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

Canucks like Courts Too

Help Support Ranchers.net:

A

Anonymous

Guest
Toronto, January 9th, 2006:

In reasons released late Thursday, January 5th, 2006 Toronto Regional Senior Justice Warren Winkler ruled that the mad cow class action involving approximately 100,000 Canadian cattle farmers against the Federal Government and Ridley Inc. will continue.

The class action lawsuit alleges that the BSE crisis, the closing of the U.S. and other international borders to Canadian cattle and beef, and the loss of billions of dollars by the Canadian cattle industry, was the result of gross incompetence on the part of the Canadian government and negligence on the part of feed manufacturer Ridley Inc. The damages claimed are in excess of 20 billion dollars.

Justice Winkler dismissed a motion brought by lawyers acting on behalf of the federal government and Ridley Inc. (Canada) to strike out the cattle farmers’ claim. The motion to dismiss the claim against Ridley Corporation Limited (Australia) was granted.

BSE is an incurable neurological disease of cattle that is transmitted when healthy cattle eat the remains of infected cattle or other ruminants (cud chewers). The claim alleges that the federal government was negligent in enacting, or failing to enact in a timely fashion, regulations with respect to permissible ingredients in cattle feed. It is also alleged that Ridley Inc. was negligent as a result of its continued inclusion of ruminant meat and bonemeal in cattle feed sold in Canada, despite the knowledge that ruminant meat and bonemeal use in cattle feed could cause BSE in Canadian cattle and that Ridley Inc. knew or ought to have known that a diagnosis of BSE would result in a ban on the importation of Canadian cattle and beef products into the United States and elsewhere.

Following a serious outbreak of “mad cow disease” in the United Kingdom in the 1980s, the Canadian government responded in 1990 by banning the importation of live cattle from the UK and Ireland and placing the cattle that had been imported since 1982 in a monitoring program. When one of the monitored cattle from the UK in Alberta tested positive for BSE in December, 1993 the government took stock. They discovered that at least 80 of the original 191 cattle imported from the UK and Ireland since 1982 may have entered the Canadian animal feed system through rendering after slaughter or death from some other cause. In early 1994 the government ordered the remainder of the original 191 cattle then in Canada to be exported or destroyed. What the government did not do, however, was immediately ban the use of ruminant tissues in cattle feed, an action that the lawsuit alleges would have prevented the BSE crisis.

On May 17, 1994 the government’s own internal risk assessment on past importations of cattle from the UK concluded that “the probability of entry of BSE infected cattle through the 1982-89 importation of 183 cattle from the U.K. appears to be very high” and that “further cases of BSE would likely prompt a trade embargo against Canadian exports of cattle, beef and dairy products for an indefinite period of time”. The assessment identified potential losses to cattle producers amounting to billions of dollars. The government finally enacted a ruminant feed ban which came into effect in October 1997, in response to recommendations by the World Health Organization and a similar ban in the United States which became effective in August 1997.

There were no further cases of BSE in Canada from 1993 until May of 2003, five and one half years after the ban was introduced, when the first case of BSE in a Canadian-born cow was diagnosed. Following this discovery, the United States, Mexico and Japan immediately closed their borders to Canadian beef and live cattle. The infected cow was born in Saskatchewan in the spring of 1997. The federal government identified the most likely source of BSE for the infected cow as being a product known as Feed-Rite Calf-Glow produced at the Feed-Rite mill in St. Paul, Alberta, that contained ruminant meat and bonemeal contaminated with the BSE prion. Feed-Rite was the predecessor company to Ridley Inc.

Cameron Pallett, legal counsel for the Ontario Plaintiff commented, “One can only wonder why, once the federal government determined that more than 80 British cattle had been ground up and turned into cattle feed, it took them until August of 1997 to enact a feed ban. Why did it take almost four years to act when the government knew that even a single case of BSE in the Canadian herd would cause untold suffering and potential destruction to the livelihoods of thousands of hardworking Canadian families? Had they acted prudently and in a timely manner this would never have happened.”

Although findings of liability against the federal government and Ridley Inc. remain to be made, Mr. Pallett and his colleagues find this a positive development for cattle producers and urge them to visit the BSE class action web site for more information: www.bseclassaction.ca.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Wonder if the packers will join in on this since they were cattle owners also?
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
Oldtimer said:
Cameron Pallett, legal counsel for the Ontario Plaintiff commented, “One can only wonder why, once the federal government determined that more than 80 British cattle had been ground up and turned into cattle feed, it took them until August of 1997 to enact a feed ban.

So I wonder when the U.S actually put their own feed ban in place :?:


or where their british cattle ended up. :?:
 

cowsense

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,394
Reaction score
0
Location
Central Saskatchewan
One has to wonder just how many actual producers are involved in this one; It definately is nowhere near 100k! I really wonder how they were able to influence a judge to continue this ambulance chasing farce! :? :?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
cowsense said:
One has to wonder just how many actual producers are involved in this one; It definately is nowhere near 100k! I really wonder how they were able to influence a judge to continue this ambulance chasing farce! :? :?

Think peace pipe.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I've been trying to figure out what that would come out to per person--$20 billion divided by 100,000? I don't even have a calculator with enough zeros........
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
What surprizes me is of any producer I have talked to nobody seems to be involved with this farce yet it represents 100,000 of us. I emailed the lawyer that was to be representing the Sask producers and I have yet to recieve an answer to the email and that was last summer. I doubt this is backed by many producers if the lawyers won't even answer producer questions about the case. :roll:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Just wondering. Do you Canadian producers think that the Canadian government did "Everything" possible to protect you from a BSE fallout?

Do you think there were "No Mistakes" (intentional or unintentional) made?

Remember now, we all had the UK/EU epidemic to observe and learn from.
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
Don't really know why you guys are calling this thing a farce. You seem to be the ones who believe the transmission theory.

Have a read of the material on http://www.bseclassaction.ca/english/index_en.htm

You might even be able to help this thing along Tam!
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
Mr. Pallett and his colleagues I think are kinda of streching the numbers...a wee mite ..
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
No doubt frenchie. The 100,000 thing is a stretch, as well as the 20 billion. Hard to argue that they do not have some interesting points however.

Mike -
Just wondering. Do you Canadian producers think that the Canadian government did "Everything" possible to protect you from a BSE fallout?

Come now Mike. Did yours? This BSE crap is not about Canada or the USA. If you believe the transmission theory, as Pallett and the gang do, you must believe that Canada and the USA were equally at risk.

If you go back to the first Canadian cow, back in the 90's and say that that is wher this thing started, you need to know the story. The cow was down and the farmer gave her a couple of rounds in the noodle. She got up and was on the fight. Only then did the farmer call in the CFIA to deal with her as he realised that she was one of the imported cows. Some survailance program hey. If the farmer would have used a bigger gun, the hole story may have been NO story.

Chance Mike - simply chance. The cows that were imported into the USA at the same time were not under any better survailance. In fact, more Canadian cows were traced than American cows.

If this transmission theory has to be the accepted theory, then the governments of both Canada and the USA should be held responsible.

If the case goes only so far as to have the governments of both of our countries back down and take another look at the true cause of BSE, well good for Randy, and Kathy, and Tim H, our hero Mark Purdey and others, who have questioned this crap from the start.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
RandyK, In no way was I insinuating that the USDA did a better job than the CFIA in handling the BSE crisis.

I just think that the above mentioned lawsuit should go through the system to expose any wrondoing/mistakes that could be a detriment to producers down the road and could show government agencies that they can be held accountable.

You are right, Canada was a victim of circumstance. The producer's paid for any mistakes that might have been made.
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
So Mike, would you like to make this a lawsuit against the USDA AND the Canadian Government?

No one in Canada could convince our "Producer Funded" Industry leadership to make this happen. These lawyers are working mostly on their own time with hints of payout for themselves WHEN they win something. Got any American Laywers that you can think of that would do the same. Maybe they could give Mr. Pallett a call and really start something here. :wink:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
rkaiser said:
Don't really know why you guys are calling this thing a farce. You seem to be the ones who believe the transmission theory.

Have a read of the material on http://www.bseclassaction.ca/english/index_en.htm

You might even be able to help this thing along Tam!

Randy would you like to show me where I said the transmission theory was the only theory I believe in? Oh I forgot you just make statements to stir things up so no proof will be coming. :wink:
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
Excuse me Ms. Tam. I take your word for it --- Okay.
Why is it that you believe this law suit is a farce? If you want a question answered, contact Pallett. He seems to be the PR man of the group.
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
I'd pretty well have to be BMR. In fact, I don't even think that there are 100,000. If you're asking if I donated, I can honestly say that I can't remember, but I'll have to check. I've throw a lot of good money and a lot of time at almost any group that has the guts to make a stand. I do know that I donated to the group who planned to sue Rcalf, but don't know where that one is at.

I guess my hope is that myself and a few others can help these guys when they get blindsided by the Feds. I think that the excuses will fly about probabilities and such and that is where I think it will get interesting.

Will the feds talk about the CHANCE of other ways of contracting BSE? And if they do, will they be cornered into a challenge to the very core of their argument about feed transmission.

I like the fact that this case is moving ahead. Ignorance is bliss, and the more we all ignore, the more blissful we will be. There is still no solid proof that BSE can be transmitted through normal feeding practices no matter how long and boring flounder's post become. Maybe this case will bring this fact back into the limelight.

Cheers
Randy
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,011
Reaction score
220
Location
Big Muddy valley
Strange you can't remember. Must be getting old or just a convenient memory. We sent a check to the outfit that was going to sue R-CALF as well but to date I don't think it's been cashed. To bad.
 

Latest posts

Top