Bullets add to hog farmers' worries
By Elizabeth Ahlin
WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER
A bad year for western Iowa hog farmers just got worse.
After months of consistent economic losses because of dropping hog prices and lower demand for pork, they can now add “shooting target” to their list of woes.
Several liquid propane tanks on hog farms have been hit by bullets from a high-caliber rifle, Calhoun County Sheriff Bill Davis said Monday.
The shooter or shooters appear to target hog farms in Sac and Calhoun Counties. All of the propane tanks that were fired upon were near modern, indoor hog barns, Davis said.
To date, no one has been injured, but the practice is extremely dangerous, said Aaron Putze, executive director of the Coalition to Support Iowa Farmers.
Speculation abounds as to what is behind the shootings. Are they some sort of prank? The action of ecoterrorists? Or something different entirely? Authorities have not named a motive or a suspect.
The Animal Liberation Front claimed responsibility for vandalism to an animal laboratory at the University of Iowa in 2004 and for the release of minks from an Iowa farm in 2002 and 2000. A spokeswoman for the group does not believe ALF is involved in the shootings. Read More
While it’s unknown who is doing this, the fact that these attacks have only been against family farmers who use modern production methods would suggest that it could be some animal rights activists. It also fits in with the mentality of those groups who value the life of an animal more than they do people. Either way, these families shouldn’t have to be worried about being shot at while taking care of their livestock. Hopefully those that are responsible are caught very soon before they hurt someone.
Showing posts with label hog farmers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hog farmers. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Suing Hog Farmers
Hog lawsuits raising stink in Missouri
By BILL DRAPER – 6 hours ago
BERLIN, Mo. — A faint rotten-egg smell drifts off a covered lagoon a hundred yards from a well-traveled Missouri gravel road. It's not an overpowering odor, but it's there.
Aside from a few dirt-speckled pickup trucks kicking up dust as they pass by, this battleground — ground zero in what some see as a high-stakes fight for the future of Missouri agriculture — is calm.
But in Kansas City law offices 80 miles away, combatants prepare for another showdown over the smells drifting from this 80,000-head hog operation. Is the aroma an obnoxious affront to neighbors or simply the "odor of agriculture" that comes with life in the country?
It's a fight Charlie Speer has waged for nearly 15 years. The Kansas City attorney has won almost $10 million from Premium Standard Farms and its affiliates in trials since 1999, and this summer praised a $1.2 million settlement with an unrelated southwest Missouri operation as having "set the bar" for future settlements.
Hog odor lawsuits are nothing new. The issue of what constitutes an agricultural nuisance has been argued anywhere hogs are raised.
"In Missouri, there is no limit to the amount a plaintiff can recover for an alleged nuisance, no matter how slight," Smithfield said in a statement to The Associated Press. "The potential for an unlimited recovery for a minor injury makes Missouri extremely attractive to out-of-state plaintiffs' lawyers looking for big paydays." Read More
Nobody will deny that there are smells associated with animal agriculture. However, I think the thing that gets lost in the shuffle here is the fact that these lawsuits are hurting farm families. There aren’t any billionaire executives out feeding and caring for the livestock. They are being cared for by honest hard-working family farmers that enjoy working with livestock and producing food for their country. With the anti-agriculture groups and the lawyers involved, they won’t be happy until they have run all of these families off their land.
By BILL DRAPER – 6 hours ago
BERLIN, Mo. — A faint rotten-egg smell drifts off a covered lagoon a hundred yards from a well-traveled Missouri gravel road. It's not an overpowering odor, but it's there.
Aside from a few dirt-speckled pickup trucks kicking up dust as they pass by, this battleground — ground zero in what some see as a high-stakes fight for the future of Missouri agriculture — is calm.
But in Kansas City law offices 80 miles away, combatants prepare for another showdown over the smells drifting from this 80,000-head hog operation. Is the aroma an obnoxious affront to neighbors or simply the "odor of agriculture" that comes with life in the country?
It's a fight Charlie Speer has waged for nearly 15 years. The Kansas City attorney has won almost $10 million from Premium Standard Farms and its affiliates in trials since 1999, and this summer praised a $1.2 million settlement with an unrelated southwest Missouri operation as having "set the bar" for future settlements.
Hog odor lawsuits are nothing new. The issue of what constitutes an agricultural nuisance has been argued anywhere hogs are raised.
"In Missouri, there is no limit to the amount a plaintiff can recover for an alleged nuisance, no matter how slight," Smithfield said in a statement to The Associated Press. "The potential for an unlimited recovery for a minor injury makes Missouri extremely attractive to out-of-state plaintiffs' lawyers looking for big paydays." Read More
Nobody will deny that there are smells associated with animal agriculture. However, I think the thing that gets lost in the shuffle here is the fact that these lawsuits are hurting farm families. There aren’t any billionaire executives out feeding and caring for the livestock. They are being cared for by honest hard-working family farmers that enjoy working with livestock and producing food for their country. With the anti-agriculture groups and the lawyers involved, they won’t be happy until they have run all of these families off their land.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Hog Farmer Entitled to Damages
Rochester hog farmer entitled to damages because of lawsuit, court rules
By DEBRA LANDIS
THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER
Posted Sep 11, 2009 @ 11:30 PM
ROCHESTER, IL —
A Rochester hog farmer is entitled to damages stemming from a lawsuit filed by opponents of his large-scale hog operation that delayed its construction, the Illinois 4th District Appellate Court decided this week.
Robert Young had appealed a ruling of Sangamon Circuit Judge Leslie Graves that he was not entitled to damages. Young previously successfully challenged an injunction request by the Rochester-Buckhart Action Group, which wanted to block expansion of his hog farm.
“The court ruled that we were right, and RBAG was wrong. Now, we will be asking RBAG to pay for the harm that was done,” Tom Immel, Young’s attorney, said Friday.
A hearing in Sangamon County court regarding the amount of damages will be scheduled later. Immel said Young will seek more than $300,000, including legal expenses and income Young and his wife, Sandra, lost while fighting the lawsuit.
The appellate court, in a ruling Tuesday, said Young was “engaged in a lawful business, and the planned expansion of his hog farm was put on hold at plaintiff’s (RBAG’s) behest. Read More
It seems that many times, a lawsuit is filed with the intention to stifle a time sensitive project. And in many of those instances there are very few consequences to the suing party. We see it a lot when it comes to logging, especially after forest fires. There is a very limited amount of time to harvest the burnt timber and some will tie up projects in court long enough for the wood to go to waste. In this case, it appears that this farming family will be able to recoup some of the losses they incurred when the building of their new hog barn was delayed in court. It’s important that there are consequences for filing a lawsuit and losing.
By DEBRA LANDIS
THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER
Posted Sep 11, 2009 @ 11:30 PM
ROCHESTER, IL —
A Rochester hog farmer is entitled to damages stemming from a lawsuit filed by opponents of his large-scale hog operation that delayed its construction, the Illinois 4th District Appellate Court decided this week.
Robert Young had appealed a ruling of Sangamon Circuit Judge Leslie Graves that he was not entitled to damages. Young previously successfully challenged an injunction request by the Rochester-Buckhart Action Group, which wanted to block expansion of his hog farm.
“The court ruled that we were right, and RBAG was wrong. Now, we will be asking RBAG to pay for the harm that was done,” Tom Immel, Young’s attorney, said Friday.
A hearing in Sangamon County court regarding the amount of damages will be scheduled later. Immel said Young will seek more than $300,000, including legal expenses and income Young and his wife, Sandra, lost while fighting the lawsuit.
The appellate court, in a ruling Tuesday, said Young was “engaged in a lawful business, and the planned expansion of his hog farm was put on hold at plaintiff’s (RBAG’s) behest. Read More
It seems that many times, a lawsuit is filed with the intention to stifle a time sensitive project. And in many of those instances there are very few consequences to the suing party. We see it a lot when it comes to logging, especially after forest fires. There is a very limited amount of time to harvest the burnt timber and some will tie up projects in court long enough for the wood to go to waste. In this case, it appears that this farming family will be able to recoup some of the losses they incurred when the building of their new hog barn was delayed in court. It’s important that there are consequences for filing a lawsuit and losing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)