permaculture

[Lawrence London <lfljvenaura@gmail.com>]

A friend sent this today.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Date: Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:45 AM
Subject: Right to Farm bill passes in Missouri


I don't know if you've been following the Right to Farm Act in Missouri,
but the bill has just passed. Right to Farm is now the law in two states,
Missouri and North Dakota.
<>
Right to Farm in Missouri is seeing some backlash
http://quincyjournal.com/farm-agriculture/2014/01/9844/right-to-farm-in-missouri-is-seeing-some-backlash/

Supporters says raising this to the constitutional level will give farmers
legal protection

A constitutional amendment on the November 2014 ballot in Missouri is
seeing some backlash. Amendment one, also known as Right To Farm would
bring constitutional protection to Missouri's farmers. Dan Kleinsorge of
Missouri Farmers Care (a supporter of the amendment) says currently the
right to farm is only legislative. "We've seen in recent years that animal
rights groups, especially the Humane Society of the United States or HSUS,
have become a lot more bold about taking on agriculture directly and trying
to legislate certain agricultural practices out." Kleinsorge says raising
the Right to Farm to the constitutional level will give farmers legal
protection to "challenge those types of statutes in the future, and
actually get them thrown out in court."

On Tuesday, January 21st, a consortium known as Missouri's Food For America
gathered at the state capitol in Jefferson City, to argue against the
amendment. The group is led by Monroe County farmer and former state
legislator Wes Shoemyer. Shoemyer says because the amendment takes the
rights of Farmers to the constitutional level, it will supercede all other
state statutes dealing with agriculture. He argues, "Whenever we see this
type of constitutional amendment, it will actually take away folks right
for redress if there are some very egregious nuisance of environmental
issues that might arise in the future."

For example, Shoemyer suggests a farmer who wants to farm either organic or
non-GMO would have no redress if their crops are contaminated by GMO crops.
And he says most Missouri farmers do not need the protection afforded by
amendment one, "You see the groups that are supporting it to be Monsanto,
Cargill, and some of the big corporate things" (sic)"  He said he believes,
"Right to Farm" would be much more protection for these corporate entities
than it would be for our family farms.

Shoemyer expects his group to include a broad spectrum of farmers, consumer
groups and others interested in family farm activity.
<>
You might want to google "right to farm act" to see just what this is.
Basically it reads that no law can be made that restricts the way farmers
want to farm. And it benefits mainly the Giant Ag people, Monsanto and the
like, who want to be free of lawsuits against GMOs, limits placed on
chemical usage (herbicides, fertilizers, etc.) and the inhumane practises
common to raising animals in CAFOs.

So if your swine or poultry are leading horrible lives and being
slaughtered cruelly, that's okay. No one can make you change your ways.
Likewise if your GMO crops are leaching into your organic neighbor's field
and contaminating his crops, that's okay too. He just has to live with it.
Plus, of course you can feed your chickens arsenic and your beef cattle
ground up bovine brains. It's the American Way!

It's worth reading a few of those articles to see what the fight is all
about. The Missouri vote was close enough to demand a recount... but the
ayes won. So in Missouri now, food can be manufactured any way the
producers want. Free from legislation.