• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

And now for the rest of the story.................

Kato

Well-known member
Gee, I guess it's not just the Canadians around here who are feelin' the love for Rancher's Caring About Lawyers' Finances........... :wink:

This is the latest from the Canadian Cattlemen's Association.

Fire, Ready, (Aiming optional), Reload and Fire Again


How many times over the years has R-CALF blasted out a press release trumpeting some “revelation” about Canadian cattle production, only to be proven wrong when the facts came out? The group’s latest effort, a letter to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) objecting to Canada’s WTO complaint on COOL, is no exception.

R-CALF’s attempt to portray the Canadian cattle industry as feeding at the government trough is spurious. If they can’t be right, at least they are predictable.

Let’s review R-CALF’s record . . .

There was the time in 2005 when they declared that Canada was decreasing its BSE testing levels, when in fact Canada was increasing its testing levels. They also tried to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes with their analysis that Canadian BSE testing levels didn’t measure up to U.S. levels, but when the CCA explained that the Canadian beef herd is about one-sixth the size of the U.S. beef herd, it became clear that Canada actually was testing proportionately higher numbers of cattle than the U.S.

There was the time in 2007 when they claimed Canadian cattle were being illegally sold in U.S. auction barns, when in fact somebody just imagined they had seen a Canadian ear tag in South Dakota. The tags in question were collected at a packer in Nebraska and the Canadian cattle identification system quickly traced them back to animals that were exported from Canada to the U.S. the day prior to slaughter. There was no way the ear tags in question could have been on cattle in a sale barn in South Dakota at the time alleged. R-CALF just riled folks up without bothering to learn the facts and they never apologized for their error afterward.

There was the time also in 2007 when the Washington State R-CALF affiliate claimed thousands of Canadian cattle were being lost in that state. The CCA and several Canadian cattle exporters travelled to the state capital to review the situation, which turned out to be based on little more than a couple of e-mails from state officials to feedlots seeking reconciliation of a handful of transposition errors. The few human errors that had been identified were all corrected long before the R-CALF affiliate launched its missile. Of course, again there was no retraction or apology from those who leapt before they looked.

As the Canada – U.S. border re-opened to young cattle in 2005 and older cattle in 2007, each time R-CALF predicted a “wall of cattle” would flood into the U.S. market and destroy U.S. prices. Nothing anywhere close to that happened on either occasion. In fact, the resumption of live cattle trade could best be described as a ‘trickle’ upon initial re-opening at both stages since many traders were hesitant to be the first to operate under the new rules established on both occasions.

Canadian live cattle exports to the U.S. have not climbed back to the level achieved in 2002, the last unrestricted year before BSE. Canadian live cattle exports to the U.S. in 2009 were the lowest they have been (not counting 2003-2005 when the border was closed to all cattle) since 2000.

There have been innumerable other instances when facts have belied the rhetoric spewed by R-CALF, not the least of which were their earlier subsidy allegations against Canada in the late 1990s, which the U.S. government investigated thoroughly before exonerating Canada and terminating the complaint.

In their latest efforts, they describe the Canadian cattle herd as “unsustainable at its present size.” We don’t know what counts as unsustainable in R-CALF’s book, but when the January 1, 2010, cattle inventory numbers are released in mid-February, we expect to see the 5th consecutive year of beef cow herd reduction in Canada. In fact, we are expecting the smallest beef cow herd in Canada since the mid 1990s. If anything, the herd needs to start growing to meet the demand that we believe will resume growing as the broader North American economy recovers. R-CALF just plain has its facts wrong on the size of the Canadian cattle herd.

R-CALF’s latest complaints about government support are very light on details as to what these programs might be or when they were delivered. When the U.S. re-opened the border to trade in live young cattle in 2005, we heard similar charges of subsidies, but the reality is that any government support provided in 2003 through 2005 was only a small fraction of what the industry lost due to the over-reaction of export markets, including the U.S., shutting us out. Furthermore, any temporary programs that were created during that time were terminated when the U.S. border partially opened.

We suppose that R-CALF will continue its pattern and they will again work to extract donations from honest hardworking ranchers that they have riled up with their bogus Canadian subsidy allegations. If they proceed with a formal complaint, the CCA will again defend the Canadian industry. Even though we will be ultimately exonerated, markets will be disrupted in the meantime and the lawyers will be the main beneficiaries. Let’s just hope that those who have carried water for R-CALF in the past are getting tired of being misled and will think twice before funding them further.
 

burnt

Well-known member
Liars hate being caught in their lies and will inevitably resort to more lies to cover them up.


So, what's coming next? :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
What you've got is two politicians telling their half of the story.

I will take exception to the claim about those Canadian ear tags in SD. That clearly was a coverup by the USDA and the packer - unless you want to call a whole family crazy or a pack of liars.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
What you've got is two politicians telling their half of the story.

I will take exception to the claim about those Canadian ear tags in SD. That clearly was a coverup by the USDA and the packer - unless you want to call a whole family crazy or a pack of liars.

Are you calling Sam Holland a LIAR?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Big Muddy rancher said:
Sandhusker said:
What you've got is two politicians telling their half of the story.

I will take exception to the claim about those Canadian ear tags in SD. That clearly was a coverup by the USDA and the packer - unless you want to call a whole family crazy or a pack of liars.

Are you calling Sam Holland a LIAR?

No, but I'm saying the people giving him information are liars, and garbage in, garbage out. Otherwise, if you believe the "official" explaination, you believe that the people who personally owned and fed those cattle every day and said that they saw those tags on their cattle don't know what they're talking about - which is what the USDA told them - that they didn't see what they knew they saw.
 

mwj

Well-known member
Feel free to drag that old thread back and show us your facts!!!!!!!!! The ''owner'' did not show any more than a sad story. If you were to operate your bank with that kind of ''facts'' you would be selling pencils on the street corner :lol:
 

Kato

Well-known member
I for one would like to see the Houdini that could get illegal cattle past the USDA vet where those cattle are supposed to have crossed. :shock: :shock: :shock: She's a force of nature, and I pity the fool who crosses her. I've offered before, and I'll offer again, if someone would like to go and confront her, let me know, so I can set up my lawnchair on the Canadian side and watch the show. :D :D :D :D

But enough of the diversionary tactics. I noticed there was no refuting the facts, put forward by the CCA, just diversions.... mmm.....

What you've got is two politicians telling their half of the story.

What two politicians are you talking about? This is a newsletter article from the CCA.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
Sandhusker said:
What you've got is two politicians telling their half of the story.

I will take exception to the claim about those Canadian ear tags in SD. That clearly was a coverup by the USDA and the packer - unless you want to call a whole family crazy or a pack of liars.

Are you calling Sam Holland a LIAR?

No, but I'm saying the people giving him information are liars, and garbage in, garbage out. Otherwise, if you believe the "official" explaination, you believe that the people who personally owned and fed those cattle every day and said that they saw those tags on their cattle don't know what they're talking about - which is what the USDA told them - that they didn't see what they knew they saw.

Tam called Sam Holland and he told her that the numbers in the cattle at the plant matched the ones given him from when the cattle crossed the border.

Ben Roberts was going to investigate and get back to ranchers on his findings. Notice he hasn't been back.
 

Clarencen

Well-known member
Well, I guess this is an old issue now. The Van Dykes finally got their money so no need to pursue it any more. Still there was never a proper, satisfactory, or believable explaination made. It was just glossed over. Something was covered up. Someone didn't do their job or else the system was flawed.

The packing Co, Swift I believe it was, tried to beat the Van Dykes out of the money for their cattle, and a years feed and work. While the Van Dykes got their money, I believe they were entitled to more for the delay, the stress, worry, badgering, and harrassment they received. I will give R-Calf and the South Dakota Stockgrowers a lot of credit for going to bat for them. No one needs an ID system if it is goiing to cause all that much pain and confusion.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Clarencen said:
Well, I guess this is an old issue now. The Van Dykes finally got their money so no need to pursue it any more. Still there was never a proper, satisfactory, or believable explaination made. It was just glossed over. Something was covered up. Someone didn't do their job or else the system was flawed.

The packing Co, Swift I believe it was, tried to beat the Van Dykes out of the money for their cattle, and a years feed and work. While the Van Dykes got their money, I believe they were entitled to more for the delay, the stress, worry, badgering, and harrassment they received. I will give R-Calf and the South Dakota Stockgrowers a lot of credit for going to bat for them. No one needs an ID system if it is goiing to cause all that much pain and confusion.

To bad that they had to go through all they did. Those cattle were documented crossing the border just the day before. It should have been no trouble but the Van Dykes insisted they were their cattle. Bad deal all around. Sam Holland was very adamant that those cattle cleared customs just before they made it to the plant. The USDA should have been at bat for them with the facts rather then R-CALF with hysteria. :?
 

Clarencen

Well-known member
What would you have done, big Muddy? If there was a mixup at the packing plant or wereever the cattle were unloaded, why should the Van Dykes have ever been involved. When they started to be accused, then grilled and badgered. I think they delibertly tried to confuse them. I don't know the Van Dykes or anyone involved, but I sure wouldn't want that to happen to me.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Big Muddy rancher said:
Clarencen said:
Well, I guess this is an old issue now. The Van Dykes finally got their money so no need to pursue it any more. Still there was never a proper, satisfactory, or believable explaination made. It was just glossed over. Something was covered up. Someone didn't do their job or else the system was flawed.

The packing Co, Swift I believe it was, tried to beat the Van Dykes out of the money for their cattle, and a years feed and work. While the Van Dykes got their money, I believe they were entitled to more for the delay, the stress, worry, badgering, and harrassment they received. I will give R-Calf and the South Dakota Stockgrowers a lot of credit for going to bat for them. No one needs an ID system if it is goiing to cause all that much pain and confusion.

To bad that they had to go through all they did. Those cattle were documented crossing the border just the day before. It should have been no trouble but the Van Dykes insisted they were their cattle. Bad deal all around. Sam Holland was very adamant that those cattle cleared customs just before they made it to the plant. The USDA should have been at bat for them with the facts rather then R-CALF with hysteria. :?

Van Dykes insisted they were their cattle because they were their cattle.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
Clarencen said:
Well, I guess this is an old issue now. The Van Dykes finally got their money so no need to pursue it any more. Still there was never a proper, satisfactory, or believable explaination made. It was just glossed over. Something was covered up. Someone didn't do their job or else the system was flawed.

The packing Co, Swift I believe it was, tried to beat the Van Dykes out of the money for their cattle, and a years feed and work. While the Van Dykes got their money, I believe they were entitled to more for the delay, the stress, worry, badgering, and harrassment they received. I will give R-Calf and the South Dakota Stockgrowers a lot of credit for going to bat for them. No one needs an ID system if it is goiing to cause all that much pain and confusion.

To bad that they had to go through all they did. Those cattle were documented crossing the border just the day before. It should have been no trouble but the Van Dykes insisted they were their cattle. Bad deal all around. Sam Holland was very adamant that those cattle cleared customs just before they made it to the plant. The USDA should have been at bat for them with the facts rather then R-CALF with hysteria. :?

Van Dykes insisted they were their cattle because they were their cattle.

So you are calling Dr. Sam Holland a LIAR.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Big Muddy rancher said:
Sandhusker said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
To bad that they had to go through all they did. Those cattle were documented crossing the border just the day before. It should have been no trouble but the Van Dykes insisted they were their cattle. Bad deal all around. Sam Holland was very adamant that those cattle cleared customs just before they made it to the plant. The USDA should have been at bat for them with the facts rather then R-CALF with hysteria. :?

Van Dykes insisted they were their cattle because they were their cattle.

So you are calling Dr. Sam Holland a LIAR.

So you are calling a whole family of producers liars.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
Sandhusker said:
Van Dykes insisted they were their cattle because they were their cattle.

So you are calling Dr. Sam Holland a LIAR.

So you are calling a whole family of producers liars.

I am calling them mistaken as the paper work on those cattle proved when they came across the border. If the Van Dykes had put brands on the cattle it would have been a different story .
I have crossed that border enough and seen the paper work involved to get livestock across. The screw up was at the plant and it should have been straightened out at the plant.
 

Clarencen

Well-known member
Well big Muddy, I am not looking for a conspiracy,I am not argueing that these catle did not clear customs, I am not argueing that they didn't arrive at the plant in a sealed truck. My point is, we never got a real explaination of what was really going on. Your comment ," The Van Dykes insisted that they were their cattle" bothers me. They sent their cattle to the packing plant, they expected to get paid for them. This thing dragged on for a long time, and was in the new down here for a long time.

If all had been on the up and up, one telephone call and 20 minutes of time would have cleared it all up. Why did they even question the Van Dykes? Why did they try to tear down their character? why did they check the sale barns where Van Dykes bought their cattle? Why did they try to cheat the Van Dykes out of their money? Why did they try to nail them to the wall?

You answer these questions, then I will shut up. I don't belong to either the stockgrowers or R-calf, but if they would not have made this all public the Van Dykes would have never got their money, and may have even been in jail. R-calf did help defend the little guy against the big ones. Yes Sam Holland did make an honest statement, as far as that went. Something was covered up though, and it still stinks.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
The "Official Story" is that a simple mistake was made by Swift and it was verified with border papers - nothing to see here folks, move along. However, that doesn't explain the fact that Swift claimed that, immediately after those cattle surfaced, they pulled their records and they could account for all Canadian cattle in their yards.

That doesn't explain why, if they only had to check border papers, it took 2 months to complete the investigation.

There's too much smoke here for there to be no fire.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Clarencen said:
Well big Muddy, I am not looking for a conspiracy,I am not argueing that these catle did not clear customs, I am not argueing that they didn't arrive at the plant in a sealed truck. My point is, we never got a real explaination of what was really going on. Your comment ," The Van Dykes insisted that they were their cattle" bothers me. They sent their cattle to the packing plant, they expected to get paid for them. This thing dragged on for a long time, and was in the new down here for a long time.

If all had been on the up and up, one telephone call and 20 minutes of time would have cleared it all up. Why did they even question the Van Dykes? Why did they try to tear down their character? why did they check the sale barns where Van Dykes bought their cattle? Why did they try to cheat the Van Dykes out of their money? Why did they try to nail them to the wall?

You answer these questions, then I will shut up. I don't belong to either the stockgrowers or R-calf, but if they would not have made this all public the Van Dykes would have never got their money, and may have even been in jail. R-calf did help defend the little guy against the big ones. Yes Sam Holland did make an honest statement, as far as that went. Something was covered up though, and it still stinks.

I can't answer for Swifts or the USDA. What I am saying is the records proved those cattle crossed the Canadian border the day before.
What the Van Dykes went through should be between the USDA, Swifts and the respective state governments to prevent this from happening. R-CALF and the SDSG pushed this to use against Canadian cattle and the more publicity they could get against the system the better.

Go back and reread the close to 20 threads about this. Just search Van Dykes.


"Yes Sam Holland did make an honest statement, as far as that went"
What do you mean by "As far at that went"?.
 

mrj

Well-known member
There are enough problems of real substance for the cattle producer/feeder without looking for imaginary 'spooks' in the form of evil in other segments of the cattle/beef industry.

I do not know the Van Dykes, nor what their level of expertise or knowledge of cattle may be.

I DO know Dr. Holland and his extremely high reputation for honesty and his regard for the law.

This indicent was blown way out of proportion and now is closed far as I'm concerned.

mrj
 

Kato

Well-known member
The discussion about this incident is taking place because it's easier than addressing the issues of RCALF in general brought up by the CCA article. Much easier to pick out one sentence, and blow it all out of proportion until the original point of the thread drops off the page.

It's a diversion, because our good RCALF supporters have no answers to the points brought up at the beginning of the thread. :roll: :roll:
 
Top