|
|
|
|
 By JENNIFER TANGEMAN
Staff Writer
Few people exhibit an enthusiasm about historical artifacts as Jim Bowsher does.
When crews working for G.A. Wintzer and Son Co. started working to build new office space on West Auglaize Street, they came across some interesting finds where a rental home had previously sat.
Jim Kent and others of Kent Surveying began finding pieces of artifacts. They called in local history buff, Bowsher, to try to figure out what the bits and pieces meant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friday, 30 October 2009 |
By MATT NICHOLS
Staff Writer
Proponents say passage of an Ohio ballot issue would not only guarantee safer food for Ohioans but also help keep a highly organized animal activist group at bay.
But one opponent says the law will do nothing against special interest groups and will only add more unchecked big government to the industry.
On Tuesday’s ballot, Ohioans will decide whether a governor-appointed advisory board is a viable way to maintain livestock practices across the state.
If Ohio Issue 2 is passed, an amendment would be made to the state Constitution which would create an Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board. The board would establish and implement standards of care for livestock and poultry across the state and would monitor food safety, local availability, affordability of food and farm management practices.
The Ohio Farm Bureau is one of many agricultural organizations in favor of the 13-member board.
Ohio Farm Bureau spokesperson Joe Cornely told the Wapakoneta Daily News the board’s establishment would not only be best for Ohio livestock — but also Ohio consumers.
“You cannot have a discussion about what is best for animals without also discussing what’s best for people,” Cornely said. “And that’s what this board is all about.”
The board would consist of the Department of Agriculture director, who would serve as the chair, a family farmer appointed by the speaker of House of Representatives, a family farmer appointed by the Senate president and 10 members appointed by the governor with Senate approval.
Among those 10 members must be a a family farm representative, one member knowledgeable about Ohio food safety, two members representing an Ohio farmer organization, one veterinarian, the state veterinarian, the dean of an Ohio college’s agriculture department, two members of the public and one member representing a county Humane Society.
“We think this is a comprehensive inclusive system to decide what’s right, rather than going piecemeal by piecemeal dictating how we should do things in Ohio,” Cornely said.
Cornely said the board is a necessity for Ohio livestock farmers to defend their industry and
See BATTLE, Page 6A
their livelihood amid pressure from animal activist groups looking to make an example out of Ohio.
In February, Cornely
said members of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) met with Ohio Farm Bureau representatives regarding cages used for chickens and hogs. Cornely said HSUS President and CEO Wayne Pacelle issued an ultimatum, saying if changes were not made, the activist group would resort to tactics similar to those employed in California.
The groups efforts in California led to the passage of Proposition 2, which amended how the state’s farmers could house their livestock. Even though the amendment is a year old, Cornely said it has brought a devastating impact to farmers on the West Coast.
“The poultry industry has been forced to examine whether or not they can continue to be profitable under constraints that came from the passage from that ballot measure,” Cornely said. “There have been economic studies that suggest that many of those egg producers will soon be in shutdown mode. Their cost of production has gone up 25 to 45 percent.”
Cornely said The Ohio Farm Bureau’s contention is HSUS intends to make livestock practices so expensive, Ohio farmers have no choice but to abandon their production.
The Farm Bureau spokesperson said he admits more government isn’t always a popular answer, but in this case, it is entirely necessary.
“The choice becomes do we want these policies established by a board of knowledgeable Ohioans who will look at all the issues, or do we want those rules established by an animal rights group via a $10 million advertising campaign,” Cornely said.
Amid all the state agricultural organizations, only one stands against the proposed amendment.
The Ohio Farmers Union is the lone organization pleading Ohioans to vote down the issue.
Ohio Farmers Union President Roger Wise said adding an amendment proposed by the General Assembly which would establish a state-appointed board creates more unchecked government — something he said farmers have been historically against.
Wise said HSUS only finds fault with a few vertically integrated farms, and not all livestock producers in Ohio.
“The vast majority who raise livestock and poultry do not have a problem with animal rights or special interest groups,” Wise said.
A negotiated settlement with HSUS would have been the best answer to all parties involved, Wise said. Settlements with HSUS have already been made in Michigan, Colorado, Maine and Oregon, and he believes HSUS would have been open to talks in Ohio.
But that wasn’t the case, Wise said.
“A negotiated settlement would have been far less acrimonious and far less costly,” Wise said. “It would have been a much better resolution, but instead we have a board with no process for appeal.”
The farming organization president said the board will be funded on the backs of Ohio producers who are already facing dire straits.
The pork industry in Ohio has lost money 22 of the last 24 months, and Wise said the standards board would do them no favors.
If the proposal passes Tuesday, Wise said it will be only a minor road block for HSUS. With no settlement, the activist group will likely come back next year with a greater resolve.
“They’ve already said they’re going to bring up more issues next year which haven’t even been acknowledged,” Wise said. “I won’t be surprised if you see commercials next year promoting very graphic and horrific scenes that will pull at the heartstrings of voters. It’s not going to be a pretty sight.
“This all could have been avoided,” he said.
|
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 02 November 2009 )
|
|
|
|
