Food Inc.

Last semester, I was sitting in my introduction to agricultural journalism class as my professor announced we would be watching a video. The title of the video was announced there were a few angry looks and mutterings from my classmates and in my case, confusion. What was so wrong with a movie called Food Inc.?

Minutes into the video, I had some concerns. It turns out, Food Inc. was not a scripted movie just about “food”. Produced by Robert Kenner, Food Inc. is shot in documentary style, and attempted to portray the American food system, producers and products to consumers. I did not find many sources in the movie credible and questioned the motive of several of their “experts.” I felt as though the views in Food Inc. were skewed and at times inaccurate.

Don’t get me wrong, I am a proponent of food safety and education. I believe that consumers are entitled to a secure food supply. Because after all, I consume food like every other person. I also spent a summer working for the food service industry. As a Sonic Car-Hop I watched safety videos over food contamination prevention. Food safety was an essential aspect of my job. But, Food Inc. categorized many restaurants and food producers into a category of negligent food practices.

Food Inc. highlighted the consequences of food contamination through the Jack in  the Box fast food chain’s 1993 E-Coli break out. They focused on minimal national food contamination situations when in fact the outbreaks are rare.

This segment of the movie struck a personnel note with me. One of my best friend’s family members had contracted E-Coli several years ago. The young girl was hospitalized for a significant amount of time because of E-Coli complications, but is living a healthy life today.

She represents one of the 2,000 individuals in the U.S. that contract the virus yearly. With a national population of 311 million, the U.S. food consumers that contract

E-Coli is relatively marginal. Foodborne Illness

I live in a country with one of the world’s safest food supplies. I grew up in a community where food producers were my neighbors, and I trust the products they yield. Yet, I have also seen the consequences of food negligence. However, no industry is perfect and the reality is that there will always be members of any industry that do not follow the rules. Food Inc. seemed to highlight the minority of bad producers in an industry filled with honest ones.

The day I saw Food Inc. there were many emotions in my classroom. Onscreen you glimpsed a frustrated consumer, passionate animal activist and animated yet misinformed organic producer. In the classroom, you could see anger, hurt and resentment portrayed on the faces of agriculturists.

Many of my fellow students grew up on farms and are involved with food production. I also saw another emotion on their faces; understanding. We may be young, but my peers and I understood that propaganda such as Food Inc. misbrands our industry. If we are to continue our careers in agriculture we must know the myths we have to overcome, such as the misinformation about E-Coli, food safety and producer motives.

I am grateful that my professor chose to show our class the video Food Inc. As agriculturalists and future professional agriculture communicators it was essential that our class view Food Inc.

After watching Food Inc. I was encouraged to further research the food industry and Food Inc. itself. This movie does not end on your television screen. The website Food Inc. offers resources for teachers and news of future food documentaries. Food Inc. has 442,480 likes on Facebook. Clearly, this movie has had an impact. The website also has over 13 alliance partners, including the Humane Society of the United States. Images of cattle with bar codes adorn the homepage and create a questionable view of agriculture.

As agriculturists we have the power to spread an accurate message about food production. Food Inc. focused on the negative aspects of the American food system. It is time for honest producers to tell their story.

I am now in my second semester of college, and I found myself sitting in my cross culture journalism class the other day. Our professor was showing our class a familiar clip of a video: Food Inc.  This time, I was in a lecture hall with hundreds of prominently urban students. I was not in my agriculture journalism class of 13 students. However, sitting beside me were the other two agricultural journalism students in the class. As the professor asked the class’s opinion on the video, our hands were raised. We might have been outnumbered, but we made sure agriculture’s voice was heard. 

Agriculture Future of America

The first week of college is full of excitement; figuring out your class schedules, meeting new friends and receiving endless flyers about campus activities. One of the first decisions I made in college has defined my college career and positively shaped my future.

I was at the College of Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources annual Fall Roundup when I saw my friend, Lance Day. I had known Lance for years through 4-H, and he was standing by a booth for Agriculture Future of America. I had never heard of this organization before. As Lance and I began talking, I realized AFA sounded like an advantageous opportunity, and he encouraged me to apply for the upcoming conference.

I learned that AFA is a scholarship program, leadership conference, networking opportunity and so much more. After visiting the AFA booth, I had wished I had learned about the scholarship program when I was a high school senior. There are community and state AFA scholarships that can substantially assist with college tuition.

As soon as I left the Fall Roundup, I organized the many flyers and information I had received, and went to the AFA website. I began filling out an application to gain industry sponsorship so I could attend the national fall conference.

One application and a congratulatory email later, I found myself bound for Kansas City. I had a giant suitcase filled countless professional dress outfits and a permanent smile fixated on my face. I was having my first national agriculture experience on the college level.

To get to the conference, I drove to Kansas City with several of my friends from the University of Missouri. In fact, many of the individuals I had met through the National FFA Organization and 4-H had also qualified to attend the AFA conference. I had met these friends through the Missouri Agribusiness Academy, I had attended National 4-H Congress with them and I had even competed against them.

AFA made me realize that the connections I had made in the agriculture industry in high school were invaluable and that they would continue through college. At the conference, I rekindled connections with students from different universities and made new friendships with students from across the U.S. Seeing countless familiar faces at AFA assured me that the friendships I had developed will carry over into the work force.

The conference itself was a once in a lifetime experience. Luckily, AFA offers three tracks for students- so I can continue my AFA experience. As a freshman, I was in the first track and expanded my knowledge of the agriculture industry, met with current industry leaders and discovered what role I will play in the agriculture world.

Now, 4 months after attending the conference I have been selected as the AFA summer communications and marketing intern. I will have the opportunity to use my agriculture journalism experience to assist the AFA organization. Words cannot describe how excited and blessed I felt after receiving the news. I will be living in Kansas City this summer and working at the AFA head quarts. This traveling aggie will be reporting from Kansas City this summer!  

My friend, Nora Dodd and I at the AFA Conference in Kansas City this fall. 

Horse Processing Reflection

I was standing on a tour bus, microphone in hand, gazing across a crowd of my peers, and I was on a rant.

My freshman year of high school, I was a part of 50 4-H members and chaperones to attend the first Missouri 4-H Equine Tour. Our group was visiting the top Missouri equine facilities to listen to experts and to learn about careers in the horse industry. We were all high school students, passionate about horses and currently debating the hot topic of 2007- horse slaughter.

In 2007, the U.S. horse industry drastically changed when Congress banned domestic horse processing. Funds that supported processing facilities were cut from the national budget. For five years the U.S. has not processed a single horse, and the results to the equine market have been devastating. 

Then, on November 18, 2011, President Obama signed the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act for 2012 to provide federal funding for the reinstallation of horse processing.

But, on the Equine Tour bus the new legislation was caused a stir. Words such as “companion animal” and “pet” were being debated, and I found myself and my best friend, Sonja Perry, fiercely defending the rights of horses. In reflection we were speaking out of passion. We thought we were protecting horses-the horses we knew.

When we heard the words “horse” and “slaughter” we made the mistake that Congress and most American made. We categorized our horses, the purebred animals we raised and showed, with the bottom market feral equines that were used for processing purposes. In actuality, the processing of horses was helpful to the horse industry.

Fast forward to that fall. Once again I was in front of a crowd but this time it was a different situation. I was competing in the Missouri FFA district speech competition. The speech I was presenting was defending horse processing.

After attending the Equine Tour and listening to horse breeders predict the disastrous effects of a horse processing ban, my mind was quickly changed. This time I had done the research, I had the facts and I knew my purpose. When I presented my speech to the panel of judges I was confident that my message was correct and represented the view points of my fellow agriculturists.

Since then, I have spoken with numerous Missouri horse breeders and equine experts who have been negatively impacted from the processing ban. I have also seen the disastrous effects evident in my own community.

Looking into my own pastures at my family farm, I can see the negative effects of the horse processing ban. I may be able to separate the emotion of horse processing with the issue at hand. But I cannot distinguish the drop in value of my own trained horses have encountered because of the harmful legislation.

I grew up in a rural community surrounded by horse breeders and equine enthusiasts. Yet, soon after the ban of horse processing I noticed a change. There were fewer foals in pastures, less participants in the local rodeos and horse shows and fewer members of our local Saddle Club attending trail rides and events. Last year there were under ten participants, including my younger brother, at the Daviess County horse show. When I was in 4-H it was one of the larger horse shows in northwest Missouri. 

I have heard  stories of families taking their horses to a rodeo and coming back with additional horses in their trailer.  No one knows what to do with animals that can no longer perform or that they cannot afford. 

As with many controversial topics, everyone has a viewpoint, and there is much misinformation in circulation. I discovered many untruths about the equine industry and agriculture as a whole during my research of horse processing. In the end, I knew horse processing would be beneficial to the U.S., and I would support it.

A few years ago I was willing to “protect” my horses from a national horse slaughter ban. Today, I am more knowledgeable and have been exposed to numerous agriculture resources to form a more factual opinion about horse processing. I credit youth agriculture organizations such as 4-H and the National FFA Organization and the individuals and mentors I met to help me expand my views. I also credit first-hand experience for realizing the catastrophe a lack of horse processing caused.

I have learned that as agriculturists we have every right to defend our passion and way of life. But it is essential to research both sides of an issue, no matter what our personal views may be. We must be aware of the changes occurring within all aspects of our industry.

I know that there are honest producers who harbor a passion for horses in the Missouri equine industry and are ready to take back their livelihoods. In fact, they have now been given the chance to do so with the lifting of the national horse slaughter ban. The controversial debate of U.S. horse processing began as an issue centered around feeling and has ended as an issue of facts.

The HSUS Myth

As a college student, I miss my animals from home. I would wake up to my Corgi, Teddy lying beside me, there were pastures with livestock and a barn full of cats where I grew up. I miss those moments, so I volunteer at a local animal shelter. It offers me an opportunity to give back and it reminds me of my pets back home. 

At my first volunteer orientation, the instructor said something that really stuck with me. "You might think that donating to the HSUS helps animals. Well we don't see a penny of that money." 

Despite being named the Central Missouri Humane Society, the animal organization that I volunteer at is not an affiliate of the Humane Society of the United States. In fact, being associated with the HSUS actually hurts honest animal shelters whose goal is to assist animals in local communities. 

HSUS is an organization with an agenda, and because of it shelters such as the Central Missouri Humane Society are negatively impacted. Even volunteers are surprised to learn that their donations do not to the abandoned animals of Columbia. 

When I first told a friend that I would be volunteering at the Central Missouri Humane Society she said, "That could come back to hurt you. Better not put that on a resume." Because I am an agriculture major and a member of numerous agriculture associations, any affiliation with an organization with "humane society" in the title could be potentially harmful. 

However, I know there are homeless animals in Columbia that are over-populating shelters. Last year alone the Central Missouri Humane Society had a $100,000 budget deficit because of the economy and increased animal abandonment. Obviously, HSUS donations do not go to them. Local facilities rely on donations and volunteers so that they can continue to serve communities. You will not see these organizations pleading for money on national television with adds that pull on your heartstrings. 

Simply because you volunteer at an organization with "human society" in the title does not make you an animal rights activities. I encourage everyone to volunteer and to disprove the myth about humane societies. Agriculturists should not be afraid to volunteer.