Canadian Press

[Tam]

Bill- Tam- The USDA lists regulations for 7 countries under the BEV program-- each have differing requirements....Those countries are Mexico, Taiwan, Egypt, Lebanon, Chile, Canada, and the Phillippines- their is also a proposed draft program for Japan.....

Your statement Oldtimer was countries that we are exporting to are demanding US ONLY beef.

Your two largest export markets Jan 2005 to july 2005 are MEXICO 67,396mt and CANADA 15,319mt. Are you trying to tell us that the countries listed above who are taking Canadian beef are DEMANDING American?

I find OT's comment about Mexico and Canada a bit hard to take as if the stories are right Mexico's only stipulation on US beef was they would only take from the US what the US is taking from Canada. So if R-CALF gets Canadian beef ban from the US would that also mean the US would LOOSE the Mexican market. If Mexico isn't taking US beef because of R-CALF, they will need some extra so the beef we don't ship to the US because of R-CALF could then be shipped to Mexico. And if the US isn't taking beef from a country affected by BSE then why should we. Way to go R-CALF you just lost your two largest export markets to date and Canada and Mexico could be trading beef over top or around you. And if Beef from a country affect with BSE is not safe Why should the Asian markets take US beef, I guess R-CALF forgot the US has been AFFECTED BY BSE.

 

[Bill]

Bill, "Do you think the answer to your question may be contained in my post above where I mention the control the US packers have? That has to be the poorest deflection you have ever come up with."

So what are you doing to combat that? Have you even sent one letter to any of your representatives? Have you joined an organization that recognizes the problem and is taking measures to fix it? What have YOU done?

Bill, "Production in Canada is increasing and once the Japanese and Korean market is fully re-opened to Canada and the US, Canadians will increase our share of that market while maintaining our presence in the US."

Sounds good. How are you going to do it?

Bill, "Why don't you answer my question under the WTO thread?"

Until just now, I didn't read your post. You don't want the answers, Bill, you just want to fight with a R-CALFer. There have been plenty of examples presented the last month or so that illustrate the problems. Mike posted a good deal of them. You can either figure it out or not - doesn't effect me either way.

You can rest assured Sandhusker that I have done my share.

Most of us don't come to argue with R-laffers but to correct the BS and lies. When we ask for the facts behind a lot of issues of course the usual divert, dodge and deny tactics are used. Never a straight answer or facts to back it up.

 

[Les]

Oldtimer.... The oil that is owned by the US companys is controlled by canada...They can only drill if they are granted a permit and they can only export what the canadian government allows them to. So in reality canada controls the american oil deposits in canada and makes a huge amount of money on the exported oil.

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, why wouldn't you partner with consumer groups? Aren't they the ones who buy your product? Aren't they the ones who you want to buddy up with? Why would you not?

 

[Silver]

Silver, I can't help it if you can't see the big picture. You see, we have a little problem down here called "agency capture". The USDA is dancing to the fiddle of the big packers. These are the guys who tell us they need us, but then follow a long-term strategy of making buying US beef strictly an option. They are the same guys who want to bring in beef from all over the world, and not let anybody know where it came from. These are the same guys who will fight any small packer from getting a niche they want to protect. Their plans are potentially catastrophic to the US producer, and the have the agency in charge of policing them in their pocket. And guess what, you have the same dang problem up there.

Why do you need the US market so bad? Asia is a very lucrative market, why isn't Canada doing all they can to take that market? The answer is that your government wont buck the big packers/USDA and they don't want you to do it. Your industry is being led on a leash by the US packers and Randy Kaiser is about the only Canadian on this board who is making any waves about it. They have 80% of the packing capacity up there, you think that doesn't give them any power? Obviously that is enough to tell your own parliament what they could do with a contempt charge. I would be incensed if a company tried to pull that on Congress, but I didn't hear much from up North except that R-CALF was the problem.

"R-CALF is short sided, they're protectionist" is what I hear. We're actually trying to fix a serious problem down here, the same problem that is hurting you folks up there and all we get is static. Maybe if some of you folks up there opened your eyes and saw who was actually the threat, we could get more done. But no, the US packers have your collar on so tight you can't see straight. Maybe you like your destiny being controlled by those who profit by your weakness, we don't and are actually doing something about it.

Sandhusker, thats all fine and well. I don't even neccessarily disagree with you on many of your points.
My issue is with those that claim the border needs to be closed because of a health or safety issue. And now that group seems to include you. It's R-CALF's continual pounding of that drum when ever they think it sounds good that dispells any illusion of legitamacy they might of otherwise had. I'm all for you guys having an organization that is meant to look after the producer ( I wish we had one of our own), but I don't believe I could ever belong to a group so morally bereft as rcalf.

 

[Sandhusker]

Silver,
The Canadian border IS a health issue. Sure, you can make a strong case that there is a very small risk from Canadian beef and I would agree with you, but that is not the point. The point is that the USDA is in charge of protecting the herd and the safety of our food supply. They testified before Congress that their zero-tolerance policy was necessary to keep us safe, but then abandoned that policy with no explanation other than explaining that Canada was our biggest trade partner. That is unacceptable, disturbing, and NOT the way they should be acting in the future. The USDA has a very important job and certain protocols have to be followed. Arbitrary decisions can not be made.

If Canadian beef is safe and there is no danger to the health to US consumers or the herd, it is their job to do the homework and make the case. They need to show why long-standing policy is being changed. Remember, the zero-tolerance policy was created for health reasons, if they are going to change it, they need new and improved HEALTH information to justify it. They didn't do that. If they can, fine, do it. Until then, then are not doing their job and are setting dangerous precident with their actions. Is it too much that we demand they do their jobs? If they are allowed rein this time, what is next?

You know how if you have a weak spot in your corral/fence where a cow can get out and she does once? She'll keep on doing it until you fix that spot. The USDA is that cow and R-CALF is trying to fix the hole. That cow can't be getting out.

 

[Bill]

Tam, why wouldn't you partner with consumer groups? Aren't they the ones who buy your product? Aren't they the ones who you want to buddy up with? Why would you not?

Consumer groups don't buy CATTLE they buy BEEF and R-Calf doesn't produce BEEF they produce CATTLE. This has been made very clear to us by several on this site. Check it out Sandhusker it's in the archives.

Are you now changing that song and dance to fit your arguement? :lol: :lol: :lol: Imagine that!

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, why wouldn't you partner with consumer groups? Aren't they the ones who buy your product? Aren't they the ones who you want to buddy up with? Why would you not?

Consumer groups don't buy CATTLE they buy BEEF and R-Calf doesn't produce BEEF they produce CATTLE. This has been made very clear to us by several on this site. Check it out Sandhusker it's in the archives.

Are you now changing that song and dance to fit your arguement? :lol: :lol: :lol: Imagine that!

Excuuuuuuuuse me. Does that change the intent of my post one iota?

 

[Bill]

Tam, why wouldn't you partner with consumer groups? Aren't they the ones who buy your product? Aren't they the ones who you want to buddy up with? Why would you not?

Consumer groups don't buy CATTLE they buy BEEF and R-Calf doesn't produce BEEF they produce CATTLE. This has been made very clear to us by several on this site. Check it out Sandhusker it's in the archives.

Are you now changing that song and dance to fit your arguement? :lol: :lol: :lol: Imagine that!

Excuuuuuuuuse me. Does that change the intent of my post one iota?

The intent or the context? They are two entirely different things. My comment addresses the context of the ongoing arguements of captive supply, border closure, free trade, what NCBA or USDA did wrong this week and whether the sun still comes up in the east on a cloudy day. :roll:

It it is hypocritical that you R-Calfers can't decide if you are part of the beef industry or just sell cattle. Whatever suits the moment I guess.

 

[Sandhusker]

Bill, I'll spell it out for you. We are in the cattle industry, which is closely related to and affected greatly by the beef industry.

 

[Bill]

Bill, I'll spell it out for you. We are in the cattle industry, which is closely related to and affected greatly by the beef industry.

Well I am glad given some of your posts that you can see a connection :!: The are some of your fellow "trade group" members that don't appear to. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Tam]

Tam, why wouldn't you partner with consumer groups? Aren't they the ones who buy your product? Aren't they the ones who you want to buddy up with? Why would you not?

Aren't they the ones who buy your product

No Sandhusker, the feed lots and the Packers are the ones that buy your product (cattle) and I don't see one of you attempting to partner with them. The Consumers buy the product of the packers and retailers and according to R-CALF you are not involved in that industry (Beef). Maybe it is time you R-CALFers realized just who is your market and quit trying to put them out of business, by trying to destroy their consumer confidence. As if they don't have customers neither do you.

Aren't they the ones who you want to buddy up with? Why would you not

We are talking about consumer groups that have ANTI BEEF ties and you think it is smart for R-CALF to stand hand in hand with these type to bad mouth Canadian beef? :roll: Now that the US found a native case of BSE do you think these groups are just going to forget all the lies R-CALF has spouted about our beef? No they are going to come out with campaignes against eating ANY BEEF. Thanks to R-CALF they now can say well some in the cattle industry believe this and who are we to question them on their product. If Canada's beef is tainted so is the US beef for the same if not stronger reasons because like R-CALF has pointed out our firewalls that they claimed would protect us have hole that won't protect from imported so how can they protect from native. Your safest bet is to not eat any beef. Geez Sandhusker defend R-CALF without looking at the long term damage they are doing why don't you.

]The Canadian border IS a health issue

I ask you this Sandhusker why isn't BSE a health issue in the US

quote from your LEADER LYING LEO

So if for some reason we did find a case we can stand and look our consumers right in the eye and say, don't worry we have had these firewalls in place for years, the only country prior to having a case of BSE to have these firewalls in place for so many years. And we did it to make sure if a case was ever found it was a non-issue. If we look them right in the eye and say that I will guarantee they will keep eating beef".

What Firewalls are protecting the US consumer from BSE Sandhusker? Aren't these the same firewalls the R-CALF stood hand in hand with those consumer groups and claimed didn't protect Canada and are the main reason the US can't afford to import cattle from a country affected with BSE. Do you think those CONSUMER GROUPS have forgotten about those firewalls?