[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Farm Aid News & Views March 1997



FARM AID NEWS & VIEWS
March 1997
Volume 5, No. 3
__________________________________________
Headlines:

-  WILLIE NELSON JOINS FAMILY FARMERS IN NATIONAL 
AG DAY PROTEST
-  NPPC ACCUSED OF SPYING ON FAMILY FARM 
ORGANIZATIONS
-  SENATOR WELLSTONE CALLS FOR FEDERAL 
INVESTIGATION OF CHECKOFF FUNDS
-  USDA SECRETARY TO VISIT NORTH CAROLINA
-  WORC PETITIONS TO END CAPTIVE SUPPLIES
-  POULTRY GROWERS PRESS USDA FOR FAIRNESS
-  USDA NOT ABLE TO REGULATE ANTITRUST
-  NATIONAL CHEESE EXCHANGE NEWS
-  TROUBLESOME CREEK ON PBS

__________________________________________


FAMILY FARMERS MAKE PROGRESS IN STRUGGLE 
AGAINST INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE

Farm Aid News & Views has reported often on the 
environmental, social and economic impacts of industrial 
agriculture.  In recent months, family farmers have made some 
headway in their struggle to promote family farming and 
sustainable agriculture.  This issue of Farm Aid News & Views 
will explore recent developments in the battle over corporate 
concentration in the hog, cattle and poultry industries.  It will 
also  provide readers with ways to assist farmers in developing a 
sustainable, family farm based agriculture system.   

WILLIE NELSON JOINS FAMILY FARMERS IN NATIONAL 
AG DAY PROTEST AGAINST FACTORY FARMS

Last week, Farm Aid President Willie Nelson joined hundreds 
of family farmers in Des Moines, Iowa as they protested against 
factory farming at the offices of the National Pork Producers 
Council (NPPC), which recently admitted to paying a DC 
consulting firm $50,000 to monitor the activities of farm groups 
opposed to the industrialization of the hog industry.  

The rally, organized by the Campaign for Family Farms and the 
Environment, took place on March 20, National Agriculture 
Day.  Family pork producers alleged that the NPPC is more 
interested in promoting industrial agriculture than supporting 
family hog farmers, pointing to the NPPC's inaction in 
addressing the 25 percent decline in pork producers over the last 
five years.    

During the rally, demonstrators called for the following steps:
* An end to NPPC's surveillance of family farm groups; 
*  A full investigation by the Office of Inspector General into 
NPPC's misuse of pork checkoff funds;
* An end to the mandatory pork checkoff program.

According to hog farmer and Iowa CCI member Larry Ginter, 
"The NPPC doesn't recognize that there are ways to raise hogs 
other than huge factory farms.  Family farmers are interested in 
sound animal husbandry.  We feel that factory pork farming is a 
threat to both the environment and a way of life."  Larry Ginter's 
mother Alice had written an impassioned letter to Willie 
Nelson inviting him to the rally. 

Responding to NPPC assertions that the rise of factory farms is a 
natural evolution of the pork industry, Willie Nelson said, "I 
think it's a very unnatural evolution.  It's anti-environmental, 
it's unhealthy, it's not good for the family farm and it's not good 
for America."

To cap off the protest, farmers planted a sign that renamed the 
NPPC as the "National Factory Farm Council."  Roger Allison of 
the Missouri Rural Crisis Center said, "Today is only the 
beginning.  Family farmers will continue to fight in every 
township, every county and every state to oppose any attempt to 
promote factory farms over family farms."
 
NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS COUNCIL 
ACCUSED OF SPYING ON FAMILY FARM ORGANIZATIONS

The controversy about the National Pork Producers Council's 
(NPPC) misuse of checkoff funds began in February when it was 
revealed that NPPC had paid a Washington, DC firm nearly 
$50,000 in producer checkoff dollars in 1996 to monitor and 
collect intelligence on groups promoting family farming and 
sustainable agriculture.  Checkoff funds are federally mandated 
assessments on pork producers for use in research, promotion 
and market development.  In 1996, the NPPC received 
approximately $45 million in pork checkoff funds from 
America's pork producers.  

"The NPPC board of directors feels it is only prudent to monitor 
on a regular basis what is being said about pork producers and 
their industry by any and all groups and individuals that may 
have a negative impact on our ability to produce pork," NPPC 
President Bob Ruggles says. 

According to NPPC documents, groups under surveillance 
include the Nebraska-based Center for Rural Affairs (CRA), the 
Missouri Rural Crisis Center, Iowa Citizens for Community 
Improvement (Iowa CCI), the Corporate Agribusiness Research 
Project, the Minnesota-based Land Stewardship Project (LSP) and 
the National Farmers Union.

Although NPPC defends its surveillance activities by raising the 
specter that family farm groups have been infiltrated by "anti-
meat" activists, the real reason for their monitoring activities is 
clear.  All of the family farm groups under investigation have 
criticized the NPPC's position on issues related to hog factories 
and livestock concentration.  According to Leland Swenson, 
president of the National Farmers Union, "It appears that every 
organization that has questioned the industrialization of the hog 
industry is now being watched by the NPPC."  

The NPPC has denied allegations that checkoff funds were used 
for surveillance.  However, recently obtained reports from the 
NPPC to the National Pork Board and the USDA describe the use 
of checkoff funds for this very purpose.  In addition, the reports 
boast of NPPC's efforts to influence a "60 Minutes" story on the 
corporate takeover of the pork industry.  

Chuck Hassebrook of the Center for Rural Affairs says, "That is 
an illegal use of checkoff funds.  Federal law authorized use of 
checkoff funds to present a favorable image of pork, not to 
protect the image of corporate farming."

Rhonda Perry of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center states that 
recent NPPC activities are a direct assault on family hog farmers.  
She calls for an end to the mandatory checkoff program.  "Use of 
checkoff funds for this type of action is not morally right.  Family 
farmers cannot continue to pay mandatory fees that fund work 
meant to ultimately put them out of business."  

Hugh Espey of Iowa CCI says, "It just goes to show you how out 
of touch NPPC is with the majority of producers.  They use 
producer money to spy on rural groups rather than sit down 
with them and talk about issues." 

ACTION ALERT: SENATOR WELLSTONE CALLS FOR 
FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO POSSIBLE MISUSE OF 
CHECKOFF FUNDS

Senator Paul Wellstone (D-MN) last week called on U.S. 
Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman for an investigation by 
the USDA's Office of Inspector General into possible misuse of 
pork checkoff funds by the National Pork Producers Council 
(NPPC).  

Rhonda Perry of Missouri Rural Crisis Center applauds Senator 
Wellstone's actions.  "We need other Congressmen to sign on to 
the Wellstone letter," Perry says.  The Campaign for Family 
Farms and the Environment urges people to write or call 
Secretary Glickman to ask him to initiate a full investigation 
into this matter.

Contact: U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman, USDA, 
14th and Independence SW, Washington, DC  20250. 202-720-
3631.

USDA SECRETARY GLICKMAN 
TO VISIT NORTH CAROLINA

North Carolina has become the model of the worst that can 
happen when industrial farms come to town.  The number of 
hogs on North Carolina farms has risen from 3.7 million at the 
end of 1991 to 8.5 million in 1996, elevating the state to the 
second largest hog producer in the nation.  Meanwhile, the 
number of North Carolina hog producers has plummeted by 
two-thirds over the last ten years.  Operations marketing 2,000 or 
more hogs annually accounted for only 9.3 percent of all North 
Carolina producers, but owned 90 percent of the total hog 
inventory in the state.

USDA Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman has accepted an 
invitation from the North Carolina Hog Roundtable, a coalition 
of community, environmental and family farmer groups 
fighting the damage caused by intensive swine operations in 
their state, to come and see for himself the havoc wrecked by 
industrial hog farms.  Glickman will be participating in a Town 
Hall meeting, a forum for residents to express their concerns to 
the Secretary.

The Town Hall meeting, originally scheduled for March 10, has 
been rescheduled for May 2.  For more information, contact 
David Harris of the Land Loss Prevention Project, 919-682-5969.

ACTION ALERT: POULTRY GROWERS PRESS USDA FOR 
FAIR TREATMENT

For years poultry growers have been fighting an unfair system of 
vertically integrated production -- 98 percent of all produced is 
bred, owned, butchered and marketed by giant corporations such 
as Perdue and Tyson.  Family farmers play the role of indentured 
servant in this system through contractual agreements to raise 
the corporate-owned birds.  The typically unfair contracts are 
dictated by the corporations, and the poultry growers have 
traditionally had no recourse in their struggle to make a profit.  
Growers earn as little as four cents a pound for poultry that 
consumers buy for more than $1.20/lb. at the supermarket.  To 
make matters worse, growers are often pitted against each other 
in a system that fosters comparison and competition.

"We have worked for years to try to get the Packers and 
Stockyards Administration investigators educated to the 
problems that we've had in the field," says Marinell Strain, a 
poultry farmer and member of the Oklahoma Contract Poultry 
Growers Association.  "They always told us that they didn't have 
the authority to investigate our complaints, nor did we have 
specific evidence concerning the mis-weighing of live birds, 
inaccurate feed weights, the delivery of sickly chicks and the 
sometimes intentional miscalculations by processors."

Poultry growers have barraged the USDA with their concerns in 
letters, interviews and meetings.  The USDA seems to have 
finally recognized the plight of the family farm poultry grower 
and has asked for public comment on the general issue of 
relations between growers and processors.  

Of specific interest to the USDA's Grain Inspection, Packers and 
Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), the agency responsible for 
overseeing the poultry industry, is fairness to growers in the 
following areas:

% The weighing of live birds, which determines how much 
farmers get paid;
% How processing firms weigh and deliver the feed they provide 
to farmers; and 
% How growers' pay is calculated, including the question of 
whether it is fair to farmers to figure that pay by comparing one 
grower to another.

If new USDA regulations are adopted, the USDA would likely 
have greater power to investigate and enforce anti-grower 
actions by processors.

Poultry growers say USDA is taking a step in the right direction; 
growers have long said that federal intervention was necessary 
to protect family poultry farmers who are up against the vast 
economic and political power of huge processing companies.  "I 
think poultry growers nationwide are especially pleased about 
this initiative," says John Morrison of the National Contract 
Poultry Growers Association.  "This initiation of the rule 
making process is the direct result of the work of the National 
Contract Poultry Growers.  It's evident that our combined voices 
can be heard."

Comments must be submitted before May 12 to Harold Davis, 
Acting Deputy Administrator, GIPSA, Stop 3641, 1400 
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC  20250-3641; fax 
202-205-3941.  For more information, contact the National 
Contract Poultry Growers at 1-800-259-8100.

ACTION ALERT: WORC CIRCULATES PETITION TO END 
CAPTIVE SUPPLIES

Three corporate giants dominate over 81 percent of the nation's 
cattle slaughter: IBP, Inc., Cargill and ConAgra.  This percentage 
is up from 70 percent in 1990 and 45 percent in 1982.  While 
cattle concentration is increasing, cattle prices fell to a record low 
last year without a corresponding decrease in consumer prices.  
Family cattle producers have alleged that concentration enables 
packers to pay less for cattle because producers lack competing 
buyers to bid up prices.  Even if some competition exists 
nationally or regionally, producers in most localities may have 
access to only one buyer.  

To compound the problem of lack of competition in the cattle 
industry, the "Big Three" packers are also known to process 
"captive supplies" of cattle.  Packer controlled, owned and fed 
cattle are "captive," as are exclusively contracted feedlot cattle, 
which under contract can't receive bids from or be sold to any 
other packer.  This allows packers to artificially lower prices paid 
to ranchers. 

In an effort spearheaded by the Western Organization of 
Resource Councils (WORC) and other family farm groups, 
Secretary Glickman was asked to intervene against the misuse of 
captive supplies by adopting a rule that would prohibit packers 
from procuring cattle for slaughter through the use of a forward 
contract unless the contract has a price attached to it or is bid in 
public.  WORC also requested that packers be prohibited from 
owning and feeding cattle, unless the cattle are sold for slaughter 
in an open, public market.  

The USDA published the proposal in January and asked for 
public comment.  WORC is asking supporters of the rule to send 
their comments to:

Acting Deputy Administrator, Packers and Stockyards Programs, 
GIPSA, USDA Stop 3641,1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Room 
3039-S, Washington, DC  20250.  For a copy of the notice and the 
petition or more information, contact WORC at 406-252-9672.

REPORT: USDA NOT CAPABLE OF REGULATING 
ANTITRUST PRACTICES

The Packers and Stockyards Administration of the USDA is 
responsible for addressing antitrust issues in the livestock 
industry.  

Whether the Packers and Stockyards Administration is capable 
of regulating antitrust is another matter.  Auditors from the 
USDA's Office of Inspector General recently reported to the 
USDA Secretary of Agriculture that the Department's antitrust 
division is incapable of taking action against the anticompetitive 
practices of the meatpacking industry.  The auditors reported 
that the USDA's Packers and Stockyards Administration's 
investigative systems have not kept up with the growing 
potential for anticompetitive practices in the multibillion-dollar 
cattle industry.  

Between October 1994 and September 1996, the Packers and 
Stockyards Administration's regional offices investigated 84 
anticompetitive cases, only three of which resulted in 
enforcement action.  The auditor's report also indicates that the 
department may have been hasty last year in wrapping up a 
major investigation of allegations that the industry's top three 
corporations were using their purchasing power to drive down 
beef prices and increase their profits.

CHEESE EXCHANGE NEWS UPDATE

Farm Aid News & Views reported in January that farm 
organizations were asking the U.S. Department of Agriculture to 
use its authority to develop a new basic formula price to replace 
reliance on the National Cheese Exchange (NCE) as the nation's 
milk price setter.  In response to mounting criticism and the 
prospect of increased regulation, the NCE, based in Green Bay, 
Wisconsin, recently announced that it would close shop.  
National Cheese Exchange traders have agreed to create a new 
cash market and move their operations to the Chicago 
Mercantile Exchange.  Critics say that this move is nothing more 
than an effort to avoid increased regulation.

MUST SEE TV:
TROUBLESOME CREEK TO AIR ON PBS

Troublesome Creek: A Midwestern, a film by Jeanne Jordan and 
Steven Ascher and a 1996 Academy Award nominee, will be 
broadcast April 14 at 9:00 pm (EST) on PBS: THE AMERICAN 
EXPERIENCE.  This award-winning documentary tells the story 
of Russel and Mary Jane Jordan as they face possible foreclosure 
of their Iowa family farm.  For more information visit 
<http://www.pbs.org>.

________________________________________
Farm Aid News is produced by the Institute for 
Agriculture and Trade Policy for Farm Aid.  Editors 
Harry Smith and Kate Hoff.  We encourage the 
reproduction of Farm Aid News & Views.  Comments and 
suggestions welcome. Farm Aid (617) 354-2922.  Fax: 
(617) 354-6992. Email: Farmaid1@aol.com.  For more 
information on agricultural publications contact IATP, 
(612) 870-0453. Fax: (612) 870-4846.  
Email:farmaid1@aol.com