Parameters Revisted

[Pam in Namur]

What a treat to see some activity in the forum! I have to admit I had
given up checking for new posts....

Regarding parameters - I was a bit distressed when reading Mariah
Goode's article "It's Not Easy Being Green" in the latest Door County
Living magazine. In it she seems to suggest that the 100 Mile
Challenge is an all-or-nothing proposition, wondering how she would
explain to her children the absence of milk and bananas. I've heard
of others who make the same assumption: that participation is futile
if the goal is not 100%.

Perhaps I'm the heretic among current participants, but my goal in the
Challenge has never been 100%. It's more like 75%. The reason? It's
do-able. For the long run. For a normal person who works full-time
and has a busy volunteer schedule, too. The notion of rejecting the
Challenge because it's impossible to achieve 100% is a sad
misconception. I would encourage anyone who cares about local food to
simply set a goal that is realistic, then go about working toward that
goal without guilt.

For me, that means I drink coffee and eat chocolate. I use olive
oil. I use prepared pasta (although now choosing pasta that comes
from Illinois, not Italy). But I also buy local eggs and chickens. I
learned how to can. I bought potatoes and apples in bulk. I bought a
large freezer. And it's working in such a way that it's not daunting
to imagine this as a permanent lifestyle change, not a challenge that
will last only a year.

Let me humbly suggest that as we talk with others about the Challenge,
we encourage participation even if the goal is 75%. Or 50%. Or,
heck, even 25%. The more people who see this as a realistic lifestyle
option, the better off we'll all be.

One residual benefit that I've noticed, like Ann, is the absence of
garbage. It's amazing to me how much packaging I used to throw away,
without even thinking about it. Now, my small-ish kitchen trash can
is generally only half full at the end of the week.

Pam

[Virge]

I also hope people are not turned away from local foods because they
feel
like they need to make an "all-or-nothing" commitment. The printed
material
about the Challenge gives "rules" which state,

"Participants in the 100-Mile Food Challenge will set their own goals

and parameters. Some will choose to eat local foods exclusively for

four consecutive seasons. Some will commit to cooking one meal

a week which is completely locally sourced. Some participants, for

reasons of health, happiness, or practicality, will exempt particular

foods from the challenge. Any plan is acceptable as long as it is

a significant challenge to the individual and helps to further the

goals of increasing both the incidence of local food consumption

and public awareness and education about sustainable agriculture

and local food distribution."

The reason I am trying for as close to 100% as possible is that I want
to
see if it can be done. My concern is whether our Door County
community
could survive a long emergency of the type described in James Howard
Kunstler's book, The Long Emergency. My hunch is that if a
catastrophe occurred which stopped the supply trucks from running to
the Peninsula, we wouldn't be able to last more than a couple of
weeks. Our dependence on the truck traffic makes us quite
vulnerable. From my experience so far, I believe that, with not a
little preparation, we could manage to feed our population with
locally grown foodstuffs. We would have to ramp up the quantity, get
some food processing facilities in place, and develop an adequate
distribution system. It would also be nice to have a goal of
developing a greater variety of available foods in the County.

But I support any effort to consume local foods, no matter how little
it might be. Any effort at all represents conscious living and an
awareness of the sustainability benefits that supporting local
agriculture provides.

Blessings,
Ann

PS I don't know why this says it is from Virge, when it is from me,
Ann.