Name of Project ___________________________________________ Name Submitting ____________________________________________ Address_____________________________________________________ Zip Code _________________________ Telephone _______________________________ Please print or type. Use additional paper if needed. Please include an itemized budget. Please describe the problem that this project will address and why there is a need for the project. Please describe what you will do in the planned project. Be specific. How will you communicate to the public about the project? What kind of reporting to Sustainable Projects will you carry out? What is the amount of money you need to carry out the proposed project? Please itemize. | THE IMPORTANCE OF BUYING IOWA-GROWN FOOD Kamyar Enshayan, Cedar Falls (Editors note: Kamyar Enshayan, a PFI member, teaches at the University of Northern Iowa.) I remember my childhood years in a small town in northern Iran, I rode my bicycle to the market two or three times a week to buy food for our family. Almost all of the produce and other food sold at the market were locally-grown, in-season, and very delicious. The money spent on food circulated in the community and supported local farmers and other local businesses. Until a few years ago, when I worked as a farm apprentice at a vegetable farm in Maine, I used to think that our food choices were limited to what was shipped in from distant places. I now know that it is possible to grow a wide variety of fruit, vegetables, and other food right here in Iowa, even with minimal or no need for agrochemicals, >From mid-May to early November, Iowa farmers markets offer a vast array of fresh food: asparagus, peas, lettuce, radishes, rhubarb, spinach, maple syrup, and all kinds of flower and vegetable seedlings early in the season to pumpkins, winter squash, apples and a fall crop of greens in late October. The variety, freshness, nutritional quality and taste of these fresh-picked, locally grown foods cannot be matched. There is no substitute for locally grown food. Artificially cheap, subsidized oil has made it possible for us to ignore our local food economy in favor of shipped-in food. Students who take my class at University of Northern Iowa keep track of what they eat and where it comes from. They quickly discover that very little of what they eat comes from Iowa. An average food item served in our homes in Iowa has travelled some 2,000 miles, by-passing the local food economy. When we buy locally grown food, we support our local and regional farms, farmers, and rural communities. Our food dollars are circulated in our region. Let s asume that some 50,000 households in Blackhawk County and surrounding counties decided to spend $20 (of their weekly $70 grocery expenditure) buying locally grown food. That would be $1,000,000 every week poured into the local economy, supporting farmers, businesses and communities. That is $1,000,000 which does not leak out of northeast Iowa and instead circulates in our local economy every week. In addition, if hospitals, churches, colleges, restaurants and other institutional food buyers make a point of buying Iowa-grown food as much possible, we will have even more wealth and support for our local food economy. At a time when our communities are reduced to accepting various forms of gambling (including assembly-line hog factories) as economic development, keeping our food dollars in our community seems far more attractive and logical than bingo. There are many ways that we Iowans can support and strengthen our regional food economy: * As much as you can, buy locally-grown food at our many farmers markets. * Get to know some of your local farmers and buy eggs, meat, and produce directly from them. * When possible, you may wish to buy larger quantities of fresh produce from farmers markets for canning or freezing and enjoy them in winter months. If you can, grow a garden to develop a connection to soil and plants and to nurture your spirit while growing fresh produce of your own. But what sort-of Iowa-grown food could we eat here in winter months? A partial list of fresh, Iowa-grown food for October through April could include: potatoes, sweet potatoes, carrots and a host of other root crops, dry beans, onions, garlic, dried fruit, dried herbs, chickens, pork, beef, lamb, wheat, eggs, milk, cheese, . . . a modest list indeed. Needless to say, home canning and freezing can extend the season for regionally grown food. Re-establishment of small-scale, local canneries can help us strengthen our regional food economy by allowing farmers and home gardeners to market their products beyond the growing season. When we support regional food production, we in a direct way encourage a more diversified form of agriculture which is not entirely dependent on corn, soybeans and hogs with their vulnerable markets controlled by absentee corporations. A diversified agriculture that produces a wide variety of food (not just feed) is a practical necessity for our region. It would be good for Iowa, good for our health, good for our land and our communities, and therefore good for our economy. | UNNECESSARY FERTILIZATION: A SILENT DRAIN OF DOLLARS FROM FARM COMMUNITIES Alfred M. Blackmer (Editors note: This article by ISU professor of agronomy Fred Blackmer continues our series on the study coordinated by the Northwest Area Foundation. Blackmer s team did much of the on-farm data collection for the Iowa component of the project. This essay will appear in a book summarizing the study results, Planting the Future: Developing an Agriculture That Sustains Land and Community (ISU Press, $14.95, available after January). Recent agronomic studies in Iowa showthat most corn producers could increase their profits by applying less commercial fertilizer. The studies utilized new soil and plant tissue tests calibrated to objectively determine the extent to which nutrient availability exceeds crop needs. Surveys of randomly selected fields have documented the frequency and magnitude of the problem. About half of the cornfields sampled had soil nitrate concentrations greater than twice those needed to attain maximum yields. --- * Origin: [via Psychotronic BBS = Durham, NC = 919-286-4542]sustag- (1:3641/1) @PATH: 3641/1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (78) Fri 2 Dec 94 3:04 By: Rick Exner To: All Re: 09:Practical Farmers of Iowa newsletter, fall 1994 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @MSGID: 1:3641/223 0006aae0 @PID GIGO+ sn 175 at psybbs vsn 0.99 pl1 @SPLIT: 04 Dec 94 14:31:40 @3641/223 6952 09/11 ++++++++++ From: dnexner@iastate.edu (Rick Exner) @Subject: Practical Farmers of Iowa newsletter, fall 1994 Date: 2 Dec 1994 03:04:21 -0000 @Sender: daemon@bigblue.oit.unc.edu @Message-Id: <9412011822.AA03635@iastate.edu> Integration of the new soil and tissue tests into on-farm experiments revealed that farmers tend to apply commercial fertilizer in situations where none is needed. Most farmers are surprised to learn that it is not profitable to apply commercially prepared nitrogen fertilizers for corn grown after alfalfa or to soils receiving normal applications of animal manures. Implementation of the new tests into production agriculture would enable Iowa corn producers to increase their profits while reducing inputs of nitrogen fertilizers by at least $100 million per year. No change in cropping systems would be required. Inputs of phosphorus and potassium fertilizers could be reduced by tens of millions of dollars per year in Iowa alone. It could be argued that the savings on fertilizer are relatively unimportant, especially if farmers must pay the costs for the soil and tissue tests. However, dollars spent for local consulting services tend to remain and circulate in farm communities. Dollars spent for fertilizer materials tend to flow from farm communities to large corporations outside of farm communities. The new soil and tissue tests should promote changes in farming systems, as farmers gain the ability to determine fertilizer needs in alternative systems on their fields. For example, farmers who learn that manured cornfields require little or no commercial fertilizer may reconsider the merits of integrating crop and animal production. Perhaps the most important information provided by studies with the new tests is that farmers do not know the amounts of fertilizer needed on their fields. Without diagnostic tools like the new soil and tissue tests, farmers have no reasonable means of detecting when unnecessary fertilizers are applied. Unnecessary fertilization cannot be seen or heard by farmers. Current perceptions concerning fertilizer needs are the product of several decades of cooperation between government and industry to develop new fertilizers and promote their use. These programs have been very effective and have greatly increased the amounts of fertilizer used. The potential beneficial effects of fertilizers on farm productivity and profitability have been widely touted. Relatively little effort has been directed toward evaluating the extent of unnecessary fertilization or assessing its costs to farm communities. Widespread concern about environmental pollution has generated support for publicly funded programs to improve fertilization practices. These programs have helped farmers recognize the problems caused by inefficient fertilization practices. Much of the effort, however, has been directed toward developing and promoting products that can be sold to farmers. Examples include chemical additives designed to inhibit transformations of the fertilizer in soils. Use of these products often increases the cost of crop production and accelerates the flow of dollars from farm communities. Many local fertilizer dealers and consultants in Iowa have demonstrated great willingness to offer the new soil and tissue tests as a service to their customers. Recent reports indicate that average rates of nitrogen fertilization in Iowa have decreased by 19% during the past few years. However, most farmers still prefer to pay for extra fertilizer rather than for the tests. The large corporations that manufacture fertilizers have shown little