For those us of raised in the 1950s an ’60s, the phrase “duck and cover” should bring back memories of special drills we had in school. “Duck and cover” was a procedure taught to millions of school age students during the Cold War.

The government said it was the way to protect ourselves in the event of a nuclear attack. We were told by the government that, immediately after we saw a flash, we had to stop what we were doing and get on the ground under some cover, such as a table, or at least next to a wall, and assume the fetal position.

We know now that this would do little to protect one from the searing heat of a nuclear bomb or the radiation poisoning that would follow. But at the time, it made us feel safe and protected from a nuclear holocaust that we believed could come at any time.
The visit to Indiana by one of the most outspoken and radical anti-agricultural environmentalists could have been a nuclear incident but, as it turned out, it was a dud.

Robert Kennedy Jr. made two public appearances in the Hoosier state last week, first at Ball State University and later at Purdue University. The Purdue news service called him a “leading environmental attorney.”

He actually stumbled into the environmental movement as a result of a 1984 criminal conviction for heroin possession. A judge sentenced him to 800 hours of community service, which he satisfied with volunteer work for the Hudson River Foundation. After his 800 hours were used up, the organization hired Kennedy as its chief prosecuting attorney.

His visit to Purdue was sponsored by the College of Engineering as part of Engineering Week.

“The theme for National Engineers Week is that ‘engineers make a world of difference,’” said Leah H. Jamieson, Dean of Engineering. “Bringing Kennedy to campus during this week highlights the message that all of us – engineers, environmentalists, lawyers, policy-makers, share the responsibility of addressing environmental issues.”

Robert Koester, director of Ball State’s Center for Energy Research, Education and Service, booked Kennedy and said, “Kennedy was perfect because of his work with economic, environmental and social issues and his ideas complement this year’s freshman common reader.”

This demonstrates what the next generation of consumers is learning about the environment and agriculture.

Kennedy has made a name for himself by saying the most outlandish, offensive and untrue things about the livestock industry and agriculture in general. As a result, he gets lots of press and lots of support from the lunatic fringe.

The livestock industry is one of his favorite targets, “We’re starting with hogs. After we get done with the hogs, then we’re gonna go after the other ones.”

Kennedy also has said that a single hog confinement can put out more pollution than a city of a million people. He also told a Congressional committee that pork producers were more dangerous than Osama Bin Laden.

During his appearance at Purdue and Ball State appearances, Kennedy stressed “green” energy and only mentioned agriculture in passing. He stressed the need for solar and wind energy and called the Midwest the Saudi Arabia of wind energy. He hardly mentioned, however, renewable bio energy sources such as ethanol or biodiesel which also exist in abundance here in the Midwest.

Kennedy talked about the Fairness Doctrine, but his one-sided approach to energy is anything but fair. He, and other radical environmentalists, only support their pet technologies like wind and solar.

Indiana agriculture kept a low profile during Kennedy’s visit. When Kennedy last visited, Indiana livestock groups packed the hall and challenged his outlandish and totally false accusations. While this did not have an impact on Kennedy or the environmental radicals who came to hear him, it at least demonstrated to the media and to the public that there was another side to the story.

This time around there was no balance to the Kennedy diatribe, and the press coverage reflected it.

Gary Baise, also a nationally known environmental attorney, said this low profile approach is harming American agriculture. Baise, who is the only attorney serving on USDA’s Agricultural Air Quality Task Force and helped organize the EPA, told me agriculture must do a better job of stating its case. As Baise pointed out, “There has got to be someone on the other side saying, ‘I am sorry Mr. Kennedy that is simply not correct.’”

Agriculture can not take the “duck and cover” approach. We have the facts on our side, so we had better get more aggressive on telling our story. Both on the livestock issue and the energy issue, agriculture must be part of the debate and must insist on getting a chance to make a contribution to the discussion.

“Duck and cover” didn’t work during the Cold War, and it will not work in the war of words on food, fuel, and environmental issues.

The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of Farm World. Readers with questions or comments may write to Gary Truitt in care of this publication.