As a livestock producer myself , it pains me to see the industry as a whole strong-armed by animal rights terrorists. When we allow our production practices to be legislated by the very people who want us out of business, we are in essence giving up the right to our own survival. It’s time corporate leaders wake up and refuse to be bullied by the “veggies” in the name of political correctness. How about what’s correct for the normal 95% of us?

It’s hard for me to imagine why anyone would doubt that the HSUS scheme is to impose the laws that will incrementally outlaw ALL forms of animal use.  They say, clearly and repeatedly, that this is their intention.

Susan Wolf’s blog entry of April 5, 2010, recounts how this was described by North Carolina HSUS director Kim Alboum:

“...[was this] yet another wild accusation pulled out of thin air to create a crisis looking for a solution? As we have pointed out before, the same sound bites of breeders fleeing from one state to another are distributed by HSUS in every state with a pending breeder bill.

“When questioned about why the bill did not include cats, Alboum’s answer was “baby steps, they are next, then birds.” ...Alboum stated that in reality owning 6 females should be the separating line between hobby and commercial breeder. Alboum assured the audience that getting ANY bill on the books was worth the effort as it could be tightened up later on…”

The strategy was explained by HSUS director in New York state, Patrick Kwan, at the February 2009 Lobby Day training.  From an attendee’s report of the proceedings: ...The initial HSUS bill will set a cap of 50 intact animals per location, but once this cap is in place, HSUS will strengthen this in the future by lowering the cap each year. He likened it to getting something criminalized as a misdemeanor at first and then increasing it to a felony … HSUS will “crack down in later sessions.”  ...”

Pacelle’s blog on July 6, 2010:  “...  A.B. 1437, a bill backed by The HSUS that requires that starting in 2015 all shell (whole) eggs sold in California must come from hens who were able to stand up, lie down, turn around, and fully extend their limbs without touching one another or the sides of an enclosure. In other words: California will become a cage-free state…”  But the law does not use the term “cage free” nor require that animals be entirely free of confinement in enclosures - it requires that chickens be able to “... fully extend limbs and ... turn around freely….”  without touching the sides of an enclosure or another chicken.  HSUS now claims that the law actually MEANS “cage-free” since (in Pacelle’s view) the only way to meet the conditions of the law is to not keep chickens in ANY enclosure for “all or the majority of any day.”

In “Tips For Successful Lobbying” HSUS says “...Be flexible. Sometimes compromise is a must. Support legislative strategies that may save an otherwise doomed bill: adoption of sunset provisions, grandfathering clauses, and placing provisions into regulations instead of statute.” 

How can anyone think that HSUS will whistle innocently and pretend they had nothing to do with further restricting the use of animals?  They openly say that’s the objective, and continually explain how they plan to achieve it.

“Until there are none” is not simply an entreaty to get your pets from a shelter or rescue.

So maybe we should stop trying to please the zealots who will never be pleased, and instead take some time and really think about what is actually best for the animals.  Formulate some policies and back them up with research and statistics.  Then be proactive: adopt those policies and stick to them, and do a PR campaign with lawmakers and the public.  That won’t stop the agri-terrorists from coming after us, but it will make it more difficult for them to succeed with their legislative schemes.  They are relying on our reluctance to regulate one another, but we no longer have that luxury.

I grew up on the family farm and I’m here to tell you that hogs are not the cute little piggies in the movies. They will fight at the trough and the best pig wins not just a spot at the trough but all the spots. If allowed, they will run off every other animal. Being farm kids we made pets of everything and named the sows after our aunts. We thought it a honor and couldn ‘t imagine anyone would take offense. As much as we liked our hogs, we were taught early on not to get in the hog yard. I’ve seen sows all turn against one and fight her to the death. I’ve also seen them break through the stall and eat another pigs babies. Now somone who has probably never seen a pig outside a theatre is saying what is best for them?? Please! I have seen my own grandchildren work a 4-H hog and tame them to act like a puppy but that is an individual animal and not your normal hog. No one running an operation that makes a living has time to make a pet out of each hog and even if they are pets to a human they will still turn on another no matter how much they are fed. Let those who know hogs decide what is good for a hog. If I can make a suggestion, let the person making rules about the way to care for a hog make their announcement from inside the hog lot fence!

You know Wildman is right.  When we follow the demands of the activists they will comeback and cause more trouble.  If the government in Ohio inforces this change it is going to cost a ton of money for the pork producer to do it.  What we need to do is stand up against the animal rights activists, like what we’ve seen in Nebraska and beat them back to the point where they don’t know what to do.

Let me add one thing to my earlier post. Most people don’t realize the pressure being put on the food industry, fast food restaurants especially, to produce food in a “humane” way. This is a billion dollar market, and companies bow to pressure so as not to offend anyone. PC at it’s worst, and nothing short of blackmail. The goal of HSUS is to put them out of business, do these companies feel it is in their best interest to deal with terrorists? Someone needs to stand up and fight, and the American people need to understand, farmers are good at what they do, they don’t conspire to mistreat any animal. Maybe a chicken can’t stretch it’s wing out without touching something, does that spell abuse? When we stop trying to pin human emotions on chickens and pigs we will all be better off.

What all of you need to understand is that the average “AR” lay-being (can’t “discriminate”, you know) stopped maturing emotionally at around age nine, and firmly, sincerely believes “Bambi”, “The Lion King”, and “Happy Feet” are nature documentaries.

It furthermore thinks “Babe” is a meaningful and accurate portrayal of the “deep and rich inner lives” of farm animals; and the roughly 15 “Air Bud” sequels (to date) are touching portrayals of the actual behaviour of real dogs.

When you’re dealing with emotional infants, it’s very hard to make them come to grasp with the concept that movies aren’t reality. The H$U$, PETA, the A$PCA, etc. count on this.