Wondering?

[cowman]

I wonder if the day will ever come where a packer has the clout to dictate what kind of cattle we raise? Consider the pig industry(especially in the US). You buy your breeders from the packer. You use his feed or feed to his standards. Your facilities must meet his specs. You don't want to use his genetics/feed/standards he won't buy your product. That is how it is done in the US with Tyson Foods and in reality all the hog genetics up here come from basically one establishment.
I do realize this would be difficult to do with cattle as one "breed" doesn't fit our various climatic conditions. But what if the packer said"Okay here is the genetics we need to get the product we need. We know some of you can't raise this product so don't even try. However we have decided this is the way we intend to go for consistancy and that is the only animal we will slaughter. Use our genetics, sell to the feedlots(or our feedlot) using our feed and methods, and we will guarentee you a premium"
Do you think it is reasonable to assume this could happen? Isn't this really what the Certified Angus beef program is starting to do? Could you see how the packer could take it to the next level?

[pandiana]

Yes, cowman. I think this is a real possibility. The cattle industry is moving quickly towards these standards. At the moment, we are being pulled towards this end in the hopes of a premium or at least staying solvent. But it is quite feasible that this will become a push as more power is layed at the feet of the money men. This may not all be negative as it may provide a degree of stability to the producers knowing that they have a steady market with a contracted price. However, we know what happens to contracts. They can afford the lawyers. And as for stability, we see what happened to the PMU's and the pork industry. Something to think about in the context of change.


I suspect there will always be a fringe who will manage well with 'natural', 'organic', 'hairy', or 'rare' for those of us who are independent non-conformists. But as stated on these forums before, these niche markets fall to those with the ability to promote and market their product.

[cowman]

I don't think we can really include the PMU market in this comparison as what basically happened to them is they became obsolete? And from what I heard they were compensated fairly generously?
What I was trying to get across is the concept that one day practically all cattle will need to come from one genetic source? As the pig industry and chickens are? Again I realize climatic conditions might make this not feasible. But consider if you use "brand X" you get a contract if not you don't? And because the meat oligarchy demands "brand X" cattle if you can't/or won't raise them you are basically squeezed out or have to find alternatives?
And furthermore, the Packer is the only breeder supplying "Brand X" genetics so you have no choice but to buy from him? Isn't this exactly what happened in the hog and chicken business? Is it reasonable to expect it to happen to cattle?

[rodb]

Cowman

When we were in the US this winter I lerned that the Certified Angus Beef program has nothing to do with angus anymore in the States. The carcass has to meet a certain criteria and it is branded CA. In Canada it has to be at least 1/2 angus to qualify. I found it hard to believe but I was told it by a person who makes his living selling beef. Therefore in the States their program is just another brand name like Cargills "Sterling".

My point is that I believe there will be a push for better genetics and quality cattle and a larger discount on poorer cattle but I don';t think we will ever get to a stage where the hog and chicken genetics have gotten to. There are too many cowboys who are in love with their cows genetics too make a big change. Not necessarily a bad thing as fads come and go and some guy who sticks to his principles will eventually be right. Kind like sticking the old suit and tye in the closet and waiting for it to come back into style.

[kato]

I agree. Not all packers will want exactly the same cattle. After all, they want their product to be different from the guy down the road. I do see a lot more branded beef coming, though. The secret is to make sure it's not ONE brand!

Different end usages dictate different cattle. Bacon is bacon, ham is ham, a pork chop is a pork chop. With beef, there is a much bigger variation in the end product. A super marbled restaurant steak won't sell well to someone looking for lean meat for example.

[Willowcreek]

Future Beef in the states did almost that when they were operating. They would contract calves before they were born as long as they met their criteria for genetics. I think they required 1/4 continental and no more than 1/2 and 1/2 to 3/4 british. They were pushing Limousin and Charolais. Also had to follow all their vaccination program and feed program. But they went bankrupt fast,too.

[cakadu]

Think very carefully for a moment about having only certain genetic lines - in any livestock or poultry. The more we concentrate the gene pool, the more we are courting disaster.

I do not want to be a producer in a world where only a few genetic lines are available. I also do not want to be a consumer in that same world.

Maintaining biodiversity is critical. Certain genetic traits are important and they should be preserved. They may not fit into this "fast food" nation that we have contrived, but they are still important because eventually there will need to be an outcrossing to put some of these traits back in.

I may not be a geneticist, but it seems to me that when you breed for certain "good" characteristics, you also get the bad along with them. You can perhaps lessen the bad to a certain extent, but you can't eliminate them.

Researchers are trying desperately to stop chickens from going the way of the turkeys in that the only way turkeys can breed is through AI.

What we need to do is stop and take a long hard look at what it is we are doing and why we are doing it.

[grassfarmer]

Spot on Cakadu, this lack of genetic diversity is already affecting the beef industry with the merging and mongrelizing of breeds that is going on. That's one of the reasons I want to rear "different" cattle - some day their genetics will be like gold dust.

Willowcreek mentioned a failed branded beef program above - another was Leachman's Piedmontese sired program. I understand it was the first part of their business to go belly up - that should be a warning sign to some people as they had a good program yet still couldn't cut it. Due to too much pressure from the big packers?

[nerves]

Good day fellow cattlemen I have been reading your discussions on line and find them very interesting. I find cowmans question intriguing. Merial has a web page www.igenity.com. It deals with the leptin gene. This gene deals with fat content in the meat or marbling. There is 3 catagories cc ct tt. tt is of the higher fat content. Most of your Brish breeds have a higher percentage of tt in their breed. They have higher levels of fat, but lack red meat. Most of your exotic breeds are the opposite, with very few in the tt range,but some have been found. These animals have been tested and found through genotype. So crossing animals exotic to the british breed with the right genotype, should give you optimum meat quality. I also know that cargill and the others are very interested in this technology. Like it or not this is what I believe is next.

[cakadu]

I'm very glad to see new faces posting on this site and in some of these threads. It seems of late that we are getting more and more of you and that is a great thing.

Everything does come full circle doesn't it? Many of our early breeding pioneers - be it seeds, animals or birds - spent countless hours and generations breeding for different traits and having diversity in the species. We now want to take these lines and reduce them down to what we consider optimal for the food production systems of today.

Poultry is in and out of the barn in 42 days - maximum and we wonder why it is for the most part tasteless and without the flavor of the chicken that many of us grew up on. There is a reason why pasture poultry is a hit and it's not just with the "have" crowd, but with a great many people. Sure, pasture poultry isn't as plump as the birds you buy from the supermarket, but the pan isn't laden with fat either.

We put animals and birds into pens and force feed them to put the weight on quickly and uniformly, sell them as "fats" into the marketplace and proceed to trim the fat off of the beef. Does this make sense?

Some of us that raise the non-commercial breeds raise them for the exact reasons you are talking about. They don't get fat and aren't pushed to grow, but are left to grow the way nature intended for them to grow.

There is nothing wrong with looking for certain traits that you want to pass on, I personally don't want to see it limited to a few select lines that we may not be able to recover from. I see the scenario as this: Say we breed to have less fat, so we do all this crossing and develop genetic lines that possess these traits that are popular now. What happens when trends and consumer tastes change - how do we get the "old" traits back if the genetic pool has been reduced or in some cases eliminated?

There isn't anything without risk or consequence and many times the consequences are unforeseen, which is why I caution going full steam ahead into any one trend.

The sheep breed that we raise is naturally resistant to internal parasites and does not overeat - eliminating the necessity of continual dosing with drugs of any sort. We also use sustainable grazing management practices which helps in keeping the internal parasites down because they aren't confined to one area, nor do they eat the grass right down to the ground. The sheep themselves move around alot and we let them do it because they seem to know what it is that they need.

The point being that you cannot look at these things in isolation - rather you have to look at them from a farm management perspective and manage from the big picture.

Confined feeding is not the way to go as far as we are concerned, but I understand that many people feel it is. The way we have been going is not sustainable, so we need to look at things that might help to make it sustainable in the long run.

This whole notion of breeding for specificity goes beyond just helping the pocket book, there are many moral and ethical considerations to be made as well. Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.