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

NCBA on Trade Barriers, Agreements, and Beef Exports

Help Support Ranchers.net:

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Some points made by Terry Stokes recently may interest some people. At any rate, here are some FACTS about NCBA positions as excerpts from a TX Farm Bureau site, and I paraphrase with quotation marks to indicate Stokes' direct words. The opinion piece is in the current edition of the TX FB website. The Policy/Dues/Membership division, NOT the Federation of State Beef Councils, is the one referenced by the NCBA title used in this post. Obviously, there is NO involvement of Beef Checkoff funds here.

Considering yourself eating out and enjoying some top quality US beef in some foreign countries whether you are a citizen of either country. You will receive the bill, including tax and a tip. But......there is an additional tax of 30 to 50%......the tariff!

High tariffs are very hard to overturn. Isolationists see it as protecting domestic industry. Governments love the income non-citizens pay so their citizens don't complain about it. But those tariffs also cost native consumers excessively for products they want and "cheats US producers out of an opportunity to compete on a fair and level playing field", according to Stokes.

With the average global tariff on beef and beef products currently at 85% according to Greg Doud, working to reduce or eliminate those tariffs is a top priority for NCBA members, and a reason we supported CAFTA. We realize reducing tariffs is an uphill battle, but it is necessary if we are to grow overseas markets to their full potential.

Animal health issues can also be used to stop international beef trade. Stokes recently was involved in meetings in Ottawa seeking to eliminate restrictions related to anaplasmosis and bluetongue that have limited the ability of US cattlemen to sell feeder and breeding cattle into Canada. "I am pleased with the progress made and support of Canadian cattlemen in getting the Canadian government to resolve this issue", said Stokes.

"NCBA has made it clear, however, that we cannot support expansion of trade with Canada unless these issues are resolved. We value Canada as a trading partner and these issues have been a hindrance to US producers for too long", Stokes added.

NCBA continues work for improved access to the EU markets. Their insistence on "hormone free" beef is thinly veiled as a consumer health measure when in reality it is a protectionist policy to keep our superior product off the dinner plates of overseas customers.

NCBA is working with the Bush Administration, USDA, the US Trade Rep., and Congressmen to restore and gain access to markets closed due to BSE. Currently, US beef has regained access to a large percentage of those markets lost due to BSE, however, unfair tariffs and other restrictions limit the potential of those markets, so the work toward fairness must continue.

"This is why NCBA is committed to free and fair trade, and works tirelessly for global policies that create a fair opportunity for American cattlemen to export the safest and best-tasting beef in the world. Our members expect--and deserve--nothing less", said Stokes.

/BTW, I'm solely responsible for any errors made in paraphrasing Terry Stokes' comments.

MRJ
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
I found the figures on current beef exports. I did not write down the source, and don't recall where I read this, but did read it during the holidays in an ag publication.

The USA has regaqined access to beef export markets valued at $2.8 BILLION, or 74% of the 2003 export value of $3.9 BILLION dollars.

I thought that was interesting and encouraging for those of us who understand there is value to the producer in expanding beef markets, both domestic and foreign.

MRJ
 

fedup2

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
794
Reaction score
0
I would be interested in where your numbers came from. Here are mine and their sources. They sure don't agree with yours unless I'm reading something wrong! :???:

by Gregg Doud, Chief Economist and Julie McWright, Manager, International Markets – NCBA
Total 2005 beef and beef variety meat exports through August were $716 million – more than double the same time last year but still only about 35 percent of January-through-August 2003 exports (pre-mad cow disease). Mexico accounted for about two-thirds (67.5%) of the beef and beef variety meat export volume during this time and a little more than three-fourths of the total export value.

This from the Missouri beef council (which advertises the check off on its front page)
The value of exports rose 76 percent from $602.9 million in 2004 to $1.06 billion this year, but remained far short of the $3.26 billion in Jan.-Oct. 2003).
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
fedup2 said:
I would be interested in where your numbers came from. Here are mine and their sources. They sure don't agree with yours unless I'm reading something wrong! :???:

by Gregg Doud, Chief Economist and Julie McWright, Manager, International Markets – NCBA
Total 2005 beef and beef variety meat exports through August were $716 million – more than double the same time last year but still only about 35 percent of January-through-August 2003 exports (pre-mad cow disease). Mexico accounted for about two-thirds (67.5%) of the beef and beef variety meat export volume during this time and a little more than three-fourths of the total export value.

This from the Missouri beef council (which advertises the check off on its front page)
The value of exports rose 76 percent from $602.9 million in 2004 to $1.06 billion this year, but remained far short of the $3.26 billion in Jan.-Oct. 2003).


fedup2, I won't argue with your figures other than to point out yours are only through August. I don't know if it could possibly have grown to the $2.8 B. figure by years end, or not, but it would definitely be some higher than the August figure.

I read several ag papers in fits and starts during the very few quiet times during the wonderful holliday week+ filled with family and friends and travelling a little. I am trying to find it again, first because it frustrates me to not find it again, and because there were other interesting items, too.

BTW, isn't it logical and good that the MO Beef Council advertise the checkoff, since that group manages or controls the checkoff in MO? Do they give quite a bit of information to producers about what is done with the checkoff? Not critical, but interested in what other states do and how they manage producer information. It is difficult to do that adequately on a reasonable budget, I recall from my time on SD Beef Council.

MRJ
 

Latest posts

Top