|
| Author |
Message |
DiamondSCattleCo
Rancher
Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 1805
Location: NE Saskatchewan
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 2:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Tam wrote: |
| We went M"ID" because it was a health issue but the M'AGE is not a health issue and therefore most feel it should be left as a marketing option just like other marketing options.I hope you understand what I'm trying to get across. Sorry it took so long to reply to you but I was doing a bit more research on the topic. |
You keep saying this, but our customers consider aging to be a HEALTH issue, otherwise they wouldn't consider restricting imports to age verified beef only. Why else would the countries doing the imports want to restrict the beef based on age? Just because of some arbitrary age limit?
| Tam wrote: |
Quote:
3) Age verification is not all done by internet access. Mail in age forms and telephone systems are all in place right now. All it would take is more manpower to handle it. Thats part of the 2 yr systems roll-out that I spoke of at the beginning of this thread. For all the livestock born in Saskatchewan, it would take all of 10 incompetent data entry clerks to make the necessary entries. At the most. And if the forms were designed properly, many fewer. A good data entry clerk can easily make 2000 birthdate entries in a day. With ease.
In the interest of full disclosure would you like to explain this statement?
|
Very bad wording on my part:
Age verification DOES NOT HAVE TO all be done by internet access.
You asked me if I was willing to foot the bill to ensure that every man, woman, and child who wanted to age verify had internet access. What I'm saying is that every man, woman, and child does not need it. We already have in place data entry clerks who do the entry of the tag IDs, adding birthdates to their workload would be inconsequential. The forms that I filled out at the Co-op with the tag IDs on them had birthdate entry spots there already.
The CCIA already has a phone system, and all it would take is adding some lines and an automated system for birthdate entry. Automated phone data entry systems are available off-the-shelf, easily customized, and put into place.
Not to mention that the number of ranch households without internet access in Saskatchewan are SLIM. Of the 50 or so producers that I am friends with or deal with, I can actually only think of ONE who does not have a computer.
Overall cost would be neglible in comparison to falling behind our competition. The more I think about it, there are specialized data entry companies who could be enlisted to do the entry of all manually submitted forms. These companies work cheap, and guarantee their results. Companies that I've worked for in the past have used them to reduce peak workloads so they didn't have to hire more fulltime staff.
All this would take approximately 2 years to get moving. All I'm suggesting is that we quit worrying about protecting the margins of a few producers who have access to them, and start worrying about the margins of every single producer.
Especially since this is a HEALTH issue and no matter how times its stated that its not a HEALTH issue doesn't change the fact that our customers feel it is a HEALTH issue. I know I'm certainly not going to stand in front of the Japanese, Chinese or Europeans and tell them they're WRONG to want age verified cattle. We can't count on a US market anymore. We NEED those other markets.
<chuckle> SOrry If I've rambled a bit. I was up until 4:30am calving, and my son was wide awake and rolling at 6am. 
Rod
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Tam
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 8023
Location: Sask
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DiamondSCattleCo wrote: |
| Tam wrote: |
| We went M"ID" because it was a health issue but the M'AGE is not a health issue and therefore most feel it should be left as a marketing option just like other marketing options.I hope you understand what I'm trying to get across. Sorry it took so long to reply to you but I was doing a bit more research on the topic. |
You keep saying this, but our customers consider aging to be a HEALTH issue, otherwise they wouldn't consider restricting imports to age verified beef only. Why else would the countries doing the imports want to restrict the beef based on age? Just because of some arbitrary age limit?
| Tam wrote: |
Quote:
3) Age verification is not all done by internet access. Mail in age forms and telephone systems are all in place right now. All it would take is more manpower to handle it. Thats part of the 2 yr systems roll-out that I spoke of at the beginning of this thread. For all the livestock born in Saskatchewan, it would take all of 10 incompetent data entry clerks to make the necessary entries. At the most. And if the forms were designed properly, many fewer. A good data entry clerk can easily make 2000 birthdate entries in a day. With ease.
In the interest of full disclosure would you like to explain this statement?
|
Very bad wording on my part:
Age verification DOES NOT HAVE TO all be done by internet access.
You asked me if I was willing to foot the bill to ensure that every man, woman, and child who wanted to age verify had internet access. What I'm saying is that every man, woman, and child does not need it. We already have in place data entry clerks who do the entry of the tag IDs, adding birthdates to their workload would be inconsequential. The forms that I filled out at the Co-op with the tag IDs on them had birthdate entry spots there already.
The CCIA already has a phone system, and all it would take is adding some lines and an automated system for birthdate entry. Automated phone data entry systems are available off-the-shelf, easily customized, and put into place.
Not to mention that the number of ranch households without internet access in Saskatchewan are SLIM. Of the 50 or so producers that I am friends with or deal with, I can actually only think of ONE who does not have a computer.
Overall cost would be neglible in comparison to falling behind our competition. The more I think about it, there are specialized data entry companies who could be enlisted to do the entry of all manually submitted forms. These companies work cheap, and guarantee their results. Companies that I've worked for in the past have used them to reduce peak workloads so they didn't have to hire more fulltime staff.
All this would take approximately 2 years to get moving. All I'm suggesting is that we quit worrying about protecting the margins of a few producers who have access to them, and start worrying about the margins of every single producer.
Especially since this is a HEALTH issue and no matter how times its stated that its not a HEALTH issue doesn't change the fact that our customers feel it is a HEALTH issue. I know I'm certainly not going to stand in front of the Japanese, Chinese or Europeans and tell them they're WRONG to want age verified cattle. We can't count on a US market anymore. We NEED those other markets.
<chuckle> SOrry If I've rambled a bit. I was up until 4:30am calving, and my son was wide awake and rolling at 6am.
Rod |
Well Rod you might be surprized to know this, but I spoke to the CCIA yesterday and again today. While I was on the phone yesterday I told them about our little conversation. They went on line and read some of our comments while we were talking. seem by our conversation they agree with the information I posted and IT WAS THEM that asked me to ask you the infrastructure question. As according to them there is not system in place to handle the sheer volume of cattle you are talking about if this thing is forced into Manditory. And in the conversation I asked them about the mail in and telephone and they said there is no system in place to handle it. There is how ever ONE lady in all of Sask that has Third party user status that can enter data for producers that don't want to do it themselves but she has the right to charge for her service so that kind of takes away the idea of FREE OF CHARGE doesn't it. They also told me about the Alberta and Manitoba Government were playing with the Idea of doing it through their Ag offices but have already run into problem with the volume of producers that are volunteering to age verifing by birthdate that can't access or just don't care to do it themselves and not being able to handle the work load and handle all the other issues that they have on their plates. And we are still in the booting up stages what do you think will get done in those offices it this thing is forced on ALL PRODUCERS?
| Quote: |
| I know I'm certainly not going to stand in front of the Japanese, Chinese or Europeans and tell them they're WRONG to want age verified cattle. We can't count on a US market anymore. We NEED those other markets. |
Why do you keep saying Age verified as if the only way we can possibably age verify is by BIRTHDATE. I don't want to stop the trade either Rod I just happen to think like the CCIA if we open those markets we are more likely to keep them open if we use age verifiable by birthdate cattle and Dentition age vertified to fill in where we have to. 
Are you going to stand in front of those trading partners and tell them that we forced the producers into M'AGE' and some of the producers can't verify the age of their cattle so we may have sent them meat from over aged cattle? Are you going to stand in front of the Canadian cattle producers and tell them that the integrity of our system was called into question because some producers couldn't vertify the ages of their cattle so Japan and China slammed their border closed to us again? We need those markets Rob but we need them to stay open too. Just ask the US Producers what happens when you send the Japanese something they said they wouldn't except.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
DiamondSCattleCo
Rancher
Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 1805
Location: NE Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tam wrote: |
1) As according to them there is not system in place to handle the sheer volume of cattle you are talking about if this thing is forced into Manditory.
2) And in the conversation I asked them about the mail in and telephone and they said there is no system in place to handle it.
3) And we are still in the booting up stages what do you think will get done in those offices it this thing is forced on ALL PRODUCERS?
4) Are you going to stand in front of the Canadian cattle producers and tell them that the integrity of our system was called into question because some producers couldn't vertify the ages of their cattle so Japan and China slammed their border closed to us again? |
1) So the CCIA doesn't receive mail? Or the CCIA doesn't have telephones? Did you speak to someone with the necessary qualifications, IE) a business analyst, who could actually speak intelligently about designing a business process to handle something along these lines?
The reason I ask, is because I'm not just speaking out my butt when it comes to systems such as these that we're talking about. I'm intimately familiar with monthly manual data entry from budgetary forms, and designed a system 7 years ago for data entry. This system is far more complex than a simple entry system like the one we're speaking of. With it, 2 untrained data entry clerks can enter 1300 users information in 2 days, each month.
As of last year, the company was charging $5000.00 for it.
2) Hence the 2 year roll out. And if there is no-one in place right now to do entry of tag IDs, how do the tag IDs get into the system from the Co-op?
3) I disagree with the CCIA that this will require hundreds of people. This sounds considerably more like resistance to change than anyone qualified sitting down and thinking this through. I have been made aware of the sheer volume of calls that went through their offices, and provincial ones, when people were asking about age verificiation and how to use the current on-line system. This would be a near-term issue, part of the 2 year roll out I'm speaking of. Surely they noticed a short-term increase in calls during M-ID?
I think someone from the CCIA should call the company in the US who has that on-line system in place that Porker was telling me about in another thread. The charge for the use of that system is nominal (I'm sorry, I don't have the link anymore, Porker are you reading this?), and at that rate, the company must be making money or else they wouldn't be doing it.
4) All producers can age verify. There is nothing to prevent them from writing down birthdates. When M-ID was introduced, hundreds of producers complained that to put tags in was going to be too hard, and too expensive, and too time consuming. Oddly enough, it doesn't seem to have been much of a hardship after all. So now its going to be more of a hardship to write down the birthdate of an animal on a form, especially since the hard part truly is the tagging?
I'm sorry, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this topic. The CCA was probably right that we simply need to give people time to get used to age verification, and perhaps I'm asking for something that needs to be introduced more gradually, but Porker really opened my eyes in the other thread.
Rod
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Tam
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 8023
Location: Sask
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DiamondSCattleCo wrote: |
| Tam wrote: |
1) As according to them there is not system in place to handle the sheer volume of cattle you are talking about if this thing is forced into Manditory.
2) And in the conversation I asked them about the mail in and telephone and they said there is no system in place to handle it.
3) And we are still in the booting up stages what do you think will get done in those offices it this thing is forced on ALL PRODUCERS?
4) Are you going to stand in front of the Canadian cattle producers and tell them that the integrity of our system was called into question because some producers couldn't vertify the ages of their cattle so Japan and China slammed their border closed to us again? |
1) So the CCIA doesn't receive mail? Or the CCIA doesn't have telephones? Did you speak to someone with the necessary qualifications, IE) a business analyst, who could actually speak intelligently about designing a business process to handle something along these lines?
The reason I ask, is because I'm not just speaking out my butt when it comes to systems such as these that we're talking about. I'm intimately familiar with monthly manual data entry from budgetary forms, and designed a system 7 years ago for data entry. This system is far more complex than a simple entry system like the one we're speaking of. With it, 2 untrained data entry clerks can enter 1300 users information in 2 days, each month.
As of last year, the company was charging $5000.00 for it.
2) Hence the 2 year roll out. And if there is no-one in place right now to do entry of tag IDs, how do the tag IDs get into the system from the Co-op?
3) I disagree with the CCIA that this will require hundreds of people. This sounds considerably more like resistance to change than anyone qualified sitting down and thinking this through. I have been made aware of the sheer volume of calls that went through their offices, and provincial ones, when people were asking about age verificiation and how to use the current on-line system. This would be a near-term issue, part of the 2 year roll out I'm speaking of. Surely they noticed a short-term increase in calls during M-ID?
I think someone from the CCIA should call the company in the US who has that on-line system in place that Porker was telling me about in another thread. The charge for the use of that system is nominal (I'm sorry, I don't have the link anymore, Porker are you reading this?), and at that rate, the company must be making money or else they wouldn't be doing it.
4) All producers can age verify. There is nothing to prevent them from writing down birthdates. When M-ID was introduced, hundreds of producers complained that to put tags in was going to be too hard, and too expensive, and too time consuming. Oddly enough, it doesn't seem to have been much of a hardship after all. So now its going to be more of a hardship to write down the birthdate of an animal on a form, especially since the hard part truly is the tagging?
I'm sorry, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this topic. The CCA was probably right that we simply need to give people time to get used to age verification, and perhaps I'm asking for something that needs to be introduced more gradually, but Porker really opened my eyes in the other thread.
Rod |
1. Yes they recieve mail but recieveing mail in data and having the manpower to enter that data is two different things.
Yes they have telephones but having a telephone and having the manpower to enter data into the data bases are again two different things.
Am I to believe you about the abilities of a system over someone that works with the system knows it capabilities and knows how many people work in an office that you seem to think could just do the work with little to no problems. I DON"T THINK SO.
As of right now the Age verification system is charging NOTHING to enter the information. How long do you thing that will be if the CCIA is forced to hire a bunch new data base people to handle the work load you think they should just do no questions asked?
2. The time it takes your Coop to enter the tag numbers you buy when you buy them is far different than the time it would take to get the information back from the producer go back into the data base and enter birthdates the way each producer chooses to have his birthdates enter. That is time they will want to be compensated for. So not only will there be no premuims being paid for age verified by BIRTHDATE cattle, M'AGE' will be putting the expense of age verifing on those producers that can't or don't want to do it themselves. So much for being free of charge
3. You third comment about the resistance on behalf of the CCIA is a JOKE. The CCIA has lead the way against great resistance in making changes to the way our beef is looked at and now you are claiming they the CCIA are resistant to change. when it comes to M"AGE" 
There is a big difference in Porkers system and the CCIA system That big difference is Porker's system is VOLUNTARILY BEING TO SOLD to those producers that WANT it and can Afford it. The CCIA system is free of charge to every producer in Canada if they choose to take advantage. Porker can afford to hire all the data base operators he need to do his work. The CCIA can't afford to and still keep this a free of charge system. So again not only will there be no premiums there will be a CHARGE for something that you want forced on all producers in Canada.
| Quote: |
| 4) All producers can age verify. There is nothing to prevent them from writing down birthdates. When M-ID was introduced, hundreds of producers complained that to put tags in was going to be too hard, and too expensive, and too time consuming. Oddly enough, it doesn't seem to have been much of a hardship after all. So now its going to be more of a hardship to write down the birthdate of an animal on a form, especially since the hard part truly is the tagging? |
I don't think you will get people to believe it is as easy as writing down a birthdate Rod. or putting a tag in a ear. When in fact it is not that simple. Not only do you have to write it down, you have to enter it into a data base via internet access, then you have to keep auditable records to prove that birthdate you wrote down matchs the tags you put in the ear of the animals so if the CFIA comes around you can prove it to them. And if you do all this now while it is still VOLUNTARY you should recieve a nice premium for your hard work. But if this goes Manditory not only will you have to do the work but the premium with disappear and the once free of charge system could have charges implemented to cover the sheer volume of data that has to be entered by someone for those that can't access the internet for themselves or just doesn't want to. Anyone that believes all it will take is to write down a birthdate is Naive. and if they are that naive do you really want to risk the integrity of a system that we including you are counting on to open markets and keep them open.
| Quote: |
| I'm sorry, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this topic. The CCA was probably right that we simply need to give people time to get used to age verification, and perhaps I'm asking for something that needs to be introduced more gradually, |
This is the smartest thing you have posted yet. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
DiamondSCattleCo
Rancher
Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 1805
Location: NE Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tam wrote: |
1) Yes they recieve mail but recieveing mail in data and having the manpower to enter that data is two different things.
<snip>
Am I to believe you about the abilities of a system over someone that works with the system knows it capabilities and knows how many people work in an office that you seem to think could just do the work with little to no problems.
2) You third comment about the resistance on behalf of the CCIA is a JOKE. The CCIA has lead the way against great resistance in making changes to the way our beef is looked at and now you are claiming they the CCIA are resistant to change. when it comes to M"AGE"
3) There is a big difference in Porkers system and the CCIA system That big difference is Porker's system is VOLUNTARILY BEING TO SOLD to those producers that WANT it and can Afford it. |
1) Just out of curiosity, I sat down and wrote a little test program that was very similar to the online age verification program. I entered a producer ID, which then brought up a screen of all the RFID tags that were assigned to that producer. Then I went down the list and entered in 20 birthdates.
I am NOT a data entry clerk, but do you know how long it took me? 58 seconds. And I am a HORRIBLE typist.
So instead of blindly following what people tell you, do a little math of your own. Bring up Excel, and start banging in some birthdates. Time yourself. And remember that there are professional data entry clerks whose speed and accuracy are unreal. If I can take 20 birthdates in a minute, they could do twice that amount with ease. Figure out how much time it takes to enter a birthdate, then multiply this by the number of calves that will be born in Canada this year.
Not much of a number is it? Of course, this is such a rough way to cost it that its not even funny, but if someone is trying to convince you that system cost would be millions, with operating costs of hundreds of thousands per year, someone is lying to you. The database and hardware is already in place for the voluntary system, so those costs are fixed whether the system is mandatory or voluntary. The only additional cost would be some data entry clerks to enter manually submitted data, which I've just shown you, would be trivial.
2) Well, there certainly isn't any logical reason. If someone has done an analysis and said "it will cost this much", I'd like to see it. Until thats been done, its simply the guesswork of someone who is not qualified to determine the cost of a system. In other words, if you're asking a secretary to determine the costs, you've asked the wrong person.
And before you make the illogical jump and say that I'm attempting to discredit the CCIA, let me say that I have worked with some CCIA folks and have been impressed through and through with their dedication.
3) Porker also said its being used in countries where its REQUIRED. I asked him to list those countries, but since he hasn't been on since, he hasn't had a chance to respond. And voluntary or not, you miss my point. The cost of the system neglible, so therefore the CCIA could do the exact same thing for even less, funded from the same source as M-ID is funded.
Rod
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Tam
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 8023
Location: Sask
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DiamondSCattleCo wrote: |
| Tam wrote: |
1) Yes they recieve mail but recieveing mail in data and having the manpower to enter that data is two different things.
<snip>
Am I to believe you about the abilities of a system over someone that works with the system knows it capabilities and knows how many people work in an office that you seem to think could just do the work with little to no problems.
2) You third comment about the resistance on behalf of the CCIA is a JOKE. The CCIA has lead the way against great resistance in making changes to the way our beef is looked at and now you are claiming they the CCIA are resistant to change. when it comes to M"AGE"
3) There is a big difference in Porkers system and the CCIA system That big difference is Porker's system is VOLUNTARILY BEING TO SOLD to those producers that WANT it and can Afford it. |
1) Just out of curiosity, I sat down and wrote a little test program that was very similar to the online age verification program. I entered a producer ID, which then brought up a screen of all the RFID tags that were assigned to that producer. Then I went down the list and entered in 20 birthdates.
I am NOT a data entry clerk, but do you know how long it took me? 58 seconds. And I am a HORRIBLE typist.
So instead of blindly following what people tell you, do a little math of your own. Bring up Excel, and start banging in some birthdates. Time yourself. And remember that there are professional data entry clerks whose speed and accuracy are unreal. If I can take 20 birthdates in a minute, they could do twice that amount with ease. Figure out how much time it takes to enter a birthdate, then multiply this by the number of calves that will be born in Canada this year.
Not much of a number is it? Of course, this is such a rough way to cost it that its not even funny, but if someone is trying to convince you that system cost would be millions, with operating costs of hundreds of thousands per year, someone is lying to you. The database and hardware is already in place for the voluntary system, so those costs are fixed whether the system is mandatory or voluntary. The only additional cost would be some data entry clerks to enter manually submitted data, which I've just shown you, would be trivial.
2) Well, there certainly isn't any logical reason. If someone has done an analysis and said "it will cost this much", I'd like to see it. Until thats been done, its simply the guesswork of someone who is not qualified to determine the cost of a system. In other words, if you're asking a secretary to determine the costs, you've asked the wrong person.
And before you make the illogical jump and say that I'm attempting to discredit the CCIA, let me say that I have worked with some CCIA folks and have been impressed through and through with their dedication.
3) Porker also said its being used in countries where its REQUIRED. I asked him to list those countries, but since he hasn't been on since, he hasn't had a chance to respond. And voluntary or not, you miss my point. The cost of the system neglible, so therefore the CCIA could do the exact same thing for even less, funded from the same source as M-ID is funded.
Rod |
1. So we are to force producer into something that they don't want just because you think you know more about the systems capabilities than those that are working with it every day.
2.
| Quote: |
| Did you speak to someone with the necessary qualifications, IE) a business analyst, who could actually speak intelligently about designing a business process to handle something along these lines? |
| Quote: |
| Well, there certainly isn't any logical reason. If someone has done an analysis and said "it will cost this much", I'd like to see it. Until thats been done, its simply the guesswork of someone who is not qualified to determine the cost of a system. In other words, if you're asking a secretary to determine the costs, you've asked the wrong person. |
Why does it matter who told me Rod the CCIA's actions speak louder than any one persons word. Since you have no idea who I talked to, these two comments of yours were insulting to the CCIA in general and discrediting to them. How long do you think any one in that office would last if the CCIA office manager or Board found out that they were giving out information to producers that wasn't backed up by the CCIA research on the issue? I would say that the ladies in that office know far more than you about the system they work with and explain to producers everyday.
3. I really don't care what countries are required to use Porker's system but you can bet that Porker isn't providing his companies system for FREE OF CHARGE like the CCIA is in Canada.
And I'm not about to take the word of someone that just posted he thought Age verification is as eazy as a producer writing don't a birthdate and eazier than tagging his cattle, when he posts the cost is neglible . Especially when the agency that runs the system says differently. CCIA has proved themselves!!!!!!! You to this point are the one that is basing your point of view on GUESSWORK. So why should we take your word over anyone in the CCIA office that works with the system that you only can guess about? 
Like I said the smartest think you have said yet was The CCA was probably right that we simply need to give people time to get used to age verification, keep that in mind why don't you. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Mike
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 16442
Location: Montgomery, Al
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tam. Nothing is free.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oldtimer
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 24330
Location: Northeast Montana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
DiamondSCattleCo
Rancher
Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 1805
Location: NE Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tam wrote: |
| 1. So we are to force producer into something that they don't want just because you think you know more about the systems capabilities than those that are working with it every day. |
Tam, please go back and re-read everything I said. I am not arguing that the people who work in CCIA office know more about the CURRENT systems than I do. What I AM saying is that whoever you talked to was NOT a systems analyst was thus WHOLLY unqualified to make any comment on the cost of implementing a manual entry system, which doesn't exist yet.
| Tam wrote: |
| Why does it matter who told me Rod |
Because you certainly don't ask a user to tell you how much a system costs to build. Should I ask the driver of a car how much cost to build the car THAT THEY HAVEN'T DROVE YET? You are attempting to bring information to this debate that is fallacious and of questionable use.
| Tam wrote: |
| And I'm not about to take the word of someone that just posted he thought [b]Age verification is as eazy as a producer writing don't a birthdate and eazier than tagging his cattle, |
So, a manual system, which is what we've been haggling over, since the automated system already exists for voluntary Aging, is more difficult than writing down the birthdate of the animal? Odd, when I was RFID tagging my cattle this year, my 7 year old wrote down the RFID tag# and the cow tag# that the tag went into. From there my 9 yr old cross-referenced my birthing book for birthdate and I wrote it on the sheet that came with my RFID tags. End of manual system. Oh, except for having to pop it into the mail. So what you're telling me is that you feel the average cattle producer in Saskatchewan is less capable than a 7 or 9 yr old?
| Tam wrote: |
| view on GUESSWORK. So why should we take your word over anyone in the CCIA office that works with the system that you only can guess about? |
You miss the point. Voluntary ID already has the automated system in place. To go full mandatory ID would only require the services of a couple data entry clerks. Then we could service the needs of those producers who didn't have internet access.
| Tam wrote: |
| Like I said the smartest think you have said yet was |
I chose to ignore the dig last time, but this time I'm not. You've attempted to bait me down to your level with insults, but I won't buy into it.
And when you go to church tomorrow, you may want to read the good book a time or two. I'm not religious, but I certainly treat people with more respect and diginity than you've shown yourself capable of doing. You're now on ignore mode.
Rod
|
|
| Back to top |
|
cowsense
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 1364
Location: Central Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CCIA is a producer run private company that administers the program with oversight from CFIA. I do believe that CCIA's income is based on a small commission from tag sales and that their budget is based on traceback accounting. While new tag uses such as M- age verification are entirely possible, the infrastructure and new expenses have to be handled and budgeted; the office is going full out at present and will have to expand to handle mandatory aging. Until then a volunatary program is probably best and personaly I like being rewarded by the marketplace with any kind of a premium to justify my management practices!
Rod; you mention the Chinese market as a reason to need mandatory age; We were already back in Hong Kong and Macau long before Japan ever opened and are moving significant volumes there. While they take some high value cuts they tend to also take a lot of lower value beef products. Mainland China is a different story; price alone determines purchases and quality is secondary......I've yet to see anything stating that they are opening up for large beef imports or that they are wanting age verification. You are right in that it is a huge market waiting for developement but it is a marketplace that will almost always chose the lowest cost provider and probably will be more of a market for manufacturing beef than high end cuts!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oldtimer
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 24330
Location: Northeast Montana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
DiamondSCattleCo
Rancher
Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 1805
Location: NE Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cowsense wrote: |
| 1) Mainland China is a different story; price alone determines purchases and quality is secondary......I've yet to see anything stating that they are opening up for large beef imports or that they are wanting age verification. |
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, most of the talks with Chinese delegates have not been advertised, televised or recorded. I am aware of two producer owned entities attempting to gain access to the Chinese mainland market, and each has said they will need age verified beef, so its starting now. I've spoke to a variety of market analysts, livestock specialists, government workers, etc etc and most feel that age verified beef will be required on a world stage (not just Chinese) very soon. I don't think its something we can safely ignore for the next 5 years, especially since we desperately have to reduce our reliance on the US market. We lost billions when the border closed. We need to take measures to ensure this never happens again.
Rod
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
