If Americans Weren't So Spoiled, We'd Appreciate Horse Meat

image from here

 

We're spoiled. You're spoiled. I'm spoiled - Americans in general are spoiled. No, this isn't a political rant. Those things don't belong on a blog and frankly, there are few very bloggers who are actually qualified to rage against "the man" without looking stupid.

Americans are spoiled by our endless food choices and although it's great to live in a country with abundant, cheap food it has definitely spawned some spoiled, whiny folks who want all people to eat the same way.

Except no two people have the same dietary requirements, restrictions, desires or tastes. Additionally, no two people have the same income restraints that play a massive role in the quality, quantity and type of food that ends up in the refrigerator. There are folks like the Ninja who will eat pretty much anything (except cottage cheese) and then there are folks like me who like meat, carbs, meat, dairy, meat and fruit [and meat]. It's asinine to try to force us to eat the same things because I would starve and he would inflate like a balloon from eating all the things I didn't want.

I previously blogged that this restaurant in Philadelphia was going to be serving horsemeat on its menu. However, the chef/owner recently decided to take horsemeat off the menu because he was receiving death threats. Why is it ok to threaten to kill humans over animal lives? I will never understand how folks can have so much hate built up against others.

Furthermore, regardless of the fact that Valley Meat Company in Roswell, New Mexico, has met all the requirements for federal inspection and have been given the "everything is OK" checkmark, the USDA still hasn't sent an inspector to the plant. Why are so many people dragging their feet? This is an opportunity to jumpstart the economy in Roswell and improve the welfare of unwanted horses.

I've already listed the advantages of horse slaughter but if you don't want to go back and read my previous posts on the topic, I've written them again below:

1. Job creation - The plant would create approximately 100 jobs for Roswell area residents and during an economic recession when so many folks are wishing for a decent job - voila! Reopening plants will increase the number of jobs and boost local economies.

2. Exports - the U.S. slaughtered 94,000 horses in 2005, the last full year of horse slaughter before federal inspection funding was repealed in 2007. Without a slaughter plant in the U.S., more than 197,000 horses were exported to other North American countries last year for slaughter. That's double the number from 2007 slaughter exports. What does that mean?

3. Animal Welfare - It means thousands of horses have endured excruciatingly long drives to Canada or Mexico on trains or trucks that aren't exactly the most welfare-friendly. Opening a slaughter plant in the U.S. would prevent thousands of horses from being improperly transported across U.S. borders.

4. Horse meat is a delicacy - maybe not to you or I, but in several other countries around the world horse meat is consumed quite often and is a staple in many diets. The U.S. is missing out on valuable export dollars by not opening horse slaughter plants. For example, between January and November of 2012, the UK imported ~$80,000 worth of horsemeat into the UK. That doesn't include the rest of the EU, Japan, China or the Asia-Pacific region. In short, this could provide a boost to the total agriculture GDP. Every little bit helps right?

Growing up, our parents told us to mind our own business if said business didn't affect us. I believe the same rules apply to those who are opposed to horse slaughter, but will never eat horse meat, own a horse or have a stake in the industry and are simply chiming in because they think eating horsemeat is wrong. If the horsemeat is just to be exported to other countries, why invest so much time and pure hatred towards those trying to improve the local economy, welfare of horses and provide more protein to a hungry world.

I deeply care about not only my own horses, but about every other horse in the U.S. I am a lifelong horse owner and will fight for measures that improve the welfare of those animals who are unwanted.

So again, I ask you - what do you think? Weigh in below.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

Get Ready - Here Comes Horse Slaughter!

Here - you can listen to this while you read this. A little pep in your step.



It seems that horse-slaughter starting up in the U.S. is not as far off as it may have seemed.

Valley Meat Company in Roswell, New Mexico may only be weeks away from accepting horses for slaughter. The plant has submitted its application for federal meat inspection services under the "equine" option according to reports.

There are several positive outcomes from Valley Meat Company re-opening their doors for horse slaughter:

1. Job creation - The plant would create approximately 100 jobs for Roswell area residents and during an economic recession when so many folks are wishing for a decent job - voila! Reopening plants will increase the number of jobs and boost local economies.

2. Exports - the U.S. slaughtered 94,000 horses in 2005, the last full year of horse slaughter before federal inspection funding was repealed in 2007. Without a slaughter plant in the U.S., more than 197,000 horses were exported to other North American countries last year for slaughter. That's double the number from 2007 slaughter exports. What does that mean?

3. Animal Welfare - It means thousands of horses have endured excruciatingly long drives to Canada or Mexico on trains or trucks that aren't exactly the most welfare-friendly. Opening a slaughter plant in the U.S. would prevent thousands of horses from being improperly transported across U.S. borders.

4. Horse meat is a delicacy - maybe not to you or I, but in several other countries around the world horse meat is consumed quite often and is a staple in many diets. The U.S. is missing out on valuable export dollars and that meat by not opening horse slaughter plants. For example, between January and November of 2012, the UK imported ~$80,000 worth of horsemeat into the UK. That doesn't include the rest of the EU, Japan, China or the Asia-Pacific region. In short, this could provide a boost to the total agriculture GDP. Every little bit helps right?


Unfortunately, there are those who aren't involved in animal agriculture or the horse industry (as I am) who wish to quell horse slaughter once and for all. This article reports that four lawmakers from the states of Louisiana, South Carolina, Pennsylvania and Illinois introduced legislation to ban horse-killing for human consumption in the U.S. and prohibit transporting the animals outside the country for slaughter. Furthermore, USDA said it encouraged Congress to reinstate the ban on funding inspections.

This just confuses me - I don't understand why so many people are against a federally regulated and inspected humane slaughter process for horses. If the ban goes through, I can almost guarantee more of this.

Those are my thoughts and you know I'll keep you updated on what's going down with horse slaughter (see what I did there?). In the mean time, what are your thoughts? Think horse slaughter is a good idea?

For more of my posts about horse slaughter check out the posts below:

Legislation to Help Horse Slaughter
Horse Slaughter Funding Reinstated 
Who Are We to Judge Horsemeat?
HSUS and PETA - Lover's Quarrel 


Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

Animal Welfare and AgChat - Questions Answered!

 Fresh, clean bedding for new baby lambs in the middle of winter = great animal care

For those of you who are unfamiliar with AgChat, it's a weekly conversation held on Twitter in which anyone can ask questions revolving around a predetermined topic. The topics change every week and the participants change often too - all are welcome to engage and communicate. Tomorrow night, be sure to search #agchat around 7 pm CST and join in on the convo!

Now that we're all on the same page, I must admit that very rarely is there a topic on AgChat in which I have enough expertise to positively contribute. Soil conservation, generational planning, herd management - these things don't play a role in my life yet. They will in the future, but for now it's me, the Ninja and a few select domesticated animals that rock out at the FroBuzz Ranchero.

However, AgChat on January 22 was right up my alley. The topic was animal welfare and since I have a M.S. in animal behavior, well-being and health, I consider myself relatively knowledgeable on the topic. But, insert a wedding anniversary and a KSU vs KU basketball game and participating in AgChat was made impossible. Shucks.

My solution is to answer all the questions from the 22nd in this blog post - there were about 15 questions and I'm going to answer them here to the best of my ability and in my opinion (I"ll even try to stick to 140 characters per 'tweet'). I would love to have you all chime in and contribute your own thoughts and ideas as well!

Q1 - Please tell us about farm and ranch efforts to care for animals in the frigid temps much of the country is experiencing.
A -- Increase bedding in shelters, make sure that adequate shelter is provided and increase forage intake to increase body heat. #animalwelfare

Q2 - To farmers & ag peeps, how many nonfarm folks have you had convo with regarding farming methods in last three months?
A -- Approx five. Was at a bach party and topic of grass-fed vs grain-fed beef came up. Made sure everyone knew that all #beef is raised humanely

Q3 - How has the livestock industry improved animal welfare over the past decade.
A - Better handling facilities in the race, more efficient and safer ways of stunning. Less stressful handling has been developed i.e. quieter

Q4 - What are some of your best practices for speaking with opposing groups about animal welfare? Do's and Don'ts?
A - Don't preach. Do be honest. Don't get defensive. Do find common ground and work from there. Don't attack opposition. Verbally or otherwise

 Even though this horse is dirty (he likes to roll), he isn't being poorly cared for. It's muddy outside but he is in out of the wind and is fat; meaning he has access to lots of food which keeps his body temp up during cold weather.

Q5 - Animal welfare is something that can be hard to explain. How would you describe it?
A - The overall wellbeing of an animal. Physiological responses, behavior patterns & health status in one collective term. VERY hard to measure.

Q6 - What are the public's biggest concerns when it comes to animal welfare?
A - Industrial farming, antibiotics and slaughter plants. No question about it.

Q7 -What is the perceived value of of certifications such as Animal Welfare Approved & Certified Humane?
A - Cert is valuable but issue is if people will pay for it. Many see labeling and feel good abt purchase, even if they don't know what it means

Q8 - How can we encourage veterinarians to be more engaged in talking about animal welfare?
A - My initial thought is that they are so busy on office and farm calls they probably don't have time to chat.
A - But on 2nd thought, talking to small animal vets who don't have a lot of large animal background could help in the long run.

Q9 - How much value do producers actually put on the results of animal welfare research?
**This was my question, so I'll post my answer and few other answers that were provided**
A (mine) - depends if they 'approve' of the investigator/company/institution that funded the research. Everyone plays politics, unfortunately.
A - (from farmerhaley:)  Q9 - A LOT! The methods in which farmers use to care for their animals today all evolved out of available research. #agchat

A - from (diana_prichard:) Q9 Value is dependent on methodology. If the research is sound, I put a tremendous amount of value in it. #AgChat

A -  from (judgingcoach:) Q9: Research is only as good as the people doing it. Non-producers regularly question how it's paid for/who's putting it out? #agchat

 ** There will be a blog post regarding that last answer early next month**

 

Q10 - What are the biggest public misconceptions about farm animal welfare?

A - Where to start!?  nutrition, health care, housing, handling etc. Slaughter houses, antibiotics and nutrition are the big ones in my mind.

A - Bigger is bad or cruel. If a farmer has more than 50 animals it makes them a corporate jerk. Technology shouldn't be allowed in animal ag. 

Q11 -  Why do farmers and ranchers spend so much time, $$ and effort to keep animals healthy?
A - Because it's the right thing to do and farmers and ranchers have souls like everyone else.
A - Also, healthier animals are more productive and yield more. This means more food for a hungry world.

Q12 - How are animal welfare and antibiotic usage in livestock related.
A - Both are about responsibility at their very core. And both also contribute to a stronger, healthier and more productive animal.

Q13 - Let's help each other. Who are the animal welfare experts you recommend learning more about or from?
A - Well, I am one so first I try to come up with an answer myself. But I've worked with Temple Grandin on projects and learned a lot from her.
A - Bud Williams is also an animal handling pioneer and has some great methods.

Q14 - How can animal agriculture be more proactive in welfare?
A - Allow more tours of slaughter plants and handling facilities. Public is afraid of unknown. Make them familiar & they'll be more accepting

Q15 - This year, I will personally do ____ to foster convo regarding animal welfare.
A - I will do a better job of posting more animal welfare related posts that are easy to comprehend and can connect with consumers better.
** I think this post is a good work on my answer for number 15**

So those are my answers - if you want to see what the rest of the Twitterverse said regarding animal welfare, you can check out the archives.

Anyone want to add anything? Discuss methods, my answers, your opinions? Any non-ag folks out there with questions about animal handling or processing? I went to school to answer questions just like this and have worked, done trials and seen different methods in lots of different settings and would love to chat with you! Feel free to ask me any questions regarding animal behavior or welfare and I'll do my absolute best to answer them!

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

PETA Targets Kids With Christmas Billboard

Apparently, PETA knows no bounds. They have now taken to targeting children with their venomous lies about animal agriculture and the most recent incident is a billboard that poses the question:  "Kids, if you wouldn't eat your cat, why eat a turkey?"

I can answer that - a cat is a pet. It sleeps on your bed, eats mice (yuck) and coughs up hairballs.

Turkey, on the other hand, is a farm animal that was created by God for consumption. They eat grain in a farm setting and wild turkeys eat acorns, seeds, flower buds, insects etc. I'd much rather eat some grain, acorn or insect fed turkey than a cat that eats rodents. I've eaten bugs before but I would have to be pretty desperate to eat rat.

The video also says that PETA hopes kids will choose tofurkey for Christmas dinner.

Scuse me? You've got to be freakin' kidding me. Most kids will eat what is put on their plate but I don't know a single child who would request tofurkey over real turkey. People be crazy these days.

Check out the video below - what do you think? Has PETA crossed the line....again?



I'm starting to believe that PETA is desperate for people to take them seriously. I think they need some serious PR help.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

Animal Rights Activists Aren't Stupid

There are A LOT of people out there who make comments like "those guys are such idiots" and "they're so stupid - why do they act that way?" in regards to  animal rights activists. This is infuriating on two levels.

1) Animal rights activists are NOT dumb, contrary to popular belief. The board of directors and the leadership of The Humane Society of the United States are comprised of lawyers, MBAs, PhDs (in biochemistry, wildlife ecology and management and economics) veterinarians, doctors, CPAs and individuals with history and literature degrees (cough: Wayne Pacelle and Mark Markarian). These folks are most assuredly not stupid. I have a Masters of Science in Animal Science and it was a rough process and journey in my life. Getting a PhD is not any easier.  

 PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals - by the way, I don't know anyone who isn't for the ethical treatment of animals) is not much different. 'Leaders' armed with degrees in communications, journalism and accomplished debaters man the helm of perhaps one of the most extreme animal rights groups in the world.

2) I have said before how I am a very passionate person about a few things: rodeo, agriculture, K-State and my family. Because of this personality characteristic (which some cite as a flaw), I have deep respect for others who show that same amount of passion towards their hobbies and causes. Unfortunately, that respect flows over to people who want to put my family and I out a job. Ironic, eh? So these folks may be misguided - they don't rely on proven science when it comes to livestock production and they do crazy stunts to get people's attention - that's passionate and smart, even if it is misguided.

By thinking that the other side is stupid, we're putting them at a huge disadvantage. Underestimating our opposition is a costly mistake. Growing up playing softball, basketball, volleyball and roping I was taught to never underestimate the talent of the other team/individual. Just because someone may not consistently be winning doesn't mean they won't whup you if you're not playing your best. You see it in college sports all the time - the underdog wins by a small margin because the bigger, better team thought it would be a cakewalk (cough: KU here, here and here).

 Lastly, although they may be extreme, the actions taken by groups like PETA are effective because they garner hordes of media attention and they go after celebrities who don't align with their views. Here are a few examples:
 - Convincing Calvin Klein to stop designing with fur after leading a raid of his office, 
 - Pressuring GM to stop using animals in crash tests by storming the auto company’s float in the Rose Parade
 - Lobbying Gillette to halt tests on animals by wheeling a TV into the company’s cafeteria to show graphic undercover footage of the gruesome experiments.

Don't forget stunts like this:

 or this

 or this

and this commercial that somehow tried to connect veganism and bedroom activites (although it was met with harsh criticism as being too sexually abusive in nature).



These were all smart campaigns and they won't stop happening. The sooner that we as agriculturalists stop saying "they're stupid" and start respecting their ingenuity and meeting it head on with our own intelligent acts, the sooner we can make headway on our own endeavors. I know that agriculture is doing a much better job than we were 5 years ago at outreach and engagement but we can always do better.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~


As usual, this is my sole opinion and is not reflective of any other entity or individual's thoughts or ideas.

OH! and p.s. - I am not a fashionista and this is not a fashion blog but I was so proud of myself for putting together a professional outfit that I just have to post it here! If you want real fashionista looks check out Sheridan's blog

 Dress: Banana Republic  - clearance at Outlet Store (it has pockets!!)

Shoes: Guess - courtesy of Rebecca Acheson

Necklace - Francesca's Collections in blue (turquoise is gone)

Cuff - Maurices

Turquoise Ring - South African gift from hubsy

 

What's in That Chicken McNugget?

 photo from here

I've been asked this question before on the blog - most recently in a comment from this post. And I've always forgotten to answer it; sorry, I'm not perfect and sometimes I forget. But McDonald's of Canada has stepped up to the plate and become completely transparent in regards to what is in their products. They have recently invited their customers to pose their questions online at Our Food. Your Questions. and boy are the inquiries rolling in.

Some of the more popular questions are - my synopsis is in italics, but to read the word-for-word detailed answers, visit the website.

-- How is it that a McDonald's burger does not rot? Too dry; not enough moisture for bacteria/mold.
-- Does Canada use pink slime? (which I hate saying but that is verbatim - the actual term is lean, finely textured beef) No.
-- Does your egg McMuffin use real eggs? Yes - a freshly cracked egg for every sandwich.
-- Inside the McNugget, is it actually the meat of the chicken or cut offs that nobody would actually want to eat? Answer (verbatim): It's definitely chicken inside our McNuggets. We use seasoned chicken breast and a few seasonings, along with a natural proportion of skin for flavour and as a binder.

I hope that clears up any misconceptions about random chicken parts.

 One of my faves is, "Would you live in the life of one of your cows for even a week?" That'll make you take a deep breath! McDonald's has yet to answer that one but you can see the answers to the above questions and more by following the link to the Your Questions website.

I applaud McDonald's for taking this approach to helping consumers make connections between their food and the way it's produced/prepared. You should definitely go over and look at some of the other questions being posed and maybe even ask one of your own.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

Another One Bites the Gestation Crate Dust

While the rest of the U.S. is abuzz about a case of BSE being found in California - something I am not scared about at all, since I know the safety of our food supply (more on that here) - I am more concerned about this recent piece of news.

Burger King becomes first US national chain to pledge cage-free pork, eggs

That's right, another chain has jumped on the bandwagon.

I recently wrote an article about the quickly disappearing use of gestation crates in the U.S. and worldwide on http://swineweb.com.  I won't paste that article here because I want you to visit the site so please do so by clicking on this link.

The state of our animal agriculture industry concerns me - I hope that I never live to see the day that a real live Hunger Games era exists.

Until next time (probably two weeks),
~ Buzzard ~

Pigs Raised Outdoors Have Lots of Room to Grow

BUT they also have tons of enemies that would love a tasty pork rind to munch on....

Yesterday, we brought home Ferdinand. That won't really be his name, most likely it will change when we give the pig to the Ninja's sisters but I like 'F' names; they're cute. Anyway, Ferdinand is very friendly. He likes to root around in the dirt and run in the straw. I'm sure he'd enjoy being out in the woods by our house.

Guess what else lives in the woods by our house? and surrounds us on all sides because we live in the middle of the glorious, rolling Flint Hills.

That's a canis latrans, more affectionately known as a coyote. And they are everywhere. Last night, they were howling, barking and yipping up a storm. The dogs were barking back - it was chaos.

And you can bet that lil ole 25 lb. Ferdinand wouldn't stand a chance against Wile E. Coyote if he was out roaming around.

Which is why we raise hogs indoors.

 Ferdinand has plenty of room to move around in his stall, can root in the dirt and play in the straw all the while being safe from the dangers of hungry predators. We take care of our animals because it's the right thing to do - leaving him outside to find for himself would be cruel.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

HSUS and PETA - Lover's Quarrel

photo courtesy

Did you hear the news?! PETA and HSUS are in a spat. But probably not for long - some celebrity like Kim Kardashian (I'll never understand why she's considered a celebrity) will wear a leather cap and then be back in cahoots. However, for now they aren't seeing eye to eye on a very important issue.

Horse slaugher in the U.S.

Remember a few months ago when a bill was passed that reinstated funding for federal inspection of horse slaughter plants? Well, HSUS is totally and 100% against horse slaughter saying that the decline in horse welfare over the past few years, mainly abandonment, has occurred because of economic circumstances. Which is partly true but as www.HumaneWatch.org puts it, "who can predict economic downturn?" On the other hand, PETA is actually the voice of reason in this debate - Ingrid Newkirk, PETA co-founder, recently said to the Christian Science Monitor:

It's quite an unpopular position we've taken. There was a rush to pass a bill that said you can't slaughter them anymore in the United States. But the reason we didn't support it, which sets us almost alone, is the amount of suffering that it created exceeded the amount of suffering it was designed to stop.

I never thought that I would agree with Ingrid Newkirk, not in a million years. However, she hits the nail right on the head. We (agriculturalists) have been saying for the past four years that if there's nowhere to take the horses in the states, they'll just be shipped to Mexico for slaughter and that situation certainly won't be as well-monitored as the U.S. once was. The reinstatement of funding is a good thing for agriculture, for many reasons, which I'll briefly go over again:

1. Horse meat is a delicacy in many countries. The U.S. could once again be a player in horse meat exports to Canada and France

2. The quality of life for horses can improve phenomenally if slaughter plants re-open. No more 30 hours treks to Mexico to be slaughtered in non-USDA plants. Owners, now with an outlet for their unwanted horses, will no longer be cutting brands off their horses and turning them loose on the range.

3. Slaughter plants need manpower to run - manpower comes from men (and women). Men and women who need jobs in a crappy economy. Slaughter plants = job creation.

I definitely side with PETA on this issue, as HSUS isn't about animal welfare improvement. Their goal is to abolish animal agriculture. At least for the moment, PETA is a friend of agriculture (although I'm not sure how long that will last).

To read more of the Humane Watch piece, click here.

Thoughts?

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

No Ag Gagging in Florida

Transparency is important in agriculture. By being transparent and opening our doors, I believe we can continue to narrow the urban consumer-rural producer gap. When we allow people to see our farms, we can put to rest any ill begotten ideas they have about agriculture production.

image from here 

That's why I'm thrilled that Florida has turned down the "Ag Gag" legislation which, if passed, would have made any person photographing or videotaping on a farm subject a person to criminal prosecution and imprisonment. This bill was aimed at getting rid of undercover animal rights videographers whose sole reason for employment was to catch bad examples in the act instead of actually helping the animals. But that's for a different day.

While I realize that the bill and it's proponents had farmers' best interests at heart, what kind of message would this bill have sent to the public? We're saying that agriculture has something to hide - which we most certainly do not.

The best way to provide great examples to the public is to do the right thing - be outstanding stewards of our land and animals. An additional option would be to conduct background checks and double-check employment history of all new farm employees. That's a management tactic that should probably already be in action, truth be told.

Iowa is debating the same bill, House File 589, and I sincerely hope it doesn't pass. We need to send a message to the public that we encourage transparency and closing our doors to photos and videos isn't the way to do that. I fear the repercussions would be far outweigh the benefits of this bill.

What are your thoughts?

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

Horse Slaughter Funding Reinstated

A few days ago, some news was announcd regarding the equine industry which, as you know, is very near and dear to my heart.

In 2006, horse slaughter in the U.S. was effectively 'banned' because the funding for plant inspections was cut. All slaughter plants in the U.S. must be inspected by USDA/FSIS and if there is no funding available then there is no slaughter.

Recently, news broke that the Department of Agriculture had reinstated federal inspection money in a November 18 bill. Hallelujah!

Not suprisingly, there has been an uproar from anti-agriculturalists and people who are unfamiliar with the equine industry. Allow me to take the opportunity to lay out some facts:

- Although horse meat is not widely consumed in the U.S., it is consumed and described as a delicacy in countries like France, Canada and Mexico. We (the U.S.) comprise a very small percentage of worldwide population and shouldn't assume that if we don't like something, it's therefore taboo for everyone else. It takes all sorts of minds to make a world go round, folks.

- Horses are expensive - just like other livestock. Expensive to feed, expensive to own and very expensive to have euthanized by a veterinarian. By selling a horse to the slaughter market, an owner could save some money on a euthanasia injection but also contribute to feeding people in France, Canada, etc.

-  When horse slaughter was stopped in 2006, horse welfare drastically decreased. Where there was once a market for horses who were past their useful lives there was now an abyss of no hope. It wasn't smart to take your trailer to the salebarn and leave it unlocked because you'd likely find yourself with a few more hungry horse mouths to feed. Others were unlucky enough to walk outside in the morning and find a few horses left in their pastures. And most horrible of all, there were  instances where the hide that contained the brand had been cut off, and the horse had been set free - all to prevent the horse from being returned to the owner.

Link to article about horse in Nevada whose brand had been cut off

- This reinstatement of funding is holistically a great thing in many ways. Horse welfare will improve and jobs will be created. Job creation? Yes, that's right. Every slaughter plant that opens will employ several hundred people, if not a thousand, essentially stimulating the economy in that region.

These are all points that I have seen time and again be misrepresented or misquoted in the comment stream on horse slaughter articles. Many of those comments are outrageous and unfounded however there is one such mindset that needs to be addressed. On an article on Huffington Post, several comments have touted irresponsible breeding as the culprit of poor welfare. I hope that horse owners view the previous five years as a wakeup call. Equine people, if you can't afford to feed and care for a horse, please don't continue to breed them. If your child only wants one to ride occasionally, please seek out leasing options or buying an older horse - not contacting a breeder to have one specially bred just for your child. These are all strategies that have partially created the situation we are in. This is what a friend of mine said on Facebook and I can't say it any better myself:

 "I couldn't be more supportive of the reinstatement of funding for horse slaughter in the U.S. It is desperately needed for our industry. However, those of us that own horses shouldn't just see it as a "garbage disposal" for our unwanted horses; we have to approach the problem up front. This means prudent and responsible breeding practices. Just because you think you want a foal, consider whether this horse will contribute to your lifestyle please! There is a lot more work that goes in to making a well-trained, confident, good horse than you may realize. I support horse slaughter and I support breeding GOOD horses, it's time to focus on the latter."  - A. Wilson, cowgirl and responsible horse owner

All in all, this is a fantastic thing for agriculture and the equine industry, in my opinion. What are your thoughts?

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

The Facts on Food Day 2011

Friend or foe?

First off, let me say that I applaud an initiative that seeks to narrow the gap between rural producers and urban consumers. That is the whole point of advocacy and a national day that recognizes global hunger, environmental sustainability and the continued humane production of livestock is a giant step in the right direction. Food Day, which is today, is striving to do that through the following six principles:


1. Reduce diet-related disease by promoting safe, healthy foods
2. Support sustainable farms and limit subsidies to big-agribusiness
3. Expand access to food and alleviate hunger
4. Protect the environment and animals by reforming factory farms
5. Promote health by curbing junk-food marketing to kids
6. Support fair conditions for food and farm workers

All of these principles are written with good intentions and I agree with most of them. However, does anyone else have a problem with the wording used?

Alarms are sounding with #4 at the mention of "reforming factory farms." I wholeheartedly agree with protecting the environment and animals, however, the negative connotations that accompany 'factory farming' are counterproductive to this initiative. I won't list here what the Food Day website is touting because it was just another form of propaganda that will serve as a poor influence to consumers who want the truth. However, if you wish to read it for yourself here is the direct link to the six initiatives.

The truth is that farmers and ranchers practice humane methods in raising livestock 24/7/365. Food Day is everyday to the rural American producer and they don't need a declaration from Washington to tell them so.

I'm not the only person who thinks #2 and #4 are whack - check out this piece from Drover's CattleNetwork. Additionally, the U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance doesn't fully condone the #4 "as all farms, large and small, should keep animals healthy... Large does not mean bad."

My final issue lies with the partners in Food Day - there are about 60+ and they range from state organizations like The California Endowment, to health organizations such as National Association for Health and Fitness. But the partners who really caught my eye were:
- Farm Animal Rights Movement - www.farmusa.org - they self proclaim, "national nonprofit organization working to end the use of animals for food through public education and grassroots activism." They are also behind meatout.org.
- Humane Society of the United States - www.hsus.org - I don't think I have to inform you of their goals.

Additionally - Michael Pollan, author and self-proclaimed food expert and Wayne Pacelle, President of HSUS, are on the Food Day Advisory Board.

Now, obviously Food Day isn't out to abolish animal agriculture and I'm not saying that's their goal. This is just my gentle reminder that you can't always judge a book by its cover. Unless it's The Hobbit and then you can go ahead and judge away because that book is fabulous!

If you want to learn true facts about food production and connect with the people who produce it, head on over to www.realfarmersrealfood.com or ask a producer.

I hope that you will treat every day as a real Food Day, by thanking farmers and ranchers when you have the chance. Don't fall for misinformation just because it is nationally recognized. Take the time to suss out the info on your own and ask questions - don't fall for a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Until next time - thank a farmer!
~ Buzzard~

Live Export Ships

You may have read my blog posts about the Live Export Ban in Australia and the conditions that led to its initiation. If you haven't, you may want to familiarize yourself with the issue. Read this first and this second.

Ok - now that you're caught up. Hubsy and I have had the privilege of being hosted in Perth for the past six days - he was asked to speak at the APL/CRC Pork Roadshow so we've been socializing with western Australian swine producers, attending dinners and doing a little bit of sight seeing. On Saturday we went whale watching with some family friends and saw two of these: one docked and one at sea.

Live export ship docked in Fremantle, WA, AUS.

Live export ship on the Indian Ocean - Fremantle, WA, AUS.

I tried to zoom in and see if there were any animals aboard but I couldn't really tell and hubsy couldn't either.

It was interesting to actually see a live export ship up close - the trip from Perth to Indonesia takes about a week and a local cattle producer told us that the goal is for the cattle to not have any shrink. They said, for the most part, that they reach this goal often. It's one thing to hear and talk about something, but quite another to see it in person.

What's your opinion on the live export issue in Australia?

Until next time,

~ Buzzard ~

Practical People = Practical Solutions

While waiting to pick up cow manure at the Royal Melbourne Show yesterday, I was reading the newspaper. I ran across an article about farmers being upset with the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for taking a more extreme stand on recent animal welfare issues in Australia. In the past, RSCPA has claimed to be the 'middle ground' but farmers have recently had their doubts. In an attempt to bring them back to that middle ground, farmers have started vying for positions within the organization.

There was a really great quote in the article that applies to animal welfare issues in the United States just as much, if not more, as it does in Australia.

"We need practical people who understand animal welfare and production agriculture. The fear is that if we're dictated to by people who don't understand producing food, we're living in the ideal world instead of the real world." -- Victorian Farmers Federation President Andrew Broad

As agriculture advocates, we need to be sure to voice our opinions and positive ideas to avoid allowing organizations such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) from spearheading legislation that is harmful to America's hardworking farmers and ranchers.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

MFA - Report Animal Cruelty ASAP not ASACP

ASACP meaning - as soon as conveniently possible.

Yet another animal cruelty video has been released by Mercy For Animals (MFA). Again, I am outraged at the treatment of the pigs in this video and there is absolutely no excuse for this type of treatment. I feel the need to draw attention to some key points that need to be made.

1 - This is NOT how all farm animals are treated. Unfortunately, one bad apple provides a horrible example for the rest of the industry. Videographers don't focus on well run farms - they prey on farms such as the one featured in the video.
2 - Farmers and ranchers have a vested interest in the health and wellbeing of their animals. Producing a safe, healthy product in a humane fashion with low-stress practices is the number one priority.
3 - I find it extrememly frustrating that this footage has been sitting around for at least three weeks before being released this week. How do I know this? A 'Note' that was posted on Facebook about three weeks ago clued me in that something was going to be released soon (the note has since been taken down and I will not reveal it's source/author).

If videographers find animal cruelty - they should report it immediately. Not when it is convenient to their timeline or fundraising efforts. How many animals continued to be abused between the time the footage was collected and the day the video was released? The animal cruelty is abominable but standing by and doing nothing, and allowing that type of treatment to continue is just as abominable.

What are your thoughts on the issue? Again - I in no way condone animal cruelty and I am appalled at the images in the video, however, I feel that the videographers, undercover or not, should have reported the cruelty much more quickly than seen in this case.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

image from here

$40 Million Dollars Has Vanished

Now that I have your attention....

Have you ever had the opportunity to sell your ranch for $40 million and then, overnight, that opportunity is gone, kaput, vanished? 

Cattle producers in Australia's Northern Territory know exactly what it feels like in light of the recent export ban resulting from a video of cattle being severely mistreated in and Indonesian abattoir. I highly suggest you read my post on NCBA's YPC blog, watch the video and then come back here - it will only take 10 minutes and I swear, it's worth it and so extremely relevant.

Now that you've read all that (seriously, if you haven't you NEED TO DO IT), let's get back on topic.

As I was saying, live exports to Indonesia (and only Indonesia) have been banned for at least six months but could last for a whole year. There are several cattle stations that had been in negotiations to sell for sometime and since the ban, those negotiations have stopped and all offers have ceased. There is even a case where one Australian company had completed several months due diligence on a property but, upon hearing of the export ban, backed out before submitting a final offer. Yet another station, worth approximately $40 million, was in the final stages of the sale only to have the bottom fall out.

The North Queensland Register's Matthew Cranston states that "A halt to live exports prevents owners from selling their cattle and generating cash. Without revenue the properties lose value in the same way office towers do when they have no tenants. They may also struggle to pay bank debt, raising the prospect of defaults." 

This is a serious issue affecting cattle ranchers not just in northern Australia but in the southern states as well. The market will likely be flooded with beef that had been destined for Indonesia and beef prices will fall. Of course, consumers will be happy but this comes at great detriment to producers all over Australia.

What's your take on this issue? Do you think government officials took the right steps or did they act in senseless haste? Would love to hear your feedback!

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

 

photo from here

E6 Ranch Suffers the Consequences

Whether you care to admit it or not, we're all probably at least a little bit happy about this news update. Regardless of who committed the cruel acts at E6 Ranch, someone needed to be charged and punished for the inexecusable acts.

About two weeks ago (yes, I am this far behind on my blogging) Dairy Herd Network's email newsletter informed me that seven people, including ranch owner Kirt Espenson, had been charged in the E6 Ranch case. Bravo. Espenson was charged with Class A Misdemeanor animal cruelty (he wasn't engaged in the acts on video) and the six employees charged with felony animal cruelty. If found guilty, which in all actuality should and probably will happen, the felony charge carries a two year jail sentence and the misdemeanor charge is a one year jail stint.

Nathan Runkle, executive director of Mercy For Animals, said "We hope that this case and the action by law enforcement sends a strong message to the dairy industry that animal cruelty will not be tolerated." Espenson told officials that he had fired four employees over the horrible acts and hired a professional trainer to lead training programs in humane handling and proper euthanasia.

Thus far, I've been unsuccessful at finding out a court date, as dockets weren't available for most of July and August. But I'll be sure to keep the blogging world updated on the goings on of this case. It's essential that the world knows that farmers and ranchers don't tolerate or condone this type of behavior and that it is not the norm in our industry.

What are your thoughts? Do you think justice is being served appropriately? I'm anxious to hear feedback on this one.

Until next time (I promise it won't be another 8 days before my next post),
~ Buzzard ~

Headlines...

Ok - I read a lot of online newspapers and newsletters every day -- more than the average person if I had to guess. I get my updates from MeatingPlace.com, FeedStuffs Foodlink, Animal Ag Alliance, Drovers CattleNetwork.com, the Dairy Herd Network, the Humane Society of the United States (keeping a watchful eye on the enemy), Pork Network, BEEF Daily, the Phil Reid Beef Blog, Ohio Ag Net, Science Digital and a few others. Add in the NY Times, Washington Post, Huffington Post, Yahoo! and Yahoo!7 (Australia's Yahoo) and MSN and MSN7 and I've got quite a bit of reading on a daily basis. As I'm reading I'm constantly thinking, 'Oh, I should blog about that' but I can't possibly blog about everything like I'd like to, so instead I have listed below sofe of the most interesting agriculture articles I have read over the past few days. Some are about policy, food and health, education, animal agriculture - you name it. I hope you enjoy!

Farmed or Wild? What is the best salmon to buy?

Tennessee Establishes a Farm Animal Care Coalition (FAACT)

Is Skim Milk Making You Fat?

Curriculum Should Focus on Readin', Ritin' and Ranchin'

$2 Million Michigan Lottery Winner Defends Use of Food Stamps

What do you guys think? Is this something you'd like to see more of in the future or would you rather I continue to create my sarcastic, opinionated and fact filled posts on a regular basis?

Let me know what you're thinking!

Until next time
~ Buzzard ~

Scientists Care Too

I recently read an article titled, "In Animal Testing Debate, Fur Still Flies." It addresses the treatment and welfare of laboratory animals like rats, monkeys, guinea pigs, dogs and many more species. Many people are opposed to animal testing because not all animals fall under animal testing policies and being a 'guinea pig' (pardon the pun) for pharmaceuticals and other products is not the most glamorous of lifestyles. The fact of the matter is that animal testing enables us to have, among other things, vaccines, antibiotics, chemotherapy, joint replacement and bypass surgeries.

I would also like to bring to light that scientists who utilize animals for laboratory research give those animals the utmost care, just like a farmer does his livestock. While here in Australia, I've had the chance to do a lot research with sheep and most recently, I helped perform fat biopsies on some crossbred ewes. The surgery was not unlike one that would occur in a regular hospital.

Each surgery used a new set of sterilized surgical equipment and lots of sterile surgical guaze.

 The area where incision will be made is shaved, then cleaned with iodine and alcohol and finally, treated with an analgesic so that the sheep won't feel any pain.

During the surgery, covers are placed around the area and the scientists and researchers wear surgical gloves so the entire process stays clean. In this picture, Hyatt is suturing the tiny incision that was made to collect the sample. After he has finished the sheep will be treated with antiseptic to ensure that no infection ensues.

Regardless of your position on animal testing, you should know that research animals receive special care and are not treated badly. Scientists and researchers care about the animals that have been entrusted to us; just like farmers and ranchers.

Until next time,

~ Buzzard ~

A New Spin on Guinea Pig

That guinea pig in the pet store window isn't just for Susie's birthday anymore. Pig farmers in Australia have been utilizing the little munchkins to help decrease the occurrence of savaging piglets in piggeries.
Quick animal behavior lesson: Savaging of piglets, when a mother pig attacks her piglets usually injuring but sometimes killing them, is a well-documented behavior most often seen in first litter gilts.  While it's been genetically selected against in U.S. swine herds, it still sometimes occurs in Australian piggeries. It is thought to be related to the hormones associated with parnutrition and unfortunately there is no vaccination or cure for this horribly bizarre condition. 

Back to the guinea pigs - some Australian pig farmers have begun putting guinea pigs in farrowing crates with the mothers prior to birth in order to desensitize gilts to the presence of small, wriggling, noisy piglets. When the mother is exposed to the stimulus of sharing her home with an small animal, farmers have reported that the behavior is drastically reduced, meaning less piglets are maimed or killed by the gilts.

I'd hate to be a guinea pig in Australia....

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~