Did any of you just watch the Cattle Show on RFDTV it was great. It covered the BSE and how the U.S has to follow science and not politics when dealing with trade. It even said that if the U.S. steps back away from the science and uses politics to deal with BSE they're risking their creditbility in the Asian markets that has taken decades to build. They also said that if they want to export they will have to show that they trust a minimal risk country as that is how the rest of the world sees the U.S. as a minimal risk county. They said that if the U.S. is not willing to trade with Canada then how in the world can the U.S. expect to get back their export markets. Is R-CALF willing to destroy a decade worth of creditbility building in the Asian markets ?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Cattle Show
- Thread starter Tam
- Start date
Help Support Ranchers.net:
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
Hat said:Tam said:Did any of you just watch the Cattle Show on RFDTV it was great. It covered the BSE and how the U.S has to follow science and not politics when dealing with trade. It even said that if the U.S. steps back away from the science and uses politics to deal with BSE they're risking their creditbility in the Asian markets that has taken decades to build. They also said that if they want to export they will have to show that they trust a minimal risk country as that is how the rest of the world sees the U.S. as a minimal risk county. They said that if the U.S. is not willing to trade with Canada then how in the world can the U.S. expect to get back their export markets. Is R-CALF willing to destroy a decade worth of creditbility building in the Asian markets ?
I'm sure it was bought and paid for by the NCBA.
And the radio program wasn't bought and paid for by R-CALF. That was a speech by Leo not a debate or even the TRUTH.
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
Hat said:Big Muddy rancher said:Hat said:I'm sure it was bought and paid for by the NCBA.
And the radio program wasn't bought and paid for by R-CALF. That was a speech by Leo not a debate or even the TRUTH.
Thats your opinion.
For your information the NCBA wasn't mentioed last night.
Are you in favor of the packing industry moving north like Chris Abbot seems to be?
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
Hat said:Big Muddy rancher said:Hat said:Thats your opinion.
For your information the NCBA wasn't mentioed last night.
Are you in favor of the packing industry moving north like Chris Abbot seems to be?
where has Chris Abbot said he would like the packing industry to move North?
Did you not listen to the broadcast from Gordon Nebraska. When He mentioned about the warnings about the Packing Industry moving to Canada he laughed and said I guess we will just have to send the cattle to Canada to be processed. Is that what you want? We have what's called the BASIS that is the difference in price between Canada and Nebraska. I am sure you would not want to be on the losing side of the BASIS if your cattle had to be shipped to Canada for processing. Trdaditionaly we are 10-11 cents below your price. When the border closed the Basis went to 35 cents and now we are about 18 cents below.I am sure you don't want to the Basis to flip on you.
Kato
Well-known member
What if there is only one packer? From the sounds of things lately, the smaller ones are on the endangered species list. :?
PORKER
Well-known member
My belief is that down the road in the near future their is going to be regional packers and they will be small and more efficient and hightech.The price of energy and truck fuel is killing efficiency now and it's going to get worse when gas and diesel hits Five dollars a gallon.This is what has happened in Europe.New small packers are spring up were the cattle are raised ,not shipped 1000 miles.It's the law of diminishing returns.Look at the price of fertilizer now ,N2 is 400+ dollars and some types of dry are over 500 bucks a ton.Kind of like how far you can drive to a WalMART to save a buck when gas is $3.00 - $4.00 bucks .
agman
Well-known member
PORKER said:My belief is that down the road in the near future their is going to be regional packers and they will be small and more efficient and hightech.The price of energy and truck fuel is killing efficiency now and it's going to get worse when gas and diesel hits Five dollars a gallon.This is what has happened in Europe.New small packers are spring up were the cattle are raised ,not shipped 1000 miles.It's the law of diminishing returns.Look at the price of fertilizer now ,N2 is 400+ dollars and some types of dry are over 500 bucks a ton.Kind of like how far you can drive to a WalMART to save a buck when gas is $3.00 - $4.00 bucks .
Response... Just where do you think packing plants are located now. I think the last time I looked they were located near large concentrations of cattle on feed. That is except Creekstone. Energy efficiency in the U.S. is twice the level it was during the last every crisis. Higher energy costs will not hurt manufacturing nor transportation a hard as it did during the last energy squeeze. The countries most harmed by higher energy costs will be other nations. China is at the top of the hit list as they are 10 times less energy efficient than Japan.
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
Hat said:Big Muddy rancher said:Hat said:where has Chris Abbot said he would like the packing industry to move North?
Did you not listen to the broadcast from Gordon Nebraska. When He mentioned about the warnings about the Packing Industry moving to Canada he laughed and said I guess we will just have to send the cattle to Canada to be processed. Is that what you want? We have what's called the BASIS that is the difference in price between Canada and Nebraska. I am sure you would not want to be on the losing side of the BASIS if your cattle had to be shipped to Canada for processing. Trdaditionaly we are 10-11 cents below your price. When the border closed the Basis went to 35 cents and now we are about 18 cents below.I am sure you don't want to the Basis to flip on you.
The reason he lauged is because shipping cattle from Nebraska to Canada is a JOKE. As long as their are feedlots and huge supply of corn (NEBRASKA!!) their will be packers here. Just more mindless banter from a Canuck doing some wishful thinking about "one upping" the US rancher.
If it's such a joke why do cattle from Alberta and Sask get sent to Greely and Green Bay and to Nebraska.. It happens.
Geez, if I keep reading this thread I might come to the conclusion that this whole beef thing has been based on a system that is North American!
I was almost starting to think that the US would rather import from countries half the world away. Do geographics have anything to do with efficiency?
I was almost starting to think that the US would rather import from countries half the world away. Do geographics have anything to do with efficiency?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Proximity to the packing plant is a feedlot problem, not a packing problem.
Packers don't pay for the trucking in most cases, the feedlot does or the owner of the cattle.
So why would proximity to the feedlots be a packer efficiency problem?
~SH~
Packers don't pay for the trucking in most cases, the feedlot does or the owner of the cattle.
So why would proximity to the feedlots be a packer efficiency problem?
~SH~
PORKER
Well-known member
China is at the top of the hit list as they are 10 times less energy efficient than Japan.
THEN the PACKERS should pay more for the total transportation of each animal if the plants are located in one spot.THE CALF move from the SOUTH,NORTH eastern US.has a lot more miles of fuel and trucking costs then one raised in Mn.Agman
Well then the main transportation in China, 90%,is the PEDAL MACHINE,ONLY enegry needed there is a square meal.THEY use less enegry per mile of travel per person than any country on the face of the earth.Agman,HOW did those animals get to those FEEDLOTS(I think the last time I looked they were located near large concentrations of cattle ) AGMAN
Kato
Well-known member
Lets see now, packing plants are reduced in number. If cattle aren't going to be shipped to Canada, perhaps the cattle will be reduced in number. Less demand for corn, one would think. Then perhaps the price of corn will drop, and grain farmers just may decide it's not a profitable crop any more. No corn, no corn belt.
Cause and effect. What came first, the corn or the feedlots? Maybe the corn is there because there is a demand for it? Geeezz ... who'da thought.
What came first, the feedlots or the packers? Maybe the feedlots located themselves close to the packers to save the shipping costs? After all, the packers don't really care how much it costs to get the cattle to the plant, their concern is how much it costs to get the beef out of the plant.
Twenty years ago if you'd asked Canadian farmers if they would quit growing wheat, they would have said you were crazy. But it has happened. Wheat is only a rotation crop now, not the main crop it used to be.
Never say never. Things change.
Cause and effect. What came first, the corn or the feedlots? Maybe the corn is there because there is a demand for it? Geeezz ... who'da thought.
What came first, the feedlots or the packers? Maybe the feedlots located themselves close to the packers to save the shipping costs? After all, the packers don't really care how much it costs to get the cattle to the plant, their concern is how much it costs to get the beef out of the plant.
Twenty years ago if you'd asked Canadian farmers if they would quit growing wheat, they would have said you were crazy. But it has happened. Wheat is only a rotation crop now, not the main crop it used to be.
Never say never. Things change.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hat: "It is utterly ridicilous for these Canucks to insinuate that feedlots will be moving out of the corn belt."
Where did anyone from Canada say that?
~SH~
Where did anyone from Canada say that?
~SH~
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
2 years ago there was train loads of U.S. corn move into southern Alberta. Those boys didn't know how to feed corn but they sure learned in a hurry.If ethanol takes over the corn market it might be to expensive to feed corn in Nebraska send them to Sask to eat BARLEY. :cowboy:
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
rancher said:Ethanol production removes the starch from corn, leaving a concentration of phosphorus in the byproduct. The byproduct also is high in protein, which makes it desirable as a feed supplement for cattle.
Yea but they like energy for fattening.Alot of that brewers grain goes to the dairy farms. Feedlots can't afford it in most cases.
rancher, I do hope you intended your "please explain this to a dumb rancher" reply to Agmans' "Energy efficiency in the US is twice the level it was during the last (every) crisis" as a joke.
Do we agree that all of us can make typo's occasionally? Didn't most people get it that he meant "energy crisis"?
BTW, I skimmed through a pretty good guest ed. in the RC Journal which shows how fuel prices are not all that bad compared with the increases in value of what we have (homes, land, cattle, etc.) due to inflation. Fuel prices have remained well below those items in the inflation scheme of things, so Alan Aker says. I have seen nothing to contradict his points on the subject. Anyone else have a view on this? Maybe it should be a new thread, though, to avoid more confusion.
MRJ
Do we agree that all of us can make typo's occasionally? Didn't most people get it that he meant "energy crisis"?
BTW, I skimmed through a pretty good guest ed. in the RC Journal which shows how fuel prices are not all that bad compared with the increases in value of what we have (homes, land, cattle, etc.) due to inflation. Fuel prices have remained well below those items in the inflation scheme of things, so Alan Aker says. I have seen nothing to contradict his points on the subject. Anyone else have a view on this? Maybe it should be a new thread, though, to avoid more confusion.
MRJ
Additional thought on the subject of this thread: I wonder, due to some replies/comments on this and other threads, if everyone understands that the border closure harms the SMALL packers in the north and northwestern USA, far more than the mega-packers R-CALFers love to hate?
Those small packers apparently need some Canadian cattle in order to have enough cattle to make it profitable to harvest the local USA raised cattle in their areas.
MRJ
Those small packers apparently need some Canadian cattle in order to have enough cattle to make it profitable to harvest the local USA raised cattle in their areas.
MRJ