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

Question for BSE tester

Help Support Ranchers.net:

M

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2006
Messages
7,465
Reaction score
1
Location
Alberta
If true there are two Northern feed suppliers still using animal protien,please give me thier names,would love to hand these names over to Lyle Oberg and Kevin Sorensen!Both these men have personal interest in the beef industry,Kevin raising his own beef and Lyles family raising beef.Greg and I know Kevin and Lyle,and know they would appreciate this information...Thx
 
I think If BSE tester has some names he should turn them over to the authorities As I doubt the government and tax payers wants to be responible for their illegal behavior by having to pay for the added testing. If BSE tester hasn't turned them in then you have to wonder why. :?
 
I think the answer could be found in the OIG report on GIPSA. If reporting violations does not even get an investigation, why do it? Why are we allowing these regulatory agencies to say "there is no proof" of a violation when it is their responsibility to find that proof and they are not looking.

There has to be some credibility in our regulatory agencies and there just isn't. No one is being held accountable. On top of that, we have producers like Tam, Jason, MRJ and others who first of all don't know how to logically read some of the reports by the "experts" or the "investigators" and defend packer actions based on them. The Alberta report is just an example. It is funny to me that these are the kind of people that are "leaders" in the cattle business in the old cattle organizations in the U.S. and in Canada. With this kind of leadership, the cattle business will continue to be manipulated for the interests of packers, and not producers.
 
Econ101 said:
I think the answer could be found in the OIG report on GIPSA. If reporting violations does not even get an investigation, why do it? Why are we allowing these regulatory agencies to say "there is no proof" of a violation when it is their responsibility to find that proof and they are not looking.

There has to be some credibility in our regulatory agencies and there just isn't. No one is being held accountable. On top of that, we have producers like Tam, Jason, MRJ and others who first of all don't know how to logically read some of the reports by the "experts" or the "investigators" and defend packer actions based on them. The Alberta report is just an example. It is funny to me that these are the kind of people that are "leaders" in the cattle business in the old cattle organizations in the U.S. and in Canada. With this kind of leadership, the cattle business will continue to be manipulated for the interests of packers, and not producers.
Click to expand...
Econ you say If reporting violations does not even get an investigation, why do it? Investigation are done Econ look at the investigation into the NOV Texas cow that became the June Texas positive cow. if an investigation hadn't been done how was she found 7 months after the fact? and what happen to the USDA testing after Phyllis got done with her investigation? Wasn't the USDA force to change their testing protocol? Just because some investigations don't come up with evidence to prove your claims that would punish the packers doesn't mean an investigation wasn't done? I happen to think that if two feed mills are breaking any laws they would not be in business long as we have rules that if a feed mills is NON COMPLIANT they don't get a permit to operate. So if BSE tester has evidence to prove non compliance then turn them in and stop the stupidity
 
Tam said:
Econ101 said:
I think the answer could be found in the OIG report on GIPSA. If reporting violations does not even get an investigation, why do it? Why are we allowing these regulatory agencies to say "there is no proof" of a violation when it is their responsibility to find that proof and they are not looking.

There has to be some credibility in our regulatory agencies and there just isn't. No one is being held accountable. On top of that, we have producers like Tam, Jason, MRJ and others who first of all don't know how to logically read some of the reports by the "experts" or the "investigators" and defend packer actions based on them. The Alberta report is just an example. It is funny to me that these are the kind of people that are "leaders" in the cattle business in the old cattle organizations in the U.S. and in Canada. With this kind of leadership, the cattle business will continue to be manipulated for the interests of packers, and not producers.
Click to expand...
Econ you say If reporting violations does not even get an investigation, why do it? Investigation are done Econ look at the investigation into the NOV Texas cow that became the June Texas positive cow. if an investigation hadn't been done how was she found 7 months after the fact? and what happen to the USDA testing after Phyllis got done with her investigation? Wasn't the USDA force to change their testing protocol? Just because some investigations don't come up with evidence to prove your claims that would punish the packers doesn't mean an investigation wasn't done? I happen to think that if two feed mills are breaking any laws they would not be in business long as we have rules that if a feed mills is NON COMPLIANT they don't get a permit to operate. So if BSE tester has evidence to prove non compliance then turn them in and stop the stupidity
Click to expand...

Tam, I am not interested in the exceptions when it comes to investigations, unless they fit into a pattern.

"According to P&SP's data, the agency was tracking a total of 1,842 investigations as of June 30, 2005. The records, howver, could not be used to identify the location of work performed (i.e. the P&SP office or the regulated entity's place of business) for 1,799 of the 1,842 investigations. In addition, agency records were incomplete for 973 of the 1,842 investigations." OIG Jan. 2006 Audit report pg. ii.

Investigations were just phone calls to the ones being investigated with a big rubber stamp on their actions. There was no enforcement. I don't know about you, but the fact that 98% of what they were calling "investigations" could not be located tells me that they are training secretaries to not do their job filing. In essence, GIPSA was working for the industry to sabatoge any action that could be taken against them.

Set aside your hate for rcalf, which is just a scapegoat, and try to understand what is happening to this industry in the U.S. and in Canada. Pretty soon you are going to end up just like the poultry growers. You better start paying attention to what Tyson and the other companies have done in that industry and in the pork industry, otherwise it will be too late. Rcalf will be the least of your worries.
 
GIPSA hearings scheduled by Chambliss
Wednesday, March 1, 2006, 12:53 PM Anyone GOING to be THERE?

by Lane McConnell

The Senate Agriculture Committee will hold hearings on the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) on Thursday, March 9 at 9:30 AM Central. This announcement comes after the Committee's ranking Democrat Tom Harkin along with other bi-partisan Senators asked Committee Chairman Saxby Chambliss to hold such hearings.

The hearings will be held to review USDA management and oversight of the Packers and Stockyards Act, after a USDA Inspector General Report stated that GIPSA never enforced the Packers and Stockyards Act and had faked such enforcement efforts.
 
William Kanitz...GIPSA hearings scheduled by Chambliss
Wednesday, March 1, 2006, 12:53 PM Anyone GOING to be THERE?

Do you know if it will be televised?
 
Econ101 said:
I think the answer could be found in the OIG report on GIPSA. If reporting violations does not even get an investigation, why do it? Why are we allowing these regulatory agencies to say "there is no proof" of a violation when it is their responsibility to find that proof and they are not looking.

There has to be some credibility in our regulatory agencies and there just isn't. No one is being held accountable. On top of that, we have producers like Tam, Jason, MRJ and others who first of all don't know how to logically read some of the reports by the "experts" or the "investigators" and defend packer actions based on them. The Alberta report is just an example. It is funny to me that these are the kind of people that are "leaders" in the cattle business in the old cattle organizations in the U.S. and in Canada. With this kind of leadership, the cattle business will continue to be manipulated for the interests of packers, and not producers.
Click to expand...

Econ, what kind of crystal ball are you looking into to determine that I "don't logically know how to read some of the reports", or that I "defend packer actions based on them"? Are you bugging my phone again????

Don't those reading your drivel deserve facts to show proof of your ALLEGATIONS and outragious claims that "leaders of the old cattle organizations in the US and Canada are manipulated for the interests of packers and not producers"? Until you bring some verifiable cause and effect to those claims, they are absolute rubbish!

In your first paragraph above, are you really telling people who have evidence not to turn it in becasue "regulatory agencies will just say there is no proof", and then will not investigate?



MRJ
 
This does not look like a full blown hearing trying to solve the problems at GIPSA. We will know based on what these hearings entail, who is able to testify, and most importantly, what actions come out of it as a result.

GIPSA has sat by doing nothing on the claims in the poultry and the pork businesses other than acting like a selective collection agency when it seemed to be needed to bring stability to the industry. In fact, although GIPSA has the capacity to write rules and regulations regarding enforcement, they have not even tried to do so. There are NO enforcement provisions in the poultry side of their responsibilities and this was carefully crafted when poultry was put under the protections of the PSA. The economic market frauds the poultry companies have gotten away with in poultry are being tried in pork and now in beef. If you have a disease that is spreading, don't trust the USDA to be able to stop it if it is not in the "best interest" of agribusiness that controls them. The problem is that the short term "best interest" policy for agri-business is a long term "worst interest" policy for the industry. Allowing agribusiness to regulate themselves is about asking a heroine addict to stop on his own while putting him in group therapy with a lot of other addicts that are shooting up.
 
USDA's Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration - better known as GIPSA. On Tuesday - Harkin's request was answered - when Chambliss announced a hearing to review USDA management and oversight of the Packers and Stockyards Act. Harkin's request for a hearing came after a USDA Inspector General report said GIPSA had never enforced the Packers and Stockyards Act - had faked enforcement efforts - and even actively squelched the efforts of GIPSA employees who tried to enforce the law. Ultimately - the report saw a need for significant improvements in GIPSA management, planning and policy formulation. The Committee will meet next Thursday - March 9th - at 9:30 Central time. Members will hear from GIPSA Administrator Jim Link - USDA Inspector General Phyllis Fong - and GAO Acting Director of the Natural Resources and Environment Team Daniel Bertoni.
 
USDA's Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration - better known as GIPSA. On Tuesday - Harkin's request was answered - when Chambliss announced a hearing to review USDA management and oversight of the Packers and Stockyards Act. Harkin's request for a hearing came after a USDA Inspector General report said GIPSA had never enforced the Packers and Stockyards Act - had faked enforcement efforts - and even actively squelched the efforts of GIPSA employees who tried to enforce the law. Ultimately - the report saw a need for significant improvements in GIPSA management, planning and policy formulation. The Committee will meet next Thursday - March 9th - at 9:30 Central time. Members will hear from GIPSA Administrator Jim Link - USDA Inspector General Phyllis Fong - and GAO Acting Director of the Natural Resources and Environment Team Daniel Bertoni.
These Three should make History
 
Tam wrote:

I think If BSE tester has some names he should turn them over to the authorities As I doubt the government and tax payers wants to be responible for their illegal behavior by having to pay for the added testing. If BSE tester hasn't turned them in then you have to wonder why.
Click to expand...

You are pretty good at making your little inuendos that appear to have that alterior meaning. Can you tell me precisely what it is you are implying with that stement Tam???

Mrs. Greg wrote:

yup,was just wonderin the same!
Click to expand...

Do you care to explain what you mean by this statement??
 
Mrs. Greg wrote:

In Mikes words BSE Tester " I'M STILL WAITING!!
Click to expand...

Is that the sound of hell freezing over ??? That is how long you will have to wait with that kind of attitude lady. I seem to remember posting a message that clearly stated that if anyone, and yes, that includes women, would like to know the names of the two Feed Producers, all they would have to do is PM me. Obviously, that appears to be beyond your level of patience.

So take a pill, or a shot of whiskey, relax, think about how you will approach this hurdle and then, take the plunge. It is not as hard as it seems and if you promise to play nice in the pool with the rest of us little kids, you might get what you want. But then, that is up to me I guess.!! But bear in mind that you will get nothing from me until you provide a suitable answer to my little question as posted prior to this one. Chose wisely and hey, like Mike said, "I'M STILL WAITING!!"
 
And I suppose we can expect the same results in Canada that we are receiving from GIPSA in the US. Maybe some Secretary has been told to misfile the information so as not to disturb the industry.
 

Latest posts

Top