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

It has already started

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Taken from Cow Calf weekly

R-CALF Backs Away From Food Safety Claim
The National Meat Association (NMA) filed with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals its response brief in R-CALF v. USDA. NMA argues there is ample evidence in the record to sustain a finding that USDA's Final Rule presented no substantial risk to human health and that the preliminary injunction should never have been entered.

But, R-CALF's response filed with the Ninth Circuit last week makes this surprising admission, NMA says: "R-CALF USA [has] never argued that there was a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada."

In the aftermath of this statement, NMA is asking: "If R-CALF has never argued there's a great risk to human health from resumed imports, what was the purpose of the advertisement it took out in the Washington Post, which clearly linked the Canadian BSE situation to U.S. beef safety? Don't they believe their own rhetoric?"

NMA says no one may be more surprised than the Billings, MT, District Court that delayed the border reopening on the basis of "an increased risk to human health," even describing a "genuine risk of death for U.S. consumers" in its decision.

"R-CALF's latter-day admission that there is no great risk to human health from resumed imports of Canadian cattle and beef utterly undermines the basis for the District Court's decision," NMA says.

Instead, NMA says R-CALF now claims USDA didn't do a proper quantitative analysis.

"Apparently R-CALF failed to read the Harvard Risk Assessment. Authored by leading world experts, that assessment is the quantitative analysis of risk with which USDA supported its Rule," NMA says.


All we have heard of for almost two years is how unsafe Canadian cattle and beef is and how it would risk the lives of US consumers and now they are back peddling away from the Health safety issue they must have seen the light and it was very dim.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Taken from Cow Calf weekly

R-CALF Backs Away From Food Safety Claim
The National Meat Association (NMA) filed with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals its response brief in R-CALF v. USDA. NMA argues there is ample evidence in the record to sustain a finding that USDA's Final Rule presented no substantial risk to human health and that the preliminary injunction should never have been entered.

But, R-CALF's response filed with the Ninth Circuit last week makes this surprising admission, NMA says: "R-CALF USA [has] never argued that there was a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada."

In the aftermath of this statement, NMA is asking: "If R-CALF has never argued there's a great risk to human health from resumed imports, what was the purpose of the advertisement it took out in the Washington Post, which clearly linked the Canadian BSE situation to U.S. beef safety? Don't they believe their own rhetoric?"

NMA says no one may be more surprised than the Billings, MT, District Court that delayed the border reopening on the basis of "an increased risk to human health," even describing a "genuine risk of death for U.S. consumers" in its decision.

"R-CALF's latter-day admission that there is no great risk to human health from resumed imports of Canadian cattle and beef utterly undermines the basis for the District Court's decision," NMA says.

Instead, NMA says R-CALF now claims USDA didn't do a proper quantitative analysis.

"Apparently R-CALF failed to read the Harvard Risk Assessment. Authored by leading world experts, that assessment is the quantitative analysis of risk with which USDA supported its Rule," NMA says.


All we have heard of for almost two years is how unsafe Canadian cattle and beef is and how it would risk the lives of US consumers and now they are back peddling away from the Health safety issue they must have seen the light and it was very dim.

I don't think I have ever saw R-CALF say it was a "great risk" to human health-- always was a "higher risk" which it doesn't take a statistician to figure out when Canada has 4 origin cows and the US has none....Especially when you look at the difference in size of herds....

I live in rattlesnake country, but I don't live in fear of dying from snakebite--but when in the area of a snakeden I don't go sticking my hand down any holes or rolling over any rocks without knowing whats there first....Kind of the same feeling I have with BSE...If given the choice I will pick the lower risk product.......
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
You want other to be HONEST Oldtimer and now you say this load of crap. We have all heard your beloved leaders say how if the US imports Canadian cattle and beef it will be putting the US cattle herd and Consumers in danger. What were the word of Judge Cebull A GENUINE RISK OF DEATH where do you think he got that idea. it wasn't from the USDA.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
You want other to be HONEST Oldtimer and now you say this load of crap. We have all heard your beloved leaders say how if the US imports Canadian cattle and beef it will be putting the US cattle herd and Consumers in danger. What were the word of Judge Cebull A GENUINE RISK OF DEATH where do you think he got that idea. it wasn't from the USDA.

Tam- Where did you go to school? Must have been a Blue Jay? :wink: There is a lot of difference between "genuine risk" and "great risk"......
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
OT- I think with everything being exposed now, you better learn the difference between "higher" and "greater". It's still going to be one of the above that bites the US producer in the butt.
 

don

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,564
Reaction score
0
Location
saskatchewan
ot: Tam- Where did you go to school? Must have been a Blue Jay? There is a lot of difference between "genuine risk" and "great risk"......

might want to get a weasel for your avatar there oldtimer. keep up the good work for r-calf but i think you'll soon see your leaders jumping ship.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
and weasels going under ground! Unless Hat has somewhere for them to hide?
 

TimH

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,421
Reaction score
0
Location
Southwest Manitoba
Ha ha Ha! This is all just WAY too much free entertainment!!! :lol: :lol:

Oldtimer, you are truely hilarious. You have had your pants pulled down sooo many times on this forum that you had better start putting some industrial strength sunscreen on your wrinkled up yellow old butt or else you won't be able to sit down at your computer and entertain us. :lol: :lol:
I don't believe for one minute that anybody is actually as dumb as you appear to be.
If I had to give out an award for the most obtuse,liberal brain dead moron of 2005, it would be a toss up between you , reader the 2nd and sandhusker. At least Mr. Hat has enough integrity to admit that it is all about the money and not some BS health concerns.
It is as simple as this.......R-calf was trying to close the border long before BSE was ever discovered. Trying to disguise this fact as concern for the health of consumers only proves how full of $hit r-calf is.
Why don't you just admit,OT, that you are AFRAID to compete and you would like nothing better than for the government to step in and save you by keeping willing buyers and willing sellers from doing business in order to protect your substandard cattle from the forces of the free market!!!! :lol: :lol:
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
reader (the Second) said:
TimH said:
Ha ha Ha! This is all just WAY too much free entertainment!!! :lol: :lol:

Oldtimer, you are truely hilarious. You have had your pants pulled down sooo many times on this forum that you had better start putting some industrial strength sunscreen on your wrinkled up yellow old butt or else you won't be able to sit down at your computer and entertain us. :lol: :lol:
I don't believe for one minute that anybody is actually as dumb as you appear to be.
If I had to give out an award for the most obtuse,liberal brain dead moron of 2005, it would be a toss up between you , reader the 2nd and sandhusker. At least Mr. Hat has enough integrity to admit that it is all about the money and not some BS health concerns.
It is as simple as this.......R-calf was trying to close the border long before BSE was ever discovered. Trying to disguise this fact as concern for the health of consumers only proves how full of s*** r-calf is.
Why don't you just admit,OT, that you are AFRAID to compete and you would like nothing better than for the government to step in and save you by keeping willing buyers and willing sellers from doing business in order to protect your substandard cattle from the forces of the free market!!!! :lol: :lol:

Tim - you are WAY out of line son. I am not even an R-CALF supporter. I cannot believe the simplification and polarization and lack of balanced thinking here. MRJ I find very believable but most of the Canadians have slowly gone nuts or I am suddenly waking up to how manic they are. You are shooting yourselves in the foot.

If you are not r-calf ,why are you defending them?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
You want other to be HONEST Oldtimer and now you say this load of crap. We have all heard your beloved leaders say how if the US imports Canadian cattle and beef it will be putting the US cattle herd and Consumers in danger. What were the word of Judge Cebull A GENUINE RISK OF DEATH where do you think he got that idea. it wasn't from the USDA.

Tam- Where did you go to school? Must have been a Blue Jay? :wink: There is a lot of difference between "genuine risk" and "great risk"......

BILLINGS, MONT. (February 21, 2005) The Ranchers-Cattlemen’s Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA) urged consumers today to tell their grocery store managers, butchers, mayors, governors, members of Congress and local health officials: "Keep U.S. Beef Safe!" This call-for-action is part of a nationwide campaign to stop federal officials from dropping crucial food safety protections for imported beef, specifically from Canada.Four cases of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), a deadly disease also known as mad cow, have been identified in Canadian cattle since May 2003.

Now just a little over 6 weeks later they are saying

But, R-CALF's response filed with the Ninth Circuit last week makes this surprising admission, NMA says: "R-CALF USA [has] never argued that there was a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada."

And this was the number one reason to keep the border closed

R-CALF USA has informed the court of numerous deficiencies contained in the Final Rule, including:
 USDA’s failure to adequately assess the impact of its actions upon human health;

In their Washington ad it said

Our High health and safety standards are needed to protect consumers
It also said

The USDA has evidenced a preconceived intention, based upon inappropriate considerations, to rush to reopen the border regarless of uncertainties in the agency'd knowledge of the possible inpact on human health and animal health.

Now they are saying we never said their was great risk to human health. So they ran this ad to tell people there may be a slight risk, and they called to action because of a slight risk They took the USDA to court because of a slight risk? every one of their ads and press releases stated HUMAN HEALTH ISSUES was the reason they wanted this border kept close and now you expect us to believe it was because of a slight risk.

And since I attended school in the US can you please explain the different between a Genuine risk of DEATH and a great risk. Because personally I think every time I drive in Regina I'm at great risk but if I actually thought I was at a genuine risk of DEATH I would just stay home. :roll:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
reader (the Second) said:
TimH said:
Ha ha Ha! This is all just WAY too much free entertainment!!! :lol: :lol:

Oldtimer, you are truely hilarious. You have had your pants pulled down sooo many times on this forum that you had better start putting some industrial strength sunscreen on your wrinkled up yellow old butt or else you won't be able to sit down at your computer and entertain us. :lol: :lol:
I don't believe for one minute that anybody is actually as dumb as you appear to be.
If I had to give out an award for the most obtuse,liberal brain dead moron of 2005, it would be a toss up between you , reader the 2nd and sandhusker. At least Mr. Hat has enough integrity to admit that it is all about the money and not some BS health concerns.
It is as simple as this.......R-calf was trying to close the border long before BSE was ever discovered. Trying to disguise this fact as concern for the health of consumers only proves how full of s*** r-calf is.
Why don't you just admit,OT, that you are AFRAID to compete and you would like nothing better than for the government to step in and save you by keeping willing buyers and willing sellers from doing business in order to protect your substandard cattle from the forces of the free market!!!! :lol: :lol:

Tim - you are WAY out of line son. I am not even an R-CALF supporter. I cannot believe the simplification and polarization and lack of balanced thinking here. MRJ I find very believable but most of the Canadians have slowly gone nuts or I am suddenly waking up to how manic they are. You are shooting yourselves in the foot.

Hey Canadians and Hat, stop acting like children and debate the merits versus slinging personal insults. It is boring for the rest of us.

You are debating the merits of the article again are you Reader the Second. but you surely aren't slinging personal insults like "Canadians have slowly gone nuts"
 

don

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,564
Reaction score
0
Location
saskatchewan
Tim - personal insults are personal. When I say "Canadians have slowly gone nuts, here's what I am referring to: I am amazed at the frenzy and anger here. We spiral into it and then pull ourselves out. Some of us keep a sense of humor -- and that includes Randy ironically -- in spite of the very bad circumstances you Canadians are in. I am here because I do care about ranch life -- it's what I grew up around -- and I know that this BSE thing is not your all's fault and you are bearing most of the pain. But it's not R-CALF's fault, not that they didn't make it worse. It's a combination of USDA mishandling, bad luck, politics, unmet promises by the U.S. administration that they should not have made, and so on. Personally, I don't think there is any reason that Canada should have more BSE than the U.S. Both followed USDA policies, had some failures in the feed ban, had UK cattle, traded cattle back and forth.

However, I do agree with R-CALF that it's odd to blindly open the border because of politics when Canada has just found a third BSE cow in only a couple of months. It should have been with more thought than that. It was so obviously blatant politics versus food or animal health safety.

That's my rant for tonight.

well if ot doesn't take the weasel for an avatar it might fit you, too.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
reader (the Second) said:
Tim - personal insults are personal. When I say "Canadians have slowly gone nuts, here's what I am referring to: I am amazed at the frenzy and anger here. We spiral into it and then pull ourselves out. Some of us keep a sense of humor -- and that includes Randy ironically -- in spite of the very bad circumstances you Canadians are in. I am here because I do care about ranch life -- it's what I grew up around -- and I know that this BSE thing is not your all's fault and you are bearing most of the pain. But it's not R-CALF's fault, not that they didn't make it worse. It's a combination of USDA mishandling, bad luck, politics, unmet promises by the U.S. administration that they should not have made, and so on. Personally, I don't think there is any reason that Canada should have more BSE than the U.S. Both followed USDA policies, had some failures in the feed ban, had UK cattle, traded cattle back and forth.

However, I do agree with R-CALF that it's odd to blindly open the border because of politics when Canada has just found a third BSE cow in only a couple of months. It should have been with more thought than that. It was so obviously blatant politics versus food or animal health safety.

That's my rant for tonight.

You may not take it personal But I do as I'm a Canadian and if we are called nuts that includes me.

I like to you to explain what part of MINIMAL RISK don't you understand if there was NO RISK then there would be NO RISK but according to the OIE Canada can have 11 positives in a year and still be in the MINIMAL risk catagory. We are doing the testing as we were told that if we don't do it we loss our risk status. Maybe we should start testing like the US so we aren't punished everytime we find one.

Canada has just found a third BSE cow in only a couple of months.

Reader Canada found one in May 2003 One in Dec 2004 and One in Jan 2005 what is this third BSE cow in only a couple of months?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
reader (the Second) said:
Sorry MISS TAM, two glasses of wine with supper tonight. My daughter and a roomate are visiting and I took them out to dinner. 2 BSE cows in 11 days then. I don't count an NCBA delegation as taking a second look and USDA sure didn't stop and consider but clearly was going to open the border regardless of the four cows. Which while is is minimal risk is not no risk. I can understand a cattlemen's organization in the U.S. wanting to have more thought before exposing themselves to economic risk, having experienced loss of their export markets after ONE cow. I realize that Canadians cannot accept this point of view, but there it is.

If R-CALf had stood in the economic loss platform then we would not be so mad. But it is a little hard to stand on that platform when you are recieving historically high cattle prices now isn't it. They claimed those prices were because of the border closure but if that was true MISS READER then why was the record high price for cattle achieved after boxed beef was allowed back into the US in Sept 2003. When it look as if they were loosing the battle of keeping the border closed because they just don't want to compete with Canadian beef they brought in the Anti beef groups because of the media attention those groups recieve and started down the rode of destroying the reputation of Canadian beef claiming it was ALL tainted and a genuine risk to the US consumer health.
The US lost their export markets because of that one cow and over one hundred years of freely trading CATTLE and FEED with Canada not to mention the UK cattle and Feed and the EU feed. Did they find the Canadian cattle NO did they find the US cattle that ate Canadian feed, that same feed that supposidly contaminated our herd NO. And it seems to me as if you are the one that cannot accept the fact the R-CALF lied and anybody that points it out is either gone nuts or a paid hack.
The backtracking they are doing now in the court of appeal is proving it. They got their injunction on the risk to human health issue and now they are saying they never argued that there was a great risk to human health from resumed imports of cattle and beef from Canada." Do you really think they got it on the economic loss platform when part of Judge Cebulls ruling was Canadian beef presents a GENUINE RISK OF DEATH TO US CONSUMERS?
Telling everyone else to stop acting like children and stop with the personal insults while you are saying Canadians have gone nuts and Dittmer is a paid hack is insulting And I don't care how many glasses of wine you have had. :x
 

Latest posts

Top