Like you, I’m not up for debating the facts of chemical flavor engineering. Whew! Huge time saver. http://addictions.about.com/od/foodaddictio1/fr/The-End-Of-Overeating-By-David-Kessler.htm

We don’t have a consumer on the board because that is not how USFRA is structured. It was structured to be a farmer- and rancher-led effort. However, that suggestion gave me an idea that I will pursue with our leadership. That idea would be to have a Consumer Advisory Panel to provide us feedback on how we approach our educational and informational efforts among other things. No guarantee that it will happen, but I will discuss it with our leaders.

Farmers and ranchers do grow their crops and raise their animals for food based on consumer demand. That demand is communicated back to them through the price discovery system (CBOT, CME, local markets, etc) and by the companies that purchase their output. If the demand wasn’t there for local, organic or natural products, people wouldn’t grow them because they wouldn’t have anyone to buy them. Without customers, products don’t get made. Sure, there are brave souls our there that take a chance on “inventing” or making something new that no one has ever seen or used before. Sometimes it works; sometimes it goes belly up. Most farmers and ranchers are risk averse, even though they are in one of the most risky businesses out there. They need to be assured of a market for what they grow and raise before they will take the chance.

Despite what Dr. Butz said several decades ago, there is room for all sizes, shapes and forms of agriculture. But, only if there is a market for what they produce.

Whether or not our palates have been trained to like certain things is probably up for debate; a debate that I’m not going to enter. I just know that my food preferences were initially shaped by what my parents fed me at home when I was growing up. I will admit that, at times, I can be adventurous and learn to eat new things. (Ever had a squab head?) But, whether or not I continue to eat something I try is based more on how it tastes than anything else. By now, I know what is healthy and good for me and what may not be quite as healthy. That’s why I vary my diet and food intake. Which is also why I have a total lifetime ban on brussel sprouts in my house.

The mission of USFRA is not to try to change consumers’ eating habits. It’s to enable them, through education and information, to feel comfortable in whatever food choice they wish to make. After all, ultimately it’s their choice.

Hugh, while I appreciate the additional information to help flesh out the USFRA Board, I agree with Think that we still have only one woman; no ethnic minorities; no vegetable producers (I’ll add: focused primarily on diverse/rotational vegetable production); no urban ag practitioners; no consumer representatives; no one representing the community-based, sustainable movement building economies of scale all across the country.

This theme of “consumer requested” continued to crop up in the “Food Dialogues” of yesterday, and many of us engaged publicly in the conversation on Twitter at the time as well (#foodD) find it’s a weak argument. It’s only a valid argument in light of profit. But viewed through the lens of public health or–heck, common sense–it’s a straw man.

For the American palate has now been engineered to perceive and seek out certain flavor combinations of fat, salt and sugar (or more frequently, HFCS). Former FDA Chief, David Kessler exposed this branch of the chemical industry in his recent book, The End of Overeating: Taking Control of the Insatiable American Appetite.

People want big, cornfed steaks, to paraphrase our changeable Chef Besh yesterday, for example. Well, at some point that’s personal preference, sure–but if we REALLY want to have a dialogue about this we need to examine all of the inputs resulting in that portion of steak: chemical, environmental, worker treatment and safety, and then the health result.

Just because something CAN be done does not mean it should be done, or that it’s without ethical or societal consequences. I truly believe that no one set out 60 years ago with an evil plan for our food system. But by the Nixon administration, it had become just that: a plan of dominance not only over other nations but over our own farmers, to whom, by that time, Secretary Earl Butz had bellowed, “Get Big or Get Out.”

If you read nothing else, Hugh, I implore you to read The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture (W. Berry). And again, I am open to reading suggestions from you.

I will read and learn more, but I encourage everyone to keep an open mind and recognize that all forms of ag…small, medium, large; organic, natural, conventional… are necessary to provide the healthy food choices that are necessary, required and consumer requested to feed America.

Bob Stallman, president of American Farm Bureau
Phil Bradshaw, United Soybean Board
Bart Schott, president of National Corn Growers Association
Dale Norton, National Pork Checkoff program, Michigan Farm Bureau, National Cattleman’s Association, National Corn Growers Association and the American Soybean Association
Doug Winter, Illinois Soybean Association
Brian Greenslit, president, NM Farm Bureau
Weldon Wynn, vice-chair, Cattleman’s Beef Board (beef checkoff)
David Dick, federation chairman, National Cattleman’s Beef Association
Gary Cooper, president of Southeast Ag-Net (media)
Lisa Kunz, no freakin’ idea; sorry Ms. Kunz.

I’ll admit that I honestly wanted to believe that USFRA was working on behalf of all farmers. However, after seeing this list, i’m totally disappointed.

Let’s break this down – not a single organic grower; only one woman (Hi there, Ms. Kunz); no ethnic minorities; no vegetable producers; no urban ag practitioners; no consumer representatives; no one representing the community-based, sustainable movement (except maybe Ms Kunz, who i can’t quite identify yet). Maybe it’s just the commodity croppers and the CAFO protein peddlers who have the image problem.

In fact, no one in the leadership is beyond the sphere of Farm Bureau and big industrial ag – an industry characterized by the use of chemical and genetic manipulation technology, tax-payer funded subsidies and entitlements (those won’t last long); and check-off programs implemented at the whim of what can only be considered a trust in need of busting (more for the reading list: http://www.frbkc.org/publicat/econrev/PDF/2q01bark.pdf and http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/processing/).

I have recently read of a few of the authors and scientists that Ms. Susan recommends, and others, too, like Raj Patel (Stuffed and Starved), Mark Winne (Closing the Food Gap), Kelly Brownell (numerous papers; Rudd Center, Yale University) and – hell – even James McWilliams doesn’t look like such a dope anymore (well, still kinda) in light of this Big Food facade that is USFRA. So, I believe I’ll stick with my current dialogue about food – at my local farmers’ markets and community garden, at the feed-n-seed store, and around the dinner table. And, I believe I’m inspired to raise my voice even louder now, too, to support real food (and real economies and cultures) with my food dollars. I believe i’ll make those calls to my lawmakers. I believe that I’ll encourage my friends and family to do the same.

Apologies, Mr. Whaley, since I know this may come off as somewhat offensive – divisive even. But, I’ll encourage you to follow up on Ms. Susan’s advice and read, learn, and know. Then we can all get back to the work of building the food system that people want and can trust – changing our food system instead of raising funds and raising a ruckus to change people’s minds.

Today’s Food Dialogues are funded entirely by America’s farmers and ranchers, not industry.

Currently, affiliates provide 70-75% of the funding; industry provides 25-30%.