University of Nebraska | Hort Update for the Week of 8/31/09 - Current Problems in the Lawn & Garden

Friday, September 4, 2009

http://extensionhorticulture.unl.edu/
Hort Update for the Week of 8/31/09

Current Problems in the Lawn & Garden


Lawns

1. It's time to... Fertilize, seed, aerate, and power rake cool season grasses
2. Stinkhorns- Orange, slimy, smelly fungi growing in wood mulch
3. Winter annual weed control- Apply pre-emergence herbicides if winter annuals are a problem
4. Billbug damage- Turfgrass areas appear drought stressed
5. Brown patch- Roughly circular patches of reddish brown grass
6. Dollar spot- Small circular patches of brownish tan grass
7. Summer patch- Circular or serpentine shaped areas of tan grass

Trees & Shrubs

8. Hackberry leaves yellowing- Premature leaf yellowing and leaf drop
9. Kermes scale- Off color or dead branch tips in oaks
10. Oak twig girdler- Dead and clipped branch tips in oaks
11. Honeylocust spider mite- Bronze colored leaves
12. Burcucumber/ wild cucumber- Rampant growing annual vines in windbreaks

Landscape Ornamentals

13. Black spot (rose)- Yellow leaves with black spots, defoliation
14. Soldier beetles- Reddish orange beetles with two black spots
15. Thrips- Flower buds fail to open or petals damaged when buds open

Fruits & Vegetables

16. Rosy apple aphids- Deformed and stunted fruit and leaves, sooty mold
17. Pear harvest- Harvest when mature, but not ripe
18. Picking rhubarb now- Best to wait until spring
19. Flowers, but no cucumber fruits- Poor pollination, environmental, gynoecious cukes
20. Slow ripening (tomato)- Cool nighttime temperatures likely cause
21. Fruit cracking (tomato)- Maintain consistent soil moisture, harvest when ripe
22. Internal blossom end rot- Blackening of inside of tomatoes, often Romas
23. Fall vegetables- what to plant- NebGuide on available on what and when to plant

General Issues

24. Wolf spider- Large, hairy spiders found indoors and outdoors, beneficial
25. Cobwebs on evergreens- Spiders, not spider mites, these are not a pest

Sphere: Related Content

Time to focus on surviving the upcoming EPIC times

Thursday, July 23, 2009

I started this particular blog and my home project during the time period when I was asleep to the economic take-down of our nation by off-shore banksters and the resulting consequences that are and will begin to bloom to a point they can no longer be denied by sheeple and the main stream corporate-owned media that has worked to totally pollute our society and culture in poisonous crap.

If people want to think that the fluoride in their local water supply is a needed chemical commodity not the truth that it is an industrial waste BigPharma makes the big bucks from ... so be it. European Court Ruling Ends Water Fluoridation There is an awaken occuring.

I started my first Stevia plant this year - in the sunflower family. This natural sweetner will be taken inside before the first frost and hopefully will produce some seeds. Starting Stevia from Seed. People can keep ingesting their sodas full of Rumsfield's aspartame and argue about how they believe this government exists to take care of them like trying to argue that scorpions don't sting.

Our nation is but the military arm of the off shore banksters - and our country has been pumped and will be dumped very shortly to transform into total revolution and killing hunger when the shelves are no longer stocked and our $dollar is dead once it is no longer the global currency.

It is time to focus upon surviving what Clif High of HalfPastHuman.com has termed a time period history that will be given the EPIC by future generations.

July 21st CoasttoCoastAM inteview with Clif High & George Ure - Alta Report "Shape of Things to Come 2010" Volume Zero Issue 1 (12 videos)

With the latest about New Zealand having moved closer to Australia as a result of the huge 7.8 mag quake the other day - inactive volcanoes now coming to life all over the planet, the sun's and earth's magnetosphere revealing great changes ... we are in the time period of earth changes. Contemplating the survival of a cloud of atomized radioactive carbon resulting from the Israel drop of a bunker buster potentially on Iran is my newest personal contemplation - since it is said such cloud will take 9 passes around the globe ... leaving death in its wake.

Well .. until you hear futher from me on this blog - get your food preparation and water filter filter and start paying attention to news beyond that from main-stream corporate bought off media, i.e., television.

Sphere: Related Content

HR875: Lose your property for growing food? Big Brother legislation could mean prosecution, fines up to $1 million

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

By Chelsea Schilling

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Some small farms and organic food growers could be placed under direct supervision of the federal government under new legislation making its way through Congress.

Food Safety Modernization Act

House Resolution 875, or the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, was introduced by Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., in February. DeLauro's husband, Stanley Greenburg, works for Monsanto – the world's leading producer of herbicides and genetically engineered seed.

DeLauro's act has 39 co-sponsors and was referred to the House Agriculture Committee on Feb. 4. It calls for the creation of a Food Safety Administration to allow the government to regulate food production at all levels – and even mandates property seizure, fines of up to $1 million per offense and criminal prosecution for producers, manufacturers and distributors who fail to comply with regulations.

Michael Olson, host of the Food Chain radio show and author of "Metro Farm," told WND the government should focus on regulating food production in countries such as China and Mexico rather than burdening small and organic farmers in the U.S. with overreaching regulations.

"We need somebody to watch over us when we're eating food that comes from thousands and thousands of miles away. We need some help there," he said. "But when food comes from our neighbors or from farmers who we know, we don't need all of those rules. If your neighbor sells you something that is bad and you get sick, you are going to get your hands on that farmer, and that will be the end of it. It regulates itself."

Want your vegetables to grow like crazy? Get the amazing natural fertilizer designed to maximize taste and nutrient density!

The legislation would establish the Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services "to protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring the safety of food, improving research on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security of food from intentional contamination, and for other purposes."

Federal regulators will be tasked with ensuring that food producers, processors and distributors – both large and small – prevent and minimize food safety hazards such as food-borne illnesses and contaminants such as bacteria, chemicals, natural toxins or manufactured toxicants, viruses, parasites, prions, physical hazards or other human pathogens.

Under the legislation's broad wording, slaughterhouses, seafood processing plants, establishments that process, store, hold or transport all categories of food products prior to delivery for retail sale, farms, ranches, orchards, vineyards, aquaculture facilities and confined animal-feeding operations would be subject to strict government regulation.

Government inspectors would be required to visit and examine food production facilities, including small farms, to ensure compliance. They would review food safety records and conduct surveillance of animals, plants, products or the environment.

"What the government will do is bring in industry experts to tell them how to manage all this stuff," Olson said. "It's industry that's telling government how to set these things up. What it always boils down to is who can afford to have the most influence over the government. It would be those companies that have sufficient economies of scale to be able to afford the influence – which is, of course, industrial agriculture."

Farms and food producers would be forced to submit copies of all records to federal inspectors upon request to determine whether food is contaminated, to ensure they are in compliance with food safety laws and to maintain government tracking records. Refusal to register, permit inspector access or testing of food or equipment would be prohibited.

"What is going to happen is that local agriculture will end up suffering through some onerous protocols designed for international agriculture that they simply don't need," Olson said. "Thus, it will be a way for industrial agriculture to manage local agriculture."

Under the act, every food producer must have a written food safety plan describing likely hazards and preventative controls they have implemented and must abide by "minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water."

"That opens a whole can of worms," Olson said. "I think that's where people are starting to freak out about losing organic agriculture. Who is going to decide what the minimum standards are for fertilization or anything else? The government is going to bring in big industry and say we are setting up these protocols, so what do you think we should do? Who is it going to bring in to ask? The government will bring in people who have economies of scale who have that kind of influence."

DeLauro's act calls for the Food Safety Administration to create a "national traceability system" to retrieve history, use and location of each food product through all stages of production, processing and distribution.

Olson believes the regulations could create unjustifiable financial hardships for small farmers and run them out of business.

"That is often the purpose of rules and regulations: to get rid of your competition," he said. "Only people who are very, very large can afford to comply. They can hire one person to do paperwork. There's a specialization of labor there, and when you are very small, you can't afford to do all of these things."

Olson said despite good intentions behind the legislation, this act could devastate small U.S. farms.

"Every time we pass a rule or a law or a regulation to make the world a better place, it seems like what we do is subsidize production offshore," he said. "We tell farmers they can no longer drive diesel tractors because they make bad smoke. Well, essentially what we're doing is giving China a subsidy to grow our crops for us, or Mexico or anyone else."

Section 304 of the Food Safety Modernization Act establishes a group of "experts and stakeholders from Federal, State, and local food safety and health agencies, the food industry, consumer organizations, and academia" to make recommendations for improving food-borne illness surveillance.

According to the act, "Any person that commits an act that violates the food safety law … may be assessed a civil penalty by the Administrator of not more than $1,000,000 for each such act."

Each violation and each separate day the producer is in defiance of the law would be considered a separate offense and an additional penalty. The act suggests federal administrators consider the gravity of the violation, the degree of responsibility and the size and type of business when determining penalties.

Criminal sanctions may be imposed if contaminated food causes serious illness or death, and offenders may face fines and imprisonment of up to 10 years.

"It's just frightening what can happen with good intentions," Olson said. "It's probably the most radical notions on the face of this Earth, but local agriculture doesn't need government because it takes care of itself."

Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act

Another "food safety" bill that has organic and small farmers worried is Senate Bill 425, or the Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act, sponsored by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.

Brown's bill is backed by lobbyists for Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland and Tyson. It was introduced in September and has been referred to the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee. Some say the legislation could also put small farmers out of business.

Like HR 875, the measure establishes a nationwide "traceability system" monitored by the Food and Drug Administration for all stages of manufacturing, processing, packaging and distribution of food. It would cost $40 million over three years.

"We must ensure that the federal government has the ability and authority to protect the public, given the global nature of the food supply," Brown said when he introduced the bill. He suggested the FDA and USDA have power to declare mandatory recalls.

The government would track food shipped in interstate commerce through a recordkeeping and audit system, a secure, online database or registered identification. Each farmer or producer would be required to maintain records regarding the purchase, sale and identification of their products.

A 13-member advisory committee of food safety and tracking technology experts, representatives of the food industry, consumer advocates and government officials would assist in implementing the traceability system.

The bill calls for the committee to establish a national database or registry operated by the Food and Drug Administration. It also proposes an electronic records database to identify sales of food and its ingredients "establishing that the food and its ingredients were grown, prepared, handled, manufactured, processed, distributed, shipped, warehoused, imported, and conveyed under conditions that ensure the safety of the food."

It states, "The records should include an electronic statement with the date of, and the names and addresses of all parties to, each prior sale, purchase, or trade, and any other information as appropriate."

If government inspectors find that a food item is not in compliance, they may force producers to cease distribution, recall the item or confiscate it.

"If the postal service can track a package from my office in Washington to my office in Cincinnati, we should be able to do the same for food products," Sen. Brown said in a Sept. 4, 2008, statement. "Families that are struggling with the high cost of groceries should not also have to worry about the safety of their food. This legislation gives the government the resources it needs to protect the public."

Recalls of contaminated food are usually voluntary; however, in his weekly radio address on March 15, President Obama announced he's forming a Food Safety Working Group to propose new laws and stop corruption of the nation's food.

The group will review, update and enforce food safety laws, which Obama said "have not been updated since they were written in the time of Teddy Roosevelt."

The president said outbreaks from contaminated foods, such as a recent salmonella outbreak among consumers of peanut products, have occurred more frequently in recent years due to outdated regulations, fewer inspectors, scaled back inspections and a lack of information sharing between government agencies.

"In the end, food safety is something I take seriously, not just as your president but as a parent," Obama said. "No parent should have to worry that their child is going to get sick from their lunch just as no family should have to worry that the medicines they buy will cause them harm."

The blogosphere is buzzing with comments on the legislation, including the following:

  • Obama and his cronies or his puppetmasters are trying to take total control – nationalize everything, disarm the populace, control food, etc. We are seeing the formation of a total police state.
  • Well ... that's not very " green " of Obama. What's his real agenda?
  • This is getting way out of hand! Isn't it enough the FDA already allows poisons in our foods?
  • If you're starving, no number of guns will enable you to stay free. That's the whole idea behind this legislation. He who controls the food really makes the rules.
  • The government is terrified of the tax loss. Imagine all the tax dollars lost if people actually grew their own vegetables! Imagine if people actually coordinated their efforts with family, friends and neighbors. People could be in no time eating for the price of their own effort. ... Oh the horror of it all! The last thing the government wants is for us to be self-sufficient.
  • They want to make you dependent upon government. I say no way! already the government is giving away taxes from my great great grandchildren and now they want to take away my food, my semi-auto rifles, my right to alternative holistic medicine? We need a revolution, sheeple! Wake up! They want fascism ... can you not see that?
  • The screening processes will make it very expensive for smaller farmers, where bigger agriculture corporations can foot the bill.
  • If anything it just increases accountability, which is arguably a good thing. It pretty much says they'll only confiscate your property if there are questions of contamination and you don't comply with their inspections. I think the severity of this has been blown out of proportion by a lot of conjecture.
  • Don't waste your time calling the criminals in D.C. and begging them to act like humans. This will end with a bloody revolt.
  • The more I examine this (on the surface) seemingly innocuous bill the more I hate it. It is a coward's ploy to push out of business small farms and farmers markets without actually making them illegal because many will choose not to operate due to the compliance issue.


If you'd like to sound off on this issue, please take part in the WorldNetDaily poll.


Related offers:

Why almost everyone's wrong on coming food shortage

"Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can Do About It"

Surviving economic meltdown in the age of Obama

"The End of Prosperity" Get the book that shows how higher taxes will doom the economy – if we let it happen.

Find out how you can revive freedom, decency and justice in our nation. Get Joseph Farah's "Taking America Back" autographed for only $12.95.

"How Americans Can Buy American: The Power of Consumer Patriotism"

0 comments

Sphere: Related Content

HR875 and S425: Bills claiming to be about "food safety" written by multinational corporations to control whether we can garden

Lydia Scott

Campaign For Liberty
March 10, 2009

HR 875 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c1112RD9bb:e11439:

This bill is sitting in committee and I am not sure when it is going to hit the floor. One thing I do know is that very few of the Representatives have read it. As usual they will vote on this based on what someone else is saying. Urge your members to read the legislation and ask for opposition to this devastating legislation. Devastating for everyday folks but great for factory farming ops like Monsanto, ADM, Sodexo and Tyson to name a few.

I have no doubt that this legislation was heavily influenced by lobbyists from huge food producers. This legislation is so broad based that technically someone with a little backyard garden could get fined and have their property siezed. It will effect anyone who produces food even if they do not sell but only consume it. It will literally put all independent farmers and food producers out of business due to the huge amounts of money it will take to conform to factory farming methods. If people choose to farm without industry standards such as chemical pesticides and fertilizers they will be subject to a vareity of harassment from this completely new agency that has never before existed. That’s right, a whole new government agency is being created just to police food, for our own protection of course.

DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, READ THIS LEGISLATION FOR YOURSELF. The more people who read this legislation the more insight we are going to get and be able to share. Post your observations and insights below. Urge your members to read this legislation and to oppose the passage of this legislation.

Read entire article






March 14, 2009

A solemn walk through HR 875

By Linn Cohen-Cole

The Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture (PASA) sent out information about HR 875, which lists 'facts' to counter 'myths' and 'rumors' on the internet. It gives no specifics to back up its 'facts,' so the following close up view of the bill and accompanying commentary offers readers a chance to decide for themselves what is myth and what is fact.

Sue Diederich heads the Illinois Independent Consumers and Farmers Association, an organization formed to protect the rights of farmers and consumers to deal directly with each other without government interference. Neither of us are lawyers, but we both can read. We invite progressive headliners to read the bills themselves and provide their own analysis. The Left needs to understand what their conservative brothers and sisters in farming view as an alarming attempt to seize absolute control of all attempts at private (non-corporate), healthy, organic food growing and sharing. ~LCC

Click to watch YouTube video "Criminalize Organic Farming? Excuse Me! Bills HR875 and S 425


People seem to expect HR 875 to be titled "The Criminalization of Organic Farming and the Take over of the US Food Supply." When they don't see any words to that effect anywhere in the bill, they declare "this bill is fine" and those seeing dangers are "alarmists." Do they think the industrial side is composed of fools? These are the same people who make cheery cereals with cartoon characters on the box when, inside, high fructose corn syrup is all over the cereal which comes from Bt-corn associated with diabetes. HFCS is, too, and there is an epidemic of diabetes here even among children. They know how to package. Why do people understand that industrial food inside a box can be a problem and yet are so innocent about looking at the bills, not realizing there is packaging there, too, or how much is at stake that the public and even legislators not see since this is about taking control. The industrial side isn't stupid.

Understanding parts of the bill at times depends on smelling smoke as you read it. Here in the US, we still have only smoke ... an Ohio state ag department SWAT team raid on an organic coop, Pennsylvania ag department raids on horse and buggy Mennonites, California setting coliform levels so low fresh milk dairy farmers would need cows that produced pasteurized milk right out the udder, arrest and handcuffing of a single mother in front of her children for selling goat milk, the USDA paying its agents bonuses for foreclosing on farms, ... But in the EU where 60% of the Polish farmers are now gone because of identical bills enacted into law there, and 60 UK farmers have committed suicide, there is fire. And in Iraq, where they have been rendered helpless serfs by the theft of their country's seeds and criminalization of farmers' collection of their own seed, it is roaring. And in India where 182,000 farmers have committed suicide since the WTO and IMF got hold of agriculture and our Big Ag firms went in there, and 8 million farmers have left the land, it is out of control.

The World Trade Organization (WTO), run by the multinational meat packers and genetic engineering corporations, want HR 875, here. The bills are "harmonized" rules for globalization of food and lower food safety standards to allow for it. Those corporations are members of NIAA, a corporate consortium that brought NAIS, created by Anne Veneman, to the USDA to be made into law.

We begin with PASA offering Food & Water Watch's take on the bills to its members. PASA's assertions are in Times New Roman.

Myths and Facts H.R. 875 –The Food Safety Modernization Act

PASA members: The following information about a bill now before Congress, HR 875, was developed by our friends at Food and Water Watch, and forwarded to us by the National Sustainable Ag Coalition (NSAC), of which PASA is a member.

This Myth/Fact sheet was developed to help answer some of the rumors that are fairly rampant on the Internet right now. We will keep a close eye on the situation, and share further updates from NSAC as they become available.

MYTH: H.R. 875 "makes it illegal to grow your own garden" and would result in the "criminalization of the backyard gardener."

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would regulate, penalize, or shut down backyard gardens. This bill is focused on ensuring the safety of foods sold in supermarkets.

Though private residences are not specifically included, nor are they specifically excluded. While this does not immediately affect homeowners growing tomatoes in the backyard, entered testimony leaves the door open for just that in the future. Referring back to the Bio-Terrorism Act, in a discussion on this very topic and entered in the official record of debate on the interim rule, the same argument exists here and no new definitions or exclusions have been provided in HR 875 - and "reasonable" is a subjective term in theory as well as practice...

(13) FOOD ESTABLISHMENT-

(A) IN GENERAL- The term 'food establishment' means a slaughterhouse (except those regulated under the Federal Meat Inspection Act or the Poultry Products Inspection Act), factory, warehouse, or facility owned or operated by a person located in any State that processes food or a facility that holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients.

Now, every home in the country holds food after buying it from the grocery store. Will they be included too? Heck, no. They're going to be magnanimous and say that, while they could, they won't right now.

Response excerpted from the same Interim Rule:

"FDA has concluded that private individual residences are not ''facilities'' for purposes of the registration provision of the Bioterrorism Act. Under the Bioterrorism Act, the term ''facility'' includes ''any factory, warehouse, or establishment.''

Congress did not specify any definition for these terms. Under their common meanings, the terms can include private residences. For example, according to Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary (1994), the most relevant definition of ''establishment'' is ''a business firm, club, institution, or residence, including its possessions and employees.''

However, ''[I]n determining whether Congress has specifically addressed the question at issue, the court should not confine itself to examining a particular statutory provision in isolation.... It is a fundamental canon of statutory construction that the words of a statute must be read in their context and with a view to their place in the overall statutory scheme." FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 121 (2000).

Other parts of the registration provisions in Section 415 of the FD&C Act indicate that Congress only intended businesses to register. This raises a question as to whether Congress intended that private individual residences be considered facilities, even though food is manufactured/processed, packed, or held at such residences.

For instance, a registrant is required to submit ''the name and address of each facility at which, and all trade names under which, the registrant conducts business...'' (21 U.S.C. 350d(a)(2)).

Thus it is unclear whether Congress intended all individual private residences at which food is manufactured/processed, packed, or held to be included in the term ''facility.'' Furthermore, the requirement that a facility submit its ''name'' as well as its ''trade names'' raises a question as to whether Congress intended ''facility'' to include private individual residences since it is unlikely that a home would have a name or a trade name.

Where the words of the statute are ambiguous, an agency may make a reasonable Interpretation of the statute. Chevron, USA, Inc. v. NRDC, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842-843 (1984); Brown & Williamson, supra, at 132.

Consistent with the language of section 415(a)(2), the agency concludes that interpreting the term ''facility'' to exclude private individual residences is a reasonable construction for purposes of registration. This interpretation, however, does not necessarily preclude a reasonable construction of other provisions of the FD&C Act to include such residences. Judicial interpretation can change, and easily include residences.

MYTH: H.R. 875 would mean a "goodbye to farmers markets" because the bill would "require such a burdensome complexity of rules, inspections, licensing, fees, and penalties for each farmer who wishes to sell locally - a fruit stand, at a farmers market."

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would result in farmers markets being regulated, penalized any fines, or shut down. Farmers markets would be able to continue to flourish under the bill. In fact, the bill would insist that imported foods meet strict safety standards to ensure that unsafe imported foods are not competing with locally grown foods.

Section 406 clearly states all food offered for sale will be viewed as being in interstate commerce and subject to the provisions of this bill.

C. 406. PRESUMPTION.

In any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction shall be presumed to exist

(8) CATEGORY 4 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term 'category 4 food establishment' means a food establishment that processes all other categories of food products not described in paragraphs (5) through (7).

(9) CATEGORY 5 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term 'category 5 food establishment' means a food establishment that stores, holds, or transports food products prior to delivery for retail sale.

(14) FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITY- The term 'food production facility' means any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation.

Say it again and again, "this applies to farms and can apply to homes." It certainly looks to me that families baking cookies for bake sales could easily be included.

SEC. 206. FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITIES.

(a) Authorities- In carrying out the duties of the Administrator and the purposes of this Act, the Administrator shall have the authority, with respect to food production facilities, to--

(1) visit and inspect food production facilities in the United States and in foreign countries to determine if they are operating in compliance with the requirements of the food safety law;

(2) review food safety records as required to be kept by the Administrator under section 210 and for other food safety purposes;

(3) set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety;

(4) conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate; and

(5) collect and maintain information relevant to public health and farm practices.

(b) Inspection of Records- A food production facility shall permit the Administrator upon presentation of appropriate credentials and at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, to have access to and ability to copy all records maintained by or on behalf of such food production establishment in any format (including paper or electronic) and at any location, that are necessary to assist the Administrator--

(1) to determine whether the food is contaminated, adulterated, or otherwise not in compliance with the food safety law; or

(2) to track the food in commerce.

(c) Regulations- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and representatives of State departments of agriculture, shall promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities. Such regulations shall--

(1) consider all relevant hazards, including those occurring naturally, and those that may be unintentionally or intentionally introduced;

(2) require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;

(3) include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water;

Notice they mention harvesting, sorting and storage operations; then watch below.

To follow how this will be done, you must understand that:

1. there is a small list inside the FDA called "sources of seed contamination"
2. in which they have now defined "seed" as food,
3. so seeds can be controlled under "food safety."

Those seeds (so far) include:

seeds eaten raw such as flax, poppy sesame, etc.;
sprouting seeds such as wheat, beans, alfalfa, most greens, etc.;
seeds pressed into oils such as corn, sunflower, canola, etc.;
seeds used as animal feed such as soy ....

That is most seeds. Seeds are essential to life and thus to freedom.

The "sources of seed contamination" include five little items:

agricultural water
manure (but NOT chemical pesticides or fertilizers)
harvesting, transporting and seed cleaning equipment
seed storage facilities

What you must realize is that seed cleaning equipment is THE single most critical piece of equipment for sustainable agriculture. It is how we save organic seed. It is the machinery used after plants "go to seed" to separate out (sort) the seeds from the plant material so the farmer can collect (harvest) and then save (put in storage) seed for the next year at little cost. With his own seed, the farmer stays free of patented, genetically engineered, corporately privatized seeds.

They never mention seeds but this is precisely how they will criminalize seed banking and all holding of seeds.

You must also understand that Monsanto is getting rid of the people who do the seed cleaning and many other means of our having access to seed. This year, 2009, seed cleaning equipment is now illegal in some parts of the country which tips us off to both the intent to control seeds in this way and to how they could do things under this bill.

How can they make such vital equipment illegal? Quietly, and by saying it contaminates food. "Contaminate" is their favorite word since the public fears the deadly contamination that industry itself - not farmers - has caused. Scare the public and thus push for "food safety standards" to be set.

And to eliminate seed cleaning equipment, they have now set the standards so seed cleaning (the simple separation of seed from plant) will now require a million to a million and a half dollar building and/or equipment ... per line of seed.

So, a farmer who has been seed cleaning flax for 40 years with a hand made seed cleaner can't sell flax on the market anymore, though there are NO instances of anyone ever having gotten sick from seed cleaning equipment. A farmer who has been cleaning wheat, corn and soy each year with the same perfectly fine equipment would now need three to four and half million dollars for three pieces of equipment to continue.

(The FDA isn't so bar-setting when it comes to other things like melamine in baby formula, though it is proven to sicken and kill infants, initially denying the melamine was in our baby formula and then quickly inventing a "foods safety" standard to okay it.)

Organic farmers are not aware of this happening, perhaps because the left is being treated with kid gloves until HR 875 and related bills are/were passed. Meanwhile, the FDA and USDA have been tromping on traditional (many of them farming organically, by the way) farmers for years. The organic community is disconnected from them so hasn't been aware of what is happening to them. Indie farmers have a history of no one listening to them, which is too bad because it is they who are the ones bringing the warning that these bills are deadly. The organic community, measuring against its own seeming safety, hasn't heard or understood.

Notice, though, that because a single "foods safety" bar has been raised, in time no one will be able to get organic seeds in any number because it will be illegal for all farmers to sell them to anyone.

Now, look at the last item on the list: seed storage facilities.

They would be careful not to ban them all outright given the extreme reaction they would get. But now the method is more clear. "Food safety" is the weapon and public fear is the driver and they only need to set the bar at the level that is impossible to meet.

Farmers, gardeners, seed saving exchanges, seed companies, scientific seed projects, and seed banks, all require "seed storage facilities." All are working overtime to protect biodiversity that is rapidly disappearing because of ... genetic engineering.

Set the standard for "food safety" and certification high enough that no one can afford it and punish anyone who tries to save seed in a multitude of ways that have worked fine for thousands of years, and presto, you have just criminalized seed banking.

The penalties, I will assume, will be tremendous, the better to protect us from nothing dangerous whatever, but to make monopoly over seed more absolute. One is left with control over farmers, and end to seed exchanges, to organic seed companies, to university programs developing nice normal hybrids.

When you know that Monsanto with the help of the US government plundered ancient and rare seed banks in Iraq that held seeds with a genetic heritage (a biohistory belonging to all of us) going back 1000s of years and then made it a crime for farmers there to collect or use their own normal and non-patented seeds off their own land, you see how extreme the intent to control is.

Now, perhaps it is possible to see how the identical thing is being done here, only it comes in a heavily, heavily disguised way - through "food safety" that isn't at all - and in only one tiny little paragraph within a very large bill.

The Iraqis are now abjectly dependent on Monsanto and the US for survival itself and will have to pay whatever prices are set for food. They cannot just grow their own and be free. So, no matter what form of government they may have, they are now slaves because the control over them is that extreme. Kissinger was right - control food and you control people.

We are inches from this ourselves. The left needs to wake up.

This trick of setting bars above any ability to be in the game, is similar to how blacks had been treated. Click here. This trick of setting bars above any ability to be in the game while imposing fines that destroy people who fail to meet that standard, is sadistic. Then, taking the land as confiscatory payment, is theft by government become totalitarian and colonizing its own people.

There are other items of the list which surely will be controlled as well. In toto, that little list is the deconstruction of farming itself and given the inclusion of manure, especially of organic farming.

(4) include, with respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal's health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;

(5) provide a reasonable period of time for compliance, taking into account the needs of small businesses for additional time to comply;

(6) provide for coordination of education and enforcement activities by State and local officials, as designated by the Governors of the respective States; and

(7) include a description of the variance process under subsection (d) and the types of permissible variances which the Administrator may grant under such process.

(d) Variances- States and foreign countries that export produce intended for consumption in the United States may request from the Administrator variances from the requirements of the regulations under subsection (c). A request shall--

(1) be in writing;

(2) describe the reasons the variance is necessary;

(3) describe the procedures, processes, and practices that will be followed under the variance to ensure produce is not adulterated; and

(4) contain any other information required by the Administrator.

(e) Approval or Disapproval of Variances- If the Administrator determines after review of a request under subsection (d) that the requested variance provides equivalent protections to those promulgated under subsection (c), the Administrator may approve the request. The Administrator shall deny a request if it is--

(1) not sufficiently detailed to permit a determination;

(2) fails to cite sufficient grounds for allowing a variance; or

(3) does not provide reasonable assurances that the produce will not be adulterated.

(f) Enforcement- The Administrator may coordinate with the agency or department designated by the Governor of each State to perform activities to ensure compliance with this section.

(g) Imported Produce- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations to ensure that raw agricultural commodities and minimally processed produce imported into the United States can meet standards for food safety, inspection, labeling, and consumer protection that are at least equal to standards applicable to such commodities and produce produced in the United States.

Administrator shall have authority to grant exclusions to foreign producers.

While it may be obvious to us that this is onerous beyond any capability of coping with it, it needs to be said and described in some detail what it would actually mean for farmers or for us. Here in story form is a taste of it, so anyone could feel the insanity of it.

SEC. 201. ADMINISTRATION OF NATIONAL PROGRAM.

(a) In General- The Administrator shall--

(1) develop, administer, and annually update a national food safety program (referred to in this section as the 'program') to protect public health; and

(2) ensure that persons who produce, process, or distribute food meet their responsibility to prevent or minimize food safety hazards related to their products.

This is where it would be very helpful to realize how astoundingly onerous that long list is and what its impact would be on any farmer who previously only needed to load up his goods and bringing them to a farmers market - though that in itself is a time consuming, physically effortful job that often begins pre-dawn on those mornings and ends late in the day, all of it separate from growing the food and boxing it up to bring.

A small farm is not an industry with staff to fill out paperwork, handle licensing, manage all the industrial bureaucracy that is being loaded on here, but is most often a couple who is also taking care of a family in addition to growing crops and raising animals. These are precisely the people whom we need most as part of our food system and who will clearly be crushed by the grossly inappropriate application of such rules to small farms.

PASA writes:

MYTH: H.R. 875 would result in the "death of organic farming."

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would stop organic farming. The National Organic Program (NOP) is under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Food Safety Modernization Act only addresses food safety issues under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Of course, they are not going to come straight out and say it. But breaking this down to what is actually involved, you find that:

The administrator is charged with developing minimum standards, not maximum limits on feed, fertilizers, nutrients etc- right here goes organics.

Second, this act creates a new agency, and the FDA becomes the Federal Drug and Device Agency. It combines offices currently under FDA and Commerce Department (National Marine Fisheries).

Third, FSA is to cooperate with the USDA in "promulgating rules and orders" which will have the bearing and impact of law.

To refer back to the previous "Myth" - the one about foreign food having to meet our standard - Alaska, Hawaii, US territories and foreign countries may apply for variances, so... NO... imported foods do NOT necessarily have to meet the same standards. In fact, many countries have had to lower their standards due to WTO rules and trade agreements, and Australia had to further lower their regulatory standards when they instituted the NLIS program (their version of NAIS). There is no reason to think we would not have to do the same.

Now, comes the response to whether the bills will mean the end of organic farming. This section should be a major education for people in how things have been working. This is in response to the myth that the bills will not affect organic farming.

Animal health has traditionally meant medication and hormones, petroleum-based fly sprays and all sorts of other goodies.

Feed can be anything (GMO soy or corn anyone?).

Environment can mean pesticides, herbicides used on pastures (IF pasturing is deemed "healthy." Internationally, this is NOT so for poultry. In fact, in many countries there is NO outdoor poultry anymore - by law).

Nutrients are not necessarily whole food based, many are produced synthetically, and again, petroleum based.

Animal encroachment prevention can be anything from a scarecrow or plastic owl to poison bait and bullets. Not one of these things is specified, yet there is no place for real public opinion in the decision making process provided. I will grant that there is usually a public comment period for federal register entries, for whatever that has been worth in the past.

Meaning, it has been worth little to nothing. And obviously, the public is left having to respond ad infinitum to one issue after another. Someone compared the number of rules and regulations being thrown at us to carpet bombing, so you can't comment on everything, even if it helped which is clearly often doesn't.

SEC. 206. FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITIES.

(a) AUTHORITIES.-In carrying out the duties of the Administrator and the purposes of this Act, the Administrator shall have the authority, with respect to food production facilities, to

(1) visit and inspect food production facilities in the United States and in foreign countries to determine if they are operating in compliance with the requirements of the food safety law;

(2) review food safety records as required to be kept by the Administrator under section 210 and for other food safety purposes;

(3) set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety;

This is where words that sound so friendly and innocuous and even good are code words for international rules set by the WTO. These rules define industrial requirements, which do not fit real farming in the least, much less organic farming.

This is where insane, anti-nature, anti-farming rules like "animals and crops can't exist on the same farm" come into play. Where wild animals aren't ever supposed to be near crops so the government has been poisoning deer and frogs. The list of such manufacturing rules for farming is long, and each very much "efficiency manager comes and wrecks the farm."

(4) conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate; and

Please, those of you who find the idea of NSA-spying intolerable, look carefully at those words. Now, imagine it were your farm, your home on that farm, and realize that the USDA and FDA have been run by and the new agency will be run by Monsanto, Cargill, Tysons, and ADM. Their interest in helping consumers have safer food is nil. The bills are meant to eliminate farmers as is now rapidly occurring in the EU with identical ("harmonized") bills, now law there.

(5) collect and maintain information relevant to public health and farm practices.

Pause here to consider the implications of each of those on someone's home - their family's farm. This is quite different from applying them to industrial sites where no one lives. Beyond that, these powers are so broad and vague, they are dangerous if only in that.

Those things listed open the door to total control, warrantless entry and perpetual surveillance. Notice how innocuous they have made it appear, even beneficial - always about public health. Yet, the insincerity of this is boggling - the USDA and Big Ag have worked to prevent inspections to the point where farmers have had to actually sue to get them done, even after offering to pay for them.

(b) INSPECTION OF RECORDS.-A food production facility shall permit the Administrator upon presentation of appropriate credentials and at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner...

Who defines "reasonable"? Does a farmer have to go to court each time there is an "unreasonable" manner and time? How wide open do we push the door to Big Ag-corrupted government control over farmers - the people creating the only safe food?

Look carefully and realize the USDA right now is countenancing state ag departments conducting terrorizing raids on non-corporate farms across the country. Imagine it were your home and USDA agents banging on your door to demand paper work and if you don't have it, facing fines that would bankrupt you in a moment and lose you your land and home.

... to have access to and ability to copy all records maintained by or on behalf of such food production establishment in any format (including paper or electronic) and at any location, that are necessary to assist the Administrator-

Imagine again.

(1) to determine whether the food is contaminated, adulterated, or otherwise not in compliance with the food safety law; or

Be aware that in Pennsylvania where there has been an aggressive effort to destroy fresh milk dairy farmers, the tests by the states repeatedly do not match those of independent testers but the harm to farmers from such false tests and reporting of them is done and can't be undone. Be aware that the USDA has a record of creating test results damaging to small farmers while it refuses to inspect even when farmers ask to pay.

(2) to track the food in commerce

This could mean farmers bringing food to markets with USDA agents surveilling.

(c) REGULATIONS.-Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and representatives of State departments of agriculture, shall promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities. Such regulations shall-

Everything vague in this bill is being left to be filled in later, and by whom? The Food Safety Tsar? The Administrator? Right now, to give people pause and to wake them up a bit to how this is not a wise idea but in fact absurd, it appears that person could be Michael Taylor. He is a Monsanto lawyer infamous for approving rBGH - the first genetically engineered product ever approved - over the objections of doctors, scientists who said the numbers were being rigged, and the public.

How can anyone leave a bill so utterly vague in the hands of anyone to decide later what it all means? Do we not make laws here with specific meaning anymore? Or do we simply let totalitarian rules be applied by industry against non-industrial entities like farms and homes in any way they wish and with immense police power behind what they, for their own interests, decide?

(1) consider all relevant hazards, including those occurring naturally, and those that may be unintentionally or intentionally introduced;

Goodbye raw milk.

(2) require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;

(3) include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water;

Goodbye organic farming.

(4) include, with respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal's health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;

Goodbye organic farming and grass-fed animals.

(5) provide a reasonable period of time for compliance, taking into account the needs of small businesses for additional time to comply;

Oh, heavens, this looks like padding to throw in the word "reasonable" again but it has no explicit meaning whatever and so no safety for a soul.

(6) provide for coordination of education and enforcement activities by State and local officials, as designated by the Governors of the respective States; and

This appears to be where Homeland Security works with the USDA for such things as "depopulation of animals" - for which six meetings are already scheduled in June and into which livestock owners are not allowed though foreigners are.

These "depopulation" plans look like what is happening in Asia where animal disease caused by industry (and worth a fortune to the pharmaceutical industry) are then used by industry to wipe out its competition in heritage breeds of animals on small farms and to substitute genetically engineered animals that are patented by industry and thus owned by industry.

(7) include a description of the variance process under subsection (d) and the types of permissible variances which the Administrator may grant under such process.

(d) VARIANCES.-States and foreign countries that export produce intended for consumption in the United States may request from the Administrator variances from the requirements of the regulations under subsection (c).

This is where the "fact" that foreign countries must meet our food safety requirements collapses by simply reading the bill, as reproduced above.

PASA's "facts" are misleading:

MYTH: The bill would implement a national animal ID system.

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would implement a national animal ID system. Animal identification issues are under the jurisdiction of the USDA. The Food Safety Modernization Act addresses issues under the jurisdiction of the FDA.

This bill mandates NAIS by claiming that it is already law, then contradicts itself by citing COOL (country of origin labeling), which specifically prohibits mandatory tracking. It justifies NAIS by claiming that the American Herbal Products Assn. (AHPA) gives authority - but this is a bill (and supposedly a program) concerning interstate commerce (though any item of food for sale is "presumed" to be in interstate commerce) and AHPA does not regulate interstate commerce.

How many contradictions in a single section do we need before red flags go up? Yes, and put up red flags for whole bills if this central part is so corruptly being pushed.

It is absurd to claim that NAIS is not mandatory. Food and Water Watch has gotten this and many other items wrong. That would be fine if the whole organic movement and all our farms and freedom were not riding on our seeing these very real threats and stopping those bills completely - not compromising on them, but demanding their complete withdrawal.

(a) In General- The Administrator, in order to protect the public health, shall establish a national traceability system that enables the Administrator to retrieve the history, use, and location of an article of food through all stages of its production, processing, and distribution.

(b) Applicability- Traceability requirements under this section shall apply to food from food production facilities, food establishments, and foreign food establishments.

(c) Requirements-

(1) STANDARDS- The Administrator shall establish standards for the type of information, format, and timeframe for food production facilities and food establishments to submit records to aid the Administrator in effectively retrieving the history, use, and location of an item of food.

(2) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring the Administrator to prescribe a specific technology for the maintenance of records or labeling of food to carry out the requirements of this section.

(3) AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS FOR INSPECTION- Any records that are required by the Administrator under this section shall be available for inspection by the Administrator upon oral or written request.

(4) DEMONSTRATION OF ABILITY- The Administrator, during any inspection, may require a food establishment to demonstrate its ability to trace an item of food and submit the information in the format and time frame required under paragraph (1).

(d) Relationship to Other Requirements-

(1) CONSISTENCY WITH EXISTING STATUTES AND REGULATIONS- To the extent possible, the Administrator should establish the national traceability system under this section to be consistent with existing statutes and regulations that require recordkeeping or labeling for identifying the origin or history of food or food animals.

Does this mean consistent with international laws under the WTO? Is this a means of locking everything together into Smart Grid or NAFTA or CAFTA or GATT and even, the worst of all, CODEX?

(2) EXISTING LAWS- For purposes of this subsection, the Administrator should review the following:

(A) Country of origin labeling requirements of subtitle D of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1638 et seq.).

(B) The Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act of 1930 (7 U.S.C. 499a-t).

(C) Country of origin labeling requirements of section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1340).

(D) The National Animal Identification System as authorized by the Animal Health Protection Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.).

Another 'myth' vs. 'fact' according to PASA:

MYTH: The bill is supported by the large agribusiness industry.

FACT: No large agribusiness companies have expressed support for this bill. This bill is being supported by several Members of Congress who have strong progressive records on issues involving farmers markets, organic farming, and locally-grown foods.

Who almost certainly have not read the bills or can't interpret how it will work to destroy farmers, organic food, seed banking, and all of us.

Perhaps others know details on the organizations listed below, and why they might be supporting a bill that is so threatening to real food safety and to the survival of our farms and organic farming. PASA reports:

Also, H.R. 875 is the only food safety legislation that has been supported by all the major consumer and food safety groups, including:

Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention

Center for Science in the Public Interest America

The Consumer Federation of America is a long-standing consumer organization based in Washington, DC. However, it has accepted funding from the Rockefeller Foundation to "develop an optimum regulatory regime" for genetically engineered food.

Consumers Union -- Food & Water Watch

FWW just put out a description of the bill in which it is apparent they do not understand what is in it and what it will do. With that as their starting point, they support it.

The Pew Charitable Trusts

They are also connected to the Rockefeller Foundation, and involved with them in mandatory vaccinations programs around the world and issues of reducing population.

Safe Tables Our Priority

There is no list here of groups opposing this bill, which include the people whose lives are most at risk from it and who know its dangers the best and who should have been the first people consulted. Instead, they have been shut out and when they have tried to report extreme dangers, they are ignored, dismissed, and marginalized. Perhaps the other organizations listed here are as unfamiliar with the bill's contents and ramifications as FWW.

If you consider that not only is Rosa DeLauro married to Stanley Greenberg, who boasts Monsanto as one of his clients, but also that she receives the largest donations from agribusiness PAC's of just about anyone in Congress, does industry NEED to come out and say they support this particular bill? If cash to the sponsor doesn't count, and if formal positions supporting various specific aspects of the bill do not count, then what does? Would there not be massive public backlash against it if industry DID take a formal stand on every bill they want to see passed?

By the same token, I've not seen a single industrial ag company come out and oppose this bill, either. They have all been conspicuously silent. I seem to remember that they threw up quite a fuss over COOL, and caused enforcement to fall behind by more than 7 years... Not to mention the garbage with loopholes we've had to deal with since enforcement began. (What good does a "Canada, US, Mexico" label do for anybody? Especially with BSE (mad cow disease) in Canada and TB coming in daily from Mexico?) Where's the hoot and holler over this?

PASA also writes:

MYTH: The bill will pass the Congress next week without amendments or debate.

FACT: Food safety legislation has yet to be considered by any Congressional committee.

Alerts came from those who first discovered the bills were there, inserted only one week after Vilsack had said the USDA wasn't even considering centralizing the FDA and USDA at this time, so people saw how similar the bills were, knew how fast other things were being shoved through Congress without even reading those bills, and estimated how fast this could happen. Perhaps with people alerted now, these bogus "food safety" bills can be stopped by the organic community once it realizes they will destroy utterly it.

However, since one of us did have the luxury of listening to the farce taking place on the floor of the House of Representatives on March 11 concerning HR1105 (which funds NAIS among its hundreds of other projects) while awaiting the Livestock, Dairy and Poultry subcommittee hearing on NAIS - we have no doubt that this bill will move quickly now that 1105 has passed and since it has so many co-sponsors.

The Representatives were honest enough to admit that though the Senators claimed every bill in the Omnibus Act had been heard and passed in the previous session, when in actuality, some 100 of the 170 bills in the package had NOT. The "ominous Omnibus Act" as several Representatives called it, went from introduction to the President in less than 13 working days. I really have to question just whose side those groups are really on that would support this bill.

Our food safety system was trashed in 1995 by Secretary of Agriculture, Ann Veneman (Board member of Monsanto). She appointed Dan Amstutz (VP of Cargill) who wrote the World Trade Organization Agreement on Agriculture. Unlike GATT, WTO has major clout from trade sanctions and control of 90% of the international trade. (See The WTO and the Politics of GMO.) The World Trade Organization:

"Aims to ensure that governments do not use quarantine and food safety requirements as unjustified trade barriers... It provides Member countries with a right to implement traceability {NAIS} as an SPS measure."

The WTO did away with "quarantine and food safety requirements" that gave us "the safest food in the world" and is graciously going to allow Farmers to track AND COUNT the world's livestock for them instead. Now HR 875 and an FDA release indicate all food will be tracked and all food producers will have food inspections. With the threat of fines up to a million dollars a day, this will eliminate all the independent farms that have acted as a check on Corporate AG.

The FDA wants to implement a more effective trace-back process, using technologies to rapidly and precisely track the origin and destination of contaminated foods, feed and ingredients.

Nanotech in food can make it happen. "California's Oxonica makes Nanobarcodes from nano-particles that contain silver and gold stripes varying in width, length and amount, such that billions of combinations can be created to tag individual products. The barcodes have been primarily used to assure brand and authenticity in pharmaceuticals, but applications could be forthcoming in tracing food batches."

In regard to pets:

HR 875 uses "animals" and then "animals raised for food" and there are no exclusions. The Animal Welfare Act had exclusions for livestock, pets and people raising three or less litters of puppies a year. Therefore, pets are not excluded.

"[S]et good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety;

"[C]onduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate;

"[W]ith respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal's health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption...."

In regard to gardens:

The Feds already have plans for controlling food "FROM FARM TO FORK" including home preparation since September of 1995 (WTO ratified in 1995).

HR 875 will:

"require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;"

"include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water"

"include, with respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal's health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;"

"set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety"

"...facility owned or operated by a person located in any State that processes food or a facility that holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients."

Notice it does not say a person SELLING food. It says a person holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients. The bill specifically states it covers commerce within states, but again there is no exclusion for food raised for home use. The fact you are growing veggies for your and friends and not selling them does not exclude you.

"in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST."

Under Ag Sec. Veneman, in September, 1995, the USDA's Food Safety & Inspection Service presented a 600-page document, Farm-To-Table, intended to control every step in the food chain from production to home preparation.

This is a real life example of what has already occurred and what may be in store:

Today a state Ag inspector and two county officials show up and scare the bee-jesus out of me. First they accuse me of selling products and milk, then explain that even "giving milk products away" is illegal in California. Now everything is pasteurized, but it is illegal to share milk products in any form! They explained it was even ILLEGAL to give it to my own children if they did not live under my roof! I can't even take a lasagna dish to my grown sons home without risk of being fined, arrested and or jailed! This is OUTRAGEOUS!!!!" Donna, Aug 12, 2008. (See more stories on Feds raiding farms and co-ops.)

Conclusion

The related package of "food safety" bills is totalitarian. There are no two ways about it.

They allow government warrantless intrusion into and extreme, detailed, surveilled control over every aspect of farmers' land and home, straight-jacketing them into a bureaucratic nightmare which precludes their even functioning as farmers. And yet for real food safety and for food security, it is exactly farmers we need.

We need the real food they produce and the farmland they spare and protect from industrialization and the heritage animals and seeds they raise and their knowledge about nature and animals, and we need the way of life they represent. Free. How interesting that to have real and clean and wholesome food, it requires that farmers have freedom.

These bills which claim to be about "food safety" but are proven in the EU already to be about the destruction of farmers, are so frighteningly broad, they allow the government to take over our lives, too. They allow the government to use rules written by multinational corporations within the WTO, to control whether we can garden or how, whether we chip our pets, even what happens inside our homes in our kitchens.

These controls are all for mandating things that make money for corporations just as we are all trying to get off the corporate grid of power, fuel, food, ... Now it is easy to appreciate people' resistance to mandated vaccines (and they keep adding more kinds).

There is point at which we must say stop. Our lives are our own, our property is our own, our decisions on what to eat and how to heal ourselves are our own. We must protect our own freedom and now it is apparent how intimately tied it is those who have been providing for us forever - our farmers.

HR 875, SR 425, HR 814, HR 759 and all related bills must be withdrawn immediately and then trashed.



Author's Bio: Got lucky in meeting libertarian and conservative farmers and becoming friends, learning an incredible amount about farming and nature and science, as well as about government violations against them and against us all. They are nothing like what we've been taught to assume about the other side of the fence, but great people with immense decency.

Sphere: Related Content

Bluebirds Depend on Humans to Provide Habitat and Nesting Sites

Thursday, January 15, 2009


Bluebirds Depend on Humans to Provide Habitat and Nesting Sites
By Seve Lekwa, Story County, Iowa, Conservation Director

Pasture land with scattered trees or a large, open yard at least an acre in size with a water source nearby . . . if this describes your property, it’s likely you can attract bluebirds. Bluebirds were common when much of rural Iowa had pastures, but changes in livestock agriculture have reduced drastically the habitat available for this popular songbird.

Modern acreages are again providing the open, short grass habitats preferred by bluebirds. Natural cavities for nesting often are scarce, but landowners can easily build houses that provide suitable space and help protect bluebirds from predators such as cats, raccoons and snakes.

Simple Bluebird House Plan
Houses range from simple to complex, and plans often are available from your local Extension office. You can make a simple box from a 1"x 6" x 6' board. Rough cut western cedar is very durable, but clear pine will do. Avoid plywood if squirrels or deer mice are common because they will gnaw on it.

Cut the board in the following dimensions: the back, 13.5 inches; the roof, 7.5 inches; the front, 9 inches; two sides, 9 inches; and the floor, 4 inches. Assemble the box with galvanized nails or screws. The floor should be recessed slightly into the bottom. The roof should be flush at the back and extend over the front. One side will serve as the cleanout door, hinged at the bottom to open from the top out. A simple hinge consists of nails driven opposite each other through the front and back at the bottom edge. A single nail inserted in a downward slanting hole through the front of the box will lock the side cleanout door in place.

Drill several quarter-inch drain holes through the bottom. Drill similar-sized vent holes in the sides just below the roof line. The entry hole should be 1.5 inches in diameter and centered at least 5 inches above the floor.

Assemble the box with the rough side in if using cedar, or make shallow saw cuts on the inside of the front (below the hole) if using smooth lumber. The roughness helps young birds or weak adults get out. Do not add a perch peg. Bluebirds don’t need it, and house sparrows and wrens will use it to harass your preferred tenants. Mount the box 5 feet above ground, away from brushy areas and ideally facing a nearby tree. Boxes mounted on fences (regular steel posts) are too easy for predators to reach. PVC plastic pipe slipped over a steel fence post and positioned away from the fence makes it difficult for climbing predators to reach.

Have your box in place by early March, when male bluebirds look for nesting territories. Bluebirds usually nest twice per season, so additional boxes mounted a few hundred feet apart often will be used. Monitor your box at least weekly through mid-summer to remove unwanted house sparrow and wren nest material. Without your help, these two species will drive bluebirds away.

Sphere: Related Content

Scientist says he has found oldest spider web

Monday, December 15, 2008


LONDON – The tiny tangled threads of the world's oldest spider web have been found encased in a prehistoric piece of amber, a British scientist said Monday. Oxford University paleobiologist Martin Brasier said the 140-million-year-old webbing provides evidence that arachnids had been ensnaring their prey in silky nets since the dinosaur age. He also said the strands were linked to each other in the roughly circular pattern familiar to gardeners the world over.

"You can match the details of the spider's web with the spider's web in my garden," Brasier said.

The web was found in a small piece of amber picked up by an amateur fossil-hunter scouring the beaches on England's south coast about two years ago, Brasier said. A microscope revealed the existence of tiny threads about 1 millimeter (1/20th of an inch) long amid bits of burnt sap and fossilized vegetable matter.

While not as dramatic as a fully preserved net of spider silk, the minuscule strands show that spiders had been spinning circle-shaped webs well into prehistory, according to Simon Braddy, a University of Bristol paleobiologist uninvolved with the find.

"It's not a striking, perfect web," Braddy said. "(But) this seems to confirm that spiders were building orb webs back in the early Cretaceous" — the geological term for the period of time between 145.5 and 65.5 million years ago when dinosaurs and small mammals shared the earth.

Spider experts believe that webs were developed even earlier, but the delicate gossamer threads rarely leave any trace. Amber, or fossilized tree resin, can occasionally conserve bits of web — an earlier find in Lebanon was dated to 130 million years ago, according to Brasier.


Sphere: Related Content

Our country needs you to count worms: Volunteers wanted to carry out first earthworm 'census'

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

By David Derbyshire

Sphere: Related Content

Research Links

Pond Forums

Search Engines

Site search Web search powered by FreeFind


Search The Garden Blogosphere

Get added to this search.