What's up with R-calf

Help Support CattleToday:

dun

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
47,334
Reaction score
1
Location
MO Ozarks
From the cow-calf weekly

Our Perspective
R-Calf's Threatened Suit Is Detrimental To The Industry
Everyone understands that part of any organization's mission is to grow its membership. It's also understandable that an organization will accept and even advocate policy from time to time that might be less than perfect in order to achieve a larger goal.

But, the pursuit of power and the adherence to one goal must also have its limits. The industry shouldn't allow these power struggles to hurt the industry.

The threatened action this week by R-Calf to sue USDA over reopening of the Canadian border is a prime example of overzealous advocacy. Without question, this R-Calf action will negatively influence consumers' perception of the safety of our food supply. It also would advocate a move away from the principle that countries should abide by the accepted science in making trade decisions.

Certainly, there's a segment of the cattle industry that would like to withdraw from the global economy altogether, and supports an isolationist trade policy. However, the majority of producers support a marketplace where the U.S. producer is able to sell the highest quality, grain-fed beef to the growing global market, while ensuring a level playing field for international trade based on sound science.

They understand that while there have been, and likely always will be, some difficulties with international trade, the largest opportunity for growth resides with the growing middle class in the 96% of the world's population that lives outside U.S. borders. They also understand that despite the problems with international trade, the net result has been a plus for the industry.

In addition, these folks understand the key to creating a workable system of international trade is to have it based on sound science, not by erecting trade barriers in answer to trade barriers.
-- Troy Marshall

Time To Forget About Selecting For "Convenience" Traits
The logic is inescapable -- there is no such thing as a "convenience" trait. Jim Gosey, University of Nebraska beef breeding specialist, says it best. "Having a trouble-free cowherd isn't a luxury, it's a necessity," he says.

Traits like calving ease, disposition, fertility, fleshing ability, mature size, udder quality, structural correctness, and a myriad of other traits that combine to make a cowherd functional, aren't nice options or add-ons to the main package. They are the foundation. The term "convenience" traits sends the absolute wrong message about their place in selection priorities. A more appropriate term is "necessity" traits.

Though the necessity traits are of primary importance to the economic well being of an operation, they've been losing ground to more-easily measured -- and used -- performance traits like growth, and carcass traits.

But, breed associations and progressive seedstock suppliers have discovered these important traits can be measured and used within contemporary groups in the same manner as other performance traits. As a result, the industry is seeing a whole new array of EPDs and genetic measures being developed to describe the maternal complex.

Unfortunately, as in any industry, there's a reluctance to change, especially among those who perceive a potential risk by incorporating necessity traits into genetic evaluation programs. While the majority of breeds now offer calving-ease EPDs, and are developing fertility and longevity measures, there are still genetic providers and breed associations not providing such tools to the commercial industry.

It's time for commercial cattlemen to demand their seedstock suppliers collect and provide this information to their customers.

The use of technologies like embryo transfer and ultrasound for carcass traits has created tremendous opportunities for selecting for improved performance. But with that increased selection pressure and genetic change, there's also a corresponding need to measure and ensure functionality traits. The risk to the bottom-line performance of commercial operations is too high to continue to purchase genetics without the benefit of the proven tools we have available to us.
-- Troy Marshall
 

sillco

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2003
Messages
186
Reaction score
0
Location
Louisiana Native in South Central Wisconsin, USA
dun":1bbovqiz said:
From the cow-calf weekly

Our Perspective
R-Calf's Threatened Suit Is Detrimental To The Industry
Everyone understands that part of any organization's mission is to grow its membership. It's also understandable that an organization will accept and even advocate policy from time to time that might be less than perfect in order to achieve a larger goal.

But, the pursuit of power and the adherence to one goal must also have its limits. The industry shouldn't allow these power struggles to hurt the industry.

The threatened action this week by R-Calf to sue USDA over reopening of the Canadian border is a prime example of overzealous advocacy. Without question, this R-Calf action will negatively influence consumers' perception of the safety of our food supply. It also would advocate a move away from the principle that countries should abide by the accepted science in making trade decisions.

Certainly, there's a segment of the cattle industry that would like to withdraw from the global economy altogether, and supports an isolationist trade policy. However, the majority of producers support a marketplace where the U.S. producer is able to sell the highest quality, grain-fed beef to the growing global market, while ensuring a level playing field for international trade based on sound science.

They understand that while there have been, and likely always will be, some difficulties with international trade, the largest opportunity for growth resides with the growing middle class in the 96% of the world's population that lives outside U.S. borders. They also understand that despite the problems with international trade, the net result has been a plus for the industry.

In addition, these folks understand the key to creating a workable system of international trade is to have it based on sound science, not by erecting trade barriers in answer to trade barriers.
-- Troy Marshall

Time To Forget About Selecting For "Convenience" Traits
The logic is inescapable -- there is no such thing as a "convenience" trait. Jim Gosey, University of Nebraska beef breeding specialist, says it best. "Having a trouble-free cowherd isn't a luxury, it's a necessity," he says.

Traits like calving ease, disposition, fertility, fleshing ability, mature size, udder quality, structural correctness, and a myriad of other traits that combine to make a cowherd functional, aren't nice options or add-ons to the main package. They are the foundation. The term "convenience" traits sends the absolute wrong message about their place in selection priorities. A more appropriate term is "necessity" traits.

Though the necessity traits are of primary importance to the economic well being of an operation, they've been losing ground to more-easily measured -- and used -- performance traits like growth, and carcass traits.

But, breed associations and progressive seedstock suppliers have discovered these important traits can be measured and used within contemporary groups in the same manner as other performance traits. As a result, the industry is seeing a whole new array of EPDs and genetic measures being developed to describe the maternal complex.

Unfortunately, as in any industry, there's a reluctance to change, especially among those who perceive a potential risk by incorporating necessity traits into genetic evaluation programs. While the majority of breeds now offer calving-ease EPDs, and are developing fertility and longevity measures, there are still genetic providers and breed associations not providing such tools to the commercial industry.

It's time for commercial cattlemen to demand their seedstock suppliers collect and provide this information to their customers.

The use of technologies like embryo transfer and ultrasound for carcass traits has created tremendous opportunities for selecting for improved performance. But with that increased selection pressure and genetic change, there's also a corresponding need to measure and ensure functionality traits. The risk to the bottom-line performance of commercial operations is too high to continue to purchase genetics without the benefit of the proven tools we have available to us.
-- Troy Marshall

I guess there is a struggle between the NCBA and R-Calf as to who the beef industry should cater to. The NCBA looks at the entire beef industry, including imports and large corporate interest while R-Calf looks out for US beef producers.

Troy Marshall seems to think NCBA is totaly correct. The corporations are the answer to all marketing systems and should be supported by all cattle producers. His statements support the total corporate international trade program that repersents only 10% of our production in this country.

I am a member of NCBA, but I don't always agree with them on all issues. I disagree ith NCBA on the COOL issue. I think it will promote US produced beef. There argument is that only a small amount of beef offered in the meat case is not US produced beef. I still think if a consumer knows which is which they will pick US produced over imported beef most of the time and they will be willing to pay more for it.

As for as the Corporations go, I think they have gotten too strong and are influencing our govermant and our way of like in this country is being treathened We are loosing the middle class and that is what makes America strong.
 

Latest posts

Top