|
I saw the film many years ago, and what I learned in it still haunts my thoughts to this day.
The film follows two young men as they decided to produce a crop of corn, and it follows the progress through from beginning to end.
As a farmer myself, I was actually happy to see them crunch the numbers and point out the subsidies of a few bucks per acre they planted. I can't recall how much it was exactly, but the numer $80.00 sounds in the ballpark. When one does the math, planting 100 acres would yield $8000.00 of free money. Scaling up in this case provides incentive for as many acres as possible in order to get the most subsidies, and this is why farming is moved toward bigger and bigger producers and the capital and input intensive form of agriculture we see today.
A small farmer such as myself cannot compete with the economies of scale, but we produce smaller quantities of higher quality food, and we are not so dependant on Machinery as the big producers, who have poisoned their fields so badly that only an idiot would dare to walk around in one. The small farmer is not afraid a wielding a hoe, hand pulling their fields, or allowing so called "weeds" to coexist with the crops, simply because diversity can help protect the food crop from insect pressure, if their is any at all.
The only time I see heavy insect pressure is when plants are stressed or weakened for some reason. Plants can look totally healthy, yet something in their system can be out of balance, and the bug's automatically zero in on these weakened plants and feast. Healthy plants can repel insects effectively, and this require much more than just Nitrgen, Phosorous and Potassium, which are only the most basic nutrients a plant needs to grow. Certainly they respond to N-P-K, but they also need trace minerals which have long been depleted since the 1930's. Just because a plant looks like it is healthy, doesn't mean it necessarily is very nutritious, and the Agribusiness industry has caused any claims of either inferior or superior quality of produce be quashed by the USDA, regardles of the known facts that crops grown on depleted soil are not as nutritious as those grown on fertile soils. Any claims to that effect will trigger a visit from the FDA, with potential fines, as well as open the farmer up to litigation from those whose crops are identified as being of lesser quality due to prolonged soil depletion.
This tactic promotes the idea that all food that looks "Normal" is identical, and the consumer is kept in the dark regarding the true nutrition of the food they eat. It is also why the food industry fought Country of Origin labeling so hard. I thought it had passed, but the Corporations have already found a way to circumvent it through "Rebranding" and "Relabeling" like they do at Trader Joes and Walmart. Don't want to tell consumers where it is sourced? Easy, make it an instore label and sell it for lower cost!
Another intersting thing about the "King Corn" film was the utter refusal of the Corn Refiners Association" to allw them to film the inside of the Cargill High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) refinery, stating that it is a trade secret - I think they mentioned something about 9/11 and terroists.. Uh Huh. Frankly, I've looked for films on the process and the security for the manufactur of this foodstuff is non-existant. I see plenty of cuddly teddly bears, butterflies, and happy little kids, but this shit is produced by the tanker truck, using some pretty intricate processes and chemicals, as well as the use of catalyzers and stacks.. It appears that the industry is so concerned about the gritty and visceral images associated with the process, that they prohibit any images of a production plant to be disseminated.
Considering the HFCS is in everything processed, you'd think it would be a non issue. Frankly, I find it disturbing that they hide in the shadows with this process.
As far as subsidies go, I have looked into assistance for development of my tract over my various farms over the past decade, and everytime I tell the USDA boys that I focus on organic agroforestry and low touch agriculture, they tell me that they deal mostly with Cattle production and monoculture. Even though I grow several dozen varieties of foods, it just doesnt fit in the monocrop mentality of the USDA and Food Policy of the US. If I were to relent, I'd be up to my armpits in Ag Equipment and the debt and infrastructure it requires. I refuse to get trapped in the system by going into debt, and I am thankful I have committed to an old method of no till agriculture. Without debt, I don't have to wring excess production out of my soils and deplete it prematurely for a few bucks I give away to the vendors..
I have the luxury of having the time for years long experiments and hands on experience doing things the old fashoioned way, and have found that the old fashioned way works, is more fun, more healthy, and much more rewarding than driving around in a tractor all day listening to megadeth or whatever they do in the midwest.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
