Thank A Farmer

On Tuesday night's AgChat on Twitter a great idea was shared about how we can thank farmer and ranchers for the hard work they do growing our food. And with Thanksgiving this week, it couldn't come at a better time.

If you have a twitter account, please use the hashtag #thankafarmer on Wednesday morning and share what you are thankful for. The big effort to begin at 9am MST, but please feel free to thank a farmer all day long. Not only will this give everyone a chance to reflect on what great things farmers and ranchers produce that we should be thankful for everyday, but it will also help remind everyone else where their food comes from.

If you don't have a twitter account, please do the same thing on Facebook, or a blog if you have one. The point is we need to take the day before Thanksgiving to give thanks for all of our blessings, especially the safe, affordable, abundant food supply we enjoy in this country. It doesn't happen by accident, it happens because of the world's greatest farmers and ranchers that live in this country.

Thanks everyone and have a wonderful Thanksgiving!

Our Affordable Food Supply

The $4.29 Thanksgiving Dinner
Posted by Brad Tuttle TIME Magazine
Monday, November 23, 2009 at 10:48 am

We're not talking about using coupons or tricks to throw together a random cheapie meal. We're talking about the typical Thanksgiving feast, with turkey, cranberry sauce, rolls, stuffing, sweet potatoes, and pumpkin pie.

The American Farm Bureau (spotted via Consuming Interests, thanks) says that because prices have come down on certain foods, including turkey and milk, Thanksgiving dinner should be 4% cheaper than last year. In 2009, the average cost for a Thanksgiving dinner that feeds ten is $42.91, or about $4.29 a person. Last year, the average meal for ten was $44.61, $1.70 more expensive.

The price decrease is nice. But what stands out to me is that the day we gorge and eat and pass out and unbuckle our belts and eat some more isn't that expensive, even before food prices dropped. All you have to do is cook at home and your meals will be reasonably priced. It's as simple as that. Even if you occasionally go all out with an expensive piece of meat, cooking at home is still way cheaper than going out to eat, even at restaurants we all consider cheap.

As Jim Sartwell, an American Farm Bureau economist, says of the home-cooked Thanksgiving dinner:

Again this year, the cost per person for this special meal is less than a typical "value meal" at a fast-food outlet.

Think about that the next time you're pulling up to the drive-thru. Link

No where else on the planet can you feed so many people such a fantastic meal at such an affordable price. This is something we should be proud of, not ashamed of like some of our famous food elitists in the country try to tell you. We continue to produce this abundant, affordable food supply all the while maintaining the safest food supply in the world, growing it on less land and with less environmental impact. It’s an incredible story to tell and one that I am proud to be part of.

The Benefits of Modern Ag For Pigs

Study shows moving pigs inside has huge benefits
Nov 23, 2009 12:09 PM MST

COLUMBIA, MO(MU release) – A study by University of Missouri Extension swine experts shows that moving pigs indoors has led to improved health for pigs and higher-quality product for consumers.

Since the shift to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), veterinarians have seen a significant decline in parasites, said Beth Young, swine veterinarian with the University of Missouri Commercial Agriculture Program. Young spoke at the 2009 Swine Institute in Columbia, Nov. 10.

The Commercial Agriculture Swine Focus Team looked at changes in the swine industry since 1945.

In the 1940s, 55-70 percent of pigs were infected with lungworms. By the 1970s lungworm outbreaks only affected about 11 percent of farms. "In the past decade, lungworms are rarely seen," Young said.

"Likewise, 78-94 percent of pigs were infected with kidney worms in the 1940s, and now infestations are rarely seen," she said. Read More

It’s more than annoying to hear the anti-agriculture crowd try claiming that modern livestock housing is unhealthy for our animals. Even without these scientific studies, farmers and ranchers can easily see what methods for raising livestock allow them to be more comfortable. But it’s studies like these that we need to combine with our own stories to share with our consumers.

New Uses For Livestock Products

Waste not, want not: Companies find uses for leftover animal parts
By Greg Latshaw, USA TODAY

A growing number of companies are turning their attention to creating renewable products — such as adhesives and plastics — from the animal parts that can't be sold on supermarket shelves.

From plastics made from feather protein to diesel fuel made from fat to organic fertilizer made from poultry litter, the USA's top meat producers are developing new uses and markets for the animal parts that humans won't eat, says Tom Cook, president of the National Renderers Association in Alexandria, Va.

For years, those parts have ended up in cosmetics, soap, pet food and animal feed. Now, meat companies are putting more resources into sustainability programs, says Paul Rutledge of the American Meat Institute's sustainability committee.

At Clemson University, such products are being tested at the South Carolina school's Animal Co-Products Research & Education Center, says center Director Annel Greene.

Greene says there are a number of uses for the leftover materials that have yet to be discovered. "It's fascinating to see everything that can be done," Greene says. Read More

Most people may not realize it, but we get so much more than just meat from our livestock. Virtually nothing is wasted and even more and better uses are being discovered. Livestock play an integral part in our lives. That’s why it is so reckless for people to advocate eliminating animal agriculture. The fail to account for all the things other than food that we need them for, especially things like life-saving medicines.

Farm-City Week

Farm/City Week Tackles Livestock Myths vs. Facts
National panel clarifies animal welfare issues.
Tom Bechman
Published: Nov 20, 2009

Anyone present in the audience at the kickoff of National Farm/City Week Thursday, Nov 19 or listening via Agri-Talk radio got the message loud and clear. Farmers and groups that work with farmers are realizing that it's time to fight back against so-called animal welfare groups who issue damaging videos and spew half-truths. And the best way to fight back is for farmers and ranchers to tell their own story.

"One of our goals is for farmers and ranchers to sit down and tell the story of agriculture whenever they can," says Roger Berry, field director for the Alliance for the Future of Agriculture in Nebraska. "The other goal we have as an organization is to work with farmers and ranchers who want to bring a son or daughter back home into the operation, and find a way to do it. Often that involves turning to livestock to generate more income."

"When consumers ask questions about where their food comes from or if it's safe, that's a great opportunity to talk," Berry says. That's when we need to have farmers tell their stories."

While opponents of livestock agriculture, such as PETA and the Humane Society of the United States, are good at evoking emotion by placing disturbing videos on places like YouTube, ag supporters can do the same thing, Berry says. And many already have. There are plenty of YouTube videos on line today that show farmers doing the job of animal care the right way.

"The opposition looks for a bad actor and wants the public to think that's what all of livestock agriculture is like," he continues. "There will always be bad actors in any industry. But for every bad actor, there are thousands of farmers and ranchers out there doing things right." Read More


It’s Farm-City Week and there’s probably no more appropriate time to have it than during the week prior to Thanksgiving. I hope that in your own way, you will help spread the real story of agriculture this week. Along with that, please remember all of the people that are responsible for our ability to enjoy Thanksgiving. Our military and our farmers and ranchers are the reason we will be enjoying this holiday. Don’t forget about them in your prayers.

Cattlemen Dealing With Many Issues

WINDMILL: Cattlemen bristle at EPA, USDA rules
By Jerry Lackey
Saturday, November 21, 2009

SAN ANGELO, Texas — An unbelievable number of issues confront not only the cattle business but agriculture as a whole, says Colin Woodall, vice president of government affairs for National Cattlemen’s Beef Association in Washington, D.C. But one of the biggest concerns is the Environmental Protection Agency’s dust rule.

“The EPA is proposing a tenfold reduction in the thresholds of what they call coarse particle matter, which is EPA talk for agricultural dust,” Woodall said in a recent interview during the 65th annual National Association of Farm Broadcasters convention.

“We’re talking about everything that comes out of the back of a cotton stripper or a combine (dust, leaves and harvest debris), cows that are milling around in the lot, even dust kicked up from pickup tires while driving down the ranch road,” Woodall said. “They would all be in violation of EPA’s clean air rules.” Read More

There certainly are many issues facing agriculture, and animal agriculture in particular. In my mind it highlights the need for producers to become involved in helping shape the solutions to these problems. It’s more important than ever to be active in an agriculture organization that represents your views. Your involvement can’t end there though, you need to be politically active as well by contacting your elected officials to share your thoughts and let them know how pending legislation might affect your ability to produce food and fiber. I was reminded again this weekend that politics is a contact sport. If you have been sitting on the sidelines, please suit up and get on the field!

Producing Affordable Food is Key

November 21st, 2009 07:32am
Who can afford $7.50 a pound for turkey?
by Inside.Opinion

Food for thought: I got a call on Friday from Arnie Riebli, a fourth-generation Sonoma County farmer and co-owner of Petaluma-based Sunrise Farms, one of the top egg producers in the state. We talked about the front-page story about the Thode family raising heritage turkeys on their Sebastopol ranch.

“I know I’m not objective about the whole thing,” he said. “But I read the news media every day. Animal agriculture is under attack. And then I read about . . . 70 turkeys selling for $7.50 a pound and in other parts of the country people are going hungry.”

His question: Are we being realistic about our expectations of food production and what people can afford?

It’s a fair concern. At $7.50 a pound, a 15-pound turkey is going to cost $112.50. Who has that kind of money? A Safeway ad this week was offering turkeys for 88 cents a pound.

Riebli doesn’t raise turkeys, and he said he has nothing against a family that wants to raise heritage turkeys as a hobby. He just gets concerned when people see stories like this as a solution to society’s food needs. Read More

As we head into Thanksgiving this week, I am certainly grateful that my family doesn’t have to worry about where our next meal is coming from. It’s not because we are extremely wealthy, it’s because America’s family farmers and ranchers are producing the safest, most affordable, most abundant food supply in the history of the planet. It’s unfortunate though that this very food supply is under attack by elitists who are pushing to make it less affordable. There is no doubt that our family wouldn’t be enjoying our Thanksgiving turkey if it cost more than $100. I have absolutely no problems with those that are raising this more expensive food. If it’s a model that works for them and they are filling a demand that is there, then that’s great. I just don’t want people to think these type of systems are the way we will feed an ever growing planet.

MT Producers on Billboards

Montana Farm Bureau's billboard campaign: A new face for agriculture
By TERRI ADAMS, The Prairie StarWednesday, November 18, 2009 3:52 PM CST


Tired of the negative image being portrayed regarding animal agriculture, the Montana Farm Bureau Federation is fighting back - one billboard at a time.The billboards, with a photo and slogan, are part of a year-long campaign by the MFBF to put a face on agriculture and show that producers really do care for their animals.

The newest billboard was unveiled in Missoula, Mont., on Nov. 9, just in time for the MFBF Convention held there.Using funding provided by the Montana Beef Council, the Montana Farm Bureau Federation has previously posted billboards in Billings, Mont. MFB members have also posted road signs across the state on highways and byways, from Custer to Dillon and from Ronan to Glasgow.

“We're trying to combat the negative image of animal agriculture that has come up in the press lately,” said Sue Ann Streufert, director of member relations at MFBF. “We want people to know we truly care for our animals.”When they received the funding from the Beef Council, the idea to use it for billboards and road signs was already established.

“We do a lot of radio advertising already and we talk about how farmers and ranchers care for the land,” Streufert said. “With this funding we wanted to reach a different market and we wanted to plant visual images in the minds of the people. Seeing something is very different than just hearing a radio ad.”

The MFBF wanted to use photos of real producers working with their own animals. “Honestly, using a professional photograph to take photos never crossed our mind,” she said. Read More

You have probably heard me say in the past even though agriculture can’t compete dollar for dollar with these extremely wealthy, we have something that their money can’t buy. It’s our people in agriculture that are priceless and our friends in Montana are cashing in on it. We absolutely have to keep showing our consumers that there are real farmers and ranchers still out on the land. It sounds crazy to those of us that are out here, but many of those not still connected to the land don’t realize that. They continue to hear that all of agriculture is being run by large corporations and that just isn’t the truth. Congratulations to the farming and ranching families of Montana for their great efforts.

Researching Animal Welfare

Researchers ask: Are caged chickens miserable?
'Researchers ask: Are caged chickens miserable?';
By MICHAEL J. CRUMB Associated Press Writer
Published: Thursday, November 19, 2009 at 4:11 a.m. Last Modified: Thursday, November 19, 2009 at 4:11 a.m.

DES MOINES, Iowa - Are cramped chickens crazy chickens?

Researchers are trying to answer that question through several studies that intend to take emotions out of an angry debate between animal welfare groups and producers.

At issue are small cages, typically 24 inches wide by 25 1/2 inches deep, that can be shared by up to nine hens. About 96 percent of eggs sold in the United States come from hens who live in the so-called battery cages from the day they're born until their egg-laying days end 18 to 24 months later.

Public opinion appears to side with those who oppose the cages. Voters in California approved a proposition last year that bans cramped cages for hens. And Michigan's governor signed legislation last month requiring confined animals to have enough room to turn around and fully extend their limbs.

But even as Skewes and others conduct research, some question the need to study an issue they argue was resolved long ago.

Bruce Friedrich, a spokesman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, said banning the cages is a solution to an obvious problem.

"Think about the ... effects of not moving for up to 24 months," Friedrich said. "Their bones and muscles waste away and they go insane."

Paul Shapiro, senior director of the Humane Society of the United States' Factory Farming Campaign, agreed.

"The egg industry is trying to muddy the waters by misleading people into believing that it's possible to confine birds in barren, tiny cages and have high welfare," he said. Read More

It seems that this article really shows the true colors of those of us in agriculture and those that are pushing an animal rights agenda. I have never heard anyone in agriculture speak against research that might further our knowledge of animal care like they are hoping to accomplish with this study. The HSUS and PETA, on the other hand, are upset that this study is going to be done. It’s disappointing, but not surprising that these animal rights groups aren’t interested in it.

Another Reckless Vegan Advocate

Drop That Burger
Matthew Herper, 11.12.09, 12:20 PM EST
Forbes Magazine dated November 30, 2009
Biotech whiz Pat Brown makes the global-warming case against animal farming.

Patrick O. Brown, a Stanford University biochemist, has changed science twice by giving stuff away. In the early 1990s Brown invented the DNA microarray, a tool that measures how cells make use of their DNA; he then showed researchers how to make their own, transforming genetic research. In 2000 he was one of three scientists who launched a free, online scientific journal called the Public Library of Science (PLOS); it has already broken the stranglehold of $200-a-year scientific publications like Science and Nature.

Now he is tackling an even bigger foe. Over the next 18 months Brown, 55, will take a break from his normal scientific work (finding out how a small number of genes are translated into a much larger number of proteins) in order to change the way the world farms and eats. He wants to put an end to animal farming, or at least put a significant dent in our global hunger for cows, pigs and chickens.

Brown, who has been a vegetarian for more than 30 years and a vegan for 5, notes that while livestock accounts for only 9% of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions, it accounts for 37% of human-caused methane (most of it emanating from the animals' digestive systems) and 65% of human-caused nitrous oxide, according to the Food & Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Both are far better at trapping heat than carbon dioxide, meaning that cows, chickens and their ilk have a larger greenhouse effect than all the cars, trucks and planes in the world.

The green cognoscenti are choosing animal husbandry as their new enemy. Read More

I don’t know why it’s so hard for such smart people to understand the fact that forcing a vegetarian only diet on society would be a much bigger environmental and social disaster than the one they perceive we have today. Turning your back on the resources of 3/4 of the land mass of the world that is currently used for grazing would spell doom. Not only would there not be enough food for everyone to eat, but it would also force us to try farming on land that isn’t suitable for that type of activity. Cattle turn an un-usable natural resource into something that can sustain human life. Not to mention the valuable nutrients they produce that we use to fertilize crops.

Food Safety Involves Everyone

November 19, 2009
Senate Bill Would Require E. Coli Testing
By MICHAEL MOSS

Citing public concern that meat companies and federal regulators are not doing enough to make ground beef safe, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, has introduced legislation that would require companies to test for a deadly E. coli strain.

The bill, the E. Coli Eradication Act of 2009, is focused on the slaughterhouse trimmings and other meat components commonly used to make ground beef. It would require testing at the slaughterhouses and then at grinding facilities before the trimmings are mixed.

A few companies, including the retail giant Costco, already test incoming trimmings at their grinding facilities, but most of the industry relies on slaughterhouses to test their own trim. Grinders that do their own spot checks typically wait to test the finished product after the trim is mixed, which prevents identifying the source of contamination.

The testing required by the legislation would increase the cost of producing ground beef by about a penny a pound, a spokesman for the senator said. The United States Department of Agriculture, which in 1994 banned the sale of ground beef tainted by O157:H7, has encouraged meat companies to test their products for the pathogen. In the absence of such a rule, meat companies have adopted varied practices and testing protocols. Read More

Regardless of whether or not this legislation passes, it wouldn’t necessarily change the safety of our food supply. The reason is that proper handling and cooking guidelines must still be followed by the consumer. All the testing known to man won’t make a difference if the final handler of the product doesn’t do their part to keep the food safe. If you want to guarantee the safety of the meat you are eating, all you have to do is cook it to the proper temperature and you will never have anything to worry about. And that doesn’t cost anything to do. I believe that we need to do what we can at every stage of production to protect the safety of our food supply, but consumers have to hold up their end of the bargain as well. That goes for all types of food.

Biotech's Contributions

Biotech crops making important contributions to food production & sustainable farming

Wednesday, 18 November 2009 22:44
PG Economics
www.pgeconomics.co.uk

In the light of ongoing world food security, agricultural sustainability and climate change debates, PG Economics has released three summary documents of the yield, income and environmental effects of biotech crops . These summaries are supplemented by more detailed examinations of these impacts in the latest report on the global socio-economic and environmental impacts of the technology 1996-2007 .

The three summaries document the real contribution of biotech crops to; improving global crop yields, increasing production (and estimated contributions to food security), improving farm income and reducing the environment ‘footprint’ of agriculture.

Key impacts are:

• Biotech crops have contributed to significantly reducing the release of greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural practices. In 2007, this was equivalent to removing 14.2 billion kg of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or equal to removing nearly 6.3 million cars from the road for one year;

• A reduction in pesticide spraying (1996-2007) of 359 million kg (equivalent to 125% of the annual volume of pesticide active ingredient applied to arable crops in the European Union);

• There have been substantial net economic benefits at the farm level amounting to $10.1 billion in 2007 and $44.1 billion for the twelve year period. The farm income gains in 2007 is equivalent to adding 4.4% to the value of global production of the four main biotech crops of soybeans, corn, canola and cotton;

• Of the total farm income benefit, 46.5% ($20.5 billion) has been due to yield gains, with the balance arising from reductions in the cost of production;

• Farmers in developing countries obtained the largest share of the farm income gains in 2007 (58%) and over the twelve year period obtained 50% of the total ($44.1 billion) gains. Developing country farmers have also seen the largest increases in farm income on a per hectare basis from using the technology;

• Since 1996, biotech traits have added 67.8 million tonnes and 62.4 million tonnes respectively to global production of soybeans and corn. The technology has also contributed an extra 6.85 million tonnes of cotton lint and 4.44 million tonnes of canola;

• The average yield gains across the global area planted to biotech insect resistant corn and cotton (1996-2007) were over 6% and 13% respectively. The highest yield gains have been experienced by developing country farmers;

• The additional production arising from biotech crops (1996-2007) has contributed enough energy (in kcal terms) to feed about 402 million people for a year (additional production in 2007 contributed enough energy to feed 88 million, similar to the annual requirement of the population of the Philippines);

• If GM technology had not been available to the (12 million) farmers using the technology in 2007, maintaining global production levels at the 2007 levels would have required additional plantings of 5.9 million ha of soybeans, 3 million ha of corn, 2.5 million ha of cotton and 0.3 million ha of canola. This total area requirement is equivalent to about 6% of the arable land in the US, or 23% of the arable land in Brazil. Link

Here are some very interesting numbers that show how much modern agricultural techniques have improved our ability to produce food and fiber. With a limited amount of natural resources, specifically land, available on this planet, we must continue to improve our efficiency and productivity.

Farmers Donating Food

Big pork donation first of many
Million Meals program officially underway
Updated: Tuesday, 17 Nov 2009, 11:43 AM EST Joe Michelotti

FORT WAYNE, Ind. (WANE) - The Community Harvest Food Bank got a big donation, Tuesday, from Indiana's pork producers.

Indiana Pork is partnering with Feeding Indiana's Hungry, Inc ., to donate one million pork meals to Indiana food banks.

Fort Wayne's Community Harvest Food Bank will get about 90,000 lbs.

On Tuesday, the food bank accepted the first shipment of 5,000 lbs.

"They've always been generous, but this couldn't have come at a better time for us," said Jane Avery, Community Harvest Food Bank Executive Director.

With Thanksgiving coming up, Avery says she expects the pork to be gone by next Wednesday.
Indiana Pork announced the Million Meals program in August at the Indiana State Fair.

"This is the first time the Indiana Pork industry is tackling the problem of hunger on a coordinated statewide basis," said Randy Curless, Indiana Pork President.

Officials at Indiana Pork hope the donation helps Indiana lead the way when it comes to feeding the hungry.

"There's no reason anyone in our state should go without a meal," said Michael Platt, Executive Director of Indiana Pork. "We're encouraging all of our partners in agriculture to join us to help make Indiana the first hunger free state in the nation." Link

I absolutely love sharing stories like this. Farmers and ranchers have always been outstanding members of their communities and it continues today. When we see our neighbors struggling to put food on their table, we all know the right thing to do is share the blessings we enjoy. If you haven’t supported your local food bank in the past, I would really challenge you to do so now. There is a great need right now for people to donate food or your time. It’s always a very rewarding experience.

Animal Welfare In Modern Production

Speaker: Meat animals likely to stay in confinement settings
By ART HOVEY / Lincoln Journal Star Posted: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:00 pm

Despite increasing criticism from animal rights and welfare groups, Tim Amlaw doesn't expect to see the gates thrown open in livestock confinement settings in Nebraska and other prominent livestock states.

The typical chicken is not going back to scratching his way across the barnyard and the typical hog is not going back to burying himself up to his snout in his favorite mudhole.

Amid rising worldwide demand for food, "a concentrated system of production is going to be a necessity," Amlaw, based in Colorado as director of the farm animal program for American Humane, said in Lincoln Tuesday.

He expects demand to also dictate production systems "that keep costs reasonably low."

Amlaw's appearance at the 2009 Nebraska Cattlemen Beef Industry Issues Summit comes at a time when new laws in California, Michigan and other states are taking aim at cages for laying hens, gestation crates for pregnant hogs, and other tight spaces used for food animal production.

Read More

Reassuring consumers that our livestock are well cared for is always going to be an important thing. And every farmer or rancher that I know is always trying to make the care of their livestock even better. Modern livestock facilities can offer the higher level of care to our animals. It allows for more individualized care and closer monitoring. Animal welfare is a top priority, if it becomes anything less than that you will not be able to keep the family farm going. Successful family farms depend on high quality animal care.

AR Activists Jailed For Protecting Criminals

Twin Cities activists in Iowa jail after being found in contempt
Star Tribune
Last update: November 17, 2009 - 10:18 PM

Two political activists from Minneapolis were jailed in Iowa Tuesday for refusing to answer questions before a federal grand jury apparently investigating a five-year-old animal-rights vandalism incident.

The activists, Carrie Feldman and Scott DeMuth, were found in contempt of court by U.S. District Judge John Jarvey and placed in custody of the U.S. Marshall's Service.

rand jury deliberations are generally secret, but the organization backing Feldman and DeMuth said they were wanted for questioning about vandalism that occurred at the University of Iowa in November 2004.

The Animal Liberation Front claimed responsibility for vandalizing two labs and three offices at the University of Iowa on Nov. 14, 2004. Read More

Even though we continue to hear from many vegans that they only support “legal” protests, these attacks and the refusal to cooperate with the authorities to bring the criminals to justice continue. You shouldn’t have to resort to terrorist activities in order to share your opinions.

Vandals Kill 3800 Pigs In Iowa

Suspected act of vandalism kills 3,800 Northwest Iowa pigs

By Dolly A. Butz dbutz@siouxcityjournal.com Posted: Monday, November 16, 2009

HULL, Iowa -- A suspected act of vandalism at a hog confinement near Hull that caused the deaths of thousands of pigs last week has puzzled authorities.

"We have no idea why somebody would do something like this," Sioux County Sheriff Dan Altena said Monday.

According to Altena, someone entered the facility, 2739 Highway 75, and intentionally turned off the confinement's airflow and alarm systems sometime during the overnight hours last Thursday, causing 3,800 pigs to suffocate.

"These confinements have an alarm system that if something goes bad with the air handling unit it telephones to a certain location," Altena said. "They shut down both of those."

At 10:30 a.m. Friday, owner Todd Hasche, of rural Rock Rapids, Iowa, called police and reported that all of the feeder pigs at the facility were dead and that someone had tampered with the confinement's airflow system. Read More

It’s almost hard to read this story. Farmers and ranchers put everything they have into taking care of their crops and livestock and then on a whim, some criminal comes along and destroys it all. Hopefully they catch whoever is responsible for this very soon. To go along with this, does anyone think HSUS will come in and offer a reward on this case? If someone intentionally killed a dog or a horse in this manner, they would have already done so. I guess I won’t hold my breath, but it shows the hypocrisy of this group.

Update:
The HSUS did finally come forward with the offer of a reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of these criminals. Thanks to my friend Sarah at HSUS for sending me the information. Now if we could only get them to reverse their policy and stated goals of eliminating all animal agriculture and forcing a vegan diet on everyone.

Whackos Prefer Fish over Food & Families in CA

Radical environmentalism threatens Fresno area agriculture, shut down water supply
November 16, 6:33 AM Fresno Public Policy Examiner Jeff Crow


California's agriculture industry is facing a potential meltdown due to radicalized environmentalists who have made it clear a three inch fish is to take precedent over people.

What the environmentalists (especially the "whackos" in the movement) are doing could actually end up backfiring in their faces. It's estimated that over 24 Million California residents in 3 major areas (Silicon Valley, Central Valley/Fresno and Los Angeles) will be "shut off" from our state's water system and on top of that, we're only getting 10% of the water allotment for Agriculture, which means were going to export far less food to other states and countries, which will then cost jobs at Supermarkets, Trucking and other ancillary businesses that rely upon this water and Fresno/Clovis CA's Ag goods which rely upon this water.

But hey, what does millions of job losses factor on the overall health of the economy. This point was brought up to some extent in a recent interview I did with the Former Mayor/Current City Councilman of the City of Clovis, CA.

Accorrding to to him, its the base industry for Fresno/Clovis and that "we need to think of the dollars and cents that are in this situation" while Mario Santoyo of the California Latino Water Coalition, who I talked to also, said "if California's agricultural breadbasket in the Central Valley continues to abide by a Federal Judge's ruling, it will only be a matter of time before the price of ag goods will skyrocket, we'll probably have to further import and thus enrich a Communist China which has taken entire sectors of the US economy or the nation will become such a starving country that we will literally be storming the White House and forcing the Washington DC politicians to vastly reform the ESA, or Endangered Species Act." Read More

It really does boil down to priorities in dealing with our water supply. Is a tiny fish more important than the families that live in those communities? Well to some animal rights activists, I’m sure the answer is yes. However, the fact of the matter is that our food supply and the families that grow it and eat it should carry some weight in these discussions. Food does not magically appear. It takes water to make it happen.

Forcing Reforms Could Mean Failure

A world without roast beef: who wants that except McCartney and Stern?
Targeting meat eaters in the fight against climate change alienates ordinary people and won't save the planet on its own
Nick Herbert
guardian.co.uk, Monday 16 November 2009 17.30 GMT



Sir Paul McCartney arrived in Brussels yesterday to recruit support for his "meat-free Mondays" campaign. The argument seems so easy: cut down meat consumption and the planet will be saved.

But even if a world without roast beef was one in which we all wanted to live (please count me out), we need to think a little harder about what will really work to arrest global warming. Why are Mondays to be free of meat alone? After all, dairy cattle produce greenhouse gases as well as milk. Are we meant to become part-time vegetarians or vegans? And why single out meat? Asia's rice fields emit the same amount of methane as their livestock industry. It seems doubtful that a campaign for rice-free Tuesdays will be next.

The call last month by the government's former climate change adviser, Lord Stern, to give up meat-eating altogether could almost have been calculated to reduce public support for climate change action. In fact, the people's response, according to a subsequent opinion poll, was to deliver Stern a loud raspberry. But the reputational damage to a vitally important cause may have been more serious. Read More

Forcing these reforms, which haven’t been shown will even make a difference, down the throats of people won’t work. The best way to get everyone to buy into these carbon reducing ideas is to offer common sense options that won’t sacrifice our food and energy needs. If the quality of life drops for everyone at the expense of climate change theories, then it will be resented by most and will fail.

Are You Telling Your Story?

Ranchers fight animal activists
Beef consumer study helps cattlemen tell their story, boost battered image
By MATTHEW WEAVER
Capital Press

PASCO, Wash. -- Tom Field doesn't mind if consumers think a little differently, so long as they're eating beef.

In the midst of a fragmented consumer market, Field, the producer education executive director of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, presented marketing measures the beef industry needs to take during the Washington Cattlemen's Association annual convention in Pasco, Wash.

Consumers are besieged by negative messages from animal activists, said Field, a Centennial, Colo., rancher.

However, the majority of consumers do not necessarily change their beef consumption behavior, an association study showed.

"(Our) enemies want to paint us into this realm of being these unfeeling, uncaring industrialists running a chemical company," Field said. "I say to every reporter, 'On our ranch, we would love being able to control just one variable.' We react to the market, the weather, policy and our urban development neighbors. We don't have control over nothing, except our attitudes."

Field recommended that the best tactic to battle negative campaigns is to personalize the industry, promoting an image of good people with a legacy of caring for their animals, the environment and their land.

"People want to hear your story," Field said. "It's the best story you have to tell." Read More

I know that some people may be getting tired of hearing that they need to go tell their story. But unfortunately, until everyone is out doing something, we have to keep emphasizing the importance of doing so. Now I know that some folks don’t think they have the opportunities to talk to our consumers. That’s simply not true. The best place to start is in your own local communities. Even in our rural communities, there are people that don’t understand how their food is grown. If that isn’t a big enough stage for you, then take your advocacy online and share with the entire world how you grow food and fiber. It doesn’t matter so much what you are doing, so long as you are doing something to advocate for agriculture. Our consumers are asking for this so let’s deliver it.

ELF/ALF Members Considered Terrorists

Domestic crimes may be considered ‘terrorist’ acts
by David Ziemer
November 12, 2009
Wisconsin Law Journal

Radical environmentalists may not see themselves as terrorists, but asked whether a terrorism enhancement applies to their sentences for destroying government property, the Seventh Circuit found the issue clear cut.

On Nov. 9, the court affirmed application of U.S.S.G. 3A1.4 to members of the Earth Liberation Front who destroyed several research projects at a U.S. Forest Service facility in Rhinelander.

In 2000, the defendants, Katherine Christianson and Bryan Rivera, and two others entered the facility and damaged or destroyed more than 500 trees that were part of a genetic engineering experiment, either by cutting them down or girdling them. (“Girdling” consists of removing a strip of bark from around a tree’s entire circumstance, causing eventual death.)

Christianson and Rivera were implicated in 2007, when one of the other conspirators was arrested for the attempted bombing of the Michigan Tech University campus.

Before addressing the merits, Judge Manion cautioned, “ELF and its members are not to be confused with the typical environmental protestor denouncing and peacefully demonstrating against such things as nuclear power, strip coal mining, cutting old-growth timber, offshore drilling, damming wild rivers, and so on.”

Instead, Manion observed, “ELF’s members take their activism to unconscionable levels: since ELF’s inception in 1987, its members have been responsible for bombings, arson, vandalism, and a host of other crimes. In fact, between 2000 and 2005, 43 of the 57 reported terrorist attacks committed on American soil were done by ELF members or their sister organization, the Animal Liberation Front. ELF’s terror attacks have caused over fifty million dollars in damage to public and private property.” Read More

If you are going to use violence, property destruction or threaten a person’s life in the name of your environmental or animal rights cause, you are going to be labeled a terrorist and dealt with accordingly. There terrorists are finding that out and hopefully others in their groups will realize this isn’t a game.

Ex-Vegetarian Dancing Better With Balanced Diet

'Dancing's Mya 'no longer a vegetarian'
November 13 2009, 3:29pm EST
By Oli Simpson

Mya has revealed that she has turned her back on vegetarianism in a bid to stay on top form for Dancing With The Stars.

The singer claimed that a meat-free diet left her exhausted when she started rehearsing for the talent show.

She told OK: "I am eating more protein now - I used to be a vegetarian!

"So I'm eating lots of chicken and beef. I splurge on carbs like mac and cheese, mashed potatoes, rice and gravy, bagels - the list goes on!" Link

Doesn’t it seem odd that myself and others get attacked by vegan/vegetarians for advocating a diet that is balanced to contain the proper amounts of food from every food group? Yet here is someone that found out just how important that is. If you want to have a strong body and mind, you need to properly fuel it.