In the fall semester of 2014 I took Meat Science at my undergraduate school from Dr. Lawrence - one of the most fun classes and most entertaining professors I ever had. (In case this strikes you as an odd college course, keep in mind that my major was animal science.) The class was focused on the production and processing of pork, lamb, poultry, and beef and covered topics such as food safety and factors affecting meat quality. Within my major, the media's inadequate and often convoluted representation of the agricultural industry as a whole is often acknowledged and discussed. For now, let's just realize that mainstream representation of agricultural practices are very muddled and often misinformed. As a result, it isn't rare for ag students to receive assignments involving such topics. Dr. Lawrence brought to our attention a current (at the time) issue involving the pork industry. A common practice in sow barns that was altogether humane, though brutal to the uneducated or sympathetic eye, was secretly videoed by Mercy for Animals and exposed to the public. (If you're interested, you can Google it.) There was a major upset over the matter, as is common when it comes to agricultural practices being taken out of context and presented to the public. Wal-Mart responded to this exposure by suggesting that all Wal-Mart supported pork producers would be required to install 24/7 video surveillance throughout their plants. This became highly controversial within the industry rather quickly.
I know what you're thinking.
"If they weren't doing anything wrong and had nothing to hide, why the controversy? Don't we have a right to know where our meat is coming from?"
Absolutely, you do! Our assignment regarding this subject was to write a short essay assessing the situation and stating whether we were for or against the video surveillance, and discuss our reasons why. I don't have my essay anymore, but I remember my stance quite well.
I commended the idea, from an industry standpoint, as an attempt to reconcile with the public and regain consumer trust. If you thought pigs were being subjected to inhumane treatment and unnecessary suffering, would you want to support that? I admit that I wouldn't. When damage is done to the industry image, it's necessary to try to correct or repair the consumer perception.
But there's a flip side. Before I get into it, let me first explain what the issue at hand regarded. The controversy involved methods of euthanization for pigs/piglets in cases where the animal would have otherwise endured undue suffering. The common industry method is blunt force trauma to the head, and while it may look brutal and inhumane, it is quick and completely painless for the animal. An alternative method, regarded as more humane by the general public, is euthanization by carbon dioxide - essentially, gas chambers. It seems better, but with some education and information, most people would be singing another tune. The animal endures far more suffering and the industry standard is truly the most inhumane. But this is not considered when a completely out-of-context video is released to the public.
The flip side to my essay was that the industry has nothing to hide, but people don't know what they are seeing. They are not informed to adequately assess the situation and have too much control over something they don't understand. Now, maybe the agricultural industry is partly to blame for this. Maybe we could do better to adequately educate the consumer. Then again, the public has grown to be so dang sensitive, that we, as an industry, can't discuss these things. Why?
People are emotional. The media comes at agriculture from an emotional angle - something that people can relate to, something they cling to.
Agriculture is not emotional. Agriculture is practical. Agriculture is driven to feed the world and provide resources for almost every thing you use in your daily life.
Does that mean that animals are not cared for? Does that mean that the rancher, farmer, or producer doesn't express compassion for their livestock?
Let me make this completely clear: absolutely not.
General compassion and humanity aside (which exist more strongly in agriculture than anywhere else I've ever seen), livestock are worth too much from a financial standpoint for a producer to risk their health and well-being and a potential loss of capital.
Is there the occasional bad egg that ruins it for everybody, just like anywhere and in any workplace?
Of course. Do not let these people influence your idea of the the standard ag producer.
Sometimes, you may acquire information you don't understand. This applies to agriculture, government, and a plethora of other things. However, this doesn't necessarily mean the information should be withheld. But it is your duty to educate yourself with reputable sources, unbiased if possible, and if that is not possible then explore all sides and facets of the subject and make an informed decision for yourself. But please, for the love of God, do not be another misinformed, uneducated, overly opinionated member of society.
I'm not picking on anyone - this is something we all can relate to. Sometimes, we are that pork producer, being bombarded by the judgments of misinformed assailants. And sometimes, we are the general public - confused, overwhelmed, misconstruing and misunderstanding information. I have absolutely been the latter, especially in my relationship with the Lord.
He withholds things from us often.
Not because He doesn't love us.
Not because He thinks poorly of us.
Not because He's hiding something from us.
But because we cannot understand what He is doing.
The difference is... we can trust that He knows what He is doing. We can trust that He knows the best, that He will not lead us astray.
This goes back to my last post about reading. Read to educate yourself. Read to inform yourself. Is there always one right answer, one pure opinion, or one clear "side" to pick? Almost never. Disagree with me, your boss, your family - but do it in an educated manner. Well informed opinions make the world go round. Ill informed opinions set fire to it.
Just some food for thought, ya'll. Oh, and in case you don't know the Jack Nicholson reference, it's from the movie "A Few Good Men". If you haven't seen it, I recommend it; if you're interested, click here for one of the best rants in all of movie history.
Love each other, ya'll. -C
Love each other, ya'll. -C
I enjoying reading your posts, and as a relocated farm gal, I can relate to all that you discussed in this post. The agricultural industry has become too far removed from the general public's line of vision. Many people don't have a clue what it takes to produce the meat wrapped in the shiny cellophane wrapper or the produce conveniently washed, chopped and bagged in the refrigerated cases. They don't know how the ingredients for their beer, their cereal, their bread or their yogurt were produced. I'm not sure video surveillance is the answer, but educating the general public is a good start.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad to have a reader that can relate to this topic! You're absolutely right. Most people think their food comes from the grocery store and have little to no understanding of anything or anybody involved before that. It's a shame but I think we're making strides towards a better understanding by the general public, so long as issues like these are discussed and not swept under the rug. Thanks so much for your response!
DeleteLooking forward to more posts! Found you through your moms blog.Ranch raised gal working for a local cattle company looking after yearling heifers( they had sold out due to the drought but bought these to make cows) and part time for the local feed store
ReplyDeleteThank you so much, LaVerne! You sound like someone I could easily be friends with! I really look forward to hearing more from you.
Delete