Passion for the cattle industry has never been scarce among producers.

Arguably, the problem was logic and common courtesy when it came to the idiotic claims levied by activist groups.

On the one hand, logic suggested no thinking person could blindly accept preposterous claims such as, “Cattle are raised on factory farms run by corporations rather than families; they pump cattle full of antibiotics because the living conditions are so deplorable, all the while destroying the environment and contributing to global hunger…”

Looking across a pristine prairie, helping the neighbors work cattle, or struggling to make numb fingers work in the bitter cold while trying to keep a calf alive, it was tough to take such lunacy seriously.

Plus, mad as it might make you, Mama and Daddy taught to look someone in the eye and tell them what you thought, not hide behind some organization or another, making blind attacks on people you never met about things you couldn’t possibly know.

Yet, with each passing year and new regulation, it became obvious such groups and claims had to be reckoned with. It became startlingly clear that consumers, members of these activist groups, were so many generations removed from a direct tie to agriculture, that there was no reason for them to doubt such fiction.

All the while, producer organizations gamely fought—and still do—a gargantuan battle with funds so meager in comparison to the opposition that it was laughable.

The Tipping Point
It’s impossible to identify a watershed moment or event. It can be risky to even suggest progress. But, if producers keep on doing what they’ve done during the past 12 months, this year will likely be recognized as the turning point in the battle, when the industry stopped losing ground to activists and began reclaiming it.

Individual producers have been willing to share their story with consumers and law makers for years. But this year it seems that enough other individual producers joined in the effort that the industry crossed the threshold from defense to an offense generating momentum.

Folks like South Dakota rancher Troy Hadrick, who famously videotaped himself emptying a full bottle of Yellow Tail wine into the snow as some his cows looked on, in response to that winery’s six-figure donation to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Based on the outcry of Hadrick and others like him, the folks at Yellow Tail ultimately withdrew the donation. Incidentally, Hadrick and his wife have a website—www.advocatesforag.com.

At about the same time, Mary Kay representatives who have ties to animal agriculture castigated the company when they heard that the cosmetics giant was a sponsor for a Dallas HSUS event. Quick as a wink, Mary Kay put the notion to rest while putting HSUS in its place, explaining on that company’s Facebook page: “Some fans of Mary Kay® products and independent beauty consultants have expressed concerns over a recent sponsorship of a Dallas-area event. Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention. We have heard you and want to clarify any confusion…” The company explained the wife of the owner of the organization made a personal donation to support a local campaign against puppy mills. Turns out the event was sponsored by HSUS, and that group conveniently defined the donation as a corporate sponsorship. The folks at Mary Kay made their position known and HSUS removed the wrongful Mary Kay insinuation from the HSUS site.

In both cases the mea culpa received more public attention that the transgression. All because individual producers were willing to say, “Enough, already!”

In both cases, the new world of Social Media (Twitter, Face Book, etc.) played a huge role in getting the public involved.

Single Rocks—Lots of Ripples
Speaking of individual producers, this wasn’t year when the Masters of Beef Advocacy (MBA) program began. But it’s the year when it began to blossom.

MBA is a checkoff-funded, free, self-directed online training program that equips beef producers and industry allies with the information they need to be advocates for the beef industry. To graduate, students must complete six courses in beef advocacy. The course are:

• Modern Beef Production – Sharing the
many benefits of modern, efficient
U.S. beef production

• Animal Care – Explaining our
commitment to raising healthy
animals

• Beef Safety – Communicating why
producing safe food for consumers is a
top priority

• Beef Nutrition – Explaining how great-
tasting beef strengthens and sustains
our bodies

• Environmental Stewardship – Sharing
how we’re protecting the environment
for future generations

• The Beef Checkoff – Communicating
the value of your investment in
growing demand for beef

“We are facing tough accusations from critics about our modern food production, and we have no choice but to take our story directly to consumers in our local communities and in the global online community. That’s what graduates of the MBA program are doing every day.” says Daren Williams, executive director of communications for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, which contracts to manage the MBA program for the beef checkoff.

As of May, there were 1,366 MBA graduates and 1,484 students on their way to graduation. The program began in 2008. Incidentally, you can find an enrollment form for the program at
www.beef.org/mastersofbeefadvocacy.aspx

Other pro-cattle advocacy groups like College Aggies Online entered the fold this year, joining groups like the National Beef Ambassador Program and other advocacy sites like I Love Farmers and Truth in Food.

Challenging Activist Lies
Likewise, this wasn’t the year that professionals outside of livestock agriculture suddenly decided to lend a hand. But it’s a year when enough more of them provided focus from new vantage points that struck a chord with the public.

Even stalwarts in fighting against activist groups, blow for blow, found new ways to illustrate to the public the need for them to question the claims of groups like HSUS and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

Consider the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (www.consumerfreedom.com). If you’re unfamiliar with it, CCF was founded in 1996. It is a nonprofit coalition of restaurants, food companies, and consumers devoted to promoting personal responsibility and protecting consumer choices.

CCF is behind a host of other sites, all aimed at setting the record straight and challenging the claims of self-appointed societal police.

There’s activistcash.com, which tracks, via public records, where activist groups get their money—the companies and foundations that are primary donors.

There’s physicianscam.com aimed directly at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. According to the site’s, 7 Things you didn’t Know about PCRM: “PCRM is an animal rights group, not a real physicians committee. Contrary to what its name implies, less than 4% of PCRM’s members are actual physicians. Among the group’s relatively few active physicians is PCRM president (and former PETA Foundation president) Neal Barnard, a vegan psychiatrist who claims that cheese is “dairy crack” and “morphine on a cracker.”

Most recently, in February, CCF launched www.humanewach.org to follow HSUS activities and to challenge its claim as being an organization engaged in helping animals.

For instance, CCF commissioned a poll last winter to see what Americans knew about the group. According to CCF director of research, David Martosko, 71% of those polled believed that HSUS was an umbrella group for the nation’s local humane societies; 99% believed HSUS contributed most of its money to local organizations caring for cats and dogs.

According to the federal income tax return filed by HSUS for the tax year 2008, less than one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the organization’s budget consisted of grants to hands-on pet shelters. HSUS does not run a single shelter for dogs or cats anywhere, and it is not affiliated with any local “humane society” organizations, according to Martosko.

“These numbers indicate that Americans don’t really know what the Humane Society of the United States is all about,” Martosko said. “HSUS intentionally uses those sad dogs and cats in its TV infomercials as props in an animal rights fundraising shell game. Meanwhile, thousands of American pet shelters are underfunded and struggling…This poll indicates that most Americans think HSUS is a worthy charity. But very few Americans understand what HSUS really is—a super-rich lobbying group that puts more money into its executive pensions than in the hands of local humane societies.”

All of this progress is tenuous, though. It’s easy to see how letting off the pressure for a moment could land the industry further back of center than where it was before.

At last spring’s 2010 Stakeholder’s Summit hosted by the Animal Agriculture Alliance, another stalwart pro-livestock group, Martosko emphasized, “Animal activists are in the business of creating conflict. It’s critical to fight back. Ask yourself: do you believe in farming, or do you not? Are you willing to defend it, or not?”

The answer is obvious. What’s different these days is that more producers are figuring out how to make that pronouncement heard above the din.