Printed May 2, 2002 New York Times by Joe Brescia
Looking Over His Shoulder
ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. was there. So were celebrities like MATT DILLON, FISHER STEVENS, SUSAN SARANDON, TIM ROBBINS and NICOLE MILLER. And so was TRENT D. LOOS.
Mr. Loos was never far from Mr. Kennedy during a party for Mr. Kennedy's Waterkeeper Alliance, which has as one of its targets industrial hog farming.
So is Mr. Loos Mr. Kennedy's bodyguard? His assistant?
Hardly. He is a pig farmer from South Dakota.
''There are many inaccuracies that Mr. Kennedy accuses the pork producers of in the United States,'' he said at the party, at the restaurant Man Ray on West 15th Street. ''I want him to know that I'm going to hold him accountable to make sure that he tells the truth.''
Mr. Loos said he did not want to cause a scene (though he said that once, a month or so ago, Mr. Kennedy ''wanted to swing at me''). And Mr. Kennedy? ''I'm delighted to see Trent here,'' he said, ''as long as he pays his $150 at the door.''
As for a federal appeals court decision upholding his trespassing conviction for protesting Navy exercises in Vieques, P.R., Mr. Kennedy said, ''I did what I did.'' He added, ''I'm prepared to accept any of the consequences.''
Up for auction at the party was a walk-on part in a movie that Mr. Stevens is producing about, of all things, a pig. ''I don't want anyone to worry,'' he said. ''We're not going to eat the pig. The pig will lead a long life.''
Link to New York Times
Subscribe To Loos Tales Daily information
Posts
All Comments
Friday, December 23, 2011
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Give me a break as Congress and the Senate argue about who cares most for working class citizens they both allow the complete abuse of power of the agencies. Who is keeping them in check?
Forbes Magazine reports
Merry Christmas America, Now Give Us Your Money - Love, EPA
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency yesterday announced new mercury restrictions on coal power plants that will impose anywhere from $10 billion (EPA’s estimate) to $200 billion (third-party estimates) in new costs on energy production. On a per household basis, that imposes anywhere from $100 to $2,000 in additional energy costs on the average U.S. household each and every year.
EPA reports that mercury emissions in the United States have declined by approximately 60% since 1990. The dramatic reduction in mercury emissions is consistent with the reduction in air pollution across the board. EPA reports that emissions of the Six Principal Pollutants it monitors have decreased by 67% since 1980.
Forbes Magazine reports
Merry Christmas America, Now Give Us Your Money - Love, EPA
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency yesterday announced new mercury restrictions on coal power plants that will impose anywhere from $10 billion (EPA’s estimate) to $200 billion (third-party estimates) in new costs on energy production. On a per household basis, that imposes anywhere from $100 to $2,000 in additional energy costs on the average U.S. household each and every year.
EPA reports that mercury emissions in the United States have declined by approximately 60% since 1990. The dramatic reduction in mercury emissions is consistent with the reduction in air pollution across the board. EPA reports that emissions of the Six Principal Pollutants it monitors have decreased by 67% since 1980.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Yet another chemical that we enjoy...My point is that chemicals are good. Just understanding the proper amount is the key..NOT AVOIDANCE.
Caffeine Chemistry
Caffeine (C8H10N4O2) is the common name for trimethylxanthine (systematic name is 1,3,7-trimethylxanthine or 3,7-dihydro-1,3,7-trimethyl-1H-purine-2,6-dione). The chemical is also known as coffeine, theine, mateine, guaranine, or methyltheobromine. Caffeine is naturally produced by several plants, including coffee beans, guarana, yerba maté, cacao beans, and tea. For the plants, caffeine acts as a natural pesticide. It paralyzes and kills insects that attempt to feed on the plants.
Caffeine Chemistry
Caffeine (C8H10N4O2) is the common name for trimethylxanthine (systematic name is 1,3,7-trimethylxanthine or 3,7-dihydro-1,3,7-trimethyl-1H-purine-2,6-dione). The chemical is also known as coffeine, theine, mateine, guaranine, or methyltheobromine. Caffeine is naturally produced by several plants, including coffee beans, guarana, yerba maté, cacao beans, and tea. For the plants, caffeine acts as a natural pesticide. It paralyzes and kills insects that attempt to feed on the plants.
Thanks to chemicals American's only hear about malaria as some out of sight out mind thing...Yet the impact globally is huge. Are you sure chemicals are a bad thing?
655,000 malaria deaths in 2010: WHO
Malaria caused the death of an estimated 655,000 people last year, with 86 percent of victims children aged under five, World Health Organisation figures showed on December 13.
The cash has funded an big increase in the number of households with insecticide-treated mosquito nets, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where 50 percent now have the nets compared with just three percent in 2000.
655,000 malaria deaths in 2010: WHO
Malaria caused the death of an estimated 655,000 people last year, with 86 percent of victims children aged under five, World Health Organisation figures showed on December 13.
The cash has funded an big increase in the number of households with insecticide-treated mosquito nets, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where 50 percent now have the nets compared with just three percent in 2000.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
At the Fall Classic the concept here "for those that played along" in Duncan OK was to generate money for Drive Scholarship program. If you not subscribing to Drive I strongly encourage you to do so today at radio.drivelivestock.com
Jack Wall IL
Paul Scheideler NE
Mary Drury TX and Kurt Long NE
Jim McCoy OH and Trent Loos NE, could it be that Jim was most "pigheaded" of all?
Jack Wall IL
Paul Scheideler NE
Mary Drury TX and Kurt Long NE
Jim McCoy OH and Trent Loos NE, could it be that Jim was most "pigheaded" of all?
Monday, November 14, 2011
Wednesday, November 02, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Vehicle of Character
Last weekend the junior livestock events were held at the American Royal in Kansas City. Once again the person selected to serve as the judge said something that I think is huge for all of us to keep in mind. Wayne Huinker, while discussing his Grand Champion market hog, said, “All of us involved realize that this isn’t about the pigs. They are simply a vehicle of character for these kids.” I could not agree more and I think he summarized it perfectly. The problem is that we have too many politicians in the country today that do not have character themselves and, even worse, they don’t understand the culture in Rural America where character comes from. Consequently, you each have a project that needs to be done today that requires you to stand up and say, “Enough already.”
If you have not heard, the Department of Labor is proposing amendments and additions to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) in an attempt to increase safety requirements for young workers employed in agriculture. The proposed rules do not attempt to make changes or limit the current exemption for youth workers employed on farms owned or operated by parents, unless they are incorporated. The new rules would only apply to hired workers like your bale hauling crew.
On the surface it sounds like the proposed law is going to really assist in creating a safer work environment but instead it is going to pretty much end all kids working on farms. For example, a kid could not go help out on Grandpa’s farm. Even worse, anyone under the age of 18, who could actually drive a car legally to Grandpa’s farm, could not legally mow the lawn.
The best summary of what this proposed law change will actually do is from the Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation at Iowa State University. This interpretation of the proposed law comes directly from them.
The proposed non-ag HO prohibits employment of youth under 18 years of age in all work performed in conjunction with storing, marketing, and transporting farm-product raw materials. The proposal includes occupations performed at grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, feed yards, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions, but would not include places of employment where employees clean, sort, weigh, package and ship fruits and vegetables, or sales work involving farm-product raw materials solely done in an office.
The law would prohibit working on a farm in a yard, pen, or stall occupied by intact male equine, porcine, bovine, bison older than 6 months, sow with suckling pigs, or cow with newborn calf, or engaging or assisting in animal husbandry practices inflicting pain upon animal or likely to result in unpredictable animal behavior (breeding, branding, castrating, herding, vaccinating, dehorning, associated with herding of animals).
The provision is entitled "Occupations involving working inside fruit, forage, or grain storage silo or bin and Occupations involving working inside manure pit" and includes upright silos within two weeks after silage, manure pits, and horizontal silos while operating tractor for packing purposes). The DOL is also considering adding prohibitions that would expand the current Ag HO to include other confined spaces, such as livestock confinement buildings with or without ventilation systems.
Now I think we all fully understand that agriculture is one of the most dangerous professions in the United States. But let’s try to keep all of this in context. The National Center for Health Statistics reports that each year, in the United States alone, 20,964 young people between the ages of 5 and 19 are killed. Yes, accidents are the leading cause of death in that age range but 121 of those kids were killed simply by being pedestrians.
All reports estimate that 100 kids will die each year in farm related accidents. Honestly, as a parent I cannot imagine what this must be like. But as a parent, I also think I have a better handle on preventing those accidents than anyone writing regulations in D.C. Honestly, if you look at the numbers and the proposal, you can clearly see that kids walking down the street have the same risk as kids working on the farm. If we cannot hire kids to work on the farm, we are putting them at greater risk simply by letting them be mere pedestrians. So what have we gained?
At the end of the day, it comes back to where I started. One of the great benefits of raising kids on the farm is teaching them a good work ethic. That comes through hard work and responsibiltiy and we are close to having that stolen right away from us. Farm kids are the most employable individuals in the work pool as adults simply because they have been taught how to work and they are willing to do what it takes to get the job done.
The time for all of us to act is short. The Department of Labor is only taking comments on this issue until Nov 1, 2011. You need to log onto www.regulations.gov today and search for Fair Labor Standards and so you can comment.
We can’t let the paper pushers steal the one true “vehicle of character” that we have left in building this great nation. Do your part today!
Last weekend the junior livestock events were held at the American Royal in Kansas City. Once again the person selected to serve as the judge said something that I think is huge for all of us to keep in mind. Wayne Huinker, while discussing his Grand Champion market hog, said, “All of us involved realize that this isn’t about the pigs. They are simply a vehicle of character for these kids.” I could not agree more and I think he summarized it perfectly. The problem is that we have too many politicians in the country today that do not have character themselves and, even worse, they don’t understand the culture in Rural America where character comes from. Consequently, you each have a project that needs to be done today that requires you to stand up and say, “Enough already.”
If you have not heard, the Department of Labor is proposing amendments and additions to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) in an attempt to increase safety requirements for young workers employed in agriculture. The proposed rules do not attempt to make changes or limit the current exemption for youth workers employed on farms owned or operated by parents, unless they are incorporated. The new rules would only apply to hired workers like your bale hauling crew.
On the surface it sounds like the proposed law is going to really assist in creating a safer work environment but instead it is going to pretty much end all kids working on farms. For example, a kid could not go help out on Grandpa’s farm. Even worse, anyone under the age of 18, who could actually drive a car legally to Grandpa’s farm, could not legally mow the lawn.
The best summary of what this proposed law change will actually do is from the Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation at Iowa State University. This interpretation of the proposed law comes directly from them.
The proposed non-ag HO prohibits employment of youth under 18 years of age in all work performed in conjunction with storing, marketing, and transporting farm-product raw materials. The proposal includes occupations performed at grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, feed yards, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions, but would not include places of employment where employees clean, sort, weigh, package and ship fruits and vegetables, or sales work involving farm-product raw materials solely done in an office.
The law would prohibit working on a farm in a yard, pen, or stall occupied by intact male equine, porcine, bovine, bison older than 6 months, sow with suckling pigs, or cow with newborn calf, or engaging or assisting in animal husbandry practices inflicting pain upon animal or likely to result in unpredictable animal behavior (breeding, branding, castrating, herding, vaccinating, dehorning, associated with herding of animals).
The provision is entitled "Occupations involving working inside fruit, forage, or grain storage silo or bin and Occupations involving working inside manure pit" and includes upright silos within two weeks after silage, manure pits, and horizontal silos while operating tractor for packing purposes). The DOL is also considering adding prohibitions that would expand the current Ag HO to include other confined spaces, such as livestock confinement buildings with or without ventilation systems.
Now I think we all fully understand that agriculture is one of the most dangerous professions in the United States. But let’s try to keep all of this in context. The National Center for Health Statistics reports that each year, in the United States alone, 20,964 young people between the ages of 5 and 19 are killed. Yes, accidents are the leading cause of death in that age range but 121 of those kids were killed simply by being pedestrians.
All reports estimate that 100 kids will die each year in farm related accidents. Honestly, as a parent I cannot imagine what this must be like. But as a parent, I also think I have a better handle on preventing those accidents than anyone writing regulations in D.C. Honestly, if you look at the numbers and the proposal, you can clearly see that kids walking down the street have the same risk as kids working on the farm. If we cannot hire kids to work on the farm, we are putting them at greater risk simply by letting them be mere pedestrians. So what have we gained?
At the end of the day, it comes back to where I started. One of the great benefits of raising kids on the farm is teaching them a good work ethic. That comes through hard work and responsibiltiy and we are close to having that stolen right away from us. Farm kids are the most employable individuals in the work pool as adults simply because they have been taught how to work and they are willing to do what it takes to get the job done.
The time for all of us to act is short. The Department of Labor is only taking comments on this issue until Nov 1, 2011. You need to log onto www.regulations.gov today and search for Fair Labor Standards and so you can comment.
We can’t let the paper pushers steal the one true “vehicle of character” that we have left in building this great nation. Do your part today!
Friday, August 19, 2011
More nitrite from food information
Nearly every vegetable tested contained measurable amounts of nitrates, with averages varying from 1 to 4,800 ppm. For example, average levels were:
arugula 4,677 ppm
basil 2,292 ppm
butterhead lettuce 2,026 ppm
beets 1,279 ppm
celery 1,103 ppm
spinach 1,066 ppm
pumpkin 874 ppm
This compares to standard hotdogs or processed meats with average nitrite levels of 10 ppm.
Link here to source
Nearly every vegetable tested contained measurable amounts of nitrates, with averages varying from 1 to 4,800 ppm. For example, average levels were:
arugula 4,677 ppm
basil 2,292 ppm
butterhead lettuce 2,026 ppm
beets 1,279 ppm
celery 1,103 ppm
spinach 1,066 ppm
pumpkin 874 ppm
This compares to standard hotdogs or processed meats with average nitrite levels of 10 ppm.
Link here to source
Information about nitrate sources of food.
From the California Extenstion program. Link to source
The average daily intake of nitrate is around 100 mg and about 12 mg for nitrite. Vegetarians have a much higher daily intake (about 250 mg) because of the high nitrate content of vegetables. Less than 10 percent of the nitrates we ingest come from our drinking water; most are found in our food. Approximately 9 percent of the nitrates we ingest come from processed meats where it is used as a preservative and as a coloring agent. The greatest amount of nitrates we encounter come from vegetables like lettuce and spinach. A little over one-fifth of the nitrites we ingest come from cured meats. The highest levels originate in our own saliva, where bacteria in our mouths change nitrates to nitrites.
Vegetables and cured meats are the main source of nitrates in our diet. Vegetables with high levels of nitrates include lettuce with averages of 850 parts per million (ppm), celery at 2340 ppm, spinach at 1860 ppm, beets at 2760 ppm, and broccoli at 780 ppm. There are many factors which affect the nitrate levels in plants. The species and variety of plant are very important. Nitrate levels also vary with the part of the plant (leaf, stem, root, etc.) and maturity of the plant. Environmental factors include; drought, high temperature, shading, nutrient deficiencies, excessive fertilizers, and plant damage from insects and herbicides. The average American ingests 86 mg of nitrate a day from vegetables alone; 18.9 mg from lettuce, 16 mg from celery, 4.2 mg from spinach, 5.5 mg from beets, and 14.2 mg from potatoes. Although it would appear that vegetables would be a high risk factor in nitrate poisoning, very few cases have ever been documented. This could be because of the ascorbic acid content of most vegetables, which have protective effects against nitrate poisoning.
Cured meats account for 15.5 mg of nitrate in the American daily diet. They also account for about 4 mg of nitrite a day. Nitrates and nitrites are used on cured meats to give it the distinctive pink color, to prevent rancidity, and to prevent the growth of Clostridium botulinum spores. Nitrate and nitrite levels in cured meats have been set by the FDA at 120 ppm. The FDA also recommends 550 ppm ascorbate or sodium erythorbate which have similar effects as ascorbic acid in vegetables.
From the California Extenstion program. Link to source
The average daily intake of nitrate is around 100 mg and about 12 mg for nitrite. Vegetarians have a much higher daily intake (about 250 mg) because of the high nitrate content of vegetables. Less than 10 percent of the nitrates we ingest come from our drinking water; most are found in our food. Approximately 9 percent of the nitrates we ingest come from processed meats where it is used as a preservative and as a coloring agent. The greatest amount of nitrates we encounter come from vegetables like lettuce and spinach. A little over one-fifth of the nitrites we ingest come from cured meats. The highest levels originate in our own saliva, where bacteria in our mouths change nitrates to nitrites.
Vegetables and cured meats are the main source of nitrates in our diet. Vegetables with high levels of nitrates include lettuce with averages of 850 parts per million (ppm), celery at 2340 ppm, spinach at 1860 ppm, beets at 2760 ppm, and broccoli at 780 ppm. There are many factors which affect the nitrate levels in plants. The species and variety of plant are very important. Nitrate levels also vary with the part of the plant (leaf, stem, root, etc.) and maturity of the plant. Environmental factors include; drought, high temperature, shading, nutrient deficiencies, excessive fertilizers, and plant damage from insects and herbicides. The average American ingests 86 mg of nitrate a day from vegetables alone; 18.9 mg from lettuce, 16 mg from celery, 4.2 mg from spinach, 5.5 mg from beets, and 14.2 mg from potatoes. Although it would appear that vegetables would be a high risk factor in nitrate poisoning, very few cases have ever been documented. This could be because of the ascorbic acid content of most vegetables, which have protective effects against nitrate poisoning.
Cured meats account for 15.5 mg of nitrate in the American daily diet. They also account for about 4 mg of nitrite a day. Nitrates and nitrites are used on cured meats to give it the distinctive pink color, to prevent rancidity, and to prevent the growth of Clostridium botulinum spores. Nitrate and nitrite levels in cured meats have been set by the FDA at 120 ppm. The FDA also recommends 550 ppm ascorbate or sodium erythorbate which have similar effects as ascorbic acid in vegetables.
Monday, August 15, 2011
Autism risks for siblings higher than thought
Chicago • A new study suggests nearly one in five children with an autistic older sibling will develop the disorder too — a rate much higher than previously thought.
Researchers followed 664 infants who had at least one older brother or sister with autism. Overall, 132 infants or about 19 percent ended up with an autism diagnosis, too, by their third birthdays. Previous smaller or less diverse studies reported a prevalence of between 3 percent and 14 percent.
“We were all a bit surprised and taken aback about how high it is,” said lead author Sally Ozonoff, a psychiatry and behavioral sciences professor with the Mind Institute at the University of California at Davis.
Well lets see you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure the out, quite frankly you don't even need to be a scientist just an individual with a little common sense. Dr. John Cannell is one medical doctor that has been shouting at the top of his lung the problem is Vitamin D...or the lack there of.
Patient friendly summary
Dr. John Cannell of the Vitamin D Council has studied the link between autism and lower levels of sunlight. There is increased prevalence of autism in regions of greater cloud cover and rainfall.
According to many studies, more children with autism are born during the spring. March is the time of lowest vitamin D levels in northern mid-latitudes. These areas are further from the sun and get less light. This corresponds to brain damage around the sixth month of pregnancy.
AND
Vitamin D is Synthesized From Cholesterol and Found in Cholesterol-Rich Foods
Since cholesterol is a precursor to vitamin D, inhibiting the synthesis of cholesterol will also inhibit the synthesis of vitamin D. Since sunlight is required to turn cholesterol into vitamin D, avoiding the sun will likewise undermine our ability to synthesize vitamin D. And since vitamin D-rich foods are also rich in cholesterol, low-cholesterol diets are inherently deficient in vitamin D.
Chicago • A new study suggests nearly one in five children with an autistic older sibling will develop the disorder too — a rate much higher than previously thought.
Researchers followed 664 infants who had at least one older brother or sister with autism. Overall, 132 infants or about 19 percent ended up with an autism diagnosis, too, by their third birthdays. Previous smaller or less diverse studies reported a prevalence of between 3 percent and 14 percent.
“We were all a bit surprised and taken aback about how high it is,” said lead author Sally Ozonoff, a psychiatry and behavioral sciences professor with the Mind Institute at the University of California at Davis.
Well lets see you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure the out, quite frankly you don't even need to be a scientist just an individual with a little common sense. Dr. John Cannell is one medical doctor that has been shouting at the top of his lung the problem is Vitamin D...or the lack there of.
Patient friendly summary
Dr. John Cannell of the Vitamin D Council has studied the link between autism and lower levels of sunlight. There is increased prevalence of autism in regions of greater cloud cover and rainfall.
According to many studies, more children with autism are born during the spring. March is the time of lowest vitamin D levels in northern mid-latitudes. These areas are further from the sun and get less light. This corresponds to brain damage around the sixth month of pregnancy.
AND
Vitamin D is Synthesized From Cholesterol and Found in Cholesterol-Rich Foods
Since cholesterol is a precursor to vitamin D, inhibiting the synthesis of cholesterol will also inhibit the synthesis of vitamin D. Since sunlight is required to turn cholesterol into vitamin D, avoiding the sun will likewise undermine our ability to synthesize vitamin D. And since vitamin D-rich foods are also rich in cholesterol, low-cholesterol diets are inherently deficient in vitamin D.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
This week has brought about news that meat consumption increase your risk of Type 2 diabetes. Well that is saying that 80 years ago we did not drive cars, today the average American drives 24,000 annually cars must be the cause of an overweight society.
Lets look at some facts that too many people are overlooking.
Changing Trends: A Brief History of the US Household Consumption of
Energy, Water, Food, Beverages and Tobacco
The level of food energy in the US food supply increased from 3300 calories per capita per day in 1970 to 3900 calories in 2000 (Figure 9). This 15% increase reflects higher levels of all three food groups, carbohydrates (grains & sweeteners), fats and proteins (grains, poultry & cheese). Total calories in 1909 is estimated at 3400 kilocalories/day, so the level was flat for several decades before the recent increase.
Carbs and Blood Sugar
Even the kids health website talk about how carbs drive blood sugar and insulin not fat and protein. I am not saying avoid carb's I am saying that the science simply does not back up that protein and fat play a role in diabetes. Furthermore the study conducted recently at Harvard on diabetes was a survey not blood work.
And finally speaking to the importance of nitrate rich foods
Dr. Bryan is a biochemist and physiologist in Houston at the University of Texas at The Brown Foundation Institute of Molecular Medicine for the Prevention of Human Diseases. He tells me that by the time we are 40 years old our body only has half of the nitric oxide production that it did when we were 20. So get ready for this ground breaking scientific breakthrough: Diet and exercise become even more important and lead to improved human health through restoration of nitric oxide.
Watch it on YouTube
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
FMCSA 24-11
Wednesday, August 9, 2011
Contact: Candice Tolliver or Shashunga Clayton
Tel.: (202) 366-9999
U.S. Department of Transportation Reinforces Commitment to No New Regulations for America’s Agricultural Community
Guidance Will Ensure States Continue to Use Common Sense in Applying Existing Safety Rules
WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) announced today that it has no intention to propose new regulations governing the transport of agricultural products. The agency also released guidance designed to make sure states clearly understand the common sense exemptions that allow farmers, their employees, and their families to accomplish their day-to-day work and transport their products to market.
After hearing from concerned farmers earlier this year, FMCSA initiated this review to make sure states don't go overboard in enforcing regulations on agricultural operators, and to ensure consistent access to exemptions for farmers. No regulations will be proposed for any new safety requirements or changes to the rules governing the transport of agricultural products, farm machinery, or farm supplies to or from a farm.
“We have no intention of instituting onerous regulations on the hardworking farmers who feed our country and fuel our economy,” said Secretary Ray LaHood. “Farmers deserve to know that reasonable, common sense exemptions will continue to be consistently available to agricultural operations across the country, and that’s why we released this guidance.”
This guidance – which does not impose any new rules on farmers – follows the Federal Register public notice which FMCSA issued on May 31, 2011, asking farmers, farm organizations and the public to give input on the agency’s longstanding safety rules.
"We want to make it absolutely clear that farmers will not be subjected to new and impractical safety regulations," said U.S. Transportation Deputy Secretary John Porcari. "The farm community can be confident that states will continue to follow the regulatory exemptions for farmers that have always worked so well."
“FMCSA is pleased with the input we’ve received from the agricultural community and members of Congress. We received about 1700 comments and the vast majority called for us to preserve the guidance that leaves states to carry out the farm exceptions as they have for many years.” said FMCSA Administrator Anne Ferro. “We want to make crystal clear that we are not imposing any new regulations.”
Earlier this year, farm groups came to FMCSA with concerns that some states might not allow exemptions to Commercial Drivers License (CDL) requirements for certain farm operations using “crop-share” leasing.
When FMCSA investigated, there appeared to be wide differences among states in how the “for-hire” and related agricultural exceptions were being applied. In order to ensure consistency, FMCSA asked state officials to cease all new entrant safety audits on farmers engaged in “crop-share” leasing and issued the public notice soliciting input that would provide insight on the complex use of farm equipment on public roads. The guidance released today, which is based on that input, clarifies three critical issues:
Interstate vs. intrastate commerce. Since the difference between the two has been determined by the U.S. Supreme Court and other Federal courts, FMCSA has limited flexibility to provide additional guidelines. The Agency has concluded that new regulatory guidance concerning the distinction between interstate and intrastate commerce is not necessary. Generally, the states and the industry have a common understanding on this point. To the extent that fact-specific questions arise, the Agency will work with the States and the industry to provide a clarification for the specific scenario.
Commercial Driver's License. Federal regulations allow states to make exceptions to Commercial Driver's License (CDL) regulations for certain farm vehicle drivers such as farm employees and family members, as long as their vehicles are not used by “for-hire” motor carriers. Some states have questioned whether this exemption applies to drivers who work for “crop share” or similar arrangements. FMCSA’s notice includes guidance to ensure consistent application of the exemption. After considering the public comments, the Agency has determined that farmers who rent their land for a share of the crops and haul their own and the landlord’s crops to market should have access to the agricultural CDL exemptions given by the states.
· Implements of Husbandry. In a perfect world, farm vehicles would only operate on farms, while commercial trucks would operate on public roads. The reality is that farm equipment that is not designed or intended for everyday use on public roads is often used for short trips at limited speeds. This creates a gray area for classification. After considering the public comments, FMCSA has determined that most States have already adopted common sense enforcement practices that allow farmers to safely move equipment to and from their fields. In areas where farm implements are common, the enforcement community and the agricultural community have achieved a mutual understanding of which safety regulations should apply to farm equipment on their public roads.
FMCSA is committed to the safety of our highways and the long-term success of America's agricultural industry. To learn more about federal safety regulations that impact the transportation of agricultural products and equipment, please visit the FMCSA website at www.fmcsa.dot.gov.
Wednesday, August 9, 2011
Contact: Candice Tolliver or Shashunga Clayton
Tel.: (202) 366-9999
U.S. Department of Transportation Reinforces Commitment to No New Regulations for America’s Agricultural Community
Guidance Will Ensure States Continue to Use Common Sense in Applying Existing Safety Rules
WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) announced today that it has no intention to propose new regulations governing the transport of agricultural products. The agency also released guidance designed to make sure states clearly understand the common sense exemptions that allow farmers, their employees, and their families to accomplish their day-to-day work and transport their products to market.
After hearing from concerned farmers earlier this year, FMCSA initiated this review to make sure states don't go overboard in enforcing regulations on agricultural operators, and to ensure consistent access to exemptions for farmers. No regulations will be proposed for any new safety requirements or changes to the rules governing the transport of agricultural products, farm machinery, or farm supplies to or from a farm.
“We have no intention of instituting onerous regulations on the hardworking farmers who feed our country and fuel our economy,” said Secretary Ray LaHood. “Farmers deserve to know that reasonable, common sense exemptions will continue to be consistently available to agricultural operations across the country, and that’s why we released this guidance.”
This guidance – which does not impose any new rules on farmers – follows the Federal Register public notice which FMCSA issued on May 31, 2011, asking farmers, farm organizations and the public to give input on the agency’s longstanding safety rules.
"We want to make it absolutely clear that farmers will not be subjected to new and impractical safety regulations," said U.S. Transportation Deputy Secretary John Porcari. "The farm community can be confident that states will continue to follow the regulatory exemptions for farmers that have always worked so well."
“FMCSA is pleased with the input we’ve received from the agricultural community and members of Congress. We received about 1700 comments and the vast majority called for us to preserve the guidance that leaves states to carry out the farm exceptions as they have for many years.” said FMCSA Administrator Anne Ferro. “We want to make crystal clear that we are not imposing any new regulations.”
Earlier this year, farm groups came to FMCSA with concerns that some states might not allow exemptions to Commercial Drivers License (CDL) requirements for certain farm operations using “crop-share” leasing.
When FMCSA investigated, there appeared to be wide differences among states in how the “for-hire” and related agricultural exceptions were being applied. In order to ensure consistency, FMCSA asked state officials to cease all new entrant safety audits on farmers engaged in “crop-share” leasing and issued the public notice soliciting input that would provide insight on the complex use of farm equipment on public roads. The guidance released today, which is based on that input, clarifies three critical issues:
Interstate vs. intrastate commerce. Since the difference between the two has been determined by the U.S. Supreme Court and other Federal courts, FMCSA has limited flexibility to provide additional guidelines. The Agency has concluded that new regulatory guidance concerning the distinction between interstate and intrastate commerce is not necessary. Generally, the states and the industry have a common understanding on this point. To the extent that fact-specific questions arise, the Agency will work with the States and the industry to provide a clarification for the specific scenario.
Commercial Driver's License. Federal regulations allow states to make exceptions to Commercial Driver's License (CDL) regulations for certain farm vehicle drivers such as farm employees and family members, as long as their vehicles are not used by “for-hire” motor carriers. Some states have questioned whether this exemption applies to drivers who work for “crop share” or similar arrangements. FMCSA’s notice includes guidance to ensure consistent application of the exemption. After considering the public comments, the Agency has determined that farmers who rent their land for a share of the crops and haul their own and the landlord’s crops to market should have access to the agricultural CDL exemptions given by the states.
· Implements of Husbandry. In a perfect world, farm vehicles would only operate on farms, while commercial trucks would operate on public roads. The reality is that farm equipment that is not designed or intended for everyday use on public roads is often used for short trips at limited speeds. This creates a gray area for classification. After considering the public comments, FMCSA has determined that most States have already adopted common sense enforcement practices that allow farmers to safely move equipment to and from their fields. In areas where farm implements are common, the enforcement community and the agricultural community have achieved a mutual understanding of which safety regulations should apply to farm equipment on their public roads.
FMCSA is committed to the safety of our highways and the long-term success of America's agricultural industry. To learn more about federal safety regulations that impact the transportation of agricultural products and equipment, please visit the FMCSA website at www.fmcsa.dot.gov.
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Written for Aug 8, 2011 High Plains Journal
What are they smokin?
The list goes something like this: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington Carver, Justin Smith Morrill, Norman Borlaug, John Deere, Eli Whitney, Henry Wallace and Cyrus Hall McCormick just to name a few. Now imagine, if you will, the inclusion of Willie Nelson in that list of historical agricultural icons. Yes indeed, this may be one of the most ill-guided moves ever in recognizing agricultural leaders as the National Agriculture Hall of Fame says they are going to induct Willie Nelson into the Hall of Fame.
It is a complete embarrassment to the tremendous individuals that have already been recognized in the Hall of Fame and should cause us to question any credibility this organization might have.
Let’s forget for a moment that many refer to Willie Nelson as “America’s favorite stoner” and dismiss the 2008 CNN reports about Willie Nelson as the poster boy for tax evasion. Let’s just look at what he has really done for farmers.
First off, Willie Nelson has spent tireless hours campaigning to end horse harvesting in the United States. In June 2011 the Government Accountability Office released a report that documents that Nelson’s efforts have greatly reduced the horse welfare in the United States. Thank you Willie!
I have personally known family farmers that have had lawsuits filed against them by Farm Aid to prevent them from expanding their operations. In 2004, suits were filed against twelve farm families that I know of in Iowa and Minnesota. The Farm Aid organization has a history of working hand-in-hand with animal rights organizations that want to end animal agriculture altogether.
You don’t need to be very skilled in internet searching to find the most damaging stuff about this “non-profit” organization. This comes directly from their own website:
Farm Aid works with local, regional and national organizations to promote fair farm policies and grassroots organizing campaigns designed to defend and bolster family farm-centered agriculture. We've worked side-by-side with farmers to protest factory farms and inform farmers and eaters about issues like genetically modified food and growth hormones.
They have an extensive area on their site called “Know your food” which encourages consumers not to purchase any food that is produced in the most modern and efficient manner. Everything that Abraham Lincoln and Justin Smith Morrill accomplished in the 1862 Morrill Act, which established the Land Grant System and propelled the United States food production model into the role of world leader, is now being destroyed by this dope smoking hippie who has spent 26 years gathering funds to dismantle it.
So what has the $39 million Nelson gathered at his fundraising concerts accomplished for farmers in the past 26 years? Well, a bit of quick cowboy arithmetic tells us that they average only $1.5 million annually. Charity Navigator, an organization that ranks non-profits, says that since 2008 they have had revenues in the $1.1 million range. The first 20% of that goes to administration and fundraising expenses. Their rating as a non-profit dropped from 4-star in 2007 to 2-star in 2009. So you tell me how much real benefit has ever gone to any farmers from this project? It is minimal at best.
For those of you already revving up your email fingers to tell me “but Willie sticks up for the little farmer.” I tell you he gives them lip service and does nothing to help them in any way. In fact, I will tell you that Willie Nelson and Farm Aid work hard with every dollar they get to increase food insecurity in this country. Since their beginning, they have rejected the very science and technology that allows us to provide the consumer with the most affordable, safest food supply in the world.
In closing, I will share with you that Farm Aid has every right to spend their money as they see fit and people can continue to donate if it makes them feel all warm and fuzzy. But the truth of the matter is that if the National Agriculture Hall of Fame deems this man to be worthy of recognition in the same building as the individuals that laid the ground work for the greatness in American Agriculture then the future of our food producing machine is about to derail itself. One has to ask the obvious question about Nelson’s selection for this honor. “What were they smokin’?”
Trent Loos is 6th generation United States rancher who has taken his passion for the Rural lifestyle to the radio airwaves with a program called Loos Tales. More information can be found at www.FacesOfAg.com
What are they smokin?
The list goes something like this: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington Carver, Justin Smith Morrill, Norman Borlaug, John Deere, Eli Whitney, Henry Wallace and Cyrus Hall McCormick just to name a few. Now imagine, if you will, the inclusion of Willie Nelson in that list of historical agricultural icons. Yes indeed, this may be one of the most ill-guided moves ever in recognizing agricultural leaders as the National Agriculture Hall of Fame says they are going to induct Willie Nelson into the Hall of Fame.
It is a complete embarrassment to the tremendous individuals that have already been recognized in the Hall of Fame and should cause us to question any credibility this organization might have.
Let’s forget for a moment that many refer to Willie Nelson as “America’s favorite stoner” and dismiss the 2008 CNN reports about Willie Nelson as the poster boy for tax evasion. Let’s just look at what he has really done for farmers.
First off, Willie Nelson has spent tireless hours campaigning to end horse harvesting in the United States. In June 2011 the Government Accountability Office released a report that documents that Nelson’s efforts have greatly reduced the horse welfare in the United States. Thank you Willie!
I have personally known family farmers that have had lawsuits filed against them by Farm Aid to prevent them from expanding their operations. In 2004, suits were filed against twelve farm families that I know of in Iowa and Minnesota. The Farm Aid organization has a history of working hand-in-hand with animal rights organizations that want to end animal agriculture altogether.
You don’t need to be very skilled in internet searching to find the most damaging stuff about this “non-profit” organization. This comes directly from their own website:
Farm Aid works with local, regional and national organizations to promote fair farm policies and grassroots organizing campaigns designed to defend and bolster family farm-centered agriculture. We've worked side-by-side with farmers to protest factory farms and inform farmers and eaters about issues like genetically modified food and growth hormones.
They have an extensive area on their site called “Know your food” which encourages consumers not to purchase any food that is produced in the most modern and efficient manner. Everything that Abraham Lincoln and Justin Smith Morrill accomplished in the 1862 Morrill Act, which established the Land Grant System and propelled the United States food production model into the role of world leader, is now being destroyed by this dope smoking hippie who has spent 26 years gathering funds to dismantle it.
So what has the $39 million Nelson gathered at his fundraising concerts accomplished for farmers in the past 26 years? Well, a bit of quick cowboy arithmetic tells us that they average only $1.5 million annually. Charity Navigator, an organization that ranks non-profits, says that since 2008 they have had revenues in the $1.1 million range. The first 20% of that goes to administration and fundraising expenses. Their rating as a non-profit dropped from 4-star in 2007 to 2-star in 2009. So you tell me how much real benefit has ever gone to any farmers from this project? It is minimal at best.
For those of you already revving up your email fingers to tell me “but Willie sticks up for the little farmer.” I tell you he gives them lip service and does nothing to help them in any way. In fact, I will tell you that Willie Nelson and Farm Aid work hard with every dollar they get to increase food insecurity in this country. Since their beginning, they have rejected the very science and technology that allows us to provide the consumer with the most affordable, safest food supply in the world.
In closing, I will share with you that Farm Aid has every right to spend their money as they see fit and people can continue to donate if it makes them feel all warm and fuzzy. But the truth of the matter is that if the National Agriculture Hall of Fame deems this man to be worthy of recognition in the same building as the individuals that laid the ground work for the greatness in American Agriculture then the future of our food producing machine is about to derail itself. One has to ask the obvious question about Nelson’s selection for this honor. “What were they smokin’?”
Trent Loos is 6th generation United States rancher who has taken his passion for the Rural lifestyle to the radio airwaves with a program called Loos Tales. More information can be found at www.FacesOfAg.com
Friday, March 25, 2011
Water Use Statistics
Daily indoor per capita water use is 69.3 gallons. Here is how it breaks down:
Use
Gallons per Capita Percentage of Total Daily Use
Showers
11.6 16.8%
Clothes Washers
15.0 21.7%
Dishwashers
1.0 1.4%
Toilets
18.5 26.7%
Baths
1.2 1.7%
Leaks
9.5 13.7%
Faucets
10.9 15.7%
Other Domestic Uses
1.6 2.2%
By installing more efficient water fixtures and regularly checking for leaks, households can reduce daily per capita water use by about 35% to about 45.2 gallons per day Here's how it breaks down for households using conservation measures:
Use
Gallons per Capita Percentage of Total Daily Use
Showers
8.8 19.5%
Clothes Washers
10.0 22.1%
Toilets
8.2 18.0%
Dishwashers
0.7 1.5%
Baths
1.2 2.7%
Leaks
4.0 8.8%
Faucets
10.8 23.9%
Other Domestic Uses
1.6 3.4%
Source: Handbook of Water Use and Conservation, Amy Vickers
Daily indoor per capita water use is 69.3 gallons. Here is how it breaks down:
Use
Gallons per Capita Percentage of Total Daily Use
Showers
11.6 16.8%
Clothes Washers
15.0 21.7%
Dishwashers
1.0 1.4%
Toilets
18.5 26.7%
Baths
1.2 1.7%
Leaks
9.5 13.7%
Faucets
10.9 15.7%
Other Domestic Uses
1.6 2.2%
By installing more efficient water fixtures and regularly checking for leaks, households can reduce daily per capita water use by about 35% to about 45.2 gallons per day Here's how it breaks down for households using conservation measures:
Use
Gallons per Capita Percentage of Total Daily Use
Showers
8.8 19.5%
Clothes Washers
10.0 22.1%
Toilets
8.2 18.0%
Dishwashers
0.7 1.5%
Baths
1.2 2.7%
Leaks
4.0 8.8%
Faucets
10.8 23.9%
Other Domestic Uses
1.6 3.4%
Source: Handbook of Water Use and Conservation, Amy Vickers
Friday, March 18, 2011
Estrogen from food source
Sources: Food and Drug Administration; Hoffman and Evers; Scanga et al.; FSIS-USDA; Dr. Harlan Ritchie, Michigan State University; NCBA
Food (3-Ounce Servings) Estrogen (in nanograms)
Soybean Oil 168,000,000
Milk 11
Potatoes 225
Peas 340
Ice Cream 520
Wheat Germ 3,400
Beef (no supplemental hormone) 1.3
Beef (with supplemental hormone) 1.9
Beef (with supplemental hormone) serving size equal to 1.5 tons (3000 pounds) Estrogen amount in one human birth control pill
Sources: Food and Drug Administration; Hoffman and Evers; Scanga et al.; FSIS-USDA; Dr. Harlan Ritchie, Michigan State University; NCBA
Food (3-Ounce Servings) Estrogen (in nanograms)
Soybean Oil 168,000,000
Milk 11
Potatoes 225
Peas 340
Ice Cream 520
Wheat Germ 3,400
Beef (no supplemental hormone) 1.3
Beef (with supplemental hormone) 1.9
Beef (with supplemental hormone) serving size equal to 1.5 tons (3000 pounds) Estrogen amount in one human birth control pill
Monday, February 21, 2011
Consumers are not always right
By TRENT LOOS*
IN this information age, is there such a thing as too much information? Is the human brain capable of computing all of the information it acquires?
Last week, I attended the Worldwide Food Expo sponsored by the American Meat Institute and the International Dairy Food Assn. The first day of the expo was filled with tremendous meat research. Information was presented about the latest discoveries from the laboratory about health, safety and nutrition.
The presentation that stuck with me most was from Dr. Nathan Bryan of the University of Texas' Center for Cell Signaling. Bryan has spent his research career studying the effects of nitrites and nitrates on the human body.
He reminded us that nitrites have been used for more than 5,000 years as a food preservative. In the 1970s, a study was released that connected nitrites, particularly those found in meat, with an increased incidence of cancer. The public perception of nitrites has been a downward spiral ever since then.
Bryan's research clearly shows that nitrites and nitrates are closer to a health food than a carcinogen. Of any food source, leafy vegetables, considered by most to be a health food, contain the highest level of nitrates. In fact, the European Union, in its infinite food wisdom, reported that "since leafy vegetables are the main source of dietary nitrate, the EU established maximum limits for nitrate content in lettuce and spinach in 1997."
My point is that if you would randomly ask consumers where nitrates come from in their diets, bacon and ham would get all of the blame. I am not sure many would actually know that leafy vegetables are a primary source.
Bryan's research suggests that dietary nitrite is NOT causing cancer and is actually a beneficial compound in the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease, and that makes me wonder if we are trying to over-regulate a healthy compound.
Bryan is quite excited about how important the compound could be if used properly for prevention of cardiovascular disease. For bacon lovers like myself, this is indeed good news: One of our favorite foods could now be viewed as a health food.
Given the research of Bryan and others that has all been inconclusive in regard to the risk associated with nitrites, why, then, is a line of "nitrite-free" meats being unveiled to consumers in December? I've been told it is because the company launching this new line was simply tired of getting beat up on the nitrite issue and just decided to "give the consumers what they want."
While that may indeed be the right step for a food company interested in making a profit, it can be a risky move for those involved in the rest of the food production chain and, for that matter, for consumers.
The fact of the matter is that consumers are not always right about what is in their best interest. Food companies exhibiting at the Worldwide Food Expo made it quite clear that if they identify something a consumer is willing to pay for, they will sell it.
That basic thought process is even trickling down to the production level of food production and is resulting in unattainable animal handling and behavior standards.
It is time we start educating our consumers about the facts and dispel the myths that are forcing increased and unnecessary regulations on producers. The proof is in the figgy pudding in the EU, which is trying to regulate Mother Nature in regard to leafy vegetables and nitrites.
In addition to nitrites, a similar situation has been unfolding in the milk arena, where the consumer has been incorrectly convinced that fat should be avoided at any cost. The message there has been to drink low-fat milk and be leaner, but we are quickly learning how flawed this is, especially in light of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) studies. Ironically, consumers are now trying to supplement their diets with the fatty acid instead of simply consuming foods that are naturally higher in the substance ... like whole milk.
Dr. Mark Cook at the University of Wisconsin has proven that whole milk contains higher levels of the fatty acid and provides tremendous health benefits. CLA can increase lean body mass and decrease fat, inhibit the growth of tumors and enhance immune function. CLA also is found naturally in beef and cheese, yet consumers continue to avoid fat.
If we choose to continue to be in food business, the end user needs a tremendous level of education. If we don't educate, the consumer will demand a food product that does not impact the planet, allows for no death to plants or animals and contains no additives. Little do consumers know that their misinformation about dietary issues may actually be what kills them.
*Trent Loos is a producer, host of the "Loos Tales" radio show, public speaker and founder of Faces of Agriculture, which puts the human element back into food production. Find out more at www.FacesOfAg.com, or e-mail trentloos@gmail.com.
By TRENT LOOS*
IN this information age, is there such a thing as too much information? Is the human brain capable of computing all of the information it acquires?
Last week, I attended the Worldwide Food Expo sponsored by the American Meat Institute and the International Dairy Food Assn. The first day of the expo was filled with tremendous meat research. Information was presented about the latest discoveries from the laboratory about health, safety and nutrition.
The presentation that stuck with me most was from Dr. Nathan Bryan of the University of Texas' Center for Cell Signaling. Bryan has spent his research career studying the effects of nitrites and nitrates on the human body.
He reminded us that nitrites have been used for more than 5,000 years as a food preservative. In the 1970s, a study was released that connected nitrites, particularly those found in meat, with an increased incidence of cancer. The public perception of nitrites has been a downward spiral ever since then.
Bryan's research clearly shows that nitrites and nitrates are closer to a health food than a carcinogen. Of any food source, leafy vegetables, considered by most to be a health food, contain the highest level of nitrates. In fact, the European Union, in its infinite food wisdom, reported that "since leafy vegetables are the main source of dietary nitrate, the EU established maximum limits for nitrate content in lettuce and spinach in 1997."
My point is that if you would randomly ask consumers where nitrates come from in their diets, bacon and ham would get all of the blame. I am not sure many would actually know that leafy vegetables are a primary source.
Bryan's research suggests that dietary nitrite is NOT causing cancer and is actually a beneficial compound in the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease, and that makes me wonder if we are trying to over-regulate a healthy compound.
Bryan is quite excited about how important the compound could be if used properly for prevention of cardiovascular disease. For bacon lovers like myself, this is indeed good news: One of our favorite foods could now be viewed as a health food.
Given the research of Bryan and others that has all been inconclusive in regard to the risk associated with nitrites, why, then, is a line of "nitrite-free" meats being unveiled to consumers in December? I've been told it is because the company launching this new line was simply tired of getting beat up on the nitrite issue and just decided to "give the consumers what they want."
While that may indeed be the right step for a food company interested in making a profit, it can be a risky move for those involved in the rest of the food production chain and, for that matter, for consumers.
The fact of the matter is that consumers are not always right about what is in their best interest. Food companies exhibiting at the Worldwide Food Expo made it quite clear that if they identify something a consumer is willing to pay for, they will sell it.
That basic thought process is even trickling down to the production level of food production and is resulting in unattainable animal handling and behavior standards.
It is time we start educating our consumers about the facts and dispel the myths that are forcing increased and unnecessary regulations on producers. The proof is in the figgy pudding in the EU, which is trying to regulate Mother Nature in regard to leafy vegetables and nitrites.
In addition to nitrites, a similar situation has been unfolding in the milk arena, where the consumer has been incorrectly convinced that fat should be avoided at any cost. The message there has been to drink low-fat milk and be leaner, but we are quickly learning how flawed this is, especially in light of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) studies. Ironically, consumers are now trying to supplement their diets with the fatty acid instead of simply consuming foods that are naturally higher in the substance ... like whole milk.
Dr. Mark Cook at the University of Wisconsin has proven that whole milk contains higher levels of the fatty acid and provides tremendous health benefits. CLA can increase lean body mass and decrease fat, inhibit the growth of tumors and enhance immune function. CLA also is found naturally in beef and cheese, yet consumers continue to avoid fat.
If we choose to continue to be in food business, the end user needs a tremendous level of education. If we don't educate, the consumer will demand a food product that does not impact the planet, allows for no death to plants or animals and contains no additives. Little do consumers know that their misinformation about dietary issues may actually be what kills them.
*Trent Loos is a producer, host of the "Loos Tales" radio show, public speaker and founder of Faces of Agriculture, which puts the human element back into food production. Find out more at www.FacesOfAg.com, or e-mail trentloos@gmail.com.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Sunday, February 06, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)