Ninth Circuit Court Appeal

[agman]

THE National Meat Assn. wins a crucial first round victory in its bid to have
dissolved a preliminary injunction that is keeping Canadian cattle out of the U.S. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals grants NMA its emergency motion that it be allowed to seek intervenor status in the R-CALF v. USDA case. Moreover, the court has agreed to NMA's request for opening and closing briefs by March 28.

NMA’s opening brief will be due March 21 and answering briefs from R-CALF and USDA will be due March 28. "We are very appreciative that our appeal has been granted and will work with all parties for the quick resolution of this litigation," says NMA Executive Director Rosemary Mucklow. Have a great day.

[don]

as a canadian i want to see things move along as quickly as possible if for no other reason than to make it plain to canada the border will not open anytime soon. then we can move on with a more rational strategy than waiting for differences within the american cattle industry to get sorted out.

[rkaiser]

As a rancher from Canada with a bull sale coming up next Saturday; I can use any good news I can get my hands on.

In the long run however, shipping live cattle to America to have them add value sounds like fred flintstoneish behavoir on the part of Canadians.

Ying Yang Ying Yang Yankee Yoodle Yandy.

[Manitoba_Rancher]

Agman - since I always enjoy your thoughts on these issues. I was wondering what you think will happen in this court battle. Does NMA have a chance to overturn the R-calf decision?

[agman]

[quote="Manitoba_Rancher"]Agman - since I always enjoy your thoughts on these issues. I was wondering what you think will happen in this court battle. Does NMA have a chance to overturn the R-calf decision?[/quote]

Response...This ruling is certainly in conflict with the judge's opinion that "no harm would occur if the status quo was maintained. The appellate court acted very quickly concerning this matter. Additionally it raises the likelihood that the plaintiffs will have to post a bond to cover potential damages. This is something the judge should have required immediately if he himself was following the law governing his own actions. Sorry, I cannot comment any further.

Longer term this case will be won by the USDA on science and not the science-fiction presented by R-Calf. Have a great day.

[SASH]

[agman]

[quote="reader (the Second)"][quote="agman"]
Don't you have the ability to see both sides of an issue or is your allegiance to your clients (that provides you with insider information on legal matters) just too demanding?[/quote]

Reposne...I hope your information concerning BSE is better than your assumption regrading insider legal information. This Appellate Court ruling occurred Friday evening. It is too bad you are so far out of the loop that you missed the information.

Regarding BSE, you make some interesting and perhaps valid points which I can and do respect although I may not necessailry agree. I am not versed enough to take a strong stance either way regarding your position. I do see through your claim to be neutral as you have supported virtually evey R-Calf idea on these forums. Now who is so blind they cannot see the truth?

Regarding the spread of BSE and CWD. Controlled studies have been done with CWD infected animals along side cattle. No cross contamination occurred. There is no evidence that I am aware of that BSE is transmittable from animal to animal. If you have evidence demonstrating otherwise I am fully prepared to review that data.

My position is derived from experts in this field. This does not preclude my willingness to accept other ideas for review. I will allow the true experts to battle this one out. Have a great day.

[Oldtimer]

[agman]

[quote="Oldtimer"][quote="agman"]

Agman- Could it possibly be that reader the seconds beliefs follow R-CALF's idea's simply because R-CALF has been promoting the truth and open communication with the consumers- rather than everyone elses deny and hide the problem answer?[/quote]

Response...R-calf has taken a populist, emotional and protectionist view that could ultimately backfire and undermine the entire American beef industry. I would not expect you to see that as you have previously been unable to decipher much less complex issues concerning R-Calf. Have a great day.

[Chuckie]

agman--what exactly does "intervenor status" mean? and what does it imply re: opening the border (if it's granted)? let's not get side-tracked here.

[~SH~]

OT,

If R-CULT was truly concerned about food safety, they would not have prohibited "M"ID from "M"COOL.

R-CULT's concern for food safety was generated from using BSE as a convenient excuse to keep the Canadian border closed to live cattle.

That is precisely why their arguments are so conflicting.

One day USDA does not care about food safety.

The next day R-CULT is reciting the number of BSE tests USDA has conducted in the U.S. compared to Canada as if their total cattle numbers were comparable.

One day the packers do not care about food safety and only care about the money.

The next day we have the safest beef in the world.

One day we need to find the Canadian cattle within our system and test them.

The next day Canadian cattle are unsafe but U.S. beef, including these Canadian cattle, is safe.


R-CULT is so inconsistant with their arguments it's laughable.



~SH~

[agman]