Join the Sierra Club, I did

In case you missed it yesterday, you might wonder “What in the world are you talking about, Trent?” Link to yesterday’s Loos Lips here. Gauging from your responses to this subject yesterday, no one thinks we are nuts and most are excited to help get this accomplished. Fur Commission has posted all the vital information you need in making this decision so act today. We must have this completed by Jan 31, 2004

Why join the Sierra Club? Click here. Choose the joint membership for two votes and I chose limited income. Following information available on Fur Commission website.
For as little as $32, a joint membership gives you TWO votes in what is a vital election. The Sierra Club is locked in a life and death battle for control of the Club's $100 million-dollar-a-year treasury.

The basic reason for this action is that Paul Watson is attempting to do the same thing. We can not afford to let Watson accomplish that. If you want to know why, check this out from ActivistCash.com.

"There’s nothing wrong with being a terrorist, as long as you win. Then you write the history."
Paul Watson, at the Animal Rights 2002 convention

And he is from a family of terrorists. His wife was arrested last week.

Animal-rights activist arrested

Case shines light on FBI's efforts to dismantle liberation fronts (more)

Thursday, January 15, 2004

By PAUL SHUKOVSKY
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

"There’s nothing wrong with being a terrorist, as long as you win. Then you write the history."
An agent with the FBI's domestic terrorism squad arrested an animal rights activist yesterday for allegedly lying to a Seattle federal grand jury investigating an arson attack on an Olympia forest-product company.

The complaint against Allison Lance Watson provides a rare window into the FBI's efforts to dismantle the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front, which the bureau considers to be among the greatest domestic terrorism threats facing the nation.

Paul Watson, a celebrated defender of marine mammals and founder and president of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, spoke proudly of how his wife had not long ago been released from a Japanese jail were she was imprisoned for a short time for freeing numerous dolphins from nets. Watson said Sea Shepherd paid an $8,000 fine for his wife and one other activist. "That came out to about $600 per dolphin. We thought it was a good deal."

The LA Times laid the ground work in an article last week.

Link here.
Animal-rights activists and anti-immigration advocates are teaming in a bid to control the board, to the dismay of traditionalists.

By Miguel Bustillo and Kenneth R. Weiss
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers

January 18, 2004 An unusual alliance of anti-immigration advocates and animal-rights activists is attempting to take over the leadership of the Sierra Club, America's oldest national environmental group, in what is emerging as a bitter fight over the future of the 112-year-old organization founded by Scottish immigrant John Muir.

In response, 11 former Sierra Club presidents have written a letter expressing "extreme concern for the continuing viability of the club," protesting what they see as a concerted effort by outside organizations to hijack the mainstream conservationist group and its $95-million annual budget.

We need you to join the Sierra Club

Many of you are going to think this is nuts. I fully endorse Teresa Platt and her plea to take over the Sierra Club. Act today. You always want to know how you can help so forward this to everyone you know.

Please do link here to read and understand the whole thing, we need to get a seat on the board.

Why my family joined the Sierra Club - and why yours should too before January 31, 2004!By Teresa Platt, Executive Director, Fur Commission USA (link)

I work in the mink biz and my family's work resumé includes agriculture and commercial fishing. Most of my friends are professional farmers, ranchers, fishermen, hunters and trappers, loggers and miners, whalers and sealers, resource providers from all over the world. Such people are more often on the receiving end of Sierra Club campaigns, as opposed to members of Sierra Club.So why has my family joined the Sierra Club?

Since most Sierra Clubbers don't vote, it only takes about 30,000 votes for a candidate to win a seat on the board. That's only 15,000 families with joint membership. Executive Director Carl Pope noted that 18% of Sierra Club members fish and/or hunt (about 140,000 of the 780,000 Sierra Club members) and he worries that they will be driven out of the Club by the vegan/animal rights agenda pushed by Paul Watson.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Nails it again

Once again Joyce Morrison has drawn the picture in the Illinois Leader so well.

The powerful push to protect animals (whole story)

By Joyce Morrison (jmorrison@illinoisleader.com)

Recently a cougar (mountain lion) in Orange County, CA killed one bicyclist and would have killed the second one if her companions had not come to her rescue. Estimates are between 4,000 and 6,000 adult lions roaming California. State law prohibits hunting or killing them.

There are environmentalists and then there are extremists. It would be interesting to put some of these extremists out in the wild for about two weeks to fend for themselves without mosquito spray and all the luxuries they enjoy while making their "pristine regulations." With no weapon to defend themselves against the wolves, poisonous snakes, cougars and bears they believe should be introduced into the rural areas where people live, their controls would become much less extreme.

Why my family joined the Sierra Club - and why
yours should too before January 31, 2004!

By Teresa Platt, Executive Director, Fur Commission USA

I work in the mink biz and my family's work
resumé includes agriculture and commercial
fishing. Most of my friends are professional
farmers, ranchers, fishermen, hunters and
trappers, loggers and miners, whalers and
sealers, resource providers from all over the
world. Such people are more often on the
receiving end of Sierra Club campaigns, as
opposed to members of Sierra Club.
So why has my family joined the Sierra Club?
Because a joint membership purchased before
January 31, 2004 entitles our family to two votes
in the March 2004 Sierra Club board election. For
as little as $32, a joint membership gives you
TWO votes in what is a vital election. (1) The
Sierra Club is locked in a life and death battle
for control of the Club's $100
million-dollar-a-year treasury. (2)
The man leading the hostile takeover attempt is
Paul Watson, who claims to have invented tree
spiking and leads the eco-vigilantes of the Sea
Shepherd Conservation Society. Among crewmembers
on his rag-tag fleet of vegan vessels, Watson has
mentored convicted felon/arsonist Rodney Coronado
and Alex Pacheco, co-founder of People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), plus dozens
of eco-anarchists with lengthy arrest records
earned via crimes committed globally. (3) 2004
started off with a bang for Sea Shepherd when
Watson's wife was arrested for lying to a grand
jury about use of a leased truck which appears to
have been used in the Pacific Northwest on an
eco-terrorist road trip. (4)
Watson claims he is now but three seats away from
controlling the 15-member Sierra Club board. (5)
Imagine the damage Watson, and the people he
supports, could do with access to hundreds of
millions of dollars!
Since most Sierra Clubbers don't vote, it only
takes about 30,000 votes for a candidate to win a
seat on the board. That's only 15,000 families
with joint membership. Executive Director Carl
Pope noted that 18% of Sierra Club members fish
and/or hunt (about 140,000 of the 780,000 Sierra
Club members) and he worries that they will be
driven out of the Club by the vegan/animal rights
agenda pushed by Watson.
"It's important to have hunters and fishermen in
the Sierra Club," Pope told the Los Angeles
Times. "We are a big-tent organization. We want
the Sierra Club to be a comfortable place for
Americans who want clean air, clean water, and to
protect America's open spaces."
Your joint membership must be in good standing by
January 31 to get your two votes in order to play
in this game!

SIDEBAR: To make this fray even more interesting,
the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has earned
respect for over twenty years of battling white
supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan, claims some of
the groups backing some of the Sierra Club board
and 2004 candidates have ties to racist groups.
The SPLC is so concerned by the turn of events,
its director, Morris Dees, is running for a seat
on the Sierra Club board, in order to "sound the
alarm." You must visit
www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=45

NOTES:
(1) https://ww2.sierraclub.org/membership
(2) www.groundswellsierra.org
(3) www.activistcash.com
(4) http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/156710_animalrights15.html
(5) www.maninnature.com/Breaking/Watson.html
(6) See also "Election Becomes a Fight Over
Sierra Club's Future: Animal-rights activists and
anti-immigration advocates are teaming in a bid
to control the board, to the dismay of
traditionalists," Los Angeles Times, January 18,
2004,
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sierra18jan18,1,7295202.story?coll=la-home-headlines

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Media Contact: Ron Phillips
Office: (202) 662-4130

Data Demonstrate Little to No Evidence That Antibiotic Use
in Food Animals Presents Any Significant Risk to Human Health

-- New publication finds antibiotic bans not based on risk assessment may be more harmful to
human and animal health -

Washington, D.C. (January 19, 2004) – A new peer-reviewed article raises concern that the banning of antibiotics in food animals may harm both human and animal health. The report, published this month in the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, found there is little to no scientific evidence to suggest that the use of antibiotics in food animals negatively impacts human health.

"The scientific evidence shows that the actual risk of transfer of antibiotic resistant organisms from animals to humans caused by the use of antibiotics in food animals is extremely small and in some cases zero," said Ian Phillips, M.D., principal author and Emeritus Professor of Medical Microbiology at the medical school of Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospitals, University of London. “The European Union applied the ‘Precautionary Principle’ and set aside scientific evidence, and so made decisions about antibiotics that have in fact damaged animal health and not provided any benefits to human health. We need to advance science and risk assessments to help make sound, evidence-based and balanced decisions in the United States and around the world.”

The panel of experts, drawn from both human and animal health, found the debate over the potential of antibiotic resistance transfer from animal to humans has featured misinformation and a blurring of important distinctions. They critically reviewed more than 250 studies and available data in an attempt to draw distinctions between events that do happen, may happen, might happen and do not happen.

Surveillance data from Europe and the United States shows numerous disconnects in the patterns of resistant bacteria in animals and humans, making it unlikely that there is or has been widespread transference of resistant bacteria via the food supply. And, while a European ban on antibiotics to promote growth has not reduced antibiotic resistance levels in humans in Europe, U.S. data shows the incident of antibiotic resistant food borne pathogens is generally declining as has the number of cases caused by food-borne bacteria.

“After examining the extensive surveillance data available, no significant benefits to human health as a result of European ban are evident, while it is clear that resistance in food borne pathogens has decreased in the U.S.,” said Ronald N. Jones, M.D., co-author of the JAC report and Principal Investigator of the SENTRY Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance program, the world's largest database of antibiotic resistance.

A review of several risk assessments that have been conducted on specific antibiotics used in animals consistently showed extremely low levels of risk.

“We agree with the World Health Organization and the International Office of Epizootics that sound policy decisions must be based on scientific risk assessments that address the likely future human health consequences of proposed risk management actions. In practice, that means understanding and applying principles for prudent use of antibiotics and paying attention to surveillance and monitoring data for both antibiotic-susceptible and antibiotic-resistant illnesses caused by food-borne bacteria,” summarized Tony Cox, co-author and president of Cox Associates, an applied research company specializing in health risk analysis and operations research modeling. “Legislative and political efforts without sound science and quantitative assessment of their possible, adverse human health consequences are dangerous. If the United States follows the European ban then both animal and human health may be jeopardized.”

The report was developed by the independent advisory board to AHI, comprised of a group of human microbiologists, risk assessors, veterinarians and animal health experts, including Ian Phillips, M.D., FRCP, FRCPath, FFPHM, University of London; Ron Jones, M.D., The JONES Group/JMI Laboratories, North Liberty, IA; Mark Casewell, BSc, M.D., FRCP, FRCPath, University of London; Tony Cox, Ph.D., S.M., Cox Associates, an applied research company specializing in health risk analysis and operations research modeling, Denver, CO; Brad De Groot, M.S., D.V.M., Ph.D., Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, and Livestock Information Services, Callaway, NE; Christian Friis, D.V.M, Ph.D., Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark; Charles Nightingale, M.S., Ph.D., Hartford Hospital, University of Connecticut, Hartford, CT; Rodney Preston, Ph.D., Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX; and John Waddell, D.V.M., M.B.A., Sutton Veterinary Clinic, Sutton, NE.

“Continued use of antibiotics in food animals is important to animal health and welfare and food safety,” said Dr. John Waddell, D.V.M., a Nebraska veterinarian who has toured several Danish pigs farms. “We will continue to follow the principles of prudent use and rely on surveillance and risk assessment to ensure safe use of antibiotics to keep animals healthy.”


# # #

As a producer of the safest, cheapest, most wholesome beef in the world, I would like to share a
few thoughts with you. The chances of contracting variant CJD are about one in 40 million.

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) estimates your chances of contracting sexually transmitted diseases
in one in four. The CDC reports that a total of 153 people have ever died from CJD in the whole world. The CDC reports that 150 people die every year inthe U.S. alone from deer/car accidents. Your chances of dying in a automobile crash are one in 242.
BSE can only be contracted by cattle 30 months of age and older. Most beef consumed is from animals
under 30 months of age. There has never been any scientific proof that humans can contract CJD from eating BSE positive beef. The prion or agent is exactly the same in both diseases so many assumptions have been made.

Don't tell me it's just a farmer/rancher issue. The beef industry represents $188.4 billion to the U.S.
economy, directly and indirectly. There is only one thing I take more seriously than putting food on my table. It's putting food on your table.

U.S. agriculture takes many things for granted. We take for granted that the consumers know fact from
fiction. If you want facts...talk to a producer. If you want fiction...you'll get it!

Craig Henkel Bayard
586-3031
(308)631-8852
jdhenkel@yahoo.com

Leanne,

As a proud part of the United States Dairy Industry, I am EXTREMELY
disappointed in this issue of "Healthy Foods". Yes, a single case of
BSE has been confirmed in the United States. We are far from
approaching the situation in the UK, where 10s of 1000s of cattle were
infected. But even there, the magnitude of the human connection has
been far overblown.

Passing along an article such as the one written by Ms. Goodrich does
nothing but propagate fear and confusion. There are a multitude of
mis-statements of fact or half truths that comprise her article. Just a
few points: 1) No beef that you consume will contain "recycled dairy
cows" as that practice has been banned since 1997. 2)All beef- whether
it comes from a top end grocery store, or goes through McDonald's is
USDA inspected. Appropriate testing is done when an animal appears
questionable in any way. 3) we all can feel more than "fairly
confident" that we have not consumed "contaminated" product since the
prions that cause the problems are found only in brain and spinal tissue
of infected cattle, and a grand total of one infected animal has been
found in the many many thousands of cattle in the US. 4) Look at the
numbers from the UK, and it is clear that the risk of actually
contracting vCJD is extremely minimal

As far as your "expert" Bill Sardi and his query, he doesn't quite have
his facts straight either. He poses a query based on the USDA website,
which was clearly misinterpreted. What was previously banned was
feeding ruminant derived protein to other ruminants, as this is the
means of transmission of BSE, it doesn't matter if the ruminant protein
was from a "downer cow" or a healthy cull cow. "Downer cows" can happen
for a multitude of reasons, some are sick and shouldn't enter the food
supply, some are injured, but can yet produce a quality beef product.
It is largely from testing the downer cows at USDA inspected slaughter
facilities that testing to monitor for diseases such as BSE is
conducted.

The US beef supply is safe. Proper investigations will be done to
determine as much as possible the history of this one cow, but
safeguards have already been in place for many years.

Here are some facts which you need to be aware of:

* The U.S. began a surveillance program for BSE in 1990 and was the
first country without evidence of the disease to test for it. The
surveillance system targets all cattle with any signs of a neurological
disorder as well as those over 30 months of age and animals that are
non-ambulatory.
* The U.S. banned imports of cattle and bovine products from countries
with the disease beginning in 1989.
* The disease only spreads to animals through contaminated feed. In
1997, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration instituted a ban on feeding
ruminant-derived meat and bone meal supplements to cattle.
* BSE in the brain affects the brain and spinal cord of cattle. No
infectivity has been detected in skeletal muscle tissue.
* CJD occurs (human) in a form associated with a hereditary
predisposition (approximately 5-10% of all cases) and in a more common,
sporadic form that accounts for 85-90% of cases.
* 140 people worldwide have apparently contracted variant
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) from consumption of contaminated beef
products.
* In comparison, 150 Americans die annually due to deer/automobile
collisions
* 7000 Americans die annually because their medical doctors prescribe
incorrect medications for them (Journal of American Medical Association)
* There are 831,000 beef cowherds in the US and 80% of these herds have
less than 50 cows yet they produce 30 percent of nation's calves
(therefore, one contaminated herd does not affect the entire beef
population in the US).
* Safe guards against the transmission of this disease are in place and
effective. The system is working and this cow was found because the
strategy was put in place as a firewall to protect consumers, farmers
and ranchers and the beef population.


Please, please, watch what you print. It is possible to promote the
organic foods that you clearly believe in without spreading
mis-statements of fact and truth.

Christine Troendle

Press Release – For immediate release

Title: Consumers are safe - Isolated BSE case does not endanger US beef supply
Key Words: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), beef, consumer

Date: December 24, 2003

Contact: Trent Loos, Faces of Agriculture 970-481-1389

trent@loostales.com


(Loup City, NE) - A cow in a Washington processing plant has tested positive for BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) in preliminary evaluations by the United States Dept. of Agriculture (U.S.D.A.). While the news has made headlines around the world, the danger to consumers of U.S. beef is nearly non-existent for numerous reasons, according to rancher and Faces of Agriculture founder Trent Loos of Loup City, NE.

“Despite the efforts of anti-agriculture activist groups and their attempts to scare consumers, beef is a safe and nutritious food for humans. This single incident of BSE will not result in contamination of beef products intended for human consumption,” said Loos. “There are numerous facts about BSE that consumers need to be aware of in order to make sound decisions about their beef purchases.” For example:

BSE affects the neurological system of an animal. None of these tissues (brain and spinal cord) are used in foods for human consumption. There has been no evidence that BSE is found in skeletal muscle tissues which are consumed by humans.

BSE does not spread from animal to animal or from animal to humans. BSE only spreads to animals through the ingestion of contaminated feed. In 1997, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration instituted a ban on feeding ruminant-derived meat and bone meal supplements to cattle because of their ability to transmit the agent that causes BSE.
BSE does not affect the lactation system, therefore milk and milk products are considered safe.

The U.S. began a surveillance program for BSE in 1990 and was the first country without evidence of the disease to test for it. The surveillance system targets all cattle with any signs of a neurological disorder as well as those over 30 months of age and animals that are non-ambulatory.

Loos encourages consumers to consider the statistical risk of contracting the variant form of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD), which has been associated with the consumption of BSE-contaminated beef products. “Only 140 people, worldwide, have ever contracted variant CJD and there is no proof that the disease was directly attributed to the consumption of contaminated meat products. In comparison, 150 Americans die every year because of automobile collisions with deer. 7000 Americans die annually because their doctors prescribe incorrect medications for them. The risk to beef consumers from this BSE incident is virtually non-existent.”

According to beef industry experts, the United States developed and implemented a system to safeguard against the transmission of BSE when the disease was running rampant in the European Union. Because this diagnostic system is effective, experts were able to identify this animal and USDA officials can explore the source of the disease.

“While farmers and ranchers had hoped to avoid the incidence of BSE in the United States, there is no scientific or rational reason that this isolated incident should negatively affect consumer’s choice of beef as a healthy and safe protein food,” said Loos.

###

Trent Loos is a 6th generation United States rancher, host of daily radio show Loos Tales and founder of Faces of Agriculture, non-profit organization putting the human element back into the production of food. Get more information at www.FacesOfAg.com or email Trent at trent@loostales.com.

MINNESOTA BEEF COUNCIL PRESS RELEASEFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
For more information contact: Ron Eustice or Michelle Torno (952) 854-6980

Minnesota Beef Council Says US Beef Continues to be “World’s Safest”

(MINNEAPOLIS) –Dec. 26, 2003: Following Tuesday’s announcement that a cow in the state of Washington has tested positive for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), the Minnesota Beef Council (MBC) is aggressively assuring consumers that U.S. beef is completely safe to eat.

Facts on BSE have been distributed by MBC to all major Minnesota media outlets, retaiers and the foodservice. The key message for consumers is that the U.S. beef supply continues to be the safest in the world because of an extensive set of safeguards that have been put in place.

“The diagnosis of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) in one cow in the state of Washington proves the U.S. disease surveillance system is working, resulting in a meat supply that is safe” says MBC Chairman Dennis Swan. "Due to the strength of the U.S. system and its ability to prevent the spread of BSE, this is an animal disease story, not a food safety problem," said Swan, a beef producer from Balaton in southwest Minnesota. "Consumers should continue to eat beef with complete confidence."

Within minutes of USDA's announcement about the single case of BSE, spokespeople from the Minnesota Beef Council, the Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Association (MSCA), Minnesota Department of Animal Health, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, University of Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association conducted scores of interviews designed to reassure American consumers about the safety of US beef. This public relations effort will continue as USDA traces the origin of the cow and investigates the sources of feed consumed by the animal.

Included in conversations and interviews with the media were explanations of BSE and the system in place to prevent any potential spread of the disease. A focal point of the media interviews was discussion of the “firewall” that has been put in place to keep our beef supply safe.

The following safeguards are in place to prevent a repeat of the situation that occurred in Great Britain in the 1990’s:

The U.S. banned imports of cattle and bovine products from countries with BSE beginning in 1989.
A surveillance program for BSE was initiated in 1990, making the U.S. the first country in the world without BSE to test cattle for the disease. The surveillance system targets all cattle with any signs of neurological disorder, as well as those over 30 months of age and animals that are non-ambulatory.

The third firewall in the system is a 1997 Food and Drug Administration mandatory ban on feeding ruminant-derived meat and bone meal supplements to cattle. This is the component that will prevent any potential spread of BSE to other animals. BSE does not spread from animal to animal, only through feed sources.

Also a part of media discussion was the comprehensive, multi-year risk analysis conducted at Harvard University that concluded that while there is a risk of BSE, the U.S. is prepared to prevent the spread of the disease.

MBC Executive Director, Ron Eustice in a reassuring message for consumers says, "Current science indicates the BSE agent is not found in whole muscle meat, such as steaks and roasts, only in central nervous tissue, which is not commonly consumed in the U.S." It is also important for consumers to understand that BSE does not affect the lactation system. “Therefore milk and milk products are considered safe,” adds Eustice.

Additional Facts About BSE:

What is Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy?Bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE is an incurable and apparently infectious disease that attacks the brain and nervous system of cattle. Symptoms may include stumbling, muscle twitching, quivering, strange behavior, a drop in milk production, the inability to stand, and eventually death.

What causes BSE?
Evidence indicates that BSE likely occurred because U.K. cattle consumed animal feed derived from sheep and other ruminants (animals with four stomach compartments) infected with a neurological disease similar to BSE, called scrapie. Scrapie causes BSE-like symptoms in infected sheep.

How does BSE spread?
BSE does not spread from animal to animal or from animal to humans. BSE only spreads to animals through the ingestion of contaminated feed. Scrapie may have "jumped" the species barrier to cattle after the cattle consumed the animal feed rendered with sheep protein.

What has the U.S. done to prevent the spread of BSE?The U.S. began a surveillance program for BSE in 1990 and was the first country without evidence of the disease to test for it. The surveillance system targets all cattle with any signs of a neurological disorder as well as those over 30 months of age and animals that are non-ambulatory. The U.S. utilizes a "triple firewall" strategy. First, the U.S. protects its borders. Since 1989, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) banned the import of cattle from countries with BSE. Second, the U.S. conducts vigilant surveillance at processing plants. USDA veterinarians are stationed at every U.S. meatpacking plant and check cattle for signs of any disease, including BSE. No animal can be processed for meat without a veterinary inspection. If cattle show any symptoms that could possible indicate BSE, they are removed from the plant and tested. Third, in 1997, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration instituted a mandatory ban on feeding ruminant-derived meat and bone meal supplements to cattle because of their ability to transmit the agent that causes BSE.

Does eating beef from BSE-infected animals make people sick?
Whole muscle cuts such as steaks and roasts are considered totally safe. However, there is evidence that neurological tissue such as brains and spinal cord from an infected animal may cause variant Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease (vCJD), a neurological disorder similar to classic CJD. None of these tissues (brain and spinal cord) are used in foods for human consumption in the United States. There has been no evidence that BSE is found in skeletal muscle tissues that are consumed by humans. While some 140 cases of vCJD have been diagnosed in the U.K. since 1986, these figures show how rare the disease is, and lend support to the theory that contracting vCJD may require a combination of exposure to BSE and a genetic predisposition to vCJD.

Is milk from an infected cow safe to drink? BSE does not affect the lactation system, therefore milk and milk products are considered safe.

Additional information on the cow in Washington and the safety of U.S. beef can be found on www.mnbeef.org or www.bseinfo.org.

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), Mad Cow,

Without a doubt, the anti-ag movements in this country are ramping up their fear mongering efforts about animal agriculture. As of 8:30 this morning, I have received six different formats for letters to the editor calling for an end to animal agriculture. In the next thirty days, many groups will attempt to plant seeds of fear in every media source possible. The need for all of us to be vigilant in presenting the facts has never stared us in the face to the degree that it is now.

If, in fact, we all accept the challenge to get involved in educating our neighbors, the impact of this BSE incident will be minimal. I STRONGLY encourage you to read all newspapers, keep your ears open in your community and engage yourself in this time of need. Your letter to the editor addressing issues with facts is the best tool you have to use. If you want any help at all, please call me at 970-481-1389 or email trent@loostales.com.

These facts are the key talking points that you need to know and present.

* The U.S. began a surveillance program for BSE in 1990 and was the first country without evidence of the disease to test for it. The surveillance system targets all cattle with any signs of a neurological disorder as well as those over 30 months of age and animals that are non-ambulatory.

* The U.S. banned imports of cattle and bovine products from countries with the disease beginning in 1989.

* The disease only spreads to animals through contaminated feed. In 1997, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration instituted a ban on feeding ruminant-derived meat and bone meal supplements to cattle.

* BSE in the brain affects the brain and spinal cord of cattle. No infectivity has yet been detected in skeletal muscle tissue.

* BSE does not affect lactation therefore milk and milk products are considered safe.

* CJD occurs (human) in a form associated with a hereditary predisposition (approximately 5–10% of all cases) and in a more common, sporadic form that accounts for 85–90% of cases.

* 140 people worldwide have "apparently" contracted variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) from consumption of contaminated beef products.

* In comparison, 150 Americans die annually due to deer/automobile collisions

* 7000 Americans die annually because their medical doctors prescribe incorrect medications for them (Journal of American Medical Association)

* There are 831,000 beef cowherds in the US and 80% of these herds have less than 50 cows yet they produce 30 percent of nation’s calves (therefore, one contaminated herd does not affect the entire beef population in the US).

* $41 billion of gross output from beef production activity supports an additional $147.4 billion of economic output for a total of $188.4 billion of direct and indirect economic activity throughout the U.S. economy that is due to the beef industry.

* Safe guards against the transmission of this disease are in place and effective. The system is working and this cow was found because the strategy was put in place as a firewall to protect consumers, farmers and ranchers and the beef population.

Parting Words of Wisdom:

We have been talking about getting closer to the consumer and now is our chance. It is like coming off the bench in overtime to make the last shot in the championship game. If we haven’t played until now, this is our chance to be the hero. Just like in the big game, we have to remember to keep our cool and use what we have learned (and what we know) to get the job done. This should be looked at as an opportunity and not a crisis. Make the best of it – get to know the consumers and tell them the “real” truth. Every one of us is responsible for making sure that food producers are the ones who come out on top in this crucial game!

Trent Loos

December 16, 2003

Craig Erwich
Programming Executive Vice-President
Fox Broadcasting
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-8799

Dear Mr. Erwich:

The American Veal Association (AVA), representing the nation’s 1000 family veal growers, was disappointed with the Malcolm in the Middle television show that aired on December 7. The episode, whether intentionally or unintentionally, left viewers with a negative impression of the special-fed veal industry.

During the show, Hal Wilkerson asked his son, Reese Wilkerson, “Wow, how do they get the meat this tender?� Reese’s response: “Well, that’s the thing about veal. Imagine if you took Jamie and put him in a little box where he would never see daylight, you don’t let him move so his muscles don’t get all tough, he’s basically blind and you force feed him nothing but milk. That’s what makes them taste so good.�

That dialogue, exchanged between the characters, enforced misconceptions about our industry. Veal is a tender meat, but not because of the myths mentioned by the characters. To follow, is a brief primer to better explain our practices.

- Comfortable Housing

Modern veal housing is designed to partition the animals only up to the shoulder level, ensuring calves visual and physical interactions with their neighbors. Calves are also tethered which allows farmers to gently and safely handle calves for purposes of contact, feeding, treatment and sanitizing, while also reducing the risk of calves harming themselves and each other. Calves can comfortably lie down in natural positions, stand up and groom themselves. This type of housing and tethering allows animals to receive their own feed, individual care and attention. Most importantly, individual housing has been shown to help prevent the spread of disease by limiting calf-to-calf contact while allowing socialization.

- Well-lit Housing

Modern veal barns are well-lit by either artificial lighting or natural sunlight. Producers house their calves in well-lit barns to make it possible to monitor the calves regularly, to feed the animals and keep them clean. Typical veal barns are also heated during cold months and have year-round ventilation to provide clean, fresh air.

- Milk, ideal food for young humans and calves

Jamie Wilkerson, the young child on the show, receives milk because it is the most perfectly digestible food for him. The same is true for calves. Based upon the nutritional standards of government agencies and professional organizations, including the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and the National Research Council, veal’s milk-based formula is similar in composition to infant formula. Veal calves receive diets designed to provide all of the 40 essential nutrients they need including important amino acids, carbohydrates, fats, minerals and vitamins.

- Tenderness impacted by collagen, not production methods

As compared to beef, veal is typically more tender because of its younger age and, therefore, greater proportion of collagen in the muscle tissue. Veal calves go to market at 5 months (500 pounds) with more collagen in their muscle tissue versus beef cattle which are typically marketed at 13 to 21 months of age (1000 pounds). In addition, veal is nutritious and a nutrient-rich meat, with only 5.6 grams of fat and 27 grams of protein in a 3-ounce serving.

To comply with those production guidelines, the American Veal Association (AVA) encourages all of their family veal growers to participate in the veal quality assurance program (VQA). The program certifies family veal growers after they've completed an exam on quality production practices, such as housing and nutrition, and have agreed to audit visits by a licensed veterinarian.

Mr. Erwich, we were pleased that veal was the featured protein in this Malcolm in the Middle episode. Veal is a tender meat enjoyed by many American families, not unlike the fictional Wilkersons. That being said, we hope any future episodes, that mention veal, will more accurately reflect truth rather than activist propaganda.

Providing safe, quality veal to American consumers is a top priority for the AVA. If you have additional questions regarding the veal industry, we encourage you to visit the AVA web site at www.vealfarm.com.

Sincerely,


Roxanne Molnar
American Veal Association
1500 Fulling Mill Road
Middletown PA 17057
717.985.9125

Facts from Rosebud Hog Farm

In regard to your article of Nov. 15, 2003 entitled “Indians now disdain a farm...”, I lived on the Rosebud Indian Reservation for five years and I was responsible for interviewing and hiring the original workers on this farm. As I interviewed candidates, I had women tearfully tell me that the cigarette burns on their arms were from her mother’s boyfriend. There were girls as young as twelve having babies as a result of incest. It was not uncommon for four generations of people, up to twenty-four at a time, to live in one small government issued shack.

I can tell you firsthand about the number of kids that smoked. I caught a number of people using illegal drugs while working at the farm. Individuals were fired at the door because they came to work carrying a 44 oz bottle of malt liquor after they had already consumed many others. In addition to widespread drug abuse, alcoholism runs rampant on the reservation. When government payments are issued, it is not uncommon to have to swerve to miss drunken people staggering down the road in the middle of the night. Many have died this way.

Norman Wilson was the chairman of the tribe when the council invited Bell Farms to the reservation. Mr. Wilson told me that fetal alcohol syndrome was their biggest problem. When asked how long he felt it would take to correct all of the problems of his people, his answer will forever ring in my head: Five generations! He was so optimistic about the possibilities this farm had for his people – good paying jobs, health care benefits and a sense of pride in a job worth doing well.

As you read this letter, you may think that all Rosebud tribal members are messed up. I have left out important facts, just as you did in your article. Most of the people on that reservation are tremendous human beings. I cannot describe the emotions I felt watching them proudly come to work every day and, for the first time in their lives, feeling hope and pride in a sense of accomplishment. You didn’t interview any employees who actually kept their jobs, just disgruntled ex-employees. There are workers there who will proudly tell you they couldn’t have purchased their own home or own a reliable car if it weren’t for the farm. There are two sides to every story and you have only looked at one.

It irritates every single bone in my body that, in a society that tolerates such horribly inhumane treatment of it’s own people, your main concern about the Rosebud is abuse of animals. The goal of this swine operation has always been to produce protein for the world while providing hope to a segment of Americans that have had very few opportunities. For those willing to come to work regularly, pride leads to hope and hope is the beginning of a better future.

Trent Loos
Loup City, NE