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

USDA wants to let the NCBA control the database

Help Support Ranchers.net:

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Those of you from South Dakota have probably received a letter from the Animal Industry Board (AIB) wanting you to sign up for a national premise number for the VOLUNTARY phase of a National Cattle identification program. If you are from another state you may have or probably will receive a similar letter. I have received lots of phone calls about this and whether to fill it out or not.


Remember this program is VOLUNTARY at this time. With what has happened with COOL recently (delayed yet another 2 years) and the excuses for essentially killing it, I am going to make a big circle on the form with a line running through it and send it back to the AIB. The meat packers and retailers killed COOL by saying it was a record keeping nightmare, so I think we should use their tactics to kill MANDATORY ANIMAL ID. If there ever was going to be a record keeping nightmare this is it. The government will track your cattle for every premise to premise movement and want info on births and deaths of livestock etc. (talk about government intrusiveness).


Some other points why I am against signing up for a premise ID number is that by doing so you are saying that you support animal ID. Yes that is true, about a month ago the Sec. of Agriculture, Mike Johanns said in an interview that nearly 100,000 producers have signed up for a premise number so there is that much support for mandatory ID program. Well, I know individuals that got a premise number but are in no way in support of a mandatory program. I actually don't know why these people signed up for a number.


Another thing is that the USDA wants to let the NCBA control the database for the program. I don't know about you but I don't trust NCBA to keep my records confidential from the meat packers and others who can exploit the whole cattle industry. Results of the pilot programs that USDA funded are coming in way below what was expected for tracking livestock. Furthermore, computers are hacked into at high level places, how convenient for the database controller to simply say that someone hacked into the database and stole your cattle information.


This letter is coming from USDA, they are just using the state AIB to channel this part of the program (premise numbers) through. I have no gripe with Dr. Sam Holland or the AIB, they are doing what USDA has asked of them. For the state vets, keeping track of the animals in their state is a big part of the job, but from what I have seen and heard of the USDA wishes for a national ID I personally cannot support this in any way.


This is America and you can do what you like with this letter. I have received calls asking me if I am going to fill it out and send it back, so this letter is merely telling you what I plan to do with my letter. Maybe if enough of us draw a circle on the letter with a line running through it and send it back a strong message will be sent to USDA. There is a postage paid envelope to send it back so it will not cost you a dime.


Someday this will become mandatory and I will have to have a premise ID number, but for now this is VOLUNTARY and I volunteer not to participate.

Thank you,
Rick Fox
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
I would challenge Mr. Fox, or anyone else to show us one shred of proof that NCBA has any intention of "controlling" that data base, or anything about the M-ID program.

NCBA got the ball rolling to serve the cattle industry by giving cattle producers from any and all organizations a say in how the program should be run.

What does the man fail to understand about the words, "independent, non-profit consortium representing all species and organizations affected by M-ID"? That is what is being proposed by NCBA, not that they as an organization control it. BTW, M-ID involves many species of animals, not just cattle.

M-ID is coming from Homeland Security, and there will be no avoiding it.

However, according to an editorial by Pete Crow this week, the marketplace is driving ID far faster than government could. It is going to be required by many of the companies that sell beef.

This is just another instance where the cattle producers leading NCBA were foresighted enough to realize that change is coming. We cannot stop it, but we can shape it to work for us rather than against us.

Too bad some other organizations will not admit that philosophy can serve us better than filing lawsuits that achieve little besides enriching a bunch of lawyers.

MRJ
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
Let NCBA build it and then let www.scoringag.com run it to keep the ranchers and the farmers data safe for the species groups and the APHIS vets.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
This is just another instance where the cattle producers leading NCBA were foresighted enough to realize that change is coming. We cannot stop it, but we can shape it to work for us rather than against us.

Too bad some other organizations will not admit that philosophy can serve us better than filing lawsuits that achieve little besides enriching a bunch of lawyers.

MRJ


Too bad we have a judicial and political system that is so influenced by big corporation's interests and cattlemen's organizations (NCBA) that facilitate their selfish workings.
 

pointrider

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
218
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Econ 101,

If you have a minute, please send me an email and just say hi so I can send you a reply. Thanks!
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
PORKER said:
Big corporation's interests, Whats THAT????????? INVESTORS?????

Porker, Many company policies are not policies that are explicitly supported by the investors. Corporate boards are supposed to be making sure this does not happen but we have all seen enough of corporate america to know that corporate boards are not taking their responsibility as serious as they should. If there were more economic consequences to these failures we would see fewer of them.

We just happen to have a judicial system that is not allowing the remedies of accountability to be efficiently be exercised. Hire a bunch of lawyers to make sure you don't go over the line too far and try to execute the fraud anyway. Hide behind the absence of a specific regulation that pertains to your fraud and the courts may just let you off even though you should be held accountable for your actions. Hold the little man accountable for his actions, but not the well lawyered rich man. Let the charlatan hide behind the corporate veil. That is a recipe for an entrenched aristocracy and as unamerican as it gets.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Econ101 said:
This is just another instance where the cattle producers leading NCBA were foresighted enough to realize that change is coming. We cannot stop it, but we can shape it to work for us rather than against us.

Too bad some other organizations will not admit that philosophy can serve us better than filing lawsuits that achieve little besides enriching a bunch of lawyers.

MRJ


Too bad we have a judicial and political system that is so influenced by big corporation's interests and cattlemen's organizations (NCBA) that facilitate their selfish workings.

Econ, it is not only too bad, but very disgusting as well, that you will not admit that the cattle producer members make the decisions about policy in NCBA, and that you show no facts to back your scurrilous accusations.

MRJ
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
This is just another instance where the cattle producers leading NCBA were foresighted enough to realize that change is coming. We cannot stop it, but we can shape it to work for us rather than against us.

Too bad some other organizations will not admit that philosophy can serve us better than filing lawsuits that achieve little besides enriching a bunch of lawyers.

MRJ


Too bad we have a judicial and political system that is so influenced by big corporation's interests and cattlemen's organizations (NCBA) that facilitate their selfish workings.

Econ, it is not only too bad, but very disgusting as well, that you will not admit that the cattle producer members make the decisions about policy in NCBA, and that you show no facts to back your scurrilous accusations.

MRJ

The cattle producers make the policies and leadership reverses them. MRJ, we all saw it. However you try to sugarcoat or justify it, the result is the same.
 

Tommy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Location
South East Kansas
Sandhusker...The cattle producers make the policies and leadership reverses them. MRJ, we all saw it.

Don't you remember Sandhusker, MJ said they had a conference call with all the state organizations and decided to reverse it? More likely it was just a very few.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
PORKER said:
Big corporation's interests, Whats THAT????????? INVESTORS?????
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!! Shareholders...pension funds...mutual funds...consumers!!!
I always get a kick when the "big bad corporations" are blamed for everything and then some of the same people complain when their share price goes down. :lol:
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
MRJ, Just as the unions owe their power to bad management, R-CALF owes its existence to the NCBA and its bad management of cattlemen's issues. Scurrilous indictment would be a better description as proven by the success of R-CALF.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Bill said:
PORKER said:
Big corporation's interests, Whats THAT????????? INVESTORS?????
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!! Shareholders...pension funds...mutual funds...consumers!!!
I always get a kick when the "big bad corporations" are blamed for everything and then some of the same people complain when their share price goes down. :lol:

So, Bill, in your mind, if it is investors that are at risk there is no liability? Maybe the market place should punish investors that defraud another part of society. Pretty simple. Not all corporations act in such "scurrilous" fashion and then try to get away with it by bribing the elected officials and policy makers at the USDA. Only those caught should pay those costs. We might not have such predatory investors if that were the case. Everything is about economics.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Econ101 said:
MRJ, Just as the unions owe their power to bad management, R-CALF owes its existence to the NCBA and its bad management of cattlemen's issues. Scurrilous indictment would be a better description as proven by the success of R-CALF.

Econ, in fact, R-CALF owes its existemce far more to carefully sown seeds of discontent in the form of outright lies about the Beef Checkoff and NCBA by the LMA led by Pat Goggins, and aided and abetted by Leo McDonnell and some cattle sale barn owners.

Did you attend any of the "informational" meetings held at the salebarns in South Dakota and other northern states? I did. When attempting to challenge the "information" claiming NCBA was "living off your checkoff", and worse, I and others attempting to get the truth told at those meetings were ridiculed, put down, and called "professional meeting goers" among other choice names! Some people claimed I was being paid to attend meetings, when in fact, I was paying my own way to any meetings I attended.

I witnessed a virtual Kangaroo Kourt situation when NCBA leaders John Lacey and Clark Willingham were invited to "tell their side" of the story at Ft. Pierre. They were shouted down and verbally abused by the LMA/R-CALF spokesmen in a nearly rioutious crowd of their followers.

Based on editorials, "articles" and letters in the Goggins print empire at the time, it is obvious the entire situation was started because Pat Goggins was outvoted on some issues by other CATTLE PRODUCER MEMBERS of NCBA.

Talk about sour grapes! Mr. Goggins apparently enjoys very deep pockets, being, as I read recently, one of this nations very largest cow/calf operators, as well as having the cattle sale barn business pretty well covered in MT at least, as well as owning a publishing empire.

Using LMA, of which he was an officer at the time, in a crusade to punish an organization because the majority of members do not go along with you is beyond the means of most members. That spawned the battle against the Beef Checkoff, and led, eventually, to the birth of R-CALF. Pretty hard to imagine anyone being very proud of that "baby", under those "circumstances of birth"

It appears to be natural for humans to want someone to blame for woes of whatever nature. It was all too easy for LMA/the Resource Councils/Farmers Union and other rural activist groups to unite behind Mr. Goggins and Leo McDonnell in blaming NCBA, Packers, Retailers, and virtually anyone "big" (excepting Mr. Goggins, of course) involved beyond the proverbial "ranch gate" for any and most of the ills, real and PERCEIVED to adversely affect the cattle business.

MRJ
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ, Just as the unions owe their power to bad management, R-CALF owes its existence to the NCBA and its bad management of cattlemen's issues. Scurrilous indictment would be a better description as proven by the success of R-CALF.

Econ, in fact, R-CALF owes its existemce far more to carefully sown seeds of discontent in the form of outright lies about the Beef Checkoff and NCBA by the LMA led by Pat Goggins, and aided and abetted by Leo McDonnell and some cattle sale barn owners.

Did you attend any of the "informational" meetings held at the salebarns in South Dakota and other northern states? I did. When attempting to challenge the "information" claiming NCBA was "living off your checkoff", and worse, I and others attempting to get the truth told at those meetings were ridiculed, put down, and called "professional meeting goers" among other choice names! Some people claimed I was being paid to attend meetings, when in fact, I was paying my own way to any meetings I attended.

I witnessed a virtual Kangaroo Kourt situation when NCBA leaders John Lacey and Clark Willingham were invited to "tell their side" of the story at Ft. Pierre. They were shouted down and verbally abused by the LMA/R-CALF spokesmen in a nearly rioutious crowd of their followers.

Based on editorials, "articles" and letters in the Goggins print empire at the time, it is obvious the entire situation was started because Pat Goggins was outvoted on some issues by other CATTLE PRODUCER MEMBERS of NCBA.

Talk about sour grapes! Mr. Goggins apparently enjoys very deep pockets, being, as I read recently, one of this nations very largest cow/calf operators, as well as having the cattle sale barn business pretty well covered in MT at least, as well as owning a publishing empire.

Using LMA, of which he was an officer at the time, in a crusade to punish an organization because the majority of members do not go along with you is beyond the means of most members. That spawned the battle against the Beef Checkoff, and led, eventually, to the birth of R-CALF. Pretty hard to imagine anyone being very proud of that "baby", under those "circumstances of birth"

It appears to be natural for humans to want someone to blame for woes of whatever nature. It was all too easy for LMA/the Resource Councils/Farmers Union and other rural activist groups to unite behind Mr. Goggins and Leo McDonnell in blaming NCBA, Packers, Retailers, and virtually anyone "big" (excepting Mr. Goggins, of course) involved beyond the proverbial "ranch gate" for any and most of the ills, real and PERCEIVED to adversely affect the cattle business.

MRJ

MRJ, I haven't been to an R-CALF meeting yet. I don't belong, and I don't live anywhere near their base of support. I do know how hard it is to start organizations and that there must have been some real reasons for R-CALF to get to where they are today. If it was the Pickett case, then there you have it. SH blames packer blamers. Most of the time there has to be real issues. I don't know all of R-CALF issues but I have been apprised of some of them. As one guy put it, I don't really have a horse in that race.

I don't know a whole lot about the checkoff deal except that the advertising money is restricted which makes it pretty useless in today's cut throat advertising market. It encourages beef consumption which is a product of the packers. The producers only sell cattle. Why should producers pay for packer advertising? The whole Canadian deal on BSE showed how two of the main packers take advantage of the producers ---and the taxpayers---- any time they can because of the fact that they are the sellers of processed beef and the producers are sellers of cattle.
It proved my point to SH that the price of cattle depends on the supply and demand of cattle for packers and the price of boxed beef depends on the supply and demand of packers.

I personally don't think there is a hill of beans difference between a producer who is just over the border in Canada and one in Montana. They are both being used to the advantange of the packers in an issue that was made up by the "efficiency" that feeding MBM to feeder cattle brought. The packers, with the help of some in the industry, are able to divide the interests of the producers up so they benefit.

It would sure look a lot better if the checkoff money went to advertising companies that actually were in the business of making commercials and increasing the purchase of cattle instead of the NCBA who can't even keep policies in place that retain most of the cattlemen. Just seems a little odd to me. I have seen almost riotous crowds that would tar and feather every Tyson management personell if it would do any good. It is a good thing John Tyson wasn't around and I am sure it would be the same situation in Brooks, Canada at the recent strike.

I hope the cattle industry could work out its kinks. I know that I am tired of eating substandard meat when I buy it from Costco or some of the other places. It is going to be hard to convince me that the same ole same ole is going to do anything for increasing beef demand.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ, Just as the unions owe their power to bad management, R-CALF owes its existence to the NCBA and its bad management of cattlemen's issues. Scurrilous indictment would be a better description as proven by the success of R-CALF.

Econ, in fact, R-CALF owes its existemce far more to carefully sown seeds of discontent in the form of outright lies about the Beef Checkoff and NCBA by the LMA led by Pat Goggins, and aided and abetted by Leo McDonnell and some cattle sale barn owners.

Did you attend any of the "informational" meetings held at the salebarns in South Dakota and other northern states? I did. When attempting to challenge the "information" claiming NCBA was "living off your checkoff", and worse, I and others attempting to get the truth told at those meetings were ridiculed, put down, and called "professional meeting goers" among other choice names! Some people claimed I was being paid to attend meetings, when in fact, I was paying my own way to any meetings I attended.

I witnessed a virtual Kangaroo Kourt situation when NCBA leaders John Lacey and Clark Willingham were invited to "tell their side" of the story at Ft. Pierre. They were shouted down and verbally abused by the LMA/R-CALF spokesmen in a nearly rioutious crowd of their followers.

Based on editorials, "articles" and letters in the Goggins print empire at the time, it is obvious the entire situation was started because Pat Goggins was outvoted on some issues by other CATTLE PRODUCER MEMBERS of NCBA.

Talk about sour grapes! Mr. Goggins apparently enjoys very deep pockets, being, as I read recently, one of this nations very largest cow/calf operators, as well as having the cattle sale barn business pretty well covered in MT at least, as well as owning a publishing empire.

Using LMA, of which he was an officer at the time, in a crusade to punish an organization because the majority of members do not go along with you is beyond the means of most members. That spawned the battle against the Beef Checkoff, and led, eventually, to the birth of R-CALF. Pretty hard to imagine anyone being very proud of that "baby", under those "circumstances of birth"

It appears to be natural for humans to want someone to blame for woes of whatever nature. It was all too easy for LMA/the Resource Councils/Farmers Union and other rural activist groups to unite behind Mr. Goggins and Leo McDonnell in blaming NCBA, Packers, Retailers, and virtually anyone "big" (excepting Mr. Goggins, of course) involved beyond the proverbial "ranch gate" for any and most of the ills, real and PERCEIVED to adversely affect the cattle business.

MRJ

MRJ, I haven't been to an R-CALF meeting yet. I don't belong, and I don't live anywhere near their base of support. I do know how hard it is to start organizations and that there must have been some real reasons for R-CALF to get to where they are today. If it was the Pickett case, then there you have it. SH blames packer blamers. Most of the time there has to be real issues. I don't know all of R-CALF issues but I have been apprised of some of them. As one guy put it, I don't really have a horse in that race.

I don't know a whole lot about the checkoff deal except that the advertising money is restricted which makes it pretty useless in today's cut throat advertising market. It encourages beef consumption which is a product of the packers. The producers only sell cattle. Why should producers pay for packer advertising? The whole Canadian deal on BSE showed how two of the main packers take advantage of the producers ---and the taxpayers---- any time they can because of the fact that they are the sellers of processed beef and the producers are sellers of cattle.
It proved my point to SH that the price of cattle depends on the supply and demand of cattle for packers and the price of boxed beef depends on the supply and demand of packers.



{Econ, how/why do you believe the "checkoff money is restricted"? Isn't it logical that it would advertise beef generically since many independent producers are producing their own brands, many packers and retailers sell (and advertise! their own brands of beef, many US citizens import beef from other countries and sell that, and ALL of them pay the checkoff, so should not be discriminated against in the advertising? Add that it cannot be used to harm another commodity with false statements, doesn't that seem fair? BTW, cattle producers who fall into the trap of believing they do not produce beef as their ultimate product will fail sooner or later, IMO! It is irresponsible to think that what we do to our cattle will not affect the beef, which is only HARVESTED, not PRODUCED by packers. We cattle producers do have a definite stake in the quality of that end product, beef.MRJ}



I personally don't think there is a hill of beans difference between a producer who is just over the border in Canada and one in Montana. They are both being used to the advantange of the packers in an issue that was made up by the "efficiency" that feeding MBM to feeder cattle brought. The packers, with the help of some in the industry, are able to divide the interests of the producers up so they benefit.



{Please show us the factual basis for your statements that packers originated feeding MBM to feeder cattle. I believe cattle by-products, beginning with bone meal, have been fed to living cattle for centuries, predating "packing plants". MRJ}



It would sure look a lot better if the checkoff money went to advertising companies that actually were in the business of making commercials and increasing the purchase of cattle instead of the NCBA who can't even keep policies in place that retain most of the cattlemen. Just seems a little odd to me. I have seen almost riotous crowds that would tar and feather every Tyson management personell if it would do any good. It is a good thing John Tyson wasn't around and I am sure it would be the same situation in Brooks, Canada at the recent strike.



{Econ, I believe, and will check to validate if I'm current on this, that advertising IS done by nationally known and respected ad agencies. Do you also understand that any money passing through the Federation division of NCBA in those contracts does NOT stay in that organization? That contracts are on a cost recovery ONLY basis. Do you understand that the Federation division of NCBA is NOT the Policy/Dues division and that they are financially separate? Your words indicate you do not understand the total financial and activity separation of the two divisions of NCBA. It is the Federation of State Beef Councils (the national organization to coordinate activities of the states checkoff organizations) which contracts to do the work for the CBB. The three organizations are housed in the same office to share (on carefully scheduled allocations of time so staff is paid by whichever organization it works for in 15 minute increments) staff, housing and costs according to strictly monitored rules with solid firewalls between finances of each organization. MRJ}




I hope the cattle industry could work out its kinks. I know that I am tired of eating substandard meat when I buy it from Costco or some of the other places. It is going to be hard to convince me that the same ole same ole is going to do anything for increasing beef demand.



{Econ, "the same ole, same ole" is exactly what NCBA is working to improve upon and what R-CALF is fighting to regress even further behind!

NCBA members want actual value of our product, with more money to producers who add value to their cattle, to be the determining factor in cattle/beef sales. R-CALF wants cattle auctions to be the determining factor, with all the little tricks of that trade included, it appears.

What has R-CALF/LMA/OCM/et.al done besides file lawsuits, tell consumers our beef is not safe and USDA doesn't care? MRJ}
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Using LMA, of which he was an officer at the time, in a crusade to punish an organization because the majority of members do not go along with you is beyond the means of most members. That spawned the battle against the Beef Checkoff, and led, eventually, to the birth of R-CALF. Pretty hard to imagine anyone being very proud of that "baby", under those "circumstances of birth"

I too get tired of lies, so would you PROVE THIS to us all. :mad: :mad: Maybe you should give Leo a call and see what he has to say about all of this.

Also what spawned the sd cattle association that you are member of? Did it have anything to do with the majority of members of the old dropping NCBA and joining R-calf or was it a personal issue? I know you won't answer this, but had to try.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
rancher said:
Using LMA, of which he was an officer at the time, in a crusade to punish an organization because the majority of members do not go along with you is beyond the means of most members. That spawned the battle against the Beef Checkoff, and led, eventually, to the birth of R-CALF. Pretty hard to imagine anyone being very proud of that "baby", under those "circumstances of birth"

I too get tired of lies, so would you PROVE THIS to us all. :mad: :mad: Maybe you should give Leo a call and see what he has to say about all of this.

Also what spawned the sd cattle association that you are member of? Did it have anything to do with the majority of members of the old dropping NCBA and joining R-calf or was it a personal issue? I know you won't answer this, but had to try.

rancher, I have reams of old clippings from Goggins' papers and others, a few tapes of radio programs (mostly on KBHB and KGFX), personal memories and anecdotes of others attending the meetings mentioned, plus some videos of a SD Governors Ag Conference. All of which I seriously doubt you would give any credibility because it won't show what you want it to. Sandhusker is accepted when he says his opinions are factual for him.......while I really hate to emulate him, I, too, am entitled to have my opinions respected. My basis, media and memories, is at least as credible as anyone elses.

The times I talked to Leo were quite a few years ago and he promised to send me the financials of his group. I finally gave up on getting material that showed anything of what the money was used for.

SDCattlemen began when I was a small child, in the 1940's, I believe. I don't know much of the origins except that some people in the eastern side of SD wanted a cattle organization easier to attend than driving across the state. They live closer together and towns are close, so back then they were not accustomed to driving long distances.......and some still are not! I'm guessing some were opposed to brand inspection. Some still may be, I wouldn't know. I do know there are more cows in eastern SD than in west river, and there is good balance between the cow/calf and the feeder interests in the organization today. We work well together for the good of our industry.

FACT: SDCA predates R-CALF (and NCBA, but not the predecessor organizations) by decades.

Further FACT: No "personal issue" involved. Unless you could call this one, but I can't. While active in SD Stockgrowers, Shorty Jones, my spouse, as some of you know, was asked to serve as Region 7 chairperson of NCBA (NCA at that time).In that capacity, he was charged with representing NCBA to ALL cattle producer members of the organization in SD, and vice versa. As such, he believed he should become a member of SDCA as well as of SDSGA. He also was asked by Stockgrowers pres. or directors (I forget which) to chair a "merger committee" within SDStockgrowers' Assoc. That committee was charged with EXPLORING the possibility of a merger between the two semi-rival organizations. That he proceeded to do along with members of both organizations. At the report of his committee, the members of the SDSGA voted to continue looking at the possibility. The directors at the time, voted to override the vote of the general membership for the first time in the history of that organization and eliminated that committee of SD Stockgrowers' Assoc. We believed going against the member vote was contrary to everything proud the Stockgrowers stood for, however we continued our association with SDSGA. When the SDSGA directors removed power to act from then president Jim Houck, that was action we could not tolerate. He is a good man, and was very good for the association. Jims' grandfather, Roy Houck, was a personal friend of both Shorty and his father, and a fine mentor to Shorty after the death of his father, Ralph Jones. Both actions were so contrary to the formerly member driven, staunchly conservative and honest old Stockgrowers association, that I dropped my membership. Shorty remains a life member as a past president. It is no secret we do not approve the actitities and direction of SDSGA these days, however we were active in SDCattlemen long before R-CALF came on the scene. So, if you choose to say that is a personal issue, so be it......however, the POLICY differences are what tipped the scales in favor of SD Cattlemen for us both.

MRJ
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
MRJ said:
rancher said:
Using LMA, of which he was an officer at the time, in a crusade to punish an organization because the majority of members do not go along with you is beyond the means of most members. That spawned the battle against the Beef Checkoff, and led, eventually, to the birth of R-CALF. Pretty hard to imagine anyone being very proud of that "baby", under those "circumstances of birth"

I too get tired of lies, so would you PROVE THIS to us all. :mad: :mad: Maybe you should give Leo a call and see what he has to say about all of this.

Also what spawned the sd cattle association that you are member of? Did it have anything to do with the majority of members of the old dropping NCBA and joining R-calf or was it a personal issue? I know you won't answer this, but had to try.

rancher, I have reams of old clippings from Goggins' papers and others, a few tapes of radio programs (mostly on KBHB and KGFX), personal memories and anecdotes of others attending the meetings mentioned, plus some videos of a SD Governors Ag Conference. All of which I seriously doubt you would give any credibility because it won't show what you want it to. Sandhusker is accepted when he says his opinions are factual for him.......while I really hate to emulate him, I, too, am entitled to have my opinions respected. My basis, media and memories, is at least as credible as anyone elses.

The times I talked to Leo were quite a few years ago and he promised to send me the financials of his group. I finally gave up on getting material that showed anything of what the money was used for.

SDCattlemen began when I was a small child, in the 1940's, I believe. I don't know much of the origins except that some people in the eastern side of SD wanted a cattle organization easier to attend than driving across the state. They live closer together and towns are close, so back then they were not accustomed to driving long distances.......and some still are not! I'm guessing some were opposed to brand inspection. Some still may be, I wouldn't know. I do know there are more cows in eastern SD than in west river, and there is good balance between the cow/calf and the feeder interests in the organization today. We work well together for the good of our industry.

FACT: SDCA predates R-CALF (and NCBA, but not the predecessor organizations) by decades.

Further FACT: No "personal issue" involved. Unless you could call this one, but I can't. While active in SD Stockgrowers, Shorty Jones, my spouse, as some of you know, was asked to serve as Region 7 chairperson of NCBA (NCA at that time).In that capacity, he was charged with representing NCBA to ALL cattle producer members of the organization in SD, and vice versa. As such, he believed he should become a member of SDCA as well as of SDSGA. He also was asked by Stockgrowers pres. or directors (I forget which) to chair a "merger committee" within SDStockgrowers' Assoc. That committee was charged with EXPLORING the possibility of a merger between the two semi-rival organizations. That he proceeded to do along with members of both organizations. At the report of his committee, the members of the SDSGA voted to continue looking at the possibility. The directors at the time, voted to override the vote of the general membership for the first time in the history of that organization and eliminated that committee of SD Stockgrowers' Assoc. We believed going against the member vote was contrary to everything proud the Stockgrowers stood for, however we continued our association with SDSGA. When the SDSGA directors removed power to act from then president Jim Houck, that was action we could not tolerate. He is a good man, and was very good for the association. Jims' grandfather, Roy Houck, was a personal friend of both Shorty and his father, and a fine mentor to Shorty after the death of his father, Ralph Jones. Both actions were so contrary to the formerly member driven, staunchly conservative and honest old Stockgrowers association, that I dropped my membership. Shorty remains a life member as a past president. It is no secret we do not approve the actitities and direction of SDSGA these days, however we were active in SDCattlemen long before R-CALF came on the scene. So, if you choose to say that is a personal issue, so be it......however, the POLICY differences are what tipped the scales in favor of SD Cattlemen for us both.

MRJ
\


I want proof, Pat may have said these things, but that is NOT why R-calf started, so it is a lie.

The times I talked to Leo were quite a few years ago and he promised to send me the financials of his group. I finally gave up on getting material that showed anything of what the money was used for.

Why in the hell should you know the financials of R-calf if you are not a member. Will you produce NCBA financials to us all? I highly doubt it. You are a talker not a doer.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
rancher said:
MRJ said:
rancher said:
I too get tired of lies, so would you PROVE THIS to us all. :mad: :mad: Maybe you should give Leo a call and see what he has to say about all of this.

Also what spawned the sd cattle association that you are member of? Did it have anything to do with the majority of members of the old dropping NCBA and joining R-calf or was it a personal issue? I know you won't answer this, but had to try.

rancher, I have reams of old clippings from Goggins' papers and others, a few tapes of radio programs (mostly on KBHB and KGFX), personal memories and anecdotes of others attending the meetings mentioned, plus some videos of a SD Governors Ag Conference. All of which I seriously doubt you would give any credibility because it won't show what you want it to. Sandhusker is accepted when he says his opinions are factual for him.......while I really hate to emulate him, I, too, am entitled to have my opinions respected. My basis, media and memories, is at least as credible as anyone elses.

The times I talked to Leo were quite a few years ago and he promised to send me the financials of his group. I finally gave up on getting material that showed anything of what the money was used for.

SDCattlemen began when I was a small child, in the 1940's, I believe. I don't know much of the origins except that some people in the eastern side of SD wanted a cattle organization easier to attend than driving across the state. They live closer together and towns are close, so back then they were not accustomed to driving long distances.......and some still are not! I'm guessing some were opposed to brand inspection. Some still may be, I wouldn't know. I do know there are more cows in eastern SD than in west river, and there is good balance between the cow/calf and the feeder interests in the organization today. We work well together for the good of our industry.

FACT: SDCA predates R-CALF (and NCBA, but not the predecessor organizations) by decades.

Further FACT: No "personal issue" involved. Unless you could call this one, but I can't. While active in SD Stockgrowers, Shorty Jones, my spouse, as some of you know, was asked to serve as Region 7 chairperson of NCBA (NCA at that time).In that capacity, he was charged with representing NCBA to ALL cattle producer members of the organization in SD, and vice versa. As such, he believed he should become a member of SDCA as well as of SDSGA. He also was asked by Stockgrowers pres. or directors (I forget which) to chair a "merger committee" within SDStockgrowers' Assoc. That committee was charged with EXPLORING the possibility of a merger between the two semi-rival organizations. That he proceeded to do along with members of both organizations. At the report of his committee, the members of the SDSGA voted to continue looking at the possibility. The directors at the time, voted to override the vote of the general membership for the first time in the history of that organization and eliminated that committee of SD Stockgrowers' Assoc. We believed going against the member vote was contrary to everything proud the Stockgrowers stood for, however we continued our association with SDSGA. When the SDSGA directors removed power to act from then president Jim Houck, that was action we could not tolerate. He is a good man, and was very good for the association. Jims' grandfather, Roy Houck, was a personal friend of both Shorty and his father, and a fine mentor to Shorty after the death of his father, Ralph Jones. Both actions were so contrary to the formerly member driven, staunchly conservative and honest old Stockgrowers association, that I dropped my membership. Shorty remains a life member as a past president. It is no secret we do not approve the actitities and direction of SDSGA these days, however we were active in SDCattlemen long before R-CALF came on the scene. So, if you choose to say that is a personal issue, so be it......however, the POLICY differences are what tipped the scales in favor of SD Cattlemen for us both.

MRJ
\


I want proof, Pat may have said these things, but that is NOT why R-calf started, so it is a lie.

The times I talked to Leo were quite a few years ago and he promised to send me the financials of his group. I finally gave up on getting material that showed anything of what the money was used for.

Why in the hell should you know the financials of R-calf if you are not a member. Will you produce NCBA financials to us all? I highly doubt it. You are a talker not a doer.

NCBA financials are probably more probed and scrutinized by those opposing them than you can imagine. For starters, USDA watches to assure compliance with firewalls between the Federation division and the Policy/Dues division. I think they are on the website, in any case

Why shouldn't I know the financials of R-CALF. I've been asked to donate, they are tax exempt, and I'm a tax payer, for starters.

BTW, I did not quote Pat on anything in particular. He had friends among the auction people more than willing to spread the mis-information. It may not have been a planned sequence of the events leading to the start of R-CALF, but I do believe it was a cause and effect and lucky timing and seizing of an opportunity by R-CALF to morph their lawsuit organization into a membership organization. Your choice to not believe it changes nothing. There may have been additional stated reasons for the start of R-CALF, however the sequence and events and result remain the same, IMO.

MRJ
 

Latest posts

Top