Since I attended the AAW Syngenta Leadership Training in Phoenix in Mid April 2011 I have been going to start a blog. My reason for not doing so thus far is I couldn’t think of a catchy name that people would gravitate towards. You know names like Rose Colored Glasses, Over Easy, Sometimes Scrambled or my favorite Trailerhood Aristocrats. I also hesitate to blog for fear of causing ill feelings among the folks who are on a different side of some Ag issues. After all, my goal is to promote Agriculture not drive folks away because of a differing view point. Today that all changed, I need to make my story known, give the other side of the issues so everyone can be informed and make wise decisions. While I am an advocate of everyone’s right to their own opinion I feel it is my duty to give my side and let the chips fall where they may. Why? Because the two little people who live next door deserve a chance to do what their daddy, grandpa and great grandpa have done all their lives. They need to be able to live in the greatest country in the world and if they wish to feed America they ought to be able without unfair restrictions and limitations. So while my name might not be catchy and there aren’t many if any photos here I go.
I read a post on facebook this morning concerning the how the beef board was going to change the status quo. For many years I have been a big fan of the beef check-off. I worked hard to get it passed many years ago and have willingly paid my $1.00 per head to promote beef. Recently things have come to light that have caused me to doubt my support. The first of which was the issue of what beef check dollars were being used for besides promoting beef. The second is the CBB’s (Cattleman’s Beef Board) support and financial help to the U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance (USFRA), which I assume the beef board is going to use to change the status quo. According to an article in the June 2011 Livestock Market Digest written by Lee Pitts this organization has set up their structure and the construction of their board of directors as follows; “ the minimum buy in is $50,000 and any firm that donates $500,000 automatically becomes an ex-officio member of the board of directors.” So where does that leave the small independent cattle producer? What chance do Independent organizations like R-CALF, USCA and OCM have at getting a seat at the table or for that matter in getting their message heard by politicians in Washington DC? These groups believe that cattle producers and cattle producers alone should have total say in what needs to be done for their best interests, all members get a vote on all policies and only producers can vote. Beef packers, drug companies and other livestock interests do not direct policy for cattlemen. This is the way it should be. So, what does the beef board have to do with all of this? According to Pitts the check off so far has donated $250,000 to the USFRA. While the mission of the USFRA which is to promote agriculture, food products, to the American consumer is laudable, the way of going about it, i.e. who can bring the most money to the table is suspicious to say the least.
So, if you are still awake and have read to this point my message is that it shouldn’t be about how much money a group can ante up for a cause. It should be about what is right for all those involved in Agriculture. Until everyone has a seat at the table and contributes to the goal unified agriculture promotion doesn’t have a chance.
