There are many reasons that we should care about the natural world that surrounds us, and though I believe it should come down to a question of ethics (doesn’t other life have the same right to being here as we do?), the thing that most people care about is, well, themselves. Not only do we need biodiversity for our individual well-being, but also we need it for the self-preservation of our species.

How many unknown plant species are being wiped out in the Amazon before we even know that they exist? How many of those could have potentially been made into life-saving drugs?

And then there’s the risk of disease spreading throughout all of our staple crops that potentially hundreds of millions of people rely on because our agricultural practices have led to monocultures with little genetic diversity.

There is serious risk associated with the loss of biodiversity that may come back to haunt us later.

Tyler Martin

Professor Kanter

ESE 360

11 October 2014

Are Students Being Tricked by “Natural” Food Labels?

Walking down the buzzing, fluorescent aisles of Meijer, I’m overwhelmed by products of all shapes, sizes and colors.  I still have a monumental list of tasks I need to get done after grocery shopping, so naturally I’m in a rush.  I glance at a few boxes of pasta and compare the prices.  I can get a standard sized box of rotini for $1.79 or the same sized box of the “natural” variety for only 20 cents more. I’ve been trying to be more conscious about what kind of products I buy and consume lately, so without much thought I snatch the box with the green label emblazoned with a leaf, throw it in my cart, and get a little buzz of positivity, thinking that I’m doing good by the planet and myself.  But is what’s actually in that box of pasta what is being advertised?  It turns out that these “natural” products may be misleading.

The University of Illinois is home to over 40,000 students across from many different economic backgrounds.  Many students, however, don’t have a large budget for groceries after the costs of living, books and tuition. This makes shopping healthy difficult. Local stores such as the Common Ground Food Co-Op and Strawberry Fields have a large selection of organic foods, but the choices are often expensive.  This forces many students to shop at the big supermarket chains such as Wal-Mart, Meijer, and Schnuck’s.

These stores have been increasingly offering products that satisfy the growing demand for healthier food at a price that often beats the local stores.  Wal-Mart started carrying its Wild Oats brand earlier this year, Meijer has the “Naturals” and “Organic” labels on its products, and Schnuck’s carries its own “Full Circle” line of foods, and because products are backed by enormous corporate interests, the cost of these products is significantly reduced. The problem is that in order to supply the huge demand for these products, these companies need to cut corners.  According to Carey Gillam, a study published earlier this month by the non-profit organization Consumer Reports shows that there are trace amounts of GMO crops inside products labeled GMO-free.  Additionally, products that carry the “natural” description “contained substantial amounts of GMO ingredients.” The press release accompanying the study on the Consumer Reports website expands on this, finding that “more than eight out of 10 consumers believe that packaged foods carrying the natural label should come from food that contains ingredients grown without pesticides (86 percent), do not include artificial ingredients (87 percent),” which is patently false.

It appears that the reason for the confusion lies in the lack of regulation of the “natural” labelling.  There is currently no list of standards that a product must satisfy in order to place have the “natural” label on the packaging.  The Consumer Reports press release explains, “The FDA has not developed a formal definition for use of the term ‘natural’ or its derivatives. But the agency has not objected to the use of the term if ‘nothing artificial or synthetic (including all color additives regardless of source) has been included in, or has been added to, a food that would not normally be expected to be in the food’—though these are still found extensively in ‘natural’ labeled foods.” Until the FDA takes action on this issue, consumers will continue to be tricked by these labels.

I’ve been duped by the deceitful marketing on food plenty of times, but it’s not only the “natural” label that’s misleading. The imagery associated with these products is often green fields and rolling hills, a picturesque vista.  It’s hard not to think that these kinds of places are where my food comes from.  Michael Pollan addresses the disconnect between labels and the truth of big food production in the documentary Food, Inc. Pollan says, “If you follow the food chain back… you find a very different reality. The reality is a factory. It’s not a farm. It’s a factory.” Shoppers need to start going with a skeptical eye if they are not to fall into this trap.

So while the short term costs of the foods labelled “natural” in the big stores may be lower than the fresh products found in Strawberry Fields or Urbana’s Market at the Square, students may not be fully aware of the problems associated with the cheaper alternative.  When shopping on a budget, students should consider checking for sales at Common Ground and only buy what’s in season. If it still isn’t financially feasible, they should do their homework before going to the store, research what brands really are natural, and always read ingredients lists. I know I’m going to make changes to my habits as well. The only way to show supermarket chains that we want clear, honest labelling on our products is by voting with our wallets.

Works Cited

“End the Confusion Over the Term ‘Natural’ on Food Labels.” Consumer Reports. 4 July 2014. <http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/07/end-the-confusion-over-the-term-natural-on-food-labels/index.htm>.

Food, Inc. Dir. Robert Kenner. Movie One, 2008.

Gillam, Carey. “U.S. Foods Labeled ‘Natural’ Often Contain GMOs, Group Reports.” Reuters. 07 Oct. 2014. Web. <http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/07/us-usa-gmo-labeling-idUSKCN0HW0R520141007>.

Tyler Martin

Professor Kanter

ESE 360

22 September 2014

From Field to Prairie: A Walk Through a Prairie Restoration Project

The sky is smoky grey on this dreary Thursday morning, and I find myself walking bleary-eyed down the streets of Urbana, still half asleep.  As I move towards consciousness a little bit with each step, I notice the greenery surrounding me in the neighborhood. I’m on my way to the Florida-Orchard prairie to hear a presentation by Ken Robertson, a former professor of plant biology at the University of Illinois, but what I’m observing on my walk is yard after yard of cookie cutter, green-grass lawns, and though there are occasional patches of pansies and stands of branchy hedges to shake up the scenery, I’m struck by how boring and uniform it all is.  Not only is it bland, but it really doesn’t serve any ecological purpose. When everyone plants the same few species in their yards, not only is a void of personality, but there is a distinct lack of biodiversity, pushing out species that were once native to the area.  Soon I come to the end of the residential sameness, and in front of me is a moderately sized tract of land full of colorful prairie that starkly contrasts everything I saw on my way here.  I begin to perk up as I join the group surrounding Ken, just as he points to a beautiful yellow flower, in bloom all the way up to my chest.

“This is called goldenrod,” he tells everyone huddled around him.  He explains the process of how this blooming yellow flower came to be, a process that wasn’t easy.  Dr. John Marlin, a former professor of entomology who is also here talking to students today, oversaw the entire planting process, pouring countless hours into the project.  All the hard work produced beautiful results, too. The contrast between the normal scenery of Urbana and the Florida-Orchard prairie is as much for aesthetics as it is for ecologically function.  The prairie is next door to the university’s President’s House, so, naturally, Ken says that John intended the thirty or so species he chose for the project to be “showy.” However, prairie land is crucial for many species to survive. Bison once grazed on the grasses, and many species of birds and insects rely on the tallgrass biome to survive.  This land is also crucial for human use.  In “Understanding Prairie in the Prairie State” James Ellis writes that “the most fertile and productive agricultural soils in the world originated from these grasslands, and about 70% of the food produced for humans comes from these regions” (4).

So why is there so little prairie left? The answer is the same as what makes prairies such a crucial ecosystem.  The thousands of years of growth, death, and regrowth have made the soil some of the most nutrient-rich in the world, perfect for farmers. This led to a mass clearing of the prairies across the region to make room for farmland.  It’s been working extremely well for these farmers for the last 150 years, but the damage has been done.  We will never have the abundance of tallgrass that we once had, but there are many people who understand the need to protect the legacy of the prairie.

With rising environmental awareness in the last few decades, people like Ken and John have realized that there is a huge need for restoration projects like the Florida-Orchard prairie, both to slow down the nutrient drainage of the soil and also to preserve the prairie species that are rapidly vanishing from the Midwest.  As we walk down a pathway through the rows of prairie dropseed and New England aster, Ken drives home the point of the importance of his project.  “The tallgrass prairie is one of the most endangered biomes in the country and in the world,” he informs us.  Ellis provides some perspective into just how catastrophic the destruction of the prairie really is: “Out of the approximately 22 million acres of original prairie in Illinois, only 0.01% of the original prairie existed in 1978” (16).

Not only am I convinced that we need more restoration projects for reasons of preservation and biodiversity, but simply walking through John’s field, absorbing the color bursting from each blooming flower, hearing the birds make music and putting my nose to a branch of dropseed is enough to immediately brighten my mood in spite of the oppressive weather. The prairie is a beautiful space to immerse yourself in, but it’s one that my children and grandchildren may never get to see if we don’t continue John and Ken’s passion for restoration and preservation.

The Florida-Orchard prairie “will never be a complete prairie ecosystem,” Ken says, as it’s too small of a plot to have the number of species required to give a full picture of what the sprawling seas of grass and wildlife the Illinois prairie once was. But in 2012 the space that is now home to Ken’s project was a field of dandelions without a single Illinois-native tallgrass species in sight.  In just two short years, Ken and a team of volunteers completely transformed the landscape into the beautiful field that we have today.  This gives me hope that we will see more prairie restoration projects in the future so that we can preserve such an integral part of this state’s history.  As it stands now, the nickname “the prairie state” is a bit of a misnomer.

Work Cited

Ellis, James. “Chapter 3: Understanding Prairie in the Prairie State.” Illinois Master Naturalist Curriculum Guide. Champaign-Urbana: U of Illinois, n.d. N. pag. Print.

Growing up, I ate like I was a robot.  Almost everything put in front of me was processed in a factory, and I loved it. Whether it was boxed macaroni and cheese, fruit snacks, or Lunchables, I loved the taste of junk food, vegetables be damned. It took a long time before I’d even consider looking at something green. There was an instance when I was 6 in which I was told that I couldn’t leave the table until I ate my green beans. Being the resilient little cuss that I was, I sat at the table for almost four hours staring at my plate, before my parents finally caved and sent me to bed.  A victory indeed.

When I got into high school I’d at least started branching out. Vegetables were no longer a sin, and while I certainly didn’t eat healthy, I was trying new kinds of food. It was also at this time that I started thinking about the world and politics. I read the book Ishmael by Daniel Quinn that made me realize that there were issues with the way we treat the environment and that individual choice has a huge effect on the world. It completely changed the way I think. By the time I got to college I identified as an environmentally conscious person.  I started going to the farmer’s market to get all kinds of fresh greens. I stopped shopping at enormous chain stores like Wal-Mart.   While I’m certainly not doing everything I can to minimize my impact (I still eat more meat than I probably should), I am trying to get better at going green.  It can be tough, but even doing a little bit will make you feel better.