Jun 4

Written by: host
6/4/2007

By now, I'm sure we have all read the (very timely) front page article in Sunday's Columbian. I am impressed with Dean Baker's research and writing. I am pleased with the way he captured the essence of what CSA farms are trying to accomplish. Jim, I believe I could actually hear your voice in some of the writing!

In the article, commissioner Boldt's statement that much of Clark County’s best agricultural land "is already under houses" begs a question. Because it is true that the exquisite agricultural soils in Felida and Lakeshore are being paved and covered with houses, shouldn't we do everything that we can to protect the remaining agricultural land? Would it make sense to build on the remaining agricultural land just because the process is well underway on the other side of the county? My Mom used to say something about the stupidity of jumping off a bridge because everyone else did…

The article states that all three commissioners “...still favor folding more land currently zoned for farming into urban development areas. 'That step will satisfy growth needs while not significantly harming these new farms,' said Commissioner Betty Sue Morris. 'You need to remember that more than 50 percent of active farms in the county are on land not zoned for agriculture,' she said, arguing that niche farms can flourish in cities."

That depends on the definition of "flourish". I don't recall having seen any niche pig farms flourishing adjacent to tracts of new McMansions built on 7,500 square foot lots. What I do know is that an awful lot of people in Clark County like to eat bacon.

Urban zoning protects the rights of urban dwellers. Period. Residential code is not written with food production in mind. It does nothing to protect the rights of existing farmers from the complaints of new residents. Farms often generate noise, dust, and animal aromas that not everyone in the city can understand or appreciate. The farmer may eventually tire of continually defending himself from such complaints and give up farming altogether. Unfortunately, the rights to healthy and fair food are given up when a county’s agricultural heritage is systematically dismantled without thought of food security for its residents.

What the county needs, as Jim Hunter has suggested, is a new way of thinking regarding the development of new housing. Groups of homes could be built with a food system in mind. Villages and farms could support each other, in order to create a secure and interdependent food system.

Removing our ability to feed ourselves while depending on imported food is not in Clark County’s best interest. If our pets could speak, I think they would choose not to eat melamine-laced food from China. If pets could speak, they would ask our county commissioners not to remove any more land from agricultural zoning without a concise plan for Clark County’s food security.

~Anne

Tags: