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

R-CALF Policy Resolutions Supported

A

Anonymous

Guest
4/25/2006 2:46:00 PM


R-CALF: Mail-In Ballots Counted; Resolutions Become Policy



Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA by-laws permit every member who owns cattle to vote on policy resolutions. To accomplish this, R-CALF USA mails a ballot to each voting member immediately after its annual convention.



“While it takes longer to count mail-in ballots than to simply count a show of hands during convention, R-CALF USA’s policy ensures that each voting member has an equal voice in both the leadership and direction of the organization,” said R-CALF USA President and Region V Director Chuck Kiker. “The mail-in ballots have now been counted, and the membership has approved each and every resolution proposed at the annual convention in January.”



Members overwhelmingly (3,815-22) instructed the board to “take appropriate action to challenge and stop USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) from allowing the importation of beef products from cattle older than 30 months of age, as well as the importation of live cattle over 30 months (OTM) of age, from Japan or any other BSE-affected country.”



Regarding animal identification, members approved by a vote of 3,628-183 the following resolution: “R-CALF USA opposes a federally mandated national animal identification program. R-CALF USA opposes a totally privatized, centralized database and/or a federally centralized database. R-CALF USA supports a voluntary animal-health traceback system that ensures the protection of individual data, and a system that is compatible with the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). R-CALF USA shall continue to work with the federal government, state governments and Tribal governments, as well as the industry, to determine the feasibility, functionality, and benefit to the U.S. cattle industry of an animal-health traceback system that incorporates existing systems, such as brand programs and the Intertribal Cattle Connect program, and vests the responsibilities and authority under the auspices of state animal health officials and Tribal governments.



R-CALF USA often has been mischaracterized as being opposed to the Beef Checkoff. However, the organization’s only Beef Checkoff policy was established back in 2000, which states U.S. cattle producers should have the right to periodically vote on the Beef Checkoff.



R-CALF USA established a Checkoff Committee in January that proposed the following resolution, which passed 3,734-41: “Whereas, R-CALF USA seeks to provide the motivation, information and support necessary to our members so they can become more involved in influencing decisions regarding the Beef Checkoff, and Whereas, the vast majority of dollars collected by the Beef Checkoff comes directly from U.S. cattle producers, Therefore, be it resolved, R-CALF USA recommends the following: 1) All R-CALF USA affiliate organizations seek approval as “qualified” organizations or associations in their respective states, nominate from within their membership and actively promote those nominees for appointment to the Cattlemen’s Beef Board (CBB); 2) Those affiliate organizations also work diligently to obtain seats on their respective state beef council by providing candidates for appointment or election; 3) Be it further resolved, R-CALF USA seeks appropriate changes to the Beef Promotion Act and Order that would allow Beef Checkoff dollars collected from U.S. cattle producers to be used to promote products that are specifically born, raised and processed in the United States.



A second Beef Checkoff-related resolution, approved with a vote of 3,615-142, states: “Be it resolved: R-CALF USA will lead a nationwide referendum to amend the National Beef Promotion Act to make such Acts responsive to grassroots family cattle producers. This is NOT an effort to kill the program, but rather an effort to make the program better. Specifically, R-CALF USA is suggesting the Checkoff program be amended to include the following: 1) Checkoff dollars may be used to promote USA beef from cattle born, raised, and processed in the United States of America; 2) A periodic vote on the Checkoff program (every 5 years); 3) Prohibit any one cattle organization from serving as the “prime contractor” for the program, but allow all cattle organizations to participate in approved projects on a case-by-case basis; 4) Reform the Cattlemen’s Beef Board to reflect proportional representation from all national cattle organizations; 5) Allow Checkoff expenditures to promote branded products from small and large packing entities; 6) Provide that 70% of all funds collected remain in the state where collected, and 30% to the Cattlemen’s Beef Board; 7) Reset the date for cattle organizations to be able to bid on Checkoff contracts from 1985 to the date the Act is amended.



Members also instructed the board to “establish a standing committee to help protect and preserve private property rights,” with a vote of 3,587-101.



An Endangered Species Act resolution also was passed with a vote of 3,575-149, which states: “Whereas, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed legislation amending the ESA to offer greater incentives to landowners to participate in species recovery; and Whereas, the House legislation provides for compensation to property owners to aide the recovery of species; and Whereas the House legislature calls for better science in listing species and development of recovery plans; and Whereas, the U.S. Senate is currently considering updating and modernizing the ESA; Now therefore be it resolved that R-CALF USA strongly supports amending the ESA to advance protections of private property rights, insuring that listing and recovery decisions are based on credible science and providing financial incentives for property owners to participate in recovery of species; and Be it further resolved that R-CALF USA strongly encourages the U.S. Senate to go forward with updating and modernizing the ESA.”



On another animal-health matter, the following resolution was approved with a vote of 3,562-74: “Be it resolved, that R-CALF USA requests that APHIS and APHIS Wildlife Services look into the cause and spread and distribution of neospora caninum infection in cattle and/or livestock.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Well it looks like every thing passed with flying colors,there is not a one that is'nt needed badly,positive change is good for an industry,the check off has needed overhauling a long time and will still be a long drawn out fight,but the producer will win in the end..................good luck
 

Bill

Well-known member
I thought they were supposed to have over 18,000 members. :roll:

Looks to me like over 75% of their "members" couldn't be bothered to buy a stamp to send in their vote.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Bill said:
I thought they were supposed to have over 18,000 members. :roll:

Looks to me like over 75% of their "members" couldn't be bothered to buy a stamp to send in their vote.

Bill, do you always have to be a critic or do you have a point here? How many people voted in your organization last time they had a vote and how many members are there?

It would be nice if you would volunteer this information in the spirit of supporting your biggest foreign market.

By the way, where in the rcalf posting did it include the policies you continually bring up?
 

ocm

Well-known member
Bill said:
I thought they were supposed to have over 18,000 members. :roll:

Looks to me like over 75% of their "members" couldn't be bothered to buy a stamp to send in their vote.

Have you made a comparison to other organizations that have mail in ballots? You might be surprised. Try NCBA for instance.
 

Bill

Well-known member
The point is that this site has a handfull of chearleaders who keep doing cartwheels everytime R-Calf blinks. They keep telling us all the great things their org. is doing and how different R-Calf is from any other producer group.

Then we find out that 3/4s of them couldn't bother to buy a stamp to vote? :roll: :roll: Hardly a reafirmation of policy.

You're right on M_R. The butcher, the baker and the candlestickmaker didn't bother to vote. Only the banker did.
 

Bill

Well-known member
ocm said:
Bill said:
I thought they were supposed to have over 18,000 members. :roll:

Looks to me like over 75% of their "members" couldn't be bothered to buy a stamp to send in their vote.

Have you made a comparison to other organizations that have mail in ballots? You might be surprised. Try NCBA for instance.

Want to compare number of attendees at the conventions of the two orgs. as well?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Bill said:
The point is that this site has a handfull of chearleaders who keep doing cartwheels everytime R-Calf blinks. They keep telling us all the great things their org. is doing and how different R-Calf is from any other producer group.

Then we find out that 3/4s of them couldn't bother to buy a stamp to vote? :roll: :roll: Hardly a reafirmation of policy.

You're right on M_R. The butcher, the baker and the candlestickmaker didn't bother to vote. Only the banker did.

We also have a few Canadians that give the rest a bad name, Bill. Canada provides about 5% of the U.S. beef and some of you guys want to give the USDA a free pass on all of their sorry decisions about the beef industry just so you can make your point to be able to sell your beef to the U.S. market. Why such a self serving stance ALL THE TIME?

When was the last time you voted in the U.S. on any election, Bill? Having foreign critics like you on a group in the U.S. that is at least trying to stop the packers from ruining the beef industry for the producers sometimes is just a little much. Especially since you have done such a poor job in your own country on the subject.

Sometimes your attitude on this forum makes it hard for anyone down here to support your bend over backwards to the USDA attidude so you can keep selling beef in the U.S. regardless what the issue is or your run down anyone that disagrees with you attitude is a little much to swallow.

MR has already asked me to leave the forum because he says I am not a "serious rancher" and this site is for "serious rancthers". What a joke. MR, maybe you would like to limit your comments to the 5% of the cattle industry that you have the possibity of representing in the U.S.. I for one would welcome your rcalf hating diatribes to end and for you to work on the issues that producers face in the U.S. and in Canada. After all, isn't that what ranchers.net is supposed to be about? Too many of you are acting as pawns to the packers and their industry ruining policies.
 

don

Well-known member
econ: some of you guys want to give the USDA a free pass on all of their sorry decisions about the beef industry just so you can make your point to be able to sell your beef to the U.S. market.

yeah econ it's all canada's fault for the current structure of the american beef industry. we're such a small and insignificant part of it (5%) it seems to me it's you guys who created the mess you're in. you broke it, you fix it. quit whining about how the american rancher is a victim of the mighty canadian cattle industry. seems to me you guys were screwed without any competition from canada. look back at historical cattle numbers in canada and you'll see the american beef industry was headed towards its present structure before we were a factor. if anything what happened in the states was the model for what was done in canada. if r-calf had more brainpower maybe they'd concentrate on the cause of the problem rather than sending out pi$$ and moan press releases.
 

Bill

Well-known member
I for one would welcome your rcalf hating diatribes to end and for you to work on the issues that producers face in the U.S. and in Canada.
Of course you and the rest of the R-Bull-eeevers would like us to end holding your org. to task and citing all their inacurracies and lies. :oops:

I support CCA and NCBA on MOST issues and on some I and other Canadians who post here take them to task.

They represent the majority of cattle producers.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Bill said:
I for one would welcome your rcalf hating diatribes to end and for you to work on the issues that producers face in the U.S. and in Canada.
Of course you and the rest of the R-Bull-eeevers would like us to end holding your org. to task and citing all their inacurracies and lies. :oops:

I support CCA and NCBA on MOST issues and on some I and other Canadians who post here take them to task.

They represent the majority of cattle producers.
Heck, I support the NCBA in probably 95% of what they say. It is the 5% of what they actually do against producer interests and free market interests that bothers me. The 95% rhetoric doesn't cancel out the 5% action. Soapweed's NCBA ballot is just a propaganda tool.

Bill, your support of the NCBA means about as much as my support of the CCA. It doesn't make a hill of beans difference. If you want to register as a foreign lobbyist, then go do it. Stop using this forum to do it free.

don, we have all allowed the current industry structure to occur. It just slipped up on all of us. When I rant about it, it is not to critisize you from what happened but just so you recognize it. The question is, do we want to continually be divided so packers can have a divide and conquer strategy that works or can we find some common ground? I see more division than anything coming from most Canadians that post. There are a few notable exceptions that can see the big picture. Can't you be just a little more balanced?
 

don

Well-known member
the division occurred when r-calf started lying about canadian cattle and the canadian cattle industry. you guys say there shouldn't be a north american cattle industry but we should all stand together. what's it gonna be? get some brainpower into r-calf and it might work.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Econ wrote
"Heck, I support the NCBA in probably 95% of what they say. It is the 5% of what they actually do against producer interests and free market interests that bothers me. The 95% rhetoric doesn't cancel out the 5% action. Soapweed's NCBA ballot is just a propaganda tool.

Bill, your support of the NCBA means about as much as my support of the CCA. It doesn't make a hill of beans difference. If you want to register as a foreign lobbyist, then go do it. Stop using this forum to do it free."

Dose this mean you are a NCBA member? Are you even a producer?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
don said:
the division occurred when r-calf started lying about canadian cattle and the canadian cattle industry. you guys say there shouldn't be a north american cattle industry but we should all stand together. what's it gonna be? get some brainpower into r-calf and it might work.

don, just as the ability to export to Japan from the U.S. may shape a better bse policy for the U.S., you have to admit the same thing happened in the Canadian cattle industry. I don't think you would have your current bse policy if the border had not been closed. Politicians have to have a lot of public support behind them so it seems to have any leadership in policy. The border closing gave you the opportunity for that. Do you think it would have happened any other way?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
don said:
the division occurred when r-calf started lying about canadian cattle and the canadian cattle industry. you guys say there shouldn't be a north american cattle industry but we should all stand together. what's it gonna be? get some brainpower into r-calf and it might work.

Nobody has ever brought forward any benefits to US producers for being a part of a North American industry. Do you know any?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
don said:
the division occurred when r-calf started lying about canadian cattle and the canadian cattle industry. you guys say there shouldn't be a north american cattle industry but we should all stand together. what's it gonna be? get some brainpower into r-calf and it might work.

Nobody has ever brought forward any benefits to US producers for being a part of a North American industry. Do you know any?

Because the Canadians like the ones on this board will try to control it. Manitoba Rancher, have you been able to intimidate this Texan off ranchers.net yet?

yes

no
 
Top