GIPSA rule

[Big Muddy rancher]

Well Said. :clap: :clap: :clap: :cowboy:

 

[Faster horses]

:agree:

 

[gcreekrch]

Me too.

 

[Soapweed]

Thanks, High Plains. That was good.

 

[leanin' H]

I have been trying to get myself up to speed and educated on this very touchy issue. Thanks High Plains, for a very well thought out and written opinion. I also agree, which may or may not be good. :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Well from 40+ years of watching with the Industrys doing/ being given more and more of their own oversight- without stringent government oversight- we end up with the Wall Street type Bush Busts- and the Eastern Livestock debacles-when the rules didn't keep up with the changing market structure----- which down the line always seem to leave the big industry folks/financiers all walking out smelling like a rose- and the little guys/cow-calf producers sinking deeper in the sh*t....

I feel for all those guys that sold their years production- that now hold no fund checks- and are looking at possibly getting a dime back on their dollar months/years down the line when the courts decide.....

There was a reason the last Farm Bill (supported by cultists from both sides- R's and D's- besides the normal cattle producers) asked for the USDA to put in more stringent GIPSA rules of oversight- transparency- and teeth into enforcement .....

 

[Bill]

Hey High Plains. Very well said :clap:

 

[Sandhusker]

Actually, you're right, I don't know the details. But, I do know who is a credible source for information, and it sure as hell isn't the packers or their puppets.

Sandhusker, doesn't it bother you just a little bit to be on the same side of this issue as Oldtimer? :???: :wink:

Does it bother you to be on the same side of this issue as SH? :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Soapweed]

Actually, you're right, I don't know the details. But, I do know who is a credible source for information, and it sure as hell isn't the packers or their puppets.

Sandhusker, doesn't it bother you just a little bit to be on the same side of this issue as Oldtimer? :???: :wink:

Does it bother you to be on the same side of this issue as SH? :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[RobertMac]

Aren't these the same orgs that said the meat industry would collapse if COOL was implemented? Aren't cattle prices at record or near record prices? When are these people going to lose creditability with producers?
As producers, we don't have a good option here...either be under the thumb of big business or big government!!!!!!

 

[High Plains]

That's a good point, RobertMac. However, the current high price of cattle has little to do with COOL, I'm afraid. It has a lot more to do with the global beef trade, value of U.S. currency and the dwindling U.S. cow herd. On the negative side, U.S. beef demand is down again this year and that has been the trend since 2006. U.S. per capita meat consumption, as a whole, is down hard since '06 as well. Those points don't show a great impact from COOL nor a positive impact from U.S. consumer demand. Beef exports, on the other hand, are rolling out nicely this year while imports are limited. The weak dollar has been a boon to exports and that factor is always friendly to ag commodities. Mexican feeder cattle imports are up a good deal two years in a row since 2008. I don't have the scoop on Canadian feeder imports, but could find it. Bottom line is that COOL is not stopping imported cattle, at least from Mexico. However, the costs of COOL are still in place in managing the SKU's in the packing plant through packaging, labeling and record keeping; on down through the retailer that must also provide proof of country of origin.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

That's a good point, RobertMac. However, the current high price of cattle has little to do with COOL, I'm afraid. It has a lot more to do with the global beef trade, value of U.S. currency and the dwindling U.S. cow herd. On the negative side, U.S. beef demand is down again this year and that has been the trend since 2006. U.S. per capita meat consumption, as a whole, is down hard since '06 as well. Those points don't show a great impact from COOL nor a positive impact from U.S. consumer demand. Beef exports, on the other hand, are rolling out nicely this year while imports are limited. The weak dollar has been a boon to exports and that factor is always friendly to ag commodities. Mexican feeder cattle imports are up a good deal two years in a row since 2008. I don't have the scoop on Canadian feeder imports, but could find it. Bottom line is that COOL is not stopping imported cattle, at least from Mexico. However, the costs of COOL are still in place in managing the SKU's in the packing plant through packaging, labeling and record keeping; on down through the retailer that must also provide proof of country of origin.

There is US feeders coming into Canada at the moment.

Heaven forbid that oldtimer finds out cause that just isn't right. :wink:

 

[High Plains]

I hope that the Canadian feedlots make a buck on those feeder cattle. Might give them a chance to buy another one someday. :wink: I also hope that the markets determine the price. Capitalism. :cboy:

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

I hope that the Canadian feedlots make a buck on those feeder cattle. Might give them a chance to buy another one someday. :wink: I also hope that the markets determine the price. Capitalism. :cboy:

I hope so to. With the price of feeders and grain and the fats I don't really see how it computes. :???:

My dilemma is I am wintering my calves as I have been doing for quite awhile. Am I going to get payed for wintering them.
I had been keeping my yearlings for the summer and didn't make much or lost some for three years. I sold last spring and it would have been the year to grass them. :?

I hope I get payed for wintering them this year.

 

[Faster horses]

Me too, BMR. I hope you get paid for wintering them. Somehow,
I think you will.

Good luck!!

 

[RobertMac]

High Plains, I wasn't trying to make the point that COOL was responsible for the prices(and I agree with your assessment)...I was pointing out that these same groups were putting out propaganda to protect their interest then, as they are now.

The problem is the market power the few large packers have. When GIPSA was written, the few large packers then had about 40% market share...about the same as Tyson today. The government needs to enforce the laws that are on the books now and any real change has to come from the bottom up.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker to Soapweed: "Does it bother you to be on the same side of this issue as SH?"

That's a good question Soapweed, why not answer it truthfully?

Is it easier to stand beside those whose emotional driven beliefs resulted in 9 lost court cases because it's the popular belief at the local salebarn or someone who has been chastised for insulting common salebarn rhetoric with unopposed facts to the contrary?

Sandhusker asks a good question and I'd like to hear your answer. You can always use my lack of tact as a convenient excuse. Haha.

Consider all the previous debate on country of origin labeling Soapweed. You remember my views. Think back to those debates in contrast to the ridiculous "CAN-MEX-USA" beef labels that resulted from all that rherotic.

In retrospect, was I wrong to take a stand in opposition to such an easily supportable concept ("don't consumers have the right to know where their beef comes from")? Is Country of Origin Labeling what the R-CALFers said it would be?

The packer blamers have set out to discredit me in any manner possible. Well, you can see how successful that was. I'm still here and not affected in the least by their discrediting antics. I wouldn't give you a dime for R-CALF then and I won't give you a penny for them now because I believe they are a mental cancer on the progression of this industry and I will stand on that.


Sandhusker, does it bother you to support an organization that couldn't win a court decision if their lives depended on it? It doesn't bother me a bit to stand alone and it never did.


To the original question asked, if the GIPSA rules are proposed, they will be ruled unconstitutional in a court of law.

That's a pretty bold statement on my part wouldn't you say Sandhusker? Just think how much fun you can have with it if I am wrong, but I won't be.


Excellent post High Plains. Best I have read in a long time.

Funny how those who sell fat cattle seem to know more about fat cattle marketing options than packer blamers who just sell feeder cattle at the local sale barn.


~SH~

 

[Beefman]

The new GIPSA rules are a bad idea with regard to beef cattle trade. Perhaps the structure of the poultry business needs some serious overhauling and certainly the hog business may be next in line. Those business structures are entirely different than the beef industry. The beef business will suffer greatly with the vague language simply allowing a "one price fits all" set of rules to be interpreted anyway a court or judge would like. It appears that many of the cattle producers that are in favor of the new rules are potentially the farthest removed and least informed about what goes on at the feedlot and packing level. I have spent a lot of time in each of the sectors of the beef business from seedstock to packer and my perspective from that experience gives me a firm opinion that the suggested rules are bad for business. I find it insane that the very group of producers that accuses the feeders/packers of having too much control of cattle price would prefer to give control to the government and the courts. In what area has the government really improved our lives in the past handful of years? Country of Origin Labeling? How did that work out for you? It added the cost that was expected and that's about it. Made it tougher for packers to manage and sell beef, period. Great, let's all go out and handicap the guys that create a market outlet for our cattle. Perfect.

Taking away the opportunity to receive a premium for the better cattle simply flies in the face of a competitive market. Folks, I've sold fed cattle to the packer in three different marketing formats. I've talked to many, many packer buyers about how they price different pens of cattle. I've run many breakevens at the feedlot level to try to establish price to purchase cattle. There are differences in cattle based on multiple factors. If you want a better price, deliver what the market wants. Go find the value-added opportunities out there. Complaining that your neighbor was paid more than you were paid at the auction does not imply market manipulation. It means that the buyer paid what he was willing to pay on that given day. If you don't like the system then find a way to market the cattle better. Go talk to four or five feedlots and get them interested in your cattle. Show them why they should have confidence in the quality that you are offering. Retain ownership or even just 25% ownership of the cattle in the feedlot. If it's all roses and stacks of cash for the feeders and packers then why not take a hold and play in those wading pools? You might just find out that it's pretty tough to make a buck in any of the beef producing sectors and not everyone can win all the time.

We've got to get our eyes open here before it's too late! Government intervention will not improve the beef business, I assure you. Yes, we need price transparency in the marketplace and we need the current GIPSA rules to protect the basic principals of a fair market, but these new rules will hinder the markets. If this thing goes through in it's current form then we've got trouble on our hands. We'll be headed right back down the commodity path that we've been trying to scratch and claw out of for all of these years.

Finally, if your cattle are poor and below the market or if you are lazy and just want your cash handed over without any effort, then yes, you will probably love the proposed GIPSA rules because these are the only folks that will actually see their cattle value go up!! The better and prudent producer will be handcuffed and slapped in the face for his efforts.

Perhaps I'll create some unrest here and may not win friends in certain circles. That's fine. I'm saying what's in my heart and on my mind. I've seen this business from more angles than many producers and I feel it my responsibility to speak up for my own good and the good of everyone that raises these beasts for a living.

God bless you all and may He see fit that we can continue to feed His people with nutritious and tasty BEEF!

:cboy:

Great post High Plains.

As you point out, the proposed rule as detailed at at http://archive.gipsa.usda.gov/rulemaking/fr10/06-22-10.pdf
is extremely vague, confusing, and most of all, should be extremely concerning to anyone that sells calves or finished cattle into a value based market.

Most unfortunately, as some have already indicated on this thread, they admit to a high level of ignorance on the rule, yet will blindly line up and drink the Rcalf coolaid.

Nearly 27,000 comments on the proposed rule have been posted at http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#home Many of the comments are "form letters" from poultry producers, where several thousand posts read exactly like the next, and speak in favor of the proposed rule. You don't have to dig very deep to realize many of these posts come from folks that have very little, if any knowledge of the poultry industry.

Even so, as you point out, what might be a need in the poultry industry might not fit the beef industry. Most telling is a letter sent to Ag Secy Vilsack on Oct 4, http://agri-pulse.com/uploaded/GIPSA_letter_4Oct10.pdf
criticizing him for 1) way overstepping the guidelines from the 2008 Farm Bill and 2) failing to complete a comprehensive economic analysis on the effect of the proposed rule on the marketplace. This letter had a nearly equal number of signatures from both sides of the aisle.

Producers should never under estimate their ability to make a difference. Folks should make their own comments prior to midnight eastern time tomorrow night.

 

[Anonymous]

The sad part of this is that those who promote this "market socialism" are never held accountable for their short sighted decisions after these rules take affect. As blamers do, they just blame someone else for the consequences of their actions.


~SH~

 

[HAY MAKER]

The sad part of this is that those who promote this "market socialism" are never held accountable for their short sighted decisions after these rules take affect. As blamers do, they just blame someone else for the consequences of their actions.


~SH~

"The proposed GIPSA rule does nothing more than clarify that a prohibited practice is a prohibited practice, period." ?????????
Can anyone explain the differnce between the proposed bill and the existing one ?
good luck