Tam said:Oldtimer said:So its apples and oranges, OT, no matter how many times you try to say it isn't. When the US's feedban matches ours, AND your testing protocols match ours, then the scientific community can decide if the US is lower risk than Canada. If it is, shut down the border. You won't hear a peep from me. Until then, all countries will recognize that R-Calf is only attempting to promote a protectionist policy with no regard for fact.
Rod- right there lies some of the problem...These questions should be answered and the loopholes closed before making any moves in the changing of rules....Just because we have a politically/corporate lobbyist driven USDA these questions are not being addressed and the US cattleman/consumer is bearing the brunt of the risk....
You are saying about what R-CALF is- and one of the reasons the court case was filed so that an independent entity could look at the evidence and determine what the risk really is and whether its worth the hazard it presents to US consumers and the US cattle herd...Apparently previously the US Senate agreed when they moved to block the USDA's rule...
What gain is there for US cattle raisers to import these cattle? Is it worth the risk?
Look at the What evidence Oldtimer? The "cherry picked" evidence that R-CALF will allow their experts to testify to. :wink: As a retired lawman turn substitute judge you should want all the evidence to be presented not just the side that proves how Canada is a bigger risk when the true evidence proves OTHERWISE. Is that Justice Glasgow style Oldtimer? :wink:
BTW Funny you should ask if it is worth the risk when your organization is not willing to testify to the WHOLE TRUTH!!!! Wouldn't want to RISK that would you OLDTIMER???? :wink:
Ben Roberts said:Oldtimer, R-Calf has always had a protectionist attitude toward Canadian beef,remember, long before BSE was an issue,R-Calf attempted to close the border by imposing a tariff of $30.00 per head that lasted 28 days.
You notice that I said Canadian beef,not cattle, R-Calf speaks out of both sides of there mouth, when if you look at the genetics of the cattle that are owned by R-Calf members you will find alot of Canadian genetics that have been proven superior to ours, including your herd.
I believe,that R-Calf is in deeper than they would like to be on the border issue and if not for BSE, that they keep leaning on,it would not be an issue.
Regards
Ben Roberts
Ben Roberts said:Tam, at the time the cow was slaughtered, the Government was paying $10.00 per stem that was sent in. The plant in Moses Lake,Washington is a very small plant that kills more custom work than anything else. They also kill some cull cows and bulls in the area and send the carcass' to Midway Meats,who grinds meat for the Portland and Seattle market in Chehalis,Washington,they ship carcass' once a week to Midway Meats. At the time the cow was slaughtered it took about two weeks to get the results back from the test,the carcass had already been shipped,ground,and sold before the test results were in. The USDA knew the cow tested postive before anyone else and at that time the USDA really did not know where the carcass was. The personal at the plant don't even remember the cow,they do remember though that they did not have any downers that week. Once the USDA traced the carcass to the Moses Lake plant and then to Midway Meats, Ann Veneman made a news release stating that the cow was a downer and that the meat had never made it into the food chain (soon after she made that release,she passed the law that you could not slaughter downer animals) To stop public reaction though The USDA made the plant in Moses Lake recall 68,000 lbs. of meat and shipped it to a land-fill to be buried,this was all after the fact
This is all a matter of public record, the owners of the Moses Lake plant and Midway Meats along with their workers have given sworn statements to the USDA in this matter.
Please explain this New York Times tidbit from Dave Louthan, the man that killed the Washington cow:The personal at the plant don't even remember the cow,they do remember though that they did not have any downers that week.
The now famous cow, he said, was a white Holstein from the Sunny Dene Ranch in Mabton, Wash.
She was "a good walker," he said. As the driver poked her with a cattle prod, her eyes were "all white, bugging out."
"She wouldn't come down that step," he went on, "and I knew she was fixing to double back in and trample the downers, and that's a mess," so he killed her there.
Now if this plant has a policy not to except downers why was a trailer full of downers delivered to them? :shock:The USDA had us taking brain stem samples from downers and back door cripples only. Since we only had a few walkers on this trailer full of downers, we just killed her along with them. We took a brain sample from her head because the USDA gives up $10 per sample.
Oldtimer said:Ben Roberts said:Oldtimer, R-Calf has always had a protectionist attitude toward Canadian beef,remember, long before BSE was an issue,R-Calf attempted to close the border by imposing a tariff of $30.00 per head that lasted 28 days.
You notice that I said Canadian beef,not cattle, R-Calf speaks out of both sides of there mouth, when if you look at the genetics of the cattle that are owned by R-Calf members you will find alot of Canadian genetics that have been proven superior to ours, including your herd.
I believe,that R-Calf is in deeper than they would like to be on the border issue and if not for BSE, that they keep leaning on,it would not be an issue.
Regards
Ben Roberts
Ben- Don't remember any tariff that was imposed--could you show me links to what you are talking about...I do remember an anti dumping action they filed- which they won- but at that time were unable to show the negative economic damage the Canadian cattle/beef did to the US cattle prices...Which now is quite apparent to most cattlemen since the border was closed for a period of time- and we saw record high prices during the closure period....
I also remember they filed complaints against Canada because they used trade barriers to restrict ALL US cattle from going north with their Anaplas/Blue tongue restrictions which the scientists and all US cattle/Ag groups said were unnecessary and overly restrictive.....
And I know they took up the NCBA's dropped banner and call for M-COOL when they saw the fraud being perpetrated against US cattlemen and US consumers by the USDA allowing Packers/Retailers to pass off imported meat as a US product....They also got a law passed changing this which was sidetracked by the USDA/administration- but that I truly believe will be implemented this year....
-------McDonnell then spoke on how R-CALF USA was founded.
"We formed R-CALF USA in 1998 and filed the largest trade case in the history of this country," he said, referring to both the live cattle and anti-dumping case against Canada and Mexico, and a countervailing duty case against Canada.
"Commerce (U.S. Department of Commerce) found that Canada was dumping and placed tariffs on them," continued McDonnell. "We had more U.S. Senators testify at the U.S. Senate hearing on this cattle case than in any other case in this country's history."
He explained that these particular cases revealed a significant level of opposition against the interests of U.S. cattle producers, and because of this opposition, R-CALF USA was transformed into a membership organization.-------
Ben Roberts said:Oldtimer, R-Calf has always had a protectionist attitude toward Canadian beef,remember, long before BSE was an issue,R-Calf attempted to close the border by imposing a tariff of $30.00 per head that lasted 28 days.
You notice that I said Canadian beef,not cattle, R-Calf speaks out of both sides of there mouth, when if you look at the genetics of the cattle that are owned by R-Calf members you will find alot of Canadian genetics that have been proven superior to ours, including your herd.
I believe,that R-Calf is in deeper than they would like to be on the border issue and if not for BSE, that they keep leaning on,it would not be an issue.
Regards
Ben Roberts
Bill said:Ben Roberts said:Oldtimer, R-Calf has always had a protectionist attitude toward Canadian beef,remember, long before BSE was an issue,R-Calf attempted to close the border by imposing a tariff of $30.00 per head that lasted 28 days.
You notice that I said Canadian beef,not cattle, R-Calf speaks out of both sides of there mouth, when if you look at the genetics of the cattle that are owned by R-Calf members you will find alot of Canadian genetics that have been proven superior to ours, including your herd.
I believe,that R-Calf is in deeper than they would like to be on the border issue and if not for BSE, that they keep leaning on,it would not be an issue.
Regards
Ben Roberts
Thanks for the input Ben and your points are correct. It is always refreshing when Americans who actually understand the situation post although it sure does frustrate the R-Klowns and they do their best to chase folks like you away. I am sure you also noticed how quickly they divert the discussion to something else anti-Canadian as Oldtimer did.
Regards
Bill
Sandhusker said:Bill said:Ben Roberts said:Oldtimer, R-Calf has always had a protectionist attitude toward Canadian beef,remember, long before BSE was an issue,R-Calf attempted to close the border by imposing a tariff of $30.00 per head that lasted 28 days.
You notice that I said Canadian beef,not cattle, R-Calf speaks out of both sides of there mouth, when if you look at the genetics of the cattle that are owned by R-Calf members you will find alot of Canadian genetics that have been proven superior to ours, including your herd.
I believe,that R-Calf is in deeper than they would like to be on the border issue and if not for BSE, that they keep leaning on,it would not be an issue.
Regards
Ben Roberts
Thanks for the input Ben and your points are correct. It is always refreshing when Americans who actually understand the situation post although it sure does frustrate the R-Klowns and they do their best to chase folks like you away. I am sure you also noticed how quickly they divert the discussion to something else anti-Canadian as Oldtimer did.
Regards
Bill
You want to bring some proof on that, Bill?
Ben Roberts said:Tam, Ann Veneman made that statement during her news release.
As I stated before,it took almost two weeks for the test results to show the cow was positive. I don't know how much knowledge you have of the meat packing industry Tam, but I used to own one, and unless the animal had a very unusual characteristic you can't remember what you killed two weeks ago. Holstein cows to a person working on the kill-floor are pretty generic (black&white). They unloaded the cow from a goose-neck trailer that backed up to an almost level unloading place,and she walked off. I've never met Dave Louthan, I do know though, he was trying to profit from his stories to the press and his stories started getting pretty sensational. Mr. Louthan worked on the kill-floor but he did not kill the cow.
Tom Ellestad, knew that the cow was not a downer, because they did not kill any downers that week, but he dosen't remember that specific cow other than she was a Holstein and who the owner was.
I don't know any thing about a $10,000 contract. What I do know is that the plant sent in stem samples and were paid $10.00 each as was all other plants that killed cattle over 30 months of age. That was very costly for the USDA so they changed the criteria from animals over 30 months of age too downers only. Then when Ann Veneman passed the law that no downer animals could not be slaughtered, the only stems that are collected from cattle over 30 months, now are from rendering plants,where if another animal test positive it can be reported that the meat never entered the food chain.
Best Regards
Ben Roberts
ocm said:Sandhusker said:Bill said:Thanks for the input Ben and your points are correct. It is always refreshing when Americans who actually understand the situation post although it sure does frustrate the R-Klowns and they do their best to chase folks like you away. I am sure you also noticed how quickly they divert the discussion to something else anti-Canadian as Oldtimer did.
Regards
Bill
You want to bring some proof on that, Bill?
The Klowns are the ones at USDA who wrote rule. If my sources are correct, the USDA screwed up badly in writing the rule. The way the rule is written it allows OTM cattle but not OTM beef. Ha! Where's the science in that. It looks like their proofreading is as bad as their science.
USDA press conference notwithstanding (although there were some comments that would indicate that they knew about the screw up by then).
cowsense said:ocm said:Sandhusker said:You want to bring some proof on that, Bill?
The Klowns are the ones at USDA who wrote rule. If my sources are correct, the USDA screwed up badly in writing the rule. The way the rule is written it allows OTM cattle but not OTM beef. Ha! Where's the science in that. It looks like their proofreading is as bad as their science.
USDA press conference notwithstanding (although there were some comments that would indicate that they knew about the screw up by then).
OCM - Better do your own reading- The rule proposes live cattle born after 99 and meat products from OTM animals. Your bias exceeds your comprehension !
Sandhusker said:Tam, "Look at the What evidence Oldtimer? The "cherry picked" evidence that R-CALF will allow their experts to testify to......"
You don't know a hill of beans about how participants in court cases, ANY court case, strategize testimony, do you?
ocm said:cowsense said:ocm said:The Klowns are the ones at USDA who wrote rule. If my sources are correct, the USDA screwed up badly in writing the rule. The way the rule is written it allows OTM cattle but not OTM beef. Ha! Where's the science in that. It looks like their proofreading is as bad as their science.
USDA press conference notwithstanding (although there were some comments that would indicate that they knew about the screw up by then).
OCM - Better do your own reading- The rule proposes live cattle born after 99 and meat products from OTM animals. Your bias exceeds your comprehension !
Did you read the rule itself? Or are you relying on press releases for the information? As I understand it the press releases say meat too, but the rule itself omits it! Can you be more specific about my error?