Past Experience Has Ohio Geared Up for HSUS Battle

Chris Torres
Staff Writer

It’s been well publicized that Ohio agriculture is in a “fight” with animal rights group Humane Society of the United States over animal welfare standards.
Greg Hubbard, who lives near State College, Pa., expected to see how serious the fight was at a recent visit to the Ohio State Fair in August.

Of course, different ag groups mobilized to get the word out on animal agriculture and how they were addressing it.

Volunteers handed out fliers and educational materials, trying to educate consumers on the animal welfare issue and how agriculture was on top of it.

But what surprised him most was the effort farmers gave to tell their side of the story. It wasn’t even centered on defending themselves over animal welfare. They just wanted to connect with consumers.

“They were out there talking to people, sharing their stories. It didn’t matter what background they had. They were united,” he said.

For Hubbard, assistant manager at the Samuel E. Hayes Jr. Livestock Evaluation Center, seeing farmers interacting with consumers not only gave him pride, it gives him hope that the gap between the farming community and consumers is closing, especially with the animal welfare issue heating up.

“It was very forward thinking. And it was a very aggressive approach to the public. Animal welfare was only a sidenote. It was a pro-farmer campaign.”
Educating the public about ag issues in Ohio is nothing new.

It’s been a top priority for organizations like the Ohio Farm Bureau for several years.

Hinda Mitchell is an image consultant who has worked with all sorts of producer groups in the state. Engaging the public, she said, whether you’re talking about poultry farmers or dairy farmers, is about connecting with producers and hearing their stories.

“Probably the biggest hurdle is that folks are now several generations removed from the farm. It used to be that everybody was connected. Now its several degrees of seperation,” Mitchell said. “You do that by telling the farmer’s story.

“I think the farm community for a long time let our critics define who we are. Now we want to do that.”

At farm bureau, it started seven years ago with the launch of a glossy magazine, “Our Ohio,” which features stories about farmers from across the state.

The slick looking magazine is inviting and allows readers to learn not only about what the farmer does, but who the farmer is.

It was so successful that the magazine was expanded to include an interactive Web site along with a television series. The program is paid for by member dues.

“You don’t have to look very far to see that people don’t live on the farm and they have issues with how their food is made,” said Joe Cornely, the head of corporate communications at Ohio Farm Bureau. “I’ve been involved in this for 30-years and we have lamented the fact that people are further away from the farm. This is nothing new, but what is new is how Ohio is responding to it.”

It’s not just the farm bureau though. Other organizations, such as the Ohio Dairy Producers Association and the Ohio Livestock Coalition, have also launched their own campaigns centered on educating the public about farming.

Mitchell now works for the “Ohioans For Livestock Care” political action committee. They are a pivotal voice behind the “Issue 2” campaign, an effort to create the Ohio Livestock Standards Board.

The proposed board is in response to threats by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which, according to Cornely, made no bones about targeting Ohio in its ongoing effort to push tougher animal welfare standards around the country when its president, Wayne Pacelle, visisted with ag leaders last winter.

The organization was successful in California last year. Proposition 2, which requires larger confinement pens for certain animals, was passed overwhelmingly by voters in November.

The board would be comprised of 13 members, including experts in food safety, the state veterinarian, representatives of consumer groups and several farmers. It would be headed by the secretary of agriculture and would be tasked with establishing standards governing the care and well-being of livestock and poultry in the state.

Voters will decide on the measure in November.

There is an accompanying Web site, www.ohiolivestockcare.com, which includes educational materials on the ballot measure.

At the same time, farm bureau started working with another organization, the Center for Food Integrity, on a “Farmers Feed Us” campaign.

It includes videos of farming families who are “pleased to feed you.”

There is an incentive for people to watch the videos. Five people will be chosen to win free groceries for a year, so long as they watch a video of one of the farm families on the Web site.

The Web site, according to Cornely, has averaged over 80,000 visitors a month.

“In Ohio, it’s rather unique because we all work closely together,” he said. “It’s a team approach and that’s a benefit right there. Farmers are pretty smart. They recognize that if they want to continue to feed the world, they are going to need consumer buy-in.”

Mitchell expects the animal welfare issue to really heat up within the next few weeks. That’s when radio and television advertisements from both sides will start appearing on airwaves as the election comes closer.

Dealing with the animal rights issue, she said, will not only take connecting consumers with farmers, but also pointing out the impact changes will have on the food they eat.

“We’ve got to draw that link and it’s challenging,” she said. “But I think Ohio has really been ahead of the curve in terms of how we engage with the public.”

Ohio’s approach has caught the eye of at least one person from the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, Gary Swan.

“The Ohio Farm Bureau is just a very progressive state farm bureau organization,” Swan said. “They have been very proactive to recognize that this issue is coming straight at them like a freight train.”

Swan, the head of government relations at the farm bureau, pointed out that Pennsylvania is different in that it does not allow laws to be enacted by referendum.

However, it doesn’t shield the state from also being a target of animal rights groups.

“As we confront this issue, we’ll need to sort out how to address it,” he said.

A discussion paper is currently circulating to the bureau’s members with suggestions on what sort of policy the bureau should have in terms of addressing animal welfare in the Keystone State.

What’s worked in Ohio, Swan said, is that they have personalized ag issues right down to the farming families whom are impacted and who produce the food.

It’s an example organizations in the Keystone State, he said, can learn from.

“Agriculture in the past has sort of settled around, ‘we’ll refer to science and research as the evidence to make our case.’ But what farmers and ag as a whole needs to do more of is connect with the emotions of it,” Swan said. “We need to do a much better job connecting with non-farm public. Unfortunately, it is a lot easier to paint scary, worst case scenarios.”