kansas cattle/beast from east

[spin cycle]

firstly i've put this in Agricultural Matters cos i think it's a general issue.....but mods please move if i'm wrong

secondly.....i think it's ok to be wrong during a debate provided all accept the outcome of the discussion arrives at a sorta productive outcome.....only ego and individual pride prevent this IMO

SO...i'll 'pitch an arguement' about the title.....having being involved on the other 'kansas thread' and seen counter claim to my original reaction that ,i admit, may have been 'an emotional reaction'

during 'the beast from the east' the 'victims' (sheep) were in their normal environment and were equipped for it.....however what happened was an exaggerated/extreme circumstance

during the 'kansas heatstroke' the cattle were penned in high density and ,although normally the feedlot worked. were not suited....eg black cattle absorb more heat.....in effect vulnerable because of the man made system.....i don't think in any way you could 'stretch it' as approaching a 'normal environment'

thus i'm happy ,at the moment, to condemn the 'kansas cattle keepers' whilst 'excusing' 'the beast from the east'

am i wrong?......vote 'no' to agree with me or 'yes' to disagree

 

[wrenbird]

Perhaps not so much blame the cattle keepers but the kind of huge, corporate food-producing businesses that mean that, purely because of the economics, this is the way things are done.
Livestock become ‘units’, not ‘live’ stock?

 

[Wood field]

Is it yes your wrong.. or no your right ?
I agreed with you by the way but that’s just my opinion
Never lost any sheep during the beast from the east, but lost four in a drift last winter, these were just gimmer lambs away on tac

 

[JockCroft]

firstly i've put this in Agricultural Matters cos i think it's a general issue.....but mods please move if i'm wrong

secondly.....i think it's ok to be wrong during a debate provided all accept the outcome of the discussion arrives at a sorta productive outcome.....only ego and individual pride prevent this IMO

SO...i'll 'pitch an arguement' about the title.....having being involved on the other 'kansas thread' and seen counter claim to my original reaction that ,i admit, may have been 'an emotional reaction'

during 'the beast from the east' the 'victims' (sheep) were in their normal environment and were equipped for it.....however what happened was an exaggerated/extreme circumstance

during the 'kansas heatstroke' the cattle were penned in high density and ,although normally the feedlot worked. were not suited....eg black cattle absorb more heat.....in effect vulnerable because of the man made system.....i don't think in any way you could 'stretch it' as approaching a 'normal environment'

thus i'm happy ,at the moment, to condemn the 'kansas cattle keepers' whilst 'excusing' 'the beast from the east'

am i wrong?......vote 'no' to agree with me or 'yes' to disagree

Where do I vote?. By the way its a "NO".
Huge feedlots, few staff and probably no one made a decision, even a tanker running around spraying cattle with spring water should have helped at least reduce losses.
OR was it a convenient insurance/finance claim. Have US beef prices dropped significantly. (Noticed on another thread that their Lamb prices have fallen dramatically.

 

[Yale]

Apparently the deaths were avoidable and down to bad management.

A very expensive mistake!

 

[Yale]

Think about it,this country and chicken sheds,either the ventilation is insufficient or the fans fail and the whole shed cops it.

 

[daveydiesel1]

Think about it,this country and chicken sheds,either the ventilation is insufficient or the fans fail and the whole shed cops it.

But the loss wouldnt be anywhere near 10,000 cattle. If thier in a feedlot then they are pretty near ready for slaughter so for round countin say worth £1000 each which is probably undervalued but that works out at £10,000,000

 

[neilo]

But the loss wouldnt be anywhere near 10,000 cattle. If thier in a feedlot then they are pretty near ready for slaughter so for round countin say worth £1000 each which is probably undervalued but that works out at £10,000,000

Is the value relevant?
The 10,000 cattle were across the region, not on one site iirc. There are apparently 2.3 million cattle in feedlots just in Kansas, which is bigger than the whole of the uk iirc.

 

[neilo]

Where do I vote?. By the way its a "NO".
Huge feedlots, few staff and probably no one made a decision, even a tanker running around spraying cattle with spring water should have helped at least reduce losses.
OR was it a convenient insurance/finance claim. Have US beef prices dropped significantly. (Noticed on another thread that their Lamb prices have fallen dramatically.

Most/all feedlots in that area, or indeed most of the US, would be set up for the heat. They have sprinkler systems plumbed in, and wouldn’t be relying on old Sid trundling round with an old slurry tanker.

Quite insulting to suggest this tragedy is some sort of insurance scam tbh.

 

[roscoe erf]

how about a bit of perspective here before the hang em high lot get going
how about some actual facts about this anyone
But Iowa Corn, quoting two non-media livestock experts, reported that up to 10,000 cattle could have been killed in the heat wave.

lot of twisted knickers here but very short on facts

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment knew of at least 2,000 cattle deaths due to high temperatures and humidity as of Tuesday, spokesperson Matthew Lara said.

farmers their own worst enemy

 

[neilo]

firstly i've put this in Agricultural Matters cos i think it's a general issue.....but mods please move if i'm wrong

secondly.....i think it's ok to be wrong during a debate provided all accept the outcome of the discussion arrives at a sorta productive outcome.....only ego and individual pride prevent this IMO

SO...i'll 'pitch an arguement' about the title.....having being involved on the other 'kansas thread' and seen counter claim to my original reaction that ,i admit, may have been 'an emotional reaction'

during 'the beast from the east' the 'victims' (sheep) were in their normal environment and were equipped for it.....however what happened was an exaggerated/extreme circumstance

during the 'kansas heatstroke' the cattle were penned in high density and ,although normally the feedlot worked. were not suited....eg black cattle absorb more heat.....in effect vulnerable because of the man made system.....i don't think in any way you could 'stretch it' as approaching a 'normal environment'

thus i'm happy ,at the moment, to condemn the 'kansas cattle keepers' whilst 'excusing' 'the beast from the east'

am i wrong?......vote 'no' to agree with me or 'yes' to disagree

One could ask, as several did at the time, why the sheep that perished during the ‘Beast from the East’ weren’t provided with shelter and housed in a nice big shed?

Yes, I know that’s ridiculous, but read plenty of people suggesting it at the time.

 

[daveydiesel1]

Is the value relevant?
The 10,000 cattle were across the region, not on one site iirc. There are apparently 2.3 million cattle in feedlots just in Kansas, which is bigger than the whole of the uk iirc.

If u owned them u might think the value would be relevant

 

[neilo]

If u owned them u might think the value would be relevant

It’s all relative. Financially, it’s the same proportion of your asset gone.

 

[JockCroft]

Most/all feedlots in that area, or indeed most of the US, would be set up for the heat. They have sprinkler systems plumbed in, and wouldn’t be relying on old Sid trundling round with an old slurry tanker.

Quite insulting to suggest this tragedy is some sort of insurance scam tbh.

Hi @neilo
Didn't mean to be insulting, but "Scepticism is often the precursor of Reality" and it is the US.

 

[toquark]

I suppose the argument is that sheep on open range in a blizzard have the ability to seek shelter and demonstrate natural instinct which will help preserve life. Cattle in a feedlot cannot.

 

[onthehoof]

Trouble is people have short memories or don't look far enough back in history
I try and plan my farming activities around 'worst case scenario' events, most weather events we see today have happened before and been worse, think beast from the East - think winter '63, other events such as summer' 76 and Easter '98, floods of' 47, while we can't predict when these events will happen they sure as hell will, the Kansas beef men should have expected those temperatures and should have known what the consequences would be because it had almost certainly happened before though probably on a much smaller scale but if you don't learn from history or think it won't repeat itself you are either foolish or you must be prepared to take the loss on the chin, so I would hope my system could cope with most things that history has taught us might be around the corner, I worry for people in the Fens as another '47 will happen and the Fens will flood again as they have several times before it's just a question of when, if you've got a full 5000t grainstore 15ft below sea level make sure you are well insured.

 

[JP1]

I know technically Kansas is described as the centre of the USA. The next State East is Missouri and I remember @Walterp always citing this as the State he'd buy a farm if starting out over there

I would imagine being in the centre Kansas farmers see both extremes of annual weather ?

 

[beardface]

Where do I vote?. By the way its a "NO".
Huge feedlots, few staff and probably no one made a decision, even a tanker running around spraying cattle with spring water should have helped at least reduce losses.
OR was it a convenient insurance/finance claim. Have US beef prices dropped significantly. (Noticed on another thread that their Lamb prices have fallen dramatically.

Why do we assume big operations have few staff? Most large ag operations have more staff per head or acre than farmer Jones on 200 acre. It's simply down to spreading overheads. When I was in the states the livestock industry had far more labour per acre than the cropping industry. Veg would of trumped both obviously.

We seem to constantly berate all other farmers, yet expect the public to support us. I'd say let's have more respect for people who work equally as hard, if not harder in some countries, to produce food for their nation and others.

 

[spin cycle]

Why do we assume big operations have few staff? Most large ag operations have more staff per head or acre than farmer Jones on 200 acre. It's simply down to spreading overheads..

really ....surely 'labour' is one of the biggest overheads and keeping cattle like that is labour efficient

feck me whats the point of keeping animals like that if there's no labour saving

 

[beardface]

really ....surely 'labour' is one of the biggest overheads and keeping cattle like that is labour efficient

feck me whats the point of keeping animals like that if there's no labour saving

I think we get labour units per head and total labour confused. Example, farmer Jones has 200 acre. Does all stock work himself and has to check them stone come what may. Farmer Smith has 2000 acres. Employs a stock manager and 2 stock workers. Including himself, that's 4 available workers. All able to cover sickness, holidays and emergencies. Just because the labour per head is lower doesn't mean that there's fewer staff.
The larger farm is also more likely to have the vet onsite regularly and a robust health plan as its spread over a higher head.
You get what I'm saying?