Animal group wants all veal farms banned
September 1, 2010
By MARC KOVAC
Dix Capital Bureau
COLUMBUS -- The animal welfare group that released a hidden video of an Apple Creek farm said it would like to see all veal operations banned, not just those using the crate systems currently allowed in Ohio.
"We're calling on consumers to make more compassionate choices, and one of those choices is to adopt a healthy vegan diet," Corey Roscoe, a spokeswoman for Mercy for Animals, said during a press conference near the Statehouse on Tuesday. "The veal industry is inherently cruel."
The comments came in response to questions about Buckeye Veal, the Wayne County farm placed in the spotlight by Mercy for Animals for using so-called crate systems to raise its calves.
But the farm said late Monday, in a released statement, it was in the process of phasing out the crates in favor of group housing -- an alternative that would be allowed under revamped standards Mercy for Animals wants to see implemented.
"Veal production represents one of the cruelest industries on the face of the planet," Roscoe said. "And its abusive treatment of baby calves should not be tolerated."
She added, "Even executed with the highest standards, raising veal is inherently cruel." Read More
The problem that Mercy for Animals has is their main goal is to force a vegan diet on everyone. So no matter what type of system is used to raise livestock, they are going to claim that it is cruel. Much like the HSUS, they will never be happy and will be continually creating a crisis to drive their fundraising machine. It does no good to make deals with either of these groups because they aren’t on a time schedule and there is no middle ground with these people. All in all, this “shocking” video was a pretty weak attempt on their part and shows their desperation to stay in the news. It’s been widely advertised that veal farmers are changing to group housing systems without any government agencies forcing them to do so.
Showing posts with label veal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label veal. Show all posts
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Friday, September 26, 2008
Fighting for Ag
Farmers must stick together
"We must all stand together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."
Benjamin Franklin's words couldn't be more apt to describe our reaction to groups such as Family Farm Defenders supporting Proposition 2.
Proposition 2 would effectively ban large-scale egg ranching in California because it would require in-state producers to scrap their existing cage systems and go cage-free or install far larger, more expensive European-style cages.
No other state would face such a restriction, and so these states would fill the economic vacuum for inexpensive eggs. California already imports 50 percent of its total egg products - passage of Prop 2 would push that number toward 90 percent.
Much of the rhetoric surrounding Proposition 2 involves veal calves and sow gestation crates for hogs. This is a distraction, one we could argue is intentional by the initiative's sponsors, the Humane Society of the United States, to put cute piglets and sad-looking calves in their campaign material.
There is no veal industry in California, and no California hog producer will be using gestation crates in a few months; the industry has voluntarily changed its practices. So it's frustrating to see the "yes" on Proposition 2 campaign's release announcing support from Family Farm Defenders focus so heavily on pigs and calves.
But that's not really the most distressing thing. Read More
The independent nature of farmers and ranchers has been one of our greatest assets and one of our most debilitating weaknesses. Supporting legislation that will put your neighbor out of business is not good for agriculture, and that is the business we are all in. Supporting an organization that one day hopes to rid this country of animal agriculture will only come back to bite you eventually.
"We must all stand together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."
Benjamin Franklin's words couldn't be more apt to describe our reaction to groups such as Family Farm Defenders supporting Proposition 2.
Proposition 2 would effectively ban large-scale egg ranching in California because it would require in-state producers to scrap their existing cage systems and go cage-free or install far larger, more expensive European-style cages.
No other state would face such a restriction, and so these states would fill the economic vacuum for inexpensive eggs. California already imports 50 percent of its total egg products - passage of Prop 2 would push that number toward 90 percent.
Much of the rhetoric surrounding Proposition 2 involves veal calves and sow gestation crates for hogs. This is a distraction, one we could argue is intentional by the initiative's sponsors, the Humane Society of the United States, to put cute piglets and sad-looking calves in their campaign material.
There is no veal industry in California, and no California hog producer will be using gestation crates in a few months; the industry has voluntarily changed its practices. So it's frustrating to see the "yes" on Proposition 2 campaign's release announcing support from Family Farm Defenders focus so heavily on pigs and calves.
But that's not really the most distressing thing. Read More
The independent nature of farmers and ranchers has been one of our greatest assets and one of our most debilitating weaknesses. Supporting legislation that will put your neighbor out of business is not good for agriculture, and that is the business we are all in. Supporting an organization that one day hopes to rid this country of animal agriculture will only come back to bite you eventually.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
California Prop 2
Californians for SAFE Food Launches Campaign Opposing Proposition 2: 'The Un-SAFE Food Initiative'
SACRAMENTO, Calif., July 16, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ --
Californians for SAFE Food, a coalition of public health and food safety experts, labor unions, consumers, family farmers and veterinarians, today officially launched its campaign to oppose Proposition 2, the November ballot initiative that bans almost all modern egg production in California.
Dubbing Prop. 2 the "un-SAFE food initiative," Californians for SAFE Food also introduced its Web site, http://www.safecaliforniafood.org and released an updated list of organizations and individuals who have joined the opposition campaign.
"Proposition 2, quite simply, is an un-SAFE food initiative. It undermines California's current high food safety standards, putting us at greater risk with exposure to illness and disease like Salmonella and Bird Flu," said Julie Buckner, spokeswoman for the "NO on Prop. 2" campaign. "While the proponents claim the measure is 'moderate,' it is really a wide-sweeping, risky, and dangerous measure that will have costly, negative consequences for California." Read More
The ballot issue in California that will decide how farm animals can be raised in that state has been officially labeled as Proposition 2. While those that are striving to ban the use of cages claim this is a welfare issue, it really is a food and animal safety issue. With it’s passage, farmers and ranchers in California will lose their ability to effectively protect their animals from disease and will more than likely force the industry out of the state. It is vital that all of us in agriculture do what we can to stop it’s passage. This shouldn’t be viewed as a state issue, the outcome of this vote will have far-reaching implications nationwide.
SACRAMENTO, Calif., July 16, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ --
Californians for SAFE Food, a coalition of public health and food safety experts, labor unions, consumers, family farmers and veterinarians, today officially launched its campaign to oppose Proposition 2, the November ballot initiative that bans almost all modern egg production in California.
Dubbing Prop. 2 the "un-SAFE food initiative," Californians for SAFE Food also introduced its Web site, http://www.safecaliforniafood.org and released an updated list of organizations and individuals who have joined the opposition campaign.
"Proposition 2, quite simply, is an un-SAFE food initiative. It undermines California's current high food safety standards, putting us at greater risk with exposure to illness and disease like Salmonella and Bird Flu," said Julie Buckner, spokeswoman for the "NO on Prop. 2" campaign. "While the proponents claim the measure is 'moderate,' it is really a wide-sweeping, risky, and dangerous measure that will have costly, negative consequences for California." Read More
The ballot issue in California that will decide how farm animals can be raised in that state has been officially labeled as Proposition 2. While those that are striving to ban the use of cages claim this is a welfare issue, it really is a food and animal safety issue. With it’s passage, farmers and ranchers in California will lose their ability to effectively protect their animals from disease and will more than likely force the industry out of the state. It is vital that all of us in agriculture do what we can to stop it’s passage. This shouldn’t be viewed as a state issue, the outcome of this vote will have far-reaching implications nationwide.
Friday, April 4, 2008
Colorado's Confined Animal Bill
Confined animal bill corralled in committee
By MetroWest Staff
04/03/2008
K.C. Mason
DENVER — Under threat of a petition drive for a ballot question, Colorado lawmakers and state Agriculture Commissioner John Stulp are moving forward with a bill to increase regulations on confined animals that are raised for pork and veal.
Senate Bill 201, sponsored by Dist. 6 Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus, would prohibit the confinement of gestating sows or calves raised for veal in a way that does not allow the animal to stand up, lie down, and turn around without touching the enclosure’s sides.
“My concern is to avert a ballot initiative, which I feel this does,” Stulp said during testimony last week before the Senate Agriculture Committee. “This recognizes the need … to address future husbandry issues and hopefully get out ahead of the curve.” Read More
Colorado is trying to prevent a ballot measure, proposed by the HSUS, by passing a bill through the legislature. The decision not to fight it out at the ballots was due largely to the fact the HSUS has been very successful in ballot measures and also the amount of money they had committed to the measure. While ag could not have gone dollar for dollar with the HSUS, they have something more powerful than money, and that is the positive story of modern production agriculture. I only wish they would have used that more to their advantage.
By MetroWest Staff
04/03/2008
K.C. Mason
DENVER — Under threat of a petition drive for a ballot question, Colorado lawmakers and state Agriculture Commissioner John Stulp are moving forward with a bill to increase regulations on confined animals that are raised for pork and veal.
Senate Bill 201, sponsored by Dist. 6 Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus, would prohibit the confinement of gestating sows or calves raised for veal in a way that does not allow the animal to stand up, lie down, and turn around without touching the enclosure’s sides.
“My concern is to avert a ballot initiative, which I feel this does,” Stulp said during testimony last week before the Senate Agriculture Committee. “This recognizes the need … to address future husbandry issues and hopefully get out ahead of the curve.” Read More
Colorado is trying to prevent a ballot measure, proposed by the HSUS, by passing a bill through the legislature. The decision not to fight it out at the ballots was due largely to the fact the HSUS has been very successful in ballot measures and also the amount of money they had committed to the measure. While ag could not have gone dollar for dollar with the HSUS, they have something more powerful than money, and that is the positive story of modern production agriculture. I only wish they would have used that more to their advantage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)