KCA members gather in Hutchinson for annual meeting

By Jennifer M. Latzke

The cold weather across the state didn't deter Kansas Cattlemen's Association members from gathering for their annual meeting in Hutchinson Jan. 26 and 27. For two days members listened to industry updates and set the next year's policy agenda during its annual business meeting.

Friday afternoon, Jan. 26, began with a round of breakout sessions covering range management, soil conservation and calcium amendments to soil. Following those, Leo McDonnell, Columbus, Mont., and co-founder of R-CALF USA, spoke about the industry issues facing KCA members in the coming year, including the national animal identification program and country-of-origin labeling.

"Some say COOL would be expensive, but we saw that they've implemented the Fish rules and the sky didn't fall," McDonnell said. He added that R-CALF supports a COOL program modeled after the national school lunch program rules whereby the government would identify all imported beef as imported and the rest on the market would be domestic by default.

"It's the cheapest way and the law is already written," he said. "The worst case scenario would be that it would cost one-tenth of a cent to add the country on the label, according to the University of Florida." He urged KCA members to stay vigilant in the quest for COOL so that the cattle industry doesn't turn out like the American sheep industry in which half of all mutton consumed in the United States is imported.

McDonnell went on to discuss the results of the most recent beef checkoff survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

"They found that 92 percent of those who fund the checkoff want to be able to promote born, raised and processed U.S. product," he said. "Don't tell me the industry is divided when you see a result of 92 percent."

As for the National Animal Identification program, McDonnell challenged that it would be a burden to ranchers and that it's wrong to have a policy of managing disease outbreaks.

"When did we go from a policy of eradicating diseases to managing diseases," he asked. At the same time, McDonnell said he's in favor of some animal health traceback, for example in his state of Montana, a rancher can't move cattle across county lines without a brand inspector looking them over. He argued that the United States has practically eradicated brucellosis without NAID and that American ranchers don't need more government regulations.

McDonnell was also the recipient of the annual KCA Legacy Award, for his work in carrying the message of R-CALF and KCA to the national level.

Mandatory price reporting

Brittany Koop, the supervisor of the Mandatory Price Reporting Program for Slaughter Cattle and Sheep in St. Joseph, Mo., then spoke about the current status of Mandatory Price Reporting and its future.

"The law passed in 1999 but we didn't get relevant data until 2001," she said. "It was just a five-year law and it expired in 2004, but was extended until 2005. It was allowed to expire then." As it stands, packers submit their information on a voluntary basis and Congress is in the midst of re-authorizing and re-writing the regulations for the program.

Koop explained that currently the logistics of collecting and compiling the massive amounts of data from all the participating packers is the cause of the lag time in information release. The packers submit two reports--a pricing file with every transaction recorded individually, and a committed and delivered report that shows how many cattle were purchased and brought to the plant for processing.

"On an average trade day we can see 4,000 to 5,000 records," she said.

Koop explained that packers submit to audits four times per year and her staff can randomly audit their records if they choose. Also, there is a $10,000 penalty if the staff find a packer intentionally violated the rules or misreported their records. Koop said that her office has yet to levy a fine on a packer for misreporting.

"If you have something you'd like to see in the new regulations you should tell your congressional representatives," Koop said. "It's going to take producer organizations to step up and say 'this is what we want.'"

Legislative agenda

The evening banquet featured freshman Congresswoman Nancy Boyda, D-KS, who discussed her plans for her first term and the division among Kansas agricultural groups.

She spoke about her first experiences being lobbied by Kansas agricultural groups with opposing views to KCA and she explained that the key issue for her is funding COOL, which garnered her a round of applause.

"As for the animal ID issue, I went to a lot of parades this past year," she said. "In speaking with people I didn't hear one person for it in eastern Kansas, in the Second District." She said a bigger issue for her, especially with her new appointment to the House Agriculture Committee is keeping farmers and ranchers who want to work the land in business for as long as possible.

In the next month Boyda plans to have a panel discussion of all segments of the beef industry in Kansas, where both sides of the issues are presented in a frank and open debate. "I'd like to have a conversation, and I know that Kansas Livestock Association is not normally on panels with KCA, but I think we should try something different and find some consensus on the issues. I want to have a respectful conversation in the hope that we could bring both sides together."

Of course, the big news out of the House of Representatives is the Democratic takeover.

"There are 18 new Democrats in Congress who were elected from rural districts," Boyda said. Obviously the voters felt that something wasn't working for their families and their business interests, she added. And, while Boyda is new to Congress, she vowed that she would work for the farmers and ranchers who elected her in her district.

Negotiated selling

The following morning found another round of breakout sessions, followed by a presentation by Luke Schwieterman, of Schwieterman, Inc., on negotiated selling and how KCA members can make it work in their favors.

Schwieterman explained that all too often cattlemen just accept the price quoted to them by packer buyers, but if they follow a few tips they can change the situation.

--Take back the higher power position. Schwieterman said that the person in negotiations who has to ask a higher power for permission always wins in the end. Tell buyers you have to take the offer back to your customer or partners for approval, he said.

--Deal with the decision makers. "It's all a battle of words," Schwieterman said. "Tell them if they don't have the power to buy, you want to talk to the people who do."

--Don't be afraid to say no. Schwieterman said all too often cattle sellers are afraid their cattle will go unsold if they hold out. "Nobody ever throws them away," he said. "They all get sold in the end."

--Don't explain your answers. "Expect them to explain theirs," he said.

--Be informed. "Know the basis versus the cash prices," Schwieterman said.

--Know your partners and your adversaries. Pull together a conference call with your peers and talk about the prices you're getting from the packers, he said.

--Fight the battle of the words and keep emotion out of the negotiation.

--The reason given is seldom the true reason. Most of the time, it has to do with money and profit, he said.

--Keep track of your winning negotiations and use this history in your future ones. "Forget the losing negotiations," Schwieterman said.

He ended by saying that he didn't expect the whole market would change overnight, but if cattlemen could get just 50 cents more per head it would be worth it in the end.

"It's not illegal or immoral to make money," Schwieterman said.

National Animal Identification

Kansas Livestock Commissioner George Teagarden discussed the history and current status of the National Animal Identification plan. He explained the reasoning behind a national animal ID database is primarily speed of response in tracking and stopping a disease outbreak.

"We ship cattle across this country every day," Teagarden said. "The movement is so much different than 20 or 30 years ago. Not only is it a rapid pace, but we're shipping them long distances and co-mingling cattle at auction barns." It's this speed, distance and co-mingling that makes it difficult to track where a diseased animal has been and from where it originated using just a paper trail--time that can mean the difference between saving a herd, or losing it to disease.

"NAID would give us one source to find animals, where they've been in their lifetime, and follow the origination of the disease," Teagarden said. Depending on the nature of the disease, a single infected animal that goes through a livestock auction barn exposes every animal there to infection.

The current system, of testing for a disease in a suspected herd costs lost time and money to producers and to the government staffs conducting the tests. Meanwhile, tracing a disease through the jumble of livestock movement just using a paper trail takes time. "There have been inefficiencies in the program for years," Teagarden said. "We're looking for a better and faster program."

The first step, signing up for premises identification numbers, is still underway in the state. Teagarden said the goal is to have 25 percent of all livestock premises in the state registered, but so far only 11 percent of premises are signed up, something that Teagarden hopes to change by educating producers across the state.

"The Secretary of Agriculture, in 2005, made this a voluntary system," Teagarden said. "I've got to tell you, in 12 years I've never seen a voluntary system that worked." He gave the example of the brucellosis eradication efforts. It used to be that we'd keep out the reactors and then leave the rest in the herd and come back and re-test, he said. "Now we buy the whole herd to get rid of the disease," he said.

When asked about the use of health papers on cattle that are trucked into feedyards, Teagarden said he'd venture a guess that some trucks don't have health papers on the cattle as they're entering feedyards.

"By law, a veterinarian is supposed to eyeball the cattle," he said. The health papers are a critical component of current animal traceback, at least identifying where the cattle have been, and what veterinarian signed for them, he added. As for those veterinarians who just sign papers without looking at cattle, Teagarden explained that if they are caught, they risk losing their accredidations and their licenses to practice.

As for producers recouping the cost of new electronic tags, Teagarden said it's true that the government isn't buying tags, but the costs of containing or eradicating a disease outbreak in the future are far more expensive than a set of electronic tags.

Disease traceback is everybody's concern, Teagarden explained, especially in this time of terrorism. "I've seen terrorist documents that show they have animal disease plans, and many that will kill whole herds," Teagarden said. "Terrorists have weaponized animal diseases." This doesn't just wreck a food supply, but can wreck the whole economy.

Jennifer M. Latzke can be reached by phone at 620-227-1807, or by e-mail at jlatzke@hpj.com.

B

1

2/5/07

2 Star EK

Date: 2/1/07

	Web hpj.com

Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2008.  High Plains Publishers, Inc.  All rights reserved.  Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com