Do most ranchers still brand their cattle or only use ear tags?

[Amo]

What really pi$$ed me off about Nebraska Cattleman (our lobbyist group) at their annual convention was they threw Senator Ernie Chambers under the bus. They said he threatened to side with animal rights stuff if it was implemented state wide. I got my information second hand, but Ernie Chambers was at the begening infavor of state wide inspection. According to my source (brand commette member) he still was. No wonder I don't pay dues to them!

 

[Silver]

We haven't branded calves for a couple of years now. I'd like to, if only for a good excuse to give them some Ivomec while they are in. Instead we brand the keeper heifers in the chute before they go out with the bulls in the spring. I believe once I give up this day job I may go back to it, but time is at a premium. Branding takes a few days to prepare for and do, and I could be more productive using that time to get the crop in. Sometimes I feel like I'm meeting myself on the trail.

 

[gcreekrch]

We haven't branded calves for a couple of years now. I'd like to, if only for a good excuse to give them some Ivomec while they are in. Instead we brand the keeper heifers in the chute before they go out with the bulls in the spring. I believe once I give up this day job I may go back to it, but time is at a premium. Branding takes a few days to prepare for and do, and I could be more productive using that time to get the crop in. Sometimes I feel like I'm meeting myself on the trail.

I'll come up and brand for you Silver, I'll even bring my own iron and not charge a thing..........

A few big, slick calves might just pay your outside wages someday.

 

[tytower]

Until they get glass RFID implants going properly branding is the only way and I think even if the implants are made cheaper and useable for cattle control I will still brand.

Its fun for the Grandchildren and for me . By crikey they jump don't they . Gets an approving laugh out of every kid and thats a bit of the secret of raising kids. They gotta have fun in their growing years as well as good meat and fresh milk and eggs. Ive got a big heavy brand for maximum pain and I'm willing to brand any dissenters!.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Welcome from Downunder. Hope it's not to hot down there, we are having a mild winter in cow country up here.

 

[mrj]

What really pi$$ed me off about Nebraska Cattleman (our lobbyist group) at their annual convention was they threw Senator Ernie Chambers under the bus. They said he threatened to side with animal rights stuff if it was implemented state wide. I got my information second hand, but Ernie Chambers was at the begening infavor of state wide inspection. According to my source (brand commette member) he still was. No wonder I don't pay dues to them!

Seems to me it is your loss. Good cattle organizations are valuable to us. And have been to both sides of our family since the beginning of private ranches in western SD. Which I believe was more or less when the Open Range days ended with the 1902 Roundup of the area between the Missouri River and the Black Hills (and maybe a bit before and after that year).

We have been impressed with NE Cattlemens' Assoc. and their work for the cattle producer, and NOT impressed with Ernie Chambers, having watched his 'performances' on TV a few times during legislative sessions, where he seemed to be overly divisive and petulant in his arguments on a variety of issues. Having family in the greater Omaha area school systems, his efforts to 'change' the school system has been successful, but quality of education suffered, in some very good (prior to his 'successes') schools. It would be nice if problems were simply 'growing pains', but appears more systemic than that, imo.

mrj

 

[Amo]

I think the only people that are a fan of Ernie Chambers are the people in his district. There were about8 senators on the Ag commettee. Ernie Chambers, 2 lawyers from Lincoln & Omaha, 3 of them were active farmers/ranchers in non brand area. 2 were ranchers from brand area. One of them was a past president of Nebraska Cattleman (NC). For instance the lawyers from Omaha & Chambers understood that with out a brand, there is no way to prove ownership....example a VIN # on a vechile. They completely understood and were infavor state wide brand. The 3 senators from non brand areas understood, but said the people they represent didn't want it. I can understand that. They were elected to vote the way their constituents wanted. Then the other 2 since the feedlots were dead set against it as was NC they were against it, despite their constituents being in favor of it.

Correct me if Im wrong, but I don't think the South Dakota Stock Growers represent the feedlots? Guess thats kinda my problem with lobbyist groups. Ill agree with say Nebraska Cattleman on one thing yet disagree with them on another. Why would I give money to someone I disagree with? Seams like a lot of the time NC will side with the packers on a topic, yet they are supposed to represent the cow calf guy. Granted sometimes both sides can agree on a topic then yes one lobbyist can do both. Yet if there is a difference of opinon, then what. Farm Bearu pushed through a ban on packer ownership of hogs in Nebraska. One state senator stated Farm Bearu's board was in favor of it, but not all the members of the orginization were in favor of it. So I guess its that way with all of them. NC does do a few good things, but I guess I feel they side more with the packer instead of the rancher.

 

[jodywy]

"
Correct me if Im wrong, but I don't think the South Dakota Stock Growers represent the feedlots? Guess thats kinda my problem with lobbyist groups. Ill agree with say Nebraska Cattleman on one thing yet disagree with them on another. Why would I give money to someone I disagree with? Seams like a lot of the time NC will side with the packers on a topic, yet they are supposed to represent the cow calf guy. Granted sometimes both sides can agree on a topic then yes one lobbyist can do both. Yet if there is a difference of opinon, then what. Farm Bearu pushed through a ban on packer ownership of hogs in Nebraska. One state senator stated Farm Bearu's board was in favor of it, but not all the members of the orginization were in favor of it. So I guess its that way with all of them. NC does do a few good things, but I guess I feel they side more with the packer instead of the rancher."
go to meetings and vote , sometimes the things you disagree with only need one or two vote to go the other way.

 

[mrj]

I think the only people that are a fan of Ernie Chambers are the people in his district. There were about8 senators on the Ag commettee. Ernie Chambers, 2 lawyers from Lincoln & Omaha, 3 of them were active farmers/ranchers in non brand area. 2 were ranchers from brand area. One of them was a past president of Nebraska Cattleman (NC). For instance the lawyers from Omaha & Chambers understood that with out a brand, there is no way to prove ownership....example a VIN # on a vechile. They completely understood and were infavor state wide brand. The 3 senators from non brand areas understood, but said the people they represent didn't want it. I can understand that. They were elected to vote the way their constituents wanted. Then the other 2 since the feedlots were dead set against it as was NC they were against it, despite their constituents being in favor of it.

Correct me if Im wrong, but I don't think the South Dakota Stock Growers represent the feedlots? Guess thats kinda my problem with lobbyist groups. Ill agree with say Nebraska Cattleman on one thing yet disagree with them on another. Why would I give money to someone I disagree with? Seams like a lot of the time NC will side with the packers on a topic, yet they are supposed to represent the cow calf guy. Granted sometimes both sides can agree on a topic then yes one lobbyist can do both. Yet if there is a difference of opinon, then what. Farm Bearu pushed through a ban on packer ownership of hogs in Nebraska. One state senator stated Farm Bearu's board was in favor of it, but not all the members of the orginization were in favor of it. So I guess its that way with all of them. NC does do a few good things, but I guess I feel they side more with the packer instead of the rancher.

I'm not sure who the SDSGA represents, but their public statements come from Bullard, and the auction markets, which also help them raise money.

My history with ag groups: our families were members of SDSGA from the beginning of our history as ranchers in SD. in the late 1800's. Then during a controversial issue, the directors of SDSGA, after the convention ended, reversed a vote of the membership. That had never been done before and was something we believe changed the organization completely. We continued with NCBA, also originating in late 1800's, built by cow/calf ranchers. We eventually joined the SD Cattlemen, an organization of both cow/calf and feeders. SDCA manages to operate in a manner fair to both. After all, we both are segments of the same business and what harms one harms both, especially where government is concerned! We joined Farm Bureau for insurance, and because we believe they are on the right track, too.

Concerning brand inspection, we don't want to operate without it in west river, but if those east of the river are content with the way it is, so be it. We haven't had any problem with losing cattle to theft, have probably had an occasional stray found by brand inspection and the inspection program is better than ever.

So far as "not giving money" to a group you don't agree with.....isn't that a little like cutting ones nose to spite your face???? I'm never going to find anyone I agree on in every issue, but if we can agree on most, and the overall track of the group is right, I think more is to be gained from working together on that track!

Just as I agree with NCBA working with 'Packers' when we can. NCBA members were able to enlist help, both financial and otherwise, from packers to find ways to cut the spread of E Coli, for one. That IS a problem which comes to them INSIDE the animal, not of packer origin, nor even feedlot origin, according to science. Stopping the spread was believed to be possible, but research proved that, while it MAY be possible, it is VERY difficult. Like many organisms, E Coli O157:H7 can and will change to survive in various environments. Extreme cleaning measures in packing plants, including steam cleaning simply spread the 'bugs'. They simply went airborne, even into the heating and cooling ducts. I'm not sure of current status, but believe the incidences have been greatly cut, and that research continues.

Government excesses, whether regulation of our business, or crazy over-spending is a major area where SDCA, NCBA and AFBF usually do a good job for cattle producers, imo. All those groups have strongly supported the Beef Check Off and helped it to be successful in the face of continuing attempts to end it. We continue to support those organizations because of the benefit to our chosen industry.

mrj

 

[4Diamond]

Seems to me NCBA and the packers are a little to cozy together and the packers have all the control and use that to their full advantage.

 

[4Diamond]

Further more Missouri is putting up a vote for another $1 on the beef checkoff. It's starting to find major opposition.

 

[mrj]

Seems to me NCBA and the packers are a little to cozy together and the packers have all the control and use that to their full advantage.

Do you have any specifics? What has been done that bothers you?

mrj

 

[4Diamond]

Don't feel comfortable saying anymore. We each have our opinions and I'm sure they don't match. We'll leave it at that.

 

[Amo]

Further more Missouri is putting up a vote for another $1 on the beef checkoff. It's starting to find major opposition.

Here is a fine example as to why NCBA and their state affiliates side with their packers more than the producer. They give a warm and fuzzy feeling saying "we are in this together". Yet the packer doesn't have to a penny to the check off. They tried to get an extra check off in Nebraska too. Saying expenses have gone up since 1980, but no new revanue to help promote the product. I asked at the meeting why the packer don't pay the checkoff. We build all of this world wide demand for our product. Yes they have to pay for it, but why do they get to sell prime grade meet to Japan, and then import Austrailian beef for USA consumers to eat. We built demand for our product. They mark it up, and I would guess they make more profit per box off our beef sent to Japan, than the boxes sold to Walmart that came from Argentina or New Zeland. They said they have so much extra money tied up in R & D on how to process and market their product, etc. Since they have all that expense, they shouldn't have to help support promotion by paying the check off. So I have to figure out how to be more efficient in my ranch operation, and pay $1 a head. To me thats like saying Cummins Engines needs to pay for all of Dodge Truck advertising, because if it wasn't for Dodge using their engine they wouldn't be able to sell an engine to Peterbuilt, Freightliner, or Kenworth.

Not that Im against the check off, or some of the promotion. In fact the Nebraska beef council does some really awesome stuff promoting our industry to bloggers and people who have been on talk shows like Opraha (not her though) explaining how we take care of animals, explaining antibiodics, etc. People that are multi generations away from the farm & have no clue as to where their food comes from. Totally awesome program! Yet they use this to sway favor of getting another $1 than just the 50 cents they get now. Yet, all of this promotion they were talking about cost about 7 cents of their 50 cents they get. Then they send I think it was 15 cents to the "federation". It just all depends on if you think your getting a bang for your buck or not. Personally Id give a $1 if it would go to program where they bring bloggers out etc. Yet they are going to delute it into lord knows what (federation/conventions, etc.), and if they rearanged their budget (one board member doesn't think any money should go to the federation) they could give raises, increase the educating they are doing, and still be able to live with the 50 cents they get.

Id say your SD Cattleman is like our Nebraska Cattleman. The Nebraska stock growers went with the Nebraska feedlot council to form one group, Nebraska Cattleman. Then recently R-CALF was formed. Bill Bullard is the CEO of RCALF. They are usually polar opposite to NCBA. In Nebraska we have ICON, Independent Cattleman of Nebraska. Your SDSGA is affiliated with R-CALF. What I find funny is the beef board says any contractor (lobbyist) has a chance at check off funding. Yet the beef board, in Nebraska anyway is so heavily loaded with pro NCBA members, that if R-CALF wanted to apply for funding, they wouldn't have a chance at getting it. So all of the promotion money gets spent the way NCBA sees fit. I have never been a member of NC. When the district I live in had an NC canadate running for the beef board, and a R-CALF canadate running....all of the sudden I started receiving the NC magazine. The first issue had nice profiles of each person running for the beef board if they were a pro NC canadate. Which its their magazine, that they are sending to their membership. So its their right to print what ever they want. Yet in true "Walter Cronkite" style journalism, shouldn't they have profiled BOTH canadates? Yes its their magazine, but not exactly very "fair and ballanced" journalism IMHO. Thus that kinda shows the mentality of NC & NCBA.

Im not going to get super indepth because it probably isn't the place to, but in Nebraska we had a ban on packer ownership of livestock. Only state in the nation I do believe. That way the packer had to negoiate with the producer to get price that deals with supply and demand. Where if the packer owns cattle, he can use them to hedge his need (captive supply, formulated, etc.).....drive down the price if they feel its needed. The law is still in effect on cattle but not on hogs now. I understand both side of this debate. Yet at the end of the day, its verticle intergration. Where it delt with hogs, I doubt NCBA or NC gave an opinion on it. R-CALF & ICON were against it. I would guess, if asked off camera, they would be in favor of it. Thus just a matter of time until its the same way in the cattle industry. Thus another example of NCBA & NC siding with the packers instead of the producers. Just like you said they are supposed to represent both side since we are in the same boat. Yet the packing industry is trying to purchase cattle as cheaply as possible, which is their business. Yet we are trying to sell our cattle as high as we can, which is our business. Can one lobbyist unbiasedly represent both parties when they are at other ends of the spectrum at times? There is a reason we have Democrats & Republicans. Same applies here IMHO.

As to why I don't pay dues to any one here is another example. So R-CALF tries to represent more of the independant producers. Which I would rather agree with. ICON isn't a state affialiate of R-CALF, but its close. Well anyone know of Farmers Union? From what I know their membership base is organic/nichse market crowd. So they are also in favor of "independat producers". At least Nebraska Farmers Union formed an alliance with HSUS. They are trying to make nice by saying they are infavor of the good family farmer instead of corperate farming. Which there is an aweful lot of overlap in that statement. Since NFU has a lot of membership that has "free range chicken" mentality and HSUS "says" they are on the same page, they kinda crawled into bed with each other. I despise HSUS, so I despise NFU. Yet ICON will take the same side on issues with NFU. Which I understand 2 against 1 on a certian issue. ICON & R-CALF distance themselves from R-CALF. Which I approve of, yet they deal with NFU. Then you have NC which would love to give HSUS a swift kick in the balls, which I agree with. So.....do I give money to all of them, since I agree with all of them some of the time? Or give none of them any of my money because they sometimes I agree and other times I don't? Then which ones make the cut or don't.

 

[4Diamond]

Further more Missouri is putting up a vote for another $1 on the beef checkoff. It's starting to find major opposition.

Here is a fine example as to why NCBA and their state affiliates side with their packers more than the producer. They give a warm and fuzzy feeling saying "we are in this together". Yet the packer doesn't have to a penny to the check off. They tried to get an extra check off in Nebraska too. Saying expenses have gone up since 1980, but no new revanue to help promote the product. I asked at the meeting why the packer don't pay the checkoff. We build all of this world wide demand for our product. Yes they have to pay for it, but why do they get to sell prime grade meet to Japan, and then import Austrailian beef for USA consumers to eat. We built demand for our product. They mark it up, and I would guess they make more profit per box off our beef sent to Japan, than the boxes sold to Walmart that came from Argentina or New Zeland. They said they have so much extra money tied up in R & D on how to process and market their product, etc. Since they have all that expense, they shouldn't have to help support promotion by paying the check off. So I have to figure out how to be more efficient in my ranch operation, and pay $1 a head. To me thats like saying Cummins Engines needs to pay for all of Dodge Truck advertising, because if it wasn't for Dodge using their engine they wouldn't be able to sell an engine to Peterbuilt, Freightliner, or Kenworth.

Not that Im against the check off, or some of the promotion. In fact the Nebraska beef council does some really awesome stuff promoting our industry to bloggers and people who have been on talk shows like Opraha (not her though) explaining how we take care of animals, explaining antibiodics, etc. People that are multi generations away from the farm & have no clue as to where their food comes from. Totally awesome program! Yet they use this to sway favor of getting another $1 than just the 50 cents they get now. Yet, all of this promotion they were talking about cost about 7 cents of their 50 cents they get. Then they send I think it was 15 cents to the "federation". It just all depends on if you think your getting a bang for your buck or not. Personally Id give a $1 if it would go to program where they bring bloggers out etc. Yet they are going to delute it into lord knows what (federation/conventions, etc.), and if they rearanged their budget (one board member doesn't think any money should go to the federation) they could give raises, increase the educating they are doing, and still be able to live with the 50 cents they get.

Id say your SD Cattleman is like our Nebraska Cattleman. The Nebraska stock growers went with the Nebraska feedlot council to form one group, Nebraska Cattleman. Then recently R-CALF was formed. Bill Bullard is the CEO of RCALF. They are usually polar opposite to NCBA. In Nebraska we have ICON, Independent Cattleman of Nebraska. Your SDSGA is affiliated with R-CALF. What I find funny is the beef board says any contractor (lobbyist) has a chance at check off funding. Yet the beef board, in Nebraska anyway is so heavily loaded with pro NCBA members, that if R-CALF wanted to apply for funding, they wouldn't have a chance at getting it. So all of the promotion money gets spent the way NCBA sees fit. I have never been a member of NC. When the district I live in had an NC canadate running for the beef board, and a R-CALF canadate running....all of the sudden I started receiving the NC magazine. The first issue had nice profiles of each person running for the beef board if they were a pro NC canadate. Which its their magazine, that they are sending to their membership. So its their right to print what ever they want. Yet in true "Walter Cronkite" style journalism, shouldn't they have profiled BOTH canadates? Yes its their magazine, but not exactly very "fair and ballanced" journalism IMHO. Thus that kinda shows the mentality of NC & NCBA.

Im not going to get super indepth because it probably isn't the place to, but in Nebraska we had a ban on packer ownership of livestock. Only state in the nation I do believe. That way the packer had to negoiate with the producer to get price that deals with supply and demand. Where if the packer owns cattle, he can use them to hedge his need (captive supply, formulated, etc.).....drive down the price if they feel its needed. The law is still in effect on cattle but not on hogs now. I understand both side of this debate. Yet at the end of the day, its verticle intergration. Where it delt with hogs, I doubt NCBA or NC gave an opinion on it. R-CALF & ICON were against it. I would guess, if asked off camera, they would be in favor of it. Thus just a matter of time until its the same way in the cattle industry. Thus another example of NCBA & NC siding with the packers instead of the producers. Just like you said they are supposed to represent both side since we are in the same boat. Yet the packing industry is trying to purchase cattle as cheaply as possible, which is their business. Yet we are trying to sell our cattle as high as we can, which is our business. Can one lobbyist unbiasedly represent both parties when they are at other ends of the spectrum at times? There is a reason we have Democrats & Republicans. Same applies here IMHO.

As to why I don't pay dues to any one here is another example. So R-CALF tries to represent more of the independant producers. Which I would rather agree with. ICON isn't a state affialiate of R-CALF, but its close. Well anyone know of Farmers Union? From what I know their membership base is organic/nichse market crowd. So they are also in favor of "independat producers". At least Nebraska Farmers Union formed an alliance with HSUS. They are trying to make nice by saying they are infavor of the good family farmer instead of corperate farming. Which there is an aweful lot of overlap in that statement. Since NFU has a lot of membership that has "free range chicken" mentality and HSUS "says" they are on the same page, they kinda crawled into bed with each other. I despise HSUS, so I despise NFU. Yet ICON will take the same side on issues with NFU. Which I understand 2 against 1 on a certian issue. ICON & R-CALF distance themselves from R-CALF. Which I approve of, yet they deal with NFU. Then you have NC which would love to give HSUS a swift kick in the balls, which I agree with. So.....do I give money to all of them, since I agree with all of them some of the time? Or give none of them any of my money because they sometimes I agree and other times I don't? Then which ones make the cut or don't.

I tend to side with you and I like the info you presented. It's amazing the budget NCBA has from our beef "tax" checkoff.

 

[Amo]

Another example is the new VFD's. Veternairy Feed Directives. I don't agree with the logic behind it, but I understand it. I also will say, I don't think any lobbyist group really faught against its implamentation. I also understand the both sides of the debate about COOL.

NCBA, NC, Id guess SDC were all in favor or the repeal of COOL for various free trade reasons. OK, so now the american consumer wants to know how the food they are buying, was raised, medicated, etc. American ranchers are the only producer that have to comply with these new regulations. Now if Suzzy the house wife is concerned about the over use of antibiodics. Suzzy is elated about the new VFD's. Gives her the peace of mind that she is buying a good product to feed her family. The thing is ranchers in any other country can still use antibiodics in any way, shape, or form. That product can get imported into the USA. Once here ya they have to comply, but not until then. If Suzzy doesn't know where what she is buying came from....or even know other countries don't have to comply with the VFD, the whole rule is pointless! Im not trying to start a fight about COOL. I understood the opposiations reasionings toward it. Yet at the end of the day, yes I was pro COOL. Yup, we lost our fight. The thing is where was NCBA when this regulation was being discussed? Most likely brown nosing JBS at some resort in Cancoun. Im thinking they were in favor of it. So our cost of production gets increased. Packer can use foriegn cattle to manupliate(reduce) the price. We potentially (maybe, maybe not) have to take a lesser price with a higher cost of production.

Im not saying NCBA is completely against the rancher. They do do some good things. Like what you gave an example to with the ecoli stuff. They give a good impression, but I guess at the end of the day they will side with packer more than the producer.

Have a good day!

 

[mrj]

Another example is the new VFD's. Veternairy Feed Directives. I don't agree with the logic behind it, but I understand it. I also will say, I don't think any lobbyist group really faught against its implamentation. I also understand the both sides of the debate about COOL.

NCBA, NC, Id guess SDC were all in favor or the repeal of COOL for various free trade reasons. OK, so now the american consumer wants to know how the food they are buying, was raised, medicated, etc. American ranchers are the only producer that have to comply with these new regulations. Now if Suzzy the house wife is concerned about the over use of antibiodics. Suzzy is elated about the new VFD's. Gives her the peace of mind that she is buying a good product to feed her family. The thing is ranchers in any other country can still use antibiodics in any way, shape, or form. That product can get imported into the USA. Once here ya they have to comply, but not until then. If Suzzy doesn't know where what she is buying came from....or even know other countries don't have to comply with the VFD, the whole rule is pointless! Im not trying to start a fight about COOL. I understood the opposiations reasionings toward it. Yet at the end of the day, yes I was pro COOL. Yup, we lost our fight. The thing is where was NCBA when this regulation was being discussed? Most likely brown nosing JBS at some resort in Cancoun. Im thinking they were in favor of it. So our cost of production gets increased. Packer can use foriegn cattle to manupliate(reduce) the price. We potentially (maybe, maybe not) have to take a lesser price with a higher cost of production.

Im not saying NCBA is completely against the rancher. They do do some good things. Like what you gave an example to with the ecoli stuff. They give a good impression, but I guess at the end of the day they will side with packer more than the producer.

Have a good day!

Re. the VFD directive: where do you suppose that came from? Wasn't it our ultimate customers....the very people who buy beef? When they speak on such an important issue, we had better listen and act, IMO. Whether we believe there is or is not a problem with antibiotic use on food animals, methods of giving any injection, whether or not there is reason to believe our use (and/or abuse, unless you believe that doesn't happen!) of antibiotics causes resistance in humans, consumers already see us as 'the enemy'. We need to do all we can to assure them we are acting in a positive way to assure that the food they get from us is not going to cause them health problems. I'm not sure the science is yet proven that those of us who have always followed the rules cause problems, but until we can show we are not, maybe the best practices and working with a Veterinarian AND doing what is accepted, will leave us better able to justify proper use. We also need to partner with professionals to assure consumers that withdrawal times prevent ANY antibiotic from being in the beef we sell.

I don't know where your claims that other nations use antibiotics and then export that beef to the USA. I'm not certain that is accurate, with the "equal standards" required for imported meat.

Your snide remark "NCBA brownnosing JBS in Cancun" is ridiculous! Your implication is that NCBA spends the members money frivolously on high living travel. I don't know where you get your information, but, having personally attended and participated in many NCBA meetings, all but two conventions and most of the mid-year meetings over the past 45 years, I have strong reason to not believe your statement and implications. I have known lots of the cow/calf and even feeder members of NCBA and have many good friends among them, as well as staff over those years. If you have 'been there and done that' and still believe 'they' are controlled by other than cattlemen/women, that is your loss, imo. Our ranch has benefitted from the educational Cattlemens' College, and the speakers at conventions to the point we know our investment of time and our own money to attend meetings has been worthwhile. We are pleased that our younger generations are carrying on the traditions of participation as they are able.

Do you really not understand that beef is imported into this country to a. make leaner hamburger from our fatter, higher quality beef trimmings? And b. because recent high prices have made most of our beef priced too high for many consumers to buy! I am not against sending both ends of our USA beef to other nations because we can get more money for it there: a. the 'odd' parts of cattle not well accepted here, such as tripe, shortbreads, etc., and b. the top quality meats can bring much more money either in top restaurants here, or in select markets overseas.

mrj

 

[Amo]

Im not trying to start a fight. Obviously we are on different sides of opinion here. That is fine. Just the way I see it.

Yes I know why we import leaner cuts and export expensive cuts. If you don't think the packer uses captive supply meat to manipulate markets, explain to me why we had a major price spike when the Canadian border was closed? I really doubt it was all because of the Atkins diet craze. Yes we do need to listen to our consumers/customer! Im not against the VFD. I also agree there is over use & abuse. Im not familiar with the "equal standards" you mention. I can't swear on a bible that we are the only country on the planet that uses antibiotics, but it doesn't make much sense for other countries not to. All Im saying is if John Doe in Argentina has unlimited access to aeromiosin crumbles, and can feed it 24/7 from birth till time of sale to who ever buys it. He can do what ever he wants & not tell a soul about how he raised his cattle, right? The whole reason for the VFD is to limit access to producers that wouldn't follow proper protocol. Only feed so much when needed etc. John Doe can do what ever he wants, when ever he wants. There is no paper trail, no consequences as long as nobody knows what he has done. So if JBS imports various "mystery meats" that have been over fed antibiotics to blend with our fattier burger cuts, is Suzzy the house wife not getting beef that has had the improper use of antibiotics that was in violation of the VFD? Like I said, Im not against the VFD. Its just if we aren't all playing by the same rules, its a pointless law (in my honest opinion) IMHO. The question about other countries having to comply was brought up at a feed meeting discussing VFD. The presenter stated that it would be possible. That is the information Im going off of, and to me it makes sense.


Yes it was a snide remark. It expresses my opinion on them as a lobbyist group. That they side the feeder/packer more than the rancher. When its membership dues/money they are spending they can spend it how ever they want, provided membership feels it well worth it. My ultimate concern is how they spend the check off funding. Yes check off funding is supervised. They also got caught a while back for improper use of check off funding. I don't know what for. It could very well of been a superficial infraction. I have been to a few conventions in my day, but never been to an NCBA convention. Most conventions do have awesome/educational presentations. I dont know, but would assume all of them speakers at the meetings are sponsored by pfizer,elanco, ADM, Hubbard, etc. I bet most have a trade show. Those booths aren't free. Id guess those generate a good chunk of revenue for the group. All that stuff at your conventions gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling that this is a great organization to be a member of. How many people pay attention to the policies that get voted on by the membership IDK. Hopefully they all do. Honestly, I kinda doubt the vast majority of membership study each item that gets voted on. Just presume that "well the board is a good group, if they think its right...then it must be". Im sure some are. Hopefully no ones opinions are swayed by organizational lobbyists that give them a good meal, or vacation. If so, then you can just roll with the boards recommendations. We are all human too. Just like when the NC magazine profiled the beef board candidates they endorsed. Two of the 3 or 4 districts in Nebraska that they profiled the endorsed candidates lost by a landslide. Ive been told that NCBA/NC has been loosing membership the last few years. No factual numbers, just what a person that is in the loop of things told me. So some people do realize they have to study issues. Sometimes I have to wonder if people just think, well they have our best interests in mind so they just go with the flow.

Have you seen a pie chart on how they budget their funding? Id guess the vast majority of your dues gets spent on lobbyist work. Most of the convention/meeting funding is probably being paid for by corporate sponsors Id guess. If you feel NCBA is promoting policy that reflects your views on policy/legislation, then its the group for you. Myself & others feel they spend the due money on legislation that does more for the packer. He is the person that is supposed to buy your product at the cheapest possible price, which he should & does! Just like when I asked why the packer doesn't pay the check off. The response was they have such higher costs than we do. If there is no packer, we have no one to sell our beef to. Well in a capitalistic economy, if JBS cant be profitable and there is money to be made someone will fill its place. Product is there & people need to eat. Yet NCBA, who is supposed to represent us says we need to let them slide so we will have someone to sell our beef to. So in that example, do you think they are representing you or the packer?

I have friends that are members of NC & NCBA. We all have good points and bad points. No one will always agree on everything. Im sure NCBA has done the industry good things. If you feel your getting a good return on your investment with them, then keep it up. Im not trying to steer you away from them, just explaining the way I feel.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Why did your price spike a year ago?

The Canadian border was open.

 

[mrj]

Don't feel comfortable saying anymore. We each have our opinions and I'm sure they don't match. We'll leave it at that.

I sure an sorry you don't feel comfortable to give reasons for such a strong opinion, and one with which I equally strongly disagree.

Having participated in NCBA meetings over many years, I believe NCBA's cattlemen are pretty strong in their beliefs and have the guts and the brains to stand up to packers or anyone else. Surely there are subjects where it serves both groups well to stand together.

mrj