runninboy said:
I disagree big surprise. I guess that makes me dishonest
Yes, but only because you keep focussing on one single aspect of farming, the quality of a single end product, and assume best practises, and best intent, and best result. Not because you are a dishonest person.
And strangely, you disagree, but then say that you are a modern farmer that constantly monitors and re-evaluates adopted and accepted practises, discarding some practises as not worth the price or unwelcome. Which is
exactly what I stated.
But "modern farming" also means
1) huge mono-cultures that impact the biodiversity of the environment it is introduced into
2) manipulated crops/cattle (both genetically and by using additives) that again have a direct impact on the local biospheres by introducing resistance and toxins that upset the local balance
3) manipulation by powerful corporations of local situations on the ground, that are replacing self-sustainable practices with not-self-unsustainable ones
3) genetic manipulation (sterile crops) with the sole aim to tie a producer to a supplier, regardless of the local consequences [farmers are not always as free to chose as the theory of free and fair enterprise suggests]
4) massive consumption of additional energy for less gain per unit of energy used at the top end, with the pollution that that triggers
5) destruction of enormous amount of resources for "an ideal" end product, an increase in the meat consumption triggers an enormous pyramid of additional processes
6) plenty of huge scandals that prove that cheating the system is still an option, but now can floor the industry of entire nations
7) spread of diseases and introduction of alien predators into local food chains with devastating effects on the local systems
8) a strong industry lobby (especially the pharmaceutical industry) that doesn't have our best well-being at heart
10) all the trappings that come with a increasing concentration of power and profits
11) more and more resistant diseases that are harder and harder to cull, some of which are becoming transferable to humans
12) some new diseases or big outbreaks (not always in the animal or crop targeted, but in an innocent bystander) are a result of a change in production culture or the toxins used
13) we are producing well beyond sustainability in some areas, leaving huge exhausted areas that have lost their production value completely, or for a long period of time
etc, etc
To say "what you eat is deemed safe and feeds more people" is only a minute aspect of "modern farming", yet all the arguments that you feel seal your case, and the sole basis why you disagree with my "shades of grey" argument, it seems.
Some changes have little effect, some mild, some huge. Some we only realize years later, were unforeseen, or we are still trying to understand. There is usually deemed to be an "on balance" benefit when a new change is implemented. But if you don't see that
every change has positive and negative aspects to be placed on the balance scales, yes, you are being selective, dishonest or really don't understand how the environment or the social-impact-of-changing-business-practices-aspect works. I presume the first.
You are a farmer, I have studied at an agricultural university in a nation at the heart of "modern farming". I also talk out of experience and insight.
That we constantly update the approved list of pesticides, hormones, practices, max values, etc, alone indicates that we all agree that what we deem safe now isn't always seen as safe tomorrow. Often after we have spotted a rather disastrous (unintended) consequence that the testing period had not flagged up (or was discarded, sometimes after pressure from the highly competitive and lucrative industry [industry, not most farmers], as unlikely).
I am not advocating that we should abandon modern farming. We can't. But it is a bizarre argument to say it is not a mixed blessing, when it is emptying our seas, devastating biodiversity, and putting scars on our planet that are impossible to undo. Exactly what the end game of that is, for us and our planet, has yet to be determined.
At this moment the bee population is collapsing the world over, with only Australia not affected yet. Indicators are pointing at a combination of factors, all related to modern farming. Intensification, unification, concentration, sector dynamics, movement. The potential implications for our food production and our natural environment are immense. Sure, we are now able to buy every type of jam all across the globe. The exact price for that has yet to be established, but will be more than we actually paid at the till, and the benefits and adverse impact on our own health and well-being is not just what went into our mouth, that day, on our toast. Guaranteed.
At the same time we are feeding more and more mouths, and the mouth forecast for the next few decades is colossal. Without modern practices we would not have a hope in hell of doing that.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram