Tuesday, November 3, 2015


                                              Douglas Preston

     The number of experts sometimes amazes me.  Especially concerning how farmers and ranchers manage to feed the world without the indispensable input from experts who never have raised, processed, or produced anything.  The qualifiers for trying to dominate how things are done seems to be just an opinion or mimicking someone else's viewpoint so they can just sound important.  Or cool.
      Special interest groups seem to be forcing themselves into the conversation on just about everything today, whether they know what they are talking about or not. 
      Just think for a minute, who needs and wants the food supply to be the safest, most nutritious, and available possible?  The producers.
      Will an animal thrive on mistreatment, poor nutrition, or mishandling?  No.
      Can a crop thrive on worn out soil or in weed infested fields?  No.
      Can a crop thrive when infested with pests?  No.
      Would you not use every effective treatment for a sick animal to restore it to health?  Yes.
     Would you feed yourself, your family, your friends, or your customers with food you produce that is dangerous, inferior, or substandard?  No.
      When you are sick would you go to the man at the service station for treatment?  No.
     When you are threatened would you call the dentist to come protect you and your family?  No.
      Would you call the Sheriff to send someone out and feed your stock and milk your herd because you are going out of town for a week?  No.
     Would you trust your spiritual well being to the lawyer down on main street?  No.
      So why do you put your faith in McDonald's to dictate how it's beef is grown?  Why would you put your trust in the United Nations to put forth the plan they control how agriculture will work in the future?  Why would you believe the claims of the Sierra Club on climate matters when scientific facts are not produced by them when pressed?  And the climate is being used to determine how your agriculture is going to be permitted to operate in the future?
      Why would you care how a sandwich restaurant tries to dictate how the meat is raised that goes into their product, when their meat is mostly turkey manipulated to imitate the product you ask for?  Why would you allow the EPA take control of the water that runs across your land when they allow California to dry up and agriculture to die, all the while allowing trillions of gallons of water to run into the ocean?
     Would you trust your water to an agency that caused the most toxic spill to foul a pristine river?  As the affected people downstream asked the agency for help and they say that the heavy metals and poisons were "safe for human consumption?"  No.
     Why would you allow the EPA to have a standing SWAT TEAM to enforce rules they formulate, not how the law is written?  Why would you let them have a SWAT TEAM at all?
     When you want to purchase or raise your food organically that is a choice you freely make.  If concerned about the safety of your food that is your right to question.  And a producer who wants his product purchased and consumed by his customers, and his family, will freely do his best.
     It benefits no one to allow poor quality, dangerous, or inferior products to be stamped with the producers name on it.
     Experts are those trained and who are in the field of research and production.  Not the object of a national organization, or international, who clearly have political motives about control and not quality.
     Why would you listen to 'experts' that have no credentials?

No comments:

Post a Comment