What follows is my own response, a letter that I sent to Gov. Granholm:

Dear Governor Granholm;

I have appreciated and supported your leadership during these tough years of recession here in Michigan. I have always felt that as a state we have been lucky to have a person of your intelligence and integrity in office. However, I do take exception to your proclamation of the Michigan Meat-Out Day.

I am lucky to be father to three beautiful and intelligent young women, two of whom choose vegetarian diets. So, as a family we cook meals so that all members feel included and that all choices are respected.

I am reminded of a nonviolence conference I attended years ago. A friend of mine, a South Dakota cattle rancher, also attended. We had been working closely together on Central American issues (these being the Reagan years). The conference was held at a Methodist camp in the Black Hills. I and other organizers decided it would be appropriate to provide a strict vegetarian diet for all attendees. My rancher friend made clear his feelings and beliefs that he was being excluded and that is life’s work, life style, and family heritage was being disrespected. So, we changed the menu so all participants had meat and meatless choices, and no participant needed to feel excluded by our executive action.

Now I know that your action to proclaim a Meat-Out Day will not limit anyone from eating their preferred food, and might lead some to consider the benefits of a healthier diet. But, I still see several problems with the proclamation. People and families who have supported you and are involved in traditional agriculture, and those who make their living in the meat processing industry, or fisheries, may feel excluded and not respected just as my friend had back in South Dakota. This proclamation also falls too easily into the stereotype of the left being vegans, and against guns and traditional rural Michigan values and lifestyles. Simply, I believe the proclamation is a heavy handed way of trying to encourage us all to reflect and make intentional and healthy changes in our diets.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

I am a South Dakota cattle rancher who eats my own beef that I vaccinate and use pourons to kill lice worms and grubs. There is a limit of days after use before you can slaughter these animals after these practices have been done. The reason my beef tastes better than the supermarkets beef is because of a number of reasons. I get mine processed at a local locker. The beef is more lean and fresher than storebought beef is. The is the same reasons why garden veggies and fruits taste better than store bought do. I am not worried to eat meat from other sources however, I know that it is safe to eat. Your worries are rediculous. Are you trying to put ranchers out of business by scaring people into vegetarianism? Get your facts straight before you go spilling lies out. Organic beef is not as easy as you act like. Your death loss is a lot larger leaving you less income and less room for mistake. The same goes for milk and dairy products, you can't use a cows milk for a certain amount of time after there have been any vaccinations, or treatments. You should get both sides of a story before you go and believe the Ny Times. One other thing you don't mention is that female cattle are not implanted with steroids if they are being used in Dairy Farms. They are not implanted unless they are being fattened. The implant is gone long before the cattle are ever slaughtered. Another thing you should know is that the US has the safest food supply in the world, and there is no way you could even dispute this. You should be ashamed of yourselves for this bs and I encourage you to read some other sources than Ny Times for your information. Maybe something Beef magazine. I encourage you to support the men and women is this country that raise your food and not to put false scares out that could cause a stupid panic. I don't care whether you eat meat or not, or whether you will only eat your own home raised, but don't redicule the safest food supply in the world. The last thing any farmer or rancher wants is to supply unsafe food to people, that would ultimately put us out of business.

Safe food is top ag priority
(by John Schlageck, High Plains Journal, March 22,2010, page 4-B)

Todays consumers are continually bombarded with scads of conflicting food safety information. Before todays shoppers believe all the stories and headlines, they should consider the producer's side.
Very few celebrity spokespeople, activists leaders or the urban press seek out farmers, ranchers or agricultural leaders when they champion food saftey concerns. Contrary to what some consumers and media may think, growing and selling safe, nutritious food is a farmers No. 1 goal.
Farmers are in business to provide products for their customers. They care what consumers think about their milk, oats, wheat, beef, and other products.When consumers asked for leaner meats and lowfat dairy products, the beef, pork and dairy industries responded.
A clean, healthy environment is importan to everyone, but probably most important to farmers. A farmers well being and livelihood depend on his natural resources. While buildings and farm machinery are important tools, a farmers most precious assets are his land, soil and water. If a farmer destroys his resources, he won't be in business long.
Environment stewardship has alway been important to farmers. It always will.
Quality and safety of food are as much a concern to farmers as they are to consumers. Farmers shop at the supermarket like everyone else. They eat the same foods. Farmers are consumers too. Farmers not only care about the health and safety of their families, but also consumers.
Farmers use technology responsibly. They constantly learn new farming methods and practices by attending training sessions and courses.
New farm technology is expensive. It is in the best interest of farmers to use it carefully and sparingly. Misuse would add to the cost of production, which would result in an even lower return on their investment.
Farmers us agricultural chemicals only when necessary. When they use chemicals, farmers follow lable directions designed for publec health and safety. When a rancher uses antibiotics and other animal health products for their stock, they follow proper drug use practices. When new advances in biotechnology are discovered, farmers must abide by stringent testing and monitoring practices that ensure only safe products in the marketplace.

Not sure how this turned into an argument about organic vs. non-organic, but the bottom line is that a healthy balanced diet includes some meat. It is personal choice on what type, but a public official should not make statements or support items like this no more than they should have a "Vegetable Out" day. Just plain stupid for the leader of a state with a lot of agriculture - you would think she was boycotting importing goods from China or something (that would make more sense, wouldn't it?) And I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but if you think farmers utilizing the tools they have to efficiently raise a product take short cuts, what makes you think that some of the organic products are really as "organic" as you think they are? If you believe this you lead a sheltered life. To logan's point, the U.S. has the safest food supply in the world, don't contribute to the spread of paranoia.

This is exactly what I was trying to explain in my first post, but I am not a journalist. I am a rancher who cares about my product for consumers. I eat it, and stand behind it.

Well said George. I had stated that two of my daughters are vegetarians. That isn't quite. My oldest daughter has changed from refusing all meat products to eating primarily a vegie diet, but seeks out organic eggs, milk, and gladly eats the wild meats I or her friends provide. Organic beef and other organic products are becoming viable options for small farms.

Yea we all know the FDA and the USDA never make mistakes""NOT"""
and we all know that every single commercial cattle rancher follows every single guidelide in the book..."""NOT""""

Fact is that Trace amounts of all those chemicals are found in all commercial beef....will they cause health problems possibly..but the long term studies havent been done..just as the USDA approved of grinding up unused cow parts and using them as filler products for cattle feed...that is until mad cow disease showed up.....Where were the USDA's long term studies on cattle eating parts of other cattle???
But the proven fact remains that trace amounts of those chemicals are in the beef,,especially in the liver,kidneys,and fat....and the USDA/FDA have not done studies on the affects of long term consumption of those trace amounts...The american public has a right to know every single chemical that is in their food..even in trace amounts...but the big cattle companies dont want that to happen because they like you are afraid they will lose money if people dont want to eat their beef...which is why they also ridicule organic cattle ranchers..because more and more people each year are turning away from commercial beef,,and their not becoming vegans either,,,they are buying organic beef,,
Organic beef is nothing new its just a new name,before then it was called Kosher beef...grass fed only....no meds,no chemicals,no steroids,no chemical fertilizers on their fields,no red dyes to improve color,and no ground up wieners or organ meat in their hot dogs....so complain all you want about ridicule you cant disprove the fact that your commercial raised beef has trace amounts of unnatural chemicals in it......