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

Not of words but of deeds

In 1980, in her first year of high school, a farmer’s daughter from a rural Missouri community signed up for an agriculture education class and joined the FFA. Instead of following in her brother’s footsteps and raising hogs, this young lady chose to raise dogs for her supervised occupational education project.

Flash forward 3 decades and we find that young FFA member all grown up with a family of her own, living on a farm in the agricultural community where she was raised. She owns her own business. She pays taxes and spends money in her local community. She bought into that which so many of us who grew up on family farms bought into: there is opportunity if you are willing to work hard, maintain the good ethics with which you were raised, practice animal welfare and contribute to your community. This woman, like you and me, studied agriculture in high school and thrived in the organization that teaches leadership and citizenship and encourages us to believe in the future of the agriculture industry “with a faith born not of words but of deeds”

What began as a project in FFA became her life’s work. It allowed her to be a “stay-at-home” mom. It also gave her own mother a place to work, not far from the home farm.

In my universe, we celebrate this woman.

She was a high school student during the farm crisis of the 1980’s, witnessing the exodus of many families from their farms. She watched as fellow FFA members who headed off to college struggled with the decision, but ultimately had to choose a life and career outside of production agriculture because the opportunity dreamed of in the 70’s had shriveled up and died with the farm crisis.

It couldn’t have been easy for her. I don’t have to tell you about the input costs for raising animals – from housing to bedding, and from feed to veterinary services. She had to keep her pencil sharp, her facilities in ship-shape and the health and welfare of the animals she raised have always been a top concern.

Practicing animal welfare was from the very beginning an integral part of the business. It wasn’t something she had to think about. It was and is an inherent part of who she is.

My question to you is this: In what way is this woman so different from those of you who have called and written to me, suggesting that I am some kind of monster because I believe women like this have the right to raise and sell dogs?

This woman does not operate a “puppy mill,” yet if enough people n the state of Missouri sign a petition to get the proposal on the November ballot, she will be forced out of business. The petition was introduced in the state of Missouri by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

Yes, there are bad actors who raise and sell dogs in less-than-desirable conditions. There are bad actors in every industry, in every community, and in every walk of life. There are laws currently on the books that if enforced, will put bad actors out of business.

Most of you reading this column do not live in Missouri and might think this has nothing at all to do with you. It has everything to do with you

I am forever telling those who read this column or listen to my commentary on the radio to work together and arm yourself with knowledge. This woman is one of you. Before you shun her, perhaps you should take some initiative and learn about her business and about other dog breeders’ kennels.

While a Washington, D.C.- based animal rights group infiltrates your rural communities with anti-”puppy mill” messages, you should know two things:

First, if you raise livestock, you are next. Secondly, and most importantly, if we all stand together we will be stronger.

Next Page »