|
| Author |
Message |
mrj
Rancher
Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 3363
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Mike, sorry you thought I was trying to tell YOU who you should listen to. If you prefer the "sky-is-falling-blame-all-the-successful-people" litany some spout, that is your problem and it bothers me not at all whom you choose to trust for information.
Never said I was "suspicious" of all salesmen. Might not be too bad an idea though. One has a little responsibility for sorting fact from fiction, after all.
My point is that, IMO (I do have the right to an opinion, do I not?), people using outrageous scare tactics and hysteria to sell their product bear closer scrutiny than those who lay out the facts in a clear, calm way leaving you to make non-pressured decisions.
OT, you seem bent on accusing NCBA of anything you can dream up. Yet you comment "R-CALF has no formal policy of supporting or opposing a ntational ID program, we must remain proactive, get a seat at the table, and guide the system, so the cattle industry has ownership". That is exactly what NCBA was actively doing from the very first talk of M-ID. back when you guys were still sitting on your "no formal policy of supporting or opposing" fence. The goal of NCBA has been for it to be cattle producer driven with only appropriate information available to government entities and all other information, if any, solely owned and controlled by the producer. You guys may get it right yet, with our lead.
MRJ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sandhusker
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 18244
Location: Nebraska
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oldtimer
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 24735
Location: Northeast Montana
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bull Burger wrote: |
| Sandhusker wrote: |
| If you would be kind enough to point out anything that says R-CALF "doesn't want to be budened with traceback", I would appreciate it. |
| Oldtimer wrote: |
| Doesn't look like they are saying they don't want to be burdened by traceback.......Just that we don't stick the producer with an overcostly or difficult system...... |
They puff out their chest in complete ignorance telling how great the hot brand system is for a national ID system. I would like to see someone go to a stocker operator in Kansas that has a 1000 head from 5 northern states and trace those cattle back to their origin. |
Bullburger- Believe me-Its been done many many times over-- Feedlots in Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota... Sometimes for 1 animal, sometimes for 1000's-- I was involved in one where the fellow had sent 1500 head to a Nebraska feedlot on retained ownership that went bankrupt--When he finally found out they weren't taking care of his calves there were 600 missing-- Every live calf he had left in that feedlot was found-- most of the dead ones were identified....And some of these calves did not have his brand on them since he had not rebranded a big bunch of calves that he had bought as pairs- but since they had been branded by the original owner and because the brand inspection when they were shipped from Montana had the previous owners brand on them, he was able to recover them...... The other calf owners in the feedlot that had not branded were almost SOL--No way to tell whose cattle were whose......
And do you think a feedlot operator like this was going to worry about keeping track of lost tags or replacing them? Couldn't even feed or water the cattle........
I'm not saying brands is the only answer- but the current brand system can be worked in with a tagging system to make a better system than any tag alone will.......
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oldtimer
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 24735
Location: Northeast Montana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
~SH~
Rancher
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 5426
Location: South Western SD
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
OT: "Sandhusker -- he lives in his own little corner of the world believing what he wants to.... Remember he is still traumatized by NCBA's desertion of him on their border stand.... Poor Kadoka"
"BELIEVING WHAT I WANT TO......???"
BWAHAHAHAHA!
Listen to you OT!
AS IF R-CULT DIDN'T SUPPORT PROHIBITING "M"ID FROM "M"COOL AND CALLING "M"COOL A "GOOD LAW" AS WRITTEN??????
Ahhh....geeee.....ahhhh....that never happened.
You, the law man, who was arguing for ONLY "signed affidavits" now tries to pretend that R-CULT supported "M"ID.
You are as deceptive as that pathetic organization you "follow".
Sandsomething: "SH, Oldtimer just offered up a quote directly from R-CALF themselves! Yet you claim something else? Unbelievable....."
CLAIM SOMETHING ELSE?????
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
R-CULT SUPPORTED PROHIBITING "M"ID FROM "M"COOL AND CALLED "M"COOL A GOOD LAW AS IT IS WRITTEN, PERIOD!
Leo, your leader, sang the praises of watered down "M"COOL enforcement!
That is not a "CLAIM" that is a damn fact!
WHAT PART OF "M"ID PROHIBITED DO YOU FAIL TO COMPREHEND?????
Do you think some contradicting "STATEMENT" that was made "RECENTLY" takes presidence over their "PREVIOUS ACTIONS"?????
Like OT, you too are as deceptive as that pathetic organization you support.
Yup, you bet, you R-CULT clones just keep drinking that free R-CALF "bubble up" and "eating that rainbow stew".
Ignore the obvious fact that R-CULT supported PROHIBITING "M"ID from "M"COOL yesterday and a sink your teeth into a contradicting quote that creates the "PERCEPTION OF" R-CULT supporting a traceback system today.
Listen to those sheep blats!
Oh, I get it now, yesterday they were against "M"ID and today they are for "M"ID so in any situation, they can have their bases covered.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
You R-CULT followers are such a hoot!
~SH~
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
