Archive for September, 2009

Food For Thought

Monday, September 21st, 2009

First, a program note: Today’s post, next Monday’s, and maybe even the offerings on the next two Wednesdays, will be relatively short and…well, not insubstantial, but perhaps a little less weighty than usual.

That’s because the News Guy has been and will be spending the time and effort weightiness requires on: (a) reporting some complicated and especially weighty stories planned for the next two Fridays; and (b) responding to a higher authority.

For today, though, let’s spend a few minutes pondering the Vermont localvore (sometimes spelled ‘locavore’) scene, which is clearly becoming more mainstream, almost by the day. (Though not so mainstream that the spell-check program of this relatively new computer recognizes the word spelled either way; we’ll have to speak sternly to it).

Just last week, the celebrated TV chef Emeril Lagasse came to the Northeast Kingdom to cook with the locally grown cheese, soy, and vegetables, taping it for his show, Emeril Green, On the Planet Green Network, affiliated with the Discovery Channel.

At least so said the report on WCAX-TV (Channel 3), than which one can get no more mainstream in Vermont. Channel 3’s report quoted Legasse saying, The abundance of incredible products here is so exciting, people should be really, really proud about what’s happening around here because it’s really a serious movement.”

How “serious,” (which no longer means “serious,” but “significant” or “long-lasting”) remains to be seen. That it is a movement is no longer debatable. And if it began, as movements often do, inside a small subculture (the “granola-heads” to be both brief and offensively stereotypical), it isn’t any longer. Not only have First Lady Michelle Obama and Oprah Winfrey signed on, but there are increasing signs that getting into the localvore dodge seems to be good business.

Just check the “Green Mountain” section of Sunday’s Burlington Free-Press (as mainstream as Channel 3), devoted largely to the “eat local” movement. It isn’t just the articles, either. Some of the ads urge customers to buy from stores and restaurants that sell locally grown food.

Sounds like a way to make money. In America, that’s mainstream.

Needless to say, not everyone is on board. Led by the chain restaurant industry and agri-business, a counter-movement has sprung up, largely among those who insist that most Americans don’t care where their food comes from and prefer the sweet, the fried, and the fatty.

And the inexpensive. According to the skeptics, locally-grown food, especially if it’s also organically-grown food (often but not always part of the package) costs more than mass-produced food grown with the help of herbicides, pesticides, and petroleum-based fertilizer. They say all this “buy local” stuff will turn out to be a fad. The businesses that rely on it will go broke while the chain and fast-food restaurants thrive and customers continue to flock to the processed foods sections of the supermarkets.

There’s even an anti-localvore book: Just Food: Where Locavores Get It Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly, (Little, Brown) by James E. McWilliams.

Fortunately, we have an in-state experiment that may provide some hint of how this experiment will turn out. The pub on the first floor of the University of Vermont’s Davis Center, Brennan’s ,has transformed itself from a standard chain-food joint into a restaurant specializing in food grown organically, naturally, and locally.

The big attractions are probably still beer and (sometimes) live entertainment. But now instead of standardized fried chicken and Texas toast (whatever that may be) from World of Wings (WOW, but not to be confused with the homing pigeon association of the same name), a new Orleans-based franchise company, students can get, for instance, a breakfast of two cage-free eggs, organic scallions and sour cream, all produced in Vermont, and all for $5.75.

According to a front-page story in last week’s VermontCynic, the student newspaper, the impetus for the change came from the students. In response to an email, Pat Brown, the Director of Student Life, said, the “menu items and products now reflect  what  students asked for – a local sourcing of food products.”

As to the price, that $5.75 breakfast seems like a good bargain, but the Cynic story quoted one student who preferred last year’s “greasy college food,” and said this year’s fare “costs more.”

Brown said the menu was so “radically different” that comparing prices was difficult, but added that he thought, the prices are in the same general range as last year  depending on  what one orders.”

But is the place making money? It seemed crowded enough one day last week, but Brown said it was “way too early to tell.” Like most UVM restaurants, Brennan’s is part of University Dining Services (UDS), which, Brown wrote, “provides food service to campus and is permitted by contract to  net a small amount, but the overall goal is to provide high  quality and reasonably priced food service to the campus.  The   traffic has seemed to reflect what we saw last year.”

But UDS is not autonomous. It is part of Sodexo, very much a profit-making corporation. As such, it isn’t likely to want to maintain an operation that doesn’t earn much. On the other hand, it doesn’t want the kind of bad publicity that would come from displeasing the student body. And Brown indicated that UDS, which he said “has been exceptional in working with local foods and many of the farms and orchards in the area,” appears to have a genuine commitment to buy as much Vermont product as possible.

Were it not for one little difficulty, we could end this post right here. Alas, UDS has decided to promote Brennan’s on its web site by proclaiming that the restaurant has “a new look with a sustainable menu that is literally ‘shaking’ up campus.”

Uh, folks, you work for a university. Meaning you really ought to speak English. An earthquake would “literally” “shake up” (or “’shake’ up”) campus. So might an artillery attack or a mortar barrage. Maybe even the entire student body jumping up and down at the same time.

But a menu? No, not “literally.”

All the Water Fit to Drink

Friday, September 18th, 2009

The Newport Wastewater Treatment Plant

The Newport Wastewater Treatment Plant

It’s OK to drink the water.

At least in Vermont, one may reasonably assume that the local wastewater treatment plant has been inspected within the last decade, that any violations (and there have been violations) have been corrected, and that in some cases the offending facility was fined.

As to all those folks whose water comes from their own wells, it’s probably clean, too. You never can tell about e-coli, of course, but they’re quite rare in deep wells. If you get your water from a spring, you’re running a bigger risk, but you probably knew that.

None of which means that there is no water pollution problem in Vermont, nor that there is no legitimate criticism about the way clean water laws are enforced here. Every now and then, state officials issue a “boil water” notice for a small water system where problems are discovered, and the lakes and rivers could provide far better habitat than they do for fish and other creatures.

But drinking water from the tap is not likely to make you sick.

A reassurance necessary (or at least advisable) after the water-protection world and a whole lot of other people were knocked off their feed last Sunday by a long, detailed, and disturbing account of the nation’s clean water situation by the New York Times.

Under the headline “Clean Water Laws Neglected, at a Cost,” the Times revealed some horrible examples of, for instance, West Virginia homeowners who can’t drink their own well-water because toxic coal-mine detritus has seeped into their wells. The story also recounted several cases of lax enforcement of clean water laws as officials “repeatedly ignored obvious illegal dumping,” often intimidated by powerful corporate polluters.

In addition to the information in the newspaper, the Times conducted an “extensive review of water pollution records,” compiling a ”national database of water pollution violations that is more comprehensive than those maintained by the states or the E.P.A.”

Comprehensive, but not necessarily accurate.

Click on that link, for instance, and under “select a state,” you will see that…..WHOA, Waitaminit!.

THEY FIXED IT.

Well, sort of.

They fixed some of it. But sneakily, without any kind of public disclosure in their corrections pages that they had fixed it.

And they only fixed some of it.

Let’s go back to the beginning here.

The story in the paper reported that Vermont has 171 waste-water treatment facilities, of which 76, or 45 percent, are “out of compliance.” The on-line information painted a bleaker picture. The first page listed 15 plants, not one of which had been inspected since 1982, and eight of which had not been inspected since the 1970s. Those 15 plants had a total of 97 violations, but not one of them had been penalized a single penny.

But the information was internally inconsistent. Clicking (then, not now) on the Burlington North End waste water treatment facility led to a page saying the plant was last inspected on November 9, 1978, but that there was an enforcement action on August 5, 2005.

Or take Newport, last inspected December 7, 1981. But an enforcement action March 27 2006.

Enforcement actions without inspections? Not likely

Here is the information saved as a document on Monday:

1–15 OF 206

FACILITY NAME

CITY

LAST INSPECTED

VIOLATIONS

FINES

Hartford W W T F

White River Junction

Jan. 29, 1981

12

$0

Burlington North End W W T F

Burlington

Nov. 9, 1978

10

$0

Newport W W T F

Newport

Dec. 7, 1981

9

$0

Montpelier W W T F

Montpelier

Nov. 21, 1978

8

$0

Stowe W W T F

Stowe

Oct. 12, 1982

8

$0

Burlington Main STP

Burlington

Nov. 9, 1978

7

$0

Barre W W T F

Barre

Nov. 9, 1978

6

$0

Northfield Mtp

Northfield

Nov. 14, 1978

6

$0

Springfield W W T F

Springfield

June 5, 1978

6

$0

Burlington Riverside W W T F

Burlington

Nov. 9, 1978

5

$0

Essex Junction Mtp

Essex Junction

May 11, 1989

5

$0

Bennington STP

Bennington

May 8, 1980

4

$0

St. Johnsbury W W T F

Saint Johnsvury

Sept. 14, 1977

4

$0

Windsor W W T F

Windsor

June 5, 1978

4

$0

Fair Haven W W T P

Fair Haven

May 21, 1980

3

$0

24 facilities could not be mapped but are included in this list.

Now here it is on line Thursday:

1–15 OF 206

FACILITY NAME

CITY

LAST INSPECTED

VIOLATIONS

FINES

Hartford W W T F

White River Junction

March 21, 2008

12

$0

Burlington North End W W T F

Burlington

March 5, 2008

10

$0

Newport W W T F

Newport

Aug. 22, 2007

9

$0

Montpelier W W T F

Montpelier

March 26, 2008

8

$0

Stowe W W T F

Stowe

Dec. 5, 2008

8

$0

Burlington Main STP

Burlington

Dec. 12, 2007

7

$0

Barre W W T F

Barre

March 11, 2008

6

$0

Northfield Mtp

Northfield

Oct. 8, 2008

6

$0

Springfield W W T F

Springfield

Oct. 31, 2007

6

$0

Burlington Riverside W W T F

Burlington

Feb. 23, 2008

5

$0

Essex Junction Mtp

Essex Junction

Sept. 19, 2008

5

$0

Bennington STP

Bennington

March 1, 2008

4

$0

St. Johnsbury W W T F

Saint Johnsvury

June 28, 2007

4

$0

Windsor W W T F

Windsor

Jan. 4, 2008

4

$0

Fair Haven W W T P

Fair Haven

Oct. 23, 2008

3

$0

All of a sudden those same 15 plants have been inspected within the last few years — Newport on August 22, 2007, Burlington North End March 5, 2008. (And St. J is spelled correctly).

Somebody at the Times must have agreed with Gary Kessler, the Director of the Compliance and Enforcement Division of Director of Vermont’s Department of Environmental Conservation, that “they don’t know what they’re talking about.”

Kessler called the Times presentation, “a real disservice. It makes it look as if our inspectors haven’t left the building in decades.”

In response to complaints from officials in Vermont (and probably elsewhere) the Times has now corrected that misimpression. But its on-line data still report that no Vermont wastewater treatment plant has been fined for any violation in decades, which certainly does indicate lax enforcement.

Except it isn’t true. Kessler provided records showing thousands of dollars in assessments for “Supplemental Environmental Projects” levied against Vermont wastewater treatment plants. Burlington, for instance, has been assessed more than $58,000 in the last 13 years. Instead of going into the state’s coffers, though, the money was used for environmental improvements in the Lake Champlain Basin.

It’s possible that according to the Environmental Protection Agency, where the Times got much of its data, any assessment that does not go into the state’s General Fund is not classified as a “fine.” But that’s what most people would call it. The Internet is an extraordinarily useful tool. But a reporter can’t ask it, “just what do you mean by that?”

An extraordinarily useful question for a reporter to ask.

The New York Times (whose spokesperson did not reply to an email request for comment) is the best newspaper in the country (if not as good as it used to be, but neither are the others). It regularly serves the country well by telling people what they ought to know but what powerful forces would rather they not know. Last Sunday’s report on clean water, by reporter Charles Duhigg, was one of those stories – thorough, clear, well-documented, and mostly accurate.

Like most high-quality newspapers, the Times is trying to augment the information it provides in print with creative and innovative use of the Internet. In this case, it, uhhh, muddied the waters, as it has effectively acknowledged by changing the data available on line.

But it only corrected some of its mistakes, and it did so a bit surreptitiously. Let’s not get carried away here. The general public did not panic, and even the officials (at least in Vermont) were more annoyed than worried about public over-reaction.

But surreptitiously is not a good journalistic habit.

COME BACK FRIDAY

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

The News Guy is under the weather.

Not a big deal. Not (we are reasonably sure) H1N1 flu. Expect a new post Friday