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?
The proposal expands upon a rule published by APHIS in January 2005 that allowed the importation of certain live ruminants and ruminant products, including cattle under 30 months of age for delivery to a slaughterhouse or feedlot, from countries recognized as minimal-risk. In the rule announced today, APHIS is proposing to allow the importation of:
Live cattle and other bovines for any use born on or after, March 1, 1999, the date determined by APHIS to be the date of effective enforcement of the ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban in Canada;
Blood and blood products derived from bovines, collected under certain conditions; and
Casings and part of the small intestine derived from bovines.
Meat and meat products from animals of any age, with specified risk materials removed, were addressed in the January 2005 final rule. In March 2005, APHIS published a notice of a delay of applicability of certain provisions of that rule. This delay affected only meat and meat products from animals 30 months of age or older. If the proposed rule announced today is made final, it would be consistent to lift the delay and also allow the importation of these products.
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
He, Ellestad ,was also said to have provided documents showing that his slaughterhouse does not accept downers and the USDA knew it when they offered him the contract.Ellestad said USDA officials repeatedly offered him up to $10,000 a year to participate in the testing program because they weren't meeting their quotes in the Northwest region. He finally signed a contract to provide up to 1,000 brain samples for $10 each.
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).
If my sources are correct,
Bill 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:If my sources are correct,
You really shouldn't rely too much on what Sandhusker and Oldtimer PM to you as we all know they are extremely prone to twisting things and trying to put words in other peoples mouths. :roll:
You really shouldn't rely too much on what Sandhusker and Oldtimer PM to you as we all know they are extremely prone to twisting things and trying to put words in other peoples mouths.
Sandhusker said:You got any proof on that $30 tariff R-CALF wanted yet?
I'd hate to think you would be the type who would accept and spread any anti- R-CALF blither regardless of truthfulness.
Bill said:Sandhusker said:You got any proof on that $30 tariff R-CALF wanted yet?
I'd hate to think you would be the type who would accept and spread any anti- R-CALF blither regardless of truthfulness.
No need to judging by the PMs I have recieved from Americans who have also had more than enough of the R-Klown nonsense you and a handful of others have posted here over the past couple of years. I thought R-Klan had quite a bit of support in the Montana and North and South Dakota but after a couple people explained how your "fundraising" works and how memberships are counted it is easy to see that is not the case. From those comments and others posted at Cattle Today in reponse to Oldtimer's Canadian bashing threads it is easy to see you are in the minority.
An R-Klanner questioning truthfullness? You really crack me up Sandhusker!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: Thanks for the chuckle!
Oldtimer said:You really shouldn't rely too much on what Sandhusker and Oldtimer PM to you as we all know they are extremely prone to twisting things and trying to put words in other peoples mouths.
Bill-- Contrary to the credit you give me---I wasn't the source for ocm's info-- but I had heard the same story and my source was a Canuck-- who was spittin mad at USDA and asking what this would/could do to the whole rule.....So there may be some veracity to the story- but like ocm says we will have to wait and see...I think they plan to publish on Jan 9th...
Bill have you contacted your association for the info-- or are you again going to rely on R-CALF to keep you informed on whats happening in the cattle world.....
Ben Roberts said:Tam, like I said in my orignal post, It would be hard to know the truth about the Washington cow, when the reports were mostly lies. Believe what you wish.
Best Regards
Ben Roberts
Sandhusker said:Bill said:Sandhusker said:You got any proof on that $30 tariff R-CALF wanted yet?
I'd hate to think you would be the type who would accept and spread any anti- R-CALF blither regardless of truthfulness.
No need to judging by the PMs I have recieved from Americans who have also had more than enough of the R-Klown nonsense you and a handful of others have posted here over the past couple of years. I thought R-Klan had quite a bit of support in the Montana and North and South Dakota but after a couple people explained how your "fundraising" works and how memberships are counted it is easy to see that is not the case. From those comments and others posted at Cattle Today in reponse to Oldtimer's Canadian bashing threads it is easy to see you are in the minority.
An R-Klanner questioning truthfullness? You really crack me up Sandhusker!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: Thanks for the chuckle!
"No need to" followed by more unsupported blither. Why am I not surprised? Modus Operandi for the R-CALF bashers. :lol: :lol:
I believe your buddy, SH, would call you "factually void". He also has a one-word discription on your "intent to mislead". You comment on truthfullness? :roll: :lol:
You got anything else for us today? Anything else from Dittmer? Maybe you can post somebody's claim that R-CALF supports Al-Quiada? You sure there isn't a Islamist terrorist training camp on Bullard's back 40? Maybe R-CALF is responsible for global warming? :lol: :lol:
...R-CALF supports Al-Quiada? You sure there isn't a Islamist terrorist training camp on Bullard's back 40? Maybe R-CALF is responsible for global warming?
Sandhusker said:Tam, when the Washington cow was found, our markets closed immediately. Nobody waited to see where the beef went. Nobody waited to learn of our plans for testing/depopulation. Nobody waited to see where the cow was born. Nobody waited for word from the OIE.
Oldtimer said:Tam-- With the small percentage of cattle tested in Canada compared to the number slaughtered in Canada (less than 1%), do you really think that people think they have found all positive animals and that none have gone to slaughter ? Do you think that? How many went to slaughter before #1 was found and the number of tests greatly increased and SRM removal began?
Do you actually believe that no BSE got into the Canadian food chain?......
Oldtimer said:Tam-- With the small percentage of cattle tested in Canada compared to the number slaughtered in Canada (less than 1%), do you really think that people think they have found all positive animals and that none have gone to slaughter ? Do you think that? How many went to slaughter before #1 was found and the number of tests greatly increased and SRM removal began?
Do you actually believe that no BSE got into the Canadian food chain?......
Sandhusker said:Bill, "Gosh I don't know but if you really really think so maybe you could get the girls at the bank to check it out and report back to us when things slow down a bit with your job and all. By the way how is it that you have so much time to post here through the week being the busy man you are?"
Have you ever been in a bank, Bill? Those nifty little things you thought were personal TV sets are computer screens. We use computers all day. It takes all of 5 seconds to check over here to see if you've provided any more gems like the $30 tariff R-CALF supposedly wanted - that you refuse to provide any proof on. Some people take a break in the break room, some go out for a smoke, I check on BS you post but can't back up.