Getting on Board

[ALICIA]

The testing would not cost all that much if it is spread out all along the food chain etc. consumer
Distributer
Packer
Slaughter house
Feed lot
drovers
cow/calf producer
I have come up with 7 buyers at least before the end producted can even be put on the plate as a meal.

[bob-b]

what happens to the owner of the next mad cow? Remember it could be one of us, so think about it.

[cowman]

The Canadian vet on the news last night says the test is $50-$60 right now. Japan and Europe use a quicker test that is more accurate. The Japanese test costs $30. Why do America and Canada use the slower,less accurate, more costly test? I suspect it is like most things over here...someone with some pull owns the patent?
The guy from Colorado suggests he can do it for $7-$8 US if he has the volume! He would obviously be building more labs around the country if this thing flies. The test would be taken on the farm so no cost to the packer. The animal would have an individual ID that he had been tested. I suspect that seeing how all cattle will have an electronic ID it would just be done through a computer?

[ValueChainFX]

Cowman, the systems in use in other countries are better from what I can see from the information I have. The people we have been in discussions with are from the EU and have a very good system for trace back. I suspect that we can speculate all we like, but at the end of the day we need to meet regulations on a global basis and meet our needs here in this country. If the live test happens this would be great, but I still believe we are going to need a lab for our own use (not government) to meet the regulations (requests) from our customer base. This in my mind is just another part of our marketing program and working with people that set these regulations help us stay ahead of the game!

[cakadu]

Grassfarmer may be on to something here. The testing is actually two separate issues. I think to test is the way to go, so long as it isn't downloaded onto the producer. This conversation came up at lunch today at a meeting I was at and I may have to re-think my producer cost statement.

If we are doing the testing so that we can get into export markets i.e. satisfy global customers, then perhaps it should be a producer cost. There is no guarantee that they will start to buy our beef, pay any additional costs due to the testing or anything like that. We seem to be going on the premise that if we test, they will buy and that ain't necessarily so.

If, on the other hand, the powers that be are stepping in and saying we are doing it because Canadian consumers say they want it - then it becomes a social issue and the consumers will pay extra to have the meat tested, with the powers that be perhaps kicking in some money for the testing.

Is this line of thinking on or off the mark? I have to say that in some respects it does make sense. What are your thoughts?

[cowman]

Linda: I personally believe we need to take care of our most important customer first-the domestic market. A good part of our problem is we export so much of our production. We overproduce in this country for just about one reason...the governments plan to let the USA and the EU kick us out of the world grain markets! The death of the Crow was the final straw. How much good land went into hay and pasture then?
The reality is we shouldn't be even trying to raise cattle in this artic environment. When you have to feed 7 months of the year it truly is not efficient. No way can we compete with countries like Brazil and Argentina.
But you have to play them how they're dealt to you, and thats why we have this huge cow herd! Simply poor government policy on grain.
By the mid nineties every man and his dog was buying cows. Some of these Johnny come latelies should have never been in it but all us old boys loaded up on cows, too! The money was good and the future looked bright! Today we reap the whirlwind!

[cakadu]

The more I listen to people, cowman, the more I am getting a sense that there are some out there who would like to see us move towards becoming self-sufficient at home and not worrying about the big global marketplace.

You are so right about the other countries around the globe that can produce livestock - I'm talking beef and lamb here - for far less than what we could ever hope to produce it for - no matter how efficient we become or what economies of scale we shoot for.

There are Canadian producers going to the South American countries to produce beef - BECAUSE they can produce it for so much cheaper than we can here.

I don't have some nice neat little answer that will help to solve everything. What I will say is that the more I look at the big picture, the more I realize that we may just have to bite the bullet and some dramatic changes just may have to occur.

How is "bigger is better" actually working for us?