Food Sleuth: Helping people think beyond their plate

Organic farming offers more safeguards against natural disaster

By Melinda Hemmelgarn, M.S., R.D.

Photo © Dan Hemmelgarn Melissa Hemmelgarn with tomatoes.

There are people who will tell you there is no difference between organic and conventionally raised food, besides the price tag. In a nutshell, they’re wrong. The differences range from superior nutritional content to improved soil and water quality to animal and public health.

The “organic” label gives consumers legal assurance that no antibiotics, synthetic hormones, pesticides or herbicides were used in production. Plus, choosing organic foods is our best way to avoid genetically modified ingredients.

That’s good news all around – from end-point eaters to farmers and farm workers, who routinely face exposure to potentially harmful pesticides and herbicides on conventional farms.

However, the recent severe Midwestern floods provide another good reason to promote organic agriculture, dismantle concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and ban their new construction in the future.

For example, Associated Press reports from the Hawkeye state describe flood waters as a “noxious brew of sewage, farm chemicals and fuel.” Residents have been warned by emergency and homeland-security personnel not to wade in, or, heaven forbid, ingest the toxic soup.

According to Kevin Baskins, Communications Bureau Chief for Iowa’s Department of Natural Resources, “It may be six to nine months before Cedar Rapids is able to start treating sewage again.” Restoring safe public water supplies and the integrity of wastewater treatment plants is their first concern.

Flooding has destroyed Iowa’s public infrastructure as well as extensive acreage of industrial farmland, including factory hog farms and miles of genetically modified corn and soy crops. Flood waters may also carry off and distribute genetically modified seeds and pollen and disturb manure lagoons – the huge vats of animal waste from thousands of animals teeming with pathogenic bacteria, antibiotics, ammonia and heavy metals.

Rebuilding infrastructure, let alone surface clean up, promises to be a monstrous task in the weeks and months ahead. Farm Aid (www.farmaid.org) has established a farmer relief fund.

The National Conference of State Legislatures reports that “when appropriately applied to soil, animal manure can fertilize crops and restore nutrients to the land. When improperly managed, animal waste can pose a threat to human health and the environment.”

In fact, preventing raw animal manure from entering fields, irrigation and well water is one of the “good agricultural practices” cited by the FDA to reduce the risk of Salmonella-tainted tomatoes and E. coli-contaminated spinach and lettuce.

The Federal Clean Water Act attempts to limit the amount and types of pollutants CAFOs can release, but Mother Nature doesn’t follow those manmade rules.

A recent report published by the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production, in cooperation with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, states: “Groundwater contamination…can extend throughout the aquifer, affecting drinking water supplies far from the source of contamination.” (Read the full report.)

What’s more, recent studies show that produce can take up pathogenic bacteria via the plants’ root systems and flesh. This is one reason why produce that has been in contact with flood waters should not be consumed, even after thorough washing.

Large quantities of water will help weaken the potency of toxic compounds, but as flood waters recede, they’ll leave an oily film, dead animals, plus unknown levels of pathogenic bacteria, pharmaceuticals and poisonous agricultural chemicals in their wake, not to mention stench.

Stan Hildebrand, organic inspector and farm manager at the certified organic Sandhill Farm in Rutledge, MO, explains that the recent flooding disasters go beyond important differences in organic and conventional farming practices. They reflect “the way we have tried to straighten out rivers and remove wetlands.” Hildebrand speaks to the necessity of restoring these natural, protective areas. Even if they don’t seem to be “productive,” they are protective.

Melinda Hemmelgarn, M.S., R.D., is a registered dietitian, advocate for sustainable food systems, and Food and Society Policy Fellow. She’s based in Columbia, MO. ©Food Sleuth 2008