ohio farm bureau federation

News & Events

Text Size - + print article

Jack Fisher details the Ohio agriculture agreement

Published Jul. 1, 2010 | Discuss this article on Facebook
This article has 13 Comments
fb-newsservice-logo_320x240.jpg

There are a lot of questions about Wednesday's announcement of an agreement between Ohio Farm organizations and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

OFBF Executive Vice President Jack Fisher sat down in the Farm Bureau radio studio and answered some of your questions with staff member Joe Cornely.

Following are audio files of the entire conversation. You may listen to the entire discussion or segments of it broken out individually by topic.

Click on the links below to listen.

Full discussion (14:27)

Track 2: Background on the agreement (2:31)

Track 3: Structure of agreement (1:24)

Track 4: Significant outcome of the agreement (1:12)

Track 5: Could we have won ballot fight? (1:20)

Track 6: PR challenge (0:35)

Track 7: Risk management (1:31)

Track 8: Changes in production practices (0:58)

Track 9: Agricultural unity uncompromised (0:40)

Track 10: Farmer-leader involvement (2:20)

Track 11: Did we cave in? (1:31)

Track 12: Is HSUS done in Ohio? (0:19)

SPEAK UP

We want to hear the thoughts and questions of Ohio farmers. Please take time to read through all the agreement details and leave your comments at this link: http://ofbf.org/news-and-events/news/799/#comments. We will address them as we are able.



Text Size - + print article

Reader Comments (13)

Becky Dickerson said:
You gave up Mr.Fisher. You gave up. Ohio Farm Bureau member & Ohio citizens were ready to fight for you and for fair livestock practices and you let them win. Don't for a minute think HSUS will go away. They have OFB on a short lease now. They have us right where they want us. Mr. Fisher, Mr. Stickland and others have screwed up and Ohio Farmers will pay the price. Not the big guys. I'm extremely disappointed. I guess I'll have to think about renewing my FB membership. flag as improper
Posted Jul. 1, 2010
Matthew Weeman said:
monitoring the site are we? That's good.

Matthew Weeman flag as improper
Posted Jul. 2, 2010
Joe Cornely said:
Earlier today we removed a comment from this section. The post was not removed because of its critical nature, it was removed because it did not comply with our social media policy. Foremost, the writer made a point of saying he/she was hiding their identity. Secondly, the post was largely a personal attack.

We encourage your use of this medium to share your views, but ask that we all strive for transparency and civility.

Our policies are at http://ofbf.org/privacy-policy/

Joe Cornely, Sr. Director
Corporate Communications flag as improper
Posted Jul. 2, 2010
Diad Kinson said:
Not sure why so many of you claim that HSUS is an outside agitator. It's a national organization with lots of members in Ohio. I am a member and I live in Dayton. I helped collect those 500,000+ signatures to put the issues on the ballot for Ohio citizens to vote upon.

Ohio citizens don't walk CAFO's aka factory farms. They're bad for the environment, unbelievably cruel to animals, terrible neighbors, run a lot of small farmers out of business, produce unhealthy food.

Most of us who gathered signatures for the iniative were also surprised at the settlement and somewhat disappointed that Ohio citizens weren't able to cast their ballot. There was no doubt in our minds that the iniative would have passed resoundingly. Your reps also knew the issue would have passed once we got it on the ballot. (People would not have been mislead like they were when they voted for the Livestock Board last go-around.) Your reps knew they were backed up against the wall.

Anyone who supports CAFOs simply want to count living beings as just so many units of profit. You lost this time and you will lose again. You're right about one thing - we animal advocates won't stop. flag as improper
Posted Jul. 2, 2010
Karen Bunning said:
As a life-long OFBF member, my initial reaction was disappointment and disbelief. But then I remembered that I am a mediator for court cases. When I open a mediation session, I set out the advantages of reaching a negotiated settlement. These include certainty (no more wondering about the possible outcome of jury deliberations); cost savings (no more attorney fees and expenses adding up); and termination (the matter is over today, not months from now). These advantages accrue regardless of the terms of the agreement, and sometimes are more important than those actual terms. Add to that what farmers had to lose in continuing the fight, regardless of outcome, and settlement looks sensible. Besides spending millions of dollars and hours of work, the lingering taint of negative ads and polarization of opposing advocates could make a victory pyrrhic.
Then the terms of this agreement are positive. Production agriculture does not disagree that cock-fighting should be heavily penalized, nor that dog breeding should be regulated. Prohibition of keeping wild and dangerous animals can actually remove a potential threat to livestock. The lead-in time for changes to space requirements for chickens and pigs make planning feasible and do not put immediate financial burdens on producers. Technology and management practices have time to develop in a rational manner. The downer cows and euthanasia issues were already Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board policy. The more I study at the agreement, the better it looks for Ohio and for farmers.
Despite an instinctive aversion to dealing with HSUS, that organization is the force behind the agitation. And now HSUS has agreed to leave Ohio alone. Due to the resistence and united effort of Ohio farmers, HSUS has agreed that the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board is the proper body to set standards for Ohio. The method selected by an overwhelming vote of Ohio citizens will have time to do its work. flag as improper
Posted Jul. 3, 2010
Matthew Weeman said:
In negotiations each side typically makes some concessions regarding the ultimate ruling. In this instance the ultimate ruling is that HSUS will indeed get everything they have been asking for. Unfortunately, the matter is not over, it will never be over and as Jack Fisher even said, HSUS has not agreed to leave Ohio alone. In this case, I must respecfully disagree with the forme poster. I really feel as though instinct for a lot of members was to agree with the negotiotions because OFBF said it was good. After taking a minute to look at the fine print the reality of the situation really sank in though.

Matthew Weeman flag as improper
Posted Jul. 3, 2010
Thomas Kirby said:
You didn't cave in. You totally lost it. You are completely lost to reality.

One of the first rules of this kind of warfare is that you give the enemy nothing. The HSUS does not have the moral high ground. It has a terrorist working in a top position, one J.P. Goodwin. It has the support of many terrorists in the ELF and ALF and it's best to understand that those who cross them may experience a lot of mysterious fires and vandalism. This puts it in the proper perspective.

You should have researched the HSUS carefully before meeting with them. They belong in jail, not in control of farming. flag as improper
Posted Jul. 4, 2010
Thomas Kirby said:
You should have asked for thoughts and questions before you did this atrocity. What are you going to do now, just try to smooth it all over and condescend to people?

People are going to know that you betrayed them. What Governor Strickland is planning to give the HSUS is not his to give. What you and the Board gave him are not yours to give. Are you just going to sit there and try to excuse yourself or are you going to man up and admit that you really messed this one up?

The HSUS people belong in jail, not in your offices dictating policy. Please help put them there and help the pet owners of Ohio. flag as improper
Posted Jul. 8, 2010
Joe Isler said:
Does anybody else feel that we've been sold out by our own organizations to lie with the devil? Did we just sell out other states with this move? Will this move cause our organizations to crumble? Early in the year a state representive stopped in to talk ag. He asked who was a good voice for ag. I was proud to say Farm Bureau, need to rethink that one. flag as improper
Posted Jul. 9, 2010
Thomas Kirby said:
It ain't anymore, that's for certain. flag as improper
Posted Jul. 9, 2010
said:
Anyone that doesn't think this has an effect on other states needs to read the article on California. It is located here: http://consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/h/4212-animal-rights-ripple-effects.

From my understanding, if Hi-Q can get a foot-hold in Union Country before 12/31/10 then they can operate under the current rules, else they are subject to the "Agreement".

Anyone near the Reynoldsburg area should attend the next OLSCB meeting on 7/27. It's from 10 to 4. You can get the details at: http://www.ohiolivestockcarestandardsboard.org/.

With the posts to this site, Farm and Dairy and all the newspapers, I don't think the 30 minutes for the public to speak will be enough.

flag as improper
Posted Jul. 13, 2010
Dan Toland said:
Leslie,

You may also be interested in knowing that the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board also accepts public comment through its website.

The following link will take you to the page where comments may be submitted: http://olcsb.org/contact.aspx

In the meantime, Ohio Farm Bureau continues to receive comments through all modes of communication. Questions and concerns from all angles are being heard and will be addressed in continued coverage on this website. Be on the lookout for two additional posts concerning this subject by the end of the week.

Again, thanks to all for your continued engagement on this issue.

Dan Toland, OFBF staff

flag as improper
Posted Jul. 14, 2010
Thomas Kirby said:
30 minutes for the public to speak is simply ramming this through. flag as improper
Posted Jul. 13, 2010

Leave a Comment