Combining goes high-tech with blogging, Twitter
BY Russ Keen, rkeen@aberdeennews.com
Published on Wednesday, June 10, 2009
While green sprouts continue to emerge in area fields, Jada Bulgin of Bowdle is already harvesting wheat - and blogging about it.
She's in Texas, where her traveling “office” is the cab of a combine.
“I just really like running a combine,” Bulgin, 28, said in a phone interview. “There's nothing prettier than having an office view of a golden wheat field.”
She is working her way north with Hoffman Harvesting, the custom combining business run by her parents, Perry and Candice Hoffman of rural Bowdle.
The High Plains Journal of Dodge City, Kan., was looking for a new way to cover the wheat harvest this year and decided blogging would be a fresh approach, said Editor Holly Martin of the Journal. Bulgin responded to the Journal's ad for bloggers and was selected along with Jenna Zeorian, 20, of Zeorian Harvesting, Manley, Neb.
To follow their harvest adventures, go to www.allaboardharvest.com. The women are also on Twitter (user tag: allaboard2009). Read More
So many times you have heard me say that it is vitally important to educate consumer about farming and ranching. All aspects of it are a mystery to most of them. Most people don’t know what a combine is let alone what it does. Having a resource like this will allow them to learn first hand the hard work it takes to harvest the incredible bounty that our farmers grow. Congratulations to the Hoffman family for making this happen.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Bullish on Ag Land
Betting the farm
As world population expands, the demand for arable land should soar. At least that's what George Soros, Lord Rothschild, and other investors believe.
By Brian O'Keefe, senior editor
Last Updated: June 11, 2009: 10:26 AM ET
(Fortune) -- On a sunny Friday morning, Shonda Warner and I are in her red Toyota pickup heading southwest on Highway 61 out of Clarksdale, Miss., on our way to see one of her farms. While her black standard poodle, Walter, naps in the back seat, she's explaining the pitfalls of being an institutional land investor.
"It's really hard to buy property at the right price," says Warner as we roll past the famous crossroads where Robert Johnson is said to have sold his soul to the devil to get the secret of the blues. "Half of all farmland that trades in the United States never sees a broker. We believe you've got to have a lot of local knowledge of the marketplace. Farmers are smart and they talk. And if one Town Car full of Wall Street types rolls into town and makes a bid, suddenly all of the prices go up."
A Nebraska farm girl who went on to a globetrotting career as a derivatives trader for Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) and then as a hedge fund executive in London, Warner, 45, is back on the farm pursuing what she believes is a huge moneymaking opportunity. Two years ago Warner launched an investment firm, called Chess Ag Full Harvest Partners, with a fairly simple underlying strategy: Buy undervalued farmland in the U.S. and profit from the coming global agriculture boom. Read More
There are several ways to look at this from a farmer’s standpoint. One might be that this group is taking farmland away from the actual farmers that need it. Along with that, it might make it tougher for a younger farmer to get involved. But there is also the viewpoint that this group is keeping farmland out of the hands of developers and is helping preserve open space. But maybe the best message to take home from this story is that there are people out there that realize how important agriculture is and the vital role it plays in our society. If agriculture disappears, so does our country. In the end, we can all agree on that.
As world population expands, the demand for arable land should soar. At least that's what George Soros, Lord Rothschild, and other investors believe.
By Brian O'Keefe, senior editor
Last Updated: June 11, 2009: 10:26 AM ET
(Fortune) -- On a sunny Friday morning, Shonda Warner and I are in her red Toyota pickup heading southwest on Highway 61 out of Clarksdale, Miss., on our way to see one of her farms. While her black standard poodle, Walter, naps in the back seat, she's explaining the pitfalls of being an institutional land investor.
"It's really hard to buy property at the right price," says Warner as we roll past the famous crossroads where Robert Johnson is said to have sold his soul to the devil to get the secret of the blues. "Half of all farmland that trades in the United States never sees a broker. We believe you've got to have a lot of local knowledge of the marketplace. Farmers are smart and they talk. And if one Town Car full of Wall Street types rolls into town and makes a bid, suddenly all of the prices go up."
A Nebraska farm girl who went on to a globetrotting career as a derivatives trader for Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) and then as a hedge fund executive in London, Warner, 45, is back on the farm pursuing what she believes is a huge moneymaking opportunity. Two years ago Warner launched an investment firm, called Chess Ag Full Harvest Partners, with a fairly simple underlying strategy: Buy undervalued farmland in the U.S. and profit from the coming global agriculture boom. Read More
There are several ways to look at this from a farmer’s standpoint. One might be that this group is taking farmland away from the actual farmers that need it. Along with that, it might make it tougher for a younger farmer to get involved. But there is also the viewpoint that this group is keeping farmland out of the hands of developers and is helping preserve open space. But maybe the best message to take home from this story is that there are people out there that realize how important agriculture is and the vital role it plays in our society. If agriculture disappears, so does our country. In the end, we can all agree on that.
PETA's Fish Throwing Fit
PETA requests halt of fish-throwing by Seattle's famous Pike Place Fish Market team
June 9, 4:09 PM · 10 comments
Take a stroll downtown Seattle and you're unlikely to miss the yells and hollers coming from the fishmongers at Pike Place Fish. The popular fish-market is famous for throwing fish through the air in the historic Pike Place Market and attracts thousands of visitors from around the world each year, in addition to local and celebrity chefs and Seattleites looking for the freshest seafood in the city.
But when word spread that the American Veterinary Medical Association's (AVMA) annual conference included plans for the fishmongers from the Pike Place Fish Market to toss fish as part of a motivational convention presentation on July 10th, representatives from PETA, the People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, wrote a letter to the AVMA president asking for the organization to cancel the event with the iconic Seattle fishmongers, stating that "it's cruel enough to eat fish, but it literally adds insult to injury to use them as toys for silly stunts." Among the reasons cited for halting the fish-throwing include studies showing that fish feel pain as a result of the fishing industry.
The throwing of salmon, oysters, crabs and other seafood items at Pike Place Fish was originally used for the purpose of efficiency, eliminating the need to make repeated trips back-and-forth from behind the counter and speed up customer service, but over the years the spectacle has become popular with culinary enthusiasts and tourists from around the globe who visit the fish market hoping to see a "low flying fish" sail through the air under the glow of the food market's neon signage. The event has been captured countless times by film and media outlets, including Anthony Bourdain's No Reservations and the Food Network show Glutton for Punishment.
In response to the accusation that their actions disrespect the fish in question, assistant manager of Pike Place Fish Justin Hall was quoted as saying, "We love fish. We respect fish. Fish is what makes our business thrive and what drives customers to us. There's nothing we would ever do to disrespect seafood." Link
What else can you say about this other than to wonder if PETA realizes that these fish are already dead. However, these fish did not die for nothing. Their death gives life to the humans that eat them. Life and death are inescapable and necessary in the course of nature. Those of us in agriculture realize this simple fact early on in our lives. It’s a sad reality that we need to educate others about this as well.
June 9, 4:09 PM · 10 comments
Take a stroll downtown Seattle and you're unlikely to miss the yells and hollers coming from the fishmongers at Pike Place Fish. The popular fish-market is famous for throwing fish through the air in the historic Pike Place Market and attracts thousands of visitors from around the world each year, in addition to local and celebrity chefs and Seattleites looking for the freshest seafood in the city.
But when word spread that the American Veterinary Medical Association's (AVMA) annual conference included plans for the fishmongers from the Pike Place Fish Market to toss fish as part of a motivational convention presentation on July 10th, representatives from PETA, the People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, wrote a letter to the AVMA president asking for the organization to cancel the event with the iconic Seattle fishmongers, stating that "it's cruel enough to eat fish, but it literally adds insult to injury to use them as toys for silly stunts." Among the reasons cited for halting the fish-throwing include studies showing that fish feel pain as a result of the fishing industry.
The throwing of salmon, oysters, crabs and other seafood items at Pike Place Fish was originally used for the purpose of efficiency, eliminating the need to make repeated trips back-and-forth from behind the counter and speed up customer service, but over the years the spectacle has become popular with culinary enthusiasts and tourists from around the globe who visit the fish market hoping to see a "low flying fish" sail through the air under the glow of the food market's neon signage. The event has been captured countless times by film and media outlets, including Anthony Bourdain's No Reservations and the Food Network show Glutton for Punishment.
In response to the accusation that their actions disrespect the fish in question, assistant manager of Pike Place Fish Justin Hall was quoted as saying, "We love fish. We respect fish. Fish is what makes our business thrive and what drives customers to us. There's nothing we would ever do to disrespect seafood." Link
What else can you say about this other than to wonder if PETA realizes that these fish are already dead. However, these fish did not die for nothing. Their death gives life to the humans that eat them. Life and death are inescapable and necessary in the course of nature. Those of us in agriculture realize this simple fact early on in our lives. It’s a sad reality that we need to educate others about this as well.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
The Reality of HSUS Backed Proposal
The Economics of Animal Welfare Regulations Proposed for Ohio
By: Luther Tweeten, Emeritus Chaired Professor, Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, Ohio State University
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) seeks to phase out battery cages for Ohio's laying hens, gestation crates for its pregnant pigs, and crates for veal calves in favor of group housing (FarmPolicy [farmpolicy@gmail.com], May 5, 2009). As the nation's second largest producer of eggs (27 million laying hens) and a major producer of swine and dairy cattle, Ohio agriculture has a major stake in the outcome of this HSUS effort.
HSUS is likely to put its proposal before Ohio voters next year if poultry and livestock producers don't cooperate with HSUS to write legislation changing the way producers operate. This is no idle threat. Last year California voters approved a similar measure (Proposition 2 or Prop 2) mandating as of January 1, 2015 that it shall be a misdemeanor for any person to confine a pregnant pig, calf raised for veal, or egg-laying hen in a manner not allowing the animal to turn around freely, stand up, lie down, and fully extend its limbs. At least four other states have passed laws similar to California's Proposition 2.
Is such legislation a good idea? The following discussion is especially focused on laying hens, the enterprise likely to be most affected in Ohio. The following analysis addresses animal welfare dimensions of Prop 2-type regulations before addressing the economic dimensions.
Read the entire report
When legislation like Prop 2 is passed, it has consequences that extend much further than just livestock farmers. All of the supporting industries of the livestock business suffer as well. This results in family farms going out of business, farm workers losing their jobs, and consumers losing choices at the grocery stores. The worst part is that the welfare of the livestock this affects doesn’t improve. Voters need to start making decisions on animal welfare based on what is best for the livestock, not what makes them feel better.
By: Luther Tweeten, Emeritus Chaired Professor, Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, Ohio State University
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) seeks to phase out battery cages for Ohio's laying hens, gestation crates for its pregnant pigs, and crates for veal calves in favor of group housing (FarmPolicy [farmpolicy@gmail.com], May 5, 2009). As the nation's second largest producer of eggs (27 million laying hens) and a major producer of swine and dairy cattle, Ohio agriculture has a major stake in the outcome of this HSUS effort.
HSUS is likely to put its proposal before Ohio voters next year if poultry and livestock producers don't cooperate with HSUS to write legislation changing the way producers operate. This is no idle threat. Last year California voters approved a similar measure (Proposition 2 or Prop 2) mandating as of January 1, 2015 that it shall be a misdemeanor for any person to confine a pregnant pig, calf raised for veal, or egg-laying hen in a manner not allowing the animal to turn around freely, stand up, lie down, and fully extend its limbs. At least four other states have passed laws similar to California's Proposition 2.
Is such legislation a good idea? The following discussion is especially focused on laying hens, the enterprise likely to be most affected in Ohio. The following analysis addresses animal welfare dimensions of Prop 2-type regulations before addressing the economic dimensions.
Read the entire report
When legislation like Prop 2 is passed, it has consequences that extend much further than just livestock farmers. All of the supporting industries of the livestock business suffer as well. This results in family farms going out of business, farm workers losing their jobs, and consumers losing choices at the grocery stores. The worst part is that the welfare of the livestock this affects doesn’t improve. Voters need to start making decisions on animal welfare based on what is best for the livestock, not what makes them feel better.
Food Inc. - Not a Documentary
Film aims to expose dangers in U.S. food industry
Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:09pm EDT
By Christine Kearney
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Bigger-breasted chickens fattened artificially. New strains of deadly E. coli bacteria. A food supply controlled by a handful of corporations.
The documentary "Food, Inc." opens in the United States on Friday and portrays these purported dangers and changes in the U.S. food industry, asserting harmful effects on public health, the environment, and worker and animal rights.
Big corporations such as biotech food producer Monsanto Co., U.S. meat companies Tyson Food Inc. and Smithfield Foods, and poultry producer Perdue Farms all declined to be interviewed for the film.
But the industry has not stood silent. Trade associations across the $142-billion-a-year U.S. meat industry have banded together to counter the claims. Led by the American Meat Institute, they have created a number of websites, including one called SafeFoodInc.com.
"Each sector of the industry that's named is doing its part to counter a lot of the misinformation in the movie," said Lisa Katic, a dietitian and consultant with an unnamed coalition of trade associations representing the food industry.
"The film pulls back the curtain on the way food is produced," said Michael Pollan, who appears in the film and is the best-selling author of several books including "In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto.
"Products with farm labels attached -- this stuff comes from factories now," he said. Read More
Food Inc. is a new film being released this week that attacks US agriculture. Led by Michael Pollan, who has previously admitted that he needs to sensationalize stories about agriculture to make them sound good, is one of the people that helped make this film. Us as producers need to remind people that this is not a documentary. It is based on opinion and biases towards family farmers, particularly those that raise livestock. Fortunately there is a website that is trying to set the record straight. If you get the chance to talk to consumers, direct them towards www.safefoodinc.com.
Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:09pm EDT
By Christine Kearney
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Bigger-breasted chickens fattened artificially. New strains of deadly E. coli bacteria. A food supply controlled by a handful of corporations.
The documentary "Food, Inc." opens in the United States on Friday and portrays these purported dangers and changes in the U.S. food industry, asserting harmful effects on public health, the environment, and worker and animal rights.
Big corporations such as biotech food producer Monsanto Co., U.S. meat companies Tyson Food Inc. and Smithfield Foods, and poultry producer Perdue Farms all declined to be interviewed for the film.
But the industry has not stood silent. Trade associations across the $142-billion-a-year U.S. meat industry have banded together to counter the claims. Led by the American Meat Institute, they have created a number of websites, including one called SafeFoodInc.com.
"Each sector of the industry that's named is doing its part to counter a lot of the misinformation in the movie," said Lisa Katic, a dietitian and consultant with an unnamed coalition of trade associations representing the food industry.
"The film pulls back the curtain on the way food is produced," said Michael Pollan, who appears in the film and is the best-selling author of several books including "In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto.
"Products with farm labels attached -- this stuff comes from factories now," he said. Read More
Food Inc. is a new film being released this week that attacks US agriculture. Led by Michael Pollan, who has previously admitted that he needs to sensationalize stories about agriculture to make them sound good, is one of the people that helped make this film. Us as producers need to remind people that this is not a documentary. It is based on opinion and biases towards family farmers, particularly those that raise livestock. Fortunately there is a website that is trying to set the record straight. If you get the chance to talk to consumers, direct them towards www.safefoodinc.com.
Climate Bill in House Ag Tomorrow
House Agriculture Panel to Examine Climate Change Legislation
USAgNet - 06/09/2009
The House Agriculture Committee announced that it will consider climate change legislation at a hearing on June 11. Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) has been vocally skeptical of taking up the bill in part because of concerns about indirect land use issues in the revised renewable fuels standard. However, in recent days, he has made comments indicating he is open to efforts to ensure an appropriate agricultural piece is included in the final bill, and on Thursday, the Committee published responses to a climate change survey it issued in late March.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has reportedly told committee chairmen that they must complete mark-ups of the Waxman-Markey bill that passed the Energy and Commerce Committee last month by June 19. The bill has been referred to a total of eight committees, but the timeline makes it unlikely most will formally consider the legislation.
The Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which would have jurisdiction over any monies raised from the bill's provisions, has said Members on his panel prefer to spend their limited time on health care reform. Link
Tomorrow the House Ag Committee will be tackling the climate change legislation. This bill could drastically affect how or if America’s farmers will produce food. The opportunity to have your voice heard is now. Let your representative know that you are concerned how agriculture will fare under this proposed cap and tax climate bill.
USAgNet - 06/09/2009
The House Agriculture Committee announced that it will consider climate change legislation at a hearing on June 11. Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) has been vocally skeptical of taking up the bill in part because of concerns about indirect land use issues in the revised renewable fuels standard. However, in recent days, he has made comments indicating he is open to efforts to ensure an appropriate agricultural piece is included in the final bill, and on Thursday, the Committee published responses to a climate change survey it issued in late March.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has reportedly told committee chairmen that they must complete mark-ups of the Waxman-Markey bill that passed the Energy and Commerce Committee last month by June 19. The bill has been referred to a total of eight committees, but the timeline makes it unlikely most will formally consider the legislation.
The Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which would have jurisdiction over any monies raised from the bill's provisions, has said Members on his panel prefer to spend their limited time on health care reform. Link
Tomorrow the House Ag Committee will be tackling the climate change legislation. This bill could drastically affect how or if America’s farmers will produce food. The opportunity to have your voice heard is now. Let your representative know that you are concerned how agriculture will fare under this proposed cap and tax climate bill.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
The White House Garden
Organic Panic
Michelle Obama's garden and its discontents.
By Christopher Beam
Posted Thursday, June 4, 2009, at 9:35 PM ET
When Michelle Obama planted an organic garden on the White House lawn—which, she told NBC this week, has already yielded more than 80 pounds of produce—the response was overwhelmingly positive. (The main criticism: She should cook, too.) The Obamas' high-profile trip to New York included dinner at the impossibly local/organic/humane restaurant Blue Hill. (Main criticism: too predictable.) She even appeared on Sesame Street to champion the benefits of healthy eating. (Main criticism: no Snuffleupagus.)
Pushing organic and local foods is hardly official White House policy. So far, Five Guys is as much a part of the administration's diet as arugula. But the first lady's public statements, combined with the selection of a White House chef who favors local and organic foods, has brought more attention to what we eat than anything since Top Chef.
But beneath the nodding and smiling, there has been some grumbling. Not all sectors of the food and agriculture industry specialize in organic or local foods. "There's a lot of pushback we're hearing, a lot of whining out of that community about the first lady doing her garden," says Larry Mitchell of the American Corn Growers Association, which represents both organic and conventional farmers. "They're getting awful squeamish on this thing."
Other groups argue that organic and local foods are well and good—as long as the White House doesn't pretend that Americans can subsist on backyard heirloom tomatoes alone. "We have no problem with this concept," said Bob Young, an economist for the American Farm Bureau Federation, on The Diane Rehm Show in March. "But understand that you're making lifestyle choices here about how you want your food produced. Fine. But don't denigrate the other approaches to food production." Read More
The old adage of look before you leap should be the warning being sounded about the push for local, organic food. Just because it sounds good doesn’t mean that it is. There are drawbacks and advantages to every type of food production system. For some reason, the biggest backers of organic food can’t admit that. The final goal of agriculture in our society is to provide ourselves with enough food to eat that is affordable. Full grocery store shelves don’t happen by accident.
Michelle Obama's garden and its discontents.
By Christopher Beam
Posted Thursday, June 4, 2009, at 9:35 PM ET
When Michelle Obama planted an organic garden on the White House lawn—which, she told NBC this week, has already yielded more than 80 pounds of produce—the response was overwhelmingly positive. (The main criticism: She should cook, too.) The Obamas' high-profile trip to New York included dinner at the impossibly local/organic/humane restaurant Blue Hill. (Main criticism: too predictable.) She even appeared on Sesame Street to champion the benefits of healthy eating. (Main criticism: no Snuffleupagus.)
Pushing organic and local foods is hardly official White House policy. So far, Five Guys is as much a part of the administration's diet as arugula. But the first lady's public statements, combined with the selection of a White House chef who favors local and organic foods, has brought more attention to what we eat than anything since Top Chef.
But beneath the nodding and smiling, there has been some grumbling. Not all sectors of the food and agriculture industry specialize in organic or local foods. "There's a lot of pushback we're hearing, a lot of whining out of that community about the first lady doing her garden," says Larry Mitchell of the American Corn Growers Association, which represents both organic and conventional farmers. "They're getting awful squeamish on this thing."
Other groups argue that organic and local foods are well and good—as long as the White House doesn't pretend that Americans can subsist on backyard heirloom tomatoes alone. "We have no problem with this concept," said Bob Young, an economist for the American Farm Bureau Federation, on The Diane Rehm Show in March. "But understand that you're making lifestyle choices here about how you want your food produced. Fine. But don't denigrate the other approaches to food production." Read More
The old adage of look before you leap should be the warning being sounded about the push for local, organic food. Just because it sounds good doesn’t mean that it is. There are drawbacks and advantages to every type of food production system. For some reason, the biggest backers of organic food can’t admit that. The final goal of agriculture in our society is to provide ourselves with enough food to eat that is affordable. Full grocery store shelves don’t happen by accident.
Dairies More Green Than Ever
Study finds modern dairies green, sustainable
(6/6/2009)
Sarah Muirhead
Contrary to the negative image often associated with large farm operations, the U.S. population’s requirements for dairy products is best fulfilled and most sustainable through the application of modern agricultural techniques, a just-released study has shown.
The study, conducted by Drs. Jude Capper and Dale Bauman of Cornell University and Roger Cady, formerly of Monsanto and now with Elanco Animal Health, compared the environmental impact of modern (2007) U.S. dairy production with that of dairy systems in 1944.
Among the findings were that modern dairy practices require considerably fewer resources than dairying in 1944 with 21% of animals, 23% of feedstuffs, 35% of the water and only 10% of the land required to produce the same 1 billion kg of milk.
Waste outputs were similarly reduced, with modern dairy systems producing 24% of the manure, 43% of CH4 and 56% of N2O per billion kg of milk, compared with equivalent milk from historical dairying. Read More
So many times we hear that agriculture is to blame for a myriad of environmental problems. However, the detractors never show the complete picture of the tremendous gains farmers and ranchers have made in reducing our environmental impact. The other important thing to remember is that we made these improvements on our own because it was the right thing to do. Farmers and ranchers were being sustainable environmentalists before it was cool.
(6/6/2009)
Sarah Muirhead
Contrary to the negative image often associated with large farm operations, the U.S. population’s requirements for dairy products is best fulfilled and most sustainable through the application of modern agricultural techniques, a just-released study has shown.
The study, conducted by Drs. Jude Capper and Dale Bauman of Cornell University and Roger Cady, formerly of Monsanto and now with Elanco Animal Health, compared the environmental impact of modern (2007) U.S. dairy production with that of dairy systems in 1944.
Among the findings were that modern dairy practices require considerably fewer resources than dairying in 1944 with 21% of animals, 23% of feedstuffs, 35% of the water and only 10% of the land required to produce the same 1 billion kg of milk.
Waste outputs were similarly reduced, with modern dairy systems producing 24% of the manure, 43% of CH4 and 56% of N2O per billion kg of milk, compared with equivalent milk from historical dairying. Read More
So many times we hear that agriculture is to blame for a myriad of environmental problems. However, the detractors never show the complete picture of the tremendous gains farmers and ranchers have made in reducing our environmental impact. The other important thing to remember is that we made these improvements on our own because it was the right thing to do. Farmers and ranchers were being sustainable environmentalists before it was cool.
Teaching Kids About Ag
June 8, 2009
Breakfast on the Farm has something for everyone
Despite soggy weather, 3,500 attend annual event
By Andy Nelesen
TOWN OF WRIGHTSTOWN, WI — For 6-year-old Jack Teller, the best part of Sunday's Breakfast on the Farm was playing in the hay. For his cousin, Alex McKean, who turns 10 today, it was the ice cream.
For Alex's brother, Sam McKean, also 10, it was the scrambled eggs — and having his photo taken with a few Green Bay Packers players.
There was something for everyone at the annual dairy industry promotion held this year at New Horizons Dairy on Rosin Road. The farm is owned by David and Barb Van De Hey.
recent years.
Paul Hazaert, who has led the breakfast's food operation for seven years, had supplies on hand to feed 7,000 people after nearly running out of food in 2008. Sunday's crowds reached about 3,500 people, said Mark Hagedorn, ag agent with Brown County University of Wisconsin-Extension.
"Given the weather, we're pleased we got what we got," he said.
By noon, Hazaert used 20,160 eggs, 400 pounds of yogurt, 1,600 bagels, 1,500 cups of coffee, 800 pounds of sausage links and 5,000 cartons of milk — most of which were donated or supplied at cost by area vendors. Leftovers and extra supplies were headed for local food pantries, he said. Read More
Students 'fuel up with milk'
Monday, June 8, 2009
Franklin County, Virginia
By JOEL TURNER - Staff Writer
Dairy Day at Callaway Elementary School was an educational and fun event for the students and teachers.
The day was a mixture of dairy calves, cow milking, ice cream, dairy products, a farm bingo game, a poster contest, storytime, videos and learning about what cows and calves eat.
The students visited eight educational stations to learn about dairy farming, milking a cow, caring for dairy cows, dairy products, and participate in dairy-related activities, including watching videos of dairy farm operations.
They also learned about tractors and safety with farm equipment.
The Dairy Day was arranged and sponsored by several
organizations, including the Franklin County Farm Bureau, Virginia Cooperative Extension, Southern States, Homestead Creamery, Kroger, Farm Credit and others.
At one station, the students milked Bessy, the cow. At another station, they learned what cows and calves eat. At another, they could taste dairy products. They could also attend storytime while eating ice cream. Read More
Everyday when I look at what is being said about agriculture and food production in this country I am reminded how important it is that farmers and ranchers educate our consumers, and more importantly, the next generation of consumers. Today I’m highlighting two great example of people taking the time to teach agriculture to their neighbors. Congratulations to the New Horizons Dairy in Wisconsin and to the many groups in Franklin County, Virginia for their hard work.
Breakfast on the Farm has something for everyone
Despite soggy weather, 3,500 attend annual event
By Andy Nelesen
TOWN OF WRIGHTSTOWN, WI — For 6-year-old Jack Teller, the best part of Sunday's Breakfast on the Farm was playing in the hay. For his cousin, Alex McKean, who turns 10 today, it was the ice cream.
For Alex's brother, Sam McKean, also 10, it was the scrambled eggs — and having his photo taken with a few Green Bay Packers players.
There was something for everyone at the annual dairy industry promotion held this year at New Horizons Dairy on Rosin Road. The farm is owned by David and Barb Van De Hey.
recent years.
Paul Hazaert, who has led the breakfast's food operation for seven years, had supplies on hand to feed 7,000 people after nearly running out of food in 2008. Sunday's crowds reached about 3,500 people, said Mark Hagedorn, ag agent with Brown County University of Wisconsin-Extension.
"Given the weather, we're pleased we got what we got," he said.
By noon, Hazaert used 20,160 eggs, 400 pounds of yogurt, 1,600 bagels, 1,500 cups of coffee, 800 pounds of sausage links and 5,000 cartons of milk — most of which were donated or supplied at cost by area vendors. Leftovers and extra supplies were headed for local food pantries, he said. Read More
Students 'fuel up with milk'
Monday, June 8, 2009
Franklin County, Virginia
By JOEL TURNER - Staff Writer
Dairy Day at Callaway Elementary School was an educational and fun event for the students and teachers.
The day was a mixture of dairy calves, cow milking, ice cream, dairy products, a farm bingo game, a poster contest, storytime, videos and learning about what cows and calves eat.
The students visited eight educational stations to learn about dairy farming, milking a cow, caring for dairy cows, dairy products, and participate in dairy-related activities, including watching videos of dairy farm operations.
They also learned about tractors and safety with farm equipment.
The Dairy Day was arranged and sponsored by several
organizations, including the Franklin County Farm Bureau, Virginia Cooperative Extension, Southern States, Homestead Creamery, Kroger, Farm Credit and others.
At one station, the students milked Bessy, the cow. At another station, they learned what cows and calves eat. At another, they could taste dairy products. They could also attend storytime while eating ice cream. Read More
Everyday when I look at what is being said about agriculture and food production in this country I am reminded how important it is that farmers and ranchers educate our consumers, and more importantly, the next generation of consumers. Today I’m highlighting two great example of people taking the time to teach agriculture to their neighbors. Congratulations to the New Horizons Dairy in Wisconsin and to the many groups in Franklin County, Virginia for their hard work.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Flu Infected Herd Destroyed
Hog farmer destroys herd quarantined for swine flu
Andrea Sands, Canwest News Service
EDMONTON -- The Alberta hog farmer whose herd was quarantined after the animals were infected with swine flu has culled his entire herd, says a news release from Alberta Pork.
Arnold Van Ginkel said in the release Sunday he made the business decision because he couldn't sell the pigs, even though the animals were safe to eat. The quarantine by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency meant no animals from the farm could be marketed until testing showed the virus was gone and all the animals were healthy, the release said.
"I am disappointed that I have to cull these animals, but the presence of the Type A H1N1 virus in my herd left me with few options," said Van Ginkel, who had more than 2,000 pigs on his farm near Rocky Mountain House, west of Red Deer.
"With the quarantine still in place, I was facing another partial cull due to overcrowding and no prospects for marketing my animals once they were given a clean bill of health. The only real option left was to have a complete cull and end the uncertainty for my farm and for the entire pork industry." Read More
This is an unfortunate end to an unfortunate situation. Because of the unfounded fears over H1N1 and livestock, Van Ginkel would have never been able to market these animals. For the industry, this was the most responsible thing to have happen. Hopefully this farm family can recover from the financial and emotional hardship this has caused.
Andrea Sands, Canwest News Service
EDMONTON -- The Alberta hog farmer whose herd was quarantined after the animals were infected with swine flu has culled his entire herd, says a news release from Alberta Pork.
Arnold Van Ginkel said in the release Sunday he made the business decision because he couldn't sell the pigs, even though the animals were safe to eat. The quarantine by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency meant no animals from the farm could be marketed until testing showed the virus was gone and all the animals were healthy, the release said.
"I am disappointed that I have to cull these animals, but the presence of the Type A H1N1 virus in my herd left me with few options," said Van Ginkel, who had more than 2,000 pigs on his farm near Rocky Mountain House, west of Red Deer.
"With the quarantine still in place, I was facing another partial cull due to overcrowding and no prospects for marketing my animals once they were given a clean bill of health. The only real option left was to have a complete cull and end the uncertainty for my farm and for the entire pork industry." Read More
This is an unfortunate end to an unfortunate situation. Because of the unfounded fears over H1N1 and livestock, Van Ginkel would have never been able to market these animals. For the industry, this was the most responsible thing to have happen. Hopefully this farm family can recover from the financial and emotional hardship this has caused.
Speaking Chicken
Chicken Squawk Studied At UConn
By CAROLYN MOREAU The Hartford Courant
June 6, 2009
STORRS — - For hundreds of hours, Ebenezer Otu-Nyarko has been studying "pok cluck cluck," "cluck bawk bawk" and "cluck cluck cluck."
It might earn him a doctorate.
Otu-Nyarko, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Connecticut, has focused his research inside the poultry barn at the University of Connecticut, where microphones hang from the ceiling and every cluck, bawk and pok is recorded. He and Professor Michael Darre are trying to understand the language of chickens.
"This is not 'let's translate chicken to English,'" Darre said. "We are trying to find out their language and what their vocalizations mean."
There's a purpose behind this research, with great implications for the welfare of America's chickens. The ultimate goal is to create a black box of chicken linguistics that would monitor chatter in the hen house. Every bawk and cluck would be sampled and compared to a recorded library of chicken sounds. Cries that match known stress vocalizations would trigger an alarm, getting a farmer out of bed, if necessary, to right whatever was wrong.
"Every farmer has one goal, which is to maximize egg production or putting on meat," said Otu-Nyarko. "The earlier we see stress and remove it, the better." Read More
Trying to get sound science back into the animal rights debate will always be difficult. However, when talking about animal welfare, sound science should be ruling the day, but lately it hasn’t. If we want what’s best of our livestock, then decisions about how to raise them should be made based on good information. Anti-agriculture groups realized before we did that emotional arguments will trump rational ones and that has been the key to much of their success. As farmers and ranchers, we need to speak up on this issue and relate to the consumer how important proper animal care is. After all, proper animal welfare should make the animals feel more comfortable, not ourselves.
By CAROLYN MOREAU The Hartford Courant
June 6, 2009
STORRS — - For hundreds of hours, Ebenezer Otu-Nyarko has been studying "pok cluck cluck," "cluck bawk bawk" and "cluck cluck cluck."
It might earn him a doctorate.
Otu-Nyarko, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Connecticut, has focused his research inside the poultry barn at the University of Connecticut, where microphones hang from the ceiling and every cluck, bawk and pok is recorded. He and Professor Michael Darre are trying to understand the language of chickens.
"This is not 'let's translate chicken to English,'" Darre said. "We are trying to find out their language and what their vocalizations mean."
There's a purpose behind this research, with great implications for the welfare of America's chickens. The ultimate goal is to create a black box of chicken linguistics that would monitor chatter in the hen house. Every bawk and cluck would be sampled and compared to a recorded library of chicken sounds. Cries that match known stress vocalizations would trigger an alarm, getting a farmer out of bed, if necessary, to right whatever was wrong.
"Every farmer has one goal, which is to maximize egg production or putting on meat," said Otu-Nyarko. "The earlier we see stress and remove it, the better." Read More
Trying to get sound science back into the animal rights debate will always be difficult. However, when talking about animal welfare, sound science should be ruling the day, but lately it hasn’t. If we want what’s best of our livestock, then decisions about how to raise them should be made based on good information. Anti-agriculture groups realized before we did that emotional arguments will trump rational ones and that has been the key to much of their success. As farmers and ranchers, we need to speak up on this issue and relate to the consumer how important proper animal care is. After all, proper animal welfare should make the animals feel more comfortable, not ourselves.
Fear, Not Flu, Kills Pigs
Flu fear robs Cairo slum of its mainstay
Government culls swine raised by trash collectors
By Jeffrey Fleishman, Los Angeles Times June 7, 2009
CAIRO - A bent man walks with a sack of garbage draped over him, hiding all but his legs as he lopes up the hill toward women and children with quick hands and shrewd eyes for spotting things of value.
Trash trailing off him, he teeters around a corner and disappears into a parade of bent men. Sacks drop and flies gather in dark, humming whirls. Hands scrape plastic and rip cardboard, but a sound is missing.
The squeal is gone.
Pigs are not to blame for the so-called swine flu, which in any case has not been found in this hilltop slum, but trucks flanked by armed police have come anyway and hauled away the pigs. Raised by Coptic Christian garbage collectors who fattened them with trash and sold them to non-Muslim butchers, the animals were among the 300,000 pigs the government ordered corralled and culled. Their silence means that what scant prosperity there was amid these cliffs has vanished.
"How will I feed my children now? I've lost 70 percent of my income," says Ramzi Shawki, whose 120 pigs lived in a pen next to his house until they were driven away, slaughtered, and buried in trenches. "Our pigs are not sick. I can hold them in my arms. I'm 41 years old. I was born into collecting garbage and raising pigs. I've never been infected. But whoever doesn't give up their pigs gets arrested."
"The government gave me 2,500 pounds for my animals," about $450, says Shawki, "but they were worth 18,000 pounds." Read More
The panic that followed the outbreak of H1N1 was incredible. Making the matters worse were animal rights groups like the Humane Society of the United States who fanned the flames of this panic and tried to tell people that farmers were to blame for the problem and that eating pork was only ”probably” safe. Talk like this caused other countries to ban imports of our pork. Even worse, it led Egypt to the mass wasteful killing of 300,000 pigs and destroyed the livelihood of many people. If HSUS truly cared about animals you would think they wouldn’t contribute to the deaths of so many of the.
Government culls swine raised by trash collectors
By Jeffrey Fleishman, Los Angeles Times June 7, 2009
CAIRO - A bent man walks with a sack of garbage draped over him, hiding all but his legs as he lopes up the hill toward women and children with quick hands and shrewd eyes for spotting things of value.
Trash trailing off him, he teeters around a corner and disappears into a parade of bent men. Sacks drop and flies gather in dark, humming whirls. Hands scrape plastic and rip cardboard, but a sound is missing.
The squeal is gone.
Pigs are not to blame for the so-called swine flu, which in any case has not been found in this hilltop slum, but trucks flanked by armed police have come anyway and hauled away the pigs. Raised by Coptic Christian garbage collectors who fattened them with trash and sold them to non-Muslim butchers, the animals were among the 300,000 pigs the government ordered corralled and culled. Their silence means that what scant prosperity there was amid these cliffs has vanished.
"How will I feed my children now? I've lost 70 percent of my income," says Ramzi Shawki, whose 120 pigs lived in a pen next to his house until they were driven away, slaughtered, and buried in trenches. "Our pigs are not sick. I can hold them in my arms. I'm 41 years old. I was born into collecting garbage and raising pigs. I've never been infected. But whoever doesn't give up their pigs gets arrested."
"The government gave me 2,500 pounds for my animals," about $450, says Shawki, "but they were worth 18,000 pounds." Read More
The panic that followed the outbreak of H1N1 was incredible. Making the matters worse were animal rights groups like the Humane Society of the United States who fanned the flames of this panic and tried to tell people that farmers were to blame for the problem and that eating pork was only ”probably” safe. Talk like this caused other countries to ban imports of our pork. Even worse, it led Egypt to the mass wasteful killing of 300,000 pigs and destroyed the livelihood of many people. If HSUS truly cared about animals you would think they wouldn’t contribute to the deaths of so many of the.
Friday, June 5, 2009
WaPo Covering World Pork Expo
Swine Flu? No Word of It at Pork Expo.
By David Brown Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 5, 2009
DES MOINES -- Here at the World Pork Expo, H1N1 influenza is many contradictory things -- an unfolding disaster and a passing inconvenience, a cause of the pork industry's woes and an excuse for them, evidence of good animal husbandry and a challenge to it.
About the only thing it isn't is "swine flu." Never should have been called that, everyone agrees -- and don't even think of calling it that now.
H1N1 flu is casting a distinctly dappled shadow across the Iowa State Fair Grounds, where 18,000 pork producers (including about 3,000 from 50 foreign countries), 450 exhibitors and 2,500 pigs are spending much of this week.
"I wish I had better news for you," Don Butler, president of the National Pork Producers Council, said Wednesday as the three-day event opened. His news was that over the next six months, enough farmers would go out of business to shrink the sow herd -- the swine industry's four-legged engine -- by about 5 percent. Read More
There’s no doubt that our pork producers were the true victims of H1N1. Even though the flu isn’t in the headlines anymore, it is still causing damage. Several countries still won’t accept imports of pork from the US based on unfounded fears that the virus could be passed through the meat. Remember this when people say groups like HSUS aren’t trying to abolish animal agriculture. They did all they could to create a fear of eating pork when the disease outbreak occurred. Family farmers are now paying the price.
By David Brown Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 5, 2009
DES MOINES -- Here at the World Pork Expo, H1N1 influenza is many contradictory things -- an unfolding disaster and a passing inconvenience, a cause of the pork industry's woes and an excuse for them, evidence of good animal husbandry and a challenge to it.
About the only thing it isn't is "swine flu." Never should have been called that, everyone agrees -- and don't even think of calling it that now.
H1N1 flu is casting a distinctly dappled shadow across the Iowa State Fair Grounds, where 18,000 pork producers (including about 3,000 from 50 foreign countries), 450 exhibitors and 2,500 pigs are spending much of this week.
"I wish I had better news for you," Don Butler, president of the National Pork Producers Council, said Wednesday as the three-day event opened. His news was that over the next six months, enough farmers would go out of business to shrink the sow herd -- the swine industry's four-legged engine -- by about 5 percent. Read More
There’s no doubt that our pork producers were the true victims of H1N1. Even though the flu isn’t in the headlines anymore, it is still causing damage. Several countries still won’t accept imports of pork from the US based on unfounded fears that the virus could be passed through the meat. Remember this when people say groups like HSUS aren’t trying to abolish animal agriculture. They did all they could to create a fear of eating pork when the disease outbreak occurred. Family farmers are now paying the price.
PETA's Fish Campaign
PETA wants lighthouses to shine light on fish feelings
Animal rights group wants to use site to discourage fishing
BY TODD SPANGLER • FREE PRESS WASHINGTON STAFF • June 5, 2009
As Lake Michigan ports go, Grand Haven is an angler's paradise. If People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals gets its way, it also will be home to a lighthouse café -- serving faux fish sticks -- where patrons learn about the evils of fishing.
PETA said in a letter to the National Park Service this week that it wants to take over Grand Haven's historic twin red lighthouses once they go on a list of surplus properties this year or next. Because PETA is a nonprofit, its bid to maintain the lighthouses could be considered.
The way the animal rights group sees it, Grand Haven would be a perfect place to drum up compassion for fish. To do so, it would point to research it says suggests that fish have feelings, too, rubbing against each other to show affection, developing individual personalities, even learning to grieve. Read More
PETA continues with their efforts to humanize fish. You might recall that they were in contact with Spearfish High School here in South Dakota complaining about the their name. So far their efforts with renaming fish as “sea kittens” has been laughed at and has confirmed most people’s impression of the group as being totally out of touch with reality. It’s interesting that it seems PETA is starting to become a victim of it’s own outrageous history. In order to continue getting coverage in the media, they must continue producing more outlandish campaigns. This in turn makes them look more like the kooks they really are. That’s the problem with a group that has no guiding principles or values.
Animal rights group wants to use site to discourage fishing
BY TODD SPANGLER • FREE PRESS WASHINGTON STAFF • June 5, 2009
As Lake Michigan ports go, Grand Haven is an angler's paradise. If People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals gets its way, it also will be home to a lighthouse café -- serving faux fish sticks -- where patrons learn about the evils of fishing.
PETA said in a letter to the National Park Service this week that it wants to take over Grand Haven's historic twin red lighthouses once they go on a list of surplus properties this year or next. Because PETA is a nonprofit, its bid to maintain the lighthouses could be considered.
The way the animal rights group sees it, Grand Haven would be a perfect place to drum up compassion for fish. To do so, it would point to research it says suggests that fish have feelings, too, rubbing against each other to show affection, developing individual personalities, even learning to grieve. Read More
PETA continues with their efforts to humanize fish. You might recall that they were in contact with Spearfish High School here in South Dakota complaining about the their name. So far their efforts with renaming fish as “sea kittens” has been laughed at and has confirmed most people’s impression of the group as being totally out of touch with reality. It’s interesting that it seems PETA is starting to become a victim of it’s own outrageous history. In order to continue getting coverage in the media, they must continue producing more outlandish campaigns. This in turn makes them look more like the kooks they really are. That’s the problem with a group that has no guiding principles or values.
Ranches Threatened
‘Wild and scenic’ river push worries area rancher
Written by Hank Lohmeyer
Wednesday, 03 June 2009
The historic Escalante Ranch west of Delta is being pressured by boundary, access, and other issues involved with the new National Conservation Area and wilderness. The Dominguez Canyon Wilderness area, which has not yet been officially surveyed, is likely to have boundaries which actually abut portions of the working cattle operation.
A new concern for the ranch managers and owner is a BLM push to assess the Gunnison River and its tributary waters from Grand Junction to the Continental Divide for "wild and scenic river" (WSR) designation.
The BLM's Grand Junction Field Office has already completed an "eligibility report" on the rivers and tributaries in its district, including the Colorado and Gunnison. That report, "Evaluated 117 river and stream segments and found 20 (that) were eligible (for possible WSR designation by Congress), including a 20-mile stretch of the Colorado River west of Grand Junction, 18 miles of Big Dominguez Creek, 15 miles of Little Dominguez Creek, and stretches of the Dolores and Gunnison rivers," according the BLM.
Kent Davis is the manager of the Escalante Ranch. He is concerned that this new government initiative on wild rivers will further pressure the ranch operations. He points to a list of criteria which acknowledge the federal government's right to buy, trade, and accept donations of property, easements and assignments to gain control of WSR designated rivers and streams.
In addition, the feds also have a right to condemn private property in pursuit of their wild and scenic objectives. "The BLM has gone into court in other states to condemn property for wild and scenic rivers," Davis said. Read More
It’s easy for someone sitting in their office in Washington, DC to think it would be a good idea to give some rivers a “Wild and Scenic” designation. However, rarely do these people consider how it will affect the locals that depend on the land for their livelihood. Private property rights is one of the fundamentals that this country was built on. It seems that many people have forgotten that.
Written by Hank Lohmeyer
Wednesday, 03 June 2009
The historic Escalante Ranch west of Delta is being pressured by boundary, access, and other issues involved with the new National Conservation Area and wilderness. The Dominguez Canyon Wilderness area, which has not yet been officially surveyed, is likely to have boundaries which actually abut portions of the working cattle operation.
A new concern for the ranch managers and owner is a BLM push to assess the Gunnison River and its tributary waters from Grand Junction to the Continental Divide for "wild and scenic river" (WSR) designation.
The BLM's Grand Junction Field Office has already completed an "eligibility report" on the rivers and tributaries in its district, including the Colorado and Gunnison. That report, "Evaluated 117 river and stream segments and found 20 (that) were eligible (for possible WSR designation by Congress), including a 20-mile stretch of the Colorado River west of Grand Junction, 18 miles of Big Dominguez Creek, 15 miles of Little Dominguez Creek, and stretches of the Dolores and Gunnison rivers," according the BLM.
Kent Davis is the manager of the Escalante Ranch. He is concerned that this new government initiative on wild rivers will further pressure the ranch operations. He points to a list of criteria which acknowledge the federal government's right to buy, trade, and accept donations of property, easements and assignments to gain control of WSR designated rivers and streams.
In addition, the feds also have a right to condemn private property in pursuit of their wild and scenic objectives. "The BLM has gone into court in other states to condemn property for wild and scenic rivers," Davis said. Read More
It’s easy for someone sitting in their office in Washington, DC to think it would be a good idea to give some rivers a “Wild and Scenic” designation. However, rarely do these people consider how it will affect the locals that depend on the land for their livelihood. Private property rights is one of the fundamentals that this country was built on. It seems that many people have forgotten that.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Animal Rights Terrorism
Animal Rights Terrorism on the Rise in U.S.
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
By James Osborne
It was 4 o'clock in the morning when David Jentsch, a neuroscience professor at UCLA, awoke to a loud bang and the sound of his car alarm. He hurried to his bedroom window and saw the orange glow of his new Volvo luxury sedan burning in his yard.
He suspected immediately that it was the work of animal rights activists.
"Enough of my colleagues had been attacked that I had a feeling they were responsible," Jentsch said about the March 7 torching of his car. "Two days later the Animal Liberation Brigade took credit for it. The irony of the whole situation is that no one had ever approached me about my research before, not one harassing e-mail or phone call."
Jentsch, who experiments on monkeys and rodents in his studies on mental disorders like drug addiction and psychosis, is one of a growing number of victims in a renewed and intensified campaign by animal rights activists. In what law enforcement officials are calling a wave of militancy, groups like the Animal Liberation Front and another called The Justice Department are going after scientists personally, both at work and at home, and threatening the safety of their families.
"There is an upswing," said Laura Eimiller, a FBI spokeswoman in Los Angeles. "What's really concerning is the tactics that are being used. Previously it was non-violent, mostly harassment or vandalism. Now we're seeing the increased use of incendiary devices to target individuals."
Over the past 18 months, there have been at least 39 criminal actions undertaken in the name of animal rights, according to data compiled by the Foundation for Biomedical Research, an advocacy group for researchers. That represents a significant rise from 2006 and 2007, when there were only 25 incidents. Read More
Just as in agriculture, scientists that work in animal research are tired of having their story told by animal rights extremists. They are doing all of this in spite of the fact that their lives and the lives of their family members have been threatened. The animal rights agenda has run unchecked for too many years and people are tired of being told how they should live by these cowardly thugs. Animal researchers deserve our support on this issue. Our lives may depend on it.
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
By James Osborne
It was 4 o'clock in the morning when David Jentsch, a neuroscience professor at UCLA, awoke to a loud bang and the sound of his car alarm. He hurried to his bedroom window and saw the orange glow of his new Volvo luxury sedan burning in his yard.
He suspected immediately that it was the work of animal rights activists.
"Enough of my colleagues had been attacked that I had a feeling they were responsible," Jentsch said about the March 7 torching of his car. "Two days later the Animal Liberation Brigade took credit for it. The irony of the whole situation is that no one had ever approached me about my research before, not one harassing e-mail or phone call."
Jentsch, who experiments on monkeys and rodents in his studies on mental disorders like drug addiction and psychosis, is one of a growing number of victims in a renewed and intensified campaign by animal rights activists. In what law enforcement officials are calling a wave of militancy, groups like the Animal Liberation Front and another called The Justice Department are going after scientists personally, both at work and at home, and threatening the safety of their families.
"There is an upswing," said Laura Eimiller, a FBI spokeswoman in Los Angeles. "What's really concerning is the tactics that are being used. Previously it was non-violent, mostly harassment or vandalism. Now we're seeing the increased use of incendiary devices to target individuals."
Over the past 18 months, there have been at least 39 criminal actions undertaken in the name of animal rights, according to data compiled by the Foundation for Biomedical Research, an advocacy group for researchers. That represents a significant rise from 2006 and 2007, when there were only 25 incidents. Read More
Just as in agriculture, scientists that work in animal research are tired of having their story told by animal rights extremists. They are doing all of this in spite of the fact that their lives and the lives of their family members have been threatened. The animal rights agenda has run unchecked for too many years and people are tired of being told how they should live by these cowardly thugs. Animal researchers deserve our support on this issue. Our lives may depend on it.
Studying Small Farms
Univ. of Chicago Professor to Test Efficiency of Small Farms
By Louise Lerner
Fox News
The hamburgers at the dining hall probably contribute more to global warming than the trucks that deliver them.
While you may remember when the greenhouse gas debate turned to food production, you might not recall that one of the seminal studies of livestock farming methods — the one that calculated that eating 20 percent less meat is equivalent to switching from an SUV to a sedan — came out of the University of Chicago in 2006.
Pamela A. Martin, an assistant professor who coauthored the study, is actually a geophysicist by profession, but an interest in climate changes in the past drove her to study the present one.
Since she’s already tackled the largest share of U.S. agriculture — monocropping, like the huge fields of Midwest corn — Martin now has her sights on another potentially revolutionary topic in the field.
It turns out that for all the praise environmentalists have sung about locally grown food, no one has actually done a study that proves local food is more efficient. Read More
Here is how I see this playing out. This geophysicist turned farming expert has already denounced the use of livestock and planting fields with only one crop planted in them. That leads me to conclude that she supports garden type farming. So the idea that this study would come out and suggest small farming isn’t efficient is hard to believe. The other huge problem that I see with this study is that it seems she will assume that all “small” farms are run the same and that all “large” farms are run the same way. Dividing farms into categories strictly based on the number of acres and saying one is better than the other is ridiculous at best.
By Louise Lerner
Fox News
The hamburgers at the dining hall probably contribute more to global warming than the trucks that deliver them.
While you may remember when the greenhouse gas debate turned to food production, you might not recall that one of the seminal studies of livestock farming methods — the one that calculated that eating 20 percent less meat is equivalent to switching from an SUV to a sedan — came out of the University of Chicago in 2006.
Pamela A. Martin, an assistant professor who coauthored the study, is actually a geophysicist by profession, but an interest in climate changes in the past drove her to study the present one.
Since she’s already tackled the largest share of U.S. agriculture — monocropping, like the huge fields of Midwest corn — Martin now has her sights on another potentially revolutionary topic in the field.
It turns out that for all the praise environmentalists have sung about locally grown food, no one has actually done a study that proves local food is more efficient. Read More
Here is how I see this playing out. This geophysicist turned farming expert has already denounced the use of livestock and planting fields with only one crop planted in them. That leads me to conclude that she supports garden type farming. So the idea that this study would come out and suggest small farming isn’t efficient is hard to believe. The other huge problem that I see with this study is that it seems she will assume that all “small” farms are run the same and that all “large” farms are run the same way. Dividing farms into categories strictly based on the number of acres and saying one is better than the other is ridiculous at best.
Florez's Antibiotic Bill Rejected
June 4, 2009
Food-safety bill stalls in Senate
By JAKE HENSHA
Wjhenshaw@gannett.com
SACRAMENTO A food-safety campaign to tighten up the standard for meat served in schools and to give the state new power to recall contaminated food largely stalled Wednesday in the Senate.
Senators rejected Senate Bill 416 by Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, that would have authorized schools to buy meat and poultry that hadn't been routinely treated with antibiotic drugs.
It also would have required state school officials to collect and report to the Legislature on information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture about the use of antibiotics in meat going to California schools.
Originally, SB 416 would have banned serving meat and poultry in schools that had been routinely treated with antibiotics. Read More
The bill in California that would have required schools to purchase as much meat as possible from livestock that hadn’t been fed antibiotics was defeated. Sen. Florez has introduced a flurry of anti-agriculture bills in the CA Senate since the passage of Proposition 2. All of the bills he has brought forward have been based on emotional feeling rather than rational thought. Bills such as this one would actually decrease our ability to keep livestock healthy. I truly believe the mark of a good elected official is not the one that gets the most bills passed, rather it’s the one the gets the most bills killed.
Food-safety bill stalls in Senate
By JAKE HENSHA
Wjhenshaw@gannett.com
SACRAMENTO A food-safety campaign to tighten up the standard for meat served in schools and to give the state new power to recall contaminated food largely stalled Wednesday in the Senate.
Senators rejected Senate Bill 416 by Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, that would have authorized schools to buy meat and poultry that hadn't been routinely treated with antibiotic drugs.
It also would have required state school officials to collect and report to the Legislature on information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture about the use of antibiotics in meat going to California schools.
Originally, SB 416 would have banned serving meat and poultry in schools that had been routinely treated with antibiotics. Read More
The bill in California that would have required schools to purchase as much meat as possible from livestock that hadn’t been fed antibiotics was defeated. Sen. Florez has introduced a flurry of anti-agriculture bills in the CA Senate since the passage of Proposition 2. All of the bills he has brought forward have been based on emotional feeling rather than rational thought. Bills such as this one would actually decrease our ability to keep livestock healthy. I truly believe the mark of a good elected official is not the one that gets the most bills passed, rather it’s the one the gets the most bills killed.
Protecting Our Pigs
Humans Cause More Concern at World Pork Expo than the Pigs
06/03/2009
H1N1 is also responsible for some changes at World Pork Expo. Nineteen-hundred hogs and pigs entering the Iowa State Fairgrounds before the Wednesday opening had to be inspected and confirmed as disease free. The H1N1 scare last month prompted the U.S. Centers for Disease Control to recommend additional monitoring of animal health at major animal events - including fairs, major sales and exhibitions like the Expo. But since the virus can be borne from humans to animals, Iowa veterinarian Shawn Nicholson is more worried about humans making the pigs sick, with 71 confirmed H1N1 cases in Iowa. No pigs in the U.S. have been reported with the virus.
This year - for the first time - the Expo has stands with hand wipes installed in the animal barns - and visitors will receive hand wipes at the front gates. As for the animals – a veterinarian will inspect each one and producers must provide veterinary records to verify the pig is virus-free. Nicholson says vets will look for signs of respiratory problems - like coughing and hacking - as well as skin lesions. The veterinarians will also walk through pens throughout the show. Link
We have all seen images of people walking down the street shortly after the H1N1 outbreak wearing masks over the faces. The fact is that our pigs are the ones that we need to be concerned about. Livestock producers always take precautions to protect the health of their herd. But these days, our pork producers need to take extra steps to protect their pigs, and our food supply, from H1N1. This level of care is a great example of the commitment our farmers and ranchers have.
06/03/2009
H1N1 is also responsible for some changes at World Pork Expo. Nineteen-hundred hogs and pigs entering the Iowa State Fairgrounds before the Wednesday opening had to be inspected and confirmed as disease free. The H1N1 scare last month prompted the U.S. Centers for Disease Control to recommend additional monitoring of animal health at major animal events - including fairs, major sales and exhibitions like the Expo. But since the virus can be borne from humans to animals, Iowa veterinarian Shawn Nicholson is more worried about humans making the pigs sick, with 71 confirmed H1N1 cases in Iowa. No pigs in the U.S. have been reported with the virus.
This year - for the first time - the Expo has stands with hand wipes installed in the animal barns - and visitors will receive hand wipes at the front gates. As for the animals – a veterinarian will inspect each one and producers must provide veterinary records to verify the pig is virus-free. Nicholson says vets will look for signs of respiratory problems - like coughing and hacking - as well as skin lesions. The veterinarians will also walk through pens throughout the show. Link
We have all seen images of people walking down the street shortly after the H1N1 outbreak wearing masks over the faces. The fact is that our pigs are the ones that we need to be concerned about. Livestock producers always take precautions to protect the health of their herd. But these days, our pork producers need to take extra steps to protect their pigs, and our food supply, from H1N1. This level of care is a great example of the commitment our farmers and ranchers have.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
CA's Antibiotic Limiting Bill
Antibiotics bill takes the next step
By Dairy Herd staff Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Legislation that would limit the use of antibiotics by licensed veterinarians to prevent and control disease in animal agriculture was approved last week in California by the Senate Appropriations Committee and now goes to the Senate floor for consideration.
Bill SB416, amended earlier this month by the Senate Education Committee, would require school districts to make every effort to purchase poultry and meat products that have not been treated with non-therapeutic antibiotics.
Any school district that purchases poultry or meat products from treated animals (or doesn’t know the status of the products) would be required to report annually to the Superintendent of Public Instruction the reasons those products were purchased. The bill would require the Superintendent to compile those reports and report to Legislature starting Jan. 1, 2012.
The original bill prohibited schools from serving poultry or meat products from animals that had been treated with antibiotics at any time during the life of the animal.
In addition, this bill would prohibit a person from using antibiotics for non-therapeutic use in any animal raised for the production of any human food product as of Jan. 1, 2015.
State Senator Dean Florez, chairman of the Senate Committee on Food and Agriculture, introduced this legislation.
Western United Dairymen opposes the bill, along with the Alliance of Western Milk Producers, California Dairies Inc., California Farm Bureau Federation, California Poultry Federation, California School Nutrition Association, and the California Teamsters.
Read the entire bill SB416. Article Link
I would argue that the levels of antibiotics used in animal feed currently are therapeutic. After all, the levels used are helping prevent the possibility of an animal catching a disease. There is also plenty of evidence to suggest that a ban on the current practice of using feed-based antibiotics will actually increase the usage. In addition to this, the cost for these meat products will also increase. The only message that can be heard from legislation like this is that the state of California no longer welcomes animal agriculture because sound science doesn’t agree. Judging by the state of their budget, increasing costs based on emotional thinking is the last thing they need.
By Dairy Herd staff Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Legislation that would limit the use of antibiotics by licensed veterinarians to prevent and control disease in animal agriculture was approved last week in California by the Senate Appropriations Committee and now goes to the Senate floor for consideration.
Bill SB416, amended earlier this month by the Senate Education Committee, would require school districts to make every effort to purchase poultry and meat products that have not been treated with non-therapeutic antibiotics.
Any school district that purchases poultry or meat products from treated animals (or doesn’t know the status of the products) would be required to report annually to the Superintendent of Public Instruction the reasons those products were purchased. The bill would require the Superintendent to compile those reports and report to Legislature starting Jan. 1, 2012.
The original bill prohibited schools from serving poultry or meat products from animals that had been treated with antibiotics at any time during the life of the animal.
In addition, this bill would prohibit a person from using antibiotics for non-therapeutic use in any animal raised for the production of any human food product as of Jan. 1, 2015.
State Senator Dean Florez, chairman of the Senate Committee on Food and Agriculture, introduced this legislation.
Western United Dairymen opposes the bill, along with the Alliance of Western Milk Producers, California Dairies Inc., California Farm Bureau Federation, California Poultry Federation, California School Nutrition Association, and the California Teamsters.
Read the entire bill SB416. Article Link
I would argue that the levels of antibiotics used in animal feed currently are therapeutic. After all, the levels used are helping prevent the possibility of an animal catching a disease. There is also plenty of evidence to suggest that a ban on the current practice of using feed-based antibiotics will actually increase the usage. In addition to this, the cost for these meat products will also increase. The only message that can be heard from legislation like this is that the state of California no longer welcomes animal agriculture because sound science doesn’t agree. Judging by the state of their budget, increasing costs based on emotional thinking is the last thing they need.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)