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

HEAD EM SOUTH

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
E-mail
Font: * * * * Canadian ranchers who want to avoid the cost and hassle of the government's new rules to stamp out mad cow disease can send their young cattle across the U.S. border.

The animals can be slaughtered under laxer American rules, then shipped back into Canada and sold as steak, ribs and hamburgers - as long as the animal's high-risk tissues, known as specified risk materials, or SRM, are left behind in the U.S., Canadian officials say.

"If they take it down there and have it slaughtered and want to bring it back cut and wrapped (as meat), no problem, just as long as it comes back without the SRM," says Freeman Libby, national director of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's feed ban task force.

The agency has no objection to such cross-border traffic, Libby says, even though it highlights a gap between mad-cow rules in Canada and the U.S. The gap widens Thursday when Canada's "enhanced" feed ban goes into force. The ban requires the removal and disposal of tissues that can harbour infectious proteins, called prions, that cause mad cow disease.

The Americans continue to allow the risky cattle tissues to be used, along with other slaughter waste, in chicken and pet food as well as fertilizers.

While Libby doesn't see a problem with the mismatched policies in Canada and the U.S., others do.

The idea that beef slaughtered under U.S. rules can be sold in Canada "is complete lunacy," says Michael McBane, national co-ordinator of the Canadian Health Coalition, a public watchdog group.

He sees it as more evidence that
Canadian SRM rules are so "full of loopholes" that they will do little to eradicate mad cow disease. "Instead of a steel door we have a picket fence," says McBane.
Many in the cattle industry are also concerned about the gap between Canadian and U.S. rules, although for different reasons.

Notably, they say, the new rules put Canadian producers at a competitive disadvantage compared to their American competitors. The Canadian ban, including elaborate and costly requirements for collecting and disposing of the SRM, could see more Canadian animals shipped south for slaughter.

"In the short-term, we are going to have a lot higher costs here than our competitors, and that's not a good thing," says Dennis Laycraft, executive vice-president of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, which represents 90,000 beef producers.

His association is asking the federal government for $50 million to help offset the added costs of SRM disposal, in a bid to keep Canadian cattle in this country. "The last thing we want to do is push our cattle-processing industry out of Canada," says Laycraft.

Close to one million Canadian cattle under 30 months of age cross into the U.S. annually, with millions more slaughtered in Canada. Older cattle are not allowed to be shipped across the border because of U.S. concern about mad cow disease in Canada.

The Canadian cattle industry has, for the most part, supported the enhanced feed ban, but had hoped the Americans would introduce similar rules, which they have yet to do.
 

Bward

Well-known member
Packers now have an SRM removal fee which is deducted from your check when you ship slaughter cattle directly to them. It always comes back to the producer. :(
 

Bill

Well-known member
The one exhibiting lunacy is McBane as he has done numerous times in the past.

It is crystal clear that it is the US who has the huge SRM loopholes and until they are dealt with there most certainly will be economic incentive to slaughter Canadian cattle in the US.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Bill said:
The one exhibiting lunacy is McBane as he has done numerous times in the past.

It is crystal clear that it is the US who has the huge SRM loopholes and until they are dealt with there most certainly will be economic incentive to slaughter Canadian cattle in the US.

NOW maybe you can understand our concern about importing contaminated SRMs from you?
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
How on earth you rcalf boys can twist things around is beyond me.

This article is not only damning of the American system, it basically calls American protocol a joke.

NOW Sandhusker - maybe you can understand why America has only found a couple of BSE positives for crying out loud.
 

Bill

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
How on earth you rcalf boys can twist things around is beyond me.

This article is not only damning of the American system, it basically calls American protocol a joke.

NOW Sandhusker - maybe you can understand why America has only found a couple of BSE positives for crying out loud.

Randy, I think the proper word is reported.

When I think back to the US cases and Phyllis Fong forcing the issue, two things come to mind.
#! Nno one was surprised that the US had BSE.
#2 No one was surprised that the US was caught trying to hide it.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
How on earth you rcalf boys can twist things around is beyond me.

This article is not only damning of the American system, it basically calls American protocol a joke.

NOW Sandhusker - maybe you can understand why America has only found a couple of BSE positives for crying out loud.

The article is also a canadians take on feed bans,I just found it funny,he would compare the canadian feed ban to a picket fence LOL,does'nt surprise me he took shots at ours,I figure he still has'nt figured out the USA just dont have the need for the same type ban canada does as your risk is much greater................good luck
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
How on earth you rcalf boys can twist things around is beyond me.

This article is not only damning of the American system, it basically calls American protocol a joke.

NOW Sandhusker - maybe you can understand why America has only found a couple of BSE positives for crying out loud.

You've never seen me bragging on our testing.
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
So why not stop with the "Canada is bad" rhetoric and get on with the real battle? I can never see it stopping from poor old Haymaker and Oldtimer - these two obviously cannot be helped. But a youthful free thinking banker with a face that looks a lot like a Canadian Comedian?????????????
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
So why not stop with the "Canada is bad" rhetoric and get on with the real battle? I can never see it stopping from poor old Haymaker and Oldtimer - these two obviously cannot be helped. But a youthful free thinking banker with a face that looks a lot like a Canadian Comedian?????????????

This is no "Canada is bad" deal and no "Anti-Canada" campaign, either. You guys just wont' accept that, but that's the way it is. We would have the exact same problem if this was Mexico instead of Canada. This is a "USDA is screwing us for the big packers - that's BS - and we're not going to roll over" deal. Lets' review;

The USDA flipped on their zero-tolerance policy for the sole benefit of the big packers. BS

They then broke their own rules in reopening the border. BS

They said the risk of importing BSE from Canada was "low", but then had no definition of what the heck "low" meant. BS

They went to the OIE to change classifications to blur the lines and crowd more countries together BS

They petitioned the OIE for the same classification as Canada so they could make the arguement that we were the same risk, even though we clearly qualify for a higher rating. BS They then tell us they are doing all they can to open our export markets. BS

Everytime you guys announce another positive, they automatically announce that "It changes nothing" BS

They tell us your feed ban was effective in March, 1999. Unbelieveable BS

They pull the great Van Dyke snow job. BS

This is just what I came up with off the top of my head, Randy. I don't understand how any producer, or even citizen, who believes in accountable government can ignore any of this, let alone all of it! It just boggles my mind. It doesn't matter if this is concerning Canada, Mexico, Kenya, etc... or if it's beef, pork, beans, whatever. This whole deal is just one load of crap followed by another, and it's me, my customers, and my area who are the ones taking all the risk with no benefit. When somebody accuses me of being anti-Canadian, it torks me off. I'm anti BS.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
rkaiser said:
So why not stop with the "Canada is bad" rhetoric and get on with the real battle? I can never see it stopping from poor old Haymaker and Oldtimer - these two obviously cannot be helped. But a youthful free thinking banker with a face that looks a lot like a Canadian Comedian?????????????

Hey kaiser-- Remember who started all this "one country is bad" stuff-- and set the precedent for NAFTA- and designated a US herd and Canadian herd.... :???:

If I remember right that was back when I supported NAFTA- and thought this "free trade" could work-- until Canadians decided they needed a trade barrier to keep Canadian calf prices up and came out with this "ALL US CATTLE ARE DISEASED"- putting restrictions on US cattle going north...

Even when the USDA and the US scientists said it was an unfounded quarantine-which even after $millions of testing/proof Canada would not drop--until their teat got in the wringer over the BSE issue, and then they could scramble fast enough to try to create this North American herd....What a joke......

So don't go telling me that you set up there north of the 49th wrapped in virgin wool with any halo over your head.....
 

QUESTION

Well-known member
Here we go again the same old thing red herring and a repeate :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

Kato

Well-known member
This is no "Canada is bad" deal and no "Anti-Canada" campaign, either. You guys just wont' accept that, but that's the way it is

We won't accept it because it doesn't matter what you call it, the result is the same. Friendly fire? :???: Maybe that's what it is? :???: That doesn't matter either, because it still kills you. :shock: You are just as dead. You are fighting for a better profit margin. We are fighting for our homes and livelihoods. It tends to up the commitment when your whole life's work is on the line. :!:

There are a lot of people up here who are one bad year away from moving to town, and they are getting a little cranky. Manitoba in the past 12 months alone lost 6 percent of it's cattle producers. In one year. Everyone knows at least two or three people who've sold out this year.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Kato said:
This is no "Canada is bad" deal and no "Anti-Canada" campaign, either. You guys just wont' accept that, but that's the way it is

We won't accept it because it doesn't matter what you call it, the result is the same. Friendly fire? :???: Maybe that's what it is? :???: That doesn't matter either, because it still kills you. :shock: You are just as dead. You are fighting for a better profit margin. We are fighting for our homes and livelihoods. It tends to up the commitment when your whole life's work is on the line. :!:

There are a lot of people up here who are one bad year away from moving to town, and they are getting a little cranky. Manitoba in the past 12 months alone lost 6 percent of it's cattle producers. In one year. Everyone knows at least two or three people who've sold out this year.

So US producers are just supposed to ignore the USDA selling us out?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Kato said:
This is no "Canada is bad" deal and no "Anti-Canada" campaign, either. You guys just wont' accept that, but that's the way it is

We won't accept it because it doesn't matter what you call it, the result is the same. Friendly fire? :???: Maybe that's what it is? :???: That doesn't matter either, because it still kills you. :shock: You are just as dead. You are fighting for a better profit margin. We are fighting for our homes and livelihoods. It tends to up the commitment when your whole life's work is on the line. :!:

There are a lot of people up here who are one bad year away from moving to town, and they are getting a little cranky. Manitoba in the past 12 months alone lost 6 percent of it's cattle producers. In one year. Everyone knows at least two or three people who've sold out this year.

So Kato-- we in the US don't have the right for the same assurances and protections of our cattle herd/consumers from our government and Canada as Canadians did when they put the Anaplas/Blue tongue rules in place for 10+ years....

Canada's leading BSE expert says Canada may have 50 head of positives- the CDC says Canadian cattle are 26 times the threat/risk as US cattle...There is no proof of Canada's feedban working- in fact the evidence indicates just the opposite.....

When Canadian ranchers wanted to protect "their herd" they called ALL US CATTLE DISEASED", put on restrictions and testing requirements, which were long proven invalid- but when the US cattleman asks the same, to protect his livelihood-- some testing and proof your feedban is working-- you say "BAD USA", "BAD AMERICAN CATTLEMAN"....

BULLPUCKEY!!!
 

Kato

Well-known member
Anaplasmosis/bluetonge regulations did not keep American cattle out. They controlled the time of year of import, and required testing. That is not the same as closing the border. We have complied with every request to respect your import rules, and have not complained about it.

As for the CDC, aren't they the same people who scared people half way around the world by misdiagnosing the type of TB that Andrew Speaker had?

The difference in BSE risk between our two countries is like the difference in odds between buying two powerball tickets instead of one. We're talking about numbers in parts of millions here.

BTW. How's the brucellosis thing going? :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Kato said:
BTW. How's the brucellosis thing going? :wink:

All the related herds were tested- all negative...Montana is still Bangs Free Status.....
Are you going to try and say ALL US CATTLE ARE DISEASED again because one or two states have a problem in one isolated area........ :???: :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Kato said:
Anaplasmosis/bluetonge regulations did not keep American cattle out. They controlled the time of year of import, and required testing. That is not the same as closing the border. We have complied with every request to respect your import rules, and have not complained about it.

As for the CDC, aren't they the same people who scared people half way around the world by misdiagnosing the type of TB that Andrew Speaker had?

The difference in BSE risk between our two countries is like the difference in odds between buying two powerball tickets instead of one. We're talking about numbers in parts of millions here.

BTW. How's the brucellosis thing going? :wink:

So US producers are just supposed to ignore the USDA selling us out?
 
Top