Farmers vs. Authors

In The New York Times article, entitled “Farmer in Chief, by Michael Pollan, Pollan writes a letter to the President-Elect, informing him of the problems in the American food system and how he feels the problems should be fixed.  Problems that concern Pollan include the amount of fossil fuels used to grow and transport food, the health of the American public, and soaring food prices.  His suggestion to fix this include returning to growing food using the power of the sun, encouraging the purchase of locally-grown food, and creating a federal definition of food (only allowing food stamps on food that is deemed healthy).  In response to this article, Blake Hurst, a farmer, wrote his own article in The Journal of American Enterprise Institute.  He criticizes Pollan’s ideas about how to fix the American food system.  Hurst feels that farmers should be able to take advantage of the newest technology, and not be forced to farm using “1930s technology.”  Hurst says that a lot of the new technology has been advantageous to farmers, and a lot of it is more humane for the animals, such as pig cages.  He also feels that farmers have a choice in how they raise their food, that they are not just pawns of the government or corporations.  Hurst’s final response to Pollan’s essay is that many of Pollan’s suggestions are not feasible for farmers.  An example of this is the planting of cover crops.  Pollan and Hurst have very different ideas about the way farmers should be raising food in modern society.

An example of the spreading of harmful nitrogen fertilizers by farmer.  Much of the fertilizer runs off into rivers.  Image from:  http://www.dreamstime.com/farm-fertilizer-spreader-thumb8074488.jpg

Personally, I think my ideas align much more with Pollan’s ideas than with Hurst’s.  One of Pollan’s most interesting ideas is that farmers have to reduce their fossil fuel consumption.  I agree with Pollan’s idea that food should be produced using less fossil fuels and fertilizers.  Agriculture is the second largest user of fossil fuels, following transportation.  The consumption of fossil fuels leads to climate change, one of the biggest problems facing our generation.  Reducing fossil fuel use is better for the environment and, therefore, better for the people.  But I understand Hurst’s position that it is very difficult for farmer’s to reduce their fossil fuel usage.  It is much more economically advantageous for farmers to use the latest technology.  But I think farmer’s need to think more about the long-term implications of their fossil fuel usage.  In the future, having a lot of money won’t matter if we are all suffering from the problems caused by climate change.