
At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction - neurobuddha
http://www.tampabay.com/projects/2016/food/farm-to-fable/restaurants/
======
jcoffland
This is super common. My wife and I live in Sonoma County. She operates a
floral design business where she _only_ sources locally grown flowers. To our
frustration many of her competitors also claim to use local flowers. However,
my wife knows nearly all of the local flower growers personally and they tell
her that these same competitors give them very little to no business. Instead
they buy nearly all of their flowers from the SF flower market which in turn
gets most of it's flowers from South America. It's amazing how many businesses
have no problem flat out lying to their customers.

~~~
kbenson
What shop? I'm also in the area and would prefer to know of a shop that I
could assign a bit more trust to, since I'm getting married in the next year
or so.

~~~
jcoffland
My wife's business is called Chloris Floral.

------
wyldfire
> “It’s really hard to find non-GMO produce,” Moran said.

Aside from the IP problems of patent-infringement-via-unintended-germination,
I don't understand what's not to like about GMO. GMO seems like a great idea
-- modern human medicine seems to include techniques that are similar to or
just-short-of "GMO."

Are there any HNers who can articulate what they don't like about GMO?

~~~
brianwawok
> modern human medicine seems to include techniques that are similar to or
> just-short-of "GMO."

I think that is actually the root of the problem for some people, including
me. I have seen what modern medicine does to people. "You cholesterol is too
high, take this statin and your number will get better. Don't take it and you
will have a heart attack". And then you have family members and friends take
the drugs, and start having side effects.. random pain, random problems that
stop them from being physically active. So then they go back to a doctor and
get some new medicines, that maybe fixes the pain, but then adds a new side
effect. And pretty soon they are bed ridden and taking 14 pills to stay alive.
What a bunch of crap.

I am not anti-medicine, but I am anti-cutting-edge-for-margain-gain medicine.
If you have AIDs, you probably should take some medicine. I vaccinate myself
and my children. However I think that if you are active and eat well, I don't
care what my cholesterol is. Maybe it is high, maybe it isn't. And if you
aren't active or eating well - you need to fix that (not take medicine). If I
start dying of cancer, I will throw every medicine I can find at it. But if I
am good and healthy, I am going to leave well enough alone.

So to tie this back to food... I don't have a big desire to be a food beta
tester. I am sure 75% of GMO is fine. Could some cause something horrible to
your health in 20 years, like increased cancer risk? For sure. In fact we are
seeing that a lot of the veggies we grow now through traditional breeding
practices have reduced the vitamin content compared to the same veggie 20
years ago. But if I can pay a few pennies more for stuff that has a 100 year
track record vs something that came out of a lab a month ago? Yes please, sign
me up.

Let there be GMO. Let me be able to pay to not beta test food. I like beta
testing software, I don't like beta testing food and drugs when I am otherwise
healthy. It is insane that there is such resistance to putting a label on food
telling me the GMO status. GMO status is just the start, I would love to know
100 more things about the food I eat. Fertilizers used? Harvesting technique?
Etc. Let me have more info and make an informed choice about what I put in my
body. It may be a bunch of busywork for no gain, but that is my choice.

~~~
SilasX
Sorry for the free plug for a guy who comes off as (and in many ways is) a
crank, but that's almost verbatim the health policy preferred by Nicholas
Taleb (of Black Swan /Anti-fragile fame):

\- Be very conservative in what foods/medicines you use, limiting yourself to
those with a proven track record.

\- Ignore warnings about specific figures (e.g. cholesterol, blood pressure)
if you're otherwise healthy and active.

\- If you have a terminal condition, take risky treatments since you have
little to lose.

~~~
brianwawok
I have not heard this from him, I am looking into it now :)

I am not really following a specific food religion, but mashing together
various things I have experienced or have thought about.

------
alva
A great bit of journalism here, hopefully it reaches a lot of eyes. I think
that the fines levied on restaurants that are knowingly deceiving their
customers should be much higher. The articles states $300 is the fine for
first-time offenders, this is hardly much of a deterrence considering the
premiums placed on 'locally sourced' dishes.

If you want to get a good feel of how much proper locally grown food is, pop
in to a butchers. It costs £15/$21 for a single t-bone, but man is it worth
it. I think we are too used to eating sub-standard meats/fish as we want to
consume it more often.

~~~
forgetsusername
> _It costs £15 /$21 for a single t-bone, but man is it worth it._

I've had plenty of local meat, and I'm in a rural setting known for its
farming. I'm skeptical.

I'd love to see this actually tested, because I think this is an alternate
view of the article; the "hipster" crowd is so keen on getting locally sourced
food because it just tastes oh-so-much better (and they're more than happy to
tell you). Half the time they're not even eating locally sourced food.

The global food supply chain is pretty amazing. Why do we assume that Joe
Schmoe farmer down the road is automatically "better" at food production?
Outside of the fact that some produce can lose nutrition in transport, I'd bet
90% of people couldn't tell the difference between garden fresh or grown-in-
China...or that if they identified a difference they'd necessarily choose the
former as a preference. Taste (in the literal sense) is a funny thing.

~~~
iam-TJ
'global food supply chain' is off-shoring; think of it in the same way as the
mis-use of H1B visas and transferring I.T. work to low-wage economies, leaving
'local' I.T. workers out of a job.

Much of the unstated benefit of locally produced food is in a shorter time
between harvest and plate (fresher), less handling (bruising), less
transportation (ecological), less packaging (resources + cost), shorter supply
chain (less middlemen; farmer/producer should receive higher % of retail
price), generally more pride and care involved (better quality) plus of course
supporting the 'local' economy by keeping the money circulating locally and
local smaller family farms in business.

For animals it should mean quicker time-to-kill (less stress) due to less
travel and coral-ling at abattoirs, and, depending on the butcher, better cuts
of meat (less mechanical cutting) due to following the grain.

In the U.K. the biggest immediate benefit is the farmer receiving a greater
slice of the retail price, which is essential in some sectors (such as dairy)
where many farmers receive less than the cost of production, and certainly not
enough to protect against poor years.

Combined with low investment returns pushing capital into land 'investment'
which is driving land price growth to ridiculous levels; subsequently driving
rents for farmers who don't own their own land to bankruptcy levels (we
recently sold 10 acres @ £10,000/acre which was bought for around £2,500/acre
15 years ago [0], but the gross yield hasn't moved from around £400/acre).

Even amongst farmer land-owners many are selling off small parcels in order to
cover shortfalls in farming income or to invest in new facilities and
equipment.

The big farming agri-businesses (10,000+ acres) are about the only ones that
have the production scale to make profits and invest in land.

Born-n-bred and still living on a 1,000 acre farm, but hacking code.

[0] [http://pdf.savills.com/documents/Savills-ALMS-
Feb-2014.pdf](http://pdf.savills.com/documents/Savills-ALMS-Feb-2014.pdf)

~~~
forgetsusername
> _leaving 'local' I.T. workers out of a job._

Well, I'm not really sure that the local guy deserves a job any more than the
guy in India does.

I do agree with your post, generally, though I remain skeptical about certain
things, like "more pride and care", for example. Remember, this argument is
about "buy local", as in radius. It isn't about factory vs small-farm. As a
Canadian, I can buy Alberta beef in my grocery store. When I'm in Alberta,
that's top quality local. When I'm elsewhere, it's suddenly...bad?

~~~
iam-TJ
I'm not arguing factory vs small-farm; the system processes imposed by factory
methods can maintain consistency of production even given lower-skilled,
lower-waged, less personally invested, employees.

Generally though family farms are more personally invested in the quality of
their produce (and treatment and health of their animals) especially if it is
being sold direct locally rather than into some anonymous wholesale system.

For example, when selling locally, we'd hand-pick the best produce whereas the
bulk production would be loaded into 30 tonne bulk trailers and sent off to
some factory for additional processing. In the U.K. there has been a
resurgence of farm-outlets and farmers markets to help local producers reach
local customers directly.

People tend to remember details of locally produced products due to its local
association and so a bad experience is more likely to cause a direct negative
impact on sales the producer understands.

A related benefit of local farmer-direct outlets I overlooked is that there is
often much less wastage (more variation in the size and shape of the produce,
which reflects what nature provides).

Most bulk wholesale product has to meet minimum and maximum sizes so large
percentages of produce (10%+) can be discarded and dumped [1] especially in
poor growing years, or because it is the wrong shape [2]. Thankfully there's
been recent public, media, and political pressure on the wholesale buyers to
reduce this but it is still a significant problem.

Another benefit (for producers) is direct local supply is less susceptible to
large wholesale buyers arbitrarily forcing the farm-gate price lower in order
to maintain the wholesale pipeline profit margin without regard for the needs
of the farmer.

If other industries were as efficient and productive as farms have been over
the last 50 years we'd be in a very different world. For example, in the 1970s
we had 8 full-time workers and over harvest we'd have another 15 or so (mostly
women or students). In 2016 we have 1 full-time and 1 'apprentice' (who is
paid about 1/3 of the national minimum wage!) all year round.

So now we're less connected to the local economy and community due to the
price pressure.

In the 1970s we were banking enough profit in the good years to carry us
through the poor years and still maintain investment in equipment and
buildings. Now its a constant battle of attrition to maintain the status-quo.

It never ceases to amaze me that people are willing to pay out ridiculous sums
for luxuries like 'smart' phones, TVs, vacations, etc., and yet begrudge
paying a reasonable price for a life-supporting essential - especially when it
is freshly harvested (as opposed to processed) food.

[1] "Food waste reduction could help feed world's starving"
[http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28092034](http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28092034)

[2] "Wonky fruit and veg"
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8587496.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8587496.stm)

------
umanwizard
I've never understood what "farm-to-table" means. Doesn't all food come from a
farm? Is it supposed to mean "farm owned by a stereotypical farmer, not by a
corporation?" If so, that's pretty vague and subjective.

~~~
hayksaakian
it's super subjective until the government defines it and regulates it (read
penalize mis-labeling).

~~~
mindcrime
_it 's super subjective until the government defines it and regulates it (read
penalize mis-labeling). reply_

Yeah, once the government gets involved, it'll still be all lies, but it'll be
legal because somebody paid off the right regulator, or because the regulator
owns shares in the restaurant, etc. And then this kind of thing will be used
as a weapon to inhibit the entry of new competitors into the market, to the
benefit of the entrenched players.

~~~
smacktoward
You're overly cynical. Nobody in the United States worries about buying
adulterated milk, or medications that are actually mixtures of flavored syrup
and radium, or bread that uses sawdust as a cheap filler, because there's
clear standards for what something labeled as "milk" or "bread" means and
regulators with the power to enforce those standards.

Lots of other countries don't have those things, which is how things like this
happen:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal)

------
PedroBatista
I'm not familiar with US laws, but isn't this fraud?

~~~
brianwawok
Something like 30% of fish sold isn't the fish on the label.

Being illegal and being able to do something about it? No always the same.

Sure if your swap killed a bunch of people, you would get caught. Who is going
to instantly die form eating a GMO though?

~~~
PedroBatista
Isn't the some kind of Government Agency that buys random stuff from
supermarkets/suppliers, tests the food and inspects the label? The same for
restaurant inspections? Its not that expensive and it sends a clear message to
these people.

~~~
bradleyjg
From the article:

 _For 40,000-some Florida restaurants, 191 inspectors from the state’s
Department of Business and Professional Regulation oversee them all for
safety, sanitation and — occasionally — lies. By comparison, Georgia, with
about half the population, has 300 inspectors. Ohio has 637 for about 22,000
restaurants.

In the past two years, Florida inspectors found roughly 750 food
misrepresentation violations. Of them, 123 restaurants were fined, with an
average fine for first-time offenders between $150 and $300._

The state could beef up the number of inspectors and the fines. Should they?
I'm not sure. Certainly I don't support lying to consumers, but it isn't
exactly the crime of the century. I'd be much more concerned about safety and
sanitation, though some mislabeling has safety implications (e.g. whether nuts
are used).

There's a concept in false advertising law called "puffery" under which
obviously exaggerated representations are not considered false advertising.
Think "best chicken in the world". This isn't exactly that, but you really
should know that your $11 Caesar salad with shrimp isn't using local,
sustainable caught shrimp that goes for around ~$1/shrimp wholesale.

~~~
uremog
Even just from an economic standpoint, I think such fines should be far
higher. Sometimes it takes lab tests to determine fakes from real foods. Also,
I disagree - consumers shouldn't have to know the market. One could argue that
they should, but they should not _have to_.

------
JoeAltmaier
All these things get gamed. If you don't know something about your supplier,
its probably getting gamed.

My Sister sells chocolate. She gets it from Winan's from Ohio. Knows the
supplier folk; visits the place they make all the stuff. Knows their supplier.
They get chocolate in liquid form from their plantation in Nicaragua. Folks
there grow it, process it and ship the liquor to Ohio. So verified fair trade.

Also, its healthier. Imported beans (like everybody else) have to be fumigated
upon import. Agricultural product. But the liquor is a finished product; no
fumigation! SO that makes some people happier.

Anway she only knows all this (and trusts it) because she knows the Winans
personally, and visits the plant regularly.

------
Overtonwindow
Totally expected. Our current food model, and the American conditioned
mindset, is bigger is better, cheaper is better, and when selling food you
must maximize profits, while reducing costs - no exceptions. Americans need to
be brought down a peg or two (myself included!) that size and cost does not
equality quality, cleanliness, or health.

~~~
massysett
I thought the whole point of the "local" movement is that cheaper is not
better and bigger is not better, as people are willing to pay more for less
food because it is supposedly "local".

------
ilaksh
If we are really serious about local food then we need a much more significant
set of changes. I have integrated some ideas into this site:
[http://tinyvillages.org](http://tinyvillages.org)

------
jly
You can tell what's probably NOT 'farm to table' by the pricing of dishes.
Many restaurants would not be in business selling food at the prices they do
if were actually farm to table direct from local farmers who uses the
growing/raising practices the restaurants claim. If you buy meat or veggies of
this quality, you already know - it costs a LOT.

~~~
soundwave106
I think a better potential "red flag" is more things present that are clearly
out of season, as some restaurants clearly use trendy market jargon like "farm
to table" simply to boost prices and/or for marketing.

Central Florida's season for vegetables is the winter. Summer is too hot for
growing most things, the main things in Central Florida that are in season
during that time are citrus. Some vegetables and fruits don't really grow here
at all. Some do grow but do kind of poorly.

Sure, a climate controlled indoor hydroponic farm can grow produce that is an
"exception to the rule", but the Tampa area only has a couple (one?) of those.
Definitely not enough to cater for _all_ the restaurants that claim "farm to
table". So seeing out of season "farm to table" vegetables would be a bit of a
red flag.

The same with animals. For instance the trout mentioned in the article would
be a potential red flag of sorts, as Florida doesn't have rainbow trout.
Florida does have "spotted sea trout" but that's a different species of fish,
and the commercial harvest of that in Florida is rather limited.

You can apply this rule to other climates, of course.

------
mwnz
Great article. Not hacker news.

~~~
_da_
I disagree.

From
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html):

    
    
      On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
    

I think many hackers (myself included) find this interesting.

~~~
thecity2
Me too!

