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

The Money Behind the National Animal ID System

mrj said:
RobertMac, sorry you have to indulge in name calling to justify your position here!
Click to expand...
Please produce the quote that you believe I did any "name calling" and if I can remotely believe that it could be construed as name calling, I will apologize. If you can't, there is a name for people that make totally false accusations.
 
There is many differences between most of the producers who support NCBA and most of those who support R-CALF.

Those who support NCBA tend to be driven by facts and those who support R-CALF tend to be driven by emotion and a need to blame or are being misled by those who are.


R-CALF is 0 and 9 in court. What more needs to be said for their inability to back their allegations towards other segments of the industry ???

How many people are actually going to believe Johnny and Herman are right and all those judges, circuit court judges, and supreme court judges are wrong??? Good luck with that!


Most NCBA members realize that there will be no new money coming into this industry unless it comes from the consumer.

Most R-CALF members are conspiracy theorists who believe the packers and retailers are reaping large profits at the expense of the producers but they cannot provide a stitch of evidence to support it.

Most NCBA members tend to be more progressive and willing to participate in value added branded beef programs that require source verification.

Most R-CALF members tend to listen to their sale barn leaders who realize that vertically integrated branded beef programs eliminate their commission dollars from the equation when they route around the sale barns so they have to drum up some conspiracy theory to discourage vertically integrated systems to keep those commission dollars rolling in.

Most R-CALF members oppose mandatory ID but support mandatory brand inspection which is a mandatory ID. GO FIGURE!

Most NCBA members want to fund beef promotion, research and education once again based on the understanding of where new money in this industry originates.

Most R-CALF members support filing lawsuits against the other segments of the industry and throwing their hard earned dollars at a few self proclaimed industry prophets who file lawsuits with no chance of winning.

Most NCBA members want to see the various segments of the industry work together for the betterment of producers and consumers.

Most R-CALF members tend to support efforts that divide the various segments of the industry forcing them to square off with eachother in a court of law. The only winners in that situation are the lawyers.

Most NCBA members support increasing our export markets and realize that we have the opportunity to export more dollars worth of beef and beef by-products than we import.

Most R-CALF members want to stop imports based on their lack of understanding that we have historically exported more dollars worth of beef and beef by products than we import.

Most NCBA members want to expand their marketing options with many marketing strategies.

Most R-CALF members support the communist packer ban that would eliminate marketing opportunities for feeders.

Most NCBA members want to promote any and all beef products realizing that 95% of the beef at the retail level is US BEEF. They realize consumers don't have to ask for US beef at the retail counter because there is a 95% chance that is what they are going to get whether they ask for it or not. "Symbolism over substance"

Most R-CALF members want to promote US BEEF without incorporating the mandatory ID program that allows the identification of US BEEF.

Most R-CALF members insisted on proving where an animal was born, raised and processed before any beef could be labeled as US BEEF and now they do not want the ID program that would do just that. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Most NCBA members blame higher corn prices, falling consumer demand, and increased carcass weights for lower prices.

Most R-CALF members blame packer concentration, captive supplies, and imports for lower cattle prices but cannot tell you what the level of packer concentration, captive supplies and imports was when fat cattle reached $1.20.

Most NCBA members realize that pork and poultry are our competition.

Most R-CALF members believe the packers are our competition.

That's just a few of the differences that I can think of.


I'm proud NOT to be a member of R-CALF.



~SH~
 
Some are too proud and too blind.

SH, I sell beef at about 10% above Wal-Mart prices and make good money. The fact is that most of the money in the beef industry is soaked up between the consumer and the producer...what is NCBA doing to help producers get more of it? To be fair, I don't see R-CALF doing much to change that either. But at least they know where the problem is.
 
Howdy SH. I guess you already know my feelings about a government mandated animal and premises ID and I'm probably the only one on this board who is not a member of either R-Calf or NCBA. Both of them have done some good for the beef industry but since I don't agree with either organization on several different issues, I will never join either one.

Now that I've managed to tick off everyone else on the board, I'll get to my point.

The reason I posted the article about the funding behind NAIS was because, as I've told you before, I am vehemently against mandatory NAIS and when I found out that Farm Bureau, an organization that I and my family have been heavily involved in for a couple generations, has been promoting and funding NAIS without telling its members, I was more than a little upset!

Farm Bureau used to be an organization that believed in keeping the government out of our lives. They were big on private property rights, lower taxes, less government, and individual responsibility, all positions that I wholeheartedly agreed with.

My eyes were opened when SDFB fought the bill we tried to pass in the South Dakota legislature to keep NAIS voluntary in this state. I have nothing against anyone who wants to voluntarily participate in an animal ID program, but nobody is going to force me to register my premises and ID my livestock. Hell will freeze over first!

Farm Bureau still does some things that I agree with, but never again will they get one dime of membership money from me or from anyone in my family.

Oh, and the hot iron brand is entirely voluntary. There is no law in South Dakota forcing you to brand your cattle, your sheep, horses, goats or chickens. The hot iron brand is freely chosen as a means of identifying our livestock and the program was created by livestock producers to stop theft and it is also a very effective way of tracking livestock in a disease outbreak.

I pay $50 every five years to register each of my brands and my name and address in the South Dakota brand book is the only premise ID needed to find me and my livestock. The voters in the last presidential election put an administration in charge that is threatening to take away every freedom we have enjoyed for the last two hundred years and I refuse to be a voluntary participate in Obama's brand of socialism.
 
mrj, if "too blind or too proud" is what offended you, I apologize.

Let me explain...
25 years ago there were 60 dairies in this county...today, 2!
When I started direct selling, there were half a dozen processors with in a hours drive(half State or USDA inspected)...now there is one!
Beef cattle are down, not quite as bad, but most are old producers that just can't let go of a business they love. There are far more fenced in acres growing brush, weeds, and pine trees than cattle all across the southeast. National cattle organizations appear to be blind to this fact. Many northern cattlemen believe southern cattle to be the problem with the industry...I've seen it on these boards for years. I see the prejudice against me for being a southern that speaks out. You and SH would rather see southeastern cattlemen going out of business than to restrict imports. I have no problem with fair competition, but if you are going to import, all I ask is to sell as your product.

Because of industry concentration, the day will come that a producers will have to have a contract with a packer to be able to sell his cattle...just like poultry and pork is close to the same. When we are too blind or too proud to think that these same companies we are trusting our destiny to, aren't going to do this to us...we will help them to make it happen sooner.

Not that you care, but I am profitable in what I'm doing now. But I know my days are numbered...soon I won't have a processor and I will have to sell my cattle through the commodity market. Because of the prejudice against southern cattle, I will get about half the money that you get.

I once believed that cowboys and cattlemen were symbolic of free spirit and rugged individualism. I never thought they could be lead under the thumb of big corporations and give up control of this industry and the destiny of your children.

Liberty Belle, I apologize for intruding on your thread, but that is how you piss everyone off.

Y'all have a good day and a good future.
 
RM, re. your posts: 11-5-09-8:20am; Let me explain.....120 years ago there were many makers of horse drawn equipment for serious use on farms......today they are nearly extinct, and what they make is very expensive, selling to people with 'horse hobbies'....so what????

Re, "name calling": When YOU wrote "NCBA leadership bought into the packer plan......" you are, in effect, calling the organization a name indicating they are not following membership dictates, you are calling the packers a name indicating they are trying to destroy their very source of supply, and you are calling NCBA members something not ver flattering in saying they are responsible (or, "need to take credit for direction the industry...."). I beg to differ. There are factors outside the power of even the NCBA which affect cattle prices now, in the past, and will in the future. The organization can only do what is legal, possible, and within our financial means to affect changes in the cattle industry.

The fact is, quite a number of cattle producers stand behind that organization and work positively, and successfully much of the time, to improve our business climate. Contrasted with organizations who focus almost entirely on negativity, creating distrust of that industry with cries of "imported crap" sold as good beef, "BSE riddled beef", "NCBA is using your checkoff dollars against you" and many more we hear frequently on radio stations in SD stated by R-CALF leaders, to keep in place a state of near panic in ranchers, which appears designed to keep that money rolling in to help counter the 'threats'. Threats we have! But they are from the anti-meat people far more than from other cattle producer organizations!!!

mrj
 
Oh am I going to have fun with this one......

RM: "SH, I sell beef at about 10% above Wal-Mart prices and make good money. The fact is that most of the money in the beef industry is soaked up between the consumer and the producer..."
Click to expand...


Robert,

If most of the money in the beef industry is soaked up between the consumer and producer, why would you have to charge 10% more than Walmart for your beef to "make good money"??? Hmmm???

Are you going to try to tell me that you can process cattle as cheaply as Tyson??? Are you going to try to tell me that you can add value to all the parts of a carcass (hides, edible ofal, inedible ofal, variety meats, etc) as well as Tyson??

I didn't think so!

1. You have to charge more than Tyson because you cannot process cattle OR ADD VALUE as efficiently as they can. Since nobody will be privy to an account of your processing costs, we'll just have to take your word for it that you are comparing apples to apples when comparing processing costs relative to "making good money".

2. You can charge more for your beef than Tyson because you have found consumers who believe you offer enough extra value and can justify the added costs. You are niche market, not the norm. If your niche market was flooded by Tyson, you couldn't compete with them from an efficiency standpoint. Apples to oranges.

Just because I happen to find someone who wants my old Ford F150 bad enough to pay $10,000 for it doesn't mean that the used automobile industry is raping the consumers on trade ins when they only give $2000 for the same truck.

Congratulations, you just defeated your own argument (have to charge 10% more for the beef).


RM: "Many northern cattlemen believe southern cattle to be the problem with the industry...I've seen it on these boards for years. I see the prejudice against me for being a southern that speaks out. You and SH would rather see southeastern cattlemen going out of business than to restrict imports."
Click to expand...

Ridiculous!

If you have to "go out of the business", it won't be because of imports, it will be because you cannot cut costs enough to compete with those with outside money. It will be because we can't raise beef as cheaply as pork and poulty and still compete. It will be because your neighbors are supplementing their income with recreational hunting. It will be because of many factors that have nothing to do with imports.

Keep in mind Robert, when R-CALF was filing their dumping case against Canada, Mexico was filing a dumping case against us. At that time we were exporting more dollars worth of beef, beef variety meats, live cattle, and hides (COMBINED rather than a single category) than we were importing.


RM: "I have no problem with fair competition, but if you are going to import, all I ask is to sell as your product."
Click to expand...

The same way New Zealand lamb outsold US lamb in US supermarkets??

I don't have any problem with Canada labeling their product as "MAPLE LEAF SOURCE VERIFIED BEEF". I doubt their sales will suffer from country of origin labeling. Walmarts sales of foreign products should tell you something about US consumer loyalty to US products.


RM: "Because of industry concentration, the day will come that a producers will have to have a contract with a packer to be able to sell his cattle...just like poultry and pork is close to the same. When we are too blind or too proud to think that these same companies we are trusting our destiny to, aren't going to do this to us...we will help them to make it happen sooner."
Click to expand...

When you are so ignorant to believe that smaller less efficient packers can compete with larger more efficient packers when buying cattle you will speed the process of US producer demise. Either way, you'll still blame the large packer.


RM: "Not that you care, but I am profitable in what I'm doing now. But I know my days are numbered...soon I won't have a processor and I will have to sell my cattle through the commodity market. Because of the prejudice against southern cattle, I will get about half the money that you get."
Click to expand...

Tell that to Nolan Ryan. Oh yeh, of course, he's subsidizing his cattle business with his baseball earnings right???


RM: "I once believed that cowboys and cattlemen were symbolic of free spirit and rugged individualism. I never thought they could be lead under the thumb of big corporations and give up control of this industry and the destiny of your children."
Click to expand...

I once believed that cowboys and cattlemen were symbolic of people who based their decisions on facts and truth rather than a need to blame. Men and women who understood the concept of "PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENSE". I guess we all have our heros. I doubt John Wayne would have been a packer blamer. He would have either found out the truth about the profits in the packing industry or he would have started his own packing plant. Either way, he wouldn't be whining and blaming.


~SH~
 
LB,

To participate in branding may be voluntary but not having your cattle leave western SD without being brand inspected is not. Based on that, brand inspection is a mandatory ID system that you support. Am I wrong?

Unless you are prepared to make the argument that BRAND INSPECTION (as opposed to the act of branding) is not a form of mandatory ID, then you cannot say you oppose all forms of mandatory ID.

Now please don't take that statement out of context. I did not say I oppose brand inspection. In fact I support brand inspection west of the river for very good reason. Based on that, I cannot say I oppose any mandatory form of ID and pass the "red faced test".

I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy of those who oppose a mandatory ID but support BRAND INSPECTION which is, for all practical purposes, a mandatory ID which can trace cattle back from virtually any feedlot in the nation short of state to state conflicts with the same brands.

I'm also pointing out the hypocrisy of those (not you) who oppose Mandatory ID but insisted on proving where an animal was "born, raised, and processed" before it could carry the "US BEEF" designation for "M"COOL. You cannot trace an animal back to where it was born without a mandatory ID non matter what "M"COOL proponents tell you. USDA is in charge of enforcing "M"COOL, not the R-CALFers. "M"COOL proponents oppose what they insisted on.

Ironically, you could trace any brand back to where it was BORN if you had a state designation when it crossed state lines. Not saying I support such a thing, simply saying that the only way hot brands are not traceable is when you have the same brand registered in different states. So the R-CALFers oppose mandatory ID yet they support brand inspection which is a mandatory ID and they insisted on proving where an animal was "BORN" to carry the "US BEEF" label. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

If I walk into a feedlot in Garden City Kansas and I see a flying "V" brand on the left hip (the old Matador brand) and ask the feedlot owner what state those cattle are from, I can trace those cattle back to their owner. Hence, MANDATORY ID!! So what's your concern with premise ID when your premise has already been ID'd through brand inspection???

Trust me LB, if your cattle end up with some contagious epidemic in some feedlot somewhere in Kansas, those cattle will be traced back to you due to those brands whether you like it or not.

Like you, I have some real concerns with a government mandated ID system also due to your same concerns about government intrusion. With that said, I can also understand the importance of tracing cattle to their origination in the event of a disease outbreak. Trust me, if source verification means the difference between profit and loss in the cattle industry, most producers will source ID their cattle and I would be among them. The benefits in a profit or loss situation will outweigh the risks of government intrusion particularly when we already have brand inspection. What's the difference whether a piece of paper, confirming origination, accompanies the brand already there???

I am aware of source verified branded beef programs that will pay from $25 to $40 more for source verified cattle. At that point producers should be given the choice whether or not the risks of government intrusion outweigh the benefits of the added value. I have already participated in a total process verified branded beef program so premise ID doesn't scare me. The government does.

I don't begrude Farm Bureau for their position when I know the basis for their concern is market driven. If I want to participate in a mandatory ID branded beef program, that should be my choice. For now, I would rather let the individual producers decide until the market dictates it. I sure as heck don't need the conspiracy theorists to save me from my self with premise ID any more than I need them to tell me what manner I can market fat cattle.

As a Farm Bureau member, I could easily make an argument that I supported mandatory ID in the form of brand inspection.

You are opposing something (mandatory ID) you actively support (brand inspection).

Think about that!

Memory serves me right, the opponents of mandatory ID were even trying to force east river to be included in the brand inspection area. How do you like that for hypocrisy???

May your dams be full, your grass grow tall, and your cattle healthy.


~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
To participate in branding may be voluntary but not having your cattle leave western SD without being brand inspected is not. Based on that, brand inspection is a mandatory ID system that you support. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
Well I think you're wrong, but I suppose it's all a matter of semantics. Nothing in the brand law says I have to identify (ID) my livestock, which would make brand inspection a mandatory program the way I see it.

South Dakota law requires inspection west river to guarantee that those of us who choose to brand our livestock are protected from anyone trying to leave the brand inspection area with stolen livestock. If someone steals your unbranded cow, the brand inspector isn't going to be able to tell that it's yours when he sees it.

The law was written by livestock producers to protect those of us who choose to brand our livestock and we pay for that protection because it works. Does this make animal ID mandatory? I don't believe it does.

The only folks I've heard complain about not having brand inspection statewide are some ranchers on the east side of the Missouri that have registered brands and have suffered some huge loses to rustlers because there is no inspection on that side of the Missouri.

Rep. Charlie Hoffman, a rancher who represents District 23 in the SD House, has talked about bringing a bill to make brand inspection statewide to protect the ranchers in his east river district because they are the ones really hurting from this lack of inspection. If Charlie brings the bill, most west river legislators will support him, but it will have to come from the east side of the river if it has any hope of passing.
~SH~ said:
If I walk into a feedlot in Garden City Kansas and I see a flying "V" brand on the left hip (the old Matador brand) and ask the feedlot owner what state those cattle are from, I can trace those cattle back to their owner. Hence, MANDATORY ID!! So what's your concern with premise ID when your premise has already been ID'd through brand inspection???

Trust me LB, if your cattle end up with some contagious epidemic in some feedlot somewhere in Kansas, those cattle will be traced back to you due to those brands whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...
True. Our animal trace back works very well right now. Why should I have to pay big dollars for mandatory NAIS when there is no reason for it that I can see? There is nothing stopping me from voluntarily signing on to NAIS and I have no problem with anyone who wants to do that. Where we'll probably have to part company is when the feds come to force me into a program that violates my constitutional rights.

I have the same distrust of government that you do. I'm scared to death of what Obama is doing to this country with the bailouts, the takeover of the banks and the car companies, his attempted takeover of health care, and his Cap and Tax Climate Change bill. Can you honestly tell me that you're prepared to let him run a mandatory National Animal Identification System?

Nah, I didn't think so....
 
Actually branding has some serious flaws.

Even if the brand is registered - it is only in a state and not national registry - at least that is what I understand. If that is true and this scenario comes into play:

So Charlie Bumpkin has a heifer that he brands as "X" in Montana - it has one heifer calf that becomes a breeder and stays on the home place.

Charlie sells the original animal to some guy in Utah who brands it "Y", It stays there long enough to have two calves - both become breeders - one is branded and kept on the place and the other is not branded and sold to a kid down the road to show.

Who knows what happens to the show animal one as it is not a decent show animal but goes into the hobbyist field as a breeder - raising calves for the hobbyist who sells all his heifers to other hobbyists and sells the remainder as bulls and steers to the local hobby guys and gals.

"Some guy in Utah" then sells the original cow to some gal and then it goes to Alabama where it has three or four calves that are not branded.

The owner puts an unregistered brand on the animal - she is not branding because she has to - she is branding because she wants to know her cattle when they are in the community pasture. Calves are not branded and go to two or three places in the local area but one actually goes back to Montana as an unbranded heifer.

Then the cow goes to Tennessee where it has a couple calves that are not branded but used as breeding stock on other farms in the local area.

It then it ends up in Iowa as a slaughter cow.

I believe this to be an untraceable animal using the brand method - and for damned sure the offspring are untraceable - and today there are a lot of animals that travel this much AND more

So - unless I misunderstand the branding system you folks have - IT IS NOT INFALLABLE.

I wish you folks would stop acting like it is. To think regionally is very parochial - when in fact your cows travel all over the country and live in non-brand states as well.

As for mandatory - not so sure I like being told how to operate either.

But - someone come up with a system that works. Otherwise one will be imposed - and that my friends is a fact - especially with todays government.

To further complicate the issue - that brand "X" and "Y" can be registered in other states to other owners - making it all the more complex. And then to look for that unregistered brand - that makes it even more difficult.

To complicate it even further - the same brand can be registered to more than one person if I remember correctly - the brand location being the definitive. Now you can have several people using that brand and where they place it is the only separator in the registry.

If all brand states have someone registered to "X" and "Y" you are well and truly screwed with the trace back.

If a non brand state does not have a registry - or a person brands using a non registered brand - it further complicates the issue.

Lets make it even tougher - some COUNTIES have their own brand registry - Texas I believe is one of them - it does not even get to the state level.

Now it is close to impossible.

Especially if they raise the panacea cow - Black Angus and all the varieties of Black Angus.

So stop telling me branding works. In many cases it does - in many cases it does not. To think otherwise is what is getting you all into this pickle in the first place.

What bothers me when I see all this writing is I see people that are thinking about their own little area - it is bigger than you - it is national and it is international - so - come up with a system that works - or someone else will - it is that simple.

To make it even more unpalatable - it will be imposed - no matter what you think or want - governments move slowly but they do move - and therefore it will come.

It also tells me there are a lot of people out there that do not understand how animals travel today.

So - if I am wrong and there is a national brand registry - I have been sitting up over here all night and into the sun rise - writing like I know something and in fact I know nothing!

Hmmmm...... Please do not confuse me with that person - I actually do give a damn - I am just tired

Cheers

BC
 
LB: "I'm scared to death of what Obama is doing to this country with the bailouts, the takeover of the banks and the car companies, his attempted takeover of health care, and his Cap and Tax Climate Change bill. Can you honestly tell me that you're prepared to let him run a mandatory National Animal Identification System?"
Click to expand...

Although I see the value in being able to trace contagious or potentially contagious diseases to their source (BSE or F&M as an example) in order to preserve consumer confidence in our product (market driven), your statement above describes my apprehension to a government mandated ID system perfectly. You are right, I can't imagine Obama running anything in the manner in which it was intended let alone becoming involved in the livestock industry.

This is a tough one for me. I see the value in traceback but I can't imagine what the end results would be if mandated by this government let alone any other government.

At this point I would have to vote against any government run mandatory ID program and encourage producers to support voluntary producer driven source verification programs as the need arises and the markets dictate. I also reserve the right to change my position in the event of a major disease outbreak that threatens consumer confidence in our product. If the choice is between consumer confidence and government distrust, I would have to vote to maintain consumer confidence. Let's hope we never have to make that choice.

LB, having lived and run cattle east of the river, I would oppose any effort to expand brand inspection east of the river. Although I certainly see the benefits of brand inspection in the prevention of cattle theft particularly in less populated areas, I have not seen that the problem justifies this drastic measure at this time. I would like to hear the full debate before forming a final opinion. Brand inspection east of the river would basically force everyone east of the river into added expense and the hassle of having cattle brand inspected prior to shipping for the benefit of a few that have experienced problems. I think there is better ways of dealing with cattle theft situations than a mandatory brand inspection program. The technologies that have been applied to other industries to prevent theft could be utilized in the cattle industry as well without forcing everyone into brand inspection for those specific problem situations.

One of the biggest mistakes that was ever made in the history of the US was having a North and South Dakota as opposed to an East and West Dakota. HUGE MISTAKE!!! Both states fight the same demographic problems from east of the river to west of the river. The needs of these two areas are different and east river outvotes west river.

I would like to ask the Canadians on this site what their experiences with a mandatory ID program have been. Not to suggest that it would be the same results in the US, just to understand the issue better.


Broke Cowboy,

Excellent post!

You are absolutely correct. I did not mean to imply that IN STATE hot iron branding is a substitute for a mandatory ID program ON A NATIONAL LEVEL for the very reasons you mention. Rather, that brand inspection is a form of mandatory ID that can trace cattle in certain situations and could be part of a mandatory ID program if we were ever forced into that situation.

You are correct to the best of my knowledge there is no national brand inspection system that wouldn't fall apart the minute you crossed most state borders for the reasons you mentioned.

Incidentally, the reasons you mentioned are the same reasons the oversimplistic solution of the "M" brand for Mexico and the "C" brand for Canada would not trace those cattle to their country of origin as has been suggested by those who support "M"COOL. I hope "M"COOL proponents who insisted on proving where an animal was "BORN, raised, and slaughtered" before receiving the "US BEEF" label read your post relative to tracing Canadian and Mexican cattle with a hot iron brand.

My apologies if my post seemed to imply that state brand inspection would suffice for a national mandatory ID.

Good posts!


~SH~
 
Broke Cowboy,

Excellent post!

......................................Big snip..........................................................

My apologies if my post seemed to imply that state brand inspection would suffice for a national mandatory ID.

Good posts!

~SH~

Apology not required - as I was writing I was thinking - "Boy am I going to look stupid if there is a national registry that I do not know about!"

Be that as it may I am tired of folks telling us that a brand is all that is required. I hear it on this site all the time.

It does not work - no matter what some folks think.

Too may holes in that system - and that has been proven - over and over again.

Unfortunately I believe you will fight the "fat cats" who want to make money on this system, you will fight incompetence, you will fight people who are more politically inclined to NOT help you and you will have to bear the brunt of the cost. I think it will be a nightmare that unfolds into the never ending story.

Your domestic market may not care for some time - but your export markets are sitting up and taking notice - you want to keep that market you will have to keep them happy - and that may make YOU very unhappy!

Up to the ranchers and farmers to find a way - or it will be imposed - and there is darned little they can do about it - their pockets are not deep enough and it appears the feds are determined.

Do not shoot the messenger folks.

BC
 
SH, per usual, you miss the point of having small and medium processors. Their purpose isn't to compete directly with the large processors on a "per cost of processing" basis, it is to have an alternative marketing avenue for producers to reach the consumer. Without viable alternatives, like direct sells and private branded programs through these processors, the large corporate packers become the only marketing avenue.

As for your competition between the large packers, it will only be a matter of which one will return the largest crumb! They all operate the same...tight margins and volume for profitability...and anything they can do to lower the cost of raw product makes them more profitable. Increasing the supply of beef with respect to live cattle supply will keep downward pressure on their raw product.

30-40% of beef bypassing the large packers will make a competitive free market place. Look at the poultry market...where is the free market place? It doesn't exist! Wouldn't these same packers want the same situation in the beef market?

You say pork and poultry are our real competition, but the same large packers process the majority of all three...where is the competition going to come from?

My total cost to turn a live animal into packaged meat is $.58 per pound carcass weight (including taxes on the cost). My beef enterprise pays my cattle enterprise over $1000 per head...I wonder how many producers here would be profitable grossing $1000 per head?

I'm 10% above commodity prices because I'm in a niche market, but I'm priced at the bottom end of my niche. Do you ever wonder why I tell people not to try to compete head to head with the large packers?
 
Bravo ! Robert, Your RIGHT!!!!
You say pork and poultry are our real competition, but the same large packers process the majority of all three...where is the competition going to come from?
 
Broke Cowboy said:
Actually branding has some serious flaws.

Even if the brand is registered - it is only in a state and not national registry - at least that is what I understand. If that is true and this scenario comes into play:

So Charlie Bumpkin has a heifer that he brands as "X" in Montana - it has one heifer calf that becomes a breeder and stays on the home place.

Charlie sells the original animal to some guy in Utah who brands it "Y", It stays there long enough to have two calves - both become breeders - one is branded and kept on the place and the other is not branded and sold to a kid down the road to show.

Who knows what happens to the show animal one as it is not a decent show animal but goes into the hobbyist field as a breeder - raising calves for the hobbyist who sells all his heifers to other hobbyists and sells the remainder as bulls and steers to the local hobby guys and gals.

"Some guy in Utah" then sells the original cow to some gal and then it goes to Alabama where it has three or four calves that are not branded.

The owner puts an unregistered brand on the animal - she is not branding because she has to - she is branding because she wants to know her cattle when they are in the community pasture. Calves are not branded and go to two or three places in the local area but one actually goes back to Montana as an unbranded heifer.

Then the cow goes to Tennessee where it has a couple calves that are not branded but used as breeding stock on other farms in the local area.

It then it ends up in Iowa as a slaughter cow.

I believe this to be an untraceable animal using the brand method - and for damned sure the offspring are untraceable - and today there are a lot of animals that travel this much AND more

So - unless I misunderstand the branding system you folks have - IT IS NOT INFALLABLE.

I wish you folks would stop acting like it is. To think regionally is very parochial - when in fact your cows travel all over the country and live in non-brand states as well.

As for mandatory - not so sure I like being told how to operate either.

But - someone come up with a system that works. Otherwise one will be imposed - and that my friends is a fact - especially with todays government.

To further complicate the issue - that brand "X" and "Y" can be registered in other states to other owners - making it all the more complex. And then to look for that unregistered brand - that makes it even more difficult.

To complicate it even further - the same brand can be registered to more than one person if I remember correctly - the brand location being the definitive. Now you can have several people using that brand and where they place it is the only separator in the registry.

If all brand states have someone registered to "X" and "Y" you are well and truly screwed with the trace back.

If a non brand state does not have a registry - or a person brands using a non registered brand - it further complicates the issue.

Lets make it even tougher - some COUNTIES have their own brand registry - Texas I believe is one of them - it does not even get to the state level.

Now it is close to impossible.

Especially if they raise the panacea cow - Black Angus and all the varieties of Black Angus.

So stop telling me branding works. In many cases it does - in many cases it does not. To think otherwise is what is getting you all into this pickle in the first place.

What bothers me when I see all this writing is I see people that are thinking about their own little area - it is bigger than you - it is national and it is international - so - come up with a system that works - or someone else will - it is that simple.

To make it even more unpalatable - it will be imposed - no matter what you think or want - governments move slowly but they do move - and therefore it will come.

It also tells me there are a lot of people out there that do not understand how animals travel today.

So - if I am wrong and there is a national brand registry - I have been sitting up over here all night and into the sun rise - writing like I know something and in fact I know nothing!

Hmmmm...... Please do not confuse me with that person - I actually do give a damn - I am just tired

Cheers

BC
Click to expand...

Branding has flaws in a fairy tale like you just painted no doubt,but it is the best identification for livestock we have,using tags and or ID chips is laughable especially to your smaller outfits,they will fight this with their dieing breath,ear tags fall off brands dont,ear tags are easily cut off.You ever try cuttin off a brand ?
What we need are good brand laws,not tags/ID chips and expensive chip readers that get paid for by the cattleman and a huge data base that gets maintained by who? at what cost ? add the fact and this is a fact, One of the criticisms of the National Animal Identification System, the USDA's voluntary livestock identification and tracing program, is that tracking technology cannot stand up to the speed of commerce and still be accurate........................good luck
 
I'm posting just the conclusion of the comments on NAIS submitted by the Executive Director of Farm for Life, Mary Zanoni, Ph.D. (Cornell), J.D. (Yale) in 2005. The whole thing is a long read, but definitely worth the effort if you want to see the legitimate objections most folks opposed to a mandatory NAIS have.

After you read her conclusion, I suggest you click on the link at the bottom to read her whole argument. Read it over and if anyone still thinks we need mandatory NAIS, would you please step forward and tell us why?

Conclusion

The NAIS proposals as embodied in the Standards and Plan are unworkable because of economic costs, the huge burdens of reporting, and enormous and needless complexity. Their justifications based on animal diseases and food safety would not be served but in fact would be harmed by the NAIS. The Department has failed to consider numerous alternative methods that might actually further animal health and food security without the vast problems of the proposed NAIS. The Department has limited any input on the NAIS chiefly to a small group of parties with a preexisting bias toward mandatory animal ID; the Department did not make its plans known to small farming interest groups and did not seek any input from such groups. Last, and first, the most fatal flaw of the proposed NAIS is its disregard for fundamental human rights enshrined in our Constitution: the right to religious freedom, the right of property ownership, the right of privacy.

Not since Prohibition has any government agency attempted to enshrine in law a system, which so thoroughly stigmatizes and burdens common, everyday behavior and is so certain to meet with huge resistance from the citizens it unjustly targets.

Therefore, the Department should:

1. withdraw the present Standards and Plan as failing to embody a fair or workable system;

2. reconsider whether, particularly in light of the present effective measures against BSE, any animal I.D. scheme is warranted at present;

3. consider implementing the low cost and easily undertaken measures that would more effectively protect animal health, human health, and the food supply;

4. review its procedures for development of programs such as NAIS to correct the limitation of input to self-selected groups and the failure to notify the vast majority of affected parties; and

5. institute procedures to assure that, in the future, proposed programs will not be permitted to threaten the constitutional rights of citizens.

Mary Zanoni, Ph.D. (Cornell), J.D. (Yale),
Executive Director of Farm for Life
P.O. Box 501, Canton, New York 13617

http://reliableanswers.com/politics/nais.asp
 
Unfortunately, I think the present "ruling class" in Washington has little regard for the Constitution and is drunk on power and corruption, as indicated by this weekends vote on "the government take-over" of the healthcare industry. We need to fire all of them!!!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top