“Packers were wrong about the costs of a grade stamp

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "You're on record as stating the US consumers would not stand for us giving Japan special treatment - yet that is exactly was is happening now. You were quite vocal a few months ago, I was wondering if you could give us an update?"

I'm on record stating that if we cave to political pressure to test cattle under 24 months of age for Japan WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION, then U.S. consumers would have those same expectations of the U.S.

Japan only allowing the sale of cattle under 21 months is hardly "special treatment". Japan is setting those rules, not the U.S. We either abide by them or we don't send them any cattle. That is hardly comparable to unjustified, deceptive, expensive testing that would not reveal BSE prions in cattle under 24 months anyway.

What's your suggestion SANDBAG? Not ship any cattle to Japan since we cannot send them cattle between 21 and 24 months of age? How stupid can anyone be?

It never ceases to amaze me what kind of a worthless argument you can pull out of your pointed hat.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag: "You're on record as stating the US consumers would not stand for us giving Japan special treatment - yet that is exactly was is happening now. You were quite vocal a few months ago, I was wondering if you could give us an update?"

I'm on record stating that if we cave to political pressure to test cattle under 24 months of age for Japan WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION, then U.S. consumers would have those same expectations of the U.S.

Japan only allowing the sale of cattle under 21 months is hardly "special treatment". Japan is setting those rules, not the U.S. We either abide by them or we don't send them any cattle. That is hardly comparable to unjustified, deceptive, expensive testing that would not reveal BSE prions in cattle under 24 months anyway.

What's your suggestion SANDBAG? Not ship any cattle to Japan since we cannot send them cattle between 21 and 24 months of age? How stupid can anyone be?

It never ceases to amaze me what kind of a worthless argument you can pull out of your pointed hat.


~SH~

You're squirming, SH. You said, "I would hate to be the one who had to explain to our consumers why Japan was getting treatment that we were not giving our consumers". Are we providing our consumers nothing but 21 month and younger cattle? Who is going to have that nasty job on providing the explanation? :roll: :lol:

So now we have to abide by Japan's rules? Why do we have to abide by these and not the requests that you called "trade barriers", "not based on sound science" and "not justified"? What are you using as a definer to sort the requests out? You're very inconsistant to say the least.

Speaking of "justification", how is a 21 month age limit justified when the USDA said they would only make agreements based on sound science and set a 30 month age limit with our trade in Canada?

You're a dandy.

 

[Anonymous]

THE 21 MONTH RULE WAS JAPAN'S RULE, NOT OURS!!!!!!!!!!!

We either ship them 21 month and younger or we don't!

YOU CHOOSE!


Japan's stipulation is not supported by sound science but it's THEIR STIPULATION, NOT OURS. We would be stupid to take an "ALL OR NONE" position.

Your barking up an empty tree again, AS USUAL!



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

THE 21 MONTH RULE WAS JAPAN'S RULE, NOT OURS!!!!!!!!!!!

We either ship them 21 month and younger or we don't!

YOU CHOOSE!


Japan's stipulation is not supported by sound science but it's THEIR STIPULATION, NOT OURS. We would be stupid to take an "ALL OR NONE" position.

Your barking up an empty tree again, AS USUAL!



~SH~

You divert, divert, divert. Is the US consumer getting the same as Japan?

Did the USDA say they will negotiate on sound science unless requested not to do so? :roll:

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker-- You better go up there to South Dakota and plant a few more trees--Don't think there are enough in the whole state now to hold the old gopher trapper :lol: ........

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "Is the US consumer getting the same as Japan?"

Yes, US consumers can consume beef from carcasses from cattle under 21 months of age also.

Sandbag: "Did the USDA say they will negotiate on sound science unless requested not to do so?"

They're not negotiating on sound science. Cattle under 21 months of age are safe.

Should USDA refuse to send cattle to Japan since Japan does not want cattle between 21 and 24 months of age?



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag: "Is the US consumer getting the same as Japan?"

Yes, US consumers can consume beef from carcasses from cattle under 21 months of age also.

Sandbag: "Did the USDA say they will negotiate on sound science unless requested not to do so?"

They're not negotiating on sound science. Cattle under 21 months of age are safe.

Should USDA refuse to send cattle to Japan since Japan does not want cattle between 21 and 24 months of age?



~SH~

You seem to forget that 21 month and younger cattle are the ONLY cattle allowed for Japan. Is that the same here?

I realize the USDA is not negotiating on sound science, it's about time you recognized that. The problem is that they said they would. Is that a lie?

The USDA should allow US companies to give Japan exactly what they want - and should of done that two years ago. They should also quit saying one thing and doing another. If all trade negotiations are to use "sound science" as an absolute, how can you have an age limit of 21 for one country and 30 for another? How can you have a SRM list that is different for different countries if you're following "sound science"?

 

[Anonymous]

It appears as tho USDA will make BSE tested beef available to US consumers--altho it won't be US beef...

OK now we have rules for the US
differing rules for imports from Canada
differing rules for exports to Japan
differing rules for importing from Japan

And they still have the gall to tell us that all their decisions are based on "sound science".. :???: :? :lol: :lol:

-------------------------------------------
Fri Dec 9, 4:09 PM ET



WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States is preparing to lift a ban on Japanese beef in step with the imminent resumption of US beef exports to Japan, US Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said.

"We are ready to flip the switch and bring Kobe beef into our marketplace," he told reporters, referring to the luxury marbled meat which is Japan's most famous type of beef.

"That can happen really any day, we are that far along in the process. We've gone through our rule-making, our risk analysis, our scientific approach, and we're ready to bring Kobe beef in," he said.

The United States banned Japanese beef imports in 2001 after Japan reported its first case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy ( BSE), or mad cow disease, in its cattle.

In December 2003, Japan in turn banned US beef imports over a case of BSE in the United States.

But while Kobe beef remains a niche market, US beef exports to Japan exceeded 1.7 billion dollars in 2002, making Japan the single biggest overseas market for US beef before the ban.

Japan's food safety panel Thursday cleared the way to lifting the two-year-old ban on US beef imports on the basis of scientific evidence that meat from cattle aged up to 20 months is safe.

Japan's government is likely to announce final approval as early as Monday to allow imports of beef from US as well as Canadian cattle, which was also subject to a BSE-linked ban, officials said.

But surveys suggest that many Japanese consumers remain highly suspicious of US beef. A survey by Kyodo News this week said 75.2 percent of Japanese surveyed would be unwilling to eat the beef.

Johanns insisted there was nothing to fear.

"I can assure the Japanese consumer that beyond a shadow of a doubt, US beef is safe," he said, adding: "We're very, very encouraged by what's happening in Japan.

"We will be ready to comply with the regulations and rules that we have worked through with Japan on this issue. I've a smile on my face."

 

[Sandhusker]

OT, you forgot different rules for Taiwan, different rules for Egypt....

Who profits from all these different rules? You figure that one out (should take about 3.2 seconds) and you see who is calling the shots at the USDA.

 

[Anonymous]

OT, you forgot different rules for Taiwan, different rules for Egypt....

Who profits from all these different rules? You figure that one out (should take about 3.2 seconds) and you see who is calling the shots at the USDA.

Oh I didn't forget Sandhusker- just knew it wouldn't sink in to some anyway .......

 

[Tommy]

SH...THE 21 MONTH RULE WAS JAPAN'S RULE, NOT OURS!!!!!!!!!!!

We either ship them 21 month and younger or we don't!

YOU CHOOSE!


The 100% test was Japan's rule too Scott, but you were against that. Creekstone could have been sending Japan beef a long time ago if they had been allowed to test.

 

[Murgen]

Where's the court challenge etc. from Rcalf on these different standards?

 

[Sandhusker]

Where's the court challenge etc. from Rcalf on these different standards?

Didn't you get the message from the ninth curcuit, Murgen? We're supposed to shut up, not ask questions, and defer to the USDA. They are not accountable to anybody.

 

[Murgen]

But aren't you fighting for the cattleman's interest, let's see ya fight.

Why is RCALF not telling the consumer that under 20 months is unsafe!

And that importing under 20 months from another country is the way to go, to provide food safety?

Afraid of painting yourselves into more corners? There's only four and RCALF have already been pinned in 3 of them!

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag and OT,

The fact that Japan is willing to accept cattle under 21 months of age proves that science won. Prior to that, they wanted expensive, deceptive 100% BSE testing. Japan came our way and we didn't have to give in to this expensive, deceptive consumer fraud to export to them.

Oh yeh, U.S. producers lost millions because we didn't participate in consumer fraud advocated by Sandbag & Co. right????? Why are you concerned about that when bullsh*t Bullard says we don't need an export market. Don't you believe your leaders?

Regarding your worthless imagined "double standard", SHOULD THE U.S. GIVE JAPAN AN "ALL OR NONE" ULTIMATUM SINCE THE "SOUND SCIENCE" SAYS THAT CATTLE UNDER 30 MONTHS ARE SAFE?????

Yes or no?

Answer the question or divert because you don't want to paint your deceptive selves into a corner.

I'm sure glad idiots like you guys are not in charge of trade negotiations. You and your constant pursuit of IMAGINED double standards.

As far as cattle between 21 months and 30 months, we cannot impose our science based standards on another country by forcing them to take cattle between 21 and 30 months but we sure as hell don't have to go along with their consumer fraud of BSE testing of cattle under 24 months of age WHEN THOSE TESTS WOULD NOT REVEAL PRIONS IN CATTLE UNDER 24 MONTHS OF AGE.

Sandbag: "You seem to forget that 21 month and younger cattle are the ONLY cattle allowed for Japan. Is that the same here?"

How am I forgetting that when I just mentioned it?????

No it's not the same here BECAUSE IT'S JAPAN'S RULES, NOT OURS! Something you can't get through your thick blaming head. We can't impose science over political perception on them. They make their own choices. Some we can support (21 month) and some we cannot (fraudulent BSE testing).

The science says under 21 month of age cattle are safe for export and the science says that BSE testing of cattle under 24 months of age with the tests that creekstone was advocating is consumer fraud.

Sandbag: "I realize the USDA is not negotiating on sound science, it's about time you recognized that. The problem is that they said they would. Is that a lie?"

What the hell are you babbling about now? Explain yourself (as if your explanation would contain logic)!

Sandbag: "The USDA should allow US companies to give Japan exactly what they want - and should of done that two years ago. They should also quit saying one thing and doing another. If all trade negotiations are to use "sound science" as an absolute, how can you have an age limit of 21 for one country and 30 for another? How can you have a SRM list that is different for different countries if you're following "sound science"?"

First, USDA should not have allowed Creekstone's consumer fraud.

Second, we can only influence the thinking of other countries but we cannot impose science based standards over other country's political pressures IN ALL CASES.

There is no double standard WHEN SCIENCE CANNOT ALWAYS SET THE STANDARD OVER THEIR POLITICAL PRESSURES.

Tommy: "The 100% test was Japan's rule too Scott, but you were against that."

100% testing was a Japanese rule that was not science based and not in our best interests because it promoted consumer fraud by suggesting "BSE TESTED" meant "BSE FREE" when it didn't and it promoted expensive, unjustified testing. Obviously we won that argument or we wouldn't be talking 21 month imports WITHOUT TESTING would we?

If you Creekstone advocates would have had your way you would be promoting the idea that 100% testing was justified and you would have added that expense. Glad you're not in charge of negotations Tommy!

USDA was correct in not going along with the 100% testing consumer fraud due to the standard it set.

In contrast, cattle under 21 months of age are safe so what's the problem?

Should we give them an "ALL OR NONE" ultimatum Tommy?


This is such an empty argument since there is no way we can influence other country's decisions with OUR SCIENCE OVER THEIR POLITICS in every situation.



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Murgen, "But aren't you fighting for the cattleman's interest, let's see ya fight."

OK, Murgen, how do you recommend the ninth's court decision be tackled?

Murgen, "Why is RCALF not telling the consumer that under 20 months is unsafe!"

Ummmm, because maybe it isn't?

Murgen, "And that importing under 20 months from another country is the way to go, to provide food safety?"

Don't you see the double standards, Murgen? The USDA says the will use "sound science" as the standard in trade. How can that science have different standards for the same product? What kind of a standard as that? Explain that to me.

It looks to me that the USDA are the ones who have painted themselves in the corner - but it doesn't matter becasue we have to "defer to them". :roll: They can say one thing and do another and there are no consequences.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "They can say one thing and do another and there are no consequences."

R-CULT's leaders do it every day.


~SH~

 

[Tommy]

SH...If you Creekstone advocates would have had your way you would be promoting the idea that 100% testing was justified and you would have added that expense. Glad you're not in charge of negotations Tommy!

How would there have been any added expense when Japan was going to pay for the test?


SH...In contrast, cattle under 21 months of age are safe so what's the problem?

How do you know that Scott? We just do not have a test yet that will detect it in cattle under that age. Are you willing to eat a 21 month old beef from a BSE infected herd?


SH...Should we give them an "ALL OR NONE" ultimatum Tommy?

I would have called their bluff Scott. We have lost over 2 years of sales to them so far because we have not done what they asked.

 

[mrj]

SH...If you Creekstone advocates would have had your way you would be promoting the idea that 100% testing was justified and you would have added that expense. Glad you're not in charge of negotations Tommy!

How would there have been any added expense when Japan was going to pay for the test?


SH...In contrast, cattle under 21 months of age are safe so what's the problem?

How do you know that Scott? We just do not have a test yet that will detect it in cattle under that age.

*************************************************************

Tommy: Are you willing to eat a 21 month old beef from a BSE infected herd? }

Tommy, what do you say constitutes "a BSE infected herd"? Has there been another case found in ANY of the herds in the US or Canada where ONE animal was found to carry BSE?

MRJ

*************************************************************


SH...Should we give them an "ALL OR NONE" ultimatum Tommy?

I would have called their bluff Scott. We have lost over 2 years of sales to them so far because we have not done what they asked.

 

[Anonymous]

T: "How would there have been any added expense when Japan was going to pay for the test?"

They would have paid for the test by reducing what they paid for the beef. WE WOULD HAVE INDIRECTLY PAID FOR THE TEST had the government allowed BSE tested beef.

SH (previous): "In contrast, cattle under 21 months of age are safe so what's the problem?"

T: (in response): "How do you know that Scott?"

BSE prions have not been detected in cattle under 24 months of age particularly in the United States after the ruminant feed ban.

If BSE positive OTM animals were out there they would be showing up in the surveilance tests.

T: "We just do not have a test yet that will detect it in cattle under that age."

We banned ruminant feed and we have not found BSE positives of cattle born after the feed ban in our BSE surveilance testing.

T: "Are you willing to eat a 21 month old beef from a BSE infected herd?'

Of course not. 21 month old animals from a BSE infected herd would be destroyed.

T: "I would have called their bluff Scott. We have lost over 2 years of sales to them so far because we have not done what they asked."

1. You have no proof that the Japanese government would have allowed BSE tested beef.

2. There is no money situation that justifies consumer fraud. You said yourself we don't have a test yet that will detect BSE prions in cattle under 21 months. You basically admitted it would be fraud.


NEXT!



~SH~