• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

More R-calf sales

Help Support Ranchers.net:

As United States citizens and cattle producers, we ranchers all have a "vote" whether we actually mark an "x" on a piece of paper or not. Everything we do every day helps to define an eventual consequence. The breed of cattle we run, the bulls we buy, the feed we buy, the brand of vaccine we use, the eartags we buy, the causes we support, the vehicles we drive, everything we spend our money on (or don't spend our money on) all carries a "vote" to a certain extent.

It has been said that "the world is run by those who show up". Apathy can play a big part in ruling the world, also, by allowing those who do show up free rein to operate as they see fit. Awareness and participation by average citizens tends to keep the leaders honest.

If there was a problem with the way NCBA was run a few years back, we have only ourselves to blame. Apathy by the average rancher was apparent, and most of us didn't "show up" for the cattlemen's meetings. Then we griped because the NCBA wasn't going the way we wanted it to. In retrospect, all we had to do was go to the meetings and institute the changes we wanted. It could have been done, and lately has been done. The NCBA is now much more "user friendly", and perhaps R-Calf needs a pat on the back for getting the NCBA back on track.

On the other side of the coin, it has been observed that sometimes showing up "too much" allows the ranch back home to fall by the wayside. Back twenty or more years ago, it became rather funny because some of the cattle industry leaders were spending too much time "drinking to the health of others, and they almost ruined their own". Their home ranches were suffering because they spent their time trying to solve the bigger industry issues.

All things in moderation.
 
Sorry Oldtimer and Tommy that I didn't get your questions answered, but my ramblings were getting too long.

Oldtimer: "Can you explain the difference between NCBA's latest public position and R-CALF's-- the only difference I could see in their postconvention stance was that NCBA took forever to take the position and then refused to go to court or back a court challenge."

Well, the way I see it is that the NCBA was smart in their stance (tongue-in-cheek). They took the "popular" stand on the issue, for the record, but allowed R-Calf to take the heat. Heck, R-Calf was going to do everything in their power to keep the border shut down anyway, so why would the NCBA go out on a limb. Why would anybody deliberately stand in front of a charging bull, if they knew someone else was going to slam the gate shut. :)

Tommy: "Soapweed I would guess also that we have more in common than not. That being said, you just about admitted that the NCBA is letting R-CALF take the heat on the border issue. If so do you support their tactics?"

The NCBA did seem to make an about-face on their stand of the border issue. I do commend the NCBA because they are listening to their grass-roots producers, and making changes accordingly. Personally, I support the opening of the border. The farce of it all has gone on long enough.

As far as the Beef Check-off goes, individual R-Calf members might still support it, but the "R-Calf trend" is to be against it. Most R-Calfers don't like the NCBA, and in their minds they associate the Check-off with the NCBA, so they don't like the Check-off, either.

The Check-off is money well-spent. We need to advertise and keep Beef on the forefront, and the Check-off does a wonderful job of doing this. It will be a sad day for the cattle business if we lose it.
 
Oldtimer, it doesn't matter how many times you say it, NCBA never has, and by law, CANNOT "administrate" the Beef Checkoff.

Under the law, the Cattlemens' Beef Board manages the Beef Checkoff. They award contracts to accomplish work under strict rules in that law. There are members of many organizations, as well as some NCBA members who serve on the CBB.

Please try to be honest about this. Confusion created by mis-information does not serve the cattle/beef industry well.

MRJ
 
MRJ said:
Oldtimer, it doesn't matter how many times you say it, NCBA never has, and by law, CANNOT "administrate" the Beef Checkoff.
Click to expand...

You keep telling yourself that MRJ and you might believe it-- whenever an outfit contracts with and furnishs the day to day labor and facilities to operate (even down to the phone system and the receptionist who answers the phone) , their is no way they CAN'T be considered involved in the administration of it.............
 
You keep living in the lie about the checkoff OT but the fact remains, checkoff dollars cannot be used for lobbying. They can only be used for research, promotion, and education projects approved by the beef board members.


Name me one incident where checkoff dollars were misused due to the political influence of NCBA.

NAME ONE!


Watch this....................


If R-CULT were in charge of the beef checkoff, they would be using the money to support their packer parasite lawsuits and lying about the safety of Canadian beef.




~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Name me one incident where checkoff dollars were misused due to the political influence of NCBA.

~SH~
Click to expand...

~SH~ NCBA rides the shirtails of CBB- I've been to several dog and pony shows sponsored by the Checkoff where NCBA members walked around taking credit for the presentation, the program, and the research "their checkoff" has accomplished-- all the while hawking for new members...Then they just add in their "experts" for a 20 minute "impromptu" speach to tell you how to market your cattle the NCBA way- "And by the way we just happen to know this good old NCBA boy that runs this Nebraska feedlot that just happens to be here-we can fix you right up".....

And this is just what I've seen in little Podunk Montana- whats happening nationwide? With all their infrastructures combined its hard to keep everything seperate-- Even the chickenfeed that drops off the back of the CBB is probably a pretty tidy sum..... How could anyone tell when the CBB auditing committee is made up by charter of 2/3's NCBA members, with an NCBA member having to be committee chairman? There may be no instances of improper fund use- their could be 100's-- but it smells to high heaven when you have the chicken guarding the henhouse....
 
SH (challenge to OT): "Name me one incident where checkoff dollars were misused due to the political influence of NCBA.

NAME ONE!


OT (in response): "NCBA rides the shirtails of CBB- I've been to several dog and pony shows sponsored by the Checkoff where NCBA members walked around taking credit for the presentation, the program, and the research "their checkoff" has accomplished-- all the while hawking for new members...Then they just add in their "experts" for a 20 minute "impromptu" speach to tell you how to market your cattle the NCBA way- "And by the way we just happen to know this good old NCBA boy that runs this Nebraska feedlot that just happens to be here-we can fix you right up".....

And this is just what I've seen in little Podunk Montana- whats happening nationwide? With all their infrastructures combined its hard to keep everything seperate-- Even the chickenfeed that drops off the back of the CBB is probably a pretty tidy sum..... How could anyone tell when the CBB auditing committee is made up by charter of 2/3's NCBA members, with an NCBA member having to be committee chairman? There may be no instances of improper fund use- their could be 100's-- but it smells to high heaven when you have the chicken guarding the henhouse...."

BLAH BLAH BLAH!

Nothing but a bunch of canned sale barn statements about the checkoff.

NOT ONE EXAMPLE OF MISUSE OF CHECKOFF DOLLARS!


OT: "There may be no instances of improper fund use- their could be 100's"

AS EXPECTED!!!!!!

Give that R-CULT turbin another wrap OT. Like so many others, all you can do is repeat what you hear because you'd rather fit in with your R-CALF supporting sale barn buddies than stand up for the truth.

What a follower!



~SH~
 
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 63

Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 11:27 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Haymaker,
If you lived up here where R-calf, LMA and Pat Goggins rules everything you do with a cow, you would not dare say the things you say. Now that Pat owns every market in town and controls the buyers at all of the other markets in the state and surrounding states, controls trucking companies and also owns catfish farms and an Albertsons store, I think you would see market manipulation and price manipulation that you would understand. I went to school with Joe and John Goggins, Joe could sleep through a test and pass, got to where no one would sit on the same side of the room with him and lead to his no studying and passing.. How does J and L Livestock disperse every year? Are those cattle one iron that they have raised? no way in HELL. They are cattle Joe steals as an auctioner, puts together and sells as his own. Come up here and see. Also, the wonderful Diamond Ring Ranch sale they also own, before the border closure, sent most of the cattle from the sale to Canada. The vet that wrote the health papers for the cattle to go dared me to write to Goggins papers and ask why? This was at the beginnning of R-Calf, who do you think is financing Leo?
 
Interesting article about Mr. McDonnell's viewpoint on certain R-CALF members bidding on cattle not at local fund-raisers.

~
R-CALF Bought Cheap Cows In Canada; Group's President Says It's No 'Big Deal'

Beth Gorham
Canadian Press


March 7, 2005


WASHINGTON (CP) - Members of R-CALF, the U.S. ranchers' group that sued - on safety grounds - to keep the border closed to Canadian cattle, bought up cheap cows in Canada after the devastating ban, the group's president acknowledged Monday.

"I don't see anything ironic about it," Leo McDonnell said from Columbus, Mont. "I didn't see it as a big deal. "There's a couple of them that have bought and fed cattle up there, three or four at most," a figure disputed by a Canadian feedlot owner who says it's higher.

Three of those U.S. ranchers have been significant contributors to R-CALF's litigation fund, McDonnell said, an endeavour focused squarely on keeping the border shut.

Some in Canada are furious, saying R-CALF members have exploited a crisis they helped to create.

"It's not illegal but their ethics are terrible," said Ontario beef producer John Lunn from Norwood. "I've had enough. I have no use for these guys."

Rick Paskal, a feedlot owner in Lethbridge, Alta., said group members "recognized an opportunity for their own personal economic gain.

"They were absolutely not concerned about food safety."

In a huge setback for Canadian ranchers, a federal judge granted the group's request last week for a delay in resuming the cattle trade.

It was supposed to begin Monday for the first time in nearly two years after some $7 billion Cdn in losses for Canada's industry.

The American protectionist group has opposed reopening the border since it closed in May 2003 after Canada's first case of mad cow.

R-CALF argues that Canadian cattle are dangerous to U.S. herds and humans.

"There's nothing unique about what we're doing," said McDonnell, who noted that members of pro-trade U.S. ranching groups have also bought Canadian cattle.

"I'm not quite sure why we're the bad guys."

The Americans benefited from rock-bottom cattle prices in Canada, said Paskal, adding that he believes more than a dozen R-CALF members picked up Canadian cows, buying as much as 30,000 head of cattle each.

Some of Paskal's auctioned cows were bought by R-CALF member Lloyd DeBruycker, who has complained about "greedy" meat-packers in Canada taking his profits.

Some Canadian processors were refusing last year to slaughter cattle owned by R-CALF members.

A day after the court ruling in favour of R-CALF, U.S. senators voted to reject the U.S. Agriculture Department's plan to reopen the border to cattle, a largely symbolic move but another sign of the intense opposition that's been building.

Many legislators and U.S. ranchers have been much more vocally opposed since the last two mad cow cases were discovered in Canada in January. One cow sparked particular concern because it was born after new feed rules were implemented to halt the spread of the deadly disease.

There are still many in the U.S. industry who support dropping the ban, especially big meat-packing companies that face uncertain future without enough beef to process.

However, on Monday, a federal judge rejected efforts by the American Meat Institute to lift all barriers to Canadian beef shipments.

U.S. officials had agreed to imports of cattle up to 30 months of age, thought to be at lowest risk for contracting mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

But it could be months before they make a decision on older cattle and beef products from older cows.

~

Take care.
 
March 31, 2005

For Immediate Release

Contact Shae Dodson, Communications Coordinator 406.672.8969

Email: [email protected]



Cortez Livestock (CO) Raises $11,000 for R-CALF USA



Billings, MT ~ In an unprecedented event in the region, Cortez Livestock Auction, Cortez, CO, hosted a fund-raising sale on Wednesday, March 30, generating over $11,000 for R-CALF USA.



Judd and Rowdy Suckla, owners and operators of Cortez Livestock Auction Market, were pleased with the response to the first R-CALF USA benefit sale held in the southwestern Colorado. The Suckla Family runs generations deep in cattle production and auction market enterprises in Colorado.



"R-CALF is working day and night to restore competition to our markets and protect our industry," said Judd Suckla in a pre-sale speech. "It's time for ranchers in this part of the region to step to the plate and do their part to help the organization that's looking after us."



Larry Suckla, a Cortez area rancher, donated the black baldy steer that sold multiple times during the rollover auction. Two past presidents of Colorado Cattlemen's Association, Tom F. Spencer and Ken Clark, were among the bidders at the sale. Clark is also a former Colorado state senator.

Ginger Hill Angus, Washington, Virginia received special recognition for bidding from the furthest point from Colorado.



Alan Randolph, owner of Alan's Custom Hauling, donated a 50-mile haul that was sold to benefit R-CALF as well, raising $2,500 after selling seven times.



Leo McDonnell, founder and president of R-CALF USA, was the featured speaker prior to the sale event.



"There's no greater threat to our industry today than the extreme trade liberalization practices that are being thrown at us," said McDonnell. "Do you realize that if USDA had been successful in reopening borders to Canadian cattle and additional beef products on March 7 that the United States would now have the lowest import standards of any modern country in the world? This is serious business. We won't be able to reopen our export markets if the U.S. is a dumping ground for product the rest of the world doesn't accept.



"It's important to remember that we lost those export markets because of Canada's BSE problem. I can assure you here today that R-CALF is the only organization that has put science on the table in this dispute. USDA has offered only conjecture in the form of 'we think', 'we believe', 'it's our opinion'. R-CALF's case is strong and we have a solid foundation in scientific evidence. This is a winnable moment for cattlemen," said McDonnell.



High bidder on the baldy steer was Joe Mautz of Olathe, Colorado, at $1,500. Milton Lewis, a Cortez area rancher bought the short haul donated by Alan's Custom Hauling twice, donating more than $1,000 to the effort.



"We appreciate the support from local businesses like Dolores State Bank," said Rowdy Suckla. These folks understand what agriculture contributes to the local economy, and that hasn't gone unnoticed. We're very pleased with the success of this event. R-CALF USA is the only organization looking after grassroots producers. We're glad to help the outfit that's taking care of our customers."



Contributors at the sale included: Joe Mautz, Milton Lewis, Casey Veach, Bruce Adams, Dolores State Bank, Jimmy Suckla, Rowdy Suckla, Zane Odehl, Drew Gordanier, Steve Stocks, Steve and Pam Suckla, Charles Kahn, Keith and Deanna Ivans, Koppenhaffer Veterinary Services, Tom and Jason Blackmer, Terrill and Terra Graf, David James, James Ranch, Joe Stevenson, Al Heaton, Don Wilson, Tom Spencer, Circle T Cattle Co., Muddy Valley Ranch, Kimmi Lewis, Marty Canterbury, Ken Clark, Karen "Sparky" Turner, Ginger Hill Angus, Doug, Leesa and Sam Zalesky, and Cortez Livestock.
 
Good of you boys to start putting some money together so we'll get a bit more out of our slander/libel suit. :wink:
 
I'll have the dimes and i'll have your hundred dollars too. Better start having more sales. 7 Million a day is a fair chunk of change.
 
I'll take your hundred dollars and buy 2 R-Calf memberships with it, money well spent.
Click to expand...


You just keep socking that money away for us, we'll be down to pick it up soon. Maybe you should get some of your lies published in a newspaper or something so we can take your farm just like we're going to take Bullard's, Mc donnell's and de Bruyker's.
 
Guess I slipped up when this thread was fresh and let OT get away with another of his total fabrications about NCBA, now on page three.

Since the thread has been "refreshed" to show off current lawyer fundraisers, I will address that fabrication.

Basically, OT said that since CBB is housed in the NCBA office building, sharing a receptionist, that proves they are the same outfit. How ridiculous!

FACT: all staff people working for NCBA, and maybe doing some work on a contractual project or in any other way for CBB, record their time in 15 minute increments, and it is strictly separated and accounted for as to who is responsible for payment. Outside accountants assure complete separation of finances. CBB zealously guards the finances, as is proper.

The reason for CBB sharing office space with NCBA is to keep the overhead low, and comply with the point in the law creating the Beef Checkoff which prevented them from building a bureaucracy with the funds.

FACT: members of the CBB are nominated by state cattlemens groups, with as many as 26 such groups in a state. I know SD has 8 different statewide cattle organizations that serve on our Beef Industry Council. They come up with the nominees for the CBB from SD. There is NO requirement that CBB members or state BIC members be members of NCBA.

FACT: NCBA does not know the membership of the CBB. The question is not asked. There are NO requirements of membership in other organizations for CBB members.

FACT: There is NO requrement that committees be made up of 2/3 NCBA members, as OT has several times stated. He may have gotten that info from a LMA website, but that nevertheless DOES NOT make it true! There could be confusion over this point because there are some joint committees that have one third of members from each entity: CBB, NCBA Federation of State Beef Councils Division, and NCBA Policy Division. It appearsNCBA Federation of State Beef Councils Division members on those committees were considered the same as NCBA dues paying members. They clearly ARE NOT! Some Federation Div. members MAY be NCBA members, but are just as likely to be members of other organizations such as Farm Bureau, Farmers Union, LMA, Beef Breeds groups, etc., etc., up to at least 26 different state organizations can be represented in the Federation Division of NCBA. If one realizes that the group that is now the Federation of State Beef Councils division of NCBA was FORMERLY the National Livestock and Meat Board, it might be a little easier to understand.

Remember, this complex group of organizations was put together this way to allow the greatest possible number of cattle producer organizations to be represented and participate in "running" OUR Beef Checkoff.

I do believe, OT, that when an NCBA member uses the term "our Beef Checkoff" he means the same thing as any other rancher does when he uses that term: that the Beef Checkoff belongs to ALL cattle producers and others who pay into the system. We NCBA members are justifiably proud of the expertise of the staff we have assembled, however. Most of us are equally proud of the small staff that the CBB has put together, too. They do wonders with the limited budget they operate under. Remember that overhead for the CBB cannot, under the law, exceed 5% of income.


MRJ
 
MRJ- I'm still waiting for some proof that the Checkoff committee makeups as printed on the LMA website and several other sites is not true-- You must have some documentation somewhere to show the makeup of the committees and board....I hear this and am questioned from people every day as I collect checkoff funds and have no way to dispute it--Some are old NCBA members who told me that it was set up that way purposely so cattlemen could control their own collected funds- so outside organizations not associated to cattle raising could not get access- Sounds logical-- but you say it is not true... I'm sure as a loyal NCBA and checkoff supporter you will find the documentation I need to show these people they are wrong..........
 
OT,

If the majority of CBB members are NCBA members that only goes to show that NCBA members are more concerned about beef research, education, and promotion than the checkoff blamers you hang out with at your local sale barn. Since being an NCBA member is not a requirement of the CBB it only goes to show how desperate you blamers are to support the lie that NCBA if funded by the beef checkoff. I suppose you would rather be funding another packer parasite lawsuit huh?


~SH~
 
OT, what is your source for your claim in post above, "CBB auditing committee is made up by the charter of 2/3 NCBA members and the chairman has to be an NCBA member"?

I believe that is a totally false statement, but will check it out.

MRJ
 
OT, re. your accusations about 2/3 membership of committees required to be NCBA, I believe your "source" is regarding the Federation of State Beef Councils division of NCBA as the very same as the Policy/Dues division. That simply is not factual. Federation div. members come from the state Beef Councils and represent at least 26 different cattle organizations in the states, possibly more. They come from virtually every cattle producer organization there is.

As I've stated previously, the Federation div. is what used to be the National Livestock & Meat Board minus the people raising other meats than beef. Did you know it used to be possible to spend Beef checkoff dollars to promote pork, lamb, etc.? That is one reason I voted for the merger that eliminated the NLMB from the mix. Now the state beef councils' national organization is the Federation Division of NCBA, representing virtually ALL cattle organizations in the states having a Beef Chckoff.

That is the only explanation I can see for your "friends" comments. I haven't studied the law recently, and you can access that as easily as I can, I'm sure, but will try to get the source for anything that is written to "prove" to you what is so obvious to me. Without hearing their fears of how "outside organizations" could possibly gain control of the CBB and Checkoff funds. Care to share any of that info? Might make it more understandable.

MRJ
 
MRJ said:
OT, what is your source for your claim in post above, "CBB auditing committee is made up by the charter of 2/3 NCBA members and the chairman has to be an NCBA member"?

I believe that is a totally false statement, but will check it out.

MRJ
Click to expand...

The makeup of the CBB committees has been published on here several times and shows that certain committes have to have so many NCBA members, or 2/3 percentage of NCBA members, or be chaired by an NCBA member.... No one has ever been able to show where this info is not true....

So when talking with a longtime NCBA member who was and still is deeply involved with the checkoff, I asked about it-- I was told that the national Beef Checkoff Boards were set up with these committee requirements ( actually revised a few years after its start) to guarantee that a liberal President and administration and liberal Secretary of Agriculture (which makes the board appointments) doesn't appoint people that would want to do alternate things with the funding-- examples were Veggie groups that would want to use funding to promote vegetables along with or instead of beef, or animal rights groups that would want to spend millions on studying the humane issue of slaughtering, etc. etc. I didn't ask if he included LMA as one of these liberal groups or not---- but it was done to guarantee the checkoff is controlled by checkoff paying related industry people... This sounds very logical and makes sense- the money should be controlled by those paying it.... But then you tell me this NCBA member is wrong......That NCBA does not have control over the checkoff......

Somewhere there has to be a by-laws running the checkoff-- I've tried to find it on the checkoff website- but it is much like the NCBA's- you get sent around in circles without an answer... Can you find me these by-laws or rules that currently govern the National Beef Checkoff Board and their committees........
 

Latest posts

Top