By CELESTE BAUMGARTNER
Ohio Correspondent

FREMONT, Ohio — The Ohio Farmers Union (OFU) opposes State Issue 2 on the Nov. 3 ballot, in part because it is a constitutional amendment, said Roger Wise, OFU president.

Issue 2, if passed, would amend the state constitution to create the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board, which would oversee decisions on how farm animals are treated.

The OFU is grassroots-driven, and after discussion at two board meetings the majority of members opposed the issue, Wise said. “Besides the constitutional amendment issue, this is another layer of bureaucracy that is being formed with really no guidance, no specific norms,” Wise said.

“We don’t know what this board is going to do other than to create livestock care standards – that’s pretty vague and ambiguous,” he said. “It is unchecked government ... and this is going to be quite intrusive.”

Also, proponents have said the board will be funded with fees, permits and fines – it would have to be, because there is no money in the general fund in Ohio and there’s no money in the Ohio Department of Agriculture budget to do this, Wise said.

“Having seen what they’ve done with regard to oversight of CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations), it could be quite expensive and we don’t feel that that burden should be thrust on the majority of producers that are doing an excellent job already,” he added.
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) was the spur for having this amendment placed on the ballot. That group visited Ohio in the spring and met with the OFU, along with other farm groups. HSUS wanted to set standards for animal care; if that could not be done to its satisfaction, it would take the issue to the voters as it has successfully done in other states.

“The issues that HSUS raised didn’t seem that unreasonable,” Wise said. “There are some intense production practices out there in those huge CAFOs that are rather indefensible.”

The HSUS implied that this issue guarantees it will be back, Wise said. If that happens it will be costly and will drive a wedge between consumers and producers and a wedge between producers and regulators, Wise said.

OFU would have preferred to negotiate a settlement with HSUS. OFU found the group willing to talk and negotiate and that its requests were not out of line, Wise said. Battery cages, gestation pens and veal crates were three confinement methods discussed.
“The veal industry is moving away from the crates on its own ... as a result of consumer and retail pressure,” Wise said. “I know that Walmart, McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s and Kroger’s – to name a few – have already made some demand on the products they purchase and how they’re raised.”

HSUS is not opposed to battery cages, just the number of chickens in them; the chickens should be able to extend their wings, Wise said. Group housing, which is what the veal industry is beginning to use, isn’t that costly and doesn’t change the production practice that much.

“The producers would have us believe that this is going to be so costly and drive agriculture out of Ohio,” Wise said. “I think that is a scare tactic.”

Consumers are voting in favor of these initiatives because they are concerned about the way their food is produced and they want it done in a perceived humane manner, Wise said.

“I would urge Ohioans to vote against this,” Wise said. “I know they’re going to see $10 (million) or $12 million worth of proponent’s reasons why they should vote for it and very little spent in opposition, but that doesn’t mean that it is correct. I think we should go back to square one and I think we should start over and do this objectively and with an open mind.”