Beef Plan Movement (READ OP BEFORE POSTING)

Albert Johnson · 23-01-2019 08:26PM

dzer2 wrote: »

Veal is sold as white meat and to kill at that weight at that age they would have to be hiding a month or two before they were registered. Also veal has little to no marbling in it. One lad in the scheme was I'll for a while an a neighbour fed his cattle for 3 weeks and the factory were able to tell him the cattle were fed silage.

The whole concept of veal as white meat and the associated negative opinions regarding the slaughter of calves is huge downfall of the above system. It's going to take some clever marketing to alleviate the public's concerns about eating veal in any great quantity. The domestic market is on somewhat shaky ground from the outset which leaves only exports to ensure success. Export markets are increasingly volatile due to changing world circumstances so perhaps not the best foundation on which to build our future.

From my analysis of the limited information available it seems that even supposed "grass" fed rose veal is still highly dependent on feeding large amounts of concentrates to achieve targets. Therefore it appears to me that it's just a more extreme version of bull beef, a high cost system depending on achieving stringent targets for often little profit. I can't see how the above will be little more than yet another big white elephant for many, there's profit perhaps for a few top class operators running tight ships but there in every system.

I've heard more about veal in recent weeks than in all my life heretofore, it's starting to remind me of the talk of miscanthus as a super crop over a decade ago. It's high time I attended our local meeting as I'd love to hear some of the scheme's being proposed straight from the horses month as it were.

Siamsa Sessions · 23-01-2019 09:18PM

Would the veal attract a new consumer? Or would the consumer who was going to choose steak now choose veal instead?

Is it only robbing Peter Steak to pay Paul Veal if the veal competes with the steak market?

Hard Knocks · 23-01-2019 09:35PM

Siamsa Sessions wrote: »

Would the veal attract a new consumer? Or would the consumer who was going to choose steak now choose veal instead?

Is it only robbing Peter Steak to pay Paul Veal if the veal competes with the steak market?

There would of been allot of veal late 90’s early 00’s, know we sold weanling suckler heifers for it, there was good beef kill at that time too

Track9 · 24-01-2019 12:57AM

Reminds me of the Hype about Deer Farming circa 20 yrs back & Rabbits also .
Both these animals eat grass too .
The saying about the Klondike Gold Rush springs to mind & about the big winners in the Rush ( No it wasn't the guys finding the gold e. g farmers ) It was the guys selling the Shovels & Mules .
In today's world its the Form Fillers/ Consultants & Advisory Bodies .

Bass Reeves · 24-01-2019 01:15AM

There is a similar veal product in Canada and the US it is call pasture fed veal. It has not the same negatives connectivity of veal. I have my doubts as well it would be very seasonal (which is a problem) and trying to even shift 40-60K carcasses not to mind 100k would be a challenge . However shifting 50K carcasses at sub 200DW compared to 50K at 330K+ DW would reduce volume by 40%ish maybe more if these animals were taken to 30 months.

But the big thing I like about the BPM is that it seems to be looking at grass fed beef compared to grain fed. IMO when you are paying for ration as opposed to grass cost increases and profit decreases. Cost is killing us this year fertlizer is up by 30-40/ton, at the moment ration are 280ish/ton. Will ration come back 30/ton next summer???. 15 years ago I was paying 170/ton for ration by the pallet it is now 100/ton extra in bulk. If we can brand grass fed Beef it and not allow processors to control it like the AA and HE schemes we just might survive.

yosemitesam1 · 24-01-2019 08:53AM

Bass Reeves wrote: »

There is a similar veal product in Canada and the US it is call pasture fed veal. It has not the same negatives connectivity of veal. I have my doubts as well it would be very seasonal (which is a problem) and trying to even shift 40-60K carcasses not to mind 100k would be a challenge . However shifting 50K carcasses at sub 200DW compared to 50K at 330K+ DW would reduce volume by 40%ish maybe more if these animals were taken to 30 months.

But the big thing I like about the BPM is that it seems to be looking at grass fed beef compared to grain fed. IMO when you are paying for ration as opposed to grass cost increases and profit decreases. Cost is killing us this year fertlizer is up by 30-40/ton, at the moment ration are 280ish/ton. Will ration come back 30/ton next summer???. 15 years ago I was paying 170/ton for ration by the pallet it is now 100/ton extra in bulk. If we can brand grass fed Beef it and not allow processors to control it like the AA and HE schemes we just might survive.

Is it 100% grass fed or grass fed with meal that they're looking at?

alps · 24-01-2019 11:07AM

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Is it 100% grass fed or grass fed with meal that they're looking at?

That won't matter when our certification gets at it..take the glanbia claim of a cow fed 95% on grass...this cow eats 5.5 tonnes dry matter of grass and 1 tonne of concentrate, but the claim is made on a fresh weight basis...

So if the combined dry matter of grass and grass silage eaten is say 20%, the cow will have eaten 27.5 tonnes of grass and 1 tonne meal...

The industry is about to follow suit with a certification of this through Bord Boa inspections this summer....

If it will work for dairy, it will work for beef

Albert Johnson · 24-01-2019 06:22PM

alps wrote: »

That won't matter when our certification gets at it..take the glanbia claim of a cow fed 95% on grass...this cow eats 5.5 tonnes dry matter of grass and 1 tonne of concentrate, but the claim is made on a fresh weight basis...

So if the combined dry matter of grass and grass silage eaten is say 20%, the cow will have eaten 27.5 tonnes of grass and 1 tonne meal...

The industry is about to follow suit with a certification of this through Bord Boa inspections this summer....

If it will work for dairy, it will work for beef

The certification may ensure a public perception of a green and grass fed product but this is only half the issue in my opinion. Any system that's reliant on feeding large amounts of concentrates to achieve it's aims is looking less sustainable in this country. We are at a competitive advantage with our ability to grow grass but are at a major cost disadvantage regarding cereals for animal feed.

As to how advocating another concentrate based system with ever increasing costs can be seen as helpful is in my mind misguided. There's lots of ways to be a busy fool in beef currently without campaigning for more. Feeding anything apart from grazed grass is going to add cost to the system regardless of whether the end consumer is aware of this fact or not.

It seems ironic to me at least that despite all the calls to market our beef as "green" and grass fed that many of the proposed solutions involve the complete opposite. I think we're at a crossroads and we as an industry need to assess whether our produce will be grass fed and a premium product or corn fed and a commodity. The end result will have more impact on our future than any beef blockades or splinter groups thus far.

I don't believe it's unfair to suggest that producing beef as a commodity product has done little other than inspire a race to the bottom regards returns to the primary producers. We cannot compete with other countries as regards cheap exports and should therefore desist from trying. The niche of a superior grass fed product is our only hope of survival in my opinion.

In response to the above quirp that it works for the dairy industry I am reminded of another quote from some other contributer on this forum. I can't remember the specifics but it was in regards to high imput dairying. It was reckoned that if they inheireted the keys to a feed mill that a high imput system would win hands down over any other, of course until the feed ran out. Grass versus grain may be the biggest obstacle to our future success as an industry.

manjou · 25-01-2019 10:49AM

the grass fed idea is good but unfortunately it comes down to price and perception led by advertising. every add for meat sees animals birds with there owners standing in a lovely green field even if said animals have never seen outside shed so people assume all meat on sale comes from these lush green pastures and so make choice based on price best example truly irish all farmers standing in green fields not in there piggeries. even with angus beef or organic they will purchase these first over others if there are same price or maybe give a bit extra but not alot it still will come down to price.

Farmer · 25-01-2019 11:20AM

manjou wrote: »

the grass fed idea is good but unfortunately it comes down to price and perception led by advertising. every add for meat sees animals birds with there owners standing in a lovely green field even if said animals have never seen outside shed so people assume all meat on sale comes from these lush green pastures and so make choice based on price best example truly irish all farmers standing in green fields not in there piggeries..........

Not everyone is falling for that though. Articles like this can undo alot of green marketing

https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/het-leven-van-ierse-runderen-is-goed-behalve-als-ze-op-stal-moeten~bbd3218f/

(Hopefully your browser can translate this from Dutch but if not, you'll get the gist anyway)

jaymla627 · 25-01-2019 12:00PM

Albert Johnson wrote: »

The certification may ensure a public perception of a green and grass fed product but this is only half the issue in my opinion. Any system that's reliant on feeding large amounts of concentrates to achieve it's aims is looking less sustainable in this country. We are at a competitive advantage with our ability to grow grass but are at a major cost disadvantage regarding cereals for animal feed.

As to how advocating another concentrate based system with ever increasing costs can be seen as helpful is in my mind misguided. There's lots of ways to be a busy fool in beef currently without campaigning for more. Feeding anything apart from grazed grass is going to add cost to the system regardless of whether the end consumer is aware of this fact or not.

It seems ironic to me at least that despite all the calls to market our beef as "green" and grass fed that many of the proposed solutions involve the complete opposite. I think we're at a crossroads and we as an industry need to assess whether our produce will be grass fed and a premium product or corn fed and a commodity. The end result will have more impact on our future than any beef blockades or splinter groups thus far.

I don't believe it's unfair to suggest that producing beef as a commodity product has done little other than inspire a race to the bottom regards returns to the primary producers. We cannot compete with other countries as regards cheap exports and should therefore desist from trying. The niche of a superior grass fed product is our only hope of survival in my opinion.

In response to the above quirp that it works for the dairy industry I am reminded of another quote from some other contributer on this forum. I can't remember the specifics but it was in regards to high imput dairying. It was reckoned that if they inheireted the keys to a feed mill that a high imput system would win hands down over any other, of course until the feed ran out. Grass versus grain may be the biggest obstacle to our future success as an industry.

Basing 95% plus of your feed requirements on grass is a lovely picturecard scenario on paper, but when you get a year weatherwise like 18 where do you turn, all well and good chastising the high output dairy man but if he didn’t exist would the infrastructure and mills even have existed to keep the national herd feed during the spring/summer we have just endured.....

Albert Johnson · 25-01-2019 12:48PM

jaymla627 wrote: »

Basing 95% plus of your feed requirements on grass is a lovely picturecard scenario on paper, but when you get a year weatherwise like 18 where do you turn, all well and good chastising the high output dairy man but if he didn’t exist would the infrastructure and mills even have existed to keep the national herd feed during the spring/summer we have just endured.....

I'm not chastising anyone simply stating the facts as they appear to me. The high imput dairy comment was more to air a different view point, as with everything in farming your own personal circumstances dictate your decisions. There wasn't a cow milked here since my father's time and I have little knowledge of modern dairying, I haven't the information or the interest to debate the best practices regards milking cows.

As to whether the infrastructure that is currently in place it will be there while lads continue to utilise it, market forces dictate this and are largely out of our control. The late spring was an expensive period here in the north west but the drought had little impact on us. If we could get a summer like that every year farming marginal land would be much easier, wet summers and marginal land are something that need to be experienced to be understood.

Perhaps in dairying it may not be feasible to aim for a yearly average of 95% grazed grass with little supplementation but I don't see how it couldn't be achieved with beef. Dry stock farms are usually running a lower stocking rate from the outset and another drop in beef cattle numbers would be little harm imo. If moderately stocked then I don't see how grazed grass couldn't make up the Lions share of any diet. Feeding anything else is only adding cost that in most cases will not be rewarded in the economic return.

A dairy farmer will probably see some benefit from upping his production but a beef farmer usually doesn't enjoy such prosperity. An increase in the weekly kill mostly corresponds with a pull of the quotes so it's hard to motivate an increase in output. I see the same lads every year being overstocked and the hardship that entails be it buying fodder, renting farms here there and everywhere and constantly battling full slurry tanks. In many cases a hefty single payment from the reference years props up these enterprises but that day is coming to an end.

I believe that the next round of CAP will be much more environment based and we need to adapt to take advantage of this. A few worthwhile scheme's and a smaller national herd that can be produced and marketed sustainably is the way forward as I see it.

Buford T. Justice XIX · 25-01-2019 12:53PM

Albert Johnson wrote: »

I'm not chastising anyone simply stating the facts as they appear to me. The high imput dairy comment was more to air a different view point, as with everything in farming your own personal circumstances dictate your decisions. There wasn't a cow milked here since my father's time and I have little knowledge of modern dairying, I haven't the information or the interest to debate the best practices regards milking cows.

As to whether the infrastructure that is currently in place it will be there while lads continue to utilise it, market forces dictate this and are largely out of our control. The late spring was an expensive period here in the north west but the drought had little impact on us. If we could get a summer like that every year farming marginal land would be much easier, wet summers and marginal land are something that need to be experienced to be understood.

Perhaps in dairying it may not be feasible to aim for a yearly average of 95% grazed grass with little supplementation but I don't see how it couldn't be achieved with beef. Dry stock farms are usually running a lower stocking rate from the outset and another drop in beef cattle numbers would be little harm imo. If moderately stocked then I don't see how grazed grass couldn't make up the Lions share of any diet. Feeding anything else is only adding cost that in most cases will not be rewarded in the economic return.

A dairy farmer will probably see some benefit from upping his production but a beef farmer usually doesn't enjoy such prosperity. An increase in the weekly kill mostly corresponds with a pull of the quotes so it's hard to motivate an increase in output. I see the same lads every year being overstocked and the hardship that entails be it buying fodder, renting farms here there and everywhere and constantly battling full slurry tanks. In many cases a hefty single payment from the reference years props up these enterprises but that day is coming to an end.

I believe that the next round of CAP will be much more environment based and we need to adapt to take advantage of this. A few worthwhile scheme's and a smaller national herd that can be produced and marketed sustainably is the way forward as I see it.

I wouldn't argue with that, Albert, but there's grass and then there's grass.

To get grass grazed at the optimum time for maximum weight gain and maximum growth is a good bit different from what most farmers, myself included here, are doing. Good grass management is a bit different to 'sure they aren't hungry' management.

Albert Johnson · 25-01-2019 03:24PM

I would agree that there is a significant difference between grazing to maximize growth rates and grazing to prevent starvation. It may seem to many that I'm advocating a return to the feudal system of land lying fallow and the communal herd grading on the commons but I'm not that extreme. My own grazing set up leaves a lot to be desired but it works for the moment.

The average farmer is going to be hard pressed to find the capital or indeed the desire to enact a lot of the "advice" metered out by the comic and state bodies. Indeed research stations such as the Derrypatrick herd and others have shown that despite almost limitless resources it still couldn't be made profitable. It's going to be hard for the average Joe with a fragmented holding and 12 cows to enact much of the above advice.

This is not saying that all investment is unnecessary but that targeted spending is required. In an industry that already shows poor returns it would seem to me at least wise to be hesitant to throw good money after bad. Increased productivity should come after adequate profitability and not the other way round imo. If we're to produce more for the same or even less of a return that I struggle to see the point of being even busier fools.

As with everything in the world a balance is required to keep all in harmony. There is bound to be a way to produce a sustainable beef product be it from sucklers or dairy that is profitable and environmentally friendly. If we could identify a way to achieve the above than we have a chance of survival, it's not reinventing the wheel but a hefty task none the less.

Cavanjack · 26-01-2019 08:34AM

What's the story with this American lad going to give a fiver a kg for our beef. Sounds far fetched to me. Anyone know his background or where they found him. I hope it works out.

Bass Reeves · 26-01-2019 10:14AM

Cavanjack wrote: »

What's the story with this American lad going to give a fiver a kg for our beef. Sounds far fetched to me. Anyone know his background or where they found him. I hope it works out.

First off it is for grass fed beef. I imagine that it would need some branding and some rules and regulations. I think we need to start seeing the bigger picture. At present the processors are selling all our beef (even the HE and AA beef) as a commodity product. They dump it onto the bottom shelf of supermarkets across Europe. You would not try to sell wine to the french. Board Bia has been lazy taking our money and running generic promotion campaign's accross the world.

There seems to be a demand for grass fed hormone free beef that is not fed genetically modified grain(maize and soya mainly). Can we develop such a product, brand it and produce it. It is not in the processors interest to develop such a product as they cannot use feedlot beef or large beef finishers to control the product. In general feedlots use straights, byproducts and maize silage to finish cattle. The processors use this feedlot beef to control beef prices. They then put all this beef together and dump it onto bottom shelves across Europe.

If Irish beef can be repositioned maybe by taking 30-50K calves into grass fed rose veal and developing grass fed beef to take another 300-500K head it will lift the floor price of Irish beef. You will also reduce tonnage and this should rise prices as well. As well if we get producer groups legislation passed it would change the imbalance we have at present. At the meeting I was at a lad was talking about top class suckler bulls hitting 500k. Lads need to get away from this type of product. If you are winter feeding cattle you need a contract if no contract leave the shed empty next winter. Winter feeding costs are too high to gamble any longer.

patsy_mccabe · 26-01-2019 11:21AM

Great post there BR. But not just grass fed beef, we also need to push the whole GM free, lowest carbon footprint, high animal welfare unique selling points.

Bass Reeves · 26-01-2019 11:39AM

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

Great post there BR. But not just grass fed beef, we also need to push the whole GM free, lowest carbon footprint, high animal welfare unique selling points.

Yes we need to sort the carbon BS not just for beef but for milk as well. We need to get a proper carbon analysis of beef and milk produced off grass with low and medium rates of rations fed versus feedlot beef and milk. As AJ posted earlier we may need to reduce output to increase profitability. If we can increase profitability we can then consider upping output in the are's that are profitable without compromising the product.

There is a **** load of money being given to quango's in the form of direct government payments, GLAS money, farmer subscriptions and leavies on everything from slaughtered cattle, on tags and on milk to allow research into not just carbon footprint research but also into the genomics of dairy beef bull sires etc. We also need taht if Forestry is planted that this carbon credit goes to farms and against the agri footprint not to be swallowed by the Ireland Inc footprint.

TooOldBoots · 26-01-2019 11:47AM

I don't know how we can honestly claim to be producing a grass based product (Beef or Dairy) any more. Currently most dairy cows here are supplemented with several kg of soya/maize based feed.
As for the beef, its worse with factory finishing units feeding up to 10 -15kg of grain based nuts per animal.Every Weanling you see in the mart has been pushed and hot-housed with meal to the point that they loose the hair.
There's a serious amount of Soya and other grains imported into Ireland

coolshannagh28 · 26-01-2019 12:06PM

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Yes we need to sort the carbon BS not just for beef but for milk as well. We need to get a proper carbon analysis of beef and milk produced off grass with low and medium rates of rations fed versus feedlot beef and milk. As AJ posted earlier we may need to reduce output to increase profitability. If we can increase profitability we can then consider upping output in the are's that are profitable without compromising the product.

There is a **** load of money being given to quango's in the form of direct government payments, GLAS money, farmer subscriptions and leavies on everything from slaughtered cattle, on tags and on milk to allow research into not just carbon footprint research but also into the genomics of dairy beef bull sires etc. We also need taht if Forestry is planted that this carbon credit goes to farms and against the agri footprint not to be swallowed by the Ireland Inc footprint.

The BPM seems to be well aware of these issues and hopefully will move in the direction of addressing the potential margin in upselling our product instead of a large financial exposure in processing .
On your second point , the creep into farmers subsidy has to be reversed , the benefit must go directly to farmers not govt, again the BPM seems switched on to this but the message must be concise.
With forestry ,as per a recent discussion group , the people involved long term had only positives regarding the financial returns and are well aware of the potential of carbon credits in the future if the govt will relinquish them.
One message that was clear from those running the group was that suckler farming has been seen as finished by strategists within the department for at least a decade ,farming is definitely at a crossroads but the balance between the needs of govt, processors and farmers needs to be realigned .

K9 · 26-01-2019 01:32PM

What would be the cut off point from grass fed beef to grain fed with regards the amount of meal fed to an animal?

Coonagh · 26-01-2019 03:13PM

Lads would want to very careful about making a song and dance about feedlots, GM, high welfare and all that Jazz. Do you think the consumer/public will be able to see any difference between cattle killed out of feedlots and cattle killed out of slatted sheds during the winter months? Regarding GHG’s, carbon etc it is worth mentioning that intensively finished young cattle compare very favorably to 100% grass fed cattle and we are still only 4th or 5th in the world in terms of our beef sectors carbon footprint.

Say my name · 26-01-2019 03:16PM

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/food-and-drink/what-s-your-beef-the-problem-with-eating-less-meat-1.3767783

Buford T. Justice XIX · 26-01-2019 03:25PM

Say my name wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/food-and-drink/what-s-your-beef-the-problem-with-eating-less-meat-1.3767783

I read as far as Darragh McCullough and deleted the tab.

Did I miss anything?

Say my name · 26-01-2019 03:29PM

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I read as far as Darragh McCullough and deleted the tab.

Did I miss anything?

5euro/kilo and selling it in Hong Kong as the Irish wagyu.

Buford T. Justice XIX · 26-01-2019 03:31PM

Say my name wrote: »

5euro/kilo and selling it in Hong Kong as the Irish wagyu.

So that's a no?:P

Say my name · 26-01-2019 03:34PM

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

So that's a no?:P

You only get 3 articles free (I believe) from the Irish times. So be careful with those early withdraws.

Fair phucks to her anyway.

coolshannagh28 · 26-01-2019 09:05PM

Say my name wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/food-and-drink/what-s-your-beef-the-problem-with-eating-less-meat-1.3767783

Top girl !

Say my name · 26-01-2019 09:29PM

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

Top girl !

Those Dexters should be classed as a half livestock unit for nitrates and phos calculations.
But then I suppose the people keeping them wouldn't be bothered with such and would be extensive anyway.

coolshannagh28 · 26-01-2019 09:34PM

Say my name wrote: »

Those Dexters should be classed as a half livestock unit for nitrates and phos calculations.
But then I suppose the people keeping them wouldn't be bothered with such and would be extensive anyway.

They count as a full unit for all the schemes so hard to square the circle

Beef Plan Movement (READ OP BEFORE POSTING)

Comments