Category Archives: Livestock

GIPSA Debate on AgWired

Posted on by

A story about comments Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) made this week regarding USDA’s proposed GIPSA livestock marketing regulations has generated a flood of comments, thanks to an organized campaign by R-CALF USA.

The Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America, better known as R-CALF, took exception to the senator’s remarks during a Senate Agriculture Committee Hearing on the State of U.S. Livestock and sent out a communique to members encouraging them to make comments on the post, calling it a “rare opportunity to defend the GIPSA rule against packer lackeys.”

R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard says Sen. Roberts made “a personal attack against GIPSA Administrator Dudley Butler in an attempt to kill the GIPSA rule” so he returned fire with his own personal attack on the senator:

“Senator Pat Roberts made the most dishonorable and repulsive opening statement that anyone could possibly make at a congressional hearing. Whether you support USDA’s proposed GIPSA rule or not, every American should be appalled at Senator Robert’s theatrics. He lied. He outright lied. Senator Roberts knows, and all his staff knows, that GIPSA Administrator Dudley Butler NEVER said that the proposed GIPSA rule is a lawyer’s dream.”

There have been ethical concerns raised about Butler being in charge of livestock regulations, since he is a trial lawyer who has sued meat and poultry companies and the referenced quote is from a speech Butler made in August 2009 to the Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM), where he said “When you have a term like ‘unfair, unreasonable or undue prejudice,’ that’s a plaintiff lawyer’s dream.”

The proposed GIPSA rule, which would have a significant impact on the marketing and production of livestock and poultry, is obviously a contentious and divisive topic for the industry but it would help if there were more constructive dialogue and less name calling.

GIPSA Heating Up

Posted on by

It’s been almost exactly a year since USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) published a controversial proposed rule that would fundamentally change the way livestock is marketed in this country, and those opposed to it remain hopeful that the proposal itself will be fundamentally changed – or just eliminated.

Colin Woodall with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) says they are encouraged that the U.S. House of Representatives could vote soon on the 2012 agriculture appropriations bill, which includes language to defund the proposed GIPSA rule. “So we are really working hard to make sure we preserve that language,” Colin says in the latest Beltway Beef Commentary. He encourages cattle producers and others in the industry to contact their Congressional representatives and send a signal to the secretary that we’re “serious about this rule being a huge burden on cattle producers.”

USDA’s official position on the appropriations language is that “The final rule has not yet been published and any concerns about the rule are better addressed through the standard rulemaking process than through an appropriations rider.”

Earlier this month, American Farm Bureau Appropriations Specialist R.J. Karney said they also believe funding for the rule should stay in place. “We want USDA to be able to review the 60,000 comments that were provided and also continue the economic analysis regarding this procedural rule,” he said. Colin explained that NCBA has a long-standing relationship with AFBF, “so this is not an issue that NCBA is now breaking a relationship with Farm Bureau, this is specific to trying to make sure that everybody understands exactly what this GIPSA rule does…take away marketing opportunities for cattle producers.”

Pork producers also remain concerned about the proposed rule. “The rule is so vague, we don’t know where it stands,” said National Pork Producers Council past president Sam Carney of Iowa at World Pork Expo last week. He says they are anxious to see what the USDA economic analysis will say, but that is not expected to be out until the fall.

Listen to or download Sam’s comments here: Iowa pork producer Sam Carney

I Am Angus Spotlights Temple Grandin

Posted on by

temple grandinTemple Grandin is a doctor of animal science and professor at Colorado State University, bestselling author, and consultant to the livestock industry on animal behavior. She is also widely noted for her work in autism advocacy and is the inventor of the hug machine designed to calm hypersensitive persons.

Her autism advocacy has made her famous in the general population, thanks to the HBO movie starring Claire Danes, but she’s a hero in the cattle industry for her groundbreaking work in animal welfare and reforming livestock handling practices in beef industry. She is the focus of this episode of “I Am Angus.”

Winter Weather Woes for Livestock

Posted on by

Cattle producers around the country have been busy this winter trying to care for their animals in particularly harsh weather.

cow snowIce, snow and freezing temperatures mean lots of extra work to feed and water cattle and there were lots of producers who were unable to make the trip to Denver last week for the Cattle Industry Convention because of that. There have even been reports of barns collapsing and killing cattle. USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) officials are reminding livestock producers throughout the Plains states and the Midwest that FSA programs may be available to assist them.

“This is turning out to be a tough winter for many ranchers and farmers in the nation’s heartland, and learning about our FSA programs is an important step for producers to take,” FSA Administrator Jonathan Coppess said in a release last week. “We need producers to document the number and kind of livestock that have died as a direct result of these winter storms and timely notify their local FSA office of these losses. There may be situations where producers are transporting feed to their livestock. Producers should document these additional costs.”

FSA administers several programs that help producers recover from livestock deaths that are beyond normal mortality rates, losses of purchased and/or harvested forage, and with the additional costs of providing or transporting feed.

Here in mid Missouri, we still have a foot or more of snow in some areas after last week’s storm that dumped about 20 inches. The photo is from Brownfield Network’s Cyndi Young-Puyear who has a cow-calf operation with her husband Jim not far from the state capitol. She’s really proud of her little black and white striped calf and she reports on Facebook that the snow hasn’t slowed little “Oreo Speedwagon” down a bit!

Using Alge to Improve Ag Sustainability

Posted on by

Agriculture often gets a bad wrap on the sustainability scale but growers know that they aren’t going to jeopardize their livehoods and they are great stewards of the land. But for those growers who are still looking for some unique ways to be a little “greener” with their operations, they should consider algae.

Kent Bioenergy has its roots in aquaculture. The company was a pioneer in fish farms and needed a way to clean the water. Enter algae. Over time, the company has discovered how to harvest the algae and the co-products can be used for a variety of things depending on where the nutrients came from to grow the algae.

For example, Barry Toyonaga, Ph.D. who is the Chief Business Officer for the company, explained that they have been working with growers and livestock, dairy and hog producers to use algae as a way to reduce normal agricultural run-off.

Most of the waste is unused fertilizer coming straight off farm land and so if our algae is just recapturing the used fertilizer, and we’re harvesting that algae, its really a renewable resource for fertilizer,” explained Toyonaga.

What is especially interesting about using algae to capture run-off is that the agriculture industry is being criticized for causing “Dead Zones” in the ocean, areas where marine life cannot be supported due to depleted oxygen levels. Integrating algae can reduce this run-off, and help to remove the criticism that agriculture is causing this problem. It’s also beneficial for the grower because once the algae is harvested, it can be “reused” on the farm as an organic fertilizer, reducing costs and reducing another common criticism launched against agriculture – using fossil-fuel based inputs.

Toyonaga truly believes that his company is on to something and they are trying to interest both the agricultural community and the USDA in the technology. So if you’re a grower who is open to trying something new, considering reaching out to Kent Bioenergy.

To learn more about how integrating algae into your farm or livestock operations, listen to my interview with Barry here. Barry Toyonaga interview

You can also view photos from my San Diego Algae Tour here.

NCBA Submits Comments on GIPSA Rule

Posted on by

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) today submitted official comments on behalf of its membership to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) regarding its proposed rule on livestock and poultry marketing. Colin Woodall, NCBA vice president of government affairs, says the comments submitted to USDA represent a thorough review of the potential consequences the proposed rule will have on the U.S. beef cattle industry.

“This rule we think is government at its absolute worst,” Woodall says. “The liability changes in this rule are going to open up the cattle marketplace to trial attorneys and we’re going to have a situation where we have trial attorneys, the court system and USDA dictating what a fair price is for an animal and that’s just unacceptable.”

Listen to or download some GIPSA comments from Colin here: Colin Woodall

NCBA, along with other producer organizations that will be affected by the rule, recently released a economic impact study by Informa Economics which found that rule would result in ongoing direct and indirect costs to the livestock and poultry industries – eventually borne by producers and consumers – of more than $1.64 billion, including nearly $880 million to the beef industry. (Read report here)

Listen to Rob Murphy with Informa explain the results of the study: Informa GIPSA Study

According to NCBA, provisions in the proposed rule causing the most concern for cattlemen and women include: eliminating the requirement that a plaintiff establish injury to competition in order to prove a claim under Section 202 of the PSA, purport to define “competitive injury” and the likelihood thereof, and declare that specific acts or practices are “unfair, unjustly discriminatory or deceptive under Section 202; suggesting the factors which may establish an undue or unreasonable preference under Section 202(b) of the PSA; prohibiting sales of livestock by a packer to another packer or its affiliates; and requiring the production and publication of all cattle marketing and production contracts.

The comment period for the proposed rule ends November 22. Over 24,000 comments have been submitted so far and it is very easy to do – just click here and type in your contact info and comments and it goes right to the Federal Register.

Informa Study Finds Economic Losses Under GIPSA Rule

Posted on by

An Informa Economics study on the economic impact of the proposed GIPSA rules finds it could cost the economy $1.5 billion and nearly 23,000 jobs. The study, which was conducted on behalf of meat industry organizations, was released today in Kansas City by representatives of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Pork Producers Council, National Turkey Federation and National Meat Association.

In addition to the economic impact, the study found that a majority of industry participants think the rule language is “vague and poorly-defined”; that companies affected by the rule are uncertain about how it will be interpreted and enforced, and that “the provision that removes the burden for litigants to show competitive injury in order to seek damages is by far the largest area of concern. Informa finds that nearly 75% of the expected economic damage arising from this proposed rule can be tied directly to this provision.”

We’ll have more information about this study and the differences between its findings and the recent John Dunham study coming up shortly.

Novus Celebrates Green Acres Farm

Posted on by

Novus International employees from around the world joined with the community of Montgomery County, Missouri and the agriculture industry statewide to celebrate the opening of their new research facility Green Acres Farm.

“It was really important for us to find a welcoming community,” said Novus CEO Thad Simons at the ribbon cutting ceremony on Saturday. With him were Missouri Director of Agriculture Dr. Jon Hagler and newly elected State Representative Bart Korman of Montgomery County; as well as other company, state and local representatives.

Dr. Hagler was joined by his new wife State Rep. Linda Black of southeast Missouri. “Just to tell you how important Novus is to me, we stopped here on our way to the honeymoon,” Hagler said as he introduced his wife.

Listen to or download remarks from Rep. Korman, Jon Hagler and Thad Simons here: Novus Green Acres

See photos from the event in our Flickr photo album.

Here’s a little video tour of Green Acres Farm, led by Novus manager of product research Skip Hampton.

Vagueness of GIPSA Proposal Concerns Montana Producer

Posted on by

The basic problem with the proposed Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) rule as far as Montana cow-calf producer Bill Donald is concerned is that it is just too vague.

“We can have intelligent people that read it and come up with a very different analysis of what it will or won’t do,” Bill says. “It’s so hard to make a comment about what the rule may or may not do because it doesn’t define some things very well.”

He does believe the proposed rule has the potential to have a severe adverse impact on value-based marketing programs that producers currently utilize and because it is so vague he fears that it will lead to apprehension on the part of both buyers and sellers going into a year with one of the smallest cattle herds in history. “The market has always responded negatively to apprehension,” he says. “If people don’t know the playing field, if they don’t know what the premium is going to be for a given product or commodity, they tend to pull back and – at least in the short term – that makes for lower prices.”

Bill, who is the president-elect of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, says the most important thing for producers to do right now is to make comments on the proposed rule before the November 22 deadline. “It is going to impact every producer in the cattle industry,” Bill said. “Every time the government comes up with a rule like this, it’s incredibly important for the people who are going to be impacted to let the governing agency know how it will impact them.”

Producers can submit comments directly on-line and more information about the rule and comment period is available on the NCBA website.

Listen to or download my interview with Bill here: Bill Donald Interview

Three Weeks Until GIPSA Comment Deadline

Posted on by

Livestock producers – and anyone in the meat industry, including those who eat it – have just three weeks left to make comments on the proposed Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) rule designed to “provide significant new protections for producers against unfair, fraudulent or retaliatory practices,” according to USDA.

As of right now, nearly 13,800 comments have been received and posted by the Federal Register on the topic. The deadline for comments is November 22.

I read a random sampling of about 100 of the comments and was really disappointed by the fact that they were obviously generic letters that were submitted by various individuals, either for or against the proposal. I got very bored reading the same letter with different names. In fact, of the 100 comments I looked at, 97 of them were one of the same three letters!

cattlemen temple grandinA notable exception was a letter from Colorado State University professor and animal welfare expert Temple Grandin, who sent in a comment earlier last month, expressing concern that the proposed rule would “subject old breeding animals to additional stressful long distance transport.”

“As a scientist who has dedicated her life to improving livestock welfare, I am extremely alarmed that although this rule is concerned with marketing and competition, the department ultimately responsible for it – USDA – is also charged with enforcing the Humane Slaughter Act and apparently has paid so little attention to the animal welfare implications of this proposal,” Grandin said in her letter.

Grandin’s comments were original, personal and well stated. It’s important for those who would be affected by this rule to do their own research and determine how they personally feel about the proposal and how it would impact them. A form letter is great for quantity, but if I were the people reviewing the comments, I would be looking for quality, passion and real information. Like voting, this is an opportunity to have your voice heard, but in a much more personal way. The comment system was developed so that people who are the target of some new bureaucratic regulation can tell the people in Washington what it’s like in the real world.

This rule will have a profound impact on the future of the livestock industry, including poultry, hog and cattle producers. So, take 15 minutes and write something personal and don’t just take the easy way out and repeat some generic comments. Your future is worth at least that much. You can submit comments directly on-line here.

DC Media Question Motives of GIPSA Boss

Posted on by

The head of USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) has been the subject of two recent articles by Washington DC watchdog reporters who are questioning his objectivity when it comes to writing new rules for the livestock industry.

J. Dudley Butler, a Mississippi trial lawyer, was appointed by Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in May of 2009 to serve as Administrator of GIPSA and immediately charged with coming up with a new rule to protect livestock producers against “unfair, fraudulent or retaliatory practices” as required by the 2008 Farm Bill and through existing authority under the Packers and Stockyards Act. That rule was announced in June 2010.

Last week, Big Government’s Capitol Confidential did a piece about Butler entitled “Fox Guarding the Hen House” which focuses on how the GIPSA head could profit from the rule he proposed once he returns to private practice as a trial attorney. The article notes a comment Butler made in a speech to the Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM), an organization that he helped to found, in August 2009 – after he was appointed to the USDA position. Here’s the quote, in context from Beef Magazine, highlighting the significant phrase. “When you have a term like ‘unfair, unreasonable or undue prejudice,’ that’s a plaintiff lawyer’s dream,” Butler says in the clip. “We can get in front of a jury with that. We won’t get thrown out on what we call summary judgment because that’s a jury question.”

The Hill picked up on the story this week, saying that some things don’t mix well, like “trial lawyers and regulation of the cattle industry.” The article notes that cattle producers have a reason to be concerned about Butler – “a regulatory boss with a background in suing the very industry he now regulates, and one can readily understand the apprehension among many cattlemen and beef producers.”

Both articles note that congressional leaders have already called Butler’s actions into question, but that the Obama administration appears to be unconcerned. It does seem to be a clear conflict of interest and one has to wonder why Butler was appointed to do this job in the first place.

New Study Shows GIPSA Rule Would Cost Jobs

Posted on by

An economic impact study conducted by John Dunham and Associates concludes that the administration’s proposed rule on livestock marketing could leave approximately 104,000 Americans without jobs and a resulting $14 billion reduction in the National Gross Domestic Product (GDP). USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) proposed the rule on June 21, 2010 and it is currently in the comment period, which will end on November 22.

“As an economist who makes his living studying and modeling the economic impact of government regulations on businesses and industries, I have seen firsthand the unintended consequences of misguided policy proposals like the one proposed by USDA,” noted John Dunham, president of John Dunham and Associates, who conducted the study. “It is noteworthy that USDA says this proposal will revitalize rural America, yet my analysis shows it will actually cause substantial job losses.”

Listen to John Dunham explain the study and results here: John Dunham on GIPSA Rule Economic Study

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association President (NCBA) Steve Foglesong said they believe the rule goes beyond the intent of Congress and serves as another example of government overreach into private business. He says the report shows the economic devastation that will likely result from implementing this regulation.

“I am tired of hearing this Administration talk about job creation when their efforts seem to be more focused on job destruction,” said Foglesong. “Enough is enough. Congress did not direct USDA to write a rule that would take away the rights of cattle producers to be innovative and creative by embarking on contract agreements for premium, consumer-demanded beef. The goal of cattle producers is to provide the very best and safest product possible, while sustaining our family owned operations for future generations. I wish the administration would help us accomplish these goals and not throw them down the drain along with 104,000 jobs.”

The study found that retail meat prices would go up 3.33 percent at a national level, which would result in a 1.68 percent decrease in consumer demand. Foglesong said family farms and ranchers would also witness a reduction in beef demand and profitability. He said it is unfortunate that this study was even conducted but USDA left no choice. USDA did not conduct a comprehensive economic analysis and has indicated to 115 members of Congress calling for an economic study that one will not be conducted.

The study, commissioned by the American Meat Institute, is available online in an interactive format that aggregates economic impact on national, state and congressional district levels. It can be found at MeatFuelsAmerica.com/GIPSA. More information on how the rule may affect cattle producers can be found on the NCBA website.

Missouri Ag Coalition Fights HSUS Prop B

Posted on by

Missourians for animal careSigns opposing a proposition on the Missouri ballot backed by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) are popping up all over the state with election day just around the corner.

Like David against Goliath, Missouri’s agriculture groups, united under the banner Missourians for Animal Care, are fighting against the heavily-funded HSUS campaign with yard signs and a volunteer phone campaign. Proposition B, the “Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act,” is aimed at dog breeders, but livestock interests fear it is just the first step in furthering the HSUS anti-animal agriculture agenda in Missouri. They also contend that the regulations for legitimate dog breeders are so strict that it will basically put them out of business, while the unlicensed breeders who already are breaking the laws on the books will just continue to do so.

The Missourians for Animal Care group and others opposed to the proposition are fighting an uphill battle as proponents are saturating the airwaves with a multi-million dollar, mostly out-of-state funded, campaign featuring sad and heartbreaking stories and images of puppies raised in substandard conditions. But they are fighting anyway and we have our sign in the front yard. All we can do is hope and pray that good sense will prevail! Umm, yeah.

Read a good story on the issue from the KC Star here.

USDA Gets Input On Proposed GIPSA Rule From Congress

Posted on by

It looks like the Obama Administration via USDA is getting some pressure to look into the effect of the proposed GIPSA rule according to a release from the NCBA. You can download the letter here (pdf). You can learn more about this issue by reading our previous coverage of the issue, including interviews with this link.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack received a bipartisan letter today, Oct. 4, 2010, from 115 members of the U.S. House of Representatives calling for a comprehensive economic analysis of a propose rule on livestock and poultry marketing under the Packers and Stockyards Act. The proposed rule, released by USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) in June, was in response to a request made by Congress. However, many elected leaders note that the rule goes above and beyond the intent of Congress.

“In the 2008 Farm Bill, Congress directed the Department (USDA) to promulgate a discrete set of regulations under the Packers and Stockyards Act. However, in doing so, GIPSA also included additional proposed regulations that greatly exceed the mandate of the Farm Bill,” the House members penned. “Such a broad rule that extends so far beyond Congress’ direction in the Farm Bill and that would precipitate major changes in livestock and poultry marketing requires a vigorous economic analysis. The analysis contained in the proposed rule fails to demonstrate the need for the rule, assess the impact of its implementation on the marketplace, or establish how the implementation of the rule would address the demonstrated need.”

The letter was led by House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.); Ranking Member Frank Lucas (R-Okla.), Livestock Subcommittee Chairman David Scott (D-Ga.) and Livestock Subcommittee Ranking Member Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas). National Cattlemen’s Beef Association President Steve Foglesong said the 115 Congressmen and women that signed the letter should be given credit for standing up for U.S. farmers and ranchers and all of rural America.

Valent Launching Three New Products

Posted on by

Valent is preparing to launch three new products including INOVATE, FIERCE and RYZUP according to Dawn Refsell when I spoke with her during the Farm Progress Show.

Inovate is a soybean seed protectant that will help growers maximize soybean stand, vigor and yield. The INOVATE System contains Nipsit INSIDE Insecticide and RANCONA Xxtra Fungicide. The product received registration in January of this year and is already in the field.

Refsell said that so far farmers have been very happy with the product and she explained that they’re getting great results with stand establishment as they’re going out doing stand counts with all the growers. They’ve also seen increases in plant vigor.

A product in the pipeline is FIERCE that will be available for soybeans and no-till corn. Refsell said the use pattern for soybeans is exactly like VALOR, which is a component of FIERCE. She said it can be planted up to 7 days before planting. Valent is expecting registration on the product during 4th Quarter of this year so they are positioning it mainly for Spring.

One last product they are launching is RYZUP, which is a biological. It focuses on grass pastures and it can be applied to extend the grazing season up to 3 weeks. It should be applied when the temperature is between 40-70 degrees because during this time grass is slower to grow.

To learn more about these new Valent products, listen to my interview with Dawn Refsell or visit their website at www.valent.com.Valent Launching Three New Products

Check out our Farm Progress Photo Album.

GIPSA Proposed Rule Video Interviews

Posted on by

USDAThe most recent USDA/DOJ Public Workshop on competition in the livestock industry may be fading from people’s minds but we’re going to keep the issues discussed and presented alive, most importantly the proposed GIPSA rule that everyone seems to agree would have a profound impact on the industry. What kind of impact though is a source of significant disagreement.

You can watch a series of videos produced by the folks at American Angus Association that might help better educate you on this issue and help form your opinion of what needs to be done. Remember that we’re in a public comment period on this until the latter part of November, so please feel free to leave your comments directly via the web.

GIPSA interviews

Bill Rishel, an Angus seedstock producer from Nebraska, discusses potential impacts of the proposed GIPSA rule change.
Bill Bullard of R-CALF USA discusses potential impacts of the proposed GIPSA rules on the US cattle industry.
Colin Woodall of NCBA discusses potential impacts of the proposed GIPSA rule.
Allan Sents of McPherson County Feeders, Marquette, Kan., discusses potential impacts of the proposed GIPSA rule on the cattle business.
Jerry Bohn of Pratt Feeders discusses potential impacts of the proposed GIPSA rule.

Here’s an overview Angus Report with perspectives on both sides of the proposed GIPSA rule change. For more information, visit www.angus.org. I’ll be doing periodic posts during the public comment period for this issue in coming weeks that will include more interviews.

R-CALF President Says Livestock Pub Editors Should be Fired

Posted on by

R-CALF USA is not very happy with the way “mainstream” livestock media editorialized about the DOJ/USDA workshop in Colorado last week that was primarily about the proposed Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) rule. In fact, if it were up to the president of the organization, he would “Fire Them All.” I guess hangin’s too good for ‘em!

The “Op-Ed by R-CALF USA President Max Thornsberry, DVM, MBA” directly targets the editors of BEEF magazine, Drovers and Beef Today for what he calls “disparaging and immensely disrespectful” editorials they wrote about the proposed rule and the workshop, prior to it being held last Friday. He charges the editors with attempting “to discourage attendance or to draw attention away from the joint hearing on competition in animal agriculture.”

Dr. Thornsberry is very harsh toward the media in general, saying the beef industry publications just “want to appeal to the big, to those that represent the powerful.” He uses the word “disrespect” repeatedly, yet he clearly has no respect for the very competitive nature of the media business. “I think to be an editor of one of these magazines it should be a requirement to have to feed two pens of fat cattle a year and to independently market them,” he writes. “How can they speak with such contempt to those of us who make a living in the beef production sector, without any real knowledge of how the business operates within the United States today? It would be like me being the editor of Cosmopolitan.”

Maybe you should try that before you criticize, Dr. T. You have no idea what it is like to compete in the media world, which has its own version of packers in an industry that is progressively consolidating on all sides. And when it comes to ag media, you’d probably be surprised at how many of the reporters and editors have marketed their own cattle, either now or in a past life. They probably know more about the industry from more angles than the average cattle producer because that is their job.

Incidentally, I thought the editorials were way more fair than some of the GIPSA stories that we did here on Agwired. Sure, we did an interview with R-CALF to let them explain their position regarding the GIPSA rule, we did have live coverage of the R-CALF rally the night before the hearing, and we did live webcast the entire event so that anyone who wanted to listen could hear all viewpoints. You can thank the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association for all of that because they sponsored our coverage and contracted us to do a series of interviews with producers who are concerned about the proposed rule. Thanks to NCBA we were actually able to bring the workshop live with comments from both sides of the issue to over 800 people who could not attend, and audio from some of the panels is now available for listen or download. Thousands of other people have seen our photos, listened to our interviews and interacted with us on this issue. We would not have been able to do without NCBA’s support. Like the rest of the ag media, this website isn’t a hobby farm – we need to make money in order to stay in business.

Sorry, you can’t fire us, or hang us either – you can’t even sue us for not being fair. But, maybe a little respect would be in order.

USDA/DOJ Public Workshop Panels

Posted on by

Friday’s joint USDA/DOJ public workshop was a marathon with potentially over 2,000 people participating. You can follow some of what happened in my archived CoverItLive stream and the press conference featuring Sec. Vilsack and AG Eric Holder. For those of you who couldn’t attend, couldn’t listen to the live stream or need the audio for your reports or broadcasts I’m posting the 4 main panel sessions for you. I’m including a list of the participants of each too.

Keynote Roundtable Discussion Keynote Roundtable Discussion

Eric Holder, Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Christine Varney, Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice
Betsy Markey, Congresswoman, U.S. House of Representatives
Bill Ritter, Jr., Governor, state of Colorado
John Suthers, Attorney General, state of Colorado
Steve Bullock, Attorney General, state of Montana
John Stulp, Commissioner of Agriculture, state of Colorado

Producer/Feeder Presentation of Issues Producer/Feeder Presentation

This panel will be an opportunity to hear first-hand from producers or feeders as they share their experiences and perspectives on the industry.

Moderators:
Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Christine Varney, Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice

Panelists:
Mike Harper, sheep producer, Eaton, Colorado
Dr. Taylor Haynes, rancher, Cheyenne, Wyoming
Robbie LeValley, rancher, Hotchkiss, Colorado
Harry Livermont, rancher, Interior, South Dakota
Chris Petersen, hog farmer, Clear Lake, Iowa
Allen Sents, feedlot owner, Marquette, Kansas
Alden Zuhlke, rancher, Brunswick, Nebraska

Panel I – Trends in the Livestock Industry Trends In Livestock Industry

This panel will discuss trends in the livestock industry, including issues associated with contracting, price transparency and the effects of concentration.

Moderator:
Philip Weiser, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice

Panelists:
Jerry Bohn, general manager, Pratt Feeders, Pratt, Kansas
Libby Cook, co-founder, Wild Oats Markets and Sunflower Farmers Markets
Mark Greenwood, vice president, commercial lending, AgStar Financial Services
Bill Heffernan, professor emeritus of rural sociology, University of Missouri
Mark Lauritsen, international vice president, director food processing, packing and manufacturing division, United Food and Commercial Workers International Union
Gilles Stockton, rancher, Range, Montana
Armando Valdez, rancher, La Jara, Colorado
Clem Ward, professor and extension economist, Oklahoma State University

Panel II – Market Structure Market Structure

This panel will include a variety of market participants who will discuss market structure issues in the livestock industry.

Moderator:
James MacDonald, Chief, Agricultural Structure and Productivity Branch, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture

Panelists:
Bruce Cobb, general manager, Consolidated Beef Producers
David Domina, attorney, Domina Law Group
Mark Dopp, attorney, American Meat Institute
James Herring, president and chief executive officer, Friona Industries
Robert Mack, cattle producer/feeder, Watertown, South Dakota
Bob Miller, rancher, Okmulgee, Oklahoma
William Rishel, Richel Angus, Platt, Nebraska.
Charlie Rogers, owner/general manager, Clovis Livestock Auction

USDA/DOJ Livestock Competition Workshop and Forums Photo Album

Live Coverage – USDA/DOJ Public Workshop

Posted on by

The player below will let you see my CoverItLive stream from the workshop. Thanks to the hundreds who logged in and especially those who commented. I was also live tweeting today using the #USDADOJ hashtag.


USDA/DOJ Livestock Competition Workshop and Forums Photo Album

Live Audio USDA/DOJ Public Workshop

Posted on by

I was streaming live audio from today’s workshop all day. We had about 800 different people tune in and many stayed with it all day. It was a fascinating event in many ways, especially hearing so many different opinions in such a short period of time!

I’ve got most of the conference recorded and will be sharing out tidbits in coming days. For now, it’s time to get out of the facility and head home to ZimmComm World Headquarters in the morning. Thanks to everyone who followed along!