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

Maybe I should have a pork chop for supper.

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
21,982
Reaction score
81
Location
Big Muddy valley
I know I will be corrected if I am wrong , but I haven't seen other commodity groups i.e.pork and chicken, use BSE to scare consumers away from beef. I wish I could say that about a certain cattleman's organization . :cowboy:
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Big Muddy rancher said:
I know I will be corrected if I am wrong , but I haven't seen other commodity groups i.e.pork and chicken, use BSE to scare consumers away from beef. I wish I could say that about a certain cattleman's organization . :cowboy:



-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Callicrate Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 9:16 AM
To:XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The Merry-Go-Round of Beef

Published: March 15, 2005



Early this month in Billings, Mont., a federal judge, Richard Cebull, blocked the Bush administration's plans to resume imports of Canadian cattle and beef. Those imports ended in late May 2003 after mad cow disease was discovered in a Canadian cow. Since then, Canada has discovered three more cases of the disease. The United States Department of Agriculture argues that there is a "very low" or "minimal" risk in reopening the border to live cattle under 30 months of age and to certain cuts of beef. But that argument is based on a hope and a wish.

In pressing to reopen the border, Mr. Cebull writes in his injunction, the U.S.D.A. has made "a decision that subjects the entire U.S. beef industry to potentially catastrophic damages and that presents a genuine risk of death for U.S. customers." The Senate has endorsed this position, and the House is planning to introduce legislation. President Bush has vowed to veto any bill that keeps the border closed.

Mr. Bush believes in open trade borders, but in this case his thinking stumbles into an obvious pothole. Mr. Bush wants Japan to reopen its border to American beef. Japan won't do so unless America can prove it's free of mad cow disease. Yet the president is trying to force open the border with Canada, which can't prove that its herd is free of disease.

But the future of the beef trade with Japan worries us less than the safety of the American meat supply. Canada can't send cows across the border, but it is allowed to ship packaged meat. So Canadians have been building new slaughterhouses and selling low-priced boxed beef to American markets.

The only responsible way to resume international trade in beef is to ensure the health of the cattle. And the only way to do that is to test the cattle - all of them, if need be - and to bring a categorical end to the feeding practices that can spread mad cow disease. The agriculture department can cling, if it likes, to the notion of unproven "minimal risk." But all it takes is one sick cow to shut down a border. It doesn't get much more minimal than that.

It's hard to fathom what would happen to the beef business in this country if a single case of the human version of mad cow disease were discovered and attributed to eating Canadian or American beef. "Minimal risk," based on little more than a set of assumptions, should be an unacceptable gamble for every cattle rancher and every politician.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
"So Canadians have been building new slaughterhouses and selling low-priced boxed beef to American markets. "

Low prices to the producer does not necessarily mean low prices to consumers and with packer profits upwards of $200, who's profiting?
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Mike said:
"So Canadians have been building new slaughterhouses and selling low-priced boxed beef to American markets. "

Low prices to the producer does not necessarily mean low prices to consumers and with packer profits upwards of $200, who's profiting?


DAMN PAKAH BWAMER you know DAMN WELL THEY ARE ONLY MAKING $12 PER HEAD.................good luck
 

Kato

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,679
Reaction score
0
Location
Manitoba - At the end of the road
Cargill ... High River Alberta.
Tyson (IBP) .. Brooks Alberta.

So I guess the next move is to block the border to boxed beef? I wouldn't doubt it one little bit. :?

I would also guess we're a lot closer to having approval to test than American cattlemen are. That would be just the nudge needed to bring it on.

Then when the day comes that you actually find it at home, I guess you're on your own to deal with it. :eek:

Good luck.
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
"Cliff Munroe, head of Alberta Agriculture's regulatory services branch, said the province's two largest facilities, Lakeside Packers and Cargill Foods, have both expanded their kills significantly. Further growth is also scheduled at the major packers. "
Masswohl thought Canadian oversupply was roughly around 500,000 to 550,000 head of cattle, of which 300,000 to 350,000 were older animals. If the younger animals can't be moved to the US, it will take until 2007 to get rid of the backlog, he said.

Even if the US border does eventually open, it will only be for those animals under thirty months of age and as a result, most of the current projects in the works are for dealing with those animals over thirty months of age. "

"Canada has always been much more concerned with appeasing export markets as 55% to 60% of the country's beef products are exported, which compares with only 10% of US production.
"

Looks like they will still have a monoply on you guys with the younger cattle.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
It's hard to fathom what would happen to the beef business in this country if a single case of the human version of mad cow disease were discovered and attributed to eating Canadian or American beef. "Minimal risk," based on little more than a set of assumptions, should be an unacceptable gamble for every cattle rancher and every politician.


Do people in the UK still eat beef? they still produce beef and the consumers are eating it because they believe the science that their industry has been using to protect them, is working. Does Japanese and EU consumers still eat beef? They have BSE along with many other countries including Canada and the US(in many peoples eyes) and they follow the science to protect their consumers, and as of yet the consumers are still eating beef.

In pressing to reopen the border, Mr. Cebull writes in his injunction, the U.S.D.A. has made "a decision that subjects the entire U.S. beef industry to potentially catastrophic damages and that presents a genuine risk of death for U.S. customers.".


If R-CALF wins their case because of a this judge"s opinion on the science, will your consumers step back and question the science your industry is using and refuse to eat beef altogether. Or will they see this as ONE JUDGES OPINION and go on believing in the science and the sciencist, that have been studing BSE for two decades and that these other countries consumers believe in and go on eating beef. R-CALF is playing with fire and it will be really hard if not impossible to repair the damage it may do if it is not brought under control. Using Food safety issues to protect higher cattle prices is stupid . :mad:

If R-CALF and their membership really believed their lies, their members won't have been in Canada buying feeders and the leadership would have a problem with them doing it. But Leo says he doesn't see anything wrong with them owning and selling Canadian cattle. Or haven't you seen that post Haymaker. You didn't believe me, went I told you about these guys. I think you even called me a few names over this very topic didn't you. You didn't believe the story that ran in the Western Producer months ago so maybe you will believe the Billings Gazette and a few QUOTES from the R-CALF LEADERSHIP. What do you say now Haymaker. do you believe the R-CALF lies that made Cebull write this garbage or not.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Tam said:
It's hard to fathom what would happen to the beef business in this country if a single case of the human version of mad cow disease were discovered and attributed to eating Canadian or American beef. "Minimal risk," based on little more than a set of assumptions, should be an unacceptable gamble for every cattle rancher and every politician.


Do people in the UK still eat beef? they still produce beef and the consumers are eating it because they believe the science that their industry has been using to protect them, is working. Does Japanese and EU consumers still eat beef? They have BSE along with many other countries including Canada and the US(in many peoples eyes) and they follow the science to protect their consumers, and as of yet the consumers are still eating beef.

In pressing to reopen the border, Mr. Cebull writes in his injunction, the U.S.D.A. has made "a decision that subjects the entire U.S. beef industry to potentially catastrophic damages and that presents a genuine risk of death for U.S. customers.".


If R-CALF wins their case because of a this judge"s opinion on the science, will your consumers step back and question the science your industry is using and refuse to eat beef altogether. Or will they see this as ONE JUDGES OPINION and go on believing in the science and the sciencist, that have been studing BSE for two decades and that these other countries consumers believe in and go on eating beef. R-CALF is playing with fire and it will be really hard if not impossible to repair the damage it may do if it is not brought under control. Using Food safety issues to protect higher cattle prices is stupid . :mad:

If R-CALF and their membership really believed their lies, their members won't have been in Canada buying feeders and the leadership would have a problem with them doing it. But Leo says he doesn't see anything wrong with them owning and selling Canadian cattle. Or haven't you seen that post Haymaker. You didn't believe me, went I told you about these guys. I think you even called me a few names over this very topic didn't you. You didn't believe the story that ran in the Western Producer months ago so maybe you will believe the Billings Gazette and a few QUOTES from the R-CALF LEADERSHIP. What do you say now Haymaker. do you believe the R-CALF lies that made Cebull write this garbage or not.



I THINK WE HAVE PROVEN OVER AND OVER THAT THIS IS OLD NEWS THAT ONE CANUCKLE HEAD KEEPS TRYING TO USE TO INCITE PEOPLE,
THERE ARE A FEW MEMBERS THAT BOUGHT A FEW CATTLE,THESE FOLKS HAVE BEEN DOING BUISNESS IN CANADA YEARS FOR AND HAVE FAMILY THERE..................good luck MISS TAM
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
I don't care about what these guys have done in the PAST. If they believed the lies that R-CALF have been saying they would have stopped buying cattle once BSE was found in Canada but they didn't they were up here again last year and bought more. So they either don't believe them or these guys greed has overcomer their careing about the "presents a genuine risk of death for U.S. customers.". And if they are that greedy with the issue of BSE and its dangers what are they doing in the US that could be putting people in a genuine risk of death.

And if LEO believes the lies then he should have had a problem with anyone that was making money off cattle that "present a genuine risk of death to the US consumer." But his greed to protect you higher cattle prices using these guys money overcame his seeing anything wrong with what they were doing.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Tam said:
I don't care about what these guys have done in the PAST. If they believed the lies that R-CALF have been saying they would have stopped buying cattle once BSE was found in Canada but they didn't they were up here again last year and bought more. So they either don't believe them or these guys greed has overcomer their careing about the "presents a genuine risk of death for U.S. customers.". And if they are that greedy with the issue of BSE and its dangers what are they doing in the US that could be putting people in a genuine risk of death.

And if LEO believes the lies then he should have had a problem with anyone that was making money off cattle that "present a genuine risk of death to the US consumer." But his greed to protect you higher cattle prices using these guys money overcame his seeing anything wrong with what they were doing.


Please correct me if IM wrong Mss Tam but I still havent figured out how you could be an american buy canadian cattle and make money .maybe you explain that to me ?.................good luck PS come over to the coffe shop I have a deal for you.
 

Latest posts

Top