|
VOLUME XVII, NO. 4 |
TEXAS DAIRY REVIEW |
APRIL 2008 |
 |
|
|
Annual dairy tour offers five DOPA credits What a fine mess… State holds up De Jong permit, again San Angelo Feed Yard offers new program for dairy cows Lometa Annual Jubilee draws creepy, crawly creature — by Dario Martinez California incident taints perception of meat industry LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Seminole Biodiesel Plant LETTER TO THE EDITOR: National Dairy Animal Well-Being Initiative |
|
|
Annual dairy tour offers five DOPA credits |
|
|
The annual Dairy Manure Technology Tour will
be at Comanche Community Center, Tues., Apr., 8, 2008, with registration
at 9:30 am. Two hours of DOPA credit will be offered in the morning
session, and three hours of credit for the afternoon session. A
sponsored lunch will be provided at noon with the program scheduled to
end by 3:30 p.m. The tour will include a discussion of retention control structures (RCS). Dr. Saqib Mukhtar, Texas AgriLife Extension Agricultural Engineer, will discuss different types of manure, wastewater, and rainfall runoff storages required, and will explain ways to monitor and document liquid level and depth of RCS in the pollution prevention plan during a calendar year. Other topics of discussion will include potential ways to produce energy from dairy manure, carbon credits, and updates on the Leon River TMDL and WPP. Dr. Jason Johnson, Extension Economist, will also speak at the program. The program will conclude with a tour of Bosma Dairy to view the gravitational separator that is used to separate manure, sand, and water. Please call Texas AgriLife Extension Service, Erath County Office at 254-965-1460, or Comanche County Office at 325-356-2539, if you plan to attend the tour. |
|
|
|
|
|
What a fine mess… State holds up De Jong permit, again |
|
|
For six-and-one-half years, the Willy De Jong family of Hidden View Dairy has been striving to obtain an individual permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). But, so far, that has not yet happened. The De Jong case has gone far beyond the realm of normality, elapsing periodically into the throes of bureaucratic red tape to emerge only long enough to face another bend in the road caused by the relentless pressures of environmental groups and the inability of the state to handle the permitting process. Hidden View Dairy was granted an individual permit in 2001. But, because the TCEQ failed to notify the City of Waco, the permit was rescinded---putting the De Jong family back to operating under the 1997 general permit. The dairy is still operating under that permit today. In a lawsuit settlement in 2006 between the City of Waco and the De Jong family, the City agreed to not interfere in the dairy’s permitting process. But, the Sierra Club has since stepped in to take up the slack, producing supposed “affected persons” that only serve to tie up the process through court proceedings. This action has ironically prevented the De Jongs from operating under the current TCEQ rules that allow for the dairy to meet new Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) standards and from ultimately providing a cleaner and safer environment for the Bosque River. On March 19, 2008, Willy and his family appeared in Austin at a hearing before TCEQ commissioners. During the discussion, commissioners were stymied and could not agree over the meaning of the written language in HB 801 that refers to “affected persons.” As a result, they voted 2-1 to send the dairy’s permit application back to the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH). Disappointment for the De Jong family is not nearly a strong enough word to express this latest episode of rejection from the state. Add to that more than $200,000 paid in attorney fees this past year, and the emotional and financial depth of the situation reaches far beneath the surface. But, in spite of all this, Willy continues to show an unwavering attitude that the dairy’s permit matter will one day be resolved. He is propelled by a strong belief in God and motivated by his obligation to family, consumers and others. He is a strong defender of the environment who strives to operate above and beyond state and federal regulations. “Dairymen are basically dehumanized by these activist groups who want to call us factory farms,” Willy said. “But, we are the first responders to protect the environment every day. I’m also responsible for 21 families supported by this farm. The opposition can call me anything they want, but by the end of the day it doesn’t matter because this is my family farm.” Willy said the “people who live and work here” are making their lives better and providing their children with a future. “What greater compliment than for their kids or my kids to want to pursue the same vocation as me? But, as long as the state allows corrupt and immoral tactics by activist groups, the family farm will be destroyed. “If the state and these activists want us to provide a cleaner environment, then issue the permits and let us legally show that we are.” Willy said the ongoing battle is not about the environment. “It’s about activist groups trying to legitimize their existence at the expense of family farms.” Hidden View Dairy is located on 573 acres in Dublin, Texas. Permitted for 2000 cows, the dairy currently milks 1900 with a milk production average of 70 pounds per cow. The herd is milked in a double 23-parallel parlor and facilitated in a 2000 cow free stall barn. Hidden View Dairy has hosted many tours throughout the years, is community oriented, and prides itself on being one of the frontrunners in the dairy industry. “We are a business and an environmental success story,” Willy said. At 17 years old, Willy was a city boy. “I had never milked a cow in my life. But, I knew I wanted to be a dairyman and I signed a partnership with my dad. Now, I’m living my dream,” he said. The De Jongs moved to Texas in 1994. “Texas has been good to our family and it’s a great place to live,” he said. “I brought these cows from California to Texas and I’m proud of the genetics in my herd. We’ve gotten these animals to produce far beyond what I ever thought possible.” Willy said Central Texas is a viable, competitive and environmentally compatible market. “The permit will allow us to prove our farms are consistent with the TMDLs that are written for the Bosque River watershed.” Willy is married to Marilyn who helps keep the dairy’s records and books. They have four children: Nick, 20, an ag business major at A&M; Elizabeth 17, Daniel 15, and Lauren 13, who all attend school in Dublin. |
|
|
|
|
|
San Angelo Feed Yard offers new program for dairy cows |
|
|
If you’re raised on the wide open spaces in the Texas Panhandle, some things just come easy, like ridin’, ropin’, and tending to cattle. This could pretty much sum up the life of Monty Oneal, manager of San Angelo Feed Yard, who wouldn’t have it any other way. But, the buck doesn’t stop there. As an animal science graduate from Texas Tech University, Oneal joined San Angelo Feed Yard this past January where he took his well-earned degree and put together with it his cattle experience to design a heifer-raising program specifically for dairy cows. Going from beef cows to dairy cows presented a major challenge for Oneal. In order to design the program, he had to buckle down and do his homework on dairy cows.
“I talked to vets and nutritionists to learn
what I could. I also talked to other feed yards that had success with
their programs. I followed their models and advice to come up with a
unique plan,” he said. Oneal said the feed yard accepts cattle from anywhere in the nation. “We’ve had them from Oklahoma to Florida,” he said. “We currently have 15,000 head in the yard and another 3,000 out on wheat fields.” Regarding the dairy program, Oneal emphasized it is designed for heifer-raising. “We don’t accept cattle until after the weaning period. No bottle or crates,” he said. He added that they do grow and finish steers as well. “We can customize the program to fit a dairyman’s particular needs. Depending on the background of the cattle, we can vaccinate and begin the cattle on starter ration and then work them up to a multiple step program. We try to target 1.7 pounds of gain per cow per day.” The cattle are kept until breeding age or can be AI bred at the feed yard. Oneal said dairies can furnish their own semen (sexed or unsexed) and chose their own genetics. “We’re completely flexible and personable,” he said. Oneal said he is glad to be back working with cattle and people. Prior to San Angelo Feed Yard, Oneal worked for other feed yards and for 10 years as a pharmaceutical rep for Lextron.
“But, now I’m enjoying what I do---helping
people out and getting paid to help them make money. Last year Oneal married Haleigh, a kindergarten teacher, and they are expecting their first child, a boy, this month. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lometa Annual Jubilee draws creepy, crawly creature — by Dario Martinez |
|
|
A rattle going off doesn’t sound too bad…when it’s a baby rattle. But if it’s the larger type---attached to the end of a diamondback---it sends a shockwave of prickles down the spine. Spring is the season for snakes to begin shedding their skins and showing their heads. Fortunately, folks in Lometa, Texas, don’t have to go looking under a rock to see a diamondback. On Sat., Mar. 29, townsfolk, visitors, and spectators from near and far showed up for the Annual Lometa Diamondback Rattlesnake Jubilee. The popular event drew hundreds of curiosity-seekers who anxiously awaited the showing of the slithering creatures captured during the roundup that were safely contained in display cases at Lometa Regional Park. Lometa, located 16 miles northwest of Lampasas, has become renowned for the past several years by providing the roundup along with other events during the festival. This year, folks were entertained by a carnival and booths, live music, a tractor and car show and contests open to the public. One favorite event is the “Cow Patty Plop” where contestants are required to throw dry cow pattys. Spectators of all ages spent hours at the various booths playing games or buying t-shirts and trinkets. In line with the rattlesnake theme, several booths sold rattlesnake headbands, rattlers, key chains, and wristbands. |
|
|
|
|
|
California incident taints perception of meat industry |
|
|
Jason Beyer of ABF Packing Company in Stephenville, Texas, said he was just as dismayed as everyone else when he learned of the deplorable treatment of downed animals by workers who were caught red-handed on videotape at a Chino-based California slaughter house earlier this year. “I really don’t see how they could do what they were doing to those animals without getting written up a lot sooner,” Beyer said. “But, they’re going to be paying a big price for doing something that was wrong.” The California incident launched a major USDA investigation that resulted in the biggest beef recall in US history when it was determined meat from downer cows entered the food chain. Although no illnesses from the meat have been reported, Steve Mendell, owner of Hallmark/Westland Meat Co., admitted to illegal slaughter of cattle and misuse of downer cows after he was shown the video in front of acongressionalpanel subcommittee. The video showed non-ambulatory cows being dragged by chains, jabbed by forklifts and shocked in order to get them into the box so they could be slaughtered. The two workers seen on the undercover video taken by the Humane Society of the United States were fired and face animal cruelty charges in a San Bernardino court. Beyer and D.L. Funderburgh have owned ABF Packing Company for the past 12 years. “We try to make certain our workers go by USDA guidelines and take every step possible to treat animals in a humane way” Beyer said. He feels the California incident is an isolated case. “Or, at least I would hope that it is,” he said. “I also think that it sort of got blown out of proportion by the media. "It really wasn’t as much of a food safety issue as it was an animal abuse case that could present a threat. The bad thing is that it causes a bad perception for all of us.” Beyer said he wasn’t certain how many downer cows actually got into the food chain.
“My understanding is that these animals
passed antimortem inspection and then got down in the pens.” “At the same time, the USDA also put into place safe guards and regulations that would prevent any Specified Risk Materials from animals over 30 months of age from entering the food supply. According to the USDA, those safe guards were met," Beyer said. “In my opinion, the meat produced at that plant is safe to eat, because the safe guards in the plant were met. But, this should be a lesson to everyone in the industry. Their actions make meat packers, dairymen, and beef raisers all look bad to consumers.” Beyer said the USDA has strict guidelines for humane treatment for handling non-ambulatory animals or downer cows. “Our inspector inspects the cow and if it’s unable to get up, we cannot accept it. Our customers also require us to get third party audits to verify all animals are being treated like they should be in a humane way.” Beyer said a USDA veterinarian specifically travels from plant to plant for the sole purpose of seeing how animals are handled. The veterinarian also audits the inspectors. “We stay on our employees constantly about proper handling of all animals and emphasize they must follow the specific USDA guidelines that include written procedures on food safety, animal handling and BSE prevention. “If a downer cow comes to us, we euthanize it before it is ever moved. In the California case, the video showed those animals were conscious. I don’t know why they were trying to get those animals up and moving but USDA says you can’t mechanically move an animal to get it to rise and walk.” Beyer pointed out there are incidences when a USDA inspector may inspect a cow and it is “just fine“ at the time. “But, then the cow goes down. If that happens after it’s already been inspected, you ask for a re-inspection of the cow.” Beyer said procedures must be followed because there’s a big price to pay for stupidity. “That company in California handles about 150,000 cows per year and is now on two years probation. Financially, that will be a tremendous loss for them.” |
|
|
|
|
|
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Seminole Biodiesel Plant |
|
|
Dear Sherry Webb: Thank you so much for the article you did on the biodiesel plant. You did a great job and I appreciate your interest. I am on the board of directors at Ocho and have been in on the project from day one. It has been very difficult to get everyone to see the possibilities that I thought was possible from the very beginning. I have always seen this project as a win,win situation. Good for the gin,the members,the environmental,community and area dairy men. But this project would have never reached this phase without Wayne Mixon ,whose dedication and research has been invaluable. The support of the stock holders, the community ,and financial institutions has been wonderful. I come for a dairy background .I understand that dairymen need a constant and dependable source of feed that is high in quality and supply. It is our goal to establish relationships with our local dairymen and provide the year round product that meets their feeding requirements. I believe that by working closely with them we can provide a product and service that we all can benefit from. This project though full of positive possibilities, as in all business, will face many unforseen problems. But the board of Ocho Gin and the shareholders vision is to make this positive step to insure the future of the next generation of farmers and dairymen. I am a 70 year old farmer, father, and grandfather. I love this country and believe that with Gods help, we should leave this place better that we found it. We have been so blessed, our forefathers saved it for us and we have a obligation to do the same. I appreciate your article and would welcome the opportunity to talk to you again and invite you to visit again when we begin production. Sincerely, Lynn Long (Address & phone number on file with the Texas Dairy Review) |
|
|
|
|
|
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: National Dairy Animal Well-Being Initiative |
|
|
Dear Editor: As dairy producers, we have enjoyed a high level of consumer confidence in our products and the way we operate our farms. Caring for our animals has always been a top priority, and is integral to producing safe and wholesome dairy products for consumers. However, the undercover video footage showing deplorable animal abuse in a southern California meat processing facility has brought this issue directly to the gates of our farms. Over the past few weeks, there has been heightened interest in animal care issues by consumers and the media. In fact, it is increasingly difficult to pick up a newspaper or turn on the television and not find a story about the treatment and care of food animals. On behalf of the National Dairy Animal Well-Being Coalition, we encourage producers and others within the dairy chain to get involved and demonstrate our industry’s ethical commitment to providing for the well-being of our animals. You can get involved by endorsing the Initiative and by reviewing the draft Principles and Guidelines for dairy animal care that were introduced this past October at World Dairy Expo. These broad Principles and Guidelines address nutrition, animal health, management, housing and facilities, animal handling and transportation as well as third party oversight. They can be found at the Coalition’s Web site at www.dairywellbeing.org. We urge co-ops, producer groups and other dairy industry organizations to review the draft Principles and Guidelines and provide feedback. Comments may be directed to Jamie Jonker, co-chair of the Principles and Guidelines Committee at jjonker@nmpf.org. The Coalition will gather all feedback and release the final Principles and Guidelines at the 2008 World Dairy Expo. Also, now more than ever, we encourage all dairy producers to tell the very positive story about the excellent care provided to our animals. Talking points developed by the national dairy checkoff are posted at www.dairywellbeing.org for your use. Again, we urge the entire industry to get involved and provide feedback to the Coalition’s draft Principles and Guidelines. Together, we can protect our freedom to operate and the high level of public trust we enjoy. Best regards, Bob Golob, Deb Reinhart, Neil Rejman (Address & phone number on file with the Texas Dairy Review) |
|
|
|
|
|
Future of US cattle industry should not be left to chance |
|
|
Opinion: By R-CALF USA Region IX Director George Chambers Billings, Mont. - My parents, wife and I are the fifth and sixth generation owners of 27 Cattle Co., in Carrollton, Georgia. Our young son will hopefully become the seventh. This is not inevitable. Unless we restore the opportunity for profitability in our cattle industry, our son will likely choose a different career. It is our generation’s responsibility to restore competition to our industry so the next generation will have an opportunity to profit within this, our industry of choice. Hog and poultry producers already traveled the road cattle producers now travel. After consolidating into mega-plants, leaving producers with few marketing options, hog and poultry packers offered production contracts to some producers, allowing them to stay in business. Hundreds of thousands of hog producers, who were not invited into a production contract or who refused to trade their independence for one, exited the hog industry. Since 1980, the number of U.S. hog operations shrank from 667,000 to only 67,000. The number of U.S. cattle operations also shrank, falling by about 625,000. However, there were more cattle producers when the exodus started, so despite losing 40 percent of our operations, 900,000 exist today. This number can sustain a competitive market, provided the industry takes steps to halt its decline. What fuels this exodus of cattle operations is the machine that decimated the once independent hog and poultry industries - market control by the highly concentrated meatpacking sector. The packers’ strategy to capture control over the supply chain is simple and effective. Here’s how it works: 1) A few packers gain dominant control over meat slaughter (four packers now control 80 percent of cattle slaughter); 2) Packers restrict producer access to their slaughter plants by first slaughtering their own cattle, imported cattle, and cattle committed to them long before slaughter, before even bidding on producer-owned cattle; 3) When producers complain about restricted market access, packers offer guaranteed access in return for commitments to deliver cattle without establishing a price, causing an increase in packer-controlled cattle, known as ‘‘captive supplies,’’ and a decrease in cattle sold in the open market; 4) Packers sit back and watch their circular strategy self-perpetuate, with more and more captive-supply cattle displacing producer-owned cattle. As captive supplies grow, the open market becomes too thin to function properly, and the value of slaughter-ready cattle falls, leading to a reduction in calf prices and prices for all classes of cattle. This is good for packers, but signifies the beginning of the end for independent producers. This is why we must pass the prohibition on packer ownership of livestock in the 2007 Farm Bill. It will minimize the large packers’ ability to restrict producer access to the market and lower cattle prices. I’ve had first-hand experience in not being able to timely market slaughter-ready cattle, even while packers complained of insufficient cattle supplies. After 20 years of retaining ownership of my cattle, and in the wake of tight supplies, I shipped two loads of cattle to Iowa for feeding. When the cattle were slaughter ready, I put them on the show list and awaited bidding to begin. No bids came. After two weeks, no bids came. But my feed bill kept growing. After four weeks I bit the bullet and shipped my cattle to an auction yard in Ohio. There, my Choice and Prime quality cattle, which yield graded 2 and 3, were purchased by one of the few remaining independent packers. It is time to limit the packers’ use of market-restricting and price-depressing captive supplies, particularly since JBS-Brazil is trying to further concentrate the packing industry. Cattle producers and consumers should call Congress and urge passage of the prohibition on packer ownership of livestock in the 2007 Farm Bill. This will help restore competition and preserve the opportunity for independent cattle producers to remain independent. |
|
|
|
|
|
All internet content of this site
are Copyright © 2005-2008 TDR Publishing Co. All Rights Reserved. |
|
 |
