Farm groups, commodity organizations and most ag checkoffs have spent 25 years and billions of dollars refining and repeating their modern message: American agriculture is a business and farmers and ranchers are business people.
In the process, cowboys became beef producers and hog farmers became pork producers and a half-million or more of each became no more.
Recently, however, the big “producer” groups behind all these producers discovered most Americans don’t want their eggs, milk, vegetables, steak and sausage from “producers.”
Read Also
Cooking fish of Manitoba: Keep your catch fresh and tasty for the table
Fishing in Manitoba provides mouthwatering meals, assuming anglers handle, process and cook their fish properly before sitting down to eat. Here’s how, with recipes and fish preparation tips.
Instead, consumers want their food from – you guessed it – farmers and ranchers.
So, beginning midsummer, a new group calling itself the U.S. Farmers &Ranchers Alliance will launch a “well-funded, long-term, and co-ordinated public trust campaign for American agriculture.”
Its goal, says USFRA chairman Bob Stallman, who moonlights as president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, is to “allow its supporting organizations to operate as needed, while still pooling resources to maximize efficiencies and effectiveness of a consumer influencer and thought leader campaign.”
That means USFRA’s 30 or so groups, checkoffs and agbiz “partners” plan to spend upwards of $20 million over the next year to change the face of American agriculture.
No longer will it resemble a Land Grant alumnus ordering GM seed or livestock antibiotics on an iPhone. Instead, tomorrow’s farmer will look more like Walter Cronkite than Walter Mitty: weathered, wise, trustworthy.
In short, more golden fields, golden sunsets and golden hair and less silver hog barns, silver-sided food factories and silver semis hauling ethanol. (True; ethanol and the upcoming Farm Bill debate are two topics recently banned by USFRA for discussion.)
How USFRA will pull off this “national trust and image campaign” has yet to be finalized, says Cindy Hackman, executive director for Drake &Co., a Chesterfield, Missouri association management firm with long ties to checkoffs and ag groups, hired to manage the effort.
What is known, Hackman relates, is a troubling “consumer decline in confidence in their food source” today. That drop, according to USFRA, has two causes: a “general disconnect between consumers and farmers” and “opposition groups that attack farming on a daily basis,” she says.
If either is accurate – and both are debatable – you might wonder why the same people often accused of fuelling one or both reactions are the same people now gathering money and manpower to remake the image of American farmers and ranchers.
Hackman offered a keen insight to this curious approach in an April 19 telephone interview when she acknowledged that “Farmers and ranchers have a great reputation with consumers. It’s how farmers and ranchers produce that concerns them.”
She’s right. The problem most consumers have with farmers and ranchers is how they produce, not what they produce. Consumers have worries about new-generation technology like GM seeds, “animal health” products, crop chemistry, fertilizer run-off, and agriculture’s vast thirst for water.
As such, spending $10 million or $20 million on a glossy “consumer influencer and thought leader campaign” is waste of time, money and goodwill.
If the vast majority of consumers have questions about today’s production practices, the least “producer groups” and “producers” can do is give ‘em answers.
Golly, that’s what Walter Cronkite did.
Alan Guebert is a syndicated columnist based in Illinois.
