New thread on set aside.

[ivbinconned]

How about this one. Finally a program that the purebred breeder can count himself/herself in. Tag all your replacements, bulls that will be sold as two's, and potentially saleable breeding heifers. Not much, but a bit.

Got a newsletter from the B.C. Association of Cattle Feeders today.
It reads: "While the BCACF Board commended the CCA for it's efforts to try and rescue the industry it unanimously rejected the "Set Aside" program for the following reasons."
1. That the program would simply delay the inevitable losses that will be felt by the beef cattle industry as a result of the BSE crisis.
2. That the program would waste government resources on a program that won't solve the problem.
3. That the program artificially supports the market.
4. That the fed and feeder market would be impossible to predict with the set aside cattle re-entering the market to depress it whenever it starts to rise.
5. That it does not address the cull cow problem.
6. That it could open the industry to countervail suits when and if the border opens.

Looks like lots of room for discussion on this issue to come.

On my way to meet with Mr. Haney. Want to se what they have planned for the new money going to "Exploring new Export Markets".

[CMR]

Randy are you sure we can tag our replacement heifers and bulls? Does this program limit each producer to 40% of their calf crop or are they going to base the program total on 40% of this years calf crop.
IE If some producers dont participate can others take up the slack and tag maybe 60% of their calves.

[grassfarmer]

I don't know if Randy has a fuller set of rules than me but according to the Alberta Ag website it talks of setting "up to 40% of the 2004 calf crop into this program" - no mention of limits on individual producers. They make no mention of replacement heifers but I would think it unlikely that they will be included. A condition of setting calves aside should be that they will be slaughtered someday - it is to delay slaughter of cattle afterall not boost cow numbers. If it were paid on heifer replacements some bright sparks would breed 2-3000 extra and speculate on a better bred heifer market in 2006. I don't think we need a state funded herd expansion just yet!

[grassfarmer]

I agree grassfarmer, the 40% number is still sketchy. Called in yesterday, but nothing more than the site you mentioned.

I like the thought of this replacement thing, however. Who is to say that I will or will not retain those heifers.
Lots of discussion to come.

[BigMuddyrancher]

Their is always a schemer. Someone farming the program. thanks for pointing that out , maybe it can be fixed before the real crooks take advantage.

[BigMuddyrancher]

If the program is going to have even miniscule sucess, the details need to get out to producers ASAP. Many producers in this area are marketing their calves as soon as their yards dry up enough to load them out, and would really like to know how many they can or should set aside. The grazing reserve cattle are three weeks away from coming home and most of those calves go straight to market.

[grassfarmer]

I agree, this afterall is a scheme to help market the 2004 calf crop and won't do that unless it gets going PDQ. Trying not to be critical here but aren't the questions we are asking ie are heifer replacements eligible, is it 40% of an individuals herd pretty basic? I mean if they hadn't got these things worked out did the Government really agree to funding this?

[BFW]

I think this issue is being unnecessarily complicated. The whole objective is to delay the marketing of 40% of the 2004 calf crop until more processing capacity comes on line or the border reopens to live cattle while at the same time putting some cash into the ranchers hands. Many cattle would be delayed this long anyway this just gaurantees it. As for the replacement heifers, whats the difference many of those animals end up in feedlots and destined for slaughter anyways. This is a reasonably well thought out plan so use it to the max!