2008 Woodie Awards
Home > Opinion
Laughing Planet unlikely to improve on Holy Cow's sustainable practices
Letter to the Editor
Your recent editorial ("Holy Cow debate isn't so black and white," ODE, Feb. 8) over the impending loss of the Holy Cow Café at the food court in the EMU shows a blatant disrespect for an established and compassionate business. This is apparent from the ill-conceived childish drawing of a bloated cow that your staff chose to print. Apart from the argument of who is more "local" and who is more "sustainable," the bottom line is many people will lose their jobs, which supports them and their families. This comes at a time when the economy is at a virtual standstill and you have people with master's degrees applying for clerk jobs.
It is unlikely anything will change at the EMU's food court as far as economics are concerned, especially when the cost of everything under the sun is increasing at our universities. Holy Cow operated with sustainable practices before the word became cliché. They breathed life into an institutionalized food court that numbed the senses and depressed many who dared to enter it. Their entry into the food court was a flash of brilliance and inspiration, pleasing all the senses - unless one has been numbed from living with the "Standard American Diet" of heart-clogging and waist-bulging food coated in salt, sugar and fat used to disguise nutritionally depleted food that was grown in soils contaminated with toxic chemicals.
The argument is out there as to whether buying non-organic, locally grown foods (complete with an array of rat-tested pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, GMOs and the like) is more responsible than the organically grown food that may be grown further away. It is very unlikely that Laughing Planet can serve any locally grown foods at this time of year, unless their menu contains turnips, rutabagas, burdock root and chard.
Maybe the change is allowed by the letter of the law, but it is neither moral nor ethical to put out of business a thriving, local and sustainable business. But the editorial staff of the Emerald wouldn't know anything about moral values, unless there is a buck to be had. Sounds like the business ethics of a certain presidential administration.
Thomas William Baxter & Sherrie Sims
Dexter, OR
It is unlikely anything will change at the EMU's food court as far as economics are concerned, especially when the cost of everything under the sun is increasing at our universities. Holy Cow operated with sustainable practices before the word became cliché. They breathed life into an institutionalized food court that numbed the senses and depressed many who dared to enter it. Their entry into the food court was a flash of brilliance and inspiration, pleasing all the senses - unless one has been numbed from living with the "Standard American Diet" of heart-clogging and waist-bulging food coated in salt, sugar and fat used to disguise nutritionally depleted food that was grown in soils contaminated with toxic chemicals.
The argument is out there as to whether buying non-organic, locally grown foods (complete with an array of rat-tested pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, GMOs and the like) is more responsible than the organically grown food that may be grown further away. It is very unlikely that Laughing Planet can serve any locally grown foods at this time of year, unless their menu contains turnips, rutabagas, burdock root and chard.
Maybe the change is allowed by the letter of the law, but it is neither moral nor ethical to put out of business a thriving, local and sustainable business. But the editorial staff of the Emerald wouldn't know anything about moral values, unless there is a buck to be had. Sounds like the business ethics of a certain presidential administration.
Thomas William Baxter & Sherrie Sims
Dexter, OR
Be the first to comment on this story