• 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

Help Support Ranchers.net:

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
NCBA files to open CAN border



NCBA Executive Committee Reviews Draft of Amicus Brief for 9th Circuit Court

Goal: To Represent the Science and Safety of Beef



Washington, D.C. ­ April 15, 2005 ­ The National Cattlemen¹s Beef Association¹s (NCBA) Executive Committee, comprised of 31 voting members, all of whom are beef producers from across the country, have reviewed a draft of an amicus brief that will be submitted to the 9th Circuit Court in the case of R-CALF vs. USDA, APHIS and Mike Johanns In His Capacity as the Secretary of Agriculture. Amicus, literally meaning ³friend of the court,² is a brief filed by someone who is not party to the litigation but believes the court's decision may affect its interest. The deadline for submission is April 21, 2005.



The purpose of the amicus brief is to demonstrate to the court that the Minimal Risk Rule is based on science that consistently shows beef is safe from BSE.



In addition to being reviewed by NCBA¹s executive committee, it also is being considered by more than 20 state cattlemen and other agriculture organizations that feel equally passionate about ensuring beef¹s safety is represented in the hearing.



³The preliminary injunction granted by a district court in Montana is founded on a concern over human and animal health. The science clearly states beef is safe from BSE. Our goal is to ensure the Circuit Court, which is considering the government¹s appeal to this injunction, has the information it needs to make a decision based on science,² said Jim McAdams, Texas cattle producer and NCBA president. ³The fact of the matter is court discussions become a matter of public record, and as an industry, ranchers and farmers will not stand idly by and let a lack of information or misinformation from activists groups within our industry question the safety of beef.²



The injunction was granted to R-CALF in early March. R-CALF, an acronym for Ranchers-Cattlemen¹s Action Legal Fund, has said in its efforts to maintain trade barriers with Canada that ³recent scientific evidence has revealed that the agent responsible for BSE contamination has recently been found not just in nerve tissue, but in muscle tissue as well, raising concerns that standards should be raised, not lowered.²



³It is inexcusable for a group of our own cattlemen to misrepresent the science to maintain its isolationist position. Consumers have every reason to believe in beef¹s safety. BSE infectivity has never been found in meat,² said McAdams. ³NCBA and American ranchers and farmers are providing leadership for our industry by ensuring that the only cattle industry voice in this debate is not that of an isolationist-motivated activist group,² he said.



BSE experts from the World Organization for Animal Health agree that BSE is not a public health or herd health risk when key firewalls are in place to protect consumers and cattle, even when a case of BSE is found. The United States has these firewalls in place, as does Canada.



At NCBA¹s annual meeting in February, cattle producers directed its association staff to resolve 11 challenges before resuming trade with Canada. NCBA has made considerable progress on these directives. Remaining issues include:



Achieving science-based harmonization of blue tongue and anaplasmosis trade requirements for breeding cattle. This effort is supported by Canadian officials and the Canadian beef industry; however, the recent injunction is testing Canada¹s willingness to resolve this barrier.



Re-opening markets that are closed to U.S. beef, specifically Japan. Smaller export markets are continuing to open, including the recent announcements of trade resumption with Egypt and Taiwan, but NCBA is continuing to pressure Congress and the Administration to push for a resolution on Japan. Japanese officials have said that R-Calf¹s injunction is stalling progress on opening this key market.



³U.S. cattlemen benefit from global trade. Prior to our border slamming shut after December 23, 2003, the value of U.S. beef exports was roughly $175 per head on fed cattle prices. In order to ensure a future for tomorrow¹s cattlemen, we need growth in our industry. We cannot grow by artificially limiting supply or limiting ourselves to U.S. consumers that represent only four percent of the world¹s population. The guiding principle of our trade relations, and fair trade, must be science,² said McAdams.



Consumer confidence in the safety of beef has remained strong, despite the December 23, 2003, discovery and subsequent announcements. Likewise, consumer beef demand was up nearly eight percent in 2004, which is in part a testament to the checkoff-funded work of America¹s beef producers.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
HAY MAKER said:
NCBA files to open CAN border



NCBA Executive Committee Reviews Draft of Amicus Brief for 9th Circuit Court

Goal: To Represent the Science and Safety of Beef



Washington, D.C. ­ April 15, 2005 ­ The National Cattlemen¹s Beef Association¹s (NCBA) Executive Committee, comprised of 31 voting members, all of whom are beef producers from across the country, have reviewed a draft of an amicus brief that will be submitted to the 9th Circuit Court in the case of R-CALF vs. USDA, APHIS and Mike Johanns In His Capacity as the Secretary of Agriculture. Amicus, literally meaning ³friend of the court,² is a brief filed by someone who is not party to the litigation but believes the court's decision may affect its interest. The deadline for submission is April 21, 2005.



The purpose of the amicus brief is to demonstrate to the court that the Minimal Risk Rule is based on science that consistently shows beef is safe from BSE.



In addition to being reviewed by NCBA¹s executive committee, it also is being considered by more than 20 state cattlemen and other agriculture organizations that feel equally passionate about ensuring beef¹s safety is represented in the hearing.



³The preliminary injunction granted by a district court in Montana is founded on a concern over human and animal health. The science clearly states beef is safe from BSE. Our goal is to ensure the Circuit Court, which is considering the government¹s appeal to this injunction, has the information it needs to make a decision based on science,² said Jim McAdams, Texas cattle producer and NCBA president. ³The fact of the matter is court discussions become a matter of public record, and as an industry, ranchers and farmers will not stand idly by and let a lack of information or misinformation from activists groups within our industry question the safety of beef.²



The injunction was granted to R-CALF in early March. R-CALF, an acronym for Ranchers-Cattlemen¹s Action Legal Fund, has said in its efforts to maintain trade barriers with Canada that ³recent scientific evidence has revealed that the agent responsible for BSE contamination has recently been found not just in nerve tissue, but in muscle tissue as well, raising concerns that standards should be raised, not lowered.²



³It is inexcusable for a group of our own cattlemen to misrepresent the science to maintain its isolationist position. Consumers have every reason to believe in beef¹s safety. BSE infectivity has never been found in meat,² said McAdams. ³NCBA and American ranchers and farmers are providing leadership for our industry by ensuring that the only cattle industry voice in this debate is not that of an isolationist-motivated activist group,² he said.



BSE experts from the World Organization for Animal Health agree that BSE is not a public health or herd health risk when key firewalls are in place to protect consumers and cattle, even when a case of BSE is found. The United States has these firewalls in place, as does Canada.



At NCBA¹s annual meeting in February, cattle producers directed its association staff to resolve 11 challenges before resuming trade with Canada. NCBA has made considerable progress on these directives. Remaining issues include:


Achieving science-based harmonization of blue tongue and anaplasmosis trade requirements for breeding cattle. This effort is supported by Canadian officials and the Canadian beef industry; however, the recent injunction is testing Canada¹s willingness to resolve this barrier.



Re-opening markets that are closed to U.S. beef, specifically Japan. Smaller export markets are continuing to open, including the recent announcements of trade resumption with Egypt and Taiwan, but NCBA is continuing to pressure Congress and the Administration to push for a resolution on Japan. Japanese officials have said that R-Calf¹s injunction is stalling progress on opening this key market.



³U.S. cattlemen benefit from global trade. Prior to our border slamming shut after December 23, 2003, the value of U.S. beef exports was roughly $175 per head on fed cattle prices. In order to ensure a future for tomorrow¹s cattlemen, we need growth in our industry. We cannot grow by artificially limiting supply or limiting ourselves to U.S. consumers that represent only four percent of the world¹s population. The guiding principle of our trade relations, and fair trade, must be science,² said McAdams.



Consumer confidence in the safety of beef has remained strong, despite the December 23, 2003, discovery and subsequent announcements. Likewise, consumer beef demand was up nearly eight percent in 2004, which is in part a testament to the checkoff-funded work of America¹s beef producers.



I guess I missed this considerable progress they made?.............good luck
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
HAY MAKER said:
HAY MAKER said:
NCBA files to open CAN border



NCBA Executive Committee Reviews Draft of Amicus Brief for 9th Circuit Court

Goal: To Represent the Science and Safety of Beef



Washington, D.C. ­ April 15, 2005 ­ The National Cattlemen¹s Beef Association¹s (NCBA) Executive Committee, comprised of 31 voting members, all of whom are beef producers from across the country, have reviewed a draft of an amicus brief that will be submitted to the 9th Circuit Court in the case of R-CALF vs. USDA, APHIS and Mike Johanns In His Capacity as the Secretary of Agriculture. Amicus, literally meaning ³friend of the court,² is a brief filed by someone who is not party to the litigation but believes the court's decision may affect its interest. The deadline for submission is April 21, 2005.



The purpose of the amicus brief is to demonstrate to the court that the Minimal Risk Rule is based on science that consistently shows beef is safe from BSE.



In addition to being reviewed by NCBA¹s executive committee, it also is being considered by more than 20 state cattlemen and other agriculture organizations that feel equally passionate about ensuring beef¹s safety is represented in the hearing.



³The preliminary injunction granted by a district court in Montana is founded on a concern over human and animal health. The science clearly states beef is safe from BSE. Our goal is to ensure the Circuit Court, which is considering the government¹s appeal to this injunction, has the information it needs to make a decision based on science,² said Jim McAdams, Texas cattle producer and NCBA president. ³The fact of the matter is court discussions become a matter of public record, and as an industry, ranchers and farmers will not stand idly by and let a lack of information or misinformation from activists groups within our industry question the safety of beef.²



The injunction was granted to R-CALF in early March. R-CALF, an acronym for Ranchers-Cattlemen¹s Action Legal Fund, has said in its efforts to maintain trade barriers with Canada that ³recent scientific evidence has revealed that the agent responsible for BSE contamination has recently been found not just in nerve tissue, but in muscle tissue as well, raising concerns that standards should be raised, not lowered.²



³It is inexcusable for a group of our own cattlemen to misrepresent the science to maintain its isolationist position. Consumers have every reason to believe in beef¹s safety. BSE infectivity has never been found in meat,² said McAdams. ³NCBA and American ranchers and farmers are providing leadership for our industry by ensuring that the only cattle industry voice in this debate is not that of an isolationist-motivated activist group,² he said.



BSE experts from the World Organization for Animal Health agree that BSE is not a public health or herd health risk when key firewalls are in place to protect consumers and cattle, even when a case of BSE is found. The United States has these firewalls in place, as does Canada.



At NCBA¹s annual meeting in February, cattle producers directed its association staff to resolve 11 challenges before resuming trade with Canada. NCBA has made considerable progress on these directives. Remaining issues include:


Achieving science-based harmonization of blue tongue and anaplasmosis trade requirements for breeding cattle. This effort is supported by Canadian officials and the Canadian beef industry; however, the recent injunction is testing Canada¹s willingness to resolve this barrier.



Re-opening markets that are closed to U.S. beef, specifically Japan. Smaller export markets are continuing to open, including the recent announcements of trade resumption with Egypt and Taiwan, but NCBA is continuing to pressure Congress and the Administration to push for a resolution on Japan. Japanese officials have said that R-Calf¹s injunction is stalling progress on opening this key market.



³U.S. cattlemen benefit from global trade. Prior to our border slamming shut after December 23, 2003, the value of U.S. beef exports was roughly $175 per head on fed cattle prices. In order to ensure a future for tomorrow¹s cattlemen, we need growth in our industry. We cannot grow by artificially limiting supply or limiting ourselves to U.S. consumers that represent only four percent of the world¹s population. The guiding principle of our trade relations, and fair trade, must be science,² said McAdams.



Consumer confidence in the safety of beef has remained strong, despite the December 23, 2003, discovery and subsequent announcements. Likewise, consumer beef demand was up nearly eight percent in 2004, which is in part a testament to the checkoff-funded work of America¹s beef producers.



I guess I missed this considerable progress they made?.............good luck

Haymaker- all I can say about the local membership is- apparently they are not listening to their members again-- could it be the new Presidents Texas feeders allegiance?
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
Oldtimer said:
HAY MAKER said:
HAY MAKER said:
NCBA files to open CAN border



NCBA Executive Committee Reviews Draft of Amicus Brief for 9th Circuit Court

Goal: To Represent the Science and Safety of Beef



Washington, D.C. ­ April 15, 2005 ­ The National Cattlemen¹s Beef Association¹s (NCBA) Executive Committee, comprised of 31 voting members, all of whom are beef producers from across the country, have reviewed a draft of an amicus brief that will be submitted to the 9th Circuit Court in the case of R-CALF vs. USDA, APHIS and Mike Johanns In His Capacity as the Secretary of Agriculture. Amicus, literally meaning ³friend of the court,² is a brief filed by someone who is not party to the litigation but believes the court's decision may affect its interest. The deadline for submission is April 21, 2005.



The purpose of the amicus brief is to demonstrate to the court that the Minimal Risk Rule is based on science that consistently shows beef is safe from BSE.



In addition to being reviewed by NCBA¹s executive committee, it also is being considered by more than 20 state cattlemen and other agriculture organizations that feel equally passionate about ensuring beef¹s safety is represented in the hearing.



³The preliminary injunction granted by a district court in Montana is founded on a concern over human and animal health. The science clearly states beef is safe from BSE. Our goal is to ensure the Circuit Court, which is considering the government¹s appeal to this injunction, has the information it needs to make a decision based on science,² said Jim McAdams, Texas cattle producer and NCBA president. ³The fact of the matter is court discussions become a matter of public record, and as an industry, ranchers and farmers will not stand idly by and let a lack of information or misinformation from activists groups within our industry question the safety of beef.²



The injunction was granted to R-CALF in early March. R-CALF, an acronym for Ranchers-Cattlemen¹s Action Legal Fund, has said in its efforts to maintain trade barriers with Canada that ³recent scientific evidence has revealed that the agent responsible for BSE contamination has recently been found not just in nerve tissue, but in muscle tissue as well, raising concerns that standards should be raised, not lowered.²



³It is inexcusable for a group of our own cattlemen to misrepresent the science to maintain its isolationist position. Consumers have every reason to believe in beef¹s safety. BSE infectivity has never been found in meat,² said McAdams. ³NCBA and American ranchers and farmers are providing leadership for our industry by ensuring that the only cattle industry voice in this debate is not that of an isolationist-motivated activist group,² he said.



BSE experts from the World Organization for Animal Health agree that BSE is not a public health or herd health risk when key firewalls are in place to protect consumers and cattle, even when a case of BSE is found. The United States has these firewalls in place, as does Canada.






Achieving science-based harmonization of blue tongue and anaplasmosis trade requirements for breeding cattle. This effort is supported by Canadian officials and the Canadian beef industry; however, the recent injunction is testing Canada¹s willingness to resolve this barrier.



Re-opening markets that are closed to U.S. beef, specifically Japan. Smaller export markets are continuing to open, including the recent announcements of trade resumption with Egypt and Taiwan, but NCBA is continuing to pressure Congress and the Administration to push for a resolution on Japan. Japanese officials have said that R-Calf¹s injunction is stalling progress on opening this key market.



³U.S. cattlemen benefit from global trade. Prior to our border slamming shut after December 23, 2003, the value of U.S. beef exports was roughly $175 per head on fed cattle prices. In order to ensure a future for tomorrow¹s cattlemen, we need growth in our industry. We cannot grow by artificially limiting supply or limiting ourselves to U.S. consumers that represent only four percent of the world¹s population. The guiding principle of our trade relations, and fair trade, must be science,² said McAdams.



Consumer confidence in the safety of beef has remained strong, despite the December 23, 2003, discovery and subsequent announcements. Likewise, consumer beef demand was up nearly eight percent in 2004, which is in part a testament to the checkoff-funded work of America¹s beef producers.



I guess I missed this considerable progress they made?.............good luck

Haymaker- all I can say about the local membership is- apparently they are not listening to their members again-- could it be the new Presidents Texas feeders allegiance?

Christ you guys are like a pair of old women...conspiracy...O.M.G black helicopters everywhere.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
frenchie said:
Oldtimer said:
HAY MAKER said:
I guess I missed this considerable progress they made?.............good luck

Haymaker- all I can say about the local membership is- apparently they are not listening to their members again-- could it be the new Presidents Texas feeders allegiance?

Christ you guys are like a pair of old women...conspiracy...O.M.G black helicopters everywhere.

frenchie- You may be right- Miss Tam and you Canadians are starting to rub off on me-- maybe you're all right- R-CALF planted the mad cows in Canada and are holding the federal court judges relatives hostage- and are covering up hundreds of US positives while the consumers of the world are all begging for Canadian beef- all of which is being covered up by R-CALF, since they are the cause of all your problems :roll: :roll:
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
Oldtimer said:
frenchie said:
Oldtimer said:
Haymaker- all I can say about the local membership is- apparently they are not listening to their members again-- could it be the new Presidents Texas feeders allegiance?

Christ you guys are like a pair of old women...conspiracy...O.M.G black helicopters everywhere.

frenchie- You may be right- Miss Tam and you Canadians are starting to rub off on me-- maybe you're all right- R-CALF planted the mad cows in Canada and are holding the federal court judges relatives hostage- and are covering up hundreds of US positives while the consumers of the world are all begging for Canadian beef- all of which is being covered up by R-CALF, since they are the cause of all your problems :roll: :roll:

typical Oldtimer divert , divert.....Here let me make it easy for an old lady to understand..

=OldtimerHaymaker- all I can say about the local membership is- apparently they are not listening to their members again-- could it be the new Presidents Texas feeders allegiance




Are saying that the NCBA president is corrupt ? Yes or No
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Frenchie, based on what I have read and/or heard spoken by the two individuals over the past few years, IMO it is far more likely that the sheriff/brand inspector is the corrupted person that it is that the NCBA president is.

OT, I'm sorry it is a foreign concept to some individuals for an organization to live by, and to request and expect government agencies to also live and act based upon science, honesty and accuracy.

NCBA's actions are well within the mandate from the members. It's really irrelevant whether or not you understand and believe that. The NCBA members are running the show, whether you believe it or not.

MRJ
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Cattlemen Address Unresolved Issues with USDA: Producers are still seeking answers from USDA to a number of outstanding questions regarding BSE and trade issues. We sent a letter on, April 14, to Secretary Mike Johanns, stating that the following issues must be addressed to protect and enhance the business climate for U.S. cattlemen and further increase the demand for beef in the United States. These issues include:

1. Protocol for announcing BSE test results
2. Future of USDA's enhanced BSE surveillance program
3. Attaining OIE's "Provisionally Free" status for the U.S.
4. Canada's Anaplasmosis and Blue Tongue restrictions
5. Resuming trade of imports vs. exports
6. USDA grade stamps on imports
7. Animal identification

Specifically, NCBA is asking for:

1. Clarification on USDA protocol for release and management of information associated with inconclusive test results for BSE.
We previously expressed concern with the department's protocol in November 2004 when speculation surrounding an inconclusive test result caused unnecessary volatility in the market.

2. USDA's plan of action for the enhanced BSE surveillance program.
Since its June 2004 inception date, USDA has completed surveillance on 314,394 head of cattle under the program. We believe the principal goals of the program have now been met and a more reasonable level of testing should be resumed.

3. Report on USDA's effort to seek the "provisionally free" status for the U.S. from the World Organization of Animal Health (OIE).
In March, we requested that in light of the current volume of cattle tested under the enhanced surveillance program, USDA seek the "provisionally free" designation for the U.S. This would facilitate the reopening of many of our export markets and enhance consumer confidence in the safety of U.S. beef.

4. Increased attention be paid to resolving the issue of Canada's restrictions on U.S. cattle due to Anaplasmosis and Blue Tongue requirements, especially in regards to breeding cattle.
These non science-based trade barriers have existed for more than two decades without resolution, and we are asking USDA to "bring the full weight of your office to resolving this issue.and ensure that these rules do not become entangled in political or regulatory rifts on either side of the border."

5. Resumption of exports of products and animals from the U.S. be the department's first priority.
There is a perception among cattlemen that USDA is quick to resolve issues raised by other countries, yet slow to ensure that U.S. producers have appropriate access to the world marketplace. U.S. producers need to be first priority.

6. Consideration by the USDA of all possible options toward resolution of producer concerns over the use of the USDA Grade Stamp on imported meat and animals.
Our 11-point directive calls for the resolution of a list of conditions before trade with Canada is resumed. This list includes "USDA grades and stamps not be allowed on any imported beef product."

While Article 3 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and subsequent agreements prohibit the disallowing of USDA grade stamps on imports, NCBA is asking that USDA recommend legislative action or regulatory changes that do not interfere with our international commitments.

7. In development of a national animal identification system, focus the efforts of USDA staff on allocation of premises identification and allow the industry to manage producers' animal ID information to meet our nation's animal health requirements.
NCBA members continue to be concerned that USDA's desire to develop a national animal identification program fails to consider the use and value of a cooperative working relationship with private industry. NCBA policy prevents us from supporting government-owned and -managed databases for animal movement that have the potential to expose confidential business information to others.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
rancher said:
Cattlemen Address Unresolved Issues with USDA: Producers are still seeking answers from USDA to a number of outstanding questions regarding BSE and trade issues. We sent a letter on, April 14, to Secretary Mike Johanns, stating that the following issues must be addressed to protect and enhance the business climate for U.S. cattlemen and further increase the demand for beef in the United States. These issues include:

1. Protocol for announcing BSE test results
2. Future of USDA's enhanced BSE surveillance program
3. Attaining OIE's "Provisionally Free" status for the U.S.
4. Canada's Anaplasmosis and Blue Tongue restrictions
5. Resuming trade of imports vs. exports
6. USDA grade stamps on imports
7. Animal identification

Specifically, NCBA is asking for:

1. Clarification on USDA protocol for release and management of information associated with inconclusive test results for BSE.
We previously expressed concern with the department's protocol in November 2004 when speculation surrounding an inconclusive test result caused unnecessary volatility in the market.

2. USDA's plan of action for the enhanced BSE surveillance program.
Since its June 2004 inception date, USDA has completed surveillance on 314,394 head of cattle under the program. We believe the principal goals of the program have now been met and a more reasonable level of testing should be resumed.

3. Report on USDA's effort to seek the "provisionally free" status for the U.S. from the World Organization of Animal Health (OIE).
In March, we requested that in light of the current volume of cattle tested under the enhanced surveillance program, USDA seek the "provisionally free" designation for the U.S. This would facilitate the reopening of many of our export markets and enhance consumer confidence in the safety of U.S. beef.

4. Increased attention be paid to resolving the issue of Canada's restrictions on U.S. cattle due to Anaplasmosis and Blue Tongue requirements, especially in regards to breeding cattle.
These non science-based trade barriers have existed for more than two decades without resolution, and we are asking USDA to "bring the full weight of your office to resolving this issue.and ensure that these rules do not become entangled in political or regulatory rifts on either side of the border."

5. Resumption of exports of products and animals from the U.S. be the department's first priority.
There is a perception among cattlemen that USDA is quick to resolve issues raised by other countries, yet slow to ensure that U.S. producers have appropriate access to the world marketplace. U.S. producers need to be first priority.

6. Consideration by the USDA of all possible options toward resolution of producer concerns over the use of the USDA Grade Stamp on imported meat and animals.
Our 11-point directive calls for the resolution of a list of conditions before trade with Canada is resumed. This list includes "USDA grades and stamps not be allowed on any imported beef product."

While Article 3 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and subsequent agreements prohibit the disallowing of USDA grade stamps on imports, NCBA is asking that USDA recommend legislative action or regulatory changes that do not interfere with our international commitments.

7. In development of a national animal identification system, focus the efforts of USDA staff on allocation of premises identification and allow the industry to manage producers' animal ID information to meet our nation's animal health requirements.
NCBA members continue to be concerned that USDA's desire to develop a national animal identification program fails to consider the use and value of a cooperative working relationship with private industry. NCBA policy prevents us from supporting government-owned and -managed databases for animal movement that have the potential to expose confidential business information to others.

rancher, your point?

Mine is that those points are a work in progress. Leaders have guidelines and direction from directors who are in contact with the members 'back home'.

MRJ
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Whoa Miss Snippy, I had no point. Just posted the info I recieved from NCBA. Maybe your favorite past time of putting me down is getting old.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
rancher said:
Whoa Miss Snippy, I had no point. Just posted the info I recieved from NCBA. Maybe your favorite past time of putting me down is getting old.

Why do you think it a "put down" to ask for clarification if I couldn't see the point of your posting the information? The charge had been made in a previous post (by OT) that the leaders of NCBA were not listening to the members. I was trying to find out if you were affirming or rebutting that point by OT. Sounds like your 'grumpiness factor' is overactive tonight.

MRJ
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
5,962
Reaction score
0
Location
Western South Dakota
rancher

Sure brag about all the rain I sent and I bet you ain't even mailed me a check for it yet. Boy, see if I send any more to you! :shock: :wink: :lol:
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Jinglebob said:
rancher

Sure brag about all the rain I sent and I bet you ain't even mailed me a check for it yet. Boy, see if I send any more to you! :shock: :wink: :lol:


Thanks, check is in the mail.


It is really starting to look like good old rain now.
 

Latest posts

Top