Four Options

[intr3est]

I posted this on another thread, but wanted to start it as a new thread also, to get others opinion.

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(would still work out to about $300 head average

2) Testing what % of these cows make it to slaughter.
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. And take the chance of lower consumer confidence if we have more positives.

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.

[Cattleman]

IF other countries are willing to take our beef without us testing it because they are basing their policies on science, why are we evening talking about these options?
More stringent feed regulations, and removal of SRM materials from all animals feeds will mean we have the safety measures in place to have safe food.
I don't see any need at the time being to even discuss a mass slaughter. All this discussion just gets the media that more pumped up, and I am sure it just encourages R-CALF if we talk about mass slaughter

[topper]

Under option four you should include the costs of srm removal and also other costs that would not be necessary if option one,two, or three where implemented.My opinion anyway.

[almoy]

I agree. I rarely come to this site anymore as Tom seems to dominate it. We all know his opinion by now.

[lakenheath]

Thanks. At least I am not alone. I did not post this to slam Tom. Rather, to give him a wake up call and create some some positive change into this area. I get a lot of good information here. I am not a huge contribitor, but I read a lot.

[intr3est]

Cattleman, I was putting forth these ideas to also show that a mass cull does not make sense to me. So why are our government leaders talking about it. I guess my main point would be to make sure that we all talk to someone that matters and maybe we can have some quality input into our own lively hoods, before the wrong decisions are made for us. As for the media, they are part of the problem also, almost all reports have a negative or controversial spin to them and that will hurt us the most if we don't start standing up for ourselves and let the media know that we are on track. But if the current course is changed, should we as an industry not be ready to forth a plan that we are for. I guess I'm also wondering if removal of SRM's is enough to satisfy the consumer? Some would say not, whne you look at some of the ways that CJD is being spread. I for one think it is a minimal risk, but what do the consumers think? And God forbide we have more cases, but if we do? What then, I'm just trying to think ahead and not count on making changes after the fact. 80% good planning today is better than a 100% plan tomorrow.

[katoe]

I would also agree.There are a lot of concerns about non cwb crops also these days not being profitable.Then when a producer does price it seems to take longer to get paid every year especially in the pulses.

[Horse]

How about we as producers of calves try to downsize the calf and by so doing put less meat on the market 30 yr ago the fat market droped from 1400# 3and 4 yr olds to a 850# grain fed now the feeders are pushing out 1400# fats again, I guess thats good for the feeders but does nothing for the cow man isnt it about time we did something besides bitch and wait for the gov to do something.

[les]

I disagree I think Tom can say what ever he wants on here.Tom keeps us updated on all the crap the CWB is doing..

[crusher]

Have you ever heard of freedom of speech. Those that don't want to read Tom's comments can easily bypass them. At least his mind is in gear, plotting strategies for his farm and trying to think outside of the box.

[Cattleman]

Good points intr3est, I agree planning ahead is great. The government is always there and organizations will do things we think are stupid, and we will have to live with that. We have to focus on what we want to do with our business if these scenario's and not worry so much about what type of program is going to be developed.

[intr3est]

cattleman, my question to you and everybody else, HOW DO WE GO ABOUT CREATING OUR OWN DESTINY?

[intr3est]

I'd just like to add, what are our organizations doing different from the government stance? Are they following or demanding. step out of the box, forget towing the company line! We do have some power here, and being one of the top industries in the country for dollar income to the government!

[magpie]

Do we test or not if we do get everyone on side, all producers, organizations and even the consumers union.Take a page from UK, Japan and others who have been at the forefront of this disease. Force the hand of gov't by lobbying with the largest group the consumer's.

[Cattleman]

It is a good thing we did not follow Japan and the UK so far because they scared the hell out of their consumers and their markets suffered. It has been tough, but it could certainly be worse. Why waste money testing animals when the U.S., Canadians, Hong Kong, Macau will all by our beef untested?
Lets get SRM's out of the System and promote our beef, rather than say it is unsafe, that is why we are testing everything!!