Modesto's J.S. West debuts roomier new hen house
By John HollandModesto Bee
Published: Tuesday, Jun. 22, 2010 - 12:00 am Page 6B
LIVINGSTON – J.S. West & Cos. on Monday unveiled new housing for egg-laying hens that aims to meet the space standards approved by state voters in 2008.
The Modesto-based company completed the $3.2 million project in the face of criticism from the Humane Society of the United States, which argues that it falls short of what Proposition 2 will require as of 2015.
The barn, the first built in California since the measure was approved, will house about 132,000 hens, 8 percent of J.S. West's total flock. The company hopes to convert all of the barns on its three farms over the next five years.
"It's not without risk, but we decided we wanted to be committed to our state and to our family farms in the Central Valley," said Jill Benson, a vice president at the 101-year-old company.
The new enclosures provide an average of 116 square inches of floor space per hen. The industry standard is 67 square inches, which defenders say is a humane way to keep birds that tend to crowd together even in spacious quarters.
The Humane Society contends that hens need at least 216 square inches each to meet the measure's requirement for enough room to stand up, turn around and flap their wings freely.
"Giving each hen a paltry legal sheet of paper's worth of space is simply not compliant with California law, and it's ridiculous for J.S. West to spend millions of dollars to build a facility that will be obviously illegal in a few years," said Jennifer Fearing, senior state director for the group.
As 2015 approaches, Fearing said, the Humane Society "will indeed do everything in our power to make sure the law is not broken." Read More
The frustration from the HSUS over this new barn is the fact that their main goal was to eliminate animal agriculture in California, particularly chicken producers. So for this farm to re-commit to raising chickens is really irritating to them. The unfortunate part of everything is that now it’s not up to the HSUS or anyone else to decide how chickens can be raised in California, it will be up to a bunch of lawyers in a courtroom.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
SCOTUS Overturns GM Alfalfa Ban
Supreme Court Lifts Ban on Planting GM Alfalfa
By JENNIFER KOONS of Greenwire
Published: June 21, 2010
In its first ruling on genetically engineered crops, the Supreme Court today overturned a lower court's decision prohibiting Monsanto Co. from selling pesticide-resistant alfalfa seeds until the government completes an environmental impact study.
"An injunction is a drastic and extraordinary remedy, which should not be granted as a matter of course," Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the 7-1 majority.
A U.S. District Court in San Francisco "abused its discretion" in 2007 when it ruled that the government needed to examine the modified breed's environmental impact, Alito wrote.
"The District Court abused its discretion in enjoining APHIS [the Agriculture Department's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service] from effecting a partial deregulation and in prohibiting the possibility of planting in accordance with the terms of such a deregulation," the justice argued. Read More
The Supreme Court was pretty adamant in overturning the 9th Circuit Court decision. With all decisions like this, we need to get it out of the hands of the lawyers and put it in the hands of competent scientists and researchers so the facts can guide our actions. Genetically enhancing our crops and livestock has allowed human beings to prevent mass starvation due to a lack of resources. This technology will become even more critical as we move forward.
By JENNIFER KOONS of Greenwire
Published: June 21, 2010
In its first ruling on genetically engineered crops, the Supreme Court today overturned a lower court's decision prohibiting Monsanto Co. from selling pesticide-resistant alfalfa seeds until the government completes an environmental impact study.
"An injunction is a drastic and extraordinary remedy, which should not be granted as a matter of course," Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the 7-1 majority.
A U.S. District Court in San Francisco "abused its discretion" in 2007 when it ruled that the government needed to examine the modified breed's environmental impact, Alito wrote.
"The District Court abused its discretion in enjoining APHIS [the Agriculture Department's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service] from effecting a partial deregulation and in prohibiting the possibility of planting in accordance with the terms of such a deregulation," the justice argued. Read More
The Supreme Court was pretty adamant in overturning the 9th Circuit Court decision. With all decisions like this, we need to get it out of the hands of the lawyers and put it in the hands of competent scientists and researchers so the facts can guide our actions. Genetically enhancing our crops and livestock has allowed human beings to prevent mass starvation due to a lack of resources. This technology will become even more critical as we move forward.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Reporting the Hype, Not the Facts
Chefs now offering low-carbon diets to help save the planet
In the effort to save the planet from carbon emissions, chefs are saying eat less feedlot beef. That's because feedlot beef is by far the biggest creator of carbon gases. Fed on corn instead of the grass it was meant to eat, cows simply belch and pass wind a lot, creating much of the CO2 that's harming the earth. Bon Appétit Management Co. and other corporate food-service operators are turning to lower-carbon foods like chicken in an effort to change eating habits while reducing their carbon footprints.
By Paula Bock
SO YOU THINK trading in your gas guzzler for a hybrid will save the planet?
Try cutting back on cheeseburgers! And mangos! And fish flown in "fresh" from the southern hemisphere!
Old millennium: Low-carb diets. The new cool: Low-carbon diets. As in eat green. As in healthy for the environment. As in reduce global warming by minding what you swallow.
Just ask the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. A few years ago, it released a study showing that livestock cause more harm to the environment than all global transportation systems combined. Numero Uno emission emitter? Beef.
If Americans reduced meat consumption by just 20 percent, a University of Chicago study found, it'd be like all of us switching from a standard sedan to an ultraefficient Prius. A Japanese study estimated that raising 2.2 pounds of beef creates the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide as driving an average European car for 155 miles or burning a 100-watt bulb for nearly 20 days.
Producing a pound of feedlot beef creates the equivalent of 14.8 pounds of CO2. By comparison, a pound of pork creates the equivalent of 3.8 pounds of CO2; chicken, the equivalent of 1.1 pounds.
Why do cattle have such a huge carbon hoof print? Surprisingly, it's not so much because of transport from feedlot to fast-food joint or land cleared for grazing or even the chemical fertilizers used to grow the feed, though all that also adds up.
It's largely because cornfed cattle pass a lot of gas. Read More
Here’s another example of activism as compared to journalism. If this reporter had done some actual research as opposed to regurgitating common misconceptions, they would have learned there’s a different story to be told. For example, the writer seems to think that cattle will only produce methane if they are being fed a grain based diet. Methane is a byproduct of rumination, not the diet. There is also evidence that suggests grain fed beef actually produce less emissions over their lifetime compared to other production methods. Along with that, even though rumination produces methane, that is the process that allows us to convert indigestible forages into human consumable protein. It allows us to utilize the vast majority of land on this planet that doesn’t allow for farming. The University of Chicago study that is cited is the same one that Michael Pollan used to cite as well until the authors of that study clarified that that wasn’t true. It’s another example of the sad state of journalism today.
In the effort to save the planet from carbon emissions, chefs are saying eat less feedlot beef. That's because feedlot beef is by far the biggest creator of carbon gases. Fed on corn instead of the grass it was meant to eat, cows simply belch and pass wind a lot, creating much of the CO2 that's harming the earth. Bon Appétit Management Co. and other corporate food-service operators are turning to lower-carbon foods like chicken in an effort to change eating habits while reducing their carbon footprints.
By Paula Bock
SO YOU THINK trading in your gas guzzler for a hybrid will save the planet?
Try cutting back on cheeseburgers! And mangos! And fish flown in "fresh" from the southern hemisphere!
Old millennium: Low-carb diets. The new cool: Low-carbon diets. As in eat green. As in healthy for the environment. As in reduce global warming by minding what you swallow.
Just ask the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. A few years ago, it released a study showing that livestock cause more harm to the environment than all global transportation systems combined. Numero Uno emission emitter? Beef.
If Americans reduced meat consumption by just 20 percent, a University of Chicago study found, it'd be like all of us switching from a standard sedan to an ultraefficient Prius. A Japanese study estimated that raising 2.2 pounds of beef creates the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide as driving an average European car for 155 miles or burning a 100-watt bulb for nearly 20 days.
Producing a pound of feedlot beef creates the equivalent of 14.8 pounds of CO2. By comparison, a pound of pork creates the equivalent of 3.8 pounds of CO2; chicken, the equivalent of 1.1 pounds.
Why do cattle have such a huge carbon hoof print? Surprisingly, it's not so much because of transport from feedlot to fast-food joint or land cleared for grazing or even the chemical fertilizers used to grow the feed, though all that also adds up.
It's largely because cornfed cattle pass a lot of gas. Read More
Here’s another example of activism as compared to journalism. If this reporter had done some actual research as opposed to regurgitating common misconceptions, they would have learned there’s a different story to be told. For example, the writer seems to think that cattle will only produce methane if they are being fed a grain based diet. Methane is a byproduct of rumination, not the diet. There is also evidence that suggests grain fed beef actually produce less emissions over their lifetime compared to other production methods. Along with that, even though rumination produces methane, that is the process that allows us to convert indigestible forages into human consumable protein. It allows us to utilize the vast majority of land on this planet that doesn’t allow for farming. The University of Chicago study that is cited is the same one that Michael Pollan used to cite as well until the authors of that study clarified that that wasn’t true. It’s another example of the sad state of journalism today.
Alleged Horse Shocking at CNFR
Group targets CNFR
By TOM MORTON - Star-Tribune staff writer Posted: Saturday, June 19, 2010 1:30 am
An animal rights group posted a video on YouTube on Thursday showing three scenes of a man covertly shocking what appears to be two different horses to force them to buck during Thursday's performance of the College National Finals Rodeo in Casper.
"They claim [horses] are born to buck," said Steve Hindi, president of Showing Animals Respect and Kindness, or SHARK.
"They are not," Hindi said.
The video appears to show a young man wearing blue jeans, a long-sleeve tan shirt and black hat with his hands on the horses' necks and pulling them quickly away.
In all scenes, he immediately tucks a device under his unbuttoned sleeve.
In the first and second scenes, the slow-motion versions show the man holding in his left hand what Hindi says is a Miller Manufacturing Hot-Shot Power-mite electric prod. Read More
If you watch the video it’s pretty clear that the guy is holding a handheld electric prod. What is not clear is whether or not he is actually using it. SHARK is claiming that the prod is being used on the horses, but there is no evidence of that. Those things don’t work on contact, the button has to be pushed and we can’t tell from the video if that is happening. So unless this animal rights group can provide evidence that it is actually being used rather than just having it available then they shouldn’t be accusing anyone of anything.
By TOM MORTON - Star-Tribune staff writer Posted: Saturday, June 19, 2010 1:30 am
An animal rights group posted a video on YouTube on Thursday showing three scenes of a man covertly shocking what appears to be two different horses to force them to buck during Thursday's performance of the College National Finals Rodeo in Casper.
"They claim [horses] are born to buck," said Steve Hindi, president of Showing Animals Respect and Kindness, or SHARK.
"They are not," Hindi said.
The video appears to show a young man wearing blue jeans, a long-sleeve tan shirt and black hat with his hands on the horses' necks and pulling them quickly away.
In all scenes, he immediately tucks a device under his unbuttoned sleeve.
In the first and second scenes, the slow-motion versions show the man holding in his left hand what Hindi says is a Miller Manufacturing Hot-Shot Power-mite electric prod. Read More
If you watch the video it’s pretty clear that the guy is holding a handheld electric prod. What is not clear is whether or not he is actually using it. SHARK is claiming that the prod is being used on the horses, but there is no evidence of that. Those things don’t work on contact, the button has to be pushed and we can’t tell from the video if that is happening. So unless this animal rights group can provide evidence that it is actually being used rather than just having it available then they shouldn’t be accusing anyone of anything.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Pork Youth Ambassadors
Youth Ambassadors active at World Pork Expo
By By Jean Caspers-Simmetsimmet@agrinews.com
Date Modified: 06/17/2010 9:25 AM
DES MOINES — Pork Youth Ambassadors Jason Welter and Sarah Pakala wear navy blue polo shirts that say "We Care" with the Pork Checkoff logo on the sleeve, and they invite people to ask them questions.
Welter just graduated from South Central College in Mankato with a degree in agricultural business. He is returning home to Stewartville, Minn., to help with his family's hog operation and to work for a neighbor.
Pakala is an Iowa State University senior majoring in ag studies from Dike.They joined other ambassadors from around the country for training and helped with National Pork Board activities at World Pork Expo.
Welter grew up on his parents, Myrna and Randy,'s farrow-to-finish operation. They now farrow 125 sows and raise 600 acres of corn, soybeans and alfalfa. His father works full-time at Mayo Clinic. Welter has six brothers and sisters.
Pakala is new to the pork industry. Her interest developed when she began working for Ed Juhl, who has a hog operation near Hudson.Both won a competition to be their state's pork ambassador.
Pakala helps with World Pork Expo, the Iowa Pork Congress, the Iowa State Fair and she also works with middle school students and 4-H members.
"I'm educating the public on the good story of the pork industry," she said. Read More
We have the great pleasure of working with many groups of young adults interested in agriculture every year. The enthusiasm for promoting agriculture and the passion for making sure every consumer is receiving correct information about how food gets on their plates is incredible. With all of the energy ready to go to work, we just need to help them find the opportunities to use it. Programs like the Pork Youth Ambassadors do just that. These young people are some of our greatest advocates and they deserve all the support we can give them. ~Troy
By By Jean Caspers-Simmetsimmet@agrinews.com
Date Modified: 06/17/2010 9:25 AM
DES MOINES — Pork Youth Ambassadors Jason Welter and Sarah Pakala wear navy blue polo shirts that say "We Care" with the Pork Checkoff logo on the sleeve, and they invite people to ask them questions.
Welter just graduated from South Central College in Mankato with a degree in agricultural business. He is returning home to Stewartville, Minn., to help with his family's hog operation and to work for a neighbor.
Pakala is an Iowa State University senior majoring in ag studies from Dike.They joined other ambassadors from around the country for training and helped with National Pork Board activities at World Pork Expo.
Welter grew up on his parents, Myrna and Randy,'s farrow-to-finish operation. They now farrow 125 sows and raise 600 acres of corn, soybeans and alfalfa. His father works full-time at Mayo Clinic. Welter has six brothers and sisters.
Pakala is new to the pork industry. Her interest developed when she began working for Ed Juhl, who has a hog operation near Hudson.Both won a competition to be their state's pork ambassador.
Pakala helps with World Pork Expo, the Iowa Pork Congress, the Iowa State Fair and she also works with middle school students and 4-H members.
"I'm educating the public on the good story of the pork industry," she said. Read More
We have the great pleasure of working with many groups of young adults interested in agriculture every year. The enthusiasm for promoting agriculture and the passion for making sure every consumer is receiving correct information about how food gets on their plates is incredible. With all of the energy ready to go to work, we just need to help them find the opportunities to use it. Programs like the Pork Youth Ambassadors do just that. These young people are some of our greatest advocates and they deserve all the support we can give them. ~Troy
HSUS Sues Farm
HSUS seeks stop to Rose Acre claims
(6/17/2010)
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) filed a complaint this week with the Federal Trade Commission asking it to order Rose Acre Farms to stop making "false and misleading animal welfare claims."
The complaint accuses Rose Acre, through its promotions, web sites and spokespeople, of falsely stating that the company, the second-largest commercial egg producer in the U.S., provides a "humane and friendly environment" for its hens. HSUS said this is "grossly misleading."
HSUS referred to clandestinely filmed video at three of the company's hen houses in Iowa that "found conditions starkly at odds with the cheerful claims of the company" (Feedstuffs, April 12).
Rose Acre attorney Joe Miller said the company has not yet seen the complaint but stands behind its animal welfare program "and the humane way that we treat our animals."
HSUS is an industrial activist and lobbying organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. Link
So it appears that the HSUS is now in the business of suing farms if they don’t raise livestock in a HSUS-approved way. While that’s the way it appears on the surface, the reality is that this is another tactic to shut down animal agriculture completely. They will continue to harass livestock farmers until their vegan agenda is accomplished. During that time, they will be telling consumers anything they can think of that might scare them away from consuming animal products. If farmers and ranchers aren’t out there telling their own story, this is who will be doing it for you. ~Troy
(6/17/2010)
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) filed a complaint this week with the Federal Trade Commission asking it to order Rose Acre Farms to stop making "false and misleading animal welfare claims."
The complaint accuses Rose Acre, through its promotions, web sites and spokespeople, of falsely stating that the company, the second-largest commercial egg producer in the U.S., provides a "humane and friendly environment" for its hens. HSUS said this is "grossly misleading."
HSUS referred to clandestinely filmed video at three of the company's hen houses in Iowa that "found conditions starkly at odds with the cheerful claims of the company" (Feedstuffs, April 12).
Rose Acre attorney Joe Miller said the company has not yet seen the complaint but stands behind its animal welfare program "and the humane way that we treat our animals."
HSUS is an industrial activist and lobbying organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. Link
So it appears that the HSUS is now in the business of suing farms if they don’t raise livestock in a HSUS-approved way. While that’s the way it appears on the surface, the reality is that this is another tactic to shut down animal agriculture completely. They will continue to harass livestock farmers until their vegan agenda is accomplished. During that time, they will be telling consumers anything they can think of that might scare them away from consuming animal products. If farmers and ranchers aren’t out there telling their own story, this is who will be doing it for you. ~Troy
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Beef Industry Fights Hunger
Beef industry helps in the fight against hunger
by Tommy Noel
POCATELLO - Idaho's beef industry is helping in the fight against hunger.
Over 3,000 pounds of beef were donated to the Idaho Foodbank, courtesy of Beef Counts.
This will help feed the 116,000 people who depend on free emergency food each month.
The cattle industry-food bank partnership is the only one of its kind in the country.
"Protein is one of the things the Foodbank lacks in a big way. Today, the Foodbank can only give about five pounds a month to every family that they service. This is going to go a long ways to increase that in a significant way, and this is just the beginning," says Rick Stott of Agri Beef Co.
In addition to the beef, a $50,000 check was donated by Agri Beef Company.
The meat will now be distributed to the Foodbank's 78 partner agencies, such as the Salvation Army and various senior citizen centers. Link
The headline says it all. The beef industry is helping fight hunger, just like the farmers and ranchers that produce every other type of commodity that the human existence relies on. I’ve been proud to be involved in volunteering at food banks across the United States and there is no doubt that they serve an important need. It was especially apparent when the economy started to fall a few years ago. Many folks who lost their jobs needed some temporary help to put food on their table. Every time you volunteer at one of these food banks it’s a great reminder about what’s truly important and where our priorities should be.
by Tommy Noel
POCATELLO - Idaho's beef industry is helping in the fight against hunger.
Over 3,000 pounds of beef were donated to the Idaho Foodbank, courtesy of Beef Counts.
This will help feed the 116,000 people who depend on free emergency food each month.
The cattle industry-food bank partnership is the only one of its kind in the country.
"Protein is one of the things the Foodbank lacks in a big way. Today, the Foodbank can only give about five pounds a month to every family that they service. This is going to go a long ways to increase that in a significant way, and this is just the beginning," says Rick Stott of Agri Beef Co.
In addition to the beef, a $50,000 check was donated by Agri Beef Company.
The meat will now be distributed to the Foodbank's 78 partner agencies, such as the Salvation Army and various senior citizen centers. Link
The headline says it all. The beef industry is helping fight hunger, just like the farmers and ranchers that produce every other type of commodity that the human existence relies on. I’ve been proud to be involved in volunteering at food banks across the United States and there is no doubt that they serve an important need. It was especially apparent when the economy started to fall a few years ago. Many folks who lost their jobs needed some temporary help to put food on their table. Every time you volunteer at one of these food banks it’s a great reminder about what’s truly important and where our priorities should be.
Animal Rights Activists Destroy Denver Business
Jun 15, 2010 9:48 pm US/Mountain
Police: Animal Rights Activist Implicated In Fire
DENVER (AP) ― Police investigating a fire that destroyed a Denver-area business say they're seriously considering a claim by an animal rights activist who takes credit for it.
Police have said a fire that destroyed the Sheepskin factory in April was suspicious. Glendale Police Chief Victor Ross says his department is looking closely at a claim on a website associated with the Animal Liberation Front.
The posting by "ALF Lone Wolf" says the business was torched in retaliation for "innocent animals" killed by people.
The Animal Liberation Front is aligned with the Earth Liberation Front, whose members were convicted in a 1998 fire at the Vail ski resort that did $12 million in damage.
The Sheepskin Factory has reopened at a temporary storefront. It sells pet toys and sheepskin seat covers. Link
It’s amazing how tough these cowards think they are when they are using aliases. Yet they aren’t committed enough to their cause to use their real name. Farmers and ranchers are proud to share their names and how they feed the world because they are committed to the cause. Hopefully these arsonists are caught soon before they endanger any more human lives.
Police: Animal Rights Activist Implicated In Fire
DENVER (AP) ― Police investigating a fire that destroyed a Denver-area business say they're seriously considering a claim by an animal rights activist who takes credit for it.
Police have said a fire that destroyed the Sheepskin factory in April was suspicious. Glendale Police Chief Victor Ross says his department is looking closely at a claim on a website associated with the Animal Liberation Front.
The posting by "ALF Lone Wolf" says the business was torched in retaliation for "innocent animals" killed by people.
The Animal Liberation Front is aligned with the Earth Liberation Front, whose members were convicted in a 1998 fire at the Vail ski resort that did $12 million in damage.
The Sheepskin Factory has reopened at a temporary storefront. It sells pet toys and sheepskin seat covers. Link
It’s amazing how tough these cowards think they are when they are using aliases. Yet they aren’t committed enough to their cause to use their real name. Farmers and ranchers are proud to share their names and how they feed the world because they are committed to the cause. Hopefully these arsonists are caught soon before they endanger any more human lives.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Modern Ag Feeding The World, Benefitting The Environment
High-yield agriculture slows pace of global warming, say FSE researchers
Louis Bergeron - Stanford News Service
Advances in high-yield agriculture over the latter part of the 20th century have prevented massive amounts of greenhouse gases from entering the atmosphere - the equivalent of 590 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide - according to a new study led by two Stanford Earth scientists.
The yield improvements reduced the need to convert forests to farmland, a process that typically involves burning of trees and other plants, which generates carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
The researchers estimate that if not for increased yields, additional greenhouse gas emissions from clearing land for farming would have been equal to as much as a third of the world's total output of greenhouse gases since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution in 1850.
The researchers also calculated that for every dollar spent on agricultural research and development since 1961, emissions of the three principal greenhouse gases - methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide - were reduced by the equivalent of about a quarter of a ton of carbon dioxide - a high rate of financial return compared to other approaches to reducing the gases.
"Our results dispel the notion that modern intensive agriculture is inherently worse for the environment than a more 'old-fashioned' way of doing things," said Jennifer Burney, lead author of a paper describing the study that will be published online by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Read More
This study is pretty clear. Modern agriculture has saved billions of tons of greenhouse gasses from escaping into the atmosphere. When we invest in agriculture and implement modern practices, not only do we keep mass starvation from occurring, but it’s also beneficial for the environment. When we see people like Michael Pollan urging us to support an agricultural system that denounces modern technology, you need to realize everything they are asking for. What sounds romantic on the surface doesn’t hold water in reality.
Louis Bergeron - Stanford News Service
Advances in high-yield agriculture over the latter part of the 20th century have prevented massive amounts of greenhouse gases from entering the atmosphere - the equivalent of 590 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide - according to a new study led by two Stanford Earth scientists.
The yield improvements reduced the need to convert forests to farmland, a process that typically involves burning of trees and other plants, which generates carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
The researchers estimate that if not for increased yields, additional greenhouse gas emissions from clearing land for farming would have been equal to as much as a third of the world's total output of greenhouse gases since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution in 1850.
The researchers also calculated that for every dollar spent on agricultural research and development since 1961, emissions of the three principal greenhouse gases - methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide - were reduced by the equivalent of about a quarter of a ton of carbon dioxide - a high rate of financial return compared to other approaches to reducing the gases.
"Our results dispel the notion that modern intensive agriculture is inherently worse for the environment than a more 'old-fashioned' way of doing things," said Jennifer Burney, lead author of a paper describing the study that will be published online by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Read More
This study is pretty clear. Modern agriculture has saved billions of tons of greenhouse gasses from escaping into the atmosphere. When we invest in agriculture and implement modern practices, not only do we keep mass starvation from occurring, but it’s also beneficial for the environment. When we see people like Michael Pollan urging us to support an agricultural system that denounces modern technology, you need to realize everything they are asking for. What sounds romantic on the surface doesn’t hold water in reality.
A Failed Food System??
Amanda Hitt: Our food system is failing us
Amanda Hitt food integrity campaign director of the Government Accountability Project Posted: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 4:30 am 1 Comment
In May, E. coli-laden romaine lettuce sickened dozens of Americans in five states, and a food-related listeria outbreak has killed at least two Texans. An endless deluge of foodborne illness outbreaks demands re-evaluation of our current food system.
Americans must broaden their evaluation of food safety, however, beyond the finished product, and take the quality of the overall production cycle into account. While outbreaks and hospitalizations grab headlines, there are unseen costs to our production system. We must start putting a premium on food integrity and re-evaluate the entire process -- from soil to plate.
Foodborne illness sickens over 76 million Americans every year, causing 725,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths. One recent Georgetown University study showed that the related costs of these illnesses (medical bills, lost wages, decreased productivity) totals over $152 billion a year.
But the true cost of foodborne illness is far greater. The societal and environmental impacts of food production are themselves a type of “foodborne illness” that sickens habitats and communities. These costs must be accounted for. Read More
I find it insulting to everyone who produces food and fiber in this country when people claim that our food system has failed. One of the first numbers they like to bring up is that 76 million cases of food poisoning happens every year. This is certainly a large number and no one in our industry will be happy until it’s zero but let’s put it in perspective. There are about one billion meals consumed every day in this country alone. That means that 99.98% of the meals consumed in this country happen without incident. Is that worthy of being called a failure? Today’s farmers and ranchers are producing more food and fiber with fewer inputs than at any point in the history of the world. Is that a failure? Our livestock are healthier than ever before thus producing a consistent product. Along with that the world has never before seen a safer, more affordable, more abundant food supply. Is that a failure? There is no doubt that we can continue to improve upon our practices but the abundant supplies of food and clothing in this country seems to make it overly easy for our detractors to be critical of our industry.
Amanda Hitt food integrity campaign director of the Government Accountability Project Posted: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 4:30 am 1 Comment
In May, E. coli-laden romaine lettuce sickened dozens of Americans in five states, and a food-related listeria outbreak has killed at least two Texans. An endless deluge of foodborne illness outbreaks demands re-evaluation of our current food system.
Americans must broaden their evaluation of food safety, however, beyond the finished product, and take the quality of the overall production cycle into account. While outbreaks and hospitalizations grab headlines, there are unseen costs to our production system. We must start putting a premium on food integrity and re-evaluate the entire process -- from soil to plate.
Foodborne illness sickens over 76 million Americans every year, causing 725,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths. One recent Georgetown University study showed that the related costs of these illnesses (medical bills, lost wages, decreased productivity) totals over $152 billion a year.
But the true cost of foodborne illness is far greater. The societal and environmental impacts of food production are themselves a type of “foodborne illness” that sickens habitats and communities. These costs must be accounted for. Read More
I find it insulting to everyone who produces food and fiber in this country when people claim that our food system has failed. One of the first numbers they like to bring up is that 76 million cases of food poisoning happens every year. This is certainly a large number and no one in our industry will be happy until it’s zero but let’s put it in perspective. There are about one billion meals consumed every day in this country alone. That means that 99.98% of the meals consumed in this country happen without incident. Is that worthy of being called a failure? Today’s farmers and ranchers are producing more food and fiber with fewer inputs than at any point in the history of the world. Is that a failure? Our livestock are healthier than ever before thus producing a consistent product. Along with that the world has never before seen a safer, more affordable, more abundant food supply. Is that a failure? There is no doubt that we can continue to improve upon our practices but the abundant supplies of food and clothing in this country seems to make it overly easy for our detractors to be critical of our industry.
Ag Student's Livestock Abused, Tortured
Jun 9, 2010 10:26 pm US/Pacific
Dozens Of Animals Brutally Attacked At High School
WINTERS, Calif. (CBS13) ― An unknown number of suspects savagely hurt and killed dozens of animals in an attack on a high school agriculture department, stunning students and staff and sparking a search for the people responsible.
Officials said students at Winters High School discovered the horrific scene Wednesday morning after vandals opened up all the pens and began killing and torturing many of the animals.
All of the department's steers were let out into the field and all the other corrals were opened up, said high school junior Prestlie Pearce.
At least 25 chickens were killed, many with their necks snapped and wings broken, and five pigs were shoved into a sewage pit. The pigs were forced to stand on their hind legs to keep their snouts above the sewage and fought each other all night while trying to get out.
"I don't know how you could shove five pigs into a three-by-three sewer hole that's five feet deep," Pearce said.
Staff member Eliott Hererra helped rescue the pigs and said he was surprised to see they survived the ordeal."They were stacked on top of each other," Hererra said. "The gut feeling of seeing those pigs struggle made me want to throw up." Read More
This was a horrible event that happened last week. While there are some of the fringe in our society that think feeding livestock in a pen or using them for a food source is abuse, I think most everyone could agree that the people who did this are the ones that we should truly be concerned with.
Dozens Of Animals Brutally Attacked At High School
WINTERS, Calif. (CBS13) ― An unknown number of suspects savagely hurt and killed dozens of animals in an attack on a high school agriculture department, stunning students and staff and sparking a search for the people responsible.
Officials said students at Winters High School discovered the horrific scene Wednesday morning after vandals opened up all the pens and began killing and torturing many of the animals.
All of the department's steers were let out into the field and all the other corrals were opened up, said high school junior Prestlie Pearce.
At least 25 chickens were killed, many with their necks snapped and wings broken, and five pigs were shoved into a sewage pit. The pigs were forced to stand on their hind legs to keep their snouts above the sewage and fought each other all night while trying to get out.
"I don't know how you could shove five pigs into a three-by-three sewer hole that's five feet deep," Pearce said.
Staff member Eliott Hererra helped rescue the pigs and said he was surprised to see they survived the ordeal."They were stacked on top of each other," Hererra said. "The gut feeling of seeing those pigs struggle made me want to throw up." Read More
This was a horrible event that happened last week. While there are some of the fringe in our society that think feeding livestock in a pen or using them for a food source is abuse, I think most everyone could agree that the people who did this are the ones that we should truly be concerned with.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
EPA Disapproval Vote Tomorrow
Rockefeller Backs Murkowski's EPA Resolution in Senate
By ROBIN BRAVENDER of ClimateWire
Published: June 9, 2010
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) will vote for a resolution to hamstring U.S. EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, he said yesterday.
"I intend to vote for Senator Murkowski's Resolution of Disapproval because I believe we must send a strong message that the fate of West Virginia's economy, our manufacturing industries, and our workers should not be solely in the hands of EPA," Rockefeller said in a statement.
The Senate will vote tomorrow on a disapproval resolution (S.J.Res. 26 (pdf)) from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) that would essentially veto EPA's "endangerment" finding, a scientific determination that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare. The finding is the basis for EPA's greenhouse gas regulations, which are set to take effect next year.
Asked yesterday whether she thought she could muster the votes needed for passage, Murkowski said, "It really is dependent on many of our colleagues on the other side, who have said they agree that the EPA moving forward is the worst option. So now they've got an opportunity to really back that statement by supporting this resolution of disapproval."
Read More
This vote is still on schedule for tomorrow. Please contact your Senators and urge their support for this resolution. The endangerment finding by the unelected officials at the EPA will drive up the cost of everything from food to energy with no foreseeable benefits. In order to get this done though everyone need to let their opinion be heard. Take a couple minutes right now to do it.
By ROBIN BRAVENDER of ClimateWire
Published: June 9, 2010
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) will vote for a resolution to hamstring U.S. EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, he said yesterday.
"I intend to vote for Senator Murkowski's Resolution of Disapproval because I believe we must send a strong message that the fate of West Virginia's economy, our manufacturing industries, and our workers should not be solely in the hands of EPA," Rockefeller said in a statement.
The Senate will vote tomorrow on a disapproval resolution (S.J.Res. 26 (pdf)) from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) that would essentially veto EPA's "endangerment" finding, a scientific determination that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare. The finding is the basis for EPA's greenhouse gas regulations, which are set to take effect next year.
Asked yesterday whether she thought she could muster the votes needed for passage, Murkowski said, "It really is dependent on many of our colleagues on the other side, who have said they agree that the EPA moving forward is the worst option. So now they've got an opportunity to really back that statement by supporting this resolution of disapproval."
Read More
This vote is still on schedule for tomorrow. Please contact your Senators and urge their support for this resolution. The endangerment finding by the unelected officials at the EPA will drive up the cost of everything from food to energy with no foreseeable benefits. In order to get this done though everyone need to let their opinion be heard. Take a couple minutes right now to do it.
Another Pet Shelter Suffers From Name Confusion
Tuesday June 8, 2010
Donations to local animal shelter down more than 30 percent
Director says economy, confusion over name might have led to decline
by Billy Wolfe
Daily Mail staff
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Donations to the Kanawha-Charleston Humane Association shelter are down about $70,000 from this time last year, according to the shelter's bookkeeper.
In June 2009, the shelter had about $212,000 in donations on hand. As of Monday, the shelter had about $141,000, bookkeeper Barbara Taylor said.
The state of the economy may to be blame. Taylor said a $25,000 allocation from the Kanawha County Commission for a new truck also inflated last year's numbers somewhat.
But Director Donna Clark said the shelter has always faced an uphill battle with fundraising. One thing that has made it difficult to raise money over the years is the name of the shelter, she said.
Because the shelter's name includes the word "humane," Clark said many donors mistakenly believe their donations to the Humane Society of the United States directly support the local shelter.
She said the local shelter and the national organization are two totally separate entities, although the Humane Society has given some money to the shelter in the past.
"We hear it all the time, 'But I already gave to the Humane Society,' " she said. "They think they are helping the shelter here, but they don't understand that money doesn't come locally."
Read More
Add another local pet shelter to an ever-growing list who say that the HSUS is damaging their efforts to provide hands on pet care in their communities.
Donations to local animal shelter down more than 30 percent
Director says economy, confusion over name might have led to decline
by Billy Wolfe
Daily Mail staff
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Donations to the Kanawha-Charleston Humane Association shelter are down about $70,000 from this time last year, according to the shelter's bookkeeper.
In June 2009, the shelter had about $212,000 in donations on hand. As of Monday, the shelter had about $141,000, bookkeeper Barbara Taylor said.
The state of the economy may to be blame. Taylor said a $25,000 allocation from the Kanawha County Commission for a new truck also inflated last year's numbers somewhat.
But Director Donna Clark said the shelter has always faced an uphill battle with fundraising. One thing that has made it difficult to raise money over the years is the name of the shelter, she said.
Because the shelter's name includes the word "humane," Clark said many donors mistakenly believe their donations to the Humane Society of the United States directly support the local shelter.
She said the local shelter and the national organization are two totally separate entities, although the Humane Society has given some money to the shelter in the past.
"We hear it all the time, 'But I already gave to the Humane Society,' " she said. "They think they are helping the shelter here, but they don't understand that money doesn't come locally."
Read More
Add another local pet shelter to an ever-growing list who say that the HSUS is damaging their efforts to provide hands on pet care in their communities.
Agri-Women Share Truth About Food Inc.
American Agri-Women challenge message of movie Food, Inc.
By Drovers news source Monday, June 07, 2010
American Agri-Women is attempting to bridge the gap in the debate over food production. Food, Inc. is a documentary that aims to change the way America eats and the way American food is produced, but many in the agriculture world say the movie did not get it right. American Agri-Women wants to clear up misconceptions from the movie and continue the dialogue about America's food.
"Movies like Food, Inc. demonstrate how important it is that farmers share with consumers how food is produced. And as producers, we are interested in providing that information,” said American Agri-Women President, Chris Wilson. “Women in agriculture have a unique perspective because we are both producers and consumers. We help grow the food, and we also prepare it for our families to eat.”
Unfortunately, the film does not portray agriculture accurately. It suggests the food supply is dominated by corporate farms. However, the 2007 edition of USDA Structure and Finances of U.S. Farms: Family Farm Report, found that 98% of farms in the U.S. - more than 2.1 million - are family owned and operated. The truth is, according to Wilson, millions of family farmers work hard every day on their farms and ranches to bring us the food on our tables. Wilson and her family live on a farm of their own near Manhattan, Kansas. Read More
The absolute best way to correct the misinformation being spread about agriculture is for farmers and ranchers to personally set the record straight. Hollywood movies like Food Inc. are more concerned about the money they can generate rather than sharing the truth. People want to know the truth and they want to hear it from the people that grow their food. If you don’t want Michael Pollan or Wayne Pacelle telling your story for you then you better stand up and do it yourself.
By Drovers news source Monday, June 07, 2010
American Agri-Women is attempting to bridge the gap in the debate over food production. Food, Inc. is a documentary that aims to change the way America eats and the way American food is produced, but many in the agriculture world say the movie did not get it right. American Agri-Women wants to clear up misconceptions from the movie and continue the dialogue about America's food.
"Movies like Food, Inc. demonstrate how important it is that farmers share with consumers how food is produced. And as producers, we are interested in providing that information,” said American Agri-Women President, Chris Wilson. “Women in agriculture have a unique perspective because we are both producers and consumers. We help grow the food, and we also prepare it for our families to eat.”
Unfortunately, the film does not portray agriculture accurately. It suggests the food supply is dominated by corporate farms. However, the 2007 edition of USDA Structure and Finances of U.S. Farms: Family Farm Report, found that 98% of farms in the U.S. - more than 2.1 million - are family owned and operated. The truth is, according to Wilson, millions of family farmers work hard every day on their farms and ranches to bring us the food on our tables. Wilson and her family live on a farm of their own near Manhattan, Kansas. Read More
The absolute best way to correct the misinformation being spread about agriculture is for farmers and ranchers to personally set the record straight. Hollywood movies like Food Inc. are more concerned about the money they can generate rather than sharing the truth. People want to know the truth and they want to hear it from the people that grow their food. If you don’t want Michael Pollan or Wayne Pacelle telling your story for you then you better stand up and do it yourself.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Loos Trails and Tales
I was lucky enough to be a guest of Trent Loos on Loos Trails and Tales this morning. We discussed my conversations with John Jordan of Jordan Winery from last week and how this situation was almost identical to what happened when Yellow Tail chose to donate money to the Humane Society of the United States.
To learn more about Trent Loos, you can visit him on the web at www.FacesOfAg.com.
To learn more about Trent Loos, you can visit him on the web at www.FacesOfAg.com.
Monday, June 7, 2010
President Hears About Border Ranchers Concerns
Border ranchers react to White House meeting
Posted:Friday, June 4, 2010
TUCSON (KGUN9-TV) - All eyes and ears were on Governor Brewer and President Obama on Thursday as the two met at the White House to discuss securing the border, including sending National Guard troops.
Arguably, few have more at stake than the ranching community of southern Arizona who spend their days and nights keeping watch over their property. In late March of this year, one of their own, Robert Krentz was shot to death on his ranch near Douglas. The killer's identity is unknown, as is the killer's immigration status. But investigators have said they suspect the murder was the work of an illegal border crosser.
Even after the senseless murder, border crimes against Kentz' family and the close-knit ranching community haven't stopped.
KGUN9 talked to Gary Thrasher, a friend of the Krentz family and also a rancher. Thrasher explained what has been happening in the areas closest to the border.
"People are breaking into homes, intimidating women to lock themselves into bedrooms. There have been 2 or 3 threats since Rob's been killed," Thrasher said.
Thrasher said that a Border Patrol union leader recently told him the patrol itself doesn't feel safe. "If they don't think it's safe, how can anyone else think it's safe?" Read More
If the Border Patrol doesn’t want to protect the border because it’s too dangerous, don’t you think it’s time to do something about this problem. Why is our country sacrificing miles of our own soil and endangering the lives of our own citizens? With the government wanting to be so involved in our personal lives these days, why can’t it uphold one of the few specific responsibilities it’s supposed to, such as protecting and defending our borders?
Posted:Friday, June 4, 2010
TUCSON (KGUN9-TV) - All eyes and ears were on Governor Brewer and President Obama on Thursday as the two met at the White House to discuss securing the border, including sending National Guard troops.
Arguably, few have more at stake than the ranching community of southern Arizona who spend their days and nights keeping watch over their property. In late March of this year, one of their own, Robert Krentz was shot to death on his ranch near Douglas. The killer's identity is unknown, as is the killer's immigration status. But investigators have said they suspect the murder was the work of an illegal border crosser.
Even after the senseless murder, border crimes against Kentz' family and the close-knit ranching community haven't stopped.
KGUN9 talked to Gary Thrasher, a friend of the Krentz family and also a rancher. Thrasher explained what has been happening in the areas closest to the border.
"People are breaking into homes, intimidating women to lock themselves into bedrooms. There have been 2 or 3 threats since Rob's been killed," Thrasher said.
Thrasher said that a Border Patrol union leader recently told him the patrol itself doesn't feel safe. "If they don't think it's safe, how can anyone else think it's safe?" Read More
If the Border Patrol doesn’t want to protect the border because it’s too dangerous, don’t you think it’s time to do something about this problem. Why is our country sacrificing miles of our own soil and endangering the lives of our own citizens? With the government wanting to be so involved in our personal lives these days, why can’t it uphold one of the few specific responsibilities it’s supposed to, such as protecting and defending our borders?
Avoiding Spies On Your Farm
Farms beset by spies
Even humane facilities undertake precautions
Sunday, June 6, 2010 02:59 AM
By Holly Zachariah
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Dave Thorbahn knows his business is a target. Some of his 184 employees already have been offered cash to videotape what goes on inside his barns.
Who offered them the money or why, Thorbahn can’t say. It could have been someone looking for trade secrets, but he suspects otherwise. He wonders whether it was someone working for an animal-rights organization that wanted a peek inside Select Sires, a bull-semen facility with 1,791 bulls in 57 barns in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Thorbahn is president and CEO of the bovine-genetics business, which happens to have its headquarters along Rt. 42 near Plain City, with buildings directly across the highway from and beside Conklin Dairy Farms, a relatively small farm with just a handful of employees.
But Conklin’s place has been the subject of a criminal investigation since Mercy For Animals, an animal-rights group that promotes a vegan lifestyle, released on May 24 a secretly recorded video showing an employee of Conklin Farms viciously beating and abusing cows and calves.
Conklin herdsman Billy Joe Gregg was subsequently fired and has been charged with 12 misdemeanor counts of animal cruelty and a felony weapons charge.
Mercy For Animals’ executive director, Nathan Runkle, said an investigator working for his organization was in Ohio applying for jobs at several farms and was living near Conklin’s when he caught wind of potential abuse there and was hired.
Thorbahn isn’t so sure it was that simple.
“I have to ask myself, were they in this area because of us?” he said. “We’d be quite a plum for an organization like that.” Read More
Every farm or ranch that raises livestock is a target for the animal rights groups that use undercover videos to raise money. While it’s hard to believe that farmers and ranchers would need to protect themselves against the very people they feed and clothe, that is the sad reality. They are desperately trying to get hired anywhere they can. It’s important that farmers and ranchers protect themselves against hiring someone like this. The reason it is important is because these undercover spies won’t be there to work and take care of livestock. They will be more concerned about looking for a camera shot that they can get paid for and may play well with consumers that don’t understand animal husbandry. And, when they can’t accomplish that goal, they will simply not show up for work any longer and move to the next place, here again leaving the proper care of the livestock in jeopardy.
Even humane facilities undertake precautions
Sunday, June 6, 2010 02:59 AM
By Holly Zachariah
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Dave Thorbahn knows his business is a target. Some of his 184 employees already have been offered cash to videotape what goes on inside his barns.
Who offered them the money or why, Thorbahn can’t say. It could have been someone looking for trade secrets, but he suspects otherwise. He wonders whether it was someone working for an animal-rights organization that wanted a peek inside Select Sires, a bull-semen facility with 1,791 bulls in 57 barns in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Thorbahn is president and CEO of the bovine-genetics business, which happens to have its headquarters along Rt. 42 near Plain City, with buildings directly across the highway from and beside Conklin Dairy Farms, a relatively small farm with just a handful of employees.
But Conklin’s place has been the subject of a criminal investigation since Mercy For Animals, an animal-rights group that promotes a vegan lifestyle, released on May 24 a secretly recorded video showing an employee of Conklin Farms viciously beating and abusing cows and calves.
Conklin herdsman Billy Joe Gregg was subsequently fired and has been charged with 12 misdemeanor counts of animal cruelty and a felony weapons charge.
Mercy For Animals’ executive director, Nathan Runkle, said an investigator working for his organization was in Ohio applying for jobs at several farms and was living near Conklin’s when he caught wind of potential abuse there and was hired.
Thorbahn isn’t so sure it was that simple.
“I have to ask myself, were they in this area because of us?” he said. “We’d be quite a plum for an organization like that.” Read More
Every farm or ranch that raises livestock is a target for the animal rights groups that use undercover videos to raise money. While it’s hard to believe that farmers and ranchers would need to protect themselves against the very people they feed and clothe, that is the sad reality. They are desperately trying to get hired anywhere they can. It’s important that farmers and ranchers protect themselves against hiring someone like this. The reason it is important is because these undercover spies won’t be there to work and take care of livestock. They will be more concerned about looking for a camera shot that they can get paid for and may play well with consumers that don’t understand animal husbandry. And, when they can’t accomplish that goal, they will simply not show up for work any longer and move to the next place, here again leaving the proper care of the livestock in jeopardy.
Friday, June 4, 2010
All Eggs Taste The Same
Backyard eggs vs. store-bought: They taste the same
By Tamar Haspel
Special to The Washington Post
Wednesday, June 2, 2010; E01
Fresh eggs from well-treated chickens taste better than supermarket eggs. Ask anyone who raises chickens, or anyone who's thinking about raising chickens, or anyone who gets eggs from anyone who raises chickens. Ask anyone, actually.
Well, as of about a year ago, I raise chickens. And I wanted to believe.
When my husband, Kevin, and I made the move two years ago from Manhattan to two wooded acres on Cape Cod, we were determined to do all the things we couldn't do in the city. We garden, of course. We also fish and hunt, shellfish and lobster. We grow mushrooms and make sea salt. We brew root beer and dandelion wine.
And we raise chickens. Apparently, so does everybody and his brother. There aren't any official stats: Backyard chickens fly under the Department of Agriculture's radar. But they seem to be all the rage.
We collected our first egg last Sept. 22 (we made book on it). Although it was a runty thing, a scant two inches high, I rushed to my husband's office to show him. We have both known all our lives that chickens lay eggs, but we held it in our hands and marveled at the miraculousness of it, as though our chicken had laid a fig, or maybe a truffle. That evening, to keep the shell intact, we carefully poked holes in both ends and blew out the contents, which we scrambled in a little bit of butter. There was just enough for each of us to have a bite.
It was, of course, delicious. But it got me wondering. How much of the deliciousness came from the idea of it, and how much came from the actual yolk and white of it? Read More
Our urban and suburban friends have been busy starting their backyard food producing enterprises over the last couple years. But as the work gets more tedious and the romance wears off we finally start to see the reality come into view. I don’t have a problem with people raising their own food in a garden or with some backyard livestock but looking objectively at what it produces is important. I think the thing to remember is that there is always a lot of hype surrounding new and trendy things. It’s how you feel a year later about your new and trendy thing that tells the real story.
By Tamar Haspel
Special to The Washington Post
Wednesday, June 2, 2010; E01
Fresh eggs from well-treated chickens taste better than supermarket eggs. Ask anyone who raises chickens, or anyone who's thinking about raising chickens, or anyone who gets eggs from anyone who raises chickens. Ask anyone, actually.
Well, as of about a year ago, I raise chickens. And I wanted to believe.
When my husband, Kevin, and I made the move two years ago from Manhattan to two wooded acres on Cape Cod, we were determined to do all the things we couldn't do in the city. We garden, of course. We also fish and hunt, shellfish and lobster. We grow mushrooms and make sea salt. We brew root beer and dandelion wine.
And we raise chickens. Apparently, so does everybody and his brother. There aren't any official stats: Backyard chickens fly under the Department of Agriculture's radar. But they seem to be all the rage.
We collected our first egg last Sept. 22 (we made book on it). Although it was a runty thing, a scant two inches high, I rushed to my husband's office to show him. We have both known all our lives that chickens lay eggs, but we held it in our hands and marveled at the miraculousness of it, as though our chicken had laid a fig, or maybe a truffle. That evening, to keep the shell intact, we carefully poked holes in both ends and blew out the contents, which we scrambled in a little bit of butter. There was just enough for each of us to have a bite.
It was, of course, delicious. But it got me wondering. How much of the deliciousness came from the idea of it, and how much came from the actual yolk and white of it? Read More
Our urban and suburban friends have been busy starting their backyard food producing enterprises over the last couple years. But as the work gets more tedious and the romance wears off we finally start to see the reality come into view. I don’t have a problem with people raising their own food in a garden or with some backyard livestock but looking objectively at what it produces is important. I think the thing to remember is that there is always a lot of hype surrounding new and trendy things. It’s how you feel a year later about your new and trendy thing that tells the real story.
Consumers Will Support GM Food
Food Technology: 'What's in it for Me?'
by International Food Information Council Foundation Jun 04, 2010
Many of us can probably recall a time when we waited in a long line just to purchase the latest mobile or electronic technology. But, do we have the same reaction when it comes to technology used in food production? Granted, it may not seem as exciting as that new MP3 player or cell phone, but does food technology deserve a bad rap? What do Americans really think about food technology, and what types of messages resonate with them?
To gain insight into these very issues, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) recently conducted our 14 "Consumer Perceptions of Food Technology" Survey (formerly the "IFIC Survey of Consumer Attitudinal Trends toward Food Biotechnology"), which explores U.S. consumers' perceptions of various aspects of plant and animal biotechnology, as well as sustainability and new and emerging technologies such as nanotechnology.
Key Takeaways
While we gained several interesting insights from this year's Survey, one of the most important takeaways was that Americans' support of the use of food biotechnology is strongest when they consider its potential benefits for impacting issues of importance to them, such as reducing the impact of food and food production on the environment, and improving sustainability. Read More
The things that consumers want genetically enhanced foods to accomplish is exactly what they are doing. They were designed so less pesticides and herbicides would need to be used. We are producing more with less and feeding the world. Unfortunately there are many consumers out there who are basing their opinions about this technology off scary headlines and rumors. If consumers can look through the emotion and take an objective look at it, we’d all be better off.
by International Food Information Council Foundation Jun 04, 2010
Many of us can probably recall a time when we waited in a long line just to purchase the latest mobile or electronic technology. But, do we have the same reaction when it comes to technology used in food production? Granted, it may not seem as exciting as that new MP3 player or cell phone, but does food technology deserve a bad rap? What do Americans really think about food technology, and what types of messages resonate with them?
To gain insight into these very issues, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) recently conducted our 14 "Consumer Perceptions of Food Technology" Survey (formerly the "IFIC Survey of Consumer Attitudinal Trends toward Food Biotechnology"), which explores U.S. consumers' perceptions of various aspects of plant and animal biotechnology, as well as sustainability and new and emerging technologies such as nanotechnology.
Key Takeaways
While we gained several interesting insights from this year's Survey, one of the most important takeaways was that Americans' support of the use of food biotechnology is strongest when they consider its potential benefits for impacting issues of importance to them, such as reducing the impact of food and food production on the environment, and improving sustainability. Read More
The things that consumers want genetically enhanced foods to accomplish is exactly what they are doing. They were designed so less pesticides and herbicides would need to be used. We are producing more with less and feeding the world. Unfortunately there are many consumers out there who are basing their opinions about this technology off scary headlines and rumors. If consumers can look through the emotion and take an objective look at it, we’d all be better off.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Study Shows Grain Fed Beef Healthier Than Grass Fed
Study Shows Ground Beef From Grain-Fed Cattle Healthier Than Grass-Fed
05/27/2010 10:49AM
COLLEGE STATION – Grass-fed beef may not have as many healthful traits as some perceive, according to results from a recent Texas AgriLife Research study.
Dr. Stephen Smith, an AgriLife Research meat scientist, and a team of researchers have found that contrary to popular perception, ground beef from pasture-fed cattle had no beneficial effects on plasma lipid.
However, high monounsaturated fat ground beef from grain-fed cattle increased HDL cholesterol, increased LDL particle diameters, and decreased insulin, suggesting that ground beef produced by intensive production practices provides “a healthful, high-quality source of protein.”
"We wanted to see from this study if product from pasture-fed and corn-fed cattle had different effects on LDL or HDL cholesterol," Smith said. "We looked at the scientific literature and could not find any justifications for the statement that pasture-fed beef is better for you. All we found were rat studies in which they were fed omega-3 fatty acids, so we wanted to know if this applied to beef from grass-fed cattle."
"There really were no negative effects of feeding ground beef from the pasture-fed cattle," Smith said. "We did see many positive effects in men that consumed ground beef from corn-fed cattle. The ground beef from the USDA Prime cattle increased HDL cholesterol and LDL particle diameter. Both effects are protective against cardiovascular disease. The Prime ground beef also decreased insulin, so it may have some protective effect against type II diabetes." Read More
The biggest thing this study should provide for us is the fact that all beef is healthy for us. It doesn’t do anyone any good to vilify the type of beef our neighbor raises. It doesn’t matter what type of food you are raising, if you have to make up scary stories and spew misinformation about other products in order to promote your own, then you have a problem. All of us have preferences about what we like and don’t like but in the end we have a huge responsibility to provide food and fiber for the planet.
05/27/2010 10:49AM
COLLEGE STATION – Grass-fed beef may not have as many healthful traits as some perceive, according to results from a recent Texas AgriLife Research study.
Dr. Stephen Smith, an AgriLife Research meat scientist, and a team of researchers have found that contrary to popular perception, ground beef from pasture-fed cattle had no beneficial effects on plasma lipid.
However, high monounsaturated fat ground beef from grain-fed cattle increased HDL cholesterol, increased LDL particle diameters, and decreased insulin, suggesting that ground beef produced by intensive production practices provides “a healthful, high-quality source of protein.”
"We wanted to see from this study if product from pasture-fed and corn-fed cattle had different effects on LDL or HDL cholesterol," Smith said. "We looked at the scientific literature and could not find any justifications for the statement that pasture-fed beef is better for you. All we found were rat studies in which they were fed omega-3 fatty acids, so we wanted to know if this applied to beef from grass-fed cattle."
"There really were no negative effects of feeding ground beef from the pasture-fed cattle," Smith said. "We did see many positive effects in men that consumed ground beef from corn-fed cattle. The ground beef from the USDA Prime cattle increased HDL cholesterol and LDL particle diameter. Both effects are protective against cardiovascular disease. The Prime ground beef also decreased insulin, so it may have some protective effect against type II diabetes." Read More
The biggest thing this study should provide for us is the fact that all beef is healthy for us. It doesn’t do anyone any good to vilify the type of beef our neighbor raises. It doesn’t matter what type of food you are raising, if you have to make up scary stories and spew misinformation about other products in order to promote your own, then you have a problem. All of us have preferences about what we like and don’t like but in the end we have a huge responsibility to provide food and fiber for the planet.
ND Shelters Losing Money to Confused HSUS Donors
Difference between local, national Humane Societies confuses animal donors
Consumer Freedom center criticizes national group, which says it doesn’t claim to be a source for local sheltersA group that’s been critical of the national Humane Society renewed its jabs Wednesday, detailing in a state-by-state report on how little the society donates to local animal shelters.
By: Dave Roepke, The Forum
Grand Forks Herald
A group that’s been critical of the national Humane Society renewed its jabs Wednesday, detailing in a state-by-state report on how little the society donates to local animal shelters.
The Humane Society of the United States dismisses the criticism by the Center for Consumer Freedom, saying it doesn’t claim to be a source of grant money for local animal shelters.
Regardless of the goal of the national group, directors of shelters in Grand Forks and Fargo say they often battle the notion that donations to the HSUS will go to actual shelters.
“I definitely think it’s an issue,” said Arlette Moen, executive director of Circle of Friends Humane Society in Grand Forks.
Moen and the executive director of the FM Humane Society, Nukhet Hendricks, said they regularly encounter indications that some donors draw no distinction between their outfits and the national group.
“We have people walk into the shelter and say, ‘Oh, I give to the Humane Society of the United States,’” Moen said. “That’s our opportunity to tell them, ‘No, it doesn’t work that way.’”
Read More
It has to be incredibly frustrating for local shelters to see local money being donated to the HSUS by people who mistakenly believe they support pet shelters. I find news stories like this on a very regular basis now. Some shelters are now changing their names just so they can distance themselves from the HSUS because the confusion is affecting their ability to get donations. But the fact that HSUS is causing this hardship doesn’t seem to bother them much.
Consumer Freedom center criticizes national group, which says it doesn’t claim to be a source for local sheltersA group that’s been critical of the national Humane Society renewed its jabs Wednesday, detailing in a state-by-state report on how little the society donates to local animal shelters.
By: Dave Roepke, The Forum
Grand Forks Herald
A group that’s been critical of the national Humane Society renewed its jabs Wednesday, detailing in a state-by-state report on how little the society donates to local animal shelters.
The Humane Society of the United States dismisses the criticism by the Center for Consumer Freedom, saying it doesn’t claim to be a source of grant money for local animal shelters.
Regardless of the goal of the national group, directors of shelters in Grand Forks and Fargo say they often battle the notion that donations to the HSUS will go to actual shelters.
“I definitely think it’s an issue,” said Arlette Moen, executive director of Circle of Friends Humane Society in Grand Forks.
Moen and the executive director of the FM Humane Society, Nukhet Hendricks, said they regularly encounter indications that some donors draw no distinction between their outfits and the national group.
“We have people walk into the shelter and say, ‘Oh, I give to the Humane Society of the United States,’” Moen said. “That’s our opportunity to tell them, ‘No, it doesn’t work that way.’”
Read More
It has to be incredibly frustrating for local shelters to see local money being donated to the HSUS by people who mistakenly believe they support pet shelters. I find news stories like this on a very regular basis now. Some shelters are now changing their names just so they can distance themselves from the HSUS because the confusion is affecting their ability to get donations. But the fact that HSUS is causing this hardship doesn’t seem to bother them much.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
CA Winery Stops HSUS Donation
This weekend I found out that Jordan Vineyard and Winery in Sonoma County, CA was going to be hosting a HSUS fundraiser on June 5. After my involvement in getting Yellow Tail wine to stop their donation to HSUS and my now famous YouTube video I received many emails asking if I was going to dust off my video camera for another round.
But this time I picked up the phone instead and called the winery this morning. I explained who I was and what my concerns were about their planned donation. The helpful lady on the other end of the line took down my information and said she would have someone get back to me. A few hours later my phone rings and it’s none other than John Jordan himself, owner of the vineyard and winery.
Right off the bat he explained to me that they had made a mistake and were trying to fix the situation as best they could. He admitted that he really didn’t know the HSUS wasn’t associated with any dog or cat shelters. The intention was to raise money to help unwanted animals and he mistakenly assumed the HSUS did that. The truth of the matter is they don’t and Mr. Jordan understands that now too.
While the fundraiser for this Saturday night is still going to happen, the HSUS will not be receiving a penny of the money that will be raised. All proceeds will be given to local pet shelters that will actually use the money to help pets.
While there’s no word on whether or not Wayne Pacelle will still be attending the fundraiser, the good news is that those who need the money the worst and can use it best will be getting it.
Tonight I will be raising my glass to John Jordan and his family for realizing their mistake and making it right.
But this time I picked up the phone instead and called the winery this morning. I explained who I was and what my concerns were about their planned donation. The helpful lady on the other end of the line took down my information and said she would have someone get back to me. A few hours later my phone rings and it’s none other than John Jordan himself, owner of the vineyard and winery.
Right off the bat he explained to me that they had made a mistake and were trying to fix the situation as best they could. He admitted that he really didn’t know the HSUS wasn’t associated with any dog or cat shelters. The intention was to raise money to help unwanted animals and he mistakenly assumed the HSUS did that. The truth of the matter is they don’t and Mr. Jordan understands that now too.
While the fundraiser for this Saturday night is still going to happen, the HSUS will not be receiving a penny of the money that will be raised. All proceeds will be given to local pet shelters that will actually use the money to help pets.
While there’s no word on whether or not Wayne Pacelle will still be attending the fundraiser, the good news is that those who need the money the worst and can use it best will be getting it.
Tonight I will be raising my glass to John Jordan and his family for realizing their mistake and making it right.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
My Thoughts On The Ohio Dairy Farm Abuse Video
I’ve spent my whole life around agriculture and specifically cattle. I love everything about cows. From being there when the calves take their first steps to enjoying the tasty and nutritious beef that I help supply to the world, all of it is fascinating to me. And it’s that appreciation for these animals that has me so upset this morning.
Yesterday afternoon I found out that a new “shocking” video was being released showing the abuse of dairy cows in Ohio. When I finally got a chance to see the video last night I was outraged for many reasons.
First, I think we’ve all learned not to believe everything you see or read on the internet. Especially after watching this video I’d like to think this didn’t really happen. All of the facts in this case will eventually come out, but on the surface the blatant abuse it shows makes no sense. Deliberately mishandling the very cows that, figuratively and literally, are putting the food on your families table is incomprehensible to say the least. Anyone who has ever handled cattle also realizes that all of the things they were doing to these cows were never going to achieve any desired results.
Next, I’m completely disgusted with these undercover employees that are more concerned about getting months worth of video and are willing to let this abuse continue on in the name of their political agenda. Anyone who has a shred of decency wouldn’t let that happen. If you are aware of something like this and still allow it to occur, that makes you part of the problem.
Finally, if these allegations of abuse are found to be true then I’m livid that these people ever considered themselves dairymen and part of the agriculture community. Their actions are an insult to every one of us that work so hard everyday to properly care for our livestock. I wear the titles of Cattlemen and Rancher with pride, but along with them comes a responsibility to uphold the values and tradition of animal husbandry. Everyone I know that works with livestock feels the same way.
As a fifth generation United States rancher, my job is to care for my cows to the best of my ability. What I saw on that video is not acceptable. The good news is that it’s not the norm. I have visited dairies that ranged in size from 4 head to 4000 head. Never have I seen anything but the very best care being given. My experiences on hog farms and other cattle ranches have been the same.
If you are upset with what you see in this video, that’s OK. I am too. But if you are interested in how livestock are treated on the overwhelming majority of farms and ranches, visit one in your area and see it for yourself. ~Troy
Yesterday afternoon I found out that a new “shocking” video was being released showing the abuse of dairy cows in Ohio. When I finally got a chance to see the video last night I was outraged for many reasons.
First, I think we’ve all learned not to believe everything you see or read on the internet. Especially after watching this video I’d like to think this didn’t really happen. All of the facts in this case will eventually come out, but on the surface the blatant abuse it shows makes no sense. Deliberately mishandling the very cows that, figuratively and literally, are putting the food on your families table is incomprehensible to say the least. Anyone who has ever handled cattle also realizes that all of the things they were doing to these cows were never going to achieve any desired results.
Next, I’m completely disgusted with these undercover employees that are more concerned about getting months worth of video and are willing to let this abuse continue on in the name of their political agenda. Anyone who has a shred of decency wouldn’t let that happen. If you are aware of something like this and still allow it to occur, that makes you part of the problem.
Finally, if these allegations of abuse are found to be true then I’m livid that these people ever considered themselves dairymen and part of the agriculture community. Their actions are an insult to every one of us that work so hard everyday to properly care for our livestock. I wear the titles of Cattlemen and Rancher with pride, but along with them comes a responsibility to uphold the values and tradition of animal husbandry. Everyone I know that works with livestock feels the same way.
As a fifth generation United States rancher, my job is to care for my cows to the best of my ability. What I saw on that video is not acceptable. The good news is that it’s not the norm. I have visited dairies that ranged in size from 4 head to 4000 head. Never have I seen anything but the very best care being given. My experiences on hog farms and other cattle ranches have been the same.
If you are upset with what you see in this video, that’s OK. I am too. But if you are interested in how livestock are treated on the overwhelming majority of farms and ranches, visit one in your area and see it for yourself. ~Troy
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Attempted Murder of Another UCSC Researcher
Brake lines to UCSC researcher's car cut; FBI investigating
By Jennifer Squires jsquires@santacruzsentinel.com
Posted: 05/24/2010 03:54:36 PM PDT
Updated: 05/25/2010 07:07:13 AM PDT
SANTA CRUZ — A vandal cut the brake lines on the vehicle of a UC Santa Cruz researcher late Saturday or early Sunday, and the Police Department has called in the FBI to help investigate.
About nine FBI agents were at the researcher's Westside home on Monday. Some agents peered under the sport utility vehicle to inspect the damage, while others canvassed the neighborhood for witnesses.
The researcher, who wasn't identified, called police around 11 a.m. Sunday to report vandalism to the SUV, which was parked in front of the researcher's house on the 1200 block of Laurent Street, according to Santa Cruz Deputy Police Chief Rick Martinez.
"It's not something we see every day. Why was this one vehicle specifically targeted?" Martinez said. "... Was this to injure the driver? Was it to send a message? Was it a threat? These are all questions we're trying to sort out right now."
In February 2008, demonstrators protesting in front of a researcher's house tried to force their way into the home and attacked the researcher's husband while the family held a child's birthday party inside. A federal grand jury indicted four animal rights activists under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act a year later. Their case is pending in U.S. District Court.
The homes of two other UCSC researcher, who also works with animals, was firebombed in August 2008. In one incident, the researcher and his family had to jump to safety. No one has been arrested in connection with the firebombing incidents. Read More
Animal rights activists have been targeting researchers for their work by trying to kill them. This is nothing less than attempted murder. When you firebomb houses and disable the brakes on vehicles in an attempt to help animals it just goes to show how mentally unstable these people are. Reasonable people don’t try murdering other innocent people to make their point. ~Troy
By Jennifer Squires jsquires@santacruzsentinel.com
Posted: 05/24/2010 03:54:36 PM PDT
Updated: 05/25/2010 07:07:13 AM PDT
SANTA CRUZ — A vandal cut the brake lines on the vehicle of a UC Santa Cruz researcher late Saturday or early Sunday, and the Police Department has called in the FBI to help investigate.
About nine FBI agents were at the researcher's Westside home on Monday. Some agents peered under the sport utility vehicle to inspect the damage, while others canvassed the neighborhood for witnesses.
The researcher, who wasn't identified, called police around 11 a.m. Sunday to report vandalism to the SUV, which was parked in front of the researcher's house on the 1200 block of Laurent Street, according to Santa Cruz Deputy Police Chief Rick Martinez.
"It's not something we see every day. Why was this one vehicle specifically targeted?" Martinez said. "... Was this to injure the driver? Was it to send a message? Was it a threat? These are all questions we're trying to sort out right now."
In February 2008, demonstrators protesting in front of a researcher's house tried to force their way into the home and attacked the researcher's husband while the family held a child's birthday party inside. A federal grand jury indicted four animal rights activists under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act a year later. Their case is pending in U.S. District Court.
The homes of two other UCSC researcher, who also works with animals, was firebombed in August 2008. In one incident, the researcher and his family had to jump to safety. No one has been arrested in connection with the firebombing incidents. Read More
Animal rights activists have been targeting researchers for their work by trying to kill them. This is nothing less than attempted murder. When you firebomb houses and disable the brakes on vehicles in an attempt to help animals it just goes to show how mentally unstable these people are. Reasonable people don’t try murdering other innocent people to make their point. ~Troy
Animal Rights Activists Protest Medical Research
Animal research draws rally
Protesters say money rather than medical advances fuels research; backers disagree
By SCOTT WALDMAN, Staff writer
First published in print: Monday, May 24, 2010
The animals were among those used in medical research conducted at Albany Medical Center and their use in tests was protested by a group of animal rights activists. The group, called Adirondack Animal Rights, plans to stage monthly protests at the corner of New Scotland and Holland avenues until the hospital finds other methods of testing.
"I hope they stop and think about what's going on," said Jessica Ryle, the group's founder, as cars whizzed by and honked their horns.
Albany Medical College uses a variety of animals in tests that it claims are beneficial to science, according to its annual report with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Among the animals that experienced "pain or distress" in tests at the school in 2008 were 12 dogs, 13 rabbits, 38 pigs, two goats and 116 chinchillas, the report states.
Such testing is going on at every academic medical research facility across the country, Albany Med spokesman Greg McGarry said. He said the tests are absolutely imperative as long as "kids are dying of cancer" because that is how medical advances are discovered.
"We think that as long as there are these terrible diseases that afflict humans and animals, we have a lot to know from these animal studies," McGarry said. Read More
Yesterday I posted an article that talked about animal rights activists that are making these animals a higher priority in life than other people. Never should we allow our society get to the point where we would rather see children suffer than test possible life-saving drugs on animals. The best thing for these activists to do would be to refuse any medical treatment for themselves and their children if it’s been tested on animals. That way they could really prove their convictions. ~Troy
Protesters say money rather than medical advances fuels research; backers disagree
By SCOTT WALDMAN, Staff writer
First published in print: Monday, May 24, 2010
The animals were among those used in medical research conducted at Albany Medical Center and their use in tests was protested by a group of animal rights activists. The group, called Adirondack Animal Rights, plans to stage monthly protests at the corner of New Scotland and Holland avenues until the hospital finds other methods of testing.
"I hope they stop and think about what's going on," said Jessica Ryle, the group's founder, as cars whizzed by and honked their horns.
Albany Medical College uses a variety of animals in tests that it claims are beneficial to science, according to its annual report with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Among the animals that experienced "pain or distress" in tests at the school in 2008 were 12 dogs, 13 rabbits, 38 pigs, two goats and 116 chinchillas, the report states.
Such testing is going on at every academic medical research facility across the country, Albany Med spokesman Greg McGarry said. He said the tests are absolutely imperative as long as "kids are dying of cancer" because that is how medical advances are discovered.
"We think that as long as there are these terrible diseases that afflict humans and animals, we have a lot to know from these animal studies," McGarry said. Read More
Yesterday I posted an article that talked about animal rights activists that are making these animals a higher priority in life than other people. Never should we allow our society get to the point where we would rather see children suffer than test possible life-saving drugs on animals. The best thing for these activists to do would be to refuse any medical treatment for themselves and their children if it’s been tested on animals. That way they could really prove their convictions. ~Troy
NV Feral Horse Roundup Lawsuit Dismissed
Federal judge dismisses Nevada horse roundup suit
Associated Press
Monday, May 24, 2010 4:53 p.m.
A federal judge Monday officially dismissed a lawsuit brought by animal rights activists over a big wild horse roundup in northern Nevada, saying the case was moot and plaintiffs lacked standing.
U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman in Washington, D.C., who in December denied an injunction to prevent the roundup, said the U.S. Bureau of Land Management has already gathered 1,922 horses from the Calico Mountains Complex north of Reno, therefore challenging the use of helicopters was moot.
The group In Defense of Animals, wildlife ecologist Craig Downer and children's author Terri Farley also claimed in their suit that shipping horses removed from the range to long-term holding corrals in the Midwest is not permitted under the Wild Horse and Burro Act.
But Friedman said the plaintiffs failed to show how sending the horses to other facilities would cause harm to themselves. Read More
Here’s an update on the lawsuit that was attempting to stop BLM from being able to manage the feral horse population in Nevada. Feral horse numbers are greatly exceeding the capacity of the rangeland to accommodate them. Nobody wants to completely eliminate them, however, like all animal species their population needs to be managed. If we don’t do it then disease or starvation will do it for us. ~Troy
Associated Press
Monday, May 24, 2010 4:53 p.m.
A federal judge Monday officially dismissed a lawsuit brought by animal rights activists over a big wild horse roundup in northern Nevada, saying the case was moot and plaintiffs lacked standing.
U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman in Washington, D.C., who in December denied an injunction to prevent the roundup, said the U.S. Bureau of Land Management has already gathered 1,922 horses from the Calico Mountains Complex north of Reno, therefore challenging the use of helicopters was moot.
The group In Defense of Animals, wildlife ecologist Craig Downer and children's author Terri Farley also claimed in their suit that shipping horses removed from the range to long-term holding corrals in the Midwest is not permitted under the Wild Horse and Burro Act.
But Friedman said the plaintiffs failed to show how sending the horses to other facilities would cause harm to themselves. Read More
Here’s an update on the lawsuit that was attempting to stop BLM from being able to manage the feral horse population in Nevada. Feral horse numbers are greatly exceeding the capacity of the rangeland to accommodate them. Nobody wants to completely eliminate them, however, like all animal species their population needs to be managed. If we don’t do it then disease or starvation will do it for us. ~Troy
Monday, May 24, 2010
Animals Getting More Attention Than Abused Kids
Spotlight on animal abuse doesn't sit right with some
Adrian Humphreys, National Post, With Files From Trevor Wilhelm, Windsor Star Published: Friday, May 21, 2010
A mob of 200 gathered outside a Windsor, Ont., courthouse this week, showering vitriol and threats of torture and death on a man accused of sexually mutilating his dog. The crowd sought "Justice for Tyson," the wounded black lab mix.
A few days earlier, more than 100 protesters in Newmarket, Ont., held a mock funeral for animals euthanized during a ringworm outbreak at an animal shelter. Despite the pretend gravestones, real tears were shed.
Such public anguish and mass mobilization over animals has social advocates wondering why the streets often fall silent when such unfortunate fates befall fellow humans. One academic plans to launch a study of the phenomenon. "I look forward to the day when 200 people are speaking out about sexual abuse of children," said sex abuse survivor John Swales, a Windsor-based victim's advocate and support services advisor.
"There's no public display; it's just business as usual.... It is a dismal reflection of society when an animal receives more concern than a child." Read More
It doesn’t make sense to me how these animal rights activists can become zealots for animals while barely acknowledging the fact that many humans, especially children, go unnoticed. It’s hard to believe but some people, including upper-level personnel at groups like PETA and HSUS, truly feel that the lives of their own children don’t deserve any more consideration than that of the smallest insect. Obviously this is a pretty radical viewpoint they have taken and I feel sorry for their kids. The vast majority of people would never feel that way about their children but these radical viewpoints continue to permeate our society. ~Troy
Adrian Humphreys, National Post, With Files From Trevor Wilhelm, Windsor Star Published: Friday, May 21, 2010
A mob of 200 gathered outside a Windsor, Ont., courthouse this week, showering vitriol and threats of torture and death on a man accused of sexually mutilating his dog. The crowd sought "Justice for Tyson," the wounded black lab mix.
A few days earlier, more than 100 protesters in Newmarket, Ont., held a mock funeral for animals euthanized during a ringworm outbreak at an animal shelter. Despite the pretend gravestones, real tears were shed.
Such public anguish and mass mobilization over animals has social advocates wondering why the streets often fall silent when such unfortunate fates befall fellow humans. One academic plans to launch a study of the phenomenon. "I look forward to the day when 200 people are speaking out about sexual abuse of children," said sex abuse survivor John Swales, a Windsor-based victim's advocate and support services advisor.
"There's no public display; it's just business as usual.... It is a dismal reflection of society when an animal receives more concern than a child." Read More
It doesn’t make sense to me how these animal rights activists can become zealots for animals while barely acknowledging the fact that many humans, especially children, go unnoticed. It’s hard to believe but some people, including upper-level personnel at groups like PETA and HSUS, truly feel that the lives of their own children don’t deserve any more consideration than that of the smallest insect. Obviously this is a pretty radical viewpoint they have taken and I feel sorry for their kids. The vast majority of people would never feel that way about their children but these radical viewpoints continue to permeate our society. ~Troy
E.Coli Illnesses Significantly Drop
Beef industry keeps focus on safety improvements
High Plains Journal
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rate of illness due to E. coli O157 significantly decreased in 2009. The 2009 E. coli illness rate is the lowest since 2004 and meets the Healthy People 2010 goal to cut the number of O157 illnesses in half.
"This is good news for beef producers and consumers alike," says Jeff Clausen, a beef producer from Carson, Iowa, and the beef industry's Beef Safety Committee chairman. "Anyone involved in the ongoing battle to improve food safety is gratified by the news that illnesses from E. coli O157 have declined. However, E. coli O157 is a tough, adaptable foe and our work is not done."
Through beef checkoff investments and widespread industry commitment, the beef industry continues to make strides toward reducing the incidence of E. coli O157 by implementing multiple interventions throughout the beef production chain.
For more information on the industry's beef safety efforts, visit BIFSCo.org. For more information about programs funded by your checkoff investment, visit MyBeefCheckoff.com.
Link
Every year, producers are committing their own money to learn more about e. Coli and how best to reduce the chances for contamination. While research is determining new and better ways to handle O157, the time-tested advice of avoiding cross contamination in the kitchen and properly cooking all meat will still eliminate any chance of ever getting sick. Food safety is a team effort that we all need to be part of. ~Troy
High Plains Journal
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rate of illness due to E. coli O157 significantly decreased in 2009. The 2009 E. coli illness rate is the lowest since 2004 and meets the Healthy People 2010 goal to cut the number of O157 illnesses in half.
"This is good news for beef producers and consumers alike," says Jeff Clausen, a beef producer from Carson, Iowa, and the beef industry's Beef Safety Committee chairman. "Anyone involved in the ongoing battle to improve food safety is gratified by the news that illnesses from E. coli O157 have declined. However, E. coli O157 is a tough, adaptable foe and our work is not done."
Through beef checkoff investments and widespread industry commitment, the beef industry continues to make strides toward reducing the incidence of E. coli O157 by implementing multiple interventions throughout the beef production chain.
For more information on the industry's beef safety efforts, visit BIFSCo.org. For more information about programs funded by your checkoff investment, visit MyBeefCheckoff.com.
Link
Every year, producers are committing their own money to learn more about e. Coli and how best to reduce the chances for contamination. While research is determining new and better ways to handle O157, the time-tested advice of avoiding cross contamination in the kitchen and properly cooking all meat will still eliminate any chance of ever getting sick. Food safety is a team effort that we all need to be part of. ~Troy
Bringing Kids Out To The Ranch
Appreciating Ag
By Suzanne Jacobson
Payson, AZ
May 21, 2010
’Twas agriculture field day and not a video game was in sight. Rim Country kids played in a Rockin’ Rodeo, watched a branding, and learned how to harness draft horses all before night.
The Tonto Natural Resource Conservation District (NRCD) Agriculture field day offered about 100 students — fourth-graders from Payson Elementary School and 4-H members from Pine and Tonto Basin — the opportunity to learn about agriculture and gain an appreciation for food’s source.
“A lot of these kids don’t know where the milk comes from in the grocery store,” said Lori Brown, who hosted the event on her ranch.
“We’re all five and six times generational ranchers,” said Brown. Compare a rancher’s way of eating to today, where most people drive to grocery stores and buy processed, packaged food laden with hydrogenated everything.
“There’s this national push to reconnect children with nature,” said Hall. “Kids are spending unbelievable amounts of time in front of the computer and TV.”
Hall went into schools and taught kids where pizza comes from. “There was one little boy who thought there was a pizza farm someplace.” Read More
I always enjoy highlighting farmers and ranchers that take the time to host children for a tour. The smile on the faces of these kids is as wide as the prairie itself when they get to learn about where their food comes from and who grows it. Kids today are getting bombarded with negative messages about farmers and ranchers so it’s vitally important that we share with them the true story of agriculture. The only people that can do that best are the farmers and ranchers themselves. I hope all of you get the opportunity to be involved in teaching kids about ag at some point.
By Suzanne Jacobson
Payson, AZ
May 21, 2010
’Twas agriculture field day and not a video game was in sight. Rim Country kids played in a Rockin’ Rodeo, watched a branding, and learned how to harness draft horses all before night.
The Tonto Natural Resource Conservation District (NRCD) Agriculture field day offered about 100 students — fourth-graders from Payson Elementary School and 4-H members from Pine and Tonto Basin — the opportunity to learn about agriculture and gain an appreciation for food’s source.
“A lot of these kids don’t know where the milk comes from in the grocery store,” said Lori Brown, who hosted the event on her ranch.
“We’re all five and six times generational ranchers,” said Brown. Compare a rancher’s way of eating to today, where most people drive to grocery stores and buy processed, packaged food laden with hydrogenated everything.
“There’s this national push to reconnect children with nature,” said Hall. “Kids are spending unbelievable amounts of time in front of the computer and TV.”
Hall went into schools and taught kids where pizza comes from. “There was one little boy who thought there was a pizza farm someplace.” Read More
I always enjoy highlighting farmers and ranchers that take the time to host children for a tour. The smile on the faces of these kids is as wide as the prairie itself when they get to learn about where their food comes from and who grows it. Kids today are getting bombarded with negative messages about farmers and ranchers so it’s vitally important that we share with them the true story of agriculture. The only people that can do that best are the farmers and ranchers themselves. I hope all of you get the opportunity to be involved in teaching kids about ag at some point.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Farm Tours
Willamette Egg Farms opens doors to visitors
Congressional aides, students tour facility to learn about egg production
By MITCH LIES
Capital Press
AURORA, Ore. -- About three years back, Gordon and Greg Satrum, father and son owners of Willamette Egg Farms in Aurora, decided to open their farm to visitors.
Not doing so, Gordon said, left the impression the farm had something to hide.
"It always was just a biosecurity issue," Gordon said, regarding why the farm previously banned visitors. "We were keeping out bugs."
Today Willamette Egg Farms offers a video tour of the farm on its website. And it occasionally plays host to local schools, which take advantage of the farm's offers to teach children about egg production.
"It is in our farm's best interest to adhere to the highest standards of animal care," the farm says on its website. "As egg farmers, we know healthy, well-treated hens in a safe environment produce the best quality eggs." Read More
Biosecurity must always be a concern anytime you start having people tour your facilities. However, there is no better way to explain agriculture and how food gets on a plate than by showing them first hand. We can never be too busy to share our story, so if you ever get the chance to host a tour look at it as a special opportunity. Congratulations to Willamette Egg Farms for being advocates for agriculture.
Congressional aides, students tour facility to learn about egg production
By MITCH LIES
Capital Press
AURORA, Ore. -- About three years back, Gordon and Greg Satrum, father and son owners of Willamette Egg Farms in Aurora, decided to open their farm to visitors.
Not doing so, Gordon said, left the impression the farm had something to hide.
"It always was just a biosecurity issue," Gordon said, regarding why the farm previously banned visitors. "We were keeping out bugs."
Today Willamette Egg Farms offers a video tour of the farm on its website. And it occasionally plays host to local schools, which take advantage of the farm's offers to teach children about egg production.
"It is in our farm's best interest to adhere to the highest standards of animal care," the farm says on its website. "As egg farmers, we know healthy, well-treated hens in a safe environment produce the best quality eggs." Read More
Biosecurity must always be a concern anytime you start having people tour your facilities. However, there is no better way to explain agriculture and how food gets on a plate than by showing them first hand. We can never be too busy to share our story, so if you ever get the chance to host a tour look at it as a special opportunity. Congratulations to Willamette Egg Farms for being advocates for agriculture.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Black Cows on Green Grass
It's that time of year when winter finally seems to be over, the grass is growing and the cows are itching to get a taste. Yesterday we got one bunch of cows and calves vaccinated and put out to pasture and another bunch is on deck today.
I don't know if there is any better remedy to make you forget a long, cold winter than to swing open a gate and watch the back end of the herd as you trail them out to grass.
Stop back tomorrow for more updates on how to be an advocate for agriculture.
I don't know if there is any better remedy to make you forget a long, cold winter than to swing open a gate and watch the back end of the herd as you trail them out to grass.
Stop back tomorrow for more updates on how to be an advocate for agriculture.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Congressman Says Milk, Meat Unhealthy For Kids
Colorado congressman wants healthier school meals
By: DAN ELLIOTT Associated Press05/17/10 10:15 PM EDT
DENVER — More kids could get vegetarian meals and nondairy food and drink in the school cafeteria under a bill proposed by Colorado congressman Jared Polis.
"One of the things I've always been dismayed by is the nutritional value of the meals schools serve," Polis said Monday before promoting his Healthy School Meals Act at a suburban Denver charter school.
Polis, a Democrat, wants to give schools an incentive to offer more plant-based food. He estimated it would cost around $50 million a year but said he believes that would be more than offset in health care savings because fewer children would suffer from juvenile diabetes, heart disease and other conditions linked to obesity. Read More
Withholding meat and milk from our children is certainly not going to make them healthier. If we want our kids to be healthier we have to get back to the basics. They need to eat a balanced diet that includes meat and diary products, get plenty of exercise and cut down on the junk food. This congressman’s proposal is as ridiculous as it sounds. Besides that, I wonder if the parents and the congressman realize that the vegetarian option of macaroni and cheese they are promoting uses cheese which is made from milk, they very same milk that they want removed from the lunch program. Our kids do need to eat healthier, but telling them not to eat meat or drink milk won’t accomplish anything. ~ Troy
By: DAN ELLIOTT Associated Press05/17/10 10:15 PM EDT
DENVER — More kids could get vegetarian meals and nondairy food and drink in the school cafeteria under a bill proposed by Colorado congressman Jared Polis.
"One of the things I've always been dismayed by is the nutritional value of the meals schools serve," Polis said Monday before promoting his Healthy School Meals Act at a suburban Denver charter school.
Polis, a Democrat, wants to give schools an incentive to offer more plant-based food. He estimated it would cost around $50 million a year but said he believes that would be more than offset in health care savings because fewer children would suffer from juvenile diabetes, heart disease and other conditions linked to obesity. Read More
Withholding meat and milk from our children is certainly not going to make them healthier. If we want our kids to be healthier we have to get back to the basics. They need to eat a balanced diet that includes meat and diary products, get plenty of exercise and cut down on the junk food. This congressman’s proposal is as ridiculous as it sounds. Besides that, I wonder if the parents and the congressman realize that the vegetarian option of macaroni and cheese they are promoting uses cheese which is made from milk, they very same milk that they want removed from the lunch program. Our kids do need to eat healthier, but telling them not to eat meat or drink milk won’t accomplish anything. ~ Troy
Monday, May 17, 2010
Gov't Refuses To Protect Border Ranchers
Border Patrol: Do your job!
by Trent Loos
On behalf of the ranching families of Arizona who fear for their lives every day, I am calling on the director of the Department of Homeland Security to fulfill her duties and secure our borders.
Rob Krentz from Douglas, AZ, was murdered on his ranch March 27. Since all other signs have been ignored, his murder should serve as a wake-up call to the real problems caused by not securing our borders.
Don Kimble, a rancher and neighbor of the Krentz family, has repeatedly asked the DHS director what the government's plan is to secure the border. Kimble said, "I wasted an hour-and-a-half of my life on a conference call with the former governor of Arizona and now Director of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, and she did not answer our question."
Napolitano continues to deny any security problems. Kimble said, "One would think the Border Patrol should actually patrol the border, yet they continue to do their work 25 miles north of the border."
The government needs to explain why those agents are not working at the border. Read More
There’s no better way to get a feel for how bad the situation is down along our border than to experience it for yourself, and that’s exactly what Trent Loos did. The federal government has the responsibility to protect the citizens of this country. Plain and simple, it’s not doing that. Ranchers on the border have become our first line of defense instead. This isn’t their job or responsibility. The government seems so willing to become involved in things that aren’t their responsibility, but maybe they should take care of their primary jobs first.
by Trent Loos
On behalf of the ranching families of Arizona who fear for their lives every day, I am calling on the director of the Department of Homeland Security to fulfill her duties and secure our borders.
Rob Krentz from Douglas, AZ, was murdered on his ranch March 27. Since all other signs have been ignored, his murder should serve as a wake-up call to the real problems caused by not securing our borders.
Don Kimble, a rancher and neighbor of the Krentz family, has repeatedly asked the DHS director what the government's plan is to secure the border. Kimble said, "I wasted an hour-and-a-half of my life on a conference call with the former governor of Arizona and now Director of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, and she did not answer our question."
Napolitano continues to deny any security problems. Kimble said, "One would think the Border Patrol should actually patrol the border, yet they continue to do their work 25 miles north of the border."
The government needs to explain why those agents are not working at the border. Read More
There’s no better way to get a feel for how bad the situation is down along our border than to experience it for yourself, and that’s exactly what Trent Loos did. The federal government has the responsibility to protect the citizens of this country. Plain and simple, it’s not doing that. Ranchers on the border have become our first line of defense instead. This isn’t their job or responsibility. The government seems so willing to become involved in things that aren’t their responsibility, but maybe they should take care of their primary jobs first.
Detractor Attacked by HSUS-Paid Reporter
May 16, 2010, 8:33 pm
Report on Lobbyist Commissioned by Humane Society
By JOSEPH PLAMBECK, New York Times Blog
It reads much like a newspaper article.
For 3,500 words, the report details the workings of Richard Berman, a lobbyist in Washington and a regular foe of the Humane Society of the United States.
But in fact, the report was commissioned by the Humane Society itself and published on its Web site last week.
The author, Ian T. Shearn, 56, is a longtime newspaperman who spent 10 years at The Star-Ledger in New Jersey, where he was part of a team that won a Pulitzer Prize. He left the paper in 2008.
The dearth of available journalism jobs has since left him, like many underemployed journalists, chasing freelance jobs and doing some consulting. Read More
Last week I shared how the HSUS had hired a former journalist to start attacking people who disagree with them. Today we find out that the author of the article had been out of work. So when he was hired to do this “independent” investigation I’m sure he wanted to keep his new employer happy. In order to do that, some of the facts had to go out the window. I’ve never met anyone involved in this story, but from the outside looking in, this was a very obvious and desperate attempt by the HSUS to deflect criticism. It certainly doesn’t fit into their stated goal of helping animals. Besides that, the things being said about the HSUS by the Center for Consumer Freedom must be true or else they would be attacking the message rather than the messenger. It’s another unfortunate example of a journalist giving up his chosen profession to be a paid activist.
Report on Lobbyist Commissioned by Humane Society
By JOSEPH PLAMBECK, New York Times Blog
It reads much like a newspaper article.
For 3,500 words, the report details the workings of Richard Berman, a lobbyist in Washington and a regular foe of the Humane Society of the United States.
But in fact, the report was commissioned by the Humane Society itself and published on its Web site last week.
The author, Ian T. Shearn, 56, is a longtime newspaperman who spent 10 years at The Star-Ledger in New Jersey, where he was part of a team that won a Pulitzer Prize. He left the paper in 2008.
The dearth of available journalism jobs has since left him, like many underemployed journalists, chasing freelance jobs and doing some consulting. Read More
Last week I shared how the HSUS had hired a former journalist to start attacking people who disagree with them. Today we find out that the author of the article had been out of work. So when he was hired to do this “independent” investigation I’m sure he wanted to keep his new employer happy. In order to do that, some of the facts had to go out the window. I’ve never met anyone involved in this story, but from the outside looking in, this was a very obvious and desperate attempt by the HSUS to deflect criticism. It certainly doesn’t fit into their stated goal of helping animals. Besides that, the things being said about the HSUS by the Center for Consumer Freedom must be true or else they would be attacking the message rather than the messenger. It’s another unfortunate example of a journalist giving up his chosen profession to be a paid activist.
Good Neighboring
Brush up on Neighbor-relations Skills
Pork news source Friday, May 14, 2010
Warmer spring and summer weather means increased farm activities and non-farm families spending more time outside where farm odors are present — a recipe for potential conflict, says Nicole Olynk, Purdue University agricultural economist.
Citizen complaints against farmers most often stem from odors, but many times relate to surface or ground water, or a combination of the three. And while traditionally most complaints are related to animal agriculture, crop farmers are not exempt.
"Crop farms are not immune to negative perceptions of cropping practices," Olynk warns. "Recent times have seen debates surrounding livestock production practices and related animal welfare and humane treatment concerns. But also in the forefront of citizens' minds are environmental impacts of agricultural practices."
One way farmers can reduce friction is being mindful of the ways nonfarm neighbors perceive on-farm practices. Small acts of neighborly kindness such as helping neighbors after snowstorms or inviting them to visit the farm may build goodwill. Slight modifications to farming practices can also help ease tension. Read More
Here’s a good reminder that working with our non-farming neighbors and keeping good lines of communication open can reduce the odds of having problems with them. Many of these people don’t understand how food is grown, so not only do these conversations help reduce potential conflicts but it also gives us a chance to teach more people about agriculture.
Pork news source Friday, May 14, 2010
Warmer spring and summer weather means increased farm activities and non-farm families spending more time outside where farm odors are present — a recipe for potential conflict, says Nicole Olynk, Purdue University agricultural economist.
Citizen complaints against farmers most often stem from odors, but many times relate to surface or ground water, or a combination of the three. And while traditionally most complaints are related to animal agriculture, crop farmers are not exempt.
"Crop farms are not immune to negative perceptions of cropping practices," Olynk warns. "Recent times have seen debates surrounding livestock production practices and related animal welfare and humane treatment concerns. But also in the forefront of citizens' minds are environmental impacts of agricultural practices."
One way farmers can reduce friction is being mindful of the ways nonfarm neighbors perceive on-farm practices. Small acts of neighborly kindness such as helping neighbors after snowstorms or inviting them to visit the farm may build goodwill. Slight modifications to farming practices can also help ease tension. Read More
Here’s a good reminder that working with our non-farming neighbors and keeping good lines of communication open can reduce the odds of having problems with them. Many of these people don’t understand how food is grown, so not only do these conversations help reduce potential conflicts but it also gives us a chance to teach more people about agriculture.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Senate Cap & Tax Bill Introduced
Farm Groups Wary of New Climate Change Bill
05/12/2010
by Gary Truitt
Hoosier Ag Today
Senators John Kerry (D, Massachusetts) and Joe Lieberman (I, Connecticut) unveiled climate-change legislation on Wednesday, although the bill‘s chances of success are uncertain. The bill would focus on addressing the largest carbon-emitting sectors of the economy: heavy industry, power plants, and transportation infrastructure. It would target a 17% reduction in U.S. carbon pollution by 2020 and over 80% by 2050. It would contain a cap-and-trade system that would levy a tax against the largest emitters. Initially, the rate would be set at $12 a ton, increasing at 3% above inflation annually thereafter. An initial ceiling of $25 per ton would also be included.
The new legislation got a stamp of approval from the National Farmers Union, who supported the House version of cap-and- trade, “NFU has long supported legislation that provides an opportunity for agriculture to play a positive role in addressing our climate and energy needs. The discussion draft announced today continues along that path,” said NFU President Roger Johnson. The National Corn Growers Association took a more cautious approach. “The National Corn Growers Association is reviewing the discussion draft of the American Power Act released today by Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman. We have provided input to the Senate over the past several months on provisions pertaining to the agriculture industry, and we will continue to offer feedback after we have a chance to review the text of this important piece of legislation,” said NCGA President Darrin Ihnen.
Tamara Thies, Chief Environmental Council for the National Cattleman’s Beef Association, says agriculture needs to beware of all efforts to regulate climate change, “All this regulation and expense is based on an alarmist environmental agenda and not on sound science.” She says, regardless of the specifics of the legislation, the science behind climate change is flawed, “The American people deserve better than decisions from this administration that are not based on science or truth, but rather are based on a radical, anti-business, anti-agriculture, alarmist agenda that lacks a credible scientific foundation.”
The American Farm Bureau Federation also expressed concerns about efforts to regulate climate change. AFBF President Bob Stallman released a statement that said, “As with other climate change bills, we have concerns about the economic impact on farmers and ranchers because of potentially higher fertilizer and energy costs. We do not want to see farmers driven out of business due to additional regulation and the potential for higher input costs. Agriculture also could be forced to shrink due to land moving out of production into trees to sequester carbon. We also believe it is imperative that any energy legislation must assure a greater supply of nuclear energy, renewable fuels, and natural gas for American consumers. Further, we note the absence of renewable electricity standards in the bill and will work toward their inclusion in the future.”
The Obama administration wants action on climate change, but other issues like immigration plus election year politics make many lawmakers uneasy about tacking such a controversial issue. In a prepared statement the President said, “This legislation will put America on the path to a clean energy economy that will create American jobs building the solar panels, wind blades, and the car batteries of the future. It will strengthen our national security by beginning to break our dependence on foreign oil. And it will protect our environment for our children and grandchildren.”
With most Republicans and many Democrats opposing climate change legislation, the White House may turn to the EPA to implement a cap-and-trade system. Thies says that would not be good for agriculture, “That would give the EPA authority to tell farmers they would have to get expensive permits in order to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide.” She added many producers would be forced to shut down food production. Link
Everyone is still sifting through the legislation trying to determine what it will do, but one thing is for certain, it will increase the cost of energy every year. Over half of the electricity used in this country comes from coal. The cost of that will increase every year until they are forced out of business and the millions of miners and other workers in that industry will be out of job. Along with that, it will make electricity less affordable for working families in this country. Unless you use a sail to propel your vehicle, the cost of driving will go up as well, even if you have an electric car. I don’t disagree that we need to be finding newer sources of energy but it is reckless to get rid of our most reliable and affordable sources when we have nothing to replace them with.
05/12/2010
by Gary Truitt
Hoosier Ag Today
Senators John Kerry (D, Massachusetts) and Joe Lieberman (I, Connecticut) unveiled climate-change legislation on Wednesday, although the bill‘s chances of success are uncertain. The bill would focus on addressing the largest carbon-emitting sectors of the economy: heavy industry, power plants, and transportation infrastructure. It would target a 17% reduction in U.S. carbon pollution by 2020 and over 80% by 2050. It would contain a cap-and-trade system that would levy a tax against the largest emitters. Initially, the rate would be set at $12 a ton, increasing at 3% above inflation annually thereafter. An initial ceiling of $25 per ton would also be included.
The new legislation got a stamp of approval from the National Farmers Union, who supported the House version of cap-and- trade, “NFU has long supported legislation that provides an opportunity for agriculture to play a positive role in addressing our climate and energy needs. The discussion draft announced today continues along that path,” said NFU President Roger Johnson. The National Corn Growers Association took a more cautious approach. “The National Corn Growers Association is reviewing the discussion draft of the American Power Act released today by Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman. We have provided input to the Senate over the past several months on provisions pertaining to the agriculture industry, and we will continue to offer feedback after we have a chance to review the text of this important piece of legislation,” said NCGA President Darrin Ihnen.
Tamara Thies, Chief Environmental Council for the National Cattleman’s Beef Association, says agriculture needs to beware of all efforts to regulate climate change, “All this regulation and expense is based on an alarmist environmental agenda and not on sound science.” She says, regardless of the specifics of the legislation, the science behind climate change is flawed, “The American people deserve better than decisions from this administration that are not based on science or truth, but rather are based on a radical, anti-business, anti-agriculture, alarmist agenda that lacks a credible scientific foundation.”
The American Farm Bureau Federation also expressed concerns about efforts to regulate climate change. AFBF President Bob Stallman released a statement that said, “As with other climate change bills, we have concerns about the economic impact on farmers and ranchers because of potentially higher fertilizer and energy costs. We do not want to see farmers driven out of business due to additional regulation and the potential for higher input costs. Agriculture also could be forced to shrink due to land moving out of production into trees to sequester carbon. We also believe it is imperative that any energy legislation must assure a greater supply of nuclear energy, renewable fuels, and natural gas for American consumers. Further, we note the absence of renewable electricity standards in the bill and will work toward their inclusion in the future.”
The Obama administration wants action on climate change, but other issues like immigration plus election year politics make many lawmakers uneasy about tacking such a controversial issue. In a prepared statement the President said, “This legislation will put America on the path to a clean energy economy that will create American jobs building the solar panels, wind blades, and the car batteries of the future. It will strengthen our national security by beginning to break our dependence on foreign oil. And it will protect our environment for our children and grandchildren.”
With most Republicans and many Democrats opposing climate change legislation, the White House may turn to the EPA to implement a cap-and-trade system. Thies says that would not be good for agriculture, “That would give the EPA authority to tell farmers they would have to get expensive permits in order to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide.” She added many producers would be forced to shut down food production. Link
Everyone is still sifting through the legislation trying to determine what it will do, but one thing is for certain, it will increase the cost of energy every year. Over half of the electricity used in this country comes from coal. The cost of that will increase every year until they are forced out of business and the millions of miners and other workers in that industry will be out of job. Along with that, it will make electricity less affordable for working families in this country. Unless you use a sail to propel your vehicle, the cost of driving will go up as well, even if you have an electric car. I don’t disagree that we need to be finding newer sources of energy but it is reckless to get rid of our most reliable and affordable sources when we have nothing to replace them with.
Wisconsin DNR Partners With HSUS
Paul Smith Outdoors Editor
DNR steps on toes with partnership
Posted: May 12, 2010 (30) Comments
Spring has sprung and the 2010 class of wild ones is appearing on the Wisconsin landscape.
As it has for years, the Department of Natural Resources is reminding state residents not to pick up young wildlife, such as fawns and bunnies.
The animals may appear to be orphaned, but they are most often just fine, with a doe (the word for female deer and rabbits) nearby.
And if uninjured, they always fare better outdoors than when taken in by a human. We tend to provide inadequate or even toxic food, to say nothing of the implications of a wild animal imprinted on humans.
You've likely heard the message before, but you've never heard it like this: To spread the word this year, the DNR has partnered with a frequent opponent on hunting and wildlife management issues - the Humane Society of the United States.
The DNR and the HSUS have teamed to produce and buy air time across the state for a pair of 30-second radio spots.
The spots feature a young female voice which asks the public to respect the wild nature of wildlife. If an animal is truly injured or orphaned, have an adult contact the DNR, she instructs.
But it's the partnership, not the message, that's drawing the most attention.
"My initial reaction was shock and disbelief," said George Meyer, executive director of the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation and former DNR secretary. "If I hadn't seen it on the DNR's Web site, I would have thought it was a hoax."
Meyer said while there is value in communicating with all groups, partnering with the HSUS is a step too far. Read More
The strategy of the HSUS is simple. They try extremely hard to project a mainstream image and brush off any radical labels thrown their way. Yet at the same time, their actions tell a different story. Wisconsin residents should be extremely worried that they have bought their way into the DNR office. Proper management of wildlife is extremely important and if it was up to the HSUS they would end the most effective measures for management, which is through hunting. One look at the recipe section of their website says all you need to know about this group. There certainly aren’t any wild game recipes to be found.
DNR steps on toes with partnership
Posted: May 12, 2010 (30) Comments
Spring has sprung and the 2010 class of wild ones is appearing on the Wisconsin landscape.
As it has for years, the Department of Natural Resources is reminding state residents not to pick up young wildlife, such as fawns and bunnies.
The animals may appear to be orphaned, but they are most often just fine, with a doe (the word for female deer and rabbits) nearby.
And if uninjured, they always fare better outdoors than when taken in by a human. We tend to provide inadequate or even toxic food, to say nothing of the implications of a wild animal imprinted on humans.
You've likely heard the message before, but you've never heard it like this: To spread the word this year, the DNR has partnered with a frequent opponent on hunting and wildlife management issues - the Humane Society of the United States.
The DNR and the HSUS have teamed to produce and buy air time across the state for a pair of 30-second radio spots.
The spots feature a young female voice which asks the public to respect the wild nature of wildlife. If an animal is truly injured or orphaned, have an adult contact the DNR, she instructs.
But it's the partnership, not the message, that's drawing the most attention.
"My initial reaction was shock and disbelief," said George Meyer, executive director of the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation and former DNR secretary. "If I hadn't seen it on the DNR's Web site, I would have thought it was a hoax."
Meyer said while there is value in communicating with all groups, partnering with the HSUS is a step too far. Read More
The strategy of the HSUS is simple. They try extremely hard to project a mainstream image and brush off any radical labels thrown their way. Yet at the same time, their actions tell a different story. Wisconsin residents should be extremely worried that they have bought their way into the DNR office. Proper management of wildlife is extremely important and if it was up to the HSUS they would end the most effective measures for management, which is through hunting. One look at the recipe section of their website says all you need to know about this group. There certainly aren’t any wild game recipes to be found.
MT Looks To Reduce Wolf Numbers
Mont. aims to reduce wolf numbers for first time
By MATT VOLZ (AP) – 16 hours ago
HELENA, Mont. — Montana wildlife commissioners approved a plan Thursday that aims to reduce the gray wolf population for the first time since the once-endangered animal was reintroduced to the region 15 years ago.
The proposal approved by the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission calls for at least doubling the number of wolves that hunters can kill and introducing an archery season to go with the rifle season.
The population of wolves in the northern Rockies has increased every year since they were reintroduced to the region in 1995 after being nearly wiped out in the last century due to conflicts with humans and loss of habitat.
There were at least 524 wolves in Montana at the end of last year, and 1,706 wolves in the combined northern Rockies region of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming and parts of Washington and Oregon, wildlife officials estimate.
Ranchers and hunters say the wolf population has now grown too high, which has led to more attacks on livestock and game. Read More
Wildlife management is essential for the health of the wildlife involved. I’ve shared with you before about what happens if humans don’t manage these populations. When those numbers get too high, Mother Nature causes them to starve to death or unleashes devastating diseases that wipe out significant portions of them. That certainly doesn’t appear to be the humane option to me. Along with that, human safety and that of our domesticated animals needs to always be a priority in this equation. No wolf is worth a human life. Keeping a viable controlled population needs to be the goal.
By MATT VOLZ (AP) – 16 hours ago
HELENA, Mont. — Montana wildlife commissioners approved a plan Thursday that aims to reduce the gray wolf population for the first time since the once-endangered animal was reintroduced to the region 15 years ago.
The proposal approved by the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission calls for at least doubling the number of wolves that hunters can kill and introducing an archery season to go with the rifle season.
The population of wolves in the northern Rockies has increased every year since they were reintroduced to the region in 1995 after being nearly wiped out in the last century due to conflicts with humans and loss of habitat.
There were at least 524 wolves in Montana at the end of last year, and 1,706 wolves in the combined northern Rockies region of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming and parts of Washington and Oregon, wildlife officials estimate.
Ranchers and hunters say the wolf population has now grown too high, which has led to more attacks on livestock and game. Read More
Wildlife management is essential for the health of the wildlife involved. I’ve shared with you before about what happens if humans don’t manage these populations. When those numbers get too high, Mother Nature causes them to starve to death or unleashes devastating diseases that wipe out significant portions of them. That certainly doesn’t appear to be the humane option to me. Along with that, human safety and that of our domesticated animals needs to always be a priority in this equation. No wolf is worth a human life. Keeping a viable controlled population needs to be the goal.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
HSUS Hires Reporter To Personally Attack Opponents
Investigative Report: CCF's Richard Berman
by Ian T. Shearn
Editor’s Note: Millionaire PR operative and lobbyist Richard Berman and his shadowy
web of corporate-front organizations rake in large sums of money in attacking public
interest groups, including The Humane Society of the United States.
The HSUS hired independent journalist Ian T. Shearn to write an investigative report
about Berman and the workings of his groups. Shearn, as statehouse Bureau Chief of the
Newark Star-Ledger, led a team of reporters that won a 2005 Pulitzer Prize for the
newspaper in recognition of its coverage of the resignation of then-Gov. James
McGreevey. Shearn’s distinguished career spanned 29 years as reporter and editor. He
is now a freelance writer based in Hillsborough, N.J.
Shearn’s contract required him to identify himself in all encounters as preparing a report
for The HSUS. The final product, however, represents his independent reporting and
judgment.
If charity does indeed begin at home, in the case of Richard Berman, it starts in a $3
million, 8,800-square-foot mansion he shares with his second wife in McLean, Va. One
of his first decisions in a day of many is whether to drive the Bentley or the Ferrari to
work. On this particular spring morning, he goes with the Bentley.
“Richard Berman is a professional antagonist, trying to discredit people who are doing
good in the world,” said Wayne Pacelle, President and CEO of The Humane Society of
the United States. “He does not seek sensible discourse; he simply sees HSUS as a
pathway for enrichment. … This guy has developed a cottage industry attacking public
interest organizations.”
It is only logical that one of Berman’s most recent targets is The Humane Society of the
United States, the animal welfare charity that has grown significantly in recent years,
mostly through mergers and acquisitions, and has become increasingly aggressive on
several fronts in its opposition of the methods and practices of country’s agricultural and
food industry. One of its main targets has been the country’s powerful agribusiness
sector, and specifically what The HSUS considers inhumane factory farming conditions.
Pacelle said HSUS has no design to cripple agribusiness; it just wants to put an end to its
most egregious practices.
“The only reason there is conflict on some agriculture practices is that factory farmers
insist on treating animals like production machines—keeping some farm animals in a
near-constant state of immobilization and subjecting them to inhumane transport and
slaughter,” he said. “If the industry corrected these problems, then this tension would not
exist.”
In April, Berman’s group did garner some media attention, and exacted a degree of angst
from the Humane Society, when it pointed out on its website that less than one-half of
one percent of HSUS revenue went to animal shelters, a fact Humane Watch asserted was
hypocritical and misleading to its donors. As a result, several corporate donors—
including Yellow Tail wines—pulled back their pledges, totaling about $200,000.
For HSUS’s Pacelle, that’s regrettable though understandable. “Corporate funders want
to feel good; they don’t want to court controversy,” he said, adding, “But we do still have
11 million supporters.” Read More
The HSUS has hired a reporter to attack people that disagree with them. I guess that’s what you have to do when you can’t refute the stories being told about you. They even went so far as to blame Rick Berman for Yellow Tail stopping their donations to the HSUS. That statement alone shows the lack of “investigative reporting” that was done here. This is obviously a desperate attempt to slow the bleeding that’s happening at the HSUS. More people are learning that they are a vegan animal rights group that does more harm than good for our local community pet shelters. More than likely, what they paid this reporter and the lawyers to file a lawsuit against Rick Berman will add up to way more than they give to pet shelters every year. But that’s what you have to do when you are a professional fundraising organization and the story you are selling will no longer hold water.
by Ian T. Shearn
Editor’s Note: Millionaire PR operative and lobbyist Richard Berman and his shadowy
web of corporate-front organizations rake in large sums of money in attacking public
interest groups, including The Humane Society of the United States.
The HSUS hired independent journalist Ian T. Shearn to write an investigative report
about Berman and the workings of his groups. Shearn, as statehouse Bureau Chief of the
Newark Star-Ledger, led a team of reporters that won a 2005 Pulitzer Prize for the
newspaper in recognition of its coverage of the resignation of then-Gov. James
McGreevey. Shearn’s distinguished career spanned 29 years as reporter and editor. He
is now a freelance writer based in Hillsborough, N.J.
Shearn’s contract required him to identify himself in all encounters as preparing a report
for The HSUS. The final product, however, represents his independent reporting and
judgment.
If charity does indeed begin at home, in the case of Richard Berman, it starts in a $3
million, 8,800-square-foot mansion he shares with his second wife in McLean, Va. One
of his first decisions in a day of many is whether to drive the Bentley or the Ferrari to
work. On this particular spring morning, he goes with the Bentley.
“Richard Berman is a professional antagonist, trying to discredit people who are doing
good in the world,” said Wayne Pacelle, President and CEO of The Humane Society of
the United States. “He does not seek sensible discourse; he simply sees HSUS as a
pathway for enrichment. … This guy has developed a cottage industry attacking public
interest organizations.”
It is only logical that one of Berman’s most recent targets is The Humane Society of the
United States, the animal welfare charity that has grown significantly in recent years,
mostly through mergers and acquisitions, and has become increasingly aggressive on
several fronts in its opposition of the methods and practices of country’s agricultural and
food industry. One of its main targets has been the country’s powerful agribusiness
sector, and specifically what The HSUS considers inhumane factory farming conditions.
Pacelle said HSUS has no design to cripple agribusiness; it just wants to put an end to its
most egregious practices.
“The only reason there is conflict on some agriculture practices is that factory farmers
insist on treating animals like production machines—keeping some farm animals in a
near-constant state of immobilization and subjecting them to inhumane transport and
slaughter,” he said. “If the industry corrected these problems, then this tension would not
exist.”
In April, Berman’s group did garner some media attention, and exacted a degree of angst
from the Humane Society, when it pointed out on its website that less than one-half of
one percent of HSUS revenue went to animal shelters, a fact Humane Watch asserted was
hypocritical and misleading to its donors. As a result, several corporate donors—
including Yellow Tail wines—pulled back their pledges, totaling about $200,000.
For HSUS’s Pacelle, that’s regrettable though understandable. “Corporate funders want
to feel good; they don’t want to court controversy,” he said, adding, “But we do still have
11 million supporters.” Read More
The HSUS has hired a reporter to attack people that disagree with them. I guess that’s what you have to do when you can’t refute the stories being told about you. They even went so far as to blame Rick Berman for Yellow Tail stopping their donations to the HSUS. That statement alone shows the lack of “investigative reporting” that was done here. This is obviously a desperate attempt to slow the bleeding that’s happening at the HSUS. More people are learning that they are a vegan animal rights group that does more harm than good for our local community pet shelters. More than likely, what they paid this reporter and the lawyers to file a lawsuit against Rick Berman will add up to way more than they give to pet shelters every year. But that’s what you have to do when you are a professional fundraising organization and the story you are selling will no longer hold water.
Anti-Anti-Puppy Mill Bill in MO
MO Senate works on anti-anti-puppy mill bill
by Bob Priddy on May 11, 2010
The effort by the legislature to make it harder to pass the puppy mill petition proposal is inching forward in the legislature. The proposed law would require any petition issue placing any controls on animal agriculture to get a two-thirds majority to pass. It sets animal agriculture apart from all other issues that might go to the voters through petition campaigns.
The bill is a reaction to the petition seeking a statewide vote on regulations for dog breeding operations. Agriculture interests say it adds almost nothing to the current state regulations and is a precursor to a later petition they say would kill animal farming.
Joplin Senator Gary Nodler says backers re relying on an inflammatory phrase to touch public emotion, namely “puppy mills,” when he says is a term that is intended to unfairly describe dog breeders. He likes the phrase to a racial slur.
Sponsor Bill Stouffer of Napton is confident his proposed anti-anti puppy mill amendment can get through the Senate, then the House and get on this year’s ballot. IT will need only a simple majority from voters to become law. Link
Many states are looking into ways they can protect farmers and ranchers from emotionally based initiatives that have nothing to do with the proper care of livestock and everything to do with control. This is certainly a unique idea and it will be interesting to see the debate on this plan. We’ll stay tuned for how this ends up.
by Bob Priddy on May 11, 2010
The effort by the legislature to make it harder to pass the puppy mill petition proposal is inching forward in the legislature. The proposed law would require any petition issue placing any controls on animal agriculture to get a two-thirds majority to pass. It sets animal agriculture apart from all other issues that might go to the voters through petition campaigns.
The bill is a reaction to the petition seeking a statewide vote on regulations for dog breeding operations. Agriculture interests say it adds almost nothing to the current state regulations and is a precursor to a later petition they say would kill animal farming.
Joplin Senator Gary Nodler says backers re relying on an inflammatory phrase to touch public emotion, namely “puppy mills,” when he says is a term that is intended to unfairly describe dog breeders. He likes the phrase to a racial slur.
Sponsor Bill Stouffer of Napton is confident his proposed anti-anti puppy mill amendment can get through the Senate, then the House and get on this year’s ballot. IT will need only a simple majority from voters to become law. Link
Many states are looking into ways they can protect farmers and ranchers from emotionally based initiatives that have nothing to do with the proper care of livestock and everything to do with control. This is certainly a unique idea and it will be interesting to see the debate on this plan. We’ll stay tuned for how this ends up.
Beef: More Than What's For Dinner
A lot more than ‘what’s for dinner’
By Jim Hamilton Neighbor Newspaper, Missouri
Senior writer
Published:
Wednesday, May 12, 2010 4:09 AM CDT
May is “Beef Month,” an observance started 45 years ago to salute the beef industry from pasture to plate.For many of us, that “industry” is just a part of everyday life. Mostly, we’re not ranchers or cowboys, but just folks with a few cows. The average herd size in Missouri is 36, according to the Missouri Beef Industry Council. Some of us have many more than that, and many are similar to me and my neighbor, running five head on shared pasture.
Large or small, we’re all part of a $1.5 billion industry in this state, and our cows are among more than 2 million head thriving on 12 million acres of Show-Me pastures. Tally all of our beef and dairy cows, calves, bulls and steers and we take care of 4.45 million head of cattle. That’s about two bovines for every household in the state.
Fever losses of 50 to 90 percent in Missouri herds were devastating to farmers and ranchers in the 1850s-1860s. A century-and-a-half later, cattle owners face an equally insidious adversary in animal welfare activists.Regardless of the semantics of the organizations – animal “rights,” animal “welfare” or animal “protection” – the gist of the threat is the same: the ruination of animal agriculture.
Beef cattle producers have survived disease outbreaks, crippling market cycles, soaring production costs and misleading cholesterol claims, but no former challenge was any greater than that now posed by animal rights activism.
Any threat to animal agriculture is a threat to more than the livestock producer.
If you enjoy a beef taco, pizza or hamburger, you are under attack.
If you drive a Schwan’s truck, work at Walmart or frequent a Subway sandwich shop, animal rights is about you.
If you’re a school cook, furniture salesman, car dealer, homebuilder or an accountant, animal rights is about you. Read More
National Beef Month is a great time to remind everyone how they are connected to the beef industry and all of agriculture. The old saying goes that if you aren’t hungry or naked, thank a farmer. It’s a simple but entirely true statement. That’s why these attempts by animal rights groups to eliminate the ability of animal agriculture to function in this country should be a concern to everyone. It’s nothing less than an attack on the ability to feed and clothe ourselves.
By Jim Hamilton Neighbor Newspaper, Missouri
Senior writer
Published:
Wednesday, May 12, 2010 4:09 AM CDT
May is “Beef Month,” an observance started 45 years ago to salute the beef industry from pasture to plate.For many of us, that “industry” is just a part of everyday life. Mostly, we’re not ranchers or cowboys, but just folks with a few cows. The average herd size in Missouri is 36, according to the Missouri Beef Industry Council. Some of us have many more than that, and many are similar to me and my neighbor, running five head on shared pasture.
Large or small, we’re all part of a $1.5 billion industry in this state, and our cows are among more than 2 million head thriving on 12 million acres of Show-Me pastures. Tally all of our beef and dairy cows, calves, bulls and steers and we take care of 4.45 million head of cattle. That’s about two bovines for every household in the state.
Fever losses of 50 to 90 percent in Missouri herds were devastating to farmers and ranchers in the 1850s-1860s. A century-and-a-half later, cattle owners face an equally insidious adversary in animal welfare activists.Regardless of the semantics of the organizations – animal “rights,” animal “welfare” or animal “protection” – the gist of the threat is the same: the ruination of animal agriculture.
Beef cattle producers have survived disease outbreaks, crippling market cycles, soaring production costs and misleading cholesterol claims, but no former challenge was any greater than that now posed by animal rights activism.
Any threat to animal agriculture is a threat to more than the livestock producer.
If you enjoy a beef taco, pizza or hamburger, you are under attack.
If you drive a Schwan’s truck, work at Walmart or frequent a Subway sandwich shop, animal rights is about you.
If you’re a school cook, furniture salesman, car dealer, homebuilder or an accountant, animal rights is about you. Read More
National Beef Month is a great time to remind everyone how they are connected to the beef industry and all of agriculture. The old saying goes that if you aren’t hungry or naked, thank a farmer. It’s a simple but entirely true statement. That’s why these attempts by animal rights groups to eliminate the ability of animal agriculture to function in this country should be a concern to everyone. It’s nothing less than an attack on the ability to feed and clothe ourselves.
Chipotle Endorses HSUS
Chipotle announces support of HSUS
Posted on May 11th, 2010
Down the Dusty Lane
By Kyle Sharp
OK, survey time ... how many of you like eating at Chipotle?
I’ll admit, I enjoy the occasional Chipotle burrito myself, although I often somehow felt dirty after eating one. Why? Because of the information Chipotle distributes on their Web site and in their restaurants about how they source the meat they use. I have no problem with them using all naturally raised pork and chicken, and 50% naturally raised beef, if that is what they choose to do. It’s their habit of slandering conventional American agriculture in the process that doesn’t sit so well.
On the Chipotle Web site, the company touts the idea of making "Food With Integrity.” The site states: "Food With Integrity is a philosophy solidly based on a foundation of not exploiting animals, the environment or people.”
The not-so-hidden message there is that most U.S. farmers, those that produce more than 95% of the meat and animal products produced in this country, apparently do exploit animals, the environment and people.
But here is the final straw. Just two days before writing this column, I got an e-mail saying Chipotle was endorsing the Ohio efforts of HSUS to hijack the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board and obliterate Ohio agriculture via the overly restrictive, non-scientific initiative they are hoping to put on the November ballot. I had to see for myself, so I went to the effort’s Web site, www.ohiohumane.com, and sure enough. There, listed under business endorsements is Chipotle and their more than 100 locations in Ohio. Read More
Chipotle has decided publicly endorse the activities of the Humane Society of the United States. All of you know what they means, we get to publicly state our intention to never support a Chipotle restaurant ever again. Just a reminder, if you choose to leave a comment on their Facebook page or anywhere else, it’s best to tell your personal story and please leave out the name calling.
Posted on May 11th, 2010
Down the Dusty Lane
By Kyle Sharp
OK, survey time ... how many of you like eating at Chipotle?
I’ll admit, I enjoy the occasional Chipotle burrito myself, although I often somehow felt dirty after eating one. Why? Because of the information Chipotle distributes on their Web site and in their restaurants about how they source the meat they use. I have no problem with them using all naturally raised pork and chicken, and 50% naturally raised beef, if that is what they choose to do. It’s their habit of slandering conventional American agriculture in the process that doesn’t sit so well.
On the Chipotle Web site, the company touts the idea of making "Food With Integrity.” The site states: "Food With Integrity is a philosophy solidly based on a foundation of not exploiting animals, the environment or people.”
The not-so-hidden message there is that most U.S. farmers, those that produce more than 95% of the meat and animal products produced in this country, apparently do exploit animals, the environment and people.
But here is the final straw. Just two days before writing this column, I got an e-mail saying Chipotle was endorsing the Ohio efforts of HSUS to hijack the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board and obliterate Ohio agriculture via the overly restrictive, non-scientific initiative they are hoping to put on the November ballot. I had to see for myself, so I went to the effort’s Web site, www.ohiohumane.com, and sure enough. There, listed under business endorsements is Chipotle and their more than 100 locations in Ohio. Read More
Chipotle has decided publicly endorse the activities of the Humane Society of the United States. All of you know what they means, we get to publicly state our intention to never support a Chipotle restaurant ever again. Just a reminder, if you choose to leave a comment on their Facebook page or anywhere else, it’s best to tell your personal story and please leave out the name calling.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Biotech Benefitting Everyone
Biotechnology is future of farming
By Matt Hutton
Daily Review Atlas
Posted May 07, 2010 @ 07:56 PM
ROSEVILLE — By 2050, the United Nations estimates that the world's population will be 9.4 billion. To meet that growing need, economists say that during the next 40 years farmers will need to double their food production — it could take more food in the next 40 years to feed the world than it took in the last 10,000. Farmers say the only way to accomplish this feat is through biotechnology.
Illinois Soybean Association Chairman and Roseville Farmer Ron Moore was a speaker at a biotechnology conference — Heal, Fuel and Feed the World — in Chicago at McCormick Place. He said more than 15,000 people attended the event, which ran from May 3 to 6 with Moore involved in panel discussions May 4 and 5.
Moore said the advancements in biotechnology have drastically changed the agriculture industry in the past decade, especially the seed trade. Corn and soybeans can now be genetically engineered to be herbicide resistant, insect resistant and drought resistant. Read More
The benefits of biotechnology in our food have made a profound difference in our ability to produce more with less. Year after year, food production gets more efficient by combining generations of experience with new technology. We all benefit from a more reliable food supply and the use of less natural resources to grow it. ~ Troy
By Matt Hutton
Daily Review Atlas
Posted May 07, 2010 @ 07:56 PM
ROSEVILLE — By 2050, the United Nations estimates that the world's population will be 9.4 billion. To meet that growing need, economists say that during the next 40 years farmers will need to double their food production — it could take more food in the next 40 years to feed the world than it took in the last 10,000. Farmers say the only way to accomplish this feat is through biotechnology.
Illinois Soybean Association Chairman and Roseville Farmer Ron Moore was a speaker at a biotechnology conference — Heal, Fuel and Feed the World — in Chicago at McCormick Place. He said more than 15,000 people attended the event, which ran from May 3 to 6 with Moore involved in panel discussions May 4 and 5.
Moore said the advancements in biotechnology have drastically changed the agriculture industry in the past decade, especially the seed trade. Corn and soybeans can now be genetically engineered to be herbicide resistant, insect resistant and drought resistant. Read More
The benefits of biotechnology in our food have made a profound difference in our ability to produce more with less. Year after year, food production gets more efficient by combining generations of experience with new technology. We all benefit from a more reliable food supply and the use of less natural resources to grow it. ~ Troy
Third Party Experts Don't Find HSUS Allegations True
HSUS official denies egg videos were staged
May 7, 2010 by Ken Anderson
BrownfieldAgNews.com
A top official of the Humane Society of the United States denies that video footage shot in Iowa egg barns may have been staged.
This after a recent third-party audit of one of the companies allegedly shown in the video—Rose Acre Farms—uncovered very few of the problems depicted in the video.
Paul Shapiro directs the factory farms campaign for HSUS. “This is really nonsense, in terms of these claims that somehow—some reason—these workers at these factory farms would be doing anything differently than they’re normally doing,” Shapiro says. “There’s no evidence of it and it’s just a way to try to deflect attention from the reality of what’s going on.”
Shapiro—an outspoken promoter of vegetarianism and veganism—has in the past made statements such as “Eating meat causes animal cruelty.” In light of that, we asked Shapiro if he understands why farmers and ranchers are suspicious of HSUS’ true motives.
“That certainly is my position that many farm animals are treated cruelly,” he says, “and, yeah, I agree with you that—I think some people in the industry may be uncomfortable with that.”
Read More
It’s a bit curious that the HSUS claims to be able to walk onto any farm and find horrible abuses that are rampant in agriculture and yet third-party auditors who are trained experts in livestock handling and facilities give good grades. I’m sure the HSUS has a host of conspiracy theories to explain this but common sense tells us that these agenda-based animal rights groups will do what it takes to get their name in the news.
May 7, 2010 by Ken Anderson
BrownfieldAgNews.com
A top official of the Humane Society of the United States denies that video footage shot in Iowa egg barns may have been staged.
This after a recent third-party audit of one of the companies allegedly shown in the video—Rose Acre Farms—uncovered very few of the problems depicted in the video.
Paul Shapiro directs the factory farms campaign for HSUS. “This is really nonsense, in terms of these claims that somehow—some reason—these workers at these factory farms would be doing anything differently than they’re normally doing,” Shapiro says. “There’s no evidence of it and it’s just a way to try to deflect attention from the reality of what’s going on.”
Shapiro—an outspoken promoter of vegetarianism and veganism—has in the past made statements such as “Eating meat causes animal cruelty.” In light of that, we asked Shapiro if he understands why farmers and ranchers are suspicious of HSUS’ true motives.
“That certainly is my position that many farm animals are treated cruelly,” he says, “and, yeah, I agree with you that—I think some people in the industry may be uncomfortable with that.”
Read More
It’s a bit curious that the HSUS claims to be able to walk onto any farm and find horrible abuses that are rampant in agriculture and yet third-party auditors who are trained experts in livestock handling and facilities give good grades. I’m sure the HSUS has a host of conspiracy theories to explain this but common sense tells us that these agenda-based animal rights groups will do what it takes to get their name in the news.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Senate Cap & Trade Bill
Source: Energy bill next week
By: Jeanne CummingsMay 5, 2010 07:19 PM EDT
Politico
In a high-stakes move, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) are planning to forge ahead with or without Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and introduce an energy bill next week, according to sources familiar with the planning.
In addition to the uncertainty about Graham’s status on the bill, Kerry and Lieberman are gambling that the dramatic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico will help, rather than hurt, momentum for the legislation.
That’s not a sure thing. As described in interviews, the reform package includes provisions that allow an expansion of offshore drilling and generous revenue sharing for coastal states that allow it. Lindsey told POLITICO those provisions were essential to his support.
Since the explosion at the BP rig began pumping millions of gallons of oil into the gulf, a host of Democratic and Republican senators have expressed skepticism if not outright opposition to the idea of expanding offshore test wells.
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) threatened to filibuster the legislation. "If offshore drilling off the coast of the continental United States is part of it, this legislation is not going anywhere,” he said.
According to sources familiar with the senators’ deliberations, Kerry and Lieberman have concluded that the crisis in the gulf – which is likely to get worse before it gets better – will focus the public’s attention on the nation’s dependency on oil and facilitate the debate about reforming the energy sector. Read More
It’s irresponsible for our leaders to make reactionary decisions about the future of energy in this country based on what has happened in the Gulf of Mexico. Certainly that accident has turned into a significant mess and I don’t think anyone would deny that. However, it’s just as reckless to abandon these sources of energy when we have nothing to replace it with. To date, we can’t put sunshine or wind into the tanks of our cars. Taxing current sources of energy when there aren’t viable replacements only hurt working families in this country. But that seems to be a common theme as of late. Elitists continue to advocate for more expensive food and more expensive energy. We need to look at different energy sources as we move into the future, but common sense needs a seat at the table in these discussions.
By: Jeanne CummingsMay 5, 2010 07:19 PM EDT
Politico
In a high-stakes move, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) are planning to forge ahead with or without Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and introduce an energy bill next week, according to sources familiar with the planning.
In addition to the uncertainty about Graham’s status on the bill, Kerry and Lieberman are gambling that the dramatic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico will help, rather than hurt, momentum for the legislation.
That’s not a sure thing. As described in interviews, the reform package includes provisions that allow an expansion of offshore drilling and generous revenue sharing for coastal states that allow it. Lindsey told POLITICO those provisions were essential to his support.
Since the explosion at the BP rig began pumping millions of gallons of oil into the gulf, a host of Democratic and Republican senators have expressed skepticism if not outright opposition to the idea of expanding offshore test wells.
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) threatened to filibuster the legislation. "If offshore drilling off the coast of the continental United States is part of it, this legislation is not going anywhere,” he said.
According to sources familiar with the senators’ deliberations, Kerry and Lieberman have concluded that the crisis in the gulf – which is likely to get worse before it gets better – will focus the public’s attention on the nation’s dependency on oil and facilitate the debate about reforming the energy sector. Read More
It’s irresponsible for our leaders to make reactionary decisions about the future of energy in this country based on what has happened in the Gulf of Mexico. Certainly that accident has turned into a significant mess and I don’t think anyone would deny that. However, it’s just as reckless to abandon these sources of energy when we have nothing to replace it with. To date, we can’t put sunshine or wind into the tanks of our cars. Taxing current sources of energy when there aren’t viable replacements only hurt working families in this country. But that seems to be a common theme as of late. Elitists continue to advocate for more expensive food and more expensive energy. We need to look at different energy sources as we move into the future, but common sense needs a seat at the table in these discussions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)