Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Man robbed at Tallmadge Avenue eatery
Another winter punch heading toward Ohio
Four teens restrain man, take items from his Akron home
Complaints against officer keep coming
Police: Ohio girl dies after fall into snow bank
Region makes way for latest batch of snow; cancellations rise
Cuyahoga Falls residents come home to find burning couch on balcony
Blogs:
First Bell - On Education:
No City of Akron basketball tonight
Pets:
Pet telethon re-airs
The Heldenfiles:
Chipmunks "Squeakquel" on DVD/BD March 30
Akron Zips:
Late surge gives Zips ugly road win
Tribe Matters:
Blogmail response on Hafner
Cleveland Browns:
Stallworth's contract terminated
Balanced Ledger:
QB in Browns future: another mock draft
Kent State Sports:
KSU Notes – February 9
Cleveland Cavaliers:
NBA Power Rankings from Around the Internet
Buckeye Blogging:
Buckeyes grab 18 players on signing day
Varsity Letters:
Garfield at Buchtel basketball
All Da King's Men:
Palin At The Tea Party Convention
Blog of Mass Destruction:
Republican Pre-Conditions
Akron Law Café:
Law, Love and Chocolate
Car Chase:
Collector Car Hobby Loses One of the Best—Jim Roll
Let's Talk Real Estate:
Decisions Decisions: Credit Cards or Your Mortgage?
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Loucile is looking for a Lake Erie getaway in June for three kids, ages 1, 3, and 5.
Sound Check:
Talk of the Town – Top entertainment picks for the weekend
HRLite House:
OFCCP Report
Akron Gamer:
Makers of 'Castle Crashers' unveil 'BattleBlock Theater'
See Jane Style:
Do IT this week: Layering
Opponents believe plan would protect breeders; supporters say it wouldn't
By Bob Downing
Beacon Journal staff writer
Published on Friday, Oct 30, 2009
There's a new twist to the debate surrounding Ohio's Issue 2 to create a 13-member state board to oversee the care of farm animals.
Armed with their own legal opinions, supporters and opponents are arguing over how Issue 2 might affect Ohio's large commercial dog-breeding operations — so-called puppy mills.
Supporters, including the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, are convinced Issue 2 covers only farm animals and livestock.
The federation believes that claims that Issue 2 covers dogs are ''pretty darn far-fetched . . . and a misinterpretation or deliberate misrepresentation'' of its intent, said Joe Cornely, a spokesman for the Columbus-based farm group.
Delcianna Winders, director of education and advocacy at the New York-based Farm Sanctuary and an opponent of Issue 2, said it is ''an unquestioned possibility'' that Ohio's dog-breeding operations could fall under the jurisdiction of the board, if approved by voters Nov. 3.
The problem is that ''livestock'' is not fully defined in Issue 2 materials, Winders said.
That raises ''a major concern'' among animal activists that the proposed state board could step in and oversee dog-breeding operations and block further restrictions on puppy
mills, she said.
Such a scenario could result in Issue 2 protecting dog-breeding operations that a statewide coalition of Ohio animal groups is targeting, said Mary O'Connor-Shaver, a spokeswoman for the Coalition to Ban Ohio Dog Auctions.
''We're convinced of it in the animal-activist community,'' she said.
Her group has won approval from the Ohio Ballot Board to begin collecting 120,700 signatures in support of a proposed Ohio ban on the auction of dogs.
The petitions are needed to place the proposed law before the legislature in January.
If lawmakers don't act in 90 days on the proposal, her group could then attempt to gather more signatures to place it on the 2010 ballot.
The Ohio secretary of state's office is unable to resolve the question of dog breeding and Issue 2, spokesman Jeff Ortega said. The ballot language, set by the Ohio Ballot Board, ''is what it is,'' he said.
It might take an opinion from Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray or a court decision to determine whether Issue 2 would affect dog-breeding operations, he said.
If passed, Issue 2 would amend the Ohio Constitution to create the Livestock Care Standards Board, which would have sole authority to decide standards for care and treatment of livestock and poultry in Ohio.
It would be charged with prescribing ''standards for animal care and well-being that endeavor to maintain food safety, encourage locally grown and raised food and protect Ohio farms and families.''
The state legislature voted in June to put Issue 2 on the ballot as Ohio's farm community fought a proposal by the Humane Society of the United States to modify how Ohio farms confine egg-laying chickens, breeding pigs and veal calves.
Action in California
In 2008, the Humane Society played a key role in a California vote that changed the way farmers there must care for and shelter farm animals. Ohio became the group's next target, largely because of the state's 30 million egg-laying hens.
Those animals should be kept in cages or crates where they have room to live and move, said Paul Shapiro, senior director of the factory farming campaign for the Humane Society.
The animals need enough room to stand up, lie down, turn around and extend their limbs. Anything less is cruel to animals, bad for food safety and inherently inhumane, Shapiro said.
At the center of the debate are industry practices that provide 67 square inches of cage floor space per egg-laying chicken, veal calf crates that are 22 inches wide and gestation crates for breeding pigs that are 2 feet wide, he said.
There are no federal or state rules on the size of farm animal cages or pens, only recommended minimums from producer groups.
The Humane Society unsuccessfully proposed negotiations to settle the issue in Ohio.
The society has said it might ask Ohio voters in late 2010 to approve California-style rules on the treatment of poultry and livestock.
Before that could be done, the Ohio legislature approved the proposed constitutional amendment.
The board would be made up of one food-safety expert; two members of statewide farm groups; one veterinarian; the state veterinarian from the Ohio Department of Agriculture; the dean of an Ohio agriculture department at a college or university; one representative of the local Humane Society; two members of the public; and three family farmers, one chosen by the governor, one by the speaker of the House and one by the president of the Senate.
The director of the Ohio Department of Agriculture would chair the board.
Ohio farm interests say the Humane Society's plan is unneeded and more restrictive, takes control of Ohio farms out of Ohio and could increase farmers' costs, said Keith Stimpert, senior vice president of public policy with the 230,000-member Ohio Farm Bureau Federation.
The Ohio Poultry Association, the Ohio Pork Producers Council, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce and the Ohio Grocers Association support Issue 2.
Opponents include the Ohio Farmers Union, the Sierra Club and the Ohio League of Women Voters.
Activist's view
The debate over how Issue 2 might affect Ohio's dog-breeding operations — centered in Amish areas of Holmes County — surfaced about six weeks ago.
That's when Laura Allen of the Animal Law Coalition in Ithaca, N.Y., wrote that future restrictions on dog-breeding operations in Ohio would be blocked if Issue 2 were approved.
Ohio has 218 licensed dog breeders, more than half based in Berlin, Millersburg and Sugarcreek. In addition, Holmes County in 2008 had 537 kennels.
Ohio is No. 7 in the United States for its dog-breeding operations. Missouri is No. 1.
''There is no reason to think Issue 2 won't be said to apply to dogs and prevent regulation of commercial dog breeders or puppy mills,'' Allen wrote in a blog. ''The words 'livestock' and 'animal' are left undefined in Issue 2.''
Citing a section of the Ohio Revised Code, Allen wrote: ''In Ohio, dogs are 'subject to like restraints as other livestock.' ''
''The sense of Issue 2 is food-related, but there is a big catch-all that states this board shall 'prescribe standards for animal care and well-being that endeavor . . . to protect Ohio farms and families.' Really broad, undefined authority that could be easily construed to include dogs and thus prevent regulation of puppy mills,'' she said.
In a telephone interview, Allen said she feels strongly that a problem exists. ''It's definitely not a stretch,'' she said.
Cornely of the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation said Issue 2 was designed to deal with food animals, not dogs. ''It's about livestock and poultry. That's the answer right there,'' he said.
He cited a legal opinion provided by Maria Armstrong, a lawyer in Columbus with Bricker & Eckler.
Armstrong said the new board, if approved, would not have authority over dogs unless the Ohio legislature changes the definition of livestock.
Cornely said he suspected Issue 2 opponents are raising the dog-breeding question to ''spin to their advantage.''
Allen is married to Russ Mead, the general legal counsel for the Farm Sanctuary, which is a partner with the Humane Society in trying to get Ohio to change its confinement of farm animals, said Farm Sanctuary spokeswoman Meredith Turner.
The Humane Society was unfamiliar with the arguments over puppy mills and Issue 2, Shapiro said.
Bob Downing can be reached at 330-996-3745 or bdowning@thebeaconjournal.com.
There's a new twist to the debate surrounding Ohio's Issue 2 to create a 13-member state board to oversee the care of farm animals.
Get the full article here.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
ProChoice, OH
Posted 07:00 AM, 10/30/2009
VOTE NO on Issue #2! If you love animals, vote NO on #2. If you don't want our State Constitution amended by BIG AGRIbusiness vote NO on #2. If you don't want Big Government & Special Intersts amending our Constitution, NO on #2. Go to www.ohioact.org for NO on #2 signs.
Akron, Oh
Posted 07:23 AM, 10/30/2009
I must admit, this particular Issue has been confusing on who is representing what...last thing I want to see is the looney PETA types telling hard working, honest farmers how to do their job...still on the barbed wire fence with this one...ouch...
Akron, Oh
Posted 08:09 AM, 10/30/2009
Apprasit quite listening to Howie.
Posted 08:24 AM, 10/30/2009
ProLiberalChoice give me a break vote yes on issue 2, radical liberal non meat eaters are creating and making fusses over meat/livestock FARMS. Of course no one wants these animals abused but when it comes down to it they are bred to EAT, nothing pretty and bunny fuzzy about it. These radical eco leftists don't want anyone to eat meat, or at least make it SO expensive and unrealistic that people eat less.It is a well known agenda of these people. You cannot feed a nation with chickens that are "free ranged", it's a lovely dream but it is not realistic.Meat livestock are NOT pets people.Legit farmers also see their stock as $$ and do not want to abuse them. VOTE YES on 3, do not let this nation get taken over by a radical few.GOD BLESS AMERICA
Posted 08:25 AM, 10/30/2009
oops VOTE YES ON 2!!!!!!!
Posted 08:32 AM, 10/30/2009
Don't confuse people who care about animals as being PETA types as you call it. PETA is a looney organization and a lot of those who are animal rescuers are not supporters of the tactics of PETA. The HSUS is a way different organization and they are saying Issue 2 is bad for animals. I believe them. I plan to vote no on Issue 2. I don't want big farming corporations making choices about how animals are to be treated because they don't care. And small business farmers should be leery of this issue as well.
Akron, Oh
Posted 08:32 AM, 10/30/2009
@Isaidso...was it that obvious...and you must listen as well....
Posted 08:35 AM, 10/30/2009
Jams, no one is trying to turn people into non meat eaters. The issue is how the animals are treated. Yes, they are bred and raised for food, but they don't deserve cruel and painful treatment while they are alive. The real loonies are those going around using the lame excuse that they are trying to be turned into vegetarians so let's let the food industry continue to abuse animals. Pets or not pets, they are still living, breathing, feeling creatures. We have a responsibility to not allow to them suffer and to stop those who do mistreat animals.
Posted 08:56 AM, 10/30/2009
Let's see who is funding AGAINST it-
ProgressOhio, visit their website, they are more interested in pushing the liberal agenda than any animal ANYWHERE. Dont be fooled people.Who is the head of ProgressOhio?Brian P. Rothenberg "For the past 20 years, Brian has served Ohio progressive candidates and causes as a political and earned media strategist."- do you see animal lover,animal activist,animal anything in his bio? of course not.
Wake up before this country's democracy is taken down brick by brick.
I love animals, I have rescued animals, but I love my freedom MORE. The freedom that I will let NO liberal agenda take from me.I will not stay silent about any issue liberals/radicals are secretly trying to take over. IF this issue was ALL about animals it would one thing.But it is not.
Posted 09:01 AM, 10/30/2009
I would like to see a less radical approach to better care for farm animals. I don't trust PETA or even the Humane Society to do anything other than try to drive factory farms out of business. I agree some reforms need to be made, but they need to be reasonable. After all, our farming techniques so far have meant cheap food for people all over the country. Feeding people is good.
Barberton, OH
Posted 09:07 AM, 10/30/2009
Vote Yes on Issue 2! As I have stated before, the majority of vets (as in Doctors of Vetrinary Medicine) I have spoken to along with local farmers in the Akron area support the issue. In case you didn't look, the board will have a member of the Humane Society as well as 2 non-farmer/agribusiness members on it. There will also be a vet, a professor of agriculture and the state vet. If you think these people are not interested in how animals are treated you are crazy. Farmers have been raising animals for centuries and the anti issue 2 people want to change that. Farmers can't afford to increase the amount of land needed for what some of these groups want. The taxes will kill them or make them reduce the number of animals they have on their farm. Less animals = less meat = higher prices. Keep control of the Ohio Farms in Ohio, not somewhere else. Double post apology.
Barberton, OH
Posted 09:07 AM, 10/30/2009
Vote Yes on Issue 2! As I have stated before, the majority of vets (as in Doctors of Vetrinary Medicine) I have spoken to along with local farmers in the Akron area support the issue. In case you didn't look, the board will have a member of the Humane Society as well as 2 non-farmer/agribusiness members on it. There will also be a vet, a professor of agriculture and the state vet. If you think these people are not interested in how animals are treated you are crazy. Farmers have been raising animals for centuries and the anti issue 2 people want to change that. Farmers can't afford to increase the amount of land needed for what some of these groups want. The taxes will kill them or make them reduce the number of animals they have on their farm. Less animals = less meat = higher prices. Keep control of the Ohio Farms in Ohio, not somewhere else. Double post apology.
Munroe Falls, Oh
Posted 09:20 AM, 10/30/2009
First off; why not just expand what authority of the OHIO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE? Are they not the ones that come up with how things are done with animal husbandry?
Second; If you are that concerned with animal cruelty then get together with genuine animal breeders and people with real concern like the pet adoption agencies (PETA does not qualify because all they care about is MONEY and they mass euthanize pets www.petakillsanimals.com) and come up with a standardization set of guidelines not regulations. Let the real kennels come forward to be voluntarily inspected by both the Ohio AKC and other legitimate groups. Or is that too hard to handle?
Third; you are coming up with a new regulatory body. People are screaming already about too much government in their lives. Well guess what? This is another one. This entity that is being proposed my best guestimate will be another 35 to 50 million to run. You’re going to have to pay these people and they are going to have to meet somewhere. Because they sure ain’t going to do it for free.
columbus, oh
Posted 09:49 AM, 10/30/2009
"an unquestioned possibility" ??? Could that be any more vague, and for this, we got this level of an article? That's irresponsible of the Beacon Journal.
The definition of livestock is pretty clear in the Ohio Revised Code - animals used for food. Puppies clearly do not fit that category.
Ask yourself now - does this pass the smell test? Does any right thinking person really think a measure about food animals and the safety of our food supply really has anything to do with puppy mills? This is a smoke and mirrors tactic by Issue 2 opponents to obfuscate the issue, because they don't have any substantive arguments to make.
Vote yes on Issue 2 - it's right for farm animals and it's right for our state's food supply.
Posted 09:58 AM, 10/30/2009
There always seem to be some excuse that food prices will rise. They've already been doing that or haven't any of you been to the grocery store lately. It's a scare tactic but it's already been happening. Vote No on Issue 2. I don't want people who have no interest in treating animals the way they should be treated making decisions about their care.
Posted 10:16 AM, 10/30/2009
Just Browsing-you think someone that profits off of how an animal is raised and cared for realllly has no interest on how their animals are treated but some liberal,vague, out of state entity will care? That just doesn't make sense.
Richfield, OH
Posted 10:21 AM, 10/30/2009
I say let the farmers and puppy mill people raise the animals as they see fit.
Richfield, OH
Posted 10:22 AM, 10/30/2009
One of the top Global Warming Whackos in the UK said we will all have to move from eating meat because it dooms the planet.
Posted 10:26 AM, 10/30/2009
To bad there is no "leave it the way it is" button to push at the ballot booth.
But, right now, we only have two options;
1. (A Yes vote would mean), We pay an Ohio farm board to oversee Ohio farms in Ohio or,
2. (A No vote could mean) Non-farmers that think the "California way of things" is better for Ohio farms in Ohio, could over-see things here in a few years.
Posted 10:39 AM, 10/30/2009
Wow jams. Where have you been. The atrocities are reported all of the time. Same with the puppy mills. No one and I mean no one has the right to torture, abuse and mistreat animals in any way.
Posted 11:20 AM, 10/30/2009
this is a tough issue and i have been researching it for weeks. i am SICK and TIRED of scare tactics - "vote yes or PETA and the humane society won't let us eat meat." that is RIDICULOUS! carnivores outnumber vegetarians by a landslid.
i will continue to eat meat, support small farms and vote for legislation that leads to the proper treatment of animals we raise for food. i will also vote no on issue 2.
stop fear mongering!
Posted 11:21 AM, 10/30/2009
Just Browsing you are confusing livestock-meat producing animals with pet producing puppy mills. They are NOT the same. Farms producing meat need their animals to be fit and healthy-meat is inspected and has to pass inspections and grading.Their animals are required to get vaccinations and the such.Puppy mills have NO oversite now whatsoever. They care not what their animal's health is. BIG DIFFERENCE. Yes I agree animals should not be tortured, but let's not confuse pets with meat animals.
Posted 11:27 AM, 10/30/2009
Actually the laws on the books are NOT preventing puppy mills now,even if somehow this law is twisted into seeing puppies as livestock at least there would be an oversite board. What is there now? Humane Societies have not been effective in shutting them down.
The wording of the bill-
"TO CREATE THE OHIO LIVESTOCK CARE STANDARDS BOARD TO ESTABLISH AND IMPLEMENT STANDARDS OF CARE FOR LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY"
Has nothing to do with puppy mills,liberal opponents are just bringing puppies into the mix to persuade decent hearted people that havent read up on the issue to their side. Do you own research READ the bill itself and then decide.
Akron, oh
Posted 11:28 AM, 10/30/2009
Spirit of Reagan - your ignorance is showing. You obviously have no clue as to the conditions some of these animals live in.
Rittman, Oh
Posted 11:45 AM, 10/30/2009
The idea that another government appointed board to oversee activitied will ever improve anything, and NOT drive up cost and increase overburdensome unnecessary regulation is absurd. Somebody tell me just one example!
I will vote to kill this idiotic measure now, and fight the more idiotic measure later. The idea that we need to pass bad laws to avoid worse laws is also absurd. Kill them both!
Posted 01:15 PM, 10/30/2009
No, I'm not confused. It's in the news all the time how animals raised for food live in horrid conditions and are routinely abused. Do some research yourself. It's appalling. They may be vaccinated, but they live in awful conditions.
Munroe Falls, Oh
Posted 01:42 PM, 10/30/2009
Thank You RittmanInsider.
Akron, OH
Posted 02:02 PM, 10/30/2009
puppy mills are sick and sad and there should be something to set up to watch over them.
The footage of where you see pigs and pigglets being tossed in trucks like they are pillows is so sad. I am no vegan, but I do get a little guilt when thinking about what i eat.
I drove past a truck filled with pigs in Pennsylvania a couple of years ago.... on the back of the truck was a small white sticker that said "its whats for dinner", when I drove past the truck and saw live pigs staring out the peek holes at me I was a little disturbed...haven't been able to eat ham without regret since.
Atlantic City, NJ
Posted 02:14 PM, 10/30/2009
@Cait; get a little guilt,a little disturbed,haven't been able to eat ham without regret since, but I still do because I really could care less about how they're treated as long as I like the taste, right!!But we should watch over the puppies, oh your are so sad!!!
Akron, OH
Posted 04:17 PM, 10/30/2009
@ retlaw:
love all the hypocrites who hate on people who eat meat and ADMIT they feel guilt instead of saying killem all, but they themselves wear leather shoes, use cosmetics contain collagen derived from animals, eat gelatin in gummy worms, Hogs alone provide 40 or so important drugs, Look around your house: soap, paint, detergent, cosmetics, wallpaper, glass and plastics -- all are made from animals. We even use animal by-products in our cars: in tires, seat coverings, antifreeze....so I am sure you use something above without regret.
Chesterland, OH
Posted 05:19 PM, 10/30/2009
I have read the many comments and I have to say that I am shocked that no No one has mentioned that if Issue 2 passes, it will CHANGE THE OHIO CONSTITUTION. Think long and hard about that. Why, all of a sudden do we need this board of people with sweeping power to determine what is humane and inhumane? Even if they put a veterinarian and a rep. from a humane society on this board, they will be in the minority. The majority of $$ funder Issue 2 are from out of state orgs. who don't want anyone improving their cruel standards for raising and processing your food. This is not about PETA or HSUS. VOTE NO ON ISSUE 2!!!!!!!!
everywhere, oh
Posted 05:25 PM, 10/30/2009
I love animals - fried, grilled, baked, or broiled it's all good.
Tallmadge, OH
Posted 09:28 PM, 10/30/2009
Issue 2 sounds like it is doing the right thing but it is just a tactic to get a corporate stronghold over the agri business in Ohio.
It makes sense to me that if you treat an animal properly, it produces a better product. Kosher meat has been produced this way for eons.
I wonder what will happen to the independent, organic farms if Issue 2 passes. Just as a return to traditional farming is gaining popularity, it would appear Issue 2 will squash that, after the agricultural corporations get cozy.
Tallmadge, OH
Posted 09:35 PM, 10/30/2009
I will admit that PETA has opened my eyes to some horrid conditions run by the factory farms. There is no excuse to mistreat an animal, ever.
I'm also in favor of meaningful laws passed for punishing the abusers of animals. If you have to beat an animal, then you are beating your wife and kids, too.
Tom Erickson believes that the food will be tainted with mind controlling fortifications that will make us all zombies to the Obama Administration's policies.
tallmadge, oh
Posted 09:40 PM, 10/30/2009
VOTE YES ON ISSUE 2
Stow, OH
Posted 11:00 AM, 10/31/2009
I do not understand this issue. It seems like the more I read and hear, the less I understand issue 2.
Munroe Falls, Oh
Posted 09:05 PM, 10/31/2009
Vote no on issue 2. Make the Ohio Department of Agriculture do it's job for once.
akron, oh
Posted 11:38 PM, 11/01/2009
Thanks Jeanie for pointing out the most important part of this. Issue 2 will give big agriculture(
factory farms) unchallenged rights to continue their inhumane treatment of farm animals. Factory farming as it's conducted now is without a doubt the single biggest threat to our personal health and the health of the planet. No animal should have to live a life of extreme suffering so that I can eat a hamburger. Issue 2 will give us more of the same except that now it will be written into the constitution as being ok to allow this to continue. Get a conscience people-it's not ok.
