Dave: Agcare is nothing more than a pro-chemical, pro-biotech lobby group
fronting itself as a pro-farmer group. It is one of several useful inventions
of Terry Daynard. Dr. Daynard, a corn physiologist, was a member of my own
department for many years, and when he became head honcho of the Ontario Corn
Producers Association (OCPA) maybe 10 -15 years ago, he left two other
professors (progeny of his program) to continue the message in the department.
One of them finally quit in disgust at the increasingly molecular orientation of
the department (my interpretation, not his words) and took a job at Purdue. The
other has always been a likeable and independent-minded chap, but both were very
responsive to what Dr. D wanted - he directed a bunch of OCPA and other money
their way. The OCPA currently funds a tiny fraction of the salary of the bright
young corn breeder recently hired in the department, and exerts a wildly
disproportionate influence on what she is supposed to do. She too is a tough
and independent-minded person, and I suspect will come through this with flying
colors - but a tough position to be put into as a young, untenured assistant
professor.
I go through all this just to illustrate the many ways that central control is
exerted.
I teach a course in Crop Ecology, and used to invite Dr.D in as a guest speaker
each year. At one of the early lectures, he openly clarified that Agcare was
the new name chosen for a pre-existing organization with a name something like
Crop Protection Institute - or whatever. It was an unabashedly pro-chemical
lobby group then, and still is, but with a new, kinder and gentler name. I
think the acronym even has the word "environment" in it.
It was part of his genius to bring in all the various member groups (what is it,
about 30 separate groups? like the OCPA, the Soybean Growers, etc. etc.) to
give the appearance of a consolidated, one-voice organization to support his
agendas. You can see his hand in a number of other organizations, with
disparate names - like the Renewable Fuels bunch (e.g. lobby group for ethanol
plant subsidies, to rationalize yet more corn), and the Environmental Farm Plan
(a very very expensive, government-funded program designed to cut off the
unwelcome initiatives of the environmental movement by giving the appearance of
a pro-active farmer-based initiative to clean up their own act (for which
farmers qualify for partial funding, to voluntarily implement remedial
practices, none of which is subject to monitoring). I fully acknowledge that
some farmers truly believed and benefitted from their EFP experience, although
the overall intent - and ultimate outcome - was otherwise.
So, how does the average farmer dis-align himself/herself from these long
tentacles? You may wish to consider the NFU or the CFFO, both of whom are
genuinely democratic representative organizations in Ontario. For the
ecologically inclined, you could also join up with the EFFO or other like group
(COG, OCIA, etc.). Hope this clarifies the situation. Ann
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 12 2000 - 14:00:31 EST