by Sanne Kure-Jensen

Pasture To Plate offers on-farm dinners and food-related workshops at farms in southeastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Using a food truck’s certified kitchen, farmers can host events featuring just-picked produce, at the site where they were grown! This venture is directed by Margiana Petersen-Rockney.

Pasture To Plate educates and connects consumers to local, ecologically sustainable farms in southern New England. It provides small farmers a mobile certified kitchen for preparing value-added products from their raw produce. The mobile kitchen/food truck offers farmers a valuable tool for on-farm dinners, boosting profits and growing a stronger community.

Workshops & Dinners

Pasture To Plate’s certified mobile kitchen space is versatile and travels to host farms across southern New England. Host farms can highlight their unique setting delicious products, farming practices and land stewardship. Pasture To Plate event attendees learn about host farms and get to enjoy a fantastic multi-course meal in the fields and pastures where it was grown.

Pasture To Plate events are typically offered in three stages:

1. Farm tour and workshop. Focus will be on food preparation, cooking and/or butchering.

2. Farm dinner in the fields.

3. Products from the host farm are available for purchase.

Pasture To Plate events could be Lamb Day at a pastured sheep farm with a butchery and preparation workshop. Attendees would learn how to raise sheep sustainably as well as how to butcher and cook different cuts of meat. The farm meal could be set overlooking fields of pastured sheep and include tastings of various lamb cuts and preparations with seasonal produce. Guests could purchase the host’s meat and produce to take home.

Another option might be a French-inspired dinner at a dairy goat farm. Guests could learn to make fresh chevre goat cheese, mozzarella and yogurt. They could visit baby goats and milking mamas. Dinner could include soft-rinded cheese on sourdough bread, salads of site-grown greens, tomatoes, basil and goat mozzarella. Main meals might be quiche made with the farms eggs, site-grown caramelized onions and chevre. Guests might purchase goat milk to make their own cheese at home.

The mobile certified kitchen is also available to farmers interested in creating value-added products like tomato sauce, pestos or jams.

During the winter, volunteers are needed to work on advertising, media development and web presence. Summer events operate with volunteer labor as well. Volunteers commit to spending the day on farms learning about that farm, helping prepare the meal and serving guests. In return, the volunteers enjoy a wonderful day of learning and a delicious meal.

Pasture To Plate’s first fundraising effort was a calendar with photographs by Colin Peacock. Each month featured a tastefully elegant photograph of seasonal farm produce from Rosasharn Farm, in Rehoboth, MA. That produce is highlighted by the women who operate this farm. Each month’s photo is accompanied by an original seasonal recipe.

Leadership and Staff

Margiana Petersen-Rockney grew up on Rosasharn Farm milking goats, gardening and playing in the woods. She studied geology, biology and nutrient cycling at Brown University. Margiana ran a 50-family CSA on her own 5-acre farm. She grew vegetables and pastured heritage hogs and meat chickens. Margiana utilizes skills learned from her internship at Chez Panisse, Alice Water’s famous farm-to-table restaurant in Berkley, CA, to run successful farm dinners.

Margiana organized Young Farmer Nights (YFN), building a strong community of young and beginning farmers. Many YFN participants will be host farms during the 2013 season. She has led farm tours and workdays. Her competitive internship program taught students about diverse, sustainable, small-scale, integrated plant and animal agriculture, as well as farm business management.

The 2013 summer schedule of Pasture To Plate workshop dinners is being finalized. Interested farmers should email Margiana at pasturetoplatekitchen@gmail.com or call 401-330-7153.

Learn more about Pasture to Plate at www.pasturetoplatekitchen.com, email Margiana Petersen-Rockney at pasturetoplatekitchen@gmail.com or call 401-330-7153.

by Sanne Kure-Jensen

The Rhode Island Fruit Growers’ Association (RIFGA) honored Extension Fruit Specialist Heather Faubert at the University of Rhode Island (URI) for her Integrated Pest Management (IPM) work with fruit growers. Sandie Barden, co-owner of Barden Family Orchard, presented Faubert with an award and a lifetime membership to the RIFGA. The organization is celebrating its 100th anniversary.

Faubert has been working with URI and fruit growers on pest control since 1982. She routinely travels the state, setting up and monitoring pest traps. Faubert expands grower’s knowledge of apple and other fruit diseases and teaches insect biology. Her greatest success has been helping reduce orchard chemical use by 30 percent in the past 30 years.

Rhode Island fruit growers shared stories of how Faubert offered strategies for coping with apple scab, European Red Mite, winter moth and other problems. These diseases and pests can cause extensive crop damage if not fully controlled at the right time. Faubert’s guidance translates directly to growers’ crop quality, crop volume and the farm’s bottom line.

Barden reminisced about Faubert recording pest messages on an old answering machine before the internet, email and podcasts. Messages would list degree-days, when an insect was going to hatch and how many apple scab ascospores had been released. Barden paraphrased Faubert, “With no rain in sight you may be able to save a spray for apple scab over the next week.”

In recent years, Faubert’s involvement with the RIFGA went beyond pest control. She became an invaluable leader in the organization, providing initiative, organizational skills and unending enthusiasm. Faubert works closely with the RIFGA’s executive board and the Massachusetts Fruit Growers’ Association, arranging regular Twilight Meetings at member farms and providing up-to-date information on many aspects of fruit growing. She oversaw web development and now manages the RIFGA website.

Together with RIFGA President Kerri Stenovitch, Faubert helped develop the successful RI Farm Scavenger Hunt program. The winner of the 2012 Scavenger Hunt’s grand prize was drawn by Governor Chafee at Rhode Island Agriculture Day.

Faubert studied the oldest Rhode Island fruit growers’ records, gathering artifacts for a display at the Museum of Work and Culture. She inadvertently rescued these historic records from a fire when the building that housed them burned to the ground.

Faubert also planted the seed for a documentary on Rhode Island Orchards called Vanishing Orchards. Learn more about the film at vanishingorchards.com or Vanishing Orchard’s Facebook page. The film includes video footage of current and past growers and tracks the enormous changes in this industry and debuted at the Jane Pickens Theater in Newport, RI on May 23, 2013.

Barden finished her presentation with a quote from Kristen Castrataro, formerly of URI Extension. “It is for her genuine love of Rhode Island’s Fruit Growers, her selfless dedication to the work of our Association and her commitment to our technical development as agrarians that we bestow on Heather Faubert the first ever title of Honorary Lifelong Member of the Rhode Island Fruit Growers’ Association. With it, we extend our love and appreciation.”

“PFB is pleased that the Agriculture Committees have advanced farm bill legislation that places a high priority on crop insurance as a risk management tool and includes additional insurance opportunities for fruit and vegetable growers,” said PFB President Carl T. Shaffer.  “We are hopeful that the bipartisan supported bills, which include a flexible crop insurance program and a streamlined conservation program that focuses on working lands, will move swiftly though the full Senate over the next few weeks and through the House this summer.”

Farm Bureau notes that the Senate and House versions of the farm bill contain many similarities on issues that directly impact farmers.

PFB adds that it is important for the public to know where money from the farm bill actually goes.  “The proposed $100 billion farm bill proposals direct about $80 billion (80% of all farm bill funding) toward food stamps and other food nutrition efforts under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP.  The remaining $20 billion – which is one half of one percent of all federal spending – is targeted to help farmers afford crop insurance coverage as part of the agriculture safety net and to assist farmers in implementing conservation practices that reduce soil erosion, limit runoff and improve water quality,” concluded Shaffer.

Pennsylvania Farm Bureau is the state’s largest farm organization with a volunteer membership of more than 55,000 farm and rural families, representing farms of every size and commodity across Pennsylvania.

by Stephen Wagner

Though retired, Penn State Extension Specialist Tom McCarty is still the go-to guy for solving water problems involving pesticides and other potentially dangerous potables. A case in point, chronicled by a Penn State magazine, showed how McCarty successfully solved the plight of a woman who was being plagued by an unknown malady. This Harrisburg, PA, woman had been experiencing nausea, diarrhea and skin rashes for three years. No one could determine what was causing her ailment; best guesses indicated some sort of possible allergy. Consequently the remedy, in light of that non-professional diagnosis, was to try to purge the house of possible toxins by getting rid of plastics, clothing made with synthetic fabrics, chemical cleaners, and furniture with formaldehyde. Air filters had even been added to the house but none of those steps were of any avail. It took the victim’s dogs getting sick to make her wonder about the property’s water supply. As an alternative, she started using bottled water, a measure that seemed to afford a measure of relief.

When the water was tested, the lab told her that the water had an e-coli count 16 times greater than what the Environmental Protection Agency considered unsafe. Furthermore, a total coliform count registered more than 200 times EPA standards. From there, Dottie Johns, the victim, was at odds about where to turn. An online web search directed her to the PSU extension website about drinking water, and Johns phoned Tom McCarty. McCarty met with her and explained exactly what the test results were saying. As a result, he recommended installation of a monitoring device that employs ultra-violet radiation to kill bacteria at the primary water line before it travels to the rest of the dwelling’s plumbing. The plumbing was also flushed with a bottle of chlorine to destroy any lingering bacteria.

McCarty was the kick-off speaker at a pesticide forum held in Lancaster at the beginning of March. He discussed water quality and pesticide issues. The sessions, which ran all day, were primarily for those interested in pesticide certifications and the subjects under discussion offered credits. Related topics included Transporting Chemicals, and Spill Response and Clean Up.

“We get good at measuring stuff,” said McCarty. “We used to pride ourselves with being able to measure parts per million. Then, parts per billion. Now, parts per trillion. If you keep going on down, you are liable to detect things that you weren’t able to detect earlier. The fact that we can find stuff isn’t necessarily a bad thing.”

Then McCarty got into the nitty-gritty of the topic by asking for a show of hands by anyone who had ever spilled anything. “Let’s make it more interesting,” he said. “How far from your well is it safe to spill a jug of herbicide?” An all-inclusive answer can be found at Penn State’s Ag Communications and Marketing offices. Four years ago, Winand Hock, professor emeritus of Plant Pathology, and Eric Lorenz, senior extension associate, Pesticide Education Program, authored a paper titled ‘How to Handle Chemical Spills.’ It advocates that, “The suggested guidelines in the event of a hazardous chemical spill are included under the ‘Three C’ program: Control the spill, Contain the spill, and Clean up the spill.”

“Act quickly,” the communiqué says when talking about Spill Control. “The sooner the spill is controlled the less damage it can cause. Immediate steps should be taken to control the flow of the material being spilled, regardless of the source. If a one-gallon can on a storage shelf has rusted through and is leaking, a sprayer has tipped over, or a hazardous chemical is leaking from a damaged tank truck, do everything possible to stop the leak or spill at once…However, stopping larger leaks or spills may not be so simple. If the spill is large or dangerous, have someone get help. Do not leave the site unattended.

“…At the same time the leak is being controlled,” the advisory continues, “contain the spilled material in as small an area as possible and keep it from spreading. In some situations, a shovel or power equipment may be needed to construct a dam. Liquid spills can be further contained by spreading absorbent materials such as fine sand, vermiculite, clay, or pet litter over the entire spill. However, a word of caution is needed here. Avoid using sawdust or sweeping compounds if the material is a strong oxidizer (check the label or MSDS) because such a combination presents a possible fire hazard.

“…The only effective way to decontaminate soil saturated with a hazardous chemical is to remove the top 2 to 3 inches of soil. This contaminated soil must be disposed of at a proper disposal site. The decontaminated area should be covered with at least 2 inches of lime and then topped with fresh topsoil.”

McCarty then asked a hypothetical question: “Isn’t contamination merely theoretical? We don’t really have to worry about it?” By that he means that if you believe certain theories, such as soil being low porosity and unable to contain outlandish chemical components, spills are likely to be minimal dangers. “Small pores,” in other words, “don’t necessarily have a lot of materials in them, and it holds them well, and it has all summer to decay. So if you have something with a reasonable half life, pesticides won’t be transported through or into ground water. You could say pesticides never move through the soil. We didn’t see that,” said McCarty. “We did see that there were some conditions where they may move in small quantities.” Returning to his original question about a herbicide spill near a well, McCarty then asked “Hasn’t anybody ever tested the groundwater to find if herbicides are present?”

Stay tuned!

An overwhelming majority of farm employees, who routinely return to the very same farms every year to make a good wage and receive fair treatment, are not the ones demanding changes to the law that will restrict their hours and limit new opportunities. This 25-plus year old bill ignores the fact that numerous state and federal regulations already exist that mandate fair labor, health and safety standards, farm worker agreements and employee protections, all of which New York Farm Bureau supports. Farmers have never asked to be exempted from basic laws which govern all New York employees, such as the payment of minimum wage requirements, whistleblower protections, anti-human trafficking statutes and workplace harassment.

Attempting to apply overtime and collective bargaining rules that exist for factories are not appropriate or suitable for our state’s farms. Simply put, harvesting crops doesn’t fit into a typical work week schedule. Rainy weather may keep farm employees out of the fields for a couple of days, and when the sun is out, ripe food can’t always wait for the next day’s 8-hour shift to begin. Farms need flexibility that suits their individual needs in order to get local foods to local tables.

Just as important to consider are the employee ramifications of passing this bill. Many farmers simply can’t afford overtime costs, as farmers are price-takers and at the mercy of global market conditions setting commodity prices. Farmers who can’t afford the additional costs will limit the hours available to individual workers who come to this country to work hard and seek out additional hours to earn a decent living. Farms pay well above minimum wage, typically $9 to $12 an hour, and farmers in New York have the double edged sword of being the second highest in terms of farm labor payroll costs of the top 10 agricultural states according to research by Farm Credit East. But the employees’ work would be shut off if they were to hit a state mandated limit on hours, which forces the employees to simply travel to a different state, or pick up additional hours on another farm, becoming much more like retail workers than farm employees. Bottom line, they would make less income for their families back home under the Assembly’s plan.

New York’s farmers are dependent on quality, skilled agricultural labor, and go through great lengths to ensure safe working, living, and wage conditions for employees. Farm work agreements, required by state law above and beyond the Wage Theft Prevention Act, lay out the work to be performed, wages, work days, and a host of other important arrangements. If an employee is unhappy, they have every right and ability to simply vote with their feet and leave employment, just like everyone else in today’s work place.

If farm labor advocates were serious about helping farm employees, they would spend their great efforts in Washington, D.C. advocating for serious immigration reform to bring migrant workers who are here in this country with questionable documentation out of the shadows where they can lead more open and productive lives in this country.

We are hopeful that the public at large, and representatives in the New York State Assembly will consider the serious consequences of this bill, should it become law, to the ability of our family farmers to provide local foods to local tables. It is noteworthy that the former individuals pushing this bill have actually been indicted for failure to adequately compensate their own employees. New York Farm Bureau finds it ironic that the primary legislators behind this bill have rarely set foot on New York farms, or talked to real farm workers working in the real fields of New York.

This legislation will force serious change in our family farms, causing many of our members to stop producing the diverse fresh fruits and vegetables and dairy products that we do now and turning more to row crops that can be grown more readily in this state, which is already an extremely costly one in which to farm.

For additional information including reaction from New York farmers who employ seasonal migrant workers, check out the video on YouTube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOsDf5rglnc

“Farming is beneficial to all New Yorkers and has been the cornerstone of upstate family life since this country was founded,” said Giglio. “To have New York City push its policy onto Upstate New York farmers is a huge mistake — this will doom upstate farms at a time when agriculture is seeing resurgence. Smart public policy should entail helping farmers expand their operations and encouraging a new generation of young farmers into the field; this bill does just the opposite and sets New York on a devastating path in the wrong direction.”

Giglio noted that since 2002 and most likely long before, the number of farms and acres of farmland in the 148th Assembly District has declined. This is due in part to the high cost of property taxes, burdensome farming regulations, and the losing margin at which farmers currently operate. He also cited the recent yogurt, beer, wine and organic farming booms that are directly impacting the growth of existing farms, and after years of decline, finally securing positive operating margins in some areas of the state.

“While the idea of this could be seen as commendable to a very small degree, perhaps New York City should leave well-enough alone and be proud of the fact that New York State farms are currently the best in the nation,” said Giglio. “When was the last time we saw Upstate New York dictating policy in New York City and downstate? Farmers are subject to the most extreme conditions — seasons, weather and instability in the marketplace — to put it simply, it’s always unpredictable. Until farmers can rely on a predictable schedule and work week, this bill should not even come to the floor for a vote. Until then, this bill should be considered ‘dead on arrival’ to everyone who supports farms and New York State’s agriculture industry.”

“These downstate Assembly members are seeking to regulate farming right out of New York,” DiPietro said. “These members don’t come from the rural areas of New York and they don’t know how we conduct business on our farms. These radical changes in labor law showcase how New York is still not open for business, despite claims to the contrary. Family farms make up almost 90 percent of all farms in our state. Can they really afford more restrictions on their lifestyles? I know they cannot, and if the people who crafted this bill disagree, I encourage them to come upstate and see for themselves.”

“What the Assembly Majority doesn’t understand is that farms do not operate like other businesses. These are salt of the earth people who work from dawn to dusk with calluses on their hands. The farm industry in New York already has the second highest labor costs of the top 10 agriculture producing states. You cannot regulate an industry into prosperity. Anyone who thinks farms operate 40 hours a week and eight hours a day has never consulted a farmer about their day-to-day life,” DiPietro said.

If Assembly Bill 1792 will negatively affect your farm, please contact DiPietro’s district office and join his fight to save New York’s farms from the destructive meddling of downstate Assembly members. He can be reached by phone at 585-786-0180 or by e-mail at dipietrod@assembly.state.ny.us. Like him on Facebook as Assemblyman David DiPietro.

Q. Under what circumstances may my private property be taken by eminent domain?

The power of “eminent domain” is the right of the state to take private property for public use upon the payment of just compensation to the owner. Some people understandably consider the idea that the government can simply take private property over an owner’s objection to be distasteful or even un-American. However, many public projects that we take for granted today — the New York State Thruway, for example — would not have been possible without the state’s exercise of eminent domain. Given its focus on the “greater good,” eminent domain is appropriately used sparingly and in only those situations where the public need and benefit outweigh the harm to private ownership rights.

While the power of eminent domain is technically vested in the State of New York, the state has delegated that power to certain municipal entities, such as cities and counties, and in some cases to certain private entities that provide necessary public services, such as utility companies. When a proposed public project requires the acquisition of private property (for example, widening a highway or extending an airport runaway), most often an effort will first be made to negotiate a voluntary sale-purchase agreement with the affected owners. If those efforts prove unsuccessful — where, for example, the owner is unwilling to sell, or the parties are unable to reach an agreement on price — the sponsor of the project may proceed to acquire the property through eminent domain.

The exercise of the eminent domain is subject to the procedural requirements set forth in New York’s Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL). Under EDPL Article 2, the party seeking to acquire property through eminent domain — referred to as the “condemnor” — generally must first hold a public hearing to inform the public regarding the proposed project, to review the public use to be served, and to assess any impact on the environment. Notice of the public hearing must be provided to the owner or owners of any impacted property, as well as published in the local newspaper. At the hearing, the condemnor is required to outline the purpose and location of the proposed project, to identify the private property to be acquired, and to accept any oral or written comment from members of the public in attendance. Within 90 days after the public hearing, the condemnor must issue its determination and findings specifying, among other things, the public use, benefit, or purpose to be served by the proposed project.

An aggrieved party — including the owner of the private property proposed to be acquired — may judicially challenge the condemnor’s determination by filing a petition in court within 30 days. The scope of this judicial review, however, is very limited and usually revolves around four issues: (1) whether the condemnor complied with each of the procedural requirements of EDPL Article 2, (2) whether a public use or benefit will be served by the proposed project, (3) whether the amount of the private property proposed to be taken is reasonable in relation to the stated public use and benefit, and (4) whether the condemnor satisfied the environmental review requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. While courts will often set aside determinations based on procedural violations, most courts will generally defer to the condemnor’s determination as to the public benefit to be served and the amount of private property reasonably necessary to meet the public purpose.

A condemnor then has up to three years to initiate the proceedings set forth in EDPL Article 4 to actually acquire the title or other interest in the private property subject to the Article 2 determination. If the condemnor fails to initiate acquisition proceedings within the three-year period, the acquisition will be deemed abandoned. In the meantime, the condemnor is required to obtain an appraisal of the fair market value of the property to be acquired, and to offer the amount reflected in that appraisal to the owner as “just compensation” for the taking.  The owner may accept the offer as payment in full, or may instead accept the offer as only an advance payment, reserving the right to seek any additional compensation the owner believes is due.

If the offer is accepted as an advance payment, the owner may file a claim for additional compensation with the court as provided in EDPL Article 5.  Both the condemnor and the owner will obtain appraisals opining as to the value of the real property taken and any direct and indirect losses resulting from the acquisition. Based on the expert testimony offered by the appraisers, the court will determine the just compensation legally due to the owner from the taking. If that amount exceeds the amount offered as the advance payment, the owner will be entitled to the entry of a judgment reflecting the additional compensation due, subject to any appeal by either party.

After competing in the FFA Creed Speaking Contest, Kaylah Gulley placed 2nd and Meghan Coldwell placed 3rd. The Maple Team consisting of Bailey Saunders, Zack Bailey, Kevin Casey and Devlin Kennedy placed third. Devlin placed 7th individually. In the Veterinary Science CDE Alex O’Brien placed 4th. Winning the state Parliamentary Procedure contest was the team consisting of Max English, Emma Stein, Gabby Jordan, Liz Waite, Dylan Rogers, and Easton Murray. They will be representing New York in Louisville, KY, at the National FFA Convention in October. Also winning first place in New York State for their experience with dairy cattle were Breana Scribner in the Holstein and Milking Shorthorn category. Kaylah Gulley won the Brown Swiss breed. Hannah Wilber received first for her work with Ayrshires.

The Empire Degree is the highest state award that an FFA member can receive. This is based on their work experience, FFA leadership as well as their school and community service. Receiving the Empire Degree were Zack Bailey, Chelsey Morrison, Kylee McPhail, Easton Murray, Devlin Kennedy, and Bradley Gifford. Kennedy was awarded the District Star Farmer and Murray received the District Star in Ag Placement based on their outstanding Empire Degree applications.

The Greenwich FFA Chapter also received a gold medal in the National Chapter award contest for their work in chapter, student, and community development. Greenwich is proud to have a representative on the New York State FFA Officer Team. Gabby Jordan was elected as the 2013-2014 New York State District 3 President.