Tommy
Well-known member
July 18, 2005
Mr. Terry Stokes
Chief Executive Officer
National Cattlemen's Beef Association
P. O. Box 3469
Centennial, CO 80112
Dear Terry,
The Independent Cattlemen's Association of Texas was disappointed in last week's ruling which allowed the implementation of USDA's Final Rule and reopened the Canadian border. We are equally disappointed in NCBA's advocacy of this opening despite the Canadian Trade Directive passed at the Winter Convention and the fact that all 11 conditions have not been met. It is common knowledge that NCBA has been calling for the immediate opening of the Canadian border to live cattle almost since before the ink was dry on the directive and testified to such before Congress. The Independent Cattlemen's Association of Texas is an affiliate of NCBA, and we are gravely concerned over NCBA's cavalier disregard for this directive from its membership and affiliates. We have watched as the leadership of NCBA bypassed the instructions of its members and affiliates and has subsequently attempted to justify this betrayal.
The directive stated that all 11 criteria had to be satisfied before NCBA could support opening of the border. As of today, all of the criteria have not been satisfied, yet NCBA has been calling for the opening of the border. NCBA's July 13, 2005, Member eUpdate addressed the status of the 11 criteria and presented NCBA's conclusion. If we are to accept NCBA's interpretation of the status of each criterion, then our conclusion would be that only 10 of the 11 have been met. Yet, the directive to the NCBA leadership said that all 11 have to be satisfied. So, even using NCBA's own analysis, NCBA should not be calling for the opening of the border. However, close examination of NCBA's analysis reveals that in addition to point number 11, points number 3, 6, 7 and 9 have not been satisfied in accordance with the instructions of the membership and affiliates. Points number 4 and 10 are questionable and more evidence is required.
Specifically, we question the conclusion as follows:
No. 3 – No importation of feeder cattle until agreement for harmonization of animal health standards.
As NCBA adequately puts it: Canada has not gone far enough. Texas cattle still must be tested, and that is not satisfactory. This criteria has not been met. NCBA is incorrect to state that it has been satisfied.
No. 4 – Movement of Canadian cattle into the U.S. must be managed to minimize market disruptions.
There is nothing in NCBA's status, analysis or bottom line that would indicate or instruct as to how this will be accomplished. By NCBA's own admission, additional clarification in a number of key areas is necessary. NCBA is incorrect to state that this one has been accomplished.
No. 6 – Ban the use of fetal bovine serum from heifers imported for immediate slaughter.
Point number 9 states that heifers must be spayed. A certificate that the heifer has been spayed is the only method approved by the membership and affiliates, and heifers must be spayed prior to importation, whether for slaughter or feeding. NCBA is incorrect to state that this one has been accomplished.
No. 7 – USDA grades and stamps are not allowed on any imported beef products.
This one is easier to address than some of the others. NCBA admits that this one has not been met and uses trade rules to explain why it has not been met. NCBA should make every effort to effect a change in these rules. However, until that is accomplished, this criteria has not been satisfied and NCBA is incorrect to so state. NCBA's attempt to wiggle around this one is very disturbing
No. 9 – Feeder heifers imported into the United States from Canada must be spayed.
This point is addressed in No. 6. The directive specifically states that the heifers must be spayed. Again, NCBA is incorrect to state that this one is done.
No. 10 – USDA must work with our primary trading partners to ensure U.S. beef is not jeopardized by expanded trade with Canada.
NCBA assures us that U.S. negotiators have assured them that this rule will not affect our trade with Japan and other countries in a negative way. ICA would like to see the names of the U.S. negotiators and statements in print verifying these facts. Allowing Canadian live cattle into our supply is a very big step. In addition, ICA would like to see very plain statements from our trading partners about their policies concerning Canada and the United States. ICA has seen the comment from the Japanese government submitted during the comment period for the rule opening the border to Canadian cattle. That comment by the Japanese government would seem to fly in the face of this contention by the U.S. negotiators and NCBA. In addition, the stipulation by Egypt and other trading partners, who reopened their borders to U.S. beef, that they wanted only U.S. beef or beef from countries free of BSE also runs contrary to this assertion. NCBA has not proved that this criteria has been met to our approval.
No. 11 – The most important of all – The Administration must reach an agreement to re-establish trade with Japan, South Korea and Mexico, and apply economic sanctions if necessary.
There is no agreement yet. ICA appreciates the efforts NCBA is making to work with USDA to bring this about, but it has not happened yet. The Directive plainly states that an agreement must be reached before trade is resumed.
Conclusion: ICA voted for this Directive at the Winter Convention with the understanding that NCBA would not call for the opening of the border until these conditions were met. NCBA has repeatedly called for the immediate opening of the border despite the fact that all of the directive's conditions have not been met. A number of ICA's members are also members of NCBA. It is disturbing to our NCBA members as well as to us as an affiliate of NCBA to see this breach of trust by the leadership of NCBA. It is unconscionable as well as ill advised.
With this breach uppermost on our minds, ICA respectfully requests that NCBA not use our name nor our membership numbers in your efforts to open the Canadian border before these conditions are met. We will continue to look for issues on which we can agree with NCBA, and we will continue to voice the concerns of the cow/calf producer at NCBA meetings. As you know, what is good for the feeders, packers and retailers often is not in the best interests of the producer, but we think it is important to look for common ground. With this in mind, we voted for this Directive with the good faith expectation that NCBA would follow it to the letter as the membership and affiliates directed. You have violated our trust and owe it to your members and affiliates to immediately correct this serious error in judgment. Regardless of the outcome of the appeal at the Ninth Circuit or the trial in Montana, the leadership of NCBA owes their membership and affiliates an apology for their breach of trust and their failure to carry out the 11 point directive.
We would like to address two additional items. Recently, the Secretary of Agriculture commented that beef prices are too high. ICA requests that NCBA, an advocate of the free market system and leading voice of keeping the government out of the ranchers' business, take the lead in admonishing the Secretary to allow the market to determine when beef prices are too high. The Secretary's remark was ill timed and damaging to our cattle producer members. Secondly, we have noticed an increasing amount of negativity from NCBA toward other cattle and consumer organizations which is detrimental to our industry. We respectfully request that you stop criticizing other organizations and focus on the issues. You are fast becoming the instigator of much of the discord that you complain about in the industry. Demonizing other organizations by name is unprofessional and has no productive value. As an affiliate, it is demeaning to us when you malign other organizations.
Sincerely yours,
Bruce Dopslauf
President
Independent Cattlemen's Association of Texas
Mr. Terry Stokes
Chief Executive Officer
National Cattlemen's Beef Association
P. O. Box 3469
Centennial, CO 80112
Dear Terry,
The Independent Cattlemen's Association of Texas was disappointed in last week's ruling which allowed the implementation of USDA's Final Rule and reopened the Canadian border. We are equally disappointed in NCBA's advocacy of this opening despite the Canadian Trade Directive passed at the Winter Convention and the fact that all 11 conditions have not been met. It is common knowledge that NCBA has been calling for the immediate opening of the Canadian border to live cattle almost since before the ink was dry on the directive and testified to such before Congress. The Independent Cattlemen's Association of Texas is an affiliate of NCBA, and we are gravely concerned over NCBA's cavalier disregard for this directive from its membership and affiliates. We have watched as the leadership of NCBA bypassed the instructions of its members and affiliates and has subsequently attempted to justify this betrayal.
The directive stated that all 11 criteria had to be satisfied before NCBA could support opening of the border. As of today, all of the criteria have not been satisfied, yet NCBA has been calling for the opening of the border. NCBA's July 13, 2005, Member eUpdate addressed the status of the 11 criteria and presented NCBA's conclusion. If we are to accept NCBA's interpretation of the status of each criterion, then our conclusion would be that only 10 of the 11 have been met. Yet, the directive to the NCBA leadership said that all 11 have to be satisfied. So, even using NCBA's own analysis, NCBA should not be calling for the opening of the border. However, close examination of NCBA's analysis reveals that in addition to point number 11, points number 3, 6, 7 and 9 have not been satisfied in accordance with the instructions of the membership and affiliates. Points number 4 and 10 are questionable and more evidence is required.
Specifically, we question the conclusion as follows:
No. 3 – No importation of feeder cattle until agreement for harmonization of animal health standards.
As NCBA adequately puts it: Canada has not gone far enough. Texas cattle still must be tested, and that is not satisfactory. This criteria has not been met. NCBA is incorrect to state that it has been satisfied.
No. 4 – Movement of Canadian cattle into the U.S. must be managed to minimize market disruptions.
There is nothing in NCBA's status, analysis or bottom line that would indicate or instruct as to how this will be accomplished. By NCBA's own admission, additional clarification in a number of key areas is necessary. NCBA is incorrect to state that this one has been accomplished.
No. 6 – Ban the use of fetal bovine serum from heifers imported for immediate slaughter.
Point number 9 states that heifers must be spayed. A certificate that the heifer has been spayed is the only method approved by the membership and affiliates, and heifers must be spayed prior to importation, whether for slaughter or feeding. NCBA is incorrect to state that this one has been accomplished.
No. 7 – USDA grades and stamps are not allowed on any imported beef products.
This one is easier to address than some of the others. NCBA admits that this one has not been met and uses trade rules to explain why it has not been met. NCBA should make every effort to effect a change in these rules. However, until that is accomplished, this criteria has not been satisfied and NCBA is incorrect to so state. NCBA's attempt to wiggle around this one is very disturbing
No. 9 – Feeder heifers imported into the United States from Canada must be spayed.
This point is addressed in No. 6. The directive specifically states that the heifers must be spayed. Again, NCBA is incorrect to state that this one is done.
No. 10 – USDA must work with our primary trading partners to ensure U.S. beef is not jeopardized by expanded trade with Canada.
NCBA assures us that U.S. negotiators have assured them that this rule will not affect our trade with Japan and other countries in a negative way. ICA would like to see the names of the U.S. negotiators and statements in print verifying these facts. Allowing Canadian live cattle into our supply is a very big step. In addition, ICA would like to see very plain statements from our trading partners about their policies concerning Canada and the United States. ICA has seen the comment from the Japanese government submitted during the comment period for the rule opening the border to Canadian cattle. That comment by the Japanese government would seem to fly in the face of this contention by the U.S. negotiators and NCBA. In addition, the stipulation by Egypt and other trading partners, who reopened their borders to U.S. beef, that they wanted only U.S. beef or beef from countries free of BSE also runs contrary to this assertion. NCBA has not proved that this criteria has been met to our approval.
No. 11 – The most important of all – The Administration must reach an agreement to re-establish trade with Japan, South Korea and Mexico, and apply economic sanctions if necessary.
There is no agreement yet. ICA appreciates the efforts NCBA is making to work with USDA to bring this about, but it has not happened yet. The Directive plainly states that an agreement must be reached before trade is resumed.
Conclusion: ICA voted for this Directive at the Winter Convention with the understanding that NCBA would not call for the opening of the border until these conditions were met. NCBA has repeatedly called for the immediate opening of the border despite the fact that all of the directive's conditions have not been met. A number of ICA's members are also members of NCBA. It is disturbing to our NCBA members as well as to us as an affiliate of NCBA to see this breach of trust by the leadership of NCBA. It is unconscionable as well as ill advised.
With this breach uppermost on our minds, ICA respectfully requests that NCBA not use our name nor our membership numbers in your efforts to open the Canadian border before these conditions are met. We will continue to look for issues on which we can agree with NCBA, and we will continue to voice the concerns of the cow/calf producer at NCBA meetings. As you know, what is good for the feeders, packers and retailers often is not in the best interests of the producer, but we think it is important to look for common ground. With this in mind, we voted for this Directive with the good faith expectation that NCBA would follow it to the letter as the membership and affiliates directed. You have violated our trust and owe it to your members and affiliates to immediately correct this serious error in judgment. Regardless of the outcome of the appeal at the Ninth Circuit or the trial in Montana, the leadership of NCBA owes their membership and affiliates an apology for their breach of trust and their failure to carry out the 11 point directive.
We would like to address two additional items. Recently, the Secretary of Agriculture commented that beef prices are too high. ICA requests that NCBA, an advocate of the free market system and leading voice of keeping the government out of the ranchers' business, take the lead in admonishing the Secretary to allow the market to determine when beef prices are too high. The Secretary's remark was ill timed and damaging to our cattle producer members. Secondly, we have noticed an increasing amount of negativity from NCBA toward other cattle and consumer organizations which is detrimental to our industry. We respectfully request that you stop criticizing other organizations and focus on the issues. You are fast becoming the instigator of much of the discord that you complain about in the industry. Demonizing other organizations by name is unprofessional and has no productive value. As an affiliate, it is demeaning to us when you malign other organizations.
Sincerely yours,
Bruce Dopslauf
President
Independent Cattlemen's Association of Texas