Going Ex-Pedigree

[Buryhill Dexters]

Surely birth notifying is still a sensible thing to do, as with no cost to do still :

1) Give a purchaser the option to register the animal & pay the fee if they so wish ~ thus hopefully retaining the higher price for a pedigree animal
2) Keeps the herdbook upto date
3) still attains the higher rate of compensation if, heaven forbid, one should get a TB reactor.

[domsmith]

A couple of points - I don't quite understand the necessity to announce to the world you are no longer registering; why not just get on with it.
.

as we are on a discussion board, i think clive is trying to promote discussion on a subject that many feel is being over looked by the dcs. the over charging of members for bull registrations and the over burden of paper pushing.

i dont think you can complain at the £12 heifer fee its nothing. the bull fee seems disproportionate and out of scale with all other societies.

with angus you pay £28 to register £25 for dna test, job done. and 10 weeks to register. but they are a business pushing the breed not holding it back so comittees can cross t`s and dot i`s

good on you clive

[Broomcroft]

If an item is put forward for discussion at the AGM and is worded correctly, I would have assumed maybe incorrectly that all the members would have a vote be it in person or postal, and if enough people feel that the overage fees are a problem then one would assume that because we now have the postal vote we would get a better response from all the members

I don't know whether you could vote on a matter of actual fees? But I know a man who does and he's called Ian?

Whilst Ian is thinking, I've come up with a new logo for the Dexter..."Small cow with a big bull fee" Do you think it will catch on :D.

PS. I don't thin that birth notification qualifies for TB compensation. I have certainly been told that, but whether it is correct or not is another matter.

[Martin]

In the Sussex Society all bulls registered have to be inspected, this can only be after 300 days of age with no overage fees. The inspection is carried out by two of the Society's inspectors and is free of charge. after this you must have the animal inspected by a vet and a checklist is provided for the vet to fill out, vet fees are the responsibility of the owner of the animal. by doing it this way the Society ensures that no sub standard animal is entered into the herd book. Every 50th heifer registered is also inspected (no vet).
I am not suggesting that this happen with Dexter's as it would in effect increase costs, just to point out that there is more than one way to skin a cat.
With DNA, why have samples from the dam as well? If only done from the sire you would eventually have the same information (just take a bit longer). Is a huge database of DNA really needed?
I agree with domsmith, this is a discussion board and it is correct to discuss what is relevant to an individual and get others opinion. Just for the record, I am no longer a member of the Dexter Society, but as I am still interested in Dexters and may wish in the future to keep them again, I will always keep an eye on this forum and have a say when I believe my opinion adds to the debate. That is all the while the web master allows me to.

[Pennielea]

Clive
Members can vote on just about anything at an EGM as long as it is not 'derogatory'.

Under our present constitution the proposed resolution(s) must be supported by 25 members (signatures are required)

The only time I remember this happening was at the 2005 AGM in Cornwall, when Di Smith proposed a number of alterations to the charges for registration and transfers to reduce costs and hopefully raise the numbers of animals which were being registered in the Herd book. (Sounds familiar)

I cannot find my minutes of that meeting but Di may have withdrawn the resolutions
before a vote was taken or they were defeated as they were not put into effect.

I think she was on Council at the time and this was her response to being 'SIDELINED'

[Broomcroft]

Hi Ian

So that would appear to mean that 25 members who are willing to sign a proposal can produce a resolution to change the fees. That proposal would then go into the DCS; the trustees would then under company law be required to call an EGM. The trustees would have to issue a proxy form to all members who could then by proxy or by physically attending the EGM, vote either for or against the new fees.

Is that it in a nutshell?

If so, then I would propose reducing the bull fee from £60 to £20 plus costs, which will probably still make it about £50 I think. And I would also propose increasing the overage time for all animals from whatever it is to 36 months, in line with the Australian Society, and also reducing the overage fees on males and females from the current £100/£150 to about say £20. That way, people who want to breed extra-carefully and see what they get before registering can do so.

As the most recent treasurer, i can say with reasonable confidence that the society can easily afford to do this, in fact, based upon my research it may in the longer/medium-term actually increase the society's income because the overage fees would be used regularly.

Also, it would fit in quite nicely with good breeding practice rather than forcing people by financial mechanisms to register everything early if that is not what they wish to do (i.e. like us). As I have already said, in other societies I know, they have low overage fees (as does almost everyone) and some members choose to wait and pay the extra, and some choose to pay less and register early. But either way, it's not punitive and destructive as are the current charges.

Neither Caroline or I are members of DCS any more, but we may both be willing to join again if that were to happen. So there's two votes already! We do not wish to have unregistered stock but also will not pay these silly overage fees.



Edited By Broomcroft on 1233666679

[Ken Hobbs]

Just to clarify to points raised at the EGM on the reduuction of fees, they were all rejected at the vote, and Di was not on Council at the time.
Clive you say the Society is well off at the moment, are we looking forward to a resonable profit from last year (2008) or are you proposing to use the investment fund to cover the cost of Bull fee reduction?
there was also acomment that the new Council raised the fees, were they not advised to do so by the steeriing commiittee?

[Broomcroft]

I didn't say the society was well off Ken, I said that I think that more people would use lower overage fees than higher ones, meaning that (eventually) MORE income would be produced. i.e. It's better to have, say, 200 x £20, than 10 x £150 etc.

I am no longer treasurer by the way.

It is naturally the trustees who decided to change the fees after looking at data that I gave them the day they came into office, in the form of a simple computer model. If you call that being advised by the SC, I don't think anyone would have a problem with that. On the whole I think it was right at the time, with the exception of the bull fee and overage fee which I and others regard as bad for the breed AND bad for income at the same time. There are also people who just generally want lower fees full-stop, and cut costs accordingly, maybe that's you? I have to say with everything that's happening at the moment, I am beginning to agree myself.

[natmadaboutdexters]

Am I right in thinking that the main advantage of registering Dexters is so that you can show them/or sell them to new owners who can breed and register the offspring for themselves? If you are breeding your Dexters for beef only then there is perhaps not an advantage to registering the cattle, does the fact that they are registered pedigree add a premium to the beef price?

Natasha

[Ken Hobbs]

Just to carry on the theme of fees/income. I was the treasuer who increased the fees for which the EGM was called. As Council has been advised that fees must increase by someone who knows the finacial situation of the society, i am happy to adhere to their decision.Trying to advise Council and keeping the society accounts in the black is a difficult post as past treasurers I am sure will agree. I agree with Ted that there could be income generated from third parties, but who is willing to take the post on? i am sure it be very time consuming and we havn't got a volunteer for treasurer at the moment, have we?

Just on a another trait if we lower Bull registration fees would more people register their Bulls instead of steering them? if that happend surely it would lower the quality of the Society sires, maybe, members would register everything and we could then end up with some pretty awful offsprings which would again lower the price of good quality stock because the of the numbers of bulls availble, new breeders could just buy anything not knowing whether it is good or bad.

[Broomcroft]

was the treasuer who increased the fees for which the EGM was called.

I bet you were popular :D. The basic bull cost in total wouldn't change that much because of the costs (which are included aren't they? Can't remember.) so I wouldn't see much effect. It would still cost a lot more to do a bull than just to birth notify a steer for free because of PV. What it would do for some is to allow them to wait and see and beef it if they don't like how it turns out or they just don't want another bull. So I THINK it would have the reverse effect and increase the quality if anything. It certainly would on my farm because quite simply, I have kept something like 12 bulls till they were older, then beefed most of them and only kept the very best ones (which are now unregistered).

I've even had to beef a registered bull that I never even used because I was "forced" to register him for all the wrong reasons (cost) when I wasn't quite sure about him. He was a good bull, but I didn't feel totally comfortable with his character.

Natasha - Dexter beef is Dexter beef. A certificate doesn't change the taste. No-one I supply, butchers, customers, abattoir has ever asked for anything other than the BCMS passport. Pedigree is needed in Northern Ireland for their scheme I believe. Pedigree gives you a much better option if you are selling livestock for breeding and obviously if you are showing it is essential. It also gives you much higher compensation payments if you are hit by TB. We don't do any of these things and are a closed herd, but the TB issue is a worry and the biggest stumbling block in terms of deciding to go unreg for us.



Edited By Broomcroft on 1233683856

[Pennielea]

Pedigree is required in our beef schemes to protect both producer and customer from the 'cowboy' operators who would offer anything as 'Dexter'. As you probably know Aberdeen Angus beef is from any breed, including Holstien, which has been sired by an AA bull. It also ensures that anyone benefitting from our schemes must be a paid up member of the Society and of our support Group.

Ian

[Broomcroft]

Talking theory is very difficult, so let me give you a real-life example of why overage fees should be lower and preferably left later before they take effect. The lower fee is important "business-wise", the longer period is important "breed quality-wise".

We have two friends who both have the same breed of pedigree cattle. Their society fees are about £20 normally, and £30 or so if you go overage, and the period is set to 30 months when overage kicks in. Whether it is a bull or female makes no difference to the fees, apart from the additional cost of DNA which their society insists on for bulls (I think).

The one friend chooses to register straight away and pays the lower fee. He doesn't do it just to save money because in his opinion, he can tell whether the calf is worth registering or not early on. He is experienced.

Our other friend never registers anything until they are grown up and she will only register the animals that are what she considers good at an older age. She therefore pays a higher fee and is quite happy to do that...she chooses to do it. She doesn't register quite as many, but in practice, speaking to her, she actually registers most females. She is less experienced but very careful and she is also very proud of the fact she waits until she is certain.

All are birth-notified quickly.

Overall result: better stock, less rubbish, more income and overall lower fees, all at the same time! No theory, these people are doing it. And as an added bonus, you get happier members and less bones of contention. I can guarantee that every time a member has gone overage by mistake, and then has to pay the astronomic fee, the DCS has gained an enemy even if nothing has been said. Not good, in fact very bad.

[Pennielea]

Ken
My memory is not what it used to be and I have no dobt that you are right about Di being off council at the time. I had also forgaotten that you were the reason she was getting so uptight. But I got the procedure right.

Clive
That is it in your proverbial nutshell!!!
At this time I cannot go along with you on the detail of the charges as I have not yet examined the figures in detail. A discussion or consultation must take place either with the co-operation of Council or without it before detailed resolutions are put before an EGM to consider the rules and charges. For instance I do not see any reason for an overage fee at all, as there is no extra cost in doing a registration.

Another point which I made to you as Treasurer and the Steering Comm. about a year ago was that the cost of administering the Society should be borne by membership fees and the cost of registering animals should be covered by registration fees. At that time membership fees were subsidising registrations by up to £16000 per year.

Since then the fees have gone up again but this problem has not been addressed

I think we need to reduce our costs overall but again you, Ken and Ted as our last three Treasurers are better qualified to make that decision than I. Perhaps the three of you could form a sub-committee!!

Ian

[Broomcroft]

Ian

Our posts crossed in the post, see above. My mind is very clear and I could put a very convincing argument for reducing both the overage fee and the bull fee together without any problem. As most other societies are doing much as I would suggest it would hardly be rocket-science and I would expect the vast majority of people voting by proxy to be in favour. I don't think the example of the previous unsuccessful attempt to reduce fees is that relevant to be honest, because of proxy voting.

On the second point, the cost of doing regs is, or at least should be, extremely low. A society I know pays someone on piece-work to do it at £1 per animal, plus admin on PV etc where applicable.



Edited By Broomcroft on 1233697429