Agri News
Opinion
http://www.agrinews.com

Letter—Cementing democracy's building blocks

Thursday, July 1, 2004

The Land Stewardship Project, along with allies, beat back attempts by corporate interests to weaken township rights in the 2004 session of the Minnesota Legislature.

That's a major victory for anyone concerned about family farming, the land and the future of our rural communities. Township and county governance is the cornerstone of local democracy, and local democracy, in turn, is the foundation of everything this country was built upon.

LSP members and other Minnesotans rallied around local township power this winter and spring. When LSP co-sponsored a local democracy town meeting, along with Minnesota Farmers Union and Minnesota National Farmers Organization, on March 15, so many people showed up (over 200) that another whole section had to be opened up in the meeting hall.

At the end of that meeting, participants pulled out their cell phones and called lawmakers in St. Paul to tell them how important local control was.

The victory at the Legislature was huge in affirming that citizens who live and work in rural Minnesota continue to have the ability to decide what kinds of development takes place in their community in the future.

But it was a battle won in an ongoing fight over who will control our communities. Supporters of industrial agriculture were successful in significantly weakening our agricultural nuisance laws to the point where citizens may not be able to sue even when their health is in danger.

In 2003, citizens were stripped of their right to petition for environmental review of most large feedlots. Also of concern is that this spring our neighbor to the east, Wisconsin, weakened local government's ability to control the placement of livestock operations.

Citizens and farmers have proven that by working together during the legislative season they can save what's important to them. But factory farming's supporters aren't just working between January and May to undermine local democracy—they are at it 12 months out of the year.

Livestock task force
For example, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty has convened a " Livestock Task Force" to examine how to make the state's animal agriculture industry more competitive. This task force's recommendations are due out any day now.

Already, word has emerged that the task force sees the lack of "predictability and uniformity" at the local level as a serious impediment to the "modernization" of the livestock industry.

That's code for: "Local control is getting in the way of building factory farms." This summer, and during the 2005 Legislative session, you are going to hear a lot of talk from the task force about developing "suitable zones for livestock agriculture."

What they are talking about are suitable "zones" for large-scale industrial agriculture, and the promoters of such zones don't want local township zoning and local folks getting in the way of their plans for factory farm development.

The interests represented on the Governor's Livestock Task Force do not believe local people should have the final word on where or if large livestock facilities are sited in their community. Why?

Because it gets in the way of the factory farm model. Rod Hamilton, who is president of the Minnesota Pork Producers Association and a top official at Christensen Farms (the eighth largest hog producer in the nation), sits on the task force. Also on the task force is the key leadership of Cenex Harvest States, Land O' Lakes, Hormel Foods Corporation/Jennie-O Turkey Store and AgStar Financial Services.

With representation like that, we should not expect the Governor's Task Force to come up with recommendations that are good for family farmers and rural communities.

Companies like Hormel want a model for agriculture that gives them livestock at the lowest possible price, and that's not good news for independent farmers. What's good for Christensen Farms—loose environmental regulations and no local control—is not what is good for residents of rural communities.

Local control
Local democracy is not in the way of successful livestock farming in Minnesota. But it does pose a significant barrier to the spread of large-scale industrialized agriculture. It's much easier to influence decision makers in St. Paul that your mega-livestock operation is good for rural Minnesota, than it is to convince a group of local farmers and residents that millions of gallons of liquid manure will make a good neighbor.

For Minnesota's family farmers, local democracy has not been a problem because we live with our neighbors, work with our neighbors and farm in a way that's compatible with our neighbors.

As an independent hog farmer, I'm not afraid of local democracy. I am not afraid to work with members of the community. Who better to decide about what their community, township or county looks like than local residents who then have to live with their decision? Who better to decide about the structure of agriculture and economic development in their community?

A people's task force
LSP supports and is working for more successful farmers raising livestock and crops on the land. We want to protect the rural environment by promoting livestock on diversified family farms. We do not believe there needs to be "sacrifice" zones where anything goes.

We've joined with other organizations that share our vision -- the Minnesota Farmers Union, Minnesota National Farmers Organization and the Sustainable Farming Association of Minnesota -- and created a task force of our own that is looking at how to encourage livestock development in the state that's good for the community and the environment and maximizes return to the farmer.

We know that livestock development can be done in a way where manure is a valuable nutrient, not a waste product, and the profits generated are not shipped out of the community.

Local family farmers are accountable to their neighbors and to the environment. The factory farm model, on the other hand, extracts wealth and leaves behind wrecked environments.

A year-round job
Now that the 2004 Legislature has ended, we need to begin our "off-season" work to protect local democracy: attending meetings, writing letters to local newspapers, contacting lawmakers, debunking myths, making our voices heard any chance we get. It also means attending local township meetings and learning more about what makes these democratic institutions tick. It may even mean running for office.

Sound like a lot of work? Maybe, but without a strong, local foundation, the rest of our democratic infrastructure will simply crumble.

—Paul Sobocinski, LSP organizer and farmer from Wabasso, Minn.

Copyright 2004 Agri News
All Rights Reserved