A
Anonymous
Guest
10/5/2007 8:07:00 AM
Jolley: Five Minutes With Ray Rodriguez
I get cards and letters --- well email messages, anyway---that express opinions about some of the subjects I cover for Cattlenetwork. Just last week, Ray Rodriguez felt the urge to share his opinion about Rule 2. Just in case you haven’t been paying attention, Rule 2 was the controversial USDA decision to open the U.S. border to Canadian cattle.
Now you might think letting a few lonely cattle mosey across the border would be no big deal.
You would be dead wrong.
Although some of the major organizations like the North American Meat Processors Association, the American Meat Institute and the National Cattlemens Beef Association thought it was a good idea, a few others thought it was insane. The most vocal of the bunch, of course, was R-CALF, a group that fought long and hard to keep the border closed.
Ray Rodriguez agrees with R-CALF. In his note to me, he questioned who was writing the paychecks for the USDA. “The Federal government? Or maybe our friends in Ottawa?” I got the idea his dander was up and he was itching for a fight. So I asked him to share his thoughts with Cattlenetwork’s readers.
For those of you who don’t know him, he runs R & R Agrotech in Tucson, Arizona. A Puerto Rican born entrepreneur, he was raised on a coffee and cattle farm. After receiving a Ph.D from the University of Florida, he managed Johnnycake Charolais Florida Division in the early 70’s then moved on to Rainbows End Ranches and to Pruett-Wray Cattle Company
He started R&R Agrotech Inc in 1982, an importer-exporter of cattle, seller of cattle related products, horse feed, seeds, medications, fence posts and distributor for a few large companies. He also runs 850 cows on rented ranches in Mexico.
Want to know more? He said, “We produce and sell Fleckvieh Sim and Balancers mostly reds. We’ve imported cattle from Brazil, Mexico and Canada during the last 25 years, and exported cattle to Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Puerto Rico and Colombia.”
The man knows the cattle business and not just from a U.S. perspective. He’s got what some might call a world view. Or at least a Western hemisphere view.
OK, so here’s his views on Rule 2.
The formation of NAFTA was supposed to eliminate the discriminatory and one sided closure of borders and the non-tariff trade barriers. However, health issues have been used as "excuses" to do the same actions that were done in the past, regarding border closures and non-tariff trade barriers. I am very much in favor of free trade and free market forces. However, we have catastrophic diseases, such as BSE and FM, that trumps all other considerations.
Regarding BSE - We have 3 nations involved, one has no reported cases (Mexico), one has nine cases (Canada) the other has three cases (US).
As I understand it, the problem came from Europe when Canada was the primary importer of European cattle during the "exotic cattle craze" of the 60-70's. The vast majority of the imported animals stayed in Canada, and the subsequent generations were exported to the US and Mexico as well.
As these animals died in Canada, some went into commercially available feedstuff as a result of meat, bone and blood meals being used to feed other ruminants. Once the problem became evident in Europe, Canada and the US placed bans on the use of ruminant source meals to be fed to other ruminants. The problem arises when animals born after those bans were in effect are still coming up with thedisease in Canada.
There are no assurances that older cows or their meat coming from Canada once the embargo for older cattle is lifted, are free of this problem. It might not contaminate our cattle feedstuff due to our stringent ban, but it could sure affect the people eating it. Our national herd might be safe, but our fellow countrymen will be at risk.
Q. Several organizations have stated that the health of the Canadian herd has been poorly managed and Rule 2 just allows them to export their problems. Other groups say we're on an equal footing. What are the facts as you see them?
A. The US has no reported cases born after the ban was in effect. We have 1 atypical case, 1 imported cow from Canada and another with the same prion type as the Europe-Canada prion.
What countries are at risk, and what countries are not? What countries exhibit logical, factual and responsible policies and what countries are using this as a protectionist issue? What countries are protecting the health of their national herds and citizenship, and what countries are taking undue risks? You be the judge.
Q. Speaking of equal footing, does Rule 2 balance the playing field or give an unfair advantage to our North American trading partners?
A. In the NAFTA countries, we have a ballooning population of well paid, affluent citizens. Mexico has an expanding manufacturing base with the creation of a middle class that can well afford more protein in their diets.
Meanwhile, Mexico has not allowed any live BEEF cattle to enter since 2003 from the US or Canada. Under extreme pressure from their dairy industry they have allowed about 3,000- 4,000 head of mostly heavy-bred dairy heifers to be imported during 2007 from the US.
With expanding transportation costs, we need to look within the boundaries of these 3 nations for the production of our food. Our industry leaders need to have the vision to create jobs within our continent to help prevent the mass migrations that we have today. We need NOT look at the southern tip of South America as our future supplier of beef, when we have the natural resources within our "neighborhood"!
Q. Thousands of cattlemen read Cattlenetwork.com. What would you like to say to them? See above!
A. Maybe we should require BSE testing for 100% of meat from cattle over 30 months of age or the older cull cows coming in live, from Canada.
Jolley: Five Minutes With Ray Rodriguez
I get cards and letters --- well email messages, anyway---that express opinions about some of the subjects I cover for Cattlenetwork. Just last week, Ray Rodriguez felt the urge to share his opinion about Rule 2. Just in case you haven’t been paying attention, Rule 2 was the controversial USDA decision to open the U.S. border to Canadian cattle.
Now you might think letting a few lonely cattle mosey across the border would be no big deal.
You would be dead wrong.
Although some of the major organizations like the North American Meat Processors Association, the American Meat Institute and the National Cattlemens Beef Association thought it was a good idea, a few others thought it was insane. The most vocal of the bunch, of course, was R-CALF, a group that fought long and hard to keep the border closed.
Ray Rodriguez agrees with R-CALF. In his note to me, he questioned who was writing the paychecks for the USDA. “The Federal government? Or maybe our friends in Ottawa?” I got the idea his dander was up and he was itching for a fight. So I asked him to share his thoughts with Cattlenetwork’s readers.
For those of you who don’t know him, he runs R & R Agrotech in Tucson, Arizona. A Puerto Rican born entrepreneur, he was raised on a coffee and cattle farm. After receiving a Ph.D from the University of Florida, he managed Johnnycake Charolais Florida Division in the early 70’s then moved on to Rainbows End Ranches and to Pruett-Wray Cattle Company
He started R&R Agrotech Inc in 1982, an importer-exporter of cattle, seller of cattle related products, horse feed, seeds, medications, fence posts and distributor for a few large companies. He also runs 850 cows on rented ranches in Mexico.
Want to know more? He said, “We produce and sell Fleckvieh Sim and Balancers mostly reds. We’ve imported cattle from Brazil, Mexico and Canada during the last 25 years, and exported cattle to Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Puerto Rico and Colombia.”
The man knows the cattle business and not just from a U.S. perspective. He’s got what some might call a world view. Or at least a Western hemisphere view.
OK, so here’s his views on Rule 2.
The formation of NAFTA was supposed to eliminate the discriminatory and one sided closure of borders and the non-tariff trade barriers. However, health issues have been used as "excuses" to do the same actions that were done in the past, regarding border closures and non-tariff trade barriers. I am very much in favor of free trade and free market forces. However, we have catastrophic diseases, such as BSE and FM, that trumps all other considerations.
Regarding BSE - We have 3 nations involved, one has no reported cases (Mexico), one has nine cases (Canada) the other has three cases (US).
As I understand it, the problem came from Europe when Canada was the primary importer of European cattle during the "exotic cattle craze" of the 60-70's. The vast majority of the imported animals stayed in Canada, and the subsequent generations were exported to the US and Mexico as well.
As these animals died in Canada, some went into commercially available feedstuff as a result of meat, bone and blood meals being used to feed other ruminants. Once the problem became evident in Europe, Canada and the US placed bans on the use of ruminant source meals to be fed to other ruminants. The problem arises when animals born after those bans were in effect are still coming up with thedisease in Canada.
There are no assurances that older cows or their meat coming from Canada once the embargo for older cattle is lifted, are free of this problem. It might not contaminate our cattle feedstuff due to our stringent ban, but it could sure affect the people eating it. Our national herd might be safe, but our fellow countrymen will be at risk.
Q. Several organizations have stated that the health of the Canadian herd has been poorly managed and Rule 2 just allows them to export their problems. Other groups say we're on an equal footing. What are the facts as you see them?
A. The US has no reported cases born after the ban was in effect. We have 1 atypical case, 1 imported cow from Canada and another with the same prion type as the Europe-Canada prion.
What countries are at risk, and what countries are not? What countries exhibit logical, factual and responsible policies and what countries are using this as a protectionist issue? What countries are protecting the health of their national herds and citizenship, and what countries are taking undue risks? You be the judge.
Q. Speaking of equal footing, does Rule 2 balance the playing field or give an unfair advantage to our North American trading partners?
A. In the NAFTA countries, we have a ballooning population of well paid, affluent citizens. Mexico has an expanding manufacturing base with the creation of a middle class that can well afford more protein in their diets.
Meanwhile, Mexico has not allowed any live BEEF cattle to enter since 2003 from the US or Canada. Under extreme pressure from their dairy industry they have allowed about 3,000- 4,000 head of mostly heavy-bred dairy heifers to be imported during 2007 from the US.
With expanding transportation costs, we need to look within the boundaries of these 3 nations for the production of our food. Our industry leaders need to have the vision to create jobs within our continent to help prevent the mass migrations that we have today. We need NOT look at the southern tip of South America as our future supplier of beef, when we have the natural resources within our "neighborhood"!
Q. Thousands of cattlemen read Cattlenetwork.com. What would you like to say to them? See above!
A. Maybe we should require BSE testing for 100% of meat from cattle over 30 months of age or the older cull cows coming in live, from Canada.