Big Farms

[grassfarmer]

I'm not following the logic of your last post Coppertop.

"All one has to do is look at the posts on this site and it is easy to see why
governments think they need to regulate us, because we don't know what is good
for us !!!!"

What do you mean by that? that there is only one opinion on these posts that is right and that if others disagree with it they deserve to be regulated by Government?

[coppertop]

grassfarmer don't always get your shorts
in a knot. I merely said there are
strong opinions voiced on both sides of
many issues, so obviously the livestock
industry does not speak with one voice.
The livestock industry isn't on the same
page when it comes to speaking to
government, hence, the government feels
they need to regulate the industry
because, obviously if we don't agree on
a common position, they know best !!
Just my opinion of why we are seeing so
much top down legislation coming at us.

[Sawbones]

Coppertop..that's probably the best argument that I've heard on this post to support refundable check-off so producers have a choice. Exactly the basis of the formation of the Beef Industry Alliance. If you agree with the policies of Kevin Boone and ABP, then keep your check-off dollars in place and support them. If you want a packing plant that will allow custom slaughter for value chains or one that will develop EU markets, then allow those producers the opportunity to direct their check-off.

[coppertop]

Sawbones, I don't think that the
refundable checkoff is necessarily going
to be redirected, producers can request
it be refunded and use it to go to
Mexico if they want, they don't have to
redirect it to market our livestock.
I don't know all the answers but I feel
that a plebicite would have clearly
shown the desire of the cattle industry.
That is my issue with Bill 43. Let the
people in the industry decide if they
want a mandatory check-off or
refundable. I would hope you agree that
producers who are earning a living in
the livestock industry are better
equipped to make a decision on what is
best for the industry, than 73 MLA's who
are mainly from urban centers and have
never owned a cow, much less know what
issues the industry faces.

[smcgrath76]

Relative to the topic, I think that size
does matter. One of the best ways to
protect yourself is to employ enough
people that government won't let you
fail (aka GM). I don't know any farms
in that league at present though (a few
processors maybe).
I think that I support refundable
checkoff, however I also think producers
should have been the ones to decide.
One of my issues with refundable
checkoff though is that people may
request the refund yet still reap the
benefits. A simple example could be a
producer direct marketing, who gets a
checkoff refund and uses BIC materials
in their promotions.
The greyness is that equal is not fair
and refundable is not fair.

[coppertop]

I agree with those comments. Don't kid
yourself, the feedlot that requests their
check off refunded will ride on the coat
tails of any promotional campaign to market
their product. In my area the small
feedlots and larger cow/calf operations
were all in favor of a plebicite to let the
producers decide.

[grassfarmer]

I am direct marketing, will apply for the refund and have no use for the BIC materials in my promotions. I have found the BIC to be of very little value to my marketing when I was initially trying to establish my direct marketing venture. I would phone to ask for advice on cuts, weights you get off a carcase etc and was treated as if this was not part of their job. Impression was they were there to promote generic beef sales and were not answerable to levy paying producers wishing help setting up direct marketing operations. I've heard wonderful things about BIC and their activities but that was not my experience.

Coppertop,
In my area most producers I know were also in favor of a plebicite. They have wanted one for several years and the leadership of ABP roundly refused such requests. This last minute claim for a plebicite by the very same leadership of ABP is such a bogus issue it's not even funny - I'm surprised you would fall for it.

[coppertop]

Grassfarmer, my position on a plebicite has
nothing to do with ABP's position, I feel
as a producer I should have my 'say'. If
the majority favored a refundable check off
then that is the democratic process. It has
nothing to do with my 'falling ' for
anything. Actually, most people that know
me grassfarmer will tell you I am the least
likely person to 'fall' for anything !!!!!!

[blackjack]

...while the packers have had a free ride on the backs of producers for years...what ever dollars went into BIC should have been paid by the packers not us.I am selling a raw product whatever someone else wants to do with it after that is their choice.I perfer the choice to put my dollars into a group that will support live cattle sellers not a group that kisses packer butt.What world do you live in coppertop farmers and ranchers have been living off each since the beginning of time.

[coppertop]

blackjack, if you choose to put your
money into a group that will look after
your interest that is great, however it
isn't mandated that anyone put their
refundable check off into anything to do
with marketing beef.
I live in the REAL WORLD Blackjack, one
where I like to see people allowed to
vote on any issue that affects them vs
top down legislation before hearing the
wishes of producers. The end result
could have been been the same, but at
least the government would know the
wishes of producers.As someone who
believes that people have the right to
be heard, I would have preferred a
plebicite.

[IAMTHEMOLE]

Just for clarification, the government moved on this issue at the request of the cattle industry in Alberta. It is just that ABP decided to fight it when when they realized that they were losing control. The government did not impose this on anyone. Don't believe all you read or hear from ABP.

[coppertop]

The government moved on this at the
request of the larger feedlots etc. EG;
Highland Feeders. The feud between
Minister George and ABP has been going
on for a long time, it is unfortunate
because ABP is supposed to be the voice
of the cow/calf producer and without
them being a strong voice and with
friction between them and the minister
it leaves the cow/calf producer out in
the cold. I don't think that what is
good for the large feedlots and the
packer is necessarily good for the
cow/calf producer. Most of you have much
larger operations than I do, so if you
feel that you are getting adequate input
into government policy, then I guess it
will work for the rest of us.
I would suspect that many of the same
people that raised pure hell over Bill
19 are some of the same ones that agree
with Bill 43 !!! I am concerned where
the funds will come to ever challenge a
counterveiling duty issue, because they
cannot come from government. The last
time around ABP footed the bill, and if
most producers pull their check off out
of ABP, hopefully there are other
producer groups that step up and ante up
the cost!!!

[mcfarms]

I've been waiting for someone to figure this out, whose helicopter and airplane and big donations were given to the premier during the leadership race. They cost money and now they'll get it back and then some.

[coppertop]

One or more individuals made his plane
available to fly the candidate to various
locations.
I know one of those who provided the use of
their aircraft did not seek any publicity
for doing so.

[blackjack]

coppertop.There was a group of at least 4 that made up the Beef Industry Alliance that went to govt..Two of those groups were the WSGA and BIC and possibly NFU which are cow-calf people.The ABP did not want anything to do with this group.Now that they are scared of losing the checkoff their the ones that speak for the cow-calf man.I personally do'nt buy it.