Subject: information for small-scale farming

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 10:33:37 EDT

Hi.  I run a Community-shared agriculture farm in eastern Ontario.  
We grow organic vegetables, berries, fruits and herbs. I am looking 
for information on what plants attract beneficial insects for 
our crops. Eg. what herbs, flowers, even weeds enhance the "natural" 
ecosystem within the farm.  I am also looking for information on 
weeds as indicators.  I would like to know what the weeds growing on 
my farm tell me about the soil.  If anyone knows of any information 
on these topics I would appreciate hearing from you.

Thanks

Tamsyn Rowley

From [email-masked] Jun  1 11:02:36 1995
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 1995 09:02:38 -0400
From: JULIE ELFVING <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: "Rent-a-tree" - Farm Leases

Here's an intriguing idea.  Someone sent me a recent Washington Post
article (sorry, date unknown, but it was probably within the last 10-14
days) about a 200 acre farm that has sold "leases" at $175 per apple
tree to city people, who would then be able to visit the farm, which has
8000 apple trees, hiking trails, ponds, picnic areas, etc., anytime they
wanted.  They also receive all the apples "their" tree produces, about
800 pounds.  Some apples can be sold back to the farm or donated to
charity for tax purposes.  Reportedly, the tax deduction alone could pay
for the lease.  About 150 people signed leases during the first month,
many of them doctors, professors, or lawyers who live in Washington. 
The farm is 50 miles west of the District.

Customers receive a membership card and a gold-trimmed certificate
noting they've become "Friends of Pointe-of-View Farm."  A plaque with
each person's name is placed on the selected tree.

The owners settled on the idea after struggling to make ends meet
growing apples.  At one point, they turned their place into a weekend
pick-your-own farm to supplement income.  But money from that came in
only during the August and September harvest season, and visitors
often ended up damaging the orchard as they tromped around, according
to the article.

Obviously, this idea wouldn't be suitable for all small farm owners, but it
does have a certain appeal as a creative source of revenue. 
Apparently, the people who have bought leases have fallen in love with
the place.  The article quotes a dermatologist who bought 6 leases -- "It
wasn't just for the apples, because you can grow them anywhere. 
People need to get away from the rat race that's all around the city and
feel the tranquility of a farm.  It's a chance for them to see what this
country was like, to see another world beyond the freeways and the
malls."  An 85-year old woman who also signed a lease said,"If I wanted
to get out and scream, I can do it there.  It's the kind of freedom you don't
get locked up in an apartment."  She drives out nearly every weekend.
From [email-masked] Apr 10 15:13:12 1995
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 07:30:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Food Catchments

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 1995 09:37:39 WST
From: Warwick Rowell <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]

"The linguistics is fun, mais une grande 'erring rouge!

The major point of interest here is examining systems to define the 
conditions where food starts moving one way rather than the other.

A colleague has suggested that the social catchment is at least as 
important as the geographical/physical one in determining landcare 
involvement.  

It could be as simple as the fact that there is a bootmaker in the 
town ten miles further away, that leads to the social habit of 
shopping there rather than closer to home, and so more suppliers set 
up there, and then the wholesaler, etc.

We're finding the reverse here in the SW of WA, where little country 
towns that were established a day's horse and cart ride apart have been 
diminishing in function and population ever since the car came on 
the scene. 

The resurgence of interest in homesteading and permaculture is 
perhaps their brightest light on the horizon for many years. 
Many resettlers are adopting the strategy of buying their lot in town, 
or on the edge, where the infrastructure (technical and social) is already 
established.

Barraba, about 80 kms north of Tamworth in NSW, went through a deliberate
renewal process, of canvassing town and hinterland people for the 
facility they most resented going to Tamworth for. They then cleaned
up one of vacant shops, and advertised for in fact a bootmaker/saddler.
They came; husband, wife, two kids. A class size was viable again, 
the teacher stayed, and so their little economy grew. This is a nice 
alternative to the "sellout" to big industry. The key is to focus on 
the really needed service. The hassle with many LETS schemes for 
instance is that so many of the services offered are discretionary 
or luxury items.  

One of the major factors in sensible food catchments is the incredible
subsidies, actual and implicit, we are paying for transport. At the
moment our neighbourhood's food catchment is the world - there is fruit
from Israel, Phillipines, California, South America, etc in our 
supermarket. Our expectations are unreal.

So the pragmatic task of meeting our food (and other) needs from as close 
to home as we possibly can is also a major ethical and environmental and 
economic stance we can pursue. This task underlies the academic exploration
of foodshed, food circle, food net, or whatever we want to call it.

Ethical: 
depriving our local community of resources needed for its growth in pursuit
of a slightly higher return is systematically stupid. 

Environmental: 
Waste, energy, stupid criteria for breeding (shelf life, handling 
ability) are all minimised.

Economic: 
Economic success is more and more being seen as influenced by the recycling
of financial resources in an area. Economists have come up with a new 
definition: resilience - the amount of local demand that is met by local 
production.

The permaculture concept of zoning would be relevant to anybody managing 
their food sources. As a permaculturist, I might design a system so: 

I can meet my need for basic herbs, salads and green vegetables 
within 10m of my back door. 

I can meet my need for staple vegetables within 50m of my back door.

I can meet my need for most seasonal fruit within my neighbourhood.

I can meet my need for small meat within 50m of my back door.

I can meet my need for larger meats and milk within 1 km of my back 
door. (usually by buying from someone else in the neighbourhood)

I can meet my occasional infrequent need for exotic herbs, spices, fruit
from the local shop.

I can meet my need for bulk grains through a CSA within x miles..

It goes further - "I will make the pragmatic, ethical decision that in 
general I will invest x% in the future of my locality by being prepared to 
pay that much more for anything I can buy cheaper elsewhere than in 
my local community."
 
Wx
--
 __________________________________________________________
|                [email-masked]                |
|      20 Onslow Rd Shenton Pk 6008 Western Australia      |
|   Management Consultant     Permaculture Designer        |
|_"Helping Managers Learn"___"Helping Land Managers Learn"_|

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:44:51 1995
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 15:11:25 -0500
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: local food securtiy & the concept of a "foodshed"

Fred Kirschenmann, an organic grain farmer from North Dakota, spoke
this past week at a Northeast Region SARE Ch. 3-sponsored
conference on sustainable agriculture.  He touched on the subject
of local agriculture, local food security and the concept of a
"foodshed" (conceptual equivalent of a watershed).  Could someone
point out further reading on the "foodshed" concept?

I would appreciate examples of projects that have increased
consumer awareness of the importance and benefits of local/regional
food production?  What's the best way for the getting the message
out?

Thanks in advance,

Tom Akin

Thomas Akin
Extension Specialist
Plant & Soil Science Dept.
Bowditch Hal Box 30910
University of Massachusetts        TEL:  (413) 545-5236
Amherst, MA 01003-0910             FAX:  (413) 545-0260     

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:45:13 1995
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 21:55:19 -0800 (PST)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: info leads: foodshed concept (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 18:20:40 GMT -0600
From: Michele Gale-Sinex/CIAS <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: info leads: foodshed concept

Howdy, all--

This is a reply to Tom Akin on the foodshed concept query he passed
along from Fred Kirschenmann and augmented with his own questions.

We have a bunch of work going on here at UW-Madison and the Center 
for Integrated Agricultural Systems on this topic.  I'm writing to 
share a few highlights of that.

1.  CIAS sponsors a monthly Regional Food Systems Seminar that has
brought diverse folks together to explore topics like the economic
impacts of changing diets to meet USDA food guidelines, the
feasibility and impact of regionally reliant food systems, various
alternative and value added marketing projects taking place in the
upper Midwest, and more.  We are still in an exploratory mode
(meaning we not only have more questions than answers, we're still
formulating the questions), but some interesting perspectives have
emerged from this seminar. John Hendrickson is the coordinator of
this seminar.  You can reach him via e-mail as

[email-masked]

He is the keeper of much of the Center's information traffic on this
topic and can also refer you to UW-Madison researchers and contact
folks and Madison-area and Wisconsin/Upper Midwest collaborators on
this work. Steve Stevenson, CIAS assistant director, is also deeply
involved in foodshed activities.  He is at:

[email-masked]

2.  A few suggestions on readings.  Prof. Jack Kloppenburg (UW-Mad
Dept. of Rural Sociology) and John have authored a paper called
"Coming Into the Foodshed" which lays out a framework for foodshed
issues.  John can give you more details; I don't know whether it's
available in other than draft form at this point, but John can tell
you, or you can dink Jack at

[email-masked]

Jack has a number of graduate and undergraduate students involved in 
foodshed research, as well, and has taught seminars on the topic.

3.  Community Supported Agriculture, community gardening/urban
sustainable agriculture, farmer's markets, alternative
value-added/direct marketing, and development of seasonal/regional
restaurant menus are several of the areas that the Center has had a
strong interest in and/or supported research and other activities on.
I can offer further leads if you have specific questions.

4.  Here are suggestions for readings that we've found useful in
thinking about regional and seasonal food systems issues. I'm
knocking this out quickly on a Friday evening, so it isn't perfectly
edited format-wise.

Kate Clancy.  The role of sustainable agriculture in improving the 
safety and quality of the food supply.  /Am J of Alt Ag/ 1:1, 11-18 
(1986)

Kenneth Dahlberg.  Regenerative food systems:  broadening the scope 
and agenda of sustainability.  In Patricia Allen, ed., /Food for the 
Future./  NY:  John Wiley & Sons, 1993, pp. 75-102

Harriet Friedmann.  After Midas' feast:  alternative food regimes for 
the future.  In Patricia Allen, ed., /Food for the Future./  NY:  
John Wiley & Sons, 1993, pp. 213-233.

Arthur Getz.  Urban foodsheds.  /Permaculture Activist/ VII:3:26-27, 
1991

Joan Dye Gussow and Kate Clancy.  Dietary guidelines for
sustainability.  /J. of Nutrition Education. 18:1-5, 1986

Marcia Herrin and Joan Dye Gussow.  Designing a Sustainable Regional 
Diet.  /Journal of Nutritional Education/ 21: 270-275, 1989  (good 
biblio)

Interfaith Hunger Coalition.  /Seeds of Change:  Strategies for Food 
Security for the Inner City./  Los Angeles:  Interfaith Hunger 
Coalition, 1993

Brewster Kneen.  Distancing:  the logic of the food system; Going 
shopping; and Industrial food.  Chapters 3-5 in /From Land to 
Mouth:  Understanding the Food System./  Toronto:  NC Press Ltd.  
(Sorry I don't have the newer edition on hand to update this.)

David Orr.  Prices and the life exchanged:  costs of the US food 
system.  In /Understanding the True Cost of Food./  Washington, DC:  
Institute for Alternative Ag, 1991, pp. 1-13.

Toronto Food Policy Council.  /Developing a Food System which is Just 
and Environmentally Sustainable./  Toronto:  TFPC, 1993

There is much much much more...but this'll give you a start.

5.  Prof. Sally Leong, UW-Madison Professor of Plant Pathology, 
organized and continues to be a guiding spirit behind a foodshed 
working group here in Madland.  She is at:

[email-masked]

This group engages researchers, food and hunger activists, people 
with interests in sustainable ag., farmers, and many others in a 
variety of foodshed-related issues.

Hope this gets you started.  We're finding it an incredibly rich and 
complex area of inquiry.

Peace--
Michele

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Michele Gale-Sinex
Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems
Agricultural Technology and Family Farm Institute
UW-Madison--Voice: (608) 262-8018   FAX: (608) 265-3020

Don't pray when it rains if you don't pray
when the sun shines.  --Satchel Paige

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:45:30 1995
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 1995 08:33:29 -0800 (PST)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: concept of a "foodshed" (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 1995 10:43:15 -0500
From: Jennifer L. Wilkins <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: concept of a "foodshed"

>Fred Kirschenmann, an organic grain farmer from North Dakota, spoke
>this past week at a Northeast Region SARE Ch. 3-sponsored
>conference on sustainable agriculture.  He touched on the subject
>of local agriculture, local food security and the concept of a
>"foodshed" (conceptual equivalent of a watershed).  Could someone
>point out further reading on the "foodshed" concept?
>

The first place I heard about the concept of a Foodshed was in 1993 at the
Association for the Study of Food in Society/ Agriculture and Human Values
conference at The Penn State University in the following presentation:

Hendrickson, J. A. 1993. The foodshed:  Heuristic device and sustainable
alternative the food system.  Paper presented at the "Environment, Culture,
and Food Equity", organized jointly by the Agriculture, Food and Human
Values Society, the Association for the Study of Food in Society, and The
Penn State University, College of Agricultural Sciences, June 3-6, State
College, PA.

But Hendrickson credited Hedden with coining the term in the early 1990s!

Hedden, W. P. 1929. How Great Cities Are Fed. Boston: D. C. Heath and Co.

I would also recommend Hamm's work since he addresses the ever-important,
but all too aften ignored issue of carrying capacity (for humans!) -

Hamm, M. W. The potential for a localized food supply in New Jersey. Paper
presented at the "Environment, Culture, and Food Equity", organized jointly
by the Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society, the Association for the
Study of Food in Society, and The Penn State University, College of
Agricultural Sciences, June 3-6, State College, PA.

>I would appreciate examples of projects that have increased
>consumer awareness of the importance and benefits of local/regional
>food production?

I am in the process of developing a food guide for the Northeast which will
have a series of fact sheets about the benefits of eating locally and how
to achieve a more local diet in an area with significant seasonal
variation. This guide, poster, plus supplementary materials will be
available by the end of September.

Much of the information provided is supported by data we gathered through a
survey of Northeastern consumers as to their knowledge, attitudes, beliefs
and practices with respect to local foods - awareness and use of winter
vegetables, perceived attributes of locally-grown foods, comparison with
imported foods, connection between purchases and local agriculture,
barriers to eating locally, etc, etc, etc. Results are being prepared for
publication.

 What's the best way for the getting the message
>out?

Good question - we're working on that, too!

Jennifer L. Wilkins, Ph.D., R.D.
Senior Extension Associate
[email-masked]

Ishmael knows.

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:46:56 1995
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 1995 18:13:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: concept of a "foodshed" (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 1995 15:09:17 -0300
From: Alasdair McKay <[email-masked]>
To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: concept of a "foodshed"

> Subject: concept of a "foodshed"
> 
> >conference on sustainable agriculture.  He touched on the subject
> >of local agriculture, local food security and the concept of a
> >"foodshed" (conceptual equivalent of a watershed).  Could someone
> >point out further reading on the "foodshed" concept?
> >

The term "watershed" tends to mean different things in different parts of 
the English-speaking world. The N. American term usually refers to the 
catchment area of a river system, whereas elsewhere "watershed" means 
much the same as the N. American term "divide".  A third use of the word  
might be applied more to a structure for the diversion of water or the 
provision of shelter.

I do not think that the existence of these long-established diverse
meanings is any great problem, provided no-one uses the term in a context
where the word is other than tautologous ... and this is usually the case:
most non-US authors would be aware of the need to accommodate both US and
non-US readers. 

However ..  the introduction of a novel and supposedly analogous term
"foodshed" seems likely to be a source of confusion in an area of
discussion which is of extreme importance, unless this term is also used 
in a purely tautologous manner. If this term were presented in such a 
way that my understanding of a piece of writing depended wholly upon my 
interpretation of the meaning of the word "foodshed", I would find no 
other sense in the word than that of :

        " an artificial structure for storing food in "

I would recommend that the term be abandoned for any other purposes.

Alasdair McKay

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:48:01 1995
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 08:42:22 -0500
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Foodsheds and Food Circles - 1of4

    Local Food Security:
    Foodsheds and Food Circles  

    Submitted in four parts:
    The Foodshed and The Food Circle
    The Foodshed and The Food Circle, cont
    More local food security and food systems info and issues
    References and Resources

The foodshed and the food circle are two concepts gaining recognition as
models or conceptual frameworks for describing local food systems.

 The foodshed concept, most often attributed to Arthur Getz's in his 1991
Urban Foodsheds article in Permaculture Activist , uses the analogy of a
watershed to describe 'the area that is defined by a structure of supply'.
Getz used the image of a foodshed to answer the question of  "Where our food
is coming from  and how it is getting to us" and to picture how the local
and regional food supply system works.   Inherent in this concept, he
emphasized, was 'the suggestion of a need to protect a source, as well as
the need to know and understand its specific geographic and ecological
dimensions, condition and stability in order for it to be safeguarded and
enhanced.'       

Today the Madison, Wisconsin area Foodshed Working Group along with an
active coalition of food coops, csa associations, farmer's markets, producer
coops, bakeries and other food processors, a natural food warehouse/
distributor, UWMadison and other active participants is the best example 
of a local food system identifying with the foodshed concept.      

The Food Circle is a dynamic, community-based and regionally-integrated
food systems concept/model/vision. In effect, it is  a systems ecology.  In
contrast to the current linear producton-consumption system, The Food Circle
is a production-consumption-recycle model.   A celebration of cycles, this
model mirrors all natural systems and is based on the fact that all stable,
biological and other systems function as closed cycles or circles, carefully
preserving energy, nutrients, resources and the integrity of the whole.  

The graphic model is a wheel of concentric circles, illustrating how an
integrated  food system flows from  ag inputs and production through
consumption and waste recycling. Starting with the individual at the center
and moving outward through the family and community circles,this model shows
the food system and its parts work,   integrating  political, economic,
communication and other factors. For example, the CSA farmer in the
production sector is directly across the circle from the CSA consumer
members, showing the direct marketing relationship.    

end 1 of 4

Nancy Lee Bentley
The Food Circle
PO Box 3083
Champaign, IL 61826-3083      
(217) 586-3846
[email-masked]

For an info packet on The Food Circle, including
linear and food circle models and a reprint of 
EcoCity Journal's "An Introduction to The Food 
Circle, please send $7.95 to the address above.  

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:48:32 1995
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 95 09:54 CDT
From: john hendrickson <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: foodsheds

Tom,
 
Chances are you might hear a number of responses from Madison,
Wisconsin regarding your query about foodsheds.  Quite a number
of people at the University of Wisconsin have been galvanized by
the concept and application of the foodshed.  Another posting
correctly pointed you in the direction of the Arthur Getz article
in the journal Permaculture Activist.  The earliest known use of
the word is in the extremely interesting and telling book _How
Great Cities are Fed_ by W.P. Hedden, published in 1929.  It
seems that as far back as the 1920s people were becoming
concerned about how far food traveled and the growing complexity
of the food system.  This book describes the flow of food into
New York.  It may be at your library covered with dust.
 
This word also harkens back - and not too far back - to the term
milkshed.  Milk, due to its perishibility and bulk remained exclusively
a local commodity up until a few decades ago.
Basically, each city had its own milkshed until dairy plants
merged and long distance transport became more feasible (due
primarily to relatively cheap oil, of course).
 
Jack Kloppenburg, Steve Stevenson and I have written an article
elaborating on and attempting to define the term foodshed as well
as suggesting what it means to conduct foodshed analysis.  Look
for this article in the forthcoming book _Home Territiries:
Essays on Community and the Land_ edited by William Vitek and Wes
Jackson.  Basically we take the position that the term foodshed
should be more than an analytical tool but a word that describes
an actual place: a self-reliant, regional food system.
 
The appeal of the word foodshed over "food system" is that it so
vividly creates an image of food moving across a landscape to a
particular place, a city, in much the same dendritic pattern that
water moves through a watershed in streams and rivers and into a
large body of water.  This of course conjurs up lots of neat
metaphors and symbolisms.
 
I know of numerous examples of how eaters (consumers) have been
made aware of the importance and benefits of local food
production.  I will take some time later this week to compile
some of the projects that I know of and send them your way.
Briefly, one of the more exciting ways that eaters are connecting
to local farms is the rapidly growing Community Supported
Agriculture (CSA) movement.  My graduate thesis will be an
examination of CSA within the framework of the foodshed.
 
I will also briefly mention two efforts going on here in Madison
and the University of Wisconsin.  The Foodshed Working is a
collection of students, professors, and citizens that are working
to promote the foodshed idea and encourage the consumption of
local food.  Contact: Sally Leong at [email-masked].  The
Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems at UW has been conducting
a seminar on Regionally-Reliant Food Systems and is in the process
of formulating a research and outreach agenda for work in this area.
For more information, contact me (address below) or Steve Stevenson
([email-masked])
 
Good luck and I would appreciate it if you posted a summary of
what you receive to your query to the SANET group.  Thanks.
 
John Hendrickson
Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems
University of Wisconsin-Madison
(608) 265-3704
[email-masked]

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:48:50 1995
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 11:22:26 GMT -0600
From: Michele Gale-Sinex/CIAS <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Foodshed concept/leads

Howdy, all--

This is a reply to Tom Akin on the foodshed concept query he passed
along from Fred Kirschenmann and augmented with his own questions.  I 
sent it out Friday p.m. but apparently it bounced, so am trying 
again.  We have work going on here at UW-Madison and the Center 
for Integrated Agricultural Systems on this topic.  I'm writing to 
share a few highlights of that.

1.  CIAS sponsors a monthly Regional Food Systems Seminar that has
brought diverse folks together to explore topics like the economic
impacts of changing diets to meet USDA food guidelines, the
feasibility and impact of regionally reliant food systems, various
alternative and value added marketing projects taking place in the
upper Midwest, and more.  We are still in an exploratory mode
(meaning we not only have more questions than answers, we're still
formulating the questions), but some interesting perspectives have
emerged from this seminar. John Hendrickson is the coordinator of
this seminar.  You can reach him via e-mail as

[email-masked]

He is the keeper of much of the Center's information traffic on this
topic and can also refer you to UW-Madison researchers and contact
folks and Madison-area and Wisconsin/Upper Midwest collaborators on
this work. Steve Stevenson, CIAS assistant director, is also deeply
involved in foodshed activities.  He is at:

[email-masked]

2.  A few suggestions on readings.  Prof. Jack Kloppenburg (UW-Mad
Dept. of Rural Sociology) and John have authored a paper called
"Coming Into the Foodshed" which lays out a framework for foodshed
issues.  John can give you more details; I don't know whether it's
available in other than draft form at this point, but John can tell
you, or you can dink Jack at

[email-masked]

Jack has a number of graduate and undergraduate students involved in 
foodshed research, as well, and has taught seminars on the topic.

3.  Community Supported Agriculture, community gardening/urban
sustainable agriculture, farmer's markets, alternative
value-added/direct marketing, and development of seasonal/regional
restaurant menus are several of the areas that the Center has had a
strong interest in and/or supported research and other activities on.
I can offer further leads if you have specific questions.

4.  Here are suggestions for readings that we've found useful in
thinking about regional and seasonal food systems issues. I'm
knocking this out quickly on a Friday evening, so it isn't perfectly
edited format-wise.

Kate Clancy.  The role of sustainable agriculture in improving the 
safety and quality of the food supply.  /Am J of Alt Ag/ 1:1, 11-18 
(1986)

Kenneth Dahlberg.  Regenerative food systems:  broadening the scope 
and agenda of sustainability.  In Patricia Allen, ed., /Food for the 
Future./  NY:  John Wiley & Sons, 1993, pp. 75-102

Harriet Friedmann.  After Midas' feast:  alternative food regimes for 
the future.  In Patricia Allen, ed., /Food for the Future./  NY:  
John Wiley & Sons, 1993, pp. 213-233.

Arthur Getz.  Urban foodsheds.  /Permaculture Activist/ VII:3:26-27, 
1991

Joan Dye Gussow and Kate Clancy.  Dietary guidelines for
sustainability.  /J. of Nutrition Education. 18:1-5, 1986

Marcia Herrin and Joan Dye Gussow.  Designing a Sustainable Regional 
Diet.  /Journal of Nutritional Education/ 21: 270-275, 1989  (good 
biblio)

Interfaith Hunger Coalition.  /Seeds of Change:  Strategies for Food 
Security for the Inner City./  Los Angeles:  Interfaith Hunger 
Coalition, 1993

Brewster Kneen.  Distancing:  the logic of the food system; Going 
shopping; and Industrial food.  Chapters 3-5 in /From Land to 
Mouth:  Understanding the Food System./  Toronto:  NC Press Ltd.  
(Sorry I don't have the newer edition on hand to update this.)

David Orr.  Prices and the life exchanged:  costs of the US food 
system.  In /Understanding the True Cost of Food./  Washington, DC:  
Institute for Alternative Ag, 1991, pp. 1-13.

Toronto Food Policy Council.  /Developing a Food System which is Just 
and Environmentally Sustainable./  Toronto:  TFPC, 1993

There is much much much more...but this'll give you a start.

5.  Prof. Sally Leong, UW-Madison Professor of Plant Pathology, 
organized and continues to be a guiding spirit behind a foodshed 
working group here in Madland.  She is at:

[email-masked]

This group engages researchers, food and hunger activists, people 
with interests in sustainable ag., farmers, and many others in a 
variety of foodshed-related issues.

Hope this gets you started.  We're finding it an incredibly rich and 
complex area of inquiry.

Peace--
Michele

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:51:37 1995
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 13:45:47 -0700
From: Barbara Wetzel <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: "Foodshed" resource: CSA Proceedings

SANET-ers:

PROCEEDINGS.  COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE CONFERENCE.

Please note that the statewide University of California Sustainable
Agriculture Research and Education Program (UC SAREP) has published
proceedings from a very popular conference on Subscription Farming or
Community Supported Agriculture (CSAs).  This concept is part of a
successful Foodshed.  The conference was co-sponsored by the UC Small Farm
Center. 

>From a standing-room-only conference at the University of California Davis
in December 1993 comes this collection of farmer presentations about the
Community Supported Agriculture or CSA concept.  In CSAs consumers buy
"subscriptions" to local or nearly local farms, and farmers are able to plan
ahead with prepaid customers.  Subscription farming began in Western Europe
and Japan in the mid-1960s, first appeared in the U.S. in the mid-1980s, and
has been gathering momentum ever since.  The consumer group CSA North
America is calling for 10,000 subscription farms by the year 2000.  The
proceedings includes the presentations of four farmers experienced in
operating CSAs, who discussed their farms and the history and philosophy
behind Community Supported Agriculture.  The 37-page proceedings includes
bibliography and resource guide. Editor:  Gerry Cohn.  Price $8.00.
Available from:  UC Small Farm Center, University of California, Davis, CA
95616.  Checks or money orders payable to UC Regents; include name, address
and telephone on order.  Price includes tax and shipping.

UC SAREP is working to develop a program area in community food systems.  If
you have questions or comments about foodsheds or local food systems, please
contact Gail Feenstra, food systems analyst, 916-752-8408,
[email-masked].  Snail mail: Gail Feenstra, UC SAREP, University of
California, Davis, CA 95616.
Barbara Wetzel
UC SAREP

From [email-masked] Apr  4 09:52:28 1995
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:17:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: concept of a "foodshed" (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 95 17:16:32 -0400
From: Bob Engelman <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: concept of a "foodshed" (fwd)

On "foodsheds" Alasdair McKay writes:

>If this term were presented in such a
>way that my understanding of a piece of writing depended wholly upon my
>interpretation of the meaning of the word "foodshed", I would find no
>other sense in the word than that of :
>
>        " an artificial structure for storing food in "
>
>I would recommend that the term be abandoned for any other purposes.
>
>

I wholeheartedly agree. It's hard enough getting watershed understood.
There must be better ways of getting the concept out.

From Shirley=[email-masked] Apr  4 10:07:03 1995
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 95 8:29:11 EDT
From: AAAS Fellow -- PMP <Shirley=[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: food sheds

To Tom-

more on food sheds.  Long ago (1983) I did a food self suffiency study for 
the state of Minnesota as part of a larger plan for each state in the 
country.  This massive study was sponsored by Rodale Research Inst. in 
Emmaus, PA.  I don't know if they were all finished.  I do know that the PA 
study was very complete (as was Minnesota's, I believe!).  Rodale was 
concerned with regional food self suffiency at that time and was encouraging 
states to become more self suffient in their food needs via these studies.  I 
did a lot of number crunching and data collecting; they had some conversion 
figures and a general guide on how they wanted it to be done.  I would call 
Rodale and ask about their studies if you are interested. Good luck!

From [email-masked] Apr  4 22:11:49 1995
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 08:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: "Foodshed" as a term too difficult to understand (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 08:20:23 -0600 (CST)
From: Bart Hall-Beyer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: "Foodshed" as a term too difficult to understand

Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even
'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is that
a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.'

The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not very
bendable.

C'mon, people.  I speak several languages, and the ongoing beauty and
strength of English is its very maleability and adaptability;
borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying words to expand and
introduce meaning.  English has become the language of preference for
international communication in large measure precisely _because_ its
speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' to explain a
concept.

If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, corporate,
centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by all means do it,
and it can be discussed in those terms.  Please don't, however, set
up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term
rather than discussing the concept.

Bart Hall-Beyer
Fayetteville, Arkansas

From [email-masked] Apr  4 22:14:46 1995
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:28:56 -0700
From: by way of bbwetzel <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Foodsheds etc.

Dear Tom and other interested sanet-ers,

It looks like you've gotten excellent feedback on the foodshed question.  
There is, indeed, a network of us out here who are very interested in the 
concept of foodsheds.  Here at the UC Sustainable Agriculture Research and 
Education Program (SAREP), we are developing an RFP that focuses on community
food systems.  We are trying to encourage research and education in 
California that supports the development of sustainable production 
and distribution practices, community economic development and social equity 
within local food systems.  Our new RFP will be out in early May and will be 
due in August. 

In the past couple of years, we have funded several projects that have 
attempted to incorporate these criteria in unique ways. One project is being 
developed in Placer County, called PlacerGrown. It is a local agricultural 
marketing program that is working to expand the production, distribution and 
consumption of local foods in Placer County.  Two surveys--one for producers 
and one for consumers--are being used to gather information about what 
production and marketing strategies are being used now and to find out what 
farmers and consumers need to increase their use of locally grown foods.  
They are also developing a local food guide for consumers called "Reason for
the Season" that will describe which foods are locally available in which 
seasons.  A packet of information has just gone out to folks in the 
restaurant business, telling them about how they might "tap in" to this 
project.  The Master Preservers are being utilized to do workshops with 
consumers about how to use and preserve local foods throughout the year.  The
PlacerGrown group is also attempting to collect data about how this project 
is impacting the community economically.  Sharon Junge, county director in 
Placer County, is the contact person.

Another project we have funded for several years now is up in Arcata.  It is 
called the Arcata Community Farm.  They are leasing land from the city and 
have developed a wonderful educational farm.  It is being used as a learning 
laboratory for students studying sustainable agriculture at Humboldt State 
University; for developing a curriculum with elementary school children; as a
community supported agriculture project (they now have about 30 subscibers) 
and as an educational facility for the community.  The project has also 
involved the Hmong community (which has a substantial population in the 
area).  Several Hmong families grow food for their families on the farm, 
supplementing their diets and making them less reliant on federal food 
programs to get nutritious food.  The Hmong families and the Arcata farm 
staff are sharing information about sustainable production techniques and 
learning about each others' cultures.  The contact person is Susan Ornelas.

Both of these projects have involved both university and/or extension 
personnel and community members in their development.  We have seen that good
leadership and effective collaboration among several groups has been part of 
the reason for these projects' successes.  

We encourage other groups or individuals in California who are interested in 
the concept of foodsheds or community food systems to contact either Gail 
Feenstra (916/ 752-8408) or Dave Campbell (916/ 752-7541) and obtain a copy 
of our RFP.

Gail Feenstra
Food Systems Analyst
SAREP
UC Davis
Davis, CA 95616
[email-masked]

From [email-masked] Apr  4 22:15:31 1995
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 08:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: "Foodshed" as a term too difficult to understand (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 08:20:23 -0600 (CST)
From: Bart Hall-Beyer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: "Foodshed" as a term too difficult to understand

Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even
'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is that
a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.'

The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not very
bendable.

C'mon, people.  I speak several languages, and the ongoing beauty and
strength of English is its very maleability and adaptability;
borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying words to expand and
introduce meaning.  English has become the language of preference for
international communication in large measure precisely _because_ its
speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' to explain a
concept.

If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, corporate,
centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by all means do it,
and it can be discussed in those terms.  Please don't, however, set
up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term
rather than discussing the concept.

Bart Hall-Beyer
Fayetteville, Arkansas

From [email-masked] Apr  4 22:16:38 1995
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:28:56 -0700
From: by way of bbwetzel <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Foodsheds etc.

Dear Tom and other interested sanet-ers,

It looks like you've gotten excellent feedback on the foodshed question.  
There is, indeed, a network of us out here who are very interested in the 
concept of foodsheds.  Here at the UC Sustainable Agriculture Research and 
Education Program (SAREP), we are developing an RFP that focuses on community
food systems.  We are trying to encourage research and education in 
California that supports the development of sustainable production 
and distribution practices, community economic development and social equity 
within local food systems.  Our new RFP will be out in early May and will be 
due in August. 

In the past couple of years, we have funded several projects that have 
attempted to incorporate these criteria in unique ways. One project is being 
developed in Placer County, called PlacerGrown. It is a local agricultural 
marketing program that is working to expand the production, distribution and 
consumption of local foods in Placer County.  Two surveys--one for producers 
and one for consumers--are being used to gather information about what 
production and marketing strategies are being used now and to find out what 
farmers and consumers need to increase their use of locally grown foods.  
They are also developing a local food guide for consumers called "Reason for
the Season" that will describe which foods are locally available in which 
seasons.  A packet of information has just gone out to folks in the 
restaurant business, telling them about how they might "tap in" to this 
project.  The Master Preservers are being utilized to do workshops with 
consumers about how to use and preserve local foods throughout the year.  The
PlacerGrown group is also attempting to collect data about how this project 
is impacting the community economically.  Sharon Junge, county director in 
Placer County, is the contact person.

Another project we have funded for several years now is up in Arcata.  It is 
called the Arcata Community Farm.  They are leasing land from the city and 
have developed a wonderful educational farm.  It is being used as a learning 
laboratory for students studying sustainable agriculture at Humboldt State 
University; for developing a curriculum with elementary school children; as a
community supported agriculture project (they now have about 30 subscibers) 
and as an educational facility for the community.  The project has also 
involved the Hmong community (which has a substantial population in the 
area).  Several Hmong families grow food for their families on the farm, 
supplementing their diets and making them less reliant on federal food 
programs to get nutritious food.  The Hmong families and the Arcata farm 
staff are sharing information about sustainable production techniques and 
learning about each others' cultures.  The contact person is Susan Ornelas.

Both of these projects have involved both university and/or extension 
personnel and community members in their development.  We have seen that good
leadership and effective collaboration among several groups has been part of 
the reason for these projects' successes.  

We encourage other groups or individuals in California who are interested in 
the concept of foodsheds or community food systems to contact either Gail 
Feenstra (916/ 752-8408) or Dave Campbell (916/ 752-7541) and obtain a copy 
of our RFP.

Gail Feenstra
Food Systems Analyst
SAREP
UC Davis
Davis, CA 95616
[email-masked]

From [email-masked] Apr  4 22:20:09 1995
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 95 16:35 CDT
From: john hendrickson <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Reply to "How big is a foodshed"

On Monday April 3 Sal Schettino wrote:
 
>I like the idea of a foodshed and local buying local just hope
>you folks back east will still be able to use some of the things
>we raise here in Ca.  I have lemons Cherimoyas ,white Sopote
>,Macadamia Nuts Avocados and other subtropicals that I raise
>organic and was hoping to send this fruit to some of the people
>in like Madison, Wisconsin that cannot raise lemons etc. how big
>can this foodshed be.
 
Most of the people I am in dialog with about foodsheds and local
food systems are interested in increasing regional *self-reliance*
rather than promoting self-sufficiency.  The difference
is perhaps subtle -but significant.  Basically, the distinction is
that self-reliance does not dismiss the idea that there can be
positive aspects of equitable and appropriate trade.  What is
equitable and appropriate?....we haven't gotten that far.  What
is the size of a foodshed?  I don't have an answer.  Me, I am not
(quite) ready to give up dates and bananas and chocolate.  But I
have tried, through my own garden and my local food cooperative
to change my eating habits to reflect the seasonal availability
of locally grown fruits and vegetables.  Wisconsin produces a
relatively large amount of vegetables and could produce and
market a lot more if supermarkets were not locked into contracts
with large distributors that source produce from afar.  So, no,
we're not talking about a return to the 19 century when
all one could eat in Wisconsin in winter was tubers and roots.
But we do believe that there are opportunites to create more
sustainable food systems around the concept of the foodshed.
 
John Hendrickson
Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems
University of Wisconsin-Madison
(608) 265-3704
[email-masked]

From [email-masked] Apr  4 22:22:16 1995
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 15:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Foodsheds and Food Circles (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 16:23:42 -0600 (CST)
From: Ed DeWan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked],
    [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Foodsheds and Food Circles

From: "Nancy Lee Bentley" <[email-masked]> via Ed DeWan's
computer: 

    Local Food Security:
    Foodsheds and Food Circles  

    Submitted in four parts:
    The Foodshed and The Food Circle
    The Foodshed and The Food Circle, cont
    More local food security and food systems info and issues
    References and Resources

The foodshed and the food circle are two concepts gaining recognition as models or conceptual frameworks for describing local food systems.

 The foodshed concept, most often attributed to Arthur Getz's in his 1991 Urban Foodsheds article in Permaculture Activist , uses the analogy of a watershed to describe 'the area that is defined by a structure of supply'.  Getz used the image of a foodshe

Today the Madison, Wisconsin area Foodshed Working Group along with an
active coalition of food coops, csa associations, farmer's markets, producer
coops, bakeries and other food processors, a natural food warehouse/
distributor, UWMadison and other active participants is the best example 
of a local food system identifying with the foodshed concept.      

The Food Circle is a dynamic, community-based and regionally-integrated  food systems concept/model/vision. In effect, it is  a systems ecology.  In contrast to the current linear producton-consumption system, The Food Circle is a production-consumption-r

The graphic model is a wheel of concentric circles, illustrating how an integrated  food system flows from  ag inputs and production through consumption and waste recycling. Starting with the individual at the center and moving outward through the family 

end 1 of 4

Nancy Lee Bentley
The Food Circle
PO Box 3083
Champaign, IL 61826-3083      
(217) 586-3846
[email-masked]

For an info packet on The Food Circle, including
linear and food circle models and a reprint of 
EcoCity Journal's "An Introduction to The Food 
Circle, please send $7.95 to the address above.  

    The Foodshed and  The Food Circle, cont.
    part 2 of 4 

The goal of The Food Circle is to consciously develop networks of sustainable, community- based and regionally-integrated food systems, capable of providing the basic food needs of their members, providing markets for local food and agricultural producers

The beauty of The Food Circle lies in its addressing a host of associated issues, making it adaptable to a broad range of multidisciplinary interests as an organizing vehicle, a teaching model, a community economic development and planning model, even an 

This Food Circle is a blueprint which I have been refining and nurturing for a number of  years,  first publicly used by myself and other organizers of New York's first organic conference, Closing the Food Circle, held at Ithaca in 1984.  Since then the c
    
Several communities, including Kansas City/Columbia, Missouri and Champaign-Urbana, Illinois are developing local food circles.    The Kansas City model incorporates a food policy council and membership in a statewide foodsystems task force, including a d

The Champaign-Urbana Food Circle, sprouting shoots in this Silicon Prairie testbed community, is still an informal consortium of  csa's, food coop, vegetarian restaurant, farmer's market, farmer's market nutrition coupon project,  UIUC,  organic/sustainab
  
One key component of the local food circle operating model is communication. As Food Systems Development Coordinator with U of  I , this past year I have been working with the Sustainable Agriculture Network and other groups to develop specialty/organic/ 

The work takes time,  growing organically, for  the people must develop    
 conviction  in the ecological basis for the model and then reorient their working or consuming relationships.   Barriers  abound, from the centralized, technocratic structure of agriculture to consumer obsession with speed and convenience.  Likewise,  as

end 2 of 4
see message 1 for reprints

Nancy Lee Bentley
The Food Circle
PO Box 3083
Champaign, IL 61826-3083
(217) 586-3846
[email-masked]

    More Local Food Security and Food Systems Development Info and Issues 
    part 3 of 4

    Other approaches to local food security and food systems development have been focused on formation of local/municipal  food policy councils.  Ken Dahlberg, at the Dept. of  Political Science, Western Michigan University, has done extensive research, 

In their paper "Community Food Security: A Food Systems Approach 
to the 1995 Farm Bill", Andy Fisher and Bob Gottlieb of UCLA's  School of Architecture and Urban Planning,  brought out key issues to those activists attending the first Community Food Security Coalition's organizational meeting,  August 25th, 1994:
 
"... the concept of food security is often associated with the phenomenon of hunger.  However, food security differs from hunger in certain crucial ways.  First, food security represents a community need rather than an individual's plight, as with hunger.
non-emergency (conventional) sources at all times.'   Second, whereas hunger measures an existing condition of depravation, food security is decidedly prevention-oriented, evaluating the existence of resources -- both community and personal -- to provide 

A food security analysis extends .. into an examination of the food system.  Questions of equity and sustainability are vital to the development of food security.... A food system offering security should have sustainability such that the ecological syste

Within the organizing framework of these models, local food systems/ community food security can provide a vehicle for coalition-building among those interested in anti-hunger advocacy, sustainable agriculture, nutrition, urban agriculture, local food pol

We are approaching a time of integration, where growing numbers of food, agriculture and other professionals are recognizing the need for an integrated  local/regional  f ood systems approach  to really  address, analyze and solve the current challenges i

    part 4 of 4

    A partial listing of References and Resources on foodsheds, food circles,
community food security and local food systems issues and information.

References:

An Introduction to The Food Circle:  A Stewardship 'Technology' 
for the New Paradigm, by Nancy Lee Bentley,  EcoCity Journal,
Winter 1994.  available from The Food Circle.
 
Community Food Security: A Food Systems  Approach to the 1995 Farm
Bill, by Andy Fisher and Robert Gottlieb, UCLA , for The Community 
Food Security Coalition.
 
Food for the Future: Conditions and Contradictions of Sustainability,
edited by Patricia Allen, 1993.  New York, John Wiley.

Defining Sustainable Communities, Report from the Conference, June 2-4,
 1994, $5.00 from  Neighborhood Funders Group, 1001 South Marshall Street, 
 Suite 55,  Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27101; 910-724-9070.

Food Policy Councils:  The Experience of  Five Cities and One County,
by Kenneth Dahlberg, Paper presented to the Joint Meeting of the Agri-
culture, Food and Human Values Society and the Society for the Study of
 Food and Society, Tucson, AZ, June 1994
 
Hendrix College Project. by Melissa Beck Yazman,  available from 
Gary Valen, Hendrix College, Conway,  AR 72032.

Local Food Systems: Policies and Values Influencing their Potential, 
 by Kenneth Dahlberg, 1993. National Science Foundation supported
project, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI.

Planting the Future:  Developing an Agriculture that Sustains Land 
and Community, edited by Ann R. Bird, Gordan L. Bultena, and 
John C. Gardner.  1995.  available from Iowa State University Press, 
2121 S. State Avenue, Ames, IA 50014-8300. 
 
Regional Food Guidance:  A Tool for a Sustainable Food System, by 
Jennifer Wilkens,  Presented at the joint meeting of the Association
for the Study of Food and Nutrition and the Agriculture, Food and
Human Values Society, Tucson, AZ, May 1994.
  
Sustainable Community Values Project Preliminary Report, Workshop
presentation by Verna Kragnes and others,  Eating Closer to Home CSA 
Conference, Dec. 1994. University of Wisconsin, River Falls.   

The Community Food Security Empowerment Act, January 1995, available 
from The Community Food Security Coalition c/o Hartford Food System. 

Urban Foodsheds,  by Arthur Getz.  1991,  Permaculture Activist: 
Vol VII, No.3.

Resources:

The Community Food Security Coalition;  Mark Winne, c/o the Hartford
Food System, 509 Wethersfield Ave. Hartford, CT 06114.  203-296-9325; 
203-296-8326  fax

Andy Fisher, Robert  Gottlieb, UCLA Department of Urban Planning,
405 Hilgard Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90095 310-825-1067; 310-206-5566 fax

Kate Fitzgerald, Nessa Richman,  Sustainable Food Center, 1715 East
Sixth St., Suite 200, Austin, TX  78702; (512) 472-2073; (512) 472-2075 fax;  [email-masked]   

 Kenneth Dahlberg, Local Food Systems Project;, Department of Political 
Science, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI  49008, 
(616) 387- 5686;  (616) 387-3999 fax

Anne deMeurisse, Minnesota Food Project, 2395 University Avenue, 
Saint Paul, MN 55114.  (612) 644-2038.
 
Kate Clancy,  Department of Nutrition and Food Managerment, 034 Slocum
 Hall, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York;  13244-1250; (315) 443- 4554.

Robert L. Wilson,  consultant to City of Knoxville Food Policy Council, 
(615)-588-7168.  or Gail Harris, City of Knoxville, Food Policy Council,
 PO Box 51650, Knoxville, TN 37950-1650. (615)-546-3500. 

Sally  Leong,  Foodshed Working Group, 793A Russell Laboratories, 
UW-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin  53706 (608) 262-5309  

Nancy Lee Bentley, The Food Circle, The Food Circle Network, PO Box 3083,
Champaign, IL, 61826-3083, (217)-586-3846,  [email-masked]
for a packet of informational material including graphic linear and Food Circle models and a reprint of  the Eco-City Journal "An Introduction to The Food Circle" article,  send $7.95 to The Food Circle. 

Ben Kjelsus, The Food Circle Project, 7121 Park Road, Kansas City, MO 64129.  (816) 924-3003.

Verna Kragnes, Philadelphia Community Farm,  Box 668, Osceola, WI 54020;  (715) 294-3136.

Rod MacRae, Toronto Food Policy Council, 277 Victoria Street, Toronto,
Ontario  Canada  M5B 1W1 416-392-1107: 416-392-1357 fax

From [email-masked] Apr  5 11:34:03 1995
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Linguistics (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 10:40:24 -0300
From: Alasdair McKay <[email-masked]>
To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Linguistics

> Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even
> 'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is that
> a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.'

No very great problem with "foodshed" as an alternative to "store" "barn"
"larder"  "pantry"  or the like, but when you associate it with 
"watershed" - which means different things to different people, the 
intended meaning becomes very obscure.
 
> The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not very
> bendable.

Some people have no curiosity  -- try dismembering one.

"Watershed" to me (and many others in the English-speaking world) means "a
line on either side of which surface water flows under gravity into
different river systems".  This is a precise concept and I have no
difficulty in understanding it. The use of "shed" in this sense has also
long been used to describe the parting of hair on the head in 
hair-styling circles ( left shed ; middle shed ; right shed ).

I am also very well aware that there are many other people in the English 
speaking world who use the term "watershed" in quite a different way - 
usually to describe what I would call "catchment area", but in arid 
areas, where flow under hydraulic pressure may be more important than 
surface runoff and where no river system develops such that one cannot 
speak of its catchment area, other definitions must be used. I have 
often thought that this second usage of the term "watershed" must have come 
about through sloppy application of the first usage (arising out of a 
mis-understanding of the concept), but I am open to correction on that 
point by anyone who has good linguistic historical evidence on the matter.

After a time, one can get used to this Babel, just as one contends with 
other foreign languages.

 > 
> C'mon, people.  I speak several languages, and the ongoing beauty and
> strength of English is its very maleability and adaptability;
> borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying words to expand and
> introduce meaning. 

Undoubtedly - but most languages can do this.  If they could not, they 
would never have evolved in the first place. Probably the way in which 
English differs to some extent is in the facility to commute the function 
of a word without altering its structure to fit verbal or other inflection :

	E.g. Shakespeare's use of "spaniel" as a verb.

 - But words which have been hammered out of words whose meaning is 
different to different people do begin to cause problems.
Technical terminology will arise spontaneously when even the rich English 
vocabulary of "words to use when you don't know what to call something" 
prove inadequate for the situation. In very narrow technical fields, only 
a few people need ever understand such terms.
Children, over the generations, have also invented vocabularies for 
themselves. Usually these are left behind as things of childhood, but 
some pickings may survive to enrich the language.

> English has become the language of preference for
> international communication in large measure precisely _because_ its
> speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' to explain a
> concept.

Come on!  English is now an international language because the two 
dominant Imperial powers of the last three centuries - Britain and the 
United States - both used English. An over-rapid evolution of the English 
language at the present day would threaten its utility as the lingua 
franca of, say, the Orient rather than perpetuate it.
 
> If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, corporate,
> centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by all means do it,
> and it can be discussed in those terms. 

I have no desire whatsoever to do this.

> Please don't, however, set
> up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term
> rather than discussing the concept.

The discussions about food supply are both interesting and important and
should be conducted in a language which as many people as possible can
understand readily. In this particular topic, the invention of a lot of
new technical terms may be unwise unless they are genuinely necessary for
precise and succinct discussion by some very specialised group of people. If
nothing else, the proliferation of new terms makes me suspicious that
someone is trying to "pull the wool" (if you get my drift). I know
"straw-men" in various guises from the West and the Orient, but do not
quite understand the relevance of the term here - although the meaning is
fairly clear from the context. I presume that this particular straw man
comes from some bit of literature with which I am unfamiliar.

Why don't I knock you up tomorrow morning and we'll go out and have a 
look at this food shed of yours and then we'll find somewhere nice where 
you can eat on me?

(Possibly offensive to some, but immediately recognisable by others as
nothing but an indication of willingness to come by at an early
hour for a pre-prandial stroll around the foodshed followed by an
invitation to breakfast a good restaurant.)

Alasdair McKay

From [email-masked] Apr  5 11:35:17 1995
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 1995 21:22:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: JAYARAM DALIPARTHY <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: foodshed: market forces

More thoughts on Foodshed:
I am following the discussion on the concept of self sustainability and
reliance (to the possible extent) on the locally grown food.  It is
a great idea and can have a positive impact on small farmers of many
regions of this country, who are at present unable to compete with 
large farmers for a competetive price.

I feel that the feasibility of foodshed may greatly depend
on
 a) price of a commodity
 b) quality of a commodity
 
If locally grown food becomes competitive in price and quality then
there is a greater potential for foodshed concept.

Sincerely

Jay Daliparthy

Dept. of Plant and Soil Sciences
University of Massachusetts
Amherst MA

From [email-masked] Apr  5 23:26:20 1995
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 19:42:37 -0500 (CDT)
From: Nancy Lee Bentley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Foodsheds and Food Circles - corrected post

The message is being resent with apologies to sanet-mg and others 
for technical difficulties and poor transmission of "Foodsheds and 
Food Circles" message encountered 4/3 and 4/4. 
 
Nancy Lee Bentley
The Food Circle
PO Box 3083
Champaign, IL 61826-3083
(217) 586-3846
[email-masked]
[email-masked] (The Food Circle) 

       _Local Food Security:_
       _Foodsheds and Food Circles_

       Contents:
       The Foodshed and The Food Circle
       More Local Food Security and Food Systems Development Info/Issues
       References and Resources

       _The Foodshed and The Food Circle_
       The foodshed and the food circle are two concepts gaining recognition as
       model s or conceptual frameworks for describing local food systems.
       
        The foodshed concept, most often attributed to Arthur Getz's in his 1991
       Urban Foodsheds article in Permaculture Activist,  uses the analogy of a
       watershed to describe 'the area that is defined by a structure of supply'.  Getz
       used the image of a foodshed to answer the question of  "Where our food is
       coming from  and how it is getting to us" and to picture how the local and
       regional food supply system works.   Inherent in this concept, he empha-
       sized, was 'the suggestion of a need to protect a source, as well as the need
       to know and understand its specific geographic and ecological dimensions,
       condition and stability in order for it to be safeguarded and enhanced.'       
       
       Today the Madison, Wisconsin area Foodshed Working Group along with an
       active coalition of food coops, csa associations, farmer's markets, producer
       coops, bakeries and other food processors, a natural food warehouse/
       distributor, UWMadison and other active participants is the best example 
       of a local food system identifying with the foodshed concept.      
       
       The Food Circle is a dynamic, community-based and regionally-integrated 
       food systems concept/model/vision. In effect, it is  a systems ecology.  In
       contrast to the current linear production-consumption system, The Food
       Circle is a production-consumption-recycle model.   A celebration of cycles,
       this model mirrors all natural systems and is based on the fact that all stable,
       biological and other systems function as closed cycles or circles, carefully
       preserving energy, nutrients, resources and the integrity of the whole.  
       
       The graphic model is a wheel of concentric circles, illustrating how an
       integrated  food system flows from  ag inputs and production through
       consumption and waste recycling. Starting with the individual at the center
       and moving outward through the family and community circles,this model
       shows the food system and its parts work,   integrating  political, economic,
       communication and other factors. For example, the CSA farmer in the
       production sector is directly across the circle from the CSA consumer
       members, showing the direct marketing relationship.    
       
       The goal of The Food Circle is to consciously develop networks of
       sustainable, community- based and regionally-integrated food systems,
       capable of providing the basic food needs of their members, providing
       markets for local food and agricultural producers, providing cooperative
       communications and trading exchanges as clearinghouses for goods, services
       and information.  Finally, the concept fosters an awareness of food
       stewardship.   The bottom line is energy, values and the preservation of life. 
       In contrast to the current linear food "chain" or food system resembling a
       gas and energy guzzling snake with two funnels at each end,  The Food
       Circle depicts a fundamental closure, integration and healing of the food
       system we desperately need. The Food Circle  embraces the whole web,
       including the food system connections,  from a regional perspective. 

       The beauty of The Food Circle lies in its addressing a host of associated
       issues, making it adaptable to a broad range of multidisciplinary interests as
       an organizing vehicle, a teaching model, a community economic develop-
       ment and planning model, even an entrepreneurial model. 
       
       This Food Circle is actually a blueprint  model  I have been developing and
       nurturing for a number of  years, first publicly used by myself and other
       organizers of New York's first organic conference, Closing the Food Circle,
       held at Ithaca in 1984.  Since then the concept has grown slowly,
       organically,  through writing, presentations, university research, local
       organizing projects, local and regional workshops, and now the budding of
       plans for the first multidisciplinary  foodsystem conference, The Food Circle
       Network: Campaign for Sustainable Food Systems, targetted for 1996.  The
       Food Circle WWW page is also now under construction.

       Several communities, including Kansas City/Columbia, Missouri and
       Champaign-Urbana, Illinois are developing local food circles.    The Kansas
       City model incorporates a food policy council and membership in a statewide
       foodsystems task force, including a developing network  of  producers,
       consumers and neighborhood based local food circle projects have been
       organized.  Two yearly conferences have been held.  
       
       The Champaign-Urbana Food Circle, sprouting shoots in this Silicon Prairie
       testbed community, is still an informal consortium of  csa's, food coop,
       vegetarian restaurant, farmer's market, farmer's market nutrition coupon
       project,  UIUC,  organic/sustainable  producers in a Sustainable Agriculture
       Network and other activists, but  also includes the local electronic
       Prairienet/freenet as a component of its nervous system.  Local currency
       options, especially  incorporating electronic information/creditsystems, are
       being researched.  A precedent-setting national "Information Agriculture"
       conference, including Simulated Electronic Community  utilizing The Food
       Circle model,  is scheduled in Champaign -Urbana for  June 1995.    
         
       One key component of the local food circle operating model is
       communication. As Food Systems Development Coordinator with U of  I ,
       this past year I have been working with the Sustainable Agriculture Network
       and other groups to develop specialty/organic/ LOVA (locally- owned,
       value-added) approaches  for Illinois and Midwest producers.  An electronic
       marketing information service, including electronic marketing directory and
       marketing network development, has been proposed.  Meanwhile, we are
       working with the local CCNet (business net) Ag committee to get at least 50
       farmers up on Email before the summer, conceivably a lost cause now that
       "the fields are dry enough to work".          

       The work takes time,  growing organically, for  the people must develop    
        conviction  in the ecological basis for the model and then reorient their
       working or consuming relationships.   Barriers  abound, from the centralized,
       technocratic structure of agriculture to consumer obsession with speed and
       convenience.  Likewise,  as emphasized in the June 1994 Defining
       Sustainable Communities Conference, sponsored by the Tides Foundation, 
       "Sustainable communities require a different value system than the one
       which predominates in America today".   Yet,  the change will come,  the
       conversion will happen.  Inevitably, whether by choice or through economic
       collapse, we will end up returning to a  locally-based food system. 
             
       _More Local Food Security and Food Systems Development Issues_
       Other approaches to local food security and food systems development have
       been focused on formation of local/municipal  food policy councils.  Ken
       Dahlberg, at the Dept. of  Political Science, Western Michigan University,
       has done extensive research, written several papers on this top-down
       approach to local food systems development. He is currently coordinating
       the Local Food Systems Project, funded by W.K. Kellogg Foundation, which
       has been active in financial support and leadership in this area.  
       
        Charleston, SC; Kansas City, Mo; Knoxville, TN;  Philadelphia, PA; and St.
       Paul, MN, plus Onondaga County, (Syracuse)  NY have or have had food
       policy councils to coordinate local food systems in their municipalities, with
       varying degrees of success.  Some other cities with strong local food systems
       are Hartford, CT, Ithaca, NY, and Toronto, Ontario.  Food systems
       developments in  Los Angeles and East St. Louis, IL have been spearheaded
       by Urban and Regional Planners, rather than by food advocates per se.         
       
       In their paper "Community Food Security: A Food Systems Approach 
       to the 1995 Farm Bill", Andy Fisher and Bob Gottlieb of UCLA's  School of
       Architecture and Urban Planning,  brought out key issues to those activists
       attending the first Community Food Security Coalition's organizational
       meeting,  August 25th, 1994:
        
       "... the concept of food security is often associated with the phenomenon of
       hunger.  However, food security differs from hunger in certain crucial ways. 
       First, food security represents a community need rather than an individual's
       plight, as with hunger.   In this context, we define food security as 'all
       persons obtaining a culturally acceptable, nutritionally adequate diet through
       non-emergency (conventional) sources at all times.'   Second, whereas
       hunger measures an existing condition of depravation, food security is decid-
       edly prevention-oriented, evaluating the existence of resources -- both
       community and personal -- to provide an individual with adequate acceptable
       food...
       
       A food security analysis extends .. into an examination of the food system. 
       Questions of equity and sustainability are vital to the development of food
       security.... A food system offering security should have sustainability such
       that the ecological system is protected and improved over time.. and equity,
       meaning as a minimum, dependable access for all social groups".

       Within the organizing framework of these models, local food systems/
       community food security can provide a vehicle for coalition-building among
       those interested in anti-hunger advocacy, sustainable agriculture, nutrition,
       urban agriculture, local food policy and community development and other
       related issues.  

       We are approaching a time of integration, where growing numbers of food,
       agriculture and other professionals are recognizing the need for an integrated 
       local/regional  f ood systems approach  to really  address, analyze and solve
       the current challenges in food and agriculture today.  In this visually-oriented
       world, such models are critical tools in this emerging discipline.   They can
       help  increase understanding of our current food system, identify barriers and
       constraints to sustainability  and give us a vision and roadmap for realizing --
       making real --  an optimum food system. 

       

       
       _Resources and References_
       
       A partial listing of References and Resources on foodsheds, food circles,
       community food security and local food systems issues and information.
       
       References:
       
       An Introduction to The Food Circle:  A Stewardship 'Technology' 
       for the New Paradigm, by Nancy Lee Bentley,  EcoCity Journal,
       Winter 1994,  available from The Food Circle.
        
       Community Food Security: A Food Systems  Approach to the 1995 Farm
       Bill, by Andy Fisher and Robert Gottlieb, UCLA , for The Community 
       Food Security Coalition.
        
       Food for the Future: Conditions and Contradictions of Sustainability,
       edited by Patricia Allen, 1993.  New York, John Wiley.
       
       Defining Sustainable Communities, Report from the Conference, June 2-4,
       1994, $5.00 from  Neighborhood Funders Group, 1001 South Marshall
       Street,  Suite 55,  Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27101; 910-724-9070.
       
       Food Policy Councils:  The Experience of  Five Cities and One County,
       by Kenneth Dahlberg, Paper presented to the Joint Meeting of the Agri-
       culture, Food and Human Values Society and the Society for the Study of
        Food and Society, Tucson, AZ, June 1994
        
       Hendrix College Project. by Melissa Beck Yazman,  available from 
       Gary Valen, Hendrix College, Conway,  AR 72032.
       
       Local Food Systems: Policies and Values Influencing their Potential, 
        by Kenneth Dahlberg, 1993. National Science Foundation supported
       project, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI.
       
       Planting the Future:  Developing an Agriculture that Sustains Land 
       and Community, edited by Ann R. Bird, Gordan L. Bultena, and 
       John C. Gardner.  1995.  available from Iowa State University Press, 
       2121 S. State Avenue, Ames, IA 50014-8300. 
        
       Regional Food Guidance:  A Tool for a Sustainable Food System, by 
       Jennifer Wilkens,  Presented at the joint meeting of the Association
       for the Study of Food and Nutrition and the Agriculture, Food and
       Human Values Society, Tucson, AZ, May 1994.
         
       Sustainable Community Values Project Preliminary Report, Workshop
       presentation by Verna Kragnes and others,  Eating Closer to Home CSA 
       Conference, Dec. 1994. University of Wisconsin, River Falls.   
       
       The Community Food Security Empowerment Act, January 1995, available
       from The Community Food Security Coalition c/o Hartford Food System. 
       
       Urban Foodsheds,  by Arthur Getz.  1991,  Permaculture Activist: 
       Vol VII, No.3.

       Resources:
       
       The Community Food Security Coalition;  Mark Winne, c/o the Hartford
       Food System, 509 Wethersfield Ave. Hartford, CT 06114.  203-296-9325; 
       203-296-8326  fax
       
       Andy Fisher, Robert  Gottlieb, UCLA Department of Urban Planning,
       405 Hilgard Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90095 310-825-1067; 310-206-5566 fax
       
       Kate Fitzgerald, Nessa Richman,  Sustainable Food Center, 1715 East
       Sixth St., Suite 200, Austin, TX  78702; (512) 472-2073; (512) 472-2075
       fax;  [email-masked]   
       
        Kenneth Dahlberg, Local Food Systems Project;, Department of Political 
       Science, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI  49008, (616) 387-
       5686;  (616) 387-3999 fax
       
       Anne deMeurisse, Minnesota Food Project, 2395 University Avenue, Saint
       Paul, MN 55114.  (612) 644-2038.
        
       Kate Clancy,  Department of Nutrition and Food Managerment, 034 Slocum
       Hall, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York;  13244-1250; (315) 443-
       4554.
       
       Robert L. Wilson,  consultant to City of Knoxville Food Policy Council, 
       (615)-588-7168.  or Gail Harris, City of Knoxville, Food Policy Council, PO
       Box 51650, Knoxville, TN 37950-1650. (615)-546-3500. 
       
       Sally  Leong,  Foodshed Working Group, 793A Russell Laboratories, 
       UW-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin  53706 (608) 262-5309  

       Nancy Lee Bentley, The Food Circle, The Food Circle Network, PO Box
       3083, Champaign, IL, 61826-3083, (217)-586-3846,  [email-masked]
       for a packet of informational material including graphic linear and Food
       Circle models and a reprint of  the Eco-City Journal "An Introduction to The
       Food Circle" article,  send $6.95 to The Food Circle. 
       
       Ben Kjelsus, The Food Circle Project, 7121 Park Road, Kansas City, MO
       64129.  (816) 924-3003.
       
       Verna Kragnes, Philadelphia Community Farm,  Box 668, Osceola, WI
       54020;  (715) 294-3136.
       
       Rod MacRae, Toronto Food Policy Council, 277 Victoria Street, Toronto,
       Ontario  Canada  M5B 1W1 416-392-1107: 416-392-1357 fax

       
       Nancy Lee Bentley
       The Food Circle
       The Food Circle Network
       PO Box 3083
       Champaign, IL, 61826-3083
       (217)-586-3846
       [email-masked]
       
       For a packet of informational material including graphic linear and Food
       Circle models and a reprint of  the Eco-City Journal "An Introduction to The
       Food Circle" article,  send $7.95 payable to The Food Circle, address above. 

From [email-masked] Apr  5 23:29:10 1995
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 18:41:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Foodsheds (again) (fwd)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 10:36:15 EDT
Subject: Foodsheds (again)

The characteristic of a watershed (American usage) that makes it precisely 
definable and useful is that not only does a particular body of water always 
receive its water from a particular area, but also the reverse: that the 
water running off from a particular place always follows the same course 
(i.e., the line of steepest descent) and always ends up in the same body of 
water.  Is that supposed to apply to a "foodshed" too?  That is, must a given 
farmer always sell everything through a single channel, to be consumed in a 
single place?   If a farmer produces both wheat and vegetables, and sells the 
vegetables in a local farmers' market, must the wheat be sold there too?  A 
stream of water doesn't split and go to two places.  Unless we want to impose 
the same restriction on where farmers sell, maybe we need a "wheatshed," a 
"vegetableshed," and so on (maybe even a "Not-otherwise-Classified-shed."  
And if the farmer also raises cows, would they be sold in the cowshed?

William Lockeretz

From [email-masked] Apr  5 23:29:54 1995
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 18:43:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:55:50 CST
From: Greg McIsaac <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd)

On Wednesday April 5 Alasdare McKay described some confusions around 
the term "watershed" in the English speaking world and argued that using the 
term "foodshed" may create similar confusions.   Being an 
engineer who works with water movement and watersheds, I am in 
agreement with Mr. McKay.  However, it seems to me that much of the 
confusion over watershed terminology occurs on the international 
level and it is not surprising that the objections to the term are 
coming from outside the US.  In the US, the term "watershed" is most
often used to describe an area that sheds water to a particular outlet, 
which is what everyone else in 
the English speaking world refers to as a "catchment."   The ridges  
that divide catchments are referred to "watershed divides"  in the 
US.   However, people in the US will still use the phrase "watershed" to 
refer to events or periods of time in which some great change occurred
(e.g. "It was a watershed in American History").  In that usage they are 
using the term "watershed" to refer to the divide.  

Nancy Lee Bently prefers the term food circle to describe what seems 
to be a similar set of concepts, and this term may eliminate 
some of the confusion about foodshed terminology on the international 
level.  However, I don't particularly care for the term food circle, 
for two reasons.  A circle is a rather precise, rigid, two 
dimensional geometric form, that does not capture the dynamic, 
flexible, multidimensional character of food systems.  The ecologists have had 
the term "food web" for quite some time and that seems to capture what 
much of what foodsheds and food circles seem to be about.  Why not 
use that terminology, since it seems to be fairly well established, 
is ecologically oriented and may circumvent some confusion on the 
international scene?

Gregory McIsaac
Agricultural Engineer
University of Illinois

> Date:          Wed, 5 Apr 1995 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
> Reply-to:      [email-masked]
> From:          "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
> To:            Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
> Subject:       Linguistics (fwd)

> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 10:40:24 -0300
> From: Alasdair McKay <[email-masked]>
> To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Linguistics
> 
> 
> > Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even
> > 'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is that
> > a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.'
> 
> No very great problem with "foodshed" as an alternative to "store" "barn"
> "larder"  "pantry"  or the like, but when you associate it with 
> "watershed" - which means different things to different people, the 
> intended meaning becomes very obscure.
>  
> > The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not very
> > bendable.
> 
> Some people have no curiosity  -- try dismembering one.
> 
> "Watershed" to me (and many others in the English-speaking world) means "a
> line on either side of which surface water flows under gravity into
> different river systems".  This is a precise concept and I have no
> difficulty in understanding it. The use of "shed" in this sense has also
> long been used to describe the parting of hair on the head in 
> hair-styling circles ( left shed ; middle shed ; right shed ).
> 
> 
> I am also very well aware that there are many other people in the English 
> speaking world who use the term "watershed" in quite a different way - 
> usually to describe what I would call "catchment area", but in arid 
> areas, where flow under hydraulic pressure may be more important than 
> surface runoff and where no river system develops such that one cannot 
> speak of its catchment area, other definitions must be used. I have 
> often thought that this second usage of the term "watershed" must have come 
> about through sloppy application of the first usage (arising out of a 
> mis-understanding of the concept), but I am open to correction on that 
> point by anyone who has good linguistic historical evidence on the matter.
> 
> After a time, one can get used to this Babel, just as one contends with 
> other foreign languages.
> 
>  > 
> > C'mon, people.  I speak several languages, and the ongoing beauty and
> > strength of English is its very maleability and adaptability;
> > borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying words to expand and
> > introduce meaning. 
> 
> Undoubtedly - but most languages can do this.  If they could not, they 
> would never have evolved in the first place. Probably the way in which 
> English differs to some extent is in the facility to commute the function 
> of a word without altering its structure to fit verbal or other inflection :
> 
> 	E.g. Shakespeare's use of "spaniel" as a verb.
> 
>  - But words which have been hammered out of words whose meaning is 
> different to different people do begin to cause problems.
> Technical terminology will arise spontaneously when even the rich English 
> vocabulary of "words to use when you don't know what to call something" 
> prove inadequate for the situation. In very narrow technical fields, only 
> a few people need ever understand such terms.
> Children, over the generations, have also invented vocabularies for 
> themselves. Usually these are left behind as things of childhood, but 
> some pickings may survive to enrich the language.
> 
> > English has become the language of preference for
> > international communication in large measure precisely _because_ its
> > speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' to explain a
> > concept.
> 
> Come on!  English is now an international language because the two 
> dominant Imperial powers of the last three centuries - Britain and the 
> United States - both used English. An over-rapid evolution of the English 
> language at the present day would threaten its utility as the lingua 
> franca of, say, the Orient rather than perpetuate it.
>  
> > If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, corporate,
> > centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by all means do it,
> > and it can be discussed in those terms. 
> 
> I have no desire whatsoever to do this.
> 
> > Please don't, however, set
> > up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term
> > rather than discussing the concept.
> 
> The discussions about food supply are both interesting and important and
> should be conducted in a language which as many people as possible can
> understand readily. In this particular topic, the invention of a lot of
> new technical terms may be unwise unless they are genuinely necessary for
> precise and succinct discussion by some very specialised group of people. If
> nothing else, the proliferation of new terms makes me suspicious that
> someone is trying to "pull the wool" (if you get my drift). I know
> "straw-men" in various guises from the West and the Orient, but do not
> quite understand the relevance of the term here - although the meaning is
> fairly clear from the context. I presume that this particular straw man
> comes from some bit of literature with which I am unfamiliar.
> 
> 
> Why don't I knock you up tomorrow morning and we'll go out and have a 
> look at this food shed of yours and then we'll find somewhere nice where 
> you can eat on me?
> 
> (Possibly offensive to some, but immediately recognisable by others as
> nothing but an indication of willingness to come by at an early
> hour for a pre-prandial stroll around the foodshed followed by an
> invitation to breakfast a good restaurant.)
> 
> Alasdair McKay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

From [email-masked] Apr  7 11:18:45 1995
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 07:40:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" <[email-masked]>
To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 21:49:02 -0700
From: Bruce Gregory <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd)

On Wednesday April 5 Greg McIsaac described some alternative word useage to
"foodshed" presenting the ideas:
>the term "watershed" in the English speaking world and argued that using the 
>term "foodshed" may create similar confusions.   Being an 
>engineer who works with water movement and watersheds, I am in 
>agreement with Mr. McKay.  However, it seems to me that much of the 
>confusion over watershed terminology occurs on the international 
>level and it is not surprising that the objections to the term are 
>coming from outside the US.  In the US, the term "watershed" is most
>often used to describe an area that sheds water to a particular outlet, 
>which is what everyone else in 
>the English speaking world refers to as a "catchment."   The ridges  
>that divide catchments are referred to "watershed divides"  in the 
>US.   However, people in the US will still use the phrase "watershed" to 
>refer to events or periods of time in which some great change occurred
>(e.g. "It was a watershed in American History").  In that usage they are 
>using the term "watershed" to refer to the divide.  
>
>Nancy Lee Bently prefers the term food circle to describe what seems 
>to be a similar set of concepts, and this term may eliminate 
>some of the confusion about foodshed terminology on the international 
>level.  However, I don't particularly care for the term food circle, 
>for two reasons.  A circle is a rather precise, rigid, two 
>dimensional geometric form, that does not capture the dynamic, 
>flexible, multidimensional character of food systems.  The ecologists have had 
>the term "food web" for quite some time and that seems to capture what 
>much of what foodsheds and food circles seem to be about.  Why not 
>use that terminology, since it seems to be fairly well established, 
>is ecologically oriented and may circumvent some confusion on the 
>international scene?

A better alternative word has been buzzing through my mind of late, most
often as another description on the "foodshed" idea. How about "foodnet"?
The growing, transportation on the local, interstate or international scale
all depend upon a system of networks, (such as the media we are using now. .
.) Networks of natural systems, human made systems, you get the idea. 

Bruce Gregory
Mitchell Bay Farm 
[email-masked]

From [email-masked] Apr  7 22:04:14 1995
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 1995 16:54:41 -0400
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Subject: food security postings from SUSTAG-L

Greetings SANET-ters:

Below are some of the local food security/foodshed messages sent to
SUSTAG-L which were not copied to SANET, and one or two that were
sent directly to me.  Thanks to everyone who responded; I hope that
the sharing of knowledge among the grassroots food systems projects
from around the country will continue.  It seems like the re-
connection of the consumer and the local producer is a win-win
situation.

Best regards,

Tom Akin

-------------------------------------------------------
begin forwarded messages

Fri, 31 Mar 1995 16:36:05 -0600 (CST)
>From: William T Vorley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Foodsheds
To: [email-masked]
Message-id: <[email-masked]>
X-Mailer: EasyVincent 3.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

May I draw your attention to 2 articles Joel Salatin in New Farm:
Sept/Oct 91 8-12 and Jul/Aug 94 47-48. His "FARM" organization in
Willis VA looks very interesting.
--
Bill Vorley
[email-masked]
Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, 3216 Agronomy Hall,
Iowa State
University, Ames IA Tel. (515) 294 7853, Fax. (515) 294 9696


>From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 10:36:15 EDT
Subject: Foodsheds (again)

The characteristic of a watershed (American usage) that makes it
precisely definable and useful is that not only does a particular
body of water always receive its water from a particular area, but
also the reverse: that the  water running off from a particular
place always follows the same course  (i.e., the line of steepest
descent) and always ends up in the same body of  water.  Is that
supposed to apply to a "foodshed" too?  That is, must a given 
farmer always sell everything through a single channel, to be
consumed in a  single place?   If a farmer produces both wheat and
vegetables, and sells the  vegetables in a local farmers' market,
must the wheat be sold there too?  A  stream of water doesn't
split and go to two places.  Unless we want to impose  the same
restriction on where farmers sell, maybe we need a "wheatshed," a 
"vegetableshed," and so on (maybe even a
"Not-otherwise-Classified-shed."   And if the farmer also raises
cows, would they be sold in the cowshed? 

William Lockeretz


---------- Forwarded message ---------
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:55:50 CST
>From: Greg McIsaac <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd)
On Wednesday April 5 Alasdare McKay described some confusions
around  the term "watershed" in the English speaking world and
argued that using the  term "foodshed" may create similar
confusions.   Being an engineer who works with water movement and
watersheds, I am in  agreement with Mr. McKay.  However, it seems
to me that much of the  confusion over watershed terminology occurs
on the international  level and it is not surprising that the 
objections to the term are coming from outside the US.  In the US,
the term "watershed" is most often used to describe an area that
sheds water to a particular outlet,  which is what everyone else in
the English speaking world refers to as a "catchment."   The ridges

 that divide catchments are referred to "watershed divides"  in the

US.   However, people in the US will still use the phrase
"watershed" to  refer to events or periods of time in which some
great change occurred (e.g. "It was a watershed in American
History").  In that usage they are  using the term "watershed" to
refer to the divide.  

Nancy Lee Bently prefers the term food circle to describe what
seems  to be  a similar set of concepts, and this term may
eliminate  some of the confusion about foodshed terminology on the
international  level.  However, I don't particularly care for the
term food circle,  for two reasons.  A circle is a rather precise,
rigid, two  dimensional geometric form, that does not capture the
dynamic,  flexible, multidimensional character of food systems. 
The ecologists have had the term "food web" for quite some time and
that seems to capture what  much of what foodsheds and food circles
seem to be about.  Why not  use that terminology, since it seems to
be fairly well established,  is ecologically oriented and may
circumvent some confusion on the  international scene?
Gregory McIsaac
Agricultural Engineer
University of Illinois
 
 
   
> Date:          Wed, 5 Apr 1995 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
> Reply-to:      [email-masked]
> From:          "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)"
<[email-masked]>
> To:            Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <sustag-
[email-masked]> 
> Subject:       Linguistics (fwd)
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 10:40:24 -0300
> From: Alasdair McKay <[email-masked]>
> To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)"
<[email-masked]> 
> Subject:  Linguistics
> 
> 
> > Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even
> >'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is
> > that a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.'
> 
> No very great problem with "foodshed" as an alternative to
> "store" "barn" "larder"  "pantry"  or the like, but when you
associate it with  "watershed" - which means different things to
different people, the intended meaning becomes very obscure.
>  
> > The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not 
> > very bendable.
> 
> Some people have no curiosity  -- try dismembering one.
> 
> "Watershed" to me (and many others in the English-speaking world)
> means "a line on either side of which surface water flows under
> gravity into different river systems".  This is a precise concept
> and I have no difficulty in understanding it. The use of "shed"
> in this sense has also long been used to describe the parting of
> hair on the head in hair-styling circles ( left shed; middle shed
>; right shed ). 
> 
> I am also very well aware that there are many other people in the
> English speaking world who use the term "watershed" in quite a 
> different way -  usually to describe what I would call "catchment
> area", but in arid  areas, where flow under hydraulic pressure 
> may be more important than surface runoff and where no river
> system develops such that one cannot  speak of its catchment
> area, other definitions must be used. I have  often thought that
> this second usage of the term "watershed" must have come about
> through sloppy application of the first usage (arising out of a 
> mis-understanding of the concept), but I am open to correction on
> that point by anyone who has good linguistic historical evidence 
> on the matter.  After a time, one can get used to this Babel, 
> just as one contends with other foreign languages.
> 
> > C'mon, people.  I speak several languages, and the ongoing
> > beauty and strength of English is its very maleability and
> > adaptability; borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying
> > words to expand and introduce meaning.

> 
> Undoubtedly - but most languages can do this.  If they could not,
> they would
never have evolved in the first place. Probably the way in which 
> English
differs to some extent is in the facility to commute the function 
> of a word
without altering its structure to fit verbal or other inflection :
> 
>    E.g. Shakespeare's use of "spaniel" as a verb.
> 
>  - But words which have been hammered out of words whose meaning
> is different to different people do begin to cause problems.
> Technical terminology will arise spontaneously when even the rich
> English vocabulary of "words to use when you don't know what to
> call something" prove inadequate for the situation. In very 
> narrow technical fields, only a few people need ever understand 
> such terms.
> Children, over the generations, have also invented vocabularies 
> for themselves. Usually these are left behind as things of 
> childhood, but some pickings may survive to enrich the language.
> 
> > English has become the language of preference for
> > international communication in large measure precisely 
> >_because_ its speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' 
> > to explain a concept.
> 
> Come on!  English is now an international language because the
> two  dominant Imperial powers of the last three centuries - 
> Britain and the  United States - both used English. An over-rapid
> evolution of the English  language at the present day would
> threaten its utility as the lingua franca of, say, the Orient
> rather than perpetuate it.
>  
> > If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, 
> >corporate, centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by
> >all means do it, and it can be discussed in those terms. 
> 
> I have no desire whatsoever to do this.
> 
> > Please don't, however, set
> > up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term
> > rather than discussing the concept.
> 
> The discussions about food supply are both interesting and
> important and should be conducted in a language which as many 
>people as possible can understand readily. In this particular
> topic, the invention of a lot of new technical terms may be
> unwise unless they are genuinely necessary for precise and 
> succinct discussion by some very specialised group of people. If
> nothing else, the proliferation of new terms makes me suspicious
> that someone is trying to "pull the wool" (if you get my drift). 
> I know "straw-men" in various guises from the West and the
> Orient, but do not  quite understand the relevance of the
> term here - although the meaning is  fairly clear from the
> context. I presume that this particular straw man  comes from
> some bit of literature with which I am unfamiliar. 
> 
> 
> Why don't I knock you up tomorrow morning and we'll go out and 
> have a look at this food shed of yours and then we'll find
> somewhere nice where  you can eat on me?
> 
> (Possibly offensive to some, but immediately recognisable by 
> others as nothing but an indication of willingness to come by at
> an early hour for a pre-prandial stroll around the foodshed
> followed by an invitation to breakfast a good restaurant.)
> 
> Alasdair McKay
> 

---------- Forwarded message ---------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 21:49:02 -0700
>From: Bruce Gregory <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd)
On Wednesday April 5 Greg McIsaac described some alternative word
useage to
"foodshed" presenting the ideas:
>the term "watershed" in the English speaking world and argued that
using the 
>term "foodshed" may create similar confusions.   Being an  
>engineer who works with water movement and watersheds, I am in  
>agreement with Mr. McKay.  However, it seems to me that much of
>the confusion over watershed terminology occurs on the
>international level and it is not surprising that the objections
> to the term are coming from outside the US.  In the US, the term
> "watershed" is most often used to describe an area that sheds
> water to a particular outlet, which is what everyone else in 
>the English speaking world refers to as a "catchment."   The 
> ridges  that divide catchments are referred to "watershed
>divides"  in the US.   However, people in the US will still use
the phrase "watershed" to  
>refer to events or periods of time in which some great change
occurred 
>(e.g. "It was a watershed in American History").  In that usage
they are  
>using the term "watershed" to refer to the divide.  
>
>Nancy Lee Bently prefers the term food circle to describe what
seems  
>to be a similar set of concepts, and this term may eliminate  
>some of the confusion about foodshed terminology on the
international  
>level.  However, I don't particularly care for the term food
circle,  
>for two reasons.  A circle is a rather precise, rigid, two  
>dimensional geometric form, that does not capture the dynamic,  
>flexible, multidimensional character of food systems.  The
ecologists have had 
>the term "food web" for quite some time and that seems to capture
what  
>much of what foodsheds and food circles seem to be about.  Why not

>use that terminology, since it seems to be fairly well
established,  
>is ecologically oriented and may circumvent some confusion on the 
>international scene?

A better alternative word has been buzzing through my mind of late,
most often
as another description on the "foodshed" idea. How about "foodnet"?
The growing,
transportation on the local, interstate or international scale all
depend upon
a system of networks, (such as the media we are using now. . .)
Networks of
natural systems, human made systems, you get the idea.   
Bruce Gregory
Mitchell Bay Farm 
[email-masked]
(8U---------- Forwarded message ---------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 10:03:30 -0400 (EDT)
>From: [email-masked]
To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)"
<[email-masked]> Cc:
Principles of Sustainable Agriculture <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:
Foodsheds (again) (fwd)

Maybe its not is shed but a web.
Jonathan Haskett

On Wed, 5 Apr 1995, Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup) wrote: > From:
[email-masked]
> Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 10:36:15 EDT
> Subject: Foodsheds (again)
> 
> The characteristic of a watershed (American usage) that makes it
precisely  >
definable and useful is that not only does a particular body of
water always  >
receive its water from a particular area, but also the reverse:
that the  > water
running off from a particular place always follows the same course 
> (i.e., the
line of steepest descent) and always ends up in the same body of 
> water.  Is
that supposed to apply to a "foodshed" too?  That is, must a given 
> farmer
always sell everything through a single channel, to be consumed in
a  > single
place?   If a farmer produces both wheat and vegetables, and sells
the  >
vegetables in a local farmers' market, must the wheat be sold there
too?  A  >
stream of water doesn't split and go to two places.  Unless we want
to impose 
> the same restriction on where farmers sell, maybe we need a
"wheatshed," a  >
"vegetableshed," and so on (maybe even a
"Not-otherwise-Classified-shed."   > And
if the farmer also raises cows, would they be sold in the cowshed?
> William Lockeretz

Thomas Akin
Extension Educator
Plant & Soil Science Dept.
Bowditch Hal Box 30910
University of Massachusetts        TEL:  (413) 545-5236
Amherst, MA 01003-0910             FAX:  (413) 545-0260