A tribute a great man Dr. Stan Curtis a generation ahead of his time yet his impacts in American Agriculture will make a difference for generations to come. My thanks to Dr. Jim Pettigrew for sharing his thoughts.
Click here to listen.
Subscribe To Loos Tales Daily information
Posts
All Comments
Monday, May 17, 2010
To the Editor,
You might notice my HPJ ‘script number is in the lower 3 digits. I have read your paper for a long time.
Trent Loos , writer of Loos Tales, states in his bio that he’s a sixth generation United States farmer. I assume he offers that info to give credibility and patriotism to his opinion. Well, I had a grandfather Hyatt who fought with Ethan Allen in the War for Independence. And my wife is from a ranching family whose ancestors were in New Spain, now New Mexico, 400 years ago – what’s that, around 20 generations?
I’ll admit up front, I seldom read Loos Tales thoroughly and when I do, I almost always don’t agree with the crux of its message. Trent Loos’ writings gives me the impression that he would be a good fit politically with the Tea Baggers.
In his May 10, 2010 column about the oil patch in Western North Dakota which I did read, in the closing paragraph he wrote “… if politics and people would get out of the way … “ .
I’m willing to be corrected but I assume by “politics” he ‘s referring to consumer and environmental interests and by “people”, governmental regulators.
From the information that’s accumulating publicly on the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster and the explosion and blowout on the Deep Water Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, it appears to me the coal and oil patch people have, by politics, bullying, sex and drugs, effectively precluded “politics and people” from having adequate public interest oversight of their operations. Per Loos’ desire, in those two human and ecological disasters, “politics and people” were pushed out of the way.
"How's that work’n out” for the mine and rig workers and their families, the fisherman, shrimpers, tourist operators and Gulf people in general? And even for BP?
Dale Hyatt
Las Animas, Colorado
May 15, 2010
You might notice my HPJ ‘script number is in the lower 3 digits. I have read your paper for a long time.
Trent Loos , writer of Loos Tales, states in his bio that he’s a sixth generation United States farmer. I assume he offers that info to give credibility and patriotism to his opinion. Well, I had a grandfather Hyatt who fought with Ethan Allen in the War for Independence. And my wife is from a ranching family whose ancestors were in New Spain, now New Mexico, 400 years ago – what’s that, around 20 generations?
I’ll admit up front, I seldom read Loos Tales thoroughly and when I do, I almost always don’t agree with the crux of its message. Trent Loos’ writings gives me the impression that he would be a good fit politically with the Tea Baggers.
In his May 10, 2010 column about the oil patch in Western North Dakota which I did read, in the closing paragraph he wrote “… if politics and people would get out of the way … “ .
I’m willing to be corrected but I assume by “politics” he ‘s referring to consumer and environmental interests and by “people”, governmental regulators.
From the information that’s accumulating publicly on the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster and the explosion and blowout on the Deep Water Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, it appears to me the coal and oil patch people have, by politics, bullying, sex and drugs, effectively precluded “politics and people” from having adequate public interest oversight of their operations. Per Loos’ desire, in those two human and ecological disasters, “politics and people” were pushed out of the way.
"How's that work’n out” for the mine and rig workers and their families, the fisherman, shrimpers, tourist operators and Gulf people in general? And even for BP?
Dale Hyatt
Las Animas, Colorado
May 15, 2010
Friday, May 07, 2010
Monday, May 03, 2010
Monday, April 19, 2010
Earth Day 2050: Do you think eating is overrated?
Ron Cerri, President Nevada Cattlemen’s Association
Dr. J.J. Goicoechea, Vice President Nevada Cattlemen’s Association
Ron Torell, First Vice president Nevada Cattlemen’s Association First Vice president
Jon Griggs, Second Vice President Nevada Cattlemen’s Association
Gary McCuin, Executive Vice President Nevada Section for Society for Range Management
The American public has the highest quality of life in the world. A major reason for this is due to the “Green Revolution” that began in the 1950s which involved the development of crop rotation, the mass production and use of petroleum-based fertilizers and chemical pesticides, expanded irrigation, and the introduction of genetically superior, disease-resistant cultivars (cultivated crops). The Green Revolution reshaped the U.S. into a dense urban society. At present it is estimated that a mere 2% of the U.S. population feeds the nation and the average age of that 2% is over 55. As a result, the average American does not experience hunger and spends less than 9% of their total disposable income on food. Many American consumers have become complacent and take it for granted that food will always be plentiful at a low cost. The question becomes: Is U.S. agriculture capable of meeting future needs?
The United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization recently stated that in just 40 years global food production must double. This doubling of food production is necessary in order to head off mass global hunger and feed the projected global population of nine billion by 2050. There is a general consensus that agriculture has the capability to meet the food needs of 8–10 billion people but there is little consensus on how this can be achieved by sustainable means. Sustainability implies that high yields can be maintained through agricultural practices that have acceptable environmental impacts.
Hindering our ability to feed the world in 2050 and beyond are the efforts of well-intended, public-funded special interest and radical environmental groups as they continue to push for unrealistic legislation that hinders agriculture’s ability to produce food and fiber in a supposedly environmentally friendly and sustainable manner. Much of this unrealistic legislation has been successful primarily because many of our county, state and national politicians are far removed from agriculture, as is the population base they represent. The tsunami that agriculture is facing threatens our ability to feed the world and meet those projected 2050 needs.
About half of the world’s land surface is suitable only for rangeland and not for growing food crops. More than two-thirds of land used for grazing in the United States is not suitable for raising crops. Rangelands do produce significant quantities of grasses, shrubs and forbs that only livestock can utilize. Livestock contributes 40% of the global value of agricultural production and supports the livelihoods and food security of almost 1 billion people. Globally, livestock contributes 15% of total food energy and 25% of dietary protein. Well-managed grazing of rangelands, grasslands, and pastures is the most sustainable form of agriculture known.
Nevada, the driest and one of the least populated states in the nation, supports a livestock industry that is very dependent on the state’s 87 % public-owned land. In addition to livestock grazing, other multiple uses include recreation, mining and wildlife. Additionally, it looks like Nevada rangelands may become key to meeting the nation’s energy needs through wind and solar energy generation. All of these tangible and intangible goods and services are important to the economic and social well being of the residents of Nevada.
How can agriculture feed the growing food supply needs? How much longer can society disregard the fundamental importance of our agriculture industry? When will it change? It is the opinion of the authors that this situation may only change after hunger pains are experienced by the general public similar to what occurred during the Great Depression of the 1930s. As long as the bulk of our population has access to a cheap, reliable and quality food source, and financially support radical anti-agriculture interests, we will continue to see erosion of our agriculture base and our ability to feed the world.
Agriculturists have one more job to do that has not been necessary in the past. Because of the general public’s huge disconnect to the land and agriculture, it is up to each and every agriculturist to educate the public (and themselves) about environmentally sound food and fiber production practices. We must reinforce the safety, wholesomeness and importance of our domestically produced food supply. We must defend only the production practices that are environmentally sound and not excuse those practices and producers who do not subscribe to these production methods. We must also listen to our detractors and consider that possibly they are not entirely wrong. We must not assume we are always right, and consider that other people may have something to contribute in reaching long term agricultural sustainability.
As a consumer, before you criticize agriculture, consider your full stomach and comfortable lifestyle. Keep in mind, in large part, production agriculture is to thank for these pleasures of life you have grown accustomed to enjoying. Agriculturists, first check the closet for any skeletons that may be hiding. Don't immediately assume that those who disagree with you are evil, stupid or greedy. And even when they are, that doesn't relieve you of the responsibility for making a constructive and convincing argument. It is our hope that through this article we may open a few eyes and minds as to the past and future of agriculture production in the great nation of the United States of America on this Earth day 2010 as we prepare for Earth Day 2050
Ron Cerri, President Nevada Cattlemen’s Association
Dr. J.J. Goicoechea, Vice President Nevada Cattlemen’s Association
Ron Torell, First Vice president Nevada Cattlemen’s Association First Vice president
Jon Griggs, Second Vice President Nevada Cattlemen’s Association
Gary McCuin, Executive Vice President Nevada Section for Society for Range Management
The American public has the highest quality of life in the world. A major reason for this is due to the “Green Revolution” that began in the 1950s which involved the development of crop rotation, the mass production and use of petroleum-based fertilizers and chemical pesticides, expanded irrigation, and the introduction of genetically superior, disease-resistant cultivars (cultivated crops). The Green Revolution reshaped the U.S. into a dense urban society. At present it is estimated that a mere 2% of the U.S. population feeds the nation and the average age of that 2% is over 55. As a result, the average American does not experience hunger and spends less than 9% of their total disposable income on food. Many American consumers have become complacent and take it for granted that food will always be plentiful at a low cost. The question becomes: Is U.S. agriculture capable of meeting future needs?
The United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization recently stated that in just 40 years global food production must double. This doubling of food production is necessary in order to head off mass global hunger and feed the projected global population of nine billion by 2050. There is a general consensus that agriculture has the capability to meet the food needs of 8–10 billion people but there is little consensus on how this can be achieved by sustainable means. Sustainability implies that high yields can be maintained through agricultural practices that have acceptable environmental impacts.
Hindering our ability to feed the world in 2050 and beyond are the efforts of well-intended, public-funded special interest and radical environmental groups as they continue to push for unrealistic legislation that hinders agriculture’s ability to produce food and fiber in a supposedly environmentally friendly and sustainable manner. Much of this unrealistic legislation has been successful primarily because many of our county, state and national politicians are far removed from agriculture, as is the population base they represent. The tsunami that agriculture is facing threatens our ability to feed the world and meet those projected 2050 needs.
About half of the world’s land surface is suitable only for rangeland and not for growing food crops. More than two-thirds of land used for grazing in the United States is not suitable for raising crops. Rangelands do produce significant quantities of grasses, shrubs and forbs that only livestock can utilize. Livestock contributes 40% of the global value of agricultural production and supports the livelihoods and food security of almost 1 billion people. Globally, livestock contributes 15% of total food energy and 25% of dietary protein. Well-managed grazing of rangelands, grasslands, and pastures is the most sustainable form of agriculture known.
Nevada, the driest and one of the least populated states in the nation, supports a livestock industry that is very dependent on the state’s 87 % public-owned land. In addition to livestock grazing, other multiple uses include recreation, mining and wildlife. Additionally, it looks like Nevada rangelands may become key to meeting the nation’s energy needs through wind and solar energy generation. All of these tangible and intangible goods and services are important to the economic and social well being of the residents of Nevada.
How can agriculture feed the growing food supply needs? How much longer can society disregard the fundamental importance of our agriculture industry? When will it change? It is the opinion of the authors that this situation may only change after hunger pains are experienced by the general public similar to what occurred during the Great Depression of the 1930s. As long as the bulk of our population has access to a cheap, reliable and quality food source, and financially support radical anti-agriculture interests, we will continue to see erosion of our agriculture base and our ability to feed the world.
Agriculturists have one more job to do that has not been necessary in the past. Because of the general public’s huge disconnect to the land and agriculture, it is up to each and every agriculturist to educate the public (and themselves) about environmentally sound food and fiber production practices. We must reinforce the safety, wholesomeness and importance of our domestically produced food supply. We must defend only the production practices that are environmentally sound and not excuse those practices and producers who do not subscribe to these production methods. We must also listen to our detractors and consider that possibly they are not entirely wrong. We must not assume we are always right, and consider that other people may have something to contribute in reaching long term agricultural sustainability.
As a consumer, before you criticize agriculture, consider your full stomach and comfortable lifestyle. Keep in mind, in large part, production agriculture is to thank for these pleasures of life you have grown accustomed to enjoying. Agriculturists, first check the closet for any skeletons that may be hiding. Don't immediately assume that those who disagree with you are evil, stupid or greedy. And even when they are, that doesn't relieve you of the responsibility for making a constructive and convincing argument. It is our hope that through this article we may open a few eyes and minds as to the past and future of agriculture production in the great nation of the United States of America on this Earth day 2010 as we prepare for Earth Day 2050
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Allergies worse? Climate change could be culprit, study finds
"Climate change could allow highly allergenic trees like oaks and hickories to start replacing pines, spruces, and firs that generally don't cause allergies, exposing many more people to springtime allergy triggers," says lead author Amanda Staudt, a National Wildlife Federation climate scientist."
What a load of crap literally. I have just addressed this issue in the most recent issue of Feedstuffs. Click here to read
Here is highlight
In the late 1990s, Dr. Erika von Mutius, a health researcher, compared the rates of allergies and asthma in eastern and western Germany. Her hypothesis was that children growing up in the poorer, dirtier and generally less healthful cities of eastern Germany would suffer more from allergy and asthma than children in western Germany, with its cleaner and more modern environment.
When the two regions were reunified, von Mutius compared the disease rates. "What we found was exactly the opposite" of the hypothesis, she recalled.
Children in the polluted areas of eastern Germany had lower allergic reactions and fewer cases of asthma than children in the west. What was going on?
"Climate change could allow highly allergenic trees like oaks and hickories to start replacing pines, spruces, and firs that generally don't cause allergies, exposing many more people to springtime allergy triggers," says lead author Amanda Staudt, a National Wildlife Federation climate scientist."
What a load of crap literally. I have just addressed this issue in the most recent issue of Feedstuffs. Click here to read
Here is highlight
In the late 1990s, Dr. Erika von Mutius, a health researcher, compared the rates of allergies and asthma in eastern and western Germany. Her hypothesis was that children growing up in the poorer, dirtier and generally less healthful cities of eastern Germany would suffer more from allergy and asthma than children in western Germany, with its cleaner and more modern environment.
When the two regions were reunified, von Mutius compared the disease rates. "What we found was exactly the opposite" of the hypothesis, she recalled.
Children in the polluted areas of eastern Germany had lower allergic reactions and fewer cases of asthma than children in the west. What was going on?
Monday, April 12, 2010
In Defense of Farming
Embracing Technology . Feeding the World
FACT #1: Over 98% of all farms in America are family farms. Family farms can be large, small or somewhere in between. Each farmer today feeds 150 people versus only 9 in 1940.
FACT #2: Recent study published in the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics indicates Pollan’s view of food production would cause need for an additional 214 million acres of farmland. That is an area twice the size of California.
FACT #3: Dr. Jude Capper of Washington State University has found eggs purchased from a farmers market leave a carbon footprint 4.5 larger than those purchased at a supermarket.
FACT #4: Adrian Williams, agricultural researcher at Cranfield University in England, says “food miles” is a foolish concept that is provincial, damaging and simplistic. “The idea that a product travels a certain distance and is, therefore, worse than one you raised nearby – well, it’s just idiotic.”
FACT #5: Americans spend less than 10% of their income on food. In European countries it is over 16%.
FACT #6: CAFOs have reduced stress levels in food animals. Modern barns on dairy farms have contributed greatly to cows increasing milk production by 2.7 times annually in the past 60 years.
FACT #7: Grass-based organic beef requires more than 5 acre days to produce a pound of beef. Less than 1.7 acre days are needed in a grain-fed feedlot system using growth-enhancing technology.
FACT #8: Farm subsidies cost each American citizen only $25/year. While air travel and energy subsidies cost $50 and $250 per year respectively. Taxpayer investment in food is minimal.
FACT #9: Cornell University has proven per gallon of milk produced farmers use 35% of the water and 10% of the land mass and omit 63% less carbon than they did in 1945.
FACT #10: The global population is expected to be 9 billion by 2050 and that will require a doubling of food production in the next years. That can only be done through technological advancements as we can’t make more land.
Embracing Technology . Feeding the World
FACT #1: Over 98% of all farms in America are family farms. Family farms can be large, small or somewhere in between. Each farmer today feeds 150 people versus only 9 in 1940.
FACT #2: Recent study published in the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics indicates Pollan’s view of food production would cause need for an additional 214 million acres of farmland. That is an area twice the size of California.
FACT #3: Dr. Jude Capper of Washington State University has found eggs purchased from a farmers market leave a carbon footprint 4.5 larger than those purchased at a supermarket.
FACT #4: Adrian Williams, agricultural researcher at Cranfield University in England, says “food miles” is a foolish concept that is provincial, damaging and simplistic. “The idea that a product travels a certain distance and is, therefore, worse than one you raised nearby – well, it’s just idiotic.”
FACT #5: Americans spend less than 10% of their income on food. In European countries it is over 16%.
FACT #6: CAFOs have reduced stress levels in food animals. Modern barns on dairy farms have contributed greatly to cows increasing milk production by 2.7 times annually in the past 60 years.
FACT #7: Grass-based organic beef requires more than 5 acre days to produce a pound of beef. Less than 1.7 acre days are needed in a grain-fed feedlot system using growth-enhancing technology.
FACT #8: Farm subsidies cost each American citizen only $25/year. While air travel and energy subsidies cost $50 and $250 per year respectively. Taxpayer investment in food is minimal.
FACT #9: Cornell University has proven per gallon of milk produced farmers use 35% of the water and 10% of the land mass and omit 63% less carbon than they did in 1945.
FACT #10: The global population is expected to be 9 billion by 2050 and that will require a doubling of food production in the next years. That can only be done through technological advancements as we can’t make more land.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
Good news from Missouri
Court decision on Arrow Rock deals blow to opponents of factory farm
Of course I will remind you that last year New Zealand revealed that manure may help people fight cancer
Manure might be the answer in kicking cancer
Court decision on Arrow Rock deals blow to opponents of factory farm
A Missouri appeals court Tuesday overturned a ruling that set up a buffer around the historic village of Arrow Rock to protect it from a proposed factory farm.
The appellate decision was a blow to environmentalists and parks supporters, who feared it would let factory farms ruin pristine areas in Missouri with odors and pollution.
Of course I will remind you that last year New Zealand revealed that manure may help people fight cancer
Manure might be the answer in kicking cancer
New Scientist magazine reported dairy farmers were five times less likely than the general population to develop the disease.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
As a 6 th generation United States farmer, I have had my fill of people talking about “humanely raised meat” when they don’t have a clue... -
One huge step backwards for mankind Amazingly, we as individuals within an extremely informed society know more about less than ever before....