- Feb 18, 2010
- 881
- 12
- 164
Quote:
That is beyond scary. I thought we lived in a free country.
That is beyond scary. I thought we lived in a free country.
This is why we don't trade outside of our personally known group!!!
- Thread starter uhuh555
- Start date
- Feb 18, 2010
- 881
- 12
- 164
What I don't understand is why all the regulations on food HERE, when we import and have very little enforceable regulations on food and drugs that are coming in from other countrys. Please watch this:
Quote:
But the point of buying local is that you can know exactly that environment. You can ask that seller to see their operation. If you choose not to, that's your choice and should be. But the rest of us shouldn't have to live by your choices. We should be allowed our own.
I don't buy them at my farmers market because I can't. They aren't allowed in my state. But I never buy meat where I didn't meet the farmer and see how he or she treats the animals.
But the point of buying local is that you can know exactly that environment. You can ask that seller to see their operation. If you choose not to, that's your choice and should be. But the rest of us shouldn't have to live by your choices. We should be allowed our own.
I don't buy them at my farmers market because I can't. They aren't allowed in my state. But I never buy meat where I didn't meet the farmer and see how he or she treats the animals.
Last edited:
- Feb 18, 2010
- 881
- 12
- 164
Quote:
Canada is fine. However, I would not eat anything from China, or Thailand.
I look at labels. If it says the fish came from there, I will not buy it. I have been to China several times. Do you know the people IN CHINA do not eat frozen food from China? They will only buy it if they see it moving first. That is also true in restaurants. They don't trust the frozen stuff. They want to make sure it is healthy before they eat it. However, they do not have a problem sending it here.
It is not all we are getting from China. Look at this one:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health/2010/07/14/sylvester.drugs.from.china.cnn?hpt=C2
Canada is fine. However, I would not eat anything from China, or Thailand.
It is not all we are getting from China. Look at this one:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health/2010/07/14/sylvester.drugs.from.china.cnn?hpt=C2
Quote:
I have been trying for MONTHS to get someone at the USDA to send me a listing of USDA inspected processing plants in the Commonwealth so I can sell my goats and sheep processed and have gotten nothing but the runaround. Any idea who at the USDA can help? If they have this program to help small farmers, letting them know where they can process thier animals would be a good start.
I have been trying for MONTHS to get someone at the USDA to send me a listing of USDA inspected processing plants in the Commonwealth so I can sell my goats and sheep processed and have gotten nothing but the runaround. Any idea who at the USDA can help? If they have this program to help small farmers, letting them know where they can process thier animals would be a good start.
Last edited:
This has turned into an excellent discussion!
Quote:
Tested by a independent, non-government paid tester. Yes he reports any bad tests to the government, but his wage is paid by a local group of interested parties.
Quote:
Nope, I think factory farming is bad for animals, the environment and people. The general population will discover this in the long run, possibly too late. However, I recognize that my neighbors in factory farming are trying to make a living the best way they can. Nothing will cause knee-jerk reactions faster than threatening the way a family supports themselves. Look at all the reactions in this thread about the threats against our methods of production and sales.
I particularly love it when the local commercial chicken producer gives chicks to the 4-Hers. The ones who raise them on roomy pasture, limit feed availability to 14 hours and let them sleep at night always do better in competition than those who raise theirs broiler-house style. The evidence is plain and repeated that we produce better birds this way.
However, the local factory-farmers point out they would not be able to produce the same number of birds in the space they are currently using with barns. The labor would likely go up, as everything in the barns is automated. They would likely lose more birds to predators (though one family had horrific losses to rats in their barn). They are concerned that the over-all cost of raising birds would go up to a point where they could not sell them competitively. If the other guy isnt forced to do exactly the same thing, they will be forced out of the market place, because the other guy will continue to raise birds more cheaply broiler-house style and will grab a majority of the market based on that lower cost. It might even become cheaper to import chicken meat from China.
Americans care about price over quality until they reach an income level that can support luxury food. It should not be this way, but can any one argue that it is not?
The American public is used to cheap yet attractive appearing food abundantly available at any season with a relatively high level of food safety. Like it or not (and I dont like), factory farming has had a big part in this for a vast majority of the population. Any change in the infrastructure will cause changes to the wallet contents of a majority of Americans. We have to progress carefully and thoughtfully, and educate the public as we go.
And you cannot expect large agricultural companies to encourage regulations that reduce their profits to share-holders.
Quote:
On the surface, that may be the appearance, but I believe it is more a case that they didnt even know any one raised Muscovys. Wildlife officials saw Muscovys only as wildlife, and sometimes troublesome wildlife at that (like pythons in the Everglades). They were completely unaware that it is a domestic fowl with a long history. They did not know they were taking away any ones rights. They would be just as surprised to find that thousands of people raised and showed raccoons as a domestic animal (they do not, thats the point). The proposed law was posted for months on a Wildlife website, there was plenty of time to properly debate and discuss. However, just like wildlife folks do not generally troll around poultry magazines to notice that lots of people raise ducks, small agriculture people dont generally troll around Wildlife regulation websites to see if proposed changes will affect their operations. I believe this, based on statements in the lengthy BYC post on the subject from people who contacted the officials responsible.
These things happen, and we are going to get them corrected.
Just like I hope and work towards getting the NAIS business corrected. I believe it is possible to make that much more rational than it currently is.
Quote:
Schools already require that all students be immunized unless the parents fill out appropriate paperwork explaining why they are not (we just do not believe in it is an acceptable reason) Families with immune-deficient children who cannot have the vaccine have sued the school and the parents of children who were not immunized. These children became sick with measles and infected the immune-deficient child, who then died. I do not know how that lawsuit turned out. And I believe those with STDs are require to register with Health Services, even naming their partners.
So what you speak of is already a part of our culture. We are all required to make efforts to stop the spread of even minor diseases. This policy helped us eradicate small pox, and polio is only endemic to certain areas of the world.
Out of curiosity, what actions are appropriate to protect the health of an immune-deficient child? I have not formed a position on this issue, Im just interested in what you think.
Quote:
This was done specifically to subjugate the minority Christian group. Muslims cannot eat or come in contact with swine, so destroying all the pigs affected only the Christian Minority. They knew very well indeed that there was no swine flu risk. I do not believe any one wants our government to subjugate minority groups.
Quote:
Very well stated and of course I agree. Squeaky wheel gets the grease as they say. Small operators cannot be afraid of being squeaky wheels and keeping regulations rational for all producers.
Quote:
Of course there is a danger in becoming so paranoid and sure that everyone is out to get you that it affects how you live your life. There have been people who were so sure the federal government were coming to get them that they move way back in the hills. I believe the government is pretty busy and generally does not know that any one of us specifically exists out of the millions it has to worry about unless we draw their attention.
But I do not think most of this discussion is paranoia. We honestly care that misguided regulations will keep us from living in a way that makes us happy and does not affect our neighbors adversely. The government does not always get it right.
I do NOT believe elected officials are in a conspiracy to close down all small operators. I believe it is likely that large operators are having great influence in how regulations are written (likely because they are easy to find and contact and yes probably because of lobbyists and campaign donations, greed and corruption are everywhere. Can any of us say we are not affected by money?).
I believe elected officials generally want to keep their positions, so they generally will try to regulate as the public requests. I believe the public sometimes has those knee-jerk, heated, hastily-thought-out reactions to news stories that we have been talking about. And we get some very counter-productive regulations passed. And it is really difficult to know they are up for discussion, so we end up having to work after the fact to get regulations repealed. Annoying and costly. Can we develop a way of getting the word out on every bill to the people it would concern? It would have to be easy and automatic, or most people will still not care enough to participate.
I dont believe lawmakers want to enslave or disenfranchise the general population, what possible benefit could there be to individual lawmakers?
If we are going to pick on the government, I am always most concerned about the non-elected officials that make up the agencies/departments that advise elected officials and enforce the regulations. Many are honest and hard-working (and probably raise chickens and post on BYC). However, they are not elected, do not change when elected officials change and are out of the public eye. There is always less money and less staff to do the job as Americans love to see regulations passed to protect them but never want to see taxes raised to enforce the regulations. I would think there would be great temptation to accept bribes from large companies to overlook infringements or take short-cuts on paperwork because you are so swamped. (theres a hole in the bottom of the sea to prove it). Then to make it look like they are still doing their job, they can file reports against smaller operators. Also, inspector seems to draw the types of people who like to bully others, and they then can use the regulations to do it without personal repercussions. If there is a conspiracy anywhere, I would think it would be among these bureaucrats. They do not have to worry about being found out and voted out.
I have really enjoyed the discussion. The quick easy quotes of Franklin and others are lovely to keep in mind, pass around and repeat. Unfortunately I have needed more words to clarify my position.
Quote:
Tested by a independent, non-government paid tester. Yes he reports any bad tests to the government, but his wage is paid by a local group of interested parties.
Quote:
Nope, I think factory farming is bad for animals, the environment and people. The general population will discover this in the long run, possibly too late. However, I recognize that my neighbors in factory farming are trying to make a living the best way they can. Nothing will cause knee-jerk reactions faster than threatening the way a family supports themselves. Look at all the reactions in this thread about the threats against our methods of production and sales.
I particularly love it when the local commercial chicken producer gives chicks to the 4-Hers. The ones who raise them on roomy pasture, limit feed availability to 14 hours and let them sleep at night always do better in competition than those who raise theirs broiler-house style. The evidence is plain and repeated that we produce better birds this way.
However, the local factory-farmers point out they would not be able to produce the same number of birds in the space they are currently using with barns. The labor would likely go up, as everything in the barns is automated. They would likely lose more birds to predators (though one family had horrific losses to rats in their barn). They are concerned that the over-all cost of raising birds would go up to a point where they could not sell them competitively. If the other guy isnt forced to do exactly the same thing, they will be forced out of the market place, because the other guy will continue to raise birds more cheaply broiler-house style and will grab a majority of the market based on that lower cost. It might even become cheaper to import chicken meat from China.
Americans care about price over quality until they reach an income level that can support luxury food. It should not be this way, but can any one argue that it is not?
The American public is used to cheap yet attractive appearing food abundantly available at any season with a relatively high level of food safety. Like it or not (and I dont like), factory farming has had a big part in this for a vast majority of the population. Any change in the infrastructure will cause changes to the wallet contents of a majority of Americans. We have to progress carefully and thoughtfully, and educate the public as we go.
And you cannot expect large agricultural companies to encourage regulations that reduce their profits to share-holders.
Quote:
On the surface, that may be the appearance, but I believe it is more a case that they didnt even know any one raised Muscovys. Wildlife officials saw Muscovys only as wildlife, and sometimes troublesome wildlife at that (like pythons in the Everglades). They were completely unaware that it is a domestic fowl with a long history. They did not know they were taking away any ones rights. They would be just as surprised to find that thousands of people raised and showed raccoons as a domestic animal (they do not, thats the point). The proposed law was posted for months on a Wildlife website, there was plenty of time to properly debate and discuss. However, just like wildlife folks do not generally troll around poultry magazines to notice that lots of people raise ducks, small agriculture people dont generally troll around Wildlife regulation websites to see if proposed changes will affect their operations. I believe this, based on statements in the lengthy BYC post on the subject from people who contacted the officials responsible.
These things happen, and we are going to get them corrected.
Just like I hope and work towards getting the NAIS business corrected. I believe it is possible to make that much more rational than it currently is.
Quote:
Schools already require that all students be immunized unless the parents fill out appropriate paperwork explaining why they are not (we just do not believe in it is an acceptable reason) Families with immune-deficient children who cannot have the vaccine have sued the school and the parents of children who were not immunized. These children became sick with measles and infected the immune-deficient child, who then died. I do not know how that lawsuit turned out. And I believe those with STDs are require to register with Health Services, even naming their partners.
So what you speak of is already a part of our culture. We are all required to make efforts to stop the spread of even minor diseases. This policy helped us eradicate small pox, and polio is only endemic to certain areas of the world.
Out of curiosity, what actions are appropriate to protect the health of an immune-deficient child? I have not formed a position on this issue, Im just interested in what you think.
Quote:
This was done specifically to subjugate the minority Christian group. Muslims cannot eat or come in contact with swine, so destroying all the pigs affected only the Christian Minority. They knew very well indeed that there was no swine flu risk. I do not believe any one wants our government to subjugate minority groups.
Quote:
Very well stated and of course I agree. Squeaky wheel gets the grease as they say. Small operators cannot be afraid of being squeaky wheels and keeping regulations rational for all producers.
Quote:
Of course there is a danger in becoming so paranoid and sure that everyone is out to get you that it affects how you live your life. There have been people who were so sure the federal government were coming to get them that they move way back in the hills. I believe the government is pretty busy and generally does not know that any one of us specifically exists out of the millions it has to worry about unless we draw their attention.
But I do not think most of this discussion is paranoia. We honestly care that misguided regulations will keep us from living in a way that makes us happy and does not affect our neighbors adversely. The government does not always get it right.
I do NOT believe elected officials are in a conspiracy to close down all small operators. I believe it is likely that large operators are having great influence in how regulations are written (likely because they are easy to find and contact and yes probably because of lobbyists and campaign donations, greed and corruption are everywhere. Can any of us say we are not affected by money?).
I believe elected officials generally want to keep their positions, so they generally will try to regulate as the public requests. I believe the public sometimes has those knee-jerk, heated, hastily-thought-out reactions to news stories that we have been talking about. And we get some very counter-productive regulations passed. And it is really difficult to know they are up for discussion, so we end up having to work after the fact to get regulations repealed. Annoying and costly. Can we develop a way of getting the word out on every bill to the people it would concern? It would have to be easy and automatic, or most people will still not care enough to participate.
I dont believe lawmakers want to enslave or disenfranchise the general population, what possible benefit could there be to individual lawmakers?
If we are going to pick on the government, I am always most concerned about the non-elected officials that make up the agencies/departments that advise elected officials and enforce the regulations. Many are honest and hard-working (and probably raise chickens and post on BYC). However, they are not elected, do not change when elected officials change and are out of the public eye. There is always less money and less staff to do the job as Americans love to see regulations passed to protect them but never want to see taxes raised to enforce the regulations. I would think there would be great temptation to accept bribes from large companies to overlook infringements or take short-cuts on paperwork because you are so swamped. (theres a hole in the bottom of the sea to prove it). Then to make it look like they are still doing their job, they can file reports against smaller operators. Also, inspector seems to draw the types of people who like to bully others, and they then can use the regulations to do it without personal repercussions. If there is a conspiracy anywhere, I would think it would be among these bureaucrats. They do not have to worry about being found out and voted out.
I have really enjoyed the discussion. The quick easy quotes of Franklin and others are lovely to keep in mind, pass around and repeat. Unfortunately I have needed more words to clarify my position.
- Thread starter
- #69
Jodief100
Try contacting someone at the UKAg, Cooperative Extension Services; they can put you in direct contact with the person youll need to speak with. They could probably answer your questions better than most at the USDA.
Enroll in some of their informative classes that relate to your operations/interests. This will give you personal contacts that can give you inside answers and/or contacts when hard questions/problems arise as we all know they will.
Good Luck
http://ces.ca.uky.edu/ces/
Try contacting someone at the UKAg, Cooperative Extension Services; they can put you in direct contact with the person youll need to speak with. They could probably answer your questions better than most at the USDA.
Enroll in some of their informative classes that relate to your operations/interests. This will give you personal contacts that can give you inside answers and/or contacts when hard questions/problems arise as we all know they will.
Good Luck
http://ces.ca.uky.edu/ces/
STOP TELLING ME WHAT I CAN EAT! ITS MY BODY LEAVE ME THE $%*@ ALONE! I just saw this thread and it make me furious!!!! If I cut off a portion of mold on a block of cheese and still eat the rest of the cheese thats my choice. (I do that by the way). If I get sick from eating that cheese I have nobody to blame but myself. If someone wants to drink unpasturized milk thats their choice. Unwashed eggs? Eat away thats your choice. So long as the seller has clearly informed the buying public of what they are getting or not getting (unpasturized milk etc) then its on the BUYER to use their own judgement and take some responsiblity for what they choose to eat. I got food poisoning from Red Lobster 7 or 8 years ago. I haven't been back but I don't also didn't go out and demand that the Government shut down Red Lobster. No I called into work, drank my pedilite, felt better in 12 hours and got on with my life.
Whats next are we going to start arresting parents who don't vaccinate their children? I believe in vaccinations and think everybody should, but I won't call someone criminal (reckless maybe....but not criminal) for not vaccinating their children.
You also have to take some self responsibilty too, did you store the eggs you bought correctly? Did you wash YOUR hands before you cut the meat? What about your cats doing who knows what or walking who knows where that you let up or got up on your counter? If you don't trust the person then don't buy from them. If you do, then roll with it and call it a day. I know everybody I get my stuff from. My family hunts hard, our red meat consumption is 99% venison that we hunted, and processed ourselves. We also eat rabbits, ducks, and geese all that we hunted and processed ourselves.
Our pork is bought at the fair from the 4H kids who's families I know and have shared a beer, conversations and often times meals with. I know they run a safe operation to raise their pigs in. The processors I know personally and trust too. I always buy from the kids I know not only because of the knowledge of their operation, but to support them and their hard work.
I believe big buisness threatened by the small farmers, and the growing buy local movement. They don't want the competition and they know they produce an inferior product so they use their resources and influence on government to raise heck with any upstart buisness. They know their product is full of harmful things that when you educate people on it they really don't want what's in the high production product. There is a definate push to eat better produce and meats, so they will do what they can to squash the movement from getting any steam. Government profits off big buisness so they will work with them to ensure profits for everybody.
Its just like why they won't ever make us have to pass a breathilizer to start your car. How many families are devistated by drunk driving? You want to really put a stop to it, make you blow to start your car. If your legally sober you can drive, if not then you can't start the car. And put signficant penalties in place for starting someone elses car if they are intoxicated and driving. No the government profits too much off these things so they'll never truly be illegal. Money is what drives these decisions not health/safety concerns.
Whats next are we going to start arresting parents who don't vaccinate their children? I believe in vaccinations and think everybody should, but I won't call someone criminal (reckless maybe....but not criminal) for not vaccinating their children.
You also have to take some self responsibilty too, did you store the eggs you bought correctly? Did you wash YOUR hands before you cut the meat? What about your cats doing who knows what or walking who knows where that you let up or got up on your counter? If you don't trust the person then don't buy from them. If you do, then roll with it and call it a day. I know everybody I get my stuff from. My family hunts hard, our red meat consumption is 99% venison that we hunted, and processed ourselves. We also eat rabbits, ducks, and geese all that we hunted and processed ourselves.
Our pork is bought at the fair from the 4H kids who's families I know and have shared a beer, conversations and often times meals with. I know they run a safe operation to raise their pigs in. The processors I know personally and trust too. I always buy from the kids I know not only because of the knowledge of their operation, but to support them and their hard work.
I believe big buisness threatened by the small farmers, and the growing buy local movement. They don't want the competition and they know they produce an inferior product so they use their resources and influence on government to raise heck with any upstart buisness. They know their product is full of harmful things that when you educate people on it they really don't want what's in the high production product. There is a definate push to eat better produce and meats, so they will do what they can to squash the movement from getting any steam. Government profits off big buisness so they will work with them to ensure profits for everybody.
Its just like why they won't ever make us have to pass a breathilizer to start your car. How many families are devistated by drunk driving? You want to really put a stop to it, make you blow to start your car. If your legally sober you can drive, if not then you can't start the car. And put signficant penalties in place for starting someone elses car if they are intoxicated and driving. No the government profits too much off these things so they'll never truly be illegal. Money is what drives these decisions not health/safety concerns.
Similar threads
-
- Locked
-
- Locked
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Latest threads
-
-
Chicken perch with poop board - I finally made one (!!!) and have questions- Started by FunClucks
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
