Research before you donate

There is nothing I love more than to hear from readers and listeners. I especially like to hear from readers and listeners who have stepped away from the sidelines and engaged in the grassroots effort to tell the true story of agriculture. I hear from people every day who are taking simple yet meaningful steps to educate neighbors and friends about agriculture. Just because the first and second grade Sunday school teacher at church grew up on a farm doesn’t mean she has a complete understanding about modern agriculture practices. It’s been 15 years since she was raising pigs in dirt lots and showing those pigs at the county fair. Dirt lots might be fine for some, but there are modern housing options that have proven to provide a cleaner, healthier and safer environment for pigs and the people working with the pigs.

Technology has had an impact on every aspect of our lives, from the vehicles we drive to the appliances with which we do laundry and cook food for our families, to the medical and dental treatments we receive.

Maybe technology isn’t the best fit for everybody, but I sure prefer my energy efficient washing machine to the big old machine that used a lot more water, electricity and detergent and did a happy dance all over the laundry room when it was spinning the water out of my towels.

Last week, I heard from a reader who got in the game by doing a little research on his own. I wish I could tell you that I am the one who made the call, but I did not. This is the note I received from a farmer from Illinois:

“One program I watch is sponsored at least once per day by HSUS with the dreadful pictures of animals in wretched conditions and a message that suggests you can stop such treatment of animals for $19 per month. A toll free phone number is included. I called the number. The first exchange consisted of a request for my phone number which was denied by me. I requested information and stated that I was interested in participating by volunteering at the nearest shelter. The answer was that my $19 would help 3500 shelters. Being a hands-on type I insisted upon helping in person and where is a shelter. The answer was they helped 3500 shelters and she could not remember 3500 shelters. My request again was for just one shelter. The response was that she could not remember the name and location of 3500 shelters but for $19 per month I would be helping all of them and if not that a one-time donation of $25 could be made. That concluded the call and confirmed what you have been telling us and confirmed the suspicions I had on my own, not a whole lot different from the e-mail from Africa asking me for my bank account number so millions of dollars can be deposited from a dead man’s account there being no known heirs so the banker and I can share it as soon as I supply him with my bank account numbers. Judging from the e-mail I get there must not be a man left alive in Africa and they all died with no heirs to inherit the millions in their estates. Thought you’d like to know that someone pays attention to your column.”

What are you going to do this week to make a difference? To learn, to share, to educate? Get back to me on that, will you?

Celebrate diversity in agriculture!

As Americans, we are blessed to live in a country where freedom is and always has been central to so much in our lives.  We are a melting pot of different cultures, religious denominations, and ideologies.

Our great country was founded on the premise of freedom.  In America, one size does not fit all.  That applies to those who produce our food, fiber and fuel.  One-size-fits-all agriculture should not be our goal.     

 Audio

HSUS pushing on in Ohio

The Ohio Ballot Board has certified the Humane Society of the United States to circulate petitions in an effort to place an initiative on the state ballot this fall related to livestock housing and slaughter.

Tweeten explains, diminished animal agriculture means diminished crop production in Ohio. The poultry industry consumes more corn and soybean meal than any other livestock enterprise.

HSUS needs a total of 660,000 signatures to place the measure on the ballot for the November election.

If you think because this is happening in Ohio it doesn’t effect you, be forewarned. HSUS has made it clear they want Proposition 2-type legislation passed in every state. How do you stop them? By working together. By standing up to tell your story before HSUS does it for you, and for heaven’s sake, if you’re doing something wrong, change it or get out of the business.

Audio

Environmentally-friendly diet

Can adopting a vegetarian diet based around meat substitutes cause more damage to the environment?

According to a story by journalist Nick Collins posted at www.telegraph.uk, the study by Cranfield University, commissioned by environmental groupWWF, found a substantial number of meat substitutes were more harmful to the environment because they were imported into Britain from overseas.

I am a meat eater. However, I believe it is an individual’s right to choose whether or not they want to eat meat or not eat meat.

Let the consumer choose!

AUDIO

True colors shown

Over the course of the past few months, the animal rights group HSUS, Humane Society of the United States, has – if not shown its true colors – had its true colors shown with the help of others.

Just last week, The Center For Consumer Freedom, a non-profit organization supported by over 100 companies and thousands of individual consumers, placed a full page ad in the New York Times, highlighting “the failure of the Humane Society of the United States to devote a significant amount of money to supporting America’s underfunded pet shelters.”

 After the ag community and others raised their voices to let the makers of Yellow Tail wine know the truth about HSUS, the wine maker let it be known to the Animal Agriculture Alliance that future contributions will be made to organizations specifically devoted to hands-on care, such as rescue, sterilization, feeding, or disaster assistance - NOT HSUS.

AUDIO

HSUS now peddling dog food

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) has entered the pet food market with the launch of its Humane Choice dog food.  HSUS is marketing the product as a cruelty-free, all-natural dog food that does not contain animal-based proteins or support the factory farming industry.

HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle said the sales of this dog food will help provide them with ”additional resources to help animals through HSUS programs.”  

Friends, the Humane Society of the United States is NOT your local animal shelter. In fact, it gives less than one-half of one percent of its $100 million budget to hands-on pet shelters.

Humane Choice is produced by a certified organic grower and manufacturer in Uruguay.

Uraguay?

AUDIO

Animal abuser online registry?

According to a recent story in the New York Times, California may soon place animal abusers on the same level as sex offenders by listing them in an online registry.

There are those who believe that dogs and rats and cows and pigs are equal to boys and girls. I am not one of them. I am a firm believer that anyone who owns an animal should be responsible for that animal’s welfare. That means you provide feed, water and shelter for them and you don’t intentionally cause them physical harm.

Suggesting that animals have the same rights and place in society as people is, in my opinion, ludicrous.

AUDIO

Let the consumer choose

The recent USDA annual outlook conference in Washington, D.C. was a bit of an eye-opener for some in attendance.  Tim Burrack who chairs the Iowa Corn Promotion Board expressed concern about what he heard at the conference – specifically USDA’s shift in emphasis toward locally grown and organic foods.

Now hold on, he didn’t say that he is opposed to farmers choosing to grow organic or consumers buying locally grown foods.  His concern is that under this new reality, traditional production agriculture which has provided a safe and low-cost food supply will suffer.

What I find to be very interesting and somewhat disturbing is the use of key words or phrases that make people feel good about their “locally produced” food purchases and guilty about “traditional” purchases. IGD uses phrases like “ethically produced foods” and “thinking morally and buying locally.”

Does that mean a consumer who does not choose to buy locally produced foods is unethical and immoral? You can bet that there are some who believe this to be true.

Perhaps “traditional agriculture” should do a better job of educating consumers about the positive impact farms of all shapes and sizes have in their local communities.

Tell your story and let the consumer choose.

AUDIO

Let consumer choose

Last week’s USDA annual outlook conference in Washington, D.C. was a bit of an eye-opener for some in attendance. Tim Burrack who chairs the Iowa Corn Promotion Board expressed concern about what he heard at the conference, but told Ken Anderson from Brownfield Ag News that he is not really surprised.

Burrack’s concern? USDA’s shift in emphasis toward locally grown and organic foods.

Now hold on, he didn’t say that he is opposed to farmers choosing to grow organic or consumers buying locally grown foods. The Arlington, Iowa farmer says modern agriculture came under attack from many conference speakers and attendees. He explained that the direction from USDA is different than what has taken place in the first 36 years of his farming career.

Tim Burrack is a man of action, so he shared his concerns. “I just got up and told them, this is not the USDA that the people in the Midwest are familiar with.” Specifically, he told Deputy Agriculture Secretary Kathleen Merrigan, who is leading the USDA’s “Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food” program, what he thought.

Merrigan assured Burrack that USDA is big; there’s room for everybody. Burrack said he understands that that is the new reality that everyone needs to work under. His concern is that under this new reality, traditional production agriculture which has provided a safe and low-cost food supply will suffer.

At this time, the move toward locally produced food continues to grow. According to new research from food and grocery analysts IGD, almost a third of shoppers say they have specifically purchased locally produced food over the last month, double the number in 2006.

So then what becomes of that safe and low-cost food supply? I believe Burrack is on target when he says moving away from traditional agriculture will likely mean higher prices for food.

Tim Burrack was amazed at number of people – some who work for USDA and others who were just attending the USDA conference like he was – who said, “Thank you for saying what a lot of us are thinking.” At the same, Burrack says it’s apparent that those opposed to modern agriculture are feeling very emboldened by the Obama administration’s policies.

When researching cost-share opportunities through a USDA program, you’ll find that if you grow 100% organic or agree to be 100% organic in the next 3 years, your share for the cost of a high tunnel is much less than if you are a non-organic (traditional) grower.

What I find to be very interesting and somewhat disturbing is the use of key words or phrases that make people feel good about their “locally produced” food purchases and guilty about “traditional” purchases. IGD uses phrases like “ethically produced foods” and “thinking morally and buying locally.”

Does that mean a consumer who does not choose to buy locally produced foods is unethical and immoral? You can bet that there are some who believe this to be true.

When asked about food they have specifically purchased over the last month, IGD reports that shoppers responded:

• 30% said locally produced food (up from 15% in 2006)

• 27% Fair-trade products (up from 9%)

• 18% products with high animal welfare standards (up from 11%)

According to IGD research, many consumers purchase locally produced food not only to obtain the freshest produce, but because they have a strong desire to support local jobs, farms and stores. Perhaps “traditional agriculture” should do a better job of educating consumers about the positive impact farms of all shapes and sizes have in their local communities.

Tell your story and let the consumer choose.

Lawyers for dogs?

When Swiss voters go the polls on March 7th, one of the issues they will consider is whether animals should have lawyers. Proponents argue that the abuses of pets and other animals are often not taken seriously by local authorities and don’t make it to court.

The Swiss Farming Association opposes the plan, but pet breeders are said to be divided on the issue.

As it is now in the Switzerland, the constitution prohibits keeping pigs in single pens. Dog owners are required by law to take a training course and the country is 3 years away from making it illegal to tie a horse in its stall.

AUDIO

Next Page »