materials are unsound. A field like this needs an approach that produces crops and maintains soil OM levels without the “booster” type approach.

Part 2. How do we raise soil OM levels without causing this problem?

High levels of soil organic matter are desirable in many ways. Higher OM improves soil water holding capacity, aeration, infiltration, nutrient holding and release, and more. But how do we achieve high soil OM sustainability over the long term? And how high should it be?

Virgin soil had much higher organic matter levels than current cultivated soils. How did high soil organic matter levels arise naturally (presumably, without groundwater pollution)? The answer is: very slowly, and in the absence of tillage and crop removal. Intensive tillage is the primary culprit in “burning up” soil organic matter at a very high rate, requiring that we add outside sources of OM to the soil. Under natural, untilled forest or prairie conditions, highly carbonaceous organic litter (leaves, etc.) Is added to the soil surface each year, and roots die within the soil. No additional P or K is added to the soil system, except what weathers slowly from the rocks. Nitrogen is added in small amounts from precipitation and bacterial fixation, but held tightly in the vegetation and decomposing surface litter. Small amounts of nutrients are sequestered away each year in humus and “locked up” OM that is not available to decomposers or oxygen. Nutrients cycle around and around, with relatively slow breakdown of soil OM, and accumulation of high-carbon OM on the soil surface. In this way, soil organic matter can build up very gradually over thousands of years, to levels around 10% in many virgin mineral soils.

When this land is cleared and repeatedly tilled, OM levels drop rapidly down to less than 2% in the absence of manure or compost applications. A sick soil. But remember, our real goal for a farm field is to preserve or increase soil quality, not just its OM content. We tend to be in a frame of mind that says, “the more OM, the better.” While there is some truth to this, under any given tillage and cropping regime there is an “equilibrium” level of soil OM. Generally, the less tillage, the higher this equilibrium level. OM levels can be maintained above equilibrium only by continuous heavy applications of compost or manure that carry far more nutrients than the crops can use. This is wasteful and leads to pollution. (The Biodynamic goal of the farm as a self-contained organism helps to avoid this problem, because it discourages importation of large amounts of nutrients.) Research at the Rodale Research Center has shown that soil biological activity, quality, and fertility can be very high, even at modest (2.5-3.0%) soil OM levels, if large portion of the OM is in the “active” form, i.e. in the process of being broken down. So, the key soil quality strategy in farming is not merely accumulating a high soil OM level, but cycling it rapidly and effectively. It is counterproductive to shoot for virgin soil OM levels on tilled farm fields.

It is important to realize that the constant production of tilled crops, especially vegetables which return few residues to the soil, is the harshest way to treat your soil. Sod crops in rotation are the only tried and true way to increase long term soil OM levels without negative “side effects.” Sod accomplishes this because the soil is not tilled, and extensive root systems are formed. Traditional field crops rotations often involved applying manure or compost to a field only once in every 4- or 5- year cycle. Organic matter levels and soil nitrogen were greatly enhanced by at least 2 years of a sod hay crop. Phosphorus and potassium did not build up in such systems, but were instead mostly cycled around the farm through feed and manure.

An ideal rotation for vegetable growers, from a soil and nutrient standpoint, would be to substitute vegetable crops for the heavy feeding (field corn) and light feeding (small grains) crops in this traditional rotation. Heavy feeding vegetable crops would include intensive greens, brassicas, sweet corn, leeks, cucurbits, etc., while light feeders would be root crops, beans and peas, etc. A sod crop of legumes and grasses will provide a maximum OM contribution, while supplying its own nitrogen. If hay is harvested, there may be a net removal of P and K. These nutrients can then either be sold off the farm, or fed or otherwise recycled within the farm.

An experimental method of increasing soil OM without heavy nutrient loading is to use high-lignin, relatively low nutrient OM sources such as wood chips. These interact in a limited way with the soil, because of their high lignin content and low surface to volume ratio, but do provide an excellent OM source over the long term. Cornell did a 15-year study in the 1950’s and 1960’s in which 10 T/A/year of hardwood chips was added to experimental plots of Honeoye silt loam, a rich soil type. Soil OM and other soil quality levels were dramatically raised, with some positive (and some limited negative) effects on vegetable crop yields. Little soil nitrogen was “tied up”, contrary to expectations.

Recently, Quebec research on positive results from the use of chipped hardwood branch wood (“remial”) was reported in the Maine Organic Farmer and Gardener magazine (12/98-2/99 issue). The authors stressed the importance of fungus organisms in the soil. There is growing opinion from some soil scientists, notably Dr. Elaine Ingham of Oregon State University, that many of our agricultural soils are overbalanced toward bacterial, rather than fungal, populations because of the highly available nutrient sources we use. There may be other benefits to favoring soil fungi–perhaps establishing large and varied fungal populations in our soils could also help reduce fungal pathogen populations.

So, what are the take home lessons here? Mine are–

1. Significantly increase the sod and light-feeding crops in your rotation on “mature” fields.

2. Reduce tillage and keep soil covered with cover crops and mulches.

3. Don’t waste nutrients by excessive manure or compost applications. This is particularly important if your P levels are in the “high” range. Rely more heavily on getting nitrogen from legume cover crops and sod than from manure or compost.

4. If you want to increase soil OM levels further, try experimenting with spreading wood chips on your fields in moderate (10T/A or less) amounts. They can be spread just before spring tillage, or even better, left as mulch on the surface until next spring.

Purslane, Portahoopies and Plow Planted Peas

by Anne and Eric Nordell

In the Winter 2000 SFJ, we looked at a number of cover crop options for improving phosphorus availability. Option #419 was plow planted peas following double-cut rye. This cover crop sequence also turned out to be very effective at setting back purslane, a slippery weed which had so far eluded our cropping system in the house gardens. We would like to take the opportunity here to show how we used plow planted peas to reduce purslane pressure before planting the portahoopies.

For those not familiar with this tasty, nutritious weed, purslane can be a real challenge to manage in vegetable crops for a number of reasons. The seeds of this weed remain viable for many years in the garden, and generally do not germinate until hot weather — that is, after many of the market garden crops have already been planted. To make matters worse, this succulent plant often reroots after cultivation. Purslane also grows so close to the ground that it is impossible to control by mowing.

For all of these reasons, we have found that midsummer smother crops are more effective at controlling purslane than our usual cover crop/bare fallow sequence. These photos show just how we did it in the hot, dry summer of 1999. We repeated the same cover crop sequence in the cold, wet year of 2000 with equally good results, preparing a patch in the house garden for this year’s early hoophouse production.

#1 We clipped the cover crop of rye in this fallow area a couple of times during the spring of 1999. The resulting mulch of rye clippings shaded the soil sufficiently to prevent the purslane from germinating. Then, the end of July, we broadcast two types of pea seed on top of the rye clippings and plowed them in at the same time.

#2 We adjusted the old walking plow to cut a shallow furrow just 2-3″ deep. “Skim plowing” the rye residues placed the pea seed at the perfect depth for quick germination in hot, dry conditions. In fact, the heat loving cow peas popped out of the ground in just four days. On the other hand, it took almost twice as long for the cool season Canadian field peas to emerge, about the same time as the first of the purslane began to appear.


#3 As the weather cooled off toward the end of August, the field peas really took off, outgrowing their cousins from the South with vines four feet long. By using the two types of pea seed we effectively shaded out the purslane despite changes in the weather.

Yes, the purslane germinated and grew in the understory of the peas, but it did not receive enough sunlight to make seed. So you see, the key to our weed control strategy is the use of a well timed smother crop to intentionally germinate a generation or two of the purslane but prevent this weed from setting more seed. In this way, we can reduce the weed seed bank of purslane in the soil surface

#4 By December, the July planted peas had already died off, producing a significant, soil protective mulch. At this point, we were no longer concerned about the purslane in the understory as it had long since died off with the first hard frost.

(Please be forewarned that this cover crop sequence of double-cut rye and plow planted peas is weed-specific. For example, it is not nearly as effective on winter weeds, such as chickweed, which tend to grow and make seed once the pea vines die back. We find that an oat/pea cover crop seeded thickly mid-August is much more reliable at suppressing winter weeds, because it remains standing, and shading the ground, until freezeup.)

#5 We like to move the portable hoophouses right on to the dead pea vines before the ground freezes hard so that these structures are ready for planting as soon as the snow melts in the spring. Unfortunately, we have not been able to come up with a greenhouse design which is strong enough to pull with the team — just imagine the stresses on a long structure when turning corners — but flexible enough to conform to the uneven terrain in these gardens.

Instead, we have adapted PVC hoophouse construction to come up with a design which is easy to dismantle and move by hand, and inexpensive to build. Costs of materials for the 20′ PVC pipes, rebar, rough cut hemlock lumber and plywood run under $200. The main limitation of the PVC hoophouse is it will not withstand a snowload so removing the greenhouse covering is necessary before the snow flies.



#6 After removing the six mil greenhouse plastic, the first step in relocating the portable hoophouse is carrying the twelve foot 4 by 4 sills to the new site, placing the beams in two rows twelve feet apart. Clearing a path through the pea residue, and shoveling away the stones, makes it much easier to seat the sill beams in the soil.

#7 We then drive twenty inch pieces of 3/4″ rebar into the holes drilled through the sill beams every four feet. The rebar is surprisingly easy to hammer into our stoney soil, and to remove by twisting them out with a vice-grip — no pipe puller necessary. And so far the rebar has anchored the portahoopies sufficiently to withstand some pretty stiff winds.

#8 Four inches of the rebar sticks above the sills so that we can slide PVC hoops over them.

#9 (left) The hoops are connected at the top to the ridgepoles, also made of twenty foot pieces of 1″ PVC pipe. To move the hoops, we simply disconnect the ridgepoles from each other and drag the twenty foot sections of hoops over to the new site, and then…

#10 …reconnect them at the top again with PVC couplers. The hoops themselves are permanently attached to the ridgepoles with 1/4″ carriage bolts. We have found that heating the heads of the carriage bolts with a hand held torch helps to seat the bolts in the top of the PVC hoops so that they do not snag or rip the polyethylene greenhouse covering.

#11 The two of us can move one of these twenty by sixty foot structures in a few hours. Once the snow melts in the spring, we pull the greenhouse covering over the hoops and lath it to the sill beams and end walls.

(Take note that the simplicity of this design does not allow for roll up sides for cross ventilation. In our cool climate, we can get away with end-to-end venting through the 33″ by 66″ double doors for crops like salad mix and basil right through the summer. However, the hoophouse tomatoes would benefit from more air circulation, either through top venting skylights, or simply by reducing the length of these grow tunnels.)

One of the big advantages of the pea cover crop is the vines rot off at the base when they die. That makes it easy to rake off the residue before…

#12 …planting the first crops of the season in the portahoopies. Because these crops are planted intensively, we like to work in some well cured compost after removing the pea vines. The plow planted peas leave the soil so mellow and loose that hand forking the three 36″ beds goes pretty quickly.

This shot was taken toward the end of May in the cold, wet spring of 2000. At this time, our unprotected crops in the fields were struggling to grow, but we had already picked over this portahoopy spinach six times. Meanwhile, the heads of leaf lettuce in the second portahoopy were ready for harvest.

#13 (Right) We interplanted the lettuce with tomatoes, one row of tomatoes between two rows of lettuce on each bed. The trick to making this interplanting scheme work is planting the lettuce three weeks before the tomatoes are set out. This spacing, and timing, guarantees that neither crop crowds out the other, and that the lettuce comes off just as the tomatoes begin to blossom and need to be trellised.

Note the complete absence of purslane in the portahoopies despite the warm growing conditions in this protected environment. Even during the heat of summer, we only found a dozen of these creepy weeds in the understory of the tomatoes.

As we see it, the real value of the portahoopies is they allow us to extend our short growing season while still employing the principles of rotational cover cropping for weed control and building the soil.


Beating the Beetles – War & Peace in a Houston Garden

By Charles Capaldi

Dateline – May 1st, 2010

Today, Paul Bishop lives in Houston, Texas.  But his farming roots reach far back into a childhood with time well-spent on his grandparents’ farm in Tennessee.   Now that he’s a grown up, with a day job requiring a deft hand at tying a tie, Paul’s farming consists of  a couple 18″-deep raised beds set right on the lawn.  He trucked in a pile of black, fertile, organic soil and planted his crop right there.  When he told me that, I knew that I had a kindred spirit on the other end of the phone.  I also know from the indoctrination tapes on the interstate as you drive into the Lone Star state:  Everything in Texas is bigger, better and above all, warmer than most of the nation.  While a late season weather event left my Vermont garden blanketed in snow, Paul’s cukes are blooming in Houston.   Blooming that is, unless the cucumber beetles arrive first.

And arrive they have …

“At first I thought they looked like big, yellow lady bugs.” Paul said, “Then I looked them up on the web and they turned out to be striped cucumber beetles.”

Paul did what most of us would do in our right mind.  He ran out to a local garden supply store and asked what he could use.  Sure enough, the clerk sold him a bottle of something he promised would work and that he reassured him, was indeed organic.  Of course, the idea that we can just spray something on our crops to protect them from predators, or add something to our soil to make everything grow better, oversimplifies the relationship between the relative order of a kitchen garden and the chaos of nature.  Where the raison d’être of a garden supply store is to sell you something, the raison d’être of an organic garden is to find that balance between order and chaos.

In a small garden, picking off any visible beetles only takes a few minutes each day.  My youngest son regularly cashes in his haul of potato, asparagus, and Japanese beetles to the tune of a penny a piece – and then promptly feeds the contents of his container to the chickens who provide the service of turning them into eggs.  We also use floating row covers to confound the wee beasties – Remay, for instance,  is a woven horticultural fabric, permeable to light, air and water.  At its simplest, it can be laid directly on top of the crop to confound the pests whose stomachs are way bigger than their brains.

Unfortunately, living in the great North, just about everything blows away in the wind, so we borrowed a page from Eliot Coleman’s books (The Four Season Harvest and now, The New Organic Grower).  Portable tunnels may well be the cheapest way to cover a section of garden –tunnels made from flexible PVC pipe and appropriate cover material – greenhouse plastic, Remay, shade cloth – your choice depending on the desired effect.

In mid April, we cut 5 foot lengths of PVC and inserted them into the ground as deep as we could push them on either side of the bed.  We planted our brassicas under the protection of this tunnel – weeks ahead of the traditional spring planting date in our area (Memorial Day).  The floating row cover (for bug protection), greenhouse plastic (for heat-loving crops), or shade cloth (for mid summer cool weather crops), can be laid over top of the hoops and secured by rocks, bags of sand, or even lengths of wood.  This works like a charm to protect the crops from invaders, or in our case, from the two feet of snow that blanketed our garden during a late season winter weather event.  According to The New Organic Grower, temperatures under the floating row crop are typically 4 degrees warmer than the ambient air temperature.  Our power went out for 24 hours, the ski resorts reopened their slopes and we, needless to say, rekindled the fire in our woodstove.  The seedlings under a thin cover of Remay cloth were none the worse for wear.  So whether your problem is cucumber beetles or temperature extremes, floating row covers may be the answer you are looking for.  

Congo Farm Project – FROM STARVATION TO SUSTAINABILITY

CONGO FARM PROJECT – FROM STARVATION TO SUSTAINABILITY

Alexander Petroff 01/10/10

Note: This article appeared in the Winter 2010 Small Farmer’s Journal and is copyrighted to the author


It was April 2006. After years of imagining and studying and training in every way I could think of about how to start a self-sufficient village, I was about to actually start. I had even set up a non-profit organization, Working Villages International, and raised a little start-up money. Still, up to this point, it was all just a dream. But now, I was finally at the turning point between dream and reality. I was at day one, standing outside an old burnt-out Belgian plantation house, donated to us by the progressive young chief of the village of Luvungi. My Congolese friend and I had told him that we would need to hire some workers to help clear the land around the compound, and to put a new roof on the building.

We could pay the workers only about $2.00 per day, but that was good pay in a region where there annual income was $100 and unemployment was 98 percent. I thought we should be able to attract at least 20 workers. Then, I looked out to see a crowd of about 800 eager villagers, each one with their own hoe. They were ready to work!

Thus began WVI’s Ruzizi Valley Project in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where 10 years of war had left over 4 million people dead, plunged the country into anarchy, and just about completely collapsed the economy. Before the war, the Ruzizi Valley, located in eastern Congo, along the Rwanda border had been known as the “rice bowl of Congo.” It is located practically on the equator, with rich soil, and a relatively cool climate because of its high altitude.

Clouds of moisture evaporating from Lake Tanganyika, 40 miles south, collide with the Mitumba Mountains to the north, delivering ample rain, except during the summer dry season. A farmer’s paradise! Congolese refugees back in Maine had told me they learned of the Ruzizi Valley at their high school in Kinshasa (1000 miles from Ruzizi), “One bean plant can grow 5 pounds of beans!” Before the war, the Ruzizi Valley was covered with farms and dairy cows.

But now, practically all that was gone. When Rwanda solved its problem of genocide by pushing the Hutu fighters into Congo, Congo was severely destabilized, and Ruzizi bore the brunt of the fighting because it was right on the Rwanda border. Its farms were wiped out, and most survivors fled to the cities. Nine different countries became involved in “Africa’s First World War.” Unfortunately, their real goal was not to save Congo, but to exploit its reserves of gold, copper, diamonds and the coltan needed for cell phones.

The violence and collapsed infrastructure left the population starving. Even though many local people had been killed or driven off the land, there was a U.N. camp in the Ruzizi Valley, and that attracted refugees who were driven away from other places. The population was quite mixed ethnically, but they were all starving equally.

Two years before I started the project in Congo, I had spent my junior semester abroad, working at the Namalu Ox Hire and Ox Training Center in Uganda, and writing a paper on economic development for college. One constant problem when I was in Uganda was poisonous snakes. Karamoja was a dry province, and when anyone mixed up concrete, half a dozen poison snakes would shoot out of the grass towards you, hoping to get some moisture from the concrete. I worried about having a similar problem in Ruzizi.

I asked Chief Ombeni, “What’s the snake situation here?”

He replied, “There are no snakes.”

“But how can that be? This is exactly the kind of place that snakes like.”

“In the war, the people were hungry, so they ate all the snakes.”

“Yes, but, if you have no snakes, then you must have a rat problem.”

“No, they ate them also.”

The miracle of WVI’s Ruzizi Valley project is that we have been able to take these same starving people, and give them the training and the opportunity to produce their own food using sustainable methods. Now, after 4 years, the 600 villagers who work for us, and their families, have an ample diet and are eating much better quality food than the average American. How did we do that?

STARTING WITH AGRICULTURE

In my college travels to different non-profit groups in Uganda, I saw innumerable projects where a school or orphanage or hospital had been built. The services were important, but they depended on a constant flow of cash from Western countries. So once the Western overseers pulled out, you could see numerous ramshackle projects where the cash flow had dried up.

Another weakness was to set up a project to be fully dependent on foreigners for the day-to-day leadership of the project. The most effective projects, like the Namalu Ox Hire and Ox Training Center where I worked, carefully cultivated leadership personnel by selecting and training the most qualified individuals from the local population. This model was more sustainable because it created better loyalty from the local population, made people more receptive to the training, and encouraged local initiative.

I saw the drawbacks of relying too much on Western cash and Western project leaders. Instead, I wanted to develop my project in such a way that it requires less outside funding – not more; and less outside leadership – not more – as time went by.

Thus, I decided to put my first emphasis on agriculture and to find local leadership to manage day-to-day operations, if at all possible. Looking back over the last few years, I’m convinced that agriculture was the best choice to avoid the pitfall of long-term economic dependence on the West. By providing start-up capital and training, we can get people launched on a path of economic development that can keep going even after we pull out. And, I made it clear from the beginning that we would definitely leave: After ten years, we will move to another village: you will be on your own.

That way, based on their own economic power, people can build social services like schools, health care facilities, and care for orphans. These won’t be as fancy as services funded by Western donors, but instead of collapsing when the donor base leaves, the local services they start can continue because they will be founded on the local economic base.

LOCALIZED ECONOMICS = VILLAGE SELF RELIANCE

Africa is strewn with the wreckage of 60 years of failed development programs. Practically all of them have been based on producing something for export, something for the global economy. Even farming is no better than mining, if it is just going to be to sell overseas. There is no profit for local farmers, especially small farmers, because they have to compete with agribusiness farmers abroad who have an unfair advantage due to government subsidies and economy of scale. Any remaining profits for small African farmers are eaten by the skyrocketing price of shipping.

I was amazed to learn that according to US government statistics, the biggest component of food aid to foreign countries is actually the shipping costs, not the grain or milk. Working Villages is also not interested in selling fair trade coffee or making different craft items to be sold in U.S. boutiques. These simply can’t provide widespread economic benefit in the communities that produce them. The global economy is a failure and it will continue to be more of a failure as oil gets more expensive. So what is the alternative model?

The alternative is to build a local economy focused on providing for local needs. Gandhi called it “Swadeshi.” I call it simply “Village Self Reliance.” The idea is not to make one agribusiness CEO a billionaire while everyone who works for him struggles to scrape by. Instead, the idea is to give a village full of people a chance to make a decent living by using local land and local materials to produce food and goods that their neighbors actually need. This idea is so simple that it’s difficult for many people to understand, because they have been taught all their life that “free market” international trade is the miracle that will solve all economic problems. But, ultimately what we want at Working Villages is many locally owned, small farms and workshops that work together to provide for each other to build a community.

“MUZUNGU NYASI”

When I started my village in 2006, I set up a Congolese friend as project manager. The Ruzizi Valley has vast tracts of scrub land, and we worked hard organizing everyone to clear land and dig up the soil to plant a 60 x 100 foot garden. Villagers were enthusiastic workers. However, they suddenly became skeptical when they found out that I planned to put a grass roof on the dilapidated plantation house the chief had given us. They expected us to simply drive to the city of Bukavu and purchase a tin roof, like all the other foreign non-profit organizations they had seen. They thought I must be crazy.

Behind my back they began to call me “Muzungu Nyasi.” “Muzugu” means “white man” and “Nyasi” means “grass.” “Grass-man.” But really, it meant “Crazy-man.”

But I had learned thatching at Fox Maple school in Maine, and it was important principle to make sure everyone had a chance to earn a little money. We paid villagers 25 cents apiece for bundles of grass, and 50 cents apiece for bundles of matetei bamboo. As they soon realized that they were going to be the benefactors of this policy, they decided that “Muzungu Nyasi” was not so crazy after all.

However, the name stuck. Only now it became an honorable title. (Even a year or two later, if I visited the chief of a neighboring village, my translator would introduce me, “This is Muzungu Nyasi.” “Oh, Muzungu Nyasi! We have heard about your work. When are you coming to do a project in our village also?”) Also, amazingly, our workers had so much determination that they built a half mile road to the project – using only hand tools – in just three days.

The villagers were grateful for work, but we had so many prospective workers we couldn’t afford to keep them all. We set up a policy. For one week, we would hire the first ten men and the first ten women who showed up for work each day.

It was important to hire men, because unemployed men could become lured by various militia groups and cause violence and instability, but it was also important to hire women, because many of them were the head of household since their husbands were killed in the war.

At the end, we hired the best of the best, and these men and women became our core workers. They learned quickly and were hard workers. (Over time we expanded our work force, as we were able to raise more money. These excellent workers set a strong example, which was a great benefit as we brought new workers on board.)

I had to return to the US to graduate from Hampshire College in May, and to raise more funds. According to my previous plan, I relied heavily on my Congolese project manager. He was an enthusiastic cheerleader for the project, but unfortunately it turned out that he had no real managerial ability. I could only be in Congo for a few weeks at a time and whenever I was away, he was not able to develop the project in a focused manner. After about a year, he left the project for some more exciting endeavor. Building a farm project was not for him.

That left me with no one to manage the project. I needed to get back to Congo, to find new management, but there was a huge outbreak of instability and widespread fighting preceding the national elections (the first in 40 years) so I had to wait. Week by week, I grew more worried, wondering if my project had been destroyed during the fighting.

NEW MANAGEMENT

Finally, after several months of anxious waiting, I was able to return to Congo. Some friends in the Congolese community in Maine put me in contact with a Congolese translator named Blaize who would meet me when I flew into neighboring Rwanda. We drove over the border towards the project. As we drove through Luvungi, we had to slow down because of the bad roads. I could hear the people talking. I asked Blaize what they were saying. “They are saying, ‘Is that him?’ ‘No, it can’t be him. After so long, he won’t back. It is some other Muzungu (white man).’”

Finally, the car drove up to the project. We were amazed to find 2 of our security guards still standing guard, even though they had not been paid for several months. When I say “security guards” you might imagine someone dressed in a smart uniform, carrying a gun, standing next to a chain link fence. Such was not the case. Our guards never had any guns. There was no chain link fence. Only a ramshackle 6’ x 6’ guard shed to keep the rain off. A rope across the road was the only physical barrier. The actual security was the good will of the village, which was still hoping that the project would start up again.

When Blaize and I got out of the car, the guards began to shout in disbelief, “Muzungu Nyasi! Muzungu Nyasi!” Soon everyone gathered excitedly and welcomed me to back to the project. When I went into my room in the headquarters, I found that none of my belongings had been touched in the months of my absence. In such a poverty-stricken area, this was a real testament to the commitment of the villagers to the project.

So, I was back, the project was safe, and the villagers were enthusiastic to resume work. But I had no manager. I thought of one of the men who had helped supervise setting up the small garden in the beginning, a very quiet man from a good family nearby. I felt he might be a good choice. “Does anyone know where Fiston Malago is?”

The villagers told me, “Fiston is not here. His family estate is here, but he is in Kinshasa (the capital, some 1000 miles away). He is managing some agricultural project for the U.N. We don’t know how to reach him.” But miraculously, Blaize told me that he had dated Fiston’s younger sister in high school. If he could reach her, she must have a phone number for Fiston. Blaize tried his old phone number and he actually talked to the sister. She gave us a number for Fiston.

When we got through to Fiston in Kinshasa, he was quite surprised to hear from us. Blaize simply told him. “Muzungu Nyasi is here and he wants to talk to you. You need to come.” Fiston replied, “Muzungu Nyasi – he is a very serious man. I will be on the next plane!” We had not even offered him a job.

Two days later, he was there. I had seen Fiston working with the villagers about a year before, and intuitively, I felt like he was a natural leader, carefully showing them different techniques, even though he was fairly quiet. Only when he came back to Luvungi did I find out that he had a University degree in forestry and agronomy (plant and soil science). His job at the U.N. was paying several thousand dollars a month, a high paying job by Congolese standards. I knew he was worth it, but I also knew that we could not possibly pay that much. (I had paid the previous manager $100 per month.) I began the delicate matter of negotiating a salary with him.

“Fiston, I know that you are very qualified for this job. Unfortunately, I just don’t know how much we can afford to pay you. We don’t have much money.”

“And, how much are you making as President of WVI?”

“Well, Fiston, it’s a very new project. Since we don’t have much money, I can’t really take any salary right now…”

“Then I shall take the same amount!”

PHASE 1 – SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

Fiston’s father had been an exceptionally well-beloved governor of the province in the 1960s, but when the dictator Mobutu took over the country, Fiston’s father resigned in protest of Mobutu’s policies, further endearing him to the local populace. After returning to his estate in Luvungi, he continued to try to help out the people of his local community. He instilled that commitment to community in all his children, especially Fiston.

After completing his studies in agronomy, Fiston longed to use his knowledge to benefit his community. He later told me that when WVI came to Luvungi in 2006, he thought that would be his opportunity. He was deeply disappointed when the project manager proved to be too disorganized to accomplish anything. Fiston left and took the UN position in Kinshasa. So, when he received our call, he felt it was a second chance, and he was determined to make the most of it.

Fiston proved to be an organized and energetic leader, capable of inspiring the villagers in their work. With just a little bit of capital, he could accomplish much. He was quite familiar with tractor agriculture, but gas was $12 per gallon and we had no tractor. That could not stop him. No need to wait for a tractor. Much could be accomplished with hand labor, and villagers desperately needed jobs. Ruzizi’s fertile volcanic soil was a treasure, he told them, but they must learn techniques to keep it that way, and not let it become like the devastated lands in other parts of Africa.

The first thing Fiston stressed to them was the importance of compost. The local practice was to burn land before planting. That had to be stopped. Burning should be used only for diseased or infested plants. Although I had never seen compost piles in my travels in Africa, suddenly I started seeing the villagers hauling big armloads and wheelbarrows of weeds and grass to compost piles all over our project.

As soon as land was cleared, he had villagers build a number of raised beds for vegetables. He had them make little roofs to shelter seedlings from the blistering equatorial noonday sun. And the crops in the fields and raised beds were now covered with mulch. This was another new thing, but the thick grasses which we had used for thatching could also be cut for mulching, to preserve moisture, prevent weeds and boost soil fertility as they decomposed.

Fiston instructed villagers in the importance of crop rotation. Corn was already a popular crop in Ruzizi, corn meal mush being a common item of the local diet, but corn saps nutrients from the soil, so it should be rotated with a bean crop to help replenish nitrogen. He used beans that were popular in the local diet.

Fiston and I had had a number of conversations about the problem of farmers going into debt to plant their crops. He was determined to set up a culture to avoid this as much as possible. Instead of purchasing fertilizer and pesticides, organic methods could be used to fertilize crops and avoid insect damage. And, he felt very strongly about the idea of using open pollinated seeds so that villagers could save seeds instead of buying them.

In succeeding months, I would notice the same varieties of squash and melons that we had introduced, growing in gardens of nearby villagers. The sharing of seeds produced benefits that quickly spread beyond our project.

FEED THE WORKERS FIRST

Over the next couple years, we continued to expand our project, hiring more villagers and putting more land under cultivation. Working Villages now employs over 600 workers, and we have several hundred acres under cultivation, growing over 90 varieties of crops. One major focus has been rice and corn and beans, staples of the local diet. We rotate our fields and currently are producing about 100,000 pounds of rice per month, as well as substantial amounts of corn and beans.

Due to global warming, the Ruzizi Valley has been experiencing longer and longer dry seasons for the past few years, which cuts into our ability to grow crops. I purchased a simple GPS system from L.L. Bean. Using the GPS, we designed and built a 250 acre irrigation system to bring water from a nearby river to our land. This was all done using only hand tools. Everything is controlled by simple hand methods of trenching and channeling to direct the water to where we need it to go. This has really increased our productivity.

To the casual observer, this might look like an agribusiness, but it’s not. There are substantial differences. To begin with, our primary objective is not to produce food for the market. Our primary objective is to produce food for our workers and their families. Then, if there is anything left over after that, we sell that surplus, using the money to pay the workers. This makes a huge difference in the lives of several thousand people, who, needless to say, are no longer eating snakes.

The second thing is that we are not yet halfway into our program. Our ultimate goal, once people are trained is to give each family their own house and land. In the meantime, to get to that stage, we need to develop a more dynamic, complex economy. And, we need to increase our level of productivity from just what we can produce by hand labor.

PHASE 2: OX POWER

Our goal since the very beginning of the project has been to introduce animal traction. I worked at the Namalu Ox Hire and Ox Training Center in Uganda, and later on as an intern at Tillers International in Kalamazoo, Michigan. I’m profoundly convinced that animal traction, and – specifically in the African context – ox power, is the key to sustainable economic development. That’s why Working Villages International uses an ox yoke as its emblem.

To improve the standard of living, you must increase productivity. Ox power will substantially increase productivity over that of hand agriculture, which is the basic mode for most of Africa. But, unlike the tractor, it will not put people out of work. So it makes a perfect balance. Also, in a place like Congo, where gas is now $12 per gallon and the annual income is only $100, a tractor is simply not a realistic proposition for the poor.

In the context of WVI’s Ruzizi Valley project, the other important feature of ox power is the economic linkages that it can generate. Beginning with its purchase, at practically every step of the way, a tractor increases dependence on imported inputs and imported expertise – the very opposite of what we need to develop of Village Self Reliance. On the other hand, ox power actually creates a whole range of needs which in turn can generate a broad range of local jobs.

Ideally, I’d like to see our villagers employed building plows and harrows for farming; carts and wheels for transporting crops and goods; block and tackle set-ups for quarrying and building; slip-scrapes for road-building; and sweep-powered ox power units for grinding grain, sawing wood and other applications. Ox power can push our village to develop a diverse range of skills, creating the stronger, more dynamic economy we need.

OX TRAINING

In the African context, women traditionally do a large portion of the farming, so it was important for us to use a technique that women could use. When I go to the Topsham Fair, a mile from where I live in Maine, I see women and even girls working the oxen with voice commands, so I knew we wanted to use voice commands and not the nose rings that were introduced by the English during the colonial era. Voice commands would make it much easier for the women to participate. I had experimented with several methods, and I decided to use a technique of voice commands described by Paramananda dasa, so that our teamsters could control the oxen from behind, without having to add a second person to guide the equipment.

On one hand, we had a great advantage, in that we were working in a location where people were familiar with cows. In an area where people had resorted to eating snakes, I was amazed there were any cows at all. But the people love their cows, and a local yogurt drink is very popular. Nevertheless, hard times made it difficult to obtain cattle.

The usual practice is to hold a cattle auction, much like in the U.S. In December 2007, Fiston and I went out to buy some bull calves, since they would be the easiest for our novice teamsters to train, but we could not find any calves, only older cattle. The cattle owners told us to come back in a few months and there would be more calves.

But where had all the calves gone? It turned out that all the local calves had been purchased to by the local U.N. camp to provide Christmas dinners for their troops. We were struck by the irony. A small African calf would provide meals for at very most a dozen soldiers, but if we could have purchased and trained that same calf to be a working ox, over its lifetime it could produce crops enough for hundreds of meals to feed hungry villagers.

Nevertheless, we built a corral, training ring and a shed. When we finally purchased our bull calves in April, it was a big occasion. We recruited several villagers to be trained up as teamsters. Liv was enthusiastic to volunteer. He liked working with cows, and he was confident he could train these calves. So we agreed that he should do it. Normally, in Congo women do the gardening and men work with the cows, but we really wanted to get at least one woman teamster. Finally, our cook, Toyee agreed that she would try to train a team.

Both Toyee and Liv had been around cows. I warned them that this would be a little different. They were surprised how animated the calves became when they were first put into the training ring. I told them the best thing was to develop a relationship of trust with the animals by feeding them and brushing them. Training could start in a couple days, when the young calves were more comfortable with their teamsters and with the ring.

Within a week all the calves knew “Get-up” and “Whoa” and were learning “Gee” and “Haw.” Liv and Toyee were very proud of their students. It was difficult for me not to be present as much as I wanted to during the subsequent training, but over the course of a year, I could see that both teamsters were handling their teams quite well. It goes without saying that ox power is a key component of our program and one that Fiston and I really want to expand. Actually, Fiston himself carved our first ox yoke. He said he found it to be a therapeutic relief from his management duties.

One side effect of the ox training that we noted was that as our teamsters increased their expertise in working the oxen, it also increased their confidence in dealing with other people. Thus, when they are not with their animals, they are taking on more managerial responsibilities. The patience, encouragement and firmness they developed in working with oxen seemed to bring out their natural leadership qualities. I thought of the old timers’ saying, “Train the boy by having him train an ox.” It works for grown-ups, too.

HOUSES AND RICE HULL STOVES

We’ve made agriculture the core of our project, but since we’re trying to create an eco-village, we have other needs as well. We’re interested in alternative sources of fuel that can be used to replace wood and petroleum products like kerosene. We also need to build good quality houses that use the minimum of materials purchased from outside.

Our rice program may help us with both things. Due to our large production of rice, we purchased a rice huller to remove the inedible outer hull. Formerly, all the hulling in the Valley was done by one company who cheated farmers out of much of their money. So now, not only do we hull our own rice, but we also hull rice for several hundred small farmers in the valley. Many of them grow very small plots of rice, as small as 600 feet square. This produces tons of rice hulls, which are hard like acorn shells, and cannot be composted or burned – at least not by the normal process.

Fortunately, we found a design for a small stove fueled by rice hulls. We took the plan to our blacksmith and he was able to build the stove with a sufficiently powerful updraft to burn the rice hulls. Everyone cheered as Fiston and I burned the previously unusable rice hulls to boil a pot of water. Now Toyee and the other women in the kitchen are using it to cook with. We hope to build more stoves and save more trees.

Considering how poor the local living conditions are, it is not surprising that our workers are very interested in getting new houses. This last summer we built several brick houses, large whitewashed round buildings with screened windows (to prevent malaria) thatched roofs and beautiful tile floors. The buildings are quite handsome, but unfortunately the cost of the bricks and tiles is quite expensive, mostly due to transportation expense in hauling them from miles away where we purchase the materials.

However, we have seen in Rwanda a place where they use a kiln powered by rice hulls to fire bricks and tiles. We have plenty of rice hulls as well as a good source of clay on our land, so we want to build such a kiln at our project. Not only would this provide good quality, inexpensive housing for the villagers, it will create many jobs in construction and producing bricks.

Building a village with a complete local economy is not easy. It can sometimes be extremely challenging to deal with the surrounding problems of war and instability. What we are doing in Congo is by no means part of a general trend. Quite the opposite, in general, the country is in a state of collapse and anarchy. However, some way or other our little project continues to grow. Apart from the military, we are now the largest employer in our area. And, as our project grows, it continues to become a stronger refuge for the many people who want simply to earn a living and raise their families in a stable, productive and peaceful environment.

After several years of hard work on everyone’s part, we have finally reached the point where all the agricultural labor costs are covered by selling our surpluses. That means that all the funds we raise can be channeled to expanding other aspects of the project. We’re very excited about the coming year. In addition to developing our housing program, we have also worked up a plan for a large tree planting project to help recover from deforestation in the area.

Fiston has designed it to be an agro-forestry project. He’s selected trees like moringa, neem, avocado and mango, which will be valuable a valuable source of food, forage and medicine to the villagers as they continue to grow. He has laid out the plan so they can continue to grow shade-tolerant food crops between the trees, as well. We plan to introduce wheat for the first time. We’re also excited about our plans to expand our working ox program and bringing in some cows, now that we’ve got a solid base to maintain them.

AN AMAZING VIEW

One Sunday afternoon Fiston and I were eating lunch and looking out across the valley at a tall hill on the other side. We were talking about climbing it to get a view of our land and to plan out new fields. He said it would only take an hour and a half to hike there and back, and he was up for the climb if I was. I agreed and we were ready. For a short hike like that I figured I only needed about a liter of water. We started walking, and kept walking, and then kept walking some more. I noticed Fiston had brought about 6 liters of water with him, and he kept drinking from his water bottles as we hiked along.

Three hours after we set out, we were climbing towards the top of the hill. My canteen was just about empty, and we still had to walk three more hours to get back. I knew I couldn’t take any of Fiston’s water, because it had not been treated. He was immune to the local bacteria, but it could make me dangerously ill, especially in my current weakened state. It was a hot day, and by the time we got to the top of the hill, my body was pouring sweat and my throat was dry as a bone.

Suddenly, I was at the top of the hill. When I looked across the valley, I was amazed at how beautiful it was. My thirst dropped to the background. For the first time, I could see the whole valley and all our land, and got a real sense of what we could do. I could clearly envision how the whole project would come to life. I was thrilled and excited to think what we could do.

However, we still had to walk all the way back. During that time, my mind was trying to come up with different ways of getting water, but the fact was, there was no alternative. I couldn’t sit down and give up. I would collapse completely in the 6 hours it would take for someone to bring me back some clean water. There was no other course. I could not give up. I would have to walk back.

Somehow or other, by sheer determination and the grace of God, I made it back to the village. I saved that one last sip until we were only a couple hundred yards from the WVI headquarters at twilight. Then, once in the door, I drank lots of water and crashed onto my bed. A couple hours later, I was revived.

I remarked to Fiston, “That was an amazing view you showed me, but I have to say that you are a pretty bad judge of time. You said it would only take us an hour and a half!”

Sheepishly, Fiston leveled with me, “In fact, I knew how far it was, but I also knew that if I asked you to go on a six hour hike in the hot sun, you never would have gone. You would not have seen that amazing sight!”

I told him that if I had known, I still would still have gone. I just would have brought more water. But nevertheless, I could understand his point.

Naturally, I have to chuckle every time I think back to that hike. But I also see how it still applies to both Fiston and me in our trying to build this village. Neither of us would have tried to do this project if we had known how very difficult it was going to be every step of the way. We didn’t have sufficient resources when we started out, and, due to the war, we have struggled constantly to make it survive and grow.

But every once in awhile, I see the villagers working on a field or training oxen or building houses, and I catch a glimpse of the amazing future of this project. I’m glad we didn’t know how hard it was going to be.

Just like on the hike, now that we’ve started this project, and there are so many families that depend on it for their livelihood, and their hope, and their future – regardless of the situation – the only thing to do is to keep pushing forward.

For more information on Working Villages International see

www.workingvillages.org