In American society, the environmental movement has gained the attention of many people. One of those movements is the “locavores”. Although some benefits are gained within this movements, there are also several less-examined effects of this movement that should be noted as well. People might think they do less harm to the environment, but they are misguided. They might help out their community but they end up hurting the other nations, they don’t really reduce the gas emitted by transportation and there nutrients in food is a small portion larger. There are many definitions of locavore, from advocates arguing for political boundaries, to using quasi-geographic terms, but the one we’re talking about is those who purchase their food from a 100-500mile radii(Roberts). Looking at source G, some people might be confused on what a locavore is, thinking that buying any kind of food from a location within a 50-100 mile radii is acceptable. What it really means is that buying food that comes from a 50-100miles radii farm. Some of their most obvious benefits of being a locavore include eating healthier and tastier foods, consuming fresher, helping out the economy and environment, preventing bio-terrorism and reducing pollution(Maiser). When bought from local farms, the money spent goes back into the local community, which doubles in terms of local economy(Maiser). This is true, money spent locally does benefit the local economy, but the national economy not so much. All of this economic profits helps out the farmers, reviving small farms and increasing federal funds to local agriculture as stated in Source E. However, source C explains that locavores can end up hurting farmers in other parts of the world where the economy depends on agricultural exportations Some regions in the US cant even farm due to their environmental location, they rely on imports from farmers around the world. Balancing the combination of national and local communities keeps the US agricultural
