Are you HAPPY with the system?

[ValueChainFX]

I would like to know how many beef producers are happy with the way the industry is working today.

What would you like to see to improve the industry? (We all want higher prices so this is a given K)

Make some suggestions let's get some positives on the table here!

Happy New Year

[lonewolf]

Under the new trace back system I have concerns that when a problem occurs the first place that the slaughter houses start looking is at the primary producer. ie the cow-calf producer. I would like to see a system where integrity runs both ways. My understanding is that when my calves leave my farm without auction barns monitor tags the primary producer has a very difficult time to find out exactly where and how many yards his cattle end up in before being slaughtered.

I wish there was a system that would get infomation back to the primary producer on how their carcasses graded out.

We are being asked to start to produce consistant beef and I feel that this information would be helpful in starting to help accomplish this. I will grant you right now that there may be variability from feedlot to backgrounder due to variable feed inputs, but it is a place to start.

[flatbroke]

I couldn't have said it better, lonewolf! It seems to inevitably be the Canadian way to use a large stick over the head instead of a carrot in front of our noses. I remember reading about just such a program in some western states (voluntary) wherin the producer is provided with carcass information in exchange for participation in the I.D. program. My concern is the same as lonewolf's- The most likely place for an animal to pick up a disease, by far, is in the feedlot, but everytime something shows up, guess who will ALWAYS be the frontline to deal with government inspectors? Animals could always be traced back in the reverse (and logical) order. Why the hell did we have to "fix" something that wasn't broken? ...wouldn't have anything to do with the fact the majority of ACC members are feeders and not cow-calf producers, would it?
Happy new year :-)

[flatbroke]

...my apologies VCFX, you did ask for positives... I promise I'll post something positive as soon as I can come up with it... ;-)

[rodbradshaw]

Flatbroke

The reason for the tags was that CFIA could start at both ends. This is not a witch hunt for the cow-calf producer but a way to eliminate alot of unnecessary leg work by only working back from when the problem is found. Dave Solverson from Camrose area told a story about the traceback they were involved with under the old system. They had to round up their cattle off pasture, bring them home and then repeat the whole exercise a week or so later. As it turned out the cattle that caused the problem did not come from their farm. If the tag system had been in place they would have automatically been eliminated from the trace back.

It is funny that most people feel that Alberta Beef Producers (formerly ACC) are all cattle feeders when most of the Alberta Cattle Feeders Assoc. feel that they are all cow-calf people.

We have to treat this as an industry and all do our part otherwise we will lose the confidence of the consumer.

[ValueChainFX]

Well guys you are all right so far, I have worked on trace back through the whole system long before it was looked at by anyone! We have formed an alliance to do just that .... trace the animal all the way through the system, including who has handled it and how, plus we are determined to include all components of the supply chain AND provide feedback to the producers not only on grade but on yields and customer satisfaction (the end user) as well.
We are in the process of finalizing our agreement, but we already know the components we are going to put in place (for the most part) At this point in time we have many breeds that are already signed up for the program, several that have agreed in principal to sign and many independents that would like to run Branded (as in market brands) programs. I agree that the producer should not be the only one that has a big stick over their heads, in fact my thought is that we should all work together so the big stick is an incentive rather than a deterrent.
I will post a message here probably next week when we have formally dotted the i's and crossed the t's.

[flatbroke]

OK, I've obviously missed something...
Let's say my calves leave the yard in feb, through the sale barn and into a backgrounding lot, then on to another yard for finishing. Then, we'll mix them, say, in the finishing lot with other calves with T.B. They then test positive at the slaughterhouse. How exactly will ID tags "automatically eliminate" me from the traceback process? Seems to me just the opposite to be true. ...And don't worry- the big stick IS an incentive! As Gene hackman put it ... You can get a horse to deal cards if you've got a stock-prod shoved far enough up his (rear end)... It's just a matter of voltage. How many cards would you like? ;-)

[rodbradshaw]

Flatbroke
If calves from your place test positive at slaughter you are going to get audited, but under the old system if your calves did not have T.B. at slaughter but had been through the senario that you described it would be all lots that were sold to that feedlot, say over a month all the people that contributed to sales at auction marts where that lot had been bought because you wouldn't necessarily know what animals went where (especially with the popularity of presort sales, and livestock dealers). The net has to be cast fairly wide to get back to the source. Now in that same scenario, if your calves didn't have it but were in with calves that did, you would be eliminated from the trace back. It is simply away to eliminate a lot of possibilities by starting at both ends of the chain.
The system is not perfect but hopefully it will eliminate a lot of innocent herds. It would be nice if you could get carcass data, and it is coming but for now it is only used for the traceback of reportable diseases.

Hopefully I haven't muddied the water to much.

[rusty1]

I can understand the primary producers for feeling like lifes unfair with the CCIA - tagging requirments. What I don't understand is why the producers groups are so melie mouthed about who should pay for it. If it is a national security issue as I believe it is, then the process should be born by all Canadians. If the unthinkable happened the ripple effect would go far beyond the farm gate. I don't relly think it's cacable as to how far it would impact the public, therefore it is in everybodys best interest to have the systyem in place, therefore everyone should be responsible to help cover the cost.
That being said there are huge economic benifets to be gained by those that use the opportunity of individualy serial numbered calves.
With our projects on the go we expect to gain approx. $50 per head margin and maybe more. So one might spend his time figuring out how to make the most of the situation.

[cakadu]

Rusty - that is a question that I have asked with various people in the different levels of government. When is this going to become a social issue and not just one of the producer paying for it.

And I want to make it perfectly clear from the outset that I am ALL FOR food safety. I just don't understand why someone who is a direct marketer, who will never play in the export game has to be subjected to the same rules and regulations as the guy who runs a 50,000 head feedlot with the animals destined for the export market. There has to be degrees of compliance, with the bottom line being that it cannot and should not come solely from the producers pocket.

If we were just producing enough beef for our own domestic supply and not concerned with gaining more of the export market, which by the way I'm still trying to get my head around what with the Country of origin thing with the U.S. and the fact that at some stage in the not too distant future, our South American friends are going to be able to export beef all over, would we have all of these food safety controls in place.

If we are being asked by the federal government to do all of these things to put Canada in a position of food safety excellence, shouldn't they be willing to help PAY to get us there? I'm really curious to hear the opinions out there.

[rodbradshaw]

Cakadu
Hi long time no hear.

The producer is just paying for a small part of the system, basically the tag and the recording data base. The collection of tag data is done by the slaughter facility and the cost of the trace back is born by CFIA through everyones tax dollar.

If we are not willing to prove that we have safe food whether it be for the neighbour down the road or half way across the world we will not be in business very long. The consumer has a world perspective when it comes to food as we don't eat to live but live to eat.
Rod

[lonewolf]

1. It seems that if we are going to use the stick analogy to push or guide us in a certain direction is a mute point. As a young farmer I find that I am having less and less choices in what I do on my farm. I think the bigger problem is that we are being forced to change to the informed consumers' public perception about what is good and bad for them (just as long as the studies say so.) and, maybe grandpas' old traditional beef herd will be gone and in place a genetically modified clone will become a industry pre-requesite.

2. I noticed that my new tags at my local feed store cost me well over 25% more. Boy, it would sure be nice to receive a pay hike on my calf checks.

3. In the event that a disease is found on my farm, and keeping in mind food safety is a social issue, and one that I too agree with. Lets say the gov. comes in and orders my herd to be incinerated. then lets say they come up with a value for those animals. Let us then say that number is too low. Let us then say these animals are not going any where until my price is made. Now I will grant you that this is not in the best interest of our industry, but it brings me to my first point. If we cannot to some degree control where we want to go and look after our farms first (the gov. surely will not.) then where do we draw the line between survival and social benefit. As this is our job should we not want some sort of job security. I have yet to find a insurance company with affordable coverage and more importantly any policy that I have read contains named perils. These are not as big a concern as those that are not named, hence GOVERNMENT COMPENSATION. (that is too many letters for a beaucrat to call four letters) I think a self-directed livestock program should be avaible such as the crop insurance programs. I feel much better handling my future than leaving it the government but through social demands it makes it next to impossible to accomplish without some sort of government programs. LAter

[cakadu]

Hi Rod. Nice to see you back again. I agree that the food has to be safe, no matter where you send it - whether it be down the road or across the world. There are inherent degrees of safety that should be built into the system.

If the product goes from the farm to the processor to the customer, there are very few traceback steps and most times it is fairly easy to recall the meat. This would be a direct marketing scenario.

The other extreme is the big meat packing plants that ship all over the country and globally. When you think that a vat of hamburger can have up to 100 different animals in it, then how do you do the traceback should a problem occur? How will the tag system work then? At best all I can see them doing with ground meat is to have it go by lot numbers with all the animal trim going into a specific lot recorded. I'm still having problems figuring out how that will work, but maybe the CFIA knows something I don't.

There is also the bigger picture that the producer must take a look at. Sure the tags are only so much, but then doing the paperwork for an on farm food safety program only takes so much time, as will the paperwork for an environmental farm plan and time is money. There are also things to consider like HACCP plans etc. My point is that each one of these only takes a little money out of the producers pocket, but collectively they start to add up and erode what little margins there are - especially in the current situation.

At some point, there is going to have to be some sort of compensation or tax break or environmental credit or something that comes back to the producer because it all starts with him and why should he/we have to pay for all of it?

This is probably one of my bigger concerns with the Ag Policy Framework in that too much of this may be downloaded onto the producer without additional compensation in some form coming to offset that.

Bottom line is that if consumers want some of these things, then they're going to have to be willing to pay for them. Kind of hard to get them to see that when they want CHEAP, safe food that has some sort of convenience factor and a health benefit.

[jmillang]

(this is a personal opinion not as a moderator)

I found this news story in a email list serve I get daily. It illustrates that the entire beef chain is working in food safety. (yes its US based but I know our CDN packers are working in food safety as well.)[URL="http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E53%257E1108750%257E,00.html"]Denver
Post article[/URL]

There was an earlier comment about the chain paying for food safety not the gov't. Yes that is true to an extent, most of the costs of implementing food safety ie tags, or steam pastureization in killing plants , or modified atmostphere packaging have been done with private sector money. Which is far larger than the gov't inspection or regualtion aspect.

I also believe food safety is an issue of public good but we can't get the consumer to pay for it either directly or indirectly (through taxes, they just expect it.

We will not solve this issue here but merely everyone needs to take some responsibility and not point/ blame others in the system. ValuechainFX (and others) made the point of working together, we all need to work together and get past the advisorial roles as we have in the past.

[ValueChainFX]

This is a time in our industry where we have a tremendous opportunity (or not) depending on what you do with it.

There is a strong industry force out there right now that is working to make the system more balanced. I have been to far to many producer meetings where we hear one or two folks that dominate a meeting with negative thoughts. When in fact if we are paying for something we should be looking at ways of making that work to our advantage.

Believe this, that when someone in or out of the industry offers help, before you cut their legs out from under them perhaps we should listen to what is being offered.

Right now their is an effort being develop that is working specifically at rural development and agriculture initiatives, both to meet the needs of today and more important into tomorrow. People are either for that or against it, sitting on a fence when the industry is in trouble is not the best place to be??

My thoughts what are yours?