Search Results

33 items found

  • SCA's Plan Regulations | SCA

    Home Page Back to Check Off SCA's PLAN REGULATIONS Saskatchewan producers and livestock dealers have been paying a provincial and federal levy since April 2012. The levy or check-off, as it is also known, is collected by SCA on the sale of cattle in Saskatchewan. ​The $4.50 check-off is used to finance the operations of SCA and to help achieve the objectives outlined in the National Beef Strategy. Of the $4.50 collected $2.50 is a non-refundable national levy paid to the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off agency and the remaining $2.00 funds the SCA’s operations including research, advocacy and communications.

  • Saskatchewan Cattlemen's Association

    On the land. For your health. For Saskatchewan. Join our email list First Name Last Name Subscribe Email I agree to have you add me to the SCA email list just to receive information and news. Thanks for subscribing! About us Read More Currently under construction Latest News I'm a title January 09 I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It’s easy. Just click “Edit Text” or double click me to add your own content and make changes to the font. Read More I'm a title January 09 I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It’s easy. Just click “Edit Text” or double click me to add your own content and make changes to the font. Read More

  • What is the Check off | SCA

    Check off Page Home NATIONAL CHECK-OFF The national check-off is a mandatory levy of $2.50 per head collected on cattle sales to fund research and marketing activities on behalf of the entire industry. It is collected from cattle producers when they market their cattle by provincial organizations, using their existing collection systems involving auction markets, order buyers, brand inspectors and others who handle cattle sales. The goal of the national check-off is twofold — to increase sales of domestic and export beef and to find better and more efficient methods of producing beef and beef cattle. The national check-off generates over $8 million annually and is a critical source of revenue to fund initiatives that will advance the industry and build strong markets for Canadian cattle and beef. The national check-off solely funds research and marketing activities and does not provide any funding to the Canadian Cattlemen's Association which is funded separately through provincial organizations. The national check-off provides industry funding for the Beef Cattle Research Council responsible for the industry's national research program as well as funding for Canada Beef and their work in domestic and U.S. marketing and market development in Mexico, Asia, and more recently Russia and the Middle East. An independent study evaluating economic benefits from the national check-off shows that Canadian beef cattle producers' funding of research and marketing activities has delivered strong return on investment — and compared to other commodities falls squarely within the range of values reported for other regions and commodities and is higher in some cases. While the national check-off provides the core industry funding for research and marketing, it does not fully cover the costs of all programs and activities. Supplementary funding is obtained by leveraging the national check-off, attracting $6 for every $1 of producer check-off funds. The national check-off provides "industry funds" used as the basis to access matching dollars from other sources. At the present time, Canada's beef cattle check-off does not apply to live animals exported from Canada, nor does the levy apply to imported cattle and beef products. It is estimated that application of the national check-off to imported product would generate an additional $800,000 annually. SCA Levy Collection Order The collection of the levy is authorized by The Cattle Development Plan Regulations and the details for the collection of the levy are set out in the Commission Order that has been recently amended to reflect the increase in the provincial levy. Every cattle producer will continue to be required to pay a levy on: - every head of cattle that the cattle producer sells in Saskatchewan; and - every head of cattle raised or fed in Saskatchewan that the cattle producer delivers for sale outside of Canada, e.g. to the United States. When cattle are sold in Saskatchewan ​ A cattle producer who sells cattle in intra-provincial trade (within the province) in Saskatchewan is required to pay SCA a levy in the amount of $4.50 per head of cattle sold by that producer. Cattle are sold in intra-provincial trade when both the seller and the purchaser reside in Saskatchewan. When cattle are sold, the buyer is required to deduct the levy from the money payable to the cattle producer and forward the amount deducted to SCA. If the buyer does not deduct the levy from the sale proceeds, both the buyer and the cattle producer are liable to SCA for the amount of the levy. A buyer is a person who buys cattle and includes a livestock dealer, a livestock agent and an abattoir. When cattle are delivered for sale outside of Canada When a cattle producer delivers cattle raised or fed in Saskatchewan for sale outside Canada, the cattle producer is required to pay SCA a levy in the amount of $4.50. If a livestock dealer or livestock agent licensed in Saskatchewan is involved in the transaction that dealer or agent is required to deduct the levy from the money payable to the cattle producer and forward the amount deducted to SCA. Canada Beef Inc In July of 2011 the Canadian Beef Cattle Research, Market Development and Promotion Agency (the National Agency), the Beef Information Centre and Canada Beef Export Federation consolidated to form one national beef cattle research, marketing and promotion agency known as Canada Beef Inc. Canada Beef Inc. is a continuation of the National Agency and is a promotion-research agency established under the federal Farm Products Agencies Act. Canada Beef Inc. is authorized by Proclamation to promote the marketing and production of beef cattle, beef and beef products for the purposes of inter-provincial and import trade and to conduct and promote research activities related to those farm products. The SCA appoints a producer to represent the Saskatchewan producers on the Board of Directors of Canada Beef Inc. The operations of Canada Beef Inc. are financed by the charging and collection of a non- refundable federal levy imposed by the Beef Cattle Research, Market Development and Promotion Levies Order and by contributions from each of the provincial cattle associations. The national levy portion of the SCA levy is Saskatchewan’s contribution to Canada Beef Inc. for national beef cattle promotion, marketing and research. Federal Levies Order ​ Under the Beef Cattle Research, Market Development and Promotion Levies Order (the Federal Levies Order) every person who sells beef cattle in inter-provincial trade is required to pay to Canada Beef Inc., for each head of beef cattle sold, a federal levy in the amount prescribed by the Order. The amount of the federal levy payable on the sale of beef cattle sold in inter-provincial trade in Saskatchewan is $4.50 per head of beef cattle sold to match the Saskatchewan levy. Inter-provincial trade occurs when beef cattle are sold outside the seller’s province of residence. Only one check-off is paid When cattle are sold in Saskatchewan, either the SCA levy or the federal levy is collected, not both. The SCA levy of $4.50 is collected on cattle sold within Saskatchewan or outside of Canada. The federal levy of $4.50 is collected on cattle sold in inter-provincial trade in Saskatchewan. ​ Livestock dealers selling cattle owned for not more than 7 days The requirement to pay the levies does not apply to livestock dealers and livestock agents who, in the ordinary course of business as a livestock dealer or agent, feed or own cattle for a period of not more than 7 days. Refund of the provincial levy The provincial portion of the SCA levy is refundable at the request of the cattle producer. Cattle producers requesting a refund of the provincial levy must apply to SCA by August 31 for a refund of the provincial levy paid in the previous levy period. All refunds will be paid by SCA on or before October 31 of each year. Remittance of the SCA levy or federal levy The Saskatchewan resident purchaser or livestock dealer who is responsible for deducting and remitting the SCA Levy or the federal levy is required to remit the amount deducted to SCA by the 25th day of the next month following the month in which the cattle were sold in Saskatchewan. A livestock dealer licensed in Saskatchewan (regardless of where the livestock dealer resides) who is responsible for deducting and remitting the SCA Levy on cattle delivered for sale outside of Canada, is required to remit the amount deducted to SCA within that same time period. For example, if cattle were sold in Saskatchewan or delivered for sale outside Canada on August 15th, the money deducted would have to be remitted to SCA by September 25th. Province of origin Remitters must provide a breakdown of the number of head of cattle for which a levy has been deducted and remitted by province of origin. On the Statement of Levy Deductions, the province of origin and head count is determined by the residence of the seller. It has been agreed between the provincial cattle associations and Canada Beef Inc. that the province of residence is determined by the address of the cattle producer selling the cattle. For example, if a livestock dealer is making a cheque out to a producer from Alberta, that dealer will report those cattle as being from Alberta. Buyers are required to identify the province of origin of producers selling cattle in inter- provincial trade to enable Canada Beef Inc. to pay the fee to each of the respective provincial cattle associations. Collection Fee Buyers will continue to be able to deduct a collection fee of 5 cents per head for each levy deducted and remitted to SCA. Buyer Audits Ensuring the levy collection process meets the regulatory requirements is a responsibility of the SCA. As such, the SCA will conduct random audits to ensure that all buyers are properly collecting and remitting the SCA levy and the federal levy to SCA. Saskatchewan cattle producers selling in another province When a Saskatchewan cattle producer delivers cattle for sale to another province in Canada, the purchaser or livestock dealer in that province will be deducting and remitting the federal levy payable in that province. If a Saskatchewan cattle producer sells cattle in Alberta or Manitoba, the Federal Levy is $4.50. Under the Federal Levies Order the purchaser or dealer is required to remit the federal levy to the provincial cattle association where the purchaser or livestock dealer resides. A livestock dealer licensed in two provinces could, depending on the transaction, be carrying on business in one province or the other province. Deduction Requirements When a buyer (which includes a purchaser, livestock dealer, livestock agent and abattoir) deducts the SCA levy, or the federal levy, as the case may be, the buyer is required to provide the cattle producer with a document that clearly shows: - the number of head of cattle sold; - the amount of the levy deducted; - the name, address and phone number of the buyer; and - the date of the transaction.​

  • Canadian Beef Cattle Check-off | SCA

    SCA's PLAN REGULATIONS Saskatchewan producers and livestock dealers have been paying a provincial and federal levy since April 2012. The levy or check-off, as it is also known, is collected by SCA on the sale of cattle in Saskatchewan. ​The $4.50 check-off is used to finance the operations of SCA and to help achieve the objectives outlined in the National Beef Strategy. Of the $4.50 collected $2.50 is a non-refundable national levy paid to the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off agency and the remaining $2.00 funds the SCA’s operations including research, advocacy and communications. What is the National Check-Off The national check-off is a mandatory levy of $2.50 per head collected on cattle sales to fund research and marketing activities on behalf of the entire industry. How much do producers pay? Under Construction

  • ADOPT 20211032 | SCA

    Back to ADOPT Projects HOME Account: Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association Total Funds Requested: $14,900 Funded: Yes Amount: $3,000 ​ Objectives: Determine whether there is any benefit to growing fodder on livestock operations versus conventional feeding methods by analyzing its potential production, nutritional, and economic benefit Why is this Important? 1) Farm in Saskatchewan have said they "drought-proofed" their farm 2) hydroponically grown barley improved milk yield by 8.7% compared to corn silage 3) Could improve metabolized energy 4) Can reduce anti-nutritional factors on low-quality feeds such as phytic acid 5) Could allow producers to reallocate land 6) Economics of production need to be analyzed Methodology: 1) Compare treatment group, fed fodder daily on top of typical ration. 2) Compared to cattle in control group, planned on siliar diet with grain in place of fodder. 3) Assess average daily gain, feed efficiency, nutrient content of rations, cost of production, and feed quality. Questions to consider: Notes: We are administrating this project. Putting some funding in it would likely help as well. This was discussed at a Board meeting as well. Summary: Moisture conditions are quite variable throughout Saskatchewan, though the needs of feed for our cattle herds remain consistent. The project demonstrates the use of a fodder growing system that would "drought-proof" farms and ranches through the use of hydroponically grown barley, and compares it to conventional feeding methods.

  • ADOPT 20211076 | SCA

    Back to ADOPT Projects HOME Account: East Central Research Foundation Total Funds Requested: $9,128 Funded: Yes. Leads into carbon sequestration. Cutting low - should keep erosion into consideration from fall harvest Fall grazing is needed Amount: $1,825 Objectives: 1) Demonstrate that various intercrops of spring and winter cereals can provide silage or greenfeed yields comparable to spring monocrops, with the additional benefit of fall grazing 2) Quantify the impact of a spring and winter cereal intercrop on the initial silage or greenfeed yield as well as the yield potential from the regrowth after harvest for fall grazing ​ Why is this Important? 1) While intercropping may result in a somewhat lower forage yield compared to a spring cereal alone, it will produce a higher quality silage, as cutting low will gather much of the winter cereal component 2) total forage production may actually be higher for the intercrop when including fall grazing 3) Attention and information is needed on best seeding and fertilizer rates. 4) Intercropping spring and winter cereals extends the production of quality pasture into the fall and provides the producer with some flexibility. In a year like 2021, regrowth on annual cereals harvested for silage or greenfeed extended the grazing season significantly for many producers 5) the presence of winter cereal with a spring cereal means the forage as a whole can benefit from early and late season rainfall. ​ Methodology: 1) 2 order factorial with 4 replicates with 3 different spring cereals, grown as a monoculture or a companion crop of winter triticale or Italian ryegrass. 2) Harvest with a forage harvester when spring cereal has reached soft dough stage, for silage or greenfeed yield. 3) Harvest 2nd time in late fall for plots with winter cereal, to represent grazing. 4) Measure greenfeed yield and quality, grazing yield and quality, plus data weather. Questions to consider: Notes: ​ Summary: Intercropping spring and winter cereals extends the production of quality pasture into the fall and provides the producer with some flexibility. In a year like 2021, regrowth on annual cereals harvested for silage or greenfeed extended the grazing season significantly for many producers. The presence of winter cereal with a spring cereal means the forage as a whole can benefit from early and late season rainfall.

  • ADOPT 20211038 | SCA

    Back to ADOPT Projects HOME Account: Southeast Research Farm Total Funds Requested: $56,000 Funded: Yes Amount: $11,200 Objectives: 1) Compare two seeding methods for four forages or forage mixes either as a simple planting or combined with a barley cover crop in a saline area 2) compare with canola for economic value in 2023 to assess the difference between forage and annual crop productivity in saline areas Why is this Important? 1) Farmers tend to want to use a ‘cover crop’ to increase biomass production on the establishment year and suppress weed growth, but the cost of this cover crop is not included in the eligible establishment costs. Establishment in marginally saline areas is tricky and requires the right sort of plants 2) There are many acres within fields of grainland that are currently unproductive and ill-suited to annual grain production of canola and pulses 3) Producers are under seeding forages to gain a cash crop while forage is established, but it is not recommended. Nevertheless, there are benefits that should be highlighted so it can be a recommended practice. ​ Methodology: 1) Using Canola in saline soil as a control, also plant 8 other mixes, with half being saline forage mixes. Replicate 4 times. 2) under crop half of the plots with barley 3) Apply nutrients and weed control accordingly 4) Measure emergence, plan count, biomass, and persistence Questions to consider: Notes: Will occur at Clavet, SERF and WARC ​ Summary: There are many acres within fields of grainland that are currently unproductive and ill-suited to annual grain production of canola and pulses. Farmers tend to want to use a ‘cover crop’ to increase biomass production on the establishment year and suppress weed growth, but the cost of this cover crop is not included in the eligible establishment costs. ​ Forage establishment in marginally saline areas is difficult and requires the right sort of plants. To provide more insight, this project will compare two seeding methods for four forages or forage mixes either as a simple planting or combined with a barley cover crop in a saline area. They will then compare the economic values in 2023 to assess the difference between forage and annual crop productivity in saline areas

  • ADOPT Projects | SCA

    HOME Click on the links below for project summary

  • ADOPT 20211036 | SCA

    Back to ADOPT Projects HOME Account: Saskatchewan Forage Council Total Funds Requested: $28,035 Funded: Yes. Continue to support in kind as well. Amount: $5,600 Objectives: 1) Develop BMPs for 4R on forage 2) Demo use of nitrogen loss inhibitors 3) Include Gastec passive dosimeter tube to measure nitrogen gas losses to compare relative env impact Why is this Important? 1) 4R principles have been slow to catch on with forages. 2) Nitrogen loss inhibitor products are well regarded in crop production, but limited uptake in forages 3) This project will add another inhibitor, as well as dositubes to better validate results 4) Results in spring of 2020 had good results with inhibitors, with some sites also seeing forage crude protein increase. 5) Extreme drought last year didn't allow for results to shine. Nothing grows, even with fertilizer, if it doesn't rain. 6) Additional sites will be added. 7) These methods can showcase how to grow more forages on the same or less land. 8) Producers are reluctant to use traditional nitrogen as they have significant nitrogen losses. Methodology: 1) Test soils to note needed fertilizer application 2) Broadcast fertilizer in late April/early May depending on sites (Saskatoon, Swift, Weyburn, Yorkton, and North Battleford 3) Measure nitrogen loss with Dositube 4) Calculate forage yield, forage quality, 5) Compare weather conditions 6) Provide economic analysis Questions to consider: Notes: We are actively putting together videos and other material to showcase the results from Part 2 - However, due to the drought, they aren't as significant as Part 1. Hence, Part 3 ​ Summary: Forage producers are reluctant to use traditional nitrogen as they have significant nitrogen losses. Nitrogen loss inhibitor products are well regarded in crop production, but there has been limited uptake in forages. However, previous demonstrations in years with adequate moisture showcased good results, as forage crude protein increased. This project will add an additional inhibitor, and provide an additional year of data with (hopefully) more precipitation

  • Reasearch Priorities | SCA

    Home Home Saskatchewan Cattlemen's Association Research Priorities 2022 The SCA also makes investments in research, development and promotion of the beef cattle industry in Saskatchewan. The Board of Directors, works to ensure that producer check-off money is spent responsibly on effective projects that enhance the competitiveness of all production sectors of the Saskatchewan beef cattle industry. The SCA adheres to and follows The Cattle Development Plan Regulations, The Agri-Food Act, 2004 and its regulations, and all applicable board orders. ​ The next research proposal intake deadline is April 15, 2022 through the Saskatchewan Agriculture Development Fund If you have any questions, please contact Marianne Possberg at production@saskbeef.com See below for more details about the SCA research priorities. Click here for Research Results Page Economic Stability Priority will be given to research projects with the potential to improve the producer's efficiency, lower the cost of production and to ensure a sustainable beef industry. Projects designed to improve the adoption of technology, enhance government programs, or develop industry programs are also encouraged. Further economic research priorities are noted within other research areas below. a) Understand proper incentivization of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies, What policies and strategies will create more sequestration and reduce emissions that benefit producers? b) Note the implication of the carbon tax on farms and ranches. How does this affect consumers and their purchase power, leading to their nutrition? How does it affect producers who have diversified to produce ethanol and other products throughout the chain. c) Provide a numerical ranking of the financial costs per tonne of carbon equivalent mitigation techniques d) Understand the costs and benefits of a more traceable system, also given that improved traceability might come with more benchmarking abilities. e) Understand the potential effect of Chronic Wasting Disease on cattle & the cattle industry f) Complete a gap analysis of, and note barriers to the implementation of better vaccinating strategies and changing management practices to note preconditioning, reduced stress, etc. Genomics a) Provide knowledge needed to improve breeding strategies b) Investigate and supply tools to enable breeders to move faster towards breeding goals c) Improve upon markers available to note fleshing ability d) Investigate and develop cross breed trait selection ability for milk production, which also takes into account fertility and calving ability e) Investigate better tools, diagnostics, and programs for commercial cattle breeders. f) Investigate the impact of animal genetics on disease susceptibility and resistance. g) Identify genes with functional roles in microbiological and physiological processes that affect feed intake and efficiency in feedlot and cowcalf production. Animal Health a) Develop and promote cost-effective vaccination and management strategies that can be widely adopted throughout the beef production system to improve health, reproductive and performance outcomes b) Re-invest in vaccine development, with a specific focus on pathogens such as Mycoplasma spp, liver abscesses, foot rot, and digital dermatitis Re-invest in vaccine development, with a specific focus on pathogens such as Mycoplasma spp, liver abscesses, foot rot, and digital dermatitis c) Investigate and develop simple, cost-effective alternative vaccine delivery methods to improve vaccination rates. d) Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pain control products and strategies for avoiding or mitigating acute and chronic pain. e) Develop cost-effective non-antimicrobial products to prevent, treat and control disease.. f) Identify or develop management or treatment options that lead to improved control of internal and external parasites g) Develop a durable, reliable cattle tracing system and vaccination system for in-field and rough conditions. h) Create solutions to better manage unwanted bulls entering the feedlot, to alleviate aggression and riding from the animal. Animal Nutrition and Management a) Identify cost-effective agronomic strategies to increase feed grain energy yield per acre b) Develop new feed grain varieties with improved feed grain energy yield per acre, nitrogen and water use efficiency c) Identify, evaluate and calculate the cost-effectiveness of alternative / by-product energy feeds, considering impacts on animal performance, health, product quality, and nutrient management d) Develop cost-effective mitigation and neutralization strategies for ergot and mycotoxins in pellets, hay, and grain for cow-calf and feedlot cattle. e) Improve upon rapid mycotoxin test results (non-DON) f) Determine the appropriate levels of DON in feed before it affects the performance of cattle. g). Identify long-term efficient and cost-effective solutions to treat water not otherwise suitable for cattle to drink. h) Determine benefits of the forage byproducts of newer, economically feasible, crops in Saskatchewan i) Conduct an evidence-based risk-assessment of the effectiveness of alternative production practices (e.g. preconditioning, methods of reducing stress in weaned calves) j) Develop cost-effective nutritional and other management strategies to effectively reduce the need for antimicrobials to control liver abscesses k) Develop a better understanding of the respiratory and gut microbiomes, their establishment and development in the neonate, and their relation to immunity and disease. Environmental Stewardship a) Investigate the role of forage management in maintaining a healthy environment, as it pertains to wildlife, soil health, economic viability, and animal condition. b) Quantify nitrogen and phosphorus excretion rates in grazing animals & manure applications, and phosphorus runoff and leaching impacts on water quality / eutrophication c) Quantify factors impacting the rate and extent of carbon sequestration in tame and native pastures within ecosystems and soils in Saskatchewan. d). Quantify the impacts of native and tame pasture management on water use, cycles and watersheds across Western Canada. Forage and By-products a) Expand communication and technology transfer programs which target producers b) Develop new annual and perennial grass and legume varieties with improved stand longevity, quality, yield, and adaptability (e.g. flood and drought resistance) through traditional and/or advanced plant breeding techniques c) Quantify varietal and species differences in the ability of grasses, legumes and annual forages to maintain nutritional quality throughout the grazing season and in extended stockpiled or swath grazing systems to help inform producers’ seed selection decisions d) Investigate and refine regionally-appropriate methods of combining native, tame (annual and perennial) species and extended winter grazing practices to lengthen the grazing season and reduce winter feeding costs, while meeting animal requirements e) Investigate methods to better utilize forages and forage by-products. f) Identify and develop methods to control noxious weeds throughout the province, including but not limited to leafy spurge, burdock, absinthe, and scentless chamomile. g) Determine economic benefits of cover cropping and intercropping throughout different regions of Saskatchewan. h) Identify or develop improved grazing and range management strategies that optimize forage and beef production from native range, tame perennial pastures, and/or annual/perennial mixtures; along with agronomic and economic benefits. i) Develop and/or expand feed and forage qualities within common crops in western Canada. j) Develop new feed grain varieties with improved feed grain energy yield per acre, N and water use efficiency. k) Identify, evaluate and calculate the cost effectiveness of alternative / by-product energy feeds, considering impacts on animal performance, health, product quality, and nutrient management. l) Develop feeding strategies to optimize animal performance, nutritional value and cost of gain (e.g. ideal forage inclusion rates, grain processing/blending, high moisture corn, wheat, etc.). m) Identify or develop improved grazing and range management strategies that optimize forage and beef production from native range and tame perennial pastures. Technology and Engineering a) Develop methods to more easily distribute water to cattle in remote areas b) Create products that would ease transitions for cattle into newer areas such as feedlots and backgrounding areas. c) Validate or improve technologies such as invisible fencing, GPS locators, animal tracking, etc. ​