My comment to the EPA

As a follow up to my previous post "Animal Agriculture Under Attack", I have submitted a comment to the EPA in regards to this proposed rule using Capwiz Action Alert. I would encourage anyone in animal agriculture, or any consumer that enjoys meat and dairy products, to submit a comment. The text of my personal comment is listed below:

I oppose a new proposal by the Environmental Protection Agency that would charge livestock owners a fee for alleged greenhouse gas emissions produced by their animals. This proposal is essentially a tax on livestock operations under EPA’s presumptive minimum rate and would have no net effect on the reduction of greenhouse gases. However, this proposal would have a profoundly negative effect on the agricultural economy and would endanger the food supply for all Americans.

I am an Alabama dairyman farming in partnership with my father, and together we are proud to provide a safe, nutritious product to the American public which is essential for proper growth and maintained health. The USDA recommends that all Americans should consume three servings of dairy products daily.

Implementation of this rule would affect both producers and consumers alike. The economic impact on the farm will lead to a reduction in productivity and profitability, resulting over time in a decreased supply of meat and dairy products. Consumers, in turn, would have to pay a much higher price for these products. A decline in the availability of affordable, safe, nutritious foodstuffs would have the net effect of more of our countrymen suffering from hunger and/or malnutrition. Our country would become reliant on others to provide lower-quality alternatives to these products, and we would ultimately find ourselves in a situation similar to our current energy crisis.

I applaud the EPA for its efforts to stabilize and improve our environment. As a steward of the environment, I recognize that we in agriculture should and do adhere to certain standards pertaining to our air, ground, and water. However, I believe all laws, rules, and public policies must take into account the “big picture” net effect on our country. Going forward, I hope the EPA will work with people within the animal agriculture community to find solutions that are grounded in both good science and common sense, so as not to set rules and standards that will effectively weaken or destroy our nation’s domestic supply of meat and dairy products.

I strongly oppose this new proposal, and would appreciate the EPA’s consideration to no longer seek its adoption and implementation.

Animal Agriculture Under Attack

Animal agriculture is under attack! I know that isn't exactly breaking news, but it seems like every time we turn around there is another issue to deal with...another battle for our very survival.

This time, greenhouse gas regulation is the culprit.

I received this story via email just before breakfast, and it gave me a lot to think about while setting fence corner posts this morning. The basic premise is that the EPA is proposing a rule under the Clean Air Act that would essentially tax most livestock farmers for their animals' "emissions".

Now, we try to be good stewards of the environment and I imagine so do most all others in the animal agriculture business. I also agree with the idea that there are certain environmental quality standards we should meet, just so long as those standards are grounded in accepted, proven science and common sense. I also think it is imperative that our country not lump the production of our food into the same category with other industries.

The impact of this proposed rule would have far reaching effects on our way of life. If that cost is borne completely by the farmer, it would in effect drive many if not most of us out of business. Our food supply would decrease significantly, which would then either lead to skyrocketing food costs (and higher taxes to help those who can't afford meats and dairy products) or food shortages and rationing. Or both. And the only alternative would be relying on other countries for our food. We see how well that's worked with energy!

And what if these extra costs were passed on directly to the consumer? It's the law of supply and demand again, just in reverse from the above example. At the end of the day, we'd have less food and it would cost you much, much more to get it.

I could go on and on about this topic, but I've got cows that are expecting to be milked in five minutes. So let me leave you with this question:

Which is more important to you? Meat and dairy products that are nutritious, available, affordable, and the safest in the world, or regulating animal agriculture back into the Dark Ages and paying out the wazoo for these products (IF you can get them)?

It sounds harsh, but the choice really is that simple.

A wet start to the week

The forecast calls for rain on and off all day, but with a "short" week labor-wise we'll just have to work in between the raindrops the best we can. Priority number one for this morning will be fence construction now that we've finished drilling in all of our initial stockpile of forage seeds.

On the cow side, we're still not getting the milk production we want, but as I mentioned earlier that will probably be turning around with a change from a baleage-based to silage based TMR in a couple of weeks. We also had to treat a case of milk fever this morning. Milk fever is a condition in which a cow's blood-calcium level gets out of whack and results in muscle weakness and low body temperature within the first hours after calving. It typically happens in older cows, and is pretty simple to treat. We slowly administer a bottle of calcium solution intraveneously to the sick cow and typically she's back on her feet within minutes and back to normal within a couple of hours. Occasionaly a second treatment is required, but usually the first one does the trick. We'll keep this cow in our "sick pen" for a day or two just to make sure she doesn't have a relapse, and also to ensure that she regains her appetite.

Well, I'm off to check in on our patient. Have a good morning!