EDMONTON – The Alberta Cattle Commission cannot ignore concerns that it
has grown too unwieldy to listen to producers, says a consultant
looking at the organization.
“It’s quite serious,” said Jerry Bouma, who was hired by the newly
created Alberta Beef Council to look into ways the province’s cattle
producers can have a more effective voice.
“The people that have come together are really very motivated to see
some changes made,” said Bouma. He spoke to the Alberta Cattle
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
Commission’s semi-annual meeting about his report.
If the commission doesn’t change its structure to more fairly represent
the province’s 30,000 cow-calf producers, feedlot owners, auction
market associations and packers, members of the new beef council say
they will turn against the 30-year-old organization.
“You could see fracturing, you could see litigation and you could see
people get fed up and take acts of civil disobedience.
“They’re being forced to contribute to an organization without having a
mechanism to effectively be part of the decision-making process,”
Bouma said.
More than $10 million a year is collected by the commission through a
$2 per head checkoff. Money is used for promotion, market development,
research and industry development.
Opponents of the organization aren’t opposed to the checkoff, said
Bouma, but they want a greater say in how the money is used.
“I don’t think people are saying ‘we don’t want to pay the checkoff.’
What people are saying is ‘we want a better and clearer way to be part
of the decision-making process.’ ”
Bouma said changes to allow representation from all parts of the
industry on the cattle commission board would alleviate most of the
problem.
Greg Conn, ACC chair, asked how many cattle producers the new group
represents.
“We’d be foolish to ignore it and we’d be foolish to ignore all the
producers we represent. Just like politicians, we have to listen to
everyone and sort it out and have a process to move on,” said Conn.
He and the rest of the ACC executive were scheduled to meet with the
beef council group this week to see how far apart the sides are, or if
minor changes can be made.
“We’re open to suggestion to how we can represent producers better,”
said Conn. “If the vast majority of producers want some kind of change,
we need to change, but we have to figure out is there a select group or
is it in fact a concern of a majority of producers?”
During his presentation, Bouma said a small group of producers were
pleased with the cattle commission, a small group opposed the
organization, but the majority were “unengaged” in the organization.
“The vast majority are not engaged in this type of discussion. They
largely fall in the category of unconcerned or uninformed.”
Conn said just because the majority of producers are not part of policy
discussions doesn’t mean they’re not satisfied with the organization.
At its meeting with the beef council, the cattle commission plans to
bring a series of guiding principles. These will maintain the need for
the one producer-one vote system, rather than elections weighted for
the number of cattle owned. Also key to the commission is maintaining
the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, funded largely by the Alberta
organization.
Tom Livingston of Duchess, Alta., said he thinks it’s “ludicrous” that
people claim they aren’t represented on the organization when
two-thirds of the delegates in the zones won their seats on the
commission by acclamation.
“Anybody who sells cows in Alberta can be represented,” he said.
