Editor:

The U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee did the right thing when it approved a farm bill that contains much-needed change in federal dairy programs, including provisions outlined in the Dairy Security Act. Dairy farmers in the Upper Midwest will benefit from these changes.

The dairy provisions of the Senate farm bill will provide all dairy farmers with a more reliable safety net. The proposed changes will spur innovation in developing new dairy products, and it will help co-ops and other Midwest processors compete in growing world markets.

The Senate’s legislation includes a new, voluntary margin protection program to better safeguard farmers against disastrously low margins, such as those generated by the low milk prices and high feed costs that cost dairy farmers $20 billion in net worth between 2007 and 2009.

This policy was originally developed by dairy farmers, who came together to craft dairy policy that will allow the U.S. dairy industry to be more responsive to markets and provide a better safety net than the programs of the past.

The new margin insurance program replaces a strictly price-based safety net with a program that accounts for milk and feed prices together. It also allows for coverage of more of the country’s milk production than current programs.

Producers are able to participate at varying levels of coverage depending on their needs and comfort levels. Producers also have the option of not participating. If they are comfortable with managing their own risk, or don’t want to be subject to the Market Stabilization Program, they don’t have to sign up.

By removing the “Dairy Product Price Support Program,” we are letting world markets know that the U.S. is a full-time participant. We’re telling customers that the United States is a committed supplier, stopping the practice of leaving the export market in low-price times — just when we need markets the most. And, milk prices become regulated by demand rather than dairy policy.

The Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC) program was too restrictive in terms of who could participate. It also wasn’t always activated in times of low producer margins.

The Market Stabilization Program (MSP) is designed to kick in only when shrinking demand squeezes producer margins. It’s a temporary program that helps to amplify market signals when there’s more milk being produced than there is demand for fluid milk and dairy products. Once supply comes in balance with demand, the program stops. If world prices drop significantly below domestic prices, the program stops.

When the program is not in effect, there are no restrictions on either entering the industry or growing an existing operation.

As producer directors of our respective dairy processing cooperatives, we have been involved in formulating the policy provisions of the Dairy Security Act and believe it offers the best chance to provide sorely needed reforms to federal dairy policy. We urge the entire Senate to approve the bill that was passed by the Senate Agriculture Committee.

We need a dairy program that gives American dairy farmers consistent access to growing world dairy demand and provides security for all producers.

Randy Mooney,

Rogersville, Mo.

(The author is chairman of the board for Dairy Farmers of America. The letter was also signed by David Scheevel, Preston, Minn.,chairman of the board with the Foremost Farms USA Cooperative; and Pete Kappelman, Manitowoc, Wis., chairman, Land O’Lakes, Inc.)

For many months, a few good, caring people have been trying to get the public to realize the consequences of fracking. They gather in Youngstown, North Lima, Coitsville, Poland, Butler and New Wilmington. There are probably other groups gathering in other towns as well.

If you would attend one of these gatherings, you would feel the warmth of the atmosphere that is created any time caring people are in one place. We are very concerned about the future of the people who live here after we are gone.

Some people say fracking is safe. I don’t believe them. They justify their claims by spouting a lot of biased, deceptive statistics and findings from a few questionable studies done by a few questionable organizations..

We all know how big money and power can influence the outcomes of research done by so-called “experts.” Large industry and government have a great deal of money and power and fund many of these studies. I believe only the conclusions made by intelligent, independent researchers who have nothing to gain from their findings.

Some of us are frustrated by the apathy of the general public. They sit in their houses watching TV and thinking everything will be O.K. I am not comforted by words like “strict regulations,” “monitoring,” “safety checks” and “accountability,” or by the suggestion that water testing is a valid way of dealing with ruined water wells. These words and this suggestion, courtesy of the public relations departments of the industry, are merely providing us with a false sense of security.

Those of us who are concerned and caring are unhappy with how some people portray us. They point their fingers at us and say we are misinformed, biased and gullible. They call us extremists, radicals, deluded liars and troublemakers.

These accusations hurt our feelings because we are sensitive. Sensitivity, however, should not imply weakness. Some of us are weary and have reached a state of despair, but we emotionally support one another and are not willing to give up.

We will continue to inform the public by having events, holding debates, writing letters and demonstrating at protests and rallies or whatever peaceful means necessary to encourage people to be more concerned about what impact fracking will have on this area. It won’t be pretty — literally.

If we are unsuccessful, we will probably buy a lot of thick white paint and cover up the slogans on our protest signs. Then, we will have one last march. We will walk through this noisy, ugly, unhealthy, unsafe place and hold up our signs one last time. They will all carry the same message: WHY DID YOU LET THIS HAPPEN?

After this last event, I will gather up the signs and store them in my attic so your sons and daughters will be able to carry them some day. Corrosion, deterioration and seepage are slow processes.

Steven Beck

West Middlesex, Pa.

Editor:

I read the recent letter-to-the-editor regarding exotic animal ownership and wondered what happened with that issue.

It’s apparent that Farm Bureau threw the exotic animal people under the bus on that issue.

Further, in reading Joe Cornely’s response, it appears that he does a great job of talking in circles.

If you are a Farm Bureau member, this is the season for policy development. Why not write a policy regarding this issue? Get it back on the table.

If your not a member, join in and fight for what you believe.

I have already written a policy and sent it in to the office. What are you doing?

Richard Hill

Medina, Ohio

Editor:

Recent letters to the editor regarding Ohio Farm Bureau’s involvement in the wild and dangerous animals issue have contained several factual errors.

The letters attribute three quotes to Ohio Farm Bureau representatives: “We are always supporting things our members don’t”; “We have always stood against exotic animal ownership”; and that we said nontraditional animal owners are “acceptable collateral damage.” These quotes are fabricated.

Additionally, the letters claim Farm Bureau leaders are ignoring members’ wishes. Every voting member of every county Farm Bureau may vote on who should represent them at the annual business meeting. In turn, these elected voting delegates establish policies and elect state board members. The state board carries out the policies and applies them to emerging issues.

Specific to Farm Bureau’s engagement in nonfarm animal issues, the board based its decision on existing policies and extensive member input. Subsequently, the board’s decision was affirmed by the full delegate body, not once, but at each of the next two annual business meetings.

Because Ohio agriculture is so diverse, there are few issues on which every farmer will agree. It’s Farm Bureau’s job to reach consensus and to carry out the resulting policy.

We welcome dissenting voices, but ask that those voices not quote us incorrectly or mischaracterize our policy process.

–Joe Cornely

Columbus, Ohio

(The author is senior director, corporate communications, with the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation.)

On March 1 it was announced that the 30-inch Commonwealth Pipeline, requiring a 75-100-foot right of way, would be developed running from Lycoming County, Pa. to Maryland.

Initially developers promoted the pipeline as providing cheaper natural gas to people in Harrisburg, Baltimore and DC. More recently, they have admitted that they may export some through the Chesapeake Bay via Dominion’s Cove Point, Md. facility.

Many Pa. property owners leased their land for gas development because they wanted to help the U.S. become energy independent, and to improve national security. Exporting America’s natural gas mocks their sacrifice.

While natural gas prices have dropped to less than $2 per million cubic feet in the US, they are over $14/mcf in Asia. The U.S. already exports natural gas through pipelines to Canada and Mexico, but recently a port in Sabine Pass, La. received final approval to begin exporting liquid natural gas overseas in 2015. Cove Point, Md. and six other ports have already gained preliminary approval.

Exporting allows the price of natural gas to globalize. Chesapeake Energy boasted in their 2010 Quarter 4 report that they expect prices to rise substantially when exporting begins. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that prices will increase 54 percent by 2018 due to exporting.

In January, the US Geological Survey slashed by 66 percent their estimates of how much natural gas is recoverable from Marcellus shale. The current estimate, at 2010 rates of consumption, will last us only six years, not 100 years as was originally publicized.

What’s most troubling is that the Commonwealth Pipeline will use eminent domain to take people’s land. Landowners won’t be given the choice of whether or not to have their land used. Is this fair if some, most or all of the natural gas will be exported, driving up prices in the US?

Lawmakers in Oregon don’t think that’s reasonable. In response to an export facility at Jordan Cove, or they have proposed a bill that will either: 1) not allow the facility to export LNG, based on the quest for energy independence; or 2) if exporting is approved, pipelines will not be allowed to use eminent domain — as the gas will not provide public benefit.

The Pa. General Assembly has acted very differently. They have carved out $20 million of the impact fee (right off the top, before counties get any) and $17.5 million of state land gas royalties to increase demand for natural gas in Pa.

Essentially, instead of blocking exportation, or preparing for substantially higher prices in 2015, they are subsidizing the gas industry with incentives for natural gas vehicles and fueling stations, which will increase demand and therefore price.

Final approval to export liquid natural gas from Cove Point, Md. would make “energy independence” a scam and eminent domain for pipelines malicious.

— Elaine Lapp Esch

Lancaster, Pa.

Editor:

Senate bill 310 offered Ohio Farm Bureau the opportunity to redeem themselves from the disgrace of signing the agreement with Ted Strickland and the Humane Society of the U.S. in June 2010, where they sacrificed the exotic animal industry and the commercial dog breeders in order to gain some temporary protection for the livestock industry.

Rather than do the honorable thing, they chose to twist their own state policy to justify supporting a ban on ownership of a long list of animals, which includes many no larger or more dangerous than the family dog or cat.

I am a Farm Bureau member. So are hundreds if not thousands of other Ohioans like me who own animals that may or may not be included in the current version of SB310, sponsored by Senator Troy Balderson, of Coshocton County.

We expect Farm Bureau to support all of Ohio’s agriculture industry, not just cows, pigs and chickens. Our farms are the ones down the road from you that are too hilly to till or too small to pasture. We’re the people who buy that 5- or 10-acre plot you couldn’t sell to a “real” farmer, but it’s perfect for our kinds of animals.

Farm Bureau, we don’t pay you our $60 dues so you can use it against us. Why don’t you refund our money right now so we can give it to someone who supports all of agriculture and doesn’t tamper with the state policies we helped you write:

Ohio Farm Bureau Federation 2012 Policy Manual:

Section 13:

Commodities Animal Care:

Section 301:

“We recognize that animals are personal property and we oppose legislation and/or ballot initiatives that, unless clear abuse is evident, restricts the private ownership or use of animals or that inhibits free trade of any animal provided it meets Ohio Department of Agriculture testing and import requirements….

Section 302:

“We support more specific regulations governing the housing, care and movement of exotic animals by private individuals. (‘Specific regulations’ do not equal a ban on ownership of these animals. See Section 301 above.) We support that oversight authority of any livestock be it conventional, alternative or exotic rest with the Ohio Department of Agriculture.

Polly Britton

Pleasant Hill, Ohio

(Britton is a board member of Ohio Association of Animal Owners)

Editor

Since the introduction of Senate bill 310, disguised as a bill to regulate the private ownership of exotic animals, it seems this bill will be passed.

Overwhelming numbers of animal owners from all over Ohio have testified with solid facts and an impeccable record (no public deaths have ever occurred in Ohio from ownership) that we are not against regulation, we just want fair regulation.

At the April 24 hearing, Spencer Waugh, lobbyist for the Ohio Farm Bureau, testified in support of Senate bill 310. Once again the Farm Bureau has sold out their brothers and sisters in the agricultural realm.

Many readers may ask why I refer to exotic animals as agriculture. Well that is a simple answer. Ohio law already exists that says if you raise any animal (animal husbandry) then you are considered agriculture.

The Senate Committee of Agriculture and Natural Resources will most likely vote unanimously in support of this bill. Since most exotic animals already fall under Ohio law as agriculture, the OFBF and Senate committee are then saying they do not support agriculture in Ohio.

Since 2010 Jack Fisher, executive vice president for the Farm Bureau, first used the non-traditional animal industry as a bargaining chip for HSUS. Readers should remember that OFBF, in their own words, said we were “acceptable collateral damage.”

We have known they do not support us, despite that fact the ripple effect will also engulf them. It is sad to see our own elected officials would succumb to bullying or fear from one individual who will not see office again.

The ripple effect will be felt across Ohio. Innocent animals will be put to sleep at taxpayer’s expense just to appease out of state special interest groups.

Only one “public” person (I use the term very lightly) testified in support of this bill and she only just recently moved to Ohio, in her own words, to fight for this bill.

Numerous testimonies from non-exotic animal owners were submitted against the bill. Sum it up: Senate bill 310 will cost tax payers dollars to kill innocent animals, shut down private business in Ohio which in turn support feed mills, hardware, vets, etc.

It will not stop another incident such as Zanesville from occurring; it will create a monopoly for zoos and empowers HSUS, via a seat on a board, to govern how any animal in our state is cared for.

It additionally states that federal law should be replaced by private companies with no legal power to enforce animal care. It also gives the state the power to enter your private property on hearsay to conduct search and seizure.

I think it is time to take back Ohio and get leadership that will support agriculture, not destroy it.

Keith Campbell

Frazeysburg, Ohio

]]> http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/letters-to-the-editor/reader-take-back-ohio-with-leadership-that-supports-agriculture/36911.html/feed 2 http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/reader-farmers-need-to-read-all-of-senate-bill-310/36845.html http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/reader-farmers-need-to-read-all-of-senate-bill-310/36845.html#comments Fri, 27 Apr 2012 13:59:14 +0000 Other News http://www.farmanddairy.com/?p=36845 Editor

Once again animal owners have been sold out by Ohio leaders and the Farm Bureau. I was at the Senate hearings for SB310 — less than 30 proponents for it while hundreds of opponents attended. Our words fell on deaf ears as we told them why this bill was not fair, why this bill hurt the animal industry in Ohio. They sat there talking to each other laughing.

Troy Balderson wasn’t even in attendance most of the time. The day Balderson submitted his bill that will take away private property on hearsay, his aide told me there would be no ban. It would be great for animal owners — you have Troy’s word. Before I even got off the phone, the radio had Balderson on telling about the ban Kasich had him write. Not only did he have him write one, he had Troy’s sidekick Brian Hill write the very same thing.

Balderson and Hill do not support Ohio farms or animal owners. They would rather stand with HSUS as one along with Kasich. I have said so many times, why on God’s green Earth would you join the Ohio Farm Bureau? They sold out the pork, poultry, veal and every animal industry in Ohio and people still sent them money. Why?

Jack Fisher is on the wrong board, he needs to be on PETA’s board. Can anyone tell me when Ohio’s farmers are going to grow a backbone and stand up against the animal rights groups like Missouri? Show Ohioans for Humane Farms, ALF, ELF and Mercy for Animals where the state line is and keep them out. We have fought from June 2010 to keep our animals and will keep on fighting.

If Ohio farmers keep sitting on their butts they will be put under the bus like everyone else has. The farmers in Ohio need to wake up. Its not an exotic animal bill; it’s an animal rights bill. Any animal HSUS wants banned, they can get added — the Kasich/Balderson express gave them a voting seat. They already have water buffalo, what’s next? Jerseys?

Read the bill. All of the bill. I can call ODA and tell them the guy down the road has a snake in his house and this bill allows them to come and search his house without cause. A simple phone call and they can come in your home.

Your rights are being stripped away by the very people we elected to be our voice. Read the bill, all the bill, and then call and tell our state leaders you don’t support invasion of privacy, illegal search and seizure and you don’t support HSUS running our state.

Butch Hash

Frazeysburg, Ohio

You recently printed an article on invasive feral swine [Michigan gets tough on invasive feral swine, April 5.] This article fails to present the whole story. So-called game ranchers and disease are the focus. What is left out are the many small family farmers who raise hog breeds that don’t fit the pork producers image nor belong to the big ag-supporting Michigan Farm Bureau.

Being a small family farmer myself, we do not always make choices the bigger operators make. This is not wrong, it is diversification, a good thing that should be encouraged. You know the saying about putting all your eggs in one basket.

There are small farmers like me whom have chosen breeds of animals based on heritage and adaptability to survive climate conditions. These animals are raised humanely and allowed to express their inherent characteristics. They are well taken care of and do not routinely escape and spread disease, as the article implies.

Where is the proof that disease is being spread by hogs from these farms? These are smoke and mirror tactics employed to benefit the “industry” and hurt the small farms. Does the reader understand these same farms, whose only income is their livestock, are being forced to kill all the animals? Pregnant sows, piglets, market hogs and anything else the Michigan DNR deems as feral.

Webster defines feral as existing in an untamed state, having returned to a wild state from domestication, of or like a wild animal. By definition these farmers’ stock do not meet the grounds the Michigan DNR is using to kill them.

The same DNR is demanding farmers kill their livestock on their own or the DNR jackboots will do it for them! A real armed raid on a farm! This is a direct order from the director, Rodney Stokes. Can you imagine having to exterminate your entire source of income, let alone the emotional devastation? If the farmer does not comply, they can be arrested on a felony charge. Don’t believe me? See Bakers Green Acres on the Web for a Michigan farmer’s story.

This impacts small farmers while the “industry” sits back and rides the wave to greater profits because the “competition” is being eliminated. What an outrage this is happening in America! One can only wonder what is next as Michigan gets away with this oppression of small family farms.

Yes, there are game ranchers who are caught in this but again, you have big government wiping out family incomes without regard for freedom to make a living in a legal manner.

People want to know farmers and where their meat and produce are coming from. This tends to hold farmers accountable. Government knows no such thing.

Farmers, if we keep chucking stones at each other, the government wins and we lose. We’re all farmers and need to remember diversity is good. We can agree to disagree on certain issues. Please stop allowing this game of divide and conquer to continue. Stand up for what is right.

Dawn McLaughlin

Creston, Ohio

This letter is in response to the letter by Steven J. Beck in the March 22 issue of Farm and Dairy. The tone of the letter is to create class warfare by demonizing rich landowners who inherited or invested in land and are now selling their mineral rights. They now don’t live on their land and will be able to buy luxurious houses and even yachts. (40 percent of payments from leases go to pay taxes.)

[He implies] these greedy people are selling out to oil and gas companies who will rape the environment. This leaves non-landowners to live in fear of noise pollution, air pollution, water pollution, soil erosion, earthquakes, heavy traffic, bad health and early death. They get none of the monetary benefits.

In my 79 years I know many of these “wealthy landowners” across the state. His description of landowners isn’t like the ones I know. Many of these people work 60 to 100 hours per week, as well as family members, to produce the cheapest, safest and most abundant food supply anywhere in the world.

Also, many of these “wealthy landowners” are only a few failed crop years from bankruptcy. Some, after living frugally and having a family member also work off the farm, when they are 60 to 80 years old get the debts paid and now own the land and machinery.

The benefits Mr. Beck gets enable him to work 40 hours per week, buy cheap food, heat his house with cheap gas (wholesale price has gone from $15 per mcf to 2.50 mcf) and still enjoy a standard of living many “wealthy landowners” can’t afford.

To support his call to stop drilling and fracking (tens of thousands of wells have been safely fracked in the last 50 years) he seems to be parroting every extremist idea over the Internet, of which many are total distortions of the truth and certainly do not reflect what is going on in the real world.

Instead of calling for class warfare with this subject as well as nation issues, we need intelligent, knowledgeable people to have a dialogue and develop solutions.

Blaine Neilley

Cambridge, Ohio

]]> http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/letter-writer-misrepresented-landowners/36399.html/feed 2