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

SD Brand Board fiasco

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Here we go again! The Brand Board is not going to rest until they stop the use of a hot iron brand for cattle identification in South Dakota. Read this and weep. Thank God Lydell Peterson is still on the board, but how long can a decent, sane, and sensible member last on this board?

Stockgrowers, brand board clash on inspection program
Deadline to reach agreement is midnight Saturday
By Steve Miller, Journal staff Friday, May 30, 2008


A dispute over money could end the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association's decades-old operation of the state livestock brand inspection program.

The South Dakota Brand Board, which is responsible for the program, on Wednesday rejected the Stockgrowers Association's proposal for a new contract that would pay the group 6 percent of fees collected when horses and cattle are sold or otherwise leave the brand inspection area -- 22 counties west of the Missouri River.

About 1.4 million cattle are sold each year out of the West River region. An 80-cent brand-inspection fee is assessed on each animal, resulting in slightly more than $1 million in revenue. The inspections ensure that those in possession of livestock are the actual owners.

The Stockgrowers Association's most recent contract pays it 8 percent of the total fees.

Some brand-board members say the board could operate the program for less money and are pushing the Stockgrowers Association to accept a 2 percent or 3 percent profit on fees, according to brand board president Mark Kimball, a Platte area rancher.

Kimball said that under the most recent contract, the brand board pays all of the expenses of the inspection program.

"On a complete no-risk contract, we just felt like 6 percent was way off the chart," Kimball said Thursday.

But Stockgrowers Association executive director Margaret Nachtigall said it takes money to operate the association, just like any other organization or business that contracts to deliver services. "If you're a general contractor and you contract somebody to dig the ditches, that person is entitled to a profit; otherwise, he wouldn't be doing it," she said.

Kimball also cited a feasibility study that, he said, showed the board could operate the program more efficiently.

Kimball, along with board members Curt Mortenson of Fort Pierre and Tom Conger of Buffalo Gap, voted Wednesday against accepting the Stockgrowers' proposal for a 6 percent share of the fees. Bart Blum of Reliance abstained.

Board member Lyndell Petersen of Hermosa voted in favor of the Stockgrowers' proposal.

Neither side had submitted a new proposal as of Thursday afternoon.

If an agreement is not reached by midnight Saturday, the brand board, a quasi-government entity, will take over the program at the end of June when the current contract ends.

Petersen said that would be a mistake, and he is skeptical about the feasibility study. "The study was very superficial," Petersen said Thursday. "We needed to take details that we have from the daily and yearly operation and plug them into the premises that were brought forward by the study and make a judgment. That was not done and has not been done. To draw a conclusion without going through that exercise, to me, was unwise."

In fact, Petersen said if the brand board takes over the program, he expects costs will rise and the board will have to raise the inspection fees charged to producers when they sell cattle and horses.

"My experience with government bureaucracies is I've never seen any of them do anything but grow," said Petersen, a former longtime state legislator. "I'm predicting that if the state board takes this over, it will indeed grow, and it will indeed cost more money. Fees will get higher," he said.

Petersen said the state of Wyoming took over its brand-inspection program and has been using general-fund money to keep it afloat.

The South Dakota program is funded entirely by fees paid by the producers.

"Our main concern is expenses for producers," Kimball said.

However, Kimball said he couldn't predict whether the board could lower fees or keep them level. "I would never speculate on that right now, because all of our expenses just keep going through the roof," he said. "We're looking at maybe having to raise it a bit to make it work."

The 2008 South Dakota Legislature approved a brand-board request to raise the cap on fees to $1 per head, although the fee remained at 80 cents.

The brand board is somewhat autonomous, although it is appointed by the governor. Gov. Mike Rounds dismissed several board members in early 2004 when the board threatened to reverse a decision to take over the brand-inspection program from the Stockgrowers. A compromise was later reached allowing the Stockgrowers to continue administering the program.

The Western South Dakota Stockgrowers, formed in the late 1800s, began operating the brand program in the state and later became the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association, Nachtigall said. The group has operated the brand-inspection program for most of the time since. The state Agriculture Department ran the brand-registration program briefly in the 1930s before turning it back to the Stockgrowers, according to a former brand-board official.

Contact Steve Miller at 394-8417 or [email protected]

http://rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2008/05/30/news/local/doc483f8d1c5c0ba096915359.txt
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Well, it's happened. The brand board doesn't have a clue about the can of worms they just opened. Click on the link at the bottom of the story and read the ranchers' comments. This is going to be hilarious to watch!!! 8) :twisted:

Brand board takes over inspection contract from Stockgrowers
By Steve Miller, Journal staff Monday, June 02, 2008


The South Dakota Brand Board voted Monday to take over the brand inspection program from the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association, ending the Stockgrowers' more than 100 years of operating the program.

The brand board, meeting via conference call, voted to reject the last two proposals submitted last Friday by the Stockgrowers Association for a new agreement to replace the current contract, which expires June 30.

A major sticking point in negotiations between the two entities was the amount of profit to be allowed for administering the program.

Under the current contract, the Stockgrowers Association receives 8 percent of the total fees collected when horses and cattle are sold or otherwise leave the brand inspection area (22 counties west of the Missouri River). The current fee is 80 cents a head, and approximately 1.4 million cattle and horses are sold each year. Under the current contract, the brand board pays expenses of the program.

The brand board last Wednesday rejected a Stockgrowers proposal for a 6 percent fee.

On Friday, the Stockgrowers submitted another proposal for 6 percent, but agreed to other procedural demands by the brand board, according to Stockgrowers President Larry Nelson of Buffalo. In the second proposal, the Stockgrowers offered to pay all expenses of the program but keep the 80-cent-a-head fee, much like it had done for decades, Nelson said.

Some of the brand board members felt the brand board could operate the program more cheaply and efficiently than the Stockgrowers, board President Mark Kimball of Platte said last week.

Brand board members last week said they were willing to give the Stockgrowers only about 2 percent of the fees because the board paid all the expenses.

"We felt like that we weren't going to do it for nothing, and 2 percent was pretty close to nothing," Nelson said Monday.

Nelson said the Stockgrowers would continue its focus as an advocate for independent cattle producers. "We're not going anywhere. We're going to go right ahead and do what we've been doing."

Brand board officials did not return phone calls from the Journal on Monday. An e-mail from the brand board to the Stockgrowers did not indicate the breakdown in the Monday vote among the five-member board.

But last Wednesday, Kimball, Tom Conger of Buffalo Gap and Curt Mortenson of Fort Pierre voted against the Stockgrowers' proposal. Bart Blum of Reliance abstained.

Board member Lyndell Petersen of Hermosa was the lone member to vote in favor of the Stockgrowers last week. Petersen said he opposed the state taking over the contract. He said the state of Wyoming took over its brand inspection program and now has to subsidize it with taxpayer funds.

Nelson said the Stockgrowers Association used profits from administering the brand inspection program to help fund its organization.

Currently the program has 15 full-time inspectors, about 40 part-time inspectors, plus chief inspector Jim Reed and an administrative assistant in the Rapid City office.

It is not clear whether those employees will remain under the brand board.

Reed said last week that one inspector already had resigned over the dispute.

He said the brand board had not offered him a job. But, he added, "I'm not going to work for the brand board after all the heartburn they've given us over the past four or five years."

Aside from the brand inspection program, the Stockgrowers Association has two full-time employees. Nelson said those employees will remain on board, for now, at least.

Nelson said he isn't sure exactly how the group will replace the revenue from the brand inspection contract. "It's going to take us a little bit to assess what our position is," he said.

The organization's ties to brand inspection go back to the early 1890s, when the Western South Dakota Stockgrowers began operating the brand program in the state on behalf of livestock producers. The group later became the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association and operated the brand inspection program for most of the time since, except for a brief period in the 1930s, when the state Ag Department ran the program.

Contact Steve Miller at 394-8417 or [email protected]

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2008/06/03/news/local/doc4844a10fc44e1967681248.txt?show_comments=true#commentdiv
 

Latest posts

Top