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

Judge Delays Border Opening

Help Support Ranchers.net:

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
federal district judge Wednesday issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the U.S. Department of Agriculture from opening the U.S. border on Monday to Canadian live cattle under 30 months of age.

Federal District Judge Richard Cebull ruled from the bench after a three-hour hearing that pitted attorneys for a national cattleman's group against lawyers representing the USDA and U.S. Justice Department. He ordered attorneys to agree to a scheduling of a full trial with testimony from experts and cross-examination on the cattlemen's request for a permanent injunction against USDA's planned resumption of live cattle trade with Canada.

Whether attorneys for USDA could or would appeal the injunction to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco was unclear at midday. One government official said the judge's order could be appealed.


The Billings-based Ranchers Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of America had asked the court to bar USDA from implementing its “final rule” issued in December that found the threat of bovine spongiform encephalopathy – “mad cow disease” in the Canadian herd was a “minimal risk” and would reopen the border to live cattle imports which were halted in May 2003 when a BSE-infected cow was identified in Alberta. In January, two other cases of BSE in Canada were reported.

R-CALF contends in its lawsuit there are volumes of scientific data that suggest Canada's risk status should not be considered minimal. USDA's only risk assessment of importing BSE or having BSE spread in the U.S. herd because of trade with Canada is “low and USDA has not defined low, R-CALF argues. Additionally, the final rule contains substantial changes from the preliminary rule and these changes have not been subject to public or industry comment.

In December 2003, a cow in Washington state was found with BSE. That cow came from an Alberta dairy herd. Nevertheless, foreign buyers of U.S. beef closed their borders to imports from the United States. Japan, the largest buyer of U.S. beef, has said it will open its borders to U.S. beef from cattle between 12 and 17 months, but has set no date for resumption of trade.

Bovine spongiform encephalopathy is a brain wasting disease that causes the animal to lose its neuromuscular control. It is caused by deformed proteins in the brain and central nervous system of the infected animal and is always fatal.

A human form for BSE called variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was identified in Great Britain in 1995 and since then about 150 people in the United Kingdom have died from vCJD. Another 11 people have died in Europe. There has been one reported death in the United States from vCJD. The BSE transferred to humans who consumed tissues - brain and spinal cord - from cattle infected with BSE, which scientists believed developed from feeding rendered animal parts from ruminants such as sheep, cattle and goats.
 

sw

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
0
Here's some more info:
Bill Brewster just called to let us know that the judge in the R-CALF hearing has granted a 10-day injunction keeping the border closed. He doesn't know if it will become permanent or not, but said they were just walking out of the courtroom, and I'm sure we'll know more soon.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Here's a link with some news.

http://winnipeg.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=mb_border-cattle-20050302
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I truly doubt if the 9th circuit court of appeals will overturn it--if the government even appeals.... They are the most liberal, anti government appeals court in the nation-- especially if their is a food health issue.... Lot of Californians and west coast judges on the court....
 

SMS

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta
kinda what i figure would happen....

Now as this drags on, the question comes. Over the next couple years the Natural Gas pipeline that is in the planning stage from Alaska to MainLand US, whether this pipeline will get a warm reception from the ranchers in Alberta and Northern BC. You may ask what does this have to do with the border beef dispute. Well, you need the ranchers permission to put the pipeline across our land. I dont think many alberta ranchers are going to think this is a great idea now.

Kinda like the past premier of alberta once said, "Let them eastern [email protected]#$'s freeze in the dark", but we will be thinking more about our "friends" south of the border than Ontario this time. When you Nat. Gas south of the border hits $10/Giga Joule and fuel costs $4.50/gal, we might be willing to let a bit of this black gold go south. :mad:

Unless you want to bomb us too....


As a closing thought,

When you are the biggest and strongest kid in the sand box, you need to choose, are you the Bully or the Leader?
:wink:
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
I think they just set R-calf up to take the heat. Kind of like NCBA making all the rules on the border opening to save members, but then won't back anything they say.
 

CattleAnnie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
67
Reaction score
0
Location
Northeastern B.C.
Is anyone truly suprised by this ruling? I mean, didn't it seem like this was the next inevitable phase of this saga?


If Canadian live cattle cross the US border within the next 6 months, I'd be amazed.


Take care
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
SMS said:
kinda what i figure would happen....

Now as this drags on, the question comes. Over the next couple years the Natural Gas pipeline that is in the planning stage from Alaska to MainLand US, whether this pipeline will get a warm reception from the ranchers in Alberta and Northern BC. You may ask what does this have to do with the border beef dispute. Well, you need the ranchers permission to put the pipeline across our land. I dont think many alberta ranchers are going to think this is a great idea now.

Kinda like the past premier of alberta once said, "Let them eastern [email protected]#$'s freeze in the dark", but we will be thinking more about our "friends" south of the border than Ontario this time. When you Nat. Gas south of the border hits $10/Giga Joule and fuel costs $4.50/gal, we might be willing to let a bit of this black gold go south. :mad:

Unless you want to bomb us too....


As a closing thought,

When you are the biggest and strongest kid in the sand box, you need to choose, are you the Bully or the Leader?
:wink:

don,t waste your time !!!
 

SMS

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta
frenchie, you are right

I just called the land agent that was going to come here next week to get permission to start enviromental survey on my land for this pipeline project. Told him not to bother wasting his or my time...we have lots of time and will discuss the possibility of the US pipeline companies entering my land when the border is open 100% to beef...
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
SMS said:
frenchie, you are right

I just called the land agent that was going to come here next week to get permission to start enviromental survey on my land for this pipeline project. Told him not to bother wasting his or my time...we have lots of time and will discuss the possibility of the US pipeline companies entering my land when the border is open 100% to beef...

What goes around, comes around :wink:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
I think if I were Canadian cattleman right now I would be putting together a proposal to Japan for 100% tested beef. It's obvious they don't want ours now. THAT would throw a stick in R-Calf's spokes.
Oh, but I forgot, you have to contend with the same packers up there we have down here.
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
On your pipeline I hope you have that much clout. Here we don't, if the big money and government want it they will take it if you are for it or not. Just like all the methane drilling here, you can't keep them off if you don't own most of the mineral rights. Do you own your mineral rights up there or they all scattered to the wind like they are down here.
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
rancher said:
On your pipeline I hope you have that much clout. Here we don't, if the big money and government want it they will take it if you are for it or not. Just like all the methane drilling here, you can't keep them off if you don't own most of the mineral rights. Do you own your mineral rights up there or they all scattered to the wind like they are down here.

It his property they are crossing , its not the minerals under his ranch.So why should he not have a right to tell them to go to Hell
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
We have a thing down here called "Imminent Domain". If it's for the good of the people as a whole (or so they claim) they can pay what is "Fair Market Value". If you REALLY piss them off - they'll just take.
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Frenchie, here you can not on just property rights stop someone from using their mineral rights and the mineral rights come first. But with a pipeline I don't know how that would work, I know they can force you to sign and take what ever everyone else settled on for a price if you wait to deal.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
frenchie said:
SMS said:
frenchie, you are right

I just called the land agent that was going to come here next week to get permission to start enviromental survey on my land for this pipeline project. Told him not to bother wasting his or my time...we have lots of time and will discuss the possibility of the US pipeline companies entering my land when the border is open 100% to beef...

What goes around, comes around :wink:

I guess you boys can do what you feel is right, but fighting a pipeline to the US would be in the same category as the USDA banning Creekstone the right to test. You're making a stand but only hurting yourself. We aren't making any money selling beef to the Japanese because of this "ethics stance" and you won't make any money renting pipeline, either.
 

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Location
nw manitoba
rancher said:
Frenchie, here you can not on just property rights stop someone from using their mineral rights and the mineral rights come first.

How are they using the mineral rights to his property, when the product is coming from Alaska.and going to the lower 48 states
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
I thought of that after I posted so edited my post.
 

Latest posts

Top