HershbergerDemonst3-12.JPG

I was going to write a year-end “top food rights stories of 2013” and rank the events that seemed most important. The criminal trial of Wisconsin farmer Vernon Hershberger, the second trial of Minnesota farmer Alvin Schlangen, the legislative clashes over food sovereignty in Maine, the legal journey of Michigan hog farmer Mark Baker, the Foxborough initiative against Lawton Family Farm–all important events. 

 

Then it occurred to me that something seems to have changed about these events. This isn’t the first year we’ve seen legal and regulatory assaults on small farms producing nutrient-dense food, but it is the first year that we have seen significant and growing public support for those being targeted, along with support for other related food issues. There is clearly an expanding awareness of the reality that, yes, the corporate-inspired regulators are trying to undermine access to nutrient-dense food. 


Perhaps the most clearcut evidence of this growing awareness and involvement came in two areas I didn’t give a lot of attention to on this blog. 

 

First, an unexpected announcement a couple weeks ago from that symbol of food tyranny, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The top food safety official, Michael Taylor, announced that the FDA has decided to delay for at least six months implementation of tough new rules affecting manure, compost, and water quality for produce growers, under the Food Safety Modernization Act.  In a statement that started, “You spoke. We heard you,” Taylor said there had been 150 hearings around the country during 2013. 

 

“In our travels, we saw first-hand how everyone is committed to food safety.  We especially spent a lot of time talking to farmers, both those who are smaller and work the land their family has owned for generations, and those who oversee large, diverse operations. We have heard concerns that certain provisions, as proposed, would not fully achieve our goal of implementing the law in a way that improves public health protections while minimizing undue burden on farmers and other food producers.”

 

There had to be quite an outpouring of opposition for the FDA to put a halt on its new rules. Likely a fear within the agency that opposition was so great they’d have to face the spectre of widespread noncompliance, which the agency would have been powerless to counter. Believe me, the FDA didn’t put off its new rules because the agency has suddenly become a bunch of nice guys. 

 

The second major piece of evidence came from the grassroots effort that has taken hold to force food producers to label ingredients from genetically-modified organisms (GMO) in their products. These companies are tangling with millions of their customers, politically maneuvering and spending millions to defeat proposals springing up around the U.S. that the companies provide labeling information. Nearly seven million people in California and Washington state—presumably all of them customers of at least a few of the big food corporations—voted last year and this year in favor of propositions that would have required the labeling. Though the propositions were defeated, they lost only narrowly–51% to 49% in both states–and only after the corporations invested more than $65 million in the two states in television and other advertising to convince voters (customers) they were wrong to worry about GMO foods. Connecticut and Maine have passed legislation requiring labeling….once their neighbors do the same. Hawaii is on the cusp of becoming the first state to require such labeling. 

 

We can expect the struggle over food rights to likely intensify on various fronts, The reason? A number of the biggest food corporations, like Coke and Pepsi, are showing signs of losing market with their marquee products. Kellogg’s recently announced a seven per cent workforce reduction by 2017 because of weakening cereal sales, apparently due in part to a consumer boycott of Kashi, for supposedly including GMO ingredients.  

 

Moreover, cracks have begun to appear in the food industry’s seemingly united opposition to GMO labeling. Whole Foods, apparently seeing competitive advantage in the controversy, announced last March that it has adopted a policy that will require labeling of all foods sold in its stores containing GMO ingredients by 2018. 


But most of the big food companies won’t give in easily. They will push the politicians and regulators to be tougher on small farms. You see, these companies don’t want to attract consumers the old-fashioned way, by putting out superior products….but rather, by force and intimidation.