“A resilient garden is one that’s ready to adapt and recover, no matter what comes its way,” says Manny Barra, a master gardener at TeachMe.To and the community garden coordinator for the City of Oakland in California.

So how does one build a resilient garden and care for flowers and plants when the weather is unusual? Read on for expert tips.

Know Your Microclimate

Think of your microclimate as your garden’s unique personality: it determines how everything grows. Knowing your microclimate lets you understand the sun, shade, wind, and moisture patterns that make your space special. 

“Understanding the zone in which you grow is an ideal starting point to understand sowing and planting dates, what will be needed to protect plants in colder months, and what will not be possible if temperatures are too warm,” says Daniel Pettus,  farm manager at Olivette Riverside Community & Farm, an agrihood in Asheville, North Carolina. “ Knowing your proximity to North, South, East, West should determine how you plan your farm or garden, where you build structures. If there are existing structures in place, where these are in position to the movement of the sun throughout the season and your farm or garden are key to growing successfully.”

It’s like unlocking the cheat codes to gardening success, so you can work with nature instead of constantly struggling against it. Plus, it helps you pick the right plants for the right spots, which is a gamechanger.

Mix it Up

Diversity is key to a resilient garden. Barra suggests using a variety of plants in your garden, including native plants that naturally thrive in your area.  “If you notice certain plants struggling, don’t be afraid to swap them out for something better suited to your conditions.”

Keep Friends Together

When designing a new garden or adding new plants, consider grouping those with similar water needs to save resources and avoid waste. For instance, ferns, azaleas, and hydrangeas all have similiar water, soil and shade needs. Broccoli, cauliflower, and cabbage all need extra water once they sprout while eggplant, artichoke, zucchini, and summer squash don’t require much water.

Research And Note

Stay aware of changing weather patterns and take notes on what works and what doesn’t. 

“When starting a new farm or garden, think about the best and worst possible scenarios in your area,” says Pettus. “Research weather patterns for the past 100 years or more; design your garden to withstand the worst possible scenario, while thriving in the best.”

He suggests starting small and taking notes. You’ll want to track which varieties you’re planting and how they do, especially as you learn more about your own microclimate. 

“Some varieties of green beans or tomatoes are a little bit heartier than others. So even if you really love heirlooms, and you want to do an all heirloom garden, heirlooms are generally a bit fussier and less resilient,” adds Lara Hermanson, co-founder of California-based Farmscape which specializes in designing, installing, and maintaining sustainable gardens. Picking a heartier variety of crop can help ensure it will withstand weather changes.

Build Soil Health

Healthy soil is the foundation of a healthy garden. In addition to using mulch to prevent soil erosion, Barra suggests adding compost to build up soil health, and keep the soil draining well if heavy rains do hit your garden. 

“Make sure your soil drains well by incorporating organic matter and digging shallow trenches to direct excess water away from roots. 

For areas that frequently flood, consider adding rain gardens or planting water-tolerant species. 

Lift Them Up

Raised beds are such a lovely way to garden. It’s a better experience for the gardner–often kinder on knees and backs–and can even reduce insect damage on produce. Plus, when a cold or heat wave hits, raised beds can provide a structural base for cold frames and shade cloth.

When Inclement Weather Hits

Hermanson is a big fan of using a cold frame when drastic weather happens such as a hailstorm or freezing temperatures in the spring. “It’s important for home gardeners to get comfortable with a wide variety of quick and easy structures that you can put up when it’s really cold or really hot to help your plants transition,” Hermanson says. There are pre-fabricated cold frame options available, or you can construct your own. And don’t forget shade cloth from an online vendor like Gardeners Supply to help cover your vegetables in case of a heat wave.

Heavy rain is a bit trickier. When heavy rain hits, your garden can quickly turn into a soggy mess, but the good news is that many plants can withstand even a high amount of rain, says Hermanson. However, she suggests fertilizing the garden after a heavy rain.

“Add back in any nitrogen that may have been leached out, especially in a spring garden that needs a lot of nitrogen.”

You May Have To Start Over

If you get bad weather in the infancy of a produce plant and it’s damaged, Hermanson says it’s likely best to start over. “The right move is to be ready to assess and know when to stop rather than try to coax things back to life that have been damaged. Especially in their infancy, don’t commit to it.”

Don’t Forget The Mulch

Mulch helps keep soil moist, regulates temperatures and protects roots. You can make your own, or pick some up at a local plant nursery.

Stay Flexible

Gardening is a bit of luck and chance but as climate change continues to make the weather unpredictable, flexibility is more important than ever. Don’t be afraid to experiment and realize that not everything is going to be a success.

“Gardening in a changing climate is all about staying creative and resourceful. Gardening is always a work in progress, and even the most seasoned garden can benefit from a little TLC and creativity,” Barra says.

The post How to Care for Your Garden in Unpredictable Weather appeared first on Modern Farmer.

The pod’s dense and waxy exterior gives way to seeds coated in white pulp – sweet, bitter and nutty to the taste. They are destined for greatness in the form of chocolate bars, dried beans and tea at Lavaloha Chocolate Farm in Hilo.

“Bringing the Hawaiian cacao to light for the rest of the world – I really want to be at the forefront of that,” Lavaloha’s president Bencomo says. 

Although most of the world’s chocolate is grown in West Africa, those sweet treats aren’t guilt-free: Industry problems include slavery, child labor, poverty among farmers and more. But in recent years, small-scale producers have raised the ethical bar, and a nascent sector has formed on Hawaiian soil under American labor standards. Here, growers are making fresh kokoleka, or chocolate in ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi (Hawaiian language), through mindful agricultural practices: creating their own soil and compost, contracting with locals, and using organic fertilizer.

“For all of us in Hawai‘i, it’s integrity,” says Puna Chocolate Company owner Adam Potter. “It’s gonna be Hawaiian grown, and it’s gonna be quality beans.”

Also operating on the island, Puna Chocolate Company works with independent farmers to grow cacao, which accounts for 40 percent of its cocoa bean production. One, who is based in Hakalau, identifies as Kanaka ʻŌiwi (Native Hawaiian). The other 60 percent is produced across seven farms – four owned and three managed by Puna Chocolate Co.

To Potter, his top-selling caramel macadamia turtles are worlds away from mass-produced chocolate by major global players, such as Hershey. Imported commodities take time to reach American consumers, Potter said, which can mean slightly-rancid cocoa butter and absent flavor profiles.

“Why Hawaiian (chocolate) tastes so different is that you’re in the U.S.,” says Potter. “You’re getting fresh, from-origin chocolate.”

He and his co-owner Benjamin Vanegtern opt against aging their beans, in order to transform them into chocolate more quickly. 

“We’re probably the freshest chocolate bars you can get in the country,” Potter adds.

Still, he wants to keep prices low for the local market. In Kona, where most of the island’s resorts are located, tourists make up 80 percent of Puna Chocolate Co.’s market. But in Hilo, that percentage is flip-flopped, with residents accounting for 80 percent of business.

“We don’t need to charge that much because we do grow our own beans,” Potter says. “And we grow a lot.”

Since joining Lavaloha in 2019, Bencomo has spent most of his days farming on the property made up of almost 1,000 acres – 25 of which are dedicated to cacao. With around 10,000 trees, it’s Lavaloha’s main commodity. 

From seed to orchard, the cacao growing process can take up to two years. Once the pods turn vibrant colors – orange, red, maroon and yellow – they’re ready to be harvested with clippers and sickles. Harvesting is done by hand because appropriate equipment isn’t available on the market. Each bean is hand sorted and graded, with the lowest turned to compost. Bencomo chooses to sort the old-fashioned way because optical sorting machines are expensive and primarily used for coffee beans.

Tourists are the largest market for Lavaloha’s products, but Bencomo would eventually like to serve as a bulk bean seller. He wants to start a collective system where he buys cacao from farmers for a fair price, then resells the beans to chocolate makers and confectioners.

He manages almost a dozen employees – around 25 percent of whom are Kānaka ʻŌiwi (Native Hawaiian). The Indigenous people of Hawai‘i are increasingly being priced out of the islands due to the tourism industry, the affordable housing crisis and the skyrocketing cost of living, but a viable job market can help them continue to live in the lands of their ancestors. 

Bencomo took the reins of the business in 2022, and it’s grown steadily since then.

In Hawai‘i, “I definitely think it’s gonna be bigger,” he said. “Look out for Hawaiian cacao in the grocery stores in the next couple years, I hope.”

Across the island chain, on the east side of Kaua‘i, Will Lydgate is determined to elevate Hawai‘i’s reputation as a global leader in the chocolate industry. He estimates the state produces about 1/10,000th of the world’s cocoa supply.

“We’ll never compete on quantity, but we don’t want to,” says Lydgate, owner of Lydgate Farms. “We want to be the place where the best chocolate in the world is.”

And he believes that operating in the U.S. offers advantages beyond its agricultural resources.

Compared to other cacao-growing nations, “we also have better roads. We have FedEx,” says Lydgate. “We have scientists, universities, an electricity grid that doesn’t go on and off, stable currency – things that a lot of other tropical nations don’t have.”

But Hawaiian cacao farms do deal with their own local challenges, like high expenses and a dearth of affordable worker housing.

“In the Hawaiian islands, we’re completely separated from the global commodity cacao,” he says. “We do not touch it. It does not really influence us or change anything, other than the price of cocoa butter.”

Lydgate, his sister and his father started their foray into cacao after planting a small grove in 2002, although the family ties to Hawai‘i extend back to 1865 when Lydate’s great-great grandfather first immigrated to the then-monarchy.

Now, Lydgate Farms is made up of 46 acres, and its team of 30 includes about five people of Kānaka ʻŌiwi (Native Hawaiian) ancestry. The land gets between 50 to 70 inches of rain annually, which keeps its 3,200 thirsty cacao trees watered, and organic fertilizer is used to boost soil health. The farm relies on regenerative farming practices.

“If you’re buying from us, we’re the people that grew it,” Lydgate says. “There’s no step in between you and the farm.”

Author Megan Ulu-Lani Boyanton identifies as Kanaka ʻŌiwi (Native Hawaiian).

The post In Hawai‘i, American Farmers Believe They Do Cacao Better appeared first on Modern Farmer.

“It’s a premium product,” says executive chef and partner Daniel Garwood. “The cow has gone through its whole life. There’s a lot of natural marbling. It has an interesting flavor and texture.”

Since opening the restaurant in October of 2024, Garwood, who hails from Australia and spent time cooking in Sweden, has served ribeye, strip loin, tenderloin, brisket, and even mince pie, all from dairy cow beef.

In the U.S., dairy cows are almost exclusively raised for dairy production. The exception is male calves, sold to the beef industry and raised for veal or beef. Once a dairy cow’s milk productivity declines, the cows are slaughtered with their meat, which is often considered of a lower quality and makes its way into dog and cat food and fast food burgers. In other parts of the world, though, such as in Sweden, where Garwood worked, meat from dairy herds is prized. 

Now, a growing number of U.S. restaurants, including ACRU, Blue Hill at Stone Barns, and Gwen Restaurant in Los Angeles, have been exploring whether dairy cow meat will appeal to consumers interested in sustainability.  

“Meat from grass fed dairy cows is considered to have a lower carbon footprint than meat from traditional beef herds in part because its footprint is spread across the years of protein rich, delicious milk the animals produce in their lifetime,”  says Dan Barber of Blue Hill at Stone Barns.

There’s an idea that beef from a dairy herd is a more sustainable option, because you are getting more food for the resources used. Instead of simply just getting milk or beef from the land, water, feed, put into the cow you’re getting both. 

Sustainability was a big draw for The Oberon Group, which owns restaurants and food markets in the Catskills and New York City. They introduced dairy beef in 2017, and while customers supported the sustainability efforts, there were concerns around texture.

“The customer pushback on the toughness was significant,” says Henry Rich, managing partner.

As dairy cows are older when they are slaughtered compared to beef cattle, which usually are culled at six to seven months for veal, or two years for beef, the meat is generally considered tougher.

“They generally don’t have a lot of intramuscular fat or marbling that gives beef the flavoring that is associated with it. And all of those things usually reduce consumer acceptance. I would guess restaurants are using some pretty unique cooking methods in order to overcome that,” says Tara Felix, an associate professor in the Department of Animal Science at the University of Pennsylvania.

The Oberon Group is focused on sustainable, environmental restaurants with a goal of carbon-neutrality and zero-waste. As he explains it, they started serving dairy beef in a meat-centric restaurant, Metta, because, at the time, they believed that because the carbon emissions of the cow were already caused by dairy, using the cows for meat would have a lower carbon footprint that cows that were just used for meat. The calculation soon felt a bit off to Rich.

“The claim that they had lower overall carbon footprints is because you’re ignoring the first however many years of life because they’d be here anywhere. That accounting started to feel a little fuzzy for me,” Rich says.

There is research that seems to agree that dairy beef has a lower carbon footprint than conventional beef. An analysis from Our World in Data, found that per 100 grams of protein beef from a beef herd had 49.89 grams of greenhouse gasses, whereas beef from a dairy herd was 16.87 grams.

“The challenge is that sustainability means something different to everyone. Is it reduced methane emissions? Is it reduced feed inputs? Is it reduced time on feed?” says Felix who added that it’s a question a number of people are currently researching in regards to the offspring from dairy farms which do already often make their way into beef herd programs.

Between the customer response and the lack of clarity over sustainability, The Oberon Group ended up phasing out the dairy beef program after about two years.

However, the company started and stopped its dairy beef program before the coronavirus pandemic upended life as we knew it. Chefs life Garwood and Barber that have started their dairy beef programs within the last year or so have done so at a time when there is perhaps more awareness of the interconnectedness of food systems, and climate-related disasters such as the wildfires in Maui or more recently in L.A., have pushed more people to think about the impacts of global warming. Garwood and Barber have so far received vastly different responses to their program. 

“The response has been overwhelmingly positive. Grass-fed beef and meat from dairy cows has the reputation of being tough, but some of our guests have told us it’s the best steak they’ve ever had,” says Chef Dan Barber of Blue Hill at Stone Barns.

Blue Hill started using dairy beef in 2023, but Barber credits the cows on his family’s dairy in the Berkshires for making him want to experiment with dairy beef.

“Blue Hill Farm, my family’s dairy farm in the Berkshires, had an older dairy cow ready for culling at least once or twice a year. I bet it was my proximity to these exceptional ladies—spending years, in some cases seven or eight or more years, getting to know them well—that made their inevitable fate of becoming dog food feel disrespectful,” says Barber.

Barber and Garwood haven’t yet faced any significant negative customer response. At Blue Hill at Stone Barns, dairy cows forage on grass and hay before being slaughtered.

“The meat from grass-fed dairy cows has this incredible, idiosyncratic flavor,” says Barber. “But more than that, the idea is to showcase how delicious this often-overlooked meat can be and create a market for it.”

U.S. dairy farmers typically get only about 60 cents per pound for meat from retired dairy cows as dog food and fast food hamburgers. If they could get closer to $6 a pound or more for their animals, Barber says it could help boost revenue for dairy farmers.

Felix agrees that it could be economically appealing for dairy farmers but believes that its success would depend on the size of the dairy farm and whether or not the restaurant could take all of the animals the dairy produces.

“There are 86 million head of cattle in the United States, and each year we kill 26 to 28 million. If we’re talking about even eight or 10 restaurants using two to three cows a week, this is a very, very small market,” Felix says. “Not to discount it, because it would be great if a farmer could develop a relationship like that, but it’s probably never going to be our primary marketplace.”

That isn’t a deterrent for Garwood. Initially, he had trouble sourcing the dairy beef. “We had to buy the entire cow,” says Garwood, who is sourcing from Ends Meat in Brooklyn, which gets dairy cows from farms in upstate New York, adding that he’s had other restaurants express interest in getting primal cuts but not being able to handle the entire cow.

“We really want to pursue it,” Garwood says. “We’ll focus on whole dairy cow dinners in the coming months.”

The post Why Are Restaurants Selling Beef From Dairy Cows? appeared first on Modern Farmer.

But over the past 25 years, peer-reviewed scientific studies show that biodynamic farming enhances soil quality and biodiversity. It also produces more nutritious produce and wine that tastes better. 

With that in mind, the era of downplaying the merits of biodynamic farming is officially over. Today, biodynamic farmers on the cutting edge are taking the philosophy and science that has served them so well on their farms and applying it to their business practices.

Biodynamic farming 101

Still not sure what we mean when we say biodynamic farming? You’re not alone. Biodynamics is based on the work of philosopher and scientist Dr. Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925). It is, at its simplest level, a method of chemical-free organic farming that entails the observation of lunar phases, planetary cycles and requires the use of locally sourced materials for fertilization and soil conditioning.

Practitioners see the farm as a closed, biodiverse ecosystem that requires internal inputs—which can come from the manure of ruminants raised on the farm, or from teas made from plants grown and animal products present on the farm—to nourish and feed itself. 

There are two primary forms of biodynamic certification, through Demeter-USA and Demeter International. It is estimated that there are around 6,000 certified biodynamic farms in operation across the world, and many more who farm biodynamically without certification. (The cost of getting certified varies depending on the farm’s size, but is generally at least a few thousand dollars, and requires adherence to a complex set of rules and standards). 

Now, a new crop of producers are taking these same concepts and applying them to their businesses as a whole. Is the certified biodynamic coffee you’re drinking truly biodynamic if the coffee pods were dried on a conventionally produced table? These are the kind of questions the truly hardcore are asking.

Deeply considering every element that touches products

Gérard Bertrand, who owns and operates 16 certified biodynamic wine estates in Languedoc and Roussillon, France, has been infusing business decisions with biodynamic ideas for decades. 

At the Minervois winery Clos d’Ora, the layout was designed so that sunlight hits a precise place in the barrel cellar during each solstice. And at Languedoc’s Clos du Temple, architect Francois Fontes designed the space to link sky and earth. Glass panels bring sunshine into the winery through the ceiling, while a mashrabiya (a latticework window that is characteristic of Islamic architecture) cools the heat the sun brings and casts patterns of light and shadow. 

“The sun, the star that anchors our system and shines bright for much of the year in this region, shapes our construction projects,” Bertrand explains. 

At his wine resort Chateau L’Hospitalet, Bertrand created a The Moon Room devoted to biodynamically rooted tastings. 

“Its light fixtures mimic celestial bodies, their glow, colors, and rhythms attuned to the dishes and wines served,” Bertrand explains. “Short narratives weave through the meal, inviting guests to sense the rhythms that guide our biodynamic work. This is more than a meal—it is a multisensory journey, an education, and a fresh way of looking at the heavens.”

Robert Eden, co-owner and winemaker at Chateau Maris, also built his winery in Languedoc based on the biodynamic approach. 

“Our cellar and winery is constructed from hemp bricks and wood to create a plant-based space that can receive external energies,” Eden explains. “Built this way, our winery’s operation is not impaired, and the energy is not repelled by artificial metals and other materials.”

The placement and construction of the building was also considered with the movement of groundwater and alignment to prevailing winds. 

Other vintners, like Count Michael Goess-Enzenberg, owner of Weingut Manincor in Alto Adige, Italy, embraces a holistic approach to biodynamic farming and business-building.

“We get everything possible from organic or biodynamic sources,” Goess-Enzenberg says. “Oak for our barriques, which we use to age our wines, comes from our own forest. Straw and manure for our compost comes from local farms in our neighborhood, which we mix with remains from grapes after they’ve been pressed.”

The quartz used for the biodynamic preparation 501 (a spray used to promote grape strength and health) is sourced from their local mountains. Goess-Enzenberg likens biodynamics to a broad lifestyle that requires wholesale commitment. 

“It brings our lives into balance,” he says. 

At Cullen Wines in Margaret River, Australia, winemaker and managing director Vanya Cullen has created a biodynamic bubble around her entire operation. In addition to farming her vineyards biodynamically, Cullen has a biodynamic produce garden that feeds the on-site restaurant.

Cullen also sources barrels sourced on fruit or flower days, according to the biodynamic calendar. (In the biodynamic farming calendar commonly followed by practitioners, fruit days occur when the moon is in a fire sign—Aries, Leo or Sagittarius; flower days occur when the moon is in an air sign—Gemini, Libra or Aquarius; root days occur when the moon is in the earth sign—Capricorn, Taurus or Virgo; leaf days occur when the moon is in a water sign—Caner, Scorpio or Pisces). 

“We were amazed at the difference between wine made in barrels harvested on fruit and flower days,” Cullen says. “Wine aged in barrels harvested on fruit days are bigger and more expressive. Flower day barrels impart minerality and structure. Overall, we find that wines made with biodynamic barrels as a whole taste more complete.”

Cullen has worked with her coopers to hone the barrel program even further, prioritizing wood harvested on a new moon descending. 

Applying holistic biodynamic ideas to staff management

Beth Hoinacki, owner and operator of Goodfoot Farm in Oregon’s Willamette Valley says that her work for the International Organic Inspectors Association made her realize that biodynamic operations often unconsciously extended their practices well beyond the farming itself. She became determined to conscientiously do so on her own vegetable and fruit farm. 

“I inspected organic and biodynamic farms, and I was always struck by the staff at biodynamic farms,” Hoinacki says. “From the people who are there working in the fields every day to the owners, there was clearly this beautiful dedication to what was happening, and the story they were telling about the universe and our interconnection through the food they were growing.”

There is something about the practice of growing food biodynamically by the rhythm of the planets, moon, sun and stars that seems to engage the minds and hearts of the people involved, Hoinacki notes. 

“I intuitively knew that traditional labor structures on farms were not healthy, so when I began hiring people, I began doing so through the lens of biodynamics with the goal of expressing the character of the farm as it exists,” she says. 

Instead of the traditional power and management structure of owner and employee, she gives her employees the power to collectively agree on hours, start times and breaks. Her decision rooted power on the farm, without allowing inputs from the outside world. 

“It is a system that feeds itself,” Hoinacki notes. “I work with them on the farm because I find working the land rewarding, so we get to make decisions together. Our team members love the system.”

On the other hand… 

Inevitably, there are many who are less than convinced of the merits of biodynamically minded business decisions. 

Wendy Parr, a wine scientist and oenologist at Lincoln University in New Zealand was among the researchers who wrote “Expectation or Sensorial Reality? An Empirical Investigation of the Biodynamic Calendar for Wine Drinkers,” published in the peer-reviewed Public Library of Science mega journal PLOS ONE. In the study, 19 wine pros were asked to taste 12 different Pinot Noirs on fruit and root days. Bottom line: they found the day made no difference.

“To date, there is no clear evidence that the calendar affects tasting,” Parr says. “We know from neuroscientists’ work that no two people ever experience a wine in precisely the same way because there are a myriad of neuro-physical and psychological variables that could be involved.”

Parr adds that there is “anecdotal evidence” that wines can show changes across fruit or root days. 

“I’ve met winemakers in Europe and New Zealand who wouldn’t rack off wine on a root or leaf day,” she says. “It is not for me to say what others should believe or practise. I will add that we did one study only. In the absence of further research, the issue remains unclear.”

The jury appears to be out on whether or not tasting on a fruit or root day will drastically alter your assessment of a wine. But even a few decades ago, the notion that biodynamic farming could improve soil health was unproven and widely ridiculed. 

Tasting special wines, planning farm and winery constructions and basing staff decisions on a biodynamic calendar and philosophy may seem slightly out there—but if it helps vintners and farmers create better products and teams, who are we to argue? 

The post Biodynamic Farms Are One Thing. What About Biodynamic Businesses? appeared first on Modern Farmer.

In 2024, Environmental Defence Canada published Left Holding the Bag: A Survey of Plastic Packaging in Canada’s Grocery Stores. They found that over 70 percent of products in the produce and baby food aisle are encased in plastic. It’s not much better in the US. In 2019 Greenpeace USA assessed 20 grocery retailers with a significant national or regional presence. None of the retailers, according to Greenpeace, appeared to have comprehensive plans on how to reduce plastic use.

And while it’s true that consumers increasingly report that using less plastic matters to them, statistics paint a different picture. In 2020, over 242 million Americans used bagged or packaged salads–a figure expected to have risen to 251.47 million in 2024. Salad bags are generally categorized as “plastic film” and they jam recycling machinery. They end up in the landfill where they decompose releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Alongside the environmental concerns, there are potential health issues. Growing research suggests that chemicals used in the manufacture of plastic contribute to a multitude of health issues. Consumer Reports tested nearly 100 foods ranging from dairy products to canned goods.They found that phthalates, a chemical used to make plastic flexible, were in almost all of them. Studies suggest that regular exposure to phthalates can affect reproductive health and that older adults with phthalates in their bodies were more likely to suffer heart disease.  

But, there’s hope. In April 2024, the European Parliament voted to approve new rules aimed at reducing plastic packaging. Starting in 2030, bans will be in place for packaging of unprocessed fresh fruits and vegetables. Consumers will be encouraged to bring their containers to restaurants and cafés, which will also aim to offer 10 percent of products in reusable packaging. Since 2022,  Canada has banned the use of single use plastic bags at supermarket checkouts. And, in the US more than a hundred municipalities and cities have banned polystyrene ( styrofoam) used in food containers, including Los Angeles and New York. Illinois has gone even further. Legislation came into effect in 2024, permitting restaurants and retailers to fill or refill consumer-owned containers with ready-made or bulk food. Still, plastic packaging persists. 

Currently, out of over 300,000 grocery stores in the U.S., which range from expansive supermarkets to small specialty shops, only 1,300 zero-waste stores offer a plastic-free shopping experience.We spoke with a few shops around the country to see how they ditched the plastic. 

Maison: pay for food, not packaging

After visiting France and shopping plastic-free, Larasita Vitoux was inspired to open Maison Jar Refillery and Grocery Store in Brooklyn.

“In Europe, there are so many refilleries and stores with bulk aisles,” Vitoux says.   

Maison Jar sells bread, vegetables and dried goods all free of plastic covering. According to the store’s year-end impact report for 2023, they are making a dent in plastic use. For example: in 2023 Maison Jar sold 39,075 fluid ounces of kombucha–the equivalent of 2,443 16 oz plastic bottles. 

Something Vitoux believes could propel plastic free bulk shopping into the mainstream market is the introduction of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation. An EPR shifts the responsibility for managing materials at the end of life away from consumers and onto producers who are required to provide funding and/or services that assist in managing products after the use phase. To accomplish this, as Vitoux points out, there can be an embedded cost associated with the packaged goods that gets passed on to the consumer. 

Because bulk buying eliminates packaging, bulk items would not incur this carry over expense. 

“It would make bulk much more competitive,” Vitoux says. As of January 2025 legislation to establish EPR’s in New York State, where Maison Jar is,  had been introduced.  

Re_grocery: direct from the farm 

After living in San Francisco and enjoying bulk plastic-free shopping at the city’s iconic Rainbow Grocer, Joseph Macrino returned to Los Angeles in 2016. “ There weren’t any options in L.A. like that,” he says. So, he created his own. re_grocery’s first location opened in April 2020.

From the start, the store was popular; five years later re_grocery has expanded to a chain of three stores. One in Studio City, another in East L.A. and one in Venice. Carrying everything from cooking oils, quinoa, and organic vegetables, they work to keep  prices as competitive as conventional grocers.

“A lot of it has to do with the bulk nature of products we are purchasing,” Macrino explains. “For example, we purchase quinoa in 25lb bags. We get it directly from the farm after some processing and re-packing. It’s not going to another co-packer, where it is getting broken down into smaller packages. By avoiding that other middleman – the co-packer,  we are able to price bulk packages cheaper.” 

Customers at re_grocery weigh their containers when they arrive and receive a laser chip that is attached to the receptacle.When their goods are weighed at the check out the laser tag is scanned and the container weight is subtracted. The customer does not pay any extra for the container.

Roots Zero Waste Market: on demand ordering

The argument for wrapping a cucumber or head of cabbage in plastic is to maintain shelf life and freshness longer. At Roots, Rainey applies a “just-in-time ordering policy.” By ordering more frequently – often three times a week and only what she needs – food remains fresh. Roots sell eggs, milk, meat, and organic produce alongside bulk items such as olive oil, spices and rice. “We evaluate what’s moving on the floor seasonally and adjust to how people’s buying patterns are fluctuating at the time,” she says.

“We are an environmental company disguised as a retailer,” she says.  

Roots operates on a closed-loop business model that fits with Rainey’s environment consciousness, who is adamant that recycling does not work.

“There is no such thing as recycling,” she says. Not only do rules for what can be recycled vary by state: a plastic strawberry container, for instance, may be repurposed, but cling wrap may not be so lucky. Items such as toothpaste containers, chip bags, or juice boxes are formed with multiple layers of materials making them hard to break down and recycle.  

“We never send anything to the landfill,” Rainey says. If, for example, an apple gets bruised in produce, it’s taken to the deli where it is pressed into juice, with the  pulp repurposed for muffins and its core composted. 

 “We are an environmental company disguised as a retailer,” she says.  

The post On the Ground with Grocery Stores Ditching Plastic appeared first on Modern Farmer.

But it doesn’t have to be this way; farmers know how to feed us. It’s backward government policies that are standing in their way. We need Congress to reevaluate the subsidies provided to big ag, and prioritize farmers growing and raising nutritious food for our nation.

Our taxpayer dollars are propping up some of the largest industrial agriculture operations in the country, allowing the big to get bigger. At the same time, small and mid-sized farms are being driven out of existence. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) oversubsidizes the production of corn and soybeans, which are used for livestock feed, ethanol, and to create sugars, starches, and oils that end up in highly processed foods. The highly concentrated nature of our food and farm system, facilitated by the government’s prioritization of these commodity crops, has made it increasingly difficult for our farmers to supply us with nutritious food crops like fruits, vegetables, legumes, and whole grains. 

The most recently available farm subsidy data shows that the majority of government subsidies go toward commodity crop production, while just four percent go toward fruit and vegetable production, which the USDA ironically deems “specialty crops.” New York fruit grower Chip Kent said he has only ever received $500 in subsidies; meanwhile, a handful of the largest and wealthiest operations are raking in 80 percent of the billions of available dollars. 

“We could use a little help. Who’s gonna grow our food? You really want to buy it all from overseas?” Kent said in a recent CNBC story. 

And that is becoming a reality; according to the USDA, our fruit and vegetable supply is increasingly made up of imports. In 2021, we imported 60 percent of our fresh fruit and 38 percent of our vegetables. In 2019, we imported $15.7 billion worth of produce from Mexico and by 2023, that number increased to $21 billion. 

Our government’s misplaced prioritization of growing and exporting low-value crops, which primarily benefits the corporations dominating our food system, is reflected in America’s public health. As government subsidies support the production of sugars, starches, and oils, prices on those products remain relatively low. Over time, those foods become the most readily accessible and available, and  fresh produce is priced higher and is less accessible. Most of the American population is not consuming enough fruits and vegetables, according to the U.S. Dietary Guidelines, which determined that 80 percent of people eat too little fruit and 90 percent do not eat enough vegetables. A 2021 study found that Americans are increasingly consuming ultra-processed food (like frozen pizza, soda, and fast food), with over half of our population’s caloric intake coming from ultra-processed foods.

We are on track to have a trade deficit for five of the last seven years, our public health is at risk, and our fruit and vegetable farmers are struggling to stay afloat. The ability to reverse these harmful trends is in the hands of our government. To begin to undo this damage, the next farm bill must better support those farmers who are providing nutritious food for our people. 

It’s worth noting that the soybean industry, which receives substantially more government support, has an industry value estimated at 20 percent lower than that of fruits and vegetables. Farm Action’s research determined that by shifting less than 0.5 percent of current farm acreage to fruit and vegetable production, we could balance the 2023 agriculture trade deficit of $32 billion due to the higher value of food crops. 

We must stop outsourcing what we can grow ourselves; a different way is possible, and a healthy, sustainable food system is attainable. With the next farm bill still up in the air, Farm Action will continue advocating for Congress to shift resources and infrastructure to the production of food for our communities — to the benefit of America’s food security, public health, and farmers. 

Angela Huffman is a co-founder and president of Farm Action. She has over a decade of experience in food and agriculture policy reform and market development.

The post Opinion: The US Doesn’t Grow Enough Food – But We Could appeared first on Modern Farmer.

The Farm Bill, passed once every five years, is the most important piece of federal legislation affecting American agriculture and food access. Originally designed to keep food prices fair for both supply and demand sides, ensure an adequate supply of food, and protect and sustain natural resources, this bill now plays a wildly outsized role in shaping our food system. Lobbyists and advocates influence it from all angles. 

But the Farm Bill is not the be-all and end-all of our food system. It’s easy to think that all changes to our system must start with the Farm Bill, or that the Farm Bill is the only way to have wide influence. It can be easy to overlook opportunities available for progress on the state level, where the smaller-scale forces at work are just as complex, and the stakes just as significant. This year, there will also be scores of state-level bills debated this year from Rhode Island to Texas – bills that will greatly affect farmers, fishers, food entrepreneurs, food access, and food justice all across America.  

One of the best ways to impact the food system for the better is to invest in food policy councils (FPCs) at the community, state, and regional level. 

Be it public, private, or non-profit work, there are frequently intrasector opportunities for collaboration and information sharing within trade groups, or professional associations, which can benefit everyone, without waiting for omnibus legislation like the Farm Bill. These networks hold regular meetings and events that offer opportunities for relationship-building, coalition development, and generate conversation that can lead to new thinking in the field. Yet few opportunities exist to engage in this important work across sectors, especially on the state level. 

In an age where organizations increasingly need to prove their impact, the benefits provided by networks are incredibly valuable.

FPCs bring together diverse stakeholders from different sectors–like food entrepreneurs, farmers, food justice workers, food access workers, and concerned consumers– to identify common ground and collaborate, to help solve problems holistically. 

These food system stakeholders share the goal of a more just and resilient food system. Their participation in these networks is based on their belief that investing time and energy in it will help achieve that goal.   

FPCs are a kind of ‘backbone network,’’ so named because they provide a central structure critical for efficient operation. While in the technology sector, these networks are recognized as critical to system efficacy and efficiency (and adequately funded in response); in the world of food systems change they are largely ignored (and lack adequate funding). The fact is, FPCs need to be cultivated intentionally and invested in more widely for substantive, measurable food system change to take place. 

There are numerous obstacles when building this type of cross-sector network. One of the biggest is that most leaders, no matter what sector they are in, are fully focused on the success of their individual agencies, departments, and organizations. How can they justify prioritizing the time and effort to be part of a network? To be effective, FPCs require members to devote the time to work together in good faith, sometimes with competitors, whether for market share, grant funding, or legislative attention. The emphasis on collaboration often results in compromise that can feel off-brand. On top of that, the cost of not participating can feel fuzzy and far-off to leaders who are laser focused on maintaining their immediate stability while trying to find time to plan strategically for the next year or three. 

The fact is, those leaders can’t afford not to work within FPCs.

The fact is, those leaders can’t afford not to work within FPCs. Even the best organizational leaders in the nonprofit sector have a limited ability to focus on systemic change. Without the structure and support network of an FPC, individual progress may be haphazard, and lack the structure and shared purpose that can produce efficient, intentional, and visionary systems change. 

Over 20 years ago, Margaret Wheatley, in her book Turning to One Another, saw the potential for significant change in the actions of a few individuals: ““[T]he world only changes when a few individuals step forward. It doesn’t change from leaders or top-level programs or big ambitious plans. It changes when we, everyday people gathering in small groups, notice what we care about and take those first steps to change the situation.” 

FPCs create the space for these individuals to band together to create and implement the solutions required for significant food system change to occur. 

Enter the ‘food systems leader. Skillful network leaders practicing in the food system space focus on advancing the entire system, with all of its moving, interconnected parts. They honor each individual’s and organization’s challenges and goals, while cultivating their ability to consistently see and value ‘the big picture’ at the same time. They facilitate connection, conversation, and relationship-building. They craft invitations and create spaces where organizational leaders can take a breath, share challenges and opportunities without judgment, listen to new ideas, and gain the vision they need to do their jobs better. This is the demanding work of participatory democracy, focused on the food system.  

FPCs create the space for these individuals to band together to create and implement the solutions required for significant food system change to occur. 

In an age where organizations increasingly need to prove their impact, the benefits provided by networks are incredibly valuable. Philanthropic decision makers and funders who care about any aspect of the food system – food access and nutrition security, food business and economic development, or the intersections of food, climate, and environment – should invest in backbone food networks and encourage all of their food-focused grantees to join them. This is a path to achieving significant food system change in the next several years, regardless of what happens with the Farm Bill.

Nessa Richman is the executive director of the Rhode Island Food Policy Council and an adjunct professor at the University of Rhode Island College of the Environment and Life Sciences.

The post Opinion: A More Resilient Food System Starts at the Community Level appeared first on Modern Farmer.

Each year, about one in six Americans falls ill to foodborne illnesses, and oversight agencies have routinely found that the U.S. food safety system — a shared responsibility of the FDA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and several others — falls short.

In 2017, the Government Accountability Office called for a unified strategy to address food safety, as no less than eight different federal departments had a hand in fortifying the nation’s food. And in 2018, the GAO criticized the USDA for not doing enough to keep foodborne pathogens out of the nation’s meat supply.

In 2021, ProPublica found that the USDA knew of an ongoing salmonella outbreak but had allowed contaminated meat to continue to be sold.

Generally, the USDA inspects meat and poultry, and it sometimes has inspectors stationed inside large meat processing plants. The FDA inspects fruits, vegetables, dairy products and processed foods — about 80% of the food supply. It also inspects food overseas that will be imported to the U.S.

“Given the large number of food facilities and the agency’s limited resources, meeting the existing inspection mandates has been challenging for the agency,” the FDA told the GAO. However, the “FDA is excited for the work underway” at the agency to address food safety.

In October 2024, the FDA announced it was implementing a near agency-wide reorganization that it said would help it better oversee the nation’s food supply.

The reorganization was prompted, in part, by the FDA’s delayed response to a whistleblower complaint about infant formula produced at an Abbott Nutrition factory. Despite receiving the complaint, the agency took no action for 15 months, during which time several infants fell ill after consuming the contaminated formula.

In its announcement, the FDA said it was “focused on transforming the agency to be more efficient, nimble and ready for the future.”

COVID-19 inhibited inspections

The FDA is required to inspect about 75,000 food facilities in the U.S. each year, according to the GAO’s report, published Jan. 8. However, between 2018 and 2023, the latest year data is available, it failed to perform the number of inspections mandated by the 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act.

One reason the FDA fell behind was the COVID-19 pandemic. It affected the agency’s ability to conduct in-person inspections (as it did for other agencies, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration).

The year of the pandemic, the FDA only inspected 7% of facilities identified as “high-risk” for foodborne illnesses, according to the GAO. The number increased to about half the following years.

Still, the pandemic created a significant backlog, which the agency is still dealing with, the GAO said.

“While it is unclear when FDA will be able to clear the backlog of past due inspections created during the pandemic, FDA officials told us they are taking steps to address it,” the watchdog said in its report.

Inspection gaps, staffing challenges

Another challenge is the lack of experienced inspectors. As of 2024, the agency had 432 inspectors, which the GAO said was 90% its full capacity.

As of mid-2024, a quarter of FDA food inspectors were eligible for retirement, and more will be eligible by summer 2025. (The GAO report does not say how many retired.) The FDA is hiring new staff, but “the hiring rate has not outpaced losses,” the GAO reported.

When a foodborne illness outbreak does occur, FDA inspectors must focus their attention on the outbreak. But that adds to the backlog of regular inspections, the GAO said: Prioritizing outbreaks “directly affects” the agency’s ability to conduct inspections that might prevent outbreaks.

Adding to the workforce issue is that it takes about two years to train a new food inspector.

The FDA said it had stepped up efforts to recruit qualified inspectors, including offering student loan reimbursements.

“While these actions represent positive steps,” the GAO said, “FDA continues to face long-standing and significant workforce capacity challenges.”

The USDA has also struggled to hire and retain food safety inspectors. Even before the pandemic — when meat processing plants were known COVID-19 hotspots — agency employees reported feeling burned out with heavy workloads, Investigate Midwest reported in 2019.

For instance, due to low staffing, one USDA food inspector, at eight months pregnant, was working double shifts.

Too few overseas inspections

The FDA is required to perform about 19,000 food safety inspections overseas each year, as the U.S. imports many foods consumers want year-round, such as bananas. It also did not meet this threshold, averaging just 5% of the required figure between 2018 and 2023.

The FDA told the GAO that the required number of foreign inspections was unrealistic. As of mid-2024, just 20 employees were dedicated to foreign inspections.

In 2015, the GAO recommended the FDA determine a reasonable target for foreign inspections. Responding to this latest GAO report, the FDA said it would not do so.

“FDA officials told us in August 2024 — nearly 10 years after we made our recommendation — that they do not intend to take any further action to address it,” the GAO said. “We maintain that identifying an appropriate annual target for conducting foreign inspections and using it to assess FDA’s performance in safeguarding imported food is important.”

This article first appeared on Investigate Midwest and is republished here under a Creative Commons license. Investigate Midwest is an independent, nonprofit newsroom. Their mission is to serve the public interest by exposing dangerous and costly practices of influential agricultural corporations and institutions through in-depth and data-driven investigative journalism. Visit them online at www.investigatemidwest.org

The post As Foodborne Illnesses Sicken Tens of Millions Each Year, FDA Falls Behind on Mandated Inspections appeared first on Modern Farmer.

That’s where we come in.

These guides are some of our most popular pieces, walking you through everything from rotating your crops to incubating chicken eggs. If you want to start a garden from scratch, you’ve come to the right place. Let’s get gardening.

The post Ready to Garden? Start Here appeared first on Modern Farmer.

This year, we looked at many stories of food access and equity, and what food means to people. From exclusive avocados and exorbitantly priced butter, to a microgreens farm and a community fridge, we took a look at all corners of our food system.

Here, we’ve collected our top 10 most read, shared, and commented on Food Equity stories for you to revisit. Let us know which stories you connected with the most in the comments.

The post Top 10 Food Equity Stories of 2024 appeared first on Modern Farmer.