Dr. Tom Hartsock
University of Maryland

Although this is an Ethics Symposium, I’m not going to speak about ethics. Instead, it’s my job to set the stage, as best I can, for the ethics discussions that will follow. I’m going to take an historical look at fairs and stock shows and talk a little bit about the things we do at these events and why we do them. It is my job to present an objective assessment of how animal agriculture and stock shows fit, or don’t fit, together. So even if you don’t like what I write, remember that I’m telling it as I see it not necessarily the way I’d like it to be.

I said I’d give an objective assessment but you know that true objectivity is hard to find. So you probably should know something about my background so you can judge my comments accordingly. I grew up on a small dairy and livestock operation in central Pennsylvania and my brothers and I were very active in 4-H and FFA. Livestock judging and judging contests were a big part of my life and more often than not, our official judges were Penn State Extension Specialists. Our Extension and 4-H programs were based at Penn State and I never even considered any other school when I decided to go to college. I’m presently an Extension Livestock Specialist at the University of Maryland and a part-time swine farmer on a piece of land that is a little too close to Washington, D.C. for comfort.

Historically, life on the farm was something less than comfortable and easy. But every so often, they’d hitch old Dobbin to the cart and haul the prize cow to the fairgrounds to have it "judged" by an expert who would tell everyone which cow was best. Arguments would follow, but afterwards everybody would scramble to buy an animal that was related to the winner, especially if the same judge was going to be back next year!

Looking back, it appears that the purebred associations and breeders took over the shows and to this day, the purebred associations play a key role in many shows. To their credit, the purebred associations successfully promoted the concept of genetic selection to livestock producers. But unfortunately they spent much of their effort selecting for breed characteristics, such as color, and relatively little effort correlating and selecting for performance characteristics. For example, despite the fact

that milk was the primary product of the dairy industry, showring placings had little or nothing to do

with how much milk a cow produced. Pedigrees took on a life of their own, as described in this series of statements on the breeding of cattle:

"... No matter how he looked or what were his qualifications, if his pedigree read right his stock passed muster as being highly bred and therefore valuable cattle.... While too many breeders were satisfied to breed in this way and to go on believing that they were possessed

 

 

of herds of high-class animals, they were gradually, but surely, losing hold of the ordinary farmers as bull buyers. This of itself was a sure evidence that pedigree had come to be valued from a false standpoint. To the ordinary farmers all the pedigree in the world could not make up for the loss of milk, the loss of substance."

Line Breeding of Cattle

by Robert Bruce

1894 Live Stock Journal Almanac

The first real challenge to my traditional 4-H livestock training was a term paper that I wrote during my sophomore year at Penn State. The paper was titled "Dwarfism in Beef Cattle" and in it I described two types of beef cattle dwarfism that increased in frequency in the cattle population as a result of selection for the shorter heads, legs and bodies that carriers of dwarf genes exhibited. To quote myself from the paper "this type of animal was considered desirable, and was winning championships in the showring!"

I have to admit that I was shocked. If the purpose of showring judging was to select for genetically superior animals, then why were dwarf gene carriers being selected as showring champions? It didn’t make sense to me then and it still doesn’t make sense to me now. I really thought that the traits for which I’d been taught to select would result in the production of better performing cattle. In reality, the traits selected for in the showring had little to do with "real world agriculture." We had actually been taught to select for a set of traits considered to be possessed by the "ideal breed type." And the ideal breed types were defined by the purebred associations and their breeders who judged. There was little regard for performance characteristics. Extension people who judged were all too willing to carry the torch for the breed associations without really examining the facts.

Now it seems like I’m picking on just the cattle people so I’ll shift gears to swine. Swine breeders have made the same kinds of mistakes, and not all of them recently. Consider this letter to the editor of a breed journal:

"I have an extra good boar that is very valuable to me. Both of his testicles have failed to appear. He is now three months old and will weigh ninety pounds and not fat. You say in your answer that a surgeon can place the testicle in the scrotum. Is this a very dangerous operation, and is the hog liable to get much of a setback? Is there anything like feed or massages that might cause them to come down? I have been told that a lick on the back would do it.... Would like very much to have all the information I can get on this as I have been told that this pig is a real show prospect.."

Handling Testicles Not Properly Located

Duroc Bulletin, August, 1921

In the late 80’s the Yorkshire Journal had a set of photographs on its cover. It chronicled the breed’s effort to move away from the tall, thin-muscled pigs of the late 70’s to a more practical pig for the 80’s. Those 1988 pigs looked familiar to me so I dug out some photos of 1965 National Type

Champions. Sure enough, we took over 20 years to go from one type of hog to another and then

back again. The truth is that if we had been selecting for performance related to the production of pork, we’d have never declared those meatless wonders to be champions.

That doesn’t mean that showring champions don’t have value. They do, because now there is a showring livestock industry which has little to do with producing agricultural commodities. The commercial livestock industry focuses on producing food and the showring livestock industry

focuses on producing champions.

The other reality is that fairs and shows will continue because they are so deeply imbedded into the fabric of our lives. Shows and fairs can serve valuable functions both in youth development and agricultural literacy, but we’re going to have to face our new realities and recognize shows and fairs for what they are. I suggest that for fairs and shows to be relevant in the future, they must

accomplish one or more of the following objectives:

1. Have entertainment value without producing negative consequences

2. Have historical value

3. Serve to educate the public

4. Be PART of a comprehensive youth education project.

Fairs and shows bear the costs of putting on the events because animals draw paying customers.

Fairs located in urban and suburban areas depend on local farmers and youth livestock programs to "keep the country" in the fair and encourage participation by paying premiums. That’s free enterprise at work and it’s one of the things that makes the American system function. The downside is that the youth competitions, often associated with high dollar value sales, result in competitors trying to win at all costs. Reports of animal cruelty and adulteration of the food supply by the use of drugs and other techniques reflects negatively on the commercial food producing industry.

Preserving genetic diversity in our livestock population will become increasingly difficult as selection intensifies for specific types of performance. As the commercial livestock industry continues to select for an increasingly narrow genotype, public and private support for preserving genetic diversity will be needed. Private hobby farmers may well be the mechanism by which genetic diversity is preserved. Fairs and shows, with support from groups like the American Livestock Breeds

Conservancy, may well provide the format within which breeders come together and compete while the public pays to watch.

Increasingly, fairs and shows are becoming the only contact points with agriculture for city dwellers. These events have truly become the windows through which agriculture is viewed by a public that is several generations away from the farm. This is especially true for urban and suburban fairs and shows. What do they see when they go to a fair?

Going to a fair or stock show to learn about agriculture is a lot like going to a General Motors company picnic to learn about how cars are made. You’ll see lots of examples of the final product because the parking lot will be full of GM cars driven there by the employees. And the people who make the cars will be there too, but you’ll learn very little about what goes on back in the factory by watching what goes on at the picnic.

At our fairs and shows, we have lots of animals and lots of people who raise them, but we don’t do a good job of showing and telling the public what goes on back at the farm or ranch. Land Grant universities, through extension and 4-H would (and do) strongly support an education component that makes the public aware of the importance of agriculture.

Fairs and shows need to work more closely with youth educators to make sure that the fair or show

is a constructive PART of an overall education program. Youth education projects should be structured to more accurately reflect the realities and reward systems of the commercial animal industry so that participants come away with a realistic view of agriculture as it is today. Monetary incentives, such as premiums, sale receipts and scholarships, should reward the youth’s efforts and participation throughout the duration of the project and not for just what happens on the day of the show. Reward systems should be structured to serve as incentives for all aspects of youth development and not just the competition for who has the best animal. Are we judging the right things in the showring?