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

Canadian Politicians have Options

Help Support Ranchers.net:

A

Anonymous

Guest
Mad cow options to top the agenda at ag ministers mountain


CALGARY (CP) - Canada's agriculture ministers will get a look
Wednesday at "disaster scenario" plans that may have to be
implemented if a Montana judge extends a live cattle ban to boxed
cuts of Canadian beef.
The "worst case" includes a proposal to immediately
concentrate slaughter capacity on cattle under 30 months, which
would mean up to 18,000 older animals a week would be bound for
rendering plants.
"This is the major red meat cuts, the bulk of which are
typically ground into ground beef that would be diverted at least
temporarily into rendering or, once that system is full, for
disposal," said Ted Haney of the Canada Beef Export Federation,
part of the beef round table which drafted the proposals.
Contingency plans for the mad cow crisis are Wednesday's main
agenda item for agriculture ministers who begin three days of talks
in the Rocky Mountain resort village of Kananaskis west of
Calgary.
The controversial disposal move is described as a short-term
solution until other markets could be found for older beef. Haney
said Canada would have to cope with the more than 30,000 tonnes of
meat that have been moving across the U.S. border each month, worth
an estimated $135 million.
The options were hammered out June 22 at an Ottawa meeting.
Canada's beef industry has endured more than $7 billion in
export losses since May 2003, when the first of three cows with mad
cow disease was found on an Alberta farm. Just as the U.S. border
was poised to reopen to live cattle in March, a Montana judge sided
with a U.S. ranchers group and temporarily extended it.
Last week, it was confirmed that the Americans had their own
homegrown case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy - the scientific
name for mad cow disease - in a 12-year-old Texas cow. But no one
is clear on how that will impact court cases where a U.S.
protectionist group will argue the Canada's three cases of bovine
spongiform encephalopathy mean northern herds are unsafe.
"They're no longer BSE-free, for sure, and the likelihood of a
total closure to me seems one of the least likely scenarios to come
back," said Alberta Agriculture Minister Doug Horner, whose
province has been hit hardest by the international bans on live
cattle.
Horner says many of the ministers are aware of the suggested
scenarios, but it will be the first time the plans will have been
formally laid out.
"We're looking at things like retention programs, (or) other
markets where we'd be looking to put beef in a hurry - albeit at
probably depressed prices," he said.
"Is that palatable to the industry, is that palatable to the
rest of the country? These meetings will give us an opportunity to
bounce this off the other provinces."
Next week, an appeals court in Seattle hears a U.S. government
appeal of Judge Richard Cebull's decision to temporarily extend the
ban. A separate hearing on the long-term fate of the border will be
conducted by Cebull on July 27 in Billings, Mont.
Saskatchewan Agriculture Minister Mark Wartman said he wants
Ottawa to have a plan in case a U.S. court imposes new restrictions
on Canadian beef.
"If the decision goes in the worst possible way - closing the
border to meat as well as live animals - there are going to be
huge, huge challenges," he said from Regina.
"This is clearly a trade issue and we truly need the federal
government to come and pick up the cost."
Other options to be discussed will be keeping calves born this
spring out of the market system until January 2006 and implementing
BSE tests on all animals bound for international markets.
The testing option is the only one which would not come with a
huge cost to taxpayers.
Also on the ministers' agenda will be discussion of dwindling
farm income, international trade concern and securing improvements
to the Canadian Agriculture Stabilization Program. The impact of
spring flooding on the prairie crops is also expected to be
discussed.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Other options to be discussed will be keeping calves born this
spring out of the market system until January 2006 and implementing
BSE tests on all animals bound for international markets.
The testing option is the only one which would not come with a
huge cost to taxpayers.
If the border did close to boxed product testing would soon start and then we'll let the US taxpayers pay for Canadian certified BSE free beef. :!: Try keep your untested American beef at the front of the meatcase then OT. :wink:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Bill said:
Other options to be discussed will be keeping calves born this
spring out of the market system until January 2006 and implementing
BSE tests on all animals bound for international markets.
The testing option is the only one which would not come with a
huge cost to taxpayers.
If the border did close to boxed product testing would soon start and then we'll let the US taxpayers pay for Canadian certified BSE free beef. :!: Try keep your untested American beef at the front of the meatcase then OT. :wink:

If Canada starts testing for export markets that would really put the pressure on the USDA. R-Calf advocated Creekstone's import of Canadian live cattle to the USA for testing over a year ago which is by hindsight, what the USDA should have done. That move by the USDA drove a big wedge in the industry.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Mike said:
Bill said:
Other options to be discussed will be keeping calves born this
spring out of the market system until January 2006 and implementing
BSE tests on all animals bound for international markets.
The testing option is the only one which would not come with a
huge cost to taxpayers.
If the border did close to boxed product testing would soon start and then we'll let the US taxpayers pay for Canadian certified BSE free beef. :!: Try keep your untested American beef at the front of the meatcase then OT. :wink:

If Canada starts testing for export markets that would really put the pressure on the USDA. R-Calf advocated Creekstone's import of Canadian live cattle to the USA for testing over a year ago which is by hindsight, what the USDA should have done. That move by the USDA drove a big wedge in the industry.
I believe R-Calf supported Creekstone testing for export but I think saying they advocated the import of Canadian live cattle is a bit of a stretch.
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
Bill said:
Other options to be discussed will be keeping calves born this
spring out of the market system until January 2006 and implementing
BSE tests on all animals bound for international markets.
The testing option is the only one which would not come with a
huge cost to taxpayers.
If the border did close to boxed product testing would soon start and then we'll let the US taxpayers pay for Canadian certified BSE free beef. :!: Try keep your untested American beef at the front of the meatcase then OT. :wink:


Well if we lose we need to apply the golden rule .
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
Bill said:
Mike said:
Bill said:
If the border did close to boxed product testing would soon start and then we'll let the US taxpayers pay for Canadian certified BSE free beef. :!: Try keep your untested American beef at the front of the meatcase then OT. :wink:

If Canada starts testing for export markets that would really put the pressure on the USDA. R-Calf advocated Creekstone's import of Canadian live cattle to the USA for testing over a year ago which is by hindsight, what the USDA should have done. That move by the USDA drove a big wedge in the industry.
I believe R-Calf supported Creekstone testing for export but I think saying they advocated the import of Canadian live cattle is a bit of a stretch.

Thats not a stretch its a outright lie.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
OT the funny thing is that Americans are up here buying calves and a memo being circulated mentions a high probablilty of a border reopening shortly after the July 13th hearing.

Maybe Cebull won't even get his chance to take another kick at Canada.

Hmmm... who to believe?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Bill said:
Mike said:
Bill said:
If the border did close to boxed product testing would soon start and then we'll let the US taxpayers pay for Canadian certified BSE free beef. :!: Try keep your untested American beef at the front of the meatcase then OT. :wink:

If Canada starts testing for export markets that would really put the pressure on the USDA. R-Calf advocated Creekstone's import of Canadian live cattle to the USA for testing over a year ago which is by hindsight, what the USDA should have done. That move by the USDA drove a big wedge in the industry.
I believe R-Calf supported Creekstone testing for export but I think saying they advocated the import of Canadian live cattle is a bit of a stretch.

Believe what you want. But r-calf "wholeheartedly" endorsed Fielding's proposal, which included shipping live cattle from Canada for export.
The point was not R-Calf's good deeds but the USDA's bull headed arguments for the AMI has pi$$ed off some ranchers to the point that they have joined R-Calf, which have taken a fierce stance against the USDA.
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
Mike said:
Believe what you want. But r-calf "wholeheartedly" endorsed Fielding's proposal, which included shipping live cattle from Canada for export.


Why don,t you post the article Mike.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Mike said:
Bill said:
Mike said:
If Canada starts testing for export markets that would really put the pressure on the USDA. R-Calf advocated Creekstone's import of Canadian live cattle to the USA for testing over a year ago which is by hindsight, what the USDA should have done. That move by the USDA drove a big wedge in the industry.
I believe R-Calf supported Creekstone testing for export but I think saying they advocated the import of Canadian live cattle is a bit of a stretch.

Believe what you want. But r-calf "wholeheartedly" endorsed Fielding's proposal, which included shipping live cattle from Canada for export.
The point was not R-Calf's good deeds but the USDA's bull headed arguments for the AMI has p****d off some ranchers to the point that they have joined R-Calf, which have taken a fierce stance against the USDA.
You expect us to believe that R-Calf who doesn't want another Canadian animal to set foot on US soil and who also wants the border shut to boxed beef, supports Creekstone in their quest to import Canadian cattle? :lol: :lol: :lol: Good one. Thanks for the chuckle.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Bill said:
Mike said:
Bill said:
I believe R-Calf supported Creekstone testing for export but I think saying they advocated the import of Canadian live cattle is a bit of a stretch.

Believe what you want. But r-calf "wholeheartedly" endorsed Fielding's proposal, which included shipping live cattle from Canada for export.
The point was not R-Calf's good deeds but the USDA's bull headed arguments for the AMI has p****d off some ranchers to the point that they have joined R-Calf, which have taken a fierce stance against the USDA.
You expect us to believe that R-Calf who doesn't want another Canadian animal to set foot on US soil and who also wants the border shut to boxed beef, supports Creekstone in their quest to import Canadian cattle? :lol: :lol: :lol: Good one. Thanks for the chuckle.

Think past tense. You've had 2 more positives since that time, 1 1/2 years ago. Never said the word "supports". Supports is present tense.
And thanks for the humor in your inability to comprehend. :wink:
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
frenchie said:
Mike said:
Believe what you want. But r-calf "wholeheartedly" endorsed Fielding's proposal, which included shipping live cattle from Canada for export.


Why don,t you post the article Mike.


I guess he won,t because he can,t. :lol:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Cattle Industry Calling for Mad Cow Testing
7/26/04

Beef Groups to Press USDA for Private BSE Tests
Story by C. Gilliam

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - A group of U.S. cattle industry producers and companies plans to petition the U.S. Department of Agriculture for the right to test all their cattle for mad cow disease to comply with demands by Asian customers who currently are refusing to buy U.S. beef.

"A lawsuit is definitely an option," said Bill Bullard, chief executive officer of R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America, one member of the budding coalition challenging the USDA.

Japan, previously the biggest foreign buyer of U.S. beef with $1.4 billion purchased in 2003, halted imports last December when the first U.S. case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), commonly called mad cow disease, showed up in Washington state.

Japan has insisted that it will not ease its ban until the United States tests each cow or steer carcass for BSE, as is the practice in Japan.

But the USDA has refused, and it has refused to allow for private companies to buy the test kits that would enable them to test 100 percent of their herds.

"We've waited six months for the USDA to try and negotiate with the Japanese and other Asian markets and they've been unsuccessful," said Bullard. "Meanwhile our market share is being taken over by countries like Australia. If we don't act quickly we will have an extremely difficult time in buying back those markets. The Canadian border will eventually open, then what happens to those cattle? We cannot allow our largest trading partners to go unserviced."

R-CALF met last week in Denver with representatives from the live cattle sector, beef packing, and the beef retail and restaurant sectors to cement a coalition to challenge the USDA.

The group includes Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, a Kansas meat-packing plant, and Missouri-based Gateway Beef Cooperative, both of which have been banned by the USDA from testing their cattle. Sixty other smaller high-end packing operations are expressing interest because of decreased sales.

The companies say that by testing 100 percent of their herds they will be able to begin exporting beef to Asian markets once again.

But the USDA has said that only animals displaying certain characteristics should be tested and 100 percent testing would set an improper and costly standard that could hurt companies that don't test their presumably health animals.

A USDA spokesman could not be immediately reached for comment Friday but has offered a compromise to test cattle over 30 months.

Humans can suffer fatal brain disorder after eating meat from BSE-infected cattle, though such cases have been rare.

"It's no longer just Creekstone fighting this," Creekstone's chief operating officer, William Fielding, told Reuters. "There are a large group of producers, cattlemen and others who are very much in favor of our testing. Our plan would also unite us with Canada once again."

On Thursday in Tokyo, Japan and the United States finished a final round of scientific talks without a resolution, though Japan did acknowledge there was little value in testing young cattle for the disease.

Consumer confidence in beef declined in Japan when labeling coverups were investigated.

SacBee copyright
7/26/04
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Bill, Think about it real hard. Remember last year when some involved w/r-calf got caught with their pants down buying and owning Canadian cattle? See the connection? They were going to supply Creekstone w/cattle from Canada. That's the reason they signed on to the Creekstone proposal. These guys were sure they could buy cattle cheaper up there because of the depressed market and mop up by moving those cattle into the lucrative Jap supply chain. On THEIR terms.
Underhanded? You betcha. But it still don't alter the fact.
Back to the subject; When the USDA chose to deny Creekstone the ability to test it got in some pocketbooks and made R-Calf more determined to give the USDA hell on every move they made. Just follow the money.
ALWAYS follow the money.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Mike said:
Cattle Industry Calling for Mad Cow Testing
7/26/04

Beef Groups to Press USDA for Private BSE Tests
Story by C. Gilliam

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - A group of U.S. cattle industry producers and companies plans to petition the U.S. Department of Agriculture for the right to test all their cattle for mad cow disease to comply with demands by Asian customers who currently are refusing to buy U.S. beef.

"A lawsuit is definitely an option," said Bill Bullard, chief executive officer of R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America, one member of the budding coalition challenging the USDA.

Japan, previously the biggest foreign buyer of U.S. beef with $1.4 billion purchased in 2003, halted imports last December when the first U.S. case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), commonly called mad cow disease, showed up in Washington state.

Japan has insisted that it will not ease its ban until the United States tests each cow or steer carcass for BSE, as is the practice in Japan.

But the USDA has refused, and it has refused to allow for private companies to buy the test kits that would enable them to test 100 percent of their herds.

"We've waited six months for the USDA to try and negotiate with the Japanese and other Asian markets and they've been unsuccessful," said Bullard. "Meanwhile our market share is being taken over by countries like Australia. If we don't act quickly we will have an extremely difficult time in buying back those markets. The Canadian border will eventually open, then what happens to those cattle? We cannot allow our largest trading partners to go unserviced."

R-CALF met last week in Denver with representatives from the live cattle sector, beef packing, and the beef retail and restaurant sectors to cement a coalition to challenge the USDA.

The group includes Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, a Kansas meat-packing plant, and Missouri-based Gateway Beef Cooperative, both of which have been banned by the USDA from testing their cattle. Sixty other smaller high-end packing operations are expressing interest because of decreased sales.

The companies say that by testing 100 percent of their herds they will be able to begin exporting beef to Asian markets once again.

But the USDA has said that only animals displaying certain characteristics should be tested and 100 percent testing would set an improper and costly standard that could hurt companies that don't test their presumably health animals.

A USDA spokesman could not be immediately reached for comment Friday but has offered a compromise to test cattle over 30 months.

Humans can suffer fatal brain disorder after eating meat from BSE-infected cattle, though such cases have been rare.

"It's no longer just Creekstone fighting this," Creekstone's chief operating officer, William Fielding, told Reuters. "There are a large group of producers, cattlemen and others who are very much in favor of our testing. Our plan would also unite us with Canada once again."

On Thursday in Tokyo, Japan and the United States finished a final round of scientific talks without a resolution, though Japan did acknowledge there was little value in testing young cattle for the disease.

Consumer confidence in beef declined in Japan when labeling coverups were investigated.

SacBee copyright
7/26/04
Thanks for posting the article Mike though given all the hypocritical, contradictory statements coming out of the R-Calf leadership over the past 2 years I am hard pressed to believe Bill in this case. I stand by my earlier comments.

Believe what you want. But r-calf "wholeheartedly" endorsed Fielding's proposal, which included shipping live cattle from Canada for export.
What's the difference between support and endorse in American? :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
Mike said:
Bill, Think about it real hard. Remember last year when some involved w/r-calf got caught with their pants down buying and owning Canadian cattle? See the connection? They were going to supply Creekstone w/cattle from Canada..


Bool sheit .
 

Latest posts

Top