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

Creekstone Farms to File Lawsuit Against USDA BSE TESTING

F

flounder

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Messages
2,631
Location
TEXAS
Creekstone Farms to File Lawsuit Against USDA; Seeks Right to Voluntarily Test its Beef for BSE

3/22/2006 10:24:00 AM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor

Contact: Shannon Hembree, 202-879-9335

News Advisory:

For over two years, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has refused to allow Creekstone Farms, the award winning producer of quality Black Angus Beef, to voluntarily test all of its cattle for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as "Mad Cow" disease. Recognizing the critical importance of U.S. beef exports to Japan and elsewhere, Creekstone Farms believes it is vital to U.S. trade with Japan and other countries and the economic future of America's beef exporters to have the freedom to test for BSE, which will provide an added layer of confidence for U.S. beef customers worldwide. The company listens to its customers, who have requested that Creekstone Farms BSE test all the cattle it processes in its Kansas plant. Creekstone Farms would like to satisfy these customer requests by being allowed by USDA to voluntarily test its cattle for BSE. After two years of patiently waiting with no action, Creekstone Farms will file a lawsuit against USDA on Thursday, March 23.

WHAT: Press conference to discuss Creekstone Farms' filing of a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

WHO:

-- John Stewart, CEO and founder of Creekstone Farms Premium Beef

-- Joe B. Meng, vice president of science and technology, Creekstone Farms

-- Russell S. Frye, principal, FryeLaw, PLLC

WHERE: Murrow and White Rooms, National Press Club, 529 14th Street, NW, Washington, D.C.

WHEN: Thursday, March 23, from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.

CONTACT: Shannon Hembree, 202-879-9335

EDITOR'S NOTE: To arrange an interview with Creekstone Farms CEO John Stewart in Washington, D.C. on Thursday or Friday, please contact Stephanie Dix at 202-879-9395.

Satellite coordinates are forthcoming.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

-0-tss

/© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/




http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=62744



TSS
 
Very Interesting!!!! I wonder what this will do to the Japanese talks?

Probably can't hurt as the Japanese article I saw yesterday was speculating that they might not be open yet in September when the Japanese do an administration change-And then after that who knows- we're dealing with the "friendly" party now......
 
I wonder if Creekstone is jumping through all these hoops for nothing? :lol:

In other words, some say the Japs have offered no proof they will allow tested beef. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
From Creekstone's Website:

Creekstone Farms Premium Beef Files Lawsuit Challenging USDA's Ban on
Voluntary BSE Testing

Washington - Creekstone Farms ® Premium Beef, LLC, an innovative market leader producing award winning Black Angus Beef, filed a lawsuit today against the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Creekstone has sued USDA for refusing to allow the company to voluntarily test cattle for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) at its Arkansas City, Kansas facility. Creekstone's complaint was filed this morning in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Creekstone is challenging USDA's claim that it has the legal authority to control access to and the use of the "test kits" needed to perform BSE testing. Over the past two years, USDA has repeatedly denied Creekstone's requests to conduct voluntary BSE testing. Creekstone Farms has publicly stated that it believes U.S. beef is safe. Nevertheless, Creekstone's customers, as well as other beef consumers around the world, want beef from BSE tested cattle. For example, a December 2005 poll by the Kyodo News Service found that more than half of Japanese consumers want U.S. beef to be tested for BSE. Creekstone simply wants to satisfy its customers.

"We produce the highest quality beef available in America in our state-of-the art processing facility. Our customers support our brand for the many points of difference we provide. If BSE testing is an additional attribute that our customers want, free enterprise should allow us to provide this additional element. In a country where free enterprise, satisfying consumers, and building businesses through thoughtful marketing and innovation are encouraged, I find it very difficult to understand why our government would not be supportive of this important effort," said John Stewart, CEO and Founder of Creekstone Farms.

Creekstone Farms® Premium Beef, LLC was founded more than a decade ago with the goal of providing superior quality food products to satisfy the most discerning of palates. Today, the Creekstone Farms Premium Black Angus Beef program is one of a few branded programs certified by the USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). Creekstone supplies many of the nation's top grocers and restaurants with quality Black Angus Beef products, ranging from high quality Prime grade beef to premium value added consumer Heat & Serve entrees. Additionally, the company exports its premium quality products to Europe, Latin America and Asia. Creekstone is co-owned by Sun Capital Partners, one of America's largest private investment companies and John Stewart, CEO and Founder of the company.
 
Over 5 U.S. Meatpackers Want Blanket BSE Tests for Exports to Japan

Kyodo News, March 23, 2006



WASHINGTON, March 23, Mar 24, 2006 (Kyodo via COMTEX) -- More than five U.S. meatpackers are willing to voluntarily test all cattle for mad cow disease to satisfy customers, especially in Japan, which is continuing blanket testing of all slaughtered cattle, a Kansas-based beef producer said Thursday.
Creekstone Farms Premium Beef LLC Chief Executive Officer and Founder John Stewart revealed this willingness in an interview with Kyodo News after his company filed a federal lawsuit in Washington earlier in the day to stop the U.S. Department of Agriculture from rejecting its voluntary blanket-testing plan.

His comments suggested the company's move is likely to accelerate actions by meatpackers to figure out ways themselves to help expedite prolonged negotiations between the U.S. and Japanese governments toward Japan lifting its ban on American beef imports.

"There are substantially more companies in the industry and consumer interest groups that are interested in private testing," Stewart said.

While refusing to identify those ready to join his company in carrying out blanket testing, he put the number at "more than five."

"I think what they're just wanting to do is come public that they are in support of private testing," Stewart said.

Stewart said some large meatpackers are also poised to follow suit, stressing that the situation has changed from the time when Japan first imposed an import ban in December 2003, after the United States discovered its first case of mad cow disease, formally known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE.

Asked if large firms are still opposed to blanket testing, Stewart said, "If you would have asked two years ago, I would have said yes. You ask me today, I would say that maybe a couple of those companies could be interested in testing."

"I think those companies are watching this very closely to see what happens with Creekstone," he said.
Creekstone Farms has been lobbying for USDA permission to voluntarily test all its cattle since Japan imposed the ban in 2003, but has been refused repeatedly and even faced the threat of "criminal prosecution" if it performed blanket tests.

Stewart noted that the USDA has since retracted its statement about prosecution, but claimed that USDA policy is controlled by four or five large meatpackers, which represent over 80 percent of U.S. beef production.

"It appears that the USDA position reflects the position of the leaders in the industry...the big players," he said. "And if the big players decide that they don't want to test because it's too expensive or it doesn't work in their plants, then you find the government supporting that sort of position."

"It's not our position," Stewart said, stressing that his company does "what our customers ask us to do."

"We understand the sensitivity of this issue and we understand the needs of the Japanese consumers," he said.

"Our business model is built around satisfying the needs of consumers, and BSE testing, whether necessary or not, gives those Japanese consumers an additional level of confidence," Stewart said. "That's exactly what we want to do."

Noting that his company has been in contact with Japanese trading companies, Stewart said, "They've been positive to the point that whatever we can do to get trade resumed and they would be very happy with that."

Japan's local authorities are continuing the blanket testing of all slaughtered cattle in Japan, although the central government eased its test requirements last year to exclude animals aged up to 20 months to pave the way for resuming imports of U.S. and Canadian beef.

Strong opposition to ending the blanket testing persists in Japan, mainly among consumer groups, and the government continues to face criticism for succumbing to U.S. pressure on food safety matters.

Under a bilateral compromise deal allowing no BSE testing, Japan lifted the two-year-old ban in December on condition that imports would be limited to meat from cattle aged up to 20 months with the brains, spinal cords and other specified BSE-risk materials removed prior to shipment.

But Japan reimposed the ban on U.S. beef only after a month on Jan. 20 because a prohibited spinal column was discovered in a veal shipment at Narita airport.

The USDA maintains that BSE tests are for determining the prevalence of the disease in U.S. herds and is not for food safety purposes, arguing that blanket testing has "no scientific grounds" and that human protection is pursued through such safeguard measures as removing risk materials.

The USDA tests a small percentage of the total cattle herd under a given statistical background. But samples are mostly submitted on a voluntary contract basis, and the department is now planning to scale down the surveillance system.

2006 Kyodo News (C) Established 1945.
 
Jumping throught he hoops for nothing all right. Cargill and Tyson will be testing beef in Canada for export before the case is over, and identified American cattle will be flowing north to get on the boat.
 
Creekstone Farms has been lobbying for USDA permission to voluntarily test all its cattle since Japan imposed the ban in 2003, but has been refused repeatedly and even faced the threat of "criminal prosecution" if it performed blanket tests.

Stewart noted that the USDA has since retracted its statement about prosecution, but claimed that USDA policy is controlled by four or five large meatpackers, which represent over 80 percent of U.S. beef production.

"It appears that the USDA position reflects the position of the leaders in the industry...the big players," he said. "And if the big players decide that they don't want to test because it's too expensive or it doesn't work in their plants, then you find the government supporting that sort of position."

"It's not our position," Stewart said, stressing that his company does "what our customers ask us to do."

"We understand the sensitivity of this issue and we understand the needs of the Japanese consumers," he said.
Click to expand...

The USDA is responsible for using its regulatory authority to bully the little guys and the investigation into GIPSA shows that the USDA was actively stopping investigations into the packers.

What a racket.

Sounds like state sponsored industrial terrorism to me.
 
The USDA maintains that BSE tests are for determining the prevalence of the disease in U.S. herds and is not for food safety purposes, arguing that blanket testing has "no scientific grounds" and that human protection is pursued through such safeguard measures as removing risk materials.

The USDA tests a small percentage of the total cattle herd under a given statistical background. But samples are mostly submitted on a voluntary contract basis, and the department is now planning to scale down the surveillance system.

2006 Kyodo News (C) Established 1945.

IS this in the real world of public health and cattle industry SAFETY?? NOT!
 
rkaiser...Jumping throught he hoops for nothing all right. Cargill and Tyson will be testing beef in Canada for export before the case is over, and identified American cattle will be flowing north to get on the boat.

I suspect you are right Randy.
 
There was a news story on NPR yesterday afternoon on this. What bothered me is that the story mentioned that "a large ranchers group" was also against testing. I thought that really made is sound like ranchers were trying to hide something - torked me off. I don't need to mention who that "large rancher's group" is, but if you're trying to promote beef, believe in it, and there is a question on your product, how can submitting your product to increased scrutiny not be the route to take?

The report also stated the USDA saw BSE as a animal disease problem and not a human issue. There's some of Tam's leadership she wants. :roll: The whole world sees it as a human issue, but not the USDA. :shock:

How can there be ANY doubt of large packer influence - and I use the word "influence" lightly?
 
BSEconomics. One group has lost money due to BSE and one group alone. THE RANCHERS OF NORTH AMERICA. Every other part of the industry chain has found a way to either deal or make money.

Sandhusker writes -

How can there be ANY doubt of large packer influence - and I use the word "influence" lightly?
Click to expand...


Your statement has been obvious for three years Sandhusker.
 
Sandhusker said:
I don't need to mention who that "large rancher's group" is, but if you're trying to promote beef, believe in it, and there is a question on your product, how can submitting your product to increased scrutiny not be the route to take?
Click to expand...

Far too much commonsense for that to be applicable! :wink:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top