|
1.
ESBENSHADE CLEARED OF CRUELTY CHARGES
On June 1st, the owner/CEO and the
farm manager of Pennsylvania-based Esbenshade [egg]
Farms were acquitted of the 35 animal cruelty charges
pending against each of them (see: http://tinyurl.com/2s2459
). The “potentially precedent-setting case,”
initiated by Compassion Over Cruelty (COK), attracted
national attention. COK’s general counsel Cheryl
Leahy said: “If these animals had been dogs
or cats, there’s little doubt this case would
have resulted in a conviction. There is a clear double
standard here, and that hypocrisy is troubling.”
Gregory Martin, a Lancaster County poultry
extension educator who testified for the defense,
said: “People need to recognize that with tens
of thousands of animals, you’d expect to see
some mortality…In most cases, it is under 5
percent over the life of the birds” (see: http://tinyurl.com/oaz95
). Esbenshade, who has egg-laying operations at three
locations with a total of 2.2 million hens, reportedly
spent a large sum of money on the case. He warned
that animal rights activists are increasingly going
to infiltrate animal production industries. "They
are really adamant," he said. PennAg Industries
Association, a Harrisburg-based organization representing
agribusiness interests across the state, wants third-party
agricultural experts to be present during farm investigations
by humane officers.
ESBENSHADE: 'IT COULD HAPPEN AGAIN'
Lancaster Farming, Dave Lefever, June 7, 2007
http://www.lancasterfarming.com/node/621
PENNSYLVANIA COURT FINDS THAT ANIMAL ABUSE ON EGG
FACTORY FARM IS LEGAL
Compassion Over Killing, June 4, 2007
http://tinyurl.com/29fxz6
2.
5.7 MILLION POUNDS OF BEEF RECALLED FOR E. COLI
A ground beef recall has been expanded
for the third time in a week to now include 5.7 million
pounds due to possible E. coli contamination. The
initial recall was for 75,000 pounds, the second for
another 370,000 pounds. David Goldman, acting administrator
of the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, said
the latest recall batch of 5.3 million pounds is well
past its expiration date but may still be in consumers’
homes. The meat, sold in numerous supermarket chains
under various brand names, has been blamed for an
outbreak in Western states that caused 14 illnesses,
from April 25th through May 18th.
MEAT SUPPLIER EXPANDS BEEF RECALL TO
5.7 MILLION POUNDS OF BEEF
San Jose Mercury News/The Associated Press, June 9,
2007
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_6104177
3.
BUSH ADMINISTRATION FIGHTS TESTING FOR BSE
After the first U.S. case was BSE (bovine
spongiform encephalopathy, a.k.a. “mad cow disease”)
was confirmed in 2003, Creekstone Farms Premium Beef
requested permission to voluntarily test for the disease
every animal it planned to process. Doing so would
help the company bypass embargoes on U.S. beef and
get its meat back into foreign markets. The USDA denied
Creekstone’s request, stating: “…consensus
[of international experts] is that 100 percent testing
is not justified.”
Courtney Haden of the Birmingham Weekly writes: “The
USDA proposed testing 220,000 cattle a year nationwide
for $72 million, with tests that would take up to
five months to implement. Creekstone’s plan
was to test 300,000 cattle, its entire herd, on its
own dime, using the same USDA tests but conducted
by a private firm that could bring the job in for
only $5.4 million, in about one month. They could
test more cattle, more cheaply and more quickly. They
had to be stopped. So much for that lofty Republican
ideal of free-market initiative, or the notion that
self-regulation trumps government regulation….[A]
2004 warning by the head of the National Cattlemen’s
Beef Association, no tenderfoots when it comes to
doling out big [Republican] campaign contributions,
[said]: ‘If testing is allowed at Creekstone,
we think it would become the international standard
and the domestic standard, too.’"
The Agriculture Department regulates
the test and argued that widespread testing could
lead to a false positive that would harm the beef
industry. Creekstone sued the USDA in 2006, and last
March it was ruled that the government doesn’t
have the authority to restrict the test and the company
could begin testing as of June 1st. However, the USDA
says it will appeal, delaying the testing until the
court case plays out. Haden asks: “…why
be totally sure there’s no life-threatening
disease in the beef we eat when the USDA could get
away with testing only .006 percent of the 35,000,000
cattle slaughtered in America each year?”
WHITE HOUSE RESISTS MOVE TO TEST ALL
CATTLE FOR BSE
Capital Press/Associated Press, June 8, 2007
http://tinyurl.com/yuzsgl
HOW NOW, MAD COW?
Birmingham Weekly Mixed Media, Courtney Haden, June
7-14, 2007
http://www.bhamweekly.com/?article_id=276
4.
E.U. RECONSIDERING FEED BAN
"I cannot think why we would ever
want to start taking any kind of risk associated with
feeding animal remains to animals, said Richard Haddock,
a National Farmers' Union regional chairman and one
of the region's largest beef producers. The European
Economic and Social Committee (EESC), an E.U. advisory
group, has proposed relaxing the ban on using animal
remains in farm feed as part of the E.U.’s long-term
anti-BSE strategy. The Europe-wide ban of 2000 arose
out of fear that the practice caused the spread of
BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy, a.k.a. “mad
cow disease”). The disease shut down Britain’s
beef export trade, costing farmers billions. Some
183,000 cases of BSE in cattle have been confirmed,
and 160 people in Britain have died from variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease (vCJD), the human form of BSE. Another five
are believed to be infected. (The U.K. Spongiform
Encephalopathy Advisory Committee recently released
a “disturbing” position statement on the
possibility of transmitting vCJD through dentistry:
http://tinyurl.com/35tywc
)
The European Commission is now funding
£1.15 million ($2.3 million) of research to
determine whether feeding chicken remains to pigs
and processed pig meat to poultry could be resumed
without potential human health risks. "There
is going to be a tremendous amount of work involved
at the mills to separate out this feed from ruminant
feed, and as it will only be going into the diet as
a protein supplement it seems a little pointless.
After all, there is still plenty of other protein
around. The only benefit I can see from it is that
it might cut back on greenhouse gas emissions because,
since we have been prevented from burying dead farm
animals, they all have to be burned,” said Alan
Rose, a Somerset pig farmer. A National Farmers’
Union spokesperson stated: “…no change
to the current rules should even be considered unless
and until it can be demonstrated that it would represent
no risk to either animal or human health.” Haddock
added: "At a time when the authorities are talking
about loading farmers with at least half the cost
of disease control, it seems ridiculous to be adding
to the potential risks." Supermarket chains Asda
and Sainsbury’s have announced they will not
sell meat from animals fed meat and bone meal.
RETURN OF THE BSE NIGHTMARE?
Western Daily Press, Chris Rundle, June 2, 2007
http://tinyurl.com/3dw7bg
SUPERMARKETS SAY THEY WILL NOT SELL CHICKEN FED ON
PORK IF BAN IS LIFTED
The Times, Rajeev Syal, June 2, 2007
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article1873259.ece
5.
FARM BILL THREATENS CRATE AND FOIE GRAS BANS, MORE
The bans on gestation crates in Florida
and both gestation and veal crates in Arizona, as
well as bans on foie gras in California and Chicago,
could be nullified if legislation tucked into the
Farm Bill passes, warns Farm Sanctuary. The legislation,
part of small provision entitled Section 123, seeks
to deny citizens the right to pass state or local
laws concerning food safety or humane animal treatment.
Farm Sanctuary has also criticized the House Agriculture
Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry for its
Farm Bill amendment to subsidize the veal industry
(see: http://tinyurl.com/yuxmja
). “The subcommittee's antiquated attitudes
place the interests of big agribusiness over those
of the public or of animal welfare,” the organization
states (see also: http://tinyurl.com/27grqk
and http://tinyurl.com/242t3a
and http://tinyurl.com/2949h9
).
Similarly, a May 28th New York Times editorial mentions
House and Senate agriculture committees’ “cozy
ties to big agriculture.” It states that, five
years ago, “Their lack of enthusiasm helped
scuttle the administration's efforts to reform….a
farm subsidy program that lavishes huge amounts of
money on relatively few producers, compromises the
environment, penalizes third-world farmers and fouls
up trade negotiations.” The Times urges “the
full House and Senate should pay attention”
to proposed subsidy reforms “even if the committees
do not.”
FARM BILL STRIPS COMMUNITIES OF POWER
TO MAKE LOCAL LAWS!
Farm Sanctuary, June 8, 2007
http://www.farmsanctuary.org/campaign/fed_section123.htm
FARM ANIMAL PROTECTION ISSUES SPOTLIGHTED IN D.C.
Farm Sanctuary, June 1, 2007
http://www.farmsanctuary.org/campaign/DC_may07.htm
AN EVEN BETTER FARM BILL
The New York Times, Editorial, May 28, 2007
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/28/opinion/edfarm.php
6.
BIG AG GOBBLES BENEFITS, EXACERBATES GLOBAL POVERTY
Journalist David Moberg uses the chicken
industry as an example of how “big ag reaps
the Farm Bill benefits.” Since passage of the
1996 Farm Bill, the industry has obtained $1.25 billion
a year from grain subsidies, as determined by Tufts
researchers. From 1997 to 2005, savings to Tyson Foods
alone from not having to pay the full cost of producing
the grain in its feed have been worth $2.59 billion.
In determining the winners and losers of these subsidies,
Moberg writes: “Consumers…get cheap chicken,
even if much of it is contaminated with salmonella,
antibiotics and other undesirable pollutants. As the
world's biggest chicken producer, the United States
is also the leading exporter of chicken…which
is sold overseas at rock-bottom prices. Those dumped
exports in turn decimate the chicken industry in many
developing countries. Tally it up. Losers: farmers,
farm laborers, food processing workers, rural communities,
the environment, poor country peasants, many developing
country agricultural industries, urban laborers in
both developed and developing countries…and
U.S. taxpayers. The winner: corporate agribusiness.”
Moberg also examines the history of the Farm Bill
and considers its future.
Rather than benefiting people suffering
from poverty and hunger, as has been claimed by governments
and development agencies, “factory farming”
is in actuality a part of the poverty problem, contends
a new report by the World Society for the Protection
of Animals (WSPA). For example, it notes, “Brazil
has become the third largest poultry producer in the
world almost entirely run by big corporations. As
a result, in just one year over 20,000 families were
forced to leave the countryside.” The report
can be accessed at (PDF file): http://tinyurl.com/yra8t7.
In collaboration with WSPA and others,
the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals has published a brochure detailing recent
improvements in U.S. farmed animal welfare (PDF file:
http://tinyurl.com/2tkhxe
).
FARMERS TAKE THE HEAT, BUT BIG AG REAPS
THE FARM BILL BENEFITS
In These Times, David Moberg, June 4, 2007
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/060607P.shtml
WSPA REPORT SAYS FACTORY FARMING EXACERBATES GLOBAL
POVERTY
PRNewswire-USNewswire, May 23, 2007
http://sev.prnewswire.com/environmental-services/20070523/DCW12523052007-1.html
7.
MANURE POWER FUELS CONTROVERSY
Fibrominn, the first U.S. power plant
that uses poultry litter as a fuel, began producing
electricity in mid-May in Benson, Mn. The state is
the largest producer of turkeys in the country, and
as farms increased in size so did complaints about
their odor and pollution. As regulations also increased,
farmers looked for alternative ways to get rid of
manure. Turkey manure is drier than cow or pig manure,
which makes it burn more readily, as does the bedding
materials it is mixed with. The Benson plant was built
by Fibrowatt, which ran three such plants in Britain,
with financial incentives from the state of Minnesota.
Fibrowatt is also considering additional locations
in Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Commissioners from six rural counties are asking
the Minnesota Legislature to designate poultry manure
as a renewable energy resource, making it eligible
for state subsidies. The commissioners are also seeking
state funding to make it more competitive -the electricity
generated is currently 30% more expensive than that
from conventional plants- and a 10-year commitment,
totaling almost $50 million. Critics note that in
addition to being expensive it is also comparatively
inefficient, with the Benson plant producing a tenth
of the energy generated by a medium-sized coal plant.
Additionally, the plant is a major source of particulate
matter, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen
oxides and hydrogen sulfide. Legislation regarding
Fibrowatt is expected to again be presented in the
next legislative session.
David Morris of the Institute of Local
Self Reliance says that burning manure is the most
costly and rigid way to deal with manure pollution.
"If the state wanted to put $50 million or even
$5 million on the table and ask bidders to come up
with the most cost-effective technology, that would
be the proper way to go about it," Morris asserts.
He points to a research fund Maryland officials have
set up to find manure disposal alternatives. FibroWatch,
a website opposing Fibrowatt projects, is at: http://tinyurl.com/235332
In Texas, government researchers are
looking into producing fuel from cattle manure:
http://tinyurl.com/2cwn49
A NEW LIGHT SHED ON TURKEY MANURE
Minnesota Public Radio, Kathryn Herzog, May 17, 1999
http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/199905/17_herzogk_turkeys-m/
THE ENERGY CHALLENGE
From Turkey Waste, a New Fuel and a New Fight
The New York Times, Susan Saulny, June 6, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/06/science/earth/06manure.html
OF POOP POWER AND GAS EMISSIONS
Time, Sarah Dale, May 15, 2007
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1621243,00.html
|
![[missing header image]](images/faw_cows.jpg)
![[missing header image]](images/newsletter_ico.jpg)