Photobucket


La Vida Locavore
 Subscribe in a reader
Follow La Vida Locavore on Twitter - Read La Vida Locavore on Kindle

End the Sale of Ammonia-Tainted Beef to School Kids in 2010

by: farmrchrys

Sat Jan 02, 2010 at 08:39:58 AM PST


Bookmark and Share
(Yum, how about some of that pink slime in your burger?   - promoted by Jill Richardson)

Folks,

Might as well start the new year with a good dose of outrage, because it won't be a happy one unless we all get right down to work righting the wrongs that threaten peace, happiness and well-being world-wide. How 'bout this: A company buys up beef "trimmings" (in other words, waste swept up from beef processing floors) that are contaminated, uses machines to macerate it and centrifuges to force out the fat. Then this "pink slime" is mixed with ammonia to kill pathogens and, get this, mixed with ground beef to a level of 15% and fed to millions of school children and hapless junk food addicts at McDonalds and Burger King. The idea behind mixing the slime with ground beef is that it's so toxic it's supposed to kill pathogens that might be in the ground beef. Only one problem, there's no scientific proof of this. When folks complain about the smell, the company reduces the level of ammonia (without notifying USDA) and of course, the pink slime is sent out contaminated. This is a story of the "good ol' boys" in the USDA rubber-stamping a horrendous atrocity (they simply accepted, with no independent verification, the "safety" studies of the company making this shit). Actaully, the real purpose seems to be to reduce the cost of the hambuger patty, since the stuff is garbage, it's cheap. I say, the sale of this crap ends in 2010. What do you say?

Link to Dec. 31 NYT article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12...

farmrchrys :: End the Sale of Ammonia-Tainted Beef to School Kids in 2010
Eight years ago, federal officials were struggling to remove potentially deadly E. coli from hamburgers when an entrepreneurial company from South Dakota came up with a novel idea: injecting beef with ammonia.

The company, Beef Products Inc., had been looking to expand into the hamburger business with a product made from beef that included fatty trimmings the industry once relegated to pet food and cooking oil. The trimmings were particularly susceptible to contamination, but a study commissioned by the company showed that the ammonia process would kill E. coli as well as salmonella.

Officials at the United States Department of Agriculture endorsed the company's ammonia treatment, and have said it destroys E. coli "to an undetectable level." They decided it was so effective that in 2007, when the department began routine testing of meat used in hamburger sold to the general public, they exempted Beef Products.

With the U.S.D.A.'s stamp of approval, the company's processed beef has become a mainstay in America's hamburgers. McDonald's, Burger King and other fast-food giants use it as a component in ground beef, as do grocery chains. The federal school lunch program used an estimated 5.5 million pounds of the processed beef last year alone.

But government and industry records obtained by The New York Times show that in testing for the school lunch program, E. coli and salmonella pathogens have been found dozens of times in Beef Products meat, challenging claims by the company and the U.S.D.A. about the effectiveness of the treatment. Since 2005, E. coli has been found 3 times and salmonella 48 times, including back-to-back incidents in August in which two 27,000-pound batches were found to be contaminated. The meat was caught before reaching lunch-rooms trays.

Link to Dec. 31 NYT article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12...

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Interesting (4.00 / 3)
I had heard of the ammonia treatment of beef, hadn't thought much about it though. I think that if the treatment isn't effective then it should be discontinued.

I do have to pick a bone with you on your portrayal of beef trimmings that are waste that is swept up off the floor.

What people buy in the store as steaks, roasts, chops, ribs, etc. are portions of a carcass or primal. There isn't anything wrong with the trimmings that have a high muscle content other than they're the wrong shape to be a steak. As for the trimmings that are mostly fat, and a lot of fat is trimmed off the primals and further fabricated cuts, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of that used to be rendered for tallow and other products before sythetics came into wide use. How many people use tallow for anything or render lard from hogs? I only know of a couple. But the point I'm trying to make is that it's not 'garbage'. I probably didn't put that too well.

One of the big problems with E. coli, slamonella, etc. is that on whole intact muscle cuts these are not considered adulterants. Therefore, when the trimmings that ultimately result in meat fabrication (cutting up a primal into steaks, etc.) are ground into hamburger or turned into sausage, salami, bologna or other products, the stuff gets mixed all through the body of the product.

I'm thinking that perhaps having those pathogens declared adulterants on intact cuts and testing for them would probably go farther towards keeping them out of ground products than treating with ammonia.

Of course, we'll probably get stuck with irradiation instead. Some companies already use irradiation, and I've heard some say that it alters the taste of the meat and others say you can't tell the difference.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....


garbage (4.00 / 2)
The Beef Products raw material might not be swept off floors, although the company probably doesn't know how its suppliers treat the trimmings and doesn't care to know. Arguing that it isn't garbage is a case made only with great difficulty, though. It is not fit for human consumption until it has been treated, and after treatment the best that might be said for it is that it becomes edible waste.

There used to be a company in Baltimore County called Valley Proteins, which might still exist under that name or some other. Proteins never entered the plant. Their business was to process industrial fats for use in animal feed, so I guess that's where the "protein" part of the name arose.


[ Parent ]
It doesn't have to be treated with ammonia (4.00 / 3)
to be fit for human consumption, I think the company's reasoning for the ammonia treatment was to get out of testing for pathogens. There are lots and lots of beef trimmings that go into ground beef products that aren't treated with ammonia. But those are all subject to testing. The vast majority test negative for pathogens. Only a tiny percentage of the ground beef produced in the USA tests positive for pathogens, but because of the sheer, mindboggling volume of cattle slaughtered in this country, when a ground beef recall is announced, the ammount of meat recalled is measured in the tons, and even then it's a big number.

Trimmings are not garbage. They are as edible as the steak or roast they were trimmed off of. A lot of these trimmings also go to make things like sausages, bologna, salami, pepperoni, etc., as do a lot of the fat trimmings.

Also, just because some trimmings go to pet food and animal feeds doesn't mean that those trimmings aren't fit for human consumption, any more than it means that tuna is unfit for human consumption if I feed a can of it to my cat.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....


[ Parent ]
human consumption (4.00 / 2)
The source of the fat and what happened to it before it got to the Valley Proteins facility is what made it unfit for human consumption, not the fact that it went into animal feed.

Beef Products developed the ammonia treatment because the raw material couldn't otherwise be sold into the ground beef market, not to avoid testing. I didn't write about trimmings in general, just Beef Products.


[ Parent ]
Sorry if I miss understood (4.00 / 3)
I thought that I had read somewhere else (probably over at Meatingplace, but maybe not) that the ammonia treatment was developed to kill pathogens and that Beef Products was using that and their tests to exempt the beef treated with their process from pathogen testing.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

[ Parent ]
using that and their tests to exempt (4.00 / 1)
That is true. It's a side benefit.

The really stupid part of that aspect is, the product is sold to customers who don't require them to test, and they don't test, so it didn't save them any money. The USDA, for example, buys food for school nutrition programs on a caveat emptor basis, as do Beef Products' other customers. The USDA does its own tests, and it was the USDA that decided tests weren't necessary for Beef Products material - even though USDA did no monitoring or other oversight to verify that Beef Products maintained the process that generated the product that was originally approved.

Of course the fact that customers don't test does benefit Beef Products, because testing means rejected shipments. We remember the kerfluffle about the NYT article disclosing that Tyson refused to sell to customers that tested, with the result that Tyson quickly backtracked and decided after all to sell to Costco, which tests.


[ Parent ]
stoopider (4.00 / 1)
I read the NYT article again, because something about my comment bothered me.

USDA has been testing shipments for school nutrition programs. However, when USDA began testing hamburger sold to the general public, Beef Products material was exempted from testing.


[ Parent ]
So I've got a menu from my boyfriend's daughter's school here. (4.00 / 3)
In November she got mini-cheeseburgers twice. Thankfully that was the only ground beef she got. But good lord, the entree is meat nearly EVERY SINGLE DAY. And when it isn't meat, it's mac and cheese, pizza or pizza stix, or a bean and cheese burrito. At least that burrito is hopefully kind of healthy.  

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

Copyright violation (4.00 / 2)
There's no need to post entire articles. You provided the link, we can read the article there. In case we don't want to register for access to the site (does NYT still require registration?) you could extract salient highlights.

Was kind of... (4.00 / 2)
...wary about that myself.  I'm gonna edit it down...

Coming soon to a Philadelphia near you!

[ Parent ]
Legislative outrage (4.00 / 3)
Beef Products is a South Dakota company with plants in other states. Thune, Johnson, Brownback, and other legislators should be leading the charge to get this company under control or put it out of business.

Where's the legislative outrage?

Gah. There's been a lot of media and political claptrap lately about a doofus with explosives in his underwear, not much discussion about this article, which concerns something that actually matters.


Distractions... (4.00 / 3)
Doofuses with underwear explosives bring in ratings.  Actual investigative reporting takes more resources and is harder to fit into our infotainment society; and it's much easier for our government to harass the public, attack more of our civil liberties, and pass it off as if they're doing something to 'protect' us, rather than actually take on the powerful interests with tons of (at least, at this moment) paper wealth who are actually putting us all at risk every time we eat something.

But that was probably a rhetorical question on your part, wasn't it?

Coming soon to a Philadelphia near you!


[ Parent ]
My Response to Some of the Comments (4.00 / 2)
Folks,

Thanks for your comments on my post.

First off I will say that I was aware when I wrote it that stating that the beef trimmings were "swept up off the floor" of processing rooms was a rhetorical flourish. However, my sense is, based on what I know about how mass beef rendering is practiced in the industrial food system, this the scenario is not without possibility. the "count" says it very well.

Second, I am a staunch and vigorous defender of the broadest interpretations of the legal concept of the "fair use" of copyrighted material that promote the public's ability to share vital information, especially when it comes to the reproduction of news reporting that is otherwise available to the general public without cost (and often, again in relation to news reporting even more important in cases where there is a cost, to ensure the public has all the information required to be informed practitioners of democracy; however, to secure this right in these cases will require future court battles I would guess). I don't believe my inclusion of the entire NYT story constituted an infringement of the NYT's copyright. I did it for reader convenience and to maximize the potential that readers might actually read the article. The NYT allows public access to the article at no cost. They do not require a subscription. That said, I have no objection to Jill reducing the article in my post to excerpts (it's her blog), but I don't believe this was legally necessary. I believe it's in the public's interest to fully utilize, and defend when necessary, the fair use doctrine. If we are too ready to self limit our implementation of the fair use doctrine, they [the enemies of freedom] have already won.

Wikipedia has an excellent article on fair use at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...

and I quote:

"To prevent the private ownership of work that rightfully belongs in the public domain, facts and ideas [read "news"] are separate from copyright-only their particular expression or fixation merits such protection...

"...[Myth:] Noncommercial use is invariably fair.

"Not true, though a judge may take the profit motive or lack thereof into account. In L.A. Times v. Free Republic, the court found that the noncommercial use of L.A. Times content by the Free Republic Web site was in fact not fair use, since it allowed the public to obtain material at no cost that they would otherwise pay for [the implication being if it's available at no cost, then it would be allowed]...

"...[Myth:] If you're copying an entire work, it's not fair use...

"While copying an entire work may make it harder to justify the amount and substantiality ["balancing"] test, it does not make it impossible that a use is fair use. For instance, in the Betamax case, it was ruled that copying a complete television show for time-shifting purposes is fair use."

The Wikipedia page refers to another on the legal concept of the "balancing test",
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

and I quote from that page:

"The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Article 13 allows for uses 'which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder.'"

An important thing to remember is this: Simply because a source of information states that the information is copyrighted does make it so and does not in and of itself preclude the subsequent free and fair use if the information.

As to next steps in relation to Pink Slime, other than many thousands around the nation individually disgusted and outraged about ammonia-treated beef being fed to our school children and in distribution in our food stream, I don't as yet see an organized national effort to remove this stuff from commerce. I would say that a reasonable approach to this would be to go over the heads of USDA regulators and appeal to your Congressional delegation to ban this product. Here's a copy of a message (below) I sent to both WA Senators as well as my Congressional Representative.

Anyone can go to http://congress.org, enter a zip code to find links to your Congressional delegation's websites where you can find their addresses, phone numbers and the way to send them email messages.

Chrys

Dear [Senator/Congressperson],
Please Introduce legislation to ban ammonia-treated beef.
I started the new year with a good dose of outrage when I read a New York Times article
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12...
about a company that buys up beef "trimmings" (in other words, waste swept up from beef processing room floors) that are contaminated, uses machines to macerate it and centrifuges to force out the fat. Then this "pink slime" is mixed with ammonia to kill pathogens and, get this, mixed with ground beef to a level of 15% and fed to millions of school children and hapless junk food addicts at McDonald's and Burger King. The idea behind mixing the slime with ground beef is that it's so toxic it's supposed to kill pathogens that might be in the ground beef it's mixed with. Only one problem, there's no scientific proof of this. When folks complained about the smell, the company reduced the level of ammonia (without notifying USDA) and of course, the pink slime was sent out contaminated. This is a story of the "good ol' boys" in the Bush-era USDA rubber-stamping a horrendous atrocity (they simply accepted, with no independent verification, the "safety" studies of the company making this "product"). Since the stuff is garbage, it's cheap, so it's obvious the real purpose of Pink Slime is to reduce the cost of the hamburger patty (and inflate profits?)-- at what cost to human health? I urge you (and I'm asking this of the rest of my Washington Congressional delegation) to introduce legislation that will immediately cease any further distribution of Beef Products, Inc. ammonia-treated beef.

Sincerely, [your name and address]


Rereading the article in the Times (4.00 / 2)
reinforces my oppinion that if the damn carcasses came out of the slaughter house free of contamination, we wouldn't need things like the ammonia treatment, irradiation, etc.

In addition to your letter, you should encourage them to require USDA to test the carcass surfaces themselves, and to classify E. coli, salmonella, etc. as adulterants on intact muscle/fat as well. That's where the pathogens are coming from.

All these treatments do is allow the line speads to stay high or go higher if that's possible, and for slaughter to be sloppy or sloppier than it is now.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....


[ Parent ]
my pet hobbyhorse (0.00 / 0)
I still can't figure out why grinders should not be required to test before shipping product.

[ Parent ]
I believe that a lot of grinders do test and hold (4.00 / 1)
I also think that all of the grinders, aka further processors, do test before shipping.

There are several issues with ground beef that I've been following over at Meatingplace, and I think I have a bit of an understanding of the problems.

Test and hold presents problems and advantages -
The advantage is that contaminated product doesn't make it out into the market (if it's detected, which I'll get to in a moment).

The disadvantage is that the ammount of contaminated product that is detected, especially if it's the subject of an after shipping recall is so small percentage wise (although huge ammounts tonnage wise) makes the holding of all ground beef seem like a huge expense for little gain. The sheer ammount of beef that's ground in this country is mind boggling. I see the numbers and they're so big that that's all they are to me, just strings of numbers. I can't immagine the storage infrastructure that would be necessary to do that to all the ground beef in the country. That having been said, according to some commentors over at Meatingplace that I've read, I believe that some processors do practice test and hold. I just can't remember who those were, and even if I did, there's no way to know if the ground beef at your store is from one of those outfits or not.

Then there's the issue of beef ground at the grocery store or your butcher shop. None of that's tested as far as I know, yet the primals that the trimmings come from are from the same sources that the further processors source from. And because none of the carcasses are tested (at least to my knowleage), and neither are the primals, who's to know one way or another?

That's why things like this ammonia treatment came about, and irradiation are promoted, and why the E. coli vaccine is being tested right now. The slaughter houses are where the contamination on the meat happens in the first place. They say they can't avoid contamination (at least not cost effectively).

Then, after all of that, we have the issue of efficacy of testing in the first place.

At the further processor, you have big containers (boxes) of beef trimmings arriving to be ground into product. Those trimmings come from many, many different animals, and some pieces may be contaminated while the vast majority are not. When you test the incoming trimmings, you're only going to test a sample of it, which is only going to tell you if the sample was positive or negative for contamination. I'm assuming that statistically, if the sample's clean, odds are that the whole box is clean (but that's not garaunteed). Then you grind, and you don't just grind that one box, I'm assuming that multiple boxes are combined in a production run. Then you test again after all the beef in a run has been ground, and you assume that if there was any contamination in any of the trimmings you ground that was missed by the innitial test, it's now spread all through the ground beef you are testing now and you'll catch it. But in reality, if it's not distributed all the way through the batch that is being tested, you're only going to detect it in the samples that were taken. So, it looks to me, like even if there is contamination somewhere in the batch, the contamination could still be missed, and product released into the market, even if you're doing test and hold.

It's just a big mess. Which is why I don't buy ground beef from the store anymore, and even when I do buy ground beef from my  favorite supplier who I trust implicitly, I cook it completely, as well as garding against cross contamination when I do food prep at home.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....


[ Parent ]
grinding locally (0.00 / 0)
That takes us right back to the localism issue, doesn't it? When I buy meat from Eddie's of Roland Park, at least I know I'm buying the same meat those guys feed their own families, so I figure that is some measure of quality control. Also, if I got sick, I would know exactly who was responsible, and they know that.

[ Parent ]
Exactly right (4.00 / 1)
That's why the only ground meat I buy is from my local slaughter house. She'll tell me how she feeds the cattle her sister produces, I can watch them roll the halves out and cut them into primals, then on to finished steaks, roasts, ribs, etc.

She's transparent, and I believe she eats the meats she puts out for sale. That's why I trust her and the guys she has working there.

That's also why I won't buy ground meats at the local chain stores. I have no idea where the beef came from that they grind for sale. Although in all fairness, I don't know one way or the other whether the employees of those stores eat the same products they sell. I'm assuming they do, but I don't know.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....


[ Parent ]
Your comment (0.00 / 0)
highlights a problem - and I think it's more an actual problem than a mere symptom - of globalized industrial integration. Anonymity and secrecy are fundamental to the system's operation. Finding out who does what is difficult to impossible, as has been highlighted in NYT and USA Today articles. Avoiding responsibility is the password to the executive hallways.

[ Parent ]
The problem is the line speed in the slaughter houses (0.00 / 0)
The problem is that people don't want to pay more for beef, which would support the extra expense that would be incurred in labor etc. if the line speeds were cut in half so that slaughter could be done more carefully, and the expense of storage for all the ground beef in the USA if it were to be stored until the test results came back.

I think the large scall commercial meat industry is right in one thing -

If you really want your meats to be as safe as they can be, and I agree with those in the industry who say that it will never be 100% safe (it never has been in human history), then the consumers will have to accept that the meats that they buy will have to go up in price if they're buying by the cut. Otherwise, they'll have to start buying by the whole/half/quarter, and buy from someone they know who's doing the slaughter.

Personally, if the meat industry were to completely collapse it wouldn't effect my meat consumption one whit. I have meat animals. I have a freezer full of meat I grew, slaughtered, and put up myself and I have more meat animals that are in storage 'on the hoof' as the saying goes.

The people who are going to have to pay for reasonably safe meat are the people in cities who can't raise their own meat animals and those in other areas who could but choose not to. Those people can have safe(r) meat, but they're going to have to pay extra for it, because at the current prices, which are made possible by the current system, unfortunately, it ain't possible.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....


[ Parent ]
ain't possible? (0.00 / 0)
Cargill, a not-quite-small not-quite-large privately owned company, nets billions of dollars a year, and it ain't possible? Billions of dollars annual net profit and it ain't possible?

The victims and their survivors might not agree.


[ Parent ]
Yeah, I'm saying that it ain't possible (0.00 / 0)
to do all that unless they raise the price on the beef they sell to consumers and to further processors. Or at least they're not going to do it unless consumers and processors are willing to pay more. Or unless the government forces them to slow the lines down (which ain't gonna happen) or forces testing on each and every square inch of each and every carcass (which ain't gonna happen). I understand this, which is why I ain't gonna buy no more meat from the store.

Personally, I think that the public ought to have the crap scared out of it as far as eating meat from the store. Look at the issue with pork, cook it all the way through, people feared trichinosis and now that that's not much of a threat unless you're eating pastured pork where thrichinae is common, you could eat your ground pork rare, but the habbit's there in society and it gets cooked all the way through, at least all the people I know cook it all the way through.

Look at chicken, cook it all the way through. Why? To kill anything in there. Salmonella, campylobacter, etc.

But beef, everyone thinks that they can eat extra rare (well, maybe not everyone, but you get my point). And they can if it's an intact muscle cut because if the outside's contaminated the frying kills that. But grind it, and now the pathogen's on the inside and if you don't cook it, you'll get sick.

Good God, I just sounded like some of the commentors over at Meatingplace. But it's true.

I slaughter my own animals, and even though I'm extremely careful, I still cook everything well done except whole, intact, muscle cuts. If I grind anything, if I chop any of the meat (which I am won't to do as it's easier to clean a knife than the meat grinder). If I cut meat for stir fry, I cook it all the way. Because I know from experience that it's so damned easy to get some contamination on the meat somewhere, no matter how careful you are, no matter how slow and carefully you work, it can still happen, and you won't know it until you or someone else gets sick. And I tell that same thing to my customers who I've slaughtered for. Cook it. Don't assume that just because I did it, and it took me an hour and a half to dress out this carcass, don't assume that it's 100% sterile. Don't ever, ever, assume that unless you were the one who killed the animal and dressed the carcass or stood there and supervised the work your self. That's the only way you can know.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....


[ Parent ]
One other thing I'd also like to make crystal clear - (4.00 / 1)
I do not, for one moment, believe that processors intentionally allow contaiminated product onto the market. I think that it's more of a systemic problem in the industry and how animals are slaughtered/processed, and how the steaks, roasts, ground meats, etc. are fabricated/produced and make it into the market place.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

[ Parent ]
I disagree. (0.00 / 0)
That is much too rosy a view. If a processor doesn't test (and obviously some do not), those managers know that their product will kill some people and make many other people sick. The probability is 100%, it's a mathematical certainty, and they know it with absolute clarity. They don't know how many victims there will be, they don't know which individuals will die, they don't know when it will happen - but they know it will happen.

That constitutes intention in my book.

One problem here is that, unfortunately, an entire industry gets tarred, feathered, and boiled in oil because of the transgressions of a few bad actors.


[ Parent ]
Political Activism Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Notable Diaries
- The 2007 Ag Census
- Cuba Diaries
- Mexico Diaries
- Bolivia Diaries
- Philippines Diaries
- My Visit to Growing Power
- My Trip to a Hog Confinement
- Why We Grow So Much Corn and Soy
- How the Chicken Gets to Your Plate

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Blogs
- Beginning Farmers
- Chews Wise
- City Farmer News
- Civil Eats
- Cooking Up a Story
- Cook For Good
- DailyKos
- Eating Liberally
- Epicurean Ideal
- The Ethicurean
- F is For French Fry
- Farm Aid Blog
- Food Politics
- Food Sleuth Blog
- Foodgirl.ca
- Foodperson.com
- Ghost Town Farm
- Goods from the Woods
- The Green Fork
- Gristmill
- GroundTruth
- Irresistable Fleet of Bicycles
- John Bunting's Dairy Journal
- Liberal Oasis
- Livable Future Blog
- Marler Blog
- My Left Wing
- Not In My Food
- Obama Foodorama
- Organic on the Green
- Rural Enterprise Center
- Take a Bite Out of Climate Change
- Treehugger
- U.S. Food Policy
- Yale Sustainable Food Project

Reference
- Recipe For America
- Eat Well Guide
- Local Harvest
- Sustainable Table
- Farm Bill Primer
- California School Garden Network

Organizations
- The Center for Food Safety
- Center for Science in the Public Interest
- Community Food Security Coalition
- The Cornucopia Institute
- Farm Aid
- Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance
- Food and Water Watch
-
National Family Farm Coalition
- Organic Consumers Association
- Rodale Institute
- Slow Food USA
- Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
- Union of Concerned Scientists

Magazines
- Acres USA
- Edible Communities
- Farmers' Markets Today
- Mother Earth News
- Organic Gardening

Book Recommendations
- Animal, Vegetable, Miracle
- Appetite for Profit
- Closing the Food Gap
- Diet for a Dead Planet
- Diet for a Small Planet
- Food Politics
- Grub
- Holistic Management
- Hope's Edge
- In Defense of Food
- Mad Cow USA
- Mad Sheep
- The Omnivore's Dilemma
- Organic, Inc.
- Recipe for America
- Safe Food
- Seeds of Deception
- Teaming With Microbes
- What To Eat

User Blogs
- Beyond Green
- Bifurcated Carrot
- Born-A-Green
- Cats and Cows
- The Food Groove
- H2Ome: Smart Water Savings
- The Locavore
- Loving Spoonful
- Nourish the Spirit
- Open Air Market Network
- Orange County Progressive
- Peak Soil
- Pink Slip Nation
- Progressive Electorate
- Trees and Flowers and Birds
- Urbana's Market at the Square


Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Powered by: SoapBlox