Just What We Need- Another Lawsuit!!!!!!!

[Tam]

Supporters of creekstone farms' request cite the fact that Creekstone customers in Japan are asking that the tests be conducted and are willing to pay around $18 per head or four to five cents per pound to do so.

This was taken from a press release with Creekstones office as a contact.
Notice the "are willing to pay around $18 per head or four to five cents per pound to do so"

Now R-CALF says that the test is $20 and NCBA said it is closer to $30 and in a plant that processes 1000 head a day that could cost them $2000 to $12000 a day to cover the cost of the test. That could work out to be over 4.25 million dollars a year. Not to mention the delays. Now if Creekstone was givin the go ahead to send the brain samples to Japan and wait to get the results back how much do you think that would have cost them in slow downs at the plant. In Creekstones word in this write up Japan said they would pay around $18 but what if the test was far more than what Japan or Creekstone figured. Who would be paying for the test then?

 

[rancher]

I am sure Creekstone had this all figured out don't you on what the cost of the test and expenses would be? They must have seen a profit in it to want to do it? OR they are just trouble makers and knew it would cause a big rift in the cattle industry. They knew NCBA would back the packers and R-calf would back Creekstone. Yes, that must be why they did it, I am sure it was for profit now. Thanks Tam for clearing this all up for me.

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, why are you fretting over the costs Creekstone would incur? It's their business, let them figure it out. The issue is whether or not they should be allowed to test in the first place. Do you think the USDA should make companies submit a cash-flow now before making marketing rulings?

 

[Mike]

I question the ability of the USDA and the guvment to completely control the agriculture import/export business. I think by allowing Creekstone to test they are fearful of the export market getting out of their hands.
When Jimmy Carter was in office and the price of oil went up he retaliated with a grain embargo and the price of grain here plummeted. Broke many farmers in the meantime.
Yea buddy, that's showing them who's boss!

 

[Tam]

Tam, why are you fretting over the costs Creekstone would incur? It's their business, let them figure it out. The issue is whether or not they should be allowed to test in the first place. Do you think the USDA should make companies submit a cash-flow now before making marketing rulings?

Sandhusher who do you really think will be incurring that cost. Creekstone or the Producers? and if Creekstone was to test for Japan can you guarantee that the domestic consumers wouldn't be asking to have all the beef sold in the US tested too? and who do you think would be picking up the bill for that testing?

 

[rancher]

Tam-" if Creekstone was to test for Japan can you guarantee that the domestic consumers wouldn't be asking to have all the beef sold in the US tested too? and who do you think would be picking up the bill for that testing?"

Lets change test to under 20 months and Creekstone to USDA and see if what you say is true

if USDA was to age test for Japan can you guarantee that the domestic consumers wouldn't be asking to have all the beef sold in the US age tested too? and who do you think would be picking up the bill for that testing?

 

[Tam]

Considering that most of the beef eaten in the US and Japan comes from beef under the age of twenty months the bill sure wouldn't be as high as if it was test 100% now would it.

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, why are you fretting over the costs Creekstone would incur? It's their business, let them figure it out. The issue is whether or not they should be allowed to test in the first place. Do you think the USDA should make companies submit a cash-flow now before making marketing rulings?

Sandhusher who do you really think will be incurring that cost. Creekstone or the Producers? and if Creekstone was to test for Japan can you guarantee that the domestic consumers wouldn't be asking to have all the beef sold in the US tested too? and who do you think would be picking up the bill for that testing?

Tam, the USDA's job is not to question profitability, cost structures, etc.... Their job is to keep the US's food safe and do what they can to allow us to export ag. products.

The USDA is trying to send Japan beef from only animals 20 months or younger. Can anybody guaranatee that the domestic customers won't be asking for only those aged cattle, too? Who is going to take it in the shorts when animals over 20 months are rejected by the US consumer demanding equal treatment? What will a cull cow be worth?

 

[Murgen]

How bout Us meat packers test the under 20 months for Japan and the over 30 months for domestic consumption and have all tests verified by the UK, what do you think that would find?

 

[Jinglebob]

About testing of beef for BSE. IMO the customer is always right.

Remember when the British told us that they didn't want any beef that had had implants and beef business in the US said something on the order of, "Why it's perfectly safe. We are going to use implants and you need to buy our beef and read about how safe it is, because we used sound science to prove that cattle with implants are perfectly safe!"

And the British quit taking our beef.

THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT. Even when he/she is wrong.

If the customer wants tested beef, then we should test beef. Wheather sound science or common sense knows that we don't need to.

As for the cost, it is a cost of production. We will figure out a way to pay for it and the cost will be passed down the line to the end of the production line, which is the cow/calf man. He has no one to pass his costs on down to.

If our government had any gumption, they would get the ball rolling and get the testing going and subsidize it untill we are up and rolling and then let the meat industry take over, with the costs and work of testing.

And the same for Canada's government.

We have the best beef in the world, or so I keep reading on this site, so lets do what the customer wants and quit waiting for other countries to come around to our way of thinking.

THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT!

In my opinion, and you all know what opinions are worth!

:shock: :lol:

 

[Kato]

I agree.

As for our domestic customers demanding testing, as long as the tests keep coming back negative (and they will, because of the age factor), I don't see why they would start demanding testing.

If one came back positive, that's a different story, and I wouldn't blame them for demanding blanket testing. I'd want it too.

If it did happen it would set a new precedent for the whole world by shooting down the current science that says cattle that young can not be positive. In that case, we should all know about it so we can take appropriate measures. There's nothing to be gained by hiding from it. :!:

 

[Sandhusker]

I agree.

As for our domestic customers demanding testing, as long as the tests keep coming back negative (and they will, because of the age factor), I don't see why they would start demanding testing.

If one came back positive, that's a different story, and I wouldn't blame them for demanding blanket testing. I'd want it too.

If it did happen it would set a new precedent for the whole world by shooting down the current science that says cattle that young can not be positive. In that case, we should all know about it so we can take appropriate measures. There's nothing to be gained by hiding from it. :!:

You're right, Kato. I don't understand the fear of testing.

The arguement that our consumers will demand what we give to Japan works both ways - if they would demand testing they would also demand the age deal. Neither is likely.