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

Read the Fine Print!

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Tommy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Location
South East Kansas
Read the Fine Print!

"Indeed, the district court's finding of irreparable economic harm is undermined by the industry itself. Numerous amici curiae briefs have been filed in this case by organizations representing large sectors of the American meat industry, all of whom seek reversal of the preliminary injuction. If the Final Rule posed a true risk of exposing American beef to an irreparable stigma one would not expect to see such a broad coalition of industry members supporting its implementation."

[Taken from the Conclusion of the written order by the three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that overturned a temporary court order issued in March by U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull that blocked live cattle trade with Canada]

So, who are these organizations that represent large sectors of the American meat industry? Why did the numerous briefs filed have such an impact on the 3 judges that heard this appeal? The answers can be found in the Motion To File In Support Of Defendants and the Counsel Record attached to the written order that was released to the public 11 days after the decision.

The Motion to intervene, in support of USDA's appeals brief, as a matter of public record, was initiated by NCBA, American Farm Bureau Federation, National Pork Producers Council, 29 State Cattlemen's Groups (including Nebraska Cattlemen's Association), 18 State Farm Bureaus, (including Nebraska Farm Bureau), and 9 individual cattle producers from northern states.

Statements made in this influential document should be brought forth and questioned as to truth and fabrication by all who are affected in the outcome. One paragraph stands out as a deliberate askewing of facts.

"Prospective amici represent and include a broad range of American farmers and ranchers

whose economic, political, and social interests the prospective amici organizations serve to promote. NCBA is the largest organization representing the Nations's cattle industry; AFBF

represents some 5.6 million farm families across the country. Collectively, the States rep-

resentd by the prospective state amici organizations are home to more than 85% of the Nation's

cattle producers and 75% of the Nation's cattle herds."

Farm Bureau members should be concerned with AFBF's credentials. How can this organization represent some 5.6 million farm families across the country since the most recent, 2002 USDA Ag Census lists only 2,128,982 "farms" in existence and not all farmers are members. (Nebraska Farm Bureau claims to represent over 50,000 farm and ranch member families when they list only 48,500 farms and ranches in existence in Nebraska who are not all members) Another point of interest is the fact that the Farm Bureau, nationwide, is an insurance conglomerate, with annual net profits exceeding over $6.5 billion (annual report 1996). It controls two major farmer co-ops and keeps a stock portfolio that reads like a who's who of agribusiness giants: Archer Daniels Midlands, ConAgra, Walmart, Tyson, Monsanto, Phillip-Morris, Dupont, Novartis and Dow, just a sampling of their investments. It is also heavily invested in oil, banking and media. Who do you think they are really representing?

Then, interestingly enough, there are many Law Firms listed in support of the defenses argument, most from Wahington DC. representing the following:the Government of Canada, Alberta Beef Producers, Easterday Ranches, Inc., Canadian Cattlemen's Association and Its Affiliated Organizations, American Meat Institute, North American Meat Processors, Southwestern Meat Association, Eastern Meat Packers Association, American Association of Meat Processors, National Restaurant Association, and United Food and Commercial Workers; Pioneer, Inc.;Camelid Alliance, et al; NCBA, AFBF, 29 State Cattlemen's Associations, 18 State Farm Bureaus and 9 individual cattle producers; and finally Tyson Foods, Inc.

When researching the appeals brief it became convincingly apparent who's interests are being represented. Independent US farmers and ranchers need to be aware that the interests that influenced this process are some of the most powerful Agri-businesses in the nation. Producers need to rethink where there membership is most beneficial to their business and stop supporting organizations who work against them. Just read the fine print.

ICON Board of Director

Bob Rothwell
 

CattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
543
Reaction score
0
Farm Bureau members should be concerned with AFBF's credentials. How can this organization represent some 5.6 million farm families across the country since the most recent, 2002 USDA Ag Census lists only 2,128,982 "farms" in existence and not all farmers are members. (Nebraska Farm Bureau claims to represent over 50,000 farm and ranch member families when they list only 48,500 farms and ranches in existence in Nebraska who are not all members) Another point of interest is the fact that the Farm Bureau, nationwide, is an insurance conglomerate, with annual net profits exceeding over $6.5 billion (annual report 1996). It controls two major farmer co-ops and keeps a stock portfolio that reads like a who's who of agribusiness giants: Archer Daniels Midlands, ConAgra, Walmart, Tyson, Monsanto, Phillip-Morris, Dupont, Novartis and Dow, just a sampling of their investments. It is also heavily invested in oil, banking and media. Who do you think they are really representing?

Great Post..Tommy..................."Who do you think they are really representing? "That can be said of FB, NCBA, R-Calf, ETC!!
FB has members on the books that have NEVER pulled on a pair of shitty boots, hooked a pair of Bib's, or carried a feedbucket! Who the hell do they think they are??????? :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
CattleCo said:
Great Post..Tommy..................."Who do you think they are really representing? "That can be said of FB, NCBA, R-Calf, ETC!!
FB has members on the books that have NEVER pulled on a pair of shitty boots, hooked a pair of Bib's, or carried a feedbucket! Who the hell do they think they are??????? :roll:

Locally anymore the FB can't get enough people to a meeting to fill the elected seats- if you show up for a meeting you'll end up being an officer--and that is even with them throwing in a free dinner :wink: :lol:

Most people belong to FB because they have to join in order to buy Farm Bureau Insurance- which is sold by their agent to anybody who walks off the street, pays the dues and the premiums..... I'd bet 95% have never lived on a farm or ranch.......

I did some scouting and found a cheaper insurance that doesn't require a membership........Kind of reminds me of some of NCBA's recruitment procedures....
 

CattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
543
Reaction score
0
What insurance was cheaper??? You have peaked my interest!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
CattleCo said:
What insurance was cheaper??? You have peaked my interest!

CattleCo- We went to an independent agent and had him do some shopping-got the cheapest bid from Farmers Insurance Group....
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
One thing to note here is that AFBF does not have to depend on its voting membership for financial support. Therefore they can be a top-down organization without fear. They never have to listen to the grass roots.

NCBA could accomplish the same this if they make money by handling the national ID program.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
OCM,

Don't get too upset at NCBA and AFB for wanting less government intervention. That's still the stance of most conservatives. I know you and your liberal Farmer's Union buddies don't like to hear the truth about your dependence on government mandates.



~SH~
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
~SH~ said:
OCM,

Don't get too upset at NCBA and AFB for wanting less government intervention. That's still the stance of most conservatives. I know you and your liberal Farmer's Union buddies don't like to hear the truth about your dependence on government mandates.



~SH~

I'm just standing up for a representative democratic process rather than a top-down dictatorial one. Are you arguing that the AFBF is a benevolent dictatorship, since you agree with what they do but they don't listen to their membership?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
NCBA and AFBF both listen to their members. Their members just don't happen to be a bunch of thumbsucking import blamers and packer victims.

That's the difference.!

NCBA and AFBF members are more forward thinking and unlike you, they want less government intervention and more self reliance.

It may seem like they don't listen to their "BLAMING" members but the majority rules. Shouldn't be as big an issue now that the blamers have found a home in R-CULT.



~SH~
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
~SH~ said:
NCBA and AFBF both listen to their members. Their members just don't happen to be a bunch of thumbsucking import blamers and packer victims.

That's the difference.!

NCBA and AFBF members are more forward thinking and unlike you, they want less government intervention and more self reliance.

It may seem like they don't listen to their "BLAMING" members but the majority rules. Shouldn't be as big an issue now that the blamers have found a home in R-CULT.



~SH~

Did you hear that from the SD Farm Bureau?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
~SH~ said:
NCBA and AFBF both listen to their members. Their members just don't happen to be a bunch of thumbsucking import blamers and packer victims.

That's the difference.!

NCBA and AFBF members are more forward thinking and unlike you, they want less government intervention and more self reliance.

It may seem like they don't listen to their "BLAMING" members but the majority rules. Shouldn't be as big an issue now that the blamers have found a home in R-CULT.



~SH~

Are they listening to their members leave?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
SH, "NCBA and AFBF both listen to their members"

How soon you have chosen to forget the 11 point directive.
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Tommy said:
Read the Fine Print!

"Indeed, the district court's finding of irreparable economic harm is undermined by the industry itself. Numerous amici curiae briefs have been filed in this case by organizations representing large sectors of the American meat industry, all of whom seek reversal of the preliminary injuction. If the Final Rule posed a true risk of exposing American beef to an irreparable stigma one would not expect to see such a broad coalition of industry members supporting its implementation."

[Taken from the Conclusion of the written order by the three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that overturned a temporary court order issued in March by U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull that blocked live cattle trade with Canada]

So, who are these organizations that represent large sectors of the American meat industry? Why did the numerous briefs filed have such an impact on the 3 judges that heard this appeal? The answers can be found in the Motion To File In Support Of Defendants and the Counsel Record attached to the written order that was released to the public 11 days after the decision.

The Motion to intervene, in support of USDA's appeals brief, as a matter of public record, was initiated by NCBA, American Farm Bureau Federation, National Pork Producers Council, 29 State Cattlemen's Groups (including Nebraska Cattlemen's Association), 18 State Farm Bureaus, (including Nebraska Farm Bureau), and 9 individual cattle producers from northern states.

Statements made in this influential document should be brought forth and questioned as to truth and fabrication by all who are affected in the outcome. One paragraph stands out as a deliberate askewing of facts.

"Prospective amici represent and include a broad range of American farmers and ranchers

whose economic, political, and social interests the prospective amici organizations serve to promote. NCBA is the largest organization representing the Nations's cattle industry; AFBF

represents some 5.6 million farm families across the country. Collectively, the States rep-

resentd by the prospective state amici organizations are home to more than 85% of the Nation's

cattle producers and 75% of the Nation's cattle herds."

Farm Bureau members should be concerned with AFBF's credentials. How can this organization represent some 5.6 million farm families across the country since the most recent, 2002 USDA Ag Census lists only 2,128,982 "farms" in existence and not all farmers are members. (Nebraska Farm Bureau claims to represent over 50,000 farm and ranch member families when they list only 48,500 farms and ranches in existence in Nebraska who are not all members) Another point of interest is the fact that the Farm Bureau, nationwide, is an insurance conglomerate, with annual net profits exceeding over $6.5 billion (annual report 1996). It controls two major farmer co-ops and keeps a stock portfolio that reads like a who's who of agribusiness giants: Archer Daniels Midlands, ConAgra, Walmart, Tyson, Monsanto, Phillip-Morris, Dupont, Novartis and Dow, just a sampling of their investments. It is also heavily invested in oil, banking and media. Who do you think they are really representing?

Then, interestingly enough, there are many Law Firms listed in support of the defenses argument, most from Wahington DC. representing the following:the Government of Canada, Alberta Beef Producers, Easterday Ranches, Inc., Canadian Cattlemen's Association and Its Affiliated Organizations, American Meat Institute, North American Meat Processors, Southwestern Meat Association, Eastern Meat Packers Association, American Association of Meat Processors, National Restaurant Association, and United Food and Commercial Workers; Pioneer, Inc.;Camelid Alliance, et al; NCBA, AFBF, 29 State Cattlemen's Associations, 18 State Farm Bureaus and 9 individual cattle producers; and finally Tyson Foods, Inc.

When researching the appeals brief it became convincingly apparent who's interests are being represented. Independent US farmers and ranchers need to be aware that the interests that influenced this process are some of the most powerful Agri-businesses in the nation. Producers need to rethink where there membership is most beneficial to their business and stop supporting organizations who work against them. Just read the fine print.

ICON Board of Director

Bob Rothwell

Can't more than one family exist on a family farm or is that too much concentration?!!!!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
OCM: "Did you hear that from the SD Farm Bureau?"

I form my own opinions. A concept quite foreign to the blaming segment of our industry.


Kindergarten Econ.: "Are they listening to their members leave?"

Only the blamers are leaving!

GOOD RIDDANCE!

Progressive organizations can function a lot better without packer victims and import blamers.


Sandman: "How soon you have chosen to forget the 11 point directive."

The majority of NCBA members supported those 11 directives, I did not because I knew they could not live up to ALL OF THEM.

Hindsight proved me right.

Just like the majority of R-CULT was against an "M"ID but you were for it.

Majority rules.

NCBA should have supported only those directives they could influence, not those they couldn't.

You got nothing on me here either Sandman because I did not support the 11 directives and stated so right here.

Keep trying Sandman, I'm sure someday you'll have something legitimate to peg on me. LOL!



~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
SH, I couldn't give a crap less if you agreed with the directive or not. That's not my point. I'm pointing out that to call the NCBA member-driven after how leadership went completely against the member's directive is to speak the words of a moron.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandman: "I'm pointing out that to call the NCBA member-driven after how leadership went completely against the member's directive is to speak the words of a moron."

How did NCBA go against their member's directive?

Explain it!


You are the one who speaks the words of a moron by making an issue of my saying, "what's wrong with the U.S. market" to a Canadian then turned around and repeated Leo McDonnell's lie that the closed Canadian border has nothing to do with the Canadian producer.

WHICH WAY IS IT????

Either the closed Canadian border had to do with Canadian imports or it has to do with USDA policy?

You know damn well it has to do with Canadian imports which was proven with R-CULT's former dumping case but you and Leo can't take the heat for stabbing the Canadian producer in the back so you lie about it and blame your actions on USDA like the deceptive individuals you are.



~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
SH, I'll answer the part of your post (the very small part) that was on topic. And you accuse others of divertion? :roll:

You know exactly what NCBA membership said and what leadership did. They strengthened the NCBA/USDA/Packer alliance arguement with a prime recent example.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
Leo McDonnell's lie that the closed Canadian border has nothing to do with the Canadian producer.

I belive R-Calf's actions have affected the Canadian producer and the business climate in this country. Thank-you R-CALF!

In Japan's words, after the bombing of Pearl Harbour, "I fear we have only awakened a sleeping Giant."

Under pressure we as Canadians will adapt and prosper. Look for us to develop new and expanded markets, to become more efficient and advanced in the technologies we use.

already we are exporting more of those further processed products, some of which were of no value b4. Boxed beef is at record levels and I will predict on another subject, that pre-fab house sales will also increase.

Through this all, Canada has learned that selling raw products vs. finished products has not been an economical benefit to us. (it took the Feds. long enough, but I think they get the point now) Hell, look for pasta plants to start up across Western Canada also. (I hear durum wheat makes great noodles)
 

blackjack

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
118
Reaction score
0
Location
west central Alberta
...I hope you are right Murgen....western Canada needs to quit selling the raw materials and start more processing...how we handle the extra population base needed is a big concern...seems to me govts have a hard time getting it right because of lack of planning in infrastructure...for example look at Fort McMurray and all the lack of planning for the large increase of workers...
...from what I read good work is coming out of Leduc on research of more cuts for our older than 30 month ... hopeful the system can had value to these cows as the primary producer has pretty well given their cows away the past two years...
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
Blackjack, once lived in the Fort. As I understand it, the expansion has been a little too quick for the planners. But as the money comes in for new technologies for oil extraction and that money is put back into the infrastructure, it will continue to be a "booming" town for years to come.

Population base comes with the need to "finish" or add value to your products close to home.

If I was to provide an oppinion on North American trends, I would say that the US is in a period of importing finished goods, and Canada is in a period of domestic manufacturing of our raw resources for domestic consumption, and export possibilities to countries that realize the need for these products. (self-reliance)

Moderate Population growth and the land base(resources) we are fortunate enough to have, combined with our entrepeneurial attitude will make Canada a country of opportunity for decades to come.

But politics could screw it all up too! and the egos of some countries!
 

Latest posts

Top