Recently the extreme animal rights organization, Mercy for Animals released a video showing extreme abuse of dairy cows at a dairy in Ohio.  This has by far been the most horrifying undercover video to date.  I find it absolutely sickening that anyone could treat an animal that way. 

What I find almost as sickening is the fact the person videotaping these cruel acts spent four weeks witnessing this abuse and NEVER reported it to the authorities.  Instead, he decided to keep the camera rolling for publicity for the extreme animal rights group.  There is no way I would defend the abuser, however I think the videographer is just as guilty. 

If I had ever witnessed such violence, I would have immediately reported it so the animal's suffering could stop.  Wouldn't any person thinking logically do the same thing?  These animal rights organizations claim they love, protect and care for animals, however wouldn't protecting and caring for them mean reporting abuse AS SOON AS IT HAPPENS?   

This organization was not only filming abuse for four weeks and not saying anything, they were also building a special website for this "event."  And, after you are finished watching the abuse video on this new website, they made sure you can donate money to their cause.   

Animal rights extremists like those of the Mercy for Animals, PETA and HSUS do not have the animals interest in mind.  Instead they think how they can get publicity and more donations from well meaning individuals who want to stop the abuse.  These animal rights groups are now trying to pass this video off as how all farmers treat their animals, as a way to spread their vegan agenda.

No one in agriculture condones this behavior.  This is a case of a few bad apples, which unfortunately seems to get the most attention.  I truly hope individuals involved are punished severely.    I grew up on a farm, know many farm folks and have been to many dairies, especially over the past year.  Never once have I ever seen any kind of abuse.  Farmers care for their animals and find it impossible to abuse an animal like the way the video shows. 

Now more than ever, it is important for Farmers to tell their story.  If someone has questions about livestock production, make sure to take the time to tell them your story and how livestock are really treated.  Hosting tours and events like open houses on your farm and talking to local clubs are good ways to speak up and show the public how you really treat your livestock.  Do NOT let the "bad apples" tell your story for you. 

The following is a letter written to the South Dakota Cooperative Extension Service about HSUS' involvement in the National 4-H Confrence.   

Dear Dr. Lighari,

As a past 4-H member I have many great memories.  I was a member of the McCook County Rough Riders.  I looked forward to every weekly practice with my horse and the opportunity to go to state and earn a purple ribbon.  I also saw 4-H as a great way to make friends with those who shared the same interests as I did.  

Being involved in 4-H took many hours of hard work and dedication.  I learned many things from 4-H that I have carried with me in college and now onto a professional career.  Some of those values include: setting goals and being willing to work at them; responsibility for something other than myself; patience is definitely a virtue as a 1,000 pound animal doesn't always want to do what you want him to do and sportsmanship is universal, when you don't get that purple ribbon you thought you deserved you need to celebrate with those who did.           

I am writing to you in regards to something I am sure you have heard much about over the past few weeks, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) offering a program to students attending the National 4-H Conference in March.

When I first heard this I was very concerned that a program which is devoted to students interested in agriculture would allow an organization, such as HSUS, with its anti-meat agenda talk to our youth.  4-H after all was founded on agriculture, as a way for farm kids to show their livestock.  Agriculture production is what HSUS is trying to end along with a long list of other things including:  hunting, fishing, animal laboratories in which medical research is done and eventually pet ownership.  

While myself, along with MANY others were maybe starting to wonder what happened to 4-H, why the sudden change in direction?  I quickly became assured that while people involved in setting up the National 4-H Conference may not get it, South Dakota does.

I was very please to read the letter to the National 4-H Headquarters expressing your concern about this incident.   Agriculture is important to South Dakota as it has a $21.3 billion economic impact and employs over 101,000 people.  The majority of the 4-Hers come from a family farm, where they are dedicated to caring for their livestock and proving a safe and affordable product for their families as well as other consumers.  

Again, thank you for speaking out and continue the good work!

Kelly Wubben
Outreach Director
Agriculture United for South Dakota

It's easy to understand why a business would shut its doors to professional protestors who show up with video cameras and a political agenda. But who would have expected an egg-producing farm to be more open and transparent than a press conference put on by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)?

Last week, the HSUS brought its anti-livestock propaganda show to Iowa. At a media event in Des Moines, it released footage that its agents had taped at several large egg-laying farms. They made headlines as far away as California.

Yet the last thing the HSUS wanted was candid discussion about agricultural practices. When a vice president from one of the targeted companies showed up to watch the video and defend his industry, he was prevented from attending. In the words of the Des Moines Register, he was "blocked out."

In other words, animal-rights activists enjoyed better access to Iowa's egg farms than Iowa's egg farmers were able to obtain at an HSUS-sponsored forum that was described as a public event.

Apparently the HSUS crowd prefers its breakfast omelets served with extra helpings of irony.

There was a time when the HSUS performed the honorable work of trying to find loving homes for puppies and kittens. Nowadays, however, it prefers to deceive job-creating employers, smuggle video cameras onto farms, and release provocative images without having to debate its tactics or ideas.

Sometimes publicity-seeking journalists manage to reveal hidden corruption and uncomfortable truths. The HSUS, however, does no such thing. For starters, it's not a media organization that aims for objectivity. Instead, it has now become an ideological group that pursues a bizarre and extremist vision of animal rights--and it won't let basic fairness or democratic deliberation get in the way of its goal.

The HSUS says that it supports the ethical treatment of animals. It should also pay attention to the ethical treatment of farmers.

Here's what happened: The HSUS sent its people to several egg-laying farms in Iowa (the nation's #1 producer) and had them acquire jobs under false pretenses. Over time, these phony workers secretly videotaped examples of what they described as the inhumane treatment of chickens. Perhaps some of it was staged. We just don't know. It's all based on footage that the HSUS released last week.

"There is no other way to get the story out," complained HSUS president Wayne Pacelle.

Yet that's not true. Pacelle might have asked for a tour. "We are open to anyone who wants to visit our facilities," said one of the egg-farm executives. His company has hired a third-party auditor to review the farm's business practices.

At its closed-door, private press conference, the HSUS failed to explain any of this. In fact, egg-farm employees receive training in the care and handling of chickens. If they spot a problem, they are supposed to report it to a supervisor, who will terminate abusers if necessary. Workers even sign paperwork to this effect.

The HSUS operatives refused to honor the terms of these agreements--by design, of course. In doing so, they circumvented one of the essential mechanisms for ensuring the proper treatment of animals. They let their desire for publicity get in the way of animal welfare.

Once the full story emerges--away from the manipulative HSUS event--we see that the sky isn't falling, Chicken Little style. This is not the case of an egg farm that is doing everything the wrong way. This is an egg farm that strives for excellence as it performs the important service of providing an affordable source of food for Americans as well as jobs for those who seek honest work.

By contrast, the work of the HSUS is fundamentally dishonest. Its activists aren't really concerned about the welfare of animals. Instead, they just want attention for participating in a broad-based assault on the livestock industry. The San Francisco board of supervisors recently hopped aboard this radical bandwagon when it officially encouraged citizens and restaurants to observe "Meatless Mondays".

If people don't want to eat meat on Mondays or eggs on Tuesdays, that's their choice. It's a free country, even in San Francisco. Personally, however, I'd like to be free from the tricks and lies of the HSUS seven days a week.

Forty South Dakota Moms will have the opportunity to be selected to participate in "Mom's Day Out on the Farm."  Moms can sign up to be selected by emailing Kelly Wubben at:  Kelly@agunited.org.  Moms will be asked to complete a short survey about their purchasing habits.  Then 20 lucky moms will be selected to get on the bus, visit a dairy, pork and beef farms in the Sioux Falls area. 

When selected every participant will receive $50 in certificates good at any grocery store or restaurant as well as other gifts.  One lucky participant will win $500 in groceries! 

 Reserve the date July 13^th.  More details to come later. 

Good Luck to everyone, hope to see you on the bus.

The first day of Spring, coming up on Saturday, is designated as National Ag Day - a time when Americans take note of the abundant, affordable, and amazing array of food, fiber and fuel provided by our nation's farmers and ranchers.

            This comes sandwiched between the Academy Awards earlier this month and Earth Day, April 22.

            What do either have to do with National Ag Day?

The controversial documentary Food, Inc., was nominated for - but did not receive - an Academy Award.  The film is scheduled to run on PBS on Earth Day as an episode of the POV series.

The movie began making the rounds last summer, telling us that the food industry is lying to us about what we are eating because, if we knew the "truth," we wouldn't want to eat it.

 The trouble is, the film's makers used lots of emotion but were a bit lax in their use of the facts.  Using half-truths, errors, and omissions, the movie attempts to mislead viewers about our nation's food system.  The film purports that "big is bad and small is good" and that foods shipped from any distance are to be shunned, while locally-grown foods provide all the right answers.

Several agricultural and food-related associations, including the American Farm Bureau, have conducted intensive fact-checking regarding claims made in the film and found it lacking in general fact and objectivity in numerous areas.

While the film primarily attacks large multinational agricultural and food corporations, the less-than-accurate information and assumptions upon which the film is based attempt to negatively affect the viewers' perceptions of the food system, including many modern farming practices.  The film sides with advocates who would reduce consumer choice to promote their own food philosophies, and misses some key attributes of the U.S. food system:

• U.S. consumers are fortunate to have many safe and nutritious food choices that are the product of a dedicated system of farmers and ranchers, manufacturers and retailers, government and academia all working to produce a safe, nutritious, bountiful harvest that is the envy of most of the world.
• Our food is as safe or safer than any country of equal scale in the world. While the U.S. food safety system can always be improved, it is the model regarded as the gold standard by most nations of the world.
• The entire world, not just the U.S., relies on successful U.S. agricultural production. The U.S. will export an estimated $96 billion worth of food in 2009 to countries around the world who do not have the ability to grow it themselves
• Modern agricultural practices allow today's farmers and ranchers to produce food for a growing world population while at the same time protect our nation's natural resources.

 If the steps in the film were adopted as policy choices, it would cause dramatic increases in food prices, especially meat and poultry, because of the increased costs of their inefficient production approaches.  In addition, vast amounts of land would need to be used to raise livestock and poultry in free range systems, and the environment would suffer from open systems lacking environmental controls. 

Over 96% of all farms in America are family farms.  Family farms can be large, small, or somewhere in between.  No matter the size of the farm, farmers know that a healthy environment and healthy animals make for healthy food for consumers. 

 This article is in response to Go Vegetarian by Brittney Hansen; published as an article in January on 605magazine.com.  The below was published on 605magazine.com on March 1st. 

I am all about eating healthy and being active. In fact, I have been a person who has made these New Year's resolutions and failed. On 605magazine.com in January, Brittney Hansen talked about making a vegetarian diet your New Year's resolution. We live in America where we have the right to make our own decisions from what to eat to what we are going to wear, where we are going to live and what we are going to drive. 

I will not criticize anyone who chooses to lead a vegetarian lifestyle, after all you have that right to chose the way you eat, though it is not a path I would have chosen for myself. You surely must have a great deal of discipline in order to accomplish such a task. I, however, like my steak way too much to give it up. I only hope that person is choosing to go vegetarian for the right reasons.

Brittney mentioned in her article a few times about reducing your carbon footprint by not eating meat. However, she does not mention that a 2007 EPA report states that animal ag and meat production only produce 2.8 percent of the U.S. GHG emissions.  

Animal agricultures contribution to the GHG emissions has remained nearly constant since 1990.  I would consider this impressive since the U.S. has increased meat production almost 50 percent since then. Technology has allowed for the way meat and poultry are produced today to be more efficient and have a smaller environmental impact. 

While I agree that America does have an obesity problem, I do not agree it has anything to do with eating meat. It is simply a problem in society. Today's kids are entertained by video games and computers rather than going outside and playing and being active. People eat out more. I like McDonalds as much as the next person, but eating french fries four times a week will not help you stay healthy. It is all about balance and self control - and most importantly - personal responsibility. 

Vegetables are great and should be included in a balanced diet, but a vegetarian diet can be incredibly difficult to maintain, because most individual plant proteins do not have the full package of amino acids you need to stimulate muscle growth and maintain good health. Meat and poultry contain all nine of the essential amino acids needed by humans.

The food pyramid was established to guide Americans into making balanced diets for themselves. There is a reason why all those food groups are on the pyramid. A person will get the calcium, protein, phosphorus, vitamin A and vitamin D from the dairy group; natural sugars, fiber and vitamins from the fruit group; many different vitamins and minerals, from vegetables; carbohydrates and energy from grain products; and protein, iron, zinc, and vitamin B12from eating meat. Each of these groups has a recommended amount of portions.

I hope anyone considering a vegetarian diet gets the facts first and from a reliable source. The PETA Web site GoVeg.org is not a reliable source. Their main agenda is to end animal agriculture and create a vegan society. Consult your physician.

If you have questions about farming and the environment, talk to a farmer or contact any state farm organization, or your state's department of agriculture and get the facts. There are over 30,000 farmers and ranchers in South Dakota, and they are all dedicated to producing a safe and nutritious product for you as well as their own families.  

Farmers are the number one stewards of the land; they live on the land where they produce food.  Of course they are going to protect the land and the environment, so the farm can continue on with future generations. 

Recently Pilot Travel Centers, a truck stop chain expanding across the country, was announced as a corporate sponsor of the Humane Socitey of the United States.  Below is letter I sent to South Dakota Pilot locations, urging them to discuss this recent sponsorship with other Pilot Travel Centers.    Below is the complete letter.  Here is the link to the Press Release.               

 February 26, 2010

Curt Dutson
Pilot Travel Center
5301 North Cliff Avenue
Sioux Falls, SD 57104

Dear Curt:

It has come to the attention of Ag United for South Dakota that Pilot Travel Centers supports the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).  By way of introduction, Ag United for South Dakota is a coalition made up of six leading South Dakota agriculture organizations that represent nearly 16,000 farm and ranch families across the state.  The six groups include the Farm Bureau, the Corn Growers Association, the Soybean Association, the Pork Producers Council, the Dairy Producers and the Cattlemen's Association.

While we can certainly understand your company's desire to assist animals, it should be pointed out that HSUS is not affiliated with any local animal shelters.  In fact, they do not operate a single animal shelter, and of the $86 million collected in donations in 2008, only $450,000 actually went to organizations that provided hands-on care to animals.  HSUS is an extreme animal rights group whose agenda is to create a vegan society.   This group has gone to extreme measures to restrict and, in some states, eliminate livestock production.  These, measures affect the lively-hood of farm and ranch families here in South Dakota and across the country.

Agriculture in South Dakota creates 173,000 jobs, generates $645 million in the state's tax revenue and contributes $21.3 billion to our state's economy.  This is in South Dakota alone.  Imagine what would happen if we start losing more agriculture operations across the United States.  Unfortunately, when agriculture takes a hit, so do other businesses: trucks cannot afford to go as often or as far and families are forced to stay home. 

Growing up on a livestock farm in eastern South Dakota a trip to the Sioux Falls Stockyards or John Morrell with a load of livestock was not completed until a stop was made at one of the "truck stops" on Cliff Avenue.   Often times the booths were filled with farm families who had just unloaded their livestock, seated next to the over-the-road trucker who was hauling meat to consumers across the country.   It was a microcosm of all of the activity generated by livestock production.  The HSUS agenda would put an end to livestock production, and all of the additional business activity it generates.

Ag United would urge Pilot Travels Center to reconsider their affiliation with HSUS.  If you would like to do some research on the HSUS please check out www.humanewatch.org.  This site is operated by a group of people who have been watching the HSUS' activities very closely and offer great insight into the true agenda of the lobbying organization.   

Thank you for considering our request.  Please feel free to contact me with any questions that you may have. 

Sincerely,

Steve Dick
Executive Director
Ag United For South Dakota

CC:  Brad Kahn, Mitchell
        Garrett Wendle, Rapid City

February 19, 2010

HAND DELIVERIED:  Sioux Falls Washington Pavilion 

Dear Mr. Adams: 

Agriculture United for South Dakota would like to extend our warmest welcome to you and your band members to Sioux Falls.  We hope you find your visit to South Dakota to be both enjoyable and rewarding.   I know that many are looking forward to your performance at the Pavilion next week. 

From Rapid City to Sioux Falls and points in between more than 15,000 farm and ranch families raise beef cattle to provide a safe, affordable and nutritional source of protein for families across our state and across the world. 

We hope that you will take advantage of your time in Sioux Falls next Monday to enjoy dinner at one of the many fine establishments located within walking distance of the Washington Pavilion.  We have enclosed a Beef Bucks certificate that is good at any restaurant or retail store for the purchase of a beef entrée.  A list of downtown Sioux Falls restaurants is available at www.downtownsiouxfalls.com or by calling 605-338-4009. 

Once again, welcome to South Dakota! 

Sincerely, 

Steve Dick
Executive Director
Ag United for South Dakota

enc:  Beef Bucks

Despite the winter weather, January is always a very busy month for South Dakota agriculture.  This past month has been no different, filled with producer meetings, trade shows and association annual meetings.  For farmers, these are great opportunities to connect with other producers, learn about new products and trends, and weigh in on association policies.  I've had the opportunity to talk with many of these farmers and am excited about the level of optimism they have for 2010 and beyond. 

As you know, nearly every sector of South Dakota agriculture faced either economic or weather challenges in 2009.  However farm families across the state have good reasons to be positive about their industry in 2010. 

Dairy producers are seeing a rebound in prices for milk they produce. Pork producers are also seeing better prices.  Economics for cattle producers are still a challenge, but producers remain optimistic that a broader economic recovery and opening of export markets will boost demand and prices for beef.  All livestock producers are feeling the benefit of lower costs for feed and other inputs. 

Corn and soybean growers harvested record crops in 2009 and are looking forward to the 2010 growing season.

A positive year for South Dakota farm families would also have a very strong impact on the state's consumers and economy.  Agriculture is a significant driver of South Dakota's economy, employing more than 173,000 people, and contributing $645 million in tax revenues.  The impact on South Dakota's economy alone from agriculture is $21.3 billion.  In addition, as farmers improve productivity, they are able to continue delivering a safe, affordable and nutritious food supply to consumers across South Dakota and beyond.

So, as we head into the back half of winter, farm families are approaching a new growing season with their ever present optimism.... an optimism that has served our state and nation well for many generations.  

I enjoy seeing wildlife while working in my fields. I take steps to protect natural habitat. And I also happen to make farming my living. With hands-on experience and enjoyment of all three, I can say corn, conservation and wildlife can coexist.

Despite the claims of a recent National Wildlife Federation report drawing exaggerated and inconclusive lines between government incentives for corn-based ethanol and grassland bird populations, the healthy production of both corn and wildlife is dependent on one key ingredient: weather.

Corn and wildlife have a lot in common. Mother Nature has the overarching impact on the corn crop and the wildlife population in the state. And no two years are alike. In the case of corn and pheasants, 2009's cold, wet spring threatened the hatch as well as the ultimate corn harvest as farmers struggled to get seed in the ground.

And similar to the challenge weather conditions presented in harvesting the crop this past fall, the harsh winter we are experiencing undoubtedly will diminish the bird numbers in South Dakota as their cover and food sources are buried under snow and ice. We will have fewer pheasants this year because of the heavy snowfall we've experienced. But just like the corn still in the fields in some areas of South Dakota, it has nothing to do with the farmers' desire to make it happen.

Show me a corn field, and I'll show you wildlife habitat. Among the rows of corn, pheasants find shelter and food winter long. The National Wildlife Federation report compares corn planting and grassland bird populations between 2005 and 2007. Interestingly, 2005-2007 was among the highest pheasant populations in several key areas of South Dakota during a 10-year period. Corn plantings were up 9 percent in 2007 in South Dakota, and that was not the first time increased corn acres have paralleled increased pheasant numbers.

In fact, South Dakota pheasants are growing strong. According to the South Dakota Game Fish and Parks Department, 2009 had the fourth highest pheasants per mile count in the past 45 years. South Dakota has harvested more than 1 million pheasants each of the past 11 years and close to 2 million each of the past four years.

Loss of Conservation Reserve Program acres to corn production was cited in the report as a cause for decreased numbers of grassland birds. However, CRP is not the only area where wildlife take refuge. Hay fields, alfalfa, winter wheat, pastures and roadside ditches all provide cover for nesting.

More farmers also are leaving substantial residue in their fields, supporting comfortable habitat for wildlife. Across the state, tillage is being reduced, and food plots are being planted - even on land not enrolled in CRP.

Two sidebars in the National Wildlife Federation report suggest the biofuel requirements of the expanded renewable fuels standard will demand an additional 10.69 million acres of corn by 2015 over 2009 levels. Even the most conservative estimates of future yield growth, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's annual baseline projections, put average corn yields at almost 169 bushels per acre by 2015. South Dakota produced 177 million more bushels in 2009 on less than 1 percent more acres than in 2007.

Because of continued yield growth and additional crop switching, it is highly unlikely that native grassland will be converted to cropland as a result of increasing ethanol demand. This finding is supported by a recent analysis conducted by Air Improvement Resource, which concluded "neither forest nor pasture will be converted to crops as a result of the increase in the biofuel mandate to 15 (billion gallons per year) in 2015."

The most important commonality among wildlife and corn is this: Each in their own right is resilient, adaptive and resourceful in changing and challenging environments. Weather will play the largest role in both our corn and pheasant crop. And both are and always will be important to farmers and South Dakotans.

I find it very disappointing a country singer and one who has a farm background herself could do something so irresponsible.  After all who originally started listening to her and supporting her career?  It was those farmers, ranchers, hunters and rodeo people, whom she now seems to have forgotten about.  The fact that she chose to take the money she earned from the people who supported her and is now useing it to support a group who wants to end their livelihood is very unsettling. 

I am not a person who listens to what famous people say; however there are many uninformed people out there who take what a celebrity says to heart, even though they clearly may not be an expert in the area they are talking about.  Or in Carrie Underwood's situation they clearly have not done their research.    

This recent event got me thinking about who else supports radical animal rights groups?  After doing some research with the help of activistcash.com I found who else supports HSUS.  The findings may surprise you.  Candice Bergen, best known for her role as Murphy Brown supports HSUS.  As does:  Jenna Elfmann from Dharma and Greg; Ed Asner best known for his role on The Mary Tyler Moore Show and Barbra Streisand.  Finally - and perhaps the most disappointing to me three Golden Girls actresses, Rue McClanahan (Blanch), Bea Arthur (Dorothy) and Betty White (Rose).  These were just a few names who came up as HSUS supporters. 

This is a short list of a long list people who support an Animal Rights group.  There are many others who support groups such as PETA, Farm Animal Reform Movement (FARM) and the Sierra Club.  All of whom want to end animal agriculture, and force millions of Americans to lose their choice to choose what they eat as well as pay large amounts of money for their food. 

I would encourage everyone to not support a group or person who takes for granted what you do every day.  I did own Carrie's first CD, however I am happy to report I no longer own that CD.   I for one will not be supporting anyone who does not support American Farmers and those who help put food on millions of people's plates every day.  I may end up throwing away many CD's and DVD's in the future, but I ethically cannot support someone who does not support what my family is doing.

As Thanksgiving approaches, it is a good time to step back and reflect on the year.  More than any other holiday, food plays a central role in our Thanksgiving celebrations, so it is only appropriate to think about the state of our food supply and those who produce the food that eventually makes it to our tables each day. 

I am thankful to live in a state where agriculture and livestock production are recognized as important to communities and the state's economy.   In fact, last week, Governor Mike Rounds signed a proclamation declaring Nov. 21 as "Thank a Farmer and Rancher Day" in recognition of the work that the 31,000 farm and ranch families in our state do each day to deliver a safe, nutritious and affordable food supply.

South Dakota farmers have never been more productive - each year, they produce more food with the same amount of land and animals.  This year's corn and soybean harvest is the largest ever.  However, the ideal weather conditions that helped this bumper crop develop changed during harvest.  The wettest October in history means that many farmers will spend Thanksgiving Day in their combines trying to finish 2009 corn harvest.

The state's dairy farmers are also increasing their productivity and raising South Dakota's profile in the nation's dairy production.  But, they and other livestock producers have faced challenging economic conditions for many months.  Each day, it is costing dairy producers more to care for their cows than they receive for the milk that is produced.

Regardless of the weather and economic challenges, South Dakota's farm and ranch families continue to spend each day caring for their land and animals.  We should all be thankful to these families for their dedication to not only their farms and ranches, but also to the communities in which they live.

Despite these productivity gains, the USDA recently released a report stating that hunger is at its highest level ever in the United States.  That means there is still a tremendous amount of work to be done to ensure that the food produced by farmers makes it to the dinner tables of families across the country.

South Dakota pork producers have launched a new program that will help feed South Dakota families in need.  Last month, Ag United and the Community Food Banks of South Dakota announced the "From Our Families to Your Family" in which South Dakota pork producers will donate 50 hogs that will be processed into ground pork and distributed to families throughout the state.  These 50 hogs will provide about 7,500 pounds of meat that will feed about 4,000 families.

And, last week, food and agriculture leaders from across the state took a huge step in helping solve some of the greatest challenges in the food chain.  The South Dakota Food Chain Roundtable brought together more than 60 producers, processors, foodservice professionals and many others to identify ways to continue delivering a safe, affordable and nutritious food supply to South Dakotans and beyond.  It was a groundbreaking event and we look forward to continued cooperation among these leaders and their organizations to address the challenges we face.

Best wishes to you and your family for a Happy Thanksgiving.    

Posted by: SD Secretary of Agriculture Bill Even

My family and I have been hunting pheasants for as long as I can remember. As a lifelong South Dakotan and hunter, the fall hunting season always brings back great memories. On this year's opening weekend of pheasant season, my son and I planned to shoot a few birds after we finished building some new cattle feedlot fence. The job ran long, however, and with the ever-present possibility that a cold snap would freeze the ground and prevent us from digging the post holes, we opted to keep working and finish the fence, instead of going hunting.

As farmers, my family has always been an active partner with sportsmen. We have raised hen pheasants for release, attended Ducks Unlimited banquets, assisted Pheasants Forever with emergency winter feeding, planted acres of trees, used minimum-till and no-till planting, and helped neighbors establish native grass pasture for rotational grazing.

We are also adept at prioritizing our finite resources. Time, finances, and land need to be allocated appropriately in order to realize the greatest return on our investments. We would have liked to hunt pheasants on opening day, but the realities of the farm business had priority.

In South Dakota, agriculture and hunting have a symbiotic relationship. Agricultural land produces the crops and livestock producers depend on for their livelihoods while supporting wildlife and feeding the world. Agriculture is South Dakota's largest industry and the excellent hunting opportunities we enjoy are largely the result of our 43 million acres of productive, privately owned agricultural land.

Our abundant wildlife generates tangible economic benefits, and most farmers recognize the importance of sportsmen to our local economies. Hunters pay for lodging, buy gas and supplies, and eat in small-town cafes several weekends each year during the peak hunting season. Our productive farm and ranch land generates economic activity year-round and we are happy to add hunting and outdoor recreation to this mix.

Good, productive crops equal healthy, abundant wildlife, but pheasants and other game animals need grassland nesting grounds as well. With the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) facing changes in the coming years, some sportsmen and producers are concerned that the associated drop in grassland acres will negatively affect wildlife.

While CRP is changing, a host of exciting new opportunities have emerged. New programs like the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) will help farmers implement sustainable environmental practices that retain wildlife habitat while allowing agricultural production and grazing. This type of "working lands" conservation offers the best of both worlds: productive agricultural land that provides wildlife habitat and hunting opportunities for sportsmen.

Production agriculture and wildlife hunting are not mutually exclusive propositions. By working together to generate the most return on our investments, we can continue to develop the symbiotic relationship that has given South Dakota a worldwide reputation as a leading agricultural producer and pheasant hunting capital.

This past summer I hosted world-renowned livestock handling expert Dr. Temple Grandin at our family farm near Humboldt.  Dr. Grandin is a living legend; she has published several books on livestock handling and is widely considered the field's foremost expert.  So when the opportunity came to have her visit our farm and meet with South Dakota producers, I jumped at the chance.

But before she arrived to examine our operation, we had some clean-up to do.  We straightened a few bent gates, replaced several broken-off posts, fixed some loose tin covering our cattle shed, and in general did our best to make the place look good and be a bit safer for our cows.

As agricultural producers, sometimes we fall behind and need a compelling reason to make long-overdue changes.  In the area of animal care, well-funded special interest groups and a new generation of concerned consumers have provided the impetus to adjust our message and demonstrate that agriculture does not have any "dirty little secrets."

A growing number of Americans believe that agriculture is hiding something.  After several generations away from the farm, these skeptics have forgotten that agriculture is more complicated than the pastoral images they see on television.  They have convinced themselves that "something" is going on and are looking to "expose" agriculture's hidden agenda.  This manifests itself in dramatic video exposés, public referendums, and animal welfare legislation.

Despite these attacks on livestock agriculture, we should welcome this greater scrutiny because additional exposure offers us an incredible opportunity to seize the initiative and reframe the animal care debate on our terms.  We cannot continue with our traditional message-too many people lack the context to understand what farmers and ranchers do every day.

Instead, we must make a concerted effort to be as transparent as possible and do a better job of policing ourselves.  A number of professions-medical doctors, lawyers, accountants-have professional organizations that regulate their own members to ensure the best possible service.

Agriculture must do the same thing: clean up the bad actors and open our operations for public scrutiny.  We cannot allow our industry to fall victim to radical interest groups like the Humane Society of the United States, whose primary goal is to eliminate animal agriculture altogether.

At the same time, we cannot compromise our core principles and values: animal husbandry has been a central aspect of food production for millennia and should continue; a vegan lifestyle is a personal choice, not a moral obligation; farmers and ranchers have a responsibility to treat all living creatures with care and respect, but elevating animals to the same level as human beings sets a dangerous precedent that cannot be undone.

If we embrace transparency as necessary for success in the 21^st century and respond to criticism not by telling our opponents what we are against, but what we are for, livestock agriculture will continue to remain a viable industry for millennia to come. 

The article "Meatless Mondays promote less meat" in the Sept. 23 issue of the Argus Leader highlights the range of options that today's consumers have in building a nutritious and cost-effective diet.  However, it misses several key points that meat and livestock production play in a healthy, economical diet, protecting the environment, and boosting South Dakota's economy. 

Countless research studies have shown the value of lean, nutrient-rich meat products in a healthy diet.  Beef is a source of 10 essential nutrients and 29 cuts of beef have less than 10g of total fat and less than 95 mg of cholesterol per serving.  Pork is also a tremendous source of vitamins and minerals and eight cuts meet the USDA's standards for "lean."  Both beef and pork are a great value for a family's source of protein.

More than 31,000 South Dakota farm and ranch families work every day to produce beef, pork, dairy, or poultry products, or the crops to feed those animals.  In many cases, these families have lived and worked on the same land for generations, and are dedicated to protecting the land, water and air that they live on, drink and breathe.  Modern livestock production systems are efficient and focused on providing top quality care for the cattle, pigs or chickens being raised.  

Animal agriculture is often the target of accusations of high methane and other greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; however, the reality is very different.  According to a 2006 report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), confined animal agriculture in the U.S. was directly responsible for only about 2.5 percent of the country's total GHG emissions.  In contrast, fossil fuel combustion contributes about 80 percent of total GHG emissions.

Methane emissions in the United States are on the decline.  According to the EPA, overall U.S. methane levels declined 5.1 percent from 1990 to 2007.  In addition, methane from livestock accounts for only 2.6 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions.  

Today's farmers and ranchers are stepping up to the challenge of feeding a growing world population while minimizing their impact on the environment.  All of animal agriculture's GHG emissions from 1990 to 2005 have remained nearly constant, increasing by only about 3.5 percent since 1990.  However, while over the same period, total US red meat and poultry production has increased 40 percent, milk production has increased almost 20 percent, and egg production has increased about 32 percent. 

Finally, keeping meat on South Dakota's dinner plates also supports South Dakota's economy.  According to an analysis by South Dakota State University, the total economic impact of the state's agriculture sector is $21.3 billion and provides 173,101 jobs.  The economic impact from the nearly 12 million head of livestock in the state accounts for $5.7 billion to South Dakota's economy.  In addition, production agriculture contributes more than $645 million in tax revenues.  

On behalf of South Dakota's farm and ranch families, I encourage everyone to take a closer look at the facts of meat's nutritional benefits and the environmental protection measures taken by livestock farmers before publishing similar articles.

Last week I had the opportunity to see a film that was released earlier this summer.  The film is the documentary titled Food, Inc.  For those unfamiliar with the film, it is a one-sided view of modern agriculture and food production.  The film has not been shown at any major theatres in South Dakota and had a very limited showing in Milbank at the end of July. 

About 300 people attended the film's showing at a hotel ballroom in Sioux Falls, many of them patients of the chiropractor who sponsored the film.  Although many of the folks in attendance probably had a grandfather or an uncle who farmed, and more than likely have very fond memories of visiting the farm, it was obvious throughout the film that they have very little exposure to modern day agriculture. 

When images of chickens being transport in cages on trucks, filmgoers sighed their displeasure. They let out similar sighs at images of hogs being transported in trucks or cattle standing in a feedlot.  These gasping sounds throughout the movie indicated to me that there is an incredible disconnect with agriculture.  The interesting part is that some of agricultural practices shown are not a whole lot different than what happened 50 years ago:  chickens were put in cages and loaded on trucks, and hogs and cattle travelled to a packing house in a truck.  Apparently those filmgoers with memories of grandpa's farm weren't visiting him the day the Campbell's Soup truck came to pick up the old laying hens. 

In addition to the clever editing, the filmmakers reached back into old files to bring out some of their favorite images ... hogs on top of barns in North Carolina during a flood and an old cow being propped up with a fork lift at a packing plant ... all images that received more gasps of disbelief from the audience.

What the film did not show was the environmental stewardship and animal welfare that farm families practice every day, just like they did 50 years ago.  The difference now is that technology has made it possible to reduce to the impact that agriculture has on the environment and achieve the types of yields and efficiencies that our grandfathers could only dream about.

Changing farming practices along with advancing technology have allowed for a 37 percent reduction in the land needed to produce one bushel of corn.  Even more importantly, those yield increases are happening on existing land with less energy and less soil erosion. 

 When I left the hotel ballroom where the film was shown, I was even more convinced that farmers and those of us who believe in the future of U.S. agriculture must work 24/7 to tell our stories.  All too often, however, this is a task that many farmers overlook while they are busy producing a safe, reliable and affordable food supply for our nation and the world.

The documentary film "Food Inc" was released nationally this summer, but no major theaters in South Dakota showed the film, and it has received limited attention in our state.  However, that may change this week.  A Sioux Falls chiropractor is sponsoring a free showing of the film on Tuesday, Sept. 22, in Sioux Falls. 

According to the film's web site:  "In Food, Inc., filmmaker Robert Kenner lifts the veil on our nation's food industry, exposing the highly mechanized underbelly that has been hidden from the American consumer with the consent of our government's regulatory agencies, USDA and FDA. Our nation's food supply is now controlled by a handful of corporations that often put profit ahead of consumer health, the livelihood of the American farmer, the safety of workers and our own environment."  

It is no secret that the structure of modern agriculture has changed.  But the day-to-day work of producing food for the world's tables is still done on family farms.  According to the American Farm Bureau Federation, 98 percent of all U.S. farms are owned by individuals, family partnerships or family corporations. Just two percent of America's farms and ranches are owned by non-family corporations. Many of these farms are incorporated for legitimate business and tax reasons, the same way a dry cleaner or other small business might incorporate.

In South Dakota alone, more than 30,000 farm families work every day to provide a safe and nutritious food supply.  Several of those families opened the doors to their operations this summer and hosted open house events that were attended by hundreds of their neighbors and community members.  Check out the real faces of South Dakota agriculture here. 

The Food Inc film is just one of a number of recent attempts to demonize modern agricultural production.  An August TIME Magazine article was a one-sided criticism of U.S. food production, ignoring soaring productivity levels and farmers' dedication to animal care and protecting the environment.  A number of agricultural organizations and farmers have spoken out against the opinionated approach of the article, including an Agritalk interview with Daren Williams, NCBA executive director, a letter to TIME editors from Bob Stallman, president of American Farm Bureau Federation, and comments from Pork magazine associate editor Rick Jordahl.

I plan to see the film and encourage anyone interested in supporting South Dakota agriculture and farm families to do the same if you have the opportunity.  It is important to counter the film's myths and provide positive stories and examples of how farm families care for their animals and our state's natural resources.  Click here to get information on tickets and more details.

Allowing activists to take control of the messages about modern agriculture harms farmers and ultimately, all consumers.  Improving efficiency and productivity in agriculture has delivered the world's safest and most affordable food supply to US consumers.  These productivity gains are even more important as we look at decreasing arable land and a growing global population. 

You can find resources to address misinformation and misconceptions from the film at www.safefoodinc.org. A Forbes commentary titled "What Food Activists Ignore" also provides a balanced perspective on the film's hype.

Beef and the practices used to raise beef cattle have received much media attention this summer.  Unfortunately, we haven't been recognized for our delicious and affordable meal options or the work done by operations like Daybreak Ranch in Highmore. 

Instead, consumers hear about beef through articles like those published in TIME magazine.  The TIME article, titled "The Real Cost of Cheap Food" does an excellent job of repulsing potential meat consumers and paints conventional farmers and ranchers as heartless, mindless and greedy corporate pawns.  If you have yet to read this article, I urge to you to log on to time.com.

The NCBA and the Checkoff did try to educate the author and editor of this TIME magazine article.  Unfortunately, our industry leaders were not considered competent or to have a broad enough understanding of the beef industry and a majority of their comments were left out of this article. 

Like so many individuals involved in the media today, the author of this article approached the subject with an agenda and little regard for factual information.  Unfortunately, this is the approach that a majority of today's media as taken towards beef. 

SDCA, NCBA and the Checkoff continue to promote beef and our producers, educate consumers with factual information and provide convenient and affordable methods to prepare beef for the entire family. 

Although much of our work is done on a larger scale, state and nationwide, we still need the individual voices of producers.  SDCA's membership numbers continue to drop even though the number of issues impacting our industry are dramatically increasing, both in numbers and threat level.  Our industry is facing a number of issues that have the potential to radically change the way we do business.  If you know of a member that has recently let their SDCA membership lapse or an individual that has yet to join SDCA I encourage you to reiterate the increasing need for producer involvement in our industry.

In agriculture we are always dealing with variables over which we have little or no control. We battle drought, floods, disease, plagues, low markets, high inputs, etc. These are challenges that we accept and can overcome. The one thing that can put us out of business faster than all of the above is if we lose the battle of perception. If what we do is perceived to damage the environment, be bad for your health, or sour the soul, then we will be legislated out of business. Say it can't happen? Look at what they did in California. The HSUS, in their infinite wisdom, was able to convince enough people that it was more humane for a sow to lie down on her piglets and suffocate them than to have her in a farrowing crate. Or that chickens should be turned loose so that they can pile up in the corner of a barn and suffocate each other.

 There is currently a bill before Congress that would ban the use of antibiotics in animal feed. The theory is that since there is growing drug resistance in humans, and humans eat meat, and some meat has tiny traces of antibiotics in it, therefore if we ban the use in animals we will slow down drug resistant bugs. The problem is that the science doesn't support the theory. Just because you see a fat person drinking diet pop doesn't mean diet pop makes you fat!

This particular legislation would also make it extremely difficult to get new drugs on the market, thus driving up the cost substantially. If that isn't bad enough, you and I won't be allowed to treat our own cattle, as there is a provision that only licensed vets could administer antibiotics. They have tried something similar to this in Europe and have found that drug residues actually increased because more animals were getting sick and required more treatments.

Don't get me started on "Climate Change." Talk about cow pie science. So what can we do? Educate and get involved. Your officer team and staff recently met with Senator Thune and representatives of Sen. Johnson and Rep. Herseth-Sandlin at DakotaFest and voiced our positions on these and other issues before Congress. We will be meeting with them again on September 16^th in Washington D.C. at the NCBA Legislative Conference.

 Talk with your local legislators and keep them informed of the issues that affect agriculture.  In short, sing the praises of agriculture every chance you get to as many people as you can.  Sit on committees, boards, and be active and visible in the community. And last, but certainly not least, support the organization that is fighting every day for your livelihood, the South Dakota Cattlemen's Association.

We have a wonderful, dedicated, well-respected staff and officer team.  Support them by recruiting new members and donating to the VolunSteer program.  None of the money will be spent on lawyers and frivolous lawsuits!

Before I sign off, there is one piece of good legislation being considered in Congress that would actually benefit ranchers and farmers.  It is a bill that would exempt working farm and ranch land from the inheritance tax, as long as the land is kept by the family in production agriculture..  Contact Representative Herseth Sandlin and tell her what a good idea this is and why she should support it. 

With warmer weather and the signs of spring everywhere, it is easy to put the cold and snow of winter behind us.  But, many South Dakota livestock producers will be feeling the impact of several late winter and spring storms for years to come.

An article in the Rapid City Journal stated that the 2009 spring blizzards likely killed tens of thousands of cattle and sheep in the West River region. 

Livestock producers and county extension agents reported losses across western South Dakota ranging from 2 percent to 25 percent.  The Federal Farm Service Agency is currently estimating the total livestock loss, but based on estimates 15 percent to 20 percent losses in the hardest-hit areas, the number of dead calves and cattle could hit 50,000 or more, with a potential economic loss of $25 million.”

Losses to farmers and ranchers also have a tremendous impact on local businesses.  Many local merchants may feel the pinch when livestock producers have less money to purchase supplies, equipment and machinery. 

The federal disaster aid program will likely buffer some of financial losses for producers.  However, farmers and ranchers invest tremendous time, money and effort to keep animals safe and healthy, so this level of loss is a difficult way for many producers to start 2009.

We’ve all watched the news coverage of the H1N1 flu outbreak over the last few weeks.  I’m sure everyone has been paying a little closer attention to the health of their friends and family these days.  No one in my family has gotten sick, but that hasn’t stopped the flu outbreak from hitting very close to home for me.  I raise hogs in Central South Dakota, and like the thousands of other pork producers across the country, the outbreak has caused a serious “financial flu” for our operation. 

Initially misnamed the “swine flu,” the reports of a fast-spreading and life-threatening virus spreading around the world triggered a drop in pork prices.  The economics of hog production were already challenging, but after the flu outbreak, making a profit became downright impossible.  In fact, as of May 1, the average pork producer lost $17.89 for every hog sold. 

All of this hysteria around pork is despite the fact that the U.S. pork supply is absolutely safe.  You can’t get the H1N1 virus from eating pork or pork products and no cases of the flu have been found in the U.S. swine population.

Pork producers and organizations have done a great job of speaking up and countering the myths about pork production and the outbreak.  Within days of the outbreak announcement, regulators, elected officials and media were all correctly referring to H1N1 virus instead of “swine flu.”

I find it interesting, though, that the concerns about the safety of the pork supply come at a time when pork producers are doing more than ever before to keep our animals safe and prevent illness.  Our top priority is providing the best care possible for our animals.

Today, hogs live in clean, safe controlled environments.  Buildings are carefully designed with proper ventilation, feeding, and manure management systems.  The animals receive regular veterinary care and are monitored for any changes in health or feeding patterns.

Hogs are susceptible to a variety of illnesses, including various forms of the flu.  Raised outdoors, they could catch a number of diseases from humans or other animals. However, hogs in modern operations are not exposed to birds or other wildlife.  We also limit the number of people in the buildings and many producers have shower in/shower out procedures for workers entering and leaving the animal housing, to help maintain a more sanitary environment.

Many producers are stepping up their biosecurity procedures to even more carefully monitor animals for signs of the flu, and keeping people with flu-like symptoms out of pork production buildings. 

I am encouraged by market research showing that most Americans believe that the U.S. pork supply is safe.  I’ll continue to do my part to rebuild confidence in our pork supply by making sure my animals are as healthy and well-cared for as possible.

South Dakota Soybean Association has been very busy these last three or four months. In early December we hosted a well attended and producer friendly Ag Outlook. Ag Outlook draws soy related industry and farmers together in one big day, at about the time producers are making decisions for the next crop year. We also attract nationally known speakers who have something of value to give to each listener. The goal of the SDSA is to add value to the soy industry and Ag Outlook is a great venue for doing just that.

Various members of the SDSA board have also been busy going to leadership development training. The many things learned at these events are brought back to our state, discussed and used to keep us relevant and effective.

SDSA also attended numerous national events that help us develop a rapport with many of the leaders in government and private industry that are critical links in the success of soybean farmers. We attended the National Biodiesel Board annual meeting, the National Oilseed Processors Assn. meeting, the ASA Agribusiness Council meeting, the Commodity Classic (including ASA’s delegate sessions) and the ASA board meeting in Washington, DC. Being involved in these meetings help us become better educated and gain perspective on the issues and people that will have the most impact on our industry. Focus and clarity are crucial when presenting agricultural issues on a national stage. Visiting directly with the Secretary of Ag or South Dakota’s national legislative team in Washington is one of the most important things SDSA does. These conferences and meetings help your board to be more effective advocates for you.

SDSA also spent two days in Pierre while legislators were is session and visited with many of them about issues and bills of importance to our soybean farmers. Secretary of Ag Bill Even also spoke to our board about agriculture issues facing the SD legislature this year. A funding shortfall was at the top of his list. Many program cuts and fee hikes were discussed. After much negative talk at the start of the session, your SDSA board feels that the 2009 session ended fairly well. There were some positives and not too many negatives for the ag sector. Some of the credit will go to the Federal Stimulus bill, but much of the credit goes to the many friends of agriculture in the South Dakota legislature. SDSA thanks them for their efforts on SD Farmers’ behalf.

In short, we have been busy trying to add value to your operation. The SDSA and the South Dakota Soybean and Research and Promotion Council share a website that can be of value to your operation. It includes local news and many links to soy-related issues. We invite you to visit and hope you will find it to be a valuable tool for you. Visit at www.sdsoybean.org

Remember to be careful this spring. Slow down, enjoy the spring and lets grow some beans.

Kevin Scott, SDSA President 

As part of a beef producing family farm from central South Dakota, I have a number of deeply held beliefs about the importance of agriculture for my community and South Dakota.  I grew up on a farm, went to college and met my future husband.  Even though he graduated with an engineering degree, his love of the land brought us back to his home area where we have been farming and ranching for the last thirty years.  We now have brought our two adult sons into the operation by expanding with a 5000 head feedlot.

This was not an easy undertaking.  We worked closely with the NRCS, Department of Agriculture and an experienced Ag Engineering firm to develop a feedlot that meets EPA laws, provides a safe and nourishing environment for the livestock and hopefully economically efficient in order to pay off the loan payments required to build this facility.

Over the years, I’ve had a number of opportunities to talk with people who have a negative opinion of production agriculture.  Often, the first response is to “teach” them about all the positives – economic impact of agriculture, involvement of farmers in local communities, all the practices put into place to protect the environment and care for animals, etc.  It is easy to launch into a laundry list of everything we are doing right. 

Depending on the situation, it is easy to get defensive, which makes it even more difficult to listen to the other person’s viewpoint and more likely that the conversation will end badly.

Along with about 20 other South Dakota producers and agribusiness professionals, I recently participated in a training session facilitated by the Ag United for South Dakota and the Center for Food Integrity.  The goal of the SHARE training was to better prepare us for conversations with friends, neighbors and even complete strangers.  At the heart of the training was that values drive nearly all of our opinions and actions.  If we can take time to understand the values of someone with a negative perception of agriculture, we have a better opportunity to provide information about our own understanding of living on and managing a modern farm. 

We live in a very complex world, yet I learned through the SHARE training that we could successfully change attitudes with one conversation at a time.  A conversation is communicating back and forth . . . sharing. I’ll spend more time asking questions and learning about their perspective before launching into my own story.

For example, is the person a vegetarian because she saw a negative documentary on TV or because her father died of a heart attack she blames it on a “meat and potatoes” diet?  Knowing that will change how you talk about the beef cattle I raise.

In a successful conversation you don t try to “win” an argument, but rather try to find common ground on areas where you share the same values.  And, sometimes, you may simply agree to disagree on a controversial issue.  But, by engaging in an open, honest discussion, you’ll end the conversation on a more positive note than it began.

There are some people and organizations who are fervently opposed to modern agriculture and do not believe we have the right to exist and operate.  Chances are all the thoughtful conversations in the world will not bring us to a common ground of agreement.  However, the majority of other people who have concerns about agriculture today are open-minded with legitimate questions or have simply never been exposed to a farm or had the chance to talk to a farmer.  By taking the time to listen to their perspective, I’ll now be better able to answer questions they may have.

I appreciate the positive communication skills that the SHARE trainer provided and the opportunity to network with other South Dakota producers who also have a personal story of agriculture to tell.

As you may know, National Ag Week was recognized across the country March 16-21.  To celebrate, I had the opportunity to organize and participate in events throughout the week.  Ag United, along with Paulsen Marketing, sponsored pizza parties for 5^th graders at schools in Milbank, Mitchell, Watertown, Yankton and Sioux Falls.  The pizza tasted great, but more importantly was a talking point for producers who attended the events.  Eight local dairy and pork producers spoke to students about agriculture and how products such as meat, cheese and the flour are made to create the pizza.  The producers spoke about what they do, their animals and how they are cared for, and the processes the products go through to get to the plate.

Times are changing.  At one time it was common for families to live on a farm, raise livestock and crops.  Even though agriculture is still an important part of South Dakota economy, it is becoming more common for farm families to be the minority, even in rural areas.

In each classroom, we asked the question: “How many of you live on a farm?”  In one classroom the most students that raised their hands were seven.  I was very surprised at the low number of children who raised their hands in each class.  And, when we asked what they raised on their farm, it turned out that the majority of those students seemed to live on an acreage with maybe a horse or two and a few other pets. 

The importance of educating today’s youth on agriculture and all its benefits is becoming increasingly important.  Many are disconnected with farm and ranch life, being 3 or 4 generations removed from the farm.  These students may not have had the opportunity to be around corn, soybeans or livestock, and to understand that pork products come from a pig and milk comes from a cow, not just from the grocery store. 

In addition, there are a number of trends gaining ground and media attention that seek to portray agriculture and livestock production in a negative light.  Many activist groups are becoming more vocal, often expressing opinion passed off as facts, to those who do not have connections to farm or ranch life.   

The 5^th graders who enjoyed pizza with dairy and pork producers will someday be purchasing consumers with families of their own.  It is vital that they receive correct information early in life so they can make informed decisions on what products they buy for their families. 

The producers who volunteered their time during National Ag Week see the importance in educating others about agriculture.  They know consumers need to hear the real story from the people who know it best … those who live agriculture every day. 

Thank-you to the producers who spoke to students during National Ag Week.  I encourage everyone reading this to get involved in positive conversations about agriculture and livestock production.  These conversations go beyond classroom visits or just to students, but also with your friends, family, neighbors and colleagues in local coffee shops, at work, in the waiting room at the dentist … anywhere.    

Column by SDSA president Kevin Scott, Valley Springs

Winter 2009

This past year has been a difficult one for the Bio-Fuels industry.  Extremely high soy-oil prices that followed the crude oil market, made producing soy-diesel a money losing venture for most companies.  Even $5 fuel prices could not overcome the high cost of inputs and the abundant capacity in the industry.  The current US. capacity for bio-diesel production is somewhere near 2 billion gallons. Those plants are now operating at less than 25% of capacity and much of that production is being exported to Europe to take advantage of their incentives.  The American Soybean Association, National Bio-Diesel Board, South Dakota Soybean Association and others were in Washington DC many times over the last couple years to promote soy based bio-fuels and were able to secure a 500 million gallon carve out for bio-diesel in the current RFS.(reformulated fuel standard)  That amount is to double by the year 2012.  We are watching with great interest, how the government goes about enforcing that standard and if the demand caused by that enforcement will bring the industry back to profitability.

Most of us, as producers, are involved in the ethanol industry and know that the volatility in our markets has also been hard on profits in this area. When the first plants were being built by farmers, the hope was that the result would be a slight improvement in the price received for corn in our local area. We know now that the actual outcome has been much better than we had first imagined. I believe we as farmers have invested wisely in our future success because of the price support that the bio-fuel industry provides to our crops. We continue to produce record amounts of grain year after year with the help of better seed, equipment, inputs and methods. I feel we are a long way from top of our production capabilities and that we will continue to feed and fuel the world for many years to come.

We can not change the normal cycles that occur in agriculture or the weather or the economy.  Nothing is going to work right all of the time.  Most farmers who have been around a while know that persistence pays off. Bio-fuels production is cycling through one of those tough times that we all knew would come.  There are people who do not understand the industry and the positive effects that it has for our State and Country.  They voice their opinions without knowing the facts.  SDSA, along with the South Dakota Soybean Research and Promotion Council, will use your membership and check off funds to promote our industry and educate the public to the merits of bio-fuels in SO. and the rest of the country. We will not be shy in defending our industry to the public or policy makers. Profits will return in time and the industry will continue to grow and producers will benefit.

Welcome to 2009! Before we begin planning for a new year, let’s pause to reflect on how SDCGA benefitted producers in 2008:

• One of corn’s largest customers in South Dakota, the livestock industry, continued to expand.  For example, the dairy industry has increased by 10,000 cows statewide since 1999.
• South Dakota gas stations are adding blender pumps at a rapid pace. Through the efforts of SDCUC and EPIC, there are now 34 operational blender pumps in the state, the second highest in the nation.
• We exceeded 1 billion gallons of ethanol production in South Dakota for the first time.
• SDCGA’s Kernels of Truth education program helped expose the misinformation and exaggerations distributed by the grocery manufacturers in the “food vs. fuel” debate.
• Many SD producers took advantage of educational and networking opportunities, including the annual meeting, Growing Forward Seminars, and Commodity Classic.
• NCGA and SDCGA advised our elected officials and USDA on many issues in the new Farm Bill and will continue this close working relationship during the implementation process.

Opportunities like those listed above would not happen without the hard work of the corn office staff, the SDCGA and SDCUC board of directors and members like you that made calls to your state and national congressional staff on issues important to agriculture.

Upcoming challenges that SDCGA is working on include legislative issues at both the state and national level such as taxation, Sodsaver and higher ethanol blends. 

I hope you took advantage of the educational opportunities sponsored by SDCGA/SDCUC the past few months. Information was provided on the new farm bill, crop insurance, weather, economic forecasts, biotechnology, marketing and estate planning. With the uncertain economic conditions, 2009 will offer many challenges. The volatility in input prices and grain markets will likely continue. We need to be ready to take advantage of the opportunities that will appear.

Here’s to a safe and productive growing season!

Most of the corn in the in the vast central part of the state will be cut for silage if it has not already been chopped. The silage will be fed to some of the 1.74 million head of calves that South Dakota raises each year, be it in backgrounding, growing or finishing diets. In fact, with or without drought conditions, South Dakota has consistently been one of the top states in terms of acres harvested for silage. In 2004, 450,000 acres of corn was harvested for silage. This year that number will be even higher.

Along with leading silage production, eleven ethanol plants are on line in South Dakota, and another five are in various stages of development, providing cattle producers with a steady supply of distillers’ grain. The availability of South Dakota feed and South Dakota cattle make central South Dakota an excellent location to add value to our state’s feed and cattle. In fact, during the past few weeks I have had the opportunity to travel to the central part of South Dakota twice for events centered around cattle feedlots.

In early August, Ag United had the opportunity to work with the Pazour family from Brule County. We co-hosted an Open House and Ribbon Cutting for their new 5,000 head feedlot. The Pazours’ moved their existing feedlot so it would be in compliance with DENR and county regulations, but another factor in their decision to put a new and larger lot was their two sons chose to return to the farm after completing their education to join their father in the family business.

The kick-off for the Pazours’ new feedlot saw more than 650 neighbors, farmers, local town residents and elected officials enjoying lunch and seeing the first hand the state of the art facility, still under construction.

Just 2 ½ weeks later, Ag United participated at another event dealing with a cattle feedlot, this time just west across the Missouri River and a little to the south in Gregory County. A public meeting had been organized by a group called Concerned Citizens for Property Rights. The group had placed an ad in the local papers raising a number of issues about a new feedlot the Steffen family is putting in – the same issues that always get raised about livestock production: too much truck traffic, not enough water, health threats, etc.

The Steffen family has been raising cattle for four generations in Gregory County, and this past year they participated in a program with the local conservation district and the NRCS to move their existing feedlot to a new site and construct a new feedlot with a containment system. Like the Pazour feedlot, the Steffen feedlot will meet the DENR requirements. However, the Steffen’s new feedlot is designed for less than 999 head of cattle. Like many counties with zoning rules in place, Gregory County requires a permit for cattle operations with more than 1,000 head.

The crowd at the meeting was well over 100, many of them the same type of people that showed up at the Pazour’s open house – farmers, ranchers, local town residents and elected officials. The vast majority showed up for the same reason people showed up in Brule County – to support a family that wants to feed cattle.

During my time at the annual meeting a number of county officials stopped by the Ag United booth to express their support for agriculture – but a few went so far as to say that “we are an agriculture-friendly county, but we kept hog barns out!”

Of the 42 counties that have planning and zoning in South Dakota, a lot of the plans were put in place in the past 10 – 15 years. Many of the counties put forth such plans to keep out certain types of livestock operations, in particular hog barns. What many counties are now finding is that the rules that they put in place to “kept out hog barns” also impact other livestock operations such as dairy farms and the state’s largest livestock economic force – beef cattle.

A county that is only open to grain production and cow herds is certainly not an agriculture-friendly county. Sure there are some counties in South Dakota in which grain production and cow herds are the viable types of operations, but just about every county in the state should be an option for hog feeding and farrowing operations, dairy farms and cattle feeding.

It has often been said that “government is run by the people who show up.” That is so true in South Dakota. People involved with livestock production need to step forward to serve on the county level, either by serving on the county commission or serving on a zoning commission.

I know many of you are saying, “I don’t want to have to deal with someone calling me asking when their road will be plowed!”

Just remember, if we don’t allow our farm and ranch families to grow their operations, pretty soon there will be no one in the agriculture areas of our state that need a road plowed!

The “Cattle Feeding Matters” seminar and tour was designed to give a producers a chance to look at different types of facilities, and hear first-hand from feeders what they liked about their facilities and what they would do differently. The producers also had an opportunity over lunch to hear from the Iowa Beef Industry Council about activities producers can participate in to tell their story about beef production.

The first stop was near Little Rock, where the Doeden family feeds 480 head of cattle in a hoop barn structure. The facility was considerably cooler than the hot muggy temperature outside the barn.

The afternoon stop was at two family feedlots located just east of Sioux Center. One facility consisted of two mono-slope barns with 4,600 head of cattle the other was a 3,300 head open feedlot located across the road.

During the tour of the mono-slope barn, it was very obvious that we were close to Sioux Center. In fact, from the west end of the barn we were less than a mile away; the open lot on the east side of the road was about a 1 ¼ mile away from Sioux Center. When I commented to the person next to me about the closeness to town he replied, “This is an agriculture area, livestock gets fed in countryside.”

I shared with him that in many places in South Dakota this facility would have to be two to three miles away from the nearest town. Many South Dakota counties require a two mile setback for livestock facilities with more than 1,000 animal units from an incorporated municipality or rural residential area. In Aurora County, if you have more than 800 animal units you must be five miles from White Lake, Stickney or Plankinton, as well as five miles from the three rural residential areas in the county. Plankinton and Stickney are ten miles apart, so livestock families in that area are pretty restricted in their ability to grow their business.

Sioux County, Iowa is roughly the same geographic size as Aurora County; however it has 255,700 head of cattle compared to 53,000 head in Aurora County and more than 1,600 farms compared to 401 in Aurora County.

But the most telling numbers of any county are the population numbers. With more than 32,000 residents, Sioux County has seen it population grow by 5% since 1980. In that same time Aurora County has seen it population drop 20% to 2,901 residents. With 21% of Aurora County’s population over 65 years old, it is doubtful this trend will change. Only 14% of Sioux County’s residents are 65 years and older. That, along with an acceptance of livestock production is a good bet that Sioux County will continue to grow.

It is the hope of Ag United that the livestock producing families in South Dakota will have the ability to grow their farms and ranches in a fashion that will not only benefit themselves but everyone in their communities and counties, because if it they don’t it may not “matter” in 25 years.