Yes SH, I think you are right. There is both the supply side and the demand side of Supply and Demand. While I have never been a member of the NBCA. I lost all interest in supporting them just for that reason.
They put most of their effort in working with demand and forgot all about that it is the producer who provided the supply. I don't know all the reason for increased demand. Advertising is not all because we had the check off working for a number of years when we had the low prices in the mid 90's. A time when the producers return were the lowest ever in terms of what they would buy.
{Clarence, while it is true that much of the checikoff dollar is put into advertising, that is a very expensive area and requires lots of dollars. You surely cannot deny the success of the ad campaign when eighty-some percent of people have heard the "Beef It's What's For Dinner" slogan. FACT: it is not NCBA's Policy division that makes such decisions. It is the CBB and/or the Federation of State Beef Councils, with many or most of the projects originating at the local or state level. FACT: NCBA, as a contracting agency, has been very successful in convincing others to partner their dollars with checkoff dollars allowing more work to be done for the beef industry. New product development is one such area. Research is another. Personally, I believe much of the increase in demand is directly related to the nutrient research and projects getting that information to the medical and nutrition professions. Considering past promotion of the "white" meats as healthful and the "red" meats as harmful to health, it is VERY BIG NEWS to learn that many cuts of beef have very little more fat than poultry, and FAR MORE of the most vital nutrients. And watch for results of the research into the fatty acids in beef. I think that will be very exciting and will place beef very well in the category of beneficial naturally ocurring fats. MRJ}
Maybe the packers and those on the other end will come to their senses and realize the high prices they now pay for cattle is a result of their own lack of foresight. A smaller supply of cattle today is not so much the result of drought as it is the fact that low profits forced many out of the business. [[
Maybe I am just looking for a scrap, but it seems that most all who belong to NBCA will continue to say it is allright to let the smaller operators fall out as they are ineficient anyway. They continue to say let us take over, we are better managers and are more efficient. I don't think most of them were ineficient or poor managers. I think they did not have the capital or the opportunities to expand enough to continue. In many cases the small man is the better manager and the most efficient the large operator can just work with smaller margins.
{Clarence, when, where, or by whom have you ever heard or seen any leader or staff person from NCBA make such statements?Shouldn't you back up such a serious accusation with a fact or two?
NCBA has provided at very low cost, many, many workshops and speakers to help producers, especially the smaller one, find ways to improve their cattle operation, or manage their operations in ways to improve their profitablility.
It isn't always injections of big amounts of capital that makes the difference.Taking care of the small problems and paying attention to the most rewarding opportunities for improvement often shows real pay offs for small ranchers.
It has far more to do with attitude. The person who thinksthe world is against him, he can't do anything about it is defeating himself far more than any evil "big" operator or corporation can. The man who believes he is defeated usually is, while the one who has optimism and a can do attitude can overcome far greater obstacles than the defeatist.
MRJ}
SH, I believe you would like to be a full time cattle producer. If that is the case. What changes in the industry would you like to see in order for you to do that?