Keeney`s Corner

A current and reflective discussion of cattle breeding from outside the registered mainstream
 
HomeUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 COOL OUT ???

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
AuthorMessage
Grassfarmer



Posts : 850
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:37 am

Oldtimer wrote:
Grassfarmer wrote:
OT, Its funny how you always conveniently leave out the fact that it was not only Canada requiring bluetongue and anaplasmosis testing at that time it was also some American states - why didn't you declare war on them?
Funny too how the current record high cattle prices in the US are happening at a time when the border is open to Canadian cattle heading south - how come it's not wrecking your prices now?

Could it be that with the Packers running the show for so many years- both in Canada and the US that the profit wasn't there- and the cattle population is the lowest its been since the 1970's... That and a very depressed US dollar that isn't buying as much as it did....


How many years has the US industry been unprofitable since 2003?
How about commenting on the other half of my post regarding the states that required testing?
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
Hilly



Posts : 406
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : Sylvan Lake, Alberta

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:30 am

This pissant has found two more things to be thankful for this thanksgiving....

1. That I didn’t have the common cold during the Red Lodge gathering
2. That my shit stinks


Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:10 am

Quote :
Back in the 90's after passage of NAFTA I was a Sheriff getting Court Order after Court Order to foreclose on ranchers (some during the age of the Freemen)- that couldn't make it with the cattle/farm prices-


There`s always someone going broke...but it`s always the governments fault...
the 80`s...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joNzRzZhR2Y
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:00 am

Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Kent Powell



Posts : 606
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:47 am



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfraP4-xucA&list=UL

case closed + the debate is over = We cannot defend our position and depend on "Public outcry".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DNdy-gsb7Q



Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
OAK LANE FARM



Posts : 95
Join date : 2010-09-25

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:23 am

Grassfarmer wrote:

How about commenting on the other half of my post regarding the states that required testing?
The fact that Canadian provinces have no health requirements for shipments between provinces could be construed as a weakness. I am not saying that I agree and I am sure Canada would come up with a system in a hurry to deal with a health threat or problem. I participated in a Bluetounge study to prove that northern states cattle were of no risk. I don't think they found it in the cattle but they found the virus in mosquitos in close proximity to the international border. Much of the US interstate testing stuff is job security for the vets. There are plenty of unscientific ideas both sides of the border. A Canadian friend suggested he was pretty sure George W Bush and the CIA planted Mad Cow in Canada. As an American consumer I am sure that we could import no safer / high quality product than Canadian beef and that we have no better friend in the World than Canada .
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:39 am

[quote="Grassfarmer
I'm still confused on what you define as dumping - does this indicate that boxed beef can never be dumped in a country because the importer will sell it at the prevailing price in the destination country? Can dumping only occur of live cattle and if so why as these cattle too will become beef that will be sold at the prevailing boxed beef price in the destination country? Further what is defined as the cost of production - the total cost of boxed beef by the time it leaves the packer, the price received by the seller of fed cattle or the price received by the rancher selling calves? How can you determine the cost of production in another country when most people don't know the cost of production on their own units?
quote]

All beef, fresh, frozen, boxed, swinging, is based on a live cattle equivalent. I don't remember the fromula. Your costs of production were set by your country and I don't remember who. Your department of Ag or whatever you call it in Canada but it was set by your country.

As far as our record prices since 03 they have more to do with a weak dollar (not as many cattle are coming into the US because of it) and low cattle numbers world wide. The US, Canada, Mexico, and South America pretty much as a whole are all down on numbers. The US cow herd is the smallest since 1950 I believe.

As far as health restrictions form state to state be it Blue Tongue of Brucellosis we do go to war. Montana has been fighting other states over Brucellosis for the last several years. Does that make you feel better? I don't know of a single state that had anywhere near the restriction that Canada had on US cattle.

As far as the R-CALF bawling, we quit bawling and did something about our problems or at least tried and are still trying. I doubt you could hear an R-CALF bawling over all the belly aching and gnashing of teeth going on up there over who's to blame for your problems but you just keep listening to that Alberta Cattle Feeders organization (the equivalent to our NCBA which stands for No Cattle Born in America) and see where that gets you all. In the mean time it's alot easier to blame others for your problems than to fix them yourself.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:07 am



Back to top Go down
Dylan Biggs



Posts : 392
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:58 am




As far as the R-CALF bawling, we quit bawling and did something about our problems or at least tried and are still trying. I doubt you could hear an R-CALF bawling over all the belly aching and gnashing of teeth going on up there over who's to blame for your problems but you just keep listening to that Alberta Cattle Feeders organization (the equivalent to our NCBA which stands for No Cattle Born in America) and see where that gets you all. In the mean time it's alot easier to blame others for your problems than to fix them yourself.[/quote]

Jack, what my family and I have done is create our own privately branded beef label and slowly but surely built our sales over the past 17 yeras, we now market all of our own production and set our own prices. and are thus more insulated from the vageries of the commodity market. R Calf members may want to consider taking such proactive actions in the future. Then they won't be beholden to the pakers for their income, and won't feel so obliged to take reactionary measures against whomever is in sight, least of all Canadian producers who's total production is minor and insignificant relative to toal US numbers and production. The US market is the dog that wags the Canadian market tail, though the dilusion that we have some market influence is a rather nice fantasy. USDA "The United States has the largest fed-cattle industry in the world, and is the world's largest producer of beef, primarily high-quality, grain-fed beef for domestic and export use."

"January 1, 2011

* U.S.—92.6 million head
* Canada—12.5 million head

Beef imports from Canada as share of U.S. beef consumption:

* 2002: 3.9 percent
* 2003: 2.7 percent
* 2004: 3.8 percent
* 2005: 3.9 percent
* 2006: 3.0 percent
* 2007: 2.8 percent
* 2008: 3.1 percent
* 2009: 3.0 percent
* 2010: 3.3 percent

U.S. cattle imports from Canada:

* 2002: 1.686 million head
* 2003: 0.512 million head
* 2004: 135 head
* 2005: 0.559 million head
* 2006: 1.032 million head
* 2007: 1.405 million head
* 2008: 1.581 million head
* 2009: 1.061 million head
* 2010: 1.063 million head

U.S. beef production (commercial carcass weight):
2002: 27.09 billion pounds
2003: 26.24 billion pounds
2004: 24.55 billion pounds
2005: 24.68 billion pounds
2006: 26.15 billion pounds
2007: 26.42 billion pounds
2008: 26.56 billion pounds
2009: 26.07 billion pounds
2010: 26.41 billion pounds

Retail equivalent value of U.S. beef industry:
2002: $60 billion
2003: $63 billion
2004: $70 billion
2005: $71 billion
2006: $71 billion
2007: $74 billion
2008: $76 billion
2009: $73 billion
2010: $74 billion


Value of all Canadian beef/cattle exports (Canadian dollars):

# 2010

* $1.128 billion in live animals

* $1.150 billion in beef products
* $2.278 billion in total sales

Total value of beef EXPORTED to Canada 2010

* $730 million

So net value of exports from Canada to US a grand total of $1.5 billion.

Which amounts as a percentage of toatl US beef sales to a cololssal 2%.

Or as a % of total US beef consumption in 2010 3.3%

WOW, we wield a lot of influence on the US beef market.

Jack if you are interested in verifying the numbers
US Beef Trade


Back to top Go down
Dylan Biggs



Posts : 392
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:01 am

Dennis Voss wrote:



Laughing Laughing Laughing
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:01 pm

Dylan Biggs wrote:
Dennis Voss wrote:



Laughing Laughing Laughing
As our trade agreement dispute progresses, so does the art...well, the art supasses the dispute Smile ...DV said he was going to share his progress with us as he got a better feel of his new toys, and I`m sure glad...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Dylan Biggs



Posts : 392
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:22 pm

Dylan Biggs wrote:



As far as the R-CALF bawling, we quit bawling and did something about our problems or at least tried and are still trying. I doubt you could hear an R-CALF bawling over all the belly aching and gnashing of teeth going on up there over who's to blame for your problems but you just keep listening to that Alberta Cattle Feeders organization (the equivalent to our NCBA which stands for No Cattle Born in America) and see where that gets you all. In the mean time it's alot easier to blame others for your problems than to fix them yourself.

Jack, what my family and I have done is create our own privately branded beef label and slowly but surely built our sales over the past 17 yeras, we now market all of our own production and set our own prices. and are thus more insulated from the vageries of the commodity market. R Calf members may want to consider taking such proactive actions in the future. Then they won't be beholden to the pakers for their income, and won't feel so obliged to take reactionary measures against whomever is in sight, least of all Canadian producers who's total production is minor and insignificant relative to toal US numbers and production. The US market is the dog that wags the Canadian market tail, though the dilusion that we have some market influence is a rather nice fantasy.

USDA "The United States has the largest fed-cattle industry in the world, and is the world's largest producer of beef, primarily high-quality, grain-fed beef for domestic and export use."

"January 1, 2011

* U.S.—92.6 million head
* Canada—12.5 million head

Beef imports from Canada as share of U.S. beef consumption:

* 2002: 3.9 percent
* 2003: 2.7 percent
* 2004: 3.8 percent
* 2005: 3.9 percent
* 2006: 3.0 percent
* 2007: 2.8 percent
* 2008: 3.1 percent
* 2009: 3.0 percent
* 2010: 3.3 percent

U.S. cattle imports from Canada:

* 2002: 1.686 million head
* 2003: 0.512 million head
* 2004: 135 head
* 2005: 0.559 million head
* 2006: 1.032 million head
* 2007: 1.405 million head
* 2008: 1.581 million head
* 2009: 1.061 million head
* 2010: 1.063 million head

U.S. beef production (commercial carcass weight):
2002: 27.09 billion pounds
2003: 26.24 billion pounds
2004: 24.55 billion pounds
2005: 24.68 billion pounds
2006: 26.15 billion pounds
2007: 26.42 billion pounds
2008: 26.56 billion pounds
2009: 26.07 billion pounds
2010: 26.41 billion pounds

Retail equivalent value of U.S. beef industry:
2002: $60 billion
2003: $63 billion
2004: $70 billion
2005: $71 billion
2006: $71 billion
2007: $74 billion
2008: $76 billion
2009: $73 billion
2010: $74 billion


Value of all Canadian beef/cattle exports (Canadian dollars):

# 2010

* $1.128 billion in live animals

* $1.150 billion in beef products
* $2.278 billion in total sales

Total value of beef EXPORTED to Canada 2010

* $730 million

So net value of exports from Canada to US a grand total of $1.5 billion.

Which amounts as a percentage of toatl US beef sales to a cololssal 2%.

Or as a % of total US beef consumption in 2010 3.3%

WOW, we wield a lot of influence on the US beef market,

Jack if you are interested in verifying the numbers
US Beef Trade


[/quote]
Back to top Go down
Grassfarmer



Posts : 850
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:00 pm

Yes it's kind of interesting when you see the figures Dylan, particularly the beef imports from Canada as a share of US consumption. When R-CALF was campaigning to keep the border closed to CDN imports on the pretext of the huge health risk from the disease ridden Canadian cattle and beef the net effect was two-fold.
1. It resulted instantly in the highest % of CDN beef consumed by Americans in the decade - see 2004-5 figures. So if R-CALF had any true concern about protecting US consumers from tainted CDN beef they failed miserably.
2. It also resulted in Tyson Foods, Cargill and Nilsson Bros (XL Foods) making unprecedented profits thereby allowing them to strengthen their stranglehold on the Canadian packing sector (where we now have 2 companies handling over 90% of the national kill) as well as allowing them to build considerable warchests in their American bank accounts. Again an R-CALF failure.

I thought I'd include this little piece on R-CALF as a fitting epitaph to this thread - I just love the concluding two sentences.

"Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde Duke It Out
Colorado Springs, CO Feb. 17, 2007

Perhaps the industry wouldn’t be so fascinated by R-CALF’s internal power struggles if not for their insistence only they knew how to run a railroad.

We’ve marveled at the group’s split personality ... kind of libertarian/liberal/socialist/anarchist. At three conventions, we’ve observed them debating every detail in full session, as if committees of their peers were not to be trusted for even rudimentary work. Policy resolution sessions are chaotic and excruciating because no businesslike preparation has been done by a resolutions committee. The scene suggests semi-anarchists distrustful of even vote-on-every-paper-clip ultra-democracy. They seem terrified of losing their self- proclaimed “grassroots” certification.

Yet in this “open” organization, written financial reports were not available at the annual meeting until last year. Even then, the report disclosed little.

People are slack jawed now because just days after their annual convention, President Chuck Kiker was suddenly removed from office by the board of directors. Surprisingly, in this very “grassroots” organization, the members don’t vote on their officers. The board elects the officers themselves from among their own number. The officers serve at the board’s pleasure and, evidently, the pleasure abruptly ran out.

R-CALF’s split personality is well illustrated by their attitude towards USDA. Depending on the moment, they may laugh contemptuously at the agency, congratulate themselves for getting meetings with or speeches from USDA officials, lash out that USDA is not listening, try to get USDA to put shackles on others or be flat out suing the agency for enforcing or not enforcing laws and regulations. Apparently, that tumultuous and contradictory relationship with USDA was responsible for Kiker’s downfall.

We can shed some light on a probable scenario pieced together from various sources. Jerry Hagstrom, writing for the Congressional Daily on nationaljournal.com, noted that R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard had written a letter to USDA Secretary Mike Johanns in early January regarding the proposed 30-month rule on Canadian cattle and beef. Other sources confirm that.

In order to increase “access” in Washington, R-CALF had hired former USDA Undersecretary Bill Hawks – a man not warmly received by many R-CALF members at past conventions – as a D.C. consultant. According to Hagstrom, Hawks advised Kiker that Bullard’s letter was offensive in tone. Kiker sent a follow-up letter to smooth things over. Apparently, it was that letter that set off a furor within R-CALF. Our information is that neither letter was approved by the board beforehand.

The contrast between Bullard’s letter described as offensive and portions of Kiker’s letter provided by R-CALF members, are illustrative of R-CALF’s split personality syndrome.

“We recognize that the Secretary of Agriculture has the prerogative to lift the delay ... at any time,” a portion of Kiker’s letter apparently said. “We also understand that if the new proposed rule allowing additional imports from BSE minimal risk countries ... becomes final, USDA feels it would be consistent to lift the delay and allow the importation of the beef products ...

“Therefore, we respectfully request a reevaluation of the risk associated with the importation of beef products and whole or half carcasses from animals 30 months of age or older ... and that the delay on the importation of these products not be lifted until that evaluation is complete.”

Evidently, such mild language was enough to light the fuse on a powder keg within R-CALF.

We’ve seen evidence at least one R- CALF member, former officer Kathleen Kelley, was absolutely outraged over such diplomatic language from an R-CALF president. She also charged that someone other than Kiker or the board had provided input into the letter and considered even such input a betrayal of R-CALF’s grass roots heritage. She said the letter was contrary to an earlier Kiker fundraising letter calling for aggressively attacking USDA’s proposed rule, pressure on Congress to force withdrawal and preparation of a lawsuit.

Hagstrom said Kelley told him she had started the movement to remove Kiker.

Information we have obtained, bolstered by R- CALF’s website, is that after the meeting ousting Kiker, founder Leo McDonnell and two other directors resigned. No directors are now listed at all from Regions I (Montana and northwest states), Region IV (California and the Southwest) or Region V (Texas). We have further information claiming 12 committee chairmen have resigned.

R-CALF has always favored confrontation. Now it appears the group has used a circular firing squad to eliminate their Jekyll and Hyde split personality problem.

Source: Dittmer AFF"

Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:27 pm

I didn`t read all above; no point in it.... "infighting" is not unique to R-Calf; in fact, it is typical of any organization that does anything besides meet and eat...and even the meet and eat organizations are subject to argue about the date and the menu...
I don`t want to belong to any organization bigger than one; that includes R-calf, NCBA, AAA, or even the Luing Association...you and I would make two members, and I bet we would soon disagree Smile
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Grassfarmer



Posts : 850
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:01 pm

Yep, I wouldn't disagree with that Mike, I'm not interested in their in-fighting either I only included the article for the sake of the punchline - I thought it was hilarious.
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:31 pm

Dylan Biggs wrote:
Dylan Biggs wrote:



As far as the R-CALF bawling, we quit bawling and did something about our problems or at least tried and are still trying. I doubt you could hear an R-CALF bawling over all the belly aching and gnashing of teeth going on up there over who's to blame for your problems but you just keep listening to that Alberta Cattle Feeders organization (the equivalent to our NCBA which stands for No Cattle Born in America) and see where that gets you all. In the mean time it's alot easier to blame others for your problems than to fix them yourself.

Jack, what my family and I have done is create our own privately branded beef label and slowly but surely built our sales over the past 17 yeras, we now market all of our own production and set our own prices. and are thus more insulated from the vageries of the commodity market. R Calf members may want to consider taking such proactive actions in the future. Then they won't be beholden to the pakers for their income, and won't feel so obliged to take reactionary measures against whomever is in sight, least of all Canadian producers who's total production is minor and insignificant relative to toal US numbers and production. The US market is the dog that wags the Canadian market tail, though the dilusion that we have some market influence is a rather nice fantasy.

USDA "The United States has the largest fed-cattle industry in the world, and is the world's largest producer of beef, primarily high-quality, grain-fed beef for domestic and export use."

"January 1, 2011

* U.S.—92.6 million head
* Canada—12.5 million head

Beef imports from Canada as share of U.S. beef consumption:

* 2002: 3.9 percent
* 2003: 2.7 percent
* 2004: 3.8 percent
* 2005: 3.9 percent
* 2006: 3.0 percent
* 2007: 2.8 percent
* 2008: 3.1 percent
* 2009: 3.0 percent
* 2010: 3.3 percent

U.S. cattle imports from Canada:

* 2002: 1.686 million head
* 2003: 0.512 million head
* 2004: 135 head
* 2005: 0.559 million head
* 2006: 1.032 million head
* 2007: 1.405 million head
* 2008: 1.581 million head
* 2009: 1.061 million head
* 2010: 1.063 million head

U.S. beef production (commercial carcass weight):
2002: 27.09 billion pounds
2003: 26.24 billion pounds
2004: 24.55 billion pounds
2005: 24.68 billion pounds
2006: 26.15 billion pounds
2007: 26.42 billion pounds
2008: 26.56 billion pounds
2009: 26.07 billion pounds
2010: 26.41 billion pounds

Retail equivalent value of U.S. beef industry:
2002: $60 billion
2003: $63 billion
2004: $70 billion
2005: $71 billion
2006: $71 billion
2007: $74 billion
2008: $76 billion
2009: $73 billion
2010: $74 billion


Value of all Canadian beef/cattle exports (Canadian dollars):

# 2010

* $1.128 billion in live animals

* $1.150 billion in beef products
* $2.278 billion in total sales

Total value of beef EXPORTED to Canada 2010

* $730 million

So net value of exports from Canada to US a grand total of $1.5 billion.

Which amounts as a percentage of toatl US beef sales to a cololssal 2%.

Or as a % of total US beef consumption in 2010 3.3%

WOW, we wield a lot of influence on the US beef market,

Jack if you are interested in verifying the numbers
US Beef Trade


[/quote]

I don't need to verify your numbers Dylan. I know they are right. I use the same web site and have used it before. The US beef production numbers you have to watch though because all live cattle imported into the US and slaughtered here are considered US beef production. Thats why US beef production went down 2.5 billion pounds from 02 to 04 but you probably already knew that.

It was never about the numbers but how those numbers were used. The time of year they hit our markets and the fact that all the cattle were captive supply cattle when they came into the US and we were proved right by what our markets did after the BSE cow of 03. We lost our 9% export market and our markets soared. It wasn't about you as producers it was about how the packer owned cattle were being used to depress our markets.

An interesting side note. Who do you think would have benifited if the original dumping case would have been successful other than the US producers? Thats right the Canadian producers. We worked with an economist from one of your biggest universities who would not allow us to use his name because he said he would be fired if his name showed up on any of our material. He approached us because he understood that if the packers were forced to pay at least the cost of production for your cattle it would beifit producers on both sides of the border. I don't suppose that thought was ever discussed at any of the Alberta Cattle Feeders meetings was it?

Jack I picked a bad week to quit chewing.
Back to top Go down
Dylan Biggs



Posts : 392
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Some good points Jack, is there a good time to quit? Laughing
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:48 pm

Grassfarmer wrote:
Yes it's kind of interesting when you see the figures Dylan, particularly the beef imports from Canada as a share of US consumption. When R-CALF was campaigning to keep the border closed to CDN imports on the pretext of the huge health risk from the disease ridden Canadian cattle and beef the net effect was two-fold.
1. It resulted instantly in the highest % of CDN beef consumed by Americans in the decade - see 2004-5 figures. So if R-CALF had any true concern about protecting US consumers from tainted CDN beef they failed miserably.
Golly gee Ian you should be all for COOL. If only the public could buy Born Raised and processed in Canada.
2. It also resulted in Tyson Foods, Cargill and Nilsson Bros (XL Foods) making unprecedented profits thereby allowing them to strengthen their stranglehold on the Canadian packing sector (where we now have 2 companies handling over 90% of the national kill) as well as allowing them to build considerable warchests in their American bank accounts. Again an R-CALF failure.
Gee wizz Ian those three packers controled what, 85% of the kill in 1998. Whoes fault was it then?

I thought I'd include this little piece on R-CALF as a fitting epitaph to this thread - I just love the concluding two sentences.

"Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde Duke It Out
Colorado Springs, CO Feb. 17, 2007

Perhaps the industry wouldn’t be so fascinated by R-CALF’s internal power struggles if not for their insistence only they knew how to run a railroad.

We’ve marveled at the group’s split personality ... kind of libertarian/liberal/socialist/anarchist. At three conventions, we’ve observed them debating every detail in full session, as if committees of their peers were not to be trusted for even rudimentary work. Policy resolution sessions are chaotic and excruciating because no businesslike preparation has been done by a resolutions committee. The scene suggests semi-anarchists distrustful of even vote-on-every-paper-clip ultra-democracy. They seem terrified of losing their self- proclaimed “grassroots” certification.

Yet in this “open” organization, written financial reports were not available at the annual meeting until last year. Even then, the report disclosed little.

People are slack jawed now because just days after their annual convention, President Chuck Kiker was suddenly removed from office by the board of directors. Surprisingly, in this very “grassroots” organization, the members don’t vote on their officers. The board elects the officers themselves from among their own number. The officers serve at the board’s pleasure and, evidently, the pleasure abruptly ran out.

R-CALF’s split personality is well illustrated by their attitude towards USDA. Depending on the moment, they may laugh contemptuously at the agency, congratulate themselves for getting meetings with or speeches from USDA officials, lash out that USDA is not listening, try to get USDA to put shackles on others or be flat out suing the agency for enforcing or not enforcing laws and regulations. Apparently, that tumultuous and contradictory relationship with USDA was responsible for Kiker’s downfall.

We can shed some light on a probable scenario pieced together from various sources. Jerry Hagstrom, writing for the Congressional Daily on nationaljournal.com, noted that R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard had written a letter to USDA Secretary Mike Johanns in early January regarding the proposed 30-month rule on Canadian cattle and beef. Other sources confirm that.

In order to increase “access” in Washington, R-CALF had hired former USDA Undersecretary Bill Hawks – a man not warmly received by many R-CALF members at past conventions – as a D.C. consultant. According to Hagstrom, Hawks advised Kiker that Bullard’s letter was offensive in tone. Kiker sent a follow-up letter to smooth things over. Apparently, it was that letter that set off a furor within R-CALF. Our information is that neither letter was approved by the board beforehand.

The contrast between Bullard’s letter described as offensive and portions of Kiker’s letter provided by R-CALF members, are illustrative of R-CALF’s split personality syndrome.

“We recognize that the Secretary of Agriculture has the prerogative to lift the delay ... at any time,” a portion of Kiker’s letter apparently said. “We also understand that if the new proposed rule allowing additional imports from BSE minimal risk countries ... becomes final, USDA feels it would be consistent to lift the delay and allow the importation of the beef products ...

“Therefore, we respectfully request a reevaluation of the risk associated with the importation of beef products and whole or half carcasses from animals 30 months of age or older ... and that the delay on the importation of these products not be lifted until that evaluation is complete.”

Evidently, such mild language was enough to light the fuse on a powder keg within R-CALF.

We’ve seen evidence at least one R- CALF member, former officer Kathleen Kelley, was absolutely outraged over such diplomatic language from an R-CALF president. She also charged that someone other than Kiker or the board had provided input into the letter and considered even such input a betrayal of R-CALF’s grass roots heritage. She said the letter was contrary to an earlier Kiker fundraising letter calling for aggressively attacking USDA’s proposed rule, pressure on Congress to force withdrawal and preparation of a lawsuit.

Hagstrom said Kelley told him she had started the movement to remove Kiker.

Information we have obtained, bolstered by R- CALF’s website, is that after the meeting ousting Kiker, founder Leo McDonnell and two other directors resigned. No directors are now listed at all from Regions I (Montana and northwest states), Region IV (California and the Southwest) or Region V (Texas). We have further information claiming 12 committee chairmen have resigned.

R-CALF has always favored confrontation. Now it appears the group has used a circular firing squad to eliminate their Jekyll and Hyde split personality problem.

Source: Dittmer AFF"
This was about the only article Dittmer ever did on R-CALF that was accurate and it's why I no longer belong to R-CALF.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:50 pm

Dylan Biggs wrote:
Some good points Jack, is there a good time to quit? Laughing

I'm thinking right about now would be good. Wink
Back to top Go down
Dylan Biggs



Posts : 392
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:53 pm

Jack McNamee wrote:
Dylan Biggs wrote:
Some good points Jack, is there a good time to quit? Laughing

I'm thinking right about now would be good. Wink

A committed man, success is inevitable. Cool
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:22 pm

I got out of R-Calf and NCB and i am now soaring with the Eagles at Keeney's Corner and dam proud of it. Standing on the bridge expressing myself with total confidence Laughing Laughing
Back to top Go down
Tom D
Admin


Posts : 535
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 38
Location : Michigan

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:56 pm

The Little Red Hen

The little Red Hen was in the farmyard with her chickens, when she found a grain of wheat.

"Who will plant this wheat?" she said.

"Not I," said the Goose.

"Not I," said the Duck.

"I will, then," said the little Red Hen, and she planted the grain of wheat.

When the wheat was ripe she said, "Who will take this wheat to the mill?"

"Not I," said the Goose.

"Not I," said the Duck.

"I will, then," said the little Red Hen, and she took the wheat to the mill.

When she brought the flour home she said, "Who will make some bread with this flour?"

"Not I," said the Goose.

"Not I," said the Duck.

"I will, then," said the little Red Hen.

When the bread was baked, she said, "Who will eat this bread?"

"I will," said the Goose

"I will," said the Duck

"No, you won't," said the little Red Hen. "I shall eat it myself. Cluck! cluck!" And she called her chickens to help her.


TD, reverting back to the pure nursery rhymes of the good old days, when authors really knew what they were doing.
Back to top Go down
Hilly



Posts : 406
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : Sylvan Lake, Alberta

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:33 am

Chicken Little's weather forecast

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYgOFqpRIlA
Back to top Go down
Kent Powell



Posts : 606
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:39 am

R-CALF USA Issues a Baker’s Dozen List of Why Cattle Producers Should Oppose USDA’s New Mandatory Animal ID Rule



Billings, Mont. – Earlier this month, the mail-in ballots from R-CALF USA’s cattle-producing members located across the United States were counted and by a margin of 98.5 percent, R-CALF USA members voted to oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) new mandatory animal identification rule, commonly known as the Traceability for Livestock Moving Interstate rule (rule).



With the Dec. 9, 2011, deadline for public comments looming, R-CALF USA issued the following Baker’s Dozen list of why U.S. cattle producers should oppose USDA’s new mandatory rule:

1. There is absolutely no need for a federally mandated animal identification rule. The 50 states already have animal health import and export rules. Rather than impose its one-size-fits-all command and control regime upon the states, USDA should develop best practices guidelines that states could voluntarily use to develop programs that work best for them.

2. USDA’s rule to require persons that transport cattle across state lines to identify cattle is an ineffective and unscientific means of achieving disease traceability. USDA’s rule completely ignores the science-based principle that disease outbreaks are most likely to originate at locations where livestock are comingled with livestock from other herds, particularly with livestock from foreign herds, and where livestock comingle with diseased wildlife. State borders do not constitute likely sources of disease outbreaks.

3. USDA’s rule does not even require official ear tags to bear a state code that would at least enable health officials to immediately determine the animal’s state-of-origin.

4. USDA’s rule fails to address one of the most critical concerns raised by thousands of cattle producers during USDA’s 2009 listening sessions. That critical concern was producer liability. Under USDA’s book-end system, the person who applied an animal’s tag would be the primary suspect in any disease traceback, even if the animal was sold months or years prior to disease detection. As a primary suspect, the original ear-tagger likely would bear the cost of testing and retesting his/her entire herd.

5. USDA’s proposed rule requires all states to accept USDA’s international 840 ear tags that are functionally incapable of revealing even the state from where the animal originated without the use of an electronic wand or access to a federal database. USDA is insincere to claim hot-iron brands cannot be used by non-brand states while it simultaneously requires non-wand states to accept 840 tags.

6. Under no circumstances should the hot-iron brand be delisted, or in any way demoted below any other form of animal identification, as an official animal identification device.

7. Under no circumstances should feeder cattle be included in any mandatory animal identification rule.

8. Under no circumstances should the federal government mandate that the private property owned by the citizens of the various 50 states be identified with an official USA shield. This is an unscientific requirement that has nothing to do with disease traceability. If a shield is needed at all, cattle identification devices should bear the shield of the state from where the cattle originated. At least with a state shield, health officials would know where to start a disease investigation.

9. USDA’s proposed rule discriminates against and financially disadvantages cattle producers who reside in states that require mandatory brand inspection as a condition of leaving a brand inspection area. Not only will those producers continue to bear the cost of their state-mandated brand inspections, but now, those producers must also pay the added cost of applying additional identification devices and for recording those devices before participating in interstate commerce.

10. USDA’s proposed rule will significantly increase the cost of interstate movement by disallowing the use of expedient back-tags for cattle destined for slaughter. Back tags are an effective and expedient means of identifying cattle destined for slaughter and the elimination of this device will disrupt commerce, increase injuries, and add unnecessary cost to an industry incapable of passing additional costs to anyone else in the supply chain.

11. The proposed rule will interfere with, if not altogether eliminate, market driven incentives and economic premiums presently paid to producers that source-verify cattle. If USDA mandates a national identification system, it will no doubt persuade beef exporting nations to recognize the new system as a government-sanctioned guarantee that all beef produced in U.S. slaughter facilities can be traced to its herd of origin. When this occurs, economic premiums presently paid by packers for source information will evaporate.

12. The benefactors of the proposed rule are multinational meatpackers that will be gifted, at no cost to them, the right to advertise and promote their entire beef production as traceable to its source. Of course, individual producers and states and tribes will pay the entire cost of delivering this gift to the meatpackers free of charge. This is unacceptable and constitutes overreaching government interference in our free market system.

13. USDA has reneged on its promise to grant each state the flexibility to choose to continue using the registered hot-iron brand accompanied with a brand inspection certificate to identify cattle moved in interstate commerce. Under USDA’s rule, an individual state cannot choose to use the registered brand and accompanying brand certificate unless it can first convince another state to also agree to their use. USDA also has disallowed the brand even for group/lot identification, which is a far superior means of identifying animal groups as each animal in the group would necessarily be individually identified with the brand.

To submit comments on USDA’s rule no later than December 9:



By E-mail:

1) Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!searchResults;rpp=10;po=0;s=APHIS-2009-0091-0001

2) Find the entry titled “Traceability for Livestock Moving Interstate” with a “posted date” of 08/11/2011.

3) Just to the right of the date “08/11/2011,” click “Submit a Comment.”

4) Follow the instructions for submitting your comments that can be written in the box provided.



By U.S. Mail:



Docket No. APHIS-2009-0091

Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD

APHIS, Station 3A-03.8

4700 River Road, Unit 118

Riverdale, MD 20737-1238
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:54 am

Oak Lane Farm wrote:

Grassfarmer wrote:
How about commenting on the other half of my post regarding the states that required testing?
The fact that Canadian provinces have no health requirements for shipments between provinces could be construed as a weakness. I am not saying that I agree and I am sure Canada would come up with a system in a hurry to deal with a health threat or problem. I participated in a Bluetounge study to prove that northern states cattle were of no risk. I don't think they found it in the cattle but they found the virus in mosquitos in close proximity to the international border. Much of the US interstate testing stuff is job security for the vets. There are plenty of unscientific ideas both sides of the border. A Canadian friend suggested he was pretty sure George W Bush and the CIA planted Mad Cow in Canada. As an American consumer I am sure that we could import no safer / high quality product than Canadian beef and that we have no better friend in the World than Canada .

Well, well, well. What have we got here? A delicious pile of flood debris. Old Cluck Hen and E-on. E-on = occupy. Cluck Hen = cluck, cluck , cluck, want to look at a couple of my eggs? With the National Finals coming up in Las Vegas it might be fitting to have old Cluck Hen involved in a rodeo. Something like this.
"Coming out of chute #3 is Cluck Hen. Hailing from North Dakota. On the good bucking horse called "The Fence". And next we have the Canadian cowboy E-on. Hailing from Unfettered Access, Canada. Riding the great bronc "I Occupy My Little Tent"."
Hey Cluck Hen, why don't you tell your Canadian friend who "suggested" that "he was pretty sure (I'm talking pretty sure) George W Bush & the CIA planted mad cow in Canada" to take a flying, headlong, leap into the nearest gully and pretend with all reality that he's a "gully plug". I'm telling you Cluck Hen, your feed sack doesn't go clear to the cellar. You know what I would do if I were you Cluck Hen? Aw hell, you can guess can't you? Fargo, Fargo, Fargo. Fargo... Frozen brain. Nuts hanging on the fence. Fargo, Fargo...

Dennis Voss in the vicinity of never, ever... oh you get the point Cluck Hen.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: COOL OUT ???   

Back to top Go down
 
COOL OUT ???
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 3 of 4Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Discovery of a very cool brown dwarf amongst the ten nearest stars to the Solar System
» Really Cool Jesus video!
» fighting back in a lucid dream really cool
» Cool Empty Banners
» Cool Google logo today!!....

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Keeney`s Corner :: farm and ranch life-
Jump to: