Lazy WP, I am from a brand inspection area, and thought most here would understand that. I do understand the "leave the area rules", having used them often enough. I've attended, as an interested party several meetings of the International Brand Conferences in past years.
We most definitely DO support brand laws. As I believe NCBA does.
Personally, I can see that an ID number such as proposed, and many already use IN ADDITION TO brands, can stay with the carcass, unlike a brand, thereby making it FASTER to follow and contain any disease outbreak that threatens the CATTLE business OR the BEEF business, OR the CONSUMER.
I believe that is a GOOD thing. I believe it is a good additional tool, and is very useful for people who want to verify their committment to age and source verification.
I also believe it should not be mandatory and that those who choose NOT to use it can market their cattle without the 'absolute' verification of ownership.
I also know that there are some whom I would kindly call Luddites (those who oppose that which they do not understand, and/or new practices they erroneously FEEL might eliminate their jobs). I do not necessarily see that as part of the reasoning here, but it sure is on the part of the link 'lonesome' posted!
Soapweed, I'm sorry you feel that way about NCBA, and NE Cattlemen, but I sure haven't heard or seen anything indicating that they are in any way going against brands and brand inspection. It is a local and state program, crossing state lines very effectively IN THE WEST. I'm not sure it works all that well across the whole country. And it can't possibly work after the carcass has the hide removed and is comingled with others.
I have, since the beginning of anti-food animal activism, seen how NCBA has been fighting the HSUS, PETA and others who are promoting the end of branding and I darn sure intend to support that.
What other "politically correct" issues are you referring to? The only place I see anything that might be taken that way is in the environmental stewardship awards, and that is since partnering with NRCS, for one thing. And I'm not even sure it is there, just that so many of the eastern outfits are bought into fencing out the creeks, but they have hundreds of years of human pollution which they are cleaning up, so maybe they need it back there. It may be that one organization for cattle producers from the entire nation sometimes focuses on things western cattlemen don't believe necessary, but in those areas with so darn many people, it is a whole different world than our very close to pristine range lands. You can see it on the extreme east edge of both out states, IMO. The cattle aways get the blame for pollution, but densely popluated areas get a pass when their sewage systems overflow and end up with raw sewage in rivers and streams, unlike the feedlot guys who pay huge fines.
BTW, the Cattle Bus. Weekly is a pretty good outfit, but sometimes they do come out with a more 'stimulating' version of a story than is warranted. We all should read the proposal, talk to our state brand and animal health officials, and find out the facts, THEN act accordingly.
I realize branding is good at what it does, UNTIL the hide is off and the carcasses are co-mingled in a BIG packing plant. Then it worries me from a human health standpoint as well as animal health.
mrj