Spreading the Misinformation of Food Inc.

Dave Stockdale
Sustainability Honcho
Cattle call
SFGate.com
I was enjoying a meat-centric meal at a local restaurant a few days ago with some friends when someone brought up the film Food, Inc. So we ended up discussing the dark side of meat production while...

I was enjoying a meat-centric meal at a local restaurant a few days ago with some friends when someone brought up the film Food, Inc. So we ended up discussing the dark side of meat production while enjoying our nicely prepared pastured beef short ribs. If you also saw this film, then what follows will not be new. And yet, it never hurts to remind ourselves of some of the issues and concerns.

As the aforementioned movie revealed for many previously unaware folks, the idyllic vision we have of cows grazing on open fields under blue skies is not a very realistic picture of cattle production today. While many cattle in the United States do begin their lives on relatively small, family-owned ranches with ample amounts of pasture or rangeland, the vast majority of cattle end their lives in large, overcrowded feedlots. In many feedlots, their diet switches to grains and other products such as flesh, bones, hooves, and feathers of other animals, chicken or cattle manure, stale pastry, ground cardboard, and even plastic hay.

Cattle are a ruminant (or cud-chewing) species, as are goats, sheep, and bison. Their specialized digestive system has evolved over millennia to digest the biodiversity of grasses found on pastureland. When ruminant animals such as cattle are fed a grain-based diet, it can cause them a range of health problems, so they are often administered antibiotics to fend off the diseases they might contract under these conditions. The cattle are also often given growth hormones to make them grow bigger faster.

Not all grain-fed cattle are subject to the worst feedlot conditions. Some feedlots are less crowded and are managed without the use of antibiotics or hormones. Some facilities feed their cattle only grain and other foodstuffs (a typical diet might include barley, corn, wheat, soy meal, sugar beet pulp, cane molasses and hay) without all the fillers and questionable by-products. Feedlots producing certified organic dairy products or beef must follow guidelines that include feeding the animals certified organic grain, avoiding antibiotics and hormones, and providing some access to pasture.

In addition to the effects on animal health, the feedlot system also has some serious environmental impacts. Overcrowding of animals produces excessive amounts of manure that cannot be recycled on site. Runoff from this manure creates an excess of nitrogen in watersheds. Methane gas produced by cattle contributes to global warming. The large-scale industrial production of grain to feed the animals includes high usage of pesticides and herbicides and the widespread use of genetically engineered seed.

The feedlot system also has social consequences. As commodity prices for beef and dairy products are driven down, small family-owned ranches are often driven out of business. Those that do manage to stay afloat generally work on contract with a few large corporations, greatly limiting their autonomy, financial security, and opportunities for growth. Feedlots themselves can be toxic environments for the workers who operate them and smelly eyesores for the communities that house them. Slaughterhouses can be dangerous for workers when speed and production are considered more important than safety.

Keeping cattle on open rangeland or pasture from birth until death is an alternative to the feedlot system. Because cattle eat the diet that is biologically appropriate for them and their digestive systems, the health problems outlined above are eliminated. The negative environmental and social consequences are lessened too. Research is also showing that there are also significant health advantages to eating dairy products or beef from pasture-raised animals.

I don't eat animal protein every day, but when I do, I buy ingredients or seek out menu items that feature pastured animals whenever possible. It's my way of supporting a production system that I believe is better for me, the animals, and the planet. That fact that these products also taste better and have a more interesting texture to me is an added bonus!

This blogger from San Francisco learned everything about modern livestock production from watching the movie Food Inc. and is eager to share it.  Line by line you can go through this article and see how this mockery of a film has misinformed consumers.  For example, according to this guy every feedlot is overcrowded.  On more than one occassion he refers to overcrowded feedlots.  He also mentions that most family farmers and ranchers that raise beef are doing it for a large corporation.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  The next time you don't feel like sharing your story consider the idea that this guy is eager to share your story for you and it's apparent that he's not concerned about the truth. 

Beef Burgers, It's What's for Dinner

Appetite for "better burgers" shows no satiety
By MATTHEW BARAKAT (AP) – 21 hours ago

FALLS CHURCH, Va. — With a drive-through seemingly on every corner, you might think the market for burgers long ago reached saturation. But the fastest-growing restaurant chain in America last year was Five Guys, which specializes in double-pattied behemoths the size of a softball.

And that's just the tip of the arugula. So-called "better burger" joints are one of the fastest-growing parts the restaurant industry. Celebrity chef Bobby Flay launched Bobby's Burger Palace in the Northeast. Elevation Burger is expanding into Kuwait. Mooyah Burgers & Fries, Meatheads and the Shake Shack are looking to expand.

Higher-grade beef, fresher or more creative toppings, and better buns are bringing customers in the door.

It's a market that has room to grow. Such chains represent only about 2 percent of the $65 billion burger market, said Darren Tristano, executive vice president of Chicago-based restaurant consultant Technomic. Read More

People love burgers! Even with so much misinformation about beef production being put out there by vegan animal rights activists, consumers love what we produce. However, we need to maintain that relationship by continually sharing with them how that beef gets on their plate. They want to know and there are a lot of groups that jump at the chance to tell them their version and make it harder for the truth to get out. Education and promotion are essential items that should be on every producer’s daily chore list.

Are You Telling Your Story?

Ranchers fight animal activists
Beef consumer study helps cattlemen tell their story, boost battered image
By MATTHEW WEAVER
Capital Press

PASCO, Wash. -- Tom Field doesn't mind if consumers think a little differently, so long as they're eating beef.

In the midst of a fragmented consumer market, Field, the producer education executive director of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, presented marketing measures the beef industry needs to take during the Washington Cattlemen's Association annual convention in Pasco, Wash.

Consumers are besieged by negative messages from animal activists, said Field, a Centennial, Colo., rancher.

However, the majority of consumers do not necessarily change their beef consumption behavior, an association study showed.

"(Our) enemies want to paint us into this realm of being these unfeeling, uncaring industrialists running a chemical company," Field said. "I say to every reporter, 'On our ranch, we would love being able to control just one variable.' We react to the market, the weather, policy and our urban development neighbors. We don't have control over nothing, except our attitudes."

Field recommended that the best tactic to battle negative campaigns is to personalize the industry, promoting an image of good people with a legacy of caring for their animals, the environment and their land.

"People want to hear your story," Field said. "It's the best story you have to tell." Read More

I know that some people may be getting tired of hearing that they need to go tell their story. But unfortunately, until everyone is out doing something, we have to keep emphasizing the importance of doing so. Now I know that some folks don’t think they have the opportunities to talk to our consumers. That’s simply not true. The best place to start is in your own local communities. Even in our rural communities, there are people that don’t understand how their food is grown. If that isn’t a big enough stage for you, then take your advocacy online and share with the entire world how you grow food and fiber. It doesn’t matter so much what you are doing, so long as you are doing something to advocate for agriculture. Our consumers are asking for this so let’s deliver it.

YPC Cattle Call Blog

Cattle producers take their thoughts to the Web
Young Producers' Council wants to energize the emerging generation
By TIM HEARDEN
Capital Press

The emerging generation of cattle producers is bringing the beef industry into the digital age.
The National Cattlemen's Beef Association's Young Producers' Council has launched a blog and Facebook page to get people from college to their mid-30s more involved in industry issues.

Cari Rincker, 29 and a Shelbyville, Ill., cattle producer and agriculture attorney who leads the council's public relations committee, said there are already more than 1,000 people linked to the Facebook page and a dozen contributors have signed up to blog.

"NCBA has more than 30,000 members and the average NCBA member is about 60 years old," Rincker said. "The goal of YPC is ultimately to get more young people involved with NCBA so they can help shape NCBA policies.

"Young people are certainly a big part of the beef industry, yet they seem to not have a lot of a voice right now," she said. "We're quickly becoming a social media world. The blogosphere is a great way for young beef producers to get their stories out to the public." Read More

It’s really exciting to see so more farmers and ranchers that realize the importance of taking the time to tell their story. Congratulations to Cari Rincker and the rest of YPC for putting this blog together. Not only is it good for our consumers to learn more about the beef industry, but it’s also good for those folks who are in the beef business to be reminded that there are young, passionate ranchers out there who are ready to take on the challenges of raising cattle and promoting their product in the 21st century.

Pollan's Views To Be Balanced By Others at Cal Poly

Controversy erupts over Michael Pollan's Poly lecture
Harris Ranch Beef chairman calls for 'balanced forum'
BY KATHY JOHNSTON

Nationally known sustainable food expert Michael Pollan will now be part of a panel discussion at Cal Poly on Oct. 15 rather than giving his planned one-hour lecture. The recently announced format change comes on the heels of a letter to Cal Poly President Warren Baker from Harris Ranch Beef Company Chairman David E. Wood, threatening to withdraw a pledged $500,000 donation for a new meat processing facility on the campus.

“I find it unacceptable that the university would provide Michael Pollan an unchallenged forum to promote his stand against conventional agricultural practices,” Wood wrote in a Sept. 23 letter to Baker. The invitation “caused me to rethink my continued financial support of the university,” he wrote.

Pollan is the award-winning author of An Omnivore’s Dilemma and In Defense of Food, and appears in a recent documentary, Food, Inc. He is a Knight Professor of Journalism at University of California, Berkeley, Graduate School of Journalism.

The Sustainable Agriculture Resource Consortium, which invited Pollan to speak at a free lecture at 11 a.m. on Oct. 15 at the Performing Arts Center on campus, will now present “A Conversation with Michael Pollan,” which will also include Gary Smith, Monfort Endowed Chair in meat science at Colorado State University, and Myra Goodman, cofounder of organic vegetable company Earthbound Farms.

Baker replied to Wood in a Sept. 28 letter, “We are diligently working to create a more balanced forum for October 15. … Our singular goal is to provide our students with a full perspective on how the agriculture industry is working to be efficient in its production techniques, and to make sure that our students are familiar with the full range of ideas that are being advanced today.”
Each speaker will make opening comments before accepting written questions from the audience.

Harris Ranch spokesman Michael Smith, assistant to Wood, said in a phone interview from the beef company’s headquarters in Selma that a decision about funding for Cal Poly’s meat facility “has yet to be made.” Smith, a Cal Poly agriculture alumnus, said many alumni will be coming to the forum “as a show of force about the direction the College of Agriculture is taking.”

Smith said, “People across the nation are upset. They are saying enough is enough. This is bigger than Michael Pollan.” Read More

It’s very exciting for me to see that people are willing to stand up and defend agriculture and the need to grow enough food for everyone to eat against Michael Pollan. Three years ago when I would tell people about this guy and the lies and sensationalism that he used against my family and industry, most had never heard of him. Today, people are starting to realize that what he is promoting is reckless elitism. His plans would result in less food produced in a less efficient manner. He has tried to sell his ideas by blatantly misrepresenting the truth about modern production agriculture. And it’s not because he hasn’t seen it for himself. I spent two day with him back in 2002 as he was learning about the beef industry. But rather than sharing that knowledge with consumers, he chose to scare them instead. If he was the high quality writer that he’s given credit for, he wouldn’t have to sensationalize his stories to sell his books. Congratulations to Cal Poly and the alumni, who were instrumental in making sure Pollan’s one-sided half-truths aren’t the only story being told that day.

Consumers Enjoying Affordable Food

When it comes to food, consumers say price does matter
By Drovers news source Tuesday, September 29, 2009

As consumers place more emphasis on price and value as they fill their grocery carts, America’s conventional beef producers are helping ease the financial burden of rising food costs.

According to the Food Marketing Institute’s (FMI) 2009 U.S. Grocery Shopper Trends1, nearly 70 percent of shoppers say the recession is affecting their food shopping — up from 48 percent in 2008. Consumers in every income bracket are checking prices before checking out at the grocery store.

“U.S. consumers are facing rising food costs in a very challenging economy. What most consumers don’t know is that conventional production systems and using modern technologies keep beef affordable,” says Jan Lyons, owner of Lyons Ranch near Manhattan, Kansas.

“Conventional beef production significantly increases the volume of beef produced while conserving natural resources and reducing production costs across all segments of the industry. The result is more affordable beef for everyone.”

Conventional beef production keeps meat-case prices down

A 2009 analysis by Iowa State University agricultural economists Dr. John Lawrence and Maro Ibarburu shows if conventional beef production practices were replaced by organic- or natural-only practices, beef production would decrease by 18 percent and retail prices would increase by 11 percent. Read More

Conventional modern agriculture is under attack, mostly for being too productive. Elitists in this country don’t appreciate a safe affordable food supply since it doesn’t really matter to them. But to families that live paycheck to paycheck, it’s a make or break difference. This article does a nice job of highlighting the benefits of modern beef production.

Avery's Response to Anti-Meat Article

Sunday, August 9, 2009
Giving up Meat to Save the Planet
GreeenIsm piece by Guest: Dennis T. Avery

One of the persistent, shallow global food myths is that the world could feed more people if we gave up eating meat. Ezra Klein wrote another misguided column about this - “The Meat of the Problem” - in the Washington Post of July 29. Klein cites as his authority a naive “study” by the kids at Carnegie-Mellon University.

Klein asserts, “It is more energy efficient to grow grain and feed it to people than it is to grow grain and turn it into feed that we give to calves until they become adults that we then slaughter to feed to people.”

No, Mr. Klein, it isn’t. Either your kids haven’t done their homework, or they deliberately set out to promote vegetarian diets.

Point One: Our biggest source of livestock feed is . . . (drum-roll) . . . grass! Humans can’t get nourishment from it, but huge tracts of the earth’s land are too dry, too steep or too rocky for grain. We let cows and calves harvest sparse crops of grass from massive tracts of the American Great Plains, Canadian Prairie Provinces, the Australian Outback, New Zealand, the sandy steppes of Hungary, and huge tracts of Khazakstan—to name but a few grasslands.

Point Two: If these grassy areas aren’t grazed by animals, the dry grass will ultimately be struck by lightning, ignite, and release fiery clouds of CO2! Read More

The article that Ezra Klein wrote has received a lot of attention from both sides of the argument. Since people like Klein are so uneducated about beef production, they don’t realize that all cattle spend the vast majority of their lives eating grass. Dennis Avery does a great job of trying to educate consumers on the subject. Ruminant animals give us the ability to use a natural resource that humans can’t utilize. We would literally starve to death with our stomach full of grass. Ruminant animals on the other hand can take this resource and convert it into a protein source that is readily available to our digestive system. The argument that eating meat is destroying our planet is being made by those that don’t fully understand the beef industry.

Chicago Field Museum's Anti-Beef Display

As many of you know, Stacy and I were in Chicago this past week attending a Young Farmers and Ranchers committee meeting. We went in a day early so that we could see some of the sights in town. Only one other time had we been to the Windy City, but on that first trip we visited the Chicago Field Museum. I really enjoy visiting museums and so we decided that was going to be the first stop of the day. The other reason that we liked this place is because it houses one of South Dakota’s most famous and oldest residents. Sue the T. Rex is one of the most complete dinosaurs of her type that has ever been discovered. She was found about 80 miles northeast of where we live so we always figure that she wouldn’t mind having some visitors from back home.

The museum regularly features some traveling exhibits and one of them right now is an exhibit about water. So we bought our tickets and that was our first stop. Part way through the exhibit it talks about water usage for agriculture. Some of it was worded a little strange but nothing totally out of line. But then I came across a display that was hard not to notice. The title on the display board was “The Thirstiest Crop of All…Beef”.

I stood there stunned at what I was reading. There was plenty of misinformation being touted as the truth at a very respected museum. Among the many claims were things like it takes 1800 gallons of water to produce just one pound of beef, it talks about grain feeding our cows, and that industrial beef waste easily spills and pollutes ground and surface water. Of course the answer to all of these problems is to grass feed cattle.

As I was trying to soak this all in, a family walks by with two teenage girls. One of the girls mentioned to her parents that this is why she doesn’t eat beef. Hearing something like that, I jumped at the chance to tell them the truth about beef production. Unfortunately, they walked away from me without giving me a chance to hear my story, but the next several people that stopped by know a lot more about beef production now. After talking to several visitors about why this exhibit was wrong, I decided that I needed to talk to a museum official about this issue. Come to find out, that’s harder than it should be.

Everyone that works on the floor of the museum is a volunteer. And to boot, none of them could offer me anything other than filling out a comment card. There was a phone number on their brochure that I finally called. When answered they run you through a maze of options, but none of them was one that I needed. I wanted to speak to a real person. Well, one of the options was to push 3 if you want to make a donation. I know that money talks, so I figured when that button gets pushed it gets somebody’s attention. And it did. They transferred me to guest relations where all I could do was leave a message.

I didn’t hear back from them until yesterday. I actually visited with a very nice lady who explained to me that the exhibit originates from the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. After listening to all of my concerns she seemed eager to take my case to the next level. She sent an email to her contact at the musem in New York and they are looking into it. However, she feels that it would help if they actually heard from me directly. This exhibit is scheduled to travel around North America for at least the next year. So there is still plenty of time to get this corrected. However, they are going to need to hear from more people than just me.

Follow this link to see exactly what the exhibit says about beef production.

I have no doubt that we can get this changed, but it will take a group effort as usual. I know that everyone is busy but we must always ask ourselves if we can afford not to act.

Have a great weekend.

Troy

Update:

If you wish to contact the American Museum of Natural History about this, please send an email to Charles McClean cmclean@amnh.org. He is handling this now. I was supposed to hear something from them after Labor Day and after emails and call since then, they still aren't responding to my requests to visit about this subject. Please let them know that this discussion needs to take place. Thanks.

Troy
10/8/09

Water Myths

The Water to Grow Beef
SFGate.com 5/5/09

In the water world there is growing interest in measuring and reporting how much water is needed to produce "things" -- goods and services that humans desire. See the table "The Water Content of Things" from the new volume of The World's Water 2008-2009 (Peter Gleick, editor, Island Press, Washington D.C.). Several different tools and approaches have been developed and described, including "virtual water" (most people, including me, credit this concept to Professor Tony Allen of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London); the "water footprint"; and "embedded water." All of these are based on the same idea: it takes water to do things. One of the most remarkable, and most remarked on, numbers to come out of these efforts is the water to produce beef, and so that is my "water number" for today's post:

Water Number: It takes around 16,000 liters (or kilograms) of water (and sometimes up to 70,000 kilograms) to make a single kilogram of beef.

For those of you who have no basis for comparison, this is a VERY BIG NUMBER. It takes only around 1000 kilograms of water to make a kilogram of grain, which partly explains why it is so big for beef -- it take a lot of grain, forage, and roughage to feed a cow, as well as water to drink and service the cow. When all of this is added up, it comes to around 16,000 kg water/kg meat produced. In comparison, other meats like chicken, lamb, and goat also require substantial amounts of water, but typically far less than beef. Read More

According to the Journal of Animal Science, livestock production only accounts for 11% of the total US water use. The other thing that the author didn’t do was to do a nutritional comparison between foods. It may take more water to raise some food, but you also need to look at the energy return as well. The fact of the matter is that it takes water to do everything. Everything with life requires it, but humans are still the biggest culprit of wasting water.