“This has been a long time coming and we certainly welcome this rule. Quite simply, this proposed rule will show the United States is willing to talk the talk and walk the walk with regard to following international standards developed by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE),” said McCan. “We cannot demand our trading partners follow OIE standards when we are not here at home.”

As noted in the comments submitted by NCBA, the comprehensive BSE rule will solidify the United States’ commitment to basing trade relationships on internationally-recognized, science-based standards. McCan said maintaining a healthy cattle herd is a top priority for NCBA and USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) should be commended for putting forth a comprehensive BSE rule that allows the United States to meet demand with little, if any, market disruption.

“The U.S. beef industry has worked closely with USDA-APHIS for many years to make sure we have the highest quality controls in place to maintain a healthy cattle population” said McCan. “We must have an objective comprehensive rule in place for beef and cattle imports as soon as possible in order for our nation’s trade negotiators to have credibility in opening markets for U.S. beef. Non-tariff trade barriers hinder our ability to expand U.S. beef exports with many of our global trading partners. Cattlemen need our trade negotiators to eliminate these barriers by requiring our global trading partners to make objective, science-based decisions regarding U.S. beef.”

Comments on the proposed rule were due to the Federal Register yesterday, May 15, 2012. McCan said NCBA is ready to work with members of Congress and the administration to finalize the rule

This week, as part of an ongoing commitment to animal nutrition, Land O’Lakes Purina Feed, LLC launches an industry initiative – the Feeding for 30TM Program. This new program builds on the industry goal of achieving 30 pigs per sow per year and aims to promote proper sow management and nutrition practices to boost performance starting in the gestation and farrowing barns and continuing through all growing phases.

Through the Feeding for 30TM Program, Land O’Lakes Purina Feed and other industry experts are offering collaborative insights and management information to swine producers striving to achieve the industry goal of 30 pigs per sow per year. Researchers behind the program explain that meeting the benchmark of 30 pigs per sow per year has economic and herd health benefits. Sow nutrition is highlighted as a priority to meet the industry goal while maintaining longevity within herds.

“As input prices continue to rise and global pork demand amplifies, increased efficiency is fundamental in the U.S. swine market,” says Elena Lindemann, lactating livestock marketing director with Land O’Lakes Purina Feed, LLC. “In addition to improving a producer’s bottom line potential, properly feeding sows can promote their health and well-being – allowing better potential of achieving 30 healthy piglets weaned each year. We hope this initiative will provide useful insights and tips producers can use to support rebreeding rates, colostrum quality, birth weights and lactation performance for optimal pre-weaning pig growth and lifetime potential.”

Swine producers, veterinarians and nutritionists can learn more about the Feeding for 30TM Program and access nutritional resources by visiting www.Feedingfor30.com. Management tips also may be received by texting “FF30” to 31256.[1]

The launch of the Feeding for 30TM Program will be highlighted at the 2012 World Pork Expo in Des Moines, Iowa. Producers can discuss individual Feeding for 30TM Program goals with industry experts from Land O’Lakes Purina Feed by visiting booth #364 in the Varied Industries Building. The Feeding for 30TM Program also will be a central theme of Land O’Lakes Purina Feed, LLC’s sow nutrition forum to be held Wednesday, June 6, 2012 at 3:00 p.m. in the Varied Industry Building, Meeting Room B.

Land O’Lakes Purina Feed, LLC, in connection with its wholly owned subsidiary Purina Mills, LLC, is North America’s leading feed company serving producers nationwide through local cooperatives and independent dealerships by providing an extensive line of animal nutrition, ingredients and expertise.

[1] You will receive on-going Feeding for 30™ Program text messages with nutrition and management insights to help achieve the 30 pigs/sow/year goal. You may also receive text message asking to provide optional periodic feedback on topics that may be of interest to you in order to ensure information provided is relevant and useful. No more than approximately 4-5 messages/month. Message and data rates may apply. Text STOP to stop. Text AID for help. Terms and conditions available at Feedingfor30.com.

GPS Collars Help Missouri Researcher Track Grazing Preferences.

A recent study by Kevin Bradley, University of Missouri Extension weed scientist, confirms that cattle prefer clean, weed-free grass when given the choice.
The study tracked grazing patterns across three continuously grazed locations in Missouri. A mix of broadleaf weeds or broadleaf weeds and woody brush infested each site, which ranged from 50 to 100 acres in size.

“We sprayed half of each pasture with herbicides and left the other half untreated,” Bradley says. Depending on the undesirable species present, the site received an application of GrazonNext herbicide or a tank mix of Grazon P+D plus Remedy Ultra herbicide. The herbicide treatment eliminated most of the clover.
A month before spraying, Bradley established the baseline. He fitted three cows at each site with GPS collars to track grazing habits. A special, up-down indicator on the collars documented when the cows were actively grazing. The collars recorded their activity at one-hour intervals throughout the season. Prior to weed control, cows grazed the pasture relatively uniformly and continued to do so during the first month after treatment.

Two months after the herbicide application, grazing patterns shifted. Cows grazed 77% of the time on the treated half and only 23 percent of the time on the untreated area. Those results remained constant throughout the duration of the grazing season. In untreated areas, weeds accounted for as much as half the total forage yield, including clover.

“When we compared the grazing preference data with the weed density data, the cows clearly preferred the treated half of the pasture where there was far less weed pressure,” Bradley says.

Other key findings:
• Spraying improved pasture productivity — nearly 2 pounds of grass replaced every pound of broadleaf weeds and woody plants controlled.

• Pasture utilization improved. Cattle more uniformly grazed the entire treated area, while they avoided weeds and brush on the untreated portion.

• Grass volume remained relatively constant and was greater in the treated area at the end of the season, even though it received most of the grazing pressure.
Cows apparently prefer weed-free grass more than they do a weedy pasture that contains clover.

Bottom line
When weed density is significant, spraying presents a real opportunity to improve productivity.

“We see the grass production increase,” Bradley says. “We likely can increase our carrying capacity as well.”
Solve a weed problem first and then bring back the clover, he advises. Many soils will have a native supply of seed that will produce a year after you stop spraying. If not, spend a few dollars and seed new clover into the system.

To learn more about Bradley’s work, visit www.TheCattleVote.com

Two third grade classes will be taking an all expenses paid field trip to livestock farms in Ohio this month, thanks to the efforts of a fellow classmate in being named a winner in the Ohio Livestock Coalition’s (OLC) “ForYourInFARMation” essay contest.

Emma Crusey, a student at North Union Elementary located near Richwood, and Naomi Miranda, a student at Buckeye Elementary in Medina, were selected as this year’s winners for their response to the question, “”How do Ohio farmers make sure we have good, safe food to eat?”

Students who entered the contest used educational materials provided by OLC and available at www.ForYourInFarmation.com. The materials explain livestock farming and provide industry related data. The essays reflected what students learned about food production, from the farm to the kitchen table.

The essay contest is part of OLC’s For Your InFARMation. The program includes free educational materials for teachers designed to teach Ohio third-graders about the origins of the food they eat every day and about the important role agriculture plays in Ohio’s economy. Materials for the program support key Ohio academic content standards for social studies, language arts, science and math, and can be downloaded free of charge at www.ForYourInFARMation.com. Through these materials, students learn about farmers and the economy, livestock farming, keys to safe and healthy food, careers in agriculture and more.

OLC believes that as more and more families become generations removed from the farm, it is increasingly important to educate students at a younger age where their food comes from and the critical role Ohio livestock farmers play in feeding Ohio and the world. That’s precisely the goal of the program and students from the two classes will be able to experience this concept first-hand during their field trip this month.

How would you have responded to the essay question? Are you smarter than a third grader?

Emma Crusey, North Union, Richwood:

Ohio farmers work hard to make sure your food is healthy so you can be healthy, too.

Farmers make sure animals get proper medical care. This means regular check-ups, medicine and vaccines.

Farmers make sure their animals are safe from natural predators and diseases. They make sure the stalls are comfortable and clean.

Farmers give their animals fresh water and plenty of food. They monitor the animals to make sure they are getting the food they need. They feed them the most nutritious food they can find that way they produce the best products.

Farmers work hard to make sure our food is safe to eat and drink. They get up early and go to bed late just so you and your family can have a safe, healthy, locally grown food.

Naomi Miranda, Buckeye, Medina:

Farmers in Ohio feed the world. The raise animals and crops that provide safe, healthy and affordable food to consumers in Ohio, across the United States, and even around the world.

The farmers know that one of the keys is to be sure the animals they are raising are cared for properly. Caring for animals means ensuring that they have proper housing, food and medical care.

Ohio’s livestock farms provide animals with comfortable, safe housing that will shelter them from disease and predators, and also from hurting each other. Farmers make sure their animals have plenty of fresh, nutritious food and clean water. Healthy animals produce and become healthy food that is safe for humans to eat.

That’s why livestock farmers through Ohio make sure their animals receive proper medical care from a veterinarian — regular check-ups, vaccinations and other health problems. Proper veterinary care not only protects animals from disease — it also helps ensure the safety of our food supply.

As a result of these steps, Ohio’s livestock are healthier than ever before and that means plenty of safe, healthy, locally grown food for you and your family! Farmers feed chickens corn and soybeans. The chickens then lay eggs. Farmers gather the eggs, clean them, inspect them, package them and ship to a store or restaurant. Products are inspected and graded by the United States Department of Agriculture, to make sure that the food is safe and good.

So if you grow up strong and healthy be sure to thank Ohio farmers!

“Despite a decline in export volume, prospects for U.S. beef remain positive across the globe,” Seng said. “We are, for the most part, encouraged by the response to the recent BSE case. Nearly every trading partner followed established science and did not alter our level of market access. We remain hopeful that Japan will open to a wider range of products later this year and that access issues in other Asian markets will also be addressed. Consumer demand for U.S. beef is solid, but we need to eliminate trade barriers and maintain an active presence in these markets in the face of aggressive competition if we want to keep export value strong and get back to the record volume pace established in 2011.”

Lower lamb exports to the Caribbean and a sluggish market for variety meat held back the first quarter performance of U.S. lamb. Export volume was down 18% to 3,295 metric tons, while value increased slightly to $6.4 million. Led by strong exports to Canada, lamb muscle cuts achieved a 12% increase in value ($4.4 million) despite a 9% decline in volume (1,484 metric tons).

The grand prize winner is Jason Girouard, son of Rebecca and David Girouard of Brimfield, Massachusetts. The Tantasqua Regional High School student receives a $750 cash prize and a trip to an annual Cattle Industry Convention.

When asked why he entered the contest he said “This contest really stuck out to me because beef has been a huge part of my life. I’ve been really active lately with track and swimming at my school, and like I said in my video, eating right has been essential in my daily routine. In order to do everything I do I need to eat right!

There’s nothing like the natural proteins in beef, and the other vitamins that it has. It keeps me in the best shape I can be! Basically, I run on beef. 

When I saw this contest, I just had to enter it. I don’t want anyone thinking that beef is bad for you at all, because it’s not. It’s great for you and more people should eat it and know all the benefits that it has, and that’s basically the message that I tried to make with my video.” To view Jason’s video visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY0id8IK2ow&feature=channel

Second prize went to Sierra Shea Angell, daughter of Russ and Sally Thomas of Centralia, Missouri. The University of Missouri student, and Team Beef runner receives $250 for her efforts to showcase the power of protein in her short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IClH2Kk637s. Sierra has posted the video to her personal Facebook page and website and has received multiple likes, comments and shares!

Third prize was awarded to Parker Wade Crouse, son of Marion and Patricia Crouse of Woody, California. The Valley Oaks Charter High School student receives $100 for his video which focused on the power of cattle as recyclers and firefighters. He shared “This topic is very personal to me. I raise cattle, it is our livelihood. I don’t like it when people do not know the whole story. I love beef; I promote it everywhere that I can.” Visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsC24kFmixA to watch Parker’s video.

At the same time, the value of beef exports for the quarter rose 4% (to $1.25 billion) on 10% lower volumes (266,388 metric tons).

March pork export volume of 198,972 metric tons was 8% lower than a year ago, but up 6% from February 2012. Export value of $570.5 million was 3% higher than last year and up 8% from the previous month. These results were led by excellent growth in the China/Hong Kong region and by strong performance in Mexico, Japan and Canada.

Beef export volume in March of 89,803 metric tons was 23% lower than last year but up 3% from February. March export value of $438.5 million was down 8% year-over-year but was 7% higher than the previous month.

“A 20% increase in pork export value for the first quarter is extraordinary, especially considering the record performance of last year,” said USMEF President and CEO Philip Seng. “On the beef side, market access issues and price sensitivity are making volume growth difficult in some markets, but we are pleased to see export value remaining above last year’s record pace, even on smaller volumes.”

Pork export value per head sets new monthly record

March pork export value was particularly strong on a per-head-slaughtered basis, reaching $59.92. This was nearly $4 higher than a year ago and set a new monthly record, surpassing the previous high of $59.53 set in November 2011. Exports equated to 27.8% of total U.S. production of muscle cuts plus variety meat, and 24% when including muscle cuts only.

Mexico remains the leading market for U.S. pork on a volume basis, with first quarter exports up 17% in both volume (162,721 metric tons) and value ($299.7 million). Exports to Japan, which nearly reached the $2 billion mark in 2011, were up just 1% in volume (122,899 metric tons) but also achieved a 17% increase in value to $530.6 million. Exports to the China Hong/Kong region, which came on very strong in the second half of 2011, were 30% higher in volume in the first quarter (115,642 metric tons) and surged 82% in value to $234.9 million.

Other first quarter market highlights included:

• Exports to Canada were up 26% in volume (55,916 metric tons) and were one-third higher in value at just under $200 million.
• In Russia, where U.S. pork now has better potential for expansion under a global tariff rate quota, exports were up 20% in volume (15,510 metric tons) and 36% in value ($47.9 million).
• Led by a strong performance in Colombia, exports to the Central and South America region expanded 9% in volume (20,603 metric tons) and 16% in value ($53.5 million).

In South Korea, pork exports surged in the early months of 2011 because of culling of the domestic swine herd (due to foot-and-mouth disease) and a temporary duty-free tariff rate quota for some cuts of imported pork. Consequently, year-over-year exports to Korea were lower in the first quarter of 2012 – down 27% in volume (53,590 metric tons) and 12% in value ($154 million). It is important to note, however, that these totals were still more than double the volume and triple the value recorded in the first quarter of 2010.

“While domestic supplies are recovering in Korea, we are still creating new opportunities for U.S. pork.” Seng said. “The lower tariffs made possible by the Korea-U.S. FTA will enhance the competitiveness of U.S. pork in terms of price, and help us further expand the presence of chilled pork and value-added pork products in the retail and foodservice sectors. These marketing strategies have proven very effective in Japan, and I believe we can have similar success across north Asia.”

While beef export volume slows in some markets, value remains solid

March beef export value equated to $204.65 per fed steer and heifer slaughtered, down slightly from the March 2011 total of $205.40. Beef exports accounted for 12% of total U.S. production when including both muscle cuts and variety meat, and 9% for muscle cuts only. These ratios were lower than a year ago (15% and 11%, respectively).

Despite a 13% decline in volume, Mexico remained the leading destination for U.S. beef (55,725 metric tons) and exports to Mexico managed a 5% increase in value to $250.9 million. Export volume to Canada was steady with last year at 36,834 metric tons, but 15% higher in value at $215.4 million.

In Japan, where the Food Safety Commission continues to examine BSE-related age and product restrictions on U.S. beef, exports were down 7% in volume (29,695 metric tons) but up 10% in value ($194 million). The United States continues to gain market share, as Australia’s exports to Japan have fallen 14% in 2012.

Other first quarter market highlights included:

• Exports to Russia reflected a shift toward higher-value muscle cuts, as volume increased 4% to 14,463 metric tons but volume surged 85% to $59.9 million. As with pork, U.S. beef faces a more favorable access situation in Russia as the U.S. tariff rate quota for muscle cuts was expanded from 41,700 metric tons in 2011 to 60,000 metric tons this year.
• While exports to some Middle East markets slowed, Egypt continued to post very strong results – increasing 12% in volume (31,466 metric tons) and 18% in value ($47.7 million). As a result, exports to the Middle East region were up slightly in volume (35,480 metric tons) and 10% in value ($78.9 million).
• Led by outstanding results in Chile, exports to the Central and South America region increased 44% in volume (8,383 metric tons) and 94% in value ($32.5 million). Exports to Peru and Guatemala also posted impressive value growth.

Held on April 28th at the Wayne County Fairgrounds, nearly 275 attendees representing 30 Ohio counties traveled to Ohio’s Dairy Palooza hosted by a volunteer committee working with the 4-H dairy youth specialist, Bonnie Ayars. Although Mother Nature was having a mood swing outside with a variety of chilly weather, the atmosphere inside was filled with enthusiasm.

Dairy Palooza 2012 was a one-day educational program for dairy youth enthusiasts and leaders interested in learning more about dairy projects with hands on activities that related to current topics of concern. Printed resources and informational items were carefully bound in notebooks and distributed at the registration table. These were connected to each of the workshop sessions. There was a red bucket that became the tote for a rope halter, a feed scoop, the binder of resources, and all the items from the career fair.

The day included 4 separate sessions and within each of these, 4 workshops were offered with suggested level of experiences ranging from cloverbuds and beginners to intermediates and seniors. Demonstrations, skits, role playing, mock scenarios, live cattle, and hands on activities were methods used to teach. From bovine laundry to an actual herd display set up for viewing, from selecting projects on the hoof and on paper to communication techniques with consumers, from skillathon stations to showmanship best practices and a career fair ongoing, everyone left with improved skills and a broader base of knowledge.

The day was not without elegant “cow cuisine” and real dairy products. Cow cookies with all breeds represented set the pace at the registration table and there were cheesy pizzas accompanied by donated milk beverages. However, the specially designed and theme decorated cake with butter cream frosting was an absolute crowd pleaser as a sweet treat to the day’s conclusion. The ice cream bars and sandwiches were also welcome additions.

This remarkable event could not have taken place without an army of dedicated volunteers and presenters. Key sponsors donated more than their time, but other resources and financial support to enrich the program. It took weeks and months of planning and everyone deserves a round of applause for their efforts.

So if you are feeling remorse at missing our 2012 rendition, the good news is that there will be another version in 2013. The date is yet to be determined. New topics, new updates, and a promise of more to see and do will be the goals of the committee.

There is an increasingly tough public relations battle that the beef industry has fought with the media and the public. Since early March, the public relations road has been lined with more potholes than bumps. We first had to deal with issues surrounding lean, finely textured beef (LFTB) also distastefully referred to as “pink slime.” In late April, the fourth case of BSE, “mad cow disease”, was discovered in California. More recently, consumer activist groups have targeted an enzyme called transglutaminase, used for nearly two decades to bind meat cuts together. Not surprisingly, transglutaminase has been referred to as “meat glue” for shock value in the media.

The beef industry is not alone in fighting outside influences on their industry. The pork industry is currently dealing with outside pressure to accelerate the phase-out of the use of gestation-sow stalls. Companies such as McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Burger King, Tim Horton’s, and more recently Safeway have all made announcements as to the intentions to buy pork from suppliers that do not use gestation-sow stalls. Burger King also announced that they intend to buy eggs from cage-free operations. An unfortunate side-effect of these announcements was the fact that animal activist groups such as the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) were able to steal part of the spotlight and took credit for these developments.

Ultimately, it is consumers who should take credit for some of the developments just mentioned. Traditional media and the rapidly growing social-media outlets can advance any issue or cause at a pace that our society has never seen before. The instant availability of information can greatly impact public opinion and consumer confidence as it relates to any agricultural commodity. The beef industry needs to learn some valuable lessons from recent events that have impacted our industry. Let’s take a closer look at how two different issues were handled and the ultimate impacts.

Consider the LFTB situation. LFTB has been in the news since long before the firestorm that broke loose this past March. The product received very negative reviews in the 2008 film “Food, Inc.” and a series in the New York Times in 2009. On March 5, a news organization called “The Daily” published a story on LFTB. Keep in mind that “The Daily” was established in 2011 geared for distribution through the iPad and iPhone. Shortly after March 5, ABC World News Tonight ran the story and a food activist in Houston, Texas started a petition drive to ask USDA to remove LFTB from school menus. The “pink slime” story lingered for several weeks through March and in to April.

Beef Products, Inc., the manufacturer of LFTB, finally went on the defensive for their product later in March. News conferences and media events were held to defend the product’s honor. An event was held that involved three governors and other leaders to tour BPI, Inc’s. facilities and even tasting hamburgers with LFTB. Ultimately, the damage was done and this past week BPI, Inc. announced that it would be closing three of its four plants and hundreds of jobs would be lost.

Compare that scenario to the one surrounding the USDA’s April 24, 2012 announcement that the fourth case of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as mad cow disease, in U.S. history had been verified in a dairy cow in California. The cow was identified through U.S.D.A’s established surveillance program at a rendering plant and was not destined for our food supply. Those who remember the first U.S. discovery of BSE in 2003 can’t forget the painful economic impact of that event. Our export trade for beef at that time stopped with several of our major trading partners such as Japan and has taken until this past year to nearly fully recover.

Immediately after the BSE announcement last month, there was a large amount of media coverage for a couple of days and market prices were briefly impacted. At this time, the only noticeable impacts on export trade of beef are that two large retailers in South Korea have pulled American beef from their stores and Indonesia announced it would block U.S. beef imports. The anxiety over the BSE discovery has largely died down since the announcement less than three weeks ago.

Why has the BSE situation been much less impactful than the “pink slime” story? In my opinion, there are a few key reasons. First, this is only the fourth identified case of BSE in U.S. history and no additional cases have been found in the time since the April 24 announcement. We know that BSE can only be transmitted through feed containing meat and bone meal (MBM) from BSE-infected cattle. In 1997, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned the use of such ruminant-derived protein supplements in cattle feed. BSE was a significant issue around the globe two decades ago with as high as over 37,000 cases of “mad cow” disease found annually worldwide. In 2011, less than 35 cases of BSE were reported around the world. The disease has been effectively controlled.

Another significant reason that the BSE anxiety was relatively short-lived was the fact that producers and the public have a better understanding of BSE through research and education. The beef industry has been very pro-active with the BSE issue through the distribution of science-based, factual information from industry experts and national and state cattlemen’s associations and beef councils through web sites and social media. The public has heard the beef industry’s message on BSE early and often and there is an apparent amount of public trust established.

It can be very frustrating when one or our favorite sports teams snatches defeat from the jaws of victory by being too conservative and playing a “prevent defense.” Beef Products, Inc. played a “prevent defense” with the “pink slime” issue and paid a heavy price. The game of public opinion with the consumer will be a tough battle and it’s a game we cannot afford to lose. We must be pro-active in our defense of the beef industry to insure our product has a place on the consumer’s dinner table.

The newly formed Coalition for Sustainable Animal Agriculture, coordinated by the Center for Food Integrity (CFI), combines forces of food processors, producer groups and other agricultural stakeholders to encourage a more holistic view of what it takes to be sustainable in agriculture.

Charlie Arnot, with CFI, led much of the discussion at the recent North American Strategy Conference on Animal Agriculture that outlined the need for the coalition.

“How do we help those in the food system evaluate the potential tradeoffs when considering food safety, animal health and well-being, worker health and well-being, environmental impacts and food affordability? We think things have fundamentally shifted in the last 90 days when you look at what happened with lean finely textured beef and the current pressure of Kashi to eliminate GM soy. We’re seeing the mobilization of the online communities around specific food concerns that almost erupt like a wildfire. We’re not well prepared for that,” Arnot said. “We’re seeing more pressure on branded food companies from Non-Governmental Organizations and advocacy groups on specific issues. Animal ag and agriculture in general are not necessarily comfortable in engaging in that environment. How do we do a better job engaging in a way that helps us understand that what we’re doing is really consistent with what they want us to be doing? Rather than defending, we engage in a conversation that helps them understand what we are doing and, more importantly, understand what they want from us.”

The rift between the general public and production agriculture has grown to the degree that even sincere and legitimate communication efforts are becoming challenging. Agriculture legitimately wants to serve the needs of consumers who legitimately want to know more about their food supply, but the communication gap is becoming increasingly challenging.

“First, rather than responding with science, listen to consumer concerns, acknowledge those concerns and then help people understand what you are doing to address them. The second thing is to really increase transparency. We know we have to listen and address the concerns that are relevant to consumers. Science is not enough anymore. Science tells us if we can do something, society tells us if we should,” Arnot said. “We have to be able to understand the difference between that. We cannot substitute scientific verification for ethical justification. We need to be able to help people understand that we value what is important to them, and then we have the opportunity to introduce the science. We first must show them that we take responsibility for what happens on our farms.”

Ohio, however, has some advantages with this challenge due to the proactive creation and implementation of the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board. This has set the base for a discussion on issues that some consumers want to see addressed.

“We have to increase transparency with consumers. They want to know how it’s produced, how it’s processed, what’s in it, and what’s not in it,” said Dave White, with Center for Food & Animal Issues at the Ohio Farm Bureau, who attended the meeting. “Today’s consumers are more opinionated, they’re better informed and, though some may question their information sources, better educated. The consumer perceptions are the reality that we have to deal with today. The talking points we’ve been using for decades do not resonate with consumers.”

The Coalition effort even includes the American Humane Association (AHA) that offers a Humane Certified program for farms.

“There are 135 million animals on 5,000 farms that we third party certify. We are hoping for more growth with more animals that are under that umbrella for producing humanely raised products, whether that be dairy or meat or eggs. Also very important to us is that farmers have a very successful way of raising animals for their own business,” said Kathi Brock, the senior director of the Farm Animal Program for the AHA. “I am delighted that there is this openness to collaborate and really, to listen. Too long in ag there has been the idea that ‘if you knew us, you’d love us.’ We all need to be talking to each other. That is very healthy. To see this progression is really amazing.”