Animal Interests United: APHIS Animal Welfare; Retail Pet Stores and Licensing Exemptions Bill and How it Effects Livestock Production

Animal Rights and Environmental extremists continue their assault on Agriculture on a daily basis.  Many believe these issues involve differences in ideology, politics, or moral standards.  However, I personally believe the majority of this conflict has everything to do with greed and power.   

As our population expands and becomes increasingly wealthy globally, there will be an ever increasing need for food.  As we witness conflicts over the control of oil reserves and the recovery and distribution of energy, it should begin to make us recognize how vital it is to continue our ability to feed ourselves as a nation.  That said, many have recognized this and are determined to gain influence over the control of food, many times leaving ethics and morality behind. 

As livestock producers, often we have a very narrow vision of what “dangers” we are facing.   Perhaps a cattle producer has little care or knowledge of what is happening in the poultry industry, or a Midwestern hog producer is not well versed on how environmental extremists are damaging western ranchers.  After all, we each have enough on our plate already.  When Animal Rights Radicals attack an interest we consider to be outside agriculture we often choose to ignore the issue altogether. 

This is a mistake, and let me tell you why.

The buzz in every agriculture circle right now is the need to “tell your story”.  It is now being said that the public does not trust farmers and ranchers and that somehow we must gain back our credibility as the moral and ethical business people we are. 

Similarly, the Animal Rights extremists have a long ways to go before they become credible in the eyes of the majority.  We may feel some days that everyone is “on their side”, but this certainly isn’t the attitude of those that live outside the bubble of the animal world. 

For these Animal Rights Extremists to enter a rural state with a strong agriculture economy and insist upon control over farms and ranches would indeed be a very hard sell.  The majority of the population that does not know of these groups would instantly see them as the radicals they are.  But all they really need is a foot in the door;   a chance to gain much needed credibility before their full attack on agriculture begins.  Thus, they begin their campaign to gain credibility with animals the general population is more familiar with. 

Perhaps those of us in Agriculture should realize that attacking more widely understood animals, such as dogs and cats, is nothing more than these groups’ own recruitment tool to gain acceptance.  Once a person, who may be greatly disconnected with Agriculture, hears the extremists’ tales regarding pets they may deem them a credible source in discussions regarding Animal Agriculture as well. 

Everyone knows and loves dogs, but the care of dogs in a breeding scenario takes special ability and knowledge.  If you asked one hundred people who own a dog as a pet how they care for them, you would get one hundred widely different stories.  These various groups make only generic suggestions as to proper pet ownership, so as not to alienate a potential subscriber to their beliefs.

However, when it comes to discussions about pet breeding, these extremist groups do make statements about the proper care of breeding animals.  Most of these groups have no past experience or education in pet breeding.  This is why many of the things they propose for pet breeders, just as in Animal Agriculture, make little sense when it comes to improving the lives of animals. 

So what exactly is my point?  Those involved in production agriculture, which represents only 2% of the population, often feel alone in “battle” with these groups.  But the truth is the number of “troops” dealing with issues from these same anti-agriculture groups is huge.  Think tens of millions of individuals who are impacted, and many of whom are now beginning to express an interest in speaking up. 

Animal Agriculture producers may feel like they are at the front lines based on what we may feel the agenda of these groups are.  We may feel they intend to control our food supply, or eliminate meat, dairy, and eggs from the diet worldwide.  Those assumptions may be correct, but anti-agriculture groups are far from any of those goals, and along the way are leaving many animal lovers with a bad taste in their mouths. 

To recognize how these extremist groups are attempting to gain credibility in the eyes of the public is the goal.  For these reasons, it is highly advantageous for all animal interests to unite and stand together against these groups……..and it is just the right thing to do. 

Recently there has been some proposed "rule changes" that at first glance appears to effect only pet breeders.  However, these proposed changes entitled the “Animal Welfare; Retail Pet Stores and Licensing Exemptions”, contains some interesting language that should be quite alarming to livestock producers. 

According to APHIS, the intentions of these changes were to close a “loophole” that allowed some pet breeders to continue to operate while not being licensed and inspected by the USDA.  With Sarah L. Conant (former attorney for the HSUS) serving as the chief enforcer for APHIS, it is quite rational to be a bit skeptical of their true intentions.

The stated intentions of these changes is to include those that sell pets over the internet “sight- unseen” from operating without a government license and on-going inspection. Those with a “traditional” Pet Store allowing the potential buyer to view the animal prior to purchase are exempt.  Pet providers which deliver an animal away from the premises the animal was housed in would also be under the umbrella of this legislation.  This is where it gets interesting from a livestock standpoint. 

The proposed rule also includes Domestic farm animals.  From the APHIS Factsheet:

“The proposal will restore the definition to its original intent so that it limits the retail pet store exemption to only business and residences:• where buyers physically enter to observe the animals available for sale prior to purchasing them, and
• where only the following animals are sold or offered for sale at retail for use as pets: Dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, rats, mice, gophers, chinchilla, domestic ferrets, domestic farm animals, birds, and coldblooded species.”

I feel what constitutes a “pet” is dangerously open to interpretation. 

Have you ever sold a group of calves via an on-line video auction?  Ever purchased breeding stock “sight-unseen” without inspecting every animal in the facilities they were housed in?  Do you have a website listing for sale show animals used in fairs and other FFA and 4-H events? 

Do you want to turn your farm and ranch into a “pet store”? 

Necessitating USDA inspection would mean such things as a cobweb in the corner of your barn could mean an “infraction” of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), leading to this infraction being made public, a simple way for the extremists to paint a picture of “cruelty”.  This scenario has already occurred for years in the pet breeding community. 

Please examine the documents below and see for yourself how this could potentially damage your own agricultural enterprise. 

At the very least, stand beside those animal interests outside of your comfort zone.  Now is not the time for increased government and more bureaucracy.

APHIS FAQs: Questions and Answers: Proposed Rule – Retail Pet Sales

Docket No. APHIS-2011-0003]: Animal Welfare; Retail Pet Stores and Licensing Exemptions

Agriculture Politics

I think most will agree that the government in not exactly run in an efficient manner.  Many government projects could most likely be completed by private enterprises for half the cost or even less. 

But, for sake of argument, let’s assume for a moment that much of the additional costs and inefficiencies come as a result of an honest attempt at spending taxpayer money wisely. Perhaps the need assessments and environmental impact studies create just such an environment that it often may cost $500 in paper shuffling just to spend $5 to fill in a pothole. 

It is also stated often that many government officials and agencies are completely “out of touch” with what the public views as the concerns facing their constituents. 

Realizing It may be very unpopular, I still have to ask if many of the non-governmental producer financed groups are really run much differently than our government, or perhaps, are even modeled more closely after our failing government than anyone wishes to admit.  

I have been talking to a rapidly growing number of agriculture producers who are asking these questions, along with increasing concerns that many individual leaders seem to also be “out of touch” with what the agriculture industry is facing as challenges today.   Many feel that unintended consequences of decisions made by some leaders of such groups indicate that an issue was not studied perhaps as well as it could have been. 

Obama is criticized, and rightly so, that when pressing issues need to be discussed, he can often be found out on a golf course rather than tending to those issues. 

Similarly, when I hear about an agriculture group putting on a seminar, discussion, or “town hall” type agriculture event from a corner of the nation I am unfamiliar with, I am always interested in hearing about producer concerns for that particular region of the nation.  In most cases however, the report I read is of the speech given from a particular leader’s presentation, with little discussion that can illuminate the true producer concerns of the region, and how they will be addressed.  

Needless to say, I am equally unmoved by the photographs taken from a top floor suite showing the beauty of the city in which an event is held.  Eloquent descriptions of a wonderful dinner of wilted bull-thistle petals and organic mustard greens over wild boar cheek meat, or similar delicacies also do not impress me too much either.  My opinion is shared by an ever-growing number of producers who recognize that these things are simply charged to the expense account of producer financed groups.  This appears to many of us to be far too comparable to Obama’s golf outings for our liking.   

It is time that we recognize that many of these groups we have grown to love over generations may have become simply political-like agencies, with similar political plays made as we have come to expect out of Washington.  The gap between some leaders and the constituency they are charged with representing, ag. producers and related industry, has gotten increasingly widened of the past several years.   

This column is by no means an attempt to “rail” against all agricultural leaders of today.  Many of you working outside the limelight either at the local, state or national level deserve much more praise than in some cases you receive.  Producers can recognize those with a passion and vested interest in seeing American agriculture succeed both now and in the future.  Many of you work countless hours, often at the expense of your own personal lives and often times deferring management decisions for your own agricultural enterprises to others while working tirelessly for the benefit of American agriculture as a whole.  On behalf of agriculture producers, I thank you.

Producers, I urge you to find your voice.  Recognize that you will find others that share your concerns regarding agricultural issues.  Voice your concerns when it appears that a decision is to be made on your behalf that is either not taking into account unintended consequences or may be downright harmful to the continued success of American agriculture.  Recognize leaders that are willing to listen to your concerns, are not “out of touch”, and can understand your concerns and who have the ability to bring your concerns to a broader audience for a positive outcome. 

I feel that American agriculture can more easily fill in those potholes and take a smoother route to the continued success we all desire if we do not try to emulate the government we tend to despise when important decision making is pending.    

Who Controls Your Family's Future Food Choices?

To chime in on Trent Loos' April 5, 2012 Grandin article...Our family realized early on that though many of her ideas have proven to be beneficial for our industry, her stance on animal welfare could possibly destroy our animal ag industries. We spoke with our own industry and voiced our concerns. As a grassroots producer here are some things I’d like to point out:

1. Some fundamental animal activists facts must be understood.

a. Animal activists don’t want to compromise; they want to eliminate animal protein from our diets. They want to destroy our ability to produce any animal protein. If their efforts succeed we will not be able to afford to purchase animal protein.

b. They have used and will continue to use all avenues to accomplish this. HSUS’100 Point Change Agenda is clear about the means, and they’ve accomplished many on their list.

c. They have many deceptive faces as seen in our friend and supporter Animal Ag Alliance's Animal Activist’s Map.

d. The victories they’ve had are making it impossible for grassroots animal ag producers to stay in business. Prop 2, Prop B, Horse Slaughter…yes the outcome of all of these affect the other. The change in regulations within each industry is the vision they seek for all animal ag...destroy those industries and their ability to produce animal protein.

2. Decisions are creating unintended (or intended?) consequences.

a. Decisions being made by industry affiliate leaders, ag universities, staff, animal scientists, third party auditors and others who have decided to collaborate with animal activists, are creating circumstances detrimental to grassroot’s ability to produce affordable animal protein for our world’s families to consume.

b. These decisions have created a conduit for grassroot’s destruction, taking with it our world’s animal protein source. These individuals either realize exactly who they’re dealing with and perhaps may ultimately be benefiting from the collaborations, or they’re out of touch and ignorant about the motives of extreme animal activist and their ultimate goal: to completely eliminate animal protein consumption.

c. If animal ag industry leaders, decision makers and others have chosen to align themselves with these extreme animal right’s activist they need to be questioned about their motives.

d. Ask yourself...do these leader’s actions align with their industry’s goals and missions? If not, ask questions. What are the motives behind aligning themselves with these extreme animal activists/environmentalists...yes environmentalists because it's all connected? The answer to those questions will either reveal another agenda that supports animal activists or insufficient knowledge about the enemy. When decisions, by individuals who are out of touch with the actual process of raising protein animals for consumption, begin to debilitate and destroy the ability to provide the protein sources God intended for us to consume, grassroots must step up and say something.

3. Education is the key to understanding animal activist’s motives.

a. The best resource available is Animal Ag Alliance who has been in the business of defending animal ag against animal activists for over 30 years.

b. Every industry affiliate leader and decision maker should be attending the Animal Ag Alliance Stakeholder Summit coming up the first of May. If our animal ag groups are refusing to join forces with Animal Ag Alliance, more questions need answers. Why would any animal ag industry group refuse to hold in high regard this extremely knowledgeable resource?

c. If our industry’s leaders, refuse to educate themselves and continue to form alliances with the enemy then new leadership should be put in place. If animal ag scientists join forces with the enemy, their thoughts, attitudes and suggestions should be questioned.

d. If ag publication’s articles and animal ag journalist’s thoughts and suggestions align with the enemy, grassroots producers must question those motives as well.

These articles are great examples of what is happening to grassroots producers and their ability to economically provide animal protein to a growing population.

http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/19559/

http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/19713/

This article explains a program the beef industry must question the motives of

http://m.beefmagazine.com/health/vets-opinion/0422-whole-foods-welfare-ratings

Is there anymore evidence needed to prove the point that the current path we’re on will take away any chance our children and grandchildren have, of not only being able to purchase and raise animals, but afford to purchase and consume animal protein?

The saying, “If you don’t take an interest in politics, politics will take an interest in you” might go something like this for animal ag producers: “If grassroots producers don’t take an interest in the decisions being implemented on their behalf, animal activists and their collaborators will take a destructive interest in them.”

We have sustainable agriculture now and have had for centuries. If these groups get their way animal agriculture will not be able to sustain itself; we’ll be regulated out of business.

Accomplices To Grassroots Destruction?

The following post is from Animal Ag Armed, which is the blog I started several months ago, after an incident on our ranch concerning the Global Animal Partnership program.
Grassroots producers we are not only being attacked from outside forces, we are also being undermined from within.  You must be aware of what is happening right under your noses.  Please start paying attention, ask questions.  Start reading your ag publications carefully, and ask yourself if the articles being written reflect truth or an agenda. Let the editors of these publcications know your feelings. It is imperative we voice our concerns. Grassroots will ultimately pay the price of the agenda being pushed.
 Andy Hutchison

                                    Accomplices To Grassroots Destruction
Today will mark the conclusion of my "animal ag producer concerns" case. Most of my thoughts and questions have been penned and I'm nearing the end of gathering information and connecting dots. From this point forward I will build on the issues previously addressed.
First of all I want to make one thing clear: animal ag producers and landowners HAVE ALWAYS been concerned about animal welfare and the succession of a productive environment. The proof is in our perpetual existence. Most days animals and land are given precedence over the welfare of farm and ranching family members. This may sound harsh, but it's true and I'm sure other producers would agree.
I've aired these concerns from the viewpoint of a 6th generation female rancher. Some of the issues and questions are new, but most of the specific topics covered have bothered and bewildered me for several years. Our family, along with other ranching families, is being bombarded by them daily.
Educating and creating public conversation to raise awareness for the protection of fellow family ranchers/ farmers and landowners-Grassroots- was my goal. Hopefully I've stated my thoughts in a logical and understandable way.
My concerns manifested after a third party audit took place on our ranch, one performed by a company with a gap in knowledge of the motives of extreme animal activists. That day it became apparent that Grassroots must speak up.

The daily battles Grassroots face include, not only, covert and overt attacks by deceitful extreme animal activists and radical environmentalists, but also a smorgasbord of government overreach. We are fortunate to have the NCBA and other ag organizations working tirelessly to defend us.

The Tail Wagging The Dog

Somewhere along the way, other burdens have been added to our backs. Certain groups, individuals and companies have jumped on some "extreme pendulum swinging programs" working to satisfy every so-called consumer concern and whim, creating unintended consequences for producers.
Consumer studies are clear-the majority of consumers don't want to know how to "make a watch" they merely want to "know the time". They don't want video taped slaughter facilities, or facts on hourly rodent disposal, they simply want to be reassured. Reassured that the food they consume is wholesome, healthy, safe, clean and raised humanely, and to connect a friendly face to that food. In most instances a simple explanation along with a family photo of the place of origin on products at the meat case satisfies consumer concern and curiosity.
There are legitimate reasons for audits: a small pocket of elite consumers want more in-depth information about the origin of the food they consume, and certain markets are able to pass on premiums to producers which require third party audits. But I believe anything more... information that obsessively scrutinizes the lives and activities of animal ag producers and processing facilities is playing into the hands of the Extreme.
Expensive labor and time intensive protocols for these standards cannot become the norm-the precedence Grassroots must follow to produce products for the majority; a majority base that's predicted to reach 9 billion in the near future.

I believe this over-kill research and the scrutinizing of every aspect of animal ag production, by some of our own, is handing Grassroots unintended consequences in the forms of more business-killing regulations. This is causing an out of control snowball affect of increased expenditures for producers.
I believe some of the programs being implemented are putting ranchers and landowners at risk for more government overreach by asking that ranch gates be opened wider.
I also believe that other monetary alluring producer programs, which ask that specific personalized animal welfare information be handed over for animal activist's scrutiny (and who knows who else), further jeopardizes Grassroots.
I believe that jumping on this bandwagon of magnifying and highlighting the minuscule concerns of a few consumers is negatively distorting mainstream consumer's views of animal ag producer's procedures further; raising more questions-perpetuating more consumer uncertainty
As I stated earlier: We animal ag producers have ALWAYS held animal and land care above anything else. When specifically did this perception all change? When did The Tail Begin Wagging The Dog?
Can a doctor or lawyer's business be understood through outside observation? Neither can outside observers understand the complicated issues facing farmers and ranchers. Decisions being made by good intentioned individuals and groups, some who have little or no knowledge of the processes that create a successful farm or ranch is aiding in the development of these unintended consequences.

It's time Grassroot's voices be heard concerning decisions being implemented on our behalf. It's true that we have the opportunity to voice our concerns through membership in our ag organizations, but it has become evident that some of those concerns have been mired by distractions: bureaucracy and friction within some of these groups. The issues needing to be addressed from our standpoint can't wait. They need to be addressed today.
So in that effort I will continue to build on the topics that are posted. If issues arise and information comes out that is pertinent to Grassroots, I will post it.

Before concluding I want to share a few more thoughts on the carbon sequestration program and Agenda 21. This topic may seem out in left field but the truth is farmers and ranchers in our area were approached several years ago to sign up. I've had many questions about the true motives behind it since.
Listen to the link below, peel away a few more layers and come to your own conclusion.
Connections of ICLEI,, Agenda 21 and the Carbon Sequestration Program

Will the Real Consumer Please Stand Up?

Like many of you, I live well off the “beaten path”.  Sure, I love my small town cafés and other services offered in small towns, but often I find myself necessarily traveling to the “big city” to gather some much needed items. 

Also like many of you, I read so much negative information about agriculture online and in the media.  Often I go about my daily life feeling deeply saddened that so many are offended by what we do in rural America. 

This is what I think about on my drive to the city, how in just a few short minutes I will become face to face with the multitudes of people that hold us in such low regard, and are out to destroy us.

So I exit my pickup truck, adorned with a seed corn cap and John Deere jacket, hoping all offensive matter is removed from my boots, ready to face this public head on.  After all, they have to know what I represent as I certainly do not dress according to any urban dress code.

Well, guess what?  Rarely have I ever even been approached by anyone that questions my career, my address, or what I do with my daily life.  I’m never immediately assaulted and blamed for global warming, animal abuse, or obesity.

I push my cart through the grocer’s isles, and rarely do I hear the question of “humane-ness” come out of many consumers’ mouths in regard to meat, eggs, and dairy products. 

I choose to eat at a particularly popular fast-food chain and I don’t recall hearing those questions of “humane” come up in conversation either.  I do recognize, however, that my small slice of America is most likely not representative of America as a whole, or could even be considered an “average” representative of consumer opinions.   

I am well aware that more consumers everyday are becoming concerned about the how’s and why’s of what we do on a daily basis on our farms and ranches.  Honestly, if 1% or even one consumer has a question, we should make every attempt to answer them in an honest and respectable manner.   

However, I must go completely against the grain of most everyone in agriculture today when I say I really do not think the vast majority of consumers even have our farm practices and methods of production on their radar.   

Naturally, as agriculture producers we are quite sensitive to all the information we are hearing regarding “consumer concerns”.  We want our urban friends, and more importantly perhaps, our rural neighbors to understand that our methods of production today is far more environmentally friendly and best suit the animals in our care.  For the most part, I think that consumers that genuinely want to know what we do on the farm are receiving answers to all their questions.  But by and large, I do not think the average consumer has any questions at this time.  It should also be pretty obvious that arguing with animal rights extremists is not a battle we can hope to win.   

As many of you know, McDonalds recently announced their intentions of “studying” the sow housing methods of their pork suppliers.  I am in no way critical of a very successful American business, but I do have to ask if their decision was made solely out of true consumer concerns.  I have no insight as to McDonalds’ consumer outreach program, but it concerns me that there seems to always be a bit of hysteria created that leads to a call for such changes.   

Now, “Tim Horton’s, the Canadian coffee shop chain looking to make deeper inroads south of the border, is under mounting pressure by animal rights activists to assure that its U.S. pork and egg suppliers adopt more humane practices.”  Tim Horton’s has advanced their menu to include more meal items, many of which contain egg and pork products.  The Humane Society of the United States, (HSUS), has purchased enough shares of Tim Horton’s stock to have a voice at an upcoming shareholder’s meeting, in which they will voice “concerns” over the production methods of Tim Horton suppliers of egg and pork products.   

Of course, many of my readers will instantly see this as my attempt to add fuel to the already intense “animal ag vs. animal rights extremist” firestorm.  But my goal here is to strongly urge all agriculture producers to keep both eyes open in these matters. 

I ask who actually stands to benefit from this call for sweeping changes in agriculture production methods?  Ag producers certainly do not gain from reverting back to 30 year old production methods.  The animals themselves do not benefit from the regression to these 30 year old environments.  In my opinion, these food service and retail marketers do not stand to gain, especially in a period of high food costs.  In honesty, perhaps the animal rights organizations do have a bit to gain in receiving more credibility with the general population, and can take credit for a “victory” in changing production practices, even if perhaps their role in pushing for these changes was minimal.

It would appear to me that those who have the most to gain are the “referees”; those self-appointed “mediators” who promise to find “common ground” between the activists and production agriculture.  Could it be that these same individuals may in fact be where all the hype and hysteria originate? 

Let’s face it, the increasing global demand for food is real.  Moving forward this will be of even greater concern.  Those who are wise are doing all they can to garner some control of the production or distribution of food.  It is a wise investment. 

As ag producers, we are the first and perhaps most important link in the “food chain”.  It is vitally important that we maintain our rights to produce the food that the consumer ultimately demands.  It is also of vital importance that we maintain our global competitiveness by continuing to use the best technology of the time, and best use of our precious resources.  We need only to look at parts of Europe, now a major importer of food, to see where this could lead us if we do not remain involved and active in these matters. 

Perhaps I am wrong; maybe true consumer concerns are leading to this increased call for the elimination of agriculture technology.  I am sure successful food service and retail food chains have much more knowledge of these issues than I.  But, to me, this just doesn’t quite all add up.   

I ask that all ag producers keep both eyes wide open on these issues.  The anti-modern Ag movement perhaps has more individuals than we realize.  Wouldn’t it be quite upsetting to find out that the majority of the fires were indeed being set by the firemen?

Mark Klaus

Beginning of the Journey

Rural Americans have a heightened sense of intuition.  In the American Great Plains, often while picnicking with our urban cousins, we will sense that warm breeze on our necks, notice that flock of birds seeking shelter, and see the uneasiness of a herd of cattle in the distance.  It is at this time that our innate sense of intuition tells us that it may be advantageous to proceed with a slightly heightened level of concern, and look to that Doppler radar source to determine our danger level. 

As Agriculture producers, sometimes we also get those uneasy feelings, realizing that our intuition tells us that something just isn’t quite as it seems.  When dealing with an agricultural related issue unfortunately there is no Doppler radar to consult on these matters, and often this can lead to a great level of concern, frustration and sleepless nights. 

Questions can go unanswered, or one can be “blown off” as if their concerns are invalid and base-less. One may even have an almost complete picture of a valid threat that could prove damaging to American agriculture producers, yet without all the pieces to the puzzle uncertainty lingers. 

Here at Ag Voices United, we believe that all the pieces to those puzzles exist, and that by having open dialogue between agriculture producers and rural Americans we can better assess some hidden threats that exist and could prove damaging to our livelihoods and rural lifestyles.   

We will strive to seek out the concerns of the American Agriculture producer and share those thoughts in a respectful, productive way; thus put all those pieces together to create a picture that may illustrate some real threats to Agriculture and rural America.   

We are living in an uncertain time.  All indicators paint a picture of an increasing need for food; as populations increase and economies strengthen and change their dietary habits.  Thus, a real battle over control of food is looming, and as American agricultural producers we must keep our eyes wide open and think rationally to assess threats to our operations appropriately.   

As this battle over the control of food begins in earnest, we must never fail to recognize that as Agriculture Producers we are the first and most important link in that all important food chain.  After all, others who wish to control food resources most likely do not have the ability to drive a tractor, pull a calf, or perform the other multitude of necessary operations we perform daily on our farms and ranches.  While we recognize this, we most open up dialogue that can assure our best interests are always at the heart of every agricultural related discussion. 

Welcome to Ag Voices United.   We ARE Agriculture producers speaking out FOR Agriculture producers.