By Mark

We were on the return trip from five days at the lake. My father-in-law recommended we stop at “Tony's” for breakfast. “Order the bacon and eggs.” He spread his thumb and forefinger a little more than two inches apart. “They pile the bacon on this thick. At least a pound.” After three hours of driving (the total trip is 9 and a half), my wife reminded me that this is the exit for Tony's “if you're ready to eat.” Well it was about that time, so I pulled off.

The parking lot was crowded for ten in the morning. The sign outside warned of Giant Sandwiches. “Smokin' or non, hun?” asked the hostess, and we took our seat. Sure enough, other diners had plates piled high with bacon. That's what I ordered. The wife had the french toast. She ended up eating only half of one of her three huge slices of egg coated toast. I managed to stuff down the three eggs and about half the bacon. I left over the two huge slices of bread that came with my dish. We put the remaining bacon in a to-go container. Much of our order was thrown away and we weren't the only ones. All during the meal the busboys carried plate after plate of uneaten food into the kitchen. We paid our bill - a reasonable $12, and went on our way. Big servings and low prices sure do bring in the customers. I certainly bought in.

We took ten CDs to play for our long road trip, but never listened to one. On the way up we were entertained by tales of blackouts and crumbling infra-structure. “Boil your water in Cleveland.” “Cooling stations for the elderly will be set up in these locations in Detroit..” “We have the power grid of a third-world nation.” On the way down we also chose talk radio (mostly NPR) and heard of deadly bombings and eulogies for UN envoys. Mixed in with the hard news was a one-hour discussion about the Chesapeake Bay Program. A now 20-year project to rejuvenate the bay and bring it back from the brink of envi-ronmental disaster. Three expert mouths arguing over who should do what and who hasn't done enough. Talk of dead zones and oyster beds and run-off and nutrients. “We're making progress but have a lot more to do.” “Municipal treatment plants can install modern technology and cheaply remove the nitrogen and phosphorus from their effluent.” One guy pointed out that municipal and industrial discharges were large, but it was the fertilizer laden runoff from the watershed's lawns and farms that made the most notorious contributions to the Bay's dilemma. This is where the discussion turned to the very difficult politics involved with solving these kinds of problems. “The government has to be decisive and enact the tough regulations.” “People are willing to pay higher taxes if it means a cleaner environment.” Yeah right. How often do politicians who are for more taxes and stricter regulations get re-elected?

These aren't all small family farms. Much of the acreage is managed by huge agri-businesses. They all do the lobbying. They need the fertilizers to keep the production up and costs down, so they stay in business and the consumer doesn't have to pay too much for food. Cheap feed also raises cheap chicken and pork. Unemployed farmers and consumers who pay too much for food don't send their representatives back to Washington.

The small, artsy, expensive, nouveau cuisine dishes were ridiculed off the market several years ago. Now we have Tony's, who finds it profitable to throw away half the food it serves. Mostly white bread, margarine, and potatoes. If purchased in a supermarket, what was uneaten from our dishes would cost less than 50¢. Why is it so cheap to produce food it can be thrown away? Production of a commodity is a risky business. Large volumes are needed to offset the small profit margins. You hope for one good year to get you by the next three. Very efficient production methods have evolved and the survivors use these methods. The methods include the use of fertilizers. Excess fertilizer washes off the field and into the ditch and then the stream. Now, instead of nourishing a crop of corn, it feeds microbes in the river. Like us, the microbes consume oxygen. These overfed bugs can use up all the oxygen dissolved in the water, creating a dead zone. This is what causes schools of fish go belly up.

So, by polluting the bay, we can produce food cheap enough to throw away. Maybe we need to pause here to consider whether it matters that the bay gets polluted.

“Why should I care that some rich Virginian gets some pond scum stains on his 50 foot yacht?”

“I don't even eat oysters. They're gross looking and taste like snot.”

The simple and most reasonable argument here is the golden one. I wouldn't like it if someone dumped their garbage on me; therefore maybe they wouldn't like it if I dumped on them. Some would take another leap, and give the ecosystem of a watershed similar rights and privileges. A civil society respects the rights of everyone, from Virginia boaters to beds of oysters. We are tough enough to pass laws against vandalism and disturbing the peace. Why can't we take the tough action to restrict pollution caused by food production? Government needs to step in when the best interest of the many is not the same as the collective affect of the best interest of the individuals. Accurately predicting such a conflict can often be tricky. However, when food can be produced so cheaply that is discarded, when at the same time production of food has a major environmental impact it seems obvious that something needs to be done.