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

History lesson for Tam

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
FACT 1) When BSE first hit the international spotlight, the USDA reported to Congress what their plan was for combatting this disease. Among other things, they said the first line of defense was to ban live animals, beef, and anything that could possibly harbor the infectious agent from countries that were BSE positive. It was a zero tolerance policy based on the best knowledge we had on the disease. As BSE turned up in various countries, 22 in all, this zero tolerance ban was placed on them and there was no waivering. Actually, there was no pressure to waiver.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?

FACT 2) Canada became the 23rd country in the world to discover BSE in their borders in May, 2003. True to policy, the USDA then closed the border to Canada, as did about every other country in the world. However, this time, there was pressure from the US packing industry to change this policy almost immediately. What was different about Canada? Canada had the very same disease other countries had. We didn't know anything about BSE that we didn't know prior to implementing policy. Canada was no different than any other country that reported a single case except for one thing - money. US companies made a lot of money off of Canadian cattle. The USDA quickly began making preperations to break their standing policy and resume trade with Canada.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?

FACT 3) Enter R-CALF, a group of ranchers who's livelihoods depend on the health of the beef and cattle industies and who have EVERYTHING to lose if the US cattle industry falters. They saw a clear danger to resuming trade with a BSE positive country. They questioned why the zero-tolerance policy was being changed when all of the reasons used to formulate the policy remained unchanged. They viewed the resumption of trade with Canada as a sell out of established health policy for all for the economic benefit of a few - the US multi-national packers and sued the US Government to stop it.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?

Now you think R-CALF is to blame for all the fallout of a closed border? They didn't close it, Tam. If the USDA had done what they testified to Congress that they were going to do, the border would still be closed. Who would you blame then? R-CALF is only demanding that the government agency in charge of food and herd health ACTUALLY DO WHAT THEY SAID WAS NECESSARY TO DO. Everybody was forewarned what the policy would be if Canada got BSE. They had years to evaluate how they would be effected and years to make contigency plans. There were 22 examples to learn from.

You've got a lot of problems up there, none of which was caused by R-CALF. ALL of them were cause by producers following poor leadership or sitting on their hands doing nothing. Are you a leader up there?
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,802
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Saskatchewan
<chuckle> Well aware that I should never get involved in a BSE/RCalf thread, there is one additional note:

5) The US confirms a case of BSE in a animal, native to its own borders. This is the second case of BSE found in the USA, forcing Canadian producers to ask: Why close the barn door when the cow already took off across the border?

I am aware that us Canadians calling for an open border between the US and Canada is kind of hypocritical given that we've closed our own border to other countries beef such as Japan, but the US and Canada's infection rates are both categorized as "low", so there isn't any increased risk to the US herd from allowing Canadian beef in. Especially when you consider that Canada tests a significantly higher percentage of our slaughter animals for BSE.

Fighting to keep the border closed now is only helping the large packers. I do believe in a US/Canuck herd (I'm leaving Mexico out of this, because other than Corona and Tequila, I know very little about the country :lol: ) and believe we need a Can-Am Beef Producers Association to help combat the real danger facing producers.

[soapbox off] [flamesuit on]

Rod
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Sandhusker said:
FACT 1) When BSE first hit the international spotlight, the USDA reported to Congress what their plan was for combatting this disease. Among other things, they said the first line of defense was to ban live animals, beef, and anything that could possibly harbor the infectious agent from countries that were BSE positive. It was a zero tolerance policy based on the best knowledge we had on the disease. As BSE turned up in various countries, 22 in all, this zero tolerance ban was placed on them and there was no waivering. Actually, there was no pressure to waiver.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?

FACT 2) Canada became the 23rd country in the world to discover BSE in their borders in May, 2003. True to policy, the USDA then closed the border to Canada, as did about every other country in the world. However, this time, there was pressure from the US packing industry to change this policy almost immediately. What was different about Canada? Canada had the very same disease other countries had. We didn't know anything about BSE that we didn't know prior to implementing policy. Canada was no different than any other country that reported a single case except for one thing - money. US companies made a lot of money off of Canadian cattle. The USDA quickly began making preperations to break their standing policy and resume trade with Canada.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?

FACT 3) Enter R-CALF, a group of ranchers who's livelihoods depend on the health of the beef and cattle industies and who have EVERYTHING to lose if the US cattle industry falters. They saw a clear danger to resuming trade with a BSE positive country. They questioned why the zero-tolerance policy was being changed when all of the reasons used to formulate the policy remained unchanged. They viewed the resumption of trade with Canada as a sell out of established health policy for all for the economic benefit of a few - the US multi-national packers and sued the US Government to stop it.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?

Now you think R-CALF is to blame for all the fallout of a closed border? They didn't close it, Tam. If the USDA had done what they testified to Congress that they were going to do, the border would still be closed. Who would you blame then? R-CALF is only demanding that the government agency in charge of food and herd health ACTUALLY DO WHAT THEY SAID WAS NECESSARY TO DO. Everybody was forewarned what the policy would be if Canada got BSE. They had years to evaluate how they would be effected and years to make contigency plans. There were 22 examples to learn from.

You've got a lot of problems up there, none of which was caused by R-CALF. ALL of them were cause by producers following poor leadership or sitting on their hands doing nothing. Are you a leader up there?

FACT #4 You are an R-Calfer so I would expect you to once again only tell part of the story.

The US has had a very suspect history with numerous claims of covering up BSE cases in the past and in fact was caught red handed by the Office of the Inspector General (you remember Phyllis and her announcement that surprised very few outside of the US?) Before this, R-Calf was so naive as to believe that it could never happen in America that they went out on a limb to try use it for monetary gain.

That limb broke!

It appears that the US has at least an equal amount and likely more problems and that is why Japan and other countries are taking Canadian beef and not American.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,157
Reaction score
376
Location
Big Muddy valley
Sandhusker while your talking history you should back up a bit and remember the trail herds brought up from Texas to populate the Canadian prairies. and the basically unfettered trade of cattle and feed across the border. deny it as you like but it is very close to a North American herd.
Good thing we here in the great white north aren't waiting for the USof A to get M'ID and age verification. At least we will beable to show how our cattle are different from yours.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Big Muddy rancher said:
Sandhusker while your talking history you should back up a bit and remember the trail herds brought up from Texas to populate the Canadian prairies. and the basically unfettered trade of cattle and feed across the border. deny it as you like but it is very close to a North American herd.
Good thing we here in the great white north aren't waiting for the USof A to get M'ID and age verification. At least we will beable to show how our cattle are different from yours.

Bill and Big Muddy-- Everytime I hear of the trail herds and the North American Cattle herd-- I start laughing as I remember how Canada used the "ALL American cattle are diseased" trade barrier to restrict FAIR TRADE for the past 10+ years-- while using the US markets to shirtail on an industry built by generations of US ranchers- passing off Canadian beef to unknowing US and worldwide consumers as US BEEF .....

And they're still doing it....

I read on Agriville today- Even tho Canada has this supposedly miraculous government mandated ID system- 60% of their survey says they are not using it to record birthdates :???: :wink: Must not be worth doing it- EH?
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,802
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Saskatchewan
Oldtimer said:
I read on Agriville today- Even tho Canada has this supposedly miraculous government mandated ID system- 60% of their survey says they are not using it to record birthdates :???: :wink: Must not be worth doing it- EH?

Easy big hummer, lets keep the facts straight. It wasn't government mandated in the fashion that you imply. It was a PRODUCER driven process and we asked the government to make it mandatory. Little bit different spin, but important none the less.

As for age ID, thats something brand spankin' new. When we first discussed MID, it was simply a TRACEBACK program, and its been undeniably successful. There is not another country in the world that can match it. I'm actually hoping it goes mandatory age too. Its just not that much extra work and if our customers want it, we should give it to them.

Rod
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Sandhusker said:
FACT 1) When BSE first hit the international spotlight, the USDA reported to Congress what their plan was for combatting this disease. Among other things, they said the first line of defense was to ban live animals, beef, and anything that could possibly harbor the infectious agent from countries that were BSE positive. It was a zero tolerance policy based on the best knowledge we had on the disease. As BSE turned up in various countries, 22 in all, this zero tolerance ban was placed on them and there was no waivering. Actually, there was no pressure to waiver.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?
Gee Sandhusker Let us look at MODERN HISTORY research has proven that BSE is not contagious and that is why the OIE, the people in charge of making the guidelines for trade, said there could be trade between countries affected by BSE when the proper precautionary safeguards are implemented. From the OIE
While the Code provides increasingly restrictive recommendations which commensurate with the level of BSE risk in each country status catagories, it does not recommend any other ban than the above mentioned on trade of animals or specific animal products.
Since the USDA feels they can protect the US herd and consumers from BSE already in the US I figure that is why they feel they can protect them from anything that MIGHT COME IN FROM CANADA.


FACT 2) Canada became the 23rd country in the world to discover BSE in their borders in May, 2003. True to policy, the USDA then closed the border to Canada, as did about every other country in the world. However, this time, there was pressure from the US packing industry to change this policy almost immediately. What was different about Canada? Canada had the very same disease other countries had. We didn't know anything about BSE that we didn't know prior to implementing policy. Canada was no different than any other country that reported a single case except for one thing - money. US companies made a lot of money off of Canadian cattle. The USDA quickly began making preperations to break their standing policy and resume trade with Canada.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?
Besides the fact the Canada traded livestock and feed with the US as if it was just another part of the same country. and most, other than you R-CALFers, realized that if we had it you had it and guess what the US was the 24th country to find BSE. But because the US didn't stand on the closed border your exports also started to reopen. What do you think would have happen to the US if they had stood on the closed border policy. Would your exports have opened.


FACT 3) Enter R-CALF, a group of ranchers who's livelihoods depend on the health of the beef and cattle industies and who have EVERYTHING to lose if the US cattle industry falters. They saw a clear danger to resuming trade with a BSE positive country. They questioned why the zero-tolerance policy was being changed when all of the reasons used to formulate the policy remained unchanged. They viewed the resumption of trade with Canada as a sell out of established health policy for all for the economic benefit of a few - the US multi-national packers and sued the US Government to stop it.
ANY DISAGREEMENT SO FAR?
:wink: ENTER R-CALF This would be funny if R-CALF hadn't already tried to shut down trade with Canada with a lost lawsuit. :roll: And was the USDA not stopping the sale of US beef to the US consumers also a sell out when the US found BSE within their borders. If all beef coming from a country affected by BSE is tainted and should not be allowed to be sold to US consumers, tell us why R-CALF didn't demand the USDA pull US beef off the shelves once BSE was found in the US Herd.

Now you think R-CALF is to blame for all the fallout of a closed border? They didn't close it, Tam. If the USDA had done what they testified to Congress that they were going to do, the border would still be closed. Who would you blame then? R-CALF is only demanding that the government agency in charge of food and herd health ACTUALLY DO WHAT THEY SAID WAS NECESSARY TO DO. Everybody was forewarned what the policy would be if Canada got BSE. They had years to evaluate how they would be effected and years to make contigency plans. There were 22 examples to learn from.
Why do you keep denying the fact that it is the US slaughter industry that made the claims that R-CALFs injunction damaged the US slaughter industry and because of the damage done by R-CALF's injunction plants closed and jobs were lost?
By the way there was 23 examples of how people treat countries with BSE but the US being the 24th was still in Japan trying to get your export markets reopened. You even supported Creekstones bid to reopen the border. If we are ALL to follow the old science rules why didn't R-CALF and YOU just tell Creekstone don't bother we have to keep our borders closed like every other country affect with BSE has too? You support shutting down imports but yet you support what ever will open your exports, did you forget YOU HAVE BSE IN YOUR NATIVE HERD what happen to the ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY SANDHUSKER?

You've got a lot of problems up there, none of which was caused by R-CALF. ALL of them were cause by producers following poor leadership or sitting on their hands doing nothing. Are you a leader up there?
Gee let us look at the two systems
We found all cattle involved in the cases of BSE in Canada, did the US? NO
None of our cases were in a slaughter plant were any of the US cases? YES
We confirmed all cases of BSE positive on the first try did the US? NO
We didn't have to recall meat from the human food chain did the US? YES
We test the recommended cattle does the US? NO
We have a National ID system does the US? NO
We can trace our whole herd back to birth place can the US? NO
We can age verify using our National ID system can the US? NO
We can import live cattle from a country known to have BSE because our firewalls work can the US? NOT according to R-CALF
We have a feed ban that was updated does the US? NO
We comply to our feed bans does the US? not according to a US government investigation?
We don't have a beef organization spouting garbage about tainted beef to scare people into eating Chicken or Pork does the US? YES

Now Sandhusker which country had better leadership? Canada, a country that has a industry developed National ID system that can trace and age verify. Which proved it worked by finding all cattle involved in our BSE cases in RECORD TIME. It also proved to our consumer we care about their safety enough that beef consumption rose after BSE was found here the first country to ever have that happen. OR the US that had R-CALF spouting fear mongering crap to destroy consumer confidence in beef that is raised to a higher standard than the US's Safest Beef in the World, beef is. Which some R-CALFers even admitted to when they said if we are going to import from Canada then we deserve to have the same safeguards in place that Canada has. And the USDA admitted to when they said the new safeguards will get us up to speed with Canada and when they said the new safeguards will mimic those already implemented by Canada. Gee Sandhusker I think I will stick with the leadership we have you seem to be backing a leadership that care more about the lawyers retirement fund than helpping the US industry get catch up with the rest of the world.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
DiamondSCattleCo said:
<chuckle> Well aware that I should never get involved in a BSE/RCalf thread, there is one additional note:

5) The US confirms a case of BSE in a animal, native to its own borders. This is the second case of BSE found in the USA, forcing Canadian producers to ask: Why close the barn door when the cow already took off across the border?

I am aware that us Canadians calling for an open border between the US and Canada is kind of hypocritical given that we've closed our own border to other countries beef such as Japan, but the US and Canada's infection rates are both categorized as "low", so there isn't any increased risk to the US herd from allowing Canadian beef in. Especially when you consider that Canada tests a significantly higher percentage of our slaughter animals for BSE.

Fighting to keep the border closed now is only helping the large packers. I do believe in a US/Canuck herd (I'm leaving Mexico out of this, because other than Corona and Tequila, I know very little about the country :lol: ) and believe we need a Can-Am Beef Producers Association to help combat the real danger facing producers.

[soapbox off] [flamesuit on]

Rod

Rod, you're more than welcome to get in any thread with me. We may disagree, and probably will, but you've brought a level of common sense and civility that is lacking on this board.

Just because we have BSE, I don't think we should relax any of our standards. Actually, I believe we should strengthen them. I use the analogy of a sick child; All of us who have kids have at one time had a child who had a cold or something running around outside with no coat. Did we say "no big deal, they're already sick" or did we make them come in and get dressed better, or maybe even stay inside? My point is, we didnt' want the situation to get any worse so we took additional measures. Why should we lower our guard for BSE? Is the potential there for helping or hurting the situation?
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
As for age ID, thats something brand spankin' new. When we first discussed MID, it was simply a TRACEBACK program, and its been undeniably successful. There is not another country in the world that can match it.

Sorry their ,but the company I sell for has countrys that only use scoringag records and those records cover TEN times the data which you will never match it at third world prices and google records search speed.
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,802
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Saskatchewan
PORKER said:
Sorry their ,but the company I sell for has countrys that only use scoringag records and those records cover TEN times the data which you will never match it at third world prices and google records search speed.

That looks like a fine technology, but it certainly isn't any faster for traceback than what we have. And in these countries you sell for, is the system mandatory for all producers? If its not, then it doesn't match what we have.

Rod
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
The system is mandatory for all producers of all Crops,and Animals including Fish harvesting. Question,Can I as a consumer regulator in the US look up the RFID tag and source record from Macon Ga. with in ten seconds for a food recall on a Beef animal from Canada..
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,802
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Saskatchewan
Sandhusker said:
Did we say "no big deal, they're already sick" or did we make them come in and get dressed better, or maybe even stay inside? My point is, we didnt' want the situation to get any worse so we took additional measures.

We may have made them get a better coat on, but I doubt we stopped them from playing with the other children who were sick, especially if the other children were wearing warm coats too :)

This will likely be one of those topics in which RCalf producers and Canucks will never agree on. Thats one of the reasons I stay away from these threads :)

But you do have to agree that keeping the border closed is only going to help the packers. lol I don't remember the hockeyplayers names, but Sams now sitting on the bench. Dave may not have scored as many goals, but he's the only guy playing right now and every goal he scores hurts everyone.

Obviously we can't get the support we need up here from our competition bureau (actually not them, but a pathetically weak court) and your GIPSA isn't doing quite the job its supposed to. I just think producer energy (and money) would be better spent on both sides of border correctng those situations.

Rod
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,802
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Saskatchewan
PORKER said:
The system is mandatory for all producers of all Crops,and Animals including Fish harvesting. Question,Can I as a consumer regulator in the US look up the RFID tag and source record from Macon Ga. with in ten seconds for a food recall on a Beef animal from Canada..

Which countries are using this as a mandatory system?

Rod
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
DiamondSCattleCo said:
Sandhusker said:
Did we say "no big deal, they're already sick" or did we make them come in and get dressed better, or maybe even stay inside? My point is, we didnt' want the situation to get any worse so we took additional measures.

We may have made them get a better coat on, but I doubt we stopped them from playing with the other children who were sick, especially if the other children were wearing warm coats too :)

This will likely be one of those topics in which RCalf producers and Canucks will never agree on. Thats one of the reasons I stay away from these threads :)

But you do have to agree that keeping the border closed is only going to help the packers. lol I don't remember the hockeyplayers names, but Sams now sitting on the bench. Dave may not have scored as many goals, but he's the only guy playing right now and every goal he scores hurts everyone.

Obviously we can't get the support we need up here from our competition bureau (actually not them, but a pathetically weak court) and your GIPSA isn't doing quite the job its supposed to. I just think producer energy (and money) would be better spent on both sides of border correctng those situations.

Rod

I think by bringing the "helping the packers" arguement, you're also turning a health issue into a economic one. That's the main thing that has me riled up. Our policies were set up for health reasons, and they're being compromised for economic reasons now. I can see changing health based policy on new information, drugs, etc.... but not because it hurts/helps somebody financially.

The packers dang sure need dealt with, but there is a better way than lowering health standards.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Sandhusker said:
DiamondSCattleCo said:
Sandhusker said:
Did we say "no big deal, they're already sick" or did we make them come in and get dressed better, or maybe even stay inside? My point is, we didnt' want the situation to get any worse so we took additional measures.

We may have made them get a better coat on, but I doubt we stopped them from playing with the other children who were sick, especially if the other children were wearing warm coats too :)

This will likely be one of those topics in which RCalf producers and Canucks will never agree on. Thats one of the reasons I stay away from these threads :)

But you do have to agree that keeping the border closed is only going to help the packers. lol I don't remember the hockeyplayers names, but Sams now sitting on the bench. Dave may not have scored as many goals, but he's the only guy playing right now and every goal he scores hurts everyone.

Obviously we can't get the support we need up here from our competition bureau (actually not them, but a pathetically weak court) and your GIPSA isn't doing quite the job its supposed to. I just think producer energy (and money) would be better spent on both sides of border correctng those situations.

Rod

I think by bringing the "helping the packers" arguement, you're also turning a health issue into a economic one. That's the main thing that has me riled up. Our policies were set up for health reasons, and they're being compromised for economic reasons now. I can see changing health based policy on new information, drugs, etc.... but not because it hurts/helps somebody financially.

The packers dang sure need dealt with, but there is a better way than lowering health standards.

you're also turning a health issue into a economic one.

It could also be strongly argued that yourself as well as R-Calf have been using the Canadian border to try to turn an economic issue into a health one!
 

Latest posts

Top