Japan won't take tested beef?

[Anonymous]

It's not hard to defend USDA at all Sandman!

USDA said no to BSE testing of cattle less than 24 months of age because "BSE TESTED" does not mean "BSE FREE".

Japan eventually conceded to the "EXISTING" science and we didn't even have to use a mushroom cloud to persuade them.



~SH~

 

[Tam]

We also recieved the letter and the snips that I found to be as interesting and telling are these.

A MAFF (Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Ministry) official, though, clearly said that there was no leeway for Japan to make a concession in the talks. He then said: "We are fully aware of reports of the industry's compromise plan involving the private sector. The Government cannot accept such a Plan. Only 20 years have passed since the first BSE case was discovered. We don't know scientifically much about the disease. Cattle meat and bone are still being used as food for chickens and pigs. Under the present situation, we cannot easily make concessions. We should continue to take a careful stand"

Now I thought Creekstone had a signed deal with the Japanese only if the USDA approved the right to test. Looks like the Japanese Government was also saying NO to Creekstones deal. :shock:

This employee sees it impossible for the US to introduce a 100 percent testing system saying: " Only 3 percent of the meat of a cow in terms of weight is imported by Japan. [If the U.S. responds to Japan's call] the U.S. will be required to test 80 percent of all its cattle. If the U.S. introduces a full-inspection system, the prices of U.S. beef in Japan will double. Will you buy U.S. beef at such prices?"

WOW what happens to the other 97 percent of the total weight of the animal that is tested for Japan? :?

In the U.S. about 3.5 million cows are slaughter for human consumption annually. This volume is about 28 times larger than those in Japan. In fiscal 2002, Japan spent 4.453 billion yen for testing. By simple calculation, it would cost 120 billion yen[1.14 billion dollars] in the case of the U.S.

I'm not sure here but that seems to be a pretty high price for Japan to pay just so they can eat 3% of each carcass. :roll:

Hisanobu Kitabayashi, an expert on the BSE issue at the Worldwide Agricultural Policy Information Center, takes the view that "Japan's assertions might be viewed as unreasonable in the international community." Kitabayashi stated: "The explaination that safety will be ensured under a 100 percent BSE inspection system is no more than a myth developed by politicians to convince the people when the first BSE case was reported in Japan. Under the present technology level, it is possible to detect only infected cows that are about to develop medical conditions. Technologically, it is impossible to detect all infected cows."

"Cows 20 months and younger pose absolutely no problem. That has clearly been shown statisitically," Shimamura told reporters. Authorities say infections among young animals are extremely rare and that testing methods for them are not reliable. Cows under 20 months of age are unlikely to have exposed to meat and bone meal made from ruminant animal parts. The meal is believed to have been a major cause in previous outbreaks of mad cow disease. and has been banned by most countries.

The last two quotes just tell their own story about testing don't they.

 

[Mike]

Hisanobu Kitabayashi, an expert on the BSE issue at the Worldwide Agricultural Policy Information Center, takes the view that "Japan's assertions might be viewed as unreasonable in the international community." Kitabayashi stated: "The explaination that safety will be ensured under a 100 percent BSE inspection system is no more than a myth developed by politicians to convince the people when the first BSE case was reported in Japan. Under the present technology level, it is possible to detect only infected cows that are about to develop medical conditions. Technologically, it is impossible to detect all infected cows."

What's new? We all know that testing is not 100%.

ESPECIALLY BY THE USDA! :roll: :roll: :roll:

So..............the Japs have spent all that money on a myth.
whodathoughtit?

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, what concession on what talks? That might be pertinent to understanding the comment, dontcha think? :wink:

"Only 3 percent of the meat of a cow in terms of weight is imported by Japan." Hmmm. Let's take a calculator to that..... a 1400 lb. fat dressing 63% gives a carcass of 882 lbs. 3% of that carcass would be 26 1/2 lbs. That is all they take? :shock:

 

[Mike]

Tam, what concession on what talks? That might be pertinent to understanding the comment, dontcha think? :wink:

"Only 3 percent of the meat of a cow in terms of weight is imported by Japan." Hmmm. Let's take a calculator to that..... a 1400 lb. fat dressing 63% gives a carcass of 882 lbs. 3% of that carcass would be 26 1/2 lbs. That is all they take? :shock:

I would like to see the whole article also. We're missing something here.

 

[Tam]

Tam, what concession on what talks? That might be pertinent to understanding the comment, dontcha think? :wink:

"Only 3 percent of the meat of a cow in terms of weight is imported by Japan." Hmmm. Let's take a calculator to that..... a 1400 lb. fat dressing 63% gives a carcass of 882 lbs. 3% of that carcass would be 26 1/2 lbs. That is all they take? :shock:

You know Sandhusker and Mike this letter was the same letter that Randy was most likely talking about. It was a letter sent to the industry leaders to clarify issues.

Subject: Media Statements in Japan regarding BSE Testing for Market Access

Dear Cattle Industry Colleagues:

I am attaching a recent media summary that I prepared regarding public
statements made by the Government of Japan on BSE Testing for Market
Access. I hope that this is helpful to you and your organizations.

Yours truly,
Ted Haney

Attached was 17 pages of media snips that covered the past two years.
Randy took snips out of it that you jumped right on and went after SH and Agman. But, when I posted a few more snips that were from the more recent part of the press releases, you question them and want to know more. Why didn't you question what Randy posted? I tell you why is was because it fit your agenda thats why.
The Japanese were the ones with the figures on what percentage of the animal they take not me. That number doesn't back your claims on how you can test for the Japanese market and not for the domestic market now does it? So no wonder you question that. Just what happens to the other 97 percent of the animal? Could it be sold to the US consumers in some form? The Concessions to what talks was the same talks Randy was talking about. Testing for the Japanese market access.
Now I thought we have been listening to you say that R-CALF backed Creekstone because if the USDA had allowed testing by a private company, they would be sending beef to Japan. I thought Creekstone had a signed deal with the Japanese, but according to this statement, by a Japanese official of the MAFF, that was never the case was it.? Blame the USDA for stopping the deal but the Japanese Government was also saying NO!!!!!! Truth is R-CALF backed another dead horse and you can't admit it so you have to blame someone. If testing was the only issue then why wouldn't Japanese back the Creekstone deal.

He then said: "We are fully aware of reports of the industry's compromise plan involving the private sector. The Government cannot accept such a Plan.

 

[Mike]

Big difference! Randy gave us enough for "Context". You just threw a bunch of sentences out there that didn't make sense.

97% ? That's a bit of a stretch isn't it?

Is the 3%....... brain, tonsils, and tongue? :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, I didn't question what Randy posted because it made sense. It was straight forward and left no lingering questions. I questioned what you posted because the statement about the Japanese taking only 3% of the carcass makes no sense at all. Do you actually believe that the Japanese would take only 3% of a carcass and the other 97% would be distributed in the US market? All they would take is 20 some pounds? Come on, Tam, tell me, does this not raise a question in your mind?

Another thing that makes no sense in the context you allude, "He then said: "We are fully aware of reports of the industry's compromise plan involving the private sector. The Government cannot accept such a Plan."
If "He" is talking about a deal between Creekstone and a Japanese importer, what compromises would he be talking about? There were no compromises involving Creekstone. The Japanese importer laid out their demands to Creekstone, offered to pay for the trouble and Creekstone inked it. Where was any compromise?

 

[agman]

Yip SH and Agman, The President of the Canadian export federation is less believable than either of you.

Give him a call and tell him that, I will give you his number if you like.

Once again SH, what's up with the UTM thing. Does the article mention age. Age has only come up since the USDA started shoving down Japan's throat. They test everything. Did Japan choose they age? Did America choose the age? Did undisputed science choose the age? Or did chosen science choose the age?

Since you are there you ask him if they have provided either the U.S. or Canad with a protocol to export tested beef. Would you care to bet on the answer? I am certain Sandhusker would finance your bet!

You sure are clinging to that protocol thing aren't you, Agman. You ought to know that protocols are generally created when the need arises. Since Japan's offer to accept tested beef has fallen on deaf ears (and hard heads), no need has arisen. Thus, no protocol.

Based on the US's stance on testing, why would Japan come up with a protocol for accepting tested beef from us? If you wanted to sell me your car and I said "sure, but paint it red first", to which you declined, would you still present a purchase agreement?

The absence of a protocol is only a small hurdle for agreeing entities. Don't have one, sure doesn't take much to make one if the need is there. Existing protocols can also be changed. We had a protocol of not accepting beef from BSE positive countries. It sure got changed in a hurry.......

Gets kind of hard defending the USDA sometimes, doesn't it? :lol:

Well, back to my sandbox. Hey, isn't it about Kool-Aid time?

As I said, you have more wiggle than a worm!!!! If we could change in a hurry as you say why did Japan not change their protocol in a hurry if they wanted tested beef? Bit your tongue again did you.

 

[Mike]

Sandy. There's 2 sets of beady little eyes shining up in that tree.

 

[Sandhusker]

Agman, "As I said, you have more wiggle than a worm!!!! If we could change in a hurry as you say why did Japan not change their protocol in a hurry if they wanted tested beef? Bit your tongue again did you."

Change what protocol, Agman? Your contacts said Japan had none.

 

[agman]

Agman, "As I said, you have more wiggle than a worm!!!! If we could change in a hurry as you say why did Japan not change their protocol in a hurry if they wanted tested beef? Bit your tongue again did you."

Change what protocol, Agman? Your contacts said Japan had none.

What an evasive answer. You are right, they had none. Does it dawn on you that if they wanted to accept tested beef they would have established a protocol? Bit your old tongue again-ouch that hurts!!

 

[Sandhusker]

Agman, "As I said, you have more wiggle than a worm!!!! If we could change in a hurry as you say why did Japan not change their protocol in a hurry if they wanted tested beef? Bit your tongue again did you."

Change what protocol, Agman? Your contacts said Japan had none.

What an evasive answer. You are right, they had none. Does it dawn on you that if they wanted to accept tested beef they would have established a protocol? Bit your old tongue again-ouch that hurts!!

Why would they set up a protocol? The US and Canada are telling the world they won't test because it is against "sound science". You think they (or anybody) would set up protocol when the guys on the other side of the table are quite vocal against the idea? Like I pointed out earlier, if you and I couldn't agree on a deal to purchase your car, would you still draw up a purchase agreement?

 

[Tam]

Big difference! Randy gave us enough for "Context". You just threw a bunch of sentences out there that didn't make sense.

97% ? That's a bit of a stretch isn't it?

Is the 3%....... brain, tonsils, and tongue? :wink:

Well Mike I guess you would have to ask the Japanese what part of the animal they import. I was just quoting the Japanese. Since it was them that said it, do you have any facts to prove they are lieing about the 3%?
And Mike what part of 100% testing assures food safety is a myth don't you understand? The test doesn't work on younger cattle and Japan has proved that in the young cattle they have been testing since 2001. So selling beef as BSE tested is not a food safety assurance in the Japanese governments eyes any more, just like it is not in the INTERNATIONAL Community including the USDA's eyes.
You still haven't address the fact that it will cost the US 1.14 billion dollars in testing according to Japan figures to test cattle for their market. It has been said that the 2003 trade surplus was 1.3 billion so if you eat up 1.14 billion of the surplus in testing for the Japanese market you won't have much left will you?
And Sandhusker what raises questions in my mind is how you can think Japan takes the whole carcass when truth be known they only take a small part of the each animal slaughtered in the US. Some of what they do take are things from the animal that are not even normally eaten in the US and Canada. But you can bet they don't take as much as you think they do.
Oh and the He was an official from the MAFF and I didn't allude to anything.[

A MAFF (Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Ministry) official, though, clearly said that there was no leeway for Japan to make a concession in the talks. He then said:

the compromise the Japanese government wouldn't consider was allowing a Japanese private firm to make a trade deal with another private firm (IE Creekstone) when the Japanese government just like the USDA is in charge of making the rules to which trade can be carried out within the country and the deal was going against their trade rules. I can not believe you could not see that as a compromise. The Japanese importer according to the government had no right to even make the offer they made to Creekstone without the governments approval. Just who sets the Import rules private companies or the governments?

 

[rkaiser]

Sometimes I beleive we all just like to argue for the sake of arguing on here.

What is it that you want Tam?

You don't want BIG C to build a plant that would compete with the one you support. You don't want to attempt to deal with customers and their demands off this continent.

Do you simply want to have things the way they were prior to BSE, with a greater percent of the slaughter capacity owned by the multinationals? And have a safe little spot for your product in an "under the radar" market down there in Southern Saskatchewan?

BSE testing for markets that demand BSE testing is not really that hard for me to understand. If a company like Sunterra (who is including a lab in their design) decided to test product for a market that asked, let them.
In fact, you and the other folks who want to discredit testing as cost prohibitive will not really have much say in the near future. It will happen.

The letter you received is not the same one I was quoting from Tam. Mine was short and simple. Jump all over the 3% thing to discredit a potential market that could, and will grow and be as important to Canada as this American dependence thing we live with now.

 

[Sandhusker]

I'm with Randy, Tam. What do you want? I'm guessing that you feel compelled to challenge me on anything I say simply because I'm a R-CALF member.

What is your adversion to testing? It could open up markets for your product. No sound science for testing? Big deal, no sound science for organic, hormone free, Kosher, Halal, etc.... Sound science only became a requirement when the AMI decided they didn't want to test and didnt' want anybody else to test, either.

I don't know where you're getting this 3% deal, but I can assure you that Japan takes more than 3% of the carcass. Who ever said that has been in the Saki. Taking all but 3% would be much closer.

 

[agman]

Agman, "As I said, you have more wiggle than a worm!!!! If we could change in a hurry as you say why did Japan not change their protocol in a hurry if they wanted tested beef? Bit your tongue again did you."

Change what protocol, Agman? Your contacts said Japan had none.

What an evasive answer. You are right, they had none. Does it dawn on you that if they wanted to accept tested beef they would have established a protocol? Bit your old tongue again-ouch that hurts!!

Why would they set up a protocol? The US and Canada are telling the world they won't test because it is against "sound science". You think they (or anybody) would set up protocol when the guys on the other side of the table are quite vocal against the idea? Like I pointed out earlier, if you and I couldn't agree on a deal to purchase your car, would you still draw up a purchase agreement?

Wiggle, wiggle wiggle - the more a worm wiggles the deeper underground he goes!!!

 

[Anonymous]

I'm with Randy, Tam. What do you want? I'm guessing that you feel compelled to challenge me on anything I say simply because I'm a R-CALF member.

Sandhusker- it ain't all Tams fault....
As a member of the Canadian NCBA- the CCA- she has been brainwashed by them to not look at anything new and to just back the old status quo of backslapping the multinational corportions...Don't ask questions and don't rock the boat :???: The politicians and the corporate leaders are looking out for our best interests :???: :wink:

They, like NCBA, guarantee a decent price 2 out of every 20 years- what more do you want :wink:

 

[agman]

Agman, "Talk is cheap, action is a little bit harder to confirm."

Yep, I'll have to agree with you there, Agman. What has Japan been doing with the USDA this past year and a half? Have they been talking or acting? :wink: Maybe they would act if they heard talk that made sense.

I'm off to my sandbox now.... :lol: :lol: :lol:

If they really wanted to import beef instead of playing politics they would have established a protocol for importing tested beef from the outset. You just like to wiggle!!!

 

[Sandhusker]

Agman, "Talk is cheap, action is a little bit harder to confirm."

Yep, I'll have to agree with you there, Agman. What has Japan been doing with the USDA this past year and a half? Have they been talking or acting? :wink: Maybe they would act if they heard talk that made sense.

I'm off to my sandbox now.... :lol: :lol: :lol:

If they really wanted to import beef instead of playing politics they would have established a protocol for importing tested beef from the outset. You just like to wiggle!!!

If they really wanted to import beef? Uh, don't know how to tell you this, but Japan IS importing beef. It's coming from a place called Australia. You see, we won't meet their demands so they went across the street to someone who will. That's generally what happens in business. Try telling your clients they are out of line and that you refuse to give them what they want. I dare ya! See what happens first hand. Here's a new flash for you, Agman, JAPAN DOESN'T NEED OUR BEEF.

What has Canada and the US said publicly about testing UTM cattle? Why would Japan waste their time? But, you think they should estabish protocol for something they don't need to be supplied by someone who said they won't supply it? :shock: ...OOOOOOK :roll: