Organic Plus: Biodynamic Agriculture Is on the Rise

/by

Author: Angela K. Evans | Published: November 22, 2017 

Chef and farmer Eric Skokan of Black Cat Farm Table Bistro was shoveling out the duck house several years ago when he had an idea. In order to avoid triggering his gag reflex, why not create a portable shelter for the birds to move around his fields and fertilize his crops?

“Essentially what we’re doing is encouraging the animals to poop in the most productive place,” Skokan says. “That’s ultimately what the goal is: poop location management.”

It’s this philosophy that led Skokan and the entire Black Cat operation to become a certified biodynamic grower in June and the first biodynamic farm-to-table restaurant in the country.

While not new, biodynamic agriculture is a growing field in the U.S. as more and more farmers move toward sustainable agricultural practices that go beyond organic certification standards.

“We’re talking about crop rotation and the value of manures and soil fertility; and biodiversity and how that provides habitat for predators that eat the bad insects,” says Jim Fullmer, executive director of Demeter Association, Inc., the only biodynamic certifier in the country. “The biodynamic system is just the original idea of an organic system. That is what it was supposed to be. Not a list of materials that are allowed or prohibited, [which] is what organic has become.”

According to Demeter, there are roughly 250 biodynamic farms and wineries throughout the U.S. representing more than 20,000 acres. The organization is a qualified USDA organic certifier as well, meaning all biodynamic operations are also organic certified.

At Black Cat, Skokan and his wife and business partner, Jill, grow more than 250 different vegetables and raise sheep, pigs, chickens, turkeys and geese on 130 acres spread between three different plots of land in Boulder County. At the lowest point of production in March, about 65 percent of the Bistro’s menu comes directly from the farm, Skokan says. At the height in the fall, it hovers around 95-97 percent.

On a 60-acre plot of land on Jay Road, Skokan currently has corn and farro fields, and asparagus planted in alternating rows with clover. A grouping of bee hives sits in one corner and an almost invisible wire fence separates a large sheep pasture guarded by several white dogs that almost get lost in the herd.

Skokan will move the sheep into the crop fields after lambing season in the early spring. The animals will then graze their way through the field over several months, eating the corn and farro stalks leftover after harvest, along with the clover.

“The whole time they’re mashing organic matter, plant matter, into the soil, and dropping manure and urine and that is essentially a walking, living, composting system,” he says.

Integrating livestock into the farming operation is essential in biodynamics, Fullmer says.

“When you do that you’re addressing a lot of input concerns. You’re generating fertility out of the manures, but also the pasture and the crop rotations and everything that comes out of the presence of animals,” he says. “When that starts happening, you’re building soil humus and when you do that, the farm is able to hold onto water, it’s able to hold onto crop nutrients and provide them in a living, balanced way, which leads to pest control because you have healthy resilient crops.”

Next year, Skokan and the team at Black Cat will plant beans in the fields, then the year after that, all the nightshades. At the other plots of land that make up Black Cat, he does the same thing — raising other livestock alongside crops and rotating fields between pasture and vegetable production. He produces all his own seeds on site, another aspect of the biodynamic system, and he hasn’t used fertilizer in five years, he says.

The biodynamic standard also requires the use of eight different “preparations” made from manure, herbs and minerals. While Skokan imports these, they make their own at Aspen Moon Farms — the first biodynamic farm on the Front Range —  in Hygiene.

“Biodynamics is organics plus,” says Jason Griffith, who co-owns Aspen Moon with his wife, Erin Dreistadt. “We have to do all the things that a normal organic farm is going to do, and then we’re going to make our own fertility, and then we’re going to make preparations, and then we’re going to plant by the planting calendar. It’s definitely a work of passion, so to speak.”

To make the mineral sprays, the team at Aspen Moon buries cow horns filled with either cow dung (left in the ground throughout the winter and sprayed in the spring) or finely ground quartz crystals (buried in the spring to spray in the fall). The barrel compost is made by mixing cow manure, a salt rock rich in minerals and eggshells, along with the biodynamic compost preparations made from animal intestines stuffed with herbs. The mixture is then buried in a pit for 3-6 months and used to promote fertility throughout the entire operation with its “homeopathic qualities,” Griffith says.

KEEP READING ON BOULDER WEEKLY 

Long-term Soil Strategies Drive Many Environmental Benefits at Park Farming Organics

/by

Published: November 8, 2017

Scott Park of Park Farming Organics spoke on the farmer panel of this year’s CalCAN Summit plenary session. His farming practices model climate-beneficial agriculture through a diversified cropping approach, long-term management strategies for soil health (reduced tillage, cover cropping and additions of various sources of organic matter), and decreased use of pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, water, and energy.

This profile was made available by American Farmland Trust.

Scott Park never set foot on a farm until he was twenty years old. At that time, a fraternity brother connected him with the manager of a tomato operation in the Sacramento Valley, and Park ended up going into business with him. Six years later, he went out on his own. “The fact that I’m doing this is pretty much a fluke,” said Park. “I don’t go generations back. I think it gives me a different perspective because I didn’t have any preconceived notions about what farming is.” Today at Park Farming Organics, Park, joined by his wife Ulla and son Brian, farm 1,500 acres in Meridian, California. Out of that total, Park rents roughly 1,300 acres and owns about 200 acres. Almost all of the acreage has been certified organic by California Certified Organic Farmers (CCOF). Although he started out in tomatoes, Park’s crop portfolio has expanded to include rice, corn, wheat, millet, dry beans, herbs, cantaloupe, watermelon, cucumbers, pumpkins, squash, lettuce, gourds, stevia, coriander, flax, snow peas, safflower, sunflowers and more.

Problem

Before 1986, Park relied heavily on synthetic fertilizers, which he now characterizes as a short-term approach to farming. He switched to a long-term approach focused on nurturing soil health after noticing a nearby field was healthier than the ground he was working. “It slapped me in the face that what I was doing was completely wrong. My ground was getting harder and harder,” recalled Park.

Solution Implementation & Management

In 1989, Park grew his first cover crop. At any given moment each year, 700 of his roughly 1,500 acres are planted with cover crops. Park says, “The overall goal is to have a live root system in the ground as much of the year as possible.” Park Farming Organics uses oats, wheat, and vetch as cover crops. “What I try to do is have a heavy biomass crop and then a crop that is not as heavy as a biomass,” said Park. He estimated his farming operation adds, on average, ten to twelve tons of organic matter per year in the form of crop residue, cover crops, and compost. The additional organic matter has diminished his water needs.

KEEP READING ON CALIFORNIA CLIMATE & AGRICULTURE NETWORK

What You Wear May Be Hazardous to the Planet – Apparel as an Environmental Hazard

/by

Author: Joan Michelson | Published: November 14, 2017

Hurricane victims are replacing all their stuff – clothing, shoes, furniture, handbags, dishes, etc. Houston, Florida, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands…imagine how much stuff that is… Imagine if they all replaced even 10 percent of it with sustainable options….

The gift-giving season is upon us too, and at a time when the economy overall is doing better overall, it’s tempting to spend generously on new things for our loved ones, friends and coworkers.

But before you whip out your credit card, remember the recent National Climate Assessment, authored by 13 federal agencies (and approved for release by the Trump White House, by the way) says climate change is man-made. That means, our choices matter, so think before you buy.

Experts are predicting there will be more plastic in the oceans than fish by 2050. Imagine that…and plastic in the fish…

Annie Gullingsrud, Director of Apparel at the Cradle to Cradle Innovation Institute told me on my radio show-podcast Green Connections Radio that 85 percent of the apparel we buy ends up in landfills. So, imagine almost your entire closet in a landfill, times 310,000,000 people (n the U.S.).

What is the environmental impact of that new sweater or designer dress? Or of those beautiful boots or pretty new dishes that could dress up your Thanksgiving table?

For our series on the apparel industry, I recently visited the Textile Exchange Conference and was blown away by the cool things the fashion industry is doing to reduce their massive environmental impact (some sources have said fashion is the second dirtiest industry, next to oil). Many manufacturers and retailers now have sustainability departments and are leveraging their economic influence to incentivize their suppliers to reduce their environmental impact – that is, use less energy and water, and generate less waste.

Then there are those that have been ahead of the curve for years, quietly: Lenzing Fibers has been making textiles like Tencel from wood (but feel amazingly silky) for 25 years. Stella McCartney has been making shoes without leather and is now making backpacks and other items from recycled plastic retrieved from the ocean.

KEEP READING ON THE HUFFINGTON POST

How to Use Regenerative Farming Principles to Grow Healthier Food in Your Own Garden

/by

Author: Dr. Joseph Mercola | Published: November 19, 2017

Gabe Brown is a pioneer in regenerative land management, which helps restore soil health. I had the opportunity to visit his farm in Bismarck, North Dakota, this past July. Brown travels widely to teach people how to build soil, without which you cannot grow nutrient-dense food.

I previously interviewed him online but decided it was time to visit him on his farm and see his operation firsthand. Unfortunately, we had not anticipated the drought he had when we planned the visit. I believe he only had a quarter-inch of rain the entire year when I visited him on July 8, so the videos we shot were not as impressive as they could have been, but nevertheless were orders of magnitude better than his neighboring farmers that were still using conventional methods.

The challenge facing most farmers today is that conventional agriculture has really decimated the topsoil with tilling and the use of synthetic fertilizers, both of which disrupt and destroy microbial life. Maria-Helena Semedo of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has warned that at the current rate of topsoil degradation, all the world’s topsoil will be gone in less than 60 years.1

Brown’s farm was founded by his in-laws in 1956. They farmed it conventionally, using tillage, synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals until 1991, when Brown and his wife purchased the farm. Brown continued farming conventionally until 1993, when a good friend and no-till farmer convinced him to make that transition. Two years later, in 1995, he began diversifying his crops.

“There’s approximately 32,000 tons of atmospheric nitrogen above every acre,” Brown says. “All we have to do as producers is to plant legumes and inoculate it with the rhizobia, and it’ll take that nitrogen and convert it. In other words, make it available to the plant. I started growing peas, some clovers and alfalfa in order to do that.

We still had 1,200 acres of spring wheat in ’95. The day before I was going to start combining, I lost 100 percent of that crop to hail. I had no insurance, because it just didn’t hail here very often. Well, that was pretty devastating. 1996 came along and I started planting corn. I started planting species like triticale and vetch and trying to diversify the rotation a little bit. Unfortunately, we lost 100 percent of our crop to hail again. That was two years in a row.”

The Silver Lining

While devastating, two seasons of crop residue left on the ground had a remarkably beneficial effect. He began noticing more earthworms. The soil felt moister. In 1991, the soil on the farm could only infiltrate a half-inch of rainfall per hour. In other words, if it rained 1 inch, half of it ran off. Organic matter levels were only about 1.8 percent. Historically speaking, soil scientists tell us the organic matter in healthy soil should be in the 7 to 8 percent range.

What this meant was that three-quarters of the carbon in the soil had been lost due to improper farming methods. When 1997 brought a major drought, again, for the third time in a row, he was unable to harvest any cash crops. He still needed feed for his livestock, though, so he began planting cowpeas and Sorghum-Sudangrass, which he let the livestock graze on. He simply couldn’t afford hay. The following year, 1998, 80 percent of his crops were again lost to hail, for the fourth year in a row.

“It was hell to go through, but I tell people it was the best thing that could have happened to me, because that got me moved down the path of regenerative agriculture,” Brown says. “Due to the changes we saw on the soil, we started growing more cover crops. Back then, I just thought of it as livestock feed. But we realized that we truly can grow topsoil.

Those same soils that back in ’91 were 1.7 to 1.9 percent organic matter today are in the 5.5 to 7 percent range. Infiltration rates, where I used to only infiltrate a half of an inch per hour, we can now infiltrate an inch in nine seconds, and the second inch in 16 seconds. We’re in a 15-inch moisture environment here in Bismarck, North Dakota. Whatever moisture falls, it’s going to be able to infiltrate and be used.

It’s been a learning process over the past 20 years. How do healthy ecosystems function? We’ve really studied that and learned that it’s all these components together. We’re at the place now in our operation where we no longer use any synthetic fertilizers. We don’t use pesticides. We don’t use any fungicides. We do occasionally, in certain circumstances, use an herbicide, but it’s very selective.

It’s never while the crop is growing. It’s always before it’s growing. We do not use glyphosate. It’s only in a select situation because I refuse to till, because tillage is so detrimental to the mycorrhiza, fungi and soil biology. Now, we’re at the point where we have a healthy functioning soil ecosystem. It’s able to provide the nutrients that those plants need. In turn then, it provides those nutrients, not only to the plants, but to the animals and, hopefully, to us as people.”

Synthetic Phosphorous Is Unnecessary

Brown has been fortunate enough to be visited by many of the top scientists in the world. One of the important lessons he’s learned from them is that very few agricultural areas have a deficiency in phosphorus. Farmers have for a long time been told they need to apply phosphorous, yet Rick Haney, with the Texas Agricultural Research Service (ARS), claims there’s not a single peer-reviewed research paper demonstrating it has a positive effect on plants.  

The current production model is based on yields. The entire farm program, and the payments farmers receive from the government are all based on yield. Revenue insurance is also obtained based on past yields. But yields have nothing to do with nutrition. Synthetic phosphorous may increase yield somewhat, but does nothing to improve the nutrient content of the food.

“Big business, the chemical and fertilizer companies, tell [farmers], ‘The only way to get this yield is with our improved stacked trait genetic hybrids, and then the fertilizer — that’s needed; all these inputs,’ which is a total fallacy, because that’s not how ecosystems function,” Brown says.

KEEP READING ON MERCOLA.COM

COP23: Key Outcomes Agreed at the UN Climate Talks in Bonn

/by

Climate change was again placed at the centre of global diplomacy over the past two weeks as diplomats and ministers gathered in Bonn, Germany, for the latest annual round of United Nations climate talks.

Author: Jocelyn Timperley | Published: November 19, 2017

COP23, the second “conference of the parties” since the Paris Agreement was struck in 2015, promised to be a somewhat technical affair as countries continued to negotiate the finer details of how the agreement will work from 2020 onwards.

However, it was also the first set of negotiations since the US, under the presidency of Donald Trump, announced its intention earlier this year to withdraw from the Paris deal. And it was the first COP to be hosted by a small-island developing state with Fiji taking up the presidency, even though it was being held in Bonn.

Carbon Brief covers all the summit’s key outcomes and talking points.

 
 
Two US delegations

After Trump’s decision in June that he wanted to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement, all eyes were on the US official delegation to see how they would navigate the negotiations.

During the first week of the talks, a civil society group known as the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance called for the US delegation to be barred from attending the negotiations, due to its decision to leave the Paris deal.

Meanwhile, a seemingly pointed message was sent on day two of the COP, when Syria announced it would sign the Paris Agreement. This now leaves the US as the only country in the world stating it doesn’t intend to honour the landmark deal.

However, the delegation itself kept a relatively low profile – bar a now infamous “cleaner fossil fuels” side event which anti-Trump protesters disrupted for seven minutes, singing: “We proudly stand up until you keep it in the ground…”).

KEEP READING ON CARBON BRIEF

Cómo los alimentos regenerativos y la agricultura regenerativa pueden revertir la pobreza rural y migración forzada en las Américas

/by
 

Por: Ronnie Cummins | Publicado:05 de noviembre  2017

Elecciones recientes alrededor del mundo ha mostrado claramente un creciente apoyo público para candidatos y partidos políticos que abogan por la deportación de migrantes y restricciones más estrictas en la inmigración, incluyendo pararla completamente. Al mismo tiempo, la oposición, desafío y resistencia a las deportaciones y restricciones migratorias se han vuelto más amplias, visibles y vocales.

En los E.U.A., Donald Trump ha consolidado una base de apoyo masiva entre racistas blancos y conservadores al vilificar repetidamente a los 10 millones de migrantes indocumentados de México y Centroamérica en la nación como “criminales y violadores”. Trump ha prometido construir un muro junto a la frontera mexicana y deportar a todos los “ilegales” incluyendo 800,000 “soñadores” – migrantes latinoamericanos que llegaron a los E.U.A. de pequeños y no tienen papeles de ciudadanía.

Trump y los que proponen la deportación masiva fallan en reconocer que la política exterior – específicamente la fallida guerra contra las drogas; el apoyo sostenido a regímenes corruptos, policía, y fuerzas militares en México y Centroamérica; y los llamados Acuerdos Libres de Comercio (TLCAN y CAFTA) – han traído sobre el empobrecimiento sistemático de pequeños agricultores y habitantes rurales al Sur de la Frontera, inflamando la violencia de pandillas y carteles de droga, forzando a millones a cruzar a los E.U.A. ilegalmente.

Mientras tanto, aquellos migrantes que trabajan y se esfuerzan pero no tienen la ciudadanía o papeles de trabajo en los E.U.A. pagan miles de millones de dólares en impuestos, fortalecen comunidades migrantes y de bajos recursos, mandan millones de dólares en remesas a sus familias y comunidades de origen cada año. Generalmente trabajan varios empleos, dándole un mayor impulso a la economía estadounidense, especialmente en los sectores agrícolas, procesamiento de alimentos, restaurantero, salud y construcción, donde el trabajo es duro y la paga es baja.

En la reciente Cumbre de Migrantes en Quetzaltenango (Xela), Guatemala del  20 al 21 de octubre, emergió una nueva y prometedora solución a la “crisis de migración”: la creación de proyectos de desarrollo económico locales comunitarios basados en prácticas de alimentos, agricultura y usos de tierra.

Los alimentos y la agricultura regenerativa son el nuevo estándar de oro para la agricultura amigable con el clima y ambiente y uso de tierra alrededor del mundo. Un creciente número de líderes alimenticios y agrícolas han descrito la agricultura regenerativa como la “siguiente fase” de la comida y agricultura orgánica.

Las prácticas regenerativas son esencialmente métodos de producción orgánicos y de permacultura mejorados que excluyen pesticidas, semillas OGM y técnicas industriales. Las prácticas regenerativas se centran en mejorar la salud del suelo, retención de agua y conservación de agua de lluvia, y en usar la rotación de cultivos, agro-reforestación y pastoreo rotacional planeado – con la intención de reabsorber el exceso de carbono de la atmósfera.

Un creciente número de granjas y ranchos regenerativos en todo el mundo están demostrando cómo los agricultores y pastores pueden restaurar la salud del suelo, mejorar la nutrición del suelo y aumentar las cosechas, y al mismo tiempo fortalecer los sistemas locales de alimentos y prácticas tradicionales (como guardar las semillas y cría de animales a pequeña escala), empoderando a mujeres y jóvenes, y restaurando o mejorando la seguridad alimentaria comunal.

Participantes en la Cumbre de Migrantes en Guatemala discutieron cómo un programa de becas o préstamos impulsado comunitariamente a través de fronteras de “tres por uno”,  apoyado por migrantes, deportados, ciudadanos y municipalidades locales podrían potencialmente proveer los recursos para una transformación grande de las prácticas de alimentos, agricultura y uso de tierra de la región.

Líderes de la recién formada alianza, Regeneración Guatemala, explicaron que la restauración del carbono en el suelo y fertilidad, conservación de agua, captura de agua de lluvia y la utilización de prácticas de producción de grano orgánico y “más que orgánico”, agro-reforestación y ganadería regenerativa (especialmente de pollos), podrían hacer de Guatemala un líder agrícola en la región. Al regenerar el sistema agrícola de Guatemala, el país podría eventualmente proveer a sus 16 millones de habitantes con alimentos accesibles, de alta calidad y densos en nutrientes, y también podría dar empleo y un desarrollo económico bastante necesitado en la zona rural y áreas urbanas adyacentes, donde la pobreza y crimen son los mayores impulsores de la migración forzada.

Guatemala es una nación predominantemente rural, indígena y agrícola, similar a otras naciones en África, Asia y el Medio Oriente, donde la migración forzada se ha convertido en un peligro crítico. Un 67 por ciento de los ciudadanos de Guatemala, así como la mayoría de los más de dos millones de migrantes guatemaltecos en los E.U.A. (75 por ciento de los cuales potencialmente serán sujetos a deportación por la administración de Trump) vienen de comunidades rurales donde la pobreza, desnutrición y degradación ambiental son la norma. Una situación similar en la región ha llevado a millones de mexicanos, salvadoreños y hondureños durante las últimas décadas al exilio forzado en los E.U.A. y Canadá.

Como los participantes señalaron en la cumbre Xela una y otra vez, muchos de sus compatriotas en exilio forzado en El Norte serían felices de regresar con sus familias y comunidades de origen, si sólo hubiera trabajos y estabilidad social.

Los más de 1,500 delegados reunidos en Quetzaltenango aplaudieron entusiastamente cuando ponentes señalaron que la llamada Revolución Verde de Guatemala, la cual incluye el uso intensivo de pesticidas tóxicos, fertilizantes químicos, producción de monocultivo, OGMs y el modelo de agro-exportación, ha tenido un efecto desastroso en sus comunidades de origen y naciones. La reacción fue la misma cuando ponentes hablaron del modelo de comida chatarra/rápida, representada por Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, KFC y Burger King, y los llamados Acuerdos de Libre Comercio, incluyendo al Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte y a los Tratados de Libre Comercio de Centroamérica.

Asistentes a la conferencia, representando una sección representativa de comunidades indígenas, pequeños agricultores, cooperativas agrícolas, estudiantes, activistas de iglesia, defensores de derechos de migrantes, y “retornados” (migrantes que han regresado o han sido deportados de los E.U.A.), entusiastamente han respaldado la idea de usar prácticas agrícolas tradicionales y regenerativas para restaurar la seguridad alimentaria, salud pública, estabilidad climática y prosperidad rural en las zonas empobrecidas de México y Centroamérica donde la migración forzada se ha vuelto la norma.

De origen guatemalteco, Reginaldo Haslett-Marroquin del proyecto con base en Minnesota Main Street Project y Regeneration International dice, al desarrollar sistemas agrícolas regenerativos piloto, como las Granjas Regenerativas a través de E.U.A. y México “puede traer una revolución de ideas y un flujo de capital” en comunidades rurales empobrecidas donde las prácticas agrícolas de la supuesta Revolución Verde con uso intensivo químico – y energía – han fallado. (Periódico La Hora 21 de octubre del 2017).

Más allá de la discusión del muro de Trump, las deportaciones masivas y la discriminación racista enfrentada por millones de Latinos en los E.U.A., los asistentes a la Cumbre de Migrantes respondieron con entusiasmo a la idea de que las comunidades “aquí y allá” se pueden unir y juntar el “dinero semilla” para un nuevo sistema sano, amigable con el clima y económicamente viable de alimentos y agricultura.

Aprendí en la Cumbre que los migrantes guatemaltecos en los E.U.A. ya habían enviado de regreso casi $7 mil millones al año en transferencias de dinero a sus familias y comunidades de origen – el doble de la cantidad de dinero que los exportadores agrícolas reciben por todas sus exportaciones de productos como el café y plátanos. Migrantes salvadoreños enviaron de regreso una cantidad similar, mientras que los migrantes mexicanos enviarán más de $70 billones de dólares a sus comunidades de origen este año. Canalizar un porcentaje estratégico de estas remesas en proyectos agrícolas regenerativos comunitarios, junto con presionar a gobiernos locales y federales a igualar estas “remesas” migrantes, podría no sólo restaurar la esperanza y vitalidad a estas comunidades rurales, sino también reducir dramáticamente el número de migrantes forzados. Hasta los fanáticos de la deportación masiva de Donald Trump podrían tener problemas en rechazar este tipo de financiamiento de “arranque” cruza-fronteras para el desarrollo económico local.

Como expliqué a los asistentes de la conferencia durante la sesión de plenaria final, la agricultura regenerativa no es una invención nueva de agricultores orgánicos y ganaderos en el Norte global. Es la adaptación de prácticas agrícolas antiguas, como el sistema tradicional maya de agro-reforestación, multi-cultivo “milpa” (maíz, frijoles, calabacita y otros vegetales), composta natural y manejo holístico de gallinas y ganado.

Una forma de lo que ahora es llamado agricultura regenerativa, o agricultura regenerativa orgánica, fue practicada desde hace miles de años por la gente maya e indígena a través de América. Los mayas sobrevivieron y prosperaron en armonía con la Tierra – sin pesticidas, fertilizantes químicos, OGMs, o confinamiento animal concentrado. Se alimentaban a sí mismos mientras que también mantenían un ciclo de carbono adecuado (un balance entre CO2 en la atmósfera y carbono en el suelo y bosques) y un ambiente sano biológicamente y diverso.

Nuestra misión hoy como “regeneradores” a través de América y el mundo es recapturar, reestablecer y escalar a gran nivel estas prácticas tradicionales. Debemos modificarlas para que coincidan las condiciones ecológicas y de mercado específicas en nuestras áreas locales y regiones. De esta manera podemos regenerar al suelo, mejorar las cosechas dramáticamente y calidad de la comida, restaurar la salud pública, eliminar las presiones que causan la migración forzada, y por último pero no menos importante, reducir y reabsorber suficiente exceso de carbono de la atmósfera a través de fotosíntesis mejorada de plantas y reforestación para revertir el calentamiento global y disrupción climática.

Más allá del sueño aún utópico de fronteras abiertas, guatemaltecos y comunidades indígenas han comenzado a discutir en términos prácticos lo que podemos hacer ahora para mitigar y eventualmente parar la migración forzada. Se lo debemos a ellos y a nosotros mismos cambiar la discusión en la “crisis de inmigración” de muros y deportación a una de solidaridad a través de las fronteras y regeneración.

 
LEER MÁS ARTÍCULOS EN ESPAÑOL AQUÍ

How and Why the Fashion Industry Is Trending Toward Sustainable Clothing

/by

Author: Mantas Malukas | Published: October 26, 2017

Who makes the clothes we wear every day? Where are they being made? And what happens to all the clothes we discard? These are the questions both fashion brands and consumers are starting to ask more than ever. Fashion as we know it, whether we like to hear it or not, is an industry largely built on low-cost labor, horrible working conditions, animal cruelty, and environmental degradation.

In step sustainable fashion, the trending alternative to “fast fashion” that dominates the current clothing marketplace and, unfortunately, tends to emphasize quick manufacturing at low costs at the expense of labor and the environment. Also called eco fashion, sustainable fashion sets out to revolutionize the fashion industry by creating a system of clothing production that is totally renewable and minimizes or completely negates any ecological or social impact.

The substantial rise of sustainable fashion is in large part thanks to a greater societal move toward sustainability and socially-conscious consumerism being led primarily by younger shoppers. In fact, over 79 percent of young consumers say they are much more likely to engage with a brand that can help them make a difference, according to a recent report. On top of this, 44 percent of millennials said they would like to more eco-friendly fabrics used in clothes.

While sustainable fashion is without a doubt heading in the right direction and is very promising, it’s important not to jump too far ahead. Sustainable clothing is still only in its infancy in terms of trendiness. Consumers still overwhelmingly value price in comparison to sustainability.

And, realistically, sustainable fashion has no chance in the greater clothing marketplace if it can’t look as chic and stylish as normal high-street clothing.

But it definitely must be said that sustainable fashion has made huge strides since its early days when it was associated with a non-fashionable look that often tended to be Bohemian and dull, mostly due to hemp, cotton, and canvas being the most eco-friendly and readily available materials at the time.

But with the rise of technology, this has changed drastically. Now fashion brands are pushing bright, colorful, high-fashion worthy eco-friendly and ethical clothing that are so stylish that many consumers can’t even spot the differences.

So in addition to significantly changing consumer behaviors favoring eco and socially conscious buying, the key to sustainable fashion’s recent trendiness essentially comes down to technological innovations helping fashion designers easily create clothes that both look good and still feel comfortable.

And with 66 percent of consumers willing to spend more on a product if it comes from a sustainable brand and when the costs of creating sustainable clothing inevitably come down as tech progresses, we should only expect sustainable fashion to trend faster and higher in the years to come.

KEEP READING ON NICHE HUNT

24 U.S. Farmer Organizations #Still-In on the Paris Agreement

/by

Author: Michael Peñuelas | Published: November 2017

The international community will gather in the second week of November to evaluate the progress that the 196 signatory countries to the Paris Climate Agreement have made since 2015. This will be the first global meeting of the signatories since President Donald Trump threatened to withdraw the United States (U.S.), the world’s second most significant emitter, from the agreement.

For American farmers and ranchers, climate change is an economic issue. A stable agricultural industry depends on a stable, predictable climate.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) projects that climate change will increase the variability of pest pressures, disease prevalence, temperature swings, and precipitation patterns across the U.S., as well as the regularity of extreme events including storms, floods, dry spells, sustained drought, and heat waves.

The Paris Agreement’s central aim is to coordinate efforts to keep the global temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) by 2100. Global temperatures are already up at least 0.85 degrees Celsius (1.53 degrees Fahrenheit) when averaged over all land and ocean surfaces, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The agreement supports countries in sharing resources to combat the sources of climate change and adapt to its effects. It provides support to developing countries who are responsible for the smallest share of planet-warming emissions.

In light of the Trump Administration’s position on the Paris Agreement, thousands of businesses and organizations from across U.S. civil society have signed the “We Are Still In” declaration, committing to pursue the goals of the Agreement. More than 1,700 businesses and investors signed, alongside 327 colleges and universities. Simultaneously, the mayors of 381 cities signed the #ClimateMayors pledge and the governors of 12 states plus Puerto Rico joined the United States Climate Alliance. Both groups support the goals of the Paris Agreement.

Major agriculture-related corporations either urged President Trump not to withdraw or criticized the action, including Cargill, Dow, DuPont, and Monsanto, as did major food companies, including Campbell’s, Coca-Cola, Dannon, General Mills, Kellogg, Mars, Mondelez (formerly Kraft Foods), and Unilever, among many others.

KEEP READING ON FOOD TANK

A Native Parisian Spins a Thriving Ethical Clothing Brand From Sustainable Fibers

/by

Author: Susan Price | Published: November 13, 2017

The navy and white stripes may be iconic, but the T-shirts Amour Vert began selling several years ago were something new. The shirts were spun from a fabric so soft it they quickly caught the attention of celebrity stylemakers and major retailers.

That soft fabric also happened to be sustainable and durable, and the T-shirts were made in America in factories paying fair wages. “No one really cared at first that we were an ethical brand,” says co-founder Linda Balti. “They bought our T-shirts because they were so soft and comfortable, though once they knew how they were made they loved our story.”

Amour Vert—the name means green love in French—now has a line of dresses, tops, denim and more it sells online and in an expanding number of its own stores. All Amour Vert’s clothing is made using sustainable fabrics and non-toxic dyes, and the brand is committed to zero-waste manufacturing and fair wages. Amour Vert also partners with American Forests to plant a tree for each T-shirt it sells.

Balti grew up in Paris and trained as an engineer. She worked for a defense company for a time, but found the lab was not for her. Someone suggested she do VIP presentations for the company and at one of those meetings, she met Chirstoph Frehsee. Frehsee had founded MineWolf Systems, a company that cleared landmines, and after he sold it, he and Balti spent a year traveling around the world. While on that trip, Balti read a Newsweek article about ethical fashion that stunned her. “It was the first time I realized the impact fashion has on the environment,” says Balti. “It is the second most polluting industry in the world.”

KEEP READING ON FORBES

Huge Carbon Sink in Soil Minerals: New Avenue for Offsetting Rising Greenhouse Gases

/by

Author: Marc Kramer | Published: November 8, 2017

A Washington State University researcher has discovered that vast amounts of carbon can be stored by soil minerals more than a foot below the surface. The finding could help offset the rising greenhouse-gas emissions helping warm the Earth’s climate.

Marc Kramer, an assistant professor of environmental chemistry at WSU Vancouver, reports his finding in one of two related papers demonstrating how the right management practices can help trap much of the carbon dioxide that is rapidly warming the planet.

Soil holds more than three times the carbon found in the atmosphere, yet its potential in reducing atmospheric carbon-dioxide levels and mitigating global warming is barely understood.

Kramer, who is a reviewer for one of three reports issued with the federal National Climate Assessment released last week, compared what we know about soil to how little we know about the deep ocean.

“Hardly anyone has been down there and they just found a new species of octopus,” he said. “We know more about the surface of Mars than we do about either oceans or soils on Earth.”

Half of global soil carbon

Writing with colleagues from Stanford, Oregon State University and elsewhere in Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, Kramer said more than half of the global soil carbon pool is more than a foot beneath the surface. He also found that soil organic matter at that depth is almost entirely associated with minerals.

Kramer elaborates on the connection this week in the journal Biogeochemistry Letters. His study, which he led with colleagues from Oregon State University and the Stroud Water Research Center in Pennsylvania, is the first to explicitly examine the extent minerals control nitrogen and carbon deep in the soil.

Keeping carbon in the ground

The more we understand these processes, the more we can tailor farming and other practices to keep carbon in the ground and out of the atmosphere, Kramer said. Almost three-fourths of all carbon sequestered in the top three feet of the soil is affected by agriculture, grazing or forest management, Kramer and his colleagues report in the Annual Review paper.

Earlier research by Kramer found that certain farming practices can dramatically increase carbon in the soil. Writing in Nature Communications in 2015, Kramer documented how three farms converted to management-intensive grazing practices raised their carbon levels to those of native forest soils in just six years. While cultivation has decreased soil carbon levels by one-half to two-thirds, the soils he examined had a 75 percent increase in carbon.

“I would call it radical, anytime you can get that much carbon in the system that quickly,” Kramer said.

KEEP READING ON SCIENCE DAILY