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

Nashville

Bill

Well-known member
NCBA: Cattle Industry Convention & Trade Show Kick Off In Nashville

NASHVILLE (Jan. 31, 2007) – Over 6000 cattle producers from across the nation have descended on Nashville for the U.S. cattle industry’s largest meeting, the Cattle Industry Annual Convention and NCBA Trade Show. The convention is hosted by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, American National CattleWomen, the National Cattlemen’s Foundation and Cattle-Fax.

Wednesday’s activities begin with Cattlemen’s College®, a full day of hands-on instruction and producer education. Sponsored by Pfizer Animal Health, this year’s session is the most comprehensive Cattlemen’s College® ever. It features 18 breakout workshops, on a wide range of topics including estate planning, low-stress cattle handling, conservation easements, the 2007 Farm Bill, calf weaning strategies and preconditioning, and improving genetics.

Wednesday afternoon, the cattle industry’s largest trade show opens a four-day run, featuring over 270 exhibitors. For the first time ever, the trade show will conclude on Saturday with a day that is free and open to the public.

Wednesday’s general session will feature Kevin Freiberg, who will discuss unconventional business practices and how entrepreneurs can use unique strategies to gain a competitive edge. This session will also provide a preview of NCBA’s Cattlemen to Cattlemen, the new weekly television program that makes its debut Feb. 6 on RFD-TV.

Thursday is also an information-packed day for cattlemen, beginning with the annual Cattle-Fax Outlook Seminar. Top experts from Cattle-Fax will discuss the cattle market outlook for 2007, including the impact of exports and rising feedgrain prices. Beef Industry Issues Forums will offer insights on animal identification, natural and organic beef, the impact of ethanol and bio-fuels on the livestock industry, facts about foot-and-mouth disease, and recent task force recommendations for enhancing the Beef Checkoff Program.

Friday’s keynote speaker will be U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns. Cattlemen look forward to hearing from Sec. Johanns on such issues as the upcoming Farm Bill debate and USDA’s ongoing efforts to expand foreign market access for U.S. beef.

Friday also features committee meetings in which NCBA members debate specific policy issues. Separate committees governing checkoff-funded programs will also receive program updates and evaluate the progress this year’s checkoff program goals. These committee meetings lay the groundwork for Saturday, when the convention concludes with meetings of the Cattlemen’s Beef Board and the NCBA Board of Directors.

NCBA President Mike John, a cattleman from Huntsville, Mo., is pleased to conclude his term with one of the largest cattle industry conventions in recent memory.

“I’m glad to see so many cattlemen bringing energy and enthusiasm to the annual convention,“ John said. “It tells me that despite some difficult challenges, U.S. cattlemen want to play an active role in shaping their business climate and take charge of their future.”

It looks like a lot of information and discussion for those who will be in attendance. I know a few Canadians made the trip down as well.
 

Bill

Well-known member
More Than 6,000 Cattlemen Gather In Nashville, TN
At press time for this issue, the real policy discussions of the National Cattle Industry Convention in Nashville, TN, hadn't yet been held. The first 11/2 days are primarily composed of educational and informational programs. Following that, the committees get down to the business of making policy.

There's no shortage of issues at these meetings -- everything from the environment to taxes -- that present both challenges and opportunities for the industry. But in the meeting halls this year, the talk among the 6,000+ cattlemen in attendance centers on several key issues.

The primary topic is the corn market and the whole ethanol thing in general. The second is the national beef checkoff. The third is national ID. Let's talk about the latter two issues.

The industry survey released last week ("Producer Survey Results Show Checkoff Changes Wanted," Jan. 26 BEEF Cow-Calf Weekly) showed continued broad support for the checkoff. But a majority of respondents felt the case hasn't been made for raising the $1/head checkoff assessment.

Others are concerned the committee's recommendation of $2 is rather arbitrary and will likely create similar problems in the future. Instead, they suggest the checkoff fee be indexed to cattle prices, the Consumer Price Index or something similar.

Of course, there can be a lot of unintended consequences in these recommendations, and broad industry support and discussion is needed.

For instance, the vast majority of respondents favored spending checkoff funds only to promote U.S. beef. But giving up the 10% of total checkoff dollars contributed by importers each year brings up another set of issues. By eschewing the importer dollars, would we have to raise the assessment anyway to make up the loss of market clout?

And what would divorcing ourselves from importer dollars mean for all the retail promotions the Beef Board has used so successfully, and which have so dramatically helped to leverage our dollars and impact. If it means we must give up the industry's hugely successful promotions with the Taco Bells and Quiznos of the world, will that be more damaging than helpful to our demand-building efforts?

Another area of universal agreement was the desire by a majority of survey respondents for a regular vote on the continuation of the checkoff. The industry needs to come up with improvements to the governance -- and everyone wants producers to understand how they can contribute their input -- but no one wants the industry to waste millions every few years for an election when industry support remains as strong as it is, either.


The third topic is national ID. There's broad support for a voluntary program, and a general distrust of having the government involved in any aspect of the business. With every day that passes since the first case of BSE, the motivation or incentive for national ID seems to wane.

On the other side, there's also reluctant acknowledgement that our customers are demanding it, and the industry is at major and significant risk by not addressing national ID more aggressively. And, while no one says it in public, there's also recognition that a voluntary program, while it may provide economic incentives for adopters, won't ever adequately safeguard the industry or help it achieve its broader goals.

With sentiment running so high for promotion of only U.S. beef, I wouldn't be surprised if the industry looked hard at mandatory programs in both country-of-origin labeling and national ID as a solution. It might not satisfy anyone, but it might be better than the alternatives.
-- Troy Marshall
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Just this morning I heard Secretary Johanns say that we were going to continue to promote US BEEF in other countries. If it is a wise thing to do abroad, why would the same not apply here? If a "rising tide lifts all boats" here, why doesn't it overseas?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "Just this morning I heard Secretary Johanns say that we were going to continue to promote US BEEF in other countries. If it is a wise thing to do abroad, why would the same not apply here?"

Because under your flawed law, only 5% of our total US beef consumption would not be US Beef.

SYMBOLISM OVER SUBSTANCE!


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "Just this morning I heard Secretary Johanns say that we were going to continue to promote US BEEF in other countries. If it is a wise thing to do abroad, why would the same not apply here?"

Because under your flawed law, only 5% of our total US beef consumption would not be US Beef.

SYMBOLISM OVER SUBSTANCE!


~SH~

Sorry, SH, but more than 5% of our beef is imported, and if you want to blame the right outfit for the exceptions, you need to blame the NCBA.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "Sorry, SH, but more than 5% of our beef is imported, and if you want to blame the right outfit for the exceptions, you need to blame the NCBA."

Only 5% of our current US beef consumption would be labeled as "US BEEF" under "M"COOL as written by Leo McDonnell. Leo said "M"COOL was a good law as it's written and during an "M"COOL listening session in Billings he admitted to helping to write the law.

How the hell do you come off blaming NCBA for the exemptions when Leo claimed to have written the law?

Typical blamer!


~SH~
 

ocm

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "Just this morning I heard Secretary Johanns say that we were going to continue to promote US BEEF in other countries. If it is a wise thing to do abroad, why would the same not apply here?"

Because under your flawed law, only 5% of our total US beef consumption would not be US Beef.

SYMBOLISM OVER SUBSTANCE!


~SH~

Sorry, SH, but more than 5% of our beef is imported, and if you want to blame the right outfit for the exceptions, you need to blame the NCBA.

I think the checkoff survey has had quite an effect on our weathervane oriented politicians.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "Sorry, SH, but more than 5% of our beef is imported, and if you want to blame the right outfit for the exceptions, you need to blame the NCBA."

Only 5% of our current US beef consumption would be labeled as "US BEEF" under "M"COOL as written by Leo McDonnell. Leo said "M"COOL was a good law as it's written and during an "M"COOL listening session in Billings he admitted to helping to write the law.

How the hell do you come off blaming NCBA for the exemptions when Leo claimed to have written the law?

Typical blamer!


~SH~

He did help to write the law. So did NCBA. Why do you blame Leo, but not NCBA?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "He did help to write the law. So did NCBA. Why do you blame Leo, but not NCBA?"

NCBA supports voluntary COOL. NCBA didn't have anything to do with initiating this law. R-CULT can take full credit for their flawed law.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "He did help to write the law. So did NCBA. Why do you blame Leo, but not NCBA?"

NCBA supports voluntary COOL. NCBA didn't have anything to do with initiating this law. R-CULT can take full credit for their flawed law.


~SH~

So NCBA had nothing to do with writing this law? Do you want to lose another $100?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "So NCBA had nothing to do with writing this law? Do you want to lose another $100?"

R-CULT initiated this law and said it's a good law as it's written. Therefore, they support the food service exemptions.

Why are you trying to pawn it off on NCBA?

It's your stupid law! Be proud of it. It exemplifies your level of intelligence.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "So NCBA had nothing to do with writing this law? Do you want to lose another $100?"

R-CULT initiated this law and said it's a good law as it's written. Therefore, they support the food service exemptions.

Why are you trying to pawn it off on NCBA?

It's your stupid law! Be proud of it. It exemplifies your level of intelligence.


~SH~

So no bet?
 

Bill

Well-known member
NCBA: Johanns Briefs Cattlemen on Farm Bill, Trade, Animal ID

NASHVILLE (Feb. 2, 2007) – U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns gave the keynote address Friday at the Cattle Industry Annual Convention and Trade Show in Nashville. The convention is hosted by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, American National CattleWomen, the National Cattlemen’s Foundation and Cattle-Fax. A capacity crowd of cattle producers from across the nation heard Johanns outline USDA’s 2007 Farm Bill proposals, which were released earlier this week.

Johanns focused on several Farm Bill proposals of particular interest to cattlemen, including programs to assist beginning farmers and ranchers, funding dedicated to enhancing exports and reducing trade barriers, and increased conservation funding for conservation programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).

Johanns said cattle producers have been among the leading participants in EQIP. But he emphasized that all conservation programs need to be simplified, and their primary objective must be “to reward the best stewards of the land.”

Turning to trade issues, Johanns said his patience has run out with South Korea’s continued blocking of U.S. beef shipments, despite the fact that the market is ostensibly open to American beef.

“Korea’s (Sept. 2006) announcement about accepting U.S. beef was all about words, not actions,” Johanns said to the applause of cattlemen. “But I’m not giving up. I’ll continue pressing this issue through all channels available and at my disposal.”

Johanns said he understands the frustration cattlemen feel as a result of trade disputes. But he encouraged support for USDA’s proposed rule to expand the range of cattle and beef imports from Canada. Comments are due March 12 on the proposal to allow imports of cattle up to eight years of age and beef from cattle of any age.

“I appreciate that there is a big debate here about this proposal, and there should be,” he said. “But I always say there’s a ‘golden rule’ of trade. We need to treat others the way we expect to be treated.”

But Johanns emphasized that trading partners must also show a stronger commitment to trade in good faith. USDA hopes to advance that cause by petitioning the International Organization for Animal Health (OIE) for a BSE risk classification that will help restore beef export markets. Having already submitted data from over 800,000 BSE tests over a three-year period, Johanns anticipates a preliminary finding on the appropriate risk level classification to be released in March, with a final vote by OIE members likely taking place in May. He predicted this proceeding could pave the way for establishment of greater export levels, if all parties involved are committed to abiding by the results.

“We are prepared to live by international guidelines,” he said. “We are prepared to ‘walk the walk.’”

Johanns said trade barriers are not only unfair and frustrating, but they also limit choices for overseas consumers.

“You know, we heard all these (negative) reports about what Japanese consumers would do with U.S. beef,” Johanns said. “You know what they did? They stood in line for it.”

In closing, Johanns praised NCBA for its leadership on animal identification issues. He encouraged voluntary participation in the livestock premises registration effort.

“I think it’s the wrong approach to say, ‘it’s the Washington way or the highway,’” he said. “Help us make a voluntary identification system a reality – a meaningful reality.”

The convention continued Friday with committee meetings on a wide range of programs and policy areas. It concludes Saturday with a meeting of the NCBA Board of Directors and election of 2007 officers.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "So no bet?

No bet!

Yet another Sandcheska ILLUSION!

NCBA helping to write the law to minimize the damage AFTER R-CULT INITIATED THE LAW does not mean NCBA supported R-CULT'S UNENFORCEABLE FLAWED LAW.

You can't pawn your stupid law off on NCBA or the food service exemptions.

NCBA supported voluntary COOL not R-CULT'S "PLEASE GOVERNMENT, SAVE US FROM OURSELVES AGAIN" labeling law which exempted 75% of the imported beef.

Leo said it's a good law as written. That means he supported the food service exemptions and the watered down enforcement so producers who felt consumers should know where their beef comes from would not be burdened with traceback.


~SH~
 

Mike

Well-known member
NCBA PROMPTS INTRODUCTION OF MEAT LABELING MEASURES
WASHINGTON, D.C., April 22, 1997 -- The National Cattlemen's Beef
Association (NCBA) supports federal legislation to require imported
meat and meat products be labeled to identify the country of origin,
says NCBA President Max Deets, Beloit, Kan.

Sens. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., Larry Craig, R-Idaho, Max Baucus, D-
Mont., Thomas Daschle, D-S.D. and Tim Johnson, D-S.D. have introduced
S 617, a country-of-origin labeling measure. Reps. Helen Chenoweth, R-
Idaho and Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D. have introduced similar bipartisan
legislation, HR 1371, in the House of Representatives. Legislation
with 22 cosponsors to require country-of-origin labeling on perishable
agricultural commodities has also been introduced in the House. NCBA
policy backs efforts to let consumers know the origin of the meat they
purchase, Deets says.

NCBA is encouraged by the quick response to beef industry
concerns, says Chuck Lambert, NCBA chief economist. NCBA members
revised and reaffirmed beef labeling policy at their annual convention
in late January, and NCBA has urged Congress to introduce legislation
to require labeling of imported products. NCBA will continue to push
for full approval of a labeling measure.

"Beef quality and consistency are big issues for U.S. cattle
producers. Consumers want quality and consistency, and producers are
continually working to give them what they want," Lambert says. "U.S.
producers provide the safest and most wholesome beef product in the
world."

The recently introduced legislation is a win-win initiative for
both producers and consumers, Lambert says. U.S. cattle producers
stand behind their product, and the legislation will give them an even
stronger stance. It will give consumers the ability to make informed
decisions when purchasing meat and meat products, he says.

Initiated in 1898, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association is
the marketing organization and trade association for America's one
million cattle farmers and ranchers. With offices in Denver, Chicago
and Washington, D.C., NCBA is a consumer-focused, producer-directed
organization representing the largest segment of the nation's food and
fiber industry.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike,

DID NCBA SUPPORT THE CURRENT COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELING LAW?

YES OR NO?


Who the hell do you think you're kidding this time?

ANOTHER ILLUSION!

10 years ago Mike!

You truly are as deceptive as Little Sandcheska!



~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
SH, you clearly have no idea how the current law came about. You don't know who was involved and who wanted what. You're just flapping your lips and spewing bile. Either become informed on the subject or keep your kindergarten ass out of the conversation.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandcheska: "SH, you clearly have no idea how the current law came about. You don't know who was involved and who wanted what. You're just flapping your lips and spewing bile. Either become informed on the subject or keep your kindergarten ass out of the conversation."

Hahaha! Listen to the little ankle biter. Talk couldn't be any cheaper than it is from you.

You couldn't back any position you hold on a bet let alone disprove anyone else's position with facts to the contrary. All you ever have is cheap talk.

NCBA opposed MANDATORY Country of Origin Labeling.
Leo said "M"COOL, as written, is a good law and admitted to writing the law.

You can't change the facts with ILLUSIONS Big Talkin' Little Boy.


~SH~
 
Top