Reader comments
Sharing the harvest

This is such a great idea, keeping local farms in business and providing healthy food as well. I would love to find this kind of farm in the Logan area!

We are beginning to learn some painful lessons about the relationships between our industrial system of agriculture and the price and availability of oil and gas. Projects of this nature are going to become ever more important as time goes on.

This is awesome. I am in a food co-op, and the value, and quality can't be beat. Way to go, John!! And thanks for doing what you are doing, instead of selling out your land and cashing in.

"A share at Borski's farm is one bag a week for 15 weeks containing about one pound of food." ... "One share at Borski's farm costs $190 per share for the season..."

Please tell me this is a joke, or some kind of mistake!

$190 for 15 pounds of produce!?!?

At $12.67 a pound those had better be the best tasting tomatoes, radishes, beets, etc., that anyone has ever tasted.

And they don't even deliver them!

Absurd.

Borski's website says that one bag a week contains about one pound each or 3-5 things. That would make it $190 for about 60 pounds of produce, which is much more reasonable.

This is absolutely wonderful. I moved from Utah to New York a couple of years ago- here there are a number of CSA farms. I am glad to see that the media is paying attention to positive community developments. These farms are primarily organic, are efficient in how they impact carbon footprints, and most importantly reciprocate money in the community.

It is wonderful to see people getting back to natural community life- fight the capitalist, eat local. The more local development we gain, the more stable we are as communities independent of whatever deviation we have from accessing highly commercialized food.

I can vouch for Borski's tomatoes. I buy from him all the times plus the fresh potatoes. Even rhubarb when arranged in advance.

To Anonymous @ 2:17:

I'm glad you find this an "absolutely wonderful" thing and something to ease your transition from New York. But, reading the rest of your post, I think you may be misunderstanding some of the "wonderful" aspects of this.

First, since the farming is done on such a small scale, it is virtually guaranteed to be less efficient than the usual large-scale farming operations. A quick analysis of the simple principle of efficiencies of scale will demonstrate that.

Secondly, as each of the customers are required to travel to Borski's farm to pick up their produce, the net carbon footprint will be MUCH greater than produce processed and distributed in bulk to stores located throughout the land.

I don't want to rain on your parade here, but there are some basic and incontrovertible laws of physics and economics that dictate that this type of thing will never be as efficient or effective as the current system.

Ironically, one of the greatest beneficial effects of the capitalism that you want to fight is its efficiency. It is why every centrally planned (Communist) economy (Soviet Union, China, India, etc.) has failed, before turning to Capitalism.

On behalf of Borski Farms, the article incorrectly reported that each weekly share would consist of one pound of produce. Each weekly share contains 3-5 items, EACH weighing about 1 pound each, if not more (depending on the item--something like a winter squash would obviously weight more.)

More power to yah! Keep it up!!!

It is not carbon footprint that matterns. Even though the benfit of the doubt for travel is assuming someone travels a long way to pick it up, not always the case. Anyway more important is that you are locally independant. I see food price doubling over the next couple of years with the current politics going on, big peace of that is transportation. This bigger carbon footprint talk is like assuming a local grower goes to farmers market with 200 pounds in a 18 wheeler.

I would have to disagree with you sam hill. Large scale farms, while they are efficient in the amount of food they produce, are not efficient in the energy they use. Likewise, large scale farms ship their food across the country or world (even iceberg lettuce which is predominantly water). Traveling to Salt Lake to pick groceries once a week that originated in Kaysville is far less, in regards to carbon impact, than sending oranges from Florida to Alaska.

Lastly, CSA's develop farm space in areas that are typically local to a nearby demand for food. This implies that Johny A who is selling his apples to Johny B, will most likely use the money he made on his apples to buy other things from Johny B- money is reciprocated in the community- it is not communist it is just economic equilibrium. This style of community development is deeply rooted in our past and needs to be reinvigorated, as it, as the title says, is sustainable, far more so than large scale farming.