• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Now Is The Time

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    farmers son: Bad comparison there with the example of the Lougheed Tories! If that is your example I think I'll stick with the old ABP boys!
    A good solid stable government that got good value for Albertans to a reckless, spendthrift crew who gave away the store! Yea maybe we'd better stick with the old boys?

    Comment


      #17
      emrald1 - I think you need a reality check as far as the ABP is concerned. I have talked to the E manager of ABP, one of the members of the finance committee, and several others who are high up in the executive. I have been at numerous ABP meeting and at Cam Oostercamps meetings. In all cases, and I might add - (the delegates freely admitted) that they would not take the sentiment of producers nor their loud and clear directive to support a producer owned packing plant to the Alberta Govt.

      I don't care if the individual delegate is in love with his captors (IBP & Cargil), however I ademately believe that it is their JOB to carry the voice and opinion of producers to Govt.

      When they refuse they should be fired or at least resign! &*^&%^

      Comment


        #18
        I was just trying to show that change can happen and all it takes is a few good people to make change happen.

        If change does not happen then we are sure to continue to follow the same path as we have. We will continue to receive at least $100 less per slaughter steer/heifer than an American producer. We will continue to be dependent upon live cattle exports to provide even limited competition for live cattle in this country. We will continue to be vulnerable to the U.S. border closing to our live cattle.

        Cowman: Are you saying we should maintain the status quo? There is a saying that you get what you ask for. If we want to see things continue as they were I am sure that is exactly what will happen.

        But let’s not forget that our industry will never be the same after BSE as it was before. The status quo has simply vanished and we cannot just go back. Cargill controls a greater share of the live cattle market today than they did prior to May 20. Some of the U.S. packers that were buying our live cows have disappeared not to mention that the border is still closed to our live cows and might not reopen for a long time. We have to change. Part of that change needs to be a producer owned packing plant. The ABP needs to get onside with that reality and it will take delegates who support that change to see it happen.

        Again, I do not know how many actually read Agri-ville but hopefully someone does and they will take a few days away from their farm and run as delegate to do their part to see change happen.

        Comment


          #19
          I certainly agree with your comment "As I see it we need the 4 volunteers per zone but we also need a majority to elect them." I guess I am thinking first things first. One step at a time.

          Based on the way the delegates voted at the last AGM the majority do not wish the ABP to play a role in seeing change happen in the industry. Although the AGM votes were by no means unanimous producer resolution after producer resolution supporting producer packing plants were voted down. These were resolutions that grassroots producers passed in the country often by large margins. The same will happen at this falls Annual General Meeting unless new delegates come forward and are elected at the fall meetings.

          Comment


            #20
            When a jury of our peers "street peons" can have a decission over-rulled by a judge what hope is there.

            You know who's in bed with who.

            Cattlemen must pay Tyson's legal bills

            by Pete Hisey on 8/26/2005 for Meatingplace.com


            Plaintiffs in the captive-cattle case against Tyson Fresh Meats not only lost the case, but must pay Tyson $70,000 in legal bills, a panel from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled. According to Tyson, the appeals court rejected the plaintiffs' argument that the case was "close," deciding that the plaintiffs had "lost every aspect" of the case.

            The cattlemen plan to appeal the panel's decision to uphold the finding of an Alabama judge, who overruled a jury verdict that would have paid the cattlemen over $1 billion. The cattlemen complained that Tyson's business practices harmed independent cattle producers.

            Comment


              #21
              f_s - I couldn't agree more with you. However as a feeldot opperator I am blackmailed into keeping my mouth shut about packers.

              The is too much appathy amongst producers. They havn't relly had a reality check yet. :-(

              Comment


                #22
                Wd40: Neither the courts, the Competition Bureau or Parliamentary Committees seem able to address the problem of packer monopolies and lack of competition for live cattle.

                That is exactly why producers must deal with these problems themselves. A properly structured and properly funded producer packing plant seems to be a viable solution, not only to me but the majority of producers throughout this country. Producers are looking to address the problem of chronically unfair returns for their live cattle themselves by creating a source of competition for live cattle rather than look to government for solutions. Producer packing plants do provide an answer and the ABP should be part of that solution.

                However unless delegates come forward that will vote for needed change that change will not happen.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Talking about politics. Isn't it funny how governments of democratic countries actually have opposition parties to deal with. Opposition parties that are often made up of human beings with ideas just like the ruling party. Not always the ideas that work, but ideas just the same. These opposition parties are partially funded by the tax base just like the ruling party, am I wrong?

                  Not with ABP/CCA. It's either their way or the Hiway. BIG C does not pride itself on being the opposition party to the ABP, however a lot of the IDEAS that BIG C follows are contrary to the dictate of ABP.

                  Millions of dollars are funneled through the ABP/CCA for hundreds of IDEAS, but repeated requests for assistance from ABP for any form of BIG C activity is quickly swashed. All activity conducted by BIG C has been member funded ($100.00 yearly membership) and volunteer time by active members.

                  Congradulations ABP/CCA.

                  I hope that people consider farmers_sons call for nominees, but I also hope that everyone gets out and supports the organised resolutions being formulated by BIG C and their members.

                  We will need these resolutions passed at EVERY meeting this fall to send the message that a Producer Owned packing industry is needed to protect the interest of the Grassroots, and Feedlots producers of this country.

                  Now is the time all right.

                  Randy

                  Comment


                    #24
                    randy, excellent groundwork and I do hope that producers get out and show their support.
                    Hopefully the newspaper ads for the zone meetings are in rural papers at least a day or two before the meeting. All too often people get darn busy in the fall, and don't pay any attention to what is happening, then pick up the paper a day after it is published only to find that the ABP Zone meeting was the night before.

                    Delegates and candidates should have phoning committees in place in each zone.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      wd40, The point about feedlot operators being unable to speak for fear of being boycotted by the packer buyers was intolerable. That made me so mad when I heard about it first and I think your hand was badly played by producers and groups like ABP. That story should in my opinion have been blown up into a big media story as it is an outrage in a democratic country. The consumers of Canada were so behind the producers, we were waiting for the Government to "investigate" packer profiteering - a revelation of this totally unacceptable behavior in the general media might have created a storm that eventually reached Ottawa.
                      Unfortunately everyone just shrugged their shoulders and let it happen, cow/calf guys didn't help the feedlot operators - when will we ever learn that we need to work together?

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Will more resolutions bring about change? Producer resolutions supporting producer packing plants were brought forward to the ABP last December. One after one the delegates voted them down. I guess it is a chicken or egg thing. But unless people who support producer packing plants come forward before this coming August 31 to allow their name to stand as a candidate for delegate at the ABP fall elections then I have zero hope that any resolutions for producer packing plants will pass at the ABP Annual General Meeting in December.

                        It simply cannot be assumed that producer resolutions passed at the fall meetings will be supported by the delegates. More important than the resolutions sent forward to the AGM is the delegates who are sent forward to the AGM. Ben Thorlakson, past Chair of the Alberta Cattle Commission was quoted as saying those that show up make the rules. Well, now is the time that people start showing up who support producer packing plants.

                        I think I have said just all I can on the matter. People either read these posts on Agri-ville or they don’t. If they support the producer packing plant concept I would ask they will consider allowing their name to stand as delegate. It only takes a few days a year to be an ABP delegate, you get paid a per diem and mileage. There are both male and female delegates. The only requirement is that you paid a checkoff in the previous year and from my point of view hopefully support producer packing plants. Even if you do nothing more than put your hand up to vote at about 3 or 4 key votes then you can change our industry. But of course your ability to influence the Alberta cattle industry will be far greater than that. Again the deadline for applications is August 31. See the link at the top of the page.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          hey cowman,I'm not trying to single you out here to pick on you specifically. I've heard this line a number of times from western producers, I just found yours to copy & paste first: "When you have Liberal politicians calling Americans bastards and morons it hurts our relationship with our best customer? Sort of like a cow/calf guy calling the feeder buying his calves, a bastard? "end quote. In my opinion the Americans are our BIGGEST customer,that doesn't make them our BEST customer. They certainly put it to us all with the ( as I call it) BSE non-crisis.We have a surveillance system that worked ,making our beef the safest in the world, what a reward we got!!!I'm a cow/calf producer and have been in the "call the buyer a bastard" situation, I held my tongue and quietly changed buyers.I don't sit quietly and get crapped on and the buyer got the picture.Quite frankly I find my smaller customers to be the best to deal with.

                          Comment

                          • Reply to this Thread
                          • Return to Topic List
                          Working...