I do like the one aspect of the 'old time' CSA theory in that the subscribers share in the success and failure of the program. This means, no outside sales. What you grow goes to your subscribers. This works to make the subscribers feel more part of the farm, and it does work to educate the people who eat the food about what farming is (though I just got an e-mail from a last year subscriber who was looking over this year's seed list and said 'Oh, I'm glad you are growing corn this year.' Where last year I said over and over and over that 'the corn is planted on unirrigated land and we are having a major drought. This means, the corn isn't growing.'
Oh well.
Leigh- A lot of my concerns fall back to my belief in the inspired validity of 3-Fold Economics. I believe that farming has no place in the economic realm and has suffered tremendously because of efforts of both governments and farmers to put it in the economic realm. Intuitively, for me, farming is NOT a business and should have a different relationship with the community. This belief, of course, has caused me a lot of disappointment, heartache and plain out knots on the head.

I look toward fCSA arms that have core groups that realize that farmers should be paid as well as other professionals. Roxbury and others have lived up to that.

For the evolution of grower/consumer relations that you crave, Leigh, all I ask is that we call it whatever it is and do not call it CSA. Calling subscription farming CSA just further dilutes the meaning of CSA. I'm find with subscription framing. In truth, that's what my operation last season should have been called and that was not lost on me at the time.

For me, it is a miracle that a concept and progressive as CSA actually had a life in America during my life time. It remains and inspiration. Seeing, however, how rapidly the enlightened aspects of CSA were pulled down by the expectations of this culture remains on of the reasons I"m so easy to bolt when I see dilution occuring in other areas.

Thanks for your post, Leigh.

-Allan

Reply via email to