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

Has anyone posted this one yet?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Border rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 3, 2005
Messages
99
Reaction score
0
Location
Ab.- Mt. border
U.S. feed regulations to mirror Canada's in mad cow fight



WASHINGTON (AP) - The government will close a gap in the U.S. defence against the spread of mad cow disease by changing feed regulations to mirror those in Canada, FDA commissioner Lester Crawford said Monday.
In remarks to a food policy conference hosted by the Consumer Federation of America, Crawford said the new regulations would be coming soon. But did not say when.

Canada has regulations banning at-risk tissues - brains, spinal cords and other parts that can carry mad cow disease - from feed for all animals, including chickens, pigs and pets.

Ground-up cattle remains - leftovers from slaughtering operations - were used as protein in cattle feed until 1997, when a mad cow outbreak in Britain prompted the U.S. to ban the feed industry from using cattle remains in cattle feed.

However, the U.S. ban doesn't apply to feed for other animals, creating a potential pathway for the mad cow protein to be fed back to cattle.

For example, it's legal to add cattle protein to chicken feed. Feed that spills from cages mixes with chicken waste on the ground, then is swept up for use in cattle feed. Besides the risk of transmission from uneaten feed, scientists believe chicken waste presents a risk because the BSE protein will survive the trip through a chicken's gut.

The FDA promised to tighten the rules after the first case of mad cow disease was confirmed in the United States in December 2003. FDA said it would ban blood, poultry litter and restaurant plate waste - all potential pathways for the mad cow protein to be fed back to cattle.

FDA scrapped those restrictions last July. At the time, Crawford said an international team of experts assembled by the Agriculture Department was calling for even stronger rules and that FDA would produce new restrictions in line with those recommendations.

The first U.S. case of mad cow disease, confirmed in December 2003, was in a Canadian-born cow in Washington state. The second case, a Texas-born cow, tested positive in June.

Crawford did not say whether the new regulations would ban cattle blood and restaurant leftovers, also considered potential pathways for BSE, from cattle feed.

"Our regulations will mimic theirs," he said.



© The Canadian Press, 2005
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Thanks for posting this Border Rancher it is nice to hear that the US will be "changing feed regulations to mirror those in Canada" This is just like the announcement that said the USDA will be implimenting firewall that will catch them up with those already in Canada when they ban slaughtering downer cattle among other things.

Crawford did not say whether the new regulations would ban cattle blood and restaurant leftovers, also considered potential pathways for BSE, from cattle feed.

"Our regulations will mimic theirs," he said.


If they mimic Canada's rules plate waste will be included in the ban as we ban it in 1998, and Blood won't, unless Canada has changed their stand lately on the idea that BSE is not in the blood. :?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Gee 134 viewing and only one comment. don't you guys that boost about the US's Highest Standards in the World have something to say about the US government admitting they are playing catch up with your backwoods cousin Canada again? I would hate to see this thread drop off before you had your chance. :wink:
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
I dont think you will have trouble finding folks that will agree canada has stringent fire walls in place,following thru and complying with these rules and regulations is where there may be some doubt.

You can talk the best system in the world,and it aint worth a tinkers damn unless it is complied with...................good luck
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
HAY MAKER said:
I dont think you will have trouble finding folks that will agree canada has stringent fire walls in place,following thru and complying with these rules and regulations is where there may be some doubt.

You can talk the best system in the world,and it aint worth a tinkers damn unless it is complied with...................good luck

Just who isn't following the firewalls that are already in place. Canada has a good record of compliance to the feed bans, and you don't see big news articles about how we can't afford to import cattle from the US because our system will surely spread BSE in our herd do you? Lets see the US government investigation turned up what about the feed bans in the US? And who is telling everyone that their borders have to stay closed so BSE doesn't spread throughout the US?
I also seem to remember that our three animals weren't recalled from the food chain. One was condemned and two never left the farm they lived on. Because in Canada we don't Process condemned animals or downers. Oh where oh where was the Washington cow? She was a downer so the SRMs were removed , no she wasn't, well we voluntarily recalled the meat after it was sent out to 8 different states. No harm came from her !!!! What about the Texas cow, according to the USDA the US is not to process downers but if an animal tests negitive it's carcass is released and allowed to be processed. First she was hauled to a slaughter house Oh to late she was found Dead on the truck Oh well transfer her to a pet food plant. First test inconclusive, second test inconclusive, third test positive, third test thrown out as it was an experimental test. Fourth test negative, cow announced negative by confirmatory test. But wait fifth test postive seven months later. OOPS. But we are to believe the Texas cow was destroyed and not turned into pet food, when the rule is negative test results means legal to process. But condemned pet food is legally processed into what in the US?
Canada was told to test 8000 4D cattle in 2004, and 30,000 in 2005, to be repeated for a few years. We tested 23,550 of on farm dead and dieing in 2004 and surpassed the 30,000 by early to mid June for 2005. The US said they would do a one time shot testing. They were to test the same cattle but the 3S policy is still in play in the US on the 4D's so the USDA is testing slaughter plant animals to fill the quota and using the wrong confirmatory test.
We had to slaughter otm and utm animals in different plants, and remove SRMs from all but still no reports in the media about inspectors finding OTM cattle in UTM plants with the SRM intact. Gee I wonder who has this problem?

Well I finally agree with you on something Haymaker. :wink: The next time I hear that the US has the Worlds Highest Standards or the World Safest Beef even if it comes from one of your politicans, I will remember you said these exact words
You can talk the best system in the world,and it aint worth a tinkers damn unless it is complied with...................good luck
:nod: :p :lol2: :lol2:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oh gee I forgot you can't even boost about the best system in the world can you Haymaker? Because of statements like these :wink:
The government will close a gap in the U.S. defence against the spread of mad cow disease by changing feed regulations to mirror those in Canada,

Canada has regulations banning at-risk tissues - --- from feed for all animals

However, the U.S. ban doesn't apply to feed for other animals, creating a potential pathway for the mad cow protein to be fed back to cattle.

The FDA promised to tighten the rules -----FDA scrapped those restrictions last July

And to save the best until last
"Our regulations will mimic theirs," he said.

But these US rule changes, like you said, aint worth a tinkers damn unless complied with... Gee it must bite to have your witty little jab backfire :wink:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
HAY MAKER said:
I dont think you will have trouble finding folks that will agree canada has stringent fire walls in place,following thru and complying with these rules and regulations is where there may be some doubt.

You can talk the best system in the world,and it aint worth a tinkers damn unless it is complied with...................good luck
Just not in the R-CALF camp right? :wink: I just remembered this little quote from guess who Haymaker you got it R-CALF :shock:
R-CALF wrote in their comments to the USDA on the final ruling that:

Under no circumstances should the United States accept any cattle, beef or beef products, from countries that do not maintain identical or more stringent safeguard measures that is presently required or presently proposed in the United States which measures have been enforced for at least as long as the United States.

Again Haymaker who has the rules that the US is trying to mimic? :?
 

Maple Leaf Angus

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern Ontario
Gee, sorry for poking a stick in yer den there HayMaker.

I plum forgot how easy and lethal it is to get Tam fired up.



:nod: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Tam said:
HAY MAKER said:
I dont think you will have trouble finding folks that will agree canada has stringent fire walls in place,following thru and complying with these rules and regulations is where there may be some doubt.

You can talk the best system in the world,and it aint worth a tinkers damn unless it is complied with...................good luck
Just not in the R-CALF camp right? :wink: I just remembered this little quote from guess who Haymaker you got it R-CALF :shock:
R-CALF wrote in their comments to the USDA on the final ruling that:

Under no circumstances should the United States accept any cattle, beef or beef products, from countries that do not maintain identical or more stringent safeguard measures that is presently required or presently proposed in the United States which measures have been enforced for at least as long as the United States.

Again Haymaker who has the rules that the US is trying to mimic? :?


Miss Tam,some of us have been hollering for these changes for a long time,you know as well as most on the board ,one of the biggest complaints is packers refusing to allow the usda to make and implement these changes,you get no argument here,and I think it was only common sense that canada would implement these changes first with 5 or 6 cases of "BSE"especially the ones after the feed ban,and the "USA" finding one suspect cow that was born before the feed ban,some dont really believe the cow tested positive,too many strange occurences,as a matter of fact ,heard a rumor it was all a scam right before the R CALF court hearing to help open the border?..................good luck PS packers/usda would'nt do something like that would they? :wink:
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
What would be the advantage Haymaker, gaining your export markets back? Maybe closing less efficient plants in the US? Maybe the packer wanted to move to a country with more stringent safety protocols (Canada).

What are the reasons you can think of for the conspiracy? Everything I can think of leads to RCALF, and their disregard for the North American beef industry!
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,051
Reaction score
129
Location
Big Muddy valley
Hell Haymaker the two biggest and Baddest packers in Canada are Cargill and Tyson. How could you ever think they would let Canada does this and yet they can stop the USDA?
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Big Muddy rancher said:
Hell Haymaker the two biggest and Baddest packers in Canada are Cargill and Tyson. How could you ever think they would let Canada does this and yet they can stop the USDA?

Packeres are'nt dumb,they know to move canadian beef there is gonna have to be a pony and dog show,and you know as well as I packers own the canadian cattle industry "lock,stock & barrel"..............good luck
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
HAY MAKER said:
Tam said:
HAY MAKER said:
I dont think you will have trouble finding folks that will agree canada has stringent fire walls in place,following thru and complying with these rules and regulations is where there may be some doubt.

You can talk the best system in the world,and it aint worth a tinkers damn unless it is complied with...................good luck
Just not in the R-CALF camp right? :wink: I just remembered this little quote from guess who Haymaker you got it R-CALF :shock:
R-CALF wrote in their comments to the USDA on the final ruling that:

Under no circumstances should the United States accept any cattle, beef or beef products, from countries that do not maintain identical or more stringent safeguard measures that is presently required or presently proposed in the United States which measures have been enforced for at least as long as the United States.

Again Haymaker who has the rules that the US is trying to mimic? :?


Miss Tam,some of us have been hollering for these changes for a long time,you know as well as most on the board ,one of the biggest complaints is packers refusing to allow the usda to make and implement these changes,you get no argument here,and I think it was only common sense that canada would implement these changes first with 5 or 6 cases of "BSE"especially the ones after the feed ban,and the "USA" finding one suspect cow that was born before the feed ban,some dont really believe the cow tested positive,too many strange occurences,as a matter of fact ,heard a rumor it was all a scam right before the R CALF court hearing to help open the border?..................good luck PS packers/usda would'nt do something like that would they? :wink:


Remember this Washington Post ad.
Everyday U.S. cattle producers bring you the safest beef in the world. Thank you, US Senate, for keeping it that way.
Then Under a picture of a Cowboy on horse it states
Our high health and safety standards are needed to protect consumer, the beef industry and US jobs.
then in a radio broadcast guess who was quoted saying
“we know if we are going to keep consumer confidence we are going to maintain some of the highest standards in the world to make sure that BSE is not introduced into this country. And we are going to make sure we have the best meat and bone meal ban in this country in place. 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”.
Now I ask you how can your beef be the safest in the world when according to R-CALF beef from any country affected by BSE is a genuine risk of death and according to R-CALF "the USDA and the Packers that produce beef don't care about food safety"?
Don't you have to have the Highest standards to be able to maintain them? And What High standard do you have that we don't? remember the US announced they want to mimic ours.
And Haymaker two of the firewalls you have yet to mimic is the banning of Chicken litter, plate waste and pet food and a NATIONAL ID system. We implimented them long before we ever had a native case of BSE.
Would you also like to recount the Canadian Native cases? There were 4 not 5 or 6 but I know math in not a strong suit in the R-CALF camp so why should I expect any thing different.
To bad on the statement "especially the ones after the feed ban" according to the investigation there was only one born within the year after the feed ban implimentation so that disqualifies your statement ONES doesn't it?
And I agree Haymaker there were too many strange occurences, and the strangest was when the experts said after multiple inconclusive test results you can pretty well bet that the animal is positive but she was announced negitive. The test that proved she was positive was tossed and never reported until after the Western blot found her positive 7 months later. Strange, yes I would have to agree with you there. But if that rumor you heard came from the same source so many of your other rumors have come from I think I would get a new source. :wink:

And about the Packers you say "one of the biggest complaints is packers refusing to allow the usda to make and implement these changes" aren't these the same packers you say own the Canadian cattle industry? Why did they allow the CFIA and the Canadian cattle industry to impliment these changes over the years but they haven't allowed the USDA and the US cattle industry to? :?
 

Latest posts

Top