Why Isn’t The Cattle Industry Vaccinating It’s Cattle Against CORONACOVID19?

THE CATTLE MARKET perspective on vaccines:



What they should be doing is administering these to the cattle.

86 POSTS ON VACCINES on BEEF MAGAZINE site proves cows and other animals receive vaccines.

Frozen Vaccines for cattle – they do it with other vaccines, for other cow diseases, but are not yet doing it with coronacovid19

TAGS: ANIMAL HEALTHVACCINES Chances are, when you purchased a new refrigerator for the house, you moved the old one to the barn. Problem is, in addition to being worn out, these

Clint Peck Contributing editor | Jan 01, 2007

Chances are, when you purchased a new refrigerator for the house, you moved the old one to the barn. Problem is, in addition to being worn out, these old units can be very inefficient compared to modern refrigerators. They freeze items placed near the rear element; in the summer, they barely keep cool because the doors don’t seal well.

Freezing is one of the worst events that can happen to livestock pharmaceutical products. It’s something that can easily happen to everything in the old ‘fridge over a large part of the country during the winter.

“Improperly stored vaccines are a leading cause of immune response failure,” he says. “Not only can this mean money down the drain, but when we use these improperly stored vaccines, we get a false sense of security that our cattle are protected.”

Most labels suggest storing vaccines between 35°F and 45°F….

TAFC ClipBoard:

Humans are animals, so the virus jumped from animal to animal! Have they started testing cows, pigs, lambs, chickens and all the animals the world eats yet?

No, because there’s no science to warrant it.

If it can spread rapidly from human animal to human animal and from non-human animal to human animal, then we need to look at all the non-human animals we eat and see if the virus jumped from non-human animal to non-human animal. Of course it did. Just like it jumped from human animal to human animal. You don’t need a degree in how to raise animals for slaughter to figure that out.

The slaughter industries and governments around the globe are blocking it. That’s a lot of power invested in keeping silent about the food the world eats.

Cattle are given vaccines against other viruses, so we know they can catch viruses. From whom, what animal, do these cows catch these viruses? And do they pass them into the food you eat?

Well yes, if they’re infected and you eat an infected animal. So why so slow to focus on the animals we eat as being carriers and spreaders? Why would they be given vaccines if they can’t spread viruses?

MONEY TAKES THE PLACE OF SCIENCE when someone says there’s no science to back the claim. There’s no science, because there was no testing. And even if they’re pressured to test, they’ll conduct the research in such a way as to obtain the results they seek = no connection.

Animal exploiting industries are the foundation of the world economies. Mess with those economies by messing with the animals they use to support those economies and the people who drive to protect those economies will mess with you.


Is climate science really real? Depends on who’s behind it

TAFC ClipBoard: The most obvious question to me when considering that fourteen percent of methane gas on the planet comes from burping cows, is what are they eating to make them burp and pass gas so much? I know they’re large animals, but the food they’re eating and the drugs they’re taking must have something to do with it.

I thought for a long time that animal rights organizations blaming the burps of cows for global warming was not a good strategy for reducing the human consumption of cows.

What if cows weren’t slaughtered for food or hides? Would animal rights people advocate killing them because they were causing global warming? Wipe out all the cows, and maybe all the other animals who pass gas that contains methane? Humans too? To keep the globe from warming up?

The mass procreation of animals for exploitation is producing abnormally high rates of methane, so sure stop raising cows for exploitation purposes. Don’t raise them at all.

I just don’t think that the warming of the planet should be blamed on the amount of gas animals expel.

The article makes the point that we don’t want to get rid of the wetlands because they contribute the most methane gas. I agree.

The conclusion would then be that we shouldn’t get rid of the cows either. I agree.

But we do get rid of the cows, we eat them – year after year.

Stop raising cows for slaughter regardless of the methane issue.

Next stop will be humans and exploring what groups, races, ethnicities pass more gas than others. sldt


Is climate science really real? Depends on who’s behind it There’s been a lot of suspect science thrown around this election season. It’s time for beef producers to set things straight.

Burt Rutherford | Sep 16, 2020

Among the political talking points that has been spouted during this presidential campaign is that “science is real.” And it is—or at least real science is real. However, “science” advocated by activists and politicians is suspect, and its true objective is in pushing an agenda, not in seeking the truth.

That’s the battle we face as beef producers and that’s why it’s time to step up and make our voices heard.

BEEF Daily Editor Amanda Radke has been beating that drum for years and for BEEF Daily readers, you know that she has beaten that drum loudly the past two weeks. Here’s a little extra ammo to add to your talking points.

Among the many myths about cattle production that has been dethroned by real science is methane. A recent article published by the Beef Cattle Institute at Kansas State University provides some real science that sheds light on the issue.

READ: Log it, graze it or watch it burn

The article, titled “Cows are not the primary cause of recent increase in methane,” notes that atmospheric methane concentration increased 8 parts per billion (ppb) per year during the 1980s, 6 ppb per year in the 1990s, then remained static from 2000 to 2007. However, methane concentration has been increasing at 9 parts per million per year since then.

Ruminant animals certainly produce methane, but facts are facts—estimated enteric methane emissions have increased since 2000, but the global cattle population has remained constant.

So much for the “cows are the cause” argument.

Contribution to global methane emissions by various sources.

methane pie chart.png

Source: Beef Cattle Institute at K-State. Adapted from the Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford.

Based on the change in radio isotope ratio of atmospheric methane, the increase in methane emissions is likely from microbial sources. So where’s it coming from? “Wetlands are the largest natural source of methane emissions and methane emissions from wetlands have also been increasing since 2000,” the article notes.

READ: Mitloehner clears the air on fossil fuels, cattle and climate change

Global temperatures are rising. Are humans the main reason? That’s a discussion for another time. But the article notes that the largest methane growth rates occurred in the tropics and subtropics from 2014 to 2017, which had an average temperature increase of 1 degree C (1.8 degrees F) warmer than the 1880-1909 baseline.

“Methane emissions from wetlands increase with increasing temperatures because of increased microbial activity, but the microbes in the rumen of cattle are at a constant 38 degrees C, (100.4 F) such that global temperature would not be affecting microbial activity in the rumen,” the article notes.

Here’s the bottom line: “Wetlands are the largest global source of methane emissions and are a major driver in atmospheric methane, especially with increasing global temperatures,” the article says.

Related: Beef producers must drive the conversation on cattle and climate change

Does that mean we should drain the wetlands? Absolutely not.

Here’s why: Wetlands are a vital part of a robust environment and provide habitat for a wide range of critters. They are an important part of your conservation efforts and should be encouraged and protected. Wetlands and ruminants have been producing methane for eons and the earth has a wonderful methane cycle that provides a self-cleaning mechanism for naturally produced methane.

So the next time you hear that cows are the cause of increased methane emissions, feel free to step up and make your voice and the facts known.

Source: Is climate science really real? Depends on who’s behind it


Cattle slaughter dynamics show what a year it’s been

“There are many dynamics in cattle slaughter markets in the fourth quarter that will determine total slaughter for the year. Current estimates are for total annual 2020 cattle slaughter to be down roughly 2.5% year over year.”  

TAFC ClipBoard:

I’m looking for much higher numbers. The impact in my view has been minimal. Those numbers don’t look like a mega-sized wrench to me. I’m looking for high double digit percentages. It’ll pick up. The slaughter isn’t going to end slowly. All the indicators are there. Conversions needed to be in place yesterday and taking place now.   Stalling and praying won’t change the universe swing. I have to tell ya, I love the swing.

Cattle slaughter dynamics show what a year it’s been

COVID-19 threw a mega-sized wrench into the machinations of the cattle market. Here’s how that played out for harvest numbers.

Oct 15, 2020Source: Oklahoma State University  

It’s become almost a cliché: 2020 is a year like none other in almost every way. For beef producers, that’s played out in every sector and every market. Throw in a drought, hurricanes, wildfires and who knows what’s next and beef producers seem to be challenged in every way imaginable.  

One area where 2020 has left its large footprints is in cattle slaughter. According to Derrell Peel, year-to-date cattle slaughter through the week ending Sept. 26, 2020 was down 3.6% year over year. This includes a 4.2% decrease in steer and heifer slaughter; a 1.2% decrease in total cow slaughter; and a 3.7% decrease in bull slaughter so far this year. “Varying slaughter patterns across different cattle classes make it difficult to project where slaughter will end up as the year closes out,” notes Peel, Extension livestock marketing economist at Oklahoma State University.  

The biggest component of cattle slaughter is steer slaughter, which is down 4.3% year over year through late September. “Through March, prior to COVID-19 impacts, steer slaughter was up 5.1% year over year. By the end of May, the cumulative steer slaughter for the year to date was down 7.2% before slowly recovering through the summer and early fall,” Peel says.  

Steer slaughter in August and September has been up 2.2% year over year. Steer slaughter is projected to increase 3- 3.5% year over year in the fourth quarter leading to an annual total down roughly 2.5% compared to last year, he says.  

Heifer harvest followed a similar pattern. “In the first half of the year, cumulative heifer slaughter was down 5.1%. In the third quarter of the year, heifer slaughter was down 1.8% year over year, leading to the current year-to-date decrease of 3.9% year over year. Peel projects heifer slaughter to be down 2.0 – 2.5% year over year in the fourth quarter. “This would result in an annual heifer slaughter total down roughly 3.5% compared to 2019,” he says.  

“Beef cow slaughter is up 2.7% for the year to date as of late September. At the end of the first quarter, cumulative beef cow slaughter was nearly 11% higher year over year,” he says. By the end of the second quarter, cumulative beef cow slaughter had decreased to roughly 3.5% higher than the previous year.  

The year-over-year increase slowed more in the third quarter with beef cow slaughter in August and September unchanged from last year. Beef cow slaughter is projected to be roughly 2% above year-ago levels in the fourth quarter, leading to an annual total beef cow slaughter roughly 2.5% higher year over year, Peel says.  

“Dairy cow slaughter has decreased sharply since June, leading to a year-to-date decrease of 4.9% in late September. The year over year decrease in dairy cow slaughter since late May has been nearly 9%. The rate of decrease is expected to slow in the fourth quarter and may be down roughly 3%. Total annual dairy cow slaughter is expected to be down about 4.5% year over year,” he notes.  

“There are many dynamics in cattle slaughter markets in the fourth quarter that will determine total slaughter for the year. Current estimates are for total annual 2020 cattle slaughter to be down roughly 2.5% year over year.”

Further, Peel expects carcass weights for steers and heifers to finish the year at record-large levels, with steer carcasses exceeding 900 pounds for the first time. “Lower cattle slaughter and larger carcass weights are projected to result in total beef production close to unchanged from last year. Total 2020 commercial beef production is projected to be 27.1 – 27.3 billion pounds.”  

Source: Oklahoma State University Cow-Calf Corner newsletterwhich is solely responsible for the information provided and is wholly owned by the source. Informa Business Media and all its subsidiaries are not responsible for any of the content contained in this information asset.  

Source: Cattle slaughter dynamics show what a year it’s been


Cancelled rodeos & livestock shows raise alarm bells

TAFC Clipboard: Writer Amanda Radke speaks of animal rights activists as: “these anti-animal agricultural extremists”.

The first thing the world needs to do is to stop calling the enslavement, torture and slaughter of animals agriculture. There is nothing agricultural about me as a human animal, and nothing agricultural about any other species of animal enslaved, tortured and slaughtered for profit.

The slaughter industries are not about providing healthy food to humans, otherwise they’d switch to plants. They convinced the world that they needed to eat animals to survive, which was a lie, and now the world knows it and is turning away from that lie.

They convinced the world that animals didn’t feel pain, while they hid the interior of slaughterhouses from the public and the horror that was happening right in our neighborhoods. And now the world knows it and is turning away from that lie.

Animals don’t have roots, plants do. Animals are not designed to be grown like plants. The slaughter industries and factory farmers convinced the world that animals could be grown like plants by using the same terminology that agriculture uses to grow plants. And now the world knows it and is turning away from that lie.

They deceived the public and force fed us their meats by shaming our parents and indoctrinating us at school telling us the lie that we’d die if we didn’t consume animals, because vitamin B12 was only found in animals. And now the world knows it and is turning away from that lie.

It’s about making profits from using every square inch of a healthy animal for nefarious purposes that could be better provided by a non-animal source. They did it so long, becoming immune to the terror and pain they inflicted as if it didn’t exist. They became too big to fail and spread their venomous lies across the planet. And now the world knows it and is turning away from that lie.

The planet is abundant with plant food. Animals are not plants and plants are not animals.

As for Amanda Radke, animal rights activists and advocates are not anti-animal, they are pro-animal. The slaughter industries are anti-animal.

Cancelled rodeos & livestock shows raise alarm bells


Amanda Radke | Oct 24, 2020

For years, animals rights activists, environmental extremists and the Hollywood elite have targeted livestock producers and our way of life.

Should they have their way cattle, pigs, poultry and sheep would be obsolete. Meat, dairy and eggs would be off the plate. And our body sovereignty and our ability to choose the diet that best works for us — well, that’s off the table, too. Eat your vegetables and forget about the steak.

Fast-forward to 2020. A pandemic has circled the globe, and here in the United States, people are suffering due to the physical, emotional and economic repercussions of the virus, the shutdowns, the school closures and more. Now, we are seeing these extremists take advantage of the chaos to push their agendas further.

I’ve covered this at length in previous blogs, and to bring you up to speed, here are the links of various initiatives they have pushed this year:

Currently, agriculture’s future hangs in the balance in numerous ways, but it’s very apparent the threat in places like California, where the ballot includes items like Prop 15. If passed, Prop 15 would increase property taxes on things like agricultural buildings and fruit trees. This tax hike might be the final straw that breaks the camel’s back for many California farmers and ranchers.

And then there are repercussions that seem to be happening naturally that surely please these anti-animal agricultural extremists.

I’m talking about the closures, cancellations and postponements of major rodeos and livestock shows. From the National Western Stock Show to the Fort Worth Stock Show to the Cheyenne Frontier Days (and countless others), event planners and the cities who host these agricultural expositions are making the tough call to shutter the doors on these time-honored traditions.

But the question remains — will they ever come back once the dust settles on the COVID-19 pandemic?

With increased pressures from activist groups and greater liabilities to have animals in public places where they might be in danger from acts of violence from “vigilantes,” it appears these groups might finally be caving to the mob.

It is reassuring to see that many of these events are being picked up and moved to more friendly cities, and it’s maybe even exciting to think about how some of these events might even improve with a new venue and new leadership spearheading the event.

It’s also perhaps a relief for many agricultural families to attend these events, which now aren’t open to the public. Maybe we can finally truly focus on showing our animals and competing without the fear that a mom with a stroller full of kids might naively get kicked or run over when they get to close to our animals.

However, what does this truly mean for our future in the animal agriculture industry? Without a public place to connect with urban consumers, how do we tell our story and show people in the community who we are and what we do? If we continue to let these major events cancel, what is to become of our place in society? When does showing cattle or competing in rodeos become one of those antiquated things that states decide needs to go away for good?

Now I don’t mean to be doom and gloom today, but I think these cancellations underscore the importance of taking our stories to social media. I think we need to continue to model to our young people what showing cattle is truly all about. And we need to show them how to pivot and move forward in challenging times like this.

That is exactly what we are seeing as volunteers literally move mountains to host these shows in other places, but I urge you to think about the intent of these cancellations? Is it truly just about the virus or is there something larger and more long-term going on here?

The opinions of Amanda Radke are not necessarily those of or Farm Progress.

Source: Cancelled rodeos & livestock shows raise alarm bells


Faith and food: How personal beliefs shape food choices

TAFC ClipBoard: In my view, religion doesn’t have much to do with what people eat. Nowhere in the bible or teachings does it instruct people to eat animals; in fact it does the opposite:

“Genesis 1:29 And God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food.”

The Jews and Muslims who insist on slaughtering animals by hanging them upside down, slicing their throats and bleeding them out while conscious, do so based on superstitions that claim stunning the animal injects fear, thus poisons into the meat.

Somehow they don’t think hanging cows upside down, slicing their throats and bleeding them out while they writhe in pain doesn’t create the same fear response as stunning them unconscious before committing the carnage.

It looks like the slaughter industries are pandering to the religious cults who for perverse reasons want to see the suffering animals meet their death fully conscious, so they can enjoy eating their flesh without fear of poisons entering their bloodstream from being stunned before death.

It’s barbaric is what it is, and if someone subscribes to a religion based on barbarous acts, much like religious sacrifice, out of the dark ages, then laws must be passed to protect the animals from that religion and that horror, just to put so-called clean meat on the plate.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that those involved in the slaughter would easily bend to the will of future customers who want the slaughterers to perform unnatural acts on the animals as they die. Slicing the throat of a healthy animal, held upside down in a barrel, thrashing to be free is perverse, unnatural and barbaric and needs to be banned worldwide.

It shouldn’t even be considered – the pros and cons. There should not even be a debate.

The only faith-based position on slaughter should be not to raise animals for slaughter in the first place. It is stark evil to dismember an animal for consumption when the planet is abundant with plants for food.

The author appears to be non-accepting of those who he claims impose their convictions of not eating animals on others, while at the same time accepting of those whose convictions involve slaughter of animals for food without anesthesia: “…others feel compelled to more loudly advocate that all consumers should discontinue eating meat on moral grounds and feel justified in attempting to impose their convictions on others.

If these activists were few in number and only advocated for themselves not to consume the slaughter, then he’d be okay with it? Of course, if there was no slaughter he and his family would be out of business. So he courts the Jews and Muslims who demand the essence of a surgical procedure absent anesthesia for each animal they kill.

The killing is immoral and wanting the animal to feel the pain of such a brutal death is immoral on top of immoral. sldt


Greg Bloom | Oct 22, 2020

I grew up on a farm where we raised a lot of our own food, including the meat we ate from our own animals. I can’t remember ever having any ethical or moral issues in my mind or conscience about raising animals for food or eating meat in general. We weren’t a very religious family in the church-going sense, but we did believe that God made all things, including providing food and animals for eating.

Eating meat was always a normal part of life, and this included the animals we raised having to eventually die so we could be sustained with protein. This seemed totally normal to me. I was never really forced to consider the ethical implications of eating meat, nor did I have to defend my beliefs or my choice to eat meat to others. Only later in life did that ever become a factor.

As an adult, I worked for seven years in a beef fabrication plant that processed hanging beef sides into sub-primals, steaks and grinds. Most the beef we sourced was slaughtered in a kosher plant, so we expanded into kosher beef production with Israeli-trained rabbis working alongside our meat cutters.

The rabbis came into our plant four days a week, and I had many chances to talk with some of them about their beliefs, convictions and training. We also started processing halal beef, and I worked closely with the halal certification agency to set up our halal program.

Producing and selling kosher and halal beef afforded me a broad exposure to people of different faiths, and I hold faith convictions of my own. I discovered that the rich, long-held traditions of eating meat, including slaughtering and processing methodologies, is critically important for many people of faith. By selling kosher beef and halal beef to customers of faiths that I otherwise never would have met, I’ve begun to learn not only how their convictions prescribe the proper handing of meat, but why.

In my next few blogs, I’ll be considering how our religious convictions, or lack of any, affect our decision to eat meat. Though discussing religion can be a socially awkward topic, it can be beneficial to our understanding of how it affects our industry, in the context of a rational and peaceful discussion.

In a forthcoming blogs, I’ll be considering kosher and halal processing and the faith-based convictions that each hold that drive their meat-eating decisions. Why do they continue to hold to the ancient traditions they practice? Why do some kosher programs only allow the chuck and rib portions of the beef carcass to be consumed? Why is the demand for halal meat production increasing so rapidly?

Then I’ll devote a blog to reviewing the newly published book, “What Would Jesus Really Eat: The Biblical Case for Eating Meat.” You can find that book by clicking here if you’re interested in reading it.

I’ll examine the position of a growing number of people, some religious and some secular, that eating meat is immoral and unethical. Some quietly refrain from eating meat because of personal sensitivities or because it bothers their consciences. But others feel compelled to more loudly advocate that all consumers should discontinue eating meat on moral grounds and feel justified in attempting to impose their convictions on others.

It’s obviously a very different world now than it was in the 70s and 80s when I was growing up on the farm. Back then, no one seemed to challenge the ethics of eating meat. Today, polarizing belief systems complicate the landscape in ways that are hard to predict.

Bloom is owner of U.S. Protein, an international distributor of premium meats. Contact him at greg@usprotein.comThe opinions of the author are not necessarily those of or Farm Progress.

Source: Faith and food: How personal beliefs shape food choices


Is BVDV hiding in your herd?



Read on. Are you eating diseased cattle? How would you know?

“BVDV has been around pastures and feedlots a long time, and it continues to challenge herd management. Not only does it spread easily and show very few clinical signs, this complex virus continues to evolve, presenting new strains with shifting viral subtypes.”

Has the animal you’re eating been vaccinated and if so, then how harmful to humans? Do you think the ones who know would tell the truth?

I thought animals couldn’t spread viruses, didn’t you? If it was so harmless, then why the need to vaccinate against it? Ninety percent go undetected.

If it can be found in the bloodstream of cattle, then why not in the bloodstream of those who eat the blood?

Is BVDV hiding in your herd?

Learn more about this sneaky virus to improve your herd’s disease prevention protocols

Industry Voice by Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health | May 01, 2020

Up to 90% of bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) infections are subclinical and go unnoticed. However, the most common indication of disease prevalence is poor reproductive performance, including decreased conception rates, abortions, stillbirths and weak calves. And that’s definitely something that producers pay attention to.

“BVDV not only contributes to reproductive failure, the virus causes suppression of the animal’s immune system, making it more susceptible to other diseases,” said Richard Linhart, DVM, DACT, Boehringer Ingelheim. “Between the costs associated with poor reproductive performance and the increased likelihood of cattle developing other diseases, BVDV can leave a devastating impact on all herds.”

BVDV basics

BVDV spreads easily through most livestock environments, including feed and water. It invades the animal’s respiratory and reproductive systems, spreading between heifers, cows, calves, steers and bulls. Cattle can become infected with BVDV in one of two ways:

  • Transient infections are acquired from other animals after birth. Infected cattle can shed the virus in saliva, nasal and eye discharge, urine, feces, milk and semen. These infections typically last a few weeks and are a minor source of viral shedding.
  • Persistent infections are acquired from the dam while in utero. The virus is spread through the bloodstream to the fetus. Calves that survive may have birth defects or become persistently infected (PI).

“PI calves can look sickly, or like poor-doers, but they can also look very normal, just like any other calf in the pen,” explained Dr. Linhart. “However, PI calves are born shedding tremendous amounts of the virus, and will continue to shed the virus for their entire life.”

BVDV has been around pastures and feedlots a long time, and it continues to challenge herd management. Not only does it spread easily and show very few clinical signs, this complex virus continues to evolve, presenting new strains with shifting viral subtypes.

Gain the upper hand with a sound prevention plan

There is no treatment for BVDV infections, so establishing an effective disease prevention plan is crucial. Successful prevention programs typically include each of the following management strategies:

  1. Identifying and eliminating PI calves. “It’s really important to cull PI calves, because they’re the source of ongoing infection to other animals in the herd,” Dr. Linhart stressed. In fact, between 70% and 100% of non-vaccinated or immunocompromised cattle become infected when exposed to a PI calf.1,2 Testing calves prior to 60 days of age will help identify animals that should be culled or isolated from the herd.
  2. Establishing a biosecurity program. By upholding strict biosecurity standards, producers can help prevent a BVDV wreck. Maintaining a closed herd, buying cattle from only BVDV-free herds, quarantining newly purchased cattle and sanitizing potentially contaminated objects such as stock trailers or chutes are all ways to help ensure your cattle are not exposed to the virus.
  3. Enhancing herd immunity with effective vaccinations. Vaccinating is one of the best ways to ensure cattle are protected against BVDV. “We know there are several strains of BVDV that affect cattle, and most vaccines on the market provide good protection against Type 1a and Type 2,” asserted Dr. Linhart. “However, not all vaccines are able to provide adequate protection against Type 1b, the most predominant subtype in cattle.”3

BVDV Type 1b presents a significant threat to herd health, as it accounts for nearly 69% of all BVDV-positive cattle.3 Dr. Linhart advises producers to select a vaccine specifically labeled to protect against the most common BVDV subtypes, including Type 1b.

Visit for more information

To help producers, veterinarians and industry professionals address the challenges of this complex disease, Boehringer Ingelheim created Website visitors can view a complete resource library, submit an anonymous sample for testing and explore a nationwide heat map that makes it easy to identify the disease subtype(s) most prevalent in your area.

Source: Is BVDV hiding in your herd?


USDA advances RFID tag program for cattle disease traceability

TA-FC ClipBoard: Currently there are thirty-nine million calves/cattle slaughtered yearly in the USA. Yet there are only eight million tags distributed. There’s no talk about how that is going to keep tabs on all the cattle, unless they tag every fourth or fifth calf in a population that’s regulated.

It sounds like Adolph Hitler tagging Jews with tattoos to keep track of them? I used to wonder why bother if they were all going to slaughter anyway? Only he knows and he’s dead.

One cow gets sick and they all get sick? So these tags are for contagious diseases, not necessarily disease caused by other factors which might just as easily sweep through a herd without actually being contagious.

That’s a lot of time, effort and money going into tagging and monitoring the tags, which isn’t covered in the article (the monitoring part). How does the tag alert authorities of impending or current disease process? How do they actually work?

How many cows have to get sick before the alarm sounds? Do tags also alert to downed cows? Can the tag tell if a cow is sick? Which symptoms does it look for?

Does the tag cover corona-type viruses as well? How? Can cows get the plaque or a version of it?

Nobody has to tag a plant, do they? I wonder though if tagging plants, every other row, interspersed, could detect viruses before they take out a whole crop?

How would you do it? I know one thing for sure, the plant wouldn’t resist.

The plant industry isn’t very good at tracking where plants came from once they end up in a produce market, when a human disease breaks out due to faulty, contaminated processing.

So are these tags really meant for tracing a cow once it’s been slaughtered, dismembered and rendered in case the flesh is tainted? You mean that tag number stays with every bit of the flesh, bone and blood till it reaches its final resting place in your gut? I don’t believe it. You mean two cows don’t get mixed up, once they’re dead and being ground or slashed and pulled apart? I don’t believe it.

Thirty-nine million cows dead yearly in the USA by human hands and those humans are worried that a few may get sick and die before they have a chance to kill them?

USDA advances RFID tag program for cattle disease traceability

APHIS awards contracts to provide cattle and bison producers with up to 8 million low-frequency RFID tags.

Aug 17, 2020

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) recently awarded contracts to purchase up to 8 million low-frequency radio frequency identification (RFID) ear tags, which will help increase overall animal disease traceability in cattle and bison.

APHIS said the contract allows it to purchase additional tags each year for up to five years.

“USDA continues its commitment to protecting our nation’s animal agriculture by increasing traceability in the cattle and bison sectors — in this case, by providing free RFID tags to interested producers,” USDA undersecretary for marketing and regulatory programs Greg Ibach said. “This will not only help offset the costs of switching to RFID tags but also help us more quickly respond to potential disease events.”

USDA believes that RFID devices will provide states and the cattle and bison industries with the best opportunity to rapidly contain the spread of high-economic impact diseases, APHIS said.

Use of RFID tags better positions the livestock industry and state and federal veterinarians to accurately and quickly trace animals exposed or infected with potentially devastating diseases before they can do substantial damage to the U.S. livestock industry, the agency said.

These RFID tags will be provided to animal health officials and will be distributed for use in replacement breeding cattle and bison at no cost to the producer, APHIS explained. RFID low-frequency official calfhood vaccination (OCV) button tags are available for brucellosis-vaccinated animals, and official “840” white button tags are available for non-vaccinated heifers.

APHIS noted that free metal “National Uniform Eartagging System” tags will remain available as USDA continues to receive comments and evaluate next steps on its proposed RFID transition timeline.

That proposal is available for review and public comment through Oct. 5, 2020.

Contracts for the RFID tags were awarded to three U.S. tag companies: Allflex, Datamars and Y-Tex. Contracting with all three manufacturers will allow USDA to procure the number of tags needed to meet an industry volume equivalent to the number of replacement heifers in the U.S., APHIS said.

As part of its overall effort to increase traceability in cattle and bison, APHIS distributed more than 1.1 million RFID tags to 38 states between January and July 2020. Each state veterinarian distributes the tags in a way that best serves their industry. For more information on availability and distribution of tags, producers can contact their state veterinarian’s office. Producers can also purchase RFID tags for their animals by contacting any of the companies approved to manufacture official identification RFID tags, APHIS said.

Source: USDA advances RFID tag program for cattle disease traceability


Market Reports | Beef Magazine



Find weekly market reports on fed cattle, feeder cattle, slaughter cows and the boxed beef trade from industry experts Wes Ishmael and Ed Czerwein.

Source: Market Reports | Beef Magazine



  • Why is the Animal-Free Chef Advertising for Beef Magazine? Well, nothing is really for free, and if one wants to call exposure of the cattle industry free advertising, then fine.

Over here at Animal-Free Chef the goal is to educate the public regarding prejudice, discrimination, enslavement, torture and slaughter.

The animal-abusing industries that form the basis of most all economies worldwide participates in this longest running holocaust in history and is a perfect example how humans enslave, torture and slaughter those animals they deem inferior to human animals, thus their right by supremacy to exploit them for profit and pleasure.

It’s better to know what they’re up to, than go about one’s way without due consideration of their plots, plans and policies.

The world is changing rapidly. Everyone knows the slaughter will end sooner rather than later, and it’s up to each country to figure out on what they will base their economies in that future that we are already in.



Feeding demand for ground beef

TA-FC ClipBoard: So what does the world need now that we know about the high demand for ground cow beef? Lotza ground plant round!!

Feeding the demand for ground beef

Most U.S. beef imports go toward feeding the nation’s massive appetite for ground beef.

Wes Ishmael | Jul 13, 2020

Ground beef is such a staple in American diets and culture that it can be easy to overlook its role in the bigger picture of U.S. beef production and marketing.

U.S. beef consumption last year was 58 pounds per capita, according to Derrell Peel, Extension livestock marketing specialist at Oklahoma State University. Of that, ground beef represented about 26 pounds, or about 45% of total domestic beef consumption.

In some ways, ground beef is to the overall beef complex what the stocker business is to the overall cattle business for both consumers and producers. Both aggregate related but diverse raw material and blend them into a more homogenous product of greater value. Both also serve as a shock absorber of sorts, leveling out the seasonal ebb and flow of supplies, so the product is available year-round.

When it comes to beef trim, for example, Peel notes that peak steer slaughter usually occurs from May to late June. Peak fed heifer and beef cow slaughter typically peak in the fall. Most dairy cow slaughter occurs toward the first and last quarters. Bull slaughter — a miniscule contributor to total lean trim volume — comes mostly in the summer.

Plus, ground beef production, similar to the stocker sector, contributes to maintaining relative price relationships because of the ability to warehouse product and use products of various kinds.

“Ground beef is one of the major ways the entire beef complex maintains balance,” Peel says.

There’s nothing simple about it, though. Ground beef represents a complex production system within the hypercomplex cattle and beef industries.

Ground beef 101

For purposes here, figure that fed cattle produce 55% lean beef trim. That’s lots fatter than the 75%-to-80%-and-higher lean ground beef consumers typically see. So, you blend the fatter trim with a higher proportion of leaner trim that comes from slaughter cows and imported beef.

Similar to figuring a least-cost ration for cattle, Peel explains those in the meat business mix and match a menu of lean sources to arrive at a specific percentage lean ground beef product for the lowest possible price.

“The most economical formulation for ground beef will change with changes in relative prices, market conditions and product demands,” Peel says.

Lean trim sources on any given day range from fresh 85% lean trimmings to imported 90% lean trimmings to the bottom round.

To a degree, Peel says ground beef production also mirrors the dual, specialized supply chains that characterize the overall industry.

Food service — restaurants, schools, institutions and the like — account for about 54% of total food expenditures in the U.S., according to Peel. Beef products flowing through this chain are often bulk- packaged and then further processed for portion control. Ground beef in this sector uses domestic fat trim, along with fresh and frozen domestic and imported lean beef trim.

Conversely, retail grocery represents about 46% of total U.S. food expenditures. Much of the beef in this supply chain arrives at retailers in case-ready packaging, ready for labeling. Ground beef here is comprised mostly of domestic, fresh lean and fat beef trim.

Imports key to U.S. ground beef

Over the years Peel hears a common question: Why do we import beef? Don’t we produce enough here at home?

“We produce plenty of beef, but it’s not in the right proportion of products relative to our demands in the market,” Peel says. “To maximize value in the industry, we support our ground beef market with imported lean beef trim.”

Then Peel walks the questioner through some numbers.

First, the Livestock Marketing Information Center estimates total beef trim used in the U.S. last year at 8.5 billion pounds (see graphic). Of that, 27% (2.3 billion pounds) was from domestic beef and dairy cows; another 26% (2.2 billion pounds) was imported trim.

Livestock Marketing Information Center

Incidentally, Peel says about 72% of all beef imported to the U.S. goes toward domestic ground beef production. He explains about half of U.S. beef imports last year came from Australia and Canada, followed by Mexico, New Zealand and Brazil.

“Roughly, it takes the trim of one cow to add to the trim of one fed animal. We slaughtered 6.4 million cows in the U.S. last year, and 26 million fed steers and heifers,” he says. “You begin to see the challenge right away

“We would have to slaughter about twice as many cull cows in the United States to replace the imported trim and still make everything balance with this huge volume of fatty trim that we produce in the fed cattle industry.”

There are options, all of which come at higher cost and provide less value.

For instance, Peel says the U.S. could decrease ground beef production by about 45%. As mentioned, domestic consumers currently demand 45% of their beef consumption as ground beef. Plus, the fatter fed cattle trim currently used in ground beef production would have to find a new, lower-value home in the form of such things as tallow and pet food.

The U.S. could maintain current levels of ground beef production by utilizing more muscle cuts, which have more value in other markets.

You could also run 10% to 15% of the yearlings as range beef and market them for values similar to cull cows.

“All of those alternatives would result in lower value to the U.S. cattle industry,” Peel explains. “The way markets work, we are increasing total value to the industry by sourcing lean where we can get it cheaper to meet the needs of that market, while letting other products that could be used as a source of lean go into other markets where they have a higher value.”

The United States is a net beef exporter on a value basis. This year, for example, the latest quarterly Outlook for U.S. Agricultural Trade from USDA’s Economic Research Service projects beef and veal exports at $7.2 billion, with beef and veal imports of $6.1 billion.

“Adjustments in export and import flows collectively serve to smooth out total volumes of beef available for U.S. consumers,” says Glynn Tonsor, agricultural economist at Kansas State University, in Overview of U.S. Beef Production, Export, Import and Domestic Consumption Trends: 2003-2019.

Total U.S. beef production last year was 27.23 billion pounds. Of that, Tonsor says 3.02 million pounds of beef were exported, 3.06 million pounds of beef were imported. Total domestic beef disappearance was 27.28 billion pounds, which corresponded to 57.97 pounds per person, given U.S. population growth.

“Therefore, 11.10% of total U.S. beef production in 2019 was exported, and 11.21% of total U.S. beef disappearance was sourced from imports,” Tonsor explains. “There is a -0.53 correlation between annual export and import flows consistent with imports increasing when exports decline, and vice versa.”

“While this may be surprising, this synergistic relationship reflects differences in products involved, the role of imported products as inputs (commonly for ground beef production) into U.S. domestic consumption markets, and value differences associated with these volume flows,” Tonsor writes.

Source: Feeding demand for ground beef

TA-FC ClipBoard: So what does the world need now that we know about the high demand for ground cow beef? Lotza ground plant round!!


New TV show “Tough As Nails” celebrates everyday Americans

TA-FC ClipBoard: Let’s make it clear here that the agriculture they’re talking about is the ‘raising for slaughter industry’, and making the cattle industry cool and sexy once again.

“Witnessing first hand how food is grown? Well, animals aren’t food and they’re not plants, so they’re not grown like the cattle industry wants the world to once again believe. They’re raised from before birth to slaughter maturity.

Once that genie got out of the bottle and once slaughterhouse observational tours were banned, everybody knew that what went on inside was anything but cool and sexy – except if you’re a pervert and get off on watching animals get dismembered while listening to their screams.

And once rogue undercover reporters took the videos and circulated them, the world knew for sure that there was no love happening behind those doors in those stalls.

“…toilet paper, hand sanitizer, meats, dairy, eggs and other products we can’t live without come from…” No mention of plants here.

“Raising the livestock you love”? Who said anything about loving livestock? Isn’t it deadstock that people love? If they loved livestock they wouldn’t be able to kill the babies they raised for your plate.

So now “hard-working Americans” can be equated with slavery, sordid and deadly. No slave leaves alive. The reason these slave masters and killers keep the country running is because we built our economy on the slavery and slaughtering of innocent animals.

“Callouses on the hands, and tough as nails”, but you left out the horror. You left out the holocaust.

They say they don’t do it for the money. Geez. Serial killers don’t kill for the money either.

I’m all for country. Just minus the slaughter part. Grow plants. There’s no good coming from raising animals for slaughter. It’s not cool, sexy or worthy work.

“…this country’s essential workers: real people in real life who are real tough…”. Yeah, it takes a real person who has a real life who is real tough to raise and kill an innocent cow.

This all-new reality competition squares off everyday Americans who get their hands dirty while working long, hard hours to keep the country running.

Amanda Radke | Jul 31, 2020

Does agriculture have a public relations problem?

Perception of who we are in agriculture has been a constant struggle we have faced as more consumers move away from rural communities in favor of urban life.

This problem has escalated in recent years for a multitude of reasons — one, greater efficiencies in the industry have resulted in fewer hands involved in the work of putting food on the table; two, an abundance of food at the grocery stores means people never have to worry about where their next meal will come from; and three, instead of people being able to witness first-hand how food is grown, information derived from social media, activists, politicians and Hollywood has resulted in more confusion than ever before.

As a result, it’s been difficult to find our common ground and our shared values. I’ve always believed, however, if we could sit down with our counterparts, we would find we care about the same things when it comes to purchasing food at the grocery store to feed our families — safety, nutrition, taste, affordability, environment and animal welfare.

Even knowing we share these commonalities, there’s still a great deal of work to be done to make agriculture cool and sexy once again.

The one silver lining of the pandemic has been the “essential workers,” those who provide the goods and services we need to function in our everyday lives, are in the spotlight. All of a sudden, we care more about where our toilet paper, hand sanitizer, meats, dairy, eggs and other products we can’t live without come from. There’s a stronger push to get to know the people behind the products, and the opportunities are great if we can take advantage of this open window to share our stories.

However, in the current political climate, you may want to simply go off the grid, ignore the craziness of the outside world, shut off the mainstream media and just keep working the land and raising the livestock you love.

I totally get it, and I go back and forth from feeling like I need to reach out to our consumers to thinking it’s time for me to shut down and hide away from the world for a bit.

If you need a distraction for a moment, may I suggest a television show that celebrates the hard-working Americans who provide the food, fiber and energy to support our country and the world.

CBS has a new show called, “Tough As Nails,” and a friend alerted me to this really awesome series. This all-new reality competition squares off everyday Americans who get their hands dirty while working long, hard hours to keep the country running. In season one, we get to meet a welder, firefighter, farmer, roofer and Marine Corps veteran, just to name a few.

According to CBS, “These competitors, who consider the calluses on their hands a badge of honor, will be tested for their strength, endurance, life skills, and, most importantly, mental toughness in challenges that take place at real-world job sites.

“One competitor will be crowned champion, but nobody will go home. Even after they “punch out” of the individual competition, they will have the opportunity to win additional prizes in the team competitions that continue throughout the season,” CBS said.

“‘I was inspired to create this show almost a decade ago because of my working-class family of farmers, gold miners, builders and coal miners,” said host Phil Keoghan. ‘I’m proud of my family and wanted to shine a light on people who are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty to do a hard day’s work. Now, more than ever, it is important for all of us to recognize this country’s essential workers: real people in real life who are real tough.’”

Ohio farmer, Melissa Burns, represents agriculture well in the series.

She describes her typical day on the farm, “Every day is different. My day starts anywhere between 3:00 – 4:00 AM. House chores get completed, then depending on weather and the season you will find me in the fields or at the feed mill. We work before the sun comes up and will not stop until after dark or all the work is complete for that day.”

When asked what makes her tough as nails, Burns said, “Getting up every day and putting in the work. We don’t do it for the money. We don’t do it for anyone but ourselves. I am a tough farmer, a tough female farmer!”

It’s shows like this that are a win-win because it brings rural America and those who work in these important fields to the forefront. When it comes to a public relations campaign for the food, fiber and energy industries, this one gets the job done. Check it out and let me know what you think!

The opinions of Amanda Radke are not necessarily those of or Farm Progress.

Source: New TV show “Tough As Nails” celebrates everyday Americans