Protect your cows grassfarmer!

[kato]

Ralph did more harm than the Innisfail cow as far as I am concerned. What incentive are they going to give cattleproducers to offer up good productive cows to be culled, particularly at this time of year when they are in calf...or are they going to be allowed to have one more calf then sacrificed ????? I wish that the Premier would just get on with doing what he plans to do about Health Care Reform. I think that Doug Horner would have dealt with the media a lot better than the Premier did yesterday.
Friends of mine came back from the US yesterday and there were already news casts about how the Premier of Alberta says to cull cows !!!!!
RCALF will gobble that up !!!

[Horse]

Wouldt it be something if we could trace BSE back to the Bull from the UK in 93 when you think about it all the cases came from central alta where the bull touched down back in 93 except mabey the sask cow that no one is sure just where she came from mebey he brought a bug with him if no cases show up in the rest of Ca there just may be a link.

[ALICIA]

Horse you just could be right.

[cowman]

Before we all brand Ralph as a complete idiot, maybe we should consider that the CCA as well as the Alberta Cattle Feeders Association have also endorsed a pre feed ban cull? I assume the ABP is probably onside?
Good science or not, doesn't really matter does it? Isn't it really all about perception...as well as getting our supply back into some sort of balance with demand?
Instead of outright condemning the idea, maybe we should hear the offer first? Consider this scenario: The government offers $1,000 for each cow born pre-1998. Totally voluntary...but the catch is any pre-1998 cow not culled can never enter the food chain? In other words if you just can't bare to part with Old Bossy, then you keep her until she dies!
I suspect, with such a deal, that we could get rid of a lot of cows and it would look pretty good to our trading partners? The figure I heard for pre-1998 cows was 900,000? If we could eliminate 700,000 of those it would sure be helpful on the supply side?
Grassfarmer: I'm shocked you don't have any idea how old your cows are! Don't you keep any records?...or were you just referring to the rest of us dumb redneck Albertans?

[cowman]

Do you honestly think that there would be consideration given to paying $1000 per cow ? My bet is that if a voluntary cull program is implemented the figure would be more like $500 per cow if that !
IT will be interesting to see how the subject is dealt with at the Beef Industry Conference coming up in February.

[whiteface]

I think what will be really interesting is how many of us can and will be "bought" by our own governments. I so get the impression that if the government offers $300.00 a cow (which is still more than many of them will bring through the auction) you will all bitch about how you're being robbed. If it's $500.00, you'll all still bitch but a lot of cows will go. If (heaven forbid!) the government offers a whopping $1000.00 a cow, I think so many of you will jump so fast and even offer entire herds for that kind of payout. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in various comments I get really irriated when I get the impression that all these "strong headed, steady cattle producers that will stick it out no matter what" will cave so fast if they think for one second there is a way out with a little dignity intact. Tell me, how many of you will offer as many as you can and fully support a mass cull for the right price...
Can't wait to see how this riles you all up.
Have a good day all.

[intr3est]

Let's take a look at four options.

1) Mass cull at $300/head, using Cowman's number of 700 000 head for a total of $210 million.
a)this could be done all at once
b)could also be done on a sliding scale for compensation, depending on how soon you get rid of these culls, after the plan is implemented

2) Testing what % of these cows make it to slaughter and testing them all.
700,000 @ $30/head is $21 million.

3) A combination of the first two plans

4) Status quo and wait for the scientists and politicians to figure it out.

I'm assuming the administration and logistic costs of a mass cull would probably equal the costs associated with implementing testing. The savings on the testing side would finance the additional equipment in plants to test everything. The plants killing culls would then be equiped to test every animal if it was thought to be needed, gaining back and retaining our export markets in the case of further positives.

I understand there is a little more to it than this, but it might be a start.

[jtietjen]

Hi everybody,

It is very interesting to read all the reactions to the current situation in the beef industry, and the opinions about how to solve our problems. After the fist case in may 2003, I was actually in favor of a sizable cow cull. The reasons being, first to eliminate the risk of detecting too many more cases and secondly to downsize our national cow herd so we would be less dependant on exports until things had been straightened out. Nevertheless I do believe that it is too late now for the culling solution. It is just going to cost a lot of money and it will not solve the problem.

Normally when we experience a problem on the farm or in our lives we look around us and maybe find a solution somewhere where this problem has already occurred. We then analyze how the problem was solved, and if we are really smart we take their successes and learn from their mistakes. Now Great Britain and the EU, or Japan for that matter have been there, done that, and got over it. Contrary to them we have actually been so lucky that the consumer has so far supported us. This is not going to last forever, and in a free society it is not an alternative to shut up the press. So why can’t we:

· Test every animal over 20 (30) month old for BSE
· Record the birth date of every calf and give it an electronic ID
· Ban all animal parts in any kind of feed
· Implement the rest of the measures necessary to put an end to the uncertainty in our industry.

Somebody will have to have the guts to do that, otherwise it will just be one quick fix after the other, the consumer confidence will erode and our problem will be of a magnitude we don’t want to even think of. Maybe we should even be more proactive and ban hormone implants and feeding of antibiotics too. Just imagine somebody would come up with just a vague link between implants and breast cancer. Even the American consumer would stop buying beef.

Just a few thoughts on the subject,

johann

[intr3est]

Johann, yes, let's be proactive and not reactive! Does anybody know the date that the UK decided to go to complete testing and also allow OTM to enter the food chain. I read a report that this is the way they are now going to go and it's going to save them 93% of the cost of compensating the producer?

[intr3est]

A mass cull and waste of perfectly good beef is just disgusting. Klein was quoted today as saying that cattlemen are telling him that everything over 30 months should be culled....won't leave too many females around will it ? As for jumping at the chance of getting $300/$500/$1000 per head, if cows are aged and in poor condition, I imagine that any producer would take what they can get for them, but selling good young cows that are productive just to have them killed in a mass cull, is another story.