The rest of the story I hope commentator Paul Harvey doesn't mind me borrowing his signature line, but it sure applies to how newspapers are covering the livestock business in Ohio. There's a lot, a whole lot, of the story If you believe most of what you read from papers around Ohio, you'd think modern livestock operations are the agricultural equivalent of Armageddon. The stories talk about the potential for manure spills and runoff, the possibility of flies and rodents, and the prospect of falling land values. One comment I saw absolutely floored me. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., of Waterkeepers Alliance, said something to the effect that livestock farms are more of a threat to the security of the United States than Osama Bin Laden. I guess I don't blame reporters for using colorful quotes or sounding an alarm when a livestock operation is planned. After all, a reporter's job is to write in a way that will attract readers, and a threat, even one that's more perceived than real, makes for interesting reading. But a reporter's job is also to inform and present the entire story about an issue. And that's where most of the stories I've read fall woefully short. Where's the coverage of the actions taken by Ohio's farm community to prevent pollution and pests and to be good neighbors? For the better part of three years, farmers, environmentalists, community leaders, technicians and state government officials have worked to create new rules and regulations on where livestock farms can be built and how they must be run. The rules spell out in exhaustive detail the responsibilities of the operator and the duties of government to make sure the rules are being followed. The language of Ohio's new livestock law is so comprehensive it could probably fill half the pages of a metro paper's Sunday edition. But I've seen little of this in print. As a matter of fact, the papers which have been most critical of Ohio's livestock industry, both in their news accounts and editorials, didn't even bother to send reporters to a single one of the 16 public meetings that were held to when the new regulations were beginning to be shaped. In fairness, the potential for big livestock farms to do damage to the environment and society is newsworthy, and we've seen far too much evidence of that with one central Ohio operation that simply has been poorly managed. But there are around 40,000 other livestock operations in Ohio, both large and small, that go about their daily business responsibly. To cast doubt on these conscientious farmers because of the reputation of one bad actor doesn't seem fair, and it doesn't seem like balanced journalism. Also missing in the news accounts are the economic contributions livestock farms bring to their communities. These farms employ people who spend their paychecks with local businesses. These farms are markets for grains and forages and are sources of valuable nutrients that boost local crop incomes by millions of dollars. Ohio State University estimates that Ohio's dairy industry alone generates $4.5 billion dollars in economic activity in the state and contributes between $400 million and $500 million in various tax revenues. Reporters may not consider that to be breathtaking news, but it is important, and it's a part of the story that deserves its fair share of attention. While I'm on this subject of media coverage of Ohio's livestock industry, let me respond to one other frequent allegation. Counter to what may have been written, Farm Bureau is not a proponent of large livestock farms. The organization is a proponent of agriculture. How big a farm gets is a decision reached only by individual farmers. Farm Bureau's goal is to create a climate in which all farms, --big, medium and small, -- can prosper. I hope that the next time you read a newspaper article or editorial that is unbalanced or incomplete, you'll take some time to respond. The public deserves to be informed about the precautions livestock farmers take, the effective watchdog role their state government fulfills | |