Japan increases tariff rate on U.S. beef imports

Not good news for American beef producers to end the week on. Japan just announced it’s triggering a tariff increase on U.S.  beef imports, which means our product just got a lot more expensive for the consumers in what’s been a very valuable export market.A big part of the problem is not having a bilateral trade agreement with Japan. Thank Washington for not making that happen sooner. Here’s some reaction from agriculture:

The really interesting part is the note from the Meat Export Federation that says the increase in American beef imports really hasn’t hurt domestic supplies, with carcass and feeder cattle prices lower than in recent months, but prices are still at RECORD HIGHS.

WASHINGTON, July 28, 2017 – The government of Japan has announced that rising imports of frozen beef in the first quarter of the Japanese fiscal year (April-June) have triggered a safeguard, resulting in an automatic increase to Japan’s tariff rate under the WTO on U.S. beef imports.  The increase, from 38.5 percent to 50 percent, will begin August 1, 2017 and last through March 31, 2018.  The tariff would affect only exporters from countries, including the United States, which do not have free trade agreements with Japan currently in force.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue issued the following statement:

U.S. beef imports

USDA Ag Secretary Sonny Perdue isn’t happy to hear that the tariff rate on U.S. beef imports to Japan is taking a 12 percent jump because higher import totals this year triggered a “safeguard.” (photo from usda.gov)

“I am concerned that an increase in Japan’s tariff on frozen beef imports will impede U.S. beef sales and is likely to increase the United States’ overall trade deficit with Japan.  This would harm our important bilateral trade relationship with Japan on agricultural products.  It would also negatively affect Japanese consumers by raising prices and limiting their access to high-quality U.S. frozen beef.  I have asked representatives of the Japanese government directly and clearly to make every effort to address these strong concerns, and the harm that could result to both American producers and Japanese consumers.”

U.S. exports of beef and beef products to Japan totaled $1.5 billion last year, making it the United States’ top market.

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) President Craig Uden issued the following statement in response to the tariff increase:

U.S. beef imports

NCBA President Craig Uden says the Japan announcement of a tariff increase on U.S. beef imports should send a message to Washington about the need for a bilateral trade agreement with the largest export customer of American beef. (photo from cattle business weekly)

“We’re very disappointed to learn that the tariff on U.S. beef imports to Japan will increase from 38.5 percent to 50 percent until April 2018. Japan is the top export market for U.S. beef in both volume and value, and anything that restricts our sales to Japan will have a negative impact on America’s ranching families and our Japanese consumers. NCBA opposes artificial barriers like these because they unfairly distort the market and punish both producers and consumers. Nobody wins in this situation. Our producers lose access, and beef becomes a lot more expensive for Japanese consumers. We hope the Trump Administration and Congress realize that this unfortunate development underscores the urgent need for a bilateral trade agreement with Japan absent the Trans-Pacific Partnership.”

Background: Japan was the top export market for U.S. beef, valued at $1.5 billion in 2016. According to data compiled by the U.S. Meat Export Federation, first quarter U.S. beef sales to Japan increased 42 percent over 2016. In addition to the United States, the 50 percent safeguard tariff also applies to imports from Canada, New Zealand, and other countries that do not have a free trade agreement with Japan.

The U.S. Meat Export Federation also weighed in on Japan’s move:

“USMEF recognizes that the safeguard will not only have negative implications for U.S. beef producers, but will also have a significant impact on the Japanese foodservice industry,” explained U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) President and CEO Philip Seng. “It will be especially difficult for the gyudon beef bowl restaurants that rely heavily on Choice U.S. short plate as a primary ingredient. This sector endured a tremendous setback when U.S. beef was absent from the Japanese market due to BSE, and was finally enjoying robust growth due to greater availability of U.S. beef and strong consumer demand. USMEF will work with its partners in Japan to mitigate the impact of the safeguard as much as possible. We will also continue to pursue all opportunities to address the safeguard situation by encouraging the U.S. and Japanese governments to reach a mutually beneficial resolution to this issue.”

As agreed to in 1994 in the WTO Uruguay Round, Japan maintains separate quarterly import safeguards on chilled and frozen beef, allowing imports to increase by 17 percent compared to the corresponding quarter of the previous year. The duty increases from 38.5 percent to 50 percent when imports exceed the safeguard volume. Japan’s frozen beef imports in the 2016 Japanese fiscal year were lower than in previous years, thus the growth in imports during this first quarter of the current fiscal year exceeded 17 percent, driven in part by rebuilding of frozen inventories and strong demand for beef in Japan’s foodservice sector. The most recent quarter saw strong growth in imports from all of Japan’s main beef suppliers.

The implications for U.S. beef exports are significant because U.S. frozen beef now faces an even wider tariff disadvantage compared to Australian beef. The duty on U.S. frozen beef imports, effective Aug. 1, 2017 through March 31, 2018, will be 50 percent while the duty on Australian beef will remain at the current rate of 27.2 percent, as established in the Japan-Australia Economic Partnership Agreement (JAEPA). The snapback duty of 50 percent will apply to frozen imports from suppliers that do not have an economic partnership agreement (EPA) with Japan, which are mainly the U.S., Canada and New Zealand.

U.S. beef imports

The U.S. Meat Export Federation isn’t happy to hear the tariff rate on U.S. beef imports is taking a twelve percent jump in Japan. They point out the move normally would protect domestic supplies. but carcass prices for feeder cattle are just off record highs.

Conditions have changed since the quarterly safeguards were established in 1994, and the growth in Japan’s imports this year has not adversely impacted Japan’s domestic beef producers. Prices for wagyu carcasses and wagyu feeder cattle are down from the record highs of last year, but are otherwise the highest in recent history. Japan has also moved away from the quarterly safeguard mechanism in its recent trade agreements. Through the JAEPA, Japan transitioned from quarterly safeguards to annual safeguards, which are much less likely to be triggered. The snapback duties on Australian beef have also been reduced, minimizing any potential impact on trade. Japan also agreed to similar terms in its economic partnership agreement with Mexico and in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

Supplemental information on Japan’s imports of U.S. beef and possible implications of the safeguard are available in this brief USMEF fact sheet. Further analysis and charts are also available online.

Minnesota takes second trade mission to Cuba

It’s a debate that is guaranteed to incite emotions, both for and against. Increasing trade opportunities with Cuba is a hot button topic in Washington D.C., but it’s an important topic for agriculture. Minnesota is one state in the Union that recognizes the opportunities in Cuba. Several state officials and Ag groups took part in a recent June trade mission to our neighbors 90 miles to the south of Florida.

The timing felt a little ironic. Minnesota Lieutenant Governor Tina Smith put the trip together months ago as a follow-up to a recent state trip to Cuba last December. The Friday before the delegation arrived in Cuba on the most trade mission, President Donald Trump decided to roll back some of the Obama-era regulatory moves that opened up opportunities for the countries to do business. That made the trip a little more important in the minds of Minnesota officials and Ag groups.

trade opportunities Cuba

Minnesota Farm Bureau President Kevin Paap was a member of the recent Minnesota delegation to travel to Cuba to talk about increasing trade opportunities between the state and the island nation 90 miles south of Cuba. (contributed photo)

“It (Trump’s announcement) didn’t change any of our goals going down there,” said Minnesota Farm Bureau President Kevin Paap, a member of the delegation, “but it certainly ratcheted up the importance of our being there. We were the first Ag trade team down there after the Trump announcement, so everybody down there was aware of it.”

Paap said it was a vital opportunity for Minnesota to highlight the importance for agriculture that the countries continue to work together to become better neighbors and trading partners. It was also an opportunity to do what they could politically to help change the situation.

That was vital because Minnesota and Cuba have been doing business for some time, dating back to 2002 when then-Governor Jesse Ventura hosted the first big trade mission to Cuba. That’s where things began to really take off with trade reaching a high water mark between Cuba and Minnesota, but things have been tailing off for the last few years. The potential is there for things to improve.

“We have to understand,” Paap said, “they aren’t the biggest market, but it is an important market and a close market. It’s important to remember when dealing with perishable goods, in terms of quality and price, distance has a negative effect on all that. We should be able to beat everyone else on quality, price, and transportation.”

Despite some of the rhetoric people may hear when talking about Cuba, it’s important to note that the people of Cuba are enthusiastic about possibly trading with America.

 

The opportunities are there in Cuba for commodities like corn, soy products, black beans, dried beans, and some livestock opportunities too. He said there are things Cuba just can’t produce on their own.

“They have a lot of silt in their soils with not much in the way of organic matter,” Paap said. “They really haven’t put down a lot of nutrients into the soil in the last 50 years or so. There are some tillable acres in the country but it’s just not high quality.”

It’s not just the soils. Farmers in Cuba are working with a lack of modern equipment that American farmers are used to. A Cuban farmer used a one-bottom plow and two oxen to work one of the fields Paap saw during the trip. He says it seems like the country is locked in time decades in the past.

A trade mission like this always has two goals at the top of mind. Obviously, one goal is to do business but the other, and more important, goal is to build relationships.

“When you deal with an international trade mission, it’s always about building relationships before doing business,” Paap said. “We (Americans) probably aren’t as aware of that when you talk about dealing with other countries. You have to have a relationship. There has to be a reason for doing business besides dollars and cents.”

That’s hugely important and not just in Cuba. It’s the same if you’re talking trade with Asian countries or anyplace else in the world. The trip was a big opportunity to make sure the Cuban people understood the importance America placed on the relationship in light of the Trump announcement.

“It was a chance for us to say agriculture worked hard to make sure it wasn’t affected by the Trump announcement,” Paap stressed. “When it comes to the changes by President Trump, we weren’t as affected by those as others were and we wanted the Cubans to see that as a good sign.”

It was a chance for Minnesota to also point out they have two “champions” for trade with Cuba in Senator Amy Klobuchar and Representative Tom Emmer, working in a bipartisan manner on the topic for a long time.

The delegation went face-to-face with a lot of different people while they were in the country and Paap said it ran the gamut.

 

 

One of the most interesting changes in Cuba has to do with how they deal with foreigners. As recently as the mid-1990s, Cuban farmers weren’t allowed by law to even talk to people from outside the country, even those on a trade mission. Now, everyday people in Cuba told the delegation members that they’re hoping to get some help from the USA.

 

 

It’s not the biggest market but there are opportunities there. Paap and the American delegation were walking into the Ministry of Agriculture to meet with Cuban officials and a Chinese trade delegation was walking out at the same time.

“If we’re going to choose not to be there and involved in infrastructure upgrades, that doesn’t mean it won’t happen,” Paap said. “There’s a lot of countries putting some money into the country. Even Minnesota Ag Commissioner Dave Fredrickson (who was on the first trade mission) said it was amazing how much the country had changed, even since last December.”

There’s a lot of work to do to improve the lives of the average Cuban who earns between 20 and 24 dollars a month. Paap is a farmer in Blue Earth County and his Cuban counterparts have lots of questions for the American farmers on the trip.

“I always make sure and bring along a picture book,” Paap said, “especially when there’s a language barrier. There was a lot of interest in that. They had a lot of livestock questions about pigs and what we feed them and how heavy they are. They had a lot of questions about things like rainfall and crop yields. We had a lot of great farmer-to-farmer conversations.”

Cubans understand there are things they can’t grow in their fields. Paap wants to know why wouldn’t we want to sell Ag commodities to a country that’s only 90 miles south of America. After all, farmers understand logistics and travel better than most. Farmers realized a long time ago the value of working together, and that the people you work the best with are likely those closest to you.

The biggest obstacle for agriculture to overcome in order to improve trade with Cuba is the financing mechanism. In order for America to sell agricultural products to Cuba, the buyers have to come up with all the cash up front through a third party. That’s a big disadvantage when America’s competitors are more than happy to offer financing.

“That’s where the work of Senator Klobuchar and Congressman Emmer comes in to help try to get rid of some of those requirements,” Paap says. “That would make us a more desirable trading partner as well as the closest.”

Cattle marketing during an economic downturn

Beef prices have ridden a world-class roller coaster in recent years, making profitable cattle marketing an enormous challenge. Prices peaked in 2014, going as high as they’d been in recent memory. However, they began a downward slide in mid-2015 before tanking through most of 2016.

cattle marketing

Troy Hadrick, pictured with wife Stacy, recently began doing things different when it came to his cattle marketing efforts. Those efforts helped him and other producers get through a recent run of the worst cattle prices the industry has seen in some time. (photo courtesy of advocatesforag.com)

Troy Hadrick is a producer from Faulkton, South Dakota, who rode the highs and lows in beef cattle prices, experiencing firsthand the challenges that low prices present. While fed cattle prices had rallied from October of 2016 into early this year, the business is cyclical and low prices will come around again. Hadrick said it is possible for beef cattle producers to make it through the down times, provided they’re willing to try new things.

There are a lot of theories as to why prices began a free-fall in 2015, falling at an unprecedented pace. Before prices got to that point, Hadrick says beef saw a perfect storm of conditions that drove prices to record highs in 2014. A large number of pigs in the U.S. had died of PED so pork production was way down. An Avian Influenza outbreak had pushed chicken and poultry production lower as well. Combine those facts with the lowest cattle numbers America had seen since the 1940s and you have the recipe for high beef prices.

“There wasn’t enough beef and protein to go around,” Hadrick said, “so our industry did what it always does. It responds and makes a bunch more of the product.”

But the number of cattle head in the herd doesn’t paint the full picture. It’s more about the pounds of product the industry produces. High prices meant producers were getting cattle as fat as possible to produce as many pounds as possible. The industry was at record carcass weight during the boom.

“We were producing carcass weights of approximately 850 pounds at that time,” he said. “Our recent carcass weights were around 814 pounds. So if we kill approximately 500,000 head a week, take that times 30 pounds a head, and look at the difference. The population stays the same as we’re killing the same number of head but the amount of product we’re producing is different.”

Needless to say, prices going from record highs to unbelievably low prices came down hard on the beef industry. There’s no doubt producers were pushed out of business as profits margins shrank to razor-thin levels. Theories ranging from oversupply to market manipulation abounded as the industry was under stress. Hadrick is very sympathetic to the plight of his fellow producers, having gone through the downturn himself. He does want to point out that if producers are willing to try new things, it’s possible to weather the downturns more efficiently.

Back in 2012, the Hadricks began changing their breeding and marketing programs for their cattle. There are different grades of beef and those grades are priced differently.

 

 

Higher quality beef demands a higher price because there’s less of it available. There’s a good demand for higher quality beef because it tastes better.

“We started shooting to produce cattle that would give us the beef that would qualify for these premium programs, such as Certified Angus Beef and USDA Prime,” he said. “If you produce cattle that fit into those categories then you get a nice premium price for your product.”

They did a couple of different things to try to speed up the process of producing premium beef. The family implemented an AI program on the ranch that covered the entire herd, using the best genetics they could find on the market to help them produce the highest quality beef. There’s a lot of data being collected on sires and they looked for the bulls that could get the job done.

So, with that as their focus, here’s where they did something different from what might be considered the ‘norm’ in beef production. Their cattle go down south to be finished but the Hadricks retain ownership.

 

 

“Those cattle are then marketed on a grid,” Troy said. “They harvest those cattle, they hang on the rail, and they’re graded by a USDA Inspector. Based off of that grade and the weight, that’s how the price we receive is calculated. We don’t know the final value of the cattle until they’re hanging on the rail as meat.”

Obviously, there’s a risk of being discounted when you market on a grid. The actual grid is just like other grids you may have seen. For example, if a particular animal graded Prime and was a Yield Grade 3, you follow those two columns and where they meet, that’s what the price was that week for that animal and that’s what we’re paid.

“We started our program with AI and then combined it with genomic testing,” Hadrick said. “We would take DNA samples from some of our cattle, get it analyzed, and that would give us an indicator as far as which cattle would perform well on the grid. We’d also keep back those females that would produce the best calves.”

Between those two technologies, Hadrick said their production went from grading 90 percent Choice, 35 percent Certified Angus Beef, and no Prime, to cattle that finished 57 percent prime, and 100 percent Choice. Hadrick said producers get really good premiums for numbers like that.

“The nice part about it is it doesn’t cost us any more money to raise those cattle,” he said. “It doesn’t cost us any more to feed them, either. Of course, we have to get them bred, but at the end of the day, they’re worth more money.”

There is an additional cost with the genomic testing, but Hadrick says it’s worth it to them because the idea is to identify the cattle that are going to make the family money and those that won’t. They sort cattle accordingly and market those cattle accordingly.

The Hadrick cattle are harvested through a cooperative called U.S. Premium Beef. It’s a rancher-owned cooperative based in Kansas that owns parts of the National Beef Packing Plants in Dodge City and Liberal, Kansas. Hadrick said some visionary people put this idea together back in the 1990s.

“They wanted to give producers the incentive to produce better beef,” Hadrick said, “and they wanted food service businesses and consumers that need beef to be able to come and know they’re getting the highest quality beef. They also wanted to reward the producers that could give them the highest quality beef consistently.”

The grid system runs off what they call plant average. Hadrick said in order to get the premiums, producers have to bring in cattle that are better than what everyone else brings in. That can be a big challenge as they’re attracting a lot of cattle that are high quality right from the start.

The plant isn’t buying cattle from the Hadricks, but instead, they’re buying carcasses. Hadrick said that makes it much harder for producers to try to sneak a bad one through the plant. There’s no hiding a poor carcass once the hide comes off.

He said the new system has advantages from the traditional way of doing business in the cow/cattle industry.

 

 

“On the farming side of things, we got into ethanol, we got into crushing soybeans, in order to get our product closer to the end point,” he said. “The closer you sell your product to the final consumer of your product, the more you’re going to get for it because you’ve added some value to it.”

He said doing business this way isn’t easy. Producers have to manage risk more, they have to have a relationship with the packer, and with the feedlots they work with. Producers also have to know their cattle because they won’t get away with trying to slip a bad one through the chain.

“If you market average cattle, you’re going to get an average price,” Hadrick said. “We’re trying to do things a little differently to do things better.”

Pork Producers applaud White House on GIPSA action

GIPSA The Trump administration today gave notice that it will further delay the effective date of a GIPSA regulation related to the buying and selling of livestock, a move applauded by the National Pork Producers Council, which opposes the Obama-era rule. It also will take public comments on what to do with the regulation.

The so-called Farmer Fair Practices Rules, written by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), includes two proposed regulations and an interim final rule, the latter of which now is set to become effective Oct. 19.

“We’re extremely pleased that the Trump administration has extended the time it has to review this regulation and the public comments on it, which will show the devastating effects this rule would have on America’s pork producers,” said NPPC President Ken Maschhoff, a pork producer from Carlyle, Ill. “The regulation likely would restrict the buying and selling of livestock, lead to consolidation of the livestock industry – putting farmers out of business – and increase consumer prices for meat.”

GIPSA

National Pork Producers Council President Ken Maschoff says his group is happy with the White House decision to delay the effective date of  new GIPSA rules regarding the buying and selling of livestock. (photo courtesy of National Hog Farmer)

A notice in tomorrow’s Federal Register will indicate USDA is delaying the April 22 effective date for the interim final rule by 180 days and setting a 60-day comment period – from April 12 to June 10 – on whether to further delay or withdraw it. Just days into his presidency, President Trump extended for 60 days the public comment deadline on and Feb. 21 effective date of the Farmer Fair Practices Rules.

“The administration recognizes the importance of this issue to livestock farmers,” Maschhoff said, “and it’s following through with its pledge to look at regulations that would negatively affect people and the economy. Now we need to withdraw this bad regulation.”

NPPC is most concerned with the interim final rule, which would broaden the scope of the Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA) of 1921 related to using “unfair, unjustly discriminatory or deceptive practices” and to giving “undue or unreasonable preferences or advantages.” Specifically, the regulation would deem such actions per se violations of federal law even if they didn’t harm competition or cause competitive injury, prerequisites for winning PSA cases.

USDA in 2010 proposed several PSA provisions – collectively known as the GIPSA Rule – that Congress mandated in the 2008 Farm Bill; eliminating the need to prove a competitive injury to win a PSA lawsuit was not one of them. In fact, Congress rejected such a “no competitive injury” provision during debate on the Farm Bill. Additionally, eight federal appeals courts have held that harm to competition must be an element of a PSA case.

“Eliminating the need to prove injury to competition would prompt an explosion in PSA lawsuits by turning every contract dispute into a federal case subject to triple damages,” Maschhoff said. “The inevitable costs associated with that and the legal uncertainty it would create could lead to further vertical integration of our industry and drive packers to own more of their own hogs.

“That would reduce competition, stifle innovation and provide no benefits to anyone other than trial lawyers and activist groups that will use the rule to attack the livestock industry. For those reasons, we’re asking the administration to withdraw the rule.”

An Informa Economics study found that the GIPSA Rule today would cost the U.S. pork industry more than $420 million annually – more than $4 per hog – with most of the costs related to PSA lawsuits brought under the “no competitive injury” provision included in the interim final rule.

# # #

NPPC is the global voice for the U.S. pork industry, protecting the livelihoods of America’s 60,000 pork producers, who abide by ethical principles in caring for their animals, in protecting the environment and public health and in providing safe, wholesome, nutritious pork products to consumers worldwide. For more information, visit www.nppc.org.

Cattle feedlot labor pains getting worse

Labor pains are a good way to describe the work situation in production agriculture, but it’s not a shortage of jobs that are the problem. More and more sectors in production agriculture are having a hard time finding help and the problem runs from coast to coast. Reports abound of crops left rotting in the fields because of a shortage of available labor to get out and harvest. The labor shortages aren’t just limited to crops, either. Feedlots across the country are having a hard time finding people to work with their livestock. The labor pains have gotten progressively worse in feedlots during the past decade.

“It is a problem,” said Gary Ruskamp of Ruskamp Feed Yards in Dodge, Nebraska. “I finally just got my crew filled in again. They kind of come and go after a couple of years and then you must find new people. I’ve got all good guys now, but it’s tough.”

Labor pains cattle feedlots

Labor pains are growing in the cattle feedlot industry as qualified help is getting harder and harder to find. (photo from silverspurranches.com)

Ruskamp has a stack of applicants every time he has an open position. But the problem is almost none of the applicants are qualified to do the job. The labor shortage is real in feedlot country and there are some good reasons behind it.

“I have a son that’s a partner with me in the feed yard,” Ruskamp said, “but a lot of families have kids that don’t stay on the farm. Plus, there’s less number of kids born on the farm. If you hire someone that didn’t grow up on a farm, you have to train them. They often don’t have the ability to work with livestock and the equipment we work with.”

He added, “There’s nobody that grows up on a farm anymore. It’s changed. Fewer farms. Fewer children on farms. They go to the city to work. The kids don’t come back out here and work in feedlots. There are a few family feed yards where the son might come back and work with them, but not a lot of that is going on.”

Ruskamp tries to hire local folks for open positions but occasionally has had to cast his net far and wide for employees. However, there’s a challenge when hiring people who aren’t from the area.

“I try to stay local,” he said, “because when you hire someone from further off, they usually want to get back home at some point. They don’t usually stay as long as somebody local.”

The labor shortage is worse in some counties than others. In the northern part of Cuming county, there’s a lot more feedlots that are closer together. He said workers can skip from feedlot to feedlot, working at one for two or three years.

“If they get 50 cents an hour more,” Ruskamp said, “they’ll skip to another feed yard. Eventually, they’ll come back to the first feedlot they were at.”

The struggle for labor isn’t hitting every feedlot in the plains. Ron Coufal runs a feedlot 14 miles west of West Point, Nebraska. He has a lot of family working in the business with him so the labor situation is in good shape there. However, that’s the exception rather than the rule in most feedlots.

“Our operation consists of all family members,” Coufal said. “My sons, my brothers, and a couple nephews all work here. All told, there are nine families that make a living out of this operation. We farm quite a bit of ground and we also feed quite a few cattle.”

Coufal said it’s always a problem hiring people, specifically the right ones for the job. It can be hard to pay people what they’re worth in agriculture these days with low cattle prices. That makes it tough for would-be employers because Coufal said you need to be able to pay people in order to hire the right people for the job.

“The right kind of people are typically in business for themselves or working for corporations somewhere else,” he said. “You can always hire a body but it can be hard to find one with the brain that allows them to do the job.

“If you want to work in the livestock industry,” Coufal said, “you have to be there every day. If 8:00 in the morning is when we feed cattle, I want them fed right at 8:00 in the morning. If it’s 10:00 in the morning, then I want them fed at ten. I want them on a schedule.”

Coufal said they did hire outside help before his sons came back from college. It took a lot of work to find good people. He enjoyed the staff he worked with before it became a family operation again, but did note that good help is getting harder to find.

If you know someone that’s possibly interested in working on a livestock operation, this is what it entails. There are opportunities there for people willing to work hard and learn the trade:

 

 

MN Cattlemen and Women Meet for 2016 Annual Convention

More than 300 cattlemen, cattlewomen & cattle industry members gathered in Bloomington, MN for the 2016 Minnesota Cattle Industry Convention. This premier policy & educational event in the Minnesota cattle industry featured speakers and an industry leading tradeshow that gives cattlemen and women the tools to connect, learn and innovate into 2017.

“This year’s convention was a fantastic event.  I was very happy to see a great turn out for from both MSCA members, as well as political leaders” – MSCA newly elected President Krist Wollum.

Minnesota state Cattlemen and Cattlemen’s convention

Krist Wollum of Porter, MN was elected to lead MSCA as President for 2017 & 2018.

During general sessions, attendees had the opportunity to learn about new and innovative ways to connect with the consumer, as well as cattle focused economic and political summaries for 2016.

Convention goers also heard from state and national cattle industry and political leaders about current efforts to grow and defend the cattle industry in Minnesota and across the country.

Political leaders including Lt. Governor Tina Smith, Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) Commissioner Dave Frederickson and Senator Amy Klobuchar shared their efforts to defend the agriculture industry on behalf of Minnesota farmers and Ranchers in St. Paul and Washington, D.C.

Members of the Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Association (MSCA) resolution committee set new policy on buffers, deer, health insurance, and agency programs.

Attendees of the 2016 MSCA Cattlemen’s College had the opportunity to listen and interact with some of the most influential regional & national experts in the beef industry. Topics included Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) assessment programs, third-party audits, consumer trust and on-farm BQA best management practices. This program, sponsored by Zoetis, was a joint effort between the National BQA program, the Minnesota Beef Council, IMI Global and Wulf Cattle.

Cattle producers also had the opportunity to engage with various government agencies to learn more about programs to open additional state and federal owned land for public grazing, along with best management practices to implement livestock into cropping operations with the use of cover crops.  This workshop was a joint effort between the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), MSCA, The US Fish and Wildlife Service and Prairie Creek Seeds.

Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Convention Cattlemen

Dan Anderson of Roseau, MN was selected as the 2016 Minnesota Cattlemen of the year. (Contributed photo)

During Friday evening’s banquet, Dan Anderson of Roseau, MN, was recognized as the 2016 Minnesota Cattlemen of the year for his efforts to assist cattlemen in his region and across the state with issues impacting their herd health.  He has also been a leader in assisting fellow cattlemen in dealing with wildlife issues impacting their farm’s profitability and an exceptional leader in his dedication to growing MSCA membership.

The Minnesota Corn Growers Association was named the 2016 Beef Industry Service Award recipient for their efforts to support and grow the livestock industry in Minnesota.

Newly elected leadership included Grant Binford, Luverne as Feeder Council Chairmen and Jim Wulf, Starbuck as Cow/Calf Council Chairmen.  Newly elected regional directors include, Dan Anderson, Roseau – Region 1, Darvi Keehr, Little Falls – Region 5, Warren Jansma, Ellsworth – Region 7 and Frank Brand, Lake City – Region 9.  The MSCA executive committee for 2017-2018 will consist of Krist Wollum, Porter as President, Mike Landuyt, Walnut Grove as President-Elect and Grant Breitkreutz, Redwood Falls as Vice President. Glen Graff, Sandborn was selected by the president to serve as MSCA’s Legislative Chairmen.

“I’m very excited about the level of professionalism we have in our newly elected board of directors.  Each one of them brings a new and focused perspective of Minnesota’s cattle industry.” Krist Wollum, MSCA President

 About the Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Association

The Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Association (MSCA) is a membership-based organization that represents cattle farmers and individuals who are part of the cattle community in Minnesota.

 

###

State Climatologist talks southeast MN weather

The weather throughout fall and during the transition to winter can only be described as interesting. It’s been awhile since I was doing play-by-play for a high school football game during early November and actually had to take my winter jacket off because the press box was actually quite comfortable. I would imagine outside chores have been much less taxing during the nice fall weather too.

Conditions are going to change at some point. We know that here in southeast Minnesota. Colder weather and snow will be coming starting next week, but the question is how cold and how much?

State Climatologist Mark Seeley talks southeast Minnesota weather

Mark Seeley is a climatologist with the University of Minnesota’s Department of Soil, Water, and Climate. (photo from mprnews.org)

Mark Seeley of the University of Minnesota Department of Soil, Water, and Climate. He’s a professor, a climatologist, and the main guy Minnesota media has turned to with weather questions for decades. I first met Mark while at KLGR radio in Redwood Falls. He was at the annual Farmfest event down the road near Morgan, Minnesota, and a fellow broadcaster said I needed to talk to Mark if I wanted to do a weather segment.

My most recent weather assignment comes from my freelance reporting job with Bluff Country News Group. We wanted to know what the upcoming winter would look like so I gave Mark a call and had a visit. The 2016 calendar year weather conditions in southeast Minnesota have been record-setting, with too much heat and moisture. I wanted to know how much heat and moisture have hit the area and this is what Mark had to say:

Farm Bureau Opposes Speed Limiters Proposal

Speed limitersThe United States Department of Transportation’s (DOT) proposal to require speed limiters for large commercial vehicles doesn’t account for the fact that many commercial vehicles often cover hundreds of miles on open roads with few other vehicles around. The American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF)  recently submitted comments on the idea, saying the proposed rule would pass on significant costs to farmers and ranchers who only use heavier trucks seasonally.

Speed Limiters

The US Transportation Department is proposing the addition of speed limiters on vehicles with a gross weight greater than 26,000 pounds, which would mean more costs to farmers who only use those larger vehicles seasonally. (Photo from truckernews.com)

The proposed rule was put forth by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and DOT. The new rule would require vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 26,000 pounds to be equipped with a speed limiting device. It would be set to a speed to be specified when the final rule comes out. It would require motor carriers operating such vehicles in interstate commerce to maintain functional speed limiting devices at all times.

The AFBF says speed limits should not be arbitrarily established by federal rule. Instead, it should be based on conditions in the area in which it’s posted.

“The proposal ignores the fact that many commercial vehicles often operate for hundreds of miles without much interaction with other traffic. There is no clear rationale in the rule for suggesting a truck traveling in a rural setting with minimal traffic should have the same top speed as a truck traveling in a large city,” said AFBF.

The organization also points out that the proposal would be too costly for farmers and ranchers who use large trucks only during certain times of the year.

“If adopted, the rule would pass on significant costs to our members who do not operate as commercial motor vehicle enterprises but only utilize heavier trucks seasonally. These costs would impact an industry that is currently struggling to make ends meet with the recent downturn in the farm economy,” said AFBF.

Minnesota Cattle Industry Convention Registration Open

The Minnesota Cattle Industry convention is an event that brings together producers and beef industry partners for educational opportunities, policy discussion and development, and a cattle focused trade show.  The Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Association, along with the Minnesota Cattle women and the Minnesota Beef Council, will host the Minnesota Cattle Industry Convention and trade show December 1st – 3rd, 2016 at the Double Tree Hotel in Bloomington, MN.

Minnesota Cattle industry convention

The Minnesota Cattle Industry Convention is coming up on December 2 and 3 at the Double Tree Hotel in Bloomington, MN (Pic provided by the MN State Cattlemen’s Association)

The convention will kick off with “Mom at the Meat Counter” Janeal Yancy –PhD Meat Scientist and professor at Arkansas State University, mom and beef industry advocate blogger speaking about consumer engagement and the need for science based facts.

National association leadership will also be joining us in welcoming everyone to the convention, including NCBA President Tracey Bruner – Ramona, KS and ANCW President Penny Zimmerman – Foley, MN. 

The 2016 Cattlemen’s College speakers will focus on the need for self and third party evaluations as part of an increased need for on farm transparency.  These speakers will include Josh White – NCBA Director of Producer Education – Denver, CO, IMI Global – Castle Rock, CO and Wulf Cattle or Morris, MN.  

Friday will also include a public grazing workshop featuring a team of speakers from the Minnesota DNR and the USFWS, along with Cody Nelson of Prairie Creek Seeds discussing strategies for integrating livestock into cover crops.  

Friday’s events will round out with the 2016 Best of Beef Banquet highlighting many of the successes from 2016 and recognizing the best of the best from Minnesota’s beef industry.  The entertainment for the night will be Jerry Carrol: Farmer, Comedian & Agriculture Speaker from Raleigh, NC.  The evening will wrap up the MSCA’s annual live auction.

Saturday’s events will include the 2016 Breakfast Briefing featuring MSCA’s and NCBA’s policy work in 2016 and set the stage for policy priorities for 2017.  This session will feature Bruce Kleven – MSCA Legislative Advisor and Colin Woodal – Sr. Vice President of Government Affairs, NCBA – Washington D.C.

The convention will round out with a Beef Market Status Round Table featuring Jeff Stolle – Nebraska Cattlemen’s Association Marketing Program Manager – Lincoln, NE, Micheal Klamm – USDA-NASS – Washington D.C. and Brad Kooima – Kooima and Kaemingk Commodities, Inc. – Sioux Center, IA.

Registration and room reservation information is available at www.mnsca.org or in the November edition of the Minnesota Cattleman newspaper.  The Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Convention and Trade show block will be held until November 10th, 2015. Exhibitors and vendors are also encouraged to attend, sponsorship opportunity details available at www.mnsca.org or call 612-618-6619 with questions.

We look forward to you joining us in December!

2016-2017 Minnesota Beef Ambassador Team Announced

The Minnesota Beef Industry is proud to announce that Katie Moller of Princeton, daughter of Scott and Julie Moller, Abbey Schiefelbein of Kimball, daughter of Don and Jennifer Schiefelbien, and Zach Klaers of Arlington, son of Pat and Sandy Klaers were chosen as 2016-2017 Senior Minnesota Beef Ambassador Team Members. The 2016-2017 Junior Minnesota Beef Ambassador team includes: Emilee White of Wadena, daughter of Don and Tonja White; and Bailee Schiefelbein of Kimball, daughter of Don and Jennifer Schiefelbein.

Beef Ambassadors

The Minnesota Beef Industry is proud to announce the Minnesota Beef Ambassador team comprised of (left to right): Bailee Schiefelbein, Emilee White; Jr. Beef Ambassadors, Katie Moller, Sr. Beef Ambassador Team Lead; Zach Klaers and Abbey Schiefelbein, Sr. Beef Ambassadors. The Beef Ambassadors will work throughout the state to assist with various promotion and education programs related to beef. (Photo from Minnesota Beef)

Contestants from all over the state of Minnesota competed for a place on this year’s Beef Ambassador Team and a chance to win cash prizes sponsored by the Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Association and the Minnesota Cattlewomen’s Association, with additional sponsorship funds courtesy of the Beef Checkoff Program.

The contest took place during the Minnesota Beef Expo held on Saturday, October 22, 2016 at the CHS Miracle of Birth Center at the Minnesota State Fairgrounds.During the contest all contestants were required to prepare a written blog or social media post on a beef industry topic.

Contestants were scored by judges on their ability to incorporate beef industry information and the relatability of the message with consumers. Throughout the contest, contestants also were judged on their “elevator speech, “a short, to the point, statement outlining his/her message to consumers and what he/she wants consumers to know about the beef industry.

Additionally, contestants competed in a mock radio interview, which observed the contestants ability to “Tell the Beef Production Story and present beef and farming in a positive light, a mock consumer promotion, which observed the contestants ability to educate the consumer about beef and the beef product, and a written response, which observed the contestants ability to thoughtfully answer and identify misinformation about beef.

About the Minnesota Beef Ambassador Program

The Minnesota Beef Ambassador Program provides an opportunity for youth ages 13-19 to educate consumers and students about beef nutrition, food safety and stewardship practices of beef farmers and ranchers. The Minnesota Beef Ambassador Program is funded through support from the Minnesota CattleWomen’s Association, Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Association and the Beef Checkoff Program.