In times of great distress, this nation has risen as one, and put forth incredible effort to sustain the Republic. I do wish I had as much confidence in Alaska...as the times of great distress are on the horizon for all to see.
Over the weekend, there appeared on the Facebook group "Alaskans Working to Keep MMM&S Open" (link here: Alaskans Working to keep MMM&S Open) several photographs, posted by member Jeff Werner on the 14th. They show the nearly empty meat sections of a Fairbanks grocery.
It brought back memories I have, of the same sight, back in the 60s and 70s. Others who grew up in the Interior that I have spoken to, have similar memories. For this (partly) Bush kid, driving into town for groceries every four months was a highlight-and finding shelves empty of cereal meant months of oatmeal and pancakes to come, for example. Several times, my mother was forced back to the car, to re-work her meal plans, painstakingly detailed on a spare yearly calendar. Back then, this was due to literally losing barges at sea, in the era before the large computer controlled container ships became regular with arrivals at Alaska ports. It was soon posted that a total of 5 ship loads did not arrive during the holiday period, and that other stores showed empty shelves and display cases as well-if not as stark as the ones posted by Mr. Werner. This should be a wake up call to all. We each have a stake in Alaska Ag, whether one single bite of Alaskan grown beef, pork, sheep, goat or poultry ever crosses your lips.
Because it will be the local producer you will turn to, when (not if!) the container ships ever stop docking in Anchorage. And how can they help improve our food security issue, if MMM&S closes?Answer: They can not. MMM&S is just one critical element of food production within the state. Other challenges remain substantial.
They will not have the herds, nor the grazing lands, nor the grain production either. This is due in no small part to policy, and not because Alaskans do not want to do this, make no mistake.
When farm lands sit fallow because they are artificially priced at subdivision rates;
when new lands are not available from any source at less than "full market value" as determined by degree carrying state assessors whose job it is to maximize value over utility;
when no monies are available for the small farm/homestead for improvements;
when the Boroughs tax such improvements at "full market value" instead of farmstead;
when there is but one source for insurance for any farm endeavor, regardless of size;
when over all state policy favors residential development over feeding its citizens;
when new farmers and new methods are not welcomed by the "good old boys" of Alaska Ag;
when the message is clear that support is welcome but new help and ideas are not;
when unnecessary regulations hamper small milk producers;
when a new farmer must fight for every step forward against a juggernaut of regulation, statute, law;
when value added ventures are stymied by the above;
Unless and until these issues (and others) are addressed in practical fashion by all the bureaucrats in charge-including the new director of the Division of Ag-Alaska's ability to feed itself will be hamstrung as always, and remain the bastard step child of resource development.
And they will not be able to fill the void, never mind the hungry.
2 comments:
I disagree that MMM&S is going to have more than a continued negative impact on the livestock industry. There are two (that I know of) new beef feedlots in the Valley and from what I have seen MMM&S will not be able to accept their animals for slaughter and, as long as the state continues to fund this facility rather than let private industry open a facility, I'm not sure what these businesses will do with their beef.
I have never said that MMM&S is a negative impact, quite the contrary! It is a vital part of our food security infrastructure. There are reputedly, several groups working on a proposal that will privatize the plant. This will remove the state from staffing, leaving only an oversight role at best-depending on terms. The USDA stamp will remain with the plant as well.
And just for your information...this plant is NOT funded by the state in the normal sense. Yes, there is a line item for it, which could be cut. However, the plant generates revenues every year, which are then fed back into the general fund. Any losses are covered by the ARLF. In short, the plant costs the state exactly zero dollars. The money "appropriated" functions basically like a line of credit.
I am saddened to note that most of the legislature does not know this either.
As to the two new feed lot operations....please share! Since the plant operates at much less than capacity, I am quite sure that they will be very welcome. (The plant is oft quoted as operating at just under ten percent capacity, jfyi)
Post a Comment