Posted on 08/25/2007 12:40:16 PM PDT by george76
Eric Nelson, a fourth-generation rancher and farmer who operates a feedlot, isn't looking for more government cash. He just wants a little help from the Senate when it debates a farm bill this fall.
Nelson and many other family ranchers in the Midwest and West are hoping Congress can help them fight the gradual consolidation of the meat industry, which they say is hurting their business. A handful of large meatpacking companies slaughtered 80 percent of steers and heifers in 2005, up 30 percent from 20 years ago.
"We just want a level playing field, an environment in which we can be profitable," Nelson said. "Give us true competition and we'll take care of ourselves."
Ranchers with smaller operations have long sought changes in the law that would help stem competition from the larger companies. With new political dynamics in Congress, they could happen this year.
The changes are bound to face strong opposition from some cattle groups. The National Cattlemen's Beef Association, which represents many of the larger meatpackers, says changing the way the cattle business operates is a challenge to the free market.
"We have no doubt we will have to continue to explain why a cattleman should continue to be able to sell cattle to whoever he wants," said Jay Truitt, a lobbyist for NCBA.
The Senate passed a ban on packer ownership of cattle as part of debate on the 2002 farm bill, but the provision was dropped in negotiations with the House.
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.myway.com ...
.
Yup. That’s what usually happens when the government tries to protect family ranchers.
In 1776 more than 80% of Americans were farmers. Today it’s less than 1%. This is a continuation of a 200 year old process.
I wonder how this will affect one small rancher I know. He realized that his normal ranching practices qualify as “organic, free range, grass fed beef”, got registered, and now operates a very small processing plant (30 beeves a week or so) and sells directly to regional restaurants. So, he owns the herd, and owns the plant, and owns the distributing... and provides jobs to about 60 households in a very small, economically depressed area.
Today’s livestock operation is to the meat industry what a steel factory is to the 18th-century blacksmith. It is a huge factory designed to disassemble animals for purposes of human feed. It is massive, impersonal, and an inevitable evolution of the process. Small feeders are a thing of the past, unless they are so small they can operate without any economies of scale.
Great! This is the way America should work. We all need to cultivate the small meat providers. I’m buying locally since hearing about Swift’s muslim problem. Most smaller rural communities have a local meat cutter to accomodate the farmers who want a beef cut. These small cutters will cut, package and label your beef any way you want it. Some of them also store it for you.
It will be interesting to see how this works in rural America.
We see many family ranchers and sheep herders forced off public lands by Sierra Club lawyers who get allotments “vacated.”
The free range is closed.
“I wish I knew how to quit you!”
If 80% of Americans were farmers now, we could feed this planet and three more like it.
Except there wouldn’t be anyone out there making the tractors, trucks, and cars that all those farmers would need to get their products and themselves to markets.
Why should cattle ranchers and sheepherders in some parts of the country get essentially free federal grazing land provided to them by the government, when in other areas beef producers have to own or lease their grazing land?
It is not “ essentially free federal grazing land ...”
They pay the market price in cash and do mandated upgrades required and supervised by the forest service or BLM.
The next takeover monopoly run by the one-worlders - Big Meat!
80 percent in 2005, up 30 percent from 20 years ago.
It isn’t free. It is a lease.
And when the environmentalists get their way in court and reduce or eliminate grazing, you taxpayers get to pay millions upon millions of dollars to fight wildland fires over millions of acres.
When ranchers are grazing the land, the money is flowing from the rancher’s pockets to the BLM, ie, the taxpayer’s pockets.
When the environmentalists get their way, the money is hemorrhaging from your (the taxpayers’) pockets into the pockets of the BLM, people who are employed by the BLM as summer firefighters and fire-fighting contractors, then re-seeding/re-vegetation specialists, etc.
Which way would you like the money to flow?
This is the government and Oprah. Ranchers, “we take away from you”.
BTW, I’ve seen figures over $8,000 per year to range only 100 head. ...sparse hay only grows about 6-8 inches, only ~ 12.5 inches of rain per year. It’s actually mostly sage.
Thanks.
Family ranchers are not getting rich nor getting free grazing land. The opposite is the case.
With all the vacated allotments, our beef and sheep supply may soon be over 95 percent feed lot production.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.