Glass house or what

[cowman]

Rsomer: Here is the difference between private land and a crown grazing lease. It is a GRAZING lease not an oil surface lease. When the Alberta government collects 3 million in grazing lease fees and the leaseholders collect $40 million in surface leases then something is not quite right? Better to cancel all the grazing leases and come out $37 million ahead?
This is your money and mine that is being paid to these people so they can raise cattle that will compete with the guy using private land. Is this in any way fair?
Unfortunately I have an oil and gas meeting wed. but I have pretty well lost faith in anything the ACC stands for and I suspect nothing will ever change. I did my part opposing the checkoff increase last time. Did a lot of phoning and talking to my neighbors. It was pretty much a waste of time. I guess I have become pessimistic.

[pandiana]

I went to the Alberta Producer Meeting in Breton. It felt like a public relations exercise in which they showed a very nice film depicting all of the events that have transpired in the cattle industry to date, mostly BSE related. In particular they noted the Canadian people and media support which translated into a 60% increase in consumption of beef (their figure)for which by association they claim ownership. After this resounding pat on their back, the producers voted them another $1.00 check-off.

They did not mention any specific accomplishments that they were directly involved in other than 'we were part of a group of cattlemen' lobbying the Americans. They didn't outline a policy on fixing the problem, i.e. testing etc. They assumed there programs drove the consumer to the meat shelves in the stores.

The main problem it seems to me is that because nobody was selling any cattle their income was compromised and,therefore, in order to keep their frugal paid staff of ~20people employed they had to have more money. The irony of course is that the sector hardest hit again pays without any hope of recouping their expense.

[rsomer]

Unfortunately, that is a very accurate description of an Alberta Beef Producers fall meeting. But you did have the opportunity to vote for zone delegates which is good. I think a lot of people are like cowman and now derive at least part of their income from other sources so don’t have the same need or time to be concerned enough to attend these meetings. And so many cow calf producers have become disillusioned with their beef organization and stay away which is exactly the opposite of what they should do. But the feedlot industry recognizes that decisions affecting the profitability of the beef industry in Alberta are made within the Alberta Beef Producers and they are at these meetings and have lobbied successfully to get the feedlot sector special representation as delegates and on the Board of Directors. The cow calf sector should take a lesson from their feedlot counterparts and now more than ever should make it a priority to be at these meetings and influence the direction of their beef organization. It isn't always easy to get your point across at these meetings but you have to try and you need to show up to do that.

[ValueChainFX]

You're right there. If these groups say they represent you and the gov recognize them they have you!Unless you have a group that gives you hands on representation you have another control group that gives your money away to people that will spend it, and chances are not on your interests.

[cowman]

This is the problem with these old boy groups! They tend to turn into little beuracracies more intent on keeping the good times rolling than doing much.
When hard times hit what do most businesses do? They cut costs and they get out and hustle? Now a good portion of the ABPs funds go for export promotion, but guess what? We aren't exporting anymore! So where are they going to hustle?
So where does that money go? Probably for staff and per diems and buying the boys a roast beef dinner! It seems to me what the ACC/ABP is mostly promoting is themselves! Maybe instead of upping the checkoff they should seriously look
at downsizing? Maybe scrap the checkoff so the farmer might get a check for that old cow rather than a bill? When cows are worth 60 cents a pound what difference does a dollar make? But at 2 cents a pound it makes a big difference!
They talk about all the good work they did down in Washington. In reality that isn't their job. Trade and animal health issues are not our responsibility! That baby is the federal governments and we pay them very well to do it! If they bungle the job the cattle organizations need to make that very clear to the Canadian public but we don't need to send Janke, Haney etc. on an all expense paid junket to Washington!

[rsomer]

Your right about the ACC/ABP being a bureaucracy. More and more control of the spending is being removed from the delegates. I was going to say elected delegates but they are not all elected. The beef checkoff has increased at a rate of 14.5% compounded annually since the ACC was started 25 years ago. If the increase in the per head beef checkoff keeps increasing at this rate for the next 25 years it will be over $100 per head by 2028. Since the checkoff is collected 2.5 times per animal and when you realize the backgrounders and feedlots are margin operators and simply pass the cost of the checkoff back to the cow calf man, if we were to look ahead the cow calf operator, or if not him his children, could be effectively paying as much as $250 per head checkoff unless people show up for these meetings and say enough is enough. The cow calf man should not be so willing to pay more and more checkoff when the financial benefits do not make it back to him, instead all the benefits are siphoned off by the retailers and packing plants. And once our beef organization is successful in having American feeder calves come into Canada year round, which will effectively place a price ceiling on our feeder calves, all the promotion and market development in the world will not increase the price of a weaned calf to a Canadian producer. Yet he will continue to be asked to pay more and more checkoff without realizing any financial benefits. At what point will the people paying the checkoff realize that they need to get some benefit for their money, when they are paying $10 per head, $25, maybe $50 or will it have to go all the way to $250 per animal sold before they take enough interest to go the fall meetings.

[pandiana]

Another thing that I got to thinking about after this meeting was the amount of promotion that these check-off dollars were assigned to. It occurred to me that it would seem strange that the person harvesting trees was paying to promote the sale of newspapers or furniture and yet the primary cattle producer is paying to promote beef. Why would the packer not be expected to sell his product. No doubt we have to sell beef to sell cattle but why would the packing plant not be responsible to sell to the retailer and the retailer to the consumer?

[cowman]

I think the argument the ACC uses is the packers can't and the retailers won't! Afterall the packers claim they don't really make any money! They always trot out figures where they have a net profit of like 1% or something. And the retalers always claim beef is a price loss leader or something. I guess they just butcher and sell beef out of the goodness of their heart!
Somehow or other they use voodoo economics to survive! I sure don't understand it.

[ValueChainFX]

My understanding is the next meeting for the CCIA is Dec. 15th in Calgary!