Hi Everyone,
In this update:
1. Thoughts on the occasion of a "truncated" summer
The weather conditions at the end of August, as we all know were dramatically unseasonable. The average rainfall at Sea-Tac is less than an inch for the whole month, but we've had Augusts when we didn't get a single drop of rain. This year, here on the farm (which is much different than the nearly three inches recorded at Sea-Tac), we had between five and six inches of rain.
What is the impact on the farm of having a long stretch of our normally driest and warmest time of the year be very cool and very wet? If we were like 95% of the farms in the US, and practiced some version of mono-cropping, I would be either very hopeful or very worried. But one of the many (many!) benefits of trying to mimic the diversity of nature in one's farming is that just as in nature, when extreme weather situations occur, usually not everything is adversely affected. In our situation, heat-loving crops have become less productive due to our cold/wet period in August. But we have many crops that like cooler weather, and we can be very hopeful for them.
Among crops that flourish in cooler weather are brassicas (broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage, and kohlrabi). We have a lot of these crops planted, and are hopeful that when they mature we will enjoy better-than-average yields. Root crops also do well in cool, wet weather. Our beets, carrots, rutabagas, and (for the cows) our sugar beets are doing very well and will likely continue to be more productive.
And then there are the leeks. We normally don't start harvesting leeks until later in September or October because they don't do well in our normal summer heat. But this year they probably thought they had died and gone to heaven. I do hope you all either know how already, or will learn, how to cook with leeks, because we have a lot of them (and they will continue into Fall Session as well). Additionally, artichokes, which I typically think of as a heat-loving crop, are also doing very well. They are biannual, and it seems to me that having now pruned them, they are bouncing back very quickly for another round of fall fruit.
There are some crops that seem to do fine in either warmer or cooler weather, and these too have not been adversely affected by our cool summer. Beans are in this category, and many lettuces (though not all). Strawberries do very well with rain, and produce many more and larger berries (although the flavor is not always as good). Having planted new strawberry plants just this spring, I expected a few "pick and eat" opportunities would be the best we would do; but it's turning out otherwise. Summer squash like heat but, prolific as they are, still produce fairly well in cooler weather. And potatoes like water and do well in cooler weather.
Then there are the heat-loving crops. Many people (especially politicians) love to use the phrase "win-win." And there probably really are some "win-win" situations. But I think an observation once made by CS Lewis describes the experience that is more typical for most of us. He noted that if one person is pushing a wheelbarrow uphill and meets another person going the opposite direction on the same path, the second farmer is necessarily going downhill.
We all would like to have it both ways, but we usually don't get that. If cool, wet weather accrues benefits for crops that like that kind of weather, it just has to be detrimental to those that don't. And it is. Most notably, I suspect are: melons, peppers and eggplants, cucumbers, and tomatoes. Most of you remember that our "cloud-burst" that dumped three inches of rain in half-an-hour last year happened just when our melons were ripening. And, as you remember, it was pretty much a wash-out for the cantaloupes (although many of the watermelons were ok). It seems that is happening again this year. We are watching them like hawks, and we're not giving up yet, but we do need to recognize that the melons could be a casualty of this summer's weather. The same could be true of our eggplants and peppers, although because they hold their fruit off the ground I am more hopeful for them.
While I'm on melons, let me tell you that our strategy on melons is a little different this year. Most melon growers pick their melons "green" and then allow them to ripen off the vine (in transit, in the market, or in the consumer's home). We've always tried to not harvest the melons until they were completely ripe. This year we've decided to harvest the melons earlier in their ripening process. So you would do well to use the time-honored "sniff" test, holding them (I'm speaking of cantaloupe here) until you can smell that sweet cantaloupe scent before eating them.
The tomatoes have been good so far this year, and we do have a way of tricking them into not being adversely affected by the cold. Usually this time of year the doors and sides to the tomato houses are open both day and night to keep the tomatoes from getting too much heat. For about a week-and-a-half at the end of August we kept them closed both day and night. During the day, the outside temperatures were cool, but in the greenhouses it was nice and warm. I'm not sure the tomatoes even knew how cold and rainy it was outside! That is what accounted for our very strong harvests of the last few weeks. But it has taken a toll on the plants. They need ventilation, and having been deprived of that the plants themselves are going now downhill faster than usual. I expect the tomatoes to taper off more quickly this year than usual, and I think we're seeing that already (although there is still a lot of fruit hanging).
The lesson in all this is that when we follow the path of Nature, which in agriculture means having diversified crops, we are always assured of doing well with many crops, producing at least average crops with many other crops, and having a few crops that just don't do well during years of extreme weather. Sir Albert Howard, the person often said to be the founder of modern organic farming (we need to remember that prior to 1900 all farming was "organic"!) wrote a great deal about this in his classic and very readable magnum opus entitled An Agricultural Testament (a book that is still in print and that I would heartily recommend). And before him, of course, in at least as forceful terms, if not as readable, Rudolf Steiner (the founder of biodynamic farming) made the same argument. Howard and Steiner based their observations about how to farm more on achieving and maintaining soil fertility, and prevention of destructive population surges of damaging insects than on the (relative) assurance that growing diverse crops will lead to more reliable crop production through adverse weather years. But it all comes as a package, and in years like this especially I wouldn't want to trade places with farmers who have to face the real possibility that their one crop may fail.
2. Compost/mineralization/cover cropping
I often ask people, what is the main thing that is taken away from the farm when we harvest and distribute crops to our members? The answer is simple, as there is one thing that comprises the vast majority of what is actually taken away from the farm—probably more than 90% by weight. And, fortunately, it is something that is easily replaced, and gets replaced here every year without any effort of farmers. That, of course, is water.
But what else leaves the farm? What our members actually take from the farm with each share is a portion of the organic matter and the minerals on the farm. In its simplest terms, "agricultural sustainability" simply means that we have to put that organic matter and the minerals back. It is as basic as that: if we don't return at least as much as we took, our crops (and our health which depends on the health of our crops) will suffer.
In farming methods that we now call "conventional agriculture" (the aberration of historic agriculture which started in earnest only after 1950, but now is practiced on 98% of the farmland in the US), we have found a subterfuge for the time-honored methods of "putting back" the organic matter and minerals that are harvested from the earth. We have discovered a way to synthesize nitrogen, which now acts as a replacement for organic matter. And we have discovered a way to synthesize just two minerals (phosphorous and potassium) which allow us to grow vegetable crops that look very much like vegetable crops that were grown prior to the age of "conventional farming." But the appearance is deceiving, and the decline of nutritional value of conventionally grown vegetables has been well and undeniably documented—more than 50% reduction in the last fifty years for many vegetables, and close to that in the rest.
So, just how sustainable is the "putting back" of conventional farming? Not very. Synthesized nitrogen does make plants grow, but at a very high cost. The process requires an enormous amount of energy, and has been practical up until now only because fossil fuel has been abundant and cheap. But that is no longer the case. Additionally, the nitrogen we make is typically water soluble, which allows it to leach into our rivers, oceans, and ground water, compromising our health and the health of the planet.
How is "organic" farming different? Sadly, on most of the 2% of farmland in America that is farmed organically, another shortcut to fertility is utilized. The truth is that most land in organic production is not amended by either compost or trace minerals—it is amended with granular fertilizer that contains natural nitrogen and naturally occurring phosphorous and potassium—a non-toxic form of NPK farming. While this does not lead to the environmental damage that conventional farming does (which is a very good thing!), the National organic standards do not require composting or mineralization.
What is the alternative? Just the real thing, that's all. Rather than finding cheaper and easier ways around the hard work of retuning organic matter and minerals to the soil, the work just really needs to be done. It's not particularly complicated, but it typically proves to be very difficult on a large scale (which is why smaller farms seem to do better at this). What is required is composting and mineralization. This is the standard of biodynamic farming, and is one of the reasons that up until now the much-less-demanding standards of "organic" farming have been much more widely accepted. Last year I was talking to a Certified Organic farmer who farms ten thousand acres. He said to me, how could I ever make enough compost to spread on my whole farm? I don't have an answer for that. But I'm glad our farm is of a size that we can undertake the needful task of composting effectively.
3. Member Feedback
At the end of each season we ask for feed-back through an end-of-season survey. The end of the season is probably the best time for assessments, because our CSA is based on the whole season and members who might now say "we haven't gotten enough ... oh, let's say, ‘potatoes')" may feel differently (and will, in the case of potatoes!) before the season is out. But we also want to encourage any of you who would like to provide feedback now to do so. Sometimes by the time the end of October rolls around, you have forgotten something that was on your mind earlier in the seasons. This is a chance for you to get those thoughts to us, before you forget!
Some people are hesitant to make assessments and to offer recommendations to people who, during the growing season, literally make the farm their life. But Wendy and I don't feel that way about it. Our greatest desire is to do the very best job we can. If there is some part of our CSA that can be improved, if there is a crop that you'd like to see us grow (or grow more of), if something in our program isn't working for you, we want to know about it. Of course our CSA is more than just a business to us. But even from a business point-of-view, it makes sense to welcome feedback. Savvy business people covet the response of those they serve so they can learn how to improve. We feel that way too.
But beyond getting or even keeping customers, we think of our members as not just customers but also as friends—people who have committed themselves to us and to our farm, and to whom we have committed our efforts as farmers. It's a pretty shallow commitment if friends feel they can't speak honestly about things that might, outside a commitment of friendship, be considered as "being too critical." You have committed yourselves to us and to our farm for the whole season, and most of you have done that for years. We would be disappointed if you didn't feel like you could share your thoughts and ideas about the farm-- about what items we grow, what we distribute each week, how we distribute it, or anything that relates to the relationship that exists between us and you and your family. This is what makes long-term relationships sustainable. So, please help us by offering your honest input about anything relating to the farm. We will honestly and sincerely thank you for any way you can help us to do better what we love to do. Send us your feedback (jubileefarm@hotmail.com ), or you can drop an anonymous note in the mail: Jubilee Farm, 229 West Snoqualmie River Road NE, Carnation WA, 98014.
4. Should development in our APD be limited to food production?
I realize this is a question about which reasonable people can (and do!) disagree. To me it seems that both the letter and the intent of the law, and the "logic" of what I (and many others ) see to be the "end of the global agricultural economy" demand that we preserve our available, local farmland by restricting non-agricultural activities that make our farmlands unavailable for farming.
At the conclusion of the work of the King County Task Force on Flooding and Farming I know that my determination to establish a "food or fiber" standard for future development in our APDs (Agricultural Production Districts) was not appreciated by everyone I was working with. Those who disagreed with me would likely say rather than being "determined," I was being bullheaded--and I have to admit I can see why they would say that. But by taking an (admittedly) uncompromising stand, and aided by an eleventh-hour letter-writing effort by our local Community Alliance for Social Justice, we were able to add an amendment to the Task Force legislation that was eventually adopted that calls for the King County Agricultural Commission and other County agencies (including the King Conservation Service) to define exactly what kinds of land-use within Agricultural Productions Districts are really agricultural.
The issue is a very difficult one. As I mentioned, I am (unabashedly) of the persuasion that the traditional definition of agriculture, that of endeavors that produce "food or fiber," should be the standard. In keeping with that, I believe that all future development in the APDs should be for food or fiber production. Certainly non-"food or fiber" activities in the APDs that exist now can and should be allowed to exist. But from here on, I think we should preserve the APD land (roughly 4 % of land in King County that has been determined to be of historical agricultural use and value) for food or fiber production.
What other kinds of land-uses do people want to engage in on APD land? Well, this is where it gets sticky. But let me be honest with you, knowing that not everyone will agree and, and I said earlier, that I fully recognize that there is room here for people who are reasonable to disagree. With that qualification, I would say that I believe in the future new recreational uses such as golf courses should not be allowed on agricultural lands in the APD. I know that it can be argued that golf courses grow lots of grass and trees, and recreation is a good thing. But it seems to me that golf courses can grow grass and trees and provide needed recreational opportunities on the other 96% of the land in King County, and that the rich, productive, bottom-land of our APDs should be used for food production for our local community.
Other proposed uses for farmland in our APDs are activities like sports fields, landscaping and nursery operations, equestrian centers, "hobby" farms, and retreat centers. Please understand that I think all these endeavors are important and valuable. It just seems to me that these recreational and business ventures should not be allowed to use land designated as Agricultural Production Land (APDs). It also seemed that way to our State's Supreme Court when it ruled that recreational activities do not carry a warrant that overrides the pubic need for farms in designated APDs. But as we all know, court decisions are always arguable. What isn't arguable, I think, is that historically, these kinds of uses have displaced farms (i.e. the Kent Valley) and resulted in agricultural land being converted to recreational/industrial uses. The lesson of history is that without protection, industry and recreation will always "win" over agriculture.
The title of this section is "Should development in our APDs be limited to food production?" This is a question. I've said here what I think, but I would love to have some feed-back from those of you who are interested in this issue. In Jewish tradition there is a maxim that says "as iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." I like that, and often feel the need to be "chiseled" away at. In the tradition of philosophical thinking, there is another adage: "one must either answer the objection, or concede the point." I welcome your observations, thoughts, and objections, jubileefarm@hotmail.com.
5. Re-opening of the Road
If you are getting weary of the detours around the farm, well, SO ARE WE! We are assured that the work is on schedule, which means that the bridge on our farm will be completed by Monday the 22nd. Two more weeks to go!
Unfortunately, the work on the bridges to the South of us will drag on for a few more weeks after that. How glad we will be to have the new bridge on Tolt Hill Road and all the bridge work on our road done!
6. Farm chatter
As always, the life of the farm seems to direct the lives of me and Wen—at least during our growing season. We always like to think that things will change somehow. But the truth is, this is the life we have chosen, and (having duly consulted Wendy) I speak here for both of us when I say we are very satisfied with our choice.
The beginning of September brings with it the time to harvest something that doesn't directly end up in your share. But as explained earlier in this update, it's a very important farm product—one that is becoming more important every year. I refer, of course, to our compost. Last weekend we dug into our first-ever, static, forced-air compost pile. I was very pleased with the results, and it was a joy to, for the first time, spread compost that came 100% from materials produced on our own farm. It wasn't enough, but it was a very good start! We composted two acres with about ten thousand pounds of compost per acre. The land we composted was the area we planted this year with garlic, onions, early brassicas, and some spinach and fennel.
September also is the time we turn our attention to cover cropping. The first area we want to plant is the area we have just composted. But this September we had something further in mind.
For years, as most of you know, we've been working on re-mineralizing the farm. Our strategy has been to carefully test the soil (using 28 discrete blocks that individually test) and then amend the soil based on the mineralization standards first developed by William Albrecht, and accepted now by virtually all organic farmers.
But there is something that I read a long time ago that I haven't been able to forget about, and, because it has come up again for me in a variety of ways recently, I have felt was time to act. It's another re-mineralizing strategy, one that is not at odds with the Albrecht method, but employs a different plan on how to deliver the necessary minerals.
The idea can perhaps best be explained by analogy. So here goes. We don't always have minerals available to our cows, but we take them out to them at regular intervals. To provide minerals to our cattle we use kelp meal, which has each of the trace minerals for which tests are run in detailed laboratory analyses (and probably many more). Usually when we introduce the kelp meal the cows are at first very excited about it, and they all gather around to get what they can. But always, even if they go crazy for it when we first put it out, after a few days they ignore it. The lesson here is that they seem to "know" what they need, and how much, and when they've gotten that, they are satiated. They don't need any more.
For more than a hundred years many have argued that adding "rock dust" from quarry rock is an excellent way to re-mineralize farms. The theory is that especially with trace minerals, plants do something similar to our cows. If they need a particular mineral, they "know" it, and will find and absorb that mineral if it is available. When their need is satisfied, they no longer absorb it. All they would ever need, in any case, is a very, very small amount of any of these trace minerals. Because of this, it would make sense to provide plants with as wide a variety of minerals as possible. And it may not matter, especially if the minerals were provided in a stable form (i.e. very small rock particles) if there were excess trace minerals in the soil. Because the minerals are stable, they don't volatilize or otherwise disappear. Each of the minerals could certainly be broken down by the acidic exudates of plant roots, but until acted upon by a plant that needs that trace mineral, the mineral particles would just be a part of the composition of the soil.
You could think of this like plant roots dipping their tips into a pool of trace minerals. If the ones they need are there, they are able to find them and absorb them through the action of their root tips (along with the interface of the ever-important microbes—the organic component of the mineral/organic-matter continuum that must be honored in providing soil fertility). But if the trace minerals aren't there, the plant is deprived of some essential nutrient. And, of course, plants deprived of essential nutrients produce crops that are deficient in those minerals.
It was about ten years ago that I first tried contacting rock quarries about getting rock dust. At that time I just couldn't find any practical way of either getting the dust to our farm (too expensive to haul) or of spreading it even if we got it. So although I was interested, the idea stayed on the back burner until last year when two things happened. The first was a brief and coincidental "meeting in an elevator" that Wendy and I had with a woman at the Acres Conference in Kentucky—a woman who lived in Washington at the time and was working to bring awareness of the value of using rock dust in farming. That brief encounter led to many subsequent e-mail conversations, and eventual visits to our farm.
The second thing that happened was that I discovered that one of my farming "heroes" serves on the board of the organization called "Remineralizing the Earth"—a group committed to utilizing the principal of re-mineralizing through the use of rock dust. I had heard this farmer speak at a national conference, but I had never heard him mention rock dust (or Rudolf Steiner—I now know he is also biodynamic!).
So, to make what is now becoming a long story a little shorter, I began to search again for a source for rock dust, and this time hit pay dirt (in more ways than one!). After many discussions, several site visits, and an exhaustive, confirmatory lab analysis, we ended up, this week, getting six loads of rock dust delivered to our farm! I almost still can't believe this has happened.
The two acres we composed we have now also mineralized with rock dust, and we are hoping to get them planted into a cover crop today or tomorrow. This is kind of an agricultural dream come true for me (in the same way, maybe, that Wendy's dream of continuing her family's line of cattle has come true this year with us getting two short-horn breeding cows from her family farm). I don't know why it all fell together so well now, when I just couldn't make it happen before. Maybe it's this: "when the farmer is ready, the rock dust will come." In any event, we are very pleased with this turn of events, and will anxiously await planting into this field next year.
7. Our new home
After many years of working with the King County Building Department, Wendy and I have finally, just a couple of weeks ago, gotten the building permit to rebuild the original farmhouse on this farm. I can't tell you how many letters we've written, meetings we've gone to, and obstacles we've had to overcome. We also have become convinced that the farm needed its own water system, and getting that approved took a great deal of time, energy, and an attorney (which is required when people are more interested in who makes the argument than what the argument is!). But as is often the case when one commits to an action that is at least logically possible, perseverance has rewarded us with the official approval to build; the group B water system is complete, and our home is next in line.
There have been, along with a lot of frustrations and disappointments along the way, a few serendipities. One is that the economic slowdown (when can we call it a recession?) has left many sub-contractors not only available, but eager for work. We decided somewhere along the line to act as our own general contractor, so it is very helpful that getting bids from qualified people has, so far, been very easy.
Another thing that happened along the way is that we sold a small piece of our farm to a wonderful and enthusiastic young couple who have been work share members with us for three years. The land we sold is north of the bridge that is getting worked on now. It's a piece that for a variety of reasons we never had used. Matt and Deanna are crazy about farming and have hit the deck running—selling their produce this year at farmers' markets this summer. They have named their farm Sol to Seed. Selling this land not only allowed a new farm to start on land that wasn't being used for food production, but it allowed us to build our home without going head-over-heels in debt, something we really didn't want to do. It also allowed us build without getting a bank involved, which simplifies the building process a lot.
The foundation is already being worked on, and we are hoping to have the framing, roof, windows and doors on before winter. That may be a bit optimistic, but so far it seems very possible. That will give us the winter to work on plumbing, electric, heating, etc. We are very excited about using any means we can to be as energy independent as we can. We are planning on using the south-facing roof of our garage for solar panels, and would like to investigate whatever means we can (especially geo-thermal) to cut down energy consumption for heating and hot water. If any of you have experience and/or expertise in this field, we'd be happy to hear from you. (jubileefarm@hotmail.com).
We both want to send our very best to all of you. We are so thankful for the supportive, caring community that has developed here at Jubilee Farm. We consider it to be a privilege that we don't take lightly to be entrusted with growing food for each of you and your families.
I wish I had more time to write, but the farm just keeps us both so busy. But we are living the life we have chosen. Who could ask for more than that?
Erick and Wendy