The Strike is over. What happens now?

Anto_Meath wrote: »

I have said it here before. There is no point having a strike again, building up a back log of cattle for the factories to clobber us with the second they get a chance, like they are now. Farmers need to be smarter. Let them kill the cattle but dont let them get them out in the fridges or stand together and only provide them with the animals they dont particularly want like P1 grading animals. Sanding outside the gates fighting with your neighbours is no good for the farming industry. I hear lads in the marts at stupid crap like they wouldnt by certain other farmers cattle because of the stance the seller took during the protests... Farmers fell out because of the strike yet factories carry on as normal.

It's not sustainable for factories to give in to protests, they'd never have a moments peace

Hard Knocks wrote: »

Fair, but the farmer doesn’t deserve to be troded on either

Until we buiid an alternative market we'll never know whether it's the processors that's trodding on us or not, apparently a head honcho in Beef plan has admitted at a public meeting that they got it wrong in that the offal market is not the money spinner they claimed.
It's stupid of farmers to depend on one market and even more stupid to destroy it which is what Beef Plan are doing on social media

wrangler wrote: »

Until we buiid an alternative market we'll never know whether it's the processors that's trodding on us or not, apparently a head honcho in Beef plan has admitted at a public meeting that they got it wrong in that the offal market is not the money spinner they claimed.
It's stupid of farmers to depend on one market and even more stupid to destroy it which is what Beef Plan are doing on social media

Agree with your point .... but did Someone not post that Larry & Co put barriers in place to stop the live trade to UK, so alternative options are

Base price wrote: »

I saw that earlier. I wonder how it will go considering many farmers still have nightmares over getting payment in the past when live shipping to the Italian market re: Garavelli/TLT receivership.
Who is behind it, when do the farmers get paid? Would farmers not be better off selling through their local mart and they can be assured of payment?

Base price wrote: »

I agree about the backlog problems caused by the cluster fook of a protest but least you get paid by the factories and marts.

Base price wrote: »

To avoid confusion and I didn't mean to infer that one organisation was the same as the other. There is a difference between Emerald Isle Beef Producers and Emerald Green (livestock export company) that was put into liquidation a few years ago.

Emerald Isle Beef Producers group was set up recently by Eamonn Corley and other members of the Beef Plan organisation - the fellas who instigated the recent beef factory blockades.

Anyway notwithstanding the above, who pays for the cattle when they are collected from your yard. Many a farmer has been caught on the wrong side of the fence and has to represent cheques in the hope of payment and in some cases in order to establish a paper trail for future litigation.
https://www.farmersjournal.ie/cattle-company-wound-up-in-high-court-184370

https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/second-beef-producer-group-in-the-pipeline/

I see that the Beef Plan movement/Emerald Isle have now tried to address farmers concerns over payment on their FB page - they must be reading F&F too along with IFJ, Agriland etc. I will try and copy the post.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/285936028688976/permalink/479184112697499/

ruwithme wrote: »

The next time there's a blockade at factory gates. The owners will immediately lay off staff close there gates and just wait.

They will have alternative sources for meeting demand.

lessons have being learned by the factories,meaning any future strikes in the years ahead will be futile.

Wouldn't be certain of that.

Next time they might end up with a Beef industry regulator, just for starters.

That alone will send chills through them.

Danzy wrote: »

Wouldn't be certain of that.

Next time they might end up with a Beef industry regulator, just for starters.

That alone will send chills through them.

What could a regulator do? If it tried to force a higher price factories stop buying until farmers beg for price drops

Water John wrote: »

Transparency.

The lack of transparency is what pisses off a lot of people imo.

They feel like they are being taken for a ride.

Why don't farmers just stop calling the factory procurement agent?? Like WTF? You are getting a bad price-then don't sell. Set yourself up not to sell. Cut numbers for a year, have younger & lesser stock.
WTF is the point in filling one's gills with stock when they are losing money???

lalababa wrote: »

Why don't farmers just stop calling the factory procurement agent?? Like WTF? You are getting a bad price-then don't sell. Set yourself up not to sell. Cut numbers for a year, have younger & lesser stock.
WTF is the point in filling one's gills with stock when they are losing money???

This is what I will be trying to build more of an element of into the way I do business going forward but

1) Its not worth much of a **** if significant numbers of farmers don't do so as well....because if its just small numbers run it this way prices remain low for a unfeasibly long times to hold the stock comfortably and cost effectively....the amount of time you would have to hold would cost more than the price rise

stock need to be fed, housed during the winter months, looked after if they get sick, tested etc.....all this adds cost and means you need a hell of a price rise to justify holding for long periods of time....+ fit cattle are taking resources from developing cattle

2) your screwed with the 30 month rule as their is a ticking clock on every animal and if you go beyond that the animal becomes devalued so you are under the gun to get stock coming near the limit off...if you feed to being fit months before that limit (more costly than letting the animal come fit at a more leisurely pace - meaning you need a better price to justify it too) and you then have window to hold within the 30 months if prices are low its costing you money maintaining them.....in fact you probably won't maintain them as you can only feed intensively for the last 8-12 weeks afaik....(not sure on that as I don't often pump them before sale - try to get them of grass

normal businesses would insist on a guaranteed margin/contract to be in place before being as willing to give such an undertaking as to produce beef for processors...its just a pity farming isn't a normal business...I think the processors are making an unfair profit with such a dysfunctional set up where farmers can be screwed left right and centre and still nearly have to come back for more (and if they are not making unfair margins then they aren't selling the product properly with the setup they have) .....

Id personally be delighted to see that 30month rule confined to the pits of hell, its the single most option reducing/restrictive thing in producing beef with low cost .....you could even make an argument for its removal or extending it on an environmental basis imo.........How can they go to 48 months in Scotland or is that bull****?

Base price wrote: »

I wonder did the Chinese come up with the requirement for under 30 month old cattle or did the factories/Bord Bia sell it to them considering that QA is not a requirement.

A country where dogs are eaten, pigs were fed straight from the toilet pipe.

I'm going for a Bord Bia sales pitch for 20 bob.

amacca wrote: »

If that is the case then they are screwing the people they claim to help.

They insisted on under 30 month beef from Brazil in July when they reopened the market to them, how in the name of jesus they could verify it is any ones guess, its handier to verify it in Ireland with our database

mf240 wrote: »

They want under 30 month beef and beef from tb free farms.

Tb free for 6 months.

amacca wrote: »

What's wrong with tb free beef from animals under say 36 months or 42 months

There would be no back log for their friends in the factories if the Chinese buy all over age beef

Buford T. Justice VI wrote: »

It's a relic from BSE times, they judged the risk of contracting BSE from u30month animals to be minimal but increasing every month over 30 months.

Just how sound is their judgement or the research behind it I wonder....

Its mighty convenient timeline to put pressure on a primary producer, increase animal turnover and turn beef into a low value commodity.

Buford T. Justice VI wrote: »

iirc 30 months was about half the age of the youngest case found. It's one of those things brought in for one reason and kept on because it became familiar.

Now it's just a stick to beat farmers with.

Sounds an awful lot like they were just making **** up ... if that "it was about half the age of youngest case" thing is true

Keeping things because they are familiar......

Ffs why aren't farmers as a group screaming blue murder about it at every opportunity it is just a stick to beat the producer with and it will continue impact negatively on dairy sector too

I would think it would be a lot better to get rid of it environmentally speaking as well

amacca wrote: »

Sounds an awful lot like they were just making **** up ... if that "it was about half the age of youngest case" thing is true

Keeping things because they are familiar......

Ffs why aren't farmers as a group screaming blue murder about it at every opportunity it is just a stick to beat the producer with and it will continue impact negatively on dairy sector too

I would think it would be a lot better to get rid of it environmentally speaking as well

If they're killing beef cattle it's too late to be looking for environmental brownie points.
They're the customers, only choice we have is to produce for them or not,
They want the lighter carcase, simples

Well, have you all got your tractors serviced/washed for next week
Will it get support, many on here going

alps wrote: »

You're a mine of inaccuracies this morning and bitterness towards sections...

Contamination came from the millers and took out any size herd susceptible to it..

Incorrect yes in later cases but at the start there was bonemeal being used in Ireland mainly by some large scale lads. These were much the same lads that kept using hormones after they were banned.
It was bone meal mainly from NI that caused the issue as the British government allowed it to be cooked it to a lower temperature. When the issue arose and it was linked to bone meal it was stopped first in Bovine rations and then when there was a fear of cross contamination they banned it use completely.

Sheep breeder wrote: »

The over 30 months were killed last every day and offal, blood, all separated from unders. Agree about the bonemeal. Can’t understand why lads are so caught up on the 30 month cattle, under cattle is what the market wants and they at most spend 2 winters on farm and with breeding now should be well fit to hang, the over could be on farm for 3 winters and bigger cost and less performance and more nitrates produced and higher costs.

I'd have to take issue with that...there might be less nitrates produced as you could run a lower stocking rate in a less intensive more extensive type system

less inputs in terms of grain and fertiliser too, weight put on with less costs an let the animal get to around 600kg -650kg mark at a more leisurely pace ..less pressure on the land too and probably verifiably less emissions (even though I'd have big issues with demonising farmers for that when you consider how much other sectors are emitting + the very questionable methodology of calculating agricultural emissions)

less animals might mean a better price per head too...maybe i have lost the head but in my head thats better than the increasing animal turnover and increasing inputs caused by the need to get an animal off under some ****ing pen pushers 30 month limit ..or worse all the vested interests 30 month limit....you are working harder to earn less at that imo


really what the utter **** would be wrong with pushing it to even 36 months.....Id imagine the BSE risk would be negligible if there was one at all....from the description earlier it sounds a lot like that 30 month limit was plucked out of someones hole and its been retained because it suits to put pressure on the little guy and keep the rest in business

if I'm wrong and you can prove it I'll apologise and never again buy a dairy cross that wasn't born 6 months before his birthdate on the card

I'm not suggesting I want to supply antibiotic laced tb ridden beef to a market that doesn't want it

I'm suggesting maybe just maybe the 30 month limit isn't justified and perhaps the market doesn't really want it below that age at all .... maybe the system does to suit all the other "stake holders"

When I seen that a couple of years ago (and perhaps still) some of the most in demand flavoursome beef in certain restaurants comes from what would have been cull dairy cows that were purchased for the express purpose of giving them a couple of years to graze naturally and fatten up (thus making them years upon years over any magic 30 month limit) ....it sort of blew any legitimate scientific validity a 30 month limit had for me out of the water......any recent nuggets of info about it have only served to reinforce my belief it is complete bull****

That to me means that the over 30 month product has been devalued in the interests of everyone except the farmers .... they should be worked up about it....

Of course if I seen some peer reviewed actual research from respected scientists/experts in the area or a report not funded/influenced by vested interests I would be open to changing my mind

This was an interesting interview yesterday in the business section of the Independent.

https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/beef/fast-food-giant-mcdonalds-warns-of-longterm-threat-to-beef-sector-38727226.html

Anto_Meath wrote: »

Friend of mine killed 16 Hex heifers on Monday, all out of his own dairy cow. This would be the 5th year killing heifers belong to the He mop bull he has. Every other year his heifers graded O= to R- but on Monday his heifers graded P+ to O=. Same type of heifers as he has been sending in for 5 years and would have got the same amount of meal for the same cows and off the same bull. As he said its bad enough getting shafted on price but to be getting shafted on grades is really putting the knife in.
So this what the Factories have done in response to the 8 cent uplift in the price and the inclusion of the bonus for the O- grade.
What is really need is independent grading for cattle in every factory as they are taking the mick big time at the minute.

There isn't even consistency in the one factory, nevermind across the industry.

You'd have to suspect that the sales demand has more impact on the carcasse grade than its conformity,

You'd have to wonder are more in spec carcasses sold than are paid for.