Gourmet Magazine
By David Tamarkin

Writer David Tamarkin introduces readers to Mark Kastel in our November 2008 issue (“Organic . . . Or Else”). As co-founder of The Cornucopia Institute, Kastel and his team have spent years exposing the unsavory business practices of big corporations that claim to operate organically. Cornucopia’s dairy scorecard, an update of which was recently released, ranks every organic milk producer in the country according to how strictly they adhere to the organic movement’s principles, and the results for most corporate milk producers are far from flattering. Tamarkin spoke by phone with Kastel as he was making one of his regular road trips through the Midwest, so he had lots of time to expound on the spiritual side of organics, why he loves Publix, and why he can’t wait for a change – any change – in the Oval Office.

David Tamarkin: There are a multitude of issues facing the consumer at the supermarket. They have to think about whether products are Fair Trade, locally grown – all sorts of things – and organic is just one of them. So I’m wondering: Do you believe that sussing out which foods are honestly organic is the most pressing issue that consumers are facing?

Mark Kastel: One of my own little things is: “All I want is: everything.” As a consumer, obviously I want – and I think my sentiments are fairly representative of committed organic consumers – I want safe food. I want nutritionally superior food, and we know food that’s grown truly organically is truly superior – there’s a growing body of scientific literature that indicates that. I want food that’s really local, not just another kind of marketing hyperbole. So I want all those things. I want the environmental impact and the decisions of my purchasing to have a positive influence on how we steward the earth, and I want the animals and people involved to be fairly and humanely treated. So that’s everything. I want it all.

Organics continues to grow really aggressively; up to now, the day we’re having this interview, the indication from talking to people in the industry is it’s holding up phenomenally well, even in this terrible economic climate we’re in. But we’ve seen growth eclipsing even the organic growth in areas like the farmers markets around the country. There are now about 4,700 farmers markets in the United States, according to the USDA. That’s doubled in the last few years. The other mechanisms for local and direct marketing – CSAs, farm stands, web-based marketing and local home delivery – these vehicles have experienced exponential growth eclipsing even the historic 20 percent per annum that organics enjoy. So these consumers, many of them are voting to vet their organic product in a very intimate way. They’re forming relationships with local or regional farmers or business enterprises, so that they can understand who’s growing their food, how it’s being grown. And there’s a sense of place being built in, where their food is from. But many people around the country still need to depend on their supermarket chains or Whole Foods. And then the integrity of the organic label is of a paramount importance.

DT: For someone who’s a watchdog, you sound fairly optimistic right now.

MK: I’ve never lost my optimism about this industry. Yes, there are very poignant threats from powerful economic entities, but what makes me optimistic is that unlike all the other political fights I’ve been involved with in agriculture over the last 25 years, our secret weapon (and what we’re really engaged in here at Cornucopia) is that we have this coalition between the farmers and millions of consumers who just passionately care about these things.

To take all family farmers, all farmers in the United States – people who are by their livelihoods engaged in production agriculture – it’s about 1 percent of our population. Back in the earlier part of the last century, that was 30, 40 percent, and in some states demonstrably higher numbers. Then, when they talked about the farm vote, people had clout. Today farmers really don’t have marketplace and economic clout. And organics was founded as an alternative economic system, so that social justice would be built in. The reason that Cornucopia has any voice out there and has made a difference is that we’ve been successful in building these bridges between our farmer membership and consumers who get it. Consumers who really care. [And] it’s a two-way street, this love affair between the farmers who are engaged in these value-added enterprises and the consumers who are willing to compensate them fairly and go out of their way, whether it’s to pick up their CSA box or go to the farmers market or maybe drive all the way across town to a natural foods co-op. These consumers are willing to go out of their way to make that connection, and it’s rewarding on both sides.

DT: They really do have to go out of their way – it seems to me that as time goes by consumers have to go even more out of their way because they have to do more research to find out if their food is really what they think it is.

MK: Right. We’ve had as many as 9,000 hits on our organic dairy scorecard in a day (that’s usually after some sort of publicity comes out). These are people doing their homework. One of the things I say frequently in my speeches is that for many people, doing this research adds meaning to their food, that there’s actually a spiritual connection. And it’s not a coincidence that in most religious vernaculars, prayers at mealtime are an integral part of the religious practice. That in saying thanks for the creation and the creator, we understand that the food didn’t just come – and I’m speaking historically – that the food didn’t just come in this foam tray with shrink wrap on top. It came from the earth. It came from an animal that was part of creation. And it wasn’t that many generations ago for our species that when it didn’t rain at the right time, in the right season, your kids literally, literally starved to death. So when we thanked God for that meal, we meant it. And so for many families, joining a CSA or buying directly from a farmstand or buying off the Internet that quarter of beef, or that hog to put in the freezer, this is a way that food really is connected to the earth, and that these stewards and shepherds are the ones that bring us our meals.

One of the things that I always find so heartening in the CSA and direct-market movement is all the times I hear families refer to that as “our farm.” “Oh, try some of these tomatoes,” if they’re having me over for dinner. “They came from our farm.”

People create this intimate connection with their food. With who grows their food. With where it comes from. And they actually see the animals. It’s not just sterilized, irradiated, sanitized, processed packaged food. Dean Foods, which is one of our nemeses, the largest dairy in the United States – they don’t call themselves a dairy! They call themselves a “consumer package products company.” What are we selling?

DT: That said, I know you have been very careful to say that not all corporate organics is bad.

MK: Yes. We have to do that carefully, for a number of reasons. One is out of fairness to the organizations that are making the effort to do it right. There are purists in this organic community that will sort of shun the larger corporate players. And we think that’s unfair. But we also think it’s important to be scrupulously accurate in our research and our communications. It’s important for the consumers to know who they can trust. And these blanket determinations are also a disservice to that consumer, because a consumer who’s in Independence, Missouri – some town that might not have as sophisticated an infrastructure of organic, local direct farming – they need to find that organic food, they need that healthy, nutritious food. They need to know the brands they can trust. So, yes, we have to be careful for many reasons.

Among others, we’re right in the bullseye for many of these corporations. They would love to discredit our work. That would injure us as a resource for farmers and consumers if we ever acted recklessly, to the point that they were able to succeed in discrediting us. Hell, when we first came out with our organic dairy survey, the Organic Trade Association – which is the industry lobby group pretty much controlled by corporate agribusiness – attacked us before it was even published!

DT: Before they had even seen it?

MK: Right, before anybody outside of Cornucopia had seen it. We were very, very careful, just because we didn’t want it to fall into the hands of any of the dairies we were critiquing. It didn’t matter if it was people who we had confidence in, who we considered our friends in the organic dairy industry, or our adversaries. To maintain credibility we had to practice a high level of security. So they attacked Cornucopia for our methodology, and obviously they knew what our methodology was, because we had been completely open with what we were doing. Every dairy in the United States that did organics received our questionnaire and cover letter explaining it.

DT: Where is Organic Valley on the new scorecard?

MK: We’ve had some problems with Organic Valley. They’ve actually gone down a few notches. They’ve been more challenging for us to work with, which has been very disappointing because it’s a cooperative owned by the farmers, and their farmers are some of the best organic farmers in the country.

That controversy about them and this big dairy farm in Texas – that’s been resolved positively. But they’ve generally become more difficult to work with. So they have not been fully transparent with us in this round, and because of that they lost points.

DT: Do you see that happen a lot as companies get bigger?

MK: No. To be honest with you, it’s been rare that we’ve downgraded anybody. There are a couple others that we’ve downgraded, but that’s pretty rare. Most of the time people’s business practices remain, in organics, very consistent, and there have been a number of instances where I’m very pleased that we’ve been able to upgrade brands. And we tend to be a catalyst. They want to have the highest rating.

DT: So would you say you do this scorecard as much for consumer knowledge as you do to inspire companies to change?

MK: Oh, it’s got multiple uses. The number-one use undoubtedly is for consumers, to empower them to make good, discerning decisions. And in turn, that puts marketplace pressure on the bad actors and just as importantly it rewards the heroes. The other use is that farmers use it. There have been a number of farmers who have stopped shipping to Dean Foods-Horizon label because they’ve been uncomfortable with learning what their practices were.

DT: Are farmers always aware of what kind of environment their milk is going into? Or are they sometimes innocent? They might be completely upstanding farmers and might not know that their clients are mixing their milk with conventional milk?

MK: In conventional agriculture, milk gets traded and co-op farmers may not be present in the marketplace under their own names – certain dairy co-ops might in turn sell to others. And so in conventional there’s a high percentage of farmers who really don’t know where their milk is going. And if it goes to a cheese plant, they might not know what brand that cheese is marketed under. In organics, almost all dairy producers know where their product is going. And that’s true of other organic commodities. Except for things like cereal grains or feed grains, most farmers know where their products are going.

DT: Is the onus on the farmer to know that information?

MK: Well, there’s certainly no legal liability as long as they’re doing the right job in producing that product. But the onus is on them in terms of being astute businesspeople, having a stake, having their livelihoods depend in part on maintaining the relationship for the reputation of that label, in the eyes of the consumer. I think in terms of being astute businesspeople there are great incentives to be much more connected with the marketing of your commodities than in conventional.

[Still,] generally speaking, in organic farming today, with the exception of the direct marketers, the farmers themselves are economically stressed. Even though consumers are paying a higher price, the cost of organic feed that farmers buy – many farmers grow the majority of their own feed, but not all of it – has grown at a faster clip than the prices that the farmers have received [for their milk]. The profitability has eroded to the point where – and I’m not exaggerating – some farmers are either only breaking even or losing money.

So the farmers desperately need the equivalent of maybe 25 cents more per gallon – modest increases. But the companies by and large – even the good companies out there – feel that they can’t pass that on, because the marketing players that own or buy from factory farms are suppressing the pricing. They’re holding the price down. So all these private-label brands that are associated with Aurora or dairies like this 7,200-cow National Prairie in Texas that used to be a supplier to Organic Valley, they sell direct. For example, one of their largest customers is the HEB supermarket chain in Texas, and they have another brand called Community Market, which competes with Whole Foods. They can artificially hold their price down so that other competitors in the marketplace are pinched. And so this is one of the sad, current stories, and one of the reasons that we hope consumers and Gourmet readers will partner with us in using that scorecard to shift their purchases. Because our goal overall is either to force those companies to change their practices, or to force them out of business.

DT: You guys do more than just the dairy scorecard?

MK: We’re involved in all organic issues and commodities. And dairy is a phenomenal percentage of the organic industry overall. One of the reasons that dairy products are expensive is the infrastructure that goes into them. We’re not only talking about dairy farms, we’re talking about processing plants. But we’re talking about lots of acreage of production that goes into the feed; each dairy farmer is supporting other farmers that grow corn or oats or soybeans or hay, so it has a wide impact. The other reason dairy is so important is that it’s what we refer to as a gateway product. For many families it’s the first organic product that they bring into the household. So often families that are concerned with the health and well-being of their children are driven to look more critically at their food choices. So as their kids begin to discontinue breastfeeding they start to look at organic baby foods and organic milk. And I’ve talked to mothers who say, “I don’t eat organically, but my young child [eats] all organic food.” But after feeding these foods to their children, maybe trying a little themselves, more and more families then exclusively buy organic foods for the rest of the family. So it’s a very heartwarming experience to see that transition take place.

DT: Is that why you think you’ve gotten the most attention for your dairy work?

MK: Oh, it’s a very emotional area, yeah. I mean, moms and milk – they’re very connected. But we work in many areas. We now see a great threat to almost all fresh and local foods. Because of the food contamination issues, the government is starting to look at requiring things like toxic chemical treatment of almonds, or radiation in fruits and vegetables – very rigorous testing that could force smaller, high-quality farms out of business. It’s ironic. The farms that are the answer, not the problem, could be economically jeopardized. And some people have suggested it’s basically a conspiracy by large industrial agriculture to get rid of some of their competition.

One of the rules the USDA has considered is requiring farmers to test each crop for pathogens when they harvest them. I’ll give you two scenarios: Let’s say you’re in California and you’re growing 150 acres of spinach, and because of the climate you can grow two crops per year. What if a test costs $30? That’d be $30 twice a year. Well, you could say, that multimillion dollar operation, they can probably handle that. [But] what if you’re a CSA farmer in Northern Illinois by Rockford, or in the Finger Lakes in New York or out by San Francisco? Let’s say you harvest crops 20 or 30 weeks a year. And you have to test each one of those. And let’s say because you’re very diversified you aren’t just growing one crop – you’re growing many crops. You could have to do multiple tests 20 or 30 times a year. That can just bust those people. Plus the amount of bookkeeping that would have to track that, they might have to add employees in addition to the cost of the test. And again, these are the people that are owner-operated, hands-on, high-level craftsmen. If anybody can make sure that our food is picked at its flavor and nutritional peak, and then make sure that its actually safe, it’s these folks. And so we’re going to dumb down the whole system. If somebody with 9,000 acres of almonds – that’s where one of the problems with almonds is traced back to – and hundreds of employees doesn’t have the management control to make sure our food is safe, well then we’re going to create some sort of technological band-aid so they can continue to operate, we’re going to injure all the other good farms in the United States? We will not stand for that at The Cornucopia Institute. We’re in business to make sure that those farmers aren’t discriminated against, the good farmers, and that consumers who want to choose [good] food have that option in the marketplace.

DT: What you’re saying is that big corporations may support these tests and regulations because they know they can afford it and the smaller farmers can’t?

MK: Well, that’s part of it. I think their main incentive is they want to insulate themselves from liability. You know, when you put out a shoddy product, whether it’s an infant car seat that doesn’t work or meat that’s been contaminated with poison, if you put out a shoddy product and people die, we as citizens have the right to come after you. And it scares [these corporations] to death. So either it’s liability in terms of monetary damage to their organization, or to the image of their brands. It could put you out of business. One of the last big meat recalls literally put one of the largest meat packers in the country out of business. So I think that’s their main incentive. The fact that there would be collateral damage and that some of their highest-quality competitors could be injured or put out of business – that’s just icing on the cake.

DT: Do you find that government officials are sensitive to your concerns? Or are they more sensitive to the powerful farm-industry lobbies?

MK: It cuts both ways at the regulatory agencies. There are many, many dedicated career civil servants that really believe in their roles protecting the citizenry, their mandates to support family farmers, and their charge at the USDA with protecting the integrity of the organic label and the consumer. Unfortunately, there has been a long-term, institutional bias at the FDA and the USDA toward a cozy relationship with these corporate players. Is that because of campaign-finance involvement? Is that because of incredible investments in lobbying? I mean, Dean Foods spends millions in both campaign funding and lobbying. Is it the revolving door at many of these agencies? Or is it a combination?

We’re non-partisan, but I can only tell you that things have never been worse at the USDA and the FDA than under the Bush administration. In my vernacular, they have “Katrina’d” the organic program. That’s a critique from someone who was highly critical of the Clinton administration for some of the same biases. But we have never had more overt monkey-wrenching and a closed environment where we literally had to sue the USDA – we’re still in federal court – just to get documents that citizens are legally entitled to access. So we are just tickled to death that there’s going to be a change in administration.

DT: But has either candidate mentioned these issues, as far as you’ve seen?

MK: The only candidate I know of who has actually mentioned organics is Obama, and there was a lengthy interview with Michelle Obama, talking about how she buys organic food for her family and they believe in organic food for her children. I don’t know if the McCain campaign has discussed organics – they might have and I might just not be aware of it.

DT: Do you want big corporations to be scared of Cornucopia?

MK: Interesting. I want big corporations to be scared of retributions from the organic consumer. A lot of people would like to kill us. We’re the messenger. But we’ve seen that the work we do has clout. But it only has clout because of this unique partnership between the consumers and farmers in the marketplace. I’ll give you an example: The Publix supermarket chain in Florida – it’s one of the largest chains in the country – was buying milk from Aurora dairy. They switched, and we heard a story from some dairy farmers in Louisiana: Publix contacted these organic farmers and said, “We’d like to continue buying milk from you.” These farmers were impressed because corporate officials flew down in their Learjet, and they toured all the farms – there were at least a half dozen farms – to make sure that they were actually grazing their cattle. And they mentioned Cornucopia. Now, was it out of fear? Or was it out of optimism that they would have a good ranking on our scorecard?

We know that our work is changing the decision-making process at some of these major industry players. And so I don’t care if it’s out of fear, or out of the motivation of entrepreneurs to have the best image with organic consumers. Either way, it’s a win for farmers and consumers.

Stay Engaged

Sign up for The Cornucopia Institute’s eNews and action alerts to stay informed about organic food and farm issues.

"*" indicates required fields

Name*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.