ABP Resolution

[grassfarmer]

Here is a resolution that I intend moving at my zone meetings, I hope other producers will use it also. The accompanying letter sent to various publications gives my reasoning as to why this is THE issue of the day.

“Be it resolved that the levy currently collected and used to fund ABP become a directional levy whereby producers can allocate it to the producer organisation of their choice”

Dear Editor,
Alberta Beef Producers (ABP) have been very vocal in recent months demonstrating their opposition to the Alberta Livestock and Meat Strategy (ALMS) announced by Agriculture Minister Groeneveld in June. ABP are claiming to be the champions of cow/calf producer interests so perhaps with the Annual Fall Producer meetings of ABP just around the corner it would be worth reviewing their performance over the last year.

As producers sold their calves last fall into the worst market (adjusted for inflation) since the great depression ABP handed out a leaflet telling cow/calf producers that they were lucky the feedlots were prepared to offer them such high prices! When the ABP Annual General Meeting in Calgary came around in December it was further demonstrated how low the interests of cow/calf producers were on the ABP agenda. Once again two producer resolutions calling for a ban on packer ownership of cattle and a further resolution to allow BSE testing were roundly defeated.

Beginning in November, due to the crisis facing producers, Minister Groeneveld convened a working group of representatives from the ABP, Western Stockgrowers Association, Beef Initiative Group, Alberta Cattle Feeders Association and the Feeders Associations of Alberta. This working group was known as the B5 group although in reality it was the B4 group because the ABP’s sole contribution appeared to be stalling and opposing any progress the group tried to make. I understand this even included failing to attend some of the meetings which I feel is disgraceful given that the ABP representatives would be the only participants that were being paid for their time by producer check off dollars. Despite the ABP’s opposition the Canada Gold Beef initiative was born out of this working group of four independently funded producer groups and can perhaps serve as a model of what can be achieved by producers with the co-operation of Government.

It is clear from the performance record outlined above that ABP has not represented the interests of primary beef producers and I would suggest that the ABP’s opposition to the ALMS is more a campaign of distraction to avert producer calls for better representation and a change to the current levy distribution.
The ABP remains an organisation with it’s head stuck in the sand on beef policy. They continue to deny that corporate concentration in the packing sector is a problem, one which will be compounded by the proposed takeover of Tyson’s Brooks plant by the Nilsson group. They continue to cite the American market as the only one worth pursuing despite the fact we are constantly losing ground in our ability to compete in that market due to higher feed grain costs in Canada and a higher Canadian dollar. In addition the severe financial difficulties being faced by the United States will likely see them adopt a more protectionist stance and an early indication of that is the Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) regulations which will further disadvantage Canadian exporters.

I hope that producers will reflect on these issues and make the effort to attend their local Fall Producer Meeting this year. ABP will no doubt be setting the agendas so that most of the evening will be spend fanning the flames of opposition to the ALMS; I hope producers will not be fooled by this diversionary tactic. Instead I would ask that producers consider raising the following resolution at every ABP Fall Producer Meeting in the Province. “Be it resolved that the levy currently collected and used to fund ABP become a directional levy whereby producers can allocate it to the producer organisation of their choice” Time spent bemoaning the introduction of the ALMS is time wasted - the ALMS will be introduced and producers interests are currently being better served by organisations like the Western Stockgrowers Association, Beef Initiative Group, Alberta Cattle Feeders Association, Feeders Associations of Alberta and the National Farmers Union who have all pledged to work with the Minister and have a hand in developing and implementing the ALMS.

Iain Aitken
Rimbey

[grassfarmer]

An article from the Calgary Herald on the issue perhaps adds in a little consumer viewpoint that we beef producers should heed.
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/theeditorialpage/story.html?id=8bbd2840-d23b-4165-9f56-5c54ad81d201&p=1

[rkaiser]

Time to speak up I guess. After taking the last few months away from the politics of the beef industry and focusing on our own business, I have come to realise a few things. Old stuff mind you, about sugar and spice and the psychology of change.

I am not overly proud to say that I was one of the more radical change agents a year ago when the ABP fall meetings rolled around. Voting for and supporting any and all resolutions like the one grassfarmer has proposed this year. Pissed off with the state of my industry and quick to jump on the blame wagon with those who I agree with in principle, but have come to disagree with on direction.

I feel that we all agree that the cattle industry in Canada needs to be an exporting industry to survive. We are able to produce more beef than our domestic consumers can eat and they, in fact, have the upper hand on us due to our over supply.

By increasing exports and shorting supply -- I feel that we can force the domestic price of beef up. That is the reason I have always supported any idea that could potentially increase beef exports.

What we need more than anything else in this industry is an increase in the consumer price of beef. On a small scale, grassfarmer has proven that we can effectively increase price with a bit of work, and on a little larger scale, our group has proven it even further. Our current price at our now THREE --- Second to None, meat shop locations in Calgary for rib eye and strip loin steak is $29.97 per pound.

Innovation and willingness can invoke a change.

I feel that ABP needs to recognise this quality in some of the folks who are working outside the ABP structure and support them when they request help. But tearing apart the ABP structure with a bunch of nasty blaming and finger pointing is not the way. This article in the Herald is one sided and simply negative. Just as a lot of articles written in the past by opponents frustrated with the price of beef --- myself included.

I will not run again and do not plan to join the ranks of the disappointed once again. I plan to continue an aggressive and positive approach to drive up the consumer price of beef with the group I am involved with.

I think I would rather see ABP recognise and help fund the forward action requests of groups like the newly formed Alliance between the Western Stock Growers, and the Alberta Cattle Feeders and whatever is left of the Beef Initiative Group. This would likely generate more cash flow for these groups than a directional levy anyway since most producers have gotten to the point where they don't give a rats ass any more about the 3 dollars taken off their cheque.

[loric]

Hello everyone,

I did see the article and sent in a letter to the editor on Erik's behalf to the Herald. It was never printed. Unfortunatly, when a letter is submitted - it's never a sure thing if it makes it to publication. I've pasted it below.




Re: “Beef battle a bunch of bull” Les Brost, Opinion, October 27

Les Brost’s column contains the completely unfounded statement that Alberta Beef Producers has declared war on Alberta’s Minister of Agriculture. He also claims that Alberta Beef Producers is engaged in a campaign to subvert the Minister’s Livestock and Meat Strategy. Both of these allegations are absolutely wrong. Neither Alberta Beef Producers nor Minister Groeneveld has declared a war and anyone who says we have is either badly misinformed or deliberately making false statements.



Alberta Beef Producers appreciates Minister Groeneveld’s interest in the cattle industry and the assistance he has provided for our producers. He has been a staunch ally of our industry on trade matters and we strongly support his plans to improve market access, reduce regulatory costs, and improve feed grain productivity. We share Minister Groeneveld’s vision of an internationally competitive and profitable livestock and meat industry. The fact that we don’t completely agree on the way to achieve that vision simply means that we must continue to work with Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development on the strategy.



If Mr. Brost had made the effort to contact Alberta Beef Producers or read the information on our website, he would have developed a much clearer understanding of the issues, as well as our position, and could have written a significantly more useful and accurate column.



Erik Butters, Chair

Alberta Beef Producers

[grassfarmer]

Fine bit of backtracking there Mr Butters.

As to the earlier reply, I'll never understand the Western Canadian political mentality. An industry liquidating by the week having been thoroughly screwed over in the unequal battle with a few multi-national corporations in the processing and retailing sectors doesn't spur on any kind of resistance. Instead many producers presumably through either apathy, ignorance or stupidity continue to be willing to fund a "producer" organisation which happily supports those doing the screwing instead of working on producers behalves.

It doesn't bother me Randy, I could quite rapidly expand my beef retailing so that I wouldn't have "commodity calves" to sell either. Realise though that those of us doing this might potentially account for 10% of the domestic beef supply some-day. Our operations do nothing to raise the amount of beef exported. So I guess if everyone else is happy (or too apathetic) we just let the other 90% of producers go out of business?

Oh, and I wouldn't count on ABP generously handing out funds to any of the other organisations in the province no matter how good their ideas may be. I think there is evidence of that in the last ABP boardroom minutes where there is discussion on who will be allowed to be a delegate in future. Apparently no-one that opposes ABP policies or belongs to an organisation that opposes ABP policies will be welcome. That could be rather interesting from a legal viewpoint given that we currently must pay checkoff to ABP and I don't see how we could be excluded from standing. Still it's nice to see that ABP are spending our dollars wisely, discussing things that are so relevant to the crisis facing beef producers today.

[grassfarmer]

High speed reverse certainly seems to be the order of the day with ABP and the ALMS. At last night's meeting in Ponoka the officials were so busy sucking up to John Knapp you'd almost forget this was the same organisation that spent all summer opposing him. The speed of this change seemed to take the CCA speaker by surprise as he was being so careful not to say anything against the plan that he tied himself in knots and finished up backing up John Knapp more than the ABP!

Apart from that it was business as usual - the usual jolly little film show featuring a few officials telling their stories of how wonderful everything in "the industry" is - how far we have climbed up the hill of recovery since this time last year (demonstrated by another contraction of cow numbers by 4.6%,I think) The entire film show and premise that ABP policy is built on continues to be false though. Time and again they talk of how well we are doing - exports up, access opening up to x country, retail price of beef up again - never mentioning that this is all built on their simple but false belief in the trickle down effect to pass the benefits realised by the packing/retailing sector through to cow/calf or feedlot sectors. We need farmers_son to stand up and tell the truth - he at least knows that producers sell live cattle not beef so their story is bogus. Without acknowledging this fundamental flaw in their policy assessment ABP has nothing to offer. To totally ignore the influence that packer concentration has on our industry means they cannot represent producer interests.
ABP don't have the answers - they don't even know the questions!

[jensend]

randy i think i have to disagree with your unusually mellow assessment of the situation. i can see your point that a producer organization shouldn't be destroyed just because of bad past performance but just as financial and equity markets are being ripped apart now because of structural flaws in the economy i think abp could go the way of the dodo because it has become a servant of the packers and has really very little to do for producers. how far back would you have to go to find one significant initiative made for the benefit of producers? everything is for the 'industry' which means it's for the part of the industry holding all the cards. ask yourself how much worse things would be if abp was suddenly vaporized? there is definitely a need for a producers' voice but as of now i don't see one.

[smcgrath76]

This is an interesting conundrum GF. While I don't support directional checkoff (I do support refundable), I do support the right of an individual to be involved in the process of determining whether or not it happens.
I am not sure that a delegate or director could support directional checkoff and claim to be serving the organization they were elected to serve. This in turn creates the problem of being unable to effect change. I think this is one that has to be directed to the minister of ag himself to change the legislation.
I don't think that ABP is even to fault for the state of the industry at present. Unprecedented volatility is a tiring challenge. Many of us are doing our own thing and growing markets, some more successfully than others (GF - you and Randy are good examples). I don't think it is the role of ABP to rescue me or anyone else, rather to make sure that regulations and historical institutions don't get in the way of innovation and excellence.
I appreciate that there is a traditional mindset to much of ABP, however I think there is a traditional mindset in much of agriculture.
I am not sure we need to charge out to save the cow/calf guy, or rescue the feeding industry. Quite frankly, I think most of us had best start worrying about paddling our own boat.
I currently stand to lose a sizeable investment in a further processor as part of our process of adding value, but that is a business risk we investigated and decided to pursue. In short, my business, my problem.
I don't expect government to bail me out and I know most readers of this forum don't either. I spend a lot of my time seeking out like minded persons, rather than trying to work with everyone. This is the achilles heel of ABP and other producer organizations.
The Tyson sale is an interesting one, and given the options, one that I think I support. I don't see anyone else stepping out and fundraising to purchase the plant at Brooks and without that plant our Canadian capacity drops to roughly 2/3 of current. This creates a massive backlog of cattle to work through and a lot of producers will be hurt in the interim. Would I like to see a producer owned plant? You bet, in fact I own one. Would I like to see more foresight and global awareness and foreign trade? For sure. Do I think Government has a role to play? Yes again (with reservations). Do I think producers can gain margin and market share from these endeavors? Yes, but only if they take on "personal responsibility" including some form of investment risk sharing with others in the chain.

[grassfarmer]

Sean, I guess like a lot of guys you think I should just back off and let everyone fend for themselves. Fair enough that's one way to go (and I can definitely find better uses for my time that fighting ABP) - each to their own, sink or swim we are supposed to be in business after all. That being the case why do we need an ABP? or any other producer group? everyone would just be so busy being successful and busy doing their own thing there wouldn't be any need. We probably wouldn't need Governments either as there wouldn't be any problems that citizens needed help with.
Unfortunately that is not how society works - as long as there are people with different interests and angles there will be this thing we call politics - it's central to the other important thing called democracy. As far as ABP are concerned as long as I have to pay a checkoff to them I will fight to make sure my interests are better represented than they currently are.
At last night's meeting the chairman was complaining how poorly producers were representing themselves in our zone - zero resolutions moved at one meeting, and one(mine)last night. As Mr Butters was in the crowd I took the opportunity to highlight why I think producers are not more involved - time and again producers in our zone have gone to their meetings all fired up backing any number of resolutions to institute change. Very, very rarely does one ever get passed at the AGM in Calgary - Mr Butters answer was to shrug his shoulders and say it was democratic.
Here's the part that troubles me - the packer ownership of life cattle resolution that has been raised many times across the province but is never passed at the AGM - can any of you folks tell me who it is within our industry, within ABP that are opposed to seeing a restriction on packer ownership of cattle? How can anyone in the cow/calf or feedlot sector see a positive side to packer ownership of cattle? and be prepared to fight for the right of it to continue through defeating producer resolutions on this matter. If someone can convince me that there are such people with valid reasons I will perhaps believe that Mr Butters runs a democratic organisation.

As for the levy - why the difference between directional and refundable Sean? What difference does it make if I choose to directionally send mine to say the NFU versus getting mine refunded and then sending it to the NFU?

[farmers_son]

Re checkoff….I thought quite a bit about this. I could point out that a directional or refundable checkoff would in effect give total control of ABP to about 30 feedlots that have about ½ of Alberta’s pen space. Presently ABP is controlled mostly by one producer one vote but a directional or refundable checkoff would mean ABP was controlled by one checkoff dollar one vote and the feedlots pay the most checkoff dollars, hundreds of thousands of dollars in checkoff each. The checkoff the typical cow calf producer pays is very small in comparison and as a result with a refundable or directional checkoff the influence of the typical cow calf producer would be very diminished.

Or I could point out that the stable funding that ABP enjoys allows it to hire top quality staff. No one is going to work for an organization if they feel their job is threatened by an uncertain budget. People have house payments, car payments, they need to know their job will be there next year. Or I could point out money is power and ABP is able to be very influential nationally because of the dollars ABP contributes to national endeavours. Plus we are about to launch a WTO challenge to COOL and that takes dollars to do that. Not to mention the dollars it takes to fight a countervail which could easily be on the horizon if the Democrats gain total control in Washington. That $3 checkoff dollar is going to have do quite a bit. But the dollars are there to do it.

I would mention a term called “free riders”. With a directional or refundable checkoff people like Grassfarmer could direct their checkoff to the NFU and let others pay for marketing, for fighting countervails and WTO challenges, for research and lobbying. Grassfarmer would be a “free rider” (not to be confused with Easy Rider which evokes quite a different image of “GRASSfarmer”). Could not resist that one….:--)

Grassfarmer and others who directed their checkoff elsewhere would benefit from the efforts of those who left their checkoff in ABP without paying for it. He would be a free rider.

If everyone in the Alberta cattle industry benefits when we win trade challenges like COOL or countervails then why should not everyone pay for it?

But what really concerns me is tendency I see for primary producers to split off instead of work together. It is so hard for producers to be together in any forum, for instance ABP. I was watching a nature show on TV recently and the story is a familiar one, the lion watching the herd of gazelles waiting for the poor unsuspecting critter to separate from the herd. Easy lunch for the lion. You wonder why the gazelle would be so foolish but it seems we are not much different. Can our industry stay together or will it split into host of splinter groups supposedly catering to the unique wishes of its producer niche. And there are a lot of lions out there, not the least of which is Government who seeks to divide our industry so it can impose its will.

[blackjack]

i just have to reply to this last post as the largest pile of bullcrap...sorry for the pun...i have ever read...the cow calf guys lost control of how the checkoff dollars would be spent many years ago...and f_s as the nerve to blame it on all these other groups...what a joke...how many million are we going to spend to stop some other countries policy (cool)but yet hold the line with them on bse issues...that might have slowed our international trade...etc..etc...i hope these other groups get to share a part of my checkoff dollars....cause delegates like f_s have been running lip service while the cow-calf man literally got slaughtered...and now the abp claims they are listening...the only thing they fear is the loss of a checkoff dollar that they think is theirs...its the producers dollars f_s...not yours...

[grassfarmer]

Farmers_son, I would suggest the large feedlots already have a substantially bigger shout in the running of ABP than the what 5%? (optimistic) of cow/calf producers that attend the meetings and are eligible to vote if an election is taking place in their zone. Evidence of this was the preferential treatment given to feeders through the creation of their council on ABP long before there was a tiny little insignificant cow/calf council granted.

Staff job security is a bogus argument in this case - their jobs will presumably be threatened because of the declining cattle population/shrinking levy income in any case. I do not think ABP has much to fear from a change to the levy status - if you are doing as well as you claim representing producers the money will virtually all remain with you. 75% of cow/calf producers are asleep at the wheel and wouldn't bother to make a change to their levies destination even if they were allowed to.

You like to portray the ABP as the only producer group out there - but they aren't. All you ABPers could equally be described as freeloaders of the lobbying done by groups like the Western Stockgrowers and many other directly funded producer groups. The only difference is thus far you have been the only ones getting all the checkoff automatically and I do not feel that is either right or democratic. Sure it's let you run a prosperous organisation with a Calgary office befitting a successful oil company but is it right that only ABP receive this funding while other groups with equally good ideas, dedicated individuals and valuable contributions to make are unable to afford an office of any kind?

As for the concern over splintering or remaining in one group - we never have been one group - there are between 6 and 10 groups representing beef producers in this province in one form or another. This is not about ABP splitting into 6 different groups it is about allocating funding to other producer representative groups to strengthen their abilities to represent their members.

Speaking of splintering and splitting off from the pack - wasn't that exactly what ABP did when they bailed on the B5 group? And if you really want to form bigger alliances why doesn't ABP join the Beef Industry Alliance, the recently formed coalition of 4 major producer groups?

[Sawbones]

I guess anyone can pick a story that illustrates their point like "the lion separating its prey" but how about the buffalo that stuck together and jumped over the cliffs. ABP has not advocated for the cow/calf producer in recent history. In 2004, they were silent when CAIS decided to claw back funds because the value of the cow had increased. The funds that were put into the industry paid off bills raised the optomism of the producer who in turn invested back into the industry. To allow a claw back based on that premise was preposterous and not a word from ABP. In 2006 under the Agristability program ABP was not only silent but endorsed the policy of not changing the value of the cow from the beginning to ending inventory...the only commodity to do so..and this cost the cow calf producer millions. Currently our Ag minister is touring Asia to increase sales and hopefully will be successful or at least XL hopes so because that will be about there only market. I know we can hardly wait for that trickle down affect to kick in..and ABP dollars will be used to help pay for a lot of that advertising and promotion. Randy we do need another voice as ABP is not listening

[rkaiser]

I guess I simply do not see the provincial governement tackling the dismantling of ABP or the checkoff. And after sitting in on and contributing to the B5 group which formed the basis of ALMA, I saw no other group with any real concrete plans and just as many finger pointing ego's as ABP has in their boardroom. Directing the checkoff to other groups who are all about talk will get us no where. I am planning on presenting a resolution at the next meeting that would ask ABP to support programs with marketing action initiatives. Whether those actions be the Canada Gold program, which I also had a hand in developing of programs like GF's or our own Canadian Celtic program, or Spring Creek or etc. etc. All programs intended to increase consumption AND more importantly increase the consumer price of beef. Policy is policy and we can argue that til the cows come home.

The only policy that I could see being changed right now that would help our situation would be for ABP or any other group to take on the retailers and ask them to stop using our "food of Kings" as a lost leader for friggin french fries. Paid $4.1o for a GD dipped cone at DQ yesterday while reading a sign that drug people in for a 99 cent burger. Pathetic

Action is action and I feel it would be hard for ABP to deny supporting action. Once a resolution like this makes it to the floor of the AGM, the media will see it and I find it hard to believe that they would risk dumping it in front of the public like that.

[loric]

Just a heads up that I have the same person hired to webcast the resolutions debate at the AGM as I used for the Plan Review debate at the semi annual meeting. I'll post more details closer to the date (AGM is Dec 8-10 in Calgary). The website is www.wlex.ca