My review of the documentary "Dirt! The Movie"

 This post is now on Google News and the syndicated BasilandSpice

Garden soil, composted from vegetable and yard waste. Photo by Sally Kneidel

I was asked to write a review of "Dirt! The Movie," a documentary about our worldwide destruction of soil versus our absolute dependence on soil for our survival. The movie is an inspiring blend of interviews with scientists, farmers, and activists, as well as footage from around the world of the traditional uses and modern abuses of soil.

The first third of the movie explores the origins and contents of healthy soil, followed by testimonials from an impressive array of experts about the value and utility of soil. The filmmakers interviewed workers building with soil; one-third of the world still lives in earthen homes. Winemakers talked about the relationship between soil and subtleties of taste. Biologists dug up worms and fungi with their hands; they and others spoke passionately about the vast array of organisms essential to soil health.

A scary diagnosis
The next third of the film documented how humans are destroying the limited amount of soil we have. Little of this was new to me, yet I felt compelled to write down almost every word of it. The vivid images and words were motivating to me in the way a scary medical diagnosis can be motivating; I wanted to remember everything. To make their point about soil destruction, the filmmakers covered mountaintop removal for mining, agribusiness methods that erode soils and poison ecosystems, desertification that starves African and Indian families, and deforestation of the Amazon "for expansion of soil."  Said biologist Janine Benyus, "We've lost 1/3 of our topsoil in the last 100 years."

Benyus and other scientists denounced the agribiz practice of planting monocultures, which are more vulnerable to weather extremes and pests, leading to the use of pesticides that destroy vital soil organisms. Unhealthy soils lead to the widespread use of nitrogen fertilizer, most of which winds up in surface waters downhill from crop fields. Nitrogen pollution is responsible for the infamous dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico, where little survives but jellyfish. Nitrogen fertilizer also forms nitrous oxides that contribute to global warming. Remarked Vandana Shiva, a physicist, farmer, and activist in India, "25% of greenhouse gas emissions are coming from agriculture that has become a war against soil."

Majora Carter is featured
The last third or so of the film was devoted to solutions, spotlighting individuals who are engaged in projects to nurture soil or to help underserved populations connect with gardening. The most impressive of those to me was Majora Carter, founder of Sustainable South Bronx, who extolled the virtues of roof gardens. I gathered that the filmmaker's objective in this portion of the film was to illustrate what each of us might do as individuals, to encourage viewers to take action, however small.

While I agree that "a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step," we don't have time to piddle around.  As Wes Jackson of "The Land Institute" pointed out in the movie, "we have a hundred year window in which to find ourselves. We have come to the end of the extraction economy and we have got to figure out how to live within our means."  Jackson is being generous. We have maybe 20 years to turn things around, before reaching the point of no return environmentally. With that in mind, I would've liked to see the film focus on bigger solutions, like pressing the governments of Brazil and Southeast Asia to protect their remaining trees.  Or suggesting ways to address desertification in Africa.. As the richest country in the world, we are not powerless.

Why is the impact of livestock omitted?
In spite of the movie's merits, I was disappointed that it never mentioned the livestock sector as a major cause of soil loss worldwide. The desertification in Africa is a direct result of overgrazing of livestock. When hoofed animals graze land with too few plants to sustain them, they pull up plants by the roots. They also compact the soil with their hoofs, which keeps rain from permeating the soil.  The result is rootless, dry soil that blows away in the wind - that's desertification.  Nor did the film mention that Brazilian rainforests are cut primarily to raise feed for livestock or to graze livestock.  If we ate plant-based foods only and skipped the livestock, we'd need only a small fraction of the agricultural land we need to support livestock. In which case, forests could be spared. Is that not relevant to soil conservation? What's more relevant than that?

I was also surprised that, during the discussion of seed diversity and the importance of saving and exchanging seeds with other farmers, no mention was made of corporations such as Monsanto that are acquiring ownership and controlling the use of our crop seeds, and genetically altering many of them. (For more about Monsanto, see the Center for Food Safety website or their publication "Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers".)

Valuable for educators
But overall "Dirt! The Movie" is a film with a crucial message, and well worth watching.It's an excellent movie for a teacher or professor to use for any age student, as an introduction to an ecology unit, or to open any variety of topics involving life on the planet. It's not a gripping documentary, like "Darwin's Nightmare." But valuable.If everyone on the planet were aware of the issues covered in this film, we might stand a chance of actually turning things around before we exhaust our planet's resources...none of which are more necessary than dirt.

Key words: Dirt the movie film review movie review desertification soil topsoil nitrogen pollution dead zone Gulf of Mexico monocultures deforestation erosion agriculture gardening roof gardens Majora Carter Sustainable South Bronx Monsanto

Mass Extinctions of Wildlife Related to Our Diet Choices

Mass Extinction Underway...
A mass extinction is a catastrophic, widespread, or global event that wipes out 25 to 75 percent of existing species. Most of the mass extinctions that occurred prehistorically — before humans evolved — resulted from global climate changes that killed thousands of species and left behind those able to adapt to the new conditions.

According to a recent survey, 70 percent of biologists believe we are in the midst of a new mass extinction. Although the Earth has experienced other mass extinctions before humans evolved, biologists point out two important differences between the current mass extinction, and those of the past:

1) This mass extinction is taking place in a very short period of time, during a few decades, rather than over thousands or millions of years.

2) We are eliminating or fouling many environments, such as tropical forests, coral reefs, and wetlands, that in the past fostered the evolution of new species during the 5 to 10 million years after a mass extinction.

What’s Going On?
The destruction of habitats by humans is responsible for about 75 percent of the current extinctions. Another major cause is unregulated hunting and fishing. The introduction of nonnative species such as wild boars, Gypsy moths, and European starlings is another leading cause of extinctions.

How Are Extinctions Related to Meat Consumption?
The production of meat requires much more land than producing an equally nutritious amount of plant protein. Because most Americans eat animal products two or three times a day, we devote a hefty portion of our land to either grazing livestock or raising grain or hay to feed livestock. About 40 percent of all land area in the United States is used for grazing livestock for our dinner tables.

Consider this. In the United States, we feed 66 percent of our grain to livestock. But the rest of the world feeds only 3 percent of their grain to livestock. If we weren’t eating so much meat and dairy and eggs, think of all the agricultural land that could be restored to its natural state as forests, prairies, and wetlands. We could also slow the conversion of natural lands to agricultural lands. Our population here in the U.S. is still growing rapidly and our food production will have to increase. This year we reached 300,000. By the year 2025, just 18 years away, we'll add another 50,000 people to the United States population! See www.census.gov, or International Data Base, for more information about that.

The adoption of a vegetarian, or better yet, a vegan diet would vastly improve the outlook on the future for both humankind and wildlife.

Is Our Diet Making Us Healthy and Happy?
About 65 percent of Americans are overweight or obese. We also have high rates of heart disease, high blood pressure, colon cancer, and other ailments related to a diet high in meat, eggs, and milk fat. We’re not healthier.

But are we happier? No. Although our consumption of resources has doubled since 1957, the proportion of Americans who report they are “very happy” has remained the same.

But Wait…
Raising livestock doesn’t have to take so much land and cause so much pollution, if done on a smaller scale. Only a few decades ago, manure naturally fertilized crops and enriched the soil, rather than winding up in “waste lagoons” that leak and spill into rivers. Livestock consumed crop waste and kitchen waste. Animals and people maintained a balance. It’s only since the production of meat, milk, and eggs has become industrial in scale that it has begun to damage the Earth so severely. The damage includes ocean habitats and fish populations as well as land ecosystems.

The average American eats 248 pounds of meat a year, far more per person than any other country. It’s not possible for everyone on the planet to have that much meat. We would need four more Earths to raise enough livestock and fish, if everyone on our planet ate as much meat as Americans do.

The Union of Concerned Scientists says that our American diet is second only to our transportation as our most environmentally damaging consumer activity. We can make better diet choices for a sustainable future.

The loss of countless plant and animal species is at stake.

See our post of September 9 for an example of a wildlife population that's threatened by our consumer demand for animal protein.