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

Is the the CR*P that OT was talking about?

Ben H

Well-known member
kind of a no brainer if the contamination was in the field. Either manure was spread to late or you got migrant workers squating in the field.
 

mrj

Well-known member
What are you all prepared to do if the E coli in this situation does get blamed on cattle grazing in pastures?

Isn't it true that virtually all cattle, at some time or another, are shedding (pooping...for you who need simpler language) E coli O157:H7, also called SPEC 0157:H7.

Were samples collected from the many wild animals and birds known to carry the same strain?

What preventative measures are available to stop that strain of e coli in cattle?

What methods stop it form being spread into beef during processing, and what is being done to assure there is no transmission from workers to the meat?

What measures are available to guarantee no contamination remains on or in the meat before packaging for the consumer?

What "response" do you believe the beef industry should make?

MRJ
 

Bill

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
How the beef industry responds will be critical in the eyes of consumers!!!!

Who is supposed to respond for the BEEF industry? What org represents the BEEF industry or we to look forward to a disjointed effort where R-Klanners once again say that they aren't part of the beef industry so its not really their problem. As Oldtimer stated a few weeks back they "don't raise beefs". :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I'm afraid this will impact the cattle industry the most- we already have a million EPA laws, rules and regulations on lots, pastures, fields, watersheds, and drainages (some of which we have been able to postpone or repeal)... But this will lead to calls to implement or pass new restrictions- which the government will probably do since historically they seem to have no problems with restrictions or oversight at the producer level, while refraining to implement them on the Corporate Packer level......
 

fedup2

Well-known member
Don’t worry Bill. I can’t answer for R-Calf cause I’m not a member, but I can assure you that my neutral non-bias organization will trace down those 3 Canadian cows that are causing all the e-coli problems here & take steps to remedy the situation!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :p
 

agman

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I'm afraid this will impact the cattle industry the most- we already have a million EPA laws, rules and regulations on lots, pastures, fields, watersheds, and drainages (some of which we have been able to postpone or repeal)... But this will lead to calls to implement or pass new restrictions- which the government will probably do since historically they seem to have no problems with restrictions or oversight at the producer level, while refraining to implement them on the Corporate Packer level......

OT do you have a clue of the cost to the packer for e:coli testing procedures and prevention? Please make a post per that cost if you think they get by without government scrutiny or legal consequences. I expect you don't know the facts as usual and that is why you made such a meaningless and unsupportable statement once again.

It is the packers' problem until they decide to test every animal for e:coli before harvest and reject those animals found to be carriers. That animal will be returned to the producer. Then it will be your problem OT. Until then you can just blame the packer as usual.

Hopefully, this issue can be tackled by the entire industry working together before one more consumer is harmed and some two-bit lawyer, which the world has no shortage of, decides to file a lawsuit against the party of origin. Guess who that might be OT? It might be your cattle OT and that is why we must all work together to resolve this issue. Pointing fingers leads to animosity and stalemate; nothing changes and everyone gets harmed.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Agman- You are right, I do not know every rule that affects the Packers- but I'm also aware of the many both good and bad rules and laws that affect them they have been able to squash thru their power- and instead allowed to self police- which in some occasions is not working...And I do know all the EPA rules coming down on the cattle raiser landowner/user- that were already, before proof of a connection between cattle and the spinach, being called for to be strengthened because of this outbreak...

I'll agree that both the cattle industry and the beef industry should be working to find the causes and cures behind ecoli- but without some type of strong leadership/push by the cattle and beef groups you won't get this-and they are all too deeply at each others throats (mainly over one issue, M-COOL, and USA beef ) to ever bring this about....

Hopefully, this issue can be tackled by the entire industry working together before one more consumer is harmed and some two-bit lawyer, which the world has no shortage of, decides to file a lawsuit against the party of origin. Guess who that might be OT? It might be your cattle OT and that is why we must all work together to resolve this issue. Pointing fingers leads to animosity and stalemate; nothing changes and everyone gets harmed.


Your statement just helped aggrevate the fears that many have over the mandatory ID program- that when proven ID can be made the Packers will point fingers at and will turn their cribs full of lawyers lose on implicating/ accusing the lowly cattleman on every disease outbreak - and many don't have much faith left in the USDA being fair and impartial......
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Samples of cattle manure on pastures surrounding a spinach field have tested positive for the same strain of E. coli bacteria that killed at least three people and sickened nearly 200 others -- the first direct evidence linking a Salinas Valley farm to the outbreak that has spanned 26 states and one Canadian province.

The pasture is part of an unidentified beef cattle ranch that also leases its fields to spinach growers. Fences on the cattle operation had been penetrated by wild pigs, and disease detectives are trying to determine whether feral swine might have played a role in spreading the bacteria from pasture to spinach field.

Link to Story; http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/13/MNG71LOT711.DTL
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Ranchers were taking steps to keep livestock droppings from infecting produce long before the recent outbreak, Byrne said. These include designating watering holes for cattle so they don't drink from creeks that flow through farms and creating "buffer zones" that keep the animals away from water that could later be used to irrigate crops.

"As producers of food and as consumers ourselves, the beef industry is very concerned about the safety of the food supply," Byrne said. "Our responsibility doesn't necessarily end at the fence line."

E. coli typically comes from human and animal waste. The evidence so far indicates the spinach farmer, who also has not been identified, didn't adhere to voluntary guidelines for vegetables meant to be consumed raw, said Kevin Reilly, deputy director of prevention services for the California Department of Health Services.

While it's not uncommon for cattle to graze near fields of vegetables in the intensely cultivated valley, this field was "frankly, surrounded by pasture," Reilly said.

One theory is that wild animals may have carried the bacteria by tracking it from the pasture to the spinach field or by eating it and then excreting it themselves. Investigators found evidence that wild boars had gotten through fencing meant to protect the spinach.

But Doug Powell, scientific director of the Food Safety Network at Kansas State University, says the size of the outbreak points to flood waters rather than animals being the carrier. If that's the case, then it could have been prevented by proper water quality testing, he said.

Either way, keeping livestock away from spinach and lettuce seems the best way to prevent future outbreaks, said Joseph Pezzini, vice president of operations for Ocean Mist Farms in nearby Castroville.

"That interface is something that needs to be looked at more closely," he said. "How compatible are they, and for them to be compatible, how do you operate safely from both ends?"

But many experts cautioned against focusing exclusively on the coexistence of cattle and vegetables.

"It would be a mistake to think that all outbreaks were a result of this kind of proximity," said Trevor Suslow, a research in the plant sciences department at the University of California, Davis. "It's an important finding, but that isn't the end of the story. There are other sources for the pathogen to arrive at the product."
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Just a couple of thoughts.

What the heck does this article have to do with packers OT?

Would the production of "Organic", be safer if they started using "non-organic" fertilizers?

Obviously the ecoli pathogen is a pain in the "butt"!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Murgen said:
Just a couple of thoughts.

What the heck does this article have to do with packers OT?

I never said it did-Murgen- My only mention of Packers was that they seem to get out of oversight while the producer gets more and more stuck on them- which I'm afraid this incident will do.....

Would the production of "Organic", be safer if they started using "non-organic" fertilizers?

Obviously the ecoli pathogen is a pain in the "butt"!
 

Murgen

Well-known member
I never said it did-Murgen- My only mention of Packers was that they seem to get out of oversight while the producer gets more and more stuck on them- which I'm afraid this incident will do.....

In this case, should they be under the microscope?
 
Top