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

Why the USDA should NOT control the check off money

Help Support Ranchers.net:

jigs

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
8,439
Reaction score
0
Location
KANSAS
a little article I found proving the bias and corruption in the USDA. how foolish to assume ANY govt organization can spend wiser that you and me......
This spring complaints were filed with USDA alleging that a growing number of large, industrial dairies were ignoring the organic law that requires organic dairy cows have “access to pasture.” USDA asked the National Organic Standards Board to revisit their recommendations. The board responded by passing a rule change and new guidance document, which reinforced the “access to pasture” requirement.

USDA rejected the language adopted unanimously by the NOSB, a respected expert advisory panel, and have refused to allow the board to vote on new language at their next meeting.
 

Jason

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,994
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta Canada
What does access to pasture have to do with being organic?

That is a free range issue, not something covered under the guidelines for organics the USDA wrote.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Jason said:
What does access to pasture have to do with being organic?

That is a free range issue, not something covered under the guidelines for organics the USDA wrote.

Jason, are you now the expert on organics? It is their issue. Are you an organic producer? They are just not willing to let corporate america reduce their standards. The USDA obviously caters to the interests of corporate america and not the consumers or other different types of producers. I am sure they enjoy you setting the standards for them. :lol:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Jason said:
What does access to pasture have to do with being organic?

That is a free range issue, not something covered under the guidelines for organics the USDA wrote.

Why have a standards board if the USDA will not recognize recommendations?
 

Jason

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,994
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta Canada
USDA wrote the standards for organic production. I have a copy of the standards.

I have been trained in organic production.

The issue brought up here is free range not organic.

There is a difference.
 

PPRM

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,964
Reaction score
11
Location
NE Oregon
I was in food processing when USDA first tried to set Organic Standards. It was a typical bueracratic deal that made no sense. Some of the allowable fertilzers were akin to Chemical waste, wish I could remember exactly. It came out as trying to make to many factions happy rather than trying to make a policy that most would recognize as being truly Organic.

I am not generally a USDA basher, but they were off base on that one,

PPRM
 

jigs

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
8,439
Reaction score
0
Location
KANSAS
Jason said:
USDA wrote the standards for organic production. I have a copy of the standards.

I have been trained in organic production.

The issue brought up here is free range not organic.

There is a difference.

personally I think the access to pasture is link to confinement issues that would tend to lead people more towards factory hog farms.

organic or not, my point was how the big boys cry, and the USDA wants to bend the rules!

what really gets me is how people love organic beef, that are fed GMO feeds......
 

Jason

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,994
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta Canada
jigs said:
Jason said:
USDA wrote the standards for organic production. I have a copy of the standards.

I have been trained in organic production.

The issue brought up here is free range not organic.

There is a difference.

personally I think the access to pasture is link to confinement issues that would tend to lead people more towards factory hog farms.

organic or not, my point was how the big boys cry, and the USDA wants to bend the rules!

what really gets me is how people love organic beef, that are fed GMO feeds......

I doubt you can find a GMO feed that is raised organically. The USDA was not bending the rules. They were keeping them from being diluted.

Free range is a seperate issue from organic. Most often they will be done hand in glove, but one is not mutually exclusive of the other. You can have free range that doesn't qualify for organic, and organic that isn't free range.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
1. USDA does not CONTROL the Beef Checkoff. The cattle producers on the various state Beef Councils, Affiliation of State Beef Councils division of NCBA, and the Cattlemens' Beef Board originate the work of the beef checkoff. The function of USDA is to assure compliance with the laws governing the checkoff. Therefore any possible CONTROL exerted by USDA would be to prevent attempted deviation from the law and rules governing the beef checkoff.

2. Econ, are you saying that a corporate farm CANNOT produce organic food?

MRJ
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
MRJ said:
1. USDA does not CONTROL the Beef Checkoff. The cattle producers on the various state Beef Councils, Affiliation of State Beef Councils division of NCBA, and the Cattlemens' Beef Board originate the work of the beef checkoff. The function of USDA is to assure compliance with the laws governing the checkoff. Therefore any possible CONTROL exerted by USDA would be to prevent attempted deviation from the law and rules governing the beef checkoff.

2. Econ, are you saying that a corporate farm CANNOT produce organic food?

MRJ

No, MRJ, corportate farms can produce organic food. Many do. The problem is that the people with the real power are running large agri-corporations and have inordinate influence over EVERY aspect that has a profitability niche. This is just one example of that control. Shouldn't the National organics board be controlling the organic and standards for organic dairy? Why should Jason or people like him? Why should the USDA water down (for special interest profit) their rules. Are the national organics boards not able to keep their standards up? When organic is no longer organic, it loses its niche and therefore loses higher value. There are many ways to "cheat" on a test and when cheaters show up, the people running the show should be able to make a new rule to stop them. The USDA needs to stop showing favoritism on these issues. Many, many, many of the organic people are into the animal welfare issues and consider it a package deal. It it gets some people to buy agri-products that would not have or gets people to pay extra for a standard of production, then why does the USDA want to mess it up? Just crass NCBA/ political influence over the system to me.
 

jigs

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
8,439
Reaction score
0
Location
KANSAS
MRJ said:
1. USDA does not CONTROL the Beef Checkoff. The cattle producers on the various state Beef Councils, Affiliation of State Beef Councils division of NCBA, and the Cattlemens' Beef Board originate the work of the beef checkoff. The function of USDA is to assure compliance with the laws governing the checkoff. Therefore any possible CONTROL exerted by USDA would be to prevent attempted deviation from the law and rules governing the beef checkoff.

2. Econ, are you saying that a corporate farm CANNOT produce organic food?

MRJ

by overseeing and giving the ok on everything, they sure as hell control it !
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Econ, I don't know all the facts of this situation, and would hazard a guess that they are not ALL presented here. We do not KNOW why the organics board was over-ruled. Your opinion is only that. Your innuendoes serve no one well. Shouldn't you, at the least, offer some basis in fact when making claims of "NCBA political influence...."? You do appear to have a pretty creative imagination!

I don't have a whole lot of sympathy with the organics movement, or at least with those in it who tried to promote and use fears of BSE to consumers to increase sales of their own beef when there is no proof that it is any safer than any other beef.

I'm concerned with their implication that conventionally produced beef is full of "contaminants" or things that are harmful to health, when in fact, there is no difference in the content of the two products if laws regarding beef production are followed. If they want to claim superiority of product, they had better test every animal they slaughter for contaminants, and then prove there are such contaminants or residues in conventionally produced beef.

If they want to sell their beef on the basis that some people simpy prefer food that is raised on whatever diet, fine, but make no unproven claims for "safety" of their product over conventionally produced product.

jigs, when the programs and projects of the Beef Checkoff originate with the board members from state and national levels, and the board members make the decisions on which ones to fund, how to do the work, what is done with the results, what appears in the ads, which research to do, and so on and so one......and USDA's function is to stop anything that is not according to the law and rules of the law.......how can you honestly say that they "control" it? I see "control" as making all the decisions. What USDA does is make sure the law is followed. Big difference!

Would you mind saying why you hate the Beef Checkoff? You haven't really presented any reasons, that I've seen. People don't usually hate without reason, so what is yours?

MRJ
MRJ
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
MRJ said:
Econ, I don't know all the facts of this situation, and would hazard a guess that they are not ALL presented here. We do not KNOW why the organics board was over-ruled. Your opinion is only that. Your innuendoes serve no one well. Shouldn't you, at the least, offer some basis in fact when making claims of "NCBA political influence...."? You do appear to have a pretty creative imagination!

I don't have a whole lot of sympathy with the organics movement, or at least with those in it who tried to promote and use fears of BSE to consumers to increase sales of their own beef when there is no proof that it is any safer than any other beef.

I'm concerned with their implication that conventionally produced beef is full of "contaminants" or things that are harmful to health, when in fact, there is no difference in the content of the two products if laws regarding beef production are followed. If they want to claim superiority of product, they had better test every animal they slaughter for contaminants, and then prove there are such contaminants or residues in conventionally produced beef.

If they want to sell their beef on the basis that some people simpy prefer food that is raised on whatever diet, fine, but make no unproven claims for "safety" of their product over conventionally produced product.

jigs, when the programs and projects of the Beef Checkoff originate with the board members from state and national levels, and the board members make the decisions on which ones to fund, how to do the work, what is done with the results, what appears in the ads, which research to do, and so on and so one......and USDA's function is to stop anything that is not according to the law and rules of the law.......how can you honestly say that they "control" it? I see "control" as making all the decisions. What USDA does is make sure the law is followed. Big difference!

Would you mind saying why you hate the Beef Checkoff? You haven't really presented any reasons, that I've seen. People don't usually hate without reason, so what is yours?

MRJ
MRJ

MRJ, This issue has been going on for some time. Here is a pretty recent synopsis of the situation:

Way back in the year 2000, concerned consumers and farmers asked the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) to address a new and troubling trend -- factory farms producing "organic" milk in confinement conditions.

The board responded in 2001 by adopting a guidance document that would have helped farmers and certifiers understand what is expected of them and closed loopholes being exploited by industrial-scale farms. The USDA sat on this document, never posting it on their web site or enforcing its provisions.

This spring The Cornucopia Institute filed legal complaints with the USDA alleging that a growing number of factory farms were ignoring the organic law that requires ruminants (dairy cows) to have "access to pasture." Finally, after years of delay, the USDA asked the NOSB to revisit their recommendations. The board responded by passing a rule change and new guidance document.

Again! The USDA has thrown a monkey wrench into enforcing organic integrity. They rejected the language adopted unanimously by the NOSB, a respected and diverse expert advisory panel (saying it was "ambiguous"), and now have refused to allow the board to vote on new language at their next meeting this November. Years of delays continue as the factory farms expand.

Farmers and Consumers Have Lost Their Patience!

NO MORE USDA FOOT DRAGGING!

No more delays can be tolerated! The USDA allotted two hours for more public comments at November's meeting but has forbidden the NOSB from taking a vote and adopting final rule change language. The bureaucrats and the corporate farm operators know very well that this will be the last meeting for NOSB Chairman Jim Riddle and a number of other experienced board leaders, whose terms are ending. These folks have been the champions of cracking down on factory-farm abuses in the dairy industry. Public comments can be submitted prior to the meeting, reserving the two-hour time slot for board action on this issue.

As I stated before, many of the organic consumers are willing to pay more for food that is produced in more "humane" ways. The NOSB sets the policy and defends this type of agriculture. I don't know why the NCBA/USDA is trying to interfere with this business model. To me it is just too much abuse of power. Want to know why I say NCBA/USDA is corporate backing agriculture out of profitability? Get a clue.

Now I personally am not a total organic nut. I am mindful that some of the pesticides and or insecticides or other medications given to farm animals can have effects on us that are not totally known at this time. My sister-in-law wants to pay more of her income to make sure that she does not have to worry about this issue with herself or her kids. Why is the USDA getting in the way of organic standards set by the NOSB? To me this is ridiculous. I do know cattle producers who are organic and some of them are very profitable. Some of them have been written up in farm publications on their methods of raising cattle with much success. You just can't argue with success when it does not use all the chemicals and hormones or whatever else everyone else thinks is necessary. Reduces costs, good for the environment, and is more profitable. Why should the USDA mess up something like that? What is with the big head?
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
Econ, I don't know all the facts of this situation, and would hazard a guess that they are not ALL presented here. We do not KNOW why the organics board was over-ruled. Your opinion is only that. Your innuendoes serve no one well. Shouldn't you, at the least, offer some basis in fact when making claims of "NCBA political influence...."? You do appear to have a pretty creative imagination!

I don't have a whole lot of sympathy with the organics movement, or at least with those in it who tried to promote and use fears of BSE to consumers to increase sales of their own beef when there is no proof that it is any safer than any other beef.

I'm concerned with their implication that conventionally produced beef is full of "contaminants" or things that are harmful to health, when in fact, there is no difference in the content of the two products if laws regarding beef production are followed. If they want to claim superiority of product, they had better test every animal they slaughter for contaminants, and then prove there are such contaminants or residues in conventionally produced beef.

If they want to sell their beef on the basis that some people simpy prefer food that is raised on whatever diet, fine, but make no unproven claims for "safety" of their product over conventionally produced product.

jigs, when the programs and projects of the Beef Checkoff originate with the board members from state and national levels, and the board members make the decisions on which ones to fund, how to do the work, what is done with the results, what appears in the ads, which research to do, and so on and so one......and USDA's function is to stop anything that is not according to the law and rules of the law.......how can you honestly say that they "control" it? I see "control" as making all the decisions. What USDA does is make sure the law is followed. Big difference!

Would you mind saying why you hate the Beef Checkoff? You haven't really presented any reasons, that I've seen. People don't usually hate without reason, so what is yours?

MRJ
MRJ

MRJ, This issue has been going on for some time. Here is a pretty recent synopsis of the situation:

Way back in the year 2000, concerned consumers and farmers asked the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) to address a new and troubling trend -- factory farms producing "organic" milk in confinement conditions.

The board responded in 2001 by adopting a guidance document that would have helped farmers and certifiers understand what is expected of them and closed loopholes being exploited by industrial-scale farms. The USDA sat on this document, never posting it on their web site or enforcing its provisions.

This spring The Cornucopia Institute filed legal complaints with the USDA alleging that a growing number of factory farms were ignoring the organic law that requires ruminants (dairy cows) to have "access to pasture." Finally, after years of delay, the USDA asked the NOSB to revisit their recommendations. The board responded by passing a rule change and new guidance document.

Again! The USDA has thrown a monkey wrench into enforcing organic integrity. They rejected the language adopted unanimously by the NOSB, a respected and diverse expert advisory panel (saying it was "ambiguous"), and now have refused to allow the board to vote on new language at their next meeting this November. Years of delays continue as the factory farms expand.

Farmers and Consumers Have Lost Their Patience!

NO MORE USDA FOOT DRAGGING!

No more delays can be tolerated! The USDA allotted two hours for more public comments at November's meeting but has forbidden the NOSB from taking a vote and adopting final rule change language. The bureaucrats and the corporate farm operators know very well that this will be the last meeting for NOSB Chairman Jim Riddle and a number of other experienced board leaders, whose terms are ending. These folks have been the champions of cracking down on factory-farm abuses in the dairy industry. Public comments can be submitted prior to the meeting, reserving the two-hour time slot for board action on this issue.

As I stated before, many of the organic consumers are willing to pay more for food that is produced in more "humane" ways. The NOSB sets the policy and defends this type of agriculture. I don't know why the NCBA/USDA is trying to interfere with this business model. To me it is just too much abuse of power. Want to know why I say NCBA/USDA is corporate backing agriculture out of profitability? Get a clue.

Now I personally am not a total organic nut. I am mindful that some of the pesticides and or insecticides or other medications given to farm animals can have effects on us that are not totally known at this time. My sister-in-law wants to pay more of her income to make sure that she does not have to worry about this issue with herself or her kids. Why is the USDA getting in the way of organic standards set by the NOSB? To me this is ridiculous. I do know cattle producers who are organic and some of them are very profitable. Some of them have been written up in farm publications on their methods of raising cattle with much success. You just can't argue with success when it does not use all the chemicals and hormones or whatever else everyone else thinks is necessary. Reduces costs, good for the environment, and is more profitable. Why should the USDA mess up something like that? What is with the big head?

"What is with the big head"?.........gosh, how would we know, maybe if you would look in the mirror you could figure it out.

You sure are quick with the accusations about NCBA, yet you provide no facts or evidence to back them. I'm probably not alone among readers here in being "clueless" as to what conspiracy was whirling through your mind as you wrote that!

I've stated before that I have no problem with organic production, those who choose to eat organic foods, or those who sell those products. I do have problems with the organic producers and salespeople who make unproven claims about health benefits, and spread fears of disease in non-organic foods for their own profit when there is no proof of their claims.

Who could be proud to be financially successful by scaring their customers with unproven claims? IMO, that is equally as reprehensible as "corporate greed" (if and when it actually exists).

Re. the problem between that dairyman, NOSB, and USDA, all I'm saying is that just possibly not all the facts are presented here. And it is arrogant of you to make your stupid assertions about NCBA with no presentation of fact to back them. Not too long ago, I believe you stated you did not know much about NCBA.........and suddenly, you are an authority on what that organization, and many of its former employees think. Amazing what powers you possess!

MRJ
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
MRJ, I know the positions in the USDA some of the NCBA people are in.

If you don't know some of the major issues, go get informed. Stop being an ostrich. You asked for some more information on the dairy issue and then you critisize the organic industry and me for having an opinion on the matter. Not everything revolves around cattle issues. There are a lot of other issues that are not being adequately addressed.

Corporate greed will always be there. It is the inordinate influence exerted that is the problem.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Conman: "If you don't know some of the major issues, go get informed. Stop being an ostrich."

Hahaha! If that isn't funny!

Conman, the epitomy of beef industry ignorance, telling others to get informed. You are some entertainer Conman!

When you bring facts that contradict someone else's position, then you will have something. Until that time, your discrediting comments are worthless. You couldn't back your conspiracy theories if your life depended on it. You sir are a complete phony and a disgrace to this site.


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
~SH~ said:
Conman: "If you don't know some of the major issues, go get informed. Stop being an ostrich."

Hahaha! If that isn't funny!

Conman, the epitomy of beef industry ignorance, telling others to get informed. You are some entertainer Conman!

When you bring facts that contradict someone else's position, then you will have something. Until that time, your discrediting comments are worthless. You couldn't back your conspiracy theories if your life depended on it. You sir are a complete phony and a disgrace to this site.


~SH~

Oh, no, SH doesn't like me. I feel about as scared as those coyotes you try to chase down, SH.

There is a time and place for everything.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Econ101 said:
MRJ, I know the positions in the USDA some of the NCBA people are in.

If you don't know some of the major issues, go get informed. Stop being an ostrich. You asked for some more information on the dairy issue and then you critisize the organic industry and me for having an opinion on the matter. Not everything revolves around cattle issues. There are a lot of other issues that are not being adequately addressed.

Corporate greed will always be there. It is the inordinate influence exerted that is the problem.

Econ, I'm as informed as I can spare the time to be, and there are times I do not tell all I know in order to give others the chance to share their knowledge. I do have a life and work beyond this keyboard. My computer is slow, and my time is limited some days.

I'm only asking you to admit it may be possible that there are political manipulations in the organic industry, that not everyone who is "big" is bad, and that not eveyone who is a "small, organic or family farmer" is perfect. Yes, most are good, honest people, but the term "organic" is not synonomous with "God". It is unrealistic to think there is not knock-down-drag-out infighting on occasion, even among the "Holy" of the organics movement.

I'm only asking you to admit it may be possible that USDA and FORMER employees of NCBA and Tyson just might NOT be controlling the work of USDA to make themselves Kings of Agriculture.

You say "I know the positions in the USDA some of the NCBA people are in." Why do you continue to call FORMER employees "NCBA people"? They owe no allegiance to NCBA, other than honesty when discussing that organization.

My opinion is that some "professors" attempting to manipulate public opinion to serve pet agendas will be around even longer than "corporate greed".

MRJ
 

Latest posts

Top