PA chocolate surplus repurposed for farming use! | (PA chocolate surplus finds new use on farms / Public News Service)

By Jessica Scott-Reid for Sentient Climate.
Broadcast version by Danielle Smith for Keystone State News Connection reporting for the Sentient-Public News Service Collaboration

American consumers spend roughly $11.6 billion on candy each Halloween, but even at that rate, candy companies end up with a surplus. Those leftovers end up in some interesting places, including farms, where some farmers end up feeding candy to their animals. Chocolate and other treats that can’t be sold, or candy bits leftover from production, are being sold to some meat and dairy producers to add to their animal feed. While the practice has been going on for years, more recently, the agriculture and candy industries have been framing the practice as “sustainable” — a way to curb waste that would otherwise go to landfills. Major meat producer Cargill, for example, deems it “upcycling” and a “win-win” for the animals and the environment.

A deeper dive reveals that both meat and candy companies also benefit financially from feeding candy waste to farm animals. And some food waste experts say consumers should be questioning why there is so much of this waste to begin with.

Where the Practice Originated, and Whether It’s Healthy

Feeding candy to farm animals was initially motivated by rising corn prices during times of drought, making the practice a way for producers to reduce feed cost. Candy can apparently fill in for corn as a required sugar source. As one former cattle nutritionist turned dairy farmer, Laura Daniels, claims via social media, sugar is needed to feed bacteria in the stomach of cattle that breaks down the fiber in plant foods they consume.

However, at least one farmer doesn’t see the benefit. “Empty, nutritionally void, chemical laden sugars are being foisted on cattle and their rumens,” writes Minnesota farmer Lauren Kiesz,“all in the name of the conventional food system’s four horsemen: bigger, fatter, faster, cheaper.” Kiesz, who says she farms animals exclusively on pasture, notes, “a mouthful of grass and a mouthful of Mounds are extraordinarily different.”

The debate doesn’t end there. While some advocacy groups for pigs kept as pets urge owners not to feed candy to their animals, there are hog farmers who also add candy waste to their feed.

And it continues. “Candy of all forms is unhealthy for pigs,” says the North America Pet Pig Association. Yet, according to National Hog Farmer, “Waste chocolate can also be added up to 30 percent of finishing pig diets to support optimal growth performance without affecting carcass composition or pork quality.”

Feed is the greatest expense for most animal farmers, so cheap candy waste offers an economical solution. “When producers find a way to blend in other, cheaper ingredients into the standard cow meal, they frequently will,” reports The Counter. “As long as the stuff doesn’t hurt milk and meat output, they’re going to make more money.

Many consumers learned of the practice of feeding candy to cows in 2017, when a truckload of red Skittles spilled onto a highway in Dodge County, Wisconsin. The story went viral, making news across the country. Those particular candies were reportedly defective, lacking the signature “S” due to a power outage at the factory. Interestingly, while the truck was reportedly on its way to a nearby dairy farm, Mars (the owner of Skittles) later denied that it had sold the candy to be fed to cattle.

Questioning Candy Waste

The Hershey Company has been selling candy waste to Cargill since 2011; which the chocolate maker describes as an “innovative” “sustainability partnership.”

“Today we have an entire plant in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania (U.S.), dedicated to this environmentally, economically, nutritionally friendly effort,” states Cargill on its site. “There, our team turns tens of thousands of pounds of Hershey’s chocolate waste per year into feed ingredients for cows, pigs and other species of livestock.”

As the farmer Kiesz notes, though, claiming that feeding castoff candy to cows is a net positive to the environment, is, “on closer inspection […] completely misleading.” She explains that with all steps considered, “middle-men, inputs, and expended resources” — including the added transport of the candy — “there is no way anyone can make the argument that our environmental system is better off.”

Dr. Kathryn Bender, assistant professor of economics at the University of Delaware, seems to agree. Bender says that while “it’s always great to see these innovative solutions,” meaning the diverting of candy waste to livestock, “the most ideal thing would be if we just didn’t have that waste in the first place.”

She says that programs such as the one employed by Hershey and Cargill should be there to aid companies in measuring and subsequently cutting their waste. “Oftentimes, there’s just a lot of food waste that’s not measured, and so programs like this can allow companies to start tracking what that waste is, and then we would hope that companies would say, ‘Okay, what can we do to decrease that waste?’”

But that doesn’t seem to be happening. According to news reports, candy companies have been selling their waste to animal farmers for over a decade, at least. It turns out that having such a fallback may be quelling the motivation of a company to cut their waste, says Bender. A similar example of these perverse incentives played out in a study she worked on regarding consumer food waste that showed waste increased when consumers believed it was being composted rather than going to a landfill.

Inside the U.S. Corn Surplus

While both Hersey and Cargill tout the benefits of the partnership, Dr. Tammara Soma, associate professor and research director of the Food Systems Lab at Simon Fraser University, says consumers should be questioning why so much candy is being produced to begin with. The reason, she tells Sentient, “is because we’ve commodified corn,” and we have so much high fructose corn syrup being produced as a result.

As Soma explains, because corn is “produced in such excess and is highly subsidized in the U.S., high fructose corn syrup —- which became a cheap sweetener in lieu of sugar cane or beet sugar — got put into everything.” She says this is what spurred the production of many corn syrup based items, “like all of the candies we see for Halloween.”

Corn (and, for the record, this is dent corn not the sweet corn you eat off the cob) is considered the most valuable commodity in American agriculture, with the U.S. being the largest producer and consumer of corn in the world. Though dent corn, also called field corn, is grown mostly for feed for livestock and for ethanol, it also plays a massive role in processed food. “Corn is in the sodas Americans drink and the potato chips they snack on,” writes Roberto A. Ferdman for the Washington Post. “It’s in hamburgers and french fries, sauces and salad dressings, baked goods, breakfast cereals, virtually all poultry, and even most fish.” It’s also in candy.

Tom Philpott, a researcher at John Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, and former food and agriculture correspondent for Mother Jones and Grist, tells Sentient that the agri-food industry, “is just always looking for another profitable way to get rid of this overproduction of corn.” He adds that “someone’s going to find a use for that and a way to make a buck off of it. Selling high fructose corn syrup to the candy industry is just one way.” And because corn syrup is so cheap, he says there is little risk to candy companies to overproduce, especially when livestock farmers are there, ready to pay for it.

Hershey’s classic chocolate bar contains sugar — another product Soma explains is produced in surplus — but many of the brand’s other products, such as Twizzlers licorice, Almond Joys and York Peppermint Patties, contain corn syrup.

Soma says the commodification and surplus of corn and sugar results in waste, including “too many surplus candies, that are then fed to commodified animals.” Because animal farming has become so industrialized, she adds, “the large scale [of animals] can somewhat absorb the large scale of waste.” And on top of that, everyone gets paid.

Feeding candy to cows is not only done to curb waste and allow major corporations like Cargill to claim to be more sustainable. It also saves them money. Large companies like Hershey would otherwise likely have to pay private waste haulers, Soma explains, to either transport and dump the waste in landfills, or to be dealt with by anaerobic digesters that turn food waste into biogas. Instead, candy companies can charge meat and dairy producers to take the waste off their hands — producers who then save money thanks to the cheaper feed. They can also continue over-producing, rather than working to cut waste, while claiming to be sustainable.

Sentient reached out to Cargill for this story, but did not receive a reply.

The Bottom Line

Ultimately, Soma says that without the option of using commodified animals to absorb the surplus candy waste, “we would be able to question more why cows would ever need to eat highly processed candy derived foods,” as well as question why there is so much waste being produced to begin with, and be pushed to seek better solutions.

Overall, she says, “we need to critically question industrial agriculture and industrial commoditized food systems,” which she says are “very wasteful, very extractive, focused on profits alone at the expense of the environment, promotes monoculture and takes nature out of the equation.”

Jessica Scott-Reid wrote this article for Sentient.

get more stories like this via email

For decades, Florida’s upstream farmers and downstream aquaculturists have been at odds over water quality and environmental impacts.

Now, the new initiative “Healthy Farms-Healthy Bays” seeks to bridge the divide and foster more collaboration to protect Florida’s fragile ecosystems. It has released a new report outlining its vision, as well as specific steps to protect water quality and conserve Florida’s working lands.

Randall Dasher, a Suwannee County farmer and co-chair of the initiative, played a key role in uniting groups to work on creating a healthier watershed.

“It is about coming together and collaborating, getting across the table from each other in a nonthreatening way,” Dasher explained. “Because too much of that has gone on. That just makes people be less likely to listen and hear, and talk about best practices.”

The partnership, supported by the Florida Climate Smart Agriculture Work Group and a $100,000 grant from the VoLo Foundation, brings together farmers, aquaculturists and environmental experts to tackle challenges like nutrient runoff, declining water quality and the effects of climate change.

Ernie Shea, president of the nonprofit Solutions from the Land, said the initiative marks a turning point in how Florida’s agriculture and aquaculture can work together when it comes to climate change.

“We’re all affected,” Shea pointed out. “Climate change takes no prisoners; it affects all sides of operations. And what we’ve done with Florida Climate-Smart Agriculture is bring together the entire value chain – the producers, right up through the associations that represent farmers.”

The Suwannee River Basin was chosen as the focal point for their efforts. A team of farmers, aquaculturists and university experts conducted a two-year analysis to identify the most pressing challenges and propose solutions. One key recommendation is accelerating best practices to reduce nutrient runoff, from planting cover crops to using microbial sprays and reducing chemical inputs that affect water quality.

get more stories like this via email

Native grasslands are the most threatened ecosystem in North America.

A South Dakota advocacy group hopes its educational campaign will reach a wider audience after receiving a regional award. The South Dakota Grassland Coalition’s recent television public service announcement, part of its “Where Good Things Grow” campaign, recently won an Upper Midwest Regional Emmy award.

Quality grasslands help clean air and water, sequester carbon, reduce erosion and provide wildlife habitat.

Ron Nichols, one of the campaign’s creators, produced the television spot.

“The television spots in particular are designed to help people understand that we are all connected to the grasslands and that they’re definitely worth protecting and improving their health,” Nichols explained.

He said it was “affirming” the film’s message resonated with the region and met the high standards of an Emmy Award. Nichols also hopes it will educate people about threats to grasslands including conversion to cropland, woody encroachment and the effects of poor management.

The one-minute film features footage of rancher Kelsey Scott and her nephews caretaking land on the Cheyenne River Reservation. Nichols emphasized he appreciated the opportunity to film a local rancher practicing good grassland management.

“Rather than going out and trying to get an actor, these spots are genuine,” Nichols stressed. “They really reflect what’s happening out on the land in South Dakota.”

Along with the rancher’s cattle, the PSA includes images of sage grouse, buffalo, pronghorn and a diverse sampling of grassland plant species.

Joe Dickie and his son, Charlie, filmed the scenes and images featured over several years traveling through South Dakota’s grasslands. He is glad to showcase the results of regenerative ranching practices.

“Running cattle, resting the land, not overgrazing, being really aware of riparian areas along water,” Dickie outlined. “Really just doing the right things for the environment.”

The PSA aired more than 4,000 times this year.

get more stories like this via email

Ocean advocates are hailing a federal judge’s decision that deemed a nationwide permit for industrial aquaculture structures unlawful.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ approval of the permit for finfish nets and cages was found to violate several environmental laws.

Center for Food Safety Legal Director George Kimbrell called that a win against corporate interests pushing to industrialize the open ocean.

“It’s an important victory protecting our oceans,” said Kimbrell, “their native ecosystems, and the communities that rely on them.”

Still, Kimbrell said the court ordered both sides to return to court later this month with a plan on how to remedy the matter.

The ruling comes as an increasing number of Maine communities adopt emergency aquaculture moratoriums, but backers of large-scale aquaculture say it’s needed to meet a growing seafood demand.

Maine’s abundant coastline and working waterfronts make it an ideal place for an aquaculture business, and numerous small-scale shellfish and marine plant farms are boosting local economies.

But commercial fishermen say the growth of large, foreign-owned fish farms endangers both the ocean and their livelihoods. Kimbrell said a battle to privatize the ocean is underway.

“Taking parts of the ocean and saying, ‘you can’t fish here, and instead this is going to be an area we’re going to allow a corporation to use exclusively for a certain number of years,'” said Kimbrell. “In this case, these are 10-year permits that would have been established.”

Kimbrell said federal courts covering the Gulf of Mexico previously struck down efforts to establish industrial aquaculture there.

He said despite intense lobbying efforts by proponents, Congress has never passed a law authorizing large-scale aquaculture in federal waters.

get more stories like this via email

By Jessica Scott-Reid for Sentient Climate.
Broadcast version by Danielle Smith for Keystone State News Connection reporting for the Sentient-Public News Service Collaboration

Every Halloween, Americans spend about $11.6 billion on candy. Although this seems like a lot, candy companies often have extra candy left over. Some of this leftover candy is sent to farms, where some farmers are feeding it to their animals. This includes unsellable chocolate and candy scraps which are mixed into animal feed. While this practice has existed for a long time, it has recently been promoted by the agriculture and candy industries as a sustainable solution to reduce waste that would otherwise end up in landfills. For example, major meat producer Cargill describes the process as “upcycling,” benefiting both animals and the environment.

However, a closer look shows that both the meat and candy companies profit from this practice, raising questions about why so much food waste exists in the first place.

Origins and Health Concerns

The practice of feeding candy to farm animals began during times of drought when prices for corn soared. Farmers turned to candy as a cheaper source of sugar for their animals’ feed, with some claiming that sugar helps feed bacteria in cows’ stomachs that break down fiber from plants.

Yet, some farmers, like Minnesota’s Lauren Kiesz, argue that this practice is harmful. She points out that empty calories and chemical sugars are not suitable for cattle, critiquing the conventional agricultural system that prioritizes growth over animal health.

The debate continues with pet advocacy groups cautioning against feeding candy to pet pigs, while some pig farmers still incorporate candy waste into their feed. The North America Pet Pig Association states that candy is unhealthy for pigs, but other sources argue that waste chocolate can be a beneficial part of pig diets.

Feed costs are the largest expense for animal farmers, making cheap candy waste an appealing option. Companies like Hershey find it beneficial to mix in cheaper ingredients to maintain profitability.

In 2017, feeding candy to cows gained public attention when a truckload of Skittles spilled on a Wisconsin highway, destined for cattle feed. Even though there were reports that the candy was defective, Hershey later denied selling it to be used as animal feed.

Rethinking Candy Waste

The Hershey Company has been partnering with Cargill since 2011 to sell candy waste, a relationship they describe as a sustainable effort. Cargill claims to convert large amounts of this waste into livestock feed.

However, Kiesz argues that this practice is misleading regarding its environmental benefits. She points out the additional resources and costs involved in transporting this waste, suggesting that it’s not as green as claimed.

Dr. Kathryn Bender from the University of Delaware agrees, stressing that while creative solutions like this can be helpful, the ideal situation would be to reduce food waste entirely. Programs like the Hershey-Cargill partnership should drive companies to track their waste and help reduce it, but evidence suggests that having an easy solution like animal feed might discourage such efforts.

Dr. Tammara Soma from Simon Fraser University suggests consumers should question the excessive production of candy itself. This overproduction is largely due to the commodification of corn, resulting in an abundance of cheap high-fructose corn syrup in many food products, including candy.

Corn, particularly dent corn, is a significant agricultural commodity in the U.S., highly subsidized and used in a variety of processed foods. Its presence in many products, from sodas to fast food, has led to an overproduction of candy.

Soma argues that the surplus of corn and sugar leads to more waste, as “too many surplus candies” end up being fed to livestock. This industrial farming helps to manage this waste while allowing companies to continue their production habits unchallenged.

The Bottom Line

Soma believes that if animals didn’t absorb surplus waste from the candy industry, it would prompt more questions about why cows are consuming highly processed food and the underlying reasons for food waste. She calls for a critical examination of industrial agriculture, which often prioritizes profit over environmental sustainability and leads to high levels of waste.

Jessica Scott-Reid wrote this article for Sentient.

get more stories like this via email

In Florida, farmers and aquaculturists have struggled with water quality issues for years.

A new initiative called “Healthy Farms-Healthy Bays” aims to bring these groups together to improve the state’s ecosystems. The initiative has released a report outlining ways to protect water quality and conserve farmland.

Randall Dasher, a farmer involved in the initiative, emphasizes the importance of collaboration and communication to address environmental challenges.

Supported by the Florida Climate Smart Agriculture Work Group and funded by a $100,000 grant from the VoLo Foundation, this effort gathers farmers, aquaculturists, and environmental experts to address problems like nutrient runoff and climate change.

Ernie Shea from Solutions from the Land believes this initiative is a significant step toward cooperation between Florida’s agricultural and aquaculture sectors to combat climate change.

The focus of their efforts is the Suwannee River Basin, where a team has spent two years analyzing challenges and proposing solutions. One key recommendation is to implement best practices for reducing nutrient runoff, such as using cover crops and reducing chemical inputs.

Native grasslands are among North America’s most endangered ecosystems.

The South Dakota Grassland Coalition recently launched an educational campaign that won a regional Emmy award for its television public service announcement.

Healthy grasslands provide clean air and water, sequester carbon, and serve as wildlife habitats.

Ron Nichols, the creative force behind the campaign, produced the announcement to raise awareness of the value of grasslands.

He expressed pride in earning an Emmy for a message that resonated with the region and aimed to educate people about threats like land conversion and poor management practices.

The video features rancher Kelsey Scott and her family managing their land, highlighting genuine practices rather than staged performances.

The PSA emphasizes good land management practices such as rotational grazing and protecting waterways. It aired over 4,000 times this year.

Ocean advocates are celebrating a federal judge’s ruling that declared a permit for industrial fish farming unlawful.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ approval for these aquaculture facilities violated environmental laws.

Legal expert George Kimbrell from the Center for Food Safety heralded the decision as a victory for ocean protection.

However, both parties must return to court later this month to determine the next steps according to the ruling.

As Maine communities impose moratoriums on aquaculture expansions, proponents argue that large-scale operations are necessary to meet growing seafood demand.

Maine’s coastline provides an excellent environment for aquaculture, contributing to local economies. Still, fishermen oppose the growth of large fish farms due to the threat they pose to marine life and their livelihoods.

Kimbrell noted that privatizing ocean areas for corporate use creates conflicts with fishing communities.

Previous court rulings in the Gulf of Mexico have also halted industrial fish farming efforts.

Despite intense lobbying, Congress has not authorized large-scale aquaculture in federal waters.