Wild Farm Alliance
Wild Farm Alliance
Wild Farm Alliance About WFA What is Wild Farming Resources Contact WFA Support WFA
Wild Farm Alliance
Wild Farm Alliance

Biodiversity Farm Brochure
Biodiversity Tips, Articles & Interviews
Book Purchases
Briefing Papers
Chef's Toolkit
Food Pyramid
Organic & Biodiversity Guidelines
Links
WFA Presentations

Resources


   

Food Safety

Misdirected efforts to lower food safety risks are discouraging conservation practices proven to safeguard wildlife habitat as well as the nation’s food supply.


Wall Street Journal article

High Country News article

WFA Food Safety Policy Paper

Addendum to WFA's Food Safety Paper

Download Photos of Habitat Destruction


On May 2, 2008, “Wildlife in Middle of War on E. Coli” by Jane Zhang appeared in the Wall Street Journal, bringing national attention to the environmental costs of current food safety trends. Click here to read an excerpt from the article.

Another article, “Fields of Overkill”, by Li Miao Lovett appeared in High Country News this May, narrating how the cause of conservation and farmers in the Salinas Valley are both being scorched by food safety concerns. Click here to read more.

Current research and available science articulate the false nature of the conflict between food safety and environmental stewardship. Eliminating wildlife, which studies have shown do not pose a significant risk to food safety, and removing wildlife habitat that filters pathogens exacerbates the problem of E.coli 0157 entering the food supply.Click here for a summary of WFA's policy paper or download "Food Safety Requires a Healthy Environment: Policy Recommendations for E.coli 0157".

WFA also produced an addendum to the policy paper, which includes photos of habitat destruction. Click here to view "Environmental Destruction in the Salinas Valley: 'Food Safety' Requirements to Remove Habitat Make Leafy Greens Less Safe."

Download Photos of Habitat Destruction

More information:

Growers' survey showing environmental destruction caused by food safety requirements along California's Central Coast conducted by Monterey Resource Conservation District.
Crop Notes from Monterey County's Cooperative Extension discussing the unlikelihood of rodents as vectors of E. coli O157:H7 and other pathogenic strains.
Food Safety Policy Guide from Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF) outlining the "history, politics, and perils of the current food safety controversy."
E. coli Analysis Chart from CAFF showing the percentage of outbreaks originating in California that have been traced to processed leafy greens.

From "Wildlife in Middle of War on E. coli" by Jane Zhang, Wall Street Journal:

“Farmers around California's "Salad Bowl" have mounted an assault against wildlife to appease buyers who worry about E. coli in their leafy greens.

About one-third of the farmers surveyed in the region have cleared wide swaths of land surrounding their fields, leaving felled trees scattered along the Salinas River. Most used poisons, traps or fences to keep out frogs, squirrels and other wildlife last year, according to a Monterey County Resource Conservation District survey. Some farmers let ponds and irrigation reservoirs -- potentially prime wildlife habitat -- go dry.

Caught in the middle is wildlife whose complicity in the transmission of E. coli is unconfirmed. And farmers. While fresh-produce farmers are forced to absorb skyrocketing food-safety costs, not all of the measures are justified by science.

Despite his concerns about harming the environment, Bob Martin, general manager of Rio Farms in King City, says he cleared vegetation and trapped and poisoned mice and squirrels on the 6,000-acre farmland that mainly produces leafy greens. To keep birds out of his property, he has tried fences, propane-powered blast cannons, and hawk-like kites tied to poles. They work, but not for long. "It's all smoke and mirrors," he says, noting birds get used to the tricks.

To keep his fields as clean as possible, Mr. Martin says he spent more than $500,000 in 2007 on food-safety steps, including a full-time food-safety overseer. He is chagrined much of the extra costs have been imposed without scientific proof of their necessity.

"We are definitely between a rock and a hard spot," says Mr. Martin, who is participating in a study of the risks of E. coli from deer. "I understand the necessity of adhering to a basic set of standards." But he thinks many measures are "window dressing."

Some farmers said buyers have rejected acres of lettuce and other leafy greens after inspectors saw "potential frog habitat" or tadpoles in a nearby creek.

Some smaller farmers opt out. Dale Coke, owner of a 250-acre farm in San Juan Bautista, said he lost $50,000 to $60,000 in sales to Canadian buyers because he isn't participating in a California initiative that set standards for leafy-green growers. Had he signed up, he says, he would have to apply the rules to all of his crops, even though 70% aren't leafy greens.
Although Mr. Coke spends more than $10,000 a year on food safety, he sells to wholesalers who don't require him to follow the "draconian measures" imposed by processors, he says.”

Consumers need to communicate that "they will not tolerate environmental destruction for the production of their leafy greens," says Jo Ann Baumgartner, director of the Wild Farm Alliance. "These current practices in the Salinas Valley are bad for human health and bad for wildlife."



From "Fields of overkill" by Li Mao Lovett, High Country News:

“In California's verdant Salinas Valley, the tangles of trees and shrubs that once bordered the fields of leafy greens are disappearing. Chain-link fences now barricade the Salinas River as it flows through the nation's salad bowl. In early April, a small lake that once sheltered migratory birds and insects beneficial to farmers had been reduced to a bulldozed pit; by the end of the month, it had disappeared completely. Like the vanishing trees and hedgerows, the pond was another victim of food-safety measures gone awry.

After an E. coli outbreak in 2006 was traced to tainted spinach, the leafy greens industry and big corporate buyers like McDonald's and Wal-Mart responded with an array of tough new standards for growing spinach and lettuce. Packaged produce has been the culprit in the majority of outbreaks linked to leafy greens; those who fell sick or died in the 2006 outbreak had eaten bagged spinach from a single processing plant in California owned by Natural Selection Foods. Still, native vegetation and waterways that provide habitat for deer, birds and other wildlife were suddenly seen as health threats by those high up on the corporate food chain.

Pushed by inspectors and buyers, leafy greens growers on California's Central Coast are sterilizing their fields, ripping out wildlife habitat and putting up fences. Often, the farmers' contracts and livelihoods are at stake. "Growers have been told to cut down trees on family farms that have been around for 50 years," says Kirk Schmidt, executive director of Central Coast Water Quality Preservation. And it's not just farmers and wildlife that are losing out - the excessive measures are changing farms in ways that could actually make our food supply less safe. "Buyers are taking advantage of food safety to get a competitive edge," says Joseph McIntyre, facilitator of the California Roundtable on Agriculture and the Environment. "They're putting pressure on growers toward practices that may not have food safety benefits, as well as (cause) unintended consequences."

Click here to read the entire piece.


More on WFA's policy paper Food Safety Requires a Healthy Environment: Policy Recommendations for E.coli 0157:

WFA works in a region directly affected by this issue, and we are seeing and hearing first hand reports of how compliance with unreasonable food safety requirements is resulting in significant environmental degradation. Our mission of promoting agriculture that protects and restores wild nature strikes at the heart of this matter. Without changes to the direction food safety programs, stewardship practices supported by USDA and others that protect the environment would be jeopardized nationwide.

In the paper, a set of recommendations is made for all current and future government-sanctioned food safety programs. Some are suggested changes to Good Agricultural Practice metrics, and others are changes to the scope of what food safety programs cover. Additionally, suggestions address wider-reaching core problems that when dealt with concurrently, yield a more comprehensive plan for the safe production of food.

Major recommendations include: a) the unfounded targeting of wildlife is stopped; b) buffers between crops and grazing lands are vegetated instead of left bare, and no buffer is required between crops and habitat; c) a ceiling is placed on all government authorized food safety programs to curtail the use of environmentally destructive super metrics; and d) food safety auditors are certified through programs teaching agricultural natural resource protections that reduce the incidence of harmful pathogens on the landscape.

Click here to download the pdf.





© 2008 Wild Farm Alliance. All Rights Reserved.