R-CALF goes Back to Court

[Anonymous]

Ah well, what can we expect from someone approaching senility, eh?

THE SENILITY PRAYER : Grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference.
:wink:

 

[Tam]

"events since the briefing of the summary judgment motions only reinforce the need for this Court to review and vacate USDA's January 4, 2005 Final Rule allowing importation of cattle and beef from Canada."

What events is R-CALF talking about? The discovery of addition cases in Canada which was expected and dealt with in the final rule or the event that was covered up for 7 months in the US?

R-CALF USA's motion explains that the facts in the case had not been fully developed when the 9th Circuit considered only the narrower question of whether R-CALF USA was entitled to a preliminary injunction while the merits of the entire case were still being developed in the District Court.

I thought that R-CALF got the injunction on the merits of the case they had and now we are to understand the merits of the case were still being developed in the District court while the court of Appeal was appealing the injunction they received on the merits that weren't even developed. What did Cebull give R-CALF an injunction on a feeling that they would eventually have a case?

Back in July, the 9th Circuit heard only some very limited facts that were presented during the March hearing before Judge Cebull, and since then, even more scientific information has been discovered about BSE, indicating that USDA should be exercising more caution about this risk, not less," explained R-CALF USA President and Co-Founder Leo McDonnell. "We're asking the District Court to resume its consideration of our case, and in our motion we've pointed out the numerous inconsistencies in USDA's actions that warrant a careful, critical review by Judge Cebull."

Only some very limited facts, these the same very limited facts that Cebull saw fit to grant injunction on and later got a good butt chewing for doing so. And does the scientific information include the fact the BSE does exsist in the US herd.

The motion also points out that the 9th Circuit decision did not address all of the evidence and arguments R-CALF USA has now presented in its challenge against the Final Rule, including the evidence that indicates "USDA's regulation of BSE has been guided by consideration of inappropriate factors rather than sound scientific judgment…a desire to have open trade with Canada and the express financial impact on multinational meatpackers…"

What evidence has been heard since the court of appeal heard the evidence that got R-CALF's injunction lifted? I thought the District court postponed any further action until the Appeal court made their ruling and this is the first announcement from R-CALF about asking for the evidence to be reconsidered. When did they present more evidence to the courts?

The 9th Circuit said that federal agencies generally should be granted "deference" in their decision-making, but in this case, deference to some of USDA's conclusions simply is not warranted (see notes below). Because the 9th Circuit did not address these considerations, R-CALF USA's motion argues the District Court should not feel bound by the 9th Circuit's conclusion that no quantification is needed of the risk of such a major, precedent-setting action as the Final Rule.

Does R-CALF always suggest that the court ignore a court of appeals ruling? and if Cebull does how long do you think his ruling will last when it hits the Appeal court a second time?

"As a result, numerous pathways of BSE infectivity remain, and this has increased, rather than decreased, the United States' risk of BSE, particularly given that we have now resumed imports of cattle and cattle products from countries with an inherently greater risk for BSE," McDonnell continued. "In order to provide multinational meatpackers with cheap foreign supplies, USDA has left the U.S. with some of the least protective BSE mitigation requirements of any developed country, turning the U.S. into a dumping ground for meat and livestock other modern nations have banned.

Again with the dumping ground comment. Has he forgotten that the US is also banned and that whatever comments he makes about our beef is related back to the US beef. I guess the US beef is also beef that nobody else will eat. Just what kind of confidence is going to come from statements like his?

"The solution is to immediately correct those known deficiencies," he emphasized. "Recently, fast-food giant McDonald's, as well as a group of the world's foremost scientific experts on BSE, all filed formal comments with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that back up, with solid scientific research, the message and the position that R-CALF has maintained since the onset of our case."

Why is R-CALF siding with McDonalds is it because of the influence McDonalds have in the industry. I'm glad to see the McDonald's are trying to clean up their act as a few years ago we were talking to a truck driver that delivered cattle to McDonalds plant and he wouldn't eat their burgers as he saw just what kind of cattle they slaughtered.

Our goal has been to work with the agency to these common ends, and avoid litigation if possible," said Fudge. "But in the end, we had to stand up for what was right to ensure the long-term viability of cow/calf producers around the country.

This from a group that is named Rancher-Cattlemen Action LEGAL FUND doesn't sound to me as if they have any intention of avoiding Court action.

"The ones most affected by USDA and FDA rules always have had the least influence with those running the agencies and making the decisions," Fudge continued. "This court is the only place that has allowed us to be heard and for that we are grateful, regardless of the outcome.

This Court is that Cebulls Court they are talking about. :wink: These guys sound like a bunch of spoiled little boys. If we don't get what we want we will just take you to court. Just how many comments did the R-CALF boys write up for the comment periods on the final rule and how many times do we have to listen to Leo tell us all how tainted Canadian beef is while he claims the US beef is the safest in the world.

Now i'm going to just jump through the list right to the one that grabbed me

6) FDA's proposed amendments to the feed ban do not remove all of the loopholes USDA left in the Final Rule for FDA to address. However, FDA does acknowledge the validity of numerous concerns raised by R-CALF USA about the potential ineffectiveness of the feed ban — concerns that USDA has told the courts are inconsequential.
7) USDA's BSE risk mitigation measures are not foolproof, although the agency would like the public and the courts to think they are. In August 2005, a load of cattle imported from Canada to Wisconsin included one animal over the age limit of 30 months, and eight pregnant heifers – violations of the Final Rule. Unfortunately, the animal over the age limit was slaughtered and the meat distributed without applying BSE mitigation measures. Media reports also quoted a Canadian official who confirmed that a total of 15 pregnant animals were detected in shipments from Ontario and western Canada. These instances confirm R-CALF USA's concern that the Final Rule is inadequate to protect the U.S. from this type of risk.
Another example of the vulnerability of USDA's BSE risk mitigation measures — but one that USDA never acknowledged in its assertion that Canadian imports present virtually no risk — recently was revealed by an investigation of the agency's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) enforcement of policies to assure removal of specified risk materials (SRMs) from certain cattle. The investigation uncovered more than 1,000 violations of BSE risk mitigation measures over an 18-month period at slaughterhouses around the country – confirming that SRM removal policies were not comprehensively being implemented.

Now a quote from Leo

"we know if we are going to keep consumer confidence we are going to maintain some of the highest standards in the world to make sure that BSE is not introduced into this country. And we are going to make sure we have the best meat and bone meal ban in this country in place. So if for some reason we did find a case we can stand and look our consumers right in the eye and say, don't worry we have had these firewalls in place for years, the only country prior to having a case of BSE to have these firewalls in place for so many years. And we did it to make sure if a case was ever found it was a non-issue. If we look them right in the eye and say that I will guarantee they will keep eating beef".

Now according to R-CALF "USDA's BSE risk mitigation measures are not foolproof, although the agency would like the public and the courts to think they are" tell us all how this quote from Lying Leo was not meant to reassure the consumers in the US that you have the highest standards and beef is safe in the US now that you have BSE. Add to this the Washington post ad that spouts the highest standards in the world and consumers might just get the idea that the USDA is doing everything they can to protect them. But that is not the story R-CALF is putting out now to Cebull and Media so they can take another swing at the Canadian imports is it?

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

1) USDA's own procedures, when deciding whether to allow into the U.S. imports from a region potentially impacted by disease, state that while a qualitative risk analysis is generally adequate for regions considered to be free of certain diseases, regions in which the disease is known to exist due to recent outbreaks are deemed to pose a higher level of risk and have historically been approached quantitatively, because such an approach allows the assessment of specific risk concerns, testing of assumptions, analysis of attendant uncertainty, and evaluation of the effectiveness of proposed risk mitigation measures. USDA did not adhere to these standards when evaluating the risk of importing Canadian cattle and beef into the United States.

2) The "Animal Disease Risk Assessment, Prevention and Control Act of 2001, PL 107-9," which was not considered in the 9th Circuit's opinion on the preliminary injunction, reflects a congressional objective "to make certain that the Congress and the American public are fully informed as to the reliability of our nation's animal health inspection system (and) its ability to protect our domestic herds and the American public from the potential introduction into the United States of" BSE.

4) USDA reversed its judgment that banning cattle from countries with BSE was one of the most important measures necessary to prevent the introduction of BSE into the United States – without the agency providing adequate justification and without referencing new information that could justify USDA's reversal of its position.

7) USDA's BSE risk mitigation measures are not foolproof, although the agency would like the public and the courts to think they are. In August 2005, a load of cattle imported from Canada to Wisconsin included one animal over the age limit of 30 months, and eight pregnant heifers – violations of the Final Rule. Unfortunately, the animal over the age limit was slaughtered and the meat distributed without applying BSE mitigation measures. Media reports also quoted a Canadian official who confirmed that a total of 15 pregnant animals were detected in shipments from Ontario and western Canada. These instances confirm R-CALF USA's concern that the Final Rule is inadequate to protect the U.S. from this type of risk.

So lets have a look at a few of these points.

1) Recent outbreaks. How recent is that? 1 month? 10 months? 2 years? Or maybe 25 years later? Or perhaps maybe we should focus on the term outbreak. The USDA actually excercised some intelligence and realized that 2 isolated cases did not make for an "outbreak", but rather 2 isolated cases. Oh wait. The US had one too, didn't they? And they couldn't trace it back to Canada? Odd how that made it onto FOX news once, and then we never heard about it again. But that must qualify as an outbreak.

2) US and Canada have been trading cattle back and forth for years. If we have BSE in our herds, you guys have it in yours. Its the laws of probability and you simply haven't found more cases. US has taken in cattle from other countries with recorded BSE cases as well. Ya mean no-one from the US _ever_ imported cattle from the UK?

4) Again, you guys have BSE in your herds. So why shut the barn door when the cows already gotten out and flown across the border? One reason to shut the barn door: To prevent lower cost cattle from entering and competing in a supposedly open market.

7) Again, lets use some common sense. Detection of pregant animals is often not an exact science. I've had "open cows" calve 6 months after they'd been declared open. I've had some open cows that were supposed to calve in 4 months. People make errors. So with the 10's of thousands of head crossing the border, 15 errors were made. Not even significant.

R-calfers, face it. BSE is a WORLDWIDE problem. China, Japan, Australia, UK, Brazil, New Zealand, US and Canada all have had recorded cases of BSE. Quit trying to put up artificial boundaries to trade to fatten your own wallets with these weak arguements.

Edit: By the way, I'm not involved in the Canadian court case. I personally believe that R-Calf should be held responsible for the losses to the Canadian cattle industry with their smoke and mirrors act.

Rod

 

[Mike]

China, Japan, Australia, UK, Brazil, New Zealand, US and Canada all have had recorded cases of BSE

You sure about this?

 

[Anonymous]

If US cattlemen have nothing to worry about, why has Canada and the CFIA already put in place all these bans that R-CALF and MacDonalds are asking for? If they are not needed why did Canada enact them?

Until we get these bans in place we should not be importing cattle or beef from countries with much higher BSE infection rates like Japan and Canada.....

----------------------------
Ban from animal feed all tissues considered "specified risk materials" by
the Agriculture Department, which requires that such materials be removed
from meat that people eat. This includes tissues beyond the brain and spinal
cord, such as eyes or part of the small intestine.

_Ban the use of dead cattle in animal feed.

_Close loopholes allowing plate waste, poultry litter and blood to be fed
back to cattle.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

1) If US cattlemen have nothing to worry about, why has Canada and the CFIA already put in place all these bans that R-CALF and MacDonalds are asking for? If they are not needed why did Canada enact them?

2) Until we get these bans in place we should not be importing cattle or beef from countries with much higher BSE infection rates like Japan and Canada.....

1) We got the feed bans, and they were necessary. So why try and stop our beef, if you don't have them? Thats illogical. Perhaps your own beef should be banned from sale within the US until its as safe as ours?

Any other hoops that Canada has jumped through since the border closure is simply in the interests of having open trade again, not due to any particular science.

2) MUCH higher infection rates. Come on, 2 recorded cases is MUCH higher?

Rod

 

[Anonymous]

1) If US cattlemen have nothing to worry about, why has Canada and the CFIA already put in place all these bans that R-CALF and MacDonalds are asking for? If they are not needed why did Canada enact them?

2) Until we get these bans in place we should not be importing cattle or beef from countries with much higher BSE infection rates like Japan and Canada.....

1) We got the feed bans, and they were necessary. So why try and stop our beef, if you don't have them? Thats illogical. Perhaps your own beef should be banned from sale within the US until its as safe as ours?

Any other hoops that Canada has jumped through since the border closure is simply in the interests of having open trade again, not due to any particular science.

2) MUCH higher infection rates. Come on, 2 recorded cases is MUCH higher?

Rod

Rod- You actually don't get it do you :???: We're trying to keep the disease from spreading thru the US herd- trying to eradicate it-...Looking at the long term of the US cattle industry and not just at the buck to be made today..

And at last count Canada had 4 cases- in a herd 1/8th the size of the US herd-- Japan had 21...

And You better be the one to break the news to the Aussies and New Zealanders that they've had BSE :shock: .....

 

[Kato]

Lucky thing the Japanese can't read eh??? :dunce:

R_anchers C_aring A_bout L_awyer's F_inances are caring too much about lawyer's finances, and too little about American export markets from the look of it. :?

Duh...... think about it boys. Japan sees us as a North American market. Japan sees Canadian and American beef as equal in risk.

Like it or not. That's the way it is. :!: THINK ABOUT IT :!:

Once again, Duh.....

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

1) Rod- You actually don't get it do you :???: We're trying to keep the disease from spreading thru the US herd- trying to eradicate it-

2) And at last count Canada had 4 cases- in a herd 1/8th the size of the US herd-- Japan had 21...

3) And You better be the one to break the news to the Aussies and New Zealanders that they've had BSE :shock: .....

1) I'd say its you that doesn't get it. We've already taken further steps than the US to eradicate the disease, yet R-Calf still insists that the border must be closed because Canadian beef is riskier? Again, logic fault.

2) That we've caught more cases could also mean we've had greater vigilance. A greater %'age of our animals are tested.

3) I don't have to. I was watching a science program on Discovery where scientists from both Australia and New Zealand were quoted as saying BSE was a worldwide problem with recorded cases in every country in the world. Meaning their country as well. Whether they were full of crap or not, I don't know, but most scientists in the world agree that BSE is NOT a regional problem.

C'mon, all R-Calf is doing is causing problems for the beef industry as a whole. How many small independent packers had to close their doors due to the closed border? Does anyone in R-Calf even think about what the reduced competition is going to do to prices when the border fully opens (which it will at some point in time)?

Rod

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Not sure about China (and they may not be testing).

A daily occurence in China according to the reports I saw on the news. As for Argentina, I guess I've never seen anything about them, however Brazil has had reports of BSE.

Rod

 

[Manitoba_Rancher]

Oldtimer,

This is not about BSE! R-calf is using BSE to keep our OTM cattle out because they think we have huge stock piles of them to flood your market. Our OTM cattle supplies are getting close to being current. You R-calfers should go find a corner to boo hoo in. Buch of wannabe Ranchers! :roll:

 

[Bill]

Ah well, what can we expect from someone approaching senility, eh?

THE SENILITY PRAYER : Grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference.
:wink:

How is the eyesight Oldtimer? :wink: :lol:

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

How do you explain the OIE report of January 9, 2006 reporting NO cases in Brazil, China, Argentina? Where's the citation for BSE in these countries?

I don't know. Perhaps they weren't reported to the OIE? As I stated, I only went from what New Zealand and Australian scientists said in a televised report. Perhaps they were speaking of cases prior to 1989? As far as China, the World Health Organization has issued statements stating that China is a BSE hotspot. Since I've never visited, I can only go by what I read. Maybe its not accurate, but it doesn't change the fact that BSE is a worldwide problem, nor does it change the view that most scientists view it as a worldwide problem. Perhaps R-Calf would be better sticking the lawyer money into researching a cure/vaccine, rather than promoting protectionist policies?

Rod

 

[Sandhusker]

Lucky thing the Japanese can't read eh??? :dunce:

R_anchers C_aring A_bout L_awyer's F_inances are caring too much about lawyer's finances, and too little about American export markets from the look of it. :?

Duh...... think about it boys. Japan sees us as a North American market. Japan sees Canadian and American beef as equal in risk.

Like it or not. That's the way it is. :!: THINK ABOUT IT :!:

Once again, Duh.....

If Japan sees us as a North American market, why didn't they close the door to the US as well in May, 2003 instead of simply demanding that we not supply them with Canadian origin cattle?

 

[Sandhusker]

How do you explain the OIE report of January 9, 2006 reporting NO cases in Brazil, China, Argentina? Where's the citation for BSE in these countries?

I don't know. Perhaps they weren't reported to the OIE? As I stated, I only went from what New Zealand and Australian scientists said in a televised report. Perhaps they were speaking of cases prior to 1989? As far as China, the World Health Organization has issued statements stating that China is a BSE hotspot. Since I've never visited, I can only go by what I read. Maybe its not accurate, but it doesn't change the fact that BSE is a worldwide problem, nor does it change the view that most scientists view it as a worldwide problem. Perhaps R-Calf would be better sticking the lawyer money into researching a cure, rather than promoting protectionist policies?

Rod

Perhaps Canada should find somebody else to take the bulk of their beef so that they won't be so effected by US trade policies? :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Sand: "What other option does one have if the government isn't doing their job?"

What proof do you have that the government isn't doing it's job?

I said "PROOF", not R-CALF "ILLUSIONS".


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Sand: "What other option does one have if the government isn't doing their job?"

What proof do you have that the government isn't doing it's job?

I said "PROOF", not R-CALF "ILLUSIONS".


~SH~

What will you accept as proof?

 

[Anonymous]

What will you provide as proof?

The same proof you provided to support your Pickett position? NOTHING!



~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Oldtimer,

This is not about BSE! R-calf is using BSE to keep our OTM cattle out because they think we have huge stock piles of them to flood your market. Our OTM cattle supplies are getting close to being current. You R-calfers should go find a corner to boo hoo in. Buch of wannabe Ranchers! :roll:

MR- Go back thru the posts of the last year or two-- I have said on many occasions that if USDA and FDA would close the loopholes in the feedban and institute M-COOL, I'd be the first to say "Open her UP"....I'm almost certain that the majority of the R-CALF membership would say the same.....

This is a major herd health issue and a consumer choice issue.. If FDA does not put in the feed ban rules, I look for the OTM border argument to be prolonged and nasty--with more consumer groups and possibly consumer industries like MacDonalds getting involved-- and it may drag out the border opening for much longer...

USDA hasn't even posted the OTM border rule yet, and look at the furor its creating....

Like I said before- If these rules are unnecessary, Why has Canada implemented them? We'd at least like to have the same safeguards for the US herd..........

Or is it because Canada is a huge bastion of BSE infection, that CFIA thought you needed stronger rules :???: ?

 

[Manitoba_Rancher]

Oldtimer,

This is not about BSE! R-calf is using BSE to keep our OTM cattle out because they think we have huge stock piles of them to flood your market. Our OTM cattle supplies are getting close to being current. You R-calfers should go find a corner to boo hoo in. Buch of wannabe Ranchers! :roll:

MR- Go back thru the posts of the last year or two-- I have said on many occasions that if USDA and FDA would close the loopholes in the feedban and institute M-COOL, I'd be the first to say "Open her UP"....I'm almost certain that the majority of the R-CALF membership would say the same.....

This is a major herd health issue and a consumer choice issue.. If FDA does not put in the feed ban rules, I look for the OTM border argument to be prolonged and nasty--with more consumer groups and possibly consumer industries like MacDonalds getting involved-- and it may drag out the border opening for much longer...

USDA hasn't even posted the OTM border rule yet, and look at the furor its creating....

Like I said before- If these rules are unnecessary, Why has Canada implemented them? We'd at least like to have the same safeguards for the US herd..........

Or is it because Canada is a huge bastion of BSE infection, that CFIA thought you needed stronger rules :???: ?

.


Ot- You have way too much time on your hands...... You better get out there and ride a horse or something :wink: Way tooo nice to be inside on the computer!~ :wink: