The inside scoop on the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade debacle

This past week some of you may have seen the news coming from our home state of South Dakota about how farmers and ranchers were upset with the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade float that the state of South Dakota sponsors.  The state tourism department had put out a press release announcing Joan Jett was going to be on the float this year. 

For those of you who aren’t aware, much like the SD Department of Tourism, Joan Jett is a a card carrying PETA member. She has been featured in ads supporting meatless Monday’s and claims ranchers abuse their livestock, destroy the environment and poison people with the food we produce. Tourism is a big part of our state’s economy-the second largest industry in our state, agriculture. 

This set our wheels to turning. First, a call was made to the Department of Tourism to talk to someone about this decision.  It’s important to find the source of the information, we don’t want to hang people out to dry. We want to know the reason behind the decision and get the accurate information out. We always encourage the people we work with to find the source and not just go off on a witch hunt.

Second, we posted the information on our personal Facebook page. We felt this was a local issue and didn’t release it to everyone. We encouraged our friends to also contact the Tourism department. We didn’t want anyone fired, we wanted to make sure people understand why this has a negative impact on our number ONE industry in the state.  Our tax payer dollars were going to support someone who is actively trying to stop what our family does. 

Some within agriculture were upset that we gained the attention to this issue, because it hit all the major news sources including CNN, MSN and FoxNews plus some entertainment channels.  But that is what agriculture has been doing for years, just letting PETA say what they say about us and not doing anything.  That approach really hasn’t worked well for us has it?

In the end we got it changed, but it’s because people came together and shared their voice. So share your voice and make positive change. 

Fur and Wool Ban Not Popular

November 30, 2011

A Cool Reception to a Ban on Fur

By IAN LOVETT - NYTimes.com

WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif.

FUR is everywhere on the high fashion row of Melrose Avenue. It lines jackets on the mannequins in John Varvatos, dangles from scarves in the windows of Kitson, and drapes from hangers at Maxfield. Even on a 75-degree day in November, fur remains very much in season here.

And in the last week, these swanky window displays have become something of a political statement, a symbol of resistance to an ordinance that was passed Nov. 21 making this city the first in the country to ban the sale of fur apparel.

While boutiques here prepare for the ban to take effect in September 2013, Melrose Avenue may offer an early reading on the future of fur in the fashion industry: Even as animal rights activists declare victory, designers and storeowners have reiterated their commitment to fur’s place in high fashion, warning that shoppers will simply take their business outside of West Hollywood.

At the boutiques along Melrose Avenue, sales clerks scoffed at the idea that fur was falling out of fashion. One called the ban “ridiculous,” another said it was “super annoying.” Far from beginning to clear fur from their shelves, store owners are instead talking about clearing out of the city.     Read More

You'd be hard pressed to find anyone that believes West Hollywood, CA would represent the views of mainstream America.  This ban on fur and wool has gone so far though that even many of the people that live and work there feel that it's ridiculous.  Livestock and even wild animals provide us with many significant resources.  When it comes to the fur from wild animals, it's necessary for us to manage their populations appropriately anyhow so we might as well utilize the resources they provide us rather than waste them.  

Interestingly enough, these people even banned the sale of wool in this ordinance.  Giving a sheep a haircut once a year hardly matches the cruelty that PETA, HSUS and other anti-agriculture group would like you to believe.  -Troy

My November Column

Every month I write a column for the Dakota Farmer magazine.  I've really enjoyed writing it over the last couple years.  Last months column was pretty special for me.  I've had several people tell me that this has been their favorite article I've written.  Take a look and tell me what you think.


Click here to see the magazine article.

The cable news channel CNN ran a story on their website this summer that raised the question “Does 4-H desensitizes kids to killing?”.  As a former 4-H member for 13 years and the parent of a first year 4-H member this certainly caught my attention.  Over the course of those 13 years I spent countless hours leading, washing, combing and clipping on calves.  I did everything I could to make them as comfortable and healthy as possible.  So how could anyone ever believe that this somehow desensitizes kids?  

According to the story, some believe that 4-H helps desensitize youngsters into having no emotional attachment to animals raised for food.  A few of the commenters even tried to claim that this was some grand conspiracy by the meat industry to keep them in business.  Apparently by forcing these kids to sell their livestock to be processed somehow turns them into greedy, uncaring people and will lead to a life of mistreating the animals in their care.  

The truth of the matter is that it teaches kids about responsibility and how life works and is sustained.  We just capped off our 4-H year with a trip to Rapid City, SD for the Western Junior Livestock Show.  It’s a tremendous show that our son was very excited to be part of.  For his first year in 4-H he decided to show a bred heifer named Morgan.  All summer and through the fall he learned how to care for his calf.  He probably put a hundred miles on his bike just going back and forth to the barn to check on her.  In the end his hard work paid off when he proudly marched his well-behaved heifer into that show ring with a grin on his face.  

While we were at the show I tried to figure out how all of the hard work each one of those kids had put in that summer could somehow be a bad thing?  I didn’t see any desensitized kids.  What I saw were hard working, polite young people, working with their families and their fellow 4-Her’s to learn responsibility and proper livestock care.  

I also couldn’t help but think what a better place our world may be if every kid had a “Morgan” in their life for just one summer.  Morgan will be in our herd for the next several years but like every cow on the ranch her time will come to an end.  However, the lessons she taught our son will last forever and for that I’m grateful.  

Revised Guidelines for Livestock Processing

Meat Inspectors Get Clout to Stop Inhumane Slaughter

BY DAN FLYNN | AUG 16, 2011

Meat inspectors at federally regulated plants that slaughter animals got new instructions for humane treatment of animals.

Announced Monday by USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), the instructions come in the form of a new 40-page directive. The rules go into effect on Sept. 15. 

The directive on enforcement of humane handling codifies changes made in the last few years to ensure that animals going to slaughter are treated properly.  It replaces FSIS policies published in 1998 and 2003.

The new version, which FSIS says is going to require additional training for meat inspectors, includes a definition for "egregious inhumane handling" of animals -- "any act or condition that results in severe harm to animals, which includes the excessive beating or prodding of disabled livestock, stunning animals and allowing them to regain consciousness, or any treatment causing unnecessary pain and suffering."

The directive also provides inspectors with "verification instructions" to ensure that treatment of livestock during handling and slaughter "minimizes the animals' amount of excitement, pain, injury or discomfort."

Read More

The goal of everyone in agriculture is to continue improving on our methods.  These guidelines are updated on a fairly regular basis because we keep finding better ways to handle issues that arise.  It’s vital that we learn from problems that have happened in the past and I think this proves that we do.  No one wants to see instances of livestock being mistreated. 

Shelter Closing Due to Association with HSUS

Second Chance Rescue Center Closing Its Doors

Published: July 22, 2011, 6:08 AM

SIOUX FALLS, SD - A Sioux Falls animal shelter that recently fired its executive director and has faced financial troubles is closing. 

Second Chance Rescue Center announced Friday morning it could not overcome challenges it was up against and has decided to close its doors Sunday, July 24. 

In May, the organization announced it had fired its founder and executive director Rosey Quinn, but wouldn't say why, and that the shelter was going to head in a new direction. The organization's Board of Directors said that would involve a transition from a rescue center to an adoption center and a name change. 

The shelter also was involved in controversy over the past several years, including the large dog raid in 2009 where 172 dogs were taken from Turner County dog breeder Dan Christensen. The charges against Christensen were dropped when a judge decided Quinn acted illegally in obtaining a search warrant.    Link

Second Chance Rescue in Sioux Falls learned the unfortunate lesson of what happens when you work with a group like the HSUS that is more concerned with ending livestock and pet ownership rather than animal welfare.  As is the case in most animal welfare issues that HSUS is associated with, the animals end up suffering worse.  The HSUS convinced this shelter to lie to a judge in order to get a warrant to seize a group of dogs.  When the truth finally surfaced the judge order the dogs returned and now the Sioux Falls community has one less animal shelter.  

Animal Rights Group Allowed Abuse to Continue

Games over Indonesian animal cruelty videos cost animals' lives

EXCLUSIVE by Simon Benson

From: The Daily Telegraph

June 17, 2011

ANIMAL rights groups withheld film evidence of shocking animal cruelty in Indonesian slaughterhouses from the government for three months - before launching a major publicity campaign.

The RSPCA said it had considered the "ethical" dilemma of refusing the government access to the footage until the ABC's Four Corners highlighted the abuse two weeks ago, and admitted its actions meant thousands of animals would continue to be slaughtered between the time it discovered the brutal killings and when the footage was finally made public.

But the RSPCA said it feared the government would have done nothing had it been shown the footage earlier.    Read More

As has been the case with so many undercover videos filmed by animal rights activists, their political motivations were more important than actually stopping the abuse.  For months they were aware of this cruelty yet refused to inform authorities about it.  And now their solution is to end live exports, not how to improve facilities that handle the cattle or better training for those that work in them.  This is like ending the production of cars to prevent traffic accidents.  Their true motivation is to eliminate animal agriculture which explains their actions.  -TH

SDSU Students Study Unwanted Horse Issues

SDSU students outline unwanted horse problem

Steve Miller Journal correspondent | Posted: Sunday, January 30, 2011 9:00 am | (2) Comments

The number of unwanted horses in the United States is growing by nearly 150,000 a year since the closing of the last U.S. slaughter plants, and no single, easy solution is in sight.

Those were some conclusions of a study conducted by students in South Dakota State University’s animal and range sciences department.

Ten students presented their study Friday to a small audience at Rushmore Plaza Civic Center during the Black Hills Stock Show & Rodeo.

In 2006, the year before the last three horse slaughtering plants closed in the United States, about 105,000 horses were killed, said first-year graduate student Kathy Koch of Crofton, Neb.

The plants were forced to close after Congress eliminated funding for federal inspection of horse meat for human consumption.

Since then, thousands of unwanted U.S. horses have been going to slaughter plants in Mexico and Canada.

An outright ban on the sale or transportation of horses for slaughter is pending in Congress.

Koch said there are now about 170,000 unwanted horses each year.

She said that even if all 432 adoption facilities in the country could take 50 horses each, only 21,600 horses could be adopted, leaving a net of 148,400 unwanted horses.    Read More

The issue of unwanted horses continues to grow.  While many of the animal rights activists think everything is fine and refuse to engage in real discussions of how to handle so many unwanted horses, there plenty of people in agriculture that are looking at a real problem and offering real solutions.  There seems to be plenty of people that think we live in a world where nothing ever dies and life is always happy and easy.  The real story is this, the only way life can continue to exist on this planet is if something dies every day.  The success of life depends on death.  We have the ability to use these livestock as a resource that not only assists us in their life but also in their death.  There's nothing wrong with using horses to feed people.  For thousands of years we have relied on livestock to benefit our lives and that still holds true today.  The cruelest thing we can do for these horses, to mother nature and to ourselves is waste this natural resource.  

Summit of the Horse

U.S. NEWS
JANUARY 5, 2011

Horse Slaughter Is Reconsidered
Animal-Welfare Groups Are Joining Ranchers in a Push to Revive an Industry That Died in 2007
By STEPHANIE SIMON

Less than four years after the last equine slaughterhouses in the U.S. closed down, an unlikely coalition of ranchers, horse owners and animal-welfare groups is trying to bring them back.

The group, gathering in Las Vegas this week for a conference called Summit of the Horse, aims to map out a strategy for reviving an industry that slaughtered as many as 100,000 horses a year in the U.S. before it was effectively shut down by congressional action in 2007.

Advocates say the slaughterhouses could bring an economic boost to rural areas and give owners who no longer have the means or inclination to care for the horses an economical and humane way to dispose of them.

"We believe that humane processing is absolutely a moral and an ethical choice," said Sue Wallis, a Wyoming state lawmaker who organized the event.

Animal-rights supporters have been lobbying Congress for a ban on exporting horses for slaughter. They've had no success—but even if a ban did pass, some activists say, it would do little to ease suffering, as owners desperate to shed responsibility for their animals might simply abandon them to starve. Hiring a veterinarian to euthanize and dispose of a horse can cost hundreds of dollars. Horse-rescue groups take in some unwanted animals, but they don't have the resources to care for them all.


"Every day, I'm turning horses away. I feel like I'm playing God, because I have to pick and choose," said Whitney Wright, director of Hope for Horses, a rescue group in Asheville, N.C. She worked to shut down slaughterhouses but now would like to see a few reopen under strict guidelines for humane handling.

Read More

There is no doubt that there is an over-abundance of horses in this country. The availability of a domestic harvest facility would greatly reduce the suffering that is currently taking place. The Summit of the Horse is currently taking place where discussions about this very thing are taking place. While animal rights activists like to spend their time mocking those of us who raise livestock and provide food for this country, we are having the serious discussions that need to take place.

There's No Such Thing As Hormone Free

Hormone meat pulled off shelves


• Wendy Hargreaves
• From: Sunday Herald Sun, Austrailia
• December 26, 2010 12:00AM


It is an Australian first that has sent shock waves through the meat industry.

Industry experts predict higher beef prices as more customers demand hormone-free meat, which makes up about half of all beef sold in Australia.

Farmers have used hormone growth promotants (HGPs) to speed up muscle growth in cattle for more than 30 years, backed by rigorous safety approval from health authorities.

But in a survey of 1000 people by Meat and Livestock Australia, leaked to the Sunday Herald Sun, almost half said they would consume less meat if it had added hormones, while 16 per cent would "never touch it again" and 15 per cent would "actively warn others".

Without the HGPs, industry experts said another two million head of cattle would be needed to make up a shortfall in meat, creating environmental problems.    Read More

The most common question we get as we talk to consumers is about hormones. Most media stories, like this one, fail to give readers all of the information they need in order to make a sound decision. All food has hormones in it. Both animal and plant-based foods contain hormones. Hormones are the chemical messengers that life depends on. Many plants actually contain higher levels of hormones than meat does. There is no such thing as hormone free food.



The difference in hormone levels from a 3 ounce piece of beef treated with a growth hormone versus one that wasn’t is one-half of a nanogram. That’s one-half of one-billionth of a gram. Compare that to the amount of estrogen in a birth control pill, which is in the neighborhood of 34,000 nanograms. You would have to eat nearly 5 million pounds of beef to equal the amount of hormones in a year’s supply of birth control pill.


It’s essential that we put things in context when we are having discussions like these.

Pacelle, HSUS Says Vick Should Have Dogs Again

Humane Society president open to Michael Vick owning dogs again


By the CNN Wire Staff

(CNN) -- The head of one of America's biggest animal protection organizations said Thursday that Michael Vick, who served prison time for his role in a deadly dogfighting operation, should have the opportunity to bring a dog home -- in due time.

Humane Society President Wayne Pacelle told HLN's Jane Velez-Mitchell that the Philadelphia Eagles quarterback shouldn't get a pet immediately and should have to meet certain milestones whenever he does. But Pacelle, whose group has worked with Vick in public outreach efforts, said that it would be wrong to close the door to his ever having a dog again.

"He's been going through counseling, he's been speaking to kids twice a month, and he needs to interact with animals," said Pacelle. "If he continues to hit these markers, then if his daughter wants a dog two or three years down the line,... I'm saying that we should be open to that possibility."    Read More

So Pacelle and the HSUS continue to try driving animal agriculture out of this country yet he has no problem letting Vick own dogs again?  Vick forced dogs to kill each other and farmers and ranchers are using livestock to help feed the world and Pacelle thinks the farmers and ranchers are a bigger threat?  The reality bus left HSUS long ago but things like this continue to remind us how out of touch they really are. 

NE Gov Tells HSUS To Stay Out

Nebraska governor on HSUS: ‘We’re going to beat them’


December 9, 2010 by Ken Anderson
BrownfieldAgNews.com

The governor of Nebraska is sending a strong message to the Humane Society of the United States—if the animal rights group goes after the state’s livestock industry, it’s in for a fight.

“The Humane Society of the United States is anti-agriculture and they’re out to destroy animal agriculture—and if they want to come to Nebraska, we’re going to fight them and we’re going to beat them,” Heineman says. “Agriculture is the number one industry in this state. It’s what makes our economy so strong. I’m going to stand tall and this is a fight we won’t shy away from.”

In an interview with Brownfield after his speech to the Nebraska Cattlemen’s group in Kearney, Heineman made it clear that compromise is not an option.

“In Nebraska, no deal, no compromise—we’re going to stand up, we’re going to beat them,” he says. “They’d be better off going somewhere else because they’re going to lose if they stay in Nebraska.”

HSUS has recently become more active in Nebraska, hiring a state director and holding a town hall meeting in Lincoln.     Link

It’s great to see our elected leaders stand up for their constituents against the lying bully that is the HSUS.  Their efforts to eliminate animal agriculture are more apparent than ever and it’s being noticed.  I would think it must be getting tougher for Pacelle to continue trying to sell his group as just an animal welfare group.  You don’t see politicians coming out against worthy charities, just the fraudulent ones. 

Truth About HSUS Revealed Again

The Humane Society of the United States is not what you think


By: Ron Arnold 12/02/10 8:05 PM
Wahington Examiner
OpEd Contributor

If you donate to the Humane Society of the United States for supporting the homeless doggies and kitties in your local animal shelter, you've likely been suckered by one of Big Green's most notorious propaganda mills.

HSUS is a radical no-meat, anti-hunting, anti-gun octopus that spends millions swallowing other animal groups whole, but habitually gives less than 1 percent of its annual revenue to a few selected local shelters. It's not that they can't afford it -- they raked in $101.6 million last year alone.

HSUS got so big because of CEO Wayne Pacelle's takeovers of the extremist Fund for Animals and the respectable Doris Day Animal League, in what he calls "corporate combinations."

That, and his ability to create high-profile projects like disaster relief crews that swoop stranded cats and dogs from flooded housetops while the TV cameras watch -- then quietly dump them on nearby shelters without so much as a dime's worth of support.

Pacelle gets the credit, the grunts get the critters.    Read More

There are more people every day that are learning the truth about the HSUS.  While they continue to claim that they aren’t anti-meat or anti-ag, one only has to look at their suggested recipes to see what their true goals are.  That’s where the rubber meats the road.  But while we have made great strides in exposing this group we must continue to do more.  There are still too many people that think this group actually cares for pets.  Nothing could be further from the truth. 

A Film About Beef

Here's another great video by a student filmmaker talking about the beef industry and sharing what she learned.

A Film by Katie Griffith from ExploreBeef on Vimeo.

SD Cattlemen's Association

Today we are at the South Dakota Cattlemen's Association annual meeting in Aberdeen.  There are lots of great speakers here including Gregg Doud, chief economist from NCBA, Randy McKee, one of the best estate planners in the country, and Amanda Nolz who will be talking about social media. 

Being involved in your industry organizations is extremely important and it's why we are involved in several. 

Have a great day!

The Care Package: Cattle Welfare in the West

Three student filmmakers were recently given full access to makes short documentaries about the beef industry. As we travel across the country speaking about agriculture I continue to tell people they shouldn't ask Google about where their food comes from. They should ask the farmers and ranchers that grow it. These films offer an opportunity for everyone to learn about beef industry directly from the people involved.

Here's the first of three films I will be posting.

The Care Package: Cattle Welfare in the West from ExploreBeef on Vimeo.

Will HSUS/Ohio Deal Continue?

New Ohio ag director will review animal care deal

By JOHN SEEWER
TOLEDO, Ohio

Ohio's next agriculture director plans to take a closer a look at a deal arranged by the outgoing governor and animal rights activists that would bring tougher laws governing farm animals.

The agreement calls for a ban of certain crates and cages and prohibiting strangulation as a form of euthanasia for sick or injured animals.

"There are a lot more unanswered questions," James Zehringer, a former poultry farmer who's been a state lawmaker the past three years, said during an interview with The Associated Press.

His biggest concern is that the proposed regulations could make it too costly for new farm owners who want to get into the business by forcing them to make changes to existing farms.

"We want to grow agriculture," he said. "Ohio is losing 700 farms a year."   Read More

This could get interesting.  Now Ohio may have the political leadership to stand up to the falsehoods and threats coming from HSUS.  The question will be whether or not anyone will follow their efforts.  In order for the OLCSB to operate properly, they can’t be constantly under threat of a ballot issue from the HSUS.  While the HSUS will never b e worried about what’s best for livestock, farmers and ranchers have no choice.  It’s our duty to properly care for them, regardless of politics. 

Blaming Cows For Global Warming Not Accurate

A new beef with role of cows in global warming

November 20, 2010
Alex Horkay
TheStar.com
Statistics have been giving us a bum steer when they state how much cattle methane emissions contribute to global warming, a new study shows.


That's because mathematical equations used to predict cows' methane emissions are inaccurate and don't take into account factors such as dietary changes, said Jennifer Ellis, lead author of the study and a PhD student at the University of Guelph.


When cattle burp up their cud, they discharge methane with it, due to microbial fermentation occurring in their complex stomachs.


“Diet can change CH4 (methane) emissions quite a lot. For example, between two and 12 per cent of the energy a cow consumes will be lost as CH4,” she said.

When an equation calculates the quantity of methane emissions on one farm, it can't be used to accurately determine how much greenhouse gas is created worldwide because there is so much difference in cattle diet around the world and from farm to farm.    Read More

While most of the anti-ag groups are quick to try blaming cows for global warming, common sense scientists have shown that it’s not that simple.  There are so many factors that determine the amount of methane produced by a cow so it’s nearly impossible to determine any impact based on current models.  It’s unfortunate that these anti-ag groups have to try tricking people with false information to gain support and turn them against farming and ranching families.

Repeal Prop B?

Lawmakers Support Repeal of Prop B

'Puppy Mill' Prevention Act's narrow 51.5% passage has Missouri lawmakers examining a repeal.

MissouriRuralist.com
Published: Nov 8, 2010

Missouri lawmakers, in both the House and Senate, said they would support efforts by dog breeders and agricultural groups to repeal or dilute Proposition B, the so-called "Puppy Mill Prevention Act," passed by voters Nov. 2.

"We will start working on that issue immediately," said Senator-elect Mike Parson, whose district includes more than 150 licensed breeding operations. The next legislative session begins Jan. 5.

Proposition B, which will put new restrictions on state dog breeders, passed by substantial margins in urban areas, but failed in 100 of the state's 114 counties. Overall, it got 51.6% of the vote. However, licensed breeders and virtually all of the state's agricultural groups strongly opposed it saying it will force legitimate breeders out of business while doing nothing about unlicensed breeders.

Ag groups also argued passage of the measure – strongly backed by the Humane Society of the United States and other animal rights groups --- was just the first step as these groups move on to try and regulate animal agriculture out of business.      Read More

This was way closer than Wayne and Co. would like to think about.  He regularly goes into states and tells ag groups that they can win any vote by a healthy margin.  It’s more apparent than ever that he’s blowing smoke yet again.  There’s no doubt that the HSUS will come uncorked if there’s any attempt to modify the law.  HSUS is losing their credibility piece by piece every single day and this vote confirms it.   

Vote No on Missouri's Prop B

Ballot issue breeds contempt between dog breeders, animal-rights activists


KansasCity.com

By JASON NOBLE

JEFFERSON CITY
The forces for and against Missouri’s Proposition B are making their cases with cute and cuddly puppies.

But make no mistake, the contest to convince voters is a down and dirty dogfight.

Prop B on the Nov. 2 statewide ballot will ask voters whether to enact the “Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act,” a set of laws that would substantially sharpen regulations on dog breeders.

Proponents, led by national animal-rights groups, contend new laws are critical to ensure humane treatment within Missouri’s vast dog-breeding industry.

“The regulations on the books now … ensure that dogs in these facilities survive, but don’t do much more than that,” said Barbara Schmitz, campaign manager for Missourians for the Protection of Dogs. “We’re trying to insert animal-welfare provisions into the large-scale breeding equation.”

Breeders and animal-agriculture trade groups counter that the laws will devastate reputable family businesses and raise the price of puppies at pet stores, but do nothing to stop bad breeders.

“What this does is make regulation so strict on breeders that it will basically put them out of business,” said Anita Andrews, director of the Alliance for Truth, a campaign opposing the ballot measure.   Read More

The HSUS doesn’t want people using animals for any reason, not as pets or as sources of food.  If this bill passes it helps them on both fronts.  They know this will hurt people who raise dogs in turn making it harder for people to have dogs for pets.  It will also get their foot in the door on the livestock front and further their argument that eating meat is wrong.  HSUS is nothing but a fundraising machine and in order to keep that machine running they must continually push onerous regulations on people who use animals by distorting the truth.  Please let your friends and family in Missouri know they should vote NO on Prop B.

OH Livestock Board Drafts First Proposal

Wednesday, October 6, 2010, 1:21pm EDT


Ohio's Livestock Care board drafts 1st set of rules
http://www.bizjournals.com/


The voter-approved Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board is taking its first steps in drafting new rules to govern the treatment of animals in the state.

The board this week voted to create new standards on livestock euthanasia, marking the first time such guidelines have been established in Ohio. Specifics of the new euthanasia rules must be OK’d by a committee before going into effect and are posted here for a two-week public comment period.

The proposed euthanasia rules not only define the term itself but establish acceptable methods for horses, chickens, pigs, cattle and other farm animals based on weight and other conditions. Violators are subject to civil penalties, according to the approved draft.

The issue of more humane methods of euthanasia for animals in the state was a key sticking point in a standoff between state officials and the Humane Society of the U.S., which earlier this year was planning a ballot issue that would have bound the Livestock Care Standards Board to implement specific rules if passed. The activist group and state officials brokered a compromise in June that kept the issue from heading to the ballot and ensured the board, created with voter approval last year, would hand down regulations on dog breeding kennels, cockfighting and exotic animals. The state also has agreed to phase out so-called gestation crates used by the pork industry.

Robert Boggs, director of the state Agriculture Department, said in a release that the proposed euthanasia rules are designed to be “clear and practical for Ohio’s livestock producers.”  Link

These are the first regulations to come out of the newly formed Livestock Care Board.  Regardless of how beneficial they are for farmers and ranchers, what remains to be seen is if the HSUS will approve of them.  From here on out, any regulations the board approves will also have to be approved by the HSUS or they will start reminding everyone how they have enough signatures to go back to the ballot and force whatever they see fit.  There are certainly differing opinions about the compromise that was made in June but we do know one thing for sure, HSUS will hold the state hostage until they get everything they want.  Like a gun to Ohio’s head, those ill-gotten signatures will have more affect on the outcome of Ohio’s livestock industry than this board will.