IATP Hog Report - Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Section 7 VII. Stop the Madness! Eight Organizing Strategies for the Future: Retaining an Independent, Family Farm Structure of Agriculture Clean Water Act Enforcement State Legislation Liability Litigation Citizen Organizing Public Health and Worker Safety Humane Treatment of Animals Sustainable Agriculture Research and Demonstration | Next Section | | Table of Contents | | Home Page | Stop the Madness! The inadequate performance of state and federal agencies, with respect to protection of the public, the environment, and farm animals from the impacts of animal factories, has required that citizens organize and join forces to fight the battles for family farms, environmental quality, public health, animal welfare, community well-being, and social justice on their own. Below are eight strategies that citizen organizations are following. The information was taken from descriptions sent by the organizations themselves. Specific organizations and activities are mentioned only for illustrative purposes. Many other organizations around the nation work on these issues and the organizations mentioned below may work on other issues as well. Eight Organizing Strategies for the Future Strategy 1. Retaining an Independent, Family Farm Structure of Agriculture Helping Independent Family Hog Farmers Develop Markets By featuring special characteristics or qualities related to their production methods and marketing their pork through non-conventional channels, independent family farmers add value to their own products and garner a higher price than they would receive for the same hogs on the commodity market. The Missouri Rural Crisis Center organized the Patchwork Family Farms Project, marketing a full line of sustainably produced pork products to restaurants, grocery stores, and food coops. Niman Ranch of California processes lamb, beef, and pork from independent farms that meets its quality standards, including a protocol for humane hog farming developed by the Animal Welfare Institute. It distributes the products to upscale restaurants nationally, meat markets, Whole Foods stores in Northern California and mid-Atlantic region, Williams-Sonoma catalog, and Trader Joe's in the western U.S. During the price crisis, independent farmers selling through niche markets and direct to consumers may have been the only farmers selling hogs for prices meeting costs of production. The Land Stewardship Project is developing a special label program called Food Choices that will help independent family farmers operating sustainable systems sell their pork for a premium price. Helping Farmers Regain Control of Their Checkoff Dollars. http://www.iatp.org/hogreport/sec7.html (1 of 13)2/27/2006 3:50:18 AM
Section 7 The Campaign for Family Farms organized a drive to obtain signatures on petitions for a referendum on the pork checkoff. For every $100 of hog revenue a producer makes, a mandatory "contribution" of $0.45 is deducted for the National Pork Board. The stated purpose of the checkoff fund is to support research, promotion, and consumer education efforts that benefit hog farmers (pork producers). Most of the checkoff funds go to the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), which conducts its own research grant program. Smaller, non-industrialized farmers feel that the research funded by the Board/Council is geared disproportionately toward providing research benefits to hog factory operators. Making the checkoff voluntary, which is the aim of hog farmers signing the petition, would enable smaller producers to use the additional dollars as they see fit and put a stop to smaller producers' dollars being used to benefit primarily a few large entities. The signatures of nineteen thousand independent hog farmers were sent to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, for verification on May 24, 1999. Subsequently, the National Pork Producers Council made a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain all 19,000 signatures. The Campaign for Family Farms, with legal help from Farmers Legal Action Group, filed suit to block the release of the names to protect the privacy of signers and out of concern that individuals might be subject to retaliation by meatpackers, which also benefit from checkoff dollars. In September, 1999, a U.S. District Court granted a preliminary injunction preventing the Agriculture Department from releasing the names and addresses of hog farmers who signed the check off petition. On appeal, the injunction was made final. In February 2000, citing bureaucratic mismanagement in the handling of the checkoff petitions and noting the importance of democratic process, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman announced he would let the checkoff referendum go forward. The National Pork Producers Council, primary beneficiary of the pork checkoff dollars, planned to continue efforts to stop the referendum. Fighting for Antitrust Regulation Recent mergers in the meatpacking and hog producing sectors of the livestock industry have given cause for concern about purchasing agreements and trade practices that discriminate against independent producers. Farmers Legal Action Group provides legal analysis and recommendations to citizen groups regarding how to achieve enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act's unfair and deceptive trade practices and anti-trust provisions. Western Organization of Resource Councils and Dakota Rural Action work to get anti-trust laws enforced and to propose rules that would stop monopsonistic practices by meatpackers in the beef industry. They plan to extend their efforts to the hog industry. The Land http://www.iatp.org/hogreport/sec7.html (2 of 13)2/27/2006 3:50:18 AM
Page 1 and 2:
IATP Hog Report http://www.iatp.org
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Marlene Halverson
Page 5 and 6:
Section 0 The choice as to whether
Page 7 and 8:
Section 0 massive quantities of gro
Page 9 and 10:
Section 0 quantities far exceeding
Page 11 and 12:
Section 0 hog factories avoid the e
Page 13 and 14:
Section 0 Alternatively, we can try
Page 15 and 16:
Section 1 I. Are Independent Farmer
Page 17 and 18:
Section 1 programs were put in plac
Page 19 and 20:
Section 1 and consolidating their o
Page 21 and 22:
Section 1 Farm Credit [Service] is
Page 23 and 24:
Section 1 results despite a $58.6 m
Page 25 and 26:
Section 1 sell on the spot or cash
Page 27 and 28:
Section 1 costs to ignoring the fac
Page 29 and 30:
Section 1 Rationale: Independent ho
Page 31 and 32:
Section 1 animals and definition of
Page 33 and 34:
Section 1 Agriculture. 16 U.S. Depa
Page 35 and 36:
Section 1 46-47 Ostmeyer, A. (1999,
Page 37 and 38:
Section 1 77 Thornsbury, S., Kambha
Page 39 and 40:
Section 2 Safety Some Strategies an
Page 41 and 42:
Section 2 oxygen for complete fuel
Page 43 and 44:
Section 2 cure bacterial diseases b
Page 45 and 46:
Section 2 reach humans, including:
Page 47 and 48:
Section 2 microorganisms in the env
Page 49 and 50:
Section 2 bacteria, but it saw no r
Page 51 and 52:
Section 2 use of penicillin and tet
Page 53 and 54:
Section 2 few problems adjusting. M
Page 55 and 56:
Section 2 The Swedish thus regard i
Page 57 and 58:
Section 2 marketed, discounted to t
Page 59 and 60:
Section 2 destroyed, leaving behind
Page 61 and 62:
Section 2 and practices that make a
Page 63 and 64:
Section 2 of Minnesota, Biosystems
Page 65 and 66:
Section 2 41 Backström, L. (1999,
Page 67 and 68:
Section 2 Washington, DC: National
Page 69 and 70:
Section 2 96-98 National Research C
Page 71 and 72:
Section 2 SOU 1997:132 Del 2 (pdf-f
Page 73 and 74:
Section 2 147 Ault, D. (1994). A ge
Page 75 and 76:
Section 2 169 Ibid. 170 Ibid. http:
Page 77 and 78:
Section 3 Receiving minimal day-to-
Page 79 and 80:
Section 3 Hog Factory Impacts on Gr
Page 81 and 82:
Section 3 In 1998, the U.S. Geologi
Page 83 and 84:
Section 3 and creating setback dist
Page 85 and 86:
Section 3 of nutrients in the Bay c
Page 87 and 88:
Section 3 that lagoons begin to lea
Page 89 and 90:
Section 3 native organic matter poo
Page 91 and 92:
Section 3 Help preserve local contr
Page 93 and 94:
Section 3 25 Ritter, W.F. & Chirnsi
Page 95 and 96:
Section 3 American Prospect online,
Page 97 and 98:
Section 3 68 Understanding the Poll
Page 99 and 100:
Section 4 IV. Part of the Pig Reall
Page 101 and 102:
Section 4 centuries. In 1713, an It
Page 103 and 104:
Section 4 and 44 control participan
Page 105 and 106:
Section 4 out carbon dioxide. Plant
Page 107 and 108:
Section 4 additional systems in the
Page 109 and 110:
Section 4 pollution-reducing option
Page 111 and 112:
Section 4 18 Robbin Marks, Natural
Page 113 and 114:
Section 4 59-61 Bird, E. and Strang
Page 115 and 116:
Section 5 made up of the trust and
Page 117 and 118:
Section 5 designation" for their pr
Page 119 and 120:
Section 5 Pollution Shopping by Cor
Page 121 and 122:
Section 5 environmental laws, and a
Page 123 and 124:
Section 5 alternatives to the propo
Page 125 and 126:
Section 5 Corporate farm operations
Page 127 and 128:
Section 5 The EPA further concluded
Page 129 and 130:
Section 5 ❍ an investigation of t
Page 131 and 132: Section 5 decision by Judge Kornman
Page 133 and 134: Section 5 and other training for it
Page 135 and 136: Section 5 grounds that it was a pub
Page 137 and 138: Section 5 · Operating a facility h
Page 139 and 140: Section 5 portions of an industrial
Page 141 and 142: Section 5 practices that favor the
Page 143 and 144: Section 5 investors in animal facto
Page 145 and 146: Section 5 Health Department. Herald
Page 147 and 148: Section 5 55 RESPEC. (1998, August)
Page 149 and 150: Section 5 to Eric Nixon, regarding
Page 151 and 152: Section 5 126 Ozark Sierra Club. (2
Page 153 and 154: Section 6 | Next Section | | Table
Page 155 and 156: Section 6 about the effects of inte
Page 157 and 158: Section 6 Today, there is a special
Page 159 and 160: Section 6 persist in milk and some
Page 161 and 162: Section 6 In some of the largest ho
Page 163 and 164: Section 6 Population density inside
Page 165 and 166: Section 6 widespread abuses of anim
Page 167 and 168: Section 6 Weaning pigs when they ar
Page 169 and 170: Section 6 Ironically, the creation
Page 171 and 172: Section 6 compatible alternatives t
Page 173 and 174: Section 6 Office. 13 Dawkins, M.S.
Page 175 and 176: Section 6 37 Broom, D.M., Dantzer,
Page 177 and 178: Section 6 IPVS Special Report. B Ph
Page 179 and 180: Section 6 Obstacles and opportuniti
Page 181: Section 6 http://www.iatp.org/hogre
Page 185 and 186: Section 7 struggle to compete with
Page 187 and 188: Section 7 The South Carolina Coasta
Page 189 and 190: Section 7 groups can litigate again
Page 191 and 192: Section 7 Clean Water Fund has been
Page 193 and 194: Section 7 sustainable production me
Page 195 and 196: Section 8 VIII. Funder to Funder Su
Page 197 and 198: Section 8 report presents strong ev
Page 199 and 200: Section 9 no unwarrantably limit th
Page 201 and 202: Contacts Contacts Alabama Arkansas
Page 203 and 204: Contacts Georgia Daphne Walker Ohoo
Page 205 and 206: Contacts Teresa Opheim Iowa Environ
Page 207 and 208: Contacts Dave Dempsey Michigan Envi
Page 209 and 210: Contacts Montana Jim Jensen Montana
Page 211 and 212: Contacts Mark Trechock Dakota Resou
Page 213 and 214: Contacts Bill Berry Concerned Citiz
Page 215 and 216: Contacts John H. Davidson Midwest A
Page 217 and 218: Contacts Larry Barker Buckingham Ci
Page 219 and 220: Contacts Dan Heilig Wyoming Outdoor
Page 221 and 222: Contacts Rob Perks/Todd Robins Publ
Page 223 and 224: Funders Mary Stake Hawker, Director
Page 225 and 226: Funders Vic DeLuca Jessie Smith Noy
Page 227 and 228: Photo Galleries People Back to Main
Page 229 and 230: disease Photo Gallery: Disease Back
Page 231 and 232: Flooding Photo Gallery: Flooding Ba
Page 233 and 234:
Cartoons Cartoons Back to Main Page
Page 235 and 236:
cartoon1 Previous / Next Index Page
Page 237 and 238:
cartoon11 Previous / Next Index Pag
Page 239 and 240:
cartoon13 Previous / Next Index Pag
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
cartoon9 Previous Index Page http:/
show all

IATP Hog Report - Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?