Rethinking the testing issue

[cowman]

Oxbow: You say R-Calf represents very few in the industry? So who does represent the American cattleman?
R-calf claims their membership is growing by leaps and bounds. Is this true?
I wonder how the cow/calf producer in the USA views the NCBA? Do the majority believe that they are looking after the cow/calf guys interests?
No matter R-Calfs methods, the fact is they challenged the USDA when they tried to do an end run around the regulations? And subsequently have probably single handed kept the border closed? Or am I wrong?
The day that border opens and these cheap Canadian calves flood the US market, is the day the gravy train ends! If I was a US cow/calf producer I'd be joining R-Calf...because they would be looking after my market and contributing to my bottom line!
A lot of people up here like to bash the hell out of R-calf but if the shoe was on the other foot, they'd be right in there doing their best to keep the American calves out!

[oxbow]

Cowman, "Oxbow: You say R-Calf represents very few in the industry? So who does represent the American cattleman?"

RCALF membership is 1500 vocal members. RCALF supporters are committed and vocal - all counted. NCBA has 27,000 dues paying members, but many passive supporters.

CM, "r-calf claims their membership is growing by leaps and bounds. Is this true?"

Well, if you go from 1 to 2 that's 100% growth, but no RCALF peeled off their contingent the first few years - now their growth may be negative.

CM,"I wonder how the cow/calf producer in the USA views the NCBA? Do the majority believe that they are looking after the cow/calf guys interests?"

Most RCALF members come from the cow/calf sector, but I'd say your orientation toward RCALF vs NCBA is related to your politics and education as well as narrowness of focus. I am trroubled by some of NCBA's priorities, and I'm long time NCBA.

CM, "No matter R-Calfs methods, the fact is they challenged the USDA when they tried to do an end run around the regulations? And subsequently have probably single handed kept the border closed? Or am I wrong?"

You got it exactly right, and so they got all liquered up in their new strength. Lawyering a rules procedure is ankle biting though (i'm sure not minimizing the harm the tricky little rules lawyering has caused up north), but getting this one verdict doesn't indicate any real juice. USDA wasn't trying to do anything wrong, RCALF just found some rules violation. We all support individual protections, but these protections are often misused in our courtt system.

CM, "The day that border opens and these cheap Canadian calves flood the US market, is the day the gravy train ends!"

Well sure there is some pent up supply, and the longer RCAL gets their way, it gets worse. I was hoping the border would reopen in the spring intime to feature any extra beef during the grilling season. We'd have choked it down in a couple months. BUT NOOOO, RCALF got the border closed, so the beef stayed up north, we had high beef prices during the grilling season thus moving pork and poultry instead of beef, and since feedlot replacements are so expensive, feeders are overfeeding to keep their pens full. If US carcass weights increase a mere 30 pounds, the tonnage exceeds the mountain built up in Canada. Furthermore, everyone knows the beef is stacking uo in Canada, so it provides a negative pressure without even crossing the border. If the US Canadian border opened at the same time as all the other borders opened to Canadian and US beef, the result would be upward pressure on beef prices.

CM, "If I was a US cow/calf producer I'd be joining R-Calf...because they would be looking after my market and contributing to my bottom line!
A lot of people up here like to bash the hell out of R-calf but if the shoe was on the other foot, they'd be right in there doing their best to keep the American calves out!"

I hope I've shown the RCALF way is misguided and shorrt sighted, but none the less, RCALF is honestly trying to help producers.We all can be short sighted;it doesn't make us evil, but it is counterproductive. We are all better off with free trade, but sometimes it's tempting to try to block outthe competition.

[cowman]

Well oxbow it is your country and your cattle organizations, so I guess you should know. I wonder how come we were hearing claims of R-Calf growing by 500 members a month, when in fact you say they are shrinking? Are we hearing faulty information?
How does this NCBA membership thing work and how do they collect the money to operate? Is it a voluntary thing or what? I always assumed there was a checkoff? I believe NCBA always collected a mandatory checkoff on live Canadian cattle entering the USA?
You state you are a longtime member of NCBA...It would be interesting to hear the other point of view from an R-Calf member?
As you might know we have a new group here called BIG C who are challenging some of the things the CCA(probably fairly close to what your NCBA is)promotes. They were basically formed because they believed the CCA wasn't working in the cattlemans best interests...I wonder if they are our R-Calf?

[cowman]

Cowman. I guess that the big difference between RCALF and BIG C is that we have no reason whatsoever to be protectionist. Other than possibly challenging supplemental import quotas at a time when we can't give away our own cows of course.

The main goal of BIG C is to lessen our dependence on the American market, and use Canadian initiative to do just that.
There is no need for Canadian beef in the USA, but we will always be an exporting nation. The only way to continue producing at the rate we are is to find new export markets.

Don't want to burst your bubble cowman, but BIG C is out to correct very little, and will more than likely close up shop once these few goals are accomplished. I beleive that the ABP is the place to make changes that need to be made, and if enough people come forward, change can and will be accomplished. None of us agree with everything, and none of us really find fault in everything. ABP is established, and is not going to go away. There is a democratic process that can and will be used, and beleive me, lots of producers standing and coming into the fold at ABP are upset with government, packer arrogance, and, to some extent, lack of grassroots involvment in decision making.

[Willowcreek]

Just to clear things up- According to the July issue of The Cattlemans Newsletter (R-CALF publication) new membership in April was 270 and in May was 742. Over 11,000 members- none of which were forced to become members like NCBA practices.

[cakadu]

Randy, you are quite correct, reinventing the wheel is not really in anyone's best interests. Producers need leadership that is prepared to take action now. They also need people who are willing and able to step outside of the box and look at the big picture, from both a long and short term perspective.

Even if the CCA's plan were to work and they somehow manage to get everything under 30 months slaughtered (29 months is the magic number) and cows do get processed, there will still be well over half a million cows that are choking the system, if I'm understanding things correctly.

High on everyone's priority list should be finding new markets. From what I've gathered about BIG-C, they are most interested in lessening reliance on the U.S. and finding markets outside of North America. That can only prove to be beneficial in the long run.

[oxbow]

Let me correct the misinformation about the checkoff and NCBA. THe NCBA is charged with administating the checkoff, but they must prove the checkoff money is only used for promotion and research. I'll admit that some situations may be a little gray, like a checkoff add sponsoring "Nebraska Corn Husker football broadcasts" Money spent broadcasting Penn State vs Notre Dame would seem more effective so the husker broadcast gets pretty close to nepotism. All in all, the checkoff has been at least a 10 to 1 return, and just because you contribute checkoff money doesn't force you in the NCBA. A nonNCBA member can serve on the beef board, but that may be in theory only. Now there is still 1 minor way NCBA membership is forced, most feedyards add feeders to NCBA and put the charge on the bill. I resent this because in my case it's redundant but also sneaky. If I find 1 sneaky debit, I tend to paint the entire invoice and firm with the same brush.

One of the first actions by the checkoff was the beefquality audit that found that producers could enhance profits and quality if we'd reduce turnover of calves. I think calves were turning over 5 times. Now there are some savy players on both sides of the border that ranch a little, farm a little, and usually are making a little money. These fellows don't need to be told to hang on to calves to make money year in nd year out. So these fewer marketings may be good for cattlemen, but the salebarns suffer from reduced turnover. The salebarns orchestrated the checkoff challenge.

[oxbow]

Willocreek,

I take exception to the statement that NCBA members are forced or coerced. Would you make this case please?

[cswilson]

WillowCreek sounds like an R-Calfer he'd rather be deluded than coerced-i'm sure pinnochio must of been an italian r-calfer too.

[Willowcreek]

Oxbow- as you already said many NCBA members are forced to become members or have their membership deducted from sale price or added to feed bill in order to sell cattle to or feed cattle at certain feedlots and with some buyers. Many NCBA members were not even aware they were members. Then they had the practice that if you wanted to join your state cattle association, you had to join NCBA. Many of these are changing, hence the drop in NCBA membership and the steady rise in R-CALF members.

[cswilson]

With apologies to Karl Marx-"R-Calf is the opiate of the masses."