Is this a plan?

[cakadu]

Took this off of the food safety net - I'm wondering what you people think about this as a plan.

Canadian Cattlemen?s Association board unanimously approves strategic plan
August 20, 2004
Canadian Cattlemen?s Association- Press Release
The Canadian Cattlemen?s Association (CCA) today unanimously agreed to a strategic plan for the Canadian beef cattle industry. The plan will assist the Canadian beef cattle industry to recover from the current BSE crisis and be better able to withstand trade disruptions in the future. The strategic plan was debated at the CCA Semi Annual Meeting and Convention held August 18 to 20 in Calgary.
Key features of the plan include increasing slaughter in Canada and delaying cattle marketings to better manage marketings to capacity until additional capacity is available. Other aspects include a marketing plan for additional beef produced in Canada, targeted testing of older animals in support of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency?s surveillance program, and alternative tax strategies and cash advances/loan guarantees/debt restructuring to assist producers with current equity issues. Elements of the plan are interrelated and must be considered together.
?We have already had extensive discussions with senior government officials on aspects of this plan and will immediately continue those negotiations now that we have the go-ahead from the CCA Board of Directors,? says CCA President Stan Eby. ?We believe that between unclaimed money in previous industry support programs and a reduction in claims to the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization Program, the strategic plan can be implemented with little additional cost to Canadian taxpayers.?
While final details remain to be worked out, the delayed marketing program that CCA is pursuing includes a voluntary fed cattle delayed marketing program and 2004 calf crop delayed marketing program. Fed cattle enrolled in the program would be held back from market for up to 90 days and would qualify for compensation for feed costs during that time, with additional cattle set aside as required over the minimum 24 month period the program would be in operation. Cattle enrolled in the voluntary 2004 calf crop delayed marketing program could not be sold as finished cattle for 12 months and would qualify for compensation for feed costs and would be eligible for a cash advance to assist with cash flow. Desired outcomes are to stabilize or increase cattle prices, and matching marketing of the 2004 calf crop to increased capacity, allowing for slaughter of the 2003 calf crop. CCA will meet with government to attain support for the strategy. Further announcements are pending.The complete strategic plan will be available on the CCA website www.cattle.ca

[kato]

The plan should have started with the suspension of supplementary quotas. Permanently if necessary. I would have thought that would be at the top of the agenda.

How is holding cattle back until they are even bigger going to help things? Just delays the consequences, and puts some more custom feeding money in the pockets of the bigger feedlots. Overweight cattle do no one any good.

I can see being paid for holding on to old cows, assuming there will be a market for them before they die of old age, but not the young stuff.

A debt moratorium that would stop forclosures should also be investigated. It's been done before.

Cash advances are OK as long as keeping the cattle longer actually increases your final return. Otherwise you are working for nothing.

[jensend]

i did a quick read through on it and have discussed it a bit tonight. i think it tries to put long and short term together so that we can have increased capacity approach supply. i think it also situates us better relative to the us as far as our approach to markets goes. if we can reduce our dependancy on the states with both live and boxed it may put the american consumer in the position of having to bid on our product rather than having it as captive. the branded marketing program is a must. we can and should compete with the americans for markets on that basis. it will be interesting to see the reaction in moose jaw tomorrow night at the big-c meeting.

[cswilson]

It doesn't seem all that terrible bad to me lets face it there is no perfect solution to an imperfect situation.

[CattleAnnie]

Although it is nice to see some new suggestions aired by the CCA regarding our current situation in the beef industry, there are some rather huge holes in their proposed plan of action.

1. If the producer 'voluntarily' withholds his calf crop, where does his annual income (yeah, I know using the word income does seem rather tongue-in-cheek) come from? I have heard word of a subsidiy of UP TO $150.00 per cull cow (and how that is considered a fair value given the last five years average price is beyond my imagination) mentioned by another source, however given that on average the cull rate is around 10% of herd total it certainly does not give the producer much in the way of an income to keep an operation afloat.

2. Where does your average producer acquire the feed, land base and fascalities to overwinter his 'voluntarily' withheld calf crop?
I run 100 head of commercial cows. My partner also runs just over 100 head of commercial cows. We are not set up to background cattle. We are a cow/calf operation, and given the financial situation we are in due to that lone case of B.S.E. last May we certainly will not qualify for extra funding from finacial institutions in order to furnish the requirements of overwintering another 200 head of animals. We are also not alone in this regard. As a matter of fact, I happen to believe that the majority of producers are in the same financial situation, ergo I cannot see how this band-aid solution proposed by the CCA would function.

Does anyone else have the same perception? I really would love to find a workable solution, but I'm sorry to say that what they have proposed is not going to cut the mustard...

Take care and keep hanging in there.

[cowman]

I doubt this is the solution, but at least they are moving forward and proposing something! Testing the old cows is a positive step, I believe?
I guess when you look at it from their point of view it is fairly bold?
I also heard Stan Eby say it was going to cost the government maybe hundreds of millions of dollars? Now I suspect that might be a problem? Ottawa isn't all that keen on spending big bucks on a bunch of dumb farmers, who never voted for them anyway?
At the very least it is good that our cattle organizations are at least trying to come up with some sort of solution, instead of chanting that the border will open soon.

[cswilson]

WEll as far as the holdback option on the 2004 calves it works for us cause we calve late and reain our calves anyway-it's not a huge deal to feed a 100 calves as far as labor goes-we just handfeed a couple hundred calves a year. The interesting thing for me is the possibility that producers will receive the grading info on their calves-knowledge is power in cattle marketings-the buyers will cut through the B.S. pretty quick if you know how your cattle will perform-remember a buyer's goal is to receive a fee for handling your cattle-no more-no less-some a great people but don't forget that they take care of themselves first and foremost. As far as government knowing inventory numbers if you file income tax they pretty much know it anyway-maybe it's time we got dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

[CattleAnnie]

I do appreciate that the CCA is working hard to give the industry some options, however I just do not have the infrastructure to carry an additional 200 head of stock through the winter (neither the feed, water, land base nor the facilities). Unfortunately, I'm not alone in these circumstances so I am curious as to what if any options are available to producers also in my position. It was nice to finally see some acknowledgement to the difficult position that young producers like myself are in, due to the high debt load of start up costs...I just pray they can help guide us through these troubling times.

[grassfarmer]

I haven't studied the plan at all but in answer to cattle-annie's question it would seem logical to me that the cattle could be held over in backgrounding or finishing feedlots - this would stabilise feedlots income somewhat.

[jtietjen]

Well CattleAnnie, I’d like some help and guidance too, but I think it is naive to believe that the boys that decide on what's going to happen are working for your or my interests. Those guys are looking after themselves. You and me would probably loose money on such a program, or if we were lucky we'd break even. Now if you're set up (like Thorlakson & his friends) you can skim a little more off the ranchers and play with the big (American) boys.

Greetings from the Peace
johann