FFA scoundrels and a vegan rescue

Philosophy #6: If you want to be taken seriously, at least try to sound intelligent.

Because you really just sound like an angry child pointing fingers at the other side and whining about how nothing is fair and they're doing everything all wrong.

I'll explain. There has been a blog post circulating around on Facebook recently that, needless to say, caught my attention along with the attention of many of my friends. I actually have had 3 people bring it to my attention and request I write about it, and I've been a little conflicted about whether or not to do so, and here is why:

There are a lot of irrational and ludicrous things in this world - that's something that I think we can all agree on. And while it is often so tempting to want to point out to the world just exactly how moronic these things are, it only raises more attention to the subject matter, until it's all over everywhere.

And that, my friends, is how things go viral. Very, very stupid things.

So I strongly considered just leaving this topic be, because by just reading the title alone, one can determine that it was not written to accurately and factually disprove agricultural practices, but was written with the sole purpose of being a nuisance.

To stir the pot.
To poke the bear.
Well, the bear is peeved.

Another reason I considered walking away from this article is the fact that I was never in FFA. I was homeschooled for the vast majority of my life and we lived pretty far from town. I did participate in 4-H activities such as horse judging, shooting sports, livestock shows and the like, but never did have the opportunity to get involved in FFA. However, as anyone who has been around people who did grow up within the organization would know, it is a very prestigious institution.
 
FFA members are VERY proud of the gold and blue.
They are also now all royally pissed, to be frank.

I stand behind FFA 100% - but I cannot speak for it from experience. This makes me a poor candidate to defend FFA against something like this. But FFA obviously represents agriculture and is dedicated to upholding its reputation and dignity, and that is something that I definitely can relate to.

Part of me just feels like this article doesn't even deserve the time it will take to pick apart all the ways in which it's ridiculous. But then again... let's be honest. It's what I do best. So here we go. This one's for you, Swagerty.

First of all, click here so you can thoroughly investigate this work of art and form your own opinion of it.

Initial thought: web address is "peta2.com". Oh good. I bet they're friends with animalrevenge. I bet they have vegan brunches and sit around the fire, holding hands and singing kumbaya. (The post was actually submitted by a Ms. Emily Rohr, and I will refer to the author appropriately from here on out.)

Thought #2: that is the most unintelligent heading for an article that I have ever seen. Word of advice: if you have any intent of being taken seriously as an intelligent individual, avoid using wordage such as "lame", or teenage Internet slang to make your point. Maybe if you call Donald Trump a meanie face he'll drop out of the presidential election, too.

I'll start by drawing a direct quote from the first "point" Rohr makes.

"Yet FFA encourages students to raise and slaughter animals for food. If members are working to develop their personal growth and to do the best they can, they should also hold themselves accountable for the harm that they’re causing when they eat animals or raise animals who will be killed and eaten."

You're right, Ms. Rohr. FFA does encourage students to raise agricultural livestock to eventually enter not only the food chain, but also to enter the chain that provides a plethora of other things. You yell at meat eaters, you scorn those wearing leather shoes, you pity the meat goat, but I challenge you to go a day without using products that, unbeknownst to you, rely on agricultural production to exist. And again, I agree with you (look at how much we have in common!) when you say that these same students should be held accountable for the well-being of the livestock, whose entire lives have been entrusted to these students. And guess what? I don't know if you've spent a whole lot of time around FFA members, or agriculturalists in general, or if you just happened upon a bad chapter. I'm not sure what terrible thing has happened to you in your lifetime to make you so blind to reality, but I feel obliged to clue you in to a little tidbit about these people raising livestock:

Nobody holds themselves more accountable.

Do you think sheep, cattle, goats, chickens, horses, whatever it may be, grow on trees? Do you think these animals are cheap to obtain or maintain, much less grow to show or slaughter (oh, that dreadful word) quality? Do you honestly believe that we pour hundreds, often thousands, of dollars into these animals just to throw their well being to the wayside?

Oh, but wait. There's more! (We miss you, Billy Mays.)

I noticed there was a clickable link in that direct quote. So, being the curious person that I am, I clicked on it (like you can do here.)

Oh, yes! I am so glad you are here to save the day, vegans! Where have you been all this time while agriculture was toiling away in vain trying to feed and clothe the world?! What villains. I'm so glad that you have all the answers through veganism. Now we can all sit back and watch you liberate the planet from all of its starvation and poverty.

Thank God. We've been saved, ya'll. (This time by Lily Trahan. You and Emily make a game plan and pitch it to us, I'm sure it'll be incredibly economically and financially viable.)

I'd like to add here that I actually do have some friends that are vegan or vegetarian for their own personal reasons. I very much respect their chosen lifestyle and the reasons for it, whilst they also understand and respect mine. We don't have to share these choices or the reasons for them to have a mutual respect and understanding. However, that is not what is taking place here. There is nothing respectful, understanding, or mutual about declaring war on the very industry that sustains the entire planet, if we're being real honest here.

I can't seem to get past the first bulletin on any of these blog posts. The first point on this post includes the following statement:

"Animals on U.S. farms produce 10 times more poop than the country’s entire human population. All the excrement has to go somewhere, and it often ends up in pond-like areas called “lagoons” that flood into rivers and lakes—more than 35,000 miles of river water in 22 states is now polluted—or the feces is used as fertilizer, which also contributes to water pollution."

Her argument is literally shit (pardon my language). I can't help but find that humorous, but moving on: any of you who have ever been around animals of any kind know that there is usually a lot of fecal matter around, also. That lovely feed yard smell. (Smells like money, am I right panhandle people?) 

Okay, so animals defecate, they defecate a lot. So what's your master plan? Stop sending animals to slaughter, turn them all free and let them run amuck where they can defecate anywhere they please rather than in a controlled environment where it can be almost entirely contained? And in addition, let them reproduce to their little hearts content so that they can breed even MORE poop machines? Because, I mean, who's going to regulate the population if you've removed human consumption? You, Emily? You, Lily? Are you guys going to shoot them down and let them rot? Oh no, that'd be silly, not to mention barbaric. In order to keep the planet from being overrun, or to keep species from dying off horribly from a disease that would inevitably run rampant, maybe we should help regulate the overpopulation by culling some of these animals and using their products, thus making the process economical. Right?

Oh, wait. That's agricultural livestock production. We hate them. Sorry, I forgot. That'd never work.

Waste runoff from feedlots and the like is collected into lagoons. And you cannot imagine how many thousands and thousands of dollars is invested into making sure these do not leak or run off into lakes or ponds, into making sure that they are sufficient for the animals being held in that facility, and into making sure the detriment to the environment is negligible.

To hear all about methane emissions and those effects on that environment, see a post that I predict evolving sometime in the near future.

Funny enough, this particular blog post does indeed address the issue of world hunger:

"All the land in the world that’s used for livestock farming could be used to help conquer world hunger—meaning that if we ditched animal agriculture and instead used the land to plant crops, we’d have enough food to feed everyone. Isn’t it messed up how a portion of the world’s population is starving and the rest gorges on animal products? Going vegan removes you from this crazy imbalance."

There's a lot of issue with this so-called "solution". One is that not all land is suitable for crop production - ask any farmer (traditional, organic, or otherwise). In fact, a rather large proportion of cattle ranches are on land that couldn't be utilized for farming. (Shout out to the Chihuahuan desert and Davis Mountains of West Texas.) So land that would go to waste, is being used to produce protein. There is also a lot of land that utilizes both cattle grazing and crop production (i.e. grazing winter wheat) to benefit both sides of the spectrum. And before I go off on people who complain that cattle grazing is destroying our range lands, I'm gonna make a mental note to write an entire post on that another time. 

And I would, once more, like to point out how animals are used for so much more than food. You'd be amazed at what we would struggle to produce without animal products.

I'm going to digress back to the original FFA article, or we'll be here all day long.

"It’s also typical for lambs’ talks to be cut off and their ears hole-punched without painkillers. How can your outfit be on point with all that blood on your hands?"

The removal of lamb's tails is commonly known as "docking". A quick search on Wikipedia will tell you why it's done:

"Many breeds of sheep have their tails docked to reduce the buildup of faeces which can encourage fly strike... Docking also makes it easier to view a grown ewe's udders to detect potential problems."

Oh, hey. Lookie there. It's to help the producer better care for this animal. Who would've thought?!

Also, I have a quick question. When these lambs are tagged (I'm assuming that's what you mean by "hole punch"), you're correct in that they are not given pain killers. But were you given pain killers when your ears were pierced? I sure wasn't. I definitely survived. I screamed bloody murder, apparently (I was 6, leave me alone) but I survived! I've never seen an animal become ill or get off of feed as a result of any of these procedures when done properly.

I'm really getting long winded here, and I just don't have the time nor energy to address every idiosyncrasy in this article, so just one more:

"Many FFA chapters hold fundraising hunts where participants are encouraged to kill as many animals as possible. This violent form of “entertainment” tears families apart and leaves countless animals orphaned or badly injured. Quick kills are rare, and many animals endure prolonged, painful deaths. SMH. How can you demonstrate good sportsmanship when you promote killing? For something to be considered a “sport,” both “teams” must agree to play and have a shot at winning."

You've never ridden up on a coyote gnawing on the baby calf you helped deliver in the middle of the night a few days ago, have you?

Did you think the saying "reproduce like rabbits" was just that? Just a saying? The coyotes and the rabbits keep each other in check for the most part, but sometimes either side can get out of control. If you're going to complain about cattle eating up the land (something that contributes to society in so many more ways than just as food), you certainly have to have an issue with rabbits (something that contributes almost nothing to anything productive) taking over the range and gnawing up all the good grass for livestock to turn into protein. As far as the "prolonged, painful deaths" - that isn't nearly as true as I think you'd like for it to be. Most avid hunters are stellar at kill shots - just because an animal is thrashing around after the shot doesn't mean they are conscious, suffering, or even alive. It just means that you don't know enough about physiological processes to understand what's actually going on. 

I'm scared to even start in on the "must agree to play and have a shot at winning" part.

There are prey animals, and there are predator animals. We are predator animals.While that may seem "unfair" to you, it's just a little taste of something called 

Mother Nature. 

Reality. 

Circle of life. 

Surivival of the fittest.  

Take your pick.

You can say I'm cruel or cold blooded but these are the facts, my friend. You can sit behind your keyboard over there and point fingers and cry for the animals but that's your own fantasy. And you're more than welcome to live it, but don't act like you understand the consequences of messing with the balance that all of these animals bring to the world. 

Because there's a reason we produce animals for meat and always have. Let me repeat this, we ALWAYS have. And no, I don't have a guilty conscience about it. Yes, I sleep great at night. Because I am not deranged with a mind full of all of the unfortunate exceptions of the industry. I know the standard. I know animals are well taken care of.

I understand that bad things happen in the meat animal production industry. But bad things happen in nature, too. And bad things happen to people all the time. Bad things happen to your pet dog, or cat, or to your kid. Is that anybody's fault? Not usually. Does it mean you weren't doing your job as their caretaker? I sure hope not. Animals are going to die. Some of them are going to suffer. Is that the industry standard? How many times do I have to say this? Absolutely not. 

So if you ask me, Ms. Rohr (and I know you didn't but here it is anyway), FFA is not "lame AF", as you have suggested.
In fact, I think your slam on FFA is what appears to be inadequate and in poor taste.

I know that it has been destined for us to produce animals, eat them (oh, how DARE she say that?), wear them (yes, I went there), and utilize them in countless other ways. And this is how I know that.

"Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things."

-Genesis 9:3 

My God said so.

And I know that probably isn't satisfactory for you.

But that's okay. I guess I don't need your approval anyway.