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

MRJ- Whats a Philosophical Difference?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
A

Anonymous

Guest
Maxine-- I thought maybe you would be in a position to explain the "philosophical" difference.... :???: It couldn't be that they believe the SDCA/NCBA better represents the Packer interests- than they do the SD cattlemen... :???: It appears SDCA is pulling out all stops to try to stop any law against Packer Ownership- and their ability to use these packer owned cattle to manipulate down the prices feeders and eventually the cattleman gets.... :shock: :( You need to get them a copy of the "Talking Points" I posted so they can get a true picture of those that are affected by the law... :wink: :?

SDCA Statement on Coteau Hills Cattlemen's Disaffiliation

Scott Jones, President South Dakota Cattlemen's Association

January 18, 2008

"South Dakota Cattlemen's Association (SDCA) recently received notification from the Coteau Hills Cattlemen of their decision to disaffiliate from the SDCA. We are truly disappointed with their decision, but we will continue to work with our members in the Watertown area to address issues relevant to their businesses."

"Leadership of the Coteau Hills Cattlemen and SDCA have a philosophical difference for some time about what the role of SDCA should be and how to best achieve the goals of the association. During our annual membership meeting in November, the membership elected officers that believe SDCA should focus on policy issues to protect the business interests of cattlemen."
Click to expand...

SDCA Meets with Senator Johnson: SDCA member, Myron Williams, joined representatives from other SD ag groups in a meeting with Senator Johnson on Wednesday. In discussions about the Farm Bill, Myron indicated that SDCA had concerns with the packer ban and the negative impact it would have on voluntary, producer-driven marketing programs. SDCA opposes legislation that would restrict producers' cattle marketing options in accordance with policy recently reaffirmed by SDCA members at our annual convention last November. Though the Farm Bill was the primary topic of conversation, Williams also emphasized the importance of trade agreements to the continued profitability of cattlemen. All of the ag groups also expressed concern over the Clean Water Authority Restoration Act, which proposes to expand EPA jurisdiction over all waters by removing the term "navigable" from the Clean Water Act.
Click to expand...
 
MRJ-- I saw you lurking on here a couple of times yesterday-- Have you found out what the philosophical differences were/are yet?

I heard that this breakoff took a large part of SDCA membership...Is that right?
 
80% of the members of the largest affiliate in the state has philosophical differences :roll: :???:
Reminds me of an NCBA President when she sadly announced to the world on tv that "we weren't listening to our membership"- after members started quitting right and left.....Is that whats meant by "philosophical differences"... :???: :shock: :roll: :wink:

Could this be like NCBA who still opposes and is fighting M-COOL- even after 92% of the consumers surveyed and 92% of the cattle producers paying the checkoff support it :???: :wink: :lol: :lol: :(


Cattlemen Split from South Dakota Organization

KTIC 840 Rural Radio - Nebraska

January 18, 2008


Members of the Coteau Hills Cattlemen's Association in South Dakota will continue to participate in its livestock equipment program as well as its educational and beef industry promotional activities. But, as soon as dues expire, they will no longer be a member of the South Dakota Cattlemen's Association. A recent survey revealed that 80-percent of the organizations members responding felt it best to withdraw from the state organization. The Coteau Hills Cattlemen's Association is - or was - the largest affiliate of the South Dakota Cattlemen's Association.


According to a letter from the local organization to its members, the decision to break from the state organization was made by a review board who felt their voices had not been heard effectively at the state level for several years. It goes on to say - the board believes the problem will continue under the current leadership and staff of SDCA.


kticam.com
Click to expand...
 
Kind of makes you wonder the percentage of members in other affiliates who share those philisophical differences. You can bet those differences are not related to geography.

Come on, MRJ, this is in your back yard. Why the avoidance?
 
Sandhusker said:
Kind of makes you wonder the percentage of members in other affiliates who share those philisophical differences. You can bet those differences are not related to geography.

Come on, MRJ, this is in your back yard. Why the avoidance?
Click to expand...

Is she gone to the NCBA convention?
 
RobertMac said:
Sandhusker said:
Kind of makes you wonder the percentage of members in other affiliates who share those philisophical differences. You can bet those differences are not related to geography.

Come on, MRJ, this is in your back yard. Why the avoidance?
Click to expand...

Is she gone to the NCBA convention?
Click to expand...


No I don't think so-- if so, she's been posting on some of the other threads--but avoiding Bull Session and this thread like the Black plague :shock: :wink: :lol:

I was hoping she could lend some insight into what would make 80% of the members vote to disaffiliate with her organization...Must be a pretty good sized "philosphical difference"...But if her views are any indication of the groups philosophy- I could see why the 80% number :roll: :wink:

This reminds me of a few years back when the MSGA came out with the rule requiring members to also join NCBA- membership went out the door like prunejuice thru a loose goose...They never have fully recovered to what they were... :(
In fact just last month I got a letter and survey from the current President- who apparently is trying to figure out the problems and sent the survey to former members....The survey asked why you had dropped membership in the Stock Growers Assn- and the top item you could check on the survey was "the forced affiliation with NCBA" which I checked-- and then added "and any continuing affiliation with NCBA "...
 
OT, and the usual gang, please check my reply on the SDCA thread.

Sorry guys, I have a life. Haven't been "avoiding" anything. I will choose that to which I reply....and when. It has been interesting watching you talk to yourself, OT, before you finally drew some others in after FOUR DAYS! I wondered how long it would take.

I'm amazed anyone would find it more than mildly interesting that the directors of ONE affiliate of a state cattle organization voted (apparently no membership vote on it, BTW) to disaffiliate from the parent group. The members of Coteau Hills still have their individual memberships in the state org, as well as in NCBA.

I've been spending time learning how to copy some old photo's of my cousin, TR Stalley (who died just before Christmas of a massive heart attack) riding broncs, and making copies of his obituary and eulogy for friends and family who weren't able to attend the funeral. Pretty tough on families to lose a member who is only 61 years old, so we are hanging on to the memories and sharing photo's with one another. He was a pretty quiet guy and outside of the practical jokes and such wasn't a big talker, so photo's are especially precious. We have an aunt and uncle who are 84 years old as the last, and another uncle of 98 who are the last of our parents generation of my Seidler/Calhoon family, so have been spending some time communicating with them. More especially since the aunt lost a grandson of her aunt a week after TR. Clif was just one month older than TR and died of cancer on New Years Day. He was a good friend, and bro of my ex-sister-in law, too. So, besides being busy, I've been in a bit of a tail-spin. Too much bad things happening to good people, as you who look at the other areas of this site know all too well.

mrj
 
I knew we could "fish" you out-- Figured we'd just get a "spin' job to make the SDCA out to be the good guys with the white hats...

Now we have :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

No big deal to me- since all the SD folk I regularly speak with say SDCA is a pretty miniscule voice of only a very few SD ranchers anymore any way....
 
Last I knew, which was a couple of years ago, SDCA was around 1,000 actual, current dues paying individual or farm/ranch members.

mrj
 
mrj said:
Last I knew, which was a couple of years ago, SDCA was around 1,000 actual, current dues paying individual or farm/ranch members.

mrj
Click to expand...

You can probably drop that down now! The other guys, South Dakota Stockgrowers, have over 1700.
 
First, I stated I'm not up on the current numbers and don't know if they are published, or not.

Recent past observation tells me 'they' don't count their members the same way. In SDCA, one dues payment equals one member for the year the dues is paid, and family memberships count as one member and one vote, no matter how many there are in the family, unless each member buys an individual membership. That is, if there are four in the family ranching operation, they must each pay the individual dues to get four votes. And, unlike some organizations, SDCA and NCBA members are no longer counted as members after they stop paying dues.

Active, participating cattle producer members is what makes SDCA the valuable organization that it is. IT is the SD cattle org. which does not have a 'sugar daddy' and doesn't lure members with 'free' meals. Just provides good workshops and responsible, knowledgeable leadership in SDBIC,giving SD one of the strongest voices in Beef Checkoff management over the past several years. SDCA policies issues have had some success in setting NCBA policy issues as well.

mrj
 
MRJ, "SDCA policies issues have had some success in setting NCBA policy issues as well."

Looking at most of NCBA's policies, I don't know if having anything to do with setting those policies is much to brag about.... Probably related to the recent defection.

Who was the rocket scientist that brought up the policy about no private BSE testing? I think of him and the idiots who voted for it every renewal season.
 
Sandhusker, most likely that "rocket scientist" was a successful cattle producer, as that is the predominant member category in the NCBA Policy division. Same for those "idiots" who voted for it.

The good thing is, that the working cattle producer members of NCBA are taking stands and working on issues to better the business for ALL of us who raise cattle.

Apparently the livestock auction funded and controlled R-CALF is lead and managed by a board of geniuses (only in their own minds) directors who seem to think they can sue the cattle industry into prosperity and increase consumption of beef by spreading fears and rumors that beef is unsafe to eat.

OT, it was very apparent you were spinning and cherry picking information fed to you by some Stockgrower lemmings. I answered when I chose with facts stated publicly in newspapers and on radio by leaders of SDCA as well as with my own observations of past events.

mrj
 
OT, it was very apparent you were spinning and cherry picking information fed to you by some Stockgrower lemmings. I answered when I chose with facts stated publicly in newspapers and on radio by leaders of SDCA as well as with my own observations of past events.

mrj
Click to expand...

Here I was hoping you'd give us an "inside" scoop :wink: :lol:
 
MRJ, "The good thing is, that the working cattle producer members of NCBA are taking stands and working on issues to better the business for ALL of us who raise cattle."

I didn't realize that supporting a policy that cost producers billions of dollars and caused harm to our export markets that may never be fixed was bettering the business for ALL of us who raise cattle. Could you be a little more specific; Exactly how does NCBA figure losing business and markets benefits producers?
 
Your pet peeve there is clouding your mind, Sandhusker.

It is your OPINION that the particular NCBA policy harms the industry. NCBA did NOT cause BSE, nor the Asian reaction to it.

IF the policy was wrong, it hurt NCBA members who made the policy more than your members, since there are many more members of NCBA.

I don't agree that it was wrong, but no group is infallible either. I choose an organization where thousands of members set the policy, as there is surely less chance of failure than in organizations where a little group of directors runs everything.

mrj
 
mrj said:
Sandhusker, most likely that "rocket scientist" was a successful cattle producer, as that is the predominant member category in the NCBA Policy division. Same for those "idiots" who voted for it.

The good thing is, that the working cattle producer members of NCBA are taking stands and working on issues to better the business for ALL of us who raise cattle.

Apparently the livestock auction funded and controlled R-CALF is lead and managed by a board of geniuses (only in their own minds) directors who seem to think they can sue the cattle industry into prosperity and increase consumption of beef by spreading fears and rumors that beef is unsafe to eat.

OT, it was very apparent you were spinning and cherry picking information fed to you by some Stockgrower lemmings. I answered when I chose with facts stated publicly in newspapers and on radio by leaders of SDCA as well as with my own observations of past events.

mrj
Click to expand...

mrj, I don't think anyone thought they could sue the industry into prosperity, as you put it. They did sue for fair, safe, and transparent markets free of manipulation by their competitors (packer poultry and pork interests and captive supply). Your inability to see the difference is part of the "philosophical" difference. Not everyone wants to follow such idiocy when they become aware of it, as you are finding out.

What is amazing to me is that you can come out so harshly against this article AND NOT SAY A THING about packers lying about these facts when selling their poultry as antibiotic free or "natural" ON THEIR PACKAGES! Same with your lack of support for private testing for bse.

Let us face it mrj, you are self serving when it comes to truth for consumers. Most cattle producers see that they don't need to brainlessly support packer policies that unnecessarily misconstrue the truth and need to look out for their own interests as some on this board have noted.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top