Solution to America's M-COOL Problem

[grassfarmer]

Cowman why are quitting or "hobby farming" the only options? Beef is a huge industry worldwide, consumption is huge and will continue. Producers will continue to raise beef - why shouldn't we be fighting to earn a living in this industry? There is plenty money in the long production chain from a calf being born on the Prairies to quality beef being served to customers somewhere in the world. We need to get a fair return for our investment and the work that we put in. Just as western ranchers overcame rustlers generations ago so this one needs to overcome a similar kind of thievery - by transnational corporations. That is why I am fighting anyway.

[grassfarmer]

rkaiser, sorry I haven't been on the site since the weekend but I do take exception to your question about what Darcy has done for me or put dollars in my pocket. I know Darcy and feel that he is a much better choice to head ABP than Arno Doerksen. Arno has a feeding operation as well as cow/calf, and from what I heard from producers around this area, the feeling was that he was not as concerned about the plight of the cow/calf operator as he should have been.
As far as dollars in my pocket go, I haven't made a cent on cattle since the ABP elections, sold my calves before that time and haven't sold any yearlings as yet, so any comments I made about the current Chair of ABP certainly were not based on his having helped put dollars in my pocket.
I have certainly supported many of your comments and ideas on this site, so your cheap shot at me was uncalled for.
If we as cattle producers can't comment to one another on this site about ideas and opinions without being the brunt of personal comments, then its no wonder that the industry is in such a mess.

[cowman]

Randy: I don't think I was saying "give up"...just be realistic? The fact is practically everyone involved in agriculture would be better off(financially) if they could get their assets into something else? Now I will admit land appreciation can be another story, but then is that really agriculture?
I also believe agriculture can be a very satisfying way of life as long as a person realizes they need to run a very tight ship and keep their costs in line. Let's face it, if you don't have any debt or expensive tastes you can still live pretty darned cheap? The old idea where the farm supplied a good part of the cost of living comes to mind? Raising your own food, providing some of your energy can really cut down the cost of living. Learning some basic electrical,plumbing, welding, mechanical skills can save anyone a pile of money? And basically learning the difference between what you need and what you want can be a very valuable asset!
Now while I am fairly tight I also have some extravagant tastes...I like to own really good tools and I like a new pickup and I like to eat out a lot!
I suspect if people would realize what they could afford and live within their means they wouldn't be facing this cash crisis?
I do realize many young guys have had to borrow big time to get into farming and that is a shame. I don't have a solution for that but surely the government could have come up with something if they expect any kind of future for agriculture in this country.
I am not saying IBP/Cargill didn't make some hay while the sun shone but lets not forget so did every other little packer and abbatoir in the country? The feedlots took one good hit for sure but I can't see that they are losing money right now with these cheap feeders and really cheap feed? I would think the profit on these steers might be fairly good? I hope they don't make so much that you might consider them immoral pirates, too?
I do support BIG C because they offer to put some checks and balances back into the marketplace. The only problem I have is in my experience, human nature can take over and a positive action can turn into a monster! For example they build a cow plant with a checkoff and the people running the show start to get ambitious and think they'll rule the world. They start to believe the checkoff is their right forever! Sort of like the people at the ABP? Or our various governments?

[rkaiser]

Good comments cowman, and I apologize to you emerald for taking that shot at support for Darcy Davis. Darcy is a big boy and can stand up for himself. He has also proven that he is a loose cannon once in a while, labeling people when he sees it will be to his advantage, and now coming out with a statement about testing for export markets when the delegate body says otherwise.

Don't worry about this smart ass ever feeling the power and using it cowman, I have my own business to tend to. My drive to become a founding member of BIG C was to try to help an industry in dire needs. All the while seeing an industry leadership living like they don't really want any sort of change.
My efforts will probably never end up as more than a bunch of talk, and never have or will end up with personal gain. I have already risked business by speaking out against those who are accepted, and expect to risk more before I am done. However, I still believe this industry needs some changes to survive, and kissing the ass of the USDA has to stop.

I do repect both of your points of view and expect to be criticised as anyone who speaks out should, including yourselves.

[rkaiser]

It would be a very boring world if everyone agreed on everything. I certainly support good iniatives within the beef industry, and hopefully some of your hard work rkaiser will make the industry a better place for all of us.
I do feel that a forum such as this is best utilized to promote good initiatives and ideas, and not to critize those who do put those opinions forth. There aren't many of us that are regulars on this site, but those that are, and I include everyone, have certainly given an indication of leadership, common sense and one hell of a lot of good ideas. While I may not agree with all of what is put forward here, I do recognize that those who participate are making suggestions that they feel will be beneficial to the industry as a whole.

[SASH]

rkaiser wrote:
I would agree that restricting packer ownership is probably a pipe dream. But something so blatently criminal simply makes me mad enough that I still want to keep it on the burner. Everyone likes to say "We did it to ourselves" bull shit. WE did not do anything, that was the problem. These pirates saw opportunity in our government rules and economic situation and used their immoral business practices to take advantage of every situation. If you call this good business, then I don't want to be a businessman. I am all for getting ahead in a free market world, but do it with a bit of respect and compassion.

That really sounds like a victim mentality. How can you say to anybody what they can or can't do. How would you feel if the government told you that you couldn't own cattle or feed cattle or whatever. You would be up in arms and rightly so. All this whining about how the Packers are bullying the cow-calf producer and the feedlot operators will get you nowhere. I think BIG C and the other producer owned packing plants are a step in the right direction. However, I also think that we as producers need to limit the opportunities that Packers have to buy our product by funneling it through some sort of marketing board that would assure that everybody on the production side is making money on this venture. Until we as producers take control of our production and our pricing, this is going to be an ongoing problem.

[kpb]

SASH, you are right on the mark with all your comments on this thread. rkaiser and several others on this site have an idea of free enterprise and capitalism that is strange to say the least. They complain like crazy about the feedlots and packers and call them pirates or immoral because these businesses are trying to make the most money they can. But you can bet they always want the most money they can get for their cows and want to pay as little as they can for their inputs.
rkaiser, can you not see how inconsistent your argument is? The packers have as much right to make as much money as they can, legally, as you do. That's just what they have been doing and, in fact, to do less, would be to be irresponsible to their owners (shareholders). When was the last time you took less than you could for a cow you were selling? And when was the last time you went to the hay seller and said you'd pay him an extra $10 a bale? But you think we should regulate the packers to control their profits?
As SASH suggested, a marketing board is the only way we will get control of this if that is really what we want. But I proposed that several times in the last few months and got shot down by guys like rkaiser. And, guess what, these guys don't like the idea of us having a marketing board to control our destiny because it's anti-free enterprise!! So it's no go to a marketing board because it's anti-free enterprise but it's use the government to control the packers because they're making too much money? C'mon you've got to make up your mind--you can't have it both ways. Capitalism isn't just something for the little guy--as I said before it cuts both ways. If you want to be a free enterpriser don't complain when someone else makes as much money as they can off of you.

[grassfarmer]

SASH, You say "How can you say to anybody what they can or can't do. How would you feel if the government told you that you couldn't own cattle or feed cattle or whatever. You would be up in arms and rightly so."
It's a fundamental right in a democracy to express your views and to protect your rights. I feel we have every right to make our case to Government about the abuses going on currently.
If the Government told me I couldn't keep cows I would be upset - how come when the Government told the Packers to open their books they were told to p*** off? - the fact that they are above the law bothers me.
You continue: "However, I also think that we as producers need to limit the opportunities that Packers have to buy our product by funneling it through some sort of marketing board that would assure that everybody on the production side is making money on this venture."
How is that any different from what some of us "whiners" were proposing earlier in the thread?
If you do pursue this idea perhaps you will encounter the frustration we have with ABP and Alberta Government refusal to even consider any type of market intervention. But then again you would be falling into the trap of "How can you say to anybody what they can or can't do. How would you feel if the government told you that you couldn't own cattle or feed cattle or whatever. You would be up in arms and rightly so."
Bottom line, you critizise us but how are your ideas any different?

[grassfarmer]

kpb, I'm a capitalist and businessman but morals and ethics do exist in the world of trade. Some play by the rules, some don't. I think the idea that we are all on a level playing field in Agriculture is naive - if you choose to ignore the influence Corporate monopoly power has on the marketplace and how "legally" that monopoly was achieved you are turning a blind eye to what is really going on. That's your choice but eventually if it continues unchecked it will catch up with all producers - including the ones getting by for now by standing on the heads of others as the tide comes in.

[kpb]

grassfarmer, believe me I am not naive as to the ruthless nature of big business. I just get a little tired of the cow-calf guy complaining about getting taken advantage of by the big bad packers but, at the same time, wanting as much as he can in his own business. The plain facts are that capitalism is for everyone--the big and the little. It's all about making as much as you can and everyone should understand that. The packers have not done anything that is criminal that I've ever seen and have only been faithful to their shareholders. Ethically? I don't know that they've done anything wrong there either--is making the most amount of money possible wrong now? Or is it just wrong for the big boys?
I am in favor of a marketing board for producers for exactly the reasons you discussed in your reply to me--it would give us a large monopoly of our own to give us power to negotiate with other big boys. That's why we need it. A marketing board would not benefit me personally very much. As I've said before I'm quite comfortable making money right now in the current environment. But I agree with you, that the small producer is going to suffer under our current situation. And a marketing board is the only solution that will give them power. Capitalism and free enterprise is what gave me my ranches (from the ground up with nothing inherited)so I'm quite happy under the current scenario. But I also have friends that I would like to see stay in this business and they need to have a marketing board to give them selling power.
Again, if we want free enterprise, fine, but then we can't cry about guys, big or small, making a lot of money. That's what we are all trying to do.

[SASH]

It's not a matter of one producer standing on another producer. its a matter of producers working together. I, maybe, have a different point of view than some of those who never left the farm. My parents had registered Herefords when I was growing up. I left the farm and started a business in landscaping and excavation. If you wanted me to work for you, you paid what I asked or you didn't get me working for you. It just seems ludicrous to me that if I'm asking for $100/hr for a man and a machine and you are only offering $50/hr that I would work for you. It wouldn't even cover my fuel and maintenance let alone any profit but that's exactly how the cattle industry in Canada seems to work. Its nice to say that you like the lifestyle but I don't think I should have to pay for the privilege of checking my cows at 3 AM or starting my tractor when its 30 below. We have a commodity that the consumer wants, why can't we get a fair price. Its because of all these producers who accept these lowball prices. We've got to get everybody on the same page and stop undercutting each other so that we can make this into a profitable enterprise.

[gwf]

How would a marketing board change the price you receive for your cattle?