Animal Ag Alliance: Myths Promoted at "End Factory Farming" Conference

November 17, 2011 – About 300 activists representing the animal rights, environmental, and public health movements converged in Arlington, VA on October 27-29 for the first-ever “Conference to End Factory Farming”. More than 25 speakers attempted to gain the attention of decision makers in Washington, D.C. with sessions titled “The Hidden Costs of Factory Farming”, “Inside the Industry”, and “Building Coalitions for Change”. The goal of the event? To create synergy between competing activist campaigns and frame their extreme goal of eliminating today’s animal agriculture industry as a mainstream effort.

The event was co-hosted by Farm Sanctuary and the ASPCA and sponsored by a wide variety of extremist organizations and companies including the Humane Society of the United States, Mercy for Animals, Compassion Over Killing, A Well Fed World, Compassion in World Farming, E: The Environmental Magazine, Discovery’s TreeHugger, and Whole Foods Market.

Many speakers revealed just how out of step with American values during their presentations. For example, Holly Cheever, of HSUS’ Veterinary Medical Association Leadership Council said that “slaughterhouses are a kind of Auschwitz”. This equating of human suffering with agricultural practices not only diminishes the horrors inflicted on the victims of the Holocaust, but is a sentiment commonly expressed by PETA and other extremist groups. Jonathan Balcome, author of Pleasurable Kingdom and a former HSUS and PETA employee, referred to the the push for animal rights as comparable to “African colonialism, slavery, women’s rights, and the civil rights movement”. Many of the extremists seemed to realize that while their beliefs are not mainstream, they could still seek to influence the public through emotional appeals. As speaker Nick Cooney of The Humane League put it: “revolution is not a question of virtue, but of effectiveness.”

Notably, the single presenter who suggested compromise to target large-scale producers rather than eliminating animal agriculture in entirety, Dr. John Ikerd of the University of Missouri, was met with ridicule from the audience and fellow presenters. HSUS Senior Director of Farm Animal Protection Paul Shapiro responded to Ikerd by saying that “combating factory farming and promoting veganism are not exclusive concepts”.

Promoting veganism – and as speaker Mark Bekoff claimed, sharing the idea that meat is a “who” rather than a “what” – was a main goal of the meeting. Farm Sanctuary President Gene Baur elaborated on this ambition during a pre-conference media interview, saying: “But at the end of the day, it’s not necessary to eat any animal products. We’ll continue to hold up the vegan ideal, but we will also support and encourage any steps that move away from the industrial factory-farming model.”

The activists discussed tactics to intimidate farmers and ranchers using litigation and legislation while promoting the “factory farm” stereotype to the public. Nathan Runkle, Director of Mercy for Animals, indicated that undercover videos represent the “lifeblood” of the organization. Speaker David Wolfson, a partner with the Milbank Tweed law firm and professor at NYU’s school of law, said that providing pro bono work to activist groups is one of the most important things lawyers can do to help the movement. He also elaborated on the legal strategy used during California’s Proposition 2 campaign, saying that “if a farmer came out in criticism of the ballot initiative, they would be subject to undercover investigation and sued”.



“For modern animal agriculture, the less the consumer knows, the better.”
– Dr. Michael Greger (HSUS)

“Slaughterhouses are a kind of Auschwitz.”
– Dr. Holly Cheever (HSUS)

“The lifeblood of Mercy For Animals is our undercover investigations of animal agriculture.”
– Nathan Runkle (Mercy for Animals)

“In California, if a farmer came out in criticism of the ballot initiative, they would be subject to undercover investigation and sued.”
– David Wolfson (Milbank Tweed)

“Meat consumption shouldn’t be normal.”
– Gene Baur (Farm Sanctuary)

“Everyone can agree that cutting down on animal consumption is better for the public.”
– Paul Shapiro (HSUS)

“We need the poultry industry not to exist.”
– Wenonah Hauter (Food and Water Watch)

“Agribusiness… they’re the radicals!”
– U.S. Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA)

“Let’s hear about veganism as an alternative. Taking on meat should be the real war.”
– Dr. James McWilliams (The Atlantic)
________________________________________

The Alliance provides a full 12-page report on the conference on the Members section of its website. Everyone involved in food production should be made aware of the goals and tactics discussed at this first conference dedicated to ending animal agriculture. While vegetarians and vegans represent just a tiny fraction of society – about 97 percent of Americans include meat, milk, and eggs in their diet – they are beginning to have a disproportionately loud voice. It is critical that all stakeholders correct the misinformation presented by these extremist groups. The Alliance will continue to work to bridge the gap between farmers and consumers to show that while today’s agriculture industry has evolved to meet the needs of society, combining technology with tradition, the same commitments to the animals, the land, and food safety remain.

The full text of the Alliance's report on the “Conference to End Factory Farming” is available on the Members section of its website. For more information, contact Communications Director Sarah Hubbart at shubbart@animalagalliance.org.

Congressman Huelskamp Calls on CFTC, Courts to “Not Rest Until Missing MF Global Funds Are Restored to Customers”

Congressman Huelskamp Calls on CFTC, Courts to “Not Rest Until Missing MF Global Funds Are Restored to Customers”

(WASHINGTON) – Kansas Congressman Tim Huelskamp issued the following statement regarding the more than $600 million missing in client funds held/managed by MF Global Holdings Ltd., a securities firm.

“Throughout the past two weeks I have heard from several Kansans who are on the receiving end of MF Global’s flagrant disregard for the law and mismanagement,” Congressman Huelskamp said. “The apparent comingling of funds has wreaked havoc for many customers. For the sake of those who have fallen victim to this financial wrongdoing, it is my hope that CFTC and the courts will not rest until the missing funds are restored to customers as soon as possible. And, It is my hope that they will not rest until all involved parties are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law possible if and when violations are found.”

“I will continue to monitor the situation, put pressure on the judge and CFTC to investigate and move with all possible speed, and will support the ongoing investigations. I will work to keep my website updated with the latest information regarding MF Global, the bankruptcy court, and what it means for Kansans. I urge constituents: Do not hesitate to contact my office with any questions you may have.”

MF Global Holdings Ltd., run by former New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine, filed for bankruptcy (the eighth-largest in history) on October 31, 2011. Shortly thereafter it was discovered that hundreds of millions of dollars were missing. News reports indicate that the firm pursued bankruptcy following risky investments in the European bond market that led to major losses and downgrades. MF Global tried to avert bankruptcy by finding another firm to acquire it, but potential knowledge of the customer fund shortfall may have discouraged such acquisition.

Commodity customers’ monies were supposed to be kept in segregated accounts, but there is speculation from the CME Group that MF Global broke rules and did not keep such funds in a different account from its futures trading account. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is now investigating along with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) the “disappearance” of these funds. Specifically, CFTC is investigating possible violations of the Commodity Exchange Act that prohibit mixing of such funds (see statement from Commissioner Scott D. O’Malia). This law also requires entities like MF Global to have enough money in its accounts to cover customer liabilities (see letter from Kansas City Board of Trade to members).

The missing $633 million represents approximately 12 percent of the segregated funds; the remaining 88 percent have been accounted for.

A trustee has been appointed to oversee and recommend to a bankruptcy judge how funds will be paid out to customers. It is expected that a bankruptcy judge will hear the request of the trustee charged with overseeing these accounts to release slightly more than $500 million of the more than $600 million missing funds.

Regarding Passage of Withholding Tax Repeal

Regarding Passage of Withholding Tax Repeal

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 17, 2011—“The American Farm Bureau is pleased that the House yesterday passed H.R. 674, to repeal the 3 percent withholding tax, as already passed by the Senate. The resounding vote of 422-0 demonstrates that Americans have had enough of extraneous taxes.
“Without passage of this important legislation, the new 3 percent withholding tax, which was scheduled to begin in 2013, would have unnecessarily hit farmers hard in the pocketbook. The tax would have been withheld from many Agriculture Department payments, such as dairy support and conservation programs.
“Farm profitability and tax liability fluctuate greatly from year to year due to weather and markets, but taxes would have been withheld regardless. For agricultural operations that ended the year without owing taxes, the withholding would have amounted to an interest-free loan to the government. Reducing farm revenue by 3 percent of government payments could have created cash flow problems and made it harder for farmers to purchase the supplies they need.
“The tax would also have applied to Medicare payments. Because rural medical facilities and doctors see a higher percentage of Medicare patients, it would have been harder to maintain rural health facilities and to attract doctors to rural areas.
“The bill will now head to the president for his expected signature.”

Poll: Thirty Percent of Americans Choose Starbucks as Their Favorite Coffee

Poll: Thirty Percent of Americans Choose Starbucks as Their Favorite Coffee

Atlanta, Ga. – November 17, 2011 – Americans love their coffee. Whether it’s a nice piping hot cup of brew to start the day, served with cake as an after-dinner dessert, or as an afternoon pick-me-up.

Poll Position wanted to know what retail outlet is our favorite to buy coffee.

In a national scientific telephone poll, 30% chose Starbucks, with McDonald’s and Dunkin’ Donuts each tied for second each with 19%.

Here is a breakdown of the poll results:

Starbucks: 30%
McDonald’s: 19%
Dunkin’ Donuts: 19%
Caribou Coffee: 7%
Seattle’s best Coffee: 3%
Some Other Shop: 15%

While Starbucks led the way in almost all of our categories, it finished fourth among the 65 and older group. McDonald’s was their first choice with 27%, Dunkin’ Donuts was second at 22%, some other shop was third at 17%, Starbucks fourth with 16%, Seattle’s Best was fifth at 5%, Caribou Coffee came in sixth at 3%.

See a breakdown of survey participants by age, race, gender, and political affiliation in crosstabs for this poll at http://media.pollposition.com.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/Poll-Position-Crosstbas-Social-media-helpful-or-harmful.pdf.

Poll Position’s scientific telephone survey of 1,170 registered voters nationwide was conducted November 15, 2011 and has a margin of error of ±3%. Poll results are weighted to be a representative sampling of all American adults.

What do you think? Who is your favorite coffee retail outlet? Vote in our online companion poll and comment at http://pollposition.com/2011/11/17/favorite-coffee/.

The online companion poll in which you can vote provides unscientific results, meaning it’s a tally of participating Poll Position users, not a nationally representative sampling.

Poll Position is committed to transparency and upholding the highest professional standards in its polling, explaining why we provide you with the crosstabs of our scientific polls. Crosstabs provide a breakdown of survey participants by age, race, gender, and political affiliation.

Learn more about Poll Position’s polling methodology at http://pollposition.com/2011/09/26/our-polling-methodology/.

National Restaurant Association Voices Concerns over Proposed Health Care Regulations at IRS Hearing

National Restaurant Association Voices Concerns over Proposed Health Care Regulations at IRS Hearing

( Washington, D.C.) In testimony before Internal Revenue Service (IRS) officials today, National Restaurant Association Director of Labor and Workforce Policy Michelle Reinke Neblett described the significant challenges the restaurant industry faces under proposed health care regulations related to employer health plans.

“The restaurant industry is the nation’s second largest private industry employer, providing jobs to nearly 13 million people,” Neblett said during the public hearing. “We are an industry dominated by small businesses, and an employer of choice for workers seeking flexible work schedules, with a high proportion of part-time, seasonal and temporary workers. Our workforce is typically young and we experience a high average turnover rate relative to other industries. These characteristics result in a workforce that can be fluid, presenting unique compliance challenges for the industry. Throughout the implementation of the new health care law, we urge Administration officials to consider the collective impact of employer regulations from the perspective of restaurateurs who are trying to offer quality health care coverage that is affordable and useful to their employees and also affordable to them as an employer.”

Today’s hearing focused on proposed rules related to determining an employer health plan’s “affordability” to an employee and the plan’s “minimum value.” The new health care law requires large employers (those with 50 or more full-time equivalent workers) to offer minimum essential coverage to their full-time employees and dependents that is both affordable and of minimum value or be subject to potential penalties.

“Since the law passed, restaurateurs have asked how they should comply with an affordability test based on the household income of their employees – information they do not know and do not wish to know for privacy reasons,” Neblett said. “The National Restaurant Association believes the affordability test based on household income is flawed and suggests the option of evaluating affordability based on W-2 wages. In addition, other elements should be taken into account when factoring affordability, such as the prohibition on annual and lifetime limits and no cost-sharing for preventive services, as well as employer contributions to wellness programs and to Health Savings Accounts.

“Moreover, a restaurateur’s ability to meet the affordability test depends heavily on the rules that will be written to meet the minimum value standard under minimum essential coverage. The total effect of the affordability test and minimum value test under minimum essential coverage must be considered carefully in the context of what an employer like a restaurateur with a low-margin business is able to afford and offer employees.”

The National Restaurant Association has played an active role throughout the regulatory process, most recently filing comments on October 31 with the IRS and the Department of Health and Human Services on issues related to employer health plans.

The National Restaurant Association is a leading member of the Employers for Flexibility in Health Care (EFHC) coalition, a group of leading trade associations and businesses in the retail, restaurant, hospitality, construction, temporary staffing, and other service-related industries, as well as employer-sponsored plans insuring millions. EFHC Coalition members are dedicated to the common goal of advocating for solutions for both large and small employers and are working to help ensure that employer-sponsored coverage – the backbone of the US health care system – remains a competitive and affordable option for employers and for employees whether full-time, part-time, temporary, or seasonal workers.

Cornucopia: Future of Organic Food and Agriculture at Risk Use of Synthetic Preservatives, Genetically Mutated Ingredients and Weak Animal Welfare Standards Headed for Vote by USDA Panel

Future of Organic Food and Agriculture at Risk
Use of Synthetic Preservatives, Genetically Mutated Ingredients
and Weak Animal Welfare Standards Headed for Vote by USDA Panel
Full press release can be linked at:http://www.cornucopia.org/2011/11/future-of-organic-food-and-agriculture-at-risk/ /
Cornucopia, WI—The Cornucopia Institute, one of the nation’s leading organic industry watchdogs, is urging members of the USDA's National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), in formal testimony, to vote to preserve the integrity of organic food and farming at its upcoming meeting in Savannah, Georgia.
Some of the hot button issues on the agenda, including using artificial preservatives and genetically modified ingredients, would seem Orwellian to many longtime organic farmers and consumers. The forecasted dustup will be debated by a USDA panel, deeply divided between corporate agribusiness representatives and organic advocates.
Under the Bush and Obama administrations, the USDA Secretaries have been criticized for appointing a significant number of corporate representatives, whose primary interest appears to be loosening the federal organic standards, allegedly in pursuit of enhanced profits.
"We think this meeting may well decide the fate of organic food and agriculture in this country," said Mark A. Kastel, Codirector of The Cornucopia Institute, which represents family-scale organic farmers and their consumer allies across the U.S.
The 15-member NOSB is a citizen panel, set up by Congress, to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on organic policy and rulemaking. Upcoming votes concern the use of genetically modified and synthetic additives that have been petitioned for use in organic foods and drinks, including baby foods and formula.
While these synthetics seemingly fail the legal criteria for inclusion in organic foods, the NOSB committee recommending their use is comprised mostly of representatives working for corporations like General Mills and Campbell Soup that have only a sliver of their total sales in the organic food sector.
Additives being recommended for use in organics include nutritional oils manufactured by Martek Biosciences Corporation, part of the $30 billion multinational conglomerate Royal DSM. These oils, genetically modified to provide isolated omega-3 and omega-6 nutrients DHA and ARA, are derived from algae and soil fungus, and stabilized with a wide variety of synthetic ingredients.
When incorporated in infant formula, these oils are processed with a neurotoxic solvent, n-hexane. A byproduct of gasoline refinement, n-hexane is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as a hazardous pollutant. The recommendation to approve Martek’s oils, processed with hexane, has industry observers scratching their head since solvents, commonly used in conventional food production, are expressly forbidden in organic food production.
“What is most egregious about the NOSB push to approve the Martek Biosciences Corporation petition is that these DHA and ARA oils are in no way essential in organics, as claimed by Martek,” states Cornucopia's Kastel. “Other organic manufacturers have successfully used fish oil and egg yolks as legal and natural alternative sources of supplemental DHA.”
According to a poll of nearly 1,500 Seattle area organic consumers, conducted by PCC Natural Markets, the largest member-owned food cooperative in the United States, the overwhelming majority of shoppers would reject organic products with Martek’s oils if they knew the manufacturing details of Martek's “Life’sDHA®”.
76.4% of shoppers polled in the PCC survey would not purchase organic products with DHA from genetically modified algae, and 88.6% would not purchase organic products if hexane-extracted. If consumers knew that Martek’s oils are stabilized with synthetic ingredients, the poll suggests that 78.3% of consumers would reject the products as well.
The NOSB will also vote on a petition allowing the use of the synthetic preservative sulfur dioxide (sulfites) in wine. Winemakers who currently use sulfites are prohibited from using the USDA organic seal on their labels. "Approving sulfites, not only a synthetic preservative but a common allergen, would represent another blow to consumer confidence in the organic label, which has always signified the absence of artificial preservatives," Kastel noted.
The success of a growing number of certified organic winemakers that shun artificial preservatives proves that this synthetic is not essential to making a high quality organic wine.
"If the standards are weakened by the USDA, allowing these synthetics, it will significantly narrow the difference between organic and conventional wine," said Paul Frey of Frey Vineyards. "A major strength of the organic standards comes from consumers trusting that organic foods are wholesome and free from artificial preservatives and other threats to health and environmental stewardship."
Meanwhile, the Livestock Committee of the NOSB, which is refining the standards aimed at ensuring high levels of animal welfare on organic farms, appears to be backing away from adopting strong, enforceable standards for laying hens and other species.
"They are caving to the factory farm lobby, listening to giant vertically integrated egg producers, and ignoring the voice of rank-and-file family farmers," said Tim Koegel, a nationally prominent certified organic farmer producing pastured eggs and chickens. "The NOSB has an opportunity to make organics the true gold standard in terms of animal husbandry but instead might choose to make the organic label a joke."
The proposal for chickens would give animals as little as one square foot of living space. "Like allowing synthetics, this woefully inadequate standard would violate the organic law that requires animals be allowed to exhibit their natural instinctive behaviors," added Koegel. "Hell, those birds will not even be able to fully span their wings, let alone forage outside for insects, seeds and worms."
This is not the first time the organic community, farmers and consumers, have come together to defend the integrity of the organic label. In the mid-90s, when the Clinton Administration first suggested allowing antibiotics, genetic engineering and sewage sludge in organics, over 300,000 citizens recorded their objections with the USDA—and they won.
"We have already received numerous proxies, downloaded from our website (www.cornucopia.org) from organic stakeholders demanding that the NOSB back away from sweetheart deals for corporate agribusiness at the expense of the organic label," affirmed Kastel. "We hope many other folks, who care about organics, will make their voice heard as well."

Federal Partners Unite to Help Rural Communities with Environmental and Economic Goals

Federal Partners Unite to Help Rural Communities with Environmental and Economic Goals

BREVARD, N.C., Nov. 17, 2011 - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan spent the day in rural North Carolina discussing the Obama Administration's work to strengthen rural economies. Perciasepe and Merrigan hosted a White House Rural Council meeting with local officials, community organizations, and businesses to discuss the benefits the American Jobs Act can have on rural communities and share a new report highlighting how small towns and rural places across the country are using federal resources to enhance economic vitality and protect the environment.
Developed by the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities in cooperation with USDA, the Supporting Sustainable Rural Communities report is the Obama Administration's latest effort to better coordinate federal programs for rural communities. The report discusses federal programs that help rural America, presents sample funding mechanisms and technical assistance opportunities and performance measures rural communities can use, and includes case studies showcasing rural accomplishments.
"The Obama Administration is committed to supporting economic development in rural communities through its landmark Partnership for Sustainable Communities report and through multiple provisions in the American Jobs Act," said EPA Deputy Administrator Perciasepe. "Strategic use of federal programs, like those detailed in the report released today, can help strengthen these communities and revitalize their economies while preserving their rural heritage."
"By working together, HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA are making it easier for rural communities to access federal funding and use it to implement local and regional priorities," said USDA Deputy Secretary Merrigan.
"Coordinating federal investments achieves better results on the ground, meeting multiple economic, environmental, and community objectives with each dollar spent."
"All of us at HUD are excited for the release of this report because it gives us an opportunity to share what we already know: small towns and rural communities around the country are using the federal resources from our Partnership for Sustainable Communities in exciting and innovative ways to create jobs for American workers and spur economic growth for American families," said Acting HUD Deputy Secretary Estelle Richman.
Deputies Perciasepe and Merrigan unveiled the report in Brevard, N.C., a small community that is creating jobs and improving quality of life for its residents by building on its natural resources, traditional downtown, and experience with agriculture and manufacturing. Brevard and the region have used federal investments to enhance economic vitality in a way that is sustainable and homegrown. Supporting Sustainable Rural Communities contains case studies of 12 other rural communities and regions that are using federal resources to achieve their economic and land use visions, including:
• Grand Canyon National Park, Ariz.
• Lake Village, Ark.
• Waverly, Iowa
• Greensburg, Kan.
• Bowling Green, Ky.
• Hancock County, Maine
• North Central Montana
• Maupin, Ore.
• Howard, S.D.
• Pine Ridge Reservation, S.D.
• Rural Tennessee
• Ranson and Charles Town, W.Va.
The Partnership for Sustainable Communities is a joint effort of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and EPA to coordinate federal actions on housing, transportation, and environmental protection. USDA is working with the partnership to help serve rural communities.
At the White House Rural Council Meeting, Deputies Perciasepe and Merrigan discussed the benefits the American Jobs Act would have in North Carolina. The Act will provide a tax cut for over 170,000 businesses, support the jobs of 13,400 teachers and first responders and immediately provide a job for over 10,400 construction workers through infrastructure improvements. A typical household in North Carolina will receive a tax cut of around $1,300.
More information on Supporting Sustainable Rural Communities:
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/publications.htm#huddotepa
More information on the Partnership for Sustainable Communities and to read the report:
http://www.sustainablecommunities.gov
#
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice), or (202) 720-6382 (TDD).

Farm Bureau: EPA’s Crushing Regulatory Burdens Threaten Family Farms

EPA’s Crushing Regulatory Burdens Threaten Family Farms

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 17, 2011 – In just the last three years, the Environmental Protection Agency has set in motion a significant number of new regulations that will significantly change the face of agriculture. The coming changes threaten the continued operation of family farms and ranches, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation

Testifying today on behalf of AFBF before the House Small Business Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy and Trade, Carl Shaffer, president of the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, said EPA proposals to exert greater regulatory control over agriculture will drive up the cost of producing food, fiber and fuel.

“EPA proposals are overwhelming to farmers and ranchers and are creating a cascade of costly requirements that are likely to drive individual farmers to the tipping point,” Shaffer said. “The overwhelming number of proposed regulations on the nation’s food system is unprecedented and promises profound effects on both the structure and competitiveness of all of agriculture.”

“In contrast to EPA’s heavy-handed approach of issuing crushing regulatory burdens, agriculture and the Agriculture Department have worked together over the last few decades to make enormous strides in agriculture’s environmental performance by adopting a range of conservation practices and environmental measures,” Shaffer said.

Shaffer owns and operates a wheat, corn and green bean farm in Columbia County, Pa., located in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.

The Chesapeake Bay is one area of concern to Farm Bureau, due to the burdensome and unlawful nutrient management plan EPA is taking steps to implement. Other areas of concern include EPA’s proposals to expand the scope of waters subject to federal regulation under the Clean Water Act, which require costly and duplicative permits for normal pesticide applications, proposed standards for regulation of dust, and unjustified attempts to collect data from livestock farms.

In his testimony, Shaffer said that “EPA is literally piling regulation on top of regulation, and guidance on top of guidance, to the point of erecting barriers to economic growth,” said Shaffer.

Philip Nelson, president of Illinois Farm Bureau, also testified at today’s hearing, on behalf of farmers and ranchers in his state. Nelson raises corn, soybeans, alfalfa, cattle and hogs. He testified to the subcommittee regarding a new regulation, the Pesticide General Permit, that went into effect Nov. 1.

“This new permit is a needless duplication of existing law. We do not need this entirely new permit program,” Nelson said, noting that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act has covered pesticide labeling and application very effectively since 1947.

Further, the pesticide permit “doesn’t improve food safety, doesn’t add any additional environmental protection or benefit for society, and does nothing to improve my bottom line,” Nelson said.

Nelson also commented briefly on the potential impacts of proposed dust regulations on agriculture, urging support for legislation such as H.R. 1633, the Dust Regulation Prevention Act. The act would provide the certainty that farmers, ranchers and residents of rural areas need to ensure that normal activities that are essential parts of their farming operations are not unduly regulated by a standard for which there is no proven benefit to human health

New York Public Library: online Thanksgiving project

The New York Public Library just launched a new, online project for Thanksgiving - one of our nation's most popular mid-day meals. The Library is looking for photographs, stories, videos, audio clips of Thanksgiving traditions - the food, the prep, the customs (old and new).

http://www.nypl.org/thanksgiving

Select entries of entrées (and sides!) will be displayed in a new food exhibition appearing at NYPL in 2012. The focus of the exhibition will be lunch, the mid- meal that work-obsessed, time-obsessed Americans stirred up in their own image nearly 150 years ago.

Any possibilities are welcome and encouraged, whether it's a photograph of the friends surrounding a thanksgiving plate of kimchi or a video featuring the traditional turkey; Appetizers, soup, salad, dessert - we want to see the whole splendid feast.