Manitoba_Rancher
Well-known member
Wonder why OT hasnt responded to this post again? :???: Hes probably sending in his multiple comments under different code names... :roll:
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Kato said:
The comment period is just a dog and pony show anyhow. They're going to do what they want no matter what the comments amount to. Tyson and Cargill want that border open so it will be so.
I totally agree with you Sandhusker. After the last comment period about the border issue it appeared it didn't make any difference. This is just the way they have to do things to follow the rules. You can usually tell when the powers to be are talking out of their butts because it just smells so foul. Have a good day everyone!!
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Tam said:
I gave those sold-out bastards $20 worth.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Kruse sees' thru the Packer/AMI/USDA/NCBA Bull- and their "sound science" :
Will USDA/NCBA willingly sacrifice U.S. beef exports on the alter of free trade because U.S. packers want access to Canadian cattle for U.S. plants? The U.S. border is open to cattle and beef from cattle under the age of 30 months, which by BSE science is safe, accepted by most trading nations. R-Calf Vice President Randy Stevensen noted, "The phrase 'sound science' is seldom heard anymore. That is the case, because those who want to continue importing cattle and beef from Canada know that sound science won't support their arguments."
That's not enough to bother USDA/NCBA, as U.S. packers want access to Canadian cows older than 30 months of age. The Asian market is closed to beef from such animals, particularly cattle from countries with known BSE problems like Canada. Canada adopted a ban on feeding MBM to cattle in 1997. The problem is that it wasn't enforced. We know that because half of the BSE cases discovered in Canada were in cattle born after 1997. Those cattle that are being found to be BSE positive are being discovered in the same pool that USDA/NCBA believes should be imported into the U.S.
This strikes me as insane. It strikes our beef trading partners similarly. They don't trust U.S. packer segregation of product and the USDA allowing beef or cattle to be imported into the U.S. that they would not accept imports from is problematic. USDA/NCBA appears to believe that they are setting some kind of good example, establishing a Golden Rule for Global beef trade by accepting Canadian cows, but the impression is lost on everyone but themselves and their special interests. Were we to import old Canadian cows and were one to test BSE positive, we would deserve all the demand fallout that would result. There is nothing for the U.S. beef industry/U.S. beef producers to gain from importing Canadian cows from a herd known to be infected with BSE. . . and everything to lose.
Forget regaining Asian beef markets, we may lose Mexican beef exports too. R-Calf CEO, Bill Bullard noted, "It is clear that USDA is now putting its' desire to create a North American cattle herd above its' duty to make certain this disease is prevented from infecting the U.S. cattle herd. It's also important to note that when Canada confirmed this latest case last month, Mexico immediately halted its' plans to reopen its' borders to dairy cattle imports from Canada. Mexican animal health officials also said that one more case of BSE in Canada would be enough to shut off Canadian beef and cattle once again. Mexico's action shows that the U.S. is going to additionally risk lost export markets if USDA does not withdraw its' proposed OTM rule."
Iowa Cattlemen's Association Executive Vice President Bruce Berven made this CommStock Report longer than I'd intended. He informed me that the ICA is registering as opposed to USDA/NCBA rules to open the Canadian border to old BSE cows. Berven says the ICA is not the same organization that it was 6 months ago. Berven returned to head the ICA from Harris Beef after a 20 year absence as Executive Vice President. After the state cattlemen's organization imploded, he was charged with rebuilding it from the grassroots up. Berven says that grassroots Iowa Cattlemen strongly oppose importing cows from Canada from the pool known to have BSE, citing definitive studies that say without a doubt a positive BSE Canada cow will be discovered in the U.S. if these imports are allowed. There is no justification to be importing animals from this pool. Grassroots Iowa Cattlemen are where I'm at on this issue and other issues, including mandatory COOL, private BSE testing, Packers and Stockyard reform, and mandatory price reporting overhaul. The ICA is an NCBA affiliate with grassroots R-Calf policy. Berven pledged that the ICA will now be the grassroots Cattlemen's hired hands and will perform as such. You've got to know the insides of ICA to understand how big a change that really is.
Will USDA/NCBA willingly sacrifice U.S. beef exports on the alter of free trade because U.S. packers want access to Canadian cattle for U.S. plants? The U.S. border is open to cattle and beef from cattle under the age of 30 months, which by BSE science is safe, accepted by most trading nations. R-Calf Vice President Randy Stevensen noted, "The phrase 'sound science' is seldom heard anymore. That is the case, because those who want to continue importing cattle and beef from Canada know that sound science won't support their arguments."
That's not enough to bother USDA/NCBA, as U.S. packers want access to Canadian cows older than 30 months of age. The Asian market is closed to beef from such animals, particularly cattle from countries with known BSE problems like Canada. Canada adopted a ban on feeding MBM to cattle in 1997. The problem is that it wasn't enforced. We know that because half of the BSE cases discovered in Canada were in cattle born after 1997. Those cattle that are being found to be BSE positive are being discovered in the same pool that USDA/NCBA believes should be imported into the U.S.
This strikes me as insane. It strikes our beef trading partners similarly. They don't trust U.S. packer segregation of product and the USDA allowing beef or cattle to be imported into the U.S. that they would not accept imports from is problematic. USDA/NCBA appears to believe that they are setting some kind of good example, establishing a Golden Rule for Global beef trade by accepting Canadian cows, but the impression is lost on everyone but themselves and their special interests. Were we to import old Canadian cows and were one to test BSE positive, we would deserve all the demand fallout that would result. There is nothing for the U.S. beef industry/U.S. beef producers to gain from importing Canadian cows from a herd known to be infected with BSE. . . and everything to lose.
Forget regaining Asian beef markets, we may lose Mexican beef exports too. R-Calf CEO, Bill Bullard noted, "It is clear that USDA is now putting its' desire to create a North American cattle herd above its' duty to make certain this disease is prevented from infecting the U.S. cattle herd. It's also important to note that when Canada confirmed this latest case last month, Mexico immediately halted its' plans to reopen its' borders to dairy cattle imports from Canada. Mexican animal health officials also said that one more case of BSE in Canada would be enough to shut off Canadian beef and cattle once again. Mexico's action shows that the U.S. is going to additionally risk lost export markets if USDA does not withdraw its' proposed OTM rule."
Iowa Cattlemen's Association Executive Vice President Bruce Berven made this CommStock Report longer than I'd intended. He informed me that the ICA is registering as opposed to USDA/NCBA rules to open the Canadian border to old BSE cows. Berven says the ICA is not the same organization that it was 6 months ago. Berven returned to head the ICA from Harris Beef after a 20 year absence as Executive Vice President. After the state cattlemen's organization imploded, he was charged with rebuilding it from the grassroots up. Berven says that grassroots Iowa Cattlemen strongly oppose importing cows from Canada from the pool known to have BSE, citing definitive studies that say without a doubt a positive BSE Canada cow will be discovered in the U.S. if these imports are allowed. There is no justification to be importing animals from this pool. Grassroots Iowa Cattlemen are where I'm at on this issue and other issues, including mandatory COOL, private BSE testing, Packers and Stockyard reform, and mandatory price reporting overhaul. The ICA is an NCBA affiliate with grassroots R-Calf policy. Berven pledged that the ICA will now be the grassroots Cattlemen's hired hands and will perform as such. You've got to know the insides of ICA to understand how big a change that really is.
Kato
Well-known member
So if the border opens, does that mean R-Calf wants everyone to stop eating beef? :roll: :roll:
Kato
Well-known member
Oh yea, this is where someone comes in and says MCOOL will save the day. :wink:
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Kato, only 6% of the world's population lives in the US. If you don't like what we do here, you've always got the option of selling to that other 94%..... or do you........? Hmmmm, maybe that's your REAL problem?
A
Anonymous
Guest
March 13, 2007
Rehberg Urges Ag Secretary Johanns to Protect American Cattle
WASHINGTON, DC - Montana's Congressman, Denny Rehberg, contacted Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns to voice opposition to a proposed USDA rule allowing cattle born after March 1, 1999 to enter the United States for breeding and herd replacement purposes.
"We must ensure that we protect the United States' food supply and continue to give safety assurances to our trading partners," Rehberg, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, said in a letter to Johanns which was co-signed by twelve other House members. "We are concerned about the potential implications this change may have."
Symptoms of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), a detrimental disease found in cattle, may take years to show up, increasing the risk of this disease spreading to other cattle. Current rules only allow animals 30-months of age and younger going directly to slaughter to enter the U.S.
"Montana produces the safest, best tasting beef in the world and I'll continue to oppose rules that harm our ranchers," said Rehberg.
LETTER:
March 13, 2007
Secretary Mike Johanns
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave, SW
Washington, DC 20250
Dear Secretary Johanns:
We are writing to express our concern with USDA proposed regulations that will allow cattle born on or after March 1, 1999 to be imported from Canada and reside in the U.S. cattle population.
Symptoms of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) may take years to show up in cattle. The current regulations regarding importation of cattle from Canada have been effective. It is our concern that if the current rule allowing animals 30-months of age and younger going directly to slaughter is changed to allow cattle born on or after March 1, 1999 to reside in the United States, any of those cattle later testing positive for BSE would have severely detrimental effects on our cattle and dairy industries within the United States.
On February 7th, 2007 a mature bull located in Alberta, Canada was confirmed to be infected with BSE. This brings the total to four cases of BSE positive animals identified in Canada being born after the USDA-determined date of effective enforcement (March 1, 1999).
We must ensure that we protect the United States' food supply and continue to give safety assurances to our trading partners. We are concerned about the potential implications this change may have. We therefore urge the USDA to not finalize the proposed regulations allowing importation of cattle from Canada for breeding or herd replacement purposes, and that a thorough re-evaluation be conducted.
Sincerely,
Denny Rehberg
Montana's Congressman
Rehberg Urges Ag Secretary Johanns to Protect American Cattle
WASHINGTON, DC - Montana's Congressman, Denny Rehberg, contacted Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns to voice opposition to a proposed USDA rule allowing cattle born after March 1, 1999 to enter the United States for breeding and herd replacement purposes.
"We must ensure that we protect the United States' food supply and continue to give safety assurances to our trading partners," Rehberg, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, said in a letter to Johanns which was co-signed by twelve other House members. "We are concerned about the potential implications this change may have."
Symptoms of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), a detrimental disease found in cattle, may take years to show up, increasing the risk of this disease spreading to other cattle. Current rules only allow animals 30-months of age and younger going directly to slaughter to enter the U.S.
"Montana produces the safest, best tasting beef in the world and I'll continue to oppose rules that harm our ranchers," said Rehberg.
LETTER:
March 13, 2007
Secretary Mike Johanns
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave, SW
Washington, DC 20250
Dear Secretary Johanns:
We are writing to express our concern with USDA proposed regulations that will allow cattle born on or after March 1, 1999 to be imported from Canada and reside in the U.S. cattle population.
Symptoms of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) may take years to show up in cattle. The current regulations regarding importation of cattle from Canada have been effective. It is our concern that if the current rule allowing animals 30-months of age and younger going directly to slaughter is changed to allow cattle born on or after March 1, 1999 to reside in the United States, any of those cattle later testing positive for BSE would have severely detrimental effects on our cattle and dairy industries within the United States.
On February 7th, 2007 a mature bull located in Alberta, Canada was confirmed to be infected with BSE. This brings the total to four cases of BSE positive animals identified in Canada being born after the USDA-determined date of effective enforcement (March 1, 1999).
We must ensure that we protect the United States' food supply and continue to give safety assurances to our trading partners. We are concerned about the potential implications this change may have. We therefore urge the USDA to not finalize the proposed regulations allowing importation of cattle from Canada for breeding or herd replacement purposes, and that a thorough re-evaluation be conducted.
Sincerely,
Denny Rehberg
Montana's Congressman
Sandy
Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Maybe we should be selling our oil and gas to that other 94%.
A
Anonymous
Guest
March 23, 2007
Group Submits Extensive Comments
Against USDA's Proposed OTM Rule
Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA submitted an 86-page document of comments urging the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to withdraw its proposed plan (Rule 2) to allow imports of Canadian cattle over 30 months (OTM) of age into the U.S., along with another 50 attachments totaling well over 1000 pages of evidence that show the agency would be acting prematurely if it chooses to go forward with the planned rulemaking.
In response to continued outbreaks of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Japan and Canada, as well as the inherently higher risk associated with older Canadian and Japanese cattle, R-CALF USA members in 2006 voted overwhelmingly to "take appropriate action to challenge and stop USDA from allowing the importation of beef products from cattle older than 30 months of age, as well as the importation of live cattle over 30 months of age, from Japan or any other BSE-affected country." R-CALF USA's extensive comments on Rule 2 reflect the organization's commitment to its membership-developed policies.
R-CALF USA initially requested that USDA extend the comment period on Rule 2 due to the February 2007 discovery of a BSE-infected Canadian bull born in 2000. R-CALF USA suggested USDA should wait until Canada completed its epidemiological investigation of the bull. USDA denied the request.
"We are disappointed that USDA appears to be in such a rush to proceed with its OTM rule that it won't even provide time to gather important scientific information so that a sound decision can be made," said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard. "Quite simply, USDA did not expect Canada to detect multiple BSE-infected cattle born years after Canada implemented its feed ban, and it was inappropriate for the agency to deny our request for an extension of time pending the completion of the investigation into Canada's latest BSE case.
"We need to know if that animal was infected via cross-contamination, or more directly through prohibited feed," Bullard emphasized. "This is what the ongoing investigation may answer, and this answer is vital to determining why Canada's feed ban has not prevented the continued spread of BSE there. This is an important part of the overall analysis of Canada's BSE problem, and critical information for this rulemaking.
"In stark contradiction to earlier actions, USDA is now proposing to allow higher-risk animals from Canada into the United States, despite the fact that nothing has changed since USDA first said that the best way to protect our industry was not to allow higher-risk products into the U.S. in the first place," he pointed out. "USDA had a test that it had established to determine whether or not a country had adequate mitigation measures, and that test was whether or not animals were born after the mitigation measures were put in place. Five of Canada's 10 native cases of BSE have been born after the 1997 implementation of its feed ban – clearly indicating that the feed ban did not stop the continued spread of BSE in the Canadian feed system, or, in the Canadian cattle herd."
Bullard said problems continue with Canada's feed ban, and thousands of Canadian cattle have recently been exposed to potentially contaminated feed. In November 2006, Canadian officials issued a recall of ruminant feed across Ontario and Quebec because of meat and bone meal contamination, and just a few weeks ago, nine Saskatchewan farms were quarantined because prohibited ruminant materials were found in feed distributed to these farms.
"USDA cannot continue to ignore Canada's growing problems with BSE and the lack of enforcement of its feed ban," Bullard said. "The problems are now known to be much worse and more widespread than USDA originally thought, and R-CALF hopes USDA will acknowledge the risks and withdraw the rule entirely. The U.S. still has export customers that are very concerned about the commingling of Canadian beef and cattle with U.S. beef and cattle, and we had better begin listening to what our customers are saying. Otherwise, our industry could be put in jeopardy, and this proposed rule does just that.
"R-CALF will continue its efforts with the Administration and with Congress to halt imports of older Canadian cattle, and we'll avoid litigation if at all possible," he continued. "However, R-CALF is prepared to take whatever legal and ethical steps are necessary to protect our industry from what we know to be an avoidable and unnecessary risk."
Bullard also noted that a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators sent a letter of concern about the proposed rule to Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns, and that most participants at a recent Senate Commerce Subcommittee field hearing testified they were opposed to this rule. Additionally, a coalition of more than 100 agricultural groups sent a letter to Johanns to voice their opposition to Rule 2.
"In essence, USDA's proposed OTM rule is inconsistent with Congress' mandate to USDA to prevent the introduction of BSE into the U.S., and the proposed rule also is contingent upon overly optimistic – if not altogether erroneous – assumptions regarding the effectiveness of existing BSE mitigation measures in Canada," Bullard said. "Implementation of this OTM rule would relegate the United States to the position of practicing the least restrictive BSE standards compared to all other BSE-affected countries.
"In addition, because Canada plans to upgrade its feed ban in July 2007 to begin meeting minimal international standards, the effect of the OTM rule would be that the U.S. would have weaker BSE mitigation measures than Canada, while simultaneously assuming Canada's BSE risk right here in the United States," he noted. "It's also important to note that because of the loopholes identified in the U.S. feed ban, the U.S. does not have the protection needed to address the increased risk associated with Canada's older cattle population. Even though the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) has acknowledged inadequacies with the U.S. feed ban, no improvements have been made.
"It is our hope that the USDA will recognize that this OTM rule is premature, withdraw it, and then begin immediately to develop a comprehensive policy that protects our industry and the public from the importation of BSE and other foreign animal diseases," Bullard concluded.
Note: R-CALF USA's comments, along with the attachments, can be viewed at the "BSE-Litigation" link at www.r-calfusa.com. Please look forward to forthcoming information from an economics expert and a statistician regarding USDA's proposed rule. Those comments can be found in Attachment ZZ and Attachment TT, respectively.
Group Submits Extensive Comments
Against USDA's Proposed OTM Rule
Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA submitted an 86-page document of comments urging the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to withdraw its proposed plan (Rule 2) to allow imports of Canadian cattle over 30 months (OTM) of age into the U.S., along with another 50 attachments totaling well over 1000 pages of evidence that show the agency would be acting prematurely if it chooses to go forward with the planned rulemaking.
In response to continued outbreaks of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Japan and Canada, as well as the inherently higher risk associated with older Canadian and Japanese cattle, R-CALF USA members in 2006 voted overwhelmingly to "take appropriate action to challenge and stop USDA from allowing the importation of beef products from cattle older than 30 months of age, as well as the importation of live cattle over 30 months of age, from Japan or any other BSE-affected country." R-CALF USA's extensive comments on Rule 2 reflect the organization's commitment to its membership-developed policies.
R-CALF USA initially requested that USDA extend the comment period on Rule 2 due to the February 2007 discovery of a BSE-infected Canadian bull born in 2000. R-CALF USA suggested USDA should wait until Canada completed its epidemiological investigation of the bull. USDA denied the request.
"We are disappointed that USDA appears to be in such a rush to proceed with its OTM rule that it won't even provide time to gather important scientific information so that a sound decision can be made," said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard. "Quite simply, USDA did not expect Canada to detect multiple BSE-infected cattle born years after Canada implemented its feed ban, and it was inappropriate for the agency to deny our request for an extension of time pending the completion of the investigation into Canada's latest BSE case.
"We need to know if that animal was infected via cross-contamination, or more directly through prohibited feed," Bullard emphasized. "This is what the ongoing investigation may answer, and this answer is vital to determining why Canada's feed ban has not prevented the continued spread of BSE there. This is an important part of the overall analysis of Canada's BSE problem, and critical information for this rulemaking.
"In stark contradiction to earlier actions, USDA is now proposing to allow higher-risk animals from Canada into the United States, despite the fact that nothing has changed since USDA first said that the best way to protect our industry was not to allow higher-risk products into the U.S. in the first place," he pointed out. "USDA had a test that it had established to determine whether or not a country had adequate mitigation measures, and that test was whether or not animals were born after the mitigation measures were put in place. Five of Canada's 10 native cases of BSE have been born after the 1997 implementation of its feed ban – clearly indicating that the feed ban did not stop the continued spread of BSE in the Canadian feed system, or, in the Canadian cattle herd."
Bullard said problems continue with Canada's feed ban, and thousands of Canadian cattle have recently been exposed to potentially contaminated feed. In November 2006, Canadian officials issued a recall of ruminant feed across Ontario and Quebec because of meat and bone meal contamination, and just a few weeks ago, nine Saskatchewan farms were quarantined because prohibited ruminant materials were found in feed distributed to these farms.
"USDA cannot continue to ignore Canada's growing problems with BSE and the lack of enforcement of its feed ban," Bullard said. "The problems are now known to be much worse and more widespread than USDA originally thought, and R-CALF hopes USDA will acknowledge the risks and withdraw the rule entirely. The U.S. still has export customers that are very concerned about the commingling of Canadian beef and cattle with U.S. beef and cattle, and we had better begin listening to what our customers are saying. Otherwise, our industry could be put in jeopardy, and this proposed rule does just that.
"R-CALF will continue its efforts with the Administration and with Congress to halt imports of older Canadian cattle, and we'll avoid litigation if at all possible," he continued. "However, R-CALF is prepared to take whatever legal and ethical steps are necessary to protect our industry from what we know to be an avoidable and unnecessary risk."
Bullard also noted that a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators sent a letter of concern about the proposed rule to Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns, and that most participants at a recent Senate Commerce Subcommittee field hearing testified they were opposed to this rule. Additionally, a coalition of more than 100 agricultural groups sent a letter to Johanns to voice their opposition to Rule 2.
"In essence, USDA's proposed OTM rule is inconsistent with Congress' mandate to USDA to prevent the introduction of BSE into the U.S., and the proposed rule also is contingent upon overly optimistic – if not altogether erroneous – assumptions regarding the effectiveness of existing BSE mitigation measures in Canada," Bullard said. "Implementation of this OTM rule would relegate the United States to the position of practicing the least restrictive BSE standards compared to all other BSE-affected countries.
"In addition, because Canada plans to upgrade its feed ban in July 2007 to begin meeting minimal international standards, the effect of the OTM rule would be that the U.S. would have weaker BSE mitigation measures than Canada, while simultaneously assuming Canada's BSE risk right here in the United States," he noted. "It's also important to note that because of the loopholes identified in the U.S. feed ban, the U.S. does not have the protection needed to address the increased risk associated with Canada's older cattle population. Even though the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) has acknowledged inadequacies with the U.S. feed ban, no improvements have been made.
"It is our hope that the USDA will recognize that this OTM rule is premature, withdraw it, and then begin immediately to develop a comprehensive policy that protects our industry and the public from the importation of BSE and other foreign animal diseases," Bullard concluded.
Note: R-CALF USA's comments, along with the attachments, can be viewed at the "BSE-Litigation" link at www.r-calfusa.com. Please look forward to forthcoming information from an economics expert and a statistician regarding USDA's proposed rule. Those comments can be found in Attachment ZZ and Attachment TT, respectively.
