Sandhusker, NCBA has more than 27,000 dues paying Policy div. members, the majority of them cow/calf/stocker operators, and a significant percentage are independent cattle feeders. The predominate in policy decisions..........therefore your claims that NCBA policies damage US cattle producers simply cannot hold up. Re. producers making or not making money......what have you done to put your customers into the low cost group who have made money, according to studies at NDSU, among others? That most likely is more important than chasing the export market at this point in time. There obviously is more to trade negotiations than you seem willing to admit, and easier and more fun for you to blame USDA and NCBA. Or even packers. It clearly is not benefitting them to make such mistakes. Do you entirely rule out some form of sabotage (committed in either Korea or the USA) in those errors? I sure wouldn't!
POINT: there's much that is not yet known and understood about BSE. There is much to indicate that current practices are safe. I'm not sure there is ANY truly accurate test. Do you know of one and is it available in quantity to test every animal going to slaughter? Would only one test be absolutely accurate even if one exists? We can do and most likely are doing what is possible to keep the odds high in favor of safety, while searching diligently for better solutions, IMO, until such time as information and really accurate tests are available in necessary numbers.
Since you nor anyone else not involved in trade negotiations and in research into BSE can truly know all there is to know on these subjects, and you are claiming false deeds and deception on the part of USDA and others re. testing, SRM removal, and beef safety for starters, why should anyone believe you about these subjects over those who are doing their best with the knowledge currently available?
BTW, that "old stuff" does not go into the food chain if an animal is showing any sign of illness. Would you prefer that we do not use any older animals for food? What is your alternative, until we have enough truly accurate tests for ALL animals?
FYI, no one has "told me what to say" here. No one has bullied SK into the trade agreement! They are very tough trade negotiators. Again, what you don't know is probably illuninating compared with what you do know...yet you continue to act as if everything is at face value in negotiations. You continually claim or imply that nothing is being done to correct failures in miniscule amounts of the beef shipped. Reasonably, we know that is not true.
Certainly SK doesn't HAVE to buy our beef.....but their consumers do want it, and they want to sell products to us. Nor are we DEMANDING they buy anything forbidden in the contracts. BTW, wasn't there a prominent R-CALF member (maybe former member now) who used to say "we don't need to export beef"???
You say you contacted your legislators "pointing out short sided, block headed, arrogant stupidity of the USDA...". Boy, that's telling them!!! You remind me of a Wagon Boss on 1902 Roundups in SD who swore viciously at some of his hands, lining them out for the day, then proudly turned to another Wagon Boss, saying "that's telling 'em"! The other Wagon Boss calmly said "all my men and I are gentlemen and don't have to talk like that to understand one another"......and went on quietly and efficiently about his business!!!!
I am a nice person, and freely admit I don't know EVERYTHING about what is going on. You, on the other hand, may not truly know as much as you think you do, and need to take off those blinders and look at the whole picture. Please tell us how it would be possible for you, someone not involved, to know so much as you claim to about these issues and what you claim is IN THE MINDS of packers, USDA staff, NCBA leaders, when you don't even discuss the issues with them???chief,
Rod, maybe that isn't what you refer to, however many activists have blown it into fears over the possiblity of resistance crossing between species.
Why would you want to give up the research advances for bovine health of the past 20 years? Antibiotics, properly used for animals have proven very beneficial, and studies show improper uses are rare. And I believe you know very well that NCBA members DO care about animal welfare and have been leaders in improving care. We also understand that healthy animals are the more profitable animals, after all.
chief, I haven't talked to anyone at AMI recently, and don't need to to know that COOL covers too small a percentage of the beef sold in the USA to be viable as a quality test. Consumers want to know not only what country the beef is raised in, but which ranch/farm in the USA and COOL does not require that. Much of beef consumed in this country is through food service, restaurants, etc., and those are not covered by COOL. The means of such assurance to consumers already is available, with market driven, branded beef products. Check the current issue of Beef magazine for the latest update on the alliances providing such branded beef. That is the kind of ID consumers REALLY want on their beef! COOL, if implemented as the law is written, will prove to be an expensive lesson in "be careful what you ask for.....you may get it"!!!!
mrj