Protect your cows grassfarmer!

[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.

[Horse]

int3rest I think you mised 1 0 it should be 210mil not 21mil.
Ihave been out of cows for most of this BSE and amazed that most of you with cows bitch about the numbers and prices while you keep on breeding hfrs now I am not to smart but how do you figure that is helping,but if you think the gov would cough up 1000$ per cow let me back in in a hurry.
How much do you think the tax payer is going to keep on giving just so we can be happy rasing cows that are not needed.
I mentioned a while back I think part of the answer is to slaughter some of these calves as baby beef and eliminate some of the suply I know the feeder wont like that idea but feeding them biger and biger waiting for the packers to call is not the answer either.

[intr3est]

Horse, I posted 210 mil. for cull and 21 mil for testing, where did I miss the zero? Thanks for bring my attention to this!

[intr3est]

Horse do remember with a surplus of 3.2 billion of trade in beef, the government makes a bit of tax on this. It's in their best interest to keep a viable industry with this much income and reap the beenfits in taxes.

[grassfarmer]

Inter3est,
The latest proposal to test UK OTM cattle and let them re-enter the food chain if clear is slated to start in 2nd half of 2005. It has been proposed since 2003 and may well be delayed again as the various industry parties try to work out how it will impact them, farmers, abbattoirs, retailers, importers all working at cross purposes.
It's taken the UK Government long enough to come to the decision to test - for nearly 9 years now every OTM animal has been incinerated. Until 2000 there wasn't even a policy of testing 4Ds.The huge # of cases I think currently around 184,000 (including 14,500 cases since 1997 - the strict feedban was introduced March 1996) have been diagnosed with symptoms of BSE before they were tested. There never was a mass cull of cows in the UK so why should we need one here? The UK still reported 242 cases in 2004 - and we get excited about 3?
You mention the tax benefit of a $3.2 billion beef industry - I've heard that Cargill and Tyson don't pay tax in Alberta but to the US government instead - is that the case?

Horse, why shouldn't we breed our heifers? we can't justify keeping them without breeding them and with the price of calves being low we need to sell more, not less. Any idea that we can reduce numbers and force the price up won't work as retailers would simply suck in more imports to fill their needs.

[intr3est]

grassfarmer, you mention 242 cases since the feed ban, Is the UK able to export even now, NO! So should we follow their example in this or be proactive before we get to the point they were at after their feed ban. I don't think we will get to that point, but we should prepare for the worst and expect the best. THINK AHEAD

[grassfarmer]

No I said 14,500 cases since the feed ban. I agree we need to test OTM cattle - save the 9 years dithering about it lets do it.