gsvol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2008
- Messages
- 14,179
- Likes
- 10
Dear SAOVA friends,
The report below is from the 2009 Animal Agriculture Alliance conference. Among the many speakers were: Mike Adams, Host, AgriTalk Radio; Tom Field, Executive Director-Producer Education National Cattlemens Beef Association; David White, Senior Director, Policy Development & Research, Ohio Farm Bureau and Former Executive Director, Ohio Livestock Coalition; and Dr. Wes Jamison, Associate Professor of Communication, Palm Beach Atlantic Univ. For more information on the Animal Agriculture Alliance visit their website: http://www.animalagalliance.org/
org/
Susan WolfSportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - cPanel® lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators
Cattle Network: Take Home Messages from the Animal Agriculture Alliance Meeting
7/28/2009 11:38:00 AM
Consider these facts: Ninety-five law schools now offer at least one course in animal law. A publication exists called the Journal of Animal Law and Ethics. The World Bank has created a publication on animal welfare.
Animal rights issues have permeated our culture, and animal agriculture is seeing the effects. So in May, when farmers, legislative leaders, veterinarians, issue management specialists, government officials and others interested in the future of agriculture came together in Arlington, Virginia, for the Animal Agriculture Alliances Stakeholders Summit, thats what they talked about. This years theme was "Politics, Activism and Religion: Influencing the Debate on Animal Welfare in America."
Here are some of the highlights:
There was a warning from Wes Jamison, associate professor of communications at Palm Beach Atlantic University: animal rights activists are using messages with religious themes and language to advance their agenda: vegetarianism.
Part of what makes it possible for groups to use religious language is that so many people today have a vague and undefined religiosity, a lack of doctrinal anchor: they are attracted to the language and the ideas.
Their lack of theological understanding makes it difficult for them to refute an argument couched in religion. Were in a post theological world, adrift without a rudder, he said. He referred to the animal rights groups as meaning entrepreneurs: their audience is in search of meaning, and the groups are trying to fill that void.
Dr. Jamison explained two major reasons driving the activists to take this route. The first is that people motivated by religion tend to donate money generously; the second is that people motivated by religion can maintain the intensity of their beliefs over time. Religious converts tend to be very motivated and interested in creating more converts.
This approach also allows for groups to attract bipartisan support; religious feeling crosses party lines.
So does pet ownership, and pet owners are particularly vulnerable to the guilt on which animal activists thrive. Pet owners have to find a way to deal with a certain cognitive dissonance in their lives: they live with some kinds of animals as pets/companions, while they eat other kinds.
(the irony here is that animal rights activists ultimately think it wrong to own pets and while using such terms as 'animal companion', in the end profess to end all pet ownership altogether.)gs
The guilt involved in treating pets one way and food animals another way goes to one of the activists core messages; people donate money to alleviate that guilt.
Other religious-themed messages relate to the value of individual worth (God knows every animal, but factory farmers commodify animals); asceticism (animals suffer for our gluttony); and compassion, what Jamison called the big message to the middle.
All religions stress compassion. God is compassionate; factory farming is not.
The theme of responsibility that humans should do what they can to restore the planet appeals to what Jamison called todays meism: the growth of narcissistic self-importance.
Bruce Vincent, a third generation logger from Montana, also gave an impassioned talk, warning that animal rights groups thrive on conflict in fact, they must perpetuate conflict to survive.
t is a conflict industry, he said. "Groups involved in this industry generate cash by marketing fear. He warned that activist groups put before the public false choices, especially on animal welfare and the environment(the only way to have clean water is to eliminate animal agriculture, etc.).
Because he believes the world is run by those who show up, Vincent urged people in agriculture, and other resource-based industries, to become activists themselves: to add a line item for activism to their business plans, ensuring they set aside both time and money to do the work.
"America is ready for a new leader and a new vision, based on hope instead of fear, science instead of emotion, education instead of litigation and resolution instead of conflict," Vincent said. "That new leader should be us."
Vincent is the executive director of Provider Pals (Provider Pals), a cultural exchange program that links classrooms with farmers, ranchers, miners, loggers, oil field workers, commercial fishermen and others who provide the basics of everyday life.
Other messages:
Mike Adams, host of AgriTalk Radio: Media coverage of agriculture is of prime concern and importance. Look at the irresponsible reporting of H1N1 even the New York Times still calls it Swine Flu. More unity in agriculture is needed to get messages out properly.
Cindy Smith, USDA under secretary of marketing and regulation: Ethical treatment of animals creates marketing opportunities responding to concerns translates into a better bottom line. Well-informed consumers are good consumers. Theres going to be a greater consumer demand for information on where food came from.
Jim Wiesemeyer, senior vice president Informa Economics: Agriculture has not done any analysis on climate change e.g., what would impacts of cap and trade be? Agriculture needs to provide vision on the issue.
Dont make HSUS the subject. If you talk to PETA, youve lost.
If you think Washington thinks for your industry, think again. Bring he who has risk in the industry to speak for you; lawmakers will listen.
Nils Beaumond, director of international relations, Interbev: The animal welfare movement in the European Union is extremely strong, thanks to non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
On the issue of transport, there have been directives regarding intervals for watering, feeding, density limits, lateral doors on trucks to access animals directly and restrictions on environmental parameters during transport (how hot or cold it can be). A new draft proposal reflects rising surveillance pressure, including a requirement for live positioning.
Ed Pajor, associate professor, Purdue University: The 13 largest European retailers plan to increase regulations on animal welfare. Meanwhile, in the U.S., the private sector is taking the lead, with guidelines driven by retailers/producers. The plethora of programs is now becoming a problem, causing confusion.
Kay Johnson Smith, executive vice president of the Animal Agriculture Alliance: Regulation will be the next step if producers dont follow guidelines on their own farms. Dont tell consumers what you want them to know tell them about what they are concerned about. Dont do away with the discussion; take it over. Americans wont put up with anything that seems anti-animal or anti-environment.
Mitch Head, managing director, Golin Harris: There have been more state ballot initiatives in this decade than in any other.
The ballot initiative process has populist beginnings, and the states that allow them are mostly in the West. Their attractions: Theyre cheap to get on a ballot. You get to write the ballot language. Theyre sometimes called Superman laws because once passed by voters, they cannot be trumped by the state legislature. Courts are reluctant to intercede. Even if they lose, they get statewide attention.
If agriculture allows animal rights groups to start state initiative process, theyll end up playing defense.
The Internet may have an effect; activists have learned to use the Internet better than industry has.
Mike Opperman, public relations director, Charleston/Orwig: Modern agriculture is harder for consumers to understand and relate to. The industry tends to respond to emotional issues with science, but needs to speak to consumers hearts and heads.
Source: Suzanne Bopp
Take Home Messages From The Animal Agriculture Alliance Meeting - Cattle Network
The report below is from the 2009 Animal Agriculture Alliance conference. Among the many speakers were: Mike Adams, Host, AgriTalk Radio; Tom Field, Executive Director-Producer Education National Cattlemens Beef Association; David White, Senior Director, Policy Development & Research, Ohio Farm Bureau and Former Executive Director, Ohio Livestock Coalition; and Dr. Wes Jamison, Associate Professor of Communication, Palm Beach Atlantic Univ. For more information on the Animal Agriculture Alliance visit their website: http://www.animalagalliance.org/
org/
Susan WolfSportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - cPanel® lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators
Cattle Network: Take Home Messages from the Animal Agriculture Alliance Meeting
7/28/2009 11:38:00 AM
Consider these facts: Ninety-five law schools now offer at least one course in animal law. A publication exists called the Journal of Animal Law and Ethics. The World Bank has created a publication on animal welfare.
Animal rights issues have permeated our culture, and animal agriculture is seeing the effects. So in May, when farmers, legislative leaders, veterinarians, issue management specialists, government officials and others interested in the future of agriculture came together in Arlington, Virginia, for the Animal Agriculture Alliances Stakeholders Summit, thats what they talked about. This years theme was "Politics, Activism and Religion: Influencing the Debate on Animal Welfare in America."
Here are some of the highlights:
There was a warning from Wes Jamison, associate professor of communications at Palm Beach Atlantic University: animal rights activists are using messages with religious themes and language to advance their agenda: vegetarianism.
Part of what makes it possible for groups to use religious language is that so many people today have a vague and undefined religiosity, a lack of doctrinal anchor: they are attracted to the language and the ideas.
Their lack of theological understanding makes it difficult for them to refute an argument couched in religion. Were in a post theological world, adrift without a rudder, he said. He referred to the animal rights groups as meaning entrepreneurs: their audience is in search of meaning, and the groups are trying to fill that void.
Dr. Jamison explained two major reasons driving the activists to take this route. The first is that people motivated by religion tend to donate money generously; the second is that people motivated by religion can maintain the intensity of their beliefs over time. Religious converts tend to be very motivated and interested in creating more converts.
This approach also allows for groups to attract bipartisan support; religious feeling crosses party lines.
So does pet ownership, and pet owners are particularly vulnerable to the guilt on which animal activists thrive. Pet owners have to find a way to deal with a certain cognitive dissonance in their lives: they live with some kinds of animals as pets/companions, while they eat other kinds.
(the irony here is that animal rights activists ultimately think it wrong to own pets and while using such terms as 'animal companion', in the end profess to end all pet ownership altogether.)gs
The guilt involved in treating pets one way and food animals another way goes to one of the activists core messages; people donate money to alleviate that guilt.
Other religious-themed messages relate to the value of individual worth (God knows every animal, but factory farmers commodify animals); asceticism (animals suffer for our gluttony); and compassion, what Jamison called the big message to the middle.
All religions stress compassion. God is compassionate; factory farming is not.
The theme of responsibility that humans should do what they can to restore the planet appeals to what Jamison called todays meism: the growth of narcissistic self-importance.
Bruce Vincent, a third generation logger from Montana, also gave an impassioned talk, warning that animal rights groups thrive on conflict in fact, they must perpetuate conflict to survive.
t is a conflict industry, he said. "Groups involved in this industry generate cash by marketing fear. He warned that activist groups put before the public false choices, especially on animal welfare and the environment(the only way to have clean water is to eliminate animal agriculture, etc.).
Because he believes the world is run by those who show up, Vincent urged people in agriculture, and other resource-based industries, to become activists themselves: to add a line item for activism to their business plans, ensuring they set aside both time and money to do the work.
"America is ready for a new leader and a new vision, based on hope instead of fear, science instead of emotion, education instead of litigation and resolution instead of conflict," Vincent said. "That new leader should be us."
Vincent is the executive director of Provider Pals (Provider Pals), a cultural exchange program that links classrooms with farmers, ranchers, miners, loggers, oil field workers, commercial fishermen and others who provide the basics of everyday life.
Other messages:
Mike Adams, host of AgriTalk Radio: Media coverage of agriculture is of prime concern and importance. Look at the irresponsible reporting of H1N1 even the New York Times still calls it Swine Flu. More unity in agriculture is needed to get messages out properly.
Cindy Smith, USDA under secretary of marketing and regulation: Ethical treatment of animals creates marketing opportunities responding to concerns translates into a better bottom line. Well-informed consumers are good consumers. Theres going to be a greater consumer demand for information on where food came from.
Jim Wiesemeyer, senior vice president Informa Economics: Agriculture has not done any analysis on climate change e.g., what would impacts of cap and trade be? Agriculture needs to provide vision on the issue.
Dont make HSUS the subject. If you talk to PETA, youve lost.
If you think Washington thinks for your industry, think again. Bring he who has risk in the industry to speak for you; lawmakers will listen.
Nils Beaumond, director of international relations, Interbev: The animal welfare movement in the European Union is extremely strong, thanks to non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
On the issue of transport, there have been directives regarding intervals for watering, feeding, density limits, lateral doors on trucks to access animals directly and restrictions on environmental parameters during transport (how hot or cold it can be). A new draft proposal reflects rising surveillance pressure, including a requirement for live positioning.
Ed Pajor, associate professor, Purdue University: The 13 largest European retailers plan to increase regulations on animal welfare. Meanwhile, in the U.S., the private sector is taking the lead, with guidelines driven by retailers/producers. The plethora of programs is now becoming a problem, causing confusion.
Kay Johnson Smith, executive vice president of the Animal Agriculture Alliance: Regulation will be the next step if producers dont follow guidelines on their own farms. Dont tell consumers what you want them to know tell them about what they are concerned about. Dont do away with the discussion; take it over. Americans wont put up with anything that seems anti-animal or anti-environment.
Mitch Head, managing director, Golin Harris: There have been more state ballot initiatives in this decade than in any other.
The ballot initiative process has populist beginnings, and the states that allow them are mostly in the West. Their attractions: Theyre cheap to get on a ballot. You get to write the ballot language. Theyre sometimes called Superman laws because once passed by voters, they cannot be trumped by the state legislature. Courts are reluctant to intercede. Even if they lose, they get statewide attention.
If agriculture allows animal rights groups to start state initiative process, theyll end up playing defense.
The Internet may have an effect; activists have learned to use the Internet better than industry has.
Mike Opperman, public relations director, Charleston/Orwig: Modern agriculture is harder for consumers to understand and relate to. The industry tends to respond to emotional issues with science, but needs to speak to consumers hearts and heads.
Source: Suzanne Bopp
Take Home Messages From The Animal Agriculture Alliance Meeting - Cattle Network
lol:
