Barbecue: Relax, it’s not really French
By Eric Berg, Meat-animal Scientist, North Dakota State University

Another July 4th has passed and we are in the middle of “grilling season”. It is the season of barbecue cook-offs and other assorted celebrations that include outdoor roasting of meat. With all this attention to the BBQ, I started wondering; what is the origin of this cooking method and the word itself. I had always thought that both the word and the method had come from a French origin. So I did some digging. Turns out the origin of the word remains a point of debate and (as with many things) the French claim the origin of not only the word itself, but the cooking style.

According to one source, French pirates who sailed the French West Indies were called “Boucaniers” (the prequel to our Colonial Buccaneers). Seems the root word for Boucanier, or “Bouc”, is French for male goat and these swashbucklers got the name from their favorite meal. They would impale the goat carcass “de la barbe au cul” which loosely translates to “from beard to butt”. Since the “l” in ‘cul’ is silent in the French tongue and since the followers of this method of cooking had a hard time understanding the pirates, the word barbecue was passed on.

So you say you can’t quite stomach the fact that a French Captain Jack Sparrow invented one of the most sacred rituals of American summer-time? Then maybe you would prefer this origin. Harold McGee (in his book On Food and Cooking) links the word and cooking style to the West Indies, but not to French pirates. He states the word comes from the Spanish barbicoa which is a Taino word referring to a “framework of green sticks suspended on corner posts” where fish and meat are cooked over an open fire of coals. Just like your Weber grill, both the height and fire were adjustable to allow fast or slow cooking. From barbicoa to barbecue.
But wait gentle reader, there is more. Turns out, there were two Taino words that may have sparked the origination. This one may hit closer to home for some of you out there. The Taino word for “sacred fire pit” is barabicu. So there you go. Barbecue IS a spiritual ritual.

Okay. Let’s review. American BBQ originated with a pre-Columbian indigenous Amerindian inhabitant of the Bahamas and the Greater Antilles islands (which include Cuba, Haiti, the Dominican Republic and Jamaica). Note to reader: the former was obtained from the on-line encyclopedia Wikipedia since I didn’t know what a Taino was. Now back to our summary. The BBQ process was then stolen by the French (Okay; French pirates) who washed up on America’s Southern shores where Southern Barbecue was born! Originating with the whole hog because it was inexpensive and available to the masses, the post civil war Southern Barbecue came to be known as a central point of celebration and community fellowship.

The origins of the word and the cooking style have stayed loyal to their base. The next time you host your community ritual of cooked meat you will be able to tell the tale of barbecue’s origin. Be sure you tell it in a Pirates brogue. Yo ho ho!

Country Life Commission (1908)
President Teddy Roosevelt appointed a commission to conduct a comprehensive survey of the rural population to determine what can be done to improve the conditions of rural life. Liberty Hyde Bailey, Dean of Agriculture at Cornell, chaired the Commission. Over 550,000 people were surveyed and hearings were held at 30 locations. The Commission found that schools in rural areas were deplorable, rural people were socially isolated, roads were inadequate, communication was poor, farm credit needed to be improved, farm cooperatives were needed and the extension service was needed. They made a number of suggestions as to how to solve these problems.
The following came from a web document titled "Ag Development and U.S. History" for Rural Sociology 108 taught at Western Kentucky University by Dr. David Coffey.


"Roosevelt, long concerned with natural resource issues and public lands policy, established the Country Life Commission for a number of reasons, not the least of which being his fear that further rural depopulation would create vulnerabilities within the American food system. Believing that agriculture was the basis of all economic prosperity, Roosevelt wanted to upgrade rural institutional life and create an efficient food production system. In this way rural populations would be stabilized, the quality of rural life would be improved, and agriculture would assume its rightful place as the foundation for urban and industrial expansion.
Agriculture could conform to the emerging pattern of modern life. In nearly every state country life commissions were formed on the local level to evaluate rural problems. While the recommendations of the Country Life Commission failed to garner very much support from Congress and President William Howard Taft, who had succeed Roosevelt at the time of the issuance of the Commission's final report, the findings were critical to the future of rural policy.

Generally speaking, the Commission and the movement it spawned saw agriculture in an extremely favorable light. As typical with rural fundamentalism, the Country Lifers ascribed to rural people an honesty, patriotism, simplicity and a moral and emotional tone far superior to that of urbanites. As Bailey wrote echoing the sentiments of Thomas Jefferson, farmers were the "fundamental fact of democracy. "But many problems existed with the fabric of rural living which demanded attention. The litany of rural problems and concerns emphasized the drudgery of farm life, the lack of culture and amenities, the poverty and ineffectiveness of country institutional life, and the failure of government policy.

Among those institutions singled out for particular criticism and concern was the rural school. The failure of the rural school was often seen as the impetus for the depopulation of rural areas. The principle charge leveled against the schools was a perceived urban bias in the curriculum, the texts employed, and teaching approaches. Teachers were accused of steering the brightest youth to the cities rather than into farming. This "brain drain" seriously eroded the very foundations of rural life, it was argued. Superintendents of rural school systems hired poorly trained teachers, seldom placed enough emphasis upon continuing professional development, frequently failed to enforce laws related to attendance, and lacked a desire to supervise and evaluate performance. All too often supervision was carried out by local farmers and not be professional educators, a condition which appalled the Country Lifers who wished to see a greater level of "professionalism" in all areas of rural living, including the schools. While the quality of professional leadership and teaching came under attack, so too did the very size and scale of the typical country school. It was simply too small, too independent, and too informal to be effective. To the Country Life reformers the one-room schoolhouse was the very symbol of rural inefficiency and institutional poverty. The answer to these and other related problems was school consolidation, the "best solution to the country school problem yet devised," according to Mabel Carney, one of the leaders of the movement.15 While consolidation of schools was advocated several times prior to the Country Life movement, this reform became one of its hallmarks.

The consolidated school would become the focus of a region's social and cultural life. Grading, planning, curriculum standardization, and the professionalization of teaching and supervision were all supposed advantages of the consolidated school system. Such an approach would almost immediately lead to an improvement in educational attainment and would permit instruction in scientific agriculture, domestic science, and industrial arts, all deemed essential to a modern rural education. Schools would instruct children "to do in a perfect way, the things their fathers had not learned."6 Another recommendation of the Country Life Commission Report, Rural Free Delivery (RFD,) began and communication between all areas of our country was finally accomplished."


In 1912 Teddy Roosevelt ran for the presidency on the Progressive Party platform. Following is the Party's plank on Country Life (it reflects the findings of the Country Life Commission). Roosevelt was not successful. William Howard Taft won the election.
Country Life
"The development and prosperity of country life as important to the people who live in the cities as they are to the farmers. Increase of prosperity on the farm will favorably affect the cost of living and promote the interests of all who dwell in the country, and all who depend upon its products for clothing, shelter and food.
We pledge out party to foster the development of agricultural credit and co-operation, the teaching of agriculture in schools, agricultural college extension, the use of mechanical power on the farm, and to re-establish the Country Life Commission, thus directly promoting the welfare of the farmers, and bringing the benefits of better farming, better business and better living within their reach."

http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/agexed/aee501/reform.html

Dear Mr. Henderson,

Thank you for forwarding your concern.

At Microsoft, our mission and values are to help people and organizations throughout the world realize their full potential. With the “i’m” Initiative, our goal is to empower our users to support causes that are most important to them through something they do every day- send instant messages. Consistent with our initiative slogan “It’s your voice, it’s your choice”, people are able to choose from among ten of the most recognized social cause organizations that address issues ranging from poverty, child protection, disease, environmental degradation and animal protection.

We respect and value your opinion, however, we do not plan to make changes to our relationships with our partners. We feel strongly that these organizations provide a range of causes that will appeal to a wide range of passions.

Sincerely,

Microsoft Corporation

On another note, my High Plains Journal column has generated some interesting reader feedback this week. Thought I would share that with you as well:

"The point of the animal rights argument is that factory farmers have created freaks: biogenetically engineered livestock fashioned to human tastes, just so humans can eat them, wear them, drink them, and exploit them in rodeos, cockfights, bullfights, etc. - and then imprison them for life. Today's cows and chickens and turkeys and pigs and sheep do not exist in nature. The fact that some of these animals - who are trapped in small pens and cages, unable to go outdoors and have any kind of normal life, or crowded into filthy feedlots, or stuck as milking machines or egg laying machines or breeding machines - will sometimes fight with and kill each other, can hardly be surprising under the circumstances. Humans in similar crowded conditions do the the same thing, e.g., in prisons. That's why you farmers cruelly debeak chickens, castrate cows and horses, and cut off pigs' tails (without anesthesia, of course). How you can flatter yourself that you're being kind to animals, while fully supporting all the horrors of factory farming, is astounding to me. Reminds me of the slaveowners who used to claim they were kind to their slaves and they couldn't figure out why the abolitionists wanted them freed." ...

Ardeth Baxter
http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/73235/ardeth_baxter.html

The Valley Fair was held this weekend at Santa Clarita and Lake View Terrace, California both portions were considered very successful. I personally spoke with many vendors at the Santa Clarita portion which had rides, the arts & crafts exhibits, the horticulture exhibits, the Tigers of India show, The Sea Lion Splash show, a petting zoo and the Budweiser Clydesdale's as well as many other singers, local dancers, and shows performing. The vendors and visitors that I spoke with all enjoyed the Fair and had many nice things to say about the new location. Preliminary reports from the Los Angeles Daily News on the new location give estimates of a 60% increase of attendance for the Valley Fair.

I also attended the Livestock event held in Lake View Terrace. The parents and kids I spoke with all felt that it was a successful event and that the auction was a success. Some of the parents I spoke with felt that this was a safer venue for their children and felt that it was an advantage to be separated in 2 locations.

The Livestock event was never canceled. This is an example of how misinformation is either written in the press or placed on the Internet. I hope that this can be a lesson to all of us to be very careful of inaccurate communications and that we need to take the time and effort to find out the facts.

I thank you for your notes of concern and appreciate the time you have taken to hear some of the facts.

Yours,

Margie Beeson
Valley Fair Board of Diretors

Margie,
I can't begin to tell you how disappointed I am with banning
animals from the fair. This sends a message that animals are not to be
part of agriculture. In addition, 4-H's aninimal projects provide a
wonderful educational opportunity to learn proper care and management of
animals. I would point out that it is my understanding that we do not have
laws banning animal agriculture. Banning animals at the fair is it appears
a start to banning animals from the food chain. This effort to ban animals
from public view is giving in to a very small portion of the public. I
hope this unfortunate effort to force the public toward becoming
vegetarians will not succeed.

W. Terry Howard, PhD and P.A.S.
Professor Emeritus
University of Wisconsin-Madison
442 Agnes Drive
Madison, WI 53711

Margie,

My name is Amanda Nolz. I live on a purebred Limousin cattle operation with my family. Together we work each day to raise quality seed stock, market steers for meat consumption, and raise functional heifers for replacements in our herd. We are very proud of our agricultural roots, and one of the biggest rewards for my family and I is being able to showcase our best cattle at fairs across the country.

Since I was a little girl, my dad and I have had a ritual of taking pasture tours after chores—scoping out the ideal show heifers for me to work with when they are older. Quickly after weaning time, we select our show stock and get them in the barn to prepare them for their debut into the show ring. Every morning, my sisters and I wake up early to get the heifers fed, washed, combed, nurtured, and tied up on a nice bed of wood chips in front of cooling fans. The heifers soon become our friends, and we look forward to the many hours spent with the calves to ensure that we are competitive at competitions.

The lessons we learn from showing our own seed stock are invaluable to what we become as adults. Through living on a farm and showing cattle, I have learned the importance of responsibility, respect, trustworthiness, caring, and a hard work ethic. I am proud of being able to take part in the circle of life. Since my years in 4-H, I have moved on to become the 2006 National Beef Ambassador and a summer intern with the USDA AMS Livestock and Seed Program in Washington D.C. I have decided to dedicate my life to agriculture because it is my passion. This passion stemmed directly from my days as a little girl, befriending my show cattle.

Please reconsider eliminating livestock from your fair. It is a time honored tradition that exposes people to the wonderful world of agriculture—something that is very near and dear to my heart.

Putting agriculture first,

Amanda Nolz

www.chewingthecud.org

Dear Ms. Besson,

Hello, my name is Christie Molinaro. I heard about the issue your fair board has in regards to showing livestock at the San Fernando Valley Fair and I would just like to express my opinion on that. I live in Central Pennsylvania, I am 19 years old. I have been raising and showing livestock for 9 years now and to be perfectly honest, I cannot imagine what my life would be like without livestock.
When I was 10 years old I bought and raised my own dairy goat. She taught me a lot of responsibility and money management skills. Following that minor investment, I began buying and selling more animals of various species. Sheep, goats, steers, poultry- I raised anything my parents approved of. For me, showing at the county and state fair was the highlight of my childhood. I spent some of the best summers of my life working with my fair animals. I honestly spend hours and hours leading my market lambs, goats, and steers around our field. I treated them like my pets, they were fed like royalty. At the end of the summer I would show and sell my animals at the fair. Showing in 4-H was my opportunity to exhibit my animals to the community; to show them all the hard work I had invested that year. The sale was always rewarding as well, the money from my fair animals was set aside into my savings account. In fact, I just bought my first vehicle with the money from my 4-H animals last month!
I believe any child with the opportunity and desire to raise and show livestock at the county fair be given the chance to do so. Not only does 4-H teach valuable life skills such as responsibility, perseverance, dedication, and determination; but it also teaches money management skills. I have siblings who grew up with me not showing animals in 4-H and I see their struggles with finances today. 4-H and any organization that encourages children to raise livestock and learn about agriculture is incredibly valuable, for their lives as children and also when they mature into adults. My showing days are over because I am too old, however, I can clearly see where 4-H has benefited me. I am an Animal Science major at Penn State University, I have been employed on several different dairy farms for the past 5 years, I spent the previous year representing the Pennsylvania beef industry as the PA Beef Ambassador, and I am currently on the National Beef Ambassador Team. I believe that just goes to prove that agriculture has an abundance of opportunities available to young people passionate to take them. My passion came from my years showing at the fair!

Thank You for your time and consideration, I hope the San Fernando Fair Board makes the right decision for the proper reasons.

Sincerely,
Christie N. Molinaro

Animal Husbandry from Uncle Sam

I spent the past weekend in Big Sky, MT at the Young Agricultural Leadership Conference. Once again I felt the tremendous energy present when I am fortunate enough to accompany any group of young agriculturists. That energy is what fuels my desire to continue traveling the country. Many issues were addressed and potential solutions generated. However, I feel there is one that needs more attention in order to keep the momentum rolling in the right direction and that is the “eradication of Brucellosis” in Yellowstone Park.

Information was presented suggesting that the presence of Brucellosis in wildlife is not a problem but there is a chronic disease problem in the bison herd. Widely recognized by many as a true success story, the once nearly extinct bison are now plentiful and the largest herd of free roaming bison does indeed reside in Yellowstone Park. With that said, positive news recently came from Wyoming as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service amended the state’s Brucellosis designation to Class Free from Class A. The Class Free status is based on a state finding not Brucellosis in cattle for one full year.

As hard as it might be to believe there are individuals among us that believe the bison would be best off if man didn’t attempt to interfere. This misguided thought needs to be eradicated as well. Every American citizen stands to benefit if the great bison herd of the Yellowstone were free of this population crippling disease. Mary A. Bomar, President Bush's nominee to head the National Park Service, recently said "Systematic vaccination of elk and bison will, over the long term, reduce disease prevalence in elk and bison populations, especially if vaccine technology and methods for remote vaccine delivery to free-ranging wildlife are improved." I agree completely but would add that sooner is better than later.

Obviously cattlemen adjacent to Yellowstone stand to benefit from the complete eradication of Brucellosis but I think the urgency should be felt by every family that enjoys visiting Yellowstone Park as a vacation destination. The healthier the bison population is, the more animals there are to view and enjoy. It is reported there are more and more bison interacting with park goers on the roads. In fact Al Nash, Yellowstone's director of public affairs was quoted as saying "There are the occasional parents out there who want to photograph their child with or on a bison.” I’m fairly sure those parents aren’t aware of the fact that there have been cases of Brucellosis transmission from animals to humans.

My recent trip to Big Sky country confirmed that most people enjoy traveling with their family dog. Dogs are also susceptible to Brucellosis and it would not be difficult to for Rover to come in contact with bison mucus. Since more and more Americans treat Rover like a kid, it would be easy for the disease to be transferred from canine to human. Is all of this likely? Probably not but it is more likely than some park visitor getting mad cow disease from consuming beef and look at all the new regulations beef producers are footing the bill for thanks to unscientific scare tactics leveled against the industry.

I am no way, shape or form attempting to create unnecessary fear for park vacationers but I am trying to emphasize that everyone has a vested interest in accelerating the eradication of Brucellosis in the herds of livestock owned by the U.S. Government. Every reputable livestock owner in the country would implement any reasonable measure possible to improve the health of his or her own herd. Should Uncle Sam be any different?

Well it happened yesterday, the Illinois Senate voted to ban horse harvesting in the state, but at the same time, activity in Texas is considered positive. The Texas Senate has passed a bill change offered by Sen. Glenn Hegar that opens the door for the sale of horsemeat for human consumption as long as animals have been "tested by the commission."

Stay tuned for further developments on that..

Frank Bowman is President of Horseman's Council of Illinois and had this to share.

Most downstate democrats broke ranks and voted against the bill and most
urban republicans also broke ranks and voted for the bill. Emotions ran high
during the floor debate but in the end animal welfare issues trumped common
sense.

In another somewhat related story: What is the purpose of a county or state fair? Yes, I thought so....educating consumers about food production. Look at this development this week in California. Remember it was California that lead the nation in banning horse harvesting in 1998 and now the removal of livestock from a county fair.

Pigs, sheep, geese told to scurry from Valley Fair, drawing outrage


Anti-foie gras suit dismissed

Source: Chron.com

A judge has dismissed a lawsuit by animal rights activists challenging a state grant of $420,000 to a foie gras farm in SullivanCounty. Justice Thomas McNamara concluded Empire State Development Corp. had "a rational basis" to award the grant, without special environmental review, to Hudson Valley Foie Gras to upgrade water treatment facilities and expand.

The court challenge by the Humane Society of the United States and six New York members also lacked standing, McNamara ruled. The plaintiffs had to challenge the expenditure as unlawful and not just money spent unwisely, he wrote. "The factual bases offered to support the claim do not rise to the level of illegal or unconstitutional acts."

The underlying issue is foie gras production in New York, which the Humane Society considers cruel and wants to stop. Hudson Valley Foie Gras, with three locations in rural SullivanCounty, raises 250,000 ducks annually to produce meat. Foie gras - French for "fat liver" - farms force-feed ducks to fatten their livers well beyond normal sizes.

I know most of us don't even know what Foie Gras is, but I truly believe it has the potential to impact all of us particularly given today's governmental attitude that they are better qualified to make food choices for us. We should take a really hard look at were that started. It began in NAZI Germany and should stay there. Nothing about that government that placed the life of animal above humans should be duplicated. It appears Chicago is beginning to see that. It is also interesting to note that when a colleague of mine recently spoke to the Illinois lawyer that pushed through the foie gras ban in Chicago and asked for an explanation on why he supported the banning of a food product that the veterinary community has determined not to be raised under cruel conditions, he said with a smile and a shrug that he "did it for the money." Well, there is lies another great problem.... Trent


As the foie gras turns

Source: Chicagoist.com

Mayor Daley, who found the ban nearly as ridiculous as a runway in downtown Chicago, has predicted that aldermen will repeal the outlawed delicacy ban soon. This came on the tails of Ald. Ed Burke of the 14th Ward (remember how he wanted cabbies to have a dress code?) maneuvering aldermen into voting to repeal the ban.

In perhaps one of the better sound bites this year, Ald. Ed Smith of the 28th Ward, who happens to chair the Health Committee where the ban is upheld, not only threatened to resign if the ban was repealed, he said, "My manhood, my integrity is at stake."

Only in Chicago would you find foie gras pitted against an Alderman's manhood. Be sure to tune in next time for the continuing story of "As the Foie Gras Turns."

Resource for AVMA:

http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/sep05/050901q.asp

Prohibiting production of foie gras in the United States would have a minimal impact on agricultural markets, but several delegates expressed concern that efforts to oppose foie gras production were just "baby steps" by groups with much more ambitious goals.

Always together for American agriculture,
Trent Loos

Cocaine, I have never tried it nor I suggest anyone do so. In fact, I will most likely never try Censored either, but at least I have heard of it. What in the world are you talking about Trent?

I must admit the first time I heard the news story about this energy drink that FDA was banning the name of, I wondered why in world anybody would name a drink after a street drug. Now that they have received millions of dollars in free publicity from the government and they renamed it Censored I fully understand. So often we in farm and ranch country are reluctant to do anything that might be viewed as controversial yet we are equally offended for not being recognized.

A perfect example occurred on the last California trip visiting with some dairymen. They told me the local TV station had come to their place to capture footage. The individuals commented while at the farm how impressive and clean the dairy was only to never use the story. Why? Upon calling the station they were told there is nothing controversial about this. My point is most times we can find a silver lining in what some consider bad PR.

Another good example is who would ever have guessed that BSE in the United States would lead to improved consumer confidence and increased beef consumption, but it did. Why? Because we had unprecedented opportunities to tell the story. You may not be ready to seek limelight in any fashion but please don't avoid it. Those who are trying to put you out of business don't run from the camera.


Always together for American agriculture,
Trent Loos