Market Farming

["jay gee" <jgj23 AT mindspring.com>]

Steve Gilman wrote:

>>>>
        I agree, somewhat, with your "agribusinessization" view, although see 
a
 big surge to in LOCAL and Organic demand that by-passes the big boys
 completely......yessss!
<<<<

I'm glad that you see a big surge in local and organic demand where
you are.  The dominant local supermarkets here in Southern California are
operated by Safeway (Vons), Kroger (Ralphs), and Albertsons (formerly
U.S. Stores now d.b.a  as Albertsons and retailing as Albertsons).
Ralphs and Vons have both taken to advertising the fact that certain
produce items in their offering are "California Grown."  This practice is
a departure from prior times when "produce was produce."  Only a small
portion of the produce offered in the store is sold as "organic."
 
>>>>
        Also, organic customers tend to be more savvy in the marketplace, I'll
 warrant, and there's plenty of grassroots groups helping to keep them
 appraised of market developments AND able to swing their "vote" toward
 bona fide organic practices, which, as we've all witnessed in the first
 go-round with USDA's Organic Program, DOESN''T include GMOs, sludge,
 irradiation, etc. (although the finer points are easily lost).
<<<<

The typical organic customer has been savvy to what is going on and
cares about the process for strictly personal reasons (that's okay).
I have not yet seen a concerted effort by grower/processors who
lobbied hard to get the government to co-opt the "organic" label
to advertise the fact that crops they are growing qualify as organic.
I believe this will come later after serious market research helps them
understand how the unsavvy general public perceives organic products.

Until agrigiants understand what the mass market perception is, throwing
money behind advertising is wasteful and potentially damaging to
the brand "Organic."  Because the savvy already buy and will continue
to buy "organic" unless offered a better alternative, the giants have no
fear of losing large amount of market share for existing products.


>>>>
        As you point out, such customers (and farmers) are a growing danger to
 agribusiness. So are the daily revelations of the seamy side of our food
 system -- E.coli meat, huge commodity subsidies, lack of GMO labeling,
 etc., etc. Whenever I find myself dismayed over the clout and power of
 agribiz I try and focus on the fact that just a small increase in public
 consciousness can make mighty changes and, I submit, we're in the midst of
 millennial/monumental changes now: witness Fla. elections, Catholic Church
 abuse revelations, Enron and corporate accounting scandals and others
 lurking on the horizon........
<<<<

Smart customers and a few thousand small farmers are no big threat to
agribiz as long as they can control the dialogue about what makes
healthy eating.  Whether it be the meat packers, or feed lot operators,
or corn producer/consolidators, these interests do more lobbying than
those few thousand farmers will ever do.  No disrespect intended
to small farmers.

When I was younger, I believed that my generation (Boomers) would
be smart enough and active enough to prevent the U.S. from getting
itself entangled in another Vietnam type situation, yet this country and
my generation are marching it down that road as we post to this list.
Boomers are not speaking out and are unlikely to do so until their
offspring start returning home from the battlefield in boxes.

The sitting Administration knows the power of war mongering
and a willing media is looking for sound bites, or live battlefield
reports to raise sagging ratings.  Don't forget that products are
not the only things being advertised on U.S. television.

Unlike you, I have seen that most involved people lose interest
in pursuing "what's right" to the bitter end.  Agribusiness is
counting on this normal human behavioral phenomenon to will
out in the case of "Organic."  They can wait, and dictate the
terms of where the battle is fought.

Pure food interests did a good job getting Congress to pass
legislation that brought about change in the USDA regs
governing meat (beef) inspections.  Unfortunately, the
Congress put no teeth in the regs by empowering the USDA
to order recalls of tainted beef.  Even though a ConAgra
or someone initiates a recall of 400,000 pounds of ground
beef, the announcement comes months after the meat has been
distributed and sold off of supermarket shelves.  This is reality.

>>>>
        Therefore, I'd be very surprised (ie over my dead body) to see your
 statement (below) come true:
 
        ("Definition creep will come next so that eventually GMOs will be 
able to
 be certified organic. This will occur over a number of years, not
 abruptly.")
<<<<

I sincerely hope you are right Steve.

Unfortunately, the monied interests have prevented the U.S.
from doing what is right in more areas than I care to think of
over the past fifteen years.  Nothing on the horizon is leading
me to reach a different conclusion.  Whether it be the Florida
elections, the Catholic Church scandals, or abducted teenage
girls, the media follows the story for as long as it is "hot," and
only as long as it is hot.  According to published reports, word
out of the Vatican is that the Bishop's Rules on Child Abuse
in the U.S. will not be approved because they deal in absolutes.

The Organic story is no longer hot and the cooler it gets by
reason of the passage of time, the easier it becomes for
those who now control it to change it drastically.  Many of
you are moving on to other designations hoping to have
a protected way of marketing your products where the
quality is assured in advance by the designation on the label.
I hope you achieve such a goal.

All I can suggest is to "keep watching the skies."

Regards all,

Jay Gee
not a farmer -- but interested in farming