Getting involved

(CSA Newsletter: Week 29)

Meet this week’s vegetables:

• Sweet corn!!!! — In spite of the cool spring and summer, we have sweet corn! And, it’s delicious!
• Tomatoes — We hope you’ve been enjoying our tomatoes this year. We sure have — the combination of our new permanent greenhouse, new irrigation style and the many new open pollinated varieties has been a good one!
• Romano beans OR basil — We’ve received many wonderful reports from people who loved their romano beans roasted in olive oil. But, if you’re over-dosing on beans, we’re also offering the alternative choice of a big bunch of basil instead.
• Summer squash or cucumbers
• Romaine heart OR crisp head lettuce
• Carrots
• Purple and red potatoes
• Sweet onion

This last week was busy with more quarry activities. The tour I mentioned in the last newsletter went great, but a few conversations I had during the event made me think hard about how and why we as people get involved in these sorts of issues to begin with … and why some people do not get involved.

As we’ve talked with people around the island, we’ve encountered many who are hesitant to get involved or actively oppose the quarry on philosophical grounds. Individuals might not think the quarry is a good idea or want it on the island, but have qualms about coming out against it. I’ve primarily heard two common reasons explaining this reluctance:

1. “I don’t want to be a hypocrite; I use gravel on my farm.”

2. “I have strong beliefs about personal property rights.”

I’d love to take a moment to address both of these statements and why I personally do not think they pose a true conflict for getting involved in this particular quarry application process.

First of all, “I don’t want to be a hypocrite; I use gravel on my farm.” This is a fairly common kind of statement in political battles of all kinds. We, as people, use goods, energy, and other shared resources. In spite of our efforts at conservation, our farm Oakhill Organics is still reliant for some things upon oil, electricity, and other extractive industries. We all are — our society and lifestyle is built upon these things.

As such, if using a product forces us to be silent on the matter of its production, then technically not a one of us can comment on anything ever. As a user of electricity, I should not speak on the location and technology of power plants. As a user of gasoline, I should not protest wars over oil. As a user of gravel, I should not protest the inappropriate development of a quarry on Grand Island. By this logic of ‘hypocrisy,’ no one can speak. We are silent.

Here’s an alternative, more useful and empowering way to look at the same scenario: as a user of resources, we have an obligation to be involved in their development and production. I use electricity; therefore, I have a role in determining where my power comes from. I use oil; therefore, I should be aware of how it is extracted and be concerned with the politics of oil. I use gravel; therefore, I should have a say in what are appropriate places to site quarries.

As consumers of resources, we have a responsibility to make sure those resources are supplied in the best possible manner, harming the fewest people and places in the process. And, that is why I do not feel it is hypocritical to fight this quarry, even though we live in a house with a concrete foundation. I hope that my continued activism now and in the future will help aggregate production move away from non-replaceable prime farmlands.

For people who have philosophical beliefs regarding private property rights, I agree, but I think that I see private property rights differently. Usually, people who cite private property rights are suggesting that property owners should have the right to do whatever they want with their land. Most often, people who cite this idea are referring implicitly or explicitly to the government’s role in limiting what they can do with their land.

As a land owner, I appreciate the sentiment here, but I also think that there is a flipside way to look at property rights — namely, that as a land owner I want my property rights protected from the ways that other people choose to use their properties!

If properties were independent boxes that didn’t affect each other at all, we would live in a lovely and simple (but probably lonely) world. The reality is much more ‘organic’ and complex. What I do on my property affects my neighbors and vice versa. In the city, people agree to certain rules about property and how to live so that they can expect the same from their neighbors.

Here in the country, we might own bigger parcels, but our neighbors affect us just as much. In some ways neighbor farmers can affect neighbor farmers in even more significant ways since our land is also connected to our livelihood.

If one farmer puts in a giant well right next to his neighbors and starts pumping, that might affect the first farmer’s ability to irrigate his crops. His ability to make a living on his private property has been violated by the actions of others. His property and the things on it have been altered without his permission or consent.

And, this is where I personally draw the line on personal ‘rights’ and private property — when one neighbor’s ‘rights’ and choices immediately hurt another neighbor. In the case of this quarry, there is the potential for many farm business and personal residences to be negatively impacted.

As much as I don’t like being told what to do (who does?), I also recognize that Oregon’s land-use laws protect our farm. If we can’t build a house in the middle of the flood “way” and change the course of floodwaters, then at least we also know our upstream neighbor can’t do so either. At least, they can’t as long as they follow the laws and are required to.

Too much about the current quarry application bends the laws. In ‘legalese,’ they call bending the law ‘exceptions,’ and Oregon state law unfortunately allows for a lot of ‘exceptions’ for aggregate. Nonetheless, if we think that this action will hurt others, we once again feel obligated to get involved and be a part of the process.

And, finally, I want to address the concept of the ‘process.’ In a much earlier conversation with someone from the rock company, Casey was accused of trying to ‘shut’ them ‘down.’ The implication being that the quarry is already operating (which it’s not) and that our actions of protest lie outside the realm of what is acceptable.

On the contrary, we see ourselves as being an integral part of the process. The reason I keep using the phrases like ‘pending application’ is because that is the reality of the situation. A rock company has put in an application, and now that proposal is going through the official deciding process. That process necessarily includes naysayers such as ourselves.

If we weren’t a part of the process, it’d be much easier and quicker: the very well educated and thoughtful people in the county planning department could be replaced with monkeys or children with rubber stamps. We also wouldn’t need County Commissioners or the Land-Use Board of Appeals.

That’d certainly be easier for the rock company, but it also wouldn’t allow much consideration of appropriateness. The reality is: just because someone has an idea and has money and owns property does not mean that the idea is worthwhile or good for everyone else in a place.

But, of course, this final sentence is also up for debate. Some people would maintain that ‘might’ (in the form on money) does make right,’ even when actions clearly harm others. At that point, I have no further arguments, because clearly we are dealing with a vastly different set of values for the world. I believe in the best possible good for the most possible people (and animals, plants, etc.). If someone believes in a ‘dog eat dog’ world, then we will never see eye to eye.

Obviously, all of these issues could be explored at great length by better philosophers than I am. I’m not sure that my little arguments will ever do much to sway people whose rigid political beliefs don’t allow for independent assessment of unique cases. But, just as with the greater quarry fight itself, it doesn’t hurt to try.

Anyhow, hope no one is getting too sick of hearing about the quarry yet. To be honest, Casey and I are sick of dealing with it at this point. We still have some big work ahead of us, preparing for the hearing in September and then whatever lies beyond that.

But we have a lot of incentive these days to keep on keeping on … the first glimpses of fall-like weather have arrived on the farm. The mornings are crisp and the sun is setting much earlier. This shift in weather and day length lends a gorgeous tone to the farm — the light gets a little more golden in late August, and everything in the fields just looks so alive. The fields remind us daily that our work is worth it.

Enjoy this week’s vegetables!

Your farmers, Katie & Casey Kulla