Hi Everyone,
In this update we'll touch on the following topics:
1. October is "registration month" for Summer Session 2007
October is an important month for us. Each year in October we ask our Members who know that they want to be a part of our Summer CSA the following season to sign up. "Signing up" means filling out an application and making a $100 deposit. This can be done either on-line at www.jubileefarm.org or by completing an application that's available at the farm.
Why is this so important? Well, as I hope you all know we grow everything we distribute for our Summer Session. Doing that requires some careful planning in the late fall when we place our seed order. Having some idea how many members we will have next year is very valuable to us both in our ordering of seeds and in laying out our crop rotations (knowing how many beds we need to devote to each crop and each rotation of each crop). We know that there will always be people sign up throughout the off-season - both new members and returning members who just didn't get around to it in October. But having done this for many years now, and having kept a month-by-month membership total during the off-season for each of those years, we have been able to use the number of memberships we have on October 31 to project with some measure of accuracy how many we will have by the second week of June when we start our Summer Session. Based on that projection, we order seeds and make our crop plans for the following season.
So, October is here again. Those of you who have been with us "forever" have heard this all before. So you needn't read on, you just need to fill out your application and get it to us! The rest of you don't really need any more information either. We just need to convey to you that this is really important to us. The numbers give us the idea where we are. And the deposits end up being quite literally our "seed money" for next year's crops. We know it takes a level of commitment, and we don't take that lightly. But we too make and have made a fairly significant commitment, and it seems to us that the commitment between us, your farmers, and you, our members, is one that needs to have reciprocity. And so we ask you to do something that may have no analogue in the "smart money" world; we ask you to make a commitment now for something you won't see a return on for eight months. It's not business as usual, it's business based on trust. Your application is a vote of confidence, and a kind of formal hand-shake that says "count us in: we want to continue to use a portion of our food budget to support local, organic agriculture, and we want to do that at Jubilee Farm."
2007 applications are available on-line, and in the market. We've gotten quite a few already, but we're looking for a landslide. It would be very helpful for us if you always send an application with your deposit. We've gotten several checks and even Pay Pal payments with no application, and we don't know if they are for Fall Session or next Summer Session - nor do we have the additional application information to process your payment. Thanks!
2. When is the last pick-up for this Session?
This is one of the most commonly asked questions this time of year. Our 20th and final week is the week of October 23rd. That means that our last pick-up for Tuesdays is October 24th, our last delivery is Wednesday, October 25th, our last Friday pick-up is October 27, and our last Saturday pick-up is October 28th.
3. More on "late October pick-up strategy"
This is just a reminder that the next couple of weeks will find our farm inundated with school children and members of the public who visit Jubilee Farm to get pumpkins in late October. Saturday members can be almost guaranteed to avoid the busyness of the day by coming early. We open the doors at 10:00, when it is very quiet here. Tuesdays and Fridays are just the opposite: coming later (after 2:30) will dramatically decrease your chances of having to deal with the parking and crowdedness of school tours. I hope this helps!
4. Fall CSA
It's not enough that we are asking you all to get your applications in for our main Summer Session of 2007. But our Fall Session starts on Wednesday, November 1 st. If it seems like there is a double standard between Fall Session and Summer Session, you're right - there is. The Summer Session requires a great deal of planning, labor and cash outlay. The Fall Session is short (only six weeks), and being in the "groove" of harvesting and packing boxes as we are now it just doesn't take that much planning for us. So all you have to do to sign up is go on-line (www.jubileefarm.org/apps/) and sign up. It's easy, quick, and you can pay with a credit card at the time you apply and be done with it. We've had many, many applications already, so we know the on-line process is working well.
In case you're new, you may not be clear about what we call our "off-season" CSA Sessions (Fall, Winter, Early Spring, and Late Spring Sessions). We offer four off-season Sessions. They are short, which allows people to jump in and out if they need to. Some members sign up for all four Sessions at once, but most just sign up at the end of the Session they are in for the following Session.
Our motto here is that "when we can eat locally we ought to eat locally." All of you have done that this summer, as nothing you have received in your boxes was not grown right here. In the off-season, we can't provide a full box of produce grown on our farm; our growing season just won't allow that. But we do have produce from our farm - onions, potatoes, winter squash, winter leeks, carrots, beets, broccoli, Brussels's sprouts, and more - that we distribute in our boxes. Beyond this, we purchase Certified Organic produce as locally as we can. The boxes also include a dozen eggs every other week.
The boxes are delivered to depots. We have about 20 depots all over the Eastside and in Seattle, and are willing to start more depots to accommodate at least four members. Boxes are delivered to the depots on Wednesday. After members have picked up their first box, they return their empty box to their depots the following week when they pick up their next box. We reuse the boxes as long as we can.
If you are curious about what all (besides what I've mentioned) is in the box, you can check the web page that lists sample boxes (http://jubileefarm.org/share.html). Please remember that our first delivery for the Fall Session is Wednesday, November 1st.The deadline for application to the Fall Session to be included in the first week's delivery is Monday, October 30th at noon.
5. Initiative 933 and a Vision for Snoqualmie Valley
I've been asked by quite a few of you what I think about I-933. I don't mind saying that I'm not in favor of it. I don't like the CAO either, but I was supportive of it and would like to see rural areas remain under the CAO until something better is adopted. I-933 doesn't seem to me to be something better. I could put a lot of energy into explaining why, but I'd rather share with you a vision I have for King County's last and only unindustrialized watershed - Snoqualmie Valley.
Here in Snoqualmie Valley we have the opportunity to take a bold stand to support local, sustainable agriculture. While somewhat desperate, reactionary, and myopic plans such as I-933 and to some degree even the current CAO make attempts to establish some kind of direction for all lands in King County including our valley, I believe the Snoqualmie Valley watershed has a unique potential and because of that it warrants special consideration. Agricultural lands have been disappearing from our County at an unprecedented and alarming rate, we all know that. All the mantras about "local agriculture" won't mean a thing in our County unless land is preserved on which local agriculture can happen. To our credit, the citizens of King County have indicated their willingness to purchase development rights to preserve agriculture and open space. But the impact has been haphazard and "checkerboard" at best. We can and we need to do better.
My suggestion is this. FEMA has just completed an updated declination of the floodplain throughout the Snoqualmie watershed. This basin has thousands of acres of exceedingly rich soil. If utilized wisely, this land could become a center within King County - our last chance - for a thriving, local, sustainable agricultural community. For this to happen, I believe that some dramatic and to some degree unprecedented steps need to be taken. First, I believe that the Snoqualmie River Watershed should be declared the County's (and the State's, and probably the Nation's) first "Agricultural Preserve." In so doing the County would declare its intent to allow the floodplain properties of the Snoqualmie River to serve as the "bread basket" of King County. Lands within the newly established Snoqualmie Valley Agricultural Preserve (SVAP) are already clearly demarcated by the flood plain mapping. The use of such lands once the SVAP is established would be restricted to agriculture and agriculturally based activities. On some of these lands the County has already purchased development rights. The purchase of the non-agricultural development rights would need to be extended to all properties in the SVAP. Current owners, having been compensated for the loss of potential appreciation or development of their property at current market value, would be free to invest that capital in ways that will assure normal appreciation of their assets. I think people who own properties here would jump at the chance to take the value of their floodplain property and have it to invest. This would achieve the "fairness" that fuels so much of the passion for I-933. And current owners would not be displaced. But if they chose to stay, it would be with the knowledge that their land would never be used for anything other than agriculture.
It may seem like the amount of money necessary to establish the SVAP would be astronomical. I don't think that is the case. Only flood plain properties would be involved, and the value of flood plain properties is very low. When PCC purchased land in the floodplain for its own recent "farmland preservation program," it paid approximately $7,000/acre. This is just a fraction of the value of land elsewhere in the County. Very likely the County could access State, Federal and/or even private funding to off-set the costs. Moreover, the second part of my suggestion would make the establishment of the SVAP very attractive to many people in the County.
After the SVAP has been established, I believe we should appropriate funding to build a dam on the middle fork of the Snoqualmie River. Farming would flourish in our Valley in an unprecedented way if the constant threat of flooding were removed. A great deal of land that cannot be farmed now could be farmed if we had flood control. With flood control, growing seasons would be extended by several months, and animals could be integrated into current crop production to provide sustainable fertility. Right now few farmers can keep animals because of flooding.
A dam on the Snoqualmie River has always been intriguing to the City of Seattle. Water is a very valuable commodity, and will be more so as existing aquifers continue to diminish. Global warming, which will likely improve the agricultural productivity in the SVAP could also lead to greater demands for water in our cities. But, of course, dams have been talked about for decades, and it is often thought that the "window of opportunity" for a new dam has slammed shut.
But is that necessarily so? There are two main reasons that dams have been opposed in the past. The first and most significant has been the alteration of habitat in the area that would become a reservoir (lake and drinking-water supply) behind the dam. This is an issue to which I am sensitive. But a third part of this plan for the Snoqualmie River Watershed would provide some mitigation: the SVAP should be a chemical free agricultural preserve. Several Counties in various states have already banned the use of chemicals in their agriculture; we should too. If we did that, and if, as I've suggested, the construction of a dam is only considered after and in conjunction with the establishment of a chemical-free SVAP, one would have to seriously reconsider the net environmental impact of a dam on the Snoqualmie River. In addition to the strong argument that the ability to control river levels would have an extremely positive impact on salmon survival and viability, we would now have thousands of acres of river-bottom land instantly become (and remain in perpetuity) free from chemical infiltration. Farms that are chemical free can only succeed by engaging in careful IPM plans (Integrated Pest Management) that require the creation of habitat for the entire ecological spectrum of native insects, birds and other species of wildlife. Even the number of organic farms we have in the valley now has contributed significantly to habitat restoration through programs such as "Salmon Safe." The "trickle down" environmental effect of a chemical-free SVAP would have positive benefits in ways that we can probably not even begin to foresee at this time.
I said there were two reasons that dams have been opposed in the past. The second reason, and one that has been especially significant in the Snoqualmie Valley, is the justified fear that once flood control is established industrialization will follow. For a long time I I have said that I'd rather have flooding than the incursion of development. But this is the beauty of the SVAP Plan: we establish the SVAP using the parameters of the existing floodplain. Then, after the only activity within the preserve has been limited to farming, we introduce flood control, and let agriculture blossom in a way that will be staggering. It's true that after the dam is built, the land in the former floodplain "would have been" worth much more than its value as agricultural land. But with the SVAP in place, along with the elimination of the threat of flooding we will have the elimination of the threat of industrialization. The development rights will have been bought out in perpetuity, and the only difference after the dam is built will be that farmers will be able to raise crops longer each year, and be safe (along with their animals) from the dangers and losses due to flooding.
What would an Agricultural Preserve in the Snoqualmie Valley look like thirty years from its adoption? I doubt that any of us can imagine. How much healthy food will be produced? How many people in King County will benefit from taking the short drive to the (real) "country" and truly being able to witness and be a part of "local, organic agriculture"? How many people will be employed in a burgeoning, labor-intensive organic community? How much value will a thriving agricultural community the size of the SVAP add to King County commerce? How many food dollars that might have gone out of state or out of the country will remain in the local economy? How many support businesses will flourish on the fringes of the SVAP? How well-known throughout our state and even our nation will the "SVAP Project" become? How many travelers to our State will be drawn to visit the agricultural oasis that a far-sighted citizenry established way back in the early part of the century? How many people will make a visit to the "bread-basket" of Seattle a destination? How many governments and municipalities will be emboldened by our vision and courage to do something similar in their areas?
You may be thinking this is a dream rather than a vision. I know I can't make it happen alone, which is why I am sharing it with you. But I believe that if we gave it a chance, it would happen. It doesn't take a genius to chart the growth of organic agriculture - or sense the consciousness people are gaining about eating locally and living responsibly in a world of diminishing natural resources - and project the enormous demand that would exist for a local agricultural community that really could provide local, organic food to those who want it. If we allow it to happen, it will.
So how does a plan like this become reality? I'm not quite sure. But maybe some of you have some ideas. If you do, I'd love to hear about them.
6. Farm chatter
It seems like the last few updates I haven't had time or energy for much "farm chatter." I think about things all the time I'd like to share with you all, but sometimes when I sit down to the keyboard after a long day all my ideas, like butterflies in the field, just seem to fly away.
The season is definitely winding down. It was 40 degrees each of the last two mornings, and I hear that we may be looking at a freeze next week. Usually we are spared the "early freeze" that many of you who live on the hills get (as we used to when we lived up there). In the fall we generally get a very heavy fog that often protects us from that early, killing frost. But you never know. We have an awful lot of corn just ripening now, and one last rotation on-the-way that I'd like to see make it. The other losses in a freeze are the flowers, tomatilloes, and, of course, the tomatoes. The tomatoes are really hanging in there. We keep thinking that "this week there just won't be any more." Then we go out and hunt around, and, so far anyway, we have always found enough. That has to end, but believe me, we'll keep looking!
We're very pleased to see our cover crop coming up all over the farm. I really like the winter wheat/vetch mix not only because my combine can recover the seed easily, but because the wheat shoots up so quickly. It seems pretty unlikely now that we'll have a flood before November, but many of you remember early floods here at the farm. So it's good to see the brown soil turning green in preparation for flood season.
One crop that we've been waiting and waiting for is celery. And we're still waiting. We may be waiting until next year! We've grown great celery here before, but not for the last few years. Some of you remember that the "home grown" (which simply means celery not grown in sterile ground and pumped full of only those essential nutrients to make it look like celery) celery we grew had a very intense, celery flavor. Well, this year it just doesn't taste that way. In fact, it is a little bitter. What's really surprising about that is we used several different varieties, and they all taste about the same. I'm thinking that we may not have gotten enough water on it during our droughty summer. Anyway, it is a very slow growing item. We kept it well-weeded throughout the year. But I'm afraid that it will end up being a cover crop this year, and getting disked under next spring. Should we try again?
Last week we (finally!) fired off our first batch of bio-diesel. It's now in the "washing" stage, and could be ready to be tested by next week. The second batch is on the heels of the first. I have mixed feelings about the process as we now, at long last, are close to consummation. Maybe the source of some of those feelings is just the fear that it may not work, or the tractors may not run well on it! The other issue is that although bio-diesel is a hundred times better than fossil fuel in terms of emissions, it's not perfect. The ingredients that make it possible for vegetable oil to explode under pressure and heat in the cylinder of the tractor are pretty nasty - lye (the same thing as "draino") and methanol. Both of these are substances that I'd rather not have on the farm at all, and rather not have myself or others on the farm handling. We have been careful, and spent a lot of extra time and money trying to minimize the risk of having these items here. But I still just don't like having them around.
Trying to gain some perspective I suspect that "conventional" farmers would laugh if they heard me express concern about having a small amount of lye in a sealed container and one sealed, 50 gallon drum of methanol. And considering what the tractors do for the farm, and what not-using fossil fuel does for the environment, the economy, and in some small way for the cause of world peace, I believe it is an acceptable situation. I think for a family sized farm, bio-diesel is the way to go, and there is no reason not to take advantage of the opportunity to recycle used vegetable oil that restaurants would have had to discard, and convert it to fuel to power our tractors. I really like that that part of it. But I worry when I hear talk about growing corn to provide vegetable oil for bio-diesel. We need to cure ourselves of our corn addiction, and start growing more legumes! So, we grow soy beans, which are legumes. But I'm also not comfortable with that. To grow the amount of soy beans necessary to impact our national consumption of oil would require an astronomical number of acres of farm land that would be devoted to a crop that will not feed people - and it would likely be GMO soy beans that would be grown. That makes me uncomfortable. Obviously, refineries that would make bio-diesel can't and won't depend or even try to get used oil to recycle. So whereas I see bio-diesel to be a god-send for those of us engaged in organic agriculture at the level of what we call "appropriate technology," the larger picture, at least at this time, seems problematic.
There is more I could and would like to say, but I need to go do a few things. In closing I would like to give a special thanks to all of you who have expressed (or even thought!) appreciative words about what our farm means to you. The "our" in that sentence, by the way, includes all of you. It's the commitment of each of you to the farm that enables us to grow quality produce and to improve each year in the long-term goal of being a sustainable farm.
Erick and Wendy Haakenson