Money for crop research just a drop in the bucket
By Sue Kirchhoff, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — A deadly wheat fungus known as stem rust is shriveling crops from Africa to the Middle East, threatening the breadbasket of Pakistan and India, and could eventually reach the United States.
The potential threat to food supplies and the economy is enormous, yet Congress and the White House during the past several years did not react to urgent pleas from U.S. scientists for millions of dollars to develop wheat varieties resistant to stem rust. Instead, the main federal lab working on the disease fought budget cuts.
Help now appears to be on the way. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation this spring promised $27 million to Cornell University to run an international research effort to thwart stem rust: a fungus borne by the wind, on clothing or in cargo holds that creates sores on wheat stems that blacken and wipe out once-healthy plants. In Congress, pending spending bills would increase research. But the inability of the federal government to react quickly to a potential crisis — about 90% of all commercial wheat varieties are susceptible to the new strain of the disease — is a telling statement about the beleaguered state of federal crop science funding. Read More
Continued investments in agriculture will be the key to meeting worldwide demand for food during this century. Technology has enabled us to get where we are today, but we can’t quit now. We are going to add a few billion more mouths in the next several decades and we must utilize technology to produce more with less.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Oregon Ag Campaign
Ag campaign planned
Published: July 30, 2008
By ED MERRIMAN
Baker City Herald
Groups representing 20 commodities, ranging from cattle, wheat and grass seed to poultry, vegetables and fruit, are joining to produce one of the first industry-wide campaigns promoting awareness of issues facing Oregon's farmers and ranchers.
"This is an exciting time for agriculture. We are seeing a unity that hasn't always been there across commodity lines," said Geoff Horning, executive director of the Agri-Business Council of Oregon.
"We are facing some complex issues in a very challenging environment. Farmers and ranchers are concerned about the long-term future of agriculture in Oregon, as far as being a sustainable economic industry," Horning said.
"We are looking to develop a campaign to educate and engage urban Oregonians about some of the key ag issues in our state," Horning said. Read More
Congratualtions to Oregon agriculture for getting together to tell their story. It doesn’t matter how rural or urban your state may be, I guarantee that there are people living in your community that don’t understand what production agriculture is about. That is why it is so important to get out and share what you do.
Published: July 30, 2008
By ED MERRIMAN
Baker City Herald
Groups representing 20 commodities, ranging from cattle, wheat and grass seed to poultry, vegetables and fruit, are joining to produce one of the first industry-wide campaigns promoting awareness of issues facing Oregon's farmers and ranchers.
"This is an exciting time for agriculture. We are seeing a unity that hasn't always been there across commodity lines," said Geoff Horning, executive director of the Agri-Business Council of Oregon.
"We are facing some complex issues in a very challenging environment. Farmers and ranchers are concerned about the long-term future of agriculture in Oregon, as far as being a sustainable economic industry," Horning said.
"We are looking to develop a campaign to educate and engage urban Oregonians about some of the key ag issues in our state," Horning said. Read More
Congratualtions to Oregon agriculture for getting together to tell their story. It doesn’t matter how rural or urban your state may be, I guarantee that there are people living in your community that don’t understand what production agriculture is about. That is why it is so important to get out and share what you do.
NJ Supreme Court Ruling
Court rejects challenge to NJ farm animal rules
The Associated Press
TRENTON, N.J. - The state Supreme Court has rejected a broad challenge to New Jersey's rules governing the humane care of farm animals, sending the matter back to the state Agriculture Department for fine-tuning.
The court considered a challenge brought by a coalition of animal rights activists. The activists are questioning practices like castration without anesthesia, trimming the beaks of chickens and claws on turkeys without pain relievers, and confining animals in cramped cages.
T
he court's decision did not ban any specific practice; rather, it sent the matter back to the Agriculture Department for further action and clarification. Link
New Jersey’s law stated that commonly practiced animal husbandry techniques trumped any animal welfare laws that may be passed. HSUS and Farm Sanctuary are trying to challenge it. It is critical that we be allowed to continue to manage our livestock for their own good. Everything we do to these animals is for their own health and well being.
The Associated Press
TRENTON, N.J. - The state Supreme Court has rejected a broad challenge to New Jersey's rules governing the humane care of farm animals, sending the matter back to the state Agriculture Department for fine-tuning.
The court considered a challenge brought by a coalition of animal rights activists. The activists are questioning practices like castration without anesthesia, trimming the beaks of chickens and claws on turkeys without pain relievers, and confining animals in cramped cages.
T
he court's decision did not ban any specific practice; rather, it sent the matter back to the Agriculture Department for further action and clarification. Link
New Jersey’s law stated that commonly practiced animal husbandry techniques trumped any animal welfare laws that may be passed. HSUS and Farm Sanctuary are trying to challenge it. It is critical that we be allowed to continue to manage our livestock for their own good. Everything we do to these animals is for their own health and well being.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Urgent! - Horse Slaughter Ban Hearing
In less than a weeks time, the horse slaughter ban effort in Congress has gone from the back burner into the spotlight. A new bill, H.R. 6598, was introduced and a hearing has already been scheduled in the House of Representatives. According to the House Judiciary Committee website the hearing is for Wednesday July 31. Since Wednesday is July 30, I don't know if it is Wednesday or Thursday. Congress must run on a different calendar than the rest of us.
Regardless of which day the hearing is, everyone of us needs to contact our officials in Washington DC and urge them not to pass this bill. Stopping our ability to harvest horses is a stepping stone to banning the harvesting of other types of livestock. Even if you don't raise horses or use them in your operation, you need to consider this an assault on agriculture's ability to manage it's resources.
Here is a link to the House Judiciary Committee website. If you have a member on the committee it is even more important that you urge them to vote against the bill.
Regardless of which day the hearing is, everyone of us needs to contact our officials in Washington DC and urge them not to pass this bill. Stopping our ability to harvest horses is a stepping stone to banning the harvesting of other types of livestock. Even if you don't raise horses or use them in your operation, you need to consider this an assault on agriculture's ability to manage it's resources.
Here is a link to the House Judiciary Committee website. If you have a member on the committee it is even more important that you urge them to vote against the bill.
A New Horse Slaughter Ban Bill
New Federal Horse Slaughter Bill Introduced
by: Pat Raia July 25 2008
Legislation introduced July 23 into the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee addresses the horse slaughter issue by linking the practice to animal cruelty and leaving enforcement to federal authorities.
According to some animal welfare advocates, the proposal represents the best chance for enacting federal anti-slaughter laws since the American Horse Slaughter Act (H.R.503) has been blocked in House committees despite its passage by both houses of Congress.
"This bill is more defined and more focused and is attached to Title 18, which already deals with animal cruelty issues including dog fighting," said Chris Heyde, spokesman for the Animal Welfare Institute. "Also, enforcement will be done by the FBI and customs. These guys are professionals."
Sponsored by Judiciary Committee Chairman U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), and U.S. Rep. Dan Burton, (R-Ind.), H.R. 6598 the "Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008" prohibits transport, sale, delivery, or export of horses for slaughter for human consumption. It would also criminalize the purchase, sale, delivery, or export of horsemeat intended for human consumption.
Violators would face fines and/or one year imprisonment for a first offense or one involving five or fewer horses, and fines and/or three years imprisonment for repeat offenses or those involving more than five horses. Link
A national law to prevent horse slaughter is rearing its ugly head once again. Like a lot of things in Washington, DC, it hasn’t been able to pass on its own, so they have to attach it to something else in order to get it through. It is imperative that all producers stay in contact with their representatives and senators. Even if they have been on our side of the debate in the past, don’t assume they will continue to vote that way.
by: Pat Raia July 25 2008
Legislation introduced July 23 into the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee addresses the horse slaughter issue by linking the practice to animal cruelty and leaving enforcement to federal authorities.
According to some animal welfare advocates, the proposal represents the best chance for enacting federal anti-slaughter laws since the American Horse Slaughter Act (H.R.503) has been blocked in House committees despite its passage by both houses of Congress.
"This bill is more defined and more focused and is attached to Title 18, which already deals with animal cruelty issues including dog fighting," said Chris Heyde, spokesman for the Animal Welfare Institute. "Also, enforcement will be done by the FBI and customs. These guys are professionals."
Sponsored by Judiciary Committee Chairman U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), and U.S. Rep. Dan Burton, (R-Ind.), H.R. 6598 the "Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008" prohibits transport, sale, delivery, or export of horses for slaughter for human consumption. It would also criminalize the purchase, sale, delivery, or export of horsemeat intended for human consumption.
Violators would face fines and/or one year imprisonment for a first offense or one involving five or fewer horses, and fines and/or three years imprisonment for repeat offenses or those involving more than five horses. Link
A national law to prevent horse slaughter is rearing its ugly head once again. Like a lot of things in Washington, DC, it hasn’t been able to pass on its own, so they have to attach it to something else in order to get it through. It is imperative that all producers stay in contact with their representatives and senators. Even if they have been on our side of the debate in the past, don’t assume they will continue to vote that way.
Managing The Wolf
States will discuss wolf strategy
By JOAN BARRONStar-Tribune staff writer
CHEYENNE -- Representatives of the states of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho will decide their strategy on the wolf decision Friday during a telephone conference call, Wyoming Attorney General Bruce Salzburg said Wednesday.
Last Friday U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy, in Missoula, Mont., granted a preliminary injunction sought by environmental groups to restore the protection for wolves in the three states and halt wolf hunts.
In March, the estimated 2,000 gray wolves in the region were removed from the endangered species list. Read More
The wolf population has recovered quicker than probably anyone thought it would. It is to a point now that it needs to be managed in order to maintain a proper balance. The increased interaction between wolves and livestock and livestock owners shows the need for a management plan rather than just letting them over-populate. With a more than stable population, now is the time to put that management plan into place so those that are feeding these wolves don’t become endangered.
By JOAN BARRONStar-Tribune staff writer
CHEYENNE -- Representatives of the states of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho will decide their strategy on the wolf decision Friday during a telephone conference call, Wyoming Attorney General Bruce Salzburg said Wednesday.
Last Friday U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy, in Missoula, Mont., granted a preliminary injunction sought by environmental groups to restore the protection for wolves in the three states and halt wolf hunts.
In March, the estimated 2,000 gray wolves in the region were removed from the endangered species list. Read More
The wolf population has recovered quicker than probably anyone thought it would. It is to a point now that it needs to be managed in order to maintain a proper balance. The increased interaction between wolves and livestock and livestock owners shows the need for a management plan rather than just letting them over-populate. With a more than stable population, now is the time to put that management plan into place so those that are feeding these wolves don’t become endangered.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Cows Making Electricity
Cow Power Could Generate Electricity for Millions
Converting livestock manure into a domestic renewable fuel source could generate enough electricity to meet up to 3% of North America's entire consumption needs and lead to a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, according to research published July 24 in the Institute of Physics' Environmental Research Letters.
The journal paper, "Cow Power: The Energy & Emissions Benefits of Converting Manure to Biogas," has implications for all countries with livestock as it is the first attempt to outline a procedure for quantifying the national amount of renewable energy that herds of cattle and other livestock can generate and the concomitant GHG emission reductions. Read More
It is interesting to see how much power we could generate from manure. Obviously there are a lot of details that would have to be figured out in order to make this a reality but it does show how important livestock are not only for food but also for fuel and pharmaceuticals. Livestock are one of the original renewable resources.
Converting livestock manure into a domestic renewable fuel source could generate enough electricity to meet up to 3% of North America's entire consumption needs and lead to a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, according to research published July 24 in the Institute of Physics' Environmental Research Letters.
The journal paper, "Cow Power: The Energy & Emissions Benefits of Converting Manure to Biogas," has implications for all countries with livestock as it is the first attempt to outline a procedure for quantifying the national amount of renewable energy that herds of cattle and other livestock can generate and the concomitant GHG emission reductions. Read More
It is interesting to see how much power we could generate from manure. Obviously there are a lot of details that would have to be figured out in order to make this a reality but it does show how important livestock are not only for food but also for fuel and pharmaceuticals. Livestock are one of the original renewable resources.
Candidates Talk about Ag
Candidates pledge support for farmers
By Ted Shelsby On the farm
July 27, 2008
Like everyone else, farmers have a stake in the presidential election.
With this in mind, officials of the American Farm Bureau Federation invited presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain to speak by teleconference to their recent Council of Presidents meeting in Washington.
Each of the candidates pledged continued support for American agriculture.The following excerpts from their presentations were included in a news release from the bureau, a 6.2 million-member farm lobbying organization representing all 50 states and Puerto Rico. Read More
Energy and food policy are two extremely important components to our security and success as a nation. It seems rare to hear the presidential candidates talk about agriculture in the media, but it is very important that we know how each of them will affect our industry. In this article each of the candidates touches on a few of the issues affecting agriculture.
By Ted Shelsby On the farm
July 27, 2008
Like everyone else, farmers have a stake in the presidential election.
With this in mind, officials of the American Farm Bureau Federation invited presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain to speak by teleconference to their recent Council of Presidents meeting in Washington.
Each of the candidates pledged continued support for American agriculture.The following excerpts from their presentations were included in a news release from the bureau, a 6.2 million-member farm lobbying organization representing all 50 states and Puerto Rico. Read More
Energy and food policy are two extremely important components to our security and success as a nation. It seems rare to hear the presidential candidates talk about agriculture in the media, but it is very important that we know how each of them will affect our industry. In this article each of the candidates touches on a few of the issues affecting agriculture.
No Difference Between Milk
Study Backs Up rbST Supporters’ Claims on Milk Labeling
Submitted by Editor on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 12:45pm.
Differences Not ‘Biologically Meaningful’ in Three Types of Labeled Milk
A new scientific study published in the July issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association (JADA) reports the results of the first in-depth survey study comparing retail milk for quality, nutritional value and levels of different milk hormones, including bovine somatotropin (bST). The study found that there were “no meaningful differences” in the composition of milk with the three different label claims, according to a news release this week from the Penn State Department of Dairy and Animal Science.
Prompted by the recent trend in food labeling based on dairy cow management, the study looked specifically at three label claims: conventional milk (including milk from cows treated with rbST or recombinant bovine somatotropin), rbST-free milk and organic milk.
While minor differences were observed in milk composition for the three labels, the differences were not “biologically meaningful.” The coauthors of the study concluded that label claims “were not related to any meaningful differences in the milk compositional variables measured,” a claim that supporters of rbST in the dairy industry have been making from the start of the controversy over milk labeling. Read More
Just as we have been told all along, there is no difference in the milk from cows exposed to different management styles. After traveling to both coasts two weeks ago and talking to consumers along the way, words like “hormones” have negative a connotation regardless of the science and truth. Regardless of whether you as a producer decide to adopt certain technologies, educating consumers on the truth about the technologies available to feed a growing population is a story we all need to be telling.
Submitted by Editor on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 12:45pm.
Differences Not ‘Biologically Meaningful’ in Three Types of Labeled Milk
A new scientific study published in the July issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association (JADA) reports the results of the first in-depth survey study comparing retail milk for quality, nutritional value and levels of different milk hormones, including bovine somatotropin (bST). The study found that there were “no meaningful differences” in the composition of milk with the three different label claims, according to a news release this week from the Penn State Department of Dairy and Animal Science.
Prompted by the recent trend in food labeling based on dairy cow management, the study looked specifically at three label claims: conventional milk (including milk from cows treated with rbST or recombinant bovine somatotropin), rbST-free milk and organic milk.
While minor differences were observed in milk composition for the three labels, the differences were not “biologically meaningful.” The coauthors of the study concluded that label claims “were not related to any meaningful differences in the milk compositional variables measured,” a claim that supporters of rbST in the dairy industry have been making from the start of the controversy over milk labeling. Read More
Just as we have been told all along, there is no difference in the milk from cows exposed to different management styles. After traveling to both coasts two weeks ago and talking to consumers along the way, words like “hormones” have negative a connotation regardless of the science and truth. Regardless of whether you as a producer decide to adopt certain technologies, educating consumers on the truth about the technologies available to feed a growing population is a story we all need to be telling.
Horses to Mexico, but not Elephants
Owner says Mexican zoo 'good option' for Jenny
06:25 AM CDT on Monday, July 28, 2008
BY LAURENCE ILIFF / The Dallas Morning News
PUEBLA, Mexico – Who wouldn't want to live in semiretirement in the Mexican countryside, surrounded by a lake and trees, cared for 24/7, with a custom-built home and new friends?
That's what the owner of Africam Safari is asking those who oppose the Dallas Zoo's plan to move Jenny the elephant to a 500-acre animal park in the central Mexican state of Puebla.
"We are not intimidated by this," said Amy Camacho, whose late father opened the drive-through zoo 36 years ago. "We are sure we are a very good option."
Although Ms. Camacho did expect an animated debate on whether Jenny should be moved to the Puebla park or an elephant refuge in Tennessee, she did not expect attacks to be aimed at Africam. Read More
Isn’t it interesting that these animal activists are willing to force American horses to be shipped to Mexico to be harvested under far less humane conditions but they all come to the defense of an elephant when she might be moved there. It just goes to show that their ultimate goal is to create a crisis around every corner so they always have a fundraising tool at their disposal.
06:25 AM CDT on Monday, July 28, 2008
BY LAURENCE ILIFF / The Dallas Morning News
PUEBLA, Mexico – Who wouldn't want to live in semiretirement in the Mexican countryside, surrounded by a lake and trees, cared for 24/7, with a custom-built home and new friends?
That's what the owner of Africam Safari is asking those who oppose the Dallas Zoo's plan to move Jenny the elephant to a 500-acre animal park in the central Mexican state of Puebla.
"We are not intimidated by this," said Amy Camacho, whose late father opened the drive-through zoo 36 years ago. "We are sure we are a very good option."
Although Ms. Camacho did expect an animated debate on whether Jenny should be moved to the Puebla park or an elephant refuge in Tennessee, she did not expect attacks to be aimed at Africam. Read More
Isn’t it interesting that these animal activists are willing to force American horses to be shipped to Mexico to be harvested under far less humane conditions but they all come to the defense of an elephant when she might be moved there. It just goes to show that their ultimate goal is to create a crisis around every corner so they always have a fundraising tool at their disposal.
Friday, July 25, 2008
The Cloning Debate
GM debate: Cloned meat safe to eat says EU's food agency
Professor Dan Collins, a member of EFSA's scientific committee, told reporters that there was no appreciable difference between meat from cloned animals and that from conventional ones. But he added: "There are possible concerns there is an impact of animal health and welfare on food safety. Infectious diseases can be passed down the food chain. Healthy food comes from healthy animals."
Beef and pork produced from healthy cloned cattle and pigs are as safe as meat from conventionally bred animals, the European Food Safety Authority said yesterday. Read More
Quite surprisingly, the EU food agency has declared cloned meat as safe as conventionally raised meat. The EU certainly doesn’t have a history of approving technologies in food production, regardless of the science. While the process of getting there is different, the clone of an animal is no different than an identical twin. Even though using cloned animals for meat production is still several years away, having the discussion now is important.
Professor Dan Collins, a member of EFSA's scientific committee, told reporters that there was no appreciable difference between meat from cloned animals and that from conventional ones. But he added: "There are possible concerns there is an impact of animal health and welfare on food safety. Infectious diseases can be passed down the food chain. Healthy food comes from healthy animals."
Beef and pork produced from healthy cloned cattle and pigs are as safe as meat from conventionally bred animals, the European Food Safety Authority said yesterday. Read More
Quite surprisingly, the EU food agency has declared cloned meat as safe as conventionally raised meat. The EU certainly doesn’t have a history of approving technologies in food production, regardless of the science. While the process of getting there is different, the clone of an animal is no different than an identical twin. Even though using cloned animals for meat production is still several years away, having the discussion now is important.
New Website
Animal Care Initiative Launched by Farm Bureau
The American Farm Bureau Federation on Wednesday announced the Conversations on Animal Care initiative. The initiative is a comprehensive effort that supports farmers and ranchers who are eager to engage consumers in a positive dialogue to address the concerns of consumers about the care provided to farm animals in the production of meat, milk and eggs. The initiative also helps livestock producers share positive and personal insights on the care they provide farm animals.
A Harris poll conducted earlier this year showed that 57% of respondents agreed with the statement "farmers and ranchers in your state treat their animals humanly" but 34% answered not sure. The survey then gave respondents a series of educational information about animal care and concluded by asking the question again. The second round of questioning saw a 15% jump to 72% saying they agreed or strongly agreed with the statement.
"This tells us that, when presented with basic information about the practical and ethical standards farmers and ranchers maintain, consumers respond positively," says AFBF Public Relations Director Don Lipton. "The Conversations on Animal Care program is intended to give farmers and ranchers the confidence and tools to do just that.” Read More
Showing consumers that livestock producers take great care of their animals is the job of everyone in the industry. However, there are a lot of consumers that we need to reach, so AFBF has developed a website to help tell our story online. Having site like these also gives us as producers a resource to direct consumers to for more information about animal husbandry.
The American Farm Bureau Federation on Wednesday announced the Conversations on Animal Care initiative. The initiative is a comprehensive effort that supports farmers and ranchers who are eager to engage consumers in a positive dialogue to address the concerns of consumers about the care provided to farm animals in the production of meat, milk and eggs. The initiative also helps livestock producers share positive and personal insights on the care they provide farm animals.
A Harris poll conducted earlier this year showed that 57% of respondents agreed with the statement "farmers and ranchers in your state treat their animals humanly" but 34% answered not sure. The survey then gave respondents a series of educational information about animal care and concluded by asking the question again. The second round of questioning saw a 15% jump to 72% saying they agreed or strongly agreed with the statement.
"This tells us that, when presented with basic information about the practical and ethical standards farmers and ranchers maintain, consumers respond positively," says AFBF Public Relations Director Don Lipton. "The Conversations on Animal Care program is intended to give farmers and ranchers the confidence and tools to do just that.” Read More
Showing consumers that livestock producers take great care of their animals is the job of everyone in the industry. However, there are a lot of consumers that we need to reach, so AFBF has developed a website to help tell our story online. Having site like these also gives us as producers a resource to direct consumers to for more information about animal husbandry.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Veganism Kills More Animals
Veganism Is Murder
By Wesley J. Smith
PETA — People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals — is at it again. When actress Jessica Simpson recently wore a T-shirt bearing the words “Real Girls Eat Meat,” the animal-rights zealots pounced. “Jessica Simpson might have a right to wear what she wants,” a PETA spokesperson said, “but she doesn’t have a right to eat what she wants — eating meat is about suffering and death.”
Listening to animal-rights activists bray on about the wrongness of slaughtering animals for food — summarized in their advocacy phrase “meat is murder” — one would think that the choice we have is between a diet in which animals are killed and a strictly vegan diet involving no animal deaths.
But life is never that simple: Plant agriculture results each year in the mass slaughter of countless animals, including rabbits, gophers, mice, birds, snakes, and other field creatures. These animals are killed during harvesting, and in the various mechanized farming processes that produce wheat, corn, rice, soybeans, and other staples of vegan diets. And that doesn’t include the countless rats and mice poisoned in grain elevators, or the animals that die from loss of habitat cleared for agricultural use. Read More
While most vegans tend to believe they have taken the high moral ground, they fail to understand how food is raised. This is a great article that every vegan should read. If they truly believe that every animal life is equal, switching to a meat based diet would be their only option to reduce suffering.
By Wesley J. Smith
PETA — People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals — is at it again. When actress Jessica Simpson recently wore a T-shirt bearing the words “Real Girls Eat Meat,” the animal-rights zealots pounced. “Jessica Simpson might have a right to wear what she wants,” a PETA spokesperson said, “but she doesn’t have a right to eat what she wants — eating meat is about suffering and death.”
Listening to animal-rights activists bray on about the wrongness of slaughtering animals for food — summarized in their advocacy phrase “meat is murder” — one would think that the choice we have is between a diet in which animals are killed and a strictly vegan diet involving no animal deaths.
But life is never that simple: Plant agriculture results each year in the mass slaughter of countless animals, including rabbits, gophers, mice, birds, snakes, and other field creatures. These animals are killed during harvesting, and in the various mechanized farming processes that produce wheat, corn, rice, soybeans, and other staples of vegan diets. And that doesn’t include the countless rats and mice poisoned in grain elevators, or the animals that die from loss of habitat cleared for agricultural use. Read More
While most vegans tend to believe they have taken the high moral ground, they fail to understand how food is raised. This is a great article that every vegan should read. If they truly believe that every animal life is equal, switching to a meat based diet would be their only option to reduce suffering.
PETA Could Become "Welfare Cops"
Crazy US laws could give PETA right of farm entry
ROD SMITH
21/07/2008 9:35:00 AM
Animal rights and vegetarian activists could have the authority to enter and search California farm buildings and arrest producers for suspected violations of animal welfare laws if California voters approve a ballot initiative in coming months.
This is the conclusion of attorneys who are analyzing the legal consequences of the initiative for agricultural and food interests in California, whose "Californians for SAFE Food" coalition is organised to educate Californians on the initiative and urge them to vote no on the measure.
The determination makes it exceedingly important for producers and production companies, trade associations and allied industry across the US to become involved in the "SAFE Food" coalition, its supporters said. Read More
The thought of PETA or HSUS being the “animal welfare cops” in California should make everyone extremely concerned. There is no doubt that they would use their power to run everyone involved in production agriculture out of business.
ROD SMITH
21/07/2008 9:35:00 AM
Animal rights and vegetarian activists could have the authority to enter and search California farm buildings and arrest producers for suspected violations of animal welfare laws if California voters approve a ballot initiative in coming months.
This is the conclusion of attorneys who are analyzing the legal consequences of the initiative for agricultural and food interests in California, whose "Californians for SAFE Food" coalition is organised to educate Californians on the initiative and urge them to vote no on the measure.
The determination makes it exceedingly important for producers and production companies, trade associations and allied industry across the US to become involved in the "SAFE Food" coalition, its supporters said. Read More
The thought of PETA or HSUS being the “animal welfare cops” in California should make everyone extremely concerned. There is no doubt that they would use their power to run everyone involved in production agriculture out of business.
Prop 2 Could Break Egg Industry in CA
Measure could send egg industry packing, study says
By Reed Fujii
Record Staff Writer
July 23, 2008 6:00 AM
Proposition 2, a ballot initiative that aims to provide egg-laying hens in California room to move, more likely would force the state's $300million egg industry to move out of the state or out of business entirely if approved, a University of California, Davis, study suggests.
Proponents, however, argue that the measure on the November ballot will lead instead to widespread reform of egg-production practices.
Proposition 2 would establish a state law requiring that certain confined farm animals be allowed enough space to extend their limbs or wings fully, lie down, stand up and turn around. Laying hens would have to have space to spread their wings without touching the sides of the cage or other hens.
That would practically eliminate the current practice of confining laying hens to small cages, raising the cost of production 20 percent or more, and require the industry to invest about $500million in new housing for the chickens, said Daniel Sumner, co-author of the study released Tuesday and director of the Agricultural Issues Center at UC Davis.
Those are expenses state egg producers can't absorb while remaining competitive, he said. Read More
The egg industry will no doubt be very seriously harmed economically if Proposition 2 passes in California. While proponents argue that it didn’t happen in Arizona with the approval of Prop 204, the size of the industry that it affected in Arizona was much, much smaller. It will affect a $300 million dollar industry in California that will no longer be able to compete.
By Reed Fujii
Record Staff Writer
July 23, 2008 6:00 AM
Proposition 2, a ballot initiative that aims to provide egg-laying hens in California room to move, more likely would force the state's $300million egg industry to move out of the state or out of business entirely if approved, a University of California, Davis, study suggests.
Proponents, however, argue that the measure on the November ballot will lead instead to widespread reform of egg-production practices.
Proposition 2 would establish a state law requiring that certain confined farm animals be allowed enough space to extend their limbs or wings fully, lie down, stand up and turn around. Laying hens would have to have space to spread their wings without touching the sides of the cage or other hens.
That would practically eliminate the current practice of confining laying hens to small cages, raising the cost of production 20 percent or more, and require the industry to invest about $500million in new housing for the chickens, said Daniel Sumner, co-author of the study released Tuesday and director of the Agricultural Issues Center at UC Davis.
Those are expenses state egg producers can't absorb while remaining competitive, he said. Read More
The egg industry will no doubt be very seriously harmed economically if Proposition 2 passes in California. While proponents argue that it didn’t happen in Arizona with the approval of Prop 204, the size of the industry that it affected in Arizona was much, much smaller. It will affect a $300 million dollar industry in California that will no longer be able to compete.
Loose Horses
Horses may become highway hazards
Worried about hitting a deer with your vehicle?
In the future, you may have to expand that fear to include horses.
Throughout Illinois, including La Salle County, equines left to run at large or abandoned are increasing as owners find them too costly to care for.
One day, that is going to result in a collision with a vehicle, says Dr. Colleen O'Keefe, the Illinois Department of Agriculture's division manager of Food Safety and Animal Protection. "It's bad enough when you hit a dog or a deer, but hitting a horse, that's the fear I think everybody is holding their breath hoping wont happen," she said. Read More
We continue to hear more stories of abandoned horses from across the country. As is mentioned in the article, most areas won’t have animal shelters that can handle the larger animals, so how will they handle it? If this situation isn’t addressed sooner, it will be the taxpayers that will be footing the bill for these horses that need to be cared for or put down.
Worried about hitting a deer with your vehicle?
In the future, you may have to expand that fear to include horses.
Throughout Illinois, including La Salle County, equines left to run at large or abandoned are increasing as owners find them too costly to care for.
One day, that is going to result in a collision with a vehicle, says Dr. Colleen O'Keefe, the Illinois Department of Agriculture's division manager of Food Safety and Animal Protection. "It's bad enough when you hit a dog or a deer, but hitting a horse, that's the fear I think everybody is holding their breath hoping wont happen," she said. Read More
We continue to hear more stories of abandoned horses from across the country. As is mentioned in the article, most areas won’t have animal shelters that can handle the larger animals, so how will they handle it? If this situation isn’t addressed sooner, it will be the taxpayers that will be footing the bill for these horses that need to be cared for or put down.
Managing Wild Horses
Activists oppose BLM proposal to kill mustangs
By JESSICA ESTEPA and Frank X. Mullen Jr. Reno Gazette-Journal
In the desert near Gerlach, a tame bay horse dashed out to meet five wild horses fleeing from a government helicopter. Instinct told the mustangs to follow the bay, but it was a "Judas horse" trained to lead the wild ones into a corral.
A gate slammed. The horses were free no more.
During the past 30 years, the fates of these captured mustangs and more than 400 rounded up in Northern Nevada this month would be clear: They would be sent to an adoption center and kept until placed with a family. But now, these mustangs and hundreds like them in adoption or holding centers in the West eventually could be under a death sentence.
The animals have been a protected species since 1971, but because BLM officials say their facilities are overcrowded, adoptions have decreased and money is tight, they might euthanize some of the animals to make room for the thousands of mustangs they say would starve if left on the range.
A meeting on the proposal is expected in September.
"We know this is not a popular option, but we are at a critical point where we must consider using the legal authority allowed us," agency officials said in a prepared statement. Read More
Whenever management of animals, such as wild horses, comes up there is sure to be plenty of people that believe the best management practice is no management. Apparently the thought of these horses starving to death is more appealing to animal activists than humane euthanasia. While that isn’t the option anyone would look forward to, management of the horses is necessary. While adoption of these animals is an option, you don’t seem to see many activists adopting these horses to alleviate the situation.
By JESSICA ESTEPA and Frank X. Mullen Jr. Reno Gazette-Journal
In the desert near Gerlach, a tame bay horse dashed out to meet five wild horses fleeing from a government helicopter. Instinct told the mustangs to follow the bay, but it was a "Judas horse" trained to lead the wild ones into a corral.
A gate slammed. The horses were free no more.
During the past 30 years, the fates of these captured mustangs and more than 400 rounded up in Northern Nevada this month would be clear: They would be sent to an adoption center and kept until placed with a family. But now, these mustangs and hundreds like them in adoption or holding centers in the West eventually could be under a death sentence.
The animals have been a protected species since 1971, but because BLM officials say their facilities are overcrowded, adoptions have decreased and money is tight, they might euthanize some of the animals to make room for the thousands of mustangs they say would starve if left on the range.
A meeting on the proposal is expected in September.
"We know this is not a popular option, but we are at a critical point where we must consider using the legal authority allowed us," agency officials said in a prepared statement. Read More
Whenever management of animals, such as wild horses, comes up there is sure to be plenty of people that believe the best management practice is no management. Apparently the thought of these horses starving to death is more appealing to animal activists than humane euthanasia. While that isn’t the option anyone would look forward to, management of the horses is necessary. While adoption of these animals is an option, you don’t seem to see many activists adopting these horses to alleviate the situation.
Prop 2 Commentary
Prop. 2: City slickers try to tell farmers how to run their farms
The November ballot is filled with hot-button proposals -- a proposed ban on gay marriage, a parental notification requirement for a girl to have an abortion, and an effort by city-dwelling animal lovers to tell farmers how to run their businesses.
OK, I put a negative spin on that last one, but it's the way that many people in agriculture see Proposition 2, the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act. The initiative affects three kinds of animals: egg-laying chickens, calves raised for veal and pregnant pigs. The act is vague, simply requiring "that an enclosure or tether confining specified farm animals allow the animals for the majority of every day to fully extend their limbs or wings, lie down, stand up and turn around." It would impose a fine of as much as $1,000 or six months in jail for violations. Read More
As I continue to monitor what is being said about Proposition 2 in California I have noticed that proponents of the bill like to dismiss the affect it’s passage will have on the economics of raising livestock there. The California Veterinary Medical Association didn’t even consider it when they agreed to support the measure. I would imagine if there business was going to be more regulated by a proposed law that they would consider the economic impact it would have on their livelihood. However, it didn’t seem to concern them when it will hurt the livestock producers.
The November ballot is filled with hot-button proposals -- a proposed ban on gay marriage, a parental notification requirement for a girl to have an abortion, and an effort by city-dwelling animal lovers to tell farmers how to run their businesses.
OK, I put a negative spin on that last one, but it's the way that many people in agriculture see Proposition 2, the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act. The initiative affects three kinds of animals: egg-laying chickens, calves raised for veal and pregnant pigs. The act is vague, simply requiring "that an enclosure or tether confining specified farm animals allow the animals for the majority of every day to fully extend their limbs or wings, lie down, stand up and turn around." It would impose a fine of as much as $1,000 or six months in jail for violations. Read More
As I continue to monitor what is being said about Proposition 2 in California I have noticed that proponents of the bill like to dismiss the affect it’s passage will have on the economics of raising livestock there. The California Veterinary Medical Association didn’t even consider it when they agreed to support the measure. I would imagine if there business was going to be more regulated by a proposed law that they would consider the economic impact it would have on their livelihood. However, it didn’t seem to concern them when it will hurt the livestock producers.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Only Humans are Human
Ethics @ Work: Animal rights: Are they good for people?
Jul. 17, 2008
Asher Meir , THE JERUSALEM POST
Last week I wrote about Leona Helmsley's will, which left large sums for the care of animals. I claimed that it is technically as well as ethically impossible to actually bequeath the money directly to the animals. Technically, because animals don't have any legal standing; ethically because this technicality reflects the ethical reality that animals are unable to communicate their desires and therefore any human judgment regarding their welfare is necessarily conjectural.
This week we will learn that my point of view is not universally accepted, at least among people.
A prolonged legal battle is raging in Austria to get a 26-year-old chimpanzee named Pan declared a person, so that he may obtain a court-appointed guardian and hold property in his own name. An Austrian judge ruled earlier this year that apes are not humans, but a group of humans is appealing to the European Court of Human Rights on Pan's behalf.
And just a few weeks ago a parliamentary committee in Spain supported a bill that would give rights to great apes, making it illegal to deprive them of life and liberty. Thus, it would be illegal to use them in medical experiments or in films or circuses in Spain.
Technically, these provisions don't give animals rights; they only impose duties on human beings as is done all over the world. Animal-abuse statutes in many countries (though not in Spain) outlaw bullfighting, but that doesn't mean that bulls have rights. However, the rhetoric of the Spanish bill is a rhetoric of rights, and its supporters are vocally promoting an agenda of giving rights to great apes, and ultimately to other species. Read More
Lately, I have been selecting articles that show how some people and organizations have chosen to advocate for making animals equal to people, such as Spain’s decision to grant rights to apes. The author of this article sums up very well what I have been saying. Human rights should not be granted to animals. Doing so will begin negating what it means to be a human being.
Jul. 17, 2008
Asher Meir , THE JERUSALEM POST
Last week I wrote about Leona Helmsley's will, which left large sums for the care of animals. I claimed that it is technically as well as ethically impossible to actually bequeath the money directly to the animals. Technically, because animals don't have any legal standing; ethically because this technicality reflects the ethical reality that animals are unable to communicate their desires and therefore any human judgment regarding their welfare is necessarily conjectural.
This week we will learn that my point of view is not universally accepted, at least among people.
A prolonged legal battle is raging in Austria to get a 26-year-old chimpanzee named Pan declared a person, so that he may obtain a court-appointed guardian and hold property in his own name. An Austrian judge ruled earlier this year that apes are not humans, but a group of humans is appealing to the European Court of Human Rights on Pan's behalf.
And just a few weeks ago a parliamentary committee in Spain supported a bill that would give rights to great apes, making it illegal to deprive them of life and liberty. Thus, it would be illegal to use them in medical experiments or in films or circuses in Spain.
Technically, these provisions don't give animals rights; they only impose duties on human beings as is done all over the world. Animal-abuse statutes in many countries (though not in Spain) outlaw bullfighting, but that doesn't mean that bulls have rights. However, the rhetoric of the Spanish bill is a rhetoric of rights, and its supporters are vocally promoting an agenda of giving rights to great apes, and ultimately to other species. Read More
Lately, I have been selecting articles that show how some people and organizations have chosen to advocate for making animals equal to people, such as Spain’s decision to grant rights to apes. The author of this article sums up very well what I have been saying. Human rights should not be granted to animals. Doing so will begin negating what it means to be a human being.
Young Farmers and Ranchers
Energy prices hit agriculture especially hard, young farmers tell Congress
Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:34 PM MDT
Rapidly increasing energy prices are hitting agriculture harder than most sectors of the economy, several young Nebraska Farm Bureau leaders told the state’s Congressional delegation in visits to Capitol Hill. That makes the need for a comprehensive energy policy very apparent, they said.
“We’re not reaping the benefit of the high prices we’re seeing in the news,” Hilary Maricle of St. Edward, Farm Bureau Young Farmers and Ranchers Committee co-chair, said July 16. “Our input costs are offsetting the higher prices.”
Kristi Weeks of Juniata cited fuel, chemical and fertilizer costs which have increased more than 50 percent in one year. Her husband, Ryan Weeks, explained, “Four years ago my cost of production for a bushel of irrigated corn was $2. This year it will be about $3.40 and next year, more than $4.” Read More
Young farmers and ranchers are sometimes viewed as a mythical creature like Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster, everyone has heard of them but most people don’t think they really exist. But these young agriculturalists from Nebraska are making their presence known to our political leaders by telling their story and being involved in shaping their industry. Many times the things we do off the farm or ranch can be just as important to our survival as the things we do on our operations.
Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:34 PM MDT
Rapidly increasing energy prices are hitting agriculture harder than most sectors of the economy, several young Nebraska Farm Bureau leaders told the state’s Congressional delegation in visits to Capitol Hill. That makes the need for a comprehensive energy policy very apparent, they said.
“We’re not reaping the benefit of the high prices we’re seeing in the news,” Hilary Maricle of St. Edward, Farm Bureau Young Farmers and Ranchers Committee co-chair, said July 16. “Our input costs are offsetting the higher prices.”
Kristi Weeks of Juniata cited fuel, chemical and fertilizer costs which have increased more than 50 percent in one year. Her husband, Ryan Weeks, explained, “Four years ago my cost of production for a bushel of irrigated corn was $2. This year it will be about $3.40 and next year, more than $4.” Read More
Young farmers and ranchers are sometimes viewed as a mythical creature like Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster, everyone has heard of them but most people don’t think they really exist. But these young agriculturalists from Nebraska are making their presence known to our political leaders by telling their story and being involved in shaping their industry. Many times the things we do off the farm or ranch can be just as important to our survival as the things we do on our operations.
Cheyenne Frontier Days
Animal rights group targets popular Wyo. rodeo
By BOB MOEN
CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) — Western heritage runs deep in this high plains city, and nothing typifies the local cowboy and ranching culture more than the 10-day Cheyenne Frontier Days celebration, which boasts the world's largest outdoor rodeo.
Yet, as this year's "Daddy of 'Em All" rodeo gets under way this weekend, the event is fighting off allegations of animal cruelty, which prompted the rock band Matchbox Twenty to cancel a scheduled performance.
Animal-rights activists want certain rodeo events banned. Organizers and competitors are calling it an attack on Western tradition.
"I feel like it's like gun control. If you let him take one event, they're going to try to get another. And then, I think, it's just going to snowball from there," said Brian McNamee, a past rodeo competitor from Wyoming. Read More
Cheyenne Frontier Days has come under attack this year by a group that would like to get their foot in the door of eliminating this sport. Just as most of the people that would like to eliminate animal agriculture, these protestors fail to understand some of the things they are concerned about. Handling animals and their welfare will always be a top priority for the sport because without them there is no rodeo.
By BOB MOEN
CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) — Western heritage runs deep in this high plains city, and nothing typifies the local cowboy and ranching culture more than the 10-day Cheyenne Frontier Days celebration, which boasts the world's largest outdoor rodeo.
Yet, as this year's "Daddy of 'Em All" rodeo gets under way this weekend, the event is fighting off allegations of animal cruelty, which prompted the rock band Matchbox Twenty to cancel a scheduled performance.
Animal-rights activists want certain rodeo events banned. Organizers and competitors are calling it an attack on Western tradition.
"I feel like it's like gun control. If you let him take one event, they're going to try to get another. And then, I think, it's just going to snowball from there," said Brian McNamee, a past rodeo competitor from Wyoming. Read More
Cheyenne Frontier Days has come under attack this year by a group that would like to get their foot in the door of eliminating this sport. Just as most of the people that would like to eliminate animal agriculture, these protestors fail to understand some of the things they are concerned about. Handling animals and their welfare will always be a top priority for the sport because without them there is no rodeo.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Arizona Women in Agriculture Conference
Stacy and I spent last Friday at the Arizona Women in Agriculture Conference in Prescott and we had a blast. They had a very enthusiastic group of women there and it was obvious that they were very excited and committed to telling the story of agriculture.
Arizona Farm Bureau along with several other sponsors coordinated the event and we want to thank Peggy Jo Goodfellow and her team for the tremendous job they did hosting us.
There is nothing more invigorating for us than to be around other people that understand the importance of telling the positive story of agriculture to the consumer. No matter what you raise or how you raise it, it is imperative we remember that all of us are in agriculture together. Arizona agriculture is in good hands with the leadership and enthusiasm we witnessed there.
Troy
Arizona Farm Bureau along with several other sponsors coordinated the event and we want to thank Peggy Jo Goodfellow and her team for the tremendous job they did hosting us.
There is nothing more invigorating for us than to be around other people that understand the importance of telling the positive story of agriculture to the consumer. No matter what you raise or how you raise it, it is imperative we remember that all of us are in agriculture together. Arizona agriculture is in good hands with the leadership and enthusiasm we witnessed there.
Troy
Exploiting Women
Why does a pro-vegetarian organisation treat women like meat?
Josephine Tovey July 17, 2008
For an organisation that's so passionate about chicks, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has a shaky reputation with women.
On Monday the high-profile animal rights organisation held a demonstration out the front of the George Street KFC, involving three young women wearing nothing but lacy knickers and nipple tape in a cage with the sign "Chicks Agree: Boycott KFC".
PETA has also invited a former Big Brother housemate, Brigitte Stavaruk, to strip for its campaign, said a report in The Daily Telegraph yesterday. PETA offered the job to her because of her "big assets" - including her big personality, of course.
This is the sophisticated publicity technique the organisation has been perfecting over the past decade, with scores of their campaigns using the female body to try to raise awareness about animal rights. Not in a John-and-Yoko, dimply-bottoms-out-for-peace kind of way, but in a "put a hot naked chick next to a product you're trying to sell" way. Read More
I have always said that anti animal agriculture groups will place the human condition under that of animals. If they need to exploit women to accomplish their goals, the end justifies the means in their mind. But those of us that try to improve the lives of fellow human beings through our churches or charities are accused of “speciesism” by these groups. That’s one label, though, that won’t bother me.
Josephine Tovey July 17, 2008
For an organisation that's so passionate about chicks, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has a shaky reputation with women.
On Monday the high-profile animal rights organisation held a demonstration out the front of the George Street KFC, involving three young women wearing nothing but lacy knickers and nipple tape in a cage with the sign "Chicks Agree: Boycott KFC".
PETA has also invited a former Big Brother housemate, Brigitte Stavaruk, to strip for its campaign, said a report in The Daily Telegraph yesterday. PETA offered the job to her because of her "big assets" - including her big personality, of course.
This is the sophisticated publicity technique the organisation has been perfecting over the past decade, with scores of their campaigns using the female body to try to raise awareness about animal rights. Not in a John-and-Yoko, dimply-bottoms-out-for-peace kind of way, but in a "put a hot naked chick next to a product you're trying to sell" way. Read More
I have always said that anti animal agriculture groups will place the human condition under that of animals. If they need to exploit women to accomplish their goals, the end justifies the means in their mind. But those of us that try to improve the lives of fellow human beings through our churches or charities are accused of “speciesism” by these groups. That’s one label, though, that won’t bother me.
A Tragedy Exploited
Tony Snow's Cancer: Is There a Lesson for Us?
Posted on: Wednesday, 16 July 2008, 09:00 CDT
As a two-time cancer survivor, I would love to see Tony Snow's tragic death last week help raise awareness about colorectal cancer. The former White House press secretary was just three years younger than me and I know all too well how tough his battle was. Sadly, it's one that 50,000 Americans lose each year.
When famous people like Snow or journalist Tim Russert pass away, their deaths often inspire news coverage about their particular disease. That's good because it helps educate the public. Unfortunately, the articles often focus on early detection or the latest treatments.
As someone who detected her first cancer early and lives with many complications from various treatments, I know there's an infinitely better approach. It's cheaper, less painful, and comes with fewer side effects. It's called prevention. I would be thrilled if Tony Snow's death inspired a serious discussion about cancer prevention. That's the best hope any of us have for a long, healthy life.
One way we can help prevent cancer _ in addition to not smoking, keeping slim, exercising and not drinking _ is to eat right. But what constitutes "eating right" is often up for debate.
Food manufacturers and their lobbyists like to pretend that even the most unhealthful foods _ like hot dogs, bacon and other processed meats _ are OK in moderation. And anyone with a pepperoni addiction likes to pretend that jogging three miles a day will keep them healthy. But late last year, the game was up.
That's when two prestigious cancer research organizations _ the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research _ released a landmark report on diet and cancer risk. The scientists announced that when it comes to colon cancer, there is absolutely no amount of processed meat that's safe to eat. Read More
We probably should have seen this coming, a vegetarian using the death of Tony Snow to further their agenda. If you have watched the news at all over the last 20 years, everything causes cancer. Apparently just eating causes cancer along with breathing and sleeping. Using the tragic death of Tony Snow to promote vegetarianism is shameful.
Posted on: Wednesday, 16 July 2008, 09:00 CDT
As a two-time cancer survivor, I would love to see Tony Snow's tragic death last week help raise awareness about colorectal cancer. The former White House press secretary was just three years younger than me and I know all too well how tough his battle was. Sadly, it's one that 50,000 Americans lose each year.
When famous people like Snow or journalist Tim Russert pass away, their deaths often inspire news coverage about their particular disease. That's good because it helps educate the public. Unfortunately, the articles often focus on early detection or the latest treatments.
As someone who detected her first cancer early and lives with many complications from various treatments, I know there's an infinitely better approach. It's cheaper, less painful, and comes with fewer side effects. It's called prevention. I would be thrilled if Tony Snow's death inspired a serious discussion about cancer prevention. That's the best hope any of us have for a long, healthy life.
One way we can help prevent cancer _ in addition to not smoking, keeping slim, exercising and not drinking _ is to eat right. But what constitutes "eating right" is often up for debate.
Food manufacturers and their lobbyists like to pretend that even the most unhealthful foods _ like hot dogs, bacon and other processed meats _ are OK in moderation. And anyone with a pepperoni addiction likes to pretend that jogging three miles a day will keep them healthy. But late last year, the game was up.
That's when two prestigious cancer research organizations _ the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research _ released a landmark report on diet and cancer risk. The scientists announced that when it comes to colon cancer, there is absolutely no amount of processed meat that's safe to eat. Read More
We probably should have seen this coming, a vegetarian using the death of Tony Snow to further their agenda. If you have watched the news at all over the last 20 years, everything causes cancer. Apparently just eating causes cancer along with breathing and sleeping. Using the tragic death of Tony Snow to promote vegetarianism is shameful.
California Prop 2
Californians for SAFE Food Launches Campaign Opposing Proposition 2: 'The Un-SAFE Food Initiative'
SACRAMENTO, Calif., July 16, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ --
Californians for SAFE Food, a coalition of public health and food safety experts, labor unions, consumers, family farmers and veterinarians, today officially launched its campaign to oppose Proposition 2, the November ballot initiative that bans almost all modern egg production in California.
Dubbing Prop. 2 the "un-SAFE food initiative," Californians for SAFE Food also introduced its Web site, http://www.safecaliforniafood.org and released an updated list of organizations and individuals who have joined the opposition campaign.
"Proposition 2, quite simply, is an un-SAFE food initiative. It undermines California's current high food safety standards, putting us at greater risk with exposure to illness and disease like Salmonella and Bird Flu," said Julie Buckner, spokeswoman for the "NO on Prop. 2" campaign. "While the proponents claim the measure is 'moderate,' it is really a wide-sweeping, risky, and dangerous measure that will have costly, negative consequences for California." Read More
The ballot issue in California that will decide how farm animals can be raised in that state has been officially labeled as Proposition 2. While those that are striving to ban the use of cages claim this is a welfare issue, it really is a food and animal safety issue. With it’s passage, farmers and ranchers in California will lose their ability to effectively protect their animals from disease and will more than likely force the industry out of the state. It is vital that all of us in agriculture do what we can to stop it’s passage. This shouldn’t be viewed as a state issue, the outcome of this vote will have far-reaching implications nationwide.
SACRAMENTO, Calif., July 16, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ --
Californians for SAFE Food, a coalition of public health and food safety experts, labor unions, consumers, family farmers and veterinarians, today officially launched its campaign to oppose Proposition 2, the November ballot initiative that bans almost all modern egg production in California.
Dubbing Prop. 2 the "un-SAFE food initiative," Californians for SAFE Food also introduced its Web site, http://www.safecaliforniafood.org and released an updated list of organizations and individuals who have joined the opposition campaign.
"Proposition 2, quite simply, is an un-SAFE food initiative. It undermines California's current high food safety standards, putting us at greater risk with exposure to illness and disease like Salmonella and Bird Flu," said Julie Buckner, spokeswoman for the "NO on Prop. 2" campaign. "While the proponents claim the measure is 'moderate,' it is really a wide-sweeping, risky, and dangerous measure that will have costly, negative consequences for California." Read More
The ballot issue in California that will decide how farm animals can be raised in that state has been officially labeled as Proposition 2. While those that are striving to ban the use of cages claim this is a welfare issue, it really is a food and animal safety issue. With it’s passage, farmers and ranchers in California will lose their ability to effectively protect their animals from disease and will more than likely force the industry out of the state. It is vital that all of us in agriculture do what we can to stop it’s passage. This shouldn’t be viewed as a state issue, the outcome of this vote will have far-reaching implications nationwide.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Leona's Billions
Put Helmsley's billions to use in animal shelters
By DAVID MARTOSKO GUEST COLUMNIST
Pundits in India have a saying: "Those who do good in this life will come back in the next one as a dog in America." They might be on to something. As The New York Times reported this month, the $8 billion estate of the late hotel magnate Leona Helmsley is literally going "to the dogs."
This ostentatious act of pet philanthropy may seem bizarre. But the prospect of honoring Helmsley's dying wish shines a bright light on a national animal-welfare problem, and an even brighter one on the roadblocks impeding serious progress.
So far, two familiar national animal rights groups, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane Society of the United States have announced their intentions to claim big slices of the $8 billion bounty. But neither one has the track record to handle such a responsibility.
Look at how PETA has spent the money it already has: The group raised more than $30 million last year, and found adoptive homes for 17 animals. Just 17. Meanwhile, it killed 1,815 dogs and cats -- slightly more than the number of naked interns it sent out to "save" cows, chickens, and minks.
And although much of the public (and press) consider HSUS to be an actual "humane society," its record isn't any better. The group's name hides its lack of affiliation with any hands-on pet shelter anywhere in America. Of the $85-plus million HSUS spent in 2006, it gave only 4.2 percent to pet shelters. Read More
It’s interesting to me to read people’s comments on how to use this fortune to benefit animals. Granted, this was Helmsley’s money and she can do what she wishes with it, but imagine what $8 billion dollars could do to improve the human condition in this country. Animal shelters are no doubt strapped for cash most of the time, but so are community cupboards that many families rely on for food. But that is the mentality of these anti-agriculture groups, they put the welfare of animals over that of people.
By DAVID MARTOSKO GUEST COLUMNIST
Pundits in India have a saying: "Those who do good in this life will come back in the next one as a dog in America." They might be on to something. As The New York Times reported this month, the $8 billion estate of the late hotel magnate Leona Helmsley is literally going "to the dogs."
This ostentatious act of pet philanthropy may seem bizarre. But the prospect of honoring Helmsley's dying wish shines a bright light on a national animal-welfare problem, and an even brighter one on the roadblocks impeding serious progress.
So far, two familiar national animal rights groups, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane Society of the United States have announced their intentions to claim big slices of the $8 billion bounty. But neither one has the track record to handle such a responsibility.
Look at how PETA has spent the money it already has: The group raised more than $30 million last year, and found adoptive homes for 17 animals. Just 17. Meanwhile, it killed 1,815 dogs and cats -- slightly more than the number of naked interns it sent out to "save" cows, chickens, and minks.
And although much of the public (and press) consider HSUS to be an actual "humane society," its record isn't any better. The group's name hides its lack of affiliation with any hands-on pet shelter anywhere in America. Of the $85-plus million HSUS spent in 2006, it gave only 4.2 percent to pet shelters. Read More
It’s interesting to me to read people’s comments on how to use this fortune to benefit animals. Granted, this was Helmsley’s money and she can do what she wishes with it, but imagine what $8 billion dollars could do to improve the human condition in this country. Animal shelters are no doubt strapped for cash most of the time, but so are community cupboards that many families rely on for food. But that is the mentality of these anti-agriculture groups, they put the welfare of animals over that of people.
Bo's Appointment
Bo Derek appointed to Calif. horse racing board
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger named actress and animal rights activist Bo Derek on Tuesday to a state commission overseeing horse racing.
Derek, 51, was appointed to fill one of two vacant posts on the California Horse Racing Board, a position requires confirmation by the state Senate and pays $100 per diem.
Derek is a horse lover who has lobbied Congress for the past five years to ban the slaughter of the animals. She also owns the pet care products company Bless the Beasts, which sells such items as dog shampoos, conditioner and fur polish. Read More
Bo Derek is among a whole host of famous people who have pushed very hard in the public and also in Washington, DC to pass the horse slaughter ban. There is no doubt that she will use her new position to continue her efforts to tell you how you can manage your livestock.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger named actress and animal rights activist Bo Derek on Tuesday to a state commission overseeing horse racing.
Derek, 51, was appointed to fill one of two vacant posts on the California Horse Racing Board, a position requires confirmation by the state Senate and pays $100 per diem.
Derek is a horse lover who has lobbied Congress for the past five years to ban the slaughter of the animals. She also owns the pet care products company Bless the Beasts, which sells such items as dog shampoos, conditioner and fur polish. Read More
Bo Derek is among a whole host of famous people who have pushed very hard in the public and also in Washington, DC to pass the horse slaughter ban. There is no doubt that she will use her new position to continue her efforts to tell you how you can manage your livestock.
A New Spokesman
Matthew McConaughey Becomes Spokesman For Beef
July 16th, 2008
In a move sure to aggravate animal rights group PETA, Matthew McConaughey has thrown his support behind a new campaign promoting beef as the voice-over of their radio commercials.
McConaughey, whose girlfriend Camilla Alves just gave birth to their first child, is part of the new push to eat meat from the National Cattleman’s Beef Association.
Meghan Pusey, a spokeswoman for the organization said, “We are certain once consumers hear it, they will recognize the new voice for its endearing quality and it will reinforce their passion for beef and the protein body benefits it provides.”
There had been no response from PETA at the time of writing. Link
It seems pretty amazing these days when a celebrity is not out promoting a vegetarian diet or trying to tell people how we should raise livestock. While using celebrities to promote our products can be effective, the best advocates for agriculture are those of us working everyday on the farms and ranches across this country. Only you can tell your story.
July 16th, 2008
In a move sure to aggravate animal rights group PETA, Matthew McConaughey has thrown his support behind a new campaign promoting beef as the voice-over of their radio commercials.
McConaughey, whose girlfriend Camilla Alves just gave birth to their first child, is part of the new push to eat meat from the National Cattleman’s Beef Association.
Meghan Pusey, a spokeswoman for the organization said, “We are certain once consumers hear it, they will recognize the new voice for its endearing quality and it will reinforce their passion for beef and the protein body benefits it provides.”
There had been no response from PETA at the time of writing. Link
It seems pretty amazing these days when a celebrity is not out promoting a vegetarian diet or trying to tell people how we should raise livestock. While using celebrities to promote our products can be effective, the best advocates for agriculture are those of us working everyday on the farms and ranches across this country. Only you can tell your story.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
The EPA's Proposal
The EPA’s Blueprint for Disaster
Opponents of massive new energy taxes and regulations breathed a small sigh of relief last month when the Lieberman-Warner climate-tax bill went down in flames on the Senate floor. Even 10 Democrats broke from the party line and voted against it, writing that they would have opposed the bill on final passage. Unfortunately, power-mad bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency remain undaunted.
The EPA is expected today to release a document that blueprints a dizzying array of greenhouse-gas regulatory programs under dozens of different provisions of the 1970 Clean Air Act. The document, called an “Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,” will formally begin the process of implementing restrictions more draconian than those in the Lieberman-Warner bill — all without a single vote of Congress.
A 5-4 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA opened the door to this mischief, although that ruling was limited to motor-vehicle regulation. The EPA blueprint, judging by various leaked versions, goes far beyond that. At more than 200 pages, along with an appendix of more than 800 pages, it is a radical plan for reordering the entire U.S. economy. Read More
With no evidence that greenhouse gasses are actually having an effect on our climate or that regulating them could stop climate change if it is happening, the EPA seems to be willing to implement some outlandish regulations. While no one knows for sure if climate change is man-made, I can guarantee that these regulations would affect everyone.
Opponents of massive new energy taxes and regulations breathed a small sigh of relief last month when the Lieberman-Warner climate-tax bill went down in flames on the Senate floor. Even 10 Democrats broke from the party line and voted against it, writing that they would have opposed the bill on final passage. Unfortunately, power-mad bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency remain undaunted.
The EPA is expected today to release a document that blueprints a dizzying array of greenhouse-gas regulatory programs under dozens of different provisions of the 1970 Clean Air Act. The document, called an “Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,” will formally begin the process of implementing restrictions more draconian than those in the Lieberman-Warner bill — all without a single vote of Congress.
A 5-4 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA opened the door to this mischief, although that ruling was limited to motor-vehicle regulation. The EPA blueprint, judging by various leaked versions, goes far beyond that. At more than 200 pages, along with an appendix of more than 800 pages, it is a radical plan for reordering the entire U.S. economy. Read More
With no evidence that greenhouse gasses are actually having an effect on our climate or that regulating them could stop climate change if it is happening, the EPA seems to be willing to implement some outlandish regulations. While no one knows for sure if climate change is man-made, I can guarantee that these regulations would affect everyone.
Guilting Parents
New Rx for Kids is a Tough Pill for This Dad to Swallow
Posted on: Monday, 14 July 2008, 09:00 CDT
My daughter Kaitlyn is 8 years old. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, she's ready for cholesterol-lowering drugs. Yes, you read that right. In a move that has left many parents incredulous, the nation's pediatricians recently issued new guidelines calling for cholesterol screening of children as young as 2 _ and cholesterol drugs for kids as young as 8. Without intervention, the doctors say, today's overweight youngsters are doomed to become tomorrow's heart patients.
Do we really want to start our kids off on a decades-long regimen of drugs usually reserved for retirees?
A better solution, I think, is to teach kids to eat their veggies. Kaitlyn and her older sister, Gabriella, who is 13, are both vegetarian. Simply by eliminating meat from their diet, my daughters' risk of obesity and heart disease has been slashed. Studies show that meat-eaters are four times as likely to be obese as vegetarians are _ and 10 times more likely to suffer from heart disease. Read More
In an attempt to further push their anti-agriculture agenda, PETA is trying to guilt parents into forcing their children to adopt a vegetarian lifestyle. They are trying to convince parents that if you don’t have your children on a vegetarian diet that they will certainly suffer from a host of diseases and it will be your fault. The truth is that parents should encourage their children to eat a balanced diet and be active.
Posted on: Monday, 14 July 2008, 09:00 CDT
My daughter Kaitlyn is 8 years old. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, she's ready for cholesterol-lowering drugs. Yes, you read that right. In a move that has left many parents incredulous, the nation's pediatricians recently issued new guidelines calling for cholesterol screening of children as young as 2 _ and cholesterol drugs for kids as young as 8. Without intervention, the doctors say, today's overweight youngsters are doomed to become tomorrow's heart patients.
Do we really want to start our kids off on a decades-long regimen of drugs usually reserved for retirees?
A better solution, I think, is to teach kids to eat their veggies. Kaitlyn and her older sister, Gabriella, who is 13, are both vegetarian. Simply by eliminating meat from their diet, my daughters' risk of obesity and heart disease has been slashed. Studies show that meat-eaters are four times as likely to be obese as vegetarians are _ and 10 times more likely to suffer from heart disease. Read More
In an attempt to further push their anti-agriculture agenda, PETA is trying to guilt parents into forcing their children to adopt a vegetarian lifestyle. They are trying to convince parents that if you don’t have your children on a vegetarian diet that they will certainly suffer from a host of diseases and it will be your fault. The truth is that parents should encourage their children to eat a balanced diet and be active.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Improving our Cattle
SDSU dairy research considers history of methane emissions
By SDSU Extension
BROOKINGS, S.D. - Modern dairy cows produce more methane than their predecessors, but fewer dairy herds and a smaller dairy cow population has resulted in less overall methane emission.
South Dakota State University Extension Dairy Specialist Alvaro Garcia, along with James Linn, head of the University of Minnesota Department of Animal Science, looked at the role cattle and dairy cows play in methane emission.
Garcia and Linn presented their findings at the 2008 American Dairy Science Association meeting in Indianapolis.
They compared today's dairy herds to those of 1924, the first year U.S.Department of Agriculture cattle and dairy statistics were compiled. Read More
Agriculture has continually been improving its efficiency and this is a great look back at how far we have come. Being able to produce more with less is how we can continue to feed a growing population. This is another one of the great stories that agriculture has to tell.
By SDSU Extension
BROOKINGS, S.D. - Modern dairy cows produce more methane than their predecessors, but fewer dairy herds and a smaller dairy cow population has resulted in less overall methane emission.
South Dakota State University Extension Dairy Specialist Alvaro Garcia, along with James Linn, head of the University of Minnesota Department of Animal Science, looked at the role cattle and dairy cows play in methane emission.
Garcia and Linn presented their findings at the 2008 American Dairy Science Association meeting in Indianapolis.
They compared today's dairy herds to those of 1924, the first year U.S.Department of Agriculture cattle and dairy statistics were compiled. Read More
Agriculture has continually been improving its efficiency and this is a great look back at how far we have come. Being able to produce more with less is how we can continue to feed a growing population. This is another one of the great stories that agriculture has to tell.
Hugging Trees not Communities
Mineral County an unlikely, feisty player in national legal drama
Wednesday, July 09 2008 @ 07:51 AM MDT
by John Q. Murray
A small county along the Montana-Idaho border with 82 percent U.S. Forest Service land and a population hovering around 4,000 souls, Mineral County was an unlikely player in a national legal drama.
Wildfires that burned nearly 40,000 acres around Superior and in the Upper Ninemile in 2000 prompted the Forest Service to recommend a large-scale restoration and salvage project--the Lolo post-burn.
Just as the logging work was getting underway in February, 2003, two environmental corporations, the Ecology Center Inc. and Sierra Club Inc., filed separate lawsuits against the project. Read More
When groups file lawsuits just because they know that it will be tied up in court long enough that the timber will no longer be good enough to harvest, it is an incredible waste of natural resources. It’s also a shame that these groups can’t appreciate the importance of logging to the small communities that depend on it. They seem to place more importance on tree than a community of families.
Wednesday, July 09 2008 @ 07:51 AM MDT
by John Q. Murray
A small county along the Montana-Idaho border with 82 percent U.S. Forest Service land and a population hovering around 4,000 souls, Mineral County was an unlikely player in a national legal drama.
Wildfires that burned nearly 40,000 acres around Superior and in the Upper Ninemile in 2000 prompted the Forest Service to recommend a large-scale restoration and salvage project--the Lolo post-burn.
Just as the logging work was getting underway in February, 2003, two environmental corporations, the Ecology Center Inc. and Sierra Club Inc., filed separate lawsuits against the project. Read More
When groups file lawsuits just because they know that it will be tied up in court long enough that the timber will no longer be good enough to harvest, it is an incredible waste of natural resources. It’s also a shame that these groups can’t appreciate the importance of logging to the small communities that depend on it. They seem to place more importance on tree than a community of families.
Beef Makes for Good Blood Health
Blood donors urged to beef up iron
6 hours ago
TV chef Phil Vickery has called on barbecue enthusiasts to beef up their iron and donate healthy blood.
Vickery has joined up with the National Blood Service (NBS) in a bid to encourage people to eat iron-rich foods and do their bit to ensure Britain's blood banks are stocked up.
It comes after research showed that last year, one in 20 would-be donors were unable to give blood because the haemoglobin in their samples were too low. Read More
Beef is a great source of zinc, iron and protein, all of which are vital for a healthy, balanced diet. While some people like to claim that we could get along without eating meat, this shows the importance of this nutrient dense food. Eat beef, donate blood and save a life.
6 hours ago
TV chef Phil Vickery has called on barbecue enthusiasts to beef up their iron and donate healthy blood.
Vickery has joined up with the National Blood Service (NBS) in a bid to encourage people to eat iron-rich foods and do their bit to ensure Britain's blood banks are stocked up.
It comes after research showed that last year, one in 20 would-be donors were unable to give blood because the haemoglobin in their samples were too low. Read More
Beef is a great source of zinc, iron and protein, all of which are vital for a healthy, balanced diet. While some people like to claim that we could get along without eating meat, this shows the importance of this nutrient dense food. Eat beef, donate blood and save a life.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Domestic Terrorists
Animal activists attacking scientists’ homes
More protesters using firebombs, flooding, acid at researchers’ front doors
The Associated Press
updated 4:14 p.m. MT, Mon., July. 7, 2008
BERKELEY, Calif. - In the hills above the University of California's Berkeley campus, nine protesters gathered in front of the home of a toxicology professor, their faces covered with scarves and hoods despite the warm spring weather.
One scrawled "killer" in chalk on the scientist's doorstep, while another hurled insults through a bullhorn and announced, "Your neighbor kills animals!" Someone shattered a window.
Borrowing the kind of tactics used by anti-abortion demonstrators, animal rights activists are increasingly taking their rage straight to scientists' front doors. Read More
These terrorists continue to threaten researchers and the medical breakthroughs that could result from their research. These people shouldn’t have to live in fear because they are trying to improve the human condition. We cannot allow these terrorists to dictate how human medicine will advance in our society. That is why California, in particular, is developing new laws to afford more protection to these scientists.
More protesters using firebombs, flooding, acid at researchers’ front doors
The Associated Press
updated 4:14 p.m. MT, Mon., July. 7, 2008
BERKELEY, Calif. - In the hills above the University of California's Berkeley campus, nine protesters gathered in front of the home of a toxicology professor, their faces covered with scarves and hoods despite the warm spring weather.
One scrawled "killer" in chalk on the scientist's doorstep, while another hurled insults through a bullhorn and announced, "Your neighbor kills animals!" Someone shattered a window.
Borrowing the kind of tactics used by anti-abortion demonstrators, animal rights activists are increasingly taking their rage straight to scientists' front doors. Read More
These terrorists continue to threaten researchers and the medical breakthroughs that could result from their research. These people shouldn’t have to live in fear because they are trying to improve the human condition. We cannot allow these terrorists to dictate how human medicine will advance in our society. That is why California, in particular, is developing new laws to afford more protection to these scientists.
Tastes like Chicken
Forget free-range - the tastiest chickens are the ones in cages
By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:01am BST /07/2008
Food scientists assessed the quality of birds raised in a variety of conditions and found those that were intensively farmed had the best flavour, while those reared under organic guidelines were the least tasty.
Their findings contradict claims by campaigners who insist that organic and free-range chickens produce tastier, healthier meat because they have more freedom to move around and are given better food.
A panel of 10 taste experts sampled meat from 120 cage-reared, maize-fed, organic or free-range birds. They found the cage-reared chicken meat the least acidic, though it had a less attractive colour than other types. Dr Paul Warriss, who led the study at Bristol University's school of veterinary science, said: "In general, higher ratings were given for texture, juiciness, flavour and overall preference for meat from the birds reared in the standard system." Read More
Some animal rights activists have used the argument that the meat is better from birds that are raised outside, however this study disagrees. If some producers prefer to raise birds in a cage free system that is perfectly fine, but it is imperative that we all work together to defeat the ban on cages that Californian’s will be voting on this fall. Producers should have that choice.
By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:01am BST /07/2008
Food scientists assessed the quality of birds raised in a variety of conditions and found those that were intensively farmed had the best flavour, while those reared under organic guidelines were the least tasty.
Their findings contradict claims by campaigners who insist that organic and free-range chickens produce tastier, healthier meat because they have more freedom to move around and are given better food.
A panel of 10 taste experts sampled meat from 120 cage-reared, maize-fed, organic or free-range birds. They found the cage-reared chicken meat the least acidic, though it had a less attractive colour than other types. Dr Paul Warriss, who led the study at Bristol University's school of veterinary science, said: "In general, higher ratings were given for texture, juiciness, flavour and overall preference for meat from the birds reared in the standard system." Read More
Some animal rights activists have used the argument that the meat is better from birds that are raised outside, however this study disagrees. If some producers prefer to raise birds in a cage free system that is perfectly fine, but it is imperative that we all work together to defeat the ban on cages that Californian’s will be voting on this fall. Producers should have that choice.
Fertilizer
Market growing for Alpharetta firm's 'chicken litter' fertilizer
By DOUG NURSE The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 07/03/08
It's a fertile world for Organic Growing Systems in Alpharetta.
The newly formed company is cashing in on the rising price of synthetic fertilizer by specializing in reconstituted "chicken litter," as it's delicately put.
As the price of traditional, petroleum-based fertilizer skyrocketed 200 percent to 300 percent since 2005, more and more farmers and sod-growers are turning to natural alternatives, said Chris Nichols, the company CEO.
"Everyone is looking at us like we're the hot chick at the prom," said Marc Nichols, Chris' nephew and national sales manager. "Today we sold a third of what we did last year." Read More
At the same time there is a push by some people to have animal manure considered a toxic and hazardous material, the demand for it by consumers is growing by leaps and bounds. Because commercial fertilizer prices have been skyrocketing, the demand for manure has grown. It’s just another way that livestock producers are helping the environment.
By DOUG NURSE The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 07/03/08
It's a fertile world for Organic Growing Systems in Alpharetta.
The newly formed company is cashing in on the rising price of synthetic fertilizer by specializing in reconstituted "chicken litter," as it's delicately put.
As the price of traditional, petroleum-based fertilizer skyrocketed 200 percent to 300 percent since 2005, more and more farmers and sod-growers are turning to natural alternatives, said Chris Nichols, the company CEO.
"Everyone is looking at us like we're the hot chick at the prom," said Marc Nichols, Chris' nephew and national sales manager. "Today we sold a third of what we did last year." Read More
At the same time there is a push by some people to have animal manure considered a toxic and hazardous material, the demand for it by consumers is growing by leaps and bounds. Because commercial fertilizer prices have been skyrocketing, the demand for manure has grown. It’s just another way that livestock producers are helping the environment.
Monday, July 7, 2008
A Nation of "We Can't"?
Has anyone else noticed how we have become a nation of "we can't" as of late.
We can't drill for oil in Alaska because it will destroy the land. We can't drill for oil off our coasts because it will pollute the water. We can't use wind energy because nobody wants to look at those turbines and they harm the birds. We can't use nuclear energy because they will blow up. We can't use coal because it releases plant food (CO2) into the air. We can't build pipelines and refineries to make gasoline because they will leak.
We can't use modern farming techniques because they destroy the soil. We can't use chemicals to protect our crops because it is bad for people. We can't grow enough food to feed our planet because of ethanol. We can't use commercial fertilizers because they are made from fossil fuels. We can't use animal waste to fertilize because it contaminates water sheds.
We can't raise cattle because they release methane into the air. We can't raise any animals too close together because they produce too much waste. We can't use antibiotics to treat our animals because it will produce super bugs. We can't feed cattle corn because people need to eat it. We can't graze cattle on grass because they destroy riparian areas. We can't graze on public lands because of some endangered species. We can't raise poultry in an environementally controlled facility because it is cruel. We can't harvest animals for human consumption because it is inhumane and unethical.
When did "We Can't" become our national motto? I have had people question why Stacy and I spend so much time and energy trying to tell the story of agriculture because we can't stop the likes of HSUS and PETA from destroying animal agriculture in this country. I, however, believe that we can. If we all work together in agriculture, we can stop this movement in it's tracks. All of us need to realize that we are in this together.
Many of us in agriculture have several generations of the land in our blood. This did not happen because our ancestors said "we can't". We are the product of people that said "we can". And that is the one thing that the anti-agriculture groups have failed to take into account.
We can't drill for oil in Alaska because it will destroy the land. We can't drill for oil off our coasts because it will pollute the water. We can't use wind energy because nobody wants to look at those turbines and they harm the birds. We can't use nuclear energy because they will blow up. We can't use coal because it releases plant food (CO2) into the air. We can't build pipelines and refineries to make gasoline because they will leak.
We can't use modern farming techniques because they destroy the soil. We can't use chemicals to protect our crops because it is bad for people. We can't grow enough food to feed our planet because of ethanol. We can't use commercial fertilizers because they are made from fossil fuels. We can't use animal waste to fertilize because it contaminates water sheds.
We can't raise cattle because they release methane into the air. We can't raise any animals too close together because they produce too much waste. We can't use antibiotics to treat our animals because it will produce super bugs. We can't feed cattle corn because people need to eat it. We can't graze cattle on grass because they destroy riparian areas. We can't graze on public lands because of some endangered species. We can't raise poultry in an environementally controlled facility because it is cruel. We can't harvest animals for human consumption because it is inhumane and unethical.
When did "We Can't" become our national motto? I have had people question why Stacy and I spend so much time and energy trying to tell the story of agriculture because we can't stop the likes of HSUS and PETA from destroying animal agriculture in this country. I, however, believe that we can. If we all work together in agriculture, we can stop this movement in it's tracks. All of us need to realize that we are in this together.
Many of us in agriculture have several generations of the land in our blood. This did not happen because our ancestors said "we can't". We are the product of people that said "we can". And that is the one thing that the anti-agriculture groups have failed to take into account.
Animal Rights Groups Hope to Find a Cash Cow
Animal groups out to fetch part of Helmsley estate
NEW YORK (AP) — Animal welfare groups are set to try to fetch some of Leona Helmsley's vast fortune.
At least two groups are eyeing the hotel queen's estate — estimated to be up to $8 billion — following a report Helmsley wanted her fortune to go to the dogs.
The real estate baroness, sometimes called "The Queen of Mean" for the imperious way she treated her staff, died in August. The New York Times reported Wednesday that she left instructions that her estate be spent on the care and welfare of dogs.
While the instructions are not part of her will, and there may be wiggle room for the estate's trustees, the Times reported that courts consider expressions of intent.
The Humane Society of the United States and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said they will be suggesting programs and applying for funds if Helmsley's billions really end up funding dog welfare. Read More
The thought of HSUS getting their hands on $400 million is more than scary. Mainly because of how they would actually use it. Their claim is that they would use the money to help dogs, but they don’t operate any shelters. There are still investigations going on to discover what they did with the millions of dollars they raised in the name of helping animals in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. In addition to that, their own tax records suggest that less than 5% of their budget is used to help shelters that actually get their hands dirty working with animals. I seriously doubt their standard operating procedure would be changing if they acquired any of this money.
NEW YORK (AP) — Animal welfare groups are set to try to fetch some of Leona Helmsley's vast fortune.
At least two groups are eyeing the hotel queen's estate — estimated to be up to $8 billion — following a report Helmsley wanted her fortune to go to the dogs.
The real estate baroness, sometimes called "The Queen of Mean" for the imperious way she treated her staff, died in August. The New York Times reported Wednesday that she left instructions that her estate be spent on the care and welfare of dogs.
While the instructions are not part of her will, and there may be wiggle room for the estate's trustees, the Times reported that courts consider expressions of intent.
The Humane Society of the United States and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said they will be suggesting programs and applying for funds if Helmsley's billions really end up funding dog welfare. Read More
The thought of HSUS getting their hands on $400 million is more than scary. Mainly because of how they would actually use it. Their claim is that they would use the money to help dogs, but they don’t operate any shelters. There are still investigations going on to discover what they did with the millions of dollars they raised in the name of helping animals in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. In addition to that, their own tax records suggest that less than 5% of their budget is used to help shelters that actually get their hands dirty working with animals. I seriously doubt their standard operating procedure would be changing if they acquired any of this money.
Undermining Food Production
Greens add food production to their hit list
By Dennis T. Avery
web posted July 7, 2008
British diesel is a self-inflicted $12 per gallon, biofuels have nearly doubled their food prices, and 40 percent of U.K electrical power will be shut down over the next six years. Now, the same Green alarmists, who warn of man-made warming while the planet cools, demand sharp reductions in Europe's pesticide use. That will slash Europe's crop production in half during a global food emergency.
Is Green really the world's way forward?
Europe's Large Combustion Plant Directive will shutter 17 big generating plants in the UK alone for emitting too much CO2. Never mind that the earth has not warmed as the alarmists predicted—and has been actually cooling for 16 months in defiance of the climate models. Read More
Those that promote the claim of global warming say that the debate is over on the subject, and it seems that they are trying to claim to same thing when it comes to how we should produce food and fiber on our planet. The idea that we can feed the world with organic gardens is utterly ridiculous. Since humans figured out how to cultivate food, they have been trying to improve yields through technology, and that is the same story today. Whether it is developing a simple tool or deciphering a plant’s genetic code, every step along the way has improved our ability to grow food and that is something that will have to continue.
By Dennis T. Avery
web posted July 7, 2008
British diesel is a self-inflicted $12 per gallon, biofuels have nearly doubled their food prices, and 40 percent of U.K electrical power will be shut down over the next six years. Now, the same Green alarmists, who warn of man-made warming while the planet cools, demand sharp reductions in Europe's pesticide use. That will slash Europe's crop production in half during a global food emergency.
Is Green really the world's way forward?
Europe's Large Combustion Plant Directive will shutter 17 big generating plants in the UK alone for emitting too much CO2. Never mind that the earth has not warmed as the alarmists predicted—and has been actually cooling for 16 months in defiance of the climate models. Read More
Those that promote the claim of global warming say that the debate is over on the subject, and it seems that they are trying to claim to same thing when it comes to how we should produce food and fiber on our planet. The idea that we can feed the world with organic gardens is utterly ridiculous. Since humans figured out how to cultivate food, they have been trying to improve yields through technology, and that is the same story today. Whether it is developing a simple tool or deciphering a plant’s genetic code, every step along the way has improved our ability to grow food and that is something that will have to continue.
Tony Blair won't veg out
No need to give up meat to save planet: Tony Blair
Mon Jul 7, 2008 11:55am BST
LONDON (Reuters Life!) - Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has distanced himself from the idea that he should become a vegetarian as a way of highlighting the dangers of deforestation in his role as a climate change campaigner.
Blair, who is backing a plan for the world to halve greenhouse gases by 2050, said deforestation was responsible for producing four times as many as emissions as the airline industry.
"The destruction of tropical rainforests for conversion to farmland -- for meat and crops -- must be halted, and reversed," Blair told readers of the Independent in a question and answer session.
He was asked by one reader: "will you (therefore) go vegetarian and lead by example?"
Blair replied: "This does not mean the world has to give up meat." Read More
Tony Blair has resisted protesters calls for him to switch to a vegetarian diet. Apparently he hasn’t fallen for the bizarre notion that eliminating animal agriculture would somehow solve all of the world’s problems. The real story is that animal agriculture will be part of the solution for a world that will need more food as our population grows.
Mon Jul 7, 2008 11:55am BST
LONDON (Reuters Life!) - Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has distanced himself from the idea that he should become a vegetarian as a way of highlighting the dangers of deforestation in his role as a climate change campaigner.
Blair, who is backing a plan for the world to halve greenhouse gases by 2050, said deforestation was responsible for producing four times as many as emissions as the airline industry.
"The destruction of tropical rainforests for conversion to farmland -- for meat and crops -- must be halted, and reversed," Blair told readers of the Independent in a question and answer session.
He was asked by one reader: "will you (therefore) go vegetarian and lead by example?"
Blair replied: "This does not mean the world has to give up meat." Read More
Tony Blair has resisted protesters calls for him to switch to a vegetarian diet. Apparently he hasn’t fallen for the bizarre notion that eliminating animal agriculture would somehow solve all of the world’s problems. The real story is that animal agriculture will be part of the solution for a world that will need more food as our population grows.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Common Practice Considered Mutilation
FAWC concerns over ‘mutilation’ of lambs
By Joe Watson
Published: 02/07/2008
Concerns about the castration and tail-docking of millions of lambs were voiced yesterday by the independent Farm Animal Welfare Council.
It branded them painful mutilations and said farmers needed strong justification to continue carrying out both tasks.
The condemnation of age-old industry practices emerged in a new report from the independent FAWC, which advises UK agriculture ministers on welfare issues.
Farmers, however, argued that in many situations it is necessary to dock lambs’ tails to prevent flystrike – a debilitating animal welfare problem – and castrate male animals to avoid unnecessary pregnancies. Read More
When common practices like castration and tail docking are starting to be considered “painful mutilations” that should require “strong justification”, well then you can see the road that the UK is headed down. Practices such as these are extremely beneficial to the animal, and those around it, over the course of their lives. That is why producers started using these practices ages ago.
By Joe Watson
Published: 02/07/2008
Concerns about the castration and tail-docking of millions of lambs were voiced yesterday by the independent Farm Animal Welfare Council.
It branded them painful mutilations and said farmers needed strong justification to continue carrying out both tasks.
The condemnation of age-old industry practices emerged in a new report from the independent FAWC, which advises UK agriculture ministers on welfare issues.
Farmers, however, argued that in many situations it is necessary to dock lambs’ tails to prevent flystrike – a debilitating animal welfare problem – and castrate male animals to avoid unnecessary pregnancies. Read More
When common practices like castration and tail docking are starting to be considered “painful mutilations” that should require “strong justification”, well then you can see the road that the UK is headed down. Practices such as these are extremely beneficial to the animal, and those around it, over the course of their lives. That is why producers started using these practices ages ago.
Details get in Way of Global Warming
Are Volcanoes Melting Arctic?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Monday, June 30, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Climate Change: While the media scream that man-made global warming is making the North Pole ice-free, another possible cause is as old as the Earth itself. They just have to look deeper.
To the delight of Al Gore and the rest of the Gaia groupies, scientists at the National Snow & Ice Data Center in Colorado are predicting that the North Pole will be completely free of ice this summer. The apocalyptic headlines already are starting to appear.
"From the viewpoint of science, the North Pole is just another point on the globe, but symbolically it is hugely important," says the center's Mark Serreze. "There is supposed to be ice at the North Pole, not open water."
Icebergs breaking away and polar bears supposedly drowning are good theater, but they do not reflect reality. In April, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) published a study, based on last September's data, showing Arctic ice has shrunk from 13 million square kilometers to just 3 million.
What the WWF didn't mention was that by March of this year the Arctic ice had recovered to 14 million square kilometers and that ice-cover around the Bering Strait and Alaska was at its highest level ever recorded. Ice freezes. Ice melts. That's what ice does. Read More
Has anyone else noticed this trend of global warming advocates not sharing all of the details. Details like the fact that this melted ice will freeze back up, like there have been a string of volcanic eruptions under the ice, and 98% of Antarctica has been on a cooling trend. Those dang detail always get in the way, don’t they!
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Monday, June 30, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Climate Change: While the media scream that man-made global warming is making the North Pole ice-free, another possible cause is as old as the Earth itself. They just have to look deeper.
To the delight of Al Gore and the rest of the Gaia groupies, scientists at the National Snow & Ice Data Center in Colorado are predicting that the North Pole will be completely free of ice this summer. The apocalyptic headlines already are starting to appear.
"From the viewpoint of science, the North Pole is just another point on the globe, but symbolically it is hugely important," says the center's Mark Serreze. "There is supposed to be ice at the North Pole, not open water."
Icebergs breaking away and polar bears supposedly drowning are good theater, but they do not reflect reality. In April, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) published a study, based on last September's data, showing Arctic ice has shrunk from 13 million square kilometers to just 3 million.
What the WWF didn't mention was that by March of this year the Arctic ice had recovered to 14 million square kilometers and that ice-cover around the Bering Strait and Alaska was at its highest level ever recorded. Ice freezes. Ice melts. That's what ice does. Read More
Has anyone else noticed this trend of global warming advocates not sharing all of the details. Details like the fact that this melted ice will freeze back up, like there have been a string of volcanic eruptions under the ice, and 98% of Antarctica has been on a cooling trend. Those dang detail always get in the way, don’t they!
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Cows & the Environment
Hormone use may make dairy farming greener-US study
Mon Jun 30, 2008 5:24pm EDT
By Julie Steenhuysen
CHICAGO, June 30 (Reuters) - Using bovine growth hormones to boost milk production could help the dairy industry significantly reduce its impact on the environment, U.S. researchers said on Monday.
They said supplementing 1 million cows with the growth hormone recombinant bovine somatotropin or rbST would have the same effect as removing about 400,000 cars from the road or planting 300 million trees.
"That's a pretty substantial impact," said Dale Bauman of Cornell University, whose research appears in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Read More
The same groups that claim that animal agriculture is inefficient also fight and argue against technologies that improve efficiencies at the production level. Why? Because their goal is to eliminate our industry and anything that comes along that will mess with their argument has to be blown off as untrue. The efficiencies that we have gained in agriculture over the last 100 years is phenomenal and that is something that we should be proud of.
Mon Jun 30, 2008 5:24pm EDT
By Julie Steenhuysen
CHICAGO, June 30 (Reuters) - Using bovine growth hormones to boost milk production could help the dairy industry significantly reduce its impact on the environment, U.S. researchers said on Monday.
They said supplementing 1 million cows with the growth hormone recombinant bovine somatotropin or rbST would have the same effect as removing about 400,000 cars from the road or planting 300 million trees.
"That's a pretty substantial impact," said Dale Bauman of Cornell University, whose research appears in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Read More
The same groups that claim that animal agriculture is inefficient also fight and argue against technologies that improve efficiencies at the production level. Why? Because their goal is to eliminate our industry and anything that comes along that will mess with their argument has to be blown off as untrue. The efficiencies that we have gained in agriculture over the last 100 years is phenomenal and that is something that we should be proud of.
The War on Coal
Georgia Judge Cites Carbon Dioxide in Denying Coal Plant Permit
By MATTHEW L. WALD
Published: July 1, 2008
A judge in Georgia has thrown out an air pollution permit for a new coal-fired power plant because the permit did not set limits on carbon dioxide emissions.
Both opponents of coal use and the company that wants to build the plant said it was the first time a court decision had linked carbon dioxide to an air pollution permit.
The decision’s broader legal impact was not clear, either for the plant, proposed to be built near Blakely, in Early County, Ga., or for others outside Georgia, but it signaled that builders of coal plants would face continued difficulties in the court system as well as with elected officials in many states. Read More
Coal is one of our most abundant natural resources in this country. We have many centuries worth of coal available to us. With electricity demands always increasing, every proposed coal plant project has been met with lawsuits over the plant food (carbon dioxide) that they emit. At the same time, there are no guidelines to regarding the emissions of carbon dioxide. Why is it that those who like to complain about how our electricity is made are still more than happy to consume it?
By MATTHEW L. WALD
Published: July 1, 2008
A judge in Georgia has thrown out an air pollution permit for a new coal-fired power plant because the permit did not set limits on carbon dioxide emissions.
Both opponents of coal use and the company that wants to build the plant said it was the first time a court decision had linked carbon dioxide to an air pollution permit.
The decision’s broader legal impact was not clear, either for the plant, proposed to be built near Blakely, in Early County, Ga., or for others outside Georgia, but it signaled that builders of coal plants would face continued difficulties in the court system as well as with elected officials in many states. Read More
Coal is one of our most abundant natural resources in this country. We have many centuries worth of coal available to us. With electricity demands always increasing, every proposed coal plant project has been met with lawsuits over the plant food (carbon dioxide) that they emit. At the same time, there are no guidelines to regarding the emissions of carbon dioxide. Why is it that those who like to complain about how our electricity is made are still more than happy to consume it?
Don't Skip the Meat Case
Beef Is What's For Dinner
Your household budget may be taking a big hit. Not only because of the cost of fuel, but food. Because grocery prices are increasing at the fastest rate in almost 20 years, you may find yourself skimping on foods you normally stock up on. But there's one aisle you don't want to avoid.
The meat case at your grocery may seem more full than normal. That because as the price of oil goes up, so does the price of your favorite cuts of meat. But there is a way to stretch your dollar and still get this protein in your diet.
“If you're trying to get your protein needs and you're trying to skimp on your dollar there...you're not getting the nutritional benefits that you think you are,” says Holly Swee, Director of Nutrition for the South Dakota Beef Council. Read More
With the increases in the price of food, anti-animal agriculture groups are taking advantage of the situation to promote vegetarian diets as a way of lowering your grocery bill. But meat will always provide consumers with a very nutrient dense food source that is a key ingredient for a balanced diet.
Your household budget may be taking a big hit. Not only because of the cost of fuel, but food. Because grocery prices are increasing at the fastest rate in almost 20 years, you may find yourself skimping on foods you normally stock up on. But there's one aisle you don't want to avoid.
The meat case at your grocery may seem more full than normal. That because as the price of oil goes up, so does the price of your favorite cuts of meat. But there is a way to stretch your dollar and still get this protein in your diet.
“If you're trying to get your protein needs and you're trying to skimp on your dollar there...you're not getting the nutritional benefits that you think you are,” says Holly Swee, Director of Nutrition for the South Dakota Beef Council. Read More
With the increases in the price of food, anti-animal agriculture groups are taking advantage of the situation to promote vegetarian diets as a way of lowering your grocery bill. But meat will always provide consumers with a very nutrient dense food source that is a key ingredient for a balanced diet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)