Photo by Zack Sheppard/Flickr CC
In my previous post, I mentioned that a Cal Poly donor had written the university arguing that Michael Pollan should not be permitted to speak to students unopposed. The donor, Mr. David Wood of Harris Ranch Beef Company, wrote Dr. Warren Baker, President of Cal Poly, threatening to withdraw his promised $500,000 contribution if the invitation to Mr. Pollan was not withdrawn.
I now have copies of the actual letters. They are well worth reading by anyone concerned about the relationship of industrial agriculture to its impact on soil and water, climate change, rural sustainability, air quality, animal welfare, worker safety, antibiotic resistance, and human health, as well as by the influence of Big Agriculture on public policy.
The original letter from Mr. Wood to Dr. Baker is an Adobe file that is too big for me to upload (I am trying to find out how to do this and will post as soon as I get instructions that work), but here are Dr. Baker's response to that letter and Mr. Wood's response to Dr. Baker.
My favorite quotation from Mr. Wood's response is this:
For too long now, those intimately involved in production of agriculture have silently allowed others (academics and activists) to shape their future. Not any longer! The views of elitists' [sic] like Michael Pollan can no longer go unchallenged. Agriculture cannot allow the Pollans of the world to shape societal expectations (and ultimately policy makers' decisions) regarding the production practices that can or cannot be employed by those whose livelihood depends on the continued development and adoption of modern agriculture practices.
I will let this comment speak for itself.
SHOP THE ATLANTIC FOOD MARKETPLACE
Subscribe to Atlantic Food
Ms. Nestle,
1) Get one of your students to upload the file for you, or suffer through this: http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/328/328616.html
2) This is quite disturbing. How can a writer of moderate income be ever considered a member of the 'elite'? How can questioning how we use our soil, and how to restore it's health, be threatening to any agricultural concern?
Does this quotation from Mr. Wood's letter seem ironic to anyone else? Here's to one BIG wake up call!
"This whole mess is having a profound impact not just on Cal Poly, but rather, on Ag schools across this great nation. We believe this is a wakeup call to those in academia. We hope and pray that you are listening!"
It should not be surprising to anybody that agribusiness continues doing what they have been doing for the last few decades (while we could still have prevented the current crisis).
Like Mrs Nestle - I am writing from Rome myself. It is bitter to see what FAO employees order themselves when one goes out to dinner with them in private. Why should we expect agribusiness to change when Mrs Nestle cannot even explain to fellow colleagues at The Atlantic - like for example Corby Kummer, that eating at the top of the food chain is not sustainable with almost 7 billion people on the planet?
In my book - we cannot make the poor rich over night (thank god as they would want to consume what we do) and we can also unfortunately cannot introduce equality in the world for women (the US hasn't had a single female president so far). We know that The Green Revolution is the problem and not the solution. But even a child should be able to grasp the food chain and most of unbiased media does not.
When it comes to eating carnivores and predators - the question is not "wild or farmed" salmon for example. If we cannot explain these simple arguments to somebody unbiased at The Atlantic - what do we expect from agribusiness? Why does Mr Kummer still eat wolves and cats of the sea instead of lower on the food chain?
Why is a comedian a better source for kids than The Atlantic on this important issue?
PS: It took real sustainability activists a decade to explain the basics about nature to Mr Pollan so that he could pass it on to his audience. He was a very very slow learner but now he starts doing some good... He must recognize that there is opportunity(stic).. never mind.
PS: Rome is not only host to the FAO but has also a decent film festival (not as great as Venice but good). Why is this relevant to the discussion?
Well this year - a dog stole the show. Every grown man who watched the American remake of the Japanese film Hachiko was weeping. If we can eat tuna and salmon - we can eat dogs too (and we do). But only because we can does not mean we should. It is easier for rainforrest apes to bond with wolves than it is to bond with fish - but fish are also emotional and intelligent beings. Unless you believe in the theories of Rene Descartes and not Charles Darwin - you will think that there is a difference in kind and not merely degree between fish and dogs and humans... but for those who do believe in Darwin and evolution there are huge ethical implications as well regarding what we eat. It can make you weep.
Check out these numbers from a sustainability but also ethical point of view. Thank you.
Big Meat has all of the money in the world to lobby Congress, to influence universities, and to sway public opinion that everything that they say is true and everything representing a contrary opinion is not only false but against progress, the American Way and plentiful, inexpensive meat. Big Meat didn’t play fair over 100 years ago when it was known as the Beef Trust, and it doesn’t play fair today, so there is no reason to cut it any breaks, or listen to any of its pleas or threats on behalf of jobs, the public, or the solvency of the industry - besides, their numbers and their promises never add up. As Upton Sinclair wrote over 100 years ago, “what they wanted from a hog was all the profits that could be got out of him…” The bonus is that Big Meat wants us to pay for all of the external damage they create by making their ground meat.
If you are being told that you need to cook a hamburger to 160 degrees for it to be safe, you should not be buying that hamburger. Eating these factory made ‘things’ is riskier than playing Russian Roulette. With the latter you at least know the odds and a loss is quick and painless, whereas the next hamburger you buy from Big Meat might lead to an excruciating death or a lifetime of painful rehabilitation. Support your local sustainable farmers, and those butchers and markets that support them and provide full information about their meat. Don’t be fooled by marketing slogans and carefully crafted brand names (‘Oh, if it’s Angus Beef it must be safe!’). ‘Provenance’ and ‘traceability’ aren’t merely buzzwords of Birkenstock-wearing ‘organic’ fanatics; they are rapidly becoming a matter of life and death.
Read more from How Would You Like That Burger.