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

NCBA Finally Speaks

Help Support Ranchers.net:

You know Soap, my final tally on term limits hasn't really been made yet...I originally thought they were a great idea- until I saw some people that were doing me a good job get ousted on term limits and some young guy come in with no experience and no "seniority" and accomplish nothing in repesenting me- by the time he got enough "grey hair" to understand and do the job, his term limit was up... It is kind of one of those d#mned if I do- d#mned if I don't situations....What I've found locally is that in the state and county political contests sometimes its tough enough just finding anyone "qualified" to run for office-- because it usually means making quite a sacrifice to a family or business which many of the best won't do...Not everyone is set up where they can just take off for 90-120 days every legislative session or fly around the country every time there is a committee meeting...Lot of times the party just finds a "body" to fill the ballot......

In my opinion the best Senator (Mike Mansfield) Montana ever had for getting bucks to develop the states infrastructure and potential served as a Senator for 40+ years- over 50 years in D.C altogether- and he wouldn't have been able to do it without gaining that grey hair.....

As far as with Leo and R-CALF- he has tried to step down and get someone else to take over- but it was agreed that it was important enough to keep him in there for the continuity it brought.....I have heard that he would stay until the M-COOL law is operating, since he was one of the major backers--don't know if this is true or not....But I also believe M-COOL is the most important issue to arise in the cattle industry in the last 25 years and will affect our cattle industry in the years to come...I am convinced that if M-COOL would have been instituted the Canadian border would be open today and many of the arguments we've had with the neighbors to the north over the last year would not have happened...
 
Points taken, OT. All things in moderation, even term limits. I do know what you are talking about, as far as just finding a warm body to take certain jobs.

In fact, come to think of it, just here lately I allowed my own warm body to take on a vice president job in a worthy organization. Didn't particularly want any job, but from past experience, vice-president isn't too bad as long as the president always shows up, and if you don't have to ever take the president's job in the natural chain of events.

I must also slyly confess, that on two different occasions on two different boards, I even went so far as to nominate myself to be vice-president. Both times, I was allowed to win the position. Once was on the county extension board and the other time was on our church board. It sure beat getting stuck with being secretary, which was yet to be voted on. Kinda sneaky, but a guy has to do what a guy has to do. :wink:
 
Soapweed said:
Points taken, OT. All things in moderation, even term limits. I do know what you are talking about, as far as just finding a warm body to take certain jobs.

In fact, come to think of it, just here lately I allowed my own warm body to take on a vice president job in a worthy organization. Didn't particularly want any job, but from past experience, vice-president isn't too bad as long as the president always shows up, and if you don't have to ever take the president's job in the natural chain of events.

I must also slyly confess, that on two different occasions on two different boards, I even went so far as to nominate myself to be vice-president. Both times, I was allowed to win the position. Once was on the county extension board and the other time was on our church board. It sure beat getting stuck with being secretary, which was yet to be voted on. Kinda sneaky, but a guy has to do what a guy has to do. :wink:
Click to expand...

Last Farm Bureau meeting I talked myself out of --the two neighbors that had tried to get me to it ended up President and Vice President--Now the President (who is also my partner in the hay operation), who also is the State Rep says he will probably be going to Osaka Japan in October to represent Montana beef under a grant that will sponsor 10 Montana Farm Bureau persons to Japan to promote Montana beef :) :) , and wanted to know if I could take care of his cows and things here-- Much rather do that then eat raw fish and rice....I'm plumb happy anymore to keep the home fires burning..... :)
 
Industry Officials Estimate $1 Billion Loss from Test Announcement

By Todd Neeley, DTN Staff Reporter

OMAHA (DTN) -- Leaders of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association are still looking for answers to exactly why USDA, in an apparent break with protocol, tested a cow for bovine spongiform encephalopathy that had months before been held BSE-free.

During a teleconferenced news briefing in Washington, D.C., NCBA president Jim McAdams said that despite meeting behind closed doors with Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns today, there is still not a clear reason why the Office of the Inspector General called for additional tests on the "downer" animal.

That action, McAdams said, has already hurt cattle producers financially. He said Johanns understood the concerns but offered no explanation for announcing that additional tests would be performed even though USDA testing protocol found the animal did not have BSE
 
That's A good one!!!!!!! How dare they try to prevent BSE in our food supply?! How dare they re-investigate a questionable result that was so good for the beef industry? Let's shut up and shovel, folks.
 
I have trouble trying to figure out what the motive is to re-test this cow. It is true we don't want BSE in our food supply, and we don't want it to spread in our cattle herds. This cow has already been tested, incinerated and disposed of. What more information do they expect to find. I say, it is fine and dandy to re-test, but if this cow is found positive, what are they going to do about it. Will they do more research to find where and how she contated the disease, or will they just continue to say no problem, she didn't get into the food supply. She is just an isolated case.

Maybe we do have a better test now that we can use, maybe we should test more cows, but we can do that without re-testing this cow. So what is the motive?
 
Maybe we do have a better test now that we can use, maybe we should test more cows, but we can do that without re-testing this cow. So what is the motive?
Click to expand...

Dang, could it be that they are finally realizing what a closed border has impact on,. Balance the field and go on!, get things back to normal, get big money flowing again. Seeing a a good portion of the packing industry dissappear, hell what does that mean?
 
reader: "Drat those pesky USDA folks. How dare they try to prevent BSE in our food supply?! How dare they re-investigate a questionable result that was so good for the beef industry? Let's shut up and shovel, folks."

One day you are criticizing USDA and the next you are defending them. Make up your mind!


Would you be happy if they tested this cow every week for the next 2 years to make sure the result didn't come up different?

The ruminant feed ban, an end to slaughtering downer cows, and SRM removal is what assures food safety. Not a "could be" positive test on a cow that is long since dead.

What are they going to do different if the cow is a true positive? Nothing because the precautionary measures that are already in place assure safety, not a positive test on an incinerated cow.



~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
reader: "Drat those pesky USDA folks. How dare they try to prevent BSE in our food supply?! How dare they re-investigate a questionable result that was so good for the beef industry? Let's shut up and shovel, folks."

One day you are criticizing USDA and the next you are defending them. Make up your mind!


Would you be happy if they tested this cow every week for the next 2 years to make sure the result didn't come up different?

The ruminant feed ban, an end to slaughtering downer cows, and SRM removal is what assures food safety. Not a "could be" positive test on a cow that is long since dead.

What are they going to do different if the cow is a true positive? Nothing because the precautionary measures that are already in place assure safety, not a positive test on an incinerated cow.



~SH~
Click to expand...
SH:What are they going to do different if the cow is a true positive?

I think a lot of things will soon be done differently if she is a "true positive".
 
SH, "The ruminant feed ban, an end to slaughtering downer cows, and SRM removal is what assures food safety. Not a "could be" positive test on a cow that is long since dead. What are they going to do different if the cow is a true positive? Nothing because the precautionary measures that are already in place assure safety, not a positive test on an incinerated cow. "

Are you referring to the same ruminant feed ban that has two big holes in it called plate waste and chicken sh*t?
 
Sand: "Are you referring to the same ruminant feed ban that has two big holes in it called plate waste and chicken sh*t?"
Click to expand...

So Leo lied when he said we can look the consumer right in the eye and tell them that our beef is safe due to the firewalls we have in place.

Be sure to tell your beloved R-CALF that their statement on the safety of our beef is inaccurate.

How ironic that R-CULT calls Canadian beef unsafe when they have eliminated plate waste and chickensh*t from their feed ban.

You couldn't be more treed unless you disagree with Leo's statement regarding the safety of our beef.

WHICH WAY IS IT SANDHUSKER???

Is our beef safe or not???


Reader the second,

What should USDA do differently, to assure the safety of our beef supply, if this cow comes back a true positive?

Simple question!



~SH~
 

Latest posts

Top