The Rural Voice, 1989-06, Page 21by Sarah Borowski
According to OFAC, farmers
have done an excellent job of keep-
ing the increasingly urban consumer
consistently supplied with good food
at reasonable prices, but we have not
done such a good job of explaining to
that urban society the mechanics of
the modern food -supply system.
The realities of modern farming
often come as a surprise to people
whose ideas of rural life are outdated
and often somewhat romanticized.
And indeed, if it hadn't been for the
growing criticism of our production
methods, we farmers might have been
quite content to let the misconceptions
concerning agriculture continue.
Unfortunately, the once firm
belief in the farmer as a hard-working
fellow, an honest and natural sort of
guy, has been shaken. And what wor-
ries OFAC is that some of the more
outspoken critics of livestock farming,
especially those who advocate a total
abolition of any animal use whatso-
ever, are not only misinformed them-
selves but are, perhaps intentionally,
misleading our customers. OFAC
hints that a market for altemative
products is in the hidden agenda of
animal rightists.
The message that OFAC wishes
to send is simple: the tremendous
change in the way meat, eggs, and
milk are produced in Canada has been
to the benefit of the farmers who raise
and care for the animals, to the benefit
of the consumers who eat and use
animal products, and to the benefit of
the farm animals themselves.
Getting the message out there is
not so simple.
As was intended, the original
OFAC budget of $25,000 was spent,
almost entirely, on the acquisition of
outside expertise. Farmers may be
among the most knowledgeable in
discussing animal welfare and are
probably as qualified as anyone for
philosophical musing on animal rights
issues. But they are well out of their
field when it comes to direct public
lobbying.
OFAC chose, as professional
counsel, Norm Helms and H.C.L.
Public Relations, a company that has
been heavily involved in the business
of social activism and in recent years
with the question of animal rights
specifically.
"They've worked for the fur
industry and the pharmaceutical
industry," says Ballantine. "And the
first step was to understand the issue."
Helms' report, which the ad hoc
committee (now called the Board of
Directors) took back to the larger
OFAC body last June, is considered
an internal document. It discusses
strategies and identifies target groups
and as such is best kept under wraps.
As one OFAC director says, "It would
be unwise to allow it to fall into the
wrong hands."
We can, however, make some
educated guesses about what is and
what isn't in the public relations
report.
It probably doesn't concern itself
with the philosophical arguments of
either side of the animal rights ques-
tion. And it cannot really be expected
to predict the practical effectiveness of
investing $100,000 or a million dollars
or even $5 million in a campaign to
re-establish the credibility of the
Ontario livestock farmer. No one is
prepared to hazard a guess about how .
much it would cost to stop the animal
liberationists cold or even how much
market share might be at risk if we
were to ignore them completely.
What Norm Helms and H.C.L.
Public Relations can do is prepare
OFAC and farmers for a public
relations battle for the conscience
of the consumer. The report probably
recognizes our allies: the other animal
user groups such as the fur industry
and medical researchers, the sports
JUNE 1989 19