The point, it seems to me, is not to save a disfunctional system, whether
it's small farm (older) or megafarm (newer), but to achieve well fuctioning
options that meet both personal and public needs. I don't see megafarms
that have much diversity and healthy soils, as is also true on most
minifarms. However, with the proper sense of community, decision making,
and options available, we should be able to achieve a regeneration of
losses in food security and biological diversity. Economics seem to be a
bit easier than ecologics. Fewer people are telling me how to spend my
money than those that are telling me how to run my place. But, this may be
only an illusion of the moment.
I disagree that we have food security. We depend as a nation on fossil
fuel, imports from south of the border, and an economic interface that
creates pertubations much worse than weather. There is no "magic bullet"
that I see, whether it's revamping subsidies, markets, technology, or
regulations. Subsidies create stability of sorts that in turn creates
ecological instability, for example. Technology creates expensive options
and low interest encourages over-capitalization. What we get is economic
instability when overlaid by instability of fuel and markets. In this
scheme, there is selection for those who have built in buffers. Large,
deep pocketed corporations have one kind of buffer. Smaller operations
with diversity and careful management have another kind of buffer.
The final test will be in the management of the soil and independence from
"critical" technology that depends on major international fluctuations,
such as fossil energy. This is not to say total independence, but CRITICAL
dependence means that reaction time and available options are likely to be
inadequate for needed reactions to changes likely to occur. Check the
situation in Cuba. They are an experiment in small scale to what might in
some ways happen in the US if we examine certain imaginable scenarios. I
think we are a long way from a sustainable (ie. survivable) situation of
available options for some of these scenarios, and we certainly are being
"jerked around" plenty by public policies, regardless which political party
we discuss.
As a public policy, it is prudent to ensure the options are available, and
at least not be creating additional shock waves. As an individual, find a
niche among the essentially infinite set of possibilities that meets your
needs. As a citizen, try to find ways to work within the fluctuations of
politics to find rational policies that achieve the needs of support
without disruptive interference. It's a case by case matter of making
decisions and sharing ideas to let the good ideas grow and have influence,
and let the others die peacefully. I haven't found an instance where
hysteria was adaptive. Also, there are few places where doing nothing was
adaptive either.
=========================================================================
R. H. (Dick) Richardson * (512) 471-4128 (w)
Zoology Department * (512) 471-9651 (FAX)
University of Texas * (512) 476-5131 (h)
Austin, TX 78712 * d.richardson@mail.utexas.edu