Cattle Producers Urge Ottawa to Step Up with Programs

[Tommy]

Cattle Producers Urge Ottawa to Step Up with Programs to Ensure the Survival of Canadian Farmers



Ian McKillop - Ontario Cattlemen's Association

Farmscape for April 25, 2006 (Episode 2122)



Canadian cattle producers are urging Ottawa to step up with programs that will ensure the survival of Canadian farmers until long term solutions to the global farm income crisis can be developed.



Last week a trade dispute over unprocessed grain corn imported from the US ended when the Canadian International Trade Tribunal ruled the imports do not threaten to the Canadian corn industry.



Ian McKillop, president of the Ontario Cattlemen's Association and a director on the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, says, while it's difficult to be certain of the full impact of provisional duties in place since mid-December, they did create a great deal of uncertainty.



We have seen an increase in the number of feeder cattle that are being exported to the US over the last several months and some of that may be based upon the uncertainty related to the corn countervail issue but we are currently exporting about 9,000 head of feeder cattle per week out of Canada to the US and that compares to about 4,300 per week during our last normal five year average prior to BSE so our feeder imports are up.



Again I can't really say how much of that is related to the corn countervail but that was our concern with corn countervail, it would drive our input costs compared to the US cost of production and it would make our feeder cattle much more attractive to the US buyer and, with a duty in place, we could potentially see the flow of more cattle to the states.



McKillop agrees Canadian corn producers are suffering from low commodity prices, as are other sectors of agriculture.



He suggests reduction of international subsidies through the World Trade Organization is the place to start but he admits that process could take some time.



In the absence of that happening quickly, he maintains, it's imperative that government step forward to ensure Canadian producers operate on a level playing field with their foreign competitors.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

If you read the article and not just the headline cattlemen were asking the government not to distort trade with subsidies and tariffs.

 

[Sandhusker]

"....but we are currently exporting about 9,000 head of feeder cattle per week out of Canada to the US and that compares to about 4,300 per week during our last normal five year average prior to BSE so our feeder imports are up."

I read this part. That's a fat doubler.

 

[rancher]

"....but we are currently exporting about 9,000 head of feeder cattle per week out of Canada to the US and that compares to about 4,300 per week during our last normal five year average prior to BSE so our feeder imports are up."

I read this part. That's a fat doubler.

No wonder the market has dropped.[/img]

 

[Anonymous]

"....but we are currently exporting about 9,000 head of feeder cattle per week out of Canada to the US and that compares to about 4,300 per week during our last normal five year average prior to BSE so our feeder imports are up."

I read this part. That's a fat doubler.

No wonder the market has dropped.[/img]

BUT BUT BUT- Super Hero, NCBAers, and the Canucks say that Canadian imports don't effect our markets :wink: Funny tho how exactly what R-CALF has said will happen to prices has occurred......

Border open= years of low or hohum prices (checkoff be damned)

Border closed= record high prices on calves, culls and fats

Border opened= prices back on the downswing into the hohum to low levels again

This year may prove to many more the HUGE negative effect of the Canadian and other import beef and cattle. .....

 

[Maple Leaf Angus]

"....but we are currently exporting about 9,000 head of feeder cattle per week out of Canada to the US and that compares to about 4,300 per week during our last normal five year average prior to BSE so our feeder imports are up."

I read this part. That's a fat doubler.

No wonder the market has dropped.[/img]

BUT BUT BUT- Super Hero, NCBAers, and the Canucks say that Canadian imports don't effect our markets :wink: Funny tho how exactly what R-CALF has said will happen to prices has occurred......

Border open= years of low or hohum prices (checkoff be damned)

Border closed= record high prices on calves, culls and fats

Border opened= prices back on the downswing into the hohum to low levels again

This year may prove to many more the HUGE negative effect of the Canadian and other import beef and cattle. .....

Hummmmmm, I wonder who is taking ownership of those feeder cattle. They wouldn't be purchased by Americans and being placed into American owned feedlots, would they, Oldtimer and Sandhusker?

So in reality, if what you are saying about hurting the market is true, it is Americans that are doing the hurtin' right ole buddy, ole pal? But no problem, blame it on the Canadians. They make a good scape goat for all your little troubles.

Damn, that sounds to me a lot like greed from your own that is causing your pain . Kinda the same attitude as freakin' r-calfers show when they get on their freakin protectionist rants and binges.

But keep on, you twisted, sick hypocrites. Go right on and say that you are talking the r-calf talk about health concerns. I never heard such a pathetic bunch in all my life.

 

[Sandhusker]

They most likely are being purchased by Americans, MLA. However, I don't believe I was putting blame on Canadians. Actually, I can't see where I was blaming anybody for anything. Therefore, I think your labeling me a twisted sick hypocrite is a bit out of line. OT and I are simply pointing out a couple of related facts; more feeders coming down and lower feeder prices down here. The two events are related, do you deny that?

Are R-CALFers, or any US producer, supposed to be happy about it? We're pathetic and protectionists because we recognize a source of cash-flow erosion? Come, on, buddy! The reason you want feeders moving South is because it affects your pocketbook, why can't we have the same concerns?

This is a perfect example of why R-CALF rejects the notion of a North American Industry - we've got nothing to gain from it. We can only lose. All you bring to the table is supply. If we're going to have a profitable arrangement with somebody, we need to partner with somebody who has demand.

 

[TimH]

"....but we are currently exporting about 9,000 head of feeder cattle per week out of Canada to the US and that compares to about 4,300 per week during our last normal five year average prior to BSE so our feeder imports are up."

I read this part. That's a fat doubler.

Lets see.........thats an "extra" 4700 head per week or 244,400 head per year. These cattle are going into a market that slaughters about 35,000,000 head per year.
244,000 is just a little less than 0.7% of 35 million.

Yes boys. No wonder cattle prices are so low.
0.7% is such a huge number.

If I was you I'd get another check into the mail and headed for Billings ASAP!!!!!


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

You really should invest in a calculator Sandhusker. :wink:

 

[Jason]

Canfax Report:

© 2005 CANFAX a Division of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, or by any means whatsoever, without acknowledging that CANFAX was the author of the publication and is the owner of the copyright. For further information contact CANFAX at (403) 275-5110.




Total slaughter exports between the third week in July (when live trade resumed) and the end December were approximately 2% smaller when compared to the same time frame in 2002. Feeder cattle exports during the same weeks last year were down 16% when compared to the 2002 data. Last year live cattle exports from Alberta to the US totaled 213,392 head.

This total was made up of primarily fed cattle with a total of 198,803 head being finished and exported for slaughter and only 14,589 head being exported for feeder cattle. The live cattle exports in the same time frame for all of Canada totaled 558,235. The fed cattle total was 319,119 head while the feeders made up the balance at 238,785 head. The bulk of the exported cattle originated in Alberta (213,392 head) but Saskatchewan total was second at 176,721 head (the majority made up of feeder cattle) and Manitoba had the third largest exports at 110,555 (48% feeder cattle, 52% fed). In the first two months of 2006 Alberta's exports have been 96,725 head, which includes 10,566 feeder and 86,159 head of fed cattle.

Canada's total for the same months is 205,678 head. Exports of beef and beef products in 2005 totaled 458,377 tonnes, basically unchanged from the 2004 total of 454,939 tonnes. The main importers of Canadian beef and beef products were the US and Mexico. While the amount of exports to the US increased to a total of 370,742 tonnes, up 8% from 2004, Mexican shipments decreased 36% to 52,064 tonnes in 2005.

According to the most recent Statistics Canada data, exports in January 2006 of beef and beef products is down 14% when compared to the same month last year. Imports over the past few years have been drastically reduced. In 2005 beef imports into Canada totaled 110,518 tonnes, which was up 22% over 2004 but still less than half that of the 2003 (49.5%) and 2002 (43.8%) totals. The bulk of imported beef and beef products last year were from the US, which made up 42% of the total. The next largest was New Zealand at 28% and Uruguay at 18%. Beef imports in January were 4% smaller than January 2005. -DM

 

[Sandhusker]

Jason, do you realize that these very same time periods where you show Canadian beef exports to be down, US cattle prices were strong? Are you trying to refute me or back me?

 

[Sandhusker]

"....but we are currently exporting about 9,000 head of feeder cattle per week out of Canada to the US and that compares to about 4,300 per week during our last normal five year average prior to BSE so our feeder imports are up."

I read this part. That's a fat doubler.

Lets see.........thats an "extra" 4700 head per week or 244,400 head per year. These cattle are going into a market that slaughters about 35,000,000 head per year.
244,000 is just a little less than 0.7% of 35 million.

Yes boys. No wonder cattle prices are so low.
0.7% is such a huge number.

If I was you I'd get another check into the mail and headed for Billings ASAP!!!!!


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

You really should invest in a calculator Sandhusker. :wink:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you going on record as stating that Canadian feeders only account for .7% (or 1.4%) of US slaughter?

What about that 35MM head count? Since the topic is feeders, don't you think you ought to sort out the culls, dairy, bulls, etc.....?

I don't think you're ready for a calculator yet.

 

[Jason]

For a banker you are pretty slow on the uptake.

Total slaughter exports between the third week in July (when live trade resumed) and the end December were approximately 2% smaller when compared to the same time frame in 2002.

Feeder cattle exports during the same weeks last year were down 16% when compared to the 2002 data.

When did US fat prices start to slide? Wasn't it several months ago? How long has it been since fats were a buck? Selective memory doesn't change the fact that the price slide has little to do with Canadian cattle. We are down on numbers and the price is sliding, why is that?

Canadian cattle came into the US and prices still rose...they slow and prices fall...pretty clear other factors are driving the price.

 

[Sandhusker]

Jason, we both know there are many factors, let's not go there.

One thing to keep in mind that, depending on timing, 1000 trades might not move the market, but a single trade could trigger an avalanche of stops. The same princible applies to fats. The real pushers are not always on the surface.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Jason, we both know there are many factors, let's not go there.

One thing to keep in mind that, depending on timing, 1000 trades might not move the market, but a single trade could trigger an avalanche of stops. The same princible applies to fats. The real pushers are not always on the surface.

Yea right Sandhusker there are many factor that affect prices but we won't go there cause they don't support R-CALFs protectionist veiws.

 

[Anonymous]

R-CALF USA filed separate lawsuits against USDA in 2004 and 2005 to prevent Canadian cattle and beef imports until Canada could prove it had its BSE problem under control.

R-CALF argued that unless Canada adopted stricter BSE prevention measures, and unless the U.S. strengthened its feed ban before the Canadian border was reopened, the following would happen:


1. The U.S. would have difficulty reopening its lost export markets.

2. Consumer demand for beef would fall.

3. U.S. cattle prices would fall.

4. Canada's BSE problem would escalate.


Meanwhile, less than a year has passed since the border was reopened, and the following conditions have already materialized:

1. The U.S. is experiencing extreme difficulty in efforts to reopen lost export markets.

2. Most of the 2005 decline in beef demand occurred after the Canadian border reopened.

3. U.S. cattle prices have fallen.

4. Canada's BSE problem continues to escalate.

All R-CALF's contentions have come to be- and nothing USDA contended has even come close- just a series of flubs....

 

[TimH]

"....but we are currently exporting about 9,000 head of feeder cattle per week out of Canada to the US and that compares to about 4,300 per week during our last normal five year average prior to BSE so our feeder imports are up."

I read this part. That's a fat doubler.

Lets see.........thats an "extra" 4700 head per week or 244,400 head per year. These cattle are going into a market that slaughters about 35,000,000 head per year.
244,000 is just a little less than 0.7% of 35 million.

Yes boys. No wonder cattle prices are so low.
0.7% is such a huge number.

If I was you I'd get another check into the mail and headed for Billings ASAP!!!!!


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

You really should invest in a calculator Sandhusker. :wink:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you going on record as stating that Canadian feeders only account for .7% (or 1.4%) of US slaughter?

What about that 35MM head count? Since the topic is feeders, don't you think you ought to sort out the culls, dairy, bulls, etc.....?

I don't think you're ready for a calculator yet.

You are wrong, Sandbanker. It's pretty clear in my post that the 0.7% number represents the difference between current feeder exports and the 5 year average(Hint--"extra 4700 head"). Read it over until you understand the math.

About 85%, give or take, of the slaughter is UTM fed cattle. The other 15% is your cull cows,bulls etc.
Feel free to calculate 85% of 35 million yourself.

How much have your cull cow prices slid over the past few months???
How many CDN. OTM cattle entered the country during that period??? :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[Sandhusker]

Lets see.........thats an "extra" 4700 head per week or 244,400 head per year. These cattle are going into a market that slaughters about 35,000,000 head per year.
244,000 is just a little less than 0.7% of 35 million.

Yes boys. No wonder cattle prices are so low.
0.7% is such a huge number.

If I was you I'd get another check into the mail and headed for Billings ASAP!!!!!


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

You really should invest in a calculator Sandhusker. :wink:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you going on record as stating that Canadian feeders only account for .7% (or 1.4%) of US slaughter?

What about that 35MM head count? Since the topic is feeders, don't you think you ought to sort out the culls, dairy, bulls, etc.....?

I don't think you're ready for a calculator yet.

You are wrong, Sandbanker. It's pretty clear in my post that the 0.7% number represents the difference between current feeder exports and the 5 year average(Hint--"extra 4700 head"). Read it over until you understand the math.

About 85%, give or take, of the slaughter is UTM fed cattle. The other 15% is your cull cows,bulls etc.
Feel free to calculate 85% of 35 million yourself.

How much have your cull cow prices slid over the past few months???
How many CDN. OTM cattle entered the country during that period??? :roll: :roll: :roll:

One thing to keep in mind that, depending on timing, 1000 trades might not move the market, but a single trade could trigger an avalanche of stops. The same princible applies to feeders. The real pushers are not always on the surface.

 

[TimH]

R-CALF USA filed separate lawsuits against USDA in 2004 and 2005 to prevent Canadian cattle and beef imports until Canada could prove it had its BSE problem under control.

R-CALF argued that unless Canada adopted stricter BSE prevention measures, and unless the U.S. strengthened its feed ban before the Canadian border was reopened, the following would happen:


1. The U.S. would have difficulty reopening its lost export markets.

2. Consumer demand for beef would fall.

3. U.S. cattle prices would fall.

4. Canada's BSE problem would escalate.


Meanwhile, less than a year has passed since the border was reopened, and the following conditions have already materialized:

1. The U.S. is experiencing extreme difficulty in efforts to reopen lost export markets.

2. Most of the 2005 decline in beef demand occurred after the Canadian border reopened.

3. U.S. cattle prices have fallen.

4. Canada's BSE problem continues to escalate.

All R-CALF's contentions have come to be- and nothing USDA contended has even come close- just a series of flubs....

1. The U.S. is experiencing extreme difficulty in efforts to reopen lost export markets.
Japan accepted US beef, untested I might add, and then reimposed the ban because a shipment contained banned material. What does this have to do with Canada?

2. Consumer demand for beef would fall.
Tell us OT, How much of this fall in demand can be attributed to high retail beef prices, cheap chicken and BSE fear-mongering???

3. U.S. cattle prices have fallen
See Number 2 , above.

4. Canada's BSE problem continues to escalate.
How about the USA's BSE problem. Is it continuing to escalate as well???



Long live R-calf!!!!! I do enjoy a good laugh or two and the end of a long day!!!!!

 

[Manitoba_Rancher]

R-CALF USA filed separate lawsuits against USDA in 2004 and 2005 to prevent Canadian cattle and beef imports until Canada could prove it had its BSE problem under control.

R-CALF argued that unless Canada adopted stricter BSE prevention measures, and unless the U.S. strengthened its feed ban before the Canadian border was reopened, the following would happen:


1. The U.S. would have difficulty reopening its lost export markets.

2. Consumer demand for beef would fall.

3. U.S. cattle prices would fall.

4. Canada's BSE problem would escalate.


Meanwhile, less than a year has passed since the border was reopened, and the following conditions have already materialized:

1. The U.S. is experiencing extreme difficulty in efforts to reopen lost export markets.

2. Most of the 2005 decline in beef demand occurred after the Canadian border reopened.

3. U.S. cattle prices have fallen.

4. Canada's BSE problem continues to escalate.

All R-CALF's contentions have come to be- and nothing USDA contended has even come close- just a series of flubs....

OT- Until you prove that that you dont have a bigger problem with BSE down there dont start crowing that our problem is escalating. You better stick to raising horses.!!!!! :wink:

 

[Tam]

R-CALF USA filed separate lawsuits against USDA in 2004 and 2005 to prevent Canadian cattle and beef imports until Canada could prove it had its BSE problem under control.

R-CALF argued that unless Canada adopted stricter BSE prevention measures, and unless the U.S. strengthened its feed ban before the Canadian border was reopened, the following would happen:


1. The U.S. would have difficulty reopening its lost export markets.

2. Consumer demand for beef would fall.

3. U.S. cattle prices would fall.

4. Canada's BSE problem would escalate.


Meanwhile, less than a year has passed since the border was reopened, and the following conditions have already materialized:

1. The U.S. is experiencing extreme difficulty in efforts to reopen lost export markets.

2. Most of the 2005 decline in beef demand occurred after the Canadian border reopened.

3. U.S. cattle prices have fallen.

4. Canada's BSE problem continues to escalate.

All R-CALF's contentions have come to be- and nothing USDA contended has even come close- just a series of flubs....

Please don't forget during this time frame the US found two Native BSE cases. With less that prefect results in the investigations into said cases great consumer confidence booster right Oldtimer. So all the BSE fear mongering that R-CALF did with their "Consumer Group" :wink: buddies, to keep the border closed to Genuine risk of Death Canadian beef is really paying off now. :roll: But R-CALF wasn't hurting consumer confidence were they OLDTIMER. :wink: As for Japan, they openned, you screwed it up, is it our fault your packers don't know what Boneless means? Maybe if R-CALF had kept their lawyers out of the court room and their leaders away from the media the Japanese consumers and domestic consumers as far as that goes wouldn't be fearing eating beef, including US BEEF. I doubt Bullard saying if he had to eat Canadian beef he would rather eat no beef at all did much for the consumer confidence now that you have BSE either :roll: