Real Food, Real Farmers

When the Westport Farmers’ Market started 7 years ago, the draw was locally grown food, from farmers committed to sustainability.

When the 2012 edition kicks off on Thursday (May 24, 10 a.m. to 2 p.m.) at the Imperial Avenue commuter lot, the food will be as local as ever. But this year, there’s an even greater focus on health and sustainability.

The Farmers’ Market and Wakeman Town Farm have been leaders in a push to make Connecticut the 1st state requiring all food manufacturers to label food that contains genetically modified organisms.

At the last minute Governor Malloy removed a key provision from the bill, but the Farmers’ Market remains committed to the cause. A number of vendors this year will provide GMO-free foods.

There’s also a booth to help everyone create and maintain a healthier lifestyle, plus ideas on how to work with youth toward a sustainable future.

22 regular vendors — and 17 more on a rotating basis — will offer locally produced meat, dairy products, bread, seafood and produce. Farm-to-table chefs will conduct classes and demos.

Each week, a different non-profit will be showcased at the Market. And a new “Artist Alley” will highlight local talent.

Eat, drink and be merry. Do it all locally and sustainably, at the Westport Farmers’ Market.

And do it without GMOs.

12 responses to “Real Food, Real Farmers

  1. Sustaina-Silliness

    Sustainability is the ability to feed the world’s human population.

    For each acre of land that we use for organic, free-range, non-GMO, heirloom, steroid-free, all-natural food growing; we feed fewer people. The output/acre decreases with each of these methods.

    In the end you achieve the ultimate level of conspicuous consumption: people who enjoy specially-grown food while others die from lack of any food.

    • That is a blatantly false statement.
      1) We produce more than enough food to feed the world. Getting the right food to the right people is the difficult part.
      2) Most GMO foods are used to feed farmed fish and livestock…a much bigger waste than going to small-farming. You take away these inefficiencies when you move away from commercialized agriculture
      3) Studies show that going organic in fact increases yields in a number of crops…a few (ie corn, soybeans) have higher yields when non-organically produced.

      In sum, going, as you say, “organic, free-range, non-GMO, heirloom, etc) quite easily produces enough food to feed the world.

  2. Ben Wilder

    Corn seed with GMOs is now producing most of the Ethanol which, we are TOLD (wink, wink), reduces our dependency on foreigh oil. It also is in many foods you can buy at the supermarket. It also feeds most of the fowl produced in this country. Also, pond raised Tilapia. BUT, the brains in Africa reject the seed which could increase crops by 300% because it can not be saved from a crop and used for the next planting.
    As written, it gets curiouser and curiouser.

  3. The Westport Farmer’s market has always been more Westport than farmer’s market. Hopefully, with the support of the Wakeman Town Farm they will be able to back up their desire for sustainability with affordable farm-to-consumer products. Otherwise, their good intentions will be eaten alive by aggressive astroturf type misinformation like that offered up by Sustaina-Silliness/Monsanto.

    • Sustaina-Silliness

      KaBoom, I have no problem with the natural food movement and I have no problem with the sustainability movement. I am only pointing out that with today’s science and growing methods, these are conflicting goals. Let’s not throw around “feel-good” words and take offense when people point out the realities.

      There is no misinformation in what I have stated. Please be more specific in your accusations next time.

      Also, my last name is not Monsanto. It kind of sounds Italian. ;<)

      • You are dealing with a cult; reason accounts for nothing. “Natural foods”, (Are there unnatural foods?) merely serve to raise the profit margins of the vendors.

  4. Jim Graves

    When commercial electricity became available, many folks opposed it because they were afraid it would burn their house down. I guess there are Luddites in every generation.

    • Why would you call someone a name for asking for transparency in the food supply? Almost 50 other countries label so consumers can choose whether or not to eat GMOs. Are you willing to call all those millions names too? I’m the co-founder of Right to Know CT and fought hard to get this bill passed. You show how little you know about this topic by equating biotechnology to the commercialization of electricity. I recommend you read up on the topic before you comment again.

      • Continuing my post above. I’m not hiding behind “anonymous” or an alias. I consider that to be cowardly. I’m proud of my work on this bill.

      • The analysis of the economic consequences of “natural food” is accurate. The production of such foods raises the price of food and lowers the output. These consequences don’t mean much to people living in Mcmansions in CT, but to the 800,000,000 or so who live at a subsistence level in the rest of the world, the consequences are devastating. I suggest you read up a bit on the economics of the issue before you comment again.

      • Linda Smith

        If you’re the co-founder of the Right to Know CT bill, why in the world would you label yourself as Anonymous. It gets frustrating to try to figure out if “Anonymous” is the same “Anonymous” or if he/she is another “Anonymous”! … Oh, now I see your name below, Analiese Paik! Yes, you should be proud of your work on this bill.