Cost of testing.

[Big Muddy rancher]

The cost of testing. Figures thrown around from $18 to $28. Are the least of our worries. To hold the carcasses and offal for the results would slow line speed and productivity by 40 -60% . In Canada we now have 69 countries taking our beef. The biggest hold up right now in Canada is slaughter capacity. As we increase capacity we won't be held captive by limited competion for our cattle. We really have to be careful we don't set a precedent by testing for one country . We can sell all we produce, we just need more competition within Canada.

Testing is a tool to use for survallence purposes to determine the level of BSE. SRM removal makes the beef safe to eat. :cowboy:

 

[Sandhusker]

I wonder what the cost of SRM removal and disposal is? What about the lost revenue from having no use them? I'd like to see these numbers compared to the cost of testing.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

I wonder what the cost of SRM removal and disposal is? What about the lost revenue from having no use them? I'd like to see these numbers compared to the cost of testing.

Regardless of whether the animal is tested, SRM's have to be removed. SRM removed deals with the Food safety issue and if the test missed an animal the meat is safe. The test is to tell the prevelence of BSE with in the national herd.

Yes their is a cost to SRM removal but is that cost greater then the reduction in Kill capacity by slowing line speed by 50%. In Canada we have limited capacity right now, with not shipping to the U.S. We need to do our survalence on farms by testing the 4 D's and in the Packing houses protect our consumers by removing the SRM's. And use proper feed bans it insure that the SRM's are not fed back to ruminants.

 

[Mike]

The cost of testing. Figures thrown around from $18 to $28. Are the least of our worries. To hold the carcasses and offal for the results would slow line speed and productivity by 40 -60% . In Canada we now have 69 countries taking our beef. The biggest hold up right now in Canada is slaughter capacity. As we increase capacity we won't be held captive by limited competion for our cattle. We really have to be careful we don't set a precedent by testing for one country . We can sell all we produce, we just need more competition within Canada.

Testing is a tool to use for survallence purposes to determine the level of BSE. SRM removal makes the beef safe to eat. :cowboy:

FROM QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION AFTER WASHINGTON COW:

DR. DEHAVEN: "I would just reiterate that again the announcement today is an enhanced, more robust testing program for surveillance purposes which is separate and apart from the testing that you're referring to which is testing for marketability purposes and would test a different population of animals but be done for export or marketing purposes.

"We have those proposals or we have received such requests; those proposals are actively under consideration within the Department. I hesitate to make any prediction on how soon there might be a response or a decision with regard to those. I'd simply say that those proposals, we are aware of them, and they are actively under consideration within the Department at this point.
________________________________________________

Seems as though the USDA acknowledges that there is a such thing as "testing for marketability purposes" or "export marketing purposes".
We know how their decision went though.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker: "I wonder what the cost of SRM removal and disposal is? What about the lost revenue from having no use them? I'd like to see these numbers compared to the cost of testing."

Testing that reveals nothing in cattle under 24 months of age is not a viable alternative to SRM removal if that was your "SHOT FROM THE GRASSY KNOLL" this time.


~SH~

 

[Jason]

I believe the costs associated with SRM removal were discussed many months ago and it seems to me costs totaled about $260 per head on OTM cattle.

Canada is looking for alternate uses for SRMs and one is digesters that would generate heat for slaughter facilities.

With energy costs rising everyday, one 'expert' suggesting $250 a barrel oil, alternative energy becomes more economical.

SRM removal has become very efficient and is good for consumer confidence. I doubt testing would generate the same level of comfort when tests are changing and "being improved" every few months. That leaves consumers with the perception of why don't they get it right before we trust them.

I doubt anyone remembers, very few here now were here when Ranchers.net was started as I was, but I predicted before Canada would position itself to take more customers for high quality beef. Funny how a kick in the head can speed that process up.

Anyone fighting SRM removal is barking up the wrong tree. It has become the standard, right or wrong. From a caution and efficiency standpoint it has been the right choice.

 

[Bill]

I wonder what the cost of SRM removal and disposal is? What about the lost revenue from having no use them? I'd like to see these numbers compared to the cost of testing.

Regardless of whether the animal is tested, SRM's have to be removed. SRM removed deals with the Food safety issue and if the test missed an animal the meat is safe. The test is to tell the prevelence of BSE with in the national herd.

Yes their is a cost to SRM removal but is that cost greater then the reduction in Kill capacity by slowing line speed by 50%. In Canada we have limited capacity right now, with not shipping to the U.S. We need to do our survalence on farms by testing the 4 D's and in the Packing houses protect our consumers by removing the SRM's. And use proper feed bans it insure that the SRM's are not fed back to ruminants.

What information are you using that tell you that line speed is slowed down by 50%. It hasn't happened in Europe so why would it here? More cooler space allows the line to continue at pretty much the same speed.

The need and the support for testing all OTMs is increasing as it is the only way it will be allowed to re-enter our export markets. The status quo approach of the CCA and its affiliates is finally changing after 20 months.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

I wonder what the cost of SRM removal and disposal is? What about the lost revenue from having no use them? I'd like to see these numbers compared to the cost of testing.

Regardless of whether the animal is tested, SRM's have to be removed. SRM removed deals with the Food safety issue and if the test missed an animal the meat is safe. The test is to tell the prevelence of BSE with in the national herd.

Yes their is a cost to SRM removal but is that cost greater then the reduction in Kill capacity by slowing line speed by 50%. In Canada we have limited capacity right now, with not shipping to the U.S. We need to do our survalence on farms by testing the 4 D's and in the Packing houses protect our consumers by removing the SRM's. And use proper feed bans it insure that the SRM's are not fed back to ruminants.

What information are you using that tell you that line speed is slowed down by 50%. It hasn't happened in Europe so why would it here? More cooler space allows the line to continue at pretty much the same speed.

The need and the support for testing all OTMs is increasing as it is the only way it will be allowed to re-enter our export markets. The status quo approach of the CCA and its affiliates is finally changing after 20 months.[/quotte}



As Jason pointed out in another thread The new technology on packing plants s to have the animal in and out of the plant in six hours. How do you keep everything together. We are shipping beef products to 69 markets. Sure some are small but we could be building demand. We do have to move from reliance on the U.S.
Have we been told we can export to a counrty if we test? Does anyone have a contract for tested meat? Is the meat any safer then with SRM's removed?

I agree the CCA and affiliates have work to do . But much of that work is within Canada to Improve inter provincial trade regs, and preessure the CFIA to facilitate appoval of packing facilites rather than be a impediment to business. They have standard to enforce but can do it in a way that doesn't impede progess.

 

[Bill]

As Jason pointed out in another thread The new technology on packing plants s to have the animal in and out of the plant in six hours. How do you keep everything together. We are shipping beef products to 69 markets.

The does not answer my question as to what tells you that the existing lines will be slowed down by 50% if testing is done. I believe the turn- around time for current BSE tests is 6 hours.

Have we been told we can export to a counrty if we test? Does anyone have a contract for tested meat?

You will have to ask Ted Haney those questions. I would be interested in the answer from him, not CCA.

Is the meat any safer then with SRM's removed?

I haven't said it was safer than SRM removal.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

If you want to compare Europe to Canada ask your self if Reality and Economics have ever crossed paths in Europe. Ask some new imigrants to Canada how they were regulated and how much Government involement and money is involved with agriculture .

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Bill"
Have we been told we can export to a counrty if we test? Does anyone have a contract for tested meat?

You will have to ask Ted Haney those questions. I would be interested in the answer from him, not CCA."


Do you not have his E-MAIL? I probably get it for you if you really want to know.