To Till and to Tend

Chicken soup on the holidays, hot pastrami on rye for lunch with my mother, briskets and chickens on Shabbat – these are the foods I grew up with. For some, these foods complicate Jewish belief. Rabbi David Rosen states in the narrow-minded vegetarian documentary A Sacred Duty, “So I, simply put, am a vegetarian because I am a religious Jew.” This and similar views are supported by one of the principles of Judaism: Tsa’ar Ba’alei Chayim, compassion for all life. However, after the Flood, God tells Noah and his family, “Every creature that lives shall be yours to eat; as with the green grasses, I give you all of these. You must not, however, eat flesh with its life blood in it.” (Gen 9:3-4). No clear answers can be made from all these mixed messages. Does practicing Judaism include being a vegetarian like Rabbi Rosen promotes, or can we as a people remain omnivores consuming meat in a compassionate, responsible, sustainable manner?
                                                                                  

Still unsettled and environmentally unsatisfied, I began to read Michael Pollan’s An Omnivore’s Dilemma in hopes of learning more about the environmental effects of eating meat. Here, he honestly displays the inner workings of the American meat industry. Industrialized meat, produced in Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO)’s inefficiently uses energy resources, pollutes waters, and overuses pesticides, hormones, and antibiotics. Images of CAFO’s are inappropriately and grotesquely displayed in A Sacred Duty. The harsh scenes of animal cruelty in this movie left me unmotivated and many questions unanswered. Could there be a happy medium for meat eaters?

Yes. The answer came with a non-industrialized, sustainable method of meat farming. Pollan offers an incredible example: Polyface Farm. This farm functioned through a rotation of animals on open plots of grass, so that the grass sustained the animals, and the animals, by grazing and fertilizing, in turn sustained the grass. It also provides animals with a better standard of living and one can conclude a fantasy lifestyle. New to the notion, I have taken a liking to the idea of sustainable farming. I am excited to learn more and support its successful growth.

            Though content with my findings, the only clear conclusion that I have formed so far, is to choose your nourishment responsibly, and in manner that best suits your interpretations of Jewish teachings as well as environmental concerns. As a Jewish omnivore myself, I cannot easily encourage or even suggest a vegan or vegetarian lifestyle, but I do encourage eating meat moderately and most importantly, sensibly. For many this once came in the form of the Laws of Kashrut. However, after the devastating unraveling of the Kosher meat industry, through Agriprocessors in Iowa, many have taken to Hechsher Tzedek, a movement that supports a just meat industry – including the proper treatment of animals and workers. Still, I think about my choices – even replacing one meat meal a week (think Shabbat) with a vegetarian one could conserve more than 4,000 gallons of water (more than an entire year’s worth of showering)!

67% of Americans who say they care about the environment do so because it’s “God’s creation.”

Almost 50% of Sierra Club members go to a house of worship at least once a month.

Whoa.

I hope that it’s no surprise to any readers that there is a strong faith-based environmental movement. The National Religious Partnership for the Environment – made up of Jews (COEJL), Catholics, Protestants (NCC Eco-Justice) and Evangelicals (Evangelical Environmental Network) – has been around for over 15 years. Interfaith Power and Light (IPL) is an environmental initiative with over 25 state chapters. To these organizations and many of their affiliated houses of worship, connection between Earth stewardship and faith is clear.

Sierra Club has recently noticed this powerful movement and published a report: Faith in Action: Communities of Faith Bring Hope for the Planet, which includes the stats mentioned above. Beyond an introduction which delves into the power of faith-based action, it shares stories of 52 communities of faith – one for each state, Washington, DC and Puerto Rico – where their faith propelled them to critical ecological and sustainable action. As the report notes, the environmental movement has been secular, shying away from “values” and, dare I say it, “creation.” Never before has a study like this been done. But the environmental (and political) significance is enormous!

Though there is a clear danger in grafting “God” with “politics,” (I hope I don’t need to explain) even Sierra Club can’t ignore its wonders. 86% of the world’s population affiliates with a religion. The report notes that all the religious environmental initiatives “coalesce around a few key broadly shaped principles: stewardship, justice and concern for ‘the poor,’ and concern for one’s neighbor and future generations.” Agreement on these principles may not bring world peace. Frankly, slight variations of interpretation continue to yield devastating wars.

If we can harness the energy of religious faiths to the issues of earth stewardship, then we might just have a chance.

Logo from WiseTemple.org

    I don’t knowabout you, but when I hear the word “Arctic”,the images widely circulating in the media (i.e. melting glacial ice caps and “cuddly” [now classified as threatened] polarbears desperately searching for stable ice floes), flash through my mind. However, after reading SilentSnow: The Slow Poisoning of the Arctic by Marla Cone (2005), I nowthink to also address the humansliving in the arctic region and how they are affected by their changing environment.

    TheInuit, who inhabit various parts of the Arctic including Greenland,Canada, and Siberia, are apeople whose culture and way of life are and have been shaped by the Arctic’s habitat for thousands of years. Especially unique to them is their diet ofgame – such as seal meat and whale blubber – rich in protein and fat, which enablethe Inuit to survive the harsh conditions of their environment and preventcertain diseases of malnutrition like scurvy. If you don’t believe me, take agood look at the history of American and European polar exploration, for it willtell you of travelers from “modernized” nations who had to adopt such a diet ifthey wanted even a chance at survival in the arctic regions. Yet, these sources of food, which have alwayssustained the Inuit, today, are becoming widely seen as detrimental to theirhealth.

        Cone’sbook, reminiscent of Rachel Carson’s groundbreaking SilentSpring (1962), goes beyond popular media, uncovering the presence ofthe world’s chemical residue in the region’s waters, ice, and complex foodchain. Even after global initiatives toreduce production of DDT,PCBs, and mercury, they haven’tdisappeared. Not only do they remain in the world at large, they disproportionatelysettle in the Arctic. Through evaporation and condensation, they arecarried north by the Earth’s water and air systems. Unfortunately, the story ofthese chemicals’ travels does not end there. Through bio-accumulationand bio-magnificationof these toxins from the environment, they build up in succession of arcticspecies along the food chain, so that the Inuit (the highest on the chain)today exceed the concentration of PCB’s, mercury, and other chemicalsconsidered safe under international health guidelines. Consequences are slowlybeing seen as many Inuit children suffer from high rates of infectious diseaseslike ear infections (leading to hearing loss) and complications with braindevelopment.

In2002, the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) stated that the contamination raises”fundamental questions of cultural survival, for it threatens to drive awedge of fear between people and the land that sustains them.” While manyof us today in other settings can and do change our diet because of health concerns,the Inuit cannot. A few weeks ago, with the salmonellaoutbreak in tomatoes, did we not have the option of buying different typesof tomatoes or of simply abstaining from them altogether? The point is, we didnot have to radically change our eating habits and if we were to, would nothave to uproot our lives to do so.

We now need to be reminded ofwhat it means to be so dependent on our environment and the atrocity whenrealizing that formerly symbiotic relationship may need to be reconsidered. Yetagain, maybe, as Jews who draw an identity from the Land of Israeland reject the notion of completely abandoning it for security, we are moreunderstanding than we think. What weneed to do then is to connect our personal experiences to our neighbors’ upnorth and support the Inuit in maintaining their livelihoods. We can start by carefullydisposing our waste, continuing the fight for cleaner energy, and as always,educate ourselves with the latest news.

Although many of us are alreadyin the midst of our summers and are both mentally and physically removed fromthe ice, we should note that we are still in an InternationalPolar Year, ending in March 2009. Incommemoration of this year, Silent Snow has been made into a feature-length documentary(watch the trailer!) to be shown at the end of the IPY.

As you can see, information regardingtoxins and the Inuit has been around for some time. Just because we can’t see it, because itisn’t melting away or isn’t a cute, furry creature, doesn’t mean it isn’tthere. Let us take off the Arctic “goggles” we’ve allowed the media to let uswear, in order to see the bigger picture at hand.

For more, read a interesting interviewwith Jim Clark, former Alaskan King crab fisherman and lover of Inuit art andculture.

As an undergrad, my professors explained that climate change would never be solved. Politicians, after all, will only seek solutions for problems that they can tackle in four-year cycles. And people will only seek solutions for problems they can see. But carbon emissions are invisible and global warming would not affect us for generations. Or so we thought.

But now, the effects of climate change are felt on a daily basis. Global temperatures have increased by more than 1 degree Fahrenheit in the past 100 years. This spring, an ice sheet the size of Manhattan crashed into the Arctic sea. The recent listing of the polar bear as a threatened species explicitly acknowledged the role of climate change in their decline. The genocide in Darfur is widely attributed to resource scarcity caused by climate change. In short, climate change is no longer a problem we can shut our eyes to.

Unfortunately, to many people, climate change remains invisible. As reported in Reuters, Tesco, the world’s third-largest food retailer, recently announced a plan to end that. It will begin placing carbon labels on 20 products to help consumers see the greenhouse gas emissions per serving of certain items including potatoes, orange juice, cleansers and light bulbs. John Tierney, likewise imagines that consumers would change their behavior if consumers could only visualize their emissions. In a recent article in the New York Times, Tierney, highlights a number of gadgets that would help consumers visualize their emissions. One gadget, called “the Wattson” changes colors based on electricity consumption. Tierney imagines a world where people would wear electronic jewelry to report their carbon use. These flashing mood rings and pendants would immediately allow onlookers to assess the carbon habits of their peers. And, Tierney speculates, “If the delegates to future conferences on climate change are expected to wear illuminated symbols of their energy consumption, they won’t be visiting any more spots like Bali.”

Tierney isn’t alone in trying to figure out ways to make carbon tangible. A team of four teens in England recently won a competition for their proposed invention: the “Enuffometer.” The gadget would provide minute-by-minute monitoring of energy use, with results that could be text messaged to the owner’s mobile phone – and remotely disconnect wasteful appliances. As the insightful youthful inventors explain, the Enuffometer helps people visualize their emissions since “people find it much easier to fight something they can see.” Well put.

Carbon mood rings and the Enuffometer will likely be among the tools of the future to help us visualize our carbon emissions. But other gadgets already exist. The “Kill a Watt” helps users determine how energy is being used around the house – so that they can cut back on wasteful devices. [You can purchase a Kill a Watt (and other energy-saving gadgets) at www.coejl.earthaidkits.com.]

Those of you who read my posts know that, for me, climate change is anything but an invisible problem. To the contrary, I fear its effects are far too visible. But even I could benefit from a flashing reminder when my energy use is excessive. After all, we all need someone to remind us when we’ve used “Enuff.”

[For more on ways that already exist to visualize the effects of climate change, read Liore's May 28 post, "Have to See it to Believe it?"]

———–

I’d love your thoughts on other ways we could send consumers the right signals about energy use.