Grassfarmer "letter"

[rkaiser]

Have you sent one to Gren yet?

Here is mine.

Feb. 4th, 2005
Reply to Gren Winslow editorial in
Feb. Calving issue Canadian Cattlemen Magazine



Gren Winslow,

I’m a bit dismayed with your comment section in the 2005 calving special of Canadian Cattlemen. I appreciate that you have taken time to mention our Beef Initiative Group in your article, however this is the second time that an article was printed and needed correction through my keyboard. David Andrews wrote a few months back about the BIG C agenda, and how it included government involvement, and now you yourself have painted BIG C as some type of socialist organization. Possibly the words of the new chairman of ABP, Darcy Davis, suggesting a socialist slant to BIG C has clouded your view.

The one and only thing that BIG C wants from the government is Bridge Financing!

Your statement, and I quote “ The government would build it, and producers would buy it back a piece at a time with a $2.00 levy on every animal sold”, would seem harmless until you read the rest of the article comparing the Democracy, and Capitalist defending ABP, to the socialist policies of Quebec. May I also remind you that this very special and recognized group called ABP is elected by only about 5% of the producers of Alberta. Even Ralph Klein gets 10 times that turn out at his provincial elections.

Publicity like this is beneficial for groups like ABP/CCA, as they don’t like the opposition supplied by BIG C to the Canadian Beef Industries American Multinational Packing agenda. If that is the position that you take as well then all I can say is that it is your magazine, and you can print what you like. If you feel that your socialist label of BIG C could be corrected, I am sure that a read of our literature, or a conversation with Cam Ostercamp or myself might be in order.

How do we get through to the public that our group is working for each and every producer of this country to change the structure of this industry while not looking to the government for any more than a bloody loan. Does all capitalist action need to come from the top down? Is nothing grassroots considered anything but socialist any more?

We learned from the ABP meeting that their would be no help with the levy and they had decent arguments to quell our request, however support for a consensus could have easily been achieved had not the chairman and some of the top end directors been so quick to put down this group as Left bloody wing.

Randy Kaiser
(403) 946 - 0228

[PureCountry]

Randy, I think the reason they're trying to paint BIG C as a 'socialist' group, and not gassroots, is that that is the key to keeping them from blossoming. If BIG C ever gets the support of producers, the ABP/CCA stand to be put into a position where they may truly have to justify their usefulness. So, what better way to keep them from a grassroots image, than to label them as the opposite.

In a way, it's kind of a psychological warfare, but effective so far. It ticks me off, and hopefully BIG C can persist through it. I feel better represented by them than ABP or CCA, and I'm not sure any true cow-calf man/woman could say that ABP/CCA represents them anymore.

[cakadu]

Not being a cattle person, I'm curious about a couple of points that you two have brought up and I hope that you can help me to understand this a bit better.

One way we used to "market" beef was on a commodity basis - the live cattle went across the border and the value was captured by the Americans. The other way I see that beef crossed the border was in a box, but that value was not captured by the cow/calf or grassroots producer, it was captured by either the feedlot or primarily by the packers.

If I'm reading what BIG-C is looking to do, it wants to spread the value around so that the producer captures some of it and gets paid for what their products are worth. They also want to ensure that the large multi-nationals are not getting the lion's share of any margins, markets etc.

The general feeling/knowledge is that the ABP delegates in particular, and to some extent the CCA, are voted in by a small minority who have "bought in" to what the ABP has to offer. Apathy runs rampant in the ABP and despite some very good efforts this past fall, voters were not interested in change from the present way of doing things. Others also put in good efforts to get producers motivated to attend the zone meetings, pretty much to no avail.

The other thing I have learned is that the government tends to look at the ABP as the voice of the cattle industry, which puts it into a unique position that I'm sure they don't want to loose.

One question that I have is with the momentum that BIG-C is building, is it too early to start on this year's zone meetings to try and effect some change in voter apathy and attendance at these meetings?

When BIG-C is successful, this will mean a great deal of change for a large number of folks, so no wonder it is such a big hill. Change in agriculture is difficult to say the least, but I do believe that BIG-C (and other progressive producers) are on the right track. There is nothing to lose and everything to gain with putting more into a producer's pocket and making the beef value-chain more responsive and equitable.

[cakadu]

ABP and the Alberta Cattle Feeders Association are considered to represent industry .
Of course Alberta Milk, Alberta Pork, Chicken and the other feather groups also are considered to be the voice of their particular species.

[grassfarmer]

It's mostly written Randy, waiting for wife to proof read it, kind of busy ploughing snow too - 13 inches here and some good drifts.

[farmers_son]

I see more socialism represented by recent payments in the form of government ad hoc programs (which the ABP supported 100%) than I do in government providing repayable loans so producers can actually sell their own produce across borders, provincially and internationally, to the wholesale and retail markets.

Governments already provide the bulk of ag lending through AFSC (other provincial lenders too) and FCC so producers can buy land, no one thinks that is socialism.

There is no doubt that there will be government involvement in assisting producers to integrate up the value chain through producer packing plants. There are programs to that effect right now in Alberta. What is in doubt is just how best to do it. Given the situation with the Price plant which is privately funded there may be some difficulty with government assisting other producers to do what these people paid for themselves.

Still the need is real and necessity is the mother of invention. Presently producers are denied access to provincial and international markets unless their cattle are slaughtered at a federally inspected plant. I believe none of these plants will custom slaughter so either you build your own plant to the tune of multi-millions of dollars or you are forced to sell your produce to the big two at their price. That is so wrong.

If I am correct it is illegal for me, an Alberta beef producer, to sell a hamburger to someone in Saskatchewan much less Montana unless it has been federally inspected. Producers should not be forced to sell their live cattle to someone else to have them federally inspected. Either change the rules so producers can market their own beef or assist producers to own their own federally inspected plants. That is free enterprise at its best.

[farmers_son]

Linda it is never too early to encourage capable candidates to run for their respective Zone of ABP. Once good candidates have indicated that they intend to run, then their supporters have to get out and campaign for them long before the Zone meeting. Phoning committees prior to the zone meetings might just remind some of the apathetic producers to get off the couch and go and vote.