viagra super force online
image description

Archives

Beef Checkoff

Beef Leader

Cody producer helps lead beef checkoff at national level
Cody — Cody dairy producer Scott George has been involved full-time with his family’s milking operation since 1977 and he says he’s slowly worked his way through National Beef Federation leadership until he landed as Vice-Chairman early in 2009.
    “The Wyoming Beef Council has to have representatives from every aspect of the beef industry, and there are few dairymen in Wyoming so I became involved with that board,” says George of how he got his start.
    George’s parents homesteaded the family’s current home place midway between Cody and Powell in 1947 and began with their dairy herd in 1954 after they needed to diversify their crop farm. Today the farm employs several people full time, milks over 400 head each day and produces its own forage for the dairy herd.
    George’s new role as Vice-Chairman of the National Beef Federation means more travel away from the farm, and more time spent on conference calls and keeping up with current events.
    “This year I’ve already been to a national beef safety meeting, where representatives from every aspect of the beef packing, shipping and retailing industries were present, all in one room,” he says.
    He details how the meeting focused on everything from the science of how to make the perfect hamburger – using a perfect mix of frozen, chilled and fresh ground beef to maintain an ideal chilled temperature – to how to best market beef in a supermarket’s beef case.
    He says one of the biggest challenges facing the U.S. beef industry today is the overabundance of middle meats. “With recent consumer trends the number of people purchasing the middle cuts of beef out of the case has dropped, which means we now have this large supply of beef with nowhere to go,” he says. “The Beef Federation has worked with supermarket managers to bring the prices of those meats down so they’ll move and get the supply chain moving again.”
    He says one of the biggest challenges is getting the supermarket managers to drop their prices, which they don’t want to do because when they raise them again to match rising beef prices their customers will object.
    “Instead of lowering their prices to meet the current beef market they enjoy those increased profit margins while they last,” says George, noting that he is pleased to have noticed a drop in beef prices at local grocers.
    According to the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, the checkoff has helped drive consumer interest in beef middle meats. It says beef retail sales are up four percent over this time last year, so now more checkoff dollars are being directed toward further middle meat promotional efforts.
    The checkoff continues to target middle meats with a campaign to remind consumers that beef is a great choice for every meal occasion, whether the meal is served in a restaurant or prepared at home.
    George names that campaign as just one of the areas the National Beef Federation currently spends beef checkoff dollars.
    The biggest challenge, he says, to the beef checkoff program today is rising costs. “We don’t even do TV advertising anymore, because we just can’t afford it. We’ve had to move to strictly print and radio advertising,” he notes.
    He says one of his biggest regrets, with budget cuts, is that the Federation’s been forced to cut valuable programs, including youth education, of which George was chairman.
    “We’ve already gone through and cut programs that weren’t as effective. Now we’re to the point where we’re cutting the good programs that have been very successful,” he says. Another program that hasn’t made the priority list is the Beef Ambassador program, and George worries the Beef Cook-Off will undergo close scrutiny in the near future.
    “The Cook-Off is an excellent program that gains beef an hour of national publicity on the Food Network, but I’m afraid they’ll let that one go, too,” he says.
    George says the over-supply of beef in the U.S. hasn’t affected the cow/calf producer in Wyoming yet, but he expects to see negative effects this fall. “Right now the feeders are losing $300 per head in their lot, and when it comes time to buy calves again this fall they won’t want as many, and that’s when our producers in Wyoming will start to see it,” he says.
    Of the dairy industry, George says it’s experienced the same challenges as beef in general. However, he and his family continue to manage their herd to the best of their ability through new tools both commercially available and invented and manufactured locally for their operation.
    Christy Hemken is assistant editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup and can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
  • SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Checkoff changes receive mixed reaction in Wyo

Alterations being discussed on the national level

Casper – Increasing the checkoff and management of the program has received a lot of debate at the national level, but what do people here in Wyoming think?
    “I think it should be increased,” says Douglas rancher Aaron Clausen, “but the increase should go toward advertising for domestic product.”
    “I think it’s a good program,” says Thermopolis rancher Jim Wilson. “I would accept the increase to $2 if they put in Country of Origin Labeling. To me that’s the deciding factor”
    “I think the checkoff has got to go up,” says Tom Wright noting support for a $2 fee or more. He also supports structural changes as outlined by a multi-organization task force that reviewed the checkoff following the lawsuit over its legality (See sidebar).
    “At a time when I’m told the Australians are levying $5 per head, yeah I think we ought to go to $2,” says Wright. He also says importers should pay and be involved in the program. “The fact is that 15 percent of our beef is imported and if we’re going to promote beef we’re going to promote them so they might as well pay.”
    Midwest rancher Frank Shepperson supports the increase, but would like to see a portion of funds directed to promoting U.S. beef. He’d also like to see the 1986 charter date removed so a broader array of organizations can contract to carry out programs funded using checkoff dollars.
    As much as she hates the thought of paying more, Converse County rancher Terry Henderson says there probably should be an increase. “The program was created to benefit ranchers and if that benefit is going to continue we’re going to have to keep funding it at a more appropriate level,” says Henderson.
    Casper rancher Bill Keith says the timing is poor for an increase. “I think they ought to wait a while,” he says noting uncertainty surrounding the drought. “Ranchers are having a tough time with the drought and they’ve cut their numbers. Let’s leave it where it is and see how things turn out.”
    “It would probably work while the calf prices stay up,” says Clara Wilson who ranches along the Cheyenne River in northeastern Wyoming, “but if they would go down, the $2 a head would most likely remain. And I have a problem promoting Mexican, Canadian and other foreign beef.”
    Doug Cooper, Casper, says any increase should be accompanied by periodic referendums. “I think the checkoff should be targeted toward specific beef products and away from generic advertisement,” says Cooper. “We don’t go to the restaurant and say bring me a beef. We ask for a steak.”
    “I also think the checkoff should promote American products, but sadly that is a complicated issue,” says Cooper. “At the minimum we should be able to promote cattle raised, fed and processed in the U.S.”
    “I think that a beef promotion and marketing program does have value and based on what it is now there has been value,” says Gillette rancher Eric Barlow. “I don’t mind going to $2, but the producers have to have a voice in doing that. I think that second dollar should be explicitly for U.S. beef and state of origin beef.”
    Wyoming’s agricultural organizations have policy on the checkoff, most often asking for some changes to accompany any increase.
    “We’d only support an increase if there’s a producer referendum to support it,” says Scott Zimmerman of the Rocky Mountain Farmers Union. Of his group’s checkoff policies in general, he says producers should have the opportunity for a refund.
    “We think it should be charged not only on domestic, but also imported, product,” says Zimmerman. RMFU doesn’t necessarily believe a seat on the board of directors overseeing expenditures should accompany payment.
    The Wyoming Stock Growers Association has policy on its books supporting the recommendations of the industry-wide task force (see sidebar).
    Wyoming Farm Bureau Executive Vice President Ken Hamilton says their national organization is supportive of the increase. “I’d like to see us focus a little more on products raised in this country,” says Hamilton. “If we’re going to start labeling our products it would be a good time to tell consumers the difference.”
    While her organization doesn’t yet have specific policy Moorcroft rancher and Independent Cattlemen of Wyoming (ICOW) president Judy McCullough isn’t supportive of an increase. She’s critical of what she describes as too close of a partnership between the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and checkoff dollars. “When I see my calf prices double I’ll think about it,” she comments. “When they passed the checkoff they said it was to increase our calf prices. They were about a dollar then and they’re still about a dollar.” McCullough also says she’d like to see promotions limited to U.S. beef.
    Jennifer Womack is editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup. Send comments on this article to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

  • SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Long-range planning, CBB unanimously passes strategy

Denver, Colo. – The beef industry long-range plan was passed unanimously by both the Cattlemen’s Beef Boards (CBB) and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) on Feb. 5. Both the NCBA and CBB will now start examining how to appropriately develop tactics to fit the plan’s objectives.
“This is a long range plan, and it doesn’t have all the answers. A lot of fleshing out has to be developed from what’s on that one-page sheet,” commented Long Range Plan Task Force Committee Co-chair Charles Miller during the CBB update session on Feb. 3.
“A lot of the tactics need to be developed, and will be developed by the various groups working in specific areas of this long-range plan. The task force did consider two very critical factors in the success of this, or any other, long-range plan that this industry needs to embrace.
“One of those factors is the development of a resource plan to achieve the desired outcomes of the beef industry’s long-range plan. What this long-range plan will take to fully implement in the various segments and components is money. We know it will take money, and from the checkoff standpoint we also know how tight the checkoff budgets are. We are stretched as thin as we can be stretched.
“The policy groups that are part of this long-range plan will have to take a very long, serious and hard look at combining their efforts to move forward with an initiative to address enhancing the checkoff program. The checkoff program will need more funds. A dollar in 1987, as we all know, will not buy today nearly what it bought then. So, this is an area that has to be looked at, and it has to be looked at from the policy side,” explained Miller.
He added that many of those policy organizations were present and in agreement to meet and talk about the issue.
Another component of funding programs that Miller mentioned was the utilization of non-checkoff resources.
“There was much discussion from members of the industry chain that are not paying into the checkoff, but are benefitting from the use of our product all the way through the line. I’m talking about the wholesale and retail, and many of the restaurant organizations. There was an open discussion about the fact that they can contribute back into the system. Those monies would not come from the checkoff side, but would be contributory for funding many of these projects and activities because, again, it will benefit them as well,” noted Miller.
The second area discussed at great length by the task force was the adoption of a practical and effective industry-wide animal disease traceability program.
“This is a very sensitive subject, and it was treated as such. A serious look at a viable and practical traceability program and system needs to be looked at because it can go a long way toward enhancing the integrity of our product and our industry,” said Miller.
“Just as an example, we talked about if we had an animal disease outbreak – one of the dreaded diseases we don’t even want to talk about. What would it do to our industry as a whole, currently? Whereas, if we have traceback, at least we have the opportunity, and hopefully the ability, to keep it limited to a specific target area and address it quickly. It’s the rifle approach as compared to the shotgun approach, and this is something the task force felt very seriously about,” noted Miller.
“Both of these components are considered to be critical to the success of this, or any, long range plan. So, it was the unanimous agreement that these needed to be a part of the system,” concluded Miller.
For more information on the long-range plan, contact the Cattlemen’s Beef Board at 303-220-9890. Heather Hamilton is editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup and can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

  • SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Checkoff checkup

Tester bill would ‘modernize’ checkoff
Casper – U.S. Senator John Tester (D-Mont.) on Sept. 30 in Billings, Mont. introduced legislation supporters say will “modernize” the American Beef Checkoff.
    In announcing the Beef Checkoff Modernization Act Tester said the beef checkoff should be used to promote American beef. Approved in 1985, the beef checkoff is a $1 per head assessment with funds in Wyoming going to the Wyoming Beef Council and the national-level Cattlemen’s Beef Board. It’s the program behind the well known “Beef, it’s what’s for dinner” slogan.
     “The slogan ought to be ‘American beef, it’s what’s for dinner,’” Tester said, noting the legislation’s introduction comes simultaneous to Country of Origin Labeling’s implementation. Highlights of Tester’s legislation appear as a sidebar to this article.
    “The Beef Checkoff Modernization Act is the perfect combination for COOL,” said U.S. Cattlemen’s Association director emeritus Leo McDonnell. “This is a common sense bill that increases the marketability of U.S. beef and strengthens the role of producers in the Beef Checkoff.
    “Today’s marketplace is dysfunctional because U.S. producers are forced to pay to market and promote their competitors’ product,” explained R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard. “Currently the Checkoff allows only the promotion of generic beef, which means all the imported beef products get to ride the coattails of the U.S. farmer and rancher who are footing the lion’s share of the bill for Checkoff promotional activity.”
    Tester cited a 2006 U.S. Department of Agriculture Survey of about 8,000 American ranchers.  An overwhelming 92 percent of those surveyed said they wanted to see Checkoff money used to promote U.S. beef. Tester’s bill is S. 3404.
    In a Sept. 30 statement the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association supported the checkoff but didn’t take a position on the pending legislation or its individual elements. “As a producer-funded, producer-directed and producer-administered program, the current beef checkoff enjoys high producer support,” said the NCBA statement. “Seven in 10 producers support the beef checkoff and that support has been constant for several years, according to annual producer surveys.”
    The NCBA statement continued, “The Beef Checkoff Program has contributed to an increase in beef demand, has defended our product from crises like BSE and continues to be the best way for producers to ensure consumers – here and in countries around the world – continue to love U.S. beef. NCBA will be actively involved in discussions about this and any other bills regarding the beef checkoff.
Most importantly, any changes to the Beef Checkoff Program should build upon the success and efficiencies of current program and maintain producer oversight of their checkoff dollars through state beef councils and the Beef Promotion Operating Committee.”
    Jennifer Womack is managing editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup and can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
  • SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

NCBA says increase checkoff

 LMA support hinges on key changes

Reno, Nev. – Meeting in Reno, Nevada early February members of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association expressed their support for an increase in the beef checkoff assessment.
    “Twenty plus years of inflation have really eroded the beef checkoff’s ability to fulfill all the expectations we have placed on it over the years,” said NCBA President John Queen. “And increases in beef production have come primarily from higher cattle weights, rather than herd expansion. That’s another reason revenues don’t keep up with the industry’s needs. We’re producing more beef, but the revenue we need to market it doesn’t keep pace.”
    While NCBA is one of several contractors that manage checkoff-funded programs, it doesn’t collect the checkoff or determine the assessment rate. Collection and expenditure of the checkoff rest with the Cattlemen’s Beef Board at the national level, while state beef councils manage the state portion. Any increase in the $1 per head rate would require action by Congress to amend the Beef Promotion and Research Act.
    Cattlemen directed NCBA to ask Congress to approve a process that will allow producers to vote on enhancements to their Beef Checkoff Program.
     “All we’re asking Congress to do is empower cattle producers with a referendum process, so they can control the destiny of their checkoff,” said incoming NCBA Policy Division Chairman Bill Donald, a rancher from Melville, Mont. “Producers will decide whether to increase the checkoff assessment, but this will put the procedure in place that allows them to do that.”  
     NCBA members declined to ask for a specific increase in the checkoff rate, but did request that Congress ensure that the program is adequately funded.
     “The sense of the cattlemen at this convention is that $2 per head (a $1 increase) would adequately fund the program at this point in time,” said Donald. “But that can change over time, which is why we didn’t include a specific rate in today’s resolution.”
     Other proposed changes to the Beef Checkoff Program supported by NCBA include:
     Simplifying the petition process that determines whether a referendum will be held on continuation of the checkoff. A valid petition signed by 10 percent of the nation’s cattle producers would trigger USDA to hold a referendum within one year.
    Establish a similar petition/referendum process for future increases in the checkoff assessment. This would allow cattlemen to approve or disapprove a proposed increase, without taking the question back to Congress.
    Eliminate any reference to their charter date in determining whether organizations are eligible to manage checkoff-funded programs. Currently, some livestock organizations are not eligible because they were formed after 1986.
    NCBA members also discussed whether the checkoff should be used to specifically promote U.S. born and raised beef. Currently, U.S. beef is specifically promoted only in foreign markets, while domestic programs promote all beef. This is due in part to the fact that assessments on imported cattle and beef account for about 11 percent (roughly $8 million per year) of Beef Checkoff Program revenues. Members directed that by June 1, NCBA report back to members of its Agriculture Policy Committee with amendment options to address this issue. But the resolution specifies that options maintaining the assessment on imported cattle and beef should be strongly considered.
    The Livestock Marketing Association, a party in the legal challenge to the checkoff that was decided earlier this decade, responded to NCBA’s action on Feb. 11. A policy proposal approved by the LMA board of directors and membership last year conditioned LMA’s support for any increase in the checkoff on five enhancements to the program. They are:
•    A producer referendum every five to seven years on continuing the program.
Beef, dairy and veal producers be allowed to vote on any increase.
•    Checkoff dollars be used to promote U.S. born and raised beef.
•    “All interested, qualified entities” be permitted to contract with the Cattlemen’s Beef Board to conduct checkoff-funded projects.
•    Checkoff funds currently collected by state beef councils and remitted to the Federation of State Beef Councils for national beef research, promotion and other projects, be redirected to the CBB for budgeting to national projects.
    NCBA’s policy now goes out to its entire membership for approval. Convention results become official only after this mail-in ballot process concludes in March.
    The Wyoming Livestock Roundup is Wyoming’s leading agricultural news source. Send comments on this article to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

  • SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
generic dapoxetine priligy
keflex antibiotics