As you may have seen in the news, the House of Representatives passed their version of the Farm Bill on Friday afternoon.  And Food & Water Watch activists made a difference!  On several key issues, bad amendments were either withdrawn or defeated.

Here’s the wrap-up:

Factory Farms – An amendment to lift the cap on payments to large farms from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program was defeated on the floor of the House.  EQIP is a conservation program that gives grants to farms to improve their environmental practices.  Removing the cap on farm size would allow large factory farms to receive grants to build systems for managing the vast amounts of manure their operations generate.  The defeat of this amendment was good news for those trying to make factory farms pay to clean up the pollution they create.

Country of Origin Labeling – After lots of behind-the-scenes drama to head off a threatened amendment to gut the program, the House version of the bill clarifies how country-of-origin labeling will be instituted for meat and produce.  And it keeps the process on track so labeling will be required in September 2008. In light of the furious opposition by the meat, produce, and grocery industries, this is a major victory for consumers who took action to say they want COOL now.

Organic Production –  The House version of the bill includes funding to help farmers transition to organic production and also more support for research into organic production methods.

While we made good progress on these fronts, the Farm Bill is a much bigger package of policies.  One of the cornerstones of the Farm Bill is policy on commodity crops like corn, soybeans, cotton, and rice.  The House version of the Farm Bill leaves in place a broken system for these commodity crops.  The House missed an opportunity to re-instate supply management programs that would stop the overproduction of these crops that leads to low prices for farmers and cheap feed for factory farms.  Instead, they tinkered around the edges of bad policies that have been in place since 1996.

But even these little victories are farm from guaranteed.  The Senate must write and pass a bill and then the two must be reconciled in a conference committee.  Stay tuned for more. 

If you'd like to get updates like this by email, sign up for one of our email lists.

Welcome to Issue 7 of the Food & Water Watch podcast.

In this issue, Food & Water Watch debuts a new tool for combating factory farming; the California state legislature considers a new law that tighten the grip of private water companies on utilities in the Golden State; and U.S. Representative Bart Stupak of Michigan proposes legislation to address the problem of carbon-monoxide-treated meat.

The Food & Water Watch podcast is updated each Friday. Tune in each week for news on the fight to stop corporate control of food and water.

 Subscribe in a reader

If you read the report we released along with FactoryFarmMap.org, you know that the payments that the government makes to farmers allowing them to sell their soy and corn for less than the costs of production (read our farm bill report if you want to understand how we got into that mess) acts as an indirect subsidy for gigantic animal livestock operations, also known as factory farms.  These facilities are so big that they can't possibly grow their own livestock feed, and we report that, if factory farms paid as much for corn and soy as it costs to grow, their overall cost of production would increase by 7 to 10 percent.

Now what industry wouldn't mind a 10 percent subsidy from the government?  But apparently, that's not enough.  Big Ag would wants in on a little program called the Environmental Quality Incentives Program.  EQIP is a conservation program run by the USDA that gives grants to farms to improve their environmental practices. There is a proposed amendment to the 2007 Farm Bill that would remove the cap on what size farms (as determined by their annual income) are eligible for the program’s funding, and would allow large factory farms to receive grants to build systems for managing the vast amounts of manure their operations generate.

This proposal would be an unfair subsidy for operations that use unsustainable practices and rob small farms of desperately needed funds that could help them make their practices better. Think that stinks worse than a manure lagoon (and those are pretty bad)?  Then there's no time like right now for expressing your dismay to your member of Congress.

And, if you haven't checked out FactoryFarmMap.org, what are you waiting for?

Can’t wait to chow down on those burgers and pork chops that you grilled tonight? Ponder the likelihood that your dinner may have been unfortunate enough to grow up in a factory farm. Industrial animal production, the practice of confining thousands of cows, hogs, chickens, or other animals in tightly packed facilities, has become the dominant method of meat production in the United States.

These factory farms seriously harm human health and the environment in the communities where they locate. Take, for example, the fact that the millions of gallons of manure and other waste these industrial farms produce cannot be properly managed and often spill into waterways. They emit toxic chemicals that can cause hazardous air and water pollution. People working in these animal factories or those living nearby often suffer intensely from the odors and experience a range of negative physical effects.

We’ve used USDA data to create a new map that shows the regional concentration of these concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), but people thousands of miles away from these facilities are not immune to their effects. Consumers eating the dairy, egg, and meat products produced there are faced with the consequences of antibiotic and artificial hormone use and other food safety problems.

Concerned? You should be.

Do something about it. Use our new map to discover if factory farms have encroached on your state or county. And, don’t forget to vote with your almighty dollar by purchasing meat produced in a more sustainable way. Learn how with the Eat Well Guide.

Welcome to Issue 6 of the Food & Water Watch podcast.

In this issue, residents of Stockton, California win a battle against water privatization in their community; the Inter-American Development Bank takes aim at Peruvian water utilities; and a new report from Food & Water Watch questions the 2007 Farm Bill and the "Rush to Ethanol."

The Food & Water Watch podcast is updated each Friday. Tune in each week for news on the fight to stop corporate control of food and water.

 Subscribe in a reader

If you've been reading our blog, you know that last month Starbucks indicated that it would increase the amount of hormone-free milk that it uses from 37% to 51%. The announcement followed months of Food & Water Watch lobbying the coffeehouse to completely phase out milk containing rBGH, or Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormones, which harms cows and may harm people.

If you've been listening to our podcast, you know that last week the restaurant chain Chipotle Mexican Grill contacted Food & Water Watch to tell us that they’re aiming to be the first national restaurant in the country to go completely rBGH-free.

Are you listening Starbucks?  That sounds like a challenge.

Last year, Chipotle converted to sour cream that is 100% rBGH-free, and now it says it is working toward serving cheese that is rBGH-free as well.  In a statement on its website, Chipotle says, “We're not scientists, but ingesting hormones with our crispy tacos just doesn't seem like a good idea.”

So Starbucks, anytime you want to set a date for finishing the job and going 100% rBGH-free, you know where to find us (If you forgot, contact us here.)

Creative Commons Licensed Flickr Photo Originally uploaded by animakitty.

VS.

Creative Commons Licensed Flickr Photo Originally uploaded by gisarah.

The gauntlet has been thrown . . . 

Rising oil prices, energy security, and global warming concerns have contributed to the current hype over biofuels. With both prices and demand for oil likely to continue rising, biofuels are being presented as the way to curb greenhouse gas emissions and to develop homegrown energy that reduces U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

But hold on a minute: It turns out that corn-based ethanol is not necessarily the silver bullet everyone is seeking. To start with, even if we dedicated the entire U.S. corn crop to ethanol, it would displace only a small share of gasoline demand. Thus, we still would depend on foreign oil.

Next, we move on to the fact that ethanol is, sadly, not the solution to global warming. Ethanol tailpipe emissions can reduce some greenhouse gases, but also can increase levels of others. As you may have guessed, corn farming and ethanol production are not emissions free. When fossil fuels are used to power ethanol refineries, they can lead to higher greenhouse gas emissions than the fossil fuel that ethanol is supposed to replace.  Conversely, a modest increases in auto fuel efficiency standards of even one mile per gallon for all cars and light trucks, such as those passed by the Senate last month, could cut petroleum consumption by more than all alternative fuels and replacement fuels combined.

And, last but not least, ethanol is not the solution to revitalizing rural America. Although the rise in corn prices is certainly exciting to farmers, the ethanol industry’s growth could further concentrate agribusiness, which drains the economic health out of rural communities. 

Hang on to your piggy bank, folks. It's gonna be a long road ahead.

Welcome to Issue 5 of the Food & Water Watch Podcast.

In this issue, the House Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Oceans holds a hearing to consider the National Offshore Aquaculture Act of 2007. Food & Water Watch issues a call to President Elias Antonia Saca of El Salvador to release thirteen people detained after a protest against water privatization in El Salvador. And Chipotle Mexican Grill aims to be the first national chain to go completely rBGH-free.

The Food & Water Watch podcast is updated each Friday. Tune in each week for news on the fight to stop corporate control of food and water.

 Subscribe in a reader

We've mentioned before that labels revealing the origin of fresh and frozen food would be invaluable tools for consumers deciding what foods they wish to buy for their families. We know you think so too. 

Back in March we revealed polling results where 82% of participating consumer expressed a desire to see mandatory country-of-origin labeling on their food. Since China's recent food safety woes started making the news, that support has only grown stronger. Consumers Union conducted a poll that revealed 92% support for COOL. Ninety-two percent of you thought it was ridiculous that you could easily tell where your t-shirt was made but not where your fruit, vegetables, or meat was grown.

One company in Utah has taken matters into their own hands and will begin labeling their food "China Free." That's not really the universal information we were hoping for but it's good to see someone taking country-of-origin labeling seriously. Now only if we could get USDA or Congress to do the same.

Welcome to Issue 4 of the Food & Water Watch podcast.

This week, residents of McCloud, in Northern California, declare a victory in the ongoing struggle against a water bottling contract; the Food and Drug Administration halts the importation of five seafood items from China; and Food & Water Watch pays a visit to a sustainable fish-farming project in Brooklyn.

The Food & Water Watch podcast is updated each Friday. Tune in each week for news on the fight to stop corporate control of food and water.

 Subscribe in a reader