Saturday, October 09, 1999, 5:58:52 AM, you wrote:
BA> Long-story-short: this mineral nutrient stuff matters a whole bunch for
BA> both the quality and the nutritive value of foods and feeds. That the
BA> overwhelming majority of organic farmers don't 'get' this any better
BA> than their conventional colleagues is a continuing tragedy approaching
BA> the point of having completely squandered a remarkable opportunity.
I would remove the word "completely" from that statement - the coin's
still up in the air. In any case, the problem is the same: The
considerations currently being given weight by the majority of the
nation's (and world's) farmers, be they organic or conventional, do
NOT contemplate the factors you describe in any significant way. The
task then, is to get the issue into the public view and onto the
public agenda, beginning with a case by case manner, just as you are
already doing. The opportunity to break into a major league
demonstration project may not be far off.
(BTW, Bart was one of the people on my list of ideal debaters for the
organic movement in the imaginary "debate w/ the Avery's" scenario).
(Center for Rural and Community Development)
Cordoba, Veracruz; Cd. Guzman, Jalisco & Reynosa, Tamaulipas Mexico +
McAllen TX USA
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: