START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
593,966 people care about Real Food

Occupy the Farm: Taking Back Land for the Community

Occupy the Farm: Taking Back Land for the Community
  • 1 of 2


Written by Jason Mark

It doesn’t take an agricultural expert to know that you can’t grow vegetables without water. So it wasn’t surprising that after hundreds of people marching under the banner “Occupy the Farm” took over a University of California agricultural testing station on April 22, UC officials responded by shutting off water to the site. The next day a late-season storm brought a half-inch of rain to the San Francisco Bay Area, irrigating the thousands of vegetable starts in the ground and lifting the spirits of the urban farming activists who are determined to save the site from development.  Score: Occupiers, 1 — UC administrators, 0.

Social change activists in Berkeley, CA have always been ahead of the curve. May Day is considered the spring re-emergence for the Occupy movement, as activists around the United States engage in work stoppages, street marches, and various forms of civil disobedience to press their demands for a more equitable economy. The folks with Occupy the Farm got started early. On Earth Day they marched from Berkeley’s Ohlone Park to a 5-acre plot of land in the adjacent bedroom community of Albany. They cut the locks on the gates of the UC-Berkeley and US Department of Agriculture field trial plot, pulled up nearly an acre of thick mustard growing there, and got busy working the soil with a pair of rented rototillers. Then scores of volunteers planted 150-foot rows of lettuces, beans, cucumbers, and leafy greens. By the end of Earth Day, the Bay Area had a new urban farm.

The occupation of the Gill Tract (named for the family that donated the property to the university decades ago) appears to mark a new stage for the adolescent Occupy movement. The autumn encampments in Manhattan, Oakland, and dozens of other cities around the country were a kind of primal scream against the growing wealth disparities and corporate overreach that have come to characterize America. With their anarchist architecture and consensus decision-making, Occupy’s autonomous spaces gave people a chance to envision a radically different way of organizing society and economy — and in the process shifted the national discourse in a more progressive direction. Now, actions like the Gill Tract takeover, the occupation of foreclosed homes, and the protests outside of bank shareholder meetings are giving new potency and political relevance to the Occupy movement. Occupiers (some of them at least) are beginning to focus on actions that are at once full of political symbolism and fulfill people’s basic human needs for food and shelter. Activists have gone from imagining a new world to actually creating it.

“While those of us who originally organized this aren’t affiliated with the official Occupy movement, we are inspired by the last year of what Occupy has done,” Anya Kamenskaya, one of the Occupy the Farm organizers, told me when I visited the Gill Tract Friday morning. “We are taking that Occupy spirit and taking it to the problems in our community. You could call it Occupy 2.0”

Kamenskaya is a UC-Berkeley alum (class of 2009) who has been involved in sustainable agriculture initiatives such as The Greenhorns and Future Farmers. As we spoke, a convoy of borrowed pickup trucks was dumping load after load of dark black compost next to where a dozen straw bales had just been dropped off. Volunteers were busy painting banners for an upcoming weekend of community farming events. A flock of six laying hens pecked about among the trampled mustard stalks. “The reason we’re here is because it’s farmland, and it’s farmland in an urban area, and it should be used as farmland, especially since there are tens of thousands of people in the Bay Area who are food insecure,” Kamenskaya, wearing a floppy straw hat, said as she directed the delivery of some port-a-potties. “For years students, professors, and neighbors have come up with proposal after proposal for some kind of agro-ecology center to show people how to grow their own food. The university has had listening sessions so they can say they have listened. But they don’t incorporate our ideas into their plans.”

The land seized by Occupy the Farm is the last parcel of Class 1 agriculture soils left in the East Bay and the final remnant of a 104-acre spread bequeathed to the University of California in the 1920s. For decades this sliver of prime farmland has been used as an agricultural testing station by researchers from the USDA and UC Berkeley’s College of Natural Resources. But a 2004 UC Master Plan for the area proposes a “commercial redevelopment” for the site.  World War II era buildings on the south end of the property are slated to be turned into housing for UC faculty and graduate students, as well as retail space (including, ironically, a Whole Foods). The land currently used for agricultural trials would be re-zoned for “open space and recreation” and could include the construction of little league fields, a community center, or a childcare facility.

The occupiers say getting rid of this final vestige of farmland would be a horrible mistake: “Farmland is for farming,” Occupy the Farm said in an April 26 statement. “We cannot allow the UC to destroy one of the best resources for urban agriculture in the Bay Area.”

In an open letter published Friday, UC officials said that they “have welcomed community workshops to explore future use of this land” and “are open to further discussions with the community about implementation of the Master Plan.” At the same time, university administrators expressed resentment with the occupiers’ tactics. “We take issue with the protesters’ approach to property rights,” the letter said. “By their logic, they should be able to seize what they want if, in their minds, they have a better idea of how to use it.”

On Monday, Dan Mogulhof, head of UC’s public affairs office, told me that it’s unfair of the occupiers to think they are the only ones with hopes for the property. “We are big believers in metropolitan agriculture,” Mogulhof said. “A lot of our professors, students, and administrators are involved [in urban farming.] But there are a variety of competing interests here. We can’t be marching to the interest of just one group. We have to be representing the full range of community interest.”

  • 1 of 2

Read more: , , , , , ,

Photos from lilyrhoads via flickr

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it


+ add your own
12:47PM PDT on May 6, 2012

Great idea, at least we'll know what's in the food.

11:46AM PDT on May 6, 2012

No Farms No Food.... I'm not surprised at all to hear that UC listened but didn't change course one bit. Everything is expected to take a back seat to development. Don't back down farmers, we need more people who are aware of why it's not a good idea to keep pushing farms further and further away from people.

11:09AM PDT on May 5, 2012

"Like the good ole days when life was uncomplicated!"

Yeah, when the world was flat, all obeyed the church and no one argued with authority lest they burned at the stake, slaves and serfs knew who their masters were and there was no curing of any cancers.

But, at least, cancer rates were lower since infectious diseases kept the average age down.

And all the food was organic !

9:34AM PDT on May 5, 2012

Like the good ole days when life was uncomplicated!

7:26AM PDT on May 5, 2012

“We don’t need corporations and we don’t need gene research to tell us how to farm,” he said. “We’ve been doing it for thousands of years."

Corporations or not, this sounds pretty anti-education and anti-science to me. It's like saying all our best ideas came from thousands of years ago.

7:13AM PDT on May 5, 2012

"This could be a huge opportunity for the university to play a huge role in urban agriculture, to create a center for urban agriculture that could show how you can reduce transportation, and lower emissions, by producing food in cities.”

Any significant urban agriculture will increase transportation and emissions as it will lower the population density of said urban areas. With those people living further apart, their commutes become longer and the mass transit routes must increase while, at the same time, ridership per route will decrease. If the mass transit routes don't increase, then people start driving more.

Since an acre of land can only fully feed 1 to 4 people and with urban densities being upwards of 25 to 100+ people per acre. You'll have to displace 25 to 100 people for every 1 to 4 you feed.

In the case of Manhattan, 1.6 million people live there put there's only enough acreage to feed less than 25,000 people (with all buildings and roads removed). Who would you vote off the island?

6:47AM PDT on May 5, 2012

Now this I really LIKE ! Go people !

3:53AM PDT on May 5, 2012

I'd like to wish this project continuing good luck. They certainly have my support because they are exactly the same as the 'Diggers' or 'land levellers' from the English civil war 1642–1651. Go for it folks and ignore the city of illusion!

12:47AM PDT on May 5, 2012


5:23PM PDT on May 4, 2012

Real food for real people.

add your comment

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Care2 - Be Extraordinary - Start a Care2 Petition
ads keep care2 free

Recent Comments from Causes

This is so sad. Peition signed, on January 16, 2015.

This is just awesome and goes to show that there are people out there that care

While at the same time, somewhere on this planet, an animal was eaten alive by another animal, some are…

meet our writers

Lindsay Spangler Lindsay Spangler is a Web Editor and Producer for Care2 Causes. A recent UCLA graduate, she lives in... more
ads keep care2 free

more from causes

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.