OT, you forgot to mention that part of USCA's plan for the checkoff, according to Jim Hanna, is "to separate NCBA from checkoff funds"? That statement proves that he either does not understand, or does not admit that NCBA has NO control of Beef Checkoff funds.
NCBA has to BID for contractual work to be executed for the CBB, just like the several other entities doing such contractual work for/with Beef Checkoff dollars.
There are NO checkoff dollars going to policy issues or funding lobbying of the dues division of NCBA....period! I state this because it is a familiar, frequent accusation and was used as the basis for inciting "grass roots producers" to join R-CALF, in SD and MT, at least.
The Australian checkoff, some $162Million annually, including government money and processor money, is used to advertise ONLY exported beef, none advertises within the country.
OT, it is sad that your cult has their heads so far.....I mean are so beholden to the auction markets.....your major source of funding, auction owner/R-CALF directors prominently running the outfit, etc. that you apparently fail to think at all on your own.
Otherwise you would know it is common sense to advertise beef generically. Or would you rather it be pro-rated according to which states contribute the most money to the checkoff nationally? That would leave quite a lot to advertise "SD Produced Beef" and so on. Of course, we STILL don't have enough packing plants in-state handle all beef enrolled in the "SD PRODUCE BEEF" program we have, so that may be problematic for a time. Texas, Kansas, Nebraska all produce quite a bit of beef, so maybe.... say the top eight beef producing states, could get together and control the whole thing. Leave MT for the tourists, kooks and nuts and/or
R-CALF and R-CALF, kinder, gentler div. (aka USCA).
Sandhusker, You just can't avoid the FACT that about 95% of beef sold at retail IS produced in the USA. And that when the sky actually does start to fall, NCBA and other checkoff contractors will have a plan ready to deal with it.....just as their plans and actions prevented BSE from being a total disaster as in England.
Red Robin, thanks for beine a voice of reason and GOOD sense! The fact is that those guys fail to believe or understand that the beef checkoff already DOES advertise US beef, since that 95% (which most checkoff advertising targets) IS product of the USA. And that advertsing includes the importers checkoff dollars, too. As well as no small amount of packer and retailer dollars!
OT, good to see you, AT LAST, admit there are benefits to checkoff spending and that the new cuts and e coli research have benefitted producers!
Sandhusker, it sure would set the industry back if we get into a spitting contest, using checkoff dollars advertising SD produced calves against MT produced, or GA, or TX produced calves, for instance, to fit your demands to advertise "what WE make a profit on"!
Tex, it is very possible packers 'pay' more into checkoff projects than you would believe. I do know that on cooperative projects between restaurants and beef checkoff, the checkoff dollar is leveraged well, with the business paying many times what the checkoff dollars are going into such projects. For you alone, that is verifiable. Check with the CBB for specifics.
Maybe you boys should open your eyes to the fact that there are so many groups trying to end beef production in the USA that if we don't unite the cattle industry to keep us strong, we will go down far faster than from the phantom "invasion" of imported beef. Check our the current issue of Top Producer magazine.
mrj
NCBA has to BID for contractual work to be executed for the CBB, just like the several other entities doing such contractual work for/with Beef Checkoff dollars.
There are NO checkoff dollars going to policy issues or funding lobbying of the dues division of NCBA....period! I state this because it is a familiar, frequent accusation and was used as the basis for inciting "grass roots producers" to join R-CALF, in SD and MT, at least.
The Australian checkoff, some $162Million annually, including government money and processor money, is used to advertise ONLY exported beef, none advertises within the country.
OT, it is sad that your cult has their heads so far.....I mean are so beholden to the auction markets.....your major source of funding, auction owner/R-CALF directors prominently running the outfit, etc. that you apparently fail to think at all on your own.
Otherwise you would know it is common sense to advertise beef generically. Or would you rather it be pro-rated according to which states contribute the most money to the checkoff nationally? That would leave quite a lot to advertise "SD Produced Beef" and so on. Of course, we STILL don't have enough packing plants in-state handle all beef enrolled in the "SD PRODUCE BEEF" program we have, so that may be problematic for a time. Texas, Kansas, Nebraska all produce quite a bit of beef, so maybe.... say the top eight beef producing states, could get together and control the whole thing. Leave MT for the tourists, kooks and nuts and/or
R-CALF and R-CALF, kinder, gentler div. (aka USCA).
Sandhusker, You just can't avoid the FACT that about 95% of beef sold at retail IS produced in the USA. And that when the sky actually does start to fall, NCBA and other checkoff contractors will have a plan ready to deal with it.....just as their plans and actions prevented BSE from being a total disaster as in England.
Red Robin, thanks for beine a voice of reason and GOOD sense! The fact is that those guys fail to believe or understand that the beef checkoff already DOES advertise US beef, since that 95% (which most checkoff advertising targets) IS product of the USA. And that advertsing includes the importers checkoff dollars, too. As well as no small amount of packer and retailer dollars!
OT, good to see you, AT LAST, admit there are benefits to checkoff spending and that the new cuts and e coli research have benefitted producers!
Sandhusker, it sure would set the industry back if we get into a spitting contest, using checkoff dollars advertising SD produced calves against MT produced, or GA, or TX produced calves, for instance, to fit your demands to advertise "what WE make a profit on"!
Tex, it is very possible packers 'pay' more into checkoff projects than you would believe. I do know that on cooperative projects between restaurants and beef checkoff, the checkoff dollar is leveraged well, with the business paying many times what the checkoff dollars are going into such projects. For you alone, that is verifiable. Check with the CBB for specifics.
Maybe you boys should open your eyes to the fact that there are so many groups trying to end beef production in the USA that if we don't unite the cattle industry to keep us strong, we will go down far faster than from the phantom "invasion" of imported beef. Check our the current issue of Top Producer magazine.
mrj