HSUS: Ag Proposal a Special-Interest Power Grab

A board comprised of animal exploiters may choose how animals are treated in Ohio.

A proposed resolution has been introduced in the Ohio legislature that, if passed, would put a measure on the November ballot. Voters would then choose whether to create the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board.

This resolution was created in response to The Humane Society of the Unites States' interest in putting a Prop 2-type initiative on the November 2010 ballot.

California voters, of course, overwhelmingly voted for Prop 2 last November, allowing for the phasing out of battery cages and gestation and veal crates.

The HSUS called the resolution "a special interest power grab that is designed to circumvent the input of all Ohioans into the process and divert attention from serious reform."

Not surprisingly the Ohio Farm Bureau backs the creation of the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board.

Jack Fisher, executive vice president of the Ohio Farm Bureau, used a popular Big Ag phrase -- which I wrote about in my previous post -- to spin the resolution.

"It's time for Ohio to take control of the animal care issue by supporting proactive steps to protect both our food supply and our flocks and herds, while also ensuring we can produce the amount of food necessary to feed Ohio and the world."

The board would be comprised of 13 people, most of whom are "farmers."

(1) The Director of Agriculture who shall be the chairperson of the Board;

(2) Ten members appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate. The ten members appointed by the Governor shall be residents of this state and shall include the following:

(a) One member representing family farms;

(b) One member who is knowledgeable about food safety in this state;

(c) Two members representing a statewide organization that represents farmers;

(d) One member who is a veterinarian who is licensed in this state;

(e) The State Veterinarian in the Department of Agriculture;

(f) The dean of the agriculture department of a college or university located in this state;

(g) Two members of the public representing Ohio consumers;

(h) One member representing a county humane society that is organized under section 1717.05 of the Revised Code.

(3) One member appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives who shall be a family farmer;

(4) One member appointed by the President of the Senate who shall be a family farmer.

Most of the "farmers" would likely be those engaged in animal "agriculture." I put "farmers" and "agriculture" in quotes because I don't consider raising and killing animals to be farming or agriculture.

The HSUS is understandably upset with this initiative. If the board is created, members will be more concerned with profits than with the treatment of animals', just as they are now. Nothing would change -- except perhaps that animal ag would have even more power than they do now.

This proposed council is a blatant attempt to stall efforts to halt inhumane confinement practices for veal calves, pigs and other animals on factory farms — systems that are so restrictive that the animals are often prevented from engaging in basic movements such as turning around and extending their limbs.

(Image courtesy of "RaisingMaine.")