# data[].attributes.body
I chose this because it is a crucial step taken in to educate the community. In the film, the community takes part in purchasing produce from the one woman farm, and that not only supports her farm, but also gives the community the opportunity to see where their food comes from and the work put in to create it. "It's a simple enough idea, but its impact has been profound. Tens of thousands of families have joined CSAs, and in some areas of the country there is more demand than there are CSA farms to fill it. The government does not track CSAs, so there is no official count of how many CSAs there are in the U.S.. LocalHarvest has the most comprehensive directory of CSA farms, with over 4,000 listed in our grassroots database," (Local Harvest, 2016). This proves that community supported agriculture is not only educational but also prosperous for the community.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Thinking about signing up for a CSA but want to learn more about the idea before you commit? Read on.

For over 25 years, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) has become a popular way for consumers to buy local, seasonal food directly from a farmer.

Here are the basics: a farmer offers a certain number of "shares" to the public. Typically the share consists of a box of vegetables, but other farm products may be included. Interested consumers purchase a share (aka a "membership" or a "subscription") and in return receive a box (bag, basket) of seasonal produce each week throughout the farming season.

This arrangement creates several rewards for both the farmer and the consumer. In brief:

Advantages for farmers:

Get to spend time marketing the food early in the year, before their 16 hour days in the field begin

Receive payment early in the season, which helps with the farm's cash flow

Have an opportunity to get to know the people who eat the food they grow

Advantages for consumers:

Eat ultra-fresh food, with all the flavor and vitamin benefits

Get exposed to new vegetables and new ways of cooking

Usually get to visit the farm at least once a season

Find that kids typically favor food from "their" farm - even veggies they've never been known to eat

Develop a relationship with the farmer who grows their food and learn more about how food is grown

It's a simple enough idea, but its impact has been profound. Tens of thousands of families have joined CSAs, and in some areas of the country there is more demand than there are CSA farms to fill it. The government does not track CSAs, so there is no official count of how many CSAs there are in the U.S.. LocalHarvest has the most comprehensive directory of CSA farms, with over 4,000 listed in our grassroots database.

Variations

As you might expect with such a successful model, farmers have begun to introduce variations. One increasingly common one is the "mix and match," or "market-style" CSA. Here, rather than making up a standard box of vegetables for every member each week, the members load their own boxes with some degree of personal choice. The farmer lays out baskets of the week's vegetables. Some farmers encourage members to take a prescribed amount of what's available, leaving behind just what their families do not care for. Some CSA farmers then donate this extra produce to a food bank. In other CSAs, the members have wider choice to fill their box with whatever appeals to them, within certain limitations. (e.g. "Just one basket of strawberries per family, please.")

CSAs aren't confined to produce. Some farmers include the option for shareholders to buy shares of eggs, homemade bread, meat, cheese, fruit, flowers or other farm products along with their veggies. Sometimes several farmers will offer their products together, to offer the widest variety to their members. For example, a produce farmer might create a partnership with a neighbor to deliver chickens to the CSA drop off point, so that the CSA members can purchase farm-fresh chickens when they come to get their CSA baskets. Other farmers are creating standalone CSAs for meat, flowers, eggs, and preserved farm products. In some parts of the country, non-farming third parties are setting up CSA-like businesses, where they act as middle men and sell boxes of local (and sometimes non-local) food for their members.

Shared Risk

There is an important concept woven into the CSA model that takes the arrangement beyond the usual commercial transaction. That is the notion of shared risk: in most CSAs, members pay up front for the whole season and the farmers do their best to provide an abundant box of produce each week. If things are slim, members are not typically reimbursed. The result is a feeling of "we're in this together". On some farms the idea of shared risk is stronger than others, and CSA members may be asked to sign a policy form indicating that they agree to accept without complaint whatever the farm can produce.

Many times, the idea of shared risk is part of what creates a sense of community among members, and between members and the farmers. If a hailstorm takes out all the peppers, everyone is disappointed together, and together cheer on the winter squash and broccoli. Most CSA farmers feel a great sense of responsibility to their members, and when certain crops are scarce, they make sure the CSA gets served first.

Still, it is worth noting that very occasionally things go wrong on a farm - like they do in any kind of business - and the expected is not delivered, and members feel shortchanged. At LocalHarvest we are in touch with CSA farmers and members from all over the country. Every year we hear get complaints about a few CSA farms (two to six farms a year, over the last nine years) where something happened and the produce was simply unacceptable. It might have been a catastrophic divorce, or an unexpected death in the family. Or the weather was abominable, or the farmer was inexperienced and got in over his/her head.

In our experience, if the situation seems regrettable but reasonable - a bad thing that in good faith could have happened to anyone - most CSA members will rally, if they already know and trust the farmer. These people are more likely to take the long view, especially if they have received an abundance of produce in the past. They are naturally more likely to think, "It'll be better next year," than are new members who have nothing to which to compare a dismal experience. The take-home message is this: if the potential for "not getting your money's worth" makes you feel anxious, then shared risk may not be for you and you should shop at the farmers market.

Sometimes we hear complaints from CSA members in situations where it appears to us that nothing really went wrong, but the member had unreasonable expectations. In the hope of minimizing disappointment and maximizing satisfaction, we've prepared the following tips and questions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thinking about signing up for a CSA but want to learn more about the idea before you commit? Read on. For over 25 years, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) has become a popular way for consumers to buy local, seasonal food directly from a farmer.

# data[].attributes.headline
People don't think about where their food comes from. 

# data[].attributes.subject
People don't think about where their food comes from. 

# data[].attributes.body
I chose this quote in regard to to educating the public on where their food comes from is crucial in opening their eyes to the grocery store illusion. Most people don't ever make the connection between the farm and the grocery store unless they are from farming communities or are farmers themselves. "Less than 2 percent of the U.S. workforce is involved directly in agricultural production today — 40 percent was in 1900, according to USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS). Most Americans today are so far removed, generationally, from direct agricultural experience that they have no reason to question the glaring falsehoods spouted by activist groups and well-meaning urban ecologists" (Ishmael, 2013, p.3). This is proof of the disconnect between the consumer and the agricultural industry.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Editor's Note: "Ignorance is Ag's Biggest Challenge" is the second of a three-part series previously written by Wes. Although the series wasn't written spcifically for the veterinary community, the information is extremely relevant as the beef industry moves into reshaping itself to feed a growing planet.

"The United States today has more bus drivers than it has farmers."

That single sentence, written by Chrystia Freeland in a worth-your-time column, "The Triumph of the Family Farm" in the July-August 2012 issue of The Atlantic magazine, offers perfect perspective for what is arguably the key challenge cattle and agriculture producers face going forward.

Less than 2 percent of the U.S. workforce is involved directly in agricultural production today - 40 percent was in 1900, according to USDA's Economic Research Service (ERS). Most Americans today are so far removed, generationally, from direct agricultural experience that they have no reason to question the glaring falsehoods spouted by activist groups and well-meaning urban ecologists.

It would be like someone telling me that infrared ultra-draconian frequencies emitted by today's power stations cause cancer. I know little about the science associated with electronics, electricity or anything else that might emit a wave; there's no such thing as infrared ultra-draconian frequencies, by the way. But I know what a power station is and I know what power lines look like. I'm busy. I won't check the veracity of the claim, but at least subconsciously, I'll be wary of anything that looks like it's associated with a power station. That's not fair. It's not even rational. It's reality.

This ignorance-far different than stupidity-makes it easy for folks with an agenda to concoct messages they know will have the most effective emotional impact, themselves knowing the fiction and intent underlying such messages.

* Buy local, it's good for the environment.

* Modern, intensive cattle operations are damaging to the environment, compared to more, smaller operations.

* Methane emissions from livestock have more impact on the carbon footprint than the entire transportation industry.

* Growth hormones used in beef production are unsafe.

* Antibiotics used in livestock production are causing antibiotic resistance in humans.

The list goes on.

These all come from the same barrel as ultra-draconian frequencies.

If you know nothing about the industry or the specifics mentioned, false statements like these have a ring of truth about them.

The Spiral Downward

Perhaps more vexing is the impact of this generational disconnect on folks who don't have a bone to pick with agriculture one way or the other, but these folks are charged with all kinds of things that directly impact agricultural producers.

"One factor driving today's regulatory environment that impacts animal agriculture-covering the gamut from animal housing and subtherapeutic antimicrobial usage to environment and labor-is pressure applied by consumers," say authors of Living in a World of Decreasing Resources & Increasing Regulation: How to Advance Animal Agriculture. This white paper revolves around information synthesized from the 2012 Annual Conference of the National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA).

"Unfortunately, a majority of today's consumers are at least three generations removed from agriculture, are not literate about where food comes from and how it is produced, and tend to have high expectations," say the authors. "Because these consumers don't know the people who produce the product, they are driving regulations from a basis of non-trust rather than a basis of trust. The result does not benefit consumers or animal agriculture."

More specifically, authors of the white paper explain that consumers are calling law makers with concerns about environmental, food safety and rural quality-of-life issues, rather than how to make agriculture more productive. The latter is what helped transform agriculture in the 20th century.

"Today's societal interest in agricultural research is more complex and less obvious," say the white paper authors. "The United States went from a largely rural population-where most people were employed directly in farming-to one where only 2 percent of the population are farmers. Moreover, changing consumer demands and new environmental and natural resource problems all affect the role and priorities for public agricultural research."

The result is what the authors describe as a negative spiral:

* "Consumers turn to elected officials who, like them, are often also disconnected from animal agriculture;

* Elected officials respond to the needs of their constituents and set up regulations designed around accountability and safety;

* Implementation of regulations increase taxes for consumers who then have even higher expectations for accountability;

* Producers push back because the cost of regulations makes their long-term sustainability tenuous;

* The negative spiral continues as constituents want more regulation and those in animal agriculture want less regulation so it can be sustainable."

"While both consumers and those in food animal production want safe, affordable food produced by individuals who care about animal welfare, well-being and the environment, this common ground is shrinking due to the negative spiral," the authors say.

The Future is Research

As the common ground shrinks, so does the funding essential for public agricultural research. Ponder for a moment where the cattle business would be today without the intensive research conducted by land grant universities, and the practical outcome of that research delivered to producers via extension.

"Constraints in the world's ability to feed all its people include land availability, water supply, technology challenges, climate, energy availability and cost, food waste and losses, food safety and government policy. These constraints, therefore, put the onus on animal agriculture to increase efficiency," explain authors of the NIAA white paper.

After all, agriculture's massive increase in production with less labor and fewer inputs has had plenty to do with new technology and adoption.

"By 2050, global agricultural demand is projected to grow by 70-100 percent due to population growth, energy demands, and higher incomes in developing countries," according to Public Agricultural Research Spending and Future U.S. Agricultural Productivity Growth: Scenarios for 2010-2050,published by ERS. "Meeting this demand with existing agricultural resources will require raising global agricultural total factor productivity (TFP) by a similar level. Maintaining the U.S. contribution to global food supply would also require a similar rise in U.S. agricultural TFP."

With that in mind, ERS analysts explain that TFP growth in U.S. agriculture is dependent on long term investment in public agricultural research. TFP growth for U.S. agriculture has averaged about 1.5 percent over the last 50 years, they say.

"ERS simulations indicate that if U.S. public agricultural R&D spending remains constant (in nominal terms) until 2050, the annual rate of agricultural TFP growth will fall to under 0.75 percent and U.S. agricultural output will increase only 40 percent by 2050. Under this scenario, raising output beyond this level would require bringing more land, labor, capital, materials, and other resources into production," say the ERS analysts. "Additional public agricultural R&D spending would raise U.S. agricultural productivity and output growth. Raising R&D spending by 3.73 percent annually (offsetting the historical rate of inflation in research costs) would increase U.S. agricultural output by 73 percent by 2050. Raising R&D spending by 4.73 percent per year (1 percent annual growth in inflation-adjusted spending) would increase output by 83 percent by 2050."

So, ignorance or its solution will determine cattle and agricultural producers' ability to harness i ncreased efficiency and feed the world's growing, more economically prosperous population.

"Implications of a decline in the long term growth rate in U.S. agricultural productivity are significant for both the United States and the world," say the ERS analysts. "Slower productivity growth will likely cause agricultural prices to rise, which would reduce global economic welfare and raise poverty in urban areas and among food-deficit rural households, especially in developing countries. Rising prices would also increase pressure to expand agricultural cropland at home and abroad and input use on cropland would likely intensify. Such agricultural resource expansion and intensification could come with significant environmental costs, such as further impairment of soil and water quality, loss of biodiversity, and increased emissions of greenhouse gases. Finally, agricultural exports may also decline as U.S. farmers lose competitiveness in international markets."

"While new technology will require heavily investing in agricultural research and development, today's federal government is lessening its financial support of agricultural research and development that addresses efficiency-improving technology related to practices, products and genetics," say authors of the NIAA white paper.

Ignorance, indeed, comes at a high price.

You might also like:

Photo Gallery: Cattle Death Toll Rises As Atlas Blizzard Recovery Continues

Cargill Closure Announcement, How Much Can The Industry Afford?

65 Photos That Celebrate Cowgirls & Cattlewomen

Ranchers Will Prevail After Winter Storm Atlas Devastates Cattle Herd

3 Most Important Goals For Bunk Breaking Calves

70+ Photos Honor The Hardworking Cowboys On The Ranch

7 Common Fencing Mistakes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ignorance Is Ag's Biggest Challenge When Connecting With Consumers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Editor's Note: "Ignorance is Ag's Biggest Challenge" is the second of a three-part series previously written by Wes. Although the series wasn't written spcifically for the veterinary community, the information is extremely relevant as the beef industry moves into reshaping itself to feed a growing planet.

# data[].attributes.headline
People underestimate how much there is to farming. 

# data[].attributes.subject
People underestimate how much there is to farming. 

# data[].attributes.body
I chose this quote in regard to to educating the public on how much it takes to be in the agriculture industry, because it takes quite a lot. Farming is a game of chance, explained very basically, you plant seeds and hope they grow.

# data[].attributes.headline
Every industry has their bad apples, they just do unethical things.

# data[].attributes.subject
Every industry has their bad apples, they just do unethical things.

# data[].attributes.body
I chose this quote because it show the realistic side of many issues within the farming industry. That not all farmers hurt their animals, or distribute poor quality goods knowingly. They are just a small percentage of the farmers in the industry

# data[].attributes.headline
These people that are abusing these animals are not farmers.

# data[].attributes.subject
These people that are abusing these animals are not farmers.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel like this was an important quote to use because it gives in industry perspective on the  animal cruelty aspect to the farming industry. Most people hear one thing goes wrong within the industry, and all of a sudden american farmers as a whole become the problem. " As expected, individuals had different perceptions about how various farming practices may affect the hens’ welfare. Average scores suggest that housing hens in cages and trimming beaks were perceived as having slightly negative effects on hens’ welfare, but the responses were divided," (Heng, Peterson, Li, 2013). This explains the conflict between the good and bad sides of farming.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Milner Library proxy server will allow authorized individuals to use the indexes and databases when connecting through a computer off-campus.