Post

Anti-ag legislation bad for Illinois

I remember when I used to be so proud to tell people that I came from Illinois. I would boast about what a great agricultural state I grew up in. I’d brag about the great ag schools and the forgiving and productive soils of the state. I remember strong county beef and pork organizations and numerous dairy and sheep producers who were always giving back to their rural communities.

I remember something very different from what exists today.

I’m still very proud of the farmers and the rural communities that support agriculture, but I am sorely disappointed in the anti-agriculture legislation and overall attitude that seems to permeate through the state’s society.

If I could have the ear of the state’s leadership and lawmakers and those who take the state’s voice to Washington, D.C., I would tell them these things:

The animal rights agenda is an anti-agriculture agenda. The animal rights groups that are fighting for a change in the way we house livestock are doing so for one reason: they do not eat meat and they do not want you to eat meat. There is never a mention about the health and welfare of animals under current conditions.

Farmers are not stupid. Good animal care is good business. Farmers want healthy and productive livestock. A safe environment and proper nutrition are key to a successful livestock operation.

A ban on the slaughter of horses will actually increase the inhumane treatment of horses. We do not have the facilities or the funding to care for the old and sick horses that will have to be managed. A USDA-regulated processing facility would humanely euthanize such livestock.

The Illinois House passed a bill that bans the slaughter of horses for human consumption. Although the bill now heads to the Senate, recent federal rulings appear to have put the final nail in the coffin for the horse slaughter plant in DeKalb. The Illinois plant and two in Texas have been shut down. Where are you going to bury all of those horses? Will you have to set up a horse cemetery on the state fairgrounds or the lawn of the governor’s mansion? Who is going to pay for that? (Maybe some of the money that comes in from the gross revenue tax. That is, until there is no more gross revenue tax because everyone has either gone bankrupt or left the state.)

Never before has a livestock product been banned from processing for reasons other than food safety and public health. Dangerous precedent has been set by the passage of this bill. I can only hope that you will raise your voices to the state Senate.

What is next? A blanket ban on slaughter of non-ambulatory livestock? A ban on hog gestation stalls and veal crates?

Keith Olsen, President of the Nebraska Farm Bureau (a state, which, by the way, realizes the value of agriculture and the people who work in that industry) had this to say about a proposed ban on slaughter of non-ambulatory livestock in the U.S. Congress:

Some animals are non-ambulatory for reasons having nothing to do with disease or injury, Olsen said. “For example, hogs that lie down during transport or at a slaughter facility on a hot day would be considered non-ambulatory and therefore banned from the food chain. But science and experience show these ‘fatigued’ hogs recover. Banning the slaughter of a fatigued animal will cause significant negative economic consequences for farmers and packers — while not providing any food safety benefits to consumers,” he said.

Regarding a proposed ban on gestation crates, Olsen said this:

“Mandating pen space in livestock barns or gestation stalls fails to take into account the territorial and hierarchical nature of some animals, especially hogs. Mandating a social environment in livestock barns can subject animals to the stress of fighting to establish rank and subject some animals to lack of food and water,” Olson explained.

“We in agriculture believe we have the facts and science on our side to counter the animal rightists’ claims,” Olsen said. “But we need Congress to recognize that animal rights groups are pushing their anti-agriculture, pro-vegetarian agenda and seeking to hide it under the guise of animal welfare.”

Does anyone give a rip about the economic impact decisions being made in Springfield and/or Chicago will have on rural Illinois tomorrow? Do you care if livestock production leaves Illinois? Do you care about food security?

My friends, it is time to act. This is mission critical. If you want to have a future in agriculture in the state of Illinois and want to secure a future for the next generation, you need to make some calls, write some letters and work together.

It was Abraham Lincoln who set up the United States Department of Agriculture. He encouraged farm ownership with the Homestead Act of 1862. My guess is that he would be sorely disappointed with the way things are going in Illinois in 2007.