Who's looking out for producers?

[nightcalver]

Here's something that I came across recently. A marketing club wanted to get the facts on R-Calf's positions on issues so they contacted the national office in Billings and asked if they would send someone to their meeting so they could get the facts (straight from the horse's mouth). R-Calf sent Dennis McDonald and he was billed by R-Calf as a leading US cattle expert and R-Calf's trade committee chairman. When asked what R-Calf's official position was if a domestic case of BSE were to arise in the US, as a large number of people in the scientific community do not agree with him as to how BSE occurs (he made the comment, in front of media, after being asked if a disease that the human form of, which has been linked to less that 300 deaths world wide in the last 15 years, approximately 20 some of which have been linked directly to consumption of specific risk materials, and to which the scientific community has linked 0 cases to the consumption of muscle cuts, was a credible, legitimate threat to consumer's health and to the safety of the US food supply, he emphatically stated twice that it was.). This "leading cattle expert" stated, and was quoted in the press, that "If there is a positive case again in the US, we as a beef producing nation, shouldn't market beef in cattle older that 20 months.". When it was stated by a producer in attendance that commercial cattle producers have approximately 30% of their income from sales of cattle over the 20 month age limit R-Calf apparently has set to discontinue marketing Mr. McDonald countered that "BSE has never been found in cattle aged 20 months or younger, so why even take the chance". It seems to me that either Mr. McDonald is a loose cannon in the R-Calf organization or R-Calf doesn't truly represent the cow-calf producers as they continually say they do. What does R-Calf propose that cow-calf producers do with older animals? Shoot, shovel and shut-up? Loose up to 30% of our income? Scare the consumers and drive them away as they seem to want to do with fear mongering based on conjecture and hear-say? Or (here's a novel idea that R-Calf should look at as policy) should we use science and testing of high risk animals like we do now to promote food safety and consumer confidence?

[rkaiser]

With leadership like that Sandhusker, how can you ever go wrong!

This Dennis sounds like a real bright onion hey!

[~SH~]

Congratulations night calver!

You have discovered the lying, deceptive world of R-CULT!

More and more people are figuring it out everyday. The average media source probably knows more about this disease than Dennis, Leo and Bullard combined.

They have painted themselves into a corner. God help us if we have a domestic case of BSE and NCBA and USDA have to do their damage control for them.


~SH~

[~SH~]

Night calver: "This "leading cattle expert" stated, and was quoted in the press, that "If there is a positive case again in the US, we as a beef producing nation, shouldn't market beef in cattle older that 20 months."

Absolutely unbelievable.

Night calver, can you provide me with a link where this quote was taken?

I need this quote!


Night calver: "When it was stated by a producer in attendance that commercial cattle producers have approximately 30% of their income from sales of cattle over the 20 month age limit R-Calf apparently has set to discontinue marketing Mr. McDonald countered that "BSE has never been found in cattle aged 20 months or younger, so why even take the chance".

This from an organization that "supposedly" represents the grass roots cattle producer????

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!



~SH~

[Sandhusker]

I'd like to see the quote as well.

[TimH]

McDonald-"And if there is a positive case again in the United States", he said," we, as a beef-producing nation, shouldn't market beef in cattle older than 20 months."



R-CALF CAN border message

Expert says border should stay closed



By MARVIN BAKER, Staff Writer

February 22, 2005



A leading U.S. cattle expert thinks the Canadian border should remain closed to live cattle, and there are several reasons why he believes that.



Dennis McDonald, the trade committee chairman for the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA), said the border reopening doesn't make a lot of sense, because apparently, Canada is being treated differently than other countries, according to international law.

McDonald spoke to about 75 livestock producers and veterinarians Monday night in the North Central Research Extension Center. The meeting was sponsored by the North Central Beef Marketing Club.



Despite two positive cases of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, in the Canadian herd since the first of the year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is going ahead with plans to implement full cattle trade with Canada.



"We took the final rule and put it up against the international rule and it's not complicated," he said. "I don't know, but it's obvious, there's a different set of rules."



McDonald, who is a renowned international lawyer, as well as a family rancher in Melville, Mont., said according to international law, there shouldn't be any trade with a foreign nation that has known BSE cases for eight years after the case is identified, and trade shouldn't resume until eight years after feed bans go into effect.



If that were to hold true, the United States wouldn't be allowed to accept live Canadian cattle until January 2013. A feed ban, which went into effect in Canada in August 1997, according to that same law, would keep the border closed until at least August of this year.



"Why the exception for Canada?" McDonald asked. "We stopped trading with Scandinavia because they had two cases. We stopped trading with the Ukraine because they had one case. Why is Canada different?"



One Canadian livestock producer who attended Monday's meeting said American beef packers are hell-bent on getting the border open March 7.



Trevor Atchison, who raises Limousin cattle near Pipestone, Man., told the crowd that contrary to what many Americans think, Canadian cattle won't be dumped in the United States.



The discussion got heated between Atchison and another producer who questioned Canada's ability to care for cattle older than 30 months.



Atchison said every animal that crosses the border is purchased by a U.S. buyer, more specifically the beef packers IBP and Cargill.



"These guys are controlling western Canada," Atchison said. "Some of the statements you're hearing may not be true."



McDonald agreed.



"Who stands to gain? The packers," he said. "The potential profit is enormous."



As an example, McDonald said a Canadian veterinarian, who did everything right in diagnosing the first modern case in Alberta that was reported in May 2003, actually knew about the positive mad cow five months before it was reported to the public.



"And what happened between those two dates?" McDonald asked. "The cattle kept coming across the border. I can't quantify the value of that because there are too many zeroes."



McDonald believes that BSE doesn't exist in the U.S. domestic herd. Thus, the best way to protect the domestic herd is to identify all foreign cattle in this country immediately and label them.



The lone positive case that was reported in the United States in December 2003 was an imported Holstein from Alberta.



He said that needs to be done because the British Broadcasting Corp., recently reported that a goat in France was identified to have BSE.



"That's striking because it (BSE) now jumps to another species," McDonald said. "It was found on a farm where a BSE-positive dairy herd was destroyed. It looks like the goat got the disease from eating grass or licking the ground."



And if there is a positive case again in the United States, he said we, as a beef-producing nation, shouldn't market beef in cattle older than 20 months.



That comment created another heated debate from a producer who said up to 30 percent of his income is based on cattle older than 20 months.



McDonald countered that BSE has never been found in cattle aged 20 months or younger, so why even take the chance?



He said there is a theory in cattle country that if the border reopens to live Canadian cattle March 7, statistically within the first year, there will be a 99.9 percent chance that an infected animal will surface in the United States.



In addition, he said the market could crash by as much as 20 percent just by the sheer numbers of cattle that will enter United States ports of entry.



"How do we protect our industry? By our first line of defense," McDonald said. "And that is to keep the disease out of this country and that's why R-CALF has taken its position."



In January, R-CALF filed a lawsuit against USDA, asking the U.S. District Court to overturn the reopening.



It will come down to a March 2 hearing in Billings, Mont., that will determine whether or not the border will reopen March 7 to live Canadian cattle, as USDA originally announced in late December.



R-CALF has generated about $800,000 in contributions to fight USDA. McDonald said it's expensive fighting the U.S. government, but the money raised represents the consensus of cattle producers nationwide.



McDonald said the same judge who was responsible for closing the border in May 2003 will hear this case. He said that is a lot of pressure on one man. However, McDonald is optimistic.



"There are two new cases, otherwise the facts are the same as in 2003," McDonald said. "It's the same judge, the same facts, and I believe it will be the same result."







minotdailynews.com

*******************************
Quote from the article-"As an example, McDonald said a Canadian veterinarian, who did everything right in diagnosing the first modern case in Alberta that was reported in May 2003, actually knew about the positive mad cow five months before it was reported to the public."

This is absolutley untrue. That animal was tanked at the end of January because pneumonia was suspected. The head was sent away for testing and was not tested until May because pneumonia is such low priority.They did NOT know for 5 months that it was positive for BSE.

[rancher]

If this wasn't taken out of content like SH says, It is a bunch of Bull Sh$t. I would say test everything over the age of 30 months if we find a case.

"And if there is a positive case again in the United States, he said we, as a beef-producing nation, shouldn't market beef in cattle older than 20 months. "

[Bill]

[TimH]

Dennis McDonald-"And what happened between those two dates?" McDonald asked. "The cattle kept coming across the border. I can't quantify the value of that because there are too many zeroes."

CONTRAST THAT WITH THIS.........

"And if there is a positive case again in the United States, he said we, as a beef-producing nation, shouldn't market beef in cattle older than 20 months. "


How many zeroes would be involved with not marketing OTM beef,Mr. McDonald????

[Big Muddy rancher]

[quote="rancher"]If this wasn't taken out of content like SH says, It is a bunch of Bull Sh$t. I would say test everything over the age of 30 months if we find a case.

"And if there is a positive case again in the United States, he said we, as a beef-producing nation, shouldn't market beef in cattle older than 20 months. "[/quotte}

Hey rancher isn't this your buddies saying this.
Mc Donald's a lawyer and Cliff Edwards is a lawyer. Maybe R-CALF is their retirement fund. Keeps them busy in court. You guys better get out and Lift that bale and totr that barge, R-CALF is going to need more money for their LAWYERS.

Ranchers_ Cattlemen Ambitious Lawyer Fund.. Better donate another calf.

[Manitoba_Rancher]

good one BMR.......maybe haymaker should donate all of his cattle to R-calf to auction off! But he likely wouldnt get much for those scrawny @ssed jerseys!

[nightcalver]

Thanks Tim H for posting the article that was in the Minot Daily news by Marvin Baker. SH did you see it?

Maybe it's time to quit fighting and try to find what's best for our industry. In USDA's proposed rules they may have given us a good start (whether they knew it or not). The rules require every animal that is imported from Canada to be hot ironed brand with CAN. We already require that Mexican cattle be branded with an M so if we could get the packers, wholesalers and retailers to keep that source verification going, while at the same time remove cattle from the J-list so the meat would stay labelled until the final purchaser (consumer) we would then be able to label meat and anything without a brand would be US by default then we could let the consumers decide where there preferences lay (do they shop by their pocket book or by where it comes from).