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.