Correcting the Crown
Last week, I wrote a feature story titled “Miss Montana Anti-Ag.” For my column this week, I want to explain the back story because I believe it truly embodies the whole concept of Activists vs. Agriculture.
Now, bear with me here, I know nothing about pageants other than what I’ve seen on Toddlers in Tiaras or the smash-hit Netflix movie, “Dumplin.” In the words of the great Kacey Musgraves, “I ain’t pageant material,” therefore all of this is foreign to me as well.
Miss Montana USA, Merissa Underwood, calls herself “The Vegan Unicorn,” and is a native of California. Underwood “state hopped,” or “pageant hopped,” from California to Montana because she allegedly had a better chance of winning and advancing to compete in the Miss USA pageant in Montana rather than her home state of California. Underwood is rumored to have been recruited to compete for Miss Montana USA and used her family’s vacation home address in Montana to be eligible to compete in the state of Montana. It is important to note that Underwood is also a vocal vegan.
Merissa Underwood being crowned as Miss Montana USA 2020.
This specific post received 805 likes and 1,242 comments.
How, you ask, does this pertain to you, the agriculturist? Two weeks ago, the phones were ringing off the hook at the Western Ag Reporter. We received several calls, emails and Facebook/Instagram messages which urged us to look into posts on Underwood’s Instagram page.
Underwood posted various graphics to her Instagram story which painted agriculture in a very bad light. Which, coming from a nationally recognized public figure and role model for young girls, is not a good look. What’s worse? The information she was promoting was false. See examples below:
As you probably assumed, these comments and posts made by Underwood did not go over very well in a state where there are more cattle per capita than people. I mean, Steve Harvey may have called out the wrong name at the 2017 Miss Universe Pageant, but at least he didn’t spread false information about the industry which keeps us clothed and fed.
The first graphic you see was originally promoted by the film “Cowspiracy.” According to the Cowspiracy website, this is “the film that environmental organizations don't want you to see!” I’m not one to judge a book by its cover; therefore, I vow to pay the $4.95 to watch the flick this weekend. However, based on the trailer for the movie and the graphic posted by Underwood, I have a feeling it will fire me up.
Right off the bat, I notice falsified information. Under the climate change section, the graphic states that livestock and their byproducts are responsible for 51 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. However, if you reference the Environmental Protection Agency’s webpage dedicated to global greenhouse gas emissions, Agriculture, Forestry and Land Use are all categorized together and only responsible for 24 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
The film Cowspiracy was released in 2014. If you visit their website and look under the “Infographic,” tab, you will be directed to the page which houses the infographic Underwood posted as well as all the sources used to create said infographic.
Some of you may not know this, but I went to graduate school for one semester before deciding to no longer continue enrollment (it just wasn’t for me and, to be frank, I just wanted to get to work as an ag journalist). Now, if there is one thing I remember for my one semester of grad school it is this: Sources are only valid for seven years. For example, if I were to create an infographic like the one on Cowspiracy’s website, I would need to collect references that were originally created within the past seven years. Again, the film was released in 2014, therefore it’s understandable that some of these sources would not be valid in 2019. However, some of these sources weren’t even valid in 2014 — 2003, 2004, 2006… they weren’t even reliable sources five years ago, let alone now.
Another fact Underwood shared that jumped out to me was, “The Amazon forest fire was intentionally set to make room for more cattle farming (Brazil’s largest export) and to make room for more soya crops of which 70 percent gets fed to livestock.”
Yes, the Amazon fire was intentionally set, but it is intentionally set every single year as a prescribed burn. And Underwood was correct, 70 percent of soybean production in the U.S. is used to feed livestock — but the Amazon is not the U.S.
According to the USDA, 70 percent of soybeans produced in the U.S. are fed to animals with poultry being the number one livestock sector for consuming soybeans. The second largest benefactor of soybeans, however, is human consumption.
Reader, pull up the web browser on your phone, computer or tablet. Type in www.impossiblefoods.com and scroll all the way to the bottom of the homepage. You will see the letters “FAQ,” under the word “Questions,” — click FAQ. You will be directed to a page with questions, the first question being “What are the ingredients?” click it then read the ingredients page.
Guess what one of the largest ingredients is in Impossible Foods’ products? Soy.
So, just so we’re all on the same page here: The Amazon fire was intentionally set by the people of Brazil to make room for agricultural production, specifically soy production, in order to surpass the U.S. as the leading exporter of soy. Underwood, along with countless other anti-ags, (and believe me, when the fires were all over the news a couple months ago, it was all over my vegan and activist Facebook groups as well) are outspokenly upset about these fires set to produce one of the largest ingredients in vegan, alternative proteins? I rest my case.
The bottom line here is something I’ve preached since my first column: It’s okay to have a difference of opinion; It’s okay to be a carnivore; It’s okay to be a vegan; It’s okay to support big corporations; It’s okay to change your lifestyle in efforts to protect the planet. But it is NOT okay to spread false information about an industry which, simply, keeps you alive.
Miss Montana USA, on the off chance that you’re reading this, I beg you to please educate yourself on your state’s number one economy. Check your facts, double-check your sources and use logical thinking before you speak ill of the industry which grows the vegetables you eat and the cotton for the gowns you wear. Don’t just do it for yourself, but for the young women you are influencing.
Underwood said she would love to talk with me about her choice to be vegan but later was unable to participate in an interview due to safety concerns.
Reader, I’m sure a number of you either reached out to Miss Montana USA or have corrected agricultural misinformation at one time or another — which is wonderful, I applaud you for this. However, someone made Miss Montana USA feel unsafe and this is not the goal of communicating agriculture.
Think about it: Would you truly listen to someone who’s yelling at you and calling you names or someone who is warm and welcoming? I encourage you to civilly and professionally educate others about the agricultural industry; don’t use profanities, control your temper and speak warmly. If we all agree to speak the fact-backed truth and welcome conversation with a smile, we can change the perception of agriculture and let our industry flourish.
