Sustainable Coconut Industry in El Salvador

The coconut, Cocos nucifera, is the sole species of the genus Cocos, a palm tree grown around the world for its fruit and fiber. The origin of the plant is still debated: some scientists believe the tree is from India or the Asia-Pacific region, while others contend they're from South America. Either way, the tree has been cultivated and used for food and building materials by humans for centuries. And on the Island of the Holy Spirit, near Bahia de Jiquilisco in El Salvador, the coconut is a way of life. A little more than 10 percent of the island's 1800 residents are employed in the coconut industry; approximately 9 million coconuts are harvested from the island's trees each year. On the island is a cooperative that transforms the coconut into edible products, industrial products, or items of ornamental value.

Coconut plantation near Bahia de Jiquilisco (close to Playa El Espino).

Forty-five men cut, transport, and split about a thousand coconuts each day and thirty-five other people (primarily women) separate the "meat" of the coconut from the husk. Historically, most of the edible portion of the coconut has been used for industrial oil production. For this to happen, the women spread the meat out on the cement patios of the cooperative to dry - for six to fifteen days, depending upon if it is the rainy or dry season. Once dehydrated, the coconut meat is crushed in a mill, treated to clean it, and then sold to a factory that produces it into oil. This has been the most prominent activity, and the longest-running, on the island, but it is not consistent because contracts have not been created with the buyers; their needs fluctuate and they might not request a shipment of coconut for oil for two months. So, the islanders are changing the industry; they are looking for new avenues to sell their product. Fresh sales have been up: around 4,000 coconuts (only the meat part, removed from the husk and hard shell) are sold every few days to vendors who make it into food products.

Neat rows of coconut palms (Cocos nucifera) at the edge of Bahia de Jiquilisco, growing right up to the high tide line.

On the island, locals have started initiatives to make preserves, sweet bread, and crafts from the coconut. Today, nearly 800 pieces of coconut candies are made each day in ten different flavors and varieties, such as coco con dulce, coco rayado, coco pina, etc. Coco Art is also gaining popularity as women are making items from the hard shell of the coconuts, such as jewelry, mobiles, candle-holders and other ornamental items. The cooperative is still looking to invest in equipment that will allow them the ability to refine the oil themselves, and also for a machine that would allow them to bottle the coconut water in a sanitary method. Right now, the coconut water is just wasted, dumped out.

What is not being wasted is the natural fiber around the coconut fruit. For the past four years, this "waste product" has been made into planting substrate, liners for plant baskets, and as cropping bags. This sector of the coconut industry employs ten people who formally made a living fishing and collecting small mollusks in the mangrove swamps - jobs that were often back-breaking and low-paying. This sector is hoping to ramp up production by creating coconut coir - a substrate used for sowing seeds in greenhouses made from the pith of the coconut (the part of the husk around the spindly fibers). They also hope to increase sales of the plant baskets, but recently realized that people have become so accustomed to the plastic liners that even though the coconut liners will last seven years, consumers do not realize this and are therefore biased against them. With some strategic marketing, they should be able to improve sales.

Enjoying fresh coconut water by the pool! Near the beaches, you can always find fresh coconuts for sale, ready-to-drink for fifty cents a pop.

This seems all good. But is it? Having a coconut plantation naturally means that you have one large monoculture of nothing but C. nucifera growing for as far as the eye can see. But in this country, having something growing all the time, holding the soil in - particularly in coastal areas - is a lot better than the otherwise rampant deforestation. Coconut plantations are certainly better for the environment and human health than sugar cane plantations. Yes, there are insect pests - as one would expect in a monoculture - and those are managed by insecticides, although I cannot say specifically what kind or how often they spray on this island. So, unlike in other countries, in El Salvador, coconut plantations are not the cause for deforestation because the whole landscape was already deforested where coconuts are planted! Additionally, from personal experience, I have seen how coconut plantations are not just used for coconut cultivation; the land is used for cattle. Cows roam around in the thin shade of the palm trees, eating vegetation around the base of the trees, keeping the weeds down and adding fertility to the soil. Overall, it seems to be a reasonably sustainable industry for El Salvador.

Cheap Chinese Beans

In a bean-producing and bean-consuming country, smack in the middle of a bean-eating, bean-growing part of the world, beans are being shipped in from nearly 9,000 miles (14,000 km) away. And amazingly, despite the miles traveled from field to fork, these beans sell for 35-50 cents less per pound than locally grown beans. It was supposedly a venture that required collaboration between the Chinese government and the agricultural ministry in El Salvador, and this joint venture was meant to "benefit the citizens" of El Salvador. With short-term imported cheap food? Personally, I would like to see the Ministry of Agriculture (MAg) invest in long-term solutions such as providing education and resources to implement sustainable farming practices and seed saving techniques. Methods to reduce erosion, to capture rainwater for irrigation, to restore soil health, to fight insects or plant diseases without chemicals, to bring the product from harvest to market with minimal loss...these are topics that would truly benefit the citizens. But instead, what is the biggest complaint? That the cheap Chinese beans are only being sold in 5-pound bags, which is difficult for many people to afford (yes, the $3.75 is a stretch for many campesinos). Which is why it's obvious that only solutions that are rooted in longevity will have any lasting impact. The MAg says is has at least enough beans to cover all people in the department of La Union for 15 days. After that, what?

This bean import is being complemented by a corn import. But in this case, the importation causes the corn prices to rise despite the fact that the corn is only coming from Guatemala, Nicaragua and Honduras. This importation is causing worry on the minds of local (Salvadoran) farmers. They fear that the importers will have too much inventory when the harvest comes locally (which is the end of September into October), and this glut will cause prices to drop below what could otherwise be earned without the imported corn saturating the market. But let's dig down to the root of the issue: the reason the corn harvest is late here in El Salvador is because the rainy season began and then suddenly stopped for a couple of weeks (this was back in May). During that 2-week dry spell, all of the little corn seedlings desiccated and most died. Farmers had to turn the fields and replant when the rains started again, putting them about a month behind schedule. What could have prevented this? Very simple irrigation systems. Especially those farmers that sow their seeds on hills - these systems could be low-tech gravity fed systems. With a little proper investing and focusing on long-term solutions, many problems can be prevented!

Red beans - a staple part of the diet in El Salvador.

(NOTE: I know many problems are not as simple as they appear on the surface, I don't mean to oversimplify the issues!)

Organic Production is Growing in El Salvador

In a few small towns in the eastern part of El Salvador, in the Conchagua department, are growing their crops with homemade organic fertilizers. In a project begun by the Salvadoran Foundation for Social Promotion and Economic Development (Funsalprodese), small family farmers are using organic fertilizers made from cow manure, including bocashi and California Red Worm compost (vermiculture). Funsalprodese has a development program that focuses on sustainable agricultural production, focusing its efforts on subsistence farmers primarily. The farmers that they reach have learned that the overuse of chemical fertilizers and pesticides are harmful to their health as well as the health of the land. By making their own fertilizers, not only are they putting to use materials that would otherwise become waste, they are also helping rebuild soil fertility.

So far, only 33 families are a part of the program, but Funsalprodese hopes to reach all farmers in the Conchagua department in their efforts to improve the livelihoods of the poorest citizens of the country. The foundation works to educate farmers about new techniques that will save time and money, as well as improve their health through less contact with chemicals or through greater nutritional value of their typical meals by diversifying their crops. Funsalprodese does hope to expand to commercial farmers eventually. Meanwhile, the majority of the country still waits for the winter rains to begin. In some zones, the rain has been more frequent, but overall the rainfall has been so low that the hydroelectric company have issued a warning, saying that if 20 more days pass without rain, they will not be able to generate electricity (on a positive note, the geothermal plants have responded by saying they will boost production to cover the deficit). However, the plants and people need the rain, so it's time to be doing our best rain dances!

Corn Harvest: Lost & Postponed

In El Salvador, corn seeds are sown in early May - in the winter, or so it's called here. This winter began in the normal way: suddenly the rain began. April warmed up, making us uncomfortably sticky during the day and sigh with relief when we enter a bank or supermarket or other similarly over-air conditioned location. When the rains began, although it put a damper on our outside activities, we welcomed the rain because it meant the humidity would be lifted. Subsistence and commercial farmers also breathed easier when they saw the start of winter, the start of the growing season. It had been a long dry season and the parched countryside burst into green. Farmers took their seeds to their plots of land, that had been previously prepared by burning last year's crop waste. And they sowed their seeds. But after a week of daily rains - suddenly, there was none. And for the past two weeks, the skies have only held empty clouds; not a drop of water has hit the soil in many zones of the country and the corn seeds that had begun to germinate have died.

Corn seedling - succumbing to the lack of rain. (Photo credit: University of Wisconsin, IPCM - www.ipcm.wisc.edu)

The majority of farmers in El Salvador (most of whom are subsistence farmers) rely solely on the rain to provide their water. They often live in areas where there are no rivers or wells - or if there are rivers, at this point in the year, they are still dried up. Water that is not captured for free from nature is very expensive, especially to people who make only a few dollars (or less) per day. So when a dry air mass sweeps into the country's atmosphere and holds the rain at bay - they are at its mercy. Some farmers did not sow their seeds with the others in early May. Perhaps they were just a bit behind schedule, or maybe they didn't trust the rains would last. So their lands still sit idle, waiting to be sown. Luckily, they still have their seeds, but at this point, the corn harvest now seems like it will be in October instead of late August, as it normally is. Farmers who did sow in early May and then lost their plants may or may not be able to obtain more seeds for a second try. This will have long-term consequences on the price of corn later this year. If the harvest is later and smaller than normal, prices will rise, as we have seen in the past several years with beans.

This is also not a promising outlook for the current administration. El Salvador's president, Mauricio Funes, had assured that this year's harvest will be 25% greater than last year's - and took steps to ensure more farmers had access to seeds and other materials necessary for cultivation. So while he is learning that he too is at the mercy of mother nature, he is also making promises about greater seed distribution for the second sowing. Although corn is perhaps the crop that has suffered the most, that is only because it is the most widely planted at this time of year. Other crops lost include: beans, radishes, blackberries, and a wide variety of other annual fruits and vegetables that are consumed in their own houses, and sold or traded to their neighbors.

In my opinion, this seems to be less an issue of obtaining seeds and more an issue of improving infrastructure that would help keep the country's farmers from being pushed to their knees by nature. Micro-hydro irrigation and other water-catchment systems would be an example of practical technology that could have longer term ramifications for the country's farmers than constantly handing out seed packets.

Coffee Exports ~ Good News in El Salvador, not so in Colombia

"Green" coffee beans - bagged and ready to be sold to roasters.

The 2010/2011 harvest season has been a good one in El Salvador; not only have yields increased, they have nearly doubled when compared to the yields at the same time last year, and coffee prices have also gone up. The price per quintal (approximately 100 kilograms) this year is $213.28, whereas last year it was $148.11 - a jump of $65. Yields increased from 1.08 million quintals in the 2009/2010 harvest season to 2.07 this year. Germany buys the majority of Salvadoran coffee (at approximately 35%) followed in close second by the United States (with 32%) and then Japan at nearly 10%, Canada at 6%, and twenty-six other countries making up the remaining exports. The rise in prices and yields is certainly a boon for coffee exporters, but unfortunately those picking the coffee don't see the extra value. Of course more beans to pick does mean more money, but they do not earn more per basket of picked beans when coffee prices are high. The average Salvadoran coffee picker will see about eight dollars per quintal picked. And I can promise you that picking 100 kilograms in one day is impossible - it takes about two days, which brings the average monthly salary of a coffee picker to around $150. As long as there's work. So the more coffee to be picked, the better for these pickers. And the happier the coffee plantation owners are when the prices are high. But is it win-win?

Coffee processing/cleaning plant at Finca Santa Isabel, on the slopes of Volcan Chaparrastique (San Miguel)

Colombia is a different story this year. Due to the heavy rains that plagued the country in the later months of 2010, continued rains throughout April and unusually cold temperatures, the coffee harvest was 19% less than what it was last year at this same time. However, 2010 saw a big increase in production and exports, so the drop this year still puts them ahead of where they were in 2009. Additionally, exports only dropped by about 2%, which means producers were favoring exports to local sales - most likely due to the high prices of the global coffee market. If producers are going to be low on volume, they will make up for in with the higher prices. And indeed, Colombian coffee exporters have not seen a much lower income this year than last, thanks to the higher world coffee prices.

What I wonder is: how many of you know where your coffee comes from? And does it make a difference to you?

Round 'em Up!

I am a champion of local foods. And I am a huge promoter of organic foods, but not if it's industrial organic because that seems antithetical to the intrinsic organic principles. I definitely do not support growing and eating genetically modified plants for the myriad reasons I outlined in a previous post. And while I am not flat-out against all pesticide use no matter what, I am a strong supporter of the precautionary principle and using alternative, natural methods to control pest problems that enhance and protect biodiversity. I think, by and large, that chemicals that have been created by humans are overwhelming our environment and our bodies, and we don't yet know what the consequences will be. Contradicting the precautionary principle, the producers of these chemicals put the burden of proof on the public instead of proving to us that their chemical is harmless. These chemicals are generally manufactured by multinational corporations that not only have heavy lobbying influence in Washington, but are party to the revolving door phenomenon, whereby people who are supposed to be the regulators leave the government for a high-paying job at the chemical company, and then eventually return to another governmental post (often in the EPA or USDA). How can people who have a vested interest or something to be gained make decisions for the good of the public? I don't think they can.

And that's how we have Roundup herbicide. Roundup is the brand name broad-spectrum herbicide manufactured by Monsanto; the main active ingredient is glyphosate. Monsanto developed and patented the glyphosate molecule in the early 70's; Roundup has been on the shelf since 1973, but in 2000 the patent expired and now there are other manufacturers of glyphosate-based herbicides. This herbicide made it onto the shelf without being tested by the EPA; although the main active ingredient (glyphosate) has been classified in Toxicity Class III by the EPA (meaning it's harmful if swallowed or inhaled). Roundup kills weeds, and other plants, by inhibiting an enzyme (EPSP synthase) from being produced; without this enzyme, plants cannot produce the correct proteins for growth, and so they quickly die. The EPA has requested test results investigating any potential harmful effects of glyphosate on humans, animals, or the environment in general. Twice, the EPA caught scientists who were deliberately falsifying the test results in testing labs hired by Monsanto. Those responsible were convicted of felony charges and sentences to jail for 5 years and the lab was required to pay a hefty fine.

Map credit: University of Washington Extension

Monsanto has also been convicted of false advertising. In the late 90's, Roundup labels claimed the herbicide was as safe as table salt, and practically non-toxic to fish and other aquatic wildlife. In France, Monsanto even wrote "biodegradable!" on the label. None of these things are true; it is definitely not as safe as the salt you sprinkle over your food, it does not biodegrade, and it is very toxic to aquatic organisms. Despite all this, it is the most popular herbicide in the US, especially since Monsanto began developing Roundup-resistant varieties of agricultural crops, such as corn, soybeans, canola, sorghum, cotton, wheat, alfalfa, and beets. These plants have been genetically modified to be able to produce an enzyme similar to EPSP synthase that will trigger the proteins to keep producing, unaffected by glyphosate. This means a farmer can spray his whole field with Roundup, killing all the weeds while leaving his crops unharmed. However, some plants have developed a natural resistance to glyphosate. These are called superweeds because they cannot be killed by Roundup, or similar herbicides, and are causing farmers significant troubles around the world. Farmers are reporting over 50 different species of weeds have become resistant to Roundup; in every case, the weeds were grown in areas of intense Roundup spraying.

This is a field sprayed with glyphosate - the plants (weeds) that are still green are resistant to the herbicide. In this case, it's marestail weed. (Photo credit: Nature.com)

And now, after nearly 40 years on the market, the EPA is considering a ban or strict limiting of the herbicide due to new information of the probable human health effects from this herbicide. New studies have found glyphosate responsible for causing infertility and spontaneous abortions in pigs, cattle, and other livestock. Another study showed that glyphosate caused malformations in frog and chick embryos. In another study sponsored by the National Institute of Health, they have found that farmers and others who frequently use glyphosate have an increased risk of developing a cancer that affects the bone marrow compared to those who never used glyphosate. This same study found detectable levels of glyphosate in the urine of farmers and their children. This new information that brings to light some previously unknown adverse affects, along with the increased instances of glyphosate-resistant plants, will likely change the future of glyphosate's approval. Many farmers and scientists believe glyphosate's days are numbered. What I worry, though, is what the alternative will be. Glyphosate is not going to just go away with nothing to replace it; it's the mostly widely used herbicide in the world - something has to take its place. And will that "something" be well tested? Or will it take forty more years to discover that the chemical we've been dousing on our environment is actually a carcinogen, mutagen, and endocrine disruptor? My hope is that the precautionary principle will be called into play. There's nothing wrong with a little hope, right?

El Salvador's Slaughterhouses

*CAUTION: GRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS & PICTURES*

Six years ago, the municipal slaughterhouse in La Union, in the southeastern region of El Salvador, was ordered to be closed by the Ministry of Health because it did not meet the health standards outlined by the ministry. Yet still it continues to operate. If you are picturing an image from Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, of horrific assembly line style production practices, wipe that image from your mind. Instead picture this: one by one cows are pushed and prodded, forced in any way (including contorting their tails) to get them into a large cement building, where they are tied to a cement post. The rope is tied around their heads, and they are tied as close to the post as possible so they cannot move their heads. Next, they are stabbed in the back of the head (into the brain) so they become immobilized, and then they are untied and generally they collapse to the ground in fits of spasms and convulsions. The rope is usually re-tied to the bottom of the post to help control the dying spasms of the cow. While thrashing, their throats are slit. The brain-stabbing is to paralyze them, the throat-slitting is to actually kill them. Often, a worker will stand on the cow to help the blood rush out of the gash in the neck. The blood cover the floor and flows into a drain in the center of the large cement slaughterhouse. More often than not, this drain flows untreated into the environment (into the nearest stream or river). The floor may or may not be made of cement; it's possible it's just dirt.

After being killed and bled out, the cow carcasses are left to "rest" over night, during which time flies and other insects have free access to the raw meat. The hides are cut free and the meat is then butchered into large sections, which is how it is sold into the local markets. Local health officials lack the means to properly enforce their closure, which is why slaughterhouses such as the one in La Union continue to operate, despite the deplorable conditions. However, even if the slaughterhouse were meeting the proper standards, that would not actually change much. The blood would have to be treated before leaving, and workers would be required to wear shirts, boots, gloves, and masks while slaughtering, but nothing would change for these poor cows. So this is the reality of meat slaughtering and butchering in El Salvador. In the large supermarkets, such as Super Selectos and Dispensa de Don Juan, most of that meat comes from Nicaragua, where the slaughterhouses are more modern. But the majority of the Salvadoran population do not buy their meat there, they buy the meat at local markets, which purchase their meat from those types of slaughterhouses. Exact numbers are difficult to find, since many slaughterhouses are operating without authority to do so, and data collection is often lacking here as it is. Suffice it to say, I moved here not being a regular meat-eater (my last meat was a delicious burger from Seneca Breeze Organic Dairy in upstate NY two years ago), and with this knowledge, it makes my decision to avoid meat even easier. However, I will keep searching for humanely raised and slaughtered local meat in this country and provide an update when I encounter such a thing.

*Most information was taken from El Diario del Hoy, 31 de marzo 2011, the remainder was from personal accounts from my students, who visited a local slaughterhouse.

*Photos taken from the video of the aforementioned students, who must remain anonymous.

See the full gallery on Posterous