I have tried to unsubscribe using the instructions. You are supposed to send back a message to confirm that you don't want to subscribe but this message bounces. Please help. Linda Byard
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: SustainableTompkins Digest, Vol 23, Issue 176 Send SustainableTompkins mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of SustainableTompkins digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Healthy Cycles: Sustainable Class for Women (Sarah Brylinsky) 2. Re: FW: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops (Tony Del Plato) 3. Change.gov Environment & Energy (Katie Quinn-Jacobs) 4. Fw: Film crew on hand as biofuels plant readies large shipment (George Frantz) 5. biofuels plant (marlo capoccia) 6. Re: biofuels plant (Andy Goodell) 7. Re: FW: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 8. Fw: [COMFOOD:] NGO Statement on Chemicals Principles for ObamaTransition Team (goodsell) 9. Re: FW: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops (Joey Gates) 10. Next Earth Day mtg. (Joey Gates) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:10:16 -0500 From: "Sarah Brylinsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [SustainableTompkins] Healthy Cycles: Sustainable Class for Women To: "sustainability friends" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1256 Healthy Cycles: Positive Menstruation *Tomorrow: Thursday, Nov. 20, 7:00-8:30 pm* Greenstar Cooperative Market This class will be a lively and fun workshop about positive perceptions of the body and menstruation, and how to make healthy and planet-friendly choices that work for you. A brief history of beliefs and attitudes regarding these natural and necessary life cycles across cultures and different kinds of media will be discussed, including charting a menstrual cycle, safe and sustainable menstrual products, herbal remedies, strategies for health, and ways to embrace a more natural and healthy view of menstruation. Tea provided, everyone is welcome. Please bring any information you want to discuss or hand out, and a friend! Facilitators are Kendra Lynn, Greenstar employee, and Sarah Brylinsky, Sustainability Intern and President of the IC Feminists Society at Ithaca College. Call Greenstar Cooperative Market at (607) 273-9392? to reserve your space- only a few seats left! Questions can be directed to Sarah at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:38:21 -0500 From: "Tony Del Plato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [SustainableTompkins] FW: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops To: "Sustainable Tompkins County listserv" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Pegi & ST List, This is an important issue that the Union of Concerned Scientists has taken up in a campaign to alert lawmakers about this very risky enterprise. The full text of the proposed regulations may be found at: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-23584.pdf If you go to the UCS website, www.ucsusa.org, or contact Jennifer Palembas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'm writing a statement about the risks this ag project exposes our food supply to. best Tony Del Plato On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 8:33 PM, Pegi Ficken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've taken the liberty of forwarding this. I haven't seen it discussed > here, but it doesn't seem too sustainable to me. > Pegi> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 19 Nov > 2008 16:28:06 -0800> Subject: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through Dangerous > New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops> > I know we all have a ton on our > plate with the NOP livestock rule and many> other things, but this one > (deadline for comments Monday) is extremely> important. Perhaps it is only a > coincidence that the long-delayed timing of> the NOP livestock grazing rule > proposal means that we are> pre-occupied precisely in time for this > rulemaking on GMOs to go more under> the radar. In any case, we can't just > let this one go by.> > <http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/>> > USDA > Rushing Through Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops> > > Greetings,> > In the waning months of the Bush administration, the U.S. > Department of> Agriculture (USDA) has joined the ranks of federal agencies > rushing through> new regulations that weaken protections for human health > and the> environment. *USDA has released a proposed rule that would > significantly> weaken oversight of all genetically engineered crops, and > which continue to> allow companies to grow food crops engineered to produce > drugs and> industrial chemicals.*> > The USDA began this process over four > years ago by promising stricter> oversight. Unfortunately, improvements > considered early on have been> dismissed, and *the proposed rule now has the > same gaping holes as the> policy it is replacing, and creates a few new > ones, as well. For instance:*> > * USDA has created a huge loophole allowing > biotech companies to assess> their own crops to determine whether USDA > should regulate them. And the> criteria are open-ended, very subjective, and > will certainly reduce USDA's> oversight of GE crops.> > * The proposed rules > could also allow companies to grow untested GE crops> with no oversight > whatsoever: "Over time, the range of GE organisms subject> to oversight is > expected to decrease...," a move which USDA itself admits> will make > contamination of conventional/organic crops with untested GE> material more > likely.> > * To add insult to injury, USDA has proposed to write into law > its "Low> Level Presence" policy, which excuses it from taking any action to > remove> untested GE crops from conventional or organic food, feed and seed. > This> contamination often occurs through cross-pollination or seed > dispersal, and> has cost farmers hundreds of millions of dollars in lost > sales and lowered> profits.> > * USDA rejected options that would have > banned outdoor cultivation of> pharmaceutical-producing GE (food) crops, the > only way to ensure that> untested drugs don't end up in our food, despite > strong support from> citizens and the food industry.> > * USDA has refused > to propose any controls on pesticide-promoting GE crops,> despite increasing > pesticide use and an epidemic of resistant weeds that> have been fostered by > these crops.> > * Finally, USDA snuck in a last-minute "correction" that > bars state or local> regulation of GE crops more protective than its own > weak rule. CFS strongly> opposes such preemptive language that would bar > local or state authorities> from putting meaningful regulations or > restrictions on GE crops in place> that best suit their communities. This > last-minute change should be cause to> extend the public comment period.> > > The USDA is treading dangerous new ground here. The structure of the new> > proposal opens loopholes that can be exploited by biotech companies and> > expose consumers to more untested and unlabeled genetically engineered> > foods.> > *After denying requests for an extension to the short comment > period given> for the proposed rules, USDA's comment period closes on > Monday. Sign our> petition to the USDA today and demand stronger?not > weaker?regulations for> genetically engineered crops!*> > > > [image: Sign > this petition]<http://ga3.org/campaign/GMOregs/wedx7xsry7kiixxt?>> > Sign > this petition :> > Docket No. APHIS-2008-0023> Regulatory Analysis and > Development> PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8> 4700 River Road Unit 118> > Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.> > Re: Docket No. APHIS-2008-0023, Importation, > Interstate Movement, and> Release into the Environment of Certain> > Genetically Engineered Organisms.> > I am very concerned about the risks > genetically engineered crops--especially> those engineered to produce drugs > and industrial chemicals--pose to human> health, family farmers, wildlife, > and the environment. I urge USDA to close> the gaping loopholes in its > proposed rules, and put stronger--not> weaker--regulations in place. In > particular:> > 1)Please follow the advice of the National Academy of > Sciences and make> genetic engineering the trigger for USDA oversight so > that ALL experimental> GE crops are properly regulated. This approach is > scientifically sound,> administratively efficient, and more protective of > public health, the> environment, and the interests of farmers. Eliminate > loopholes that exempt> any GE crop that has not undergone a determination of > non-regulated status> from USDA regulatory oversight.> > 2)Please do NOT > incorporate the "Low Level Presence"> policy in the final rule. Instead, > make zero presence of> experimental GE crops in food and feed your > management goal, and gear your> implementing regulations to achieve it as > fully as possible. In particular,> make all field trials of experimental GE > crops subject to strict gene> containment standards at least as stringent as > those now applied to> pharmaceutical-producing GE crops.> > 3)Please > reconsider your "business as usual" pharma crop policy, and instead> adopt > one of two alternatives you proposed in the Draft Environmental Impact> > Statement - a simple ban on outdoor cultivation of all> > pharmaceutical-producing crops, or at least pharmaceutical-producing food> > crops - to best protect public health and the environment.> > 4)Please > regulate as necessary pesticide-promoting,> herbicide-tolerant GE crops in > order to address the rise in pesticide use> these crops have fostered, and > to mitigate the growing threat posed by> herbicide-resistant weeds to > farmers and the interests of American> agriculture.> > 5)Remove any > preemption clause that bars state and local authorities from> enacting laws > or regulations to control GE crops as they best see fit.> [image: Sign this > petition]<http://ga3.org/campaign/GMOregs/wedx7xsry7kiixxt?>> > Sign this > Petition!> > Instructions:> Sign this petition < > http://ga3.org/campaign/GMOregs/wedx7xsry7kiixxt?>> > Tell-A-Friend:> > Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this.> Tell-a-Friend! > <http://ga3.org/campaign/GMOregs/forward/wedx7xsry7kiixxt?>> > What's At > Stake:> > > > > Campaign Expiration Date:> November 25, 2008> > > ------------------------------> > If you received this message from a > friend, you can sign up for Center for> Food Safety < > http://ga3.org/cfs/join.html?r=fpLxgS9qHeHSE>.> > This message was sent to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit your subscription management> page < > http://ga3.org/cfs/smp.tcl?nkey=wedx7xsry7kiixxt&;> to modify your> email > communication preferences or update your personal profile. To stop ALL> > email from Center for Food Safety, click to> remove< > http://ga3.org/cfs/remove-domain-direct.tcl?ctx=center&nkey=wedx7xsry7kiixxt &>yourself> > from our lists (or reply via email with "remove or unsubscribe" in> the > subject line).> > <http://www.convio.com/>> > > > -- > Mark Lipson> Senior > Policy Analyst> Organic Farming Research Foundation> 831-426-6606 x109> > www.ofrf.org> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> > > > ------------------------------------> > Post message: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > List owner: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To visit your group on the web, go to:> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Odairy/> > Yahoo! Groups Links> > <*> To > visit your group on the web, go to:> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Odairy/> > > <*> Your email settings:> Individual Email | Traditional> > <*> To change > settings online go to:> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Odairy/join> (Yahoo! > ID required)> > <*> To change settings via email:> mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is > subject to:> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> > _________________________________________________________________ > Color coding for safety: Windows Live Hotmail alerts you to suspicious > email. > > http://windowslive.com/Explore/Hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_safety_ 112008 > _______________________________________________ > For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, > please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ > > RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: > [email protected] > http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins > free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org > -- The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion that stands at the cradle of true art and true science... Albert Einstein ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:43:29 -0500 From: Katie Quinn-Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [SustainableTompkins] Change.gov Environment & Energy To: Sustainable Tompkins County listserv <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Change.gov <http://www.change.gov/page/s/energyenviro> is featuring a video from the energy and environment transition team today (11/20/08). Not sure how long these posts will stay up. But there is a feedback form, if you'd like a message to go to the Obama team on either or both of these topics. It was refreshing to see that one of the assumptions the group is working with is that environment and energy are, in fact, connected. Whoo-hoo! -- Katie Q-J ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:22:40 -0800 (PST) From: George Frantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [SustainableTompkins] Fw: Film crew on hand as biofuels plant readies large shipment To: Sustainable Tompkins County listserv <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 See article? below. Last month I was at a conference where two General Motors engineers made a presentation on their fuel cell vehicle.? My jaw seem to be the only one in the room to drop when one of the GM engineers nonchalantly mentioned that their European subsidiaries produce and sell diesel autos that?get 50-plus mpg. So here we are with GM execs arguing that they need billions in taxpayer funding to save themselves, and the nation too.? Meanwhile they have consciously refused to follow the lead of Volkswagen and other foreign carmakers and invest a relatively small amount of capital to upgrade their Europoean?diesel engine technology?to meet California air quality standards so we can?take advantage of the same fuel efficient vehicles available in Europe. Meanwhile Erie, PA is exporting 80 percent of its biodiesel production to Europe in order to survive due to lack of market here. I say let them all (or the ****s if you like) go bankrupt and liquidate their assets to the world's carmakers who can build the cars we need.? We will be better off as a nation without the Big Three. George Frantz ***** Erie Times News Film crew on hand as biofuels plant readies large shipment BY JIM CARROLL [EMAIL PROTECTED] details] Published: November 19. 2008 12:01AM Lake Erie Biofuels is ready to ship another 600,000 gallons of biodiesel overseas from the Port of Erie this week, and the local company also is getting some new attention. The biodiesel plant at 1670 East Lake Road made history earlier this month when a jet used its fuel to complete the first biodiesel-powered flight across the U.S. This week, film crews from the National Broadcast Group are visiting the plant to get material for Shades of Green, a documentary that is to be shown on the Discovery Channel in February. "They chose us because of the unique facility we have here," said Lake Erie Biofuels laboratory manager Glenn Green. The local plant has the ability to use not only soybean oil to make biodiesel, but also other vegetable oils, discarded restaurant grease, chicken fat, beef tallow and other materials, and get consistent quality results. The biodiesel to be loaded in a freighter bound for Europe this week, for example, was made from canola oil, said company Chief Financial Officer Chris Peterson. The company doesn't often use canola oil because it is more expensive than soybean oil and is in more direct competition with uses for human food products. But it has better properties for winter biodiesel use. Its usual feed stock -- soybean oil -- on the other hand, is a byproduct of crushing soybeans for the soymeal that goes into human and animal food products, Peterson said. "Until the biodiesel industry came about, it was a waste product for them to a certain extent." Lake Erie Biofuels has a capacity to produce 45 million gallons of biodiesel a year. It has been operating at 60 to 70 percent after running at 90 percent for most of the summer, Peterson said. Nationwide, the biodiesel industry operated at about 20 percent capacity in 2007, Peterson said. European exports have pumped up the local plant's production, taking about 80 percent of the biodiesel it produces. But local officials hope that will change. Federal requirements for petroleum companies to mix at least 500 million gallons of renewable fuels into their diesel and heating oil are expected to increase demand for biodiesel in 2009. Plus states, such as Pennsylvania, will require a 2 percent blend of biodiesel into heating oil and diesel fuel once infrastructure for the new fuel is in place. Peterson said the goal of Lake Erie Biofuels has always been to supply biodiesel for heating oil and diesel fuel for the Northeast part of the country.. "That was our intended market from day one," he said. "What we hope to do is wean off the European exports in the next 12 to 18 months. We project instead of exporting 80 percent, to maybe get that down to 50 percent over the next 12 to 18 months." JIM CARROLL can be reached at (814) 724-1716, 870-1727 or by e-mail. ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:44:22 -0500 From: marlo capoccia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [SustainableTompkins] biofuels plant To: Sustainable Tompkins County listserv <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; delsp=yes; format=flowed hi george, i agree with your assessment that the big three are better off with the challenge of going chapter 11 and either folding or innovating (or maybe just folding). the thing i haven't heard a good answer to is what happens to the millions of workers that are employed by them? at some point they'll become employed by the companies that pick up the slack from the absence of one or more of the american automakers, but what happens to (out-of-work) employees in the meantime? the damage to individual ego and families' bank accounts will be large. -marlo On Nov 20, 2008, at 9:22 AM, George Frantz wrote: > See article below. > Last month I was at a conference where two General Motors engineers > made a presentation on their fuel cell vehicle. My jaw seem to be > the only one in the room to drop when one of the GM engineers > nonchalantly mentioned that their European subsidiaries produce and > sell diesel autos that get 50-plus mpg. > So here we are with GM execs arguing that they need billions in > taxpayer funding to save themselves, and the nation too. Meanwhile > they have consciously refused to follow the lead of Volkswagen and > other foreign carmakers and invest a relatively small amount of > capital to upgrade their Europoean diesel engine technology to meet > California air quality standards so we can take advantage of the > same fuel efficient vehicles available in Europe. > Meanwhile Erie, PA is exporting 80 percent of its biodiesel > production to Europe in order to survive due to lack of market here. > I say let them all (or the ****s if you like) go bankrupt and > liquidate their assets to the world's carmakers who can build the > cars we need. We will be better off as a nation without the Big > Three. > George Frantz > ***** > Erie Times News > Film crew on hand as biofuels plant readies large shipment > BY JIM CARROLL > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [more details] > Published: November 19. 2008 12:01AM > Lake Erie Biofuels is ready to ship another 600,000 gallons of > biodiesel overseas from the Port of Erie this week, and the local > company also is getting some new attention. > > > The biodiesel plant at 1670 East Lake Road made history earlier > this month when a jet used its fuel to complete the first biodiesel- > powered flight across the U.S. > > This week, film crews from the National Broadcast Group are > visiting the plant to get material for Shades of Green, a > documentary that is to be shown on the Discovery Channel in February. > > "They chose us because of the unique facility we have here," said > Lake Erie Biofuels laboratory manager Glenn Green. > > The local plant has the ability to use not only soybean oil to make > biodiesel, but also other vegetable oils, discarded restaurant > grease, chicken fat, beef tallow and other materials, and get > consistent quality results. > > The biodiesel to be loaded in a freighter bound for Europe this > week, for example, was made from canola oil, said company Chief > Financial Officer Chris Peterson. > > The company doesn't often use canola oil because it is more > expensive than soybean oil and is in more direct competition with > uses for human food products. But it has better properties for > winter biodiesel use. > > Its usual feed stock -- soybean oil -- on the other hand, is a > byproduct of crushing soybeans for the soymeal that goes into human > and animal food products, Peterson said. "Until the biodiesel > industry came about, it was a waste product for them to a certain > extent." > > Lake Erie Biofuels has a capacity to produce 45 million gallons of > biodiesel a year. It has been operating at 60 to 70 percent after > running at 90 percent for most of the summer, Peterson said. > > Nationwide, the biodiesel industry operated at about 20 percent > capacity in 2007, Peterson said. > > European exports have pumped up the local plant's production, > taking about 80 percent of the biodiesel it produces. But local > officials hope that will change. > > Federal requirements for petroleum companies to mix at least 500 > million gallons of renewable fuels into their diesel and heating > oil are expected to increase demand for biodiesel in 2009. Plus > states, such as Pennsylvania, will require a 2 percent blend of > biodiesel into heating oil and diesel fuel once infrastructure for > the new fuel is in place. > > Peterson said the goal of Lake Erie Biofuels has always been to > supply biodiesel for heating oil and diesel fuel for the Northeast > part of the country.. > > "That was our intended market from day one," he said. > > "What we hope to do is wean off the European exports in the next 12 > to 18 months. We project instead of exporting 80 percent, to maybe > get that down to 50 percent over the next 12 to 18 months." > > > > JIM CARROLL can be reached at (814) 724-1716, 870-1727 or by e-mail. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County > area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ > > RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: > [email protected] > http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins > free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org Marlo Capoccia Garden Gate www.gardengatedelivery.com 607 342 6228 ?You don?t ever want a crisis to go to waste; it?s an opportunity to do important things that you would otherwise avoid.? Rahm Emanuel ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:03:07 -0500 From: Andy Goodell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [SustainableTompkins] biofuels plant To: Sustainable Tompkins County listserv <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Unfortunately, we need a very strong reminder about overpopulation in the near future to avoid making our problems magnitudes worse. Of course I don't want that to happen to the autoworkers, or myself, or anyone, but it WILL have to happen eventually. We've tricked ourselves into thinking that 350,000,000 people in this country isn't so bad, and 6,700,000,000 in the world is just fine. There are just not enough of "todays" jobs for those numbers. Either we can radically change our economic and living systems to function as villages with some interconnection, or we can continue to wish that three large automakers in one region should try to support an entire country of drivers and watch it fail miserably. I have 3 decent scenarios for using a $50b auto bailout: 1) Improve local transportation: buses, bike lanes, taxis, carshare, rideshare programs, bikeshare, vanpool, trains, etc. This would cost tons but would create jobs that actually improve our lives, save people's money, and use less resources. We _should_ be planning for energy descent... 2) Give it to the automakers with crazy stipulations: Make no passenger vehicles under 50mpg, no lobbying against other forms of transportation, make at least one model car capable of competing for the 100mpg(e) x-prize, make parts for the rail and bus systems. 3) Plan for US car companies demise. Create a plan to help autoworkers find new jobs, relocate if necessary since some towns are just overflowing with autoworkers and few other jobs, and distribute the $50b as needed to ensure that as the auto companies crash their employees are not taken down with it. Give the CEOs the same exact package, not 150x more. marlo capoccia wrote: > hi george, > i agree with your assessment that the big three are better off with > the challenge of going chapter 11 and either folding or innovating > (or maybe just folding). the thing i haven't heard a good answer to > is what happens to the millions of workers that are employed by > them? at some point they'll become employed by the companies that > pick up the slack from the absence of one or more of the american > automakers, but what happens to (out-of-work) employees in the > meantime? the damage to individual ego and families' bank accounts > will be large. > > -marlo > On Nov 20, 2008, at 9:22 AM, George Frantz wrote: > > ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:44:45 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SustainableTompkins] FW: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I believe Pegi has pegged it right, to put it mildly. To anyone willing to get past the rhetoric to investigate the real effects of USDA policy history on average citizens, it is obvious that the agency, since its inception in the early 20th century, has been the loyal servant of big agribusiness. The result is the unmitigated disaster we call industrial agriculture, for which the USDA has been a primary midwife all along. >From that perspective it is an enormous waste of time to ask the agency or the congress critters who supposedly ride herd on it to serve the public interest. So it should be no surprise that the track record of political efforts, say, to make the NOP (National Organic Program) actually serve the goal of making US agriculture sustainable, is liken to a treadmill, one step forward and one or two steps backward, where you are lucky to simply run in place. For those who realize the extent to which our current type of government is a servant of corporate power, it is no surprise to discover that all federal agencies have essentially the same sordid history as the USDA. So what political strategy will work? In the post-petroleum era, as industrial agriculture slowly chokes on its immense energy inefficiency and ecological damage, and gradually shrinks from its present dominance of 99% of food production, opportunities will open to replace it with more sustainable farming systems designed and managed under local, democratic control. Instead of the present certification program approach that is expensive, unwieldy and easily and already corrupted, a combination of rising inputs costs and direct policy interventions in local food systems could drive farming toward sustainability. For the present then, the main political effort should be local consciousness raising, to build understanding of the food crisis we face and to build a consensual vision of a workable local food policy. Karl North Northland Sheep Dairy, Freetown, New York USA www.geocities.com/northsheep/ "Mother Nature never farms without animals" - Albert Howard "Pueblo que canta no morira" - Cuban saying On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:33:57 -0600 Pegi Ficken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I've taken the liberty of forwarding this. I haven't seen it > discussed here, but it doesn't seem too sustainable to me. > Pegi> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 19 > Nov 2008 16:28:06 -0800> Subject: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through > Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops> > I know we all > have a ton on our plate with the NOP livestock rule and many> other > things, but this one (deadline for comments Monday) is extremely> > important. Perhaps it is only a coincidence that the long-delayed > timing of> the NOP livestock grazing rule proposal means that we > are> pre-occupied precisely in time for this rulemaking on GMOs to > go more under> the radar. In any case, we can't just let this one go > by.> > <http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/>> > USDA Rushing Through > Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops> ____________________________________________________________ Click here to find experienced pros to help with your home improvement project. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2eRIzMxH9zam5Ee5gA9eMqWqFY P1c7DuQNSyTz8RVHxdkQV/ ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:46:46 -0500 From: "goodsell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [SustainableTompkins] Fw: [COMFOOD:] NGO Statement on Chemicals Principles for ObamaTransition Team To: "MarcellusGasInfo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Sustainable Tompkins County listserv" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I thought some on the list might find this relevant to their current work. ----- Original Message ----- From: jamie harvie To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: [COMFOOD:] NGO Statement on Chemicals Principles for ObamaTransition Team In light of the recent conversations around the Obama transition, see attached press release by colleagues working on chemicals policy. HCWH Food Coordinator Institute for a Sustainable Future 8 N. 2nd Ave. East. Suite 200 Duluth, MN 55802 218 525 7806 November 20, 2008 Scientists, Physicians, Health Advocates, Parents to Obama: Chemical Exposure is an Urgent Crisis in the United States Suggested Principles and Guidelines for Toxic Chemical Regulatory Reform in the U.S. (Washington) Physicians, scientists, health advocates, and parents groups hold great optimism and high expectations for the Obama administration in addressing toxics issues, and its ability to choose administrative staff who will prioritize public health, worker safety and a clean environment. Today, they submitted their pleas for a halt to the urgent chemical exposure crisis in the U.S. and the world, and have submitted their ideas on what to do about it to the Obama Change.gov website that has been set up to receive input for the new administration. Specific ideas submitted by the group include: Immediate steps toward prevention of exposure from known dangerous chemicals Public disclosure of chemistry in products, Protection for scientists Transforming the chemical economy to a green collar economy Addressing toxic chemical issues throughout all government agencies "Our members don't want to have to feel like they have to be research chemists to buy products for their children," says Joan Blades, co-founder of MomsRising. "Chemical regulatory reform is past due. It is outrageous more and more parents look for labels that say items meet European regulatory standards, because American standards are not to be trusted. We want our families protected from chemical exposure." Health and environmental advocates point to recent developments around the chemical bisphenol-A as a prime example of the need for greater integrity at the administration level. "An immediate priority for the new administration should be to support a ban on bisphenol A in food can liners and plastic baby bottles. More than 130 scientific studies have linked this toxic hormone disrupting chemical to breast cancer, obesity, diabetes, neurological effects and other illness--even at very low doses," said Janet Nudelman, policy director at the Breast Cancer Fund. "We have more than enough evidence of harm to act, and we need to do so quickly." "Toxic chemical exposure is such a great threat to American health. It effects some of our most fragile individuals in our society, children and the unborn child, who cannot protect themselves from these assaults. That is why we must do it for them. We are looking to the Obama administration to listen to the scientists, physicians, and health professionals to immediately implement strategies that will save lives and prevent human suffering," says Kristen Welker-Hood, ScD MSN RN Director, Environment and Health Programs with Physicians for Social Responsibility. "The EPA's own scientists had to stand by, silenced by a gag order, and watch as chemicals and rules were approved without adequate scientific study," says Dr. William Hirzy, EPA scientist, and vice president of EPA scientists' union, NTEU 280. At least one EPA advisory scientist was publicly attacked in a letter and removed from an advisory panel on a chemical used in flame retardants by industry. "Our government has failed to protect us from toxic chemicals leaking from dumps, being released into the air and water in environmental justice communities, and even in children's toys and baby bottles. We need nothing short of a total overhaul of our nation's failed chemical regulatory system, which for years has benefited the big polluters and left communities and workers struggling for justice," said Lois Gibbs, Executive Director of the Center for Health, Environment and Justice, "We believe that living without toxic chemicals in our water, soil, air, and bodies is a universal human right. It's time to stop the contamination of our nation's cities, towns, and rural areas - often located in low income communities of color. But chemical exposure also knows no boundaries and depending on the chemical, can travel thousands of miles from where it is applied," according Pam Miller, director of Alaska Community Action on Toxics, "So no one is protected from toxic chemical exposure. Arctic Indigenous peoples are among the most highly exposed people in the world." Martha Dina Arguello, executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility - Los Angeles, says, "Whether people are living in rural communities contaminated by pesticide drift, or living in cities and exposed to air contaminants from traffic, or just becoming exposed buying unregulated products, everyone is in danger from unregulated chemicals. We are asking for immediate attention to these issues with help and support for the people working toward real solutions." Even the administration's efforts to restore the integrity of the financial marketplace can play a role in ensuring safer chemicals, said Sanford Lewis, Counsel, Investor Environmental Health Network. He said, "As the Obama administration strengthens the Securities and Exchange Commission, it should ensure that all financial risks, including the risks associated with toxic products, are being disclosed to investors. This has not been the case under the prior administration." "Toxic chemicals are one of the greatest threats to our health and environment," according to Dr. Arlene Blum, Executive Director of the Green Science Policy Institute. "However, this problem can be solved. With scientific information and political will, we can move to safer products and protect our health." Guidelines and Principles for Toxic Chemical Regulatory Reform in the United States list 5 clear steps and remedies to the current chemical exposure crisis in the U.S. and the World. The complete guidelines can be found: http://isitinus.org/whatwecando.php and http://www.louisvillecharter.org/whatsnew.shtml Available for Interviews Martha Dina Arg?ello, Executive Director, Physicians for Social Responsibility - Los Angeles Cell: 310.261-0073, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Martha can address a variety of toxic chemical exposure issues - to communities of color, about educating physicians, and what has happened in California toward reforming chemical regulatory policy - she has been involved in the California Green Chemistry Initiative. Joan Blades, President and Co-Founder, MomsRising.org. To schedule an interview, contact: Gretchen Wright or Lisa Lederer at 202.371.1999 Arlene Blum PhD, Executive Director and Founder, Green Science Policy Institute 510.644.3164 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Arlene can address flame retardants and the efforts toward Green Chemistry solutions. Jose T. Bravo - Director, Just Transition Alliance / Alianza de Transicion Justa Chula Vista, CA. Jose works with communities contaminated with chemicals, which occurs mostly where low income people of color are living, although everyone is at risk. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 619.838.6694 Cell Elizabeth Crowe is a young mother. She works on chemical weapons issues, and on environmental justice issues and was very involved in the making of this document. Director, Kentucky Environmental Foundation 859.986.0868 [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jay Feldman, Executive Director, Beyond Pesticides, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 202.543.5450. Jay can address pesticide contamination from lawn chemicals and everyday pesticide use. Christopher Gavigan, CEO and Executive Director, Healthy Child, Healthy World. Author of Healthy Child, Healthy World: Creating a Cleaner, Greener, Safer Home, Christopher can address how to raise a family in a less toxic environment. 310. 820. 2030 www.healthychild.org <http://www.healthychild.org> Lois Gibbs, Executive Director, Center for Health Environment and Justice, 703.237.2249, www.chej.org. Lois has been working on toxic exposure issues since 1970 when her activism around Love Canal forced the founding of the Superfund designation. Kathryn Gilje, Executive Director, Pesticide Action Network North America, 415.981.1771, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kathryn can address the need to support farmer transitions off of chemically based farming, and the dangers of agricultural pesticide contamination for farmworkers and those living in rural communities. John Kepner, Project Director, Beyond Pesticides, 202.543.5450 ext. 20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] org. John can address lawn chemical and household pesticide exposure issues. Richard Liroff, Ph.D., Executive Director, 703.970.4790 [EMAIL PROTECTED], and Sanford Lewis, JD, Counsel, Investor Environmental Health Network, 413 549-7333, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Richard or Sanford can address how investors can address the risks and opportunities associated with toxic chemicals and products and safer materials. Sanford can also discuss how the securities and exchange commission can better protect investor interests regarding toxic chemicals in products as part of its regulatory reform efforts. Elise Miller, M.Ed. Executive Director, Institute for Children's Environmental Health National Coordinator, CHE's Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative. 360.331.7904 www.iceh.org, www.partnersforchildren.org, www.chenw.org <http://www.chenw.org> Pam Miller, Founder and Executive Director of Alaska Community Action on Toxics. Pam can address the drift of POPs chemicals from lower hemispheres, putting Indigenous peoples in the Arctic at great risk for illness from chemical contaminants and can also address the several hundred toxic waste dump sit4es, now leaking chemicals due to global warming, and contaminating water, soil and air near communities. 907.222.7714 Janet Nudelman, Director of Program and Policy, Breast Cancer Fund. Janet has been extensively involved in working toward restrictions on harmful chemicals such as bisphenol A and phthalates. To arrange an interview contact Shannon Coughlin 415.336.2245, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Judith Robinson, young mother of two. Director of Programs, Environmental Health Fund 802.257.4215, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jennifer Sass, PhD. NRDC Senior Scientist, Natural Resource Defense Council, 202.289.2362, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dr. Sass can address scientific integrity issues, and the need for chemical regulatory reform. Ted Schettler, MD, MPH. Science Director, Science and Environmental Health Network. Ted is co-author of Generations at Risk: Reproductive Health and the Environment, which examines reproductive and developmental health effects of exposure to a variety of environmental toxicants, and also co-author of In Harm's Way: Toxic Threats to Child Development. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lynn Thorp, National Campaigns Coordinator, Clean Water Action. 202.895.0420 ext. 109 http://www.cleanwateraction.org/. Lynn will address the need for chemical policy reform and what is happening with federal policy. Kirsten Welker-Hood, ScD MSN RN, Director, Environment and Health Programs, Physicians for Social Responsibility - National, Washington DC. (202) 667-4260 ext 244, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dr. Welker-Hood can speak on comprehensive federal chemical policy reform as well as medical and health professional activism advocating for safer chemical management regulation and pediatric environmental health. Resources Contaminated without Consent www.contaminatedwithoutconsent.org <http://www.contaminatedwithoutconsent.org> Healthy Child, Healthy World www.healthychild.org Is It In Us? http://isitinus.org/ <http://isitinus.org/whatwecando.php> The Louisville Charter www.louisvillecharter.org <http://isitinus.org/whatwecando.php> MomsRising www.momsrising.org <http://www.momsrising.org> Physicians for Social Responsibility www.psr.org Principles of Environmental Justice http://ej4all.org/environmental.principles.php Scientific Consensus Statement on Environmental Agents Associated with Neurodevelopmental Disorders Developed by the Collaborative on Health and the Environment's Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative February 20, 2008 (revised July 1, 2008) http://www.iceh.org/pdfs/LDDI/LDDIPolicyStatement.pdf ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- SUBSCRIBING AND UNSUBSCRIBING TO COMFOOD: You can subscribe to COMFOOD by going here: https://elist.tufts.edu/wws/subscribe/comfood You can unsubscribe to COMFOOD by going here : https://elist.tufts.edu/wws/signoff/comfood ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:36:39 -0800 (PST) From: Joey Gates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [SustainableTompkins] FW: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops To: Sustainable Tompkins County listserv <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As someone who comes from a small dairy farm family that includes 1.5 USDA employees (my cousin is still a full-time student studying sustainable design) I can tell you that there are also good people trying to do good things there. No, your comments didn't offend, I just felt a need to acknowledge that thought "outloud" as I read your posts. Joey --- On Thu, 11/20/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [SustainableTompkins] FW: [Odairy] Fwd: USDA Rushing Through Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops > To: [email protected] > Date: Thursday, November 20, 2008, 4:44 PM > I believe Pegi has pegged it right, to put it mildly. To > anyone willing > to get past the rhetoric to investigate the real effects of > USDA policy > history on average citizens, it is obvious that the agency, > since its > inception in the early 20th century, has been the loyal > servant of big > agribusiness. The result is the unmitigated disaster we > call industrial > agriculture, for which the USDA has been a primary midwife > all along. > > >From that perspective it is an enormous waste of time > to ask the agency > or the congress critters who supposedly ride herd on it to > serve the > public interest. So it should be no surprise that the track > record of > political efforts, say, to make the NOP (National Organic > Program) > actually serve the goal of making US agriculture > sustainable, is liken to > a treadmill, one step forward and one or two steps > backward, where you > are lucky to simply run in place. > > For those who realize the extent to which our current type > of government > is a servant of corporate power, it is no surprise to > discover that all > federal agencies have essentially the same sordid history > as the USDA. > > So what political strategy will work? In the post-petroleum > era, as > industrial agriculture slowly chokes on its immense energy > inefficiency > and ecological damage, and gradually shrinks from its > present dominance > of 99% of food production, opportunities will open to > replace it with > more sustainable farming systems designed and managed under > local, > democratic control. Instead of the present certification > program approach > that is expensive, unwieldy and easily and already > corrupted, a > combination of rising inputs costs and direct policy > interventions in > local food systems could drive farming toward > sustainability. For the > present then, the main political effort should be local > consciousness > raising, to build understanding of the food crisis we face > and to build a > consensual vision of a workable local food policy. > > Karl North > Northland Sheep Dairy, Freetown, New York USA > www.geocities.com/northsheep/ > "Mother Nature never farms without animals" - > Albert Howard > "Pueblo que canta no morira" - Cuban saying > > On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:33:57 -0600 Pegi Ficken > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > writes: > > > > I've taken the liberty of forwarding this. I > haven't seen it > > discussed here, but it doesn't seem too > sustainable to me. > > Pegi> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 19 > > Nov 2008 16:28:06 -0800> Subject: [Odairy] Fwd: > USDA Rushing Through > > Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops> > > I know we all > > have a ton on our plate with the NOP livestock rule > and many> other > > things, but this one (deadline for comments Monday) is > extremely> > > important. Perhaps it is only a coincidence that the > long-delayed > > timing of> the NOP livestock grazing rule proposal > means that we > > are> pre-occupied precisely in time for this > rulemaking on GMOs to > > go more under> the radar. In any case, we can't > just let this one go > > by.> > > <http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/>> > USDA > Rushing Through > > Dangerous New Rules on GE and Pharmaceutical Crops> > > ____________________________________________________________ > Click here to find experienced pros to help with your home > improvement project. > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2eRIzMxH9zam5Ee5gA9eMqWqFY P1c7DuQNSyTz8RVHxdkQV/ > _______________________________________________ > For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins > County area, please visit: > http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ > > RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: > [email protected] > http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins > free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:53:51 -0800 (PST) From: Joey Gates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [SustainableTompkins] Next Earth Day mtg. To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii The next Earth Day planning meeting will be Monday November 24th from 7-9 PM at the Cooperative Extension, Rm. B. For more info. contact Joey at this email or ring 607-351-0664. See you there! ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ SustainableTompkins mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins End of SustainableTompkins Digest, Vol 23, Issue 176 **************************************************** _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
