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

THE BOY WHO CRIED WOLF

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
NOW R-calf losers how can you denie that you arent keeping the border closed. LIARS!


today's lesson: the boys who cried beef
I draw your attention to an interesting and insightful editorial decrying the protectionist efforts of Montana cattle producers' organization R-CALF. It was published on Sunday, several days after a federal judge issued a temporary injunction keeping the U.S. border closed to imports of live young Canadan cattle, but obviously written before that ruling and with a view towards the possibility of R-CALF finagling a permanent closure of the border.



R-CALF has actually issued and called on its members to distribute - I'm not making this up - a "Safety Alert Fact Sheet" to consumers, grocery store managers, butchers, public health officials and elected officials across the U.S. They've already sent it to elected officials and health departments. Why? To make sure consumers believe that Canadian beef can give them BSE. R-CALF's belief is that if they can get consumers panicked about Canadian beef, they can generate pressure on USDA to rescind the Canadian Final Rule due to go into effect March 7. Then, when panicked consumers find out Canadian boxed beef has been entering the country for months, they can protect themselves by not eating any beef in the U.S. at all until mandatory COOL [country-of-origin labeling] is implemented, according to R-CALF's wishes.

Emphasis mine. Sounds like a scorched-earth policy, hm?


What it boils down to is this: R-CALF is engaged in a high stakes poker game. The stakes are not just R-CALF's $800,000 a year legal affairs budget. They are gambling your money - if you are at all involved anywhere in the beef chain - that they can scare consumers enough to help them achieve their political goals of cutting off beef imports. To them, risking consumer confidence in beef, indeed, risking the future of the whole industry, is a bet they are willing to make, Texas hold'em style, with all their money - and all yours.

They're not only betting everything, they are trying to fill an inside straight. Because they are gambling that if they destroy consumer confidence, if they create a "mad cow" scare and stop the beef market cold, that it will be temporary and they can re-start it later on whenever they want to do so. Such thinking is not only inconceivably, but unbelievably reckless. It is demonstrative of the naiveté of these people who apparently know so little of consumer habits, beef demand and the struggle of the last 30 years to turn this industry around at the consumer level. They evidently imagine that there are magical control valves somewhere to turn demand and consumer confidence in beef safety off and on.

"Magical control valves" ... ha.


The bottom line is that if R-CALF fails in its quest to block Canadian cattle imports, they have stated unequivocally that U.S. consumers should avoid eating beef purchased at U.S. grocery stores unless they wish to risk getting "mad cow" disease. If the USDA goes ahead with implementing the Final Rule on March 7 ... any consumer ignorant of the facts who reads R-CALF's Safety Alert sheet, with its inaccurate information and ridiculous scare tactics, would avoid beef totally.

If R-CALF's lawsuit is successful and the border reopening is delayed, another genie's bottle is uncorked. Any number of R-CALF's misleading, exaggerated and inaccurate conjectures in its legal filing could be quoted in the court's ruling, giving more credence and broad media coverage to such scare statements in the general media. And just as many people feel courts should not be making laws; legal briefs throwing everything attorneys can think of against the wall is not the proper and accurate way to establish scientific fact.

And if the curiosity of consumers is aroused and they read R-CALF's other ridiculous statements about beef's supposed continual "health risks to U.S. consumers," disaster could result.

Frankly, I cannot believe there are 12,000 R-CALF members out there who approve of such reckless brinkmanship with their livelihood. If they are concerned about this high stakes poker game with their life on the line, we suggest they get control of their leadership and its attorneys. This is not about turf. This is about survival of an industry.

No one I'm aware of in America is doing more to try to wreck the beef industry than R-CALF is right now.
 

southdevon

Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Location
Reed Point, Montana
Manitoba Rancher:

The person that founded R-CALF is a very close friend of mine, I was sitting in his office when he wrote up the plan on a piece of paper, and showed it to my dad, several other people and I. The basic priciples of r-calf are detailed in their website, and the scewed views that all of the press releases, most notably NCBA reports say, are results of politicans pushing their agendas, and flowing through loopholes, the main goal of R-CALF is not to kill the Canadian cattle producer, but give the american cattle producer a voice loud enough to shout over the packers, the same packer that have been railing you for the past 15 years. R-CALF is setting an example for other beef industries, and the screaming is coming from special interest groups, lobbiest's, and packers because they are the ant under the magnifiying glass now, not the producers. Teddy Roosevelt said "Walk softly and carry a big stick." We have had enough of walking softly, and now we are using our stick, and it makes the rich, money-driven packers, lobbiest's, and special interest groups cry like the corrupt, inept, invalids they are.
 

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
the main goal of R-CALF is not to kill the Canadian cattle producer, but give the american cattle producer a voice loud enough to shout over the packers, the same packer that have been railing you for the past 15 years. R-CALF is setting an example for other beef industries, and the screaming is coming from special interest groups, lobbiest's, and packers because they are the ant under the magnifiying glass now, not the producers.




Sure seems to me that they are out to get the Canadian beef ranchers while they have all of this low grade beef coming in from foreign countries to fill the gap. Makes a lot of sense doesnt it! :???:
 

Bull Burger

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
209
Reaction score
0
Location
Fruited Plains of western SD
southdevon said:
Manitoba Rancher:

The person that founded R-CALF is a very close friend of mine, I was sitting in his office when he wrote up the plan on a piece of paper, and showed it to my dad, several other people and I. The basic priciples of r-calf are detailed in their website, and the scewed views that all of the press releases, most notably NCBA reports say, are results of politicans pushing their agendas, and flowing through loopholes, the main goal of R-CALF is not to kill the Canadian cattle producer, but give the american cattle producer a voice loud enough to shout over the packers, the same packer that have been railing you for the past 15 years. R-CALF is setting an example for other beef industries, and the screaming is coming from special interest groups, lobbiest's, and packers because they are the ant under the magnifiying glass now, not the producers. Teddy Roosevelt said "Walk softly and carry a big stick." We have had enough of walking softly, and now we are using our stick, and it makes the rich, money-driven packers, lobbiest's, and special interest groups cry like the corrupt, inept, invalids they are.

south devon, you are another RCALF head-nodder posting what you think are new revelations. You are made of the same ilk as Mike Callicrate, Kathleen Kelley, Johnny Smith, and Dennis Hanson(unless you're contributing to Tom Daschle's campaign, then it's Mark Hanson). You come on to this forum acting like you are writing a news story for some newspaper, then after a few posts, you have the same cry-baby fear-mongering posts as Sandhusker, Oldtimer, and Nebrusker.


southdevon said:
.........and it makes the rich, money-driven packers, lobbiest's, and special interest groups cry like the corrupt, inept, invalids they are..........

Umm.....do you carry your DNC badge on your chest? Are you a money-driven rancher or a money-driven lawyer? Are the packers your enemy? If they are, why do you do business with them?

southdevon said:
..............a voice loud enough to shout over the packers, the same packer that have been railing you for the past 15 years..................

Yeah, yeah, yeah,.........the same packers that have paid you record prices........... the same packers your father and grandfather whined about...but they kept selling cattle to...but you keep the tradition alive.....You need a nanny........like R-CALF.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
South Devon,

Not knowing any better, I used to believe the same packer blaming rhetoric espoused by R-CALF that you are now believing until I did some research.

Let's examine Pickett vs. IBP shall we?

JUST THE FACTS!

FACT #1 - The judges instructions to the jurors was that they (the jurors) had to agree that IBP lacked a legitimate business reason for using "captive supplies".

FACT #2 - 75% of "captive supplies" are forward contract cattle.

FACT #3 - The plaintiffs in Pickett vs. IBP admitted under oath that they had entered into forward contract arrangements with IBP.

FACT #4 - These same plaintiffs testified that IBP had a legitimate business reason for using forward contracts (75% of captive supplies).

FACT #5 - Mike Callicrate lied under oath and the judge gave instructions to the jurors to ignore his testimony because the judge found it to be untrue.

FACT #6 - IBP's profits for the "alleged" period of market manipulation during the Pickett vs. IBP era was $26 per head.

FACT #7 - The damages assessed to IBP were more than their profits for that time period.

FACT #8 - The judge overruled the verdict after reluctantly hearing the plaintiff's weak case to begin with.


Bet R-CULT didn't tell you that did they????


Now you tell me how the hell you can testify to using forward contracts, agree that they are a legitimate business venture, then expect a guilty verdict from a jury that had to agree that IBP "LACKED" a legitimate business reason for using captive supplies?????

NO COMPRENDE'!!!

The PER HEAD PACKER PROFITS, reported by GIPSA, for the 5 major packers through the "90"s was $3.88 per head AND THAT'S WHAT YOU R-CALFERS ARE BITCHING ABOUT!!!!

BSE could bring this industry to it's knees and your worried about the packers getting $3.88 per head to process the cattle you sold them???

If you want to continue to be misled, continue to support R-CULT!


~SH~
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
21,977
Reaction score
76
Location
Big Muddy valley
southdevon said:
Manitoba Rancher:

The person that founded R-CALF is a very close friend of mine, I was sitting in his office when he wrote up the plan on a piece of paper, and showed it to my dad, several other people and I. The basic priciples of r-calf are detailed in their website, and the scewed views that all of the press releases, most notably NCBA reports say, are results of politicans pushing their agendas, and flowing through loopholes, the main goal of R-CALF is not to kill the Canadian cattle producer, but give the american cattle producer a voice loud enough to shout over the packers, the same packer that have been railing you for the past 15 years. R-CALF is setting an example for other beef industries, and the screaming is coming from special interest groups, lobbiest's, and packers because they are the ant under the magnifiying glass now, not the producers. Teddy Roosevelt said "Walk softly and carry a big stick." We have had enough of walking softly, and now we are using our stick, and it makes the rich, money-driven packers, lobbiest's, and special interest groups cry like the corrupt, inept, invalids they are.


South Devon who is the person that founded R-CALF?
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
1. Domestic demand is very high.

2. Cattle prices are very high.

Which beef industry did you mean, yours or the US's?

1. Global Demand is low
2. Cattle prices would be even higher with Global demand

Maybe you didn't hear but the US industry doesn't operate within a vaccuum
 

southdevon

Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Location
Reed Point, Montana
well, if the border was closed at the time that damn downer (CANADIAN) cow was found in washington, we would still be trading with japan, and global demand would still be high. Anyway, the border is closed, we can control the spread of disease in OUR country, and there are still countries that want our beef. Result : American prices are high, Canadian prices are low. I think you hae it backwards.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
well, if the border was closed at the time that damn downer (CANADIAN) cow was found in washington, we would still be trading with japan, and global demand would still be high. Anyway, the border is closed, we can control the spread of disease in OUR country, and there are still countries that want our beef. Result : American prices are high, Canadian prices are low. I think you hae it backwards.

The border was found at the time of the Washington cow for 7 months already. It closed on May 20th, 2003. The Japan border closed because the US had a case of BSE within it's border. The fact that it was a Canadian cow doesn't seem to matter to the Japanese, does it.

Obviously someone wants the Canadian beef too, I think the US is importing quite a bit of it, aren't they.
 

southdevon

Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Location
Reed Point, Montana
I dont want your beef, my neighbor doesn't want your beef, joe at the grecery store doesn't want your beef, the packers do, because they can buy it cheaper than they can buy ours for. As soon as there is a manditory COOL you foot will be planted firmly in your mouth. When that happens you see that consumers want high quality, great tasting, DISEASE FREE american beef.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
When that happens you see that consumers want high quality, great tasting, DISEASE FREE american beef.

Who's buying the beef that comes down in boxes, is it just rotting on the shelf? Maybe you should let the consumers know they are already eating Canadian beef that's mixed in with the American beef, if you feel so strongly about it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Quote: "Could you please elaborate on this? I see a few holes".

1. Domestic demand is very high.

2. Cattle prices are very high.



1. Domestic demand has backed off from it's peak. Retail beef prices got too high so consumers switched to poultry and pork like they usually do.

2. Cattle prices would be higher with normalized trade because we would be marketing the chuck and round better than we can market them domestically. Did you forget about the $117 fat cattle prices we had? Where are they now? $90s!


South Devon: "I dont want your beef, my neighbor doesn't want your beef, joe at the grecery store doesn't want your beef, the packers do, because they can buy it cheaper than they can buy ours for. As soon as there is a manditory COOL you foot will be planted firmly in your mouth. When that happens you see that consumers want high quality, great tasting, DISEASE FREE american beef."

Canada's beef is disease free and R-CULT's lie to the contrary will not hold water. 99% of the opportunity for disease tranmissal is removed with the SRMs. Your dog won't hunt!

If we had "M"COOL, Canada would take R-CULT's trade barrier club and beat them over the head with it because "MAPLE LEAF BEEF" would be a novelty item. Same way New Zealand beef outsold U.S. beef in certain stores.

This attitude that U.S. beef is better than Canadian is based on pure arrogance and ignorance.



~SH~
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hat,

This is about truth vs. lies. This is not about Canada vs. the U.S.

My only motive is the truth and you will not contradict anything that I present because I have done the research.

I don't have any time for R-CULT because they lie.

Their biggest lie is in regards to the safety of Canadian beef.

Can't you understand the consequences of lying about the safety of Canadian cattle and beef when we have assumed the exact same precautionary measures they have????

Either these measures assure beef safety for everyone or they don't.

I know you have been spoon fed this LMA/R-CULT bullsh*t for so long that you believe it but there is no truth in R-CULT's lies about the safety of Canadian cattle and beef.

It's indefensible. What a sad day that so many fail to understand the consequences for those lies.



~SH~
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
southdevon said:
well, if the border was closed at the time that damn downer (CANADIAN) cow was found in washington, we would still be trading with japan, and global demand would still be high. Anyway, the border is closed, we can control the spread of disease in OUR country, and there are still countries that want our beef. Result : American prices are high, Canadian prices are low. I think you hae it backwards.

First, of all southdevon the Washington cow wasn't a downer go back and look at the later USDA press releases again. Second, she was imported years before BSE was found in Canada, along with millions of other cattle, so the closed border had nothing to do with her. Third if all that mattered was that she was Canadian then why are your exports still closed. You say countries still want your beef, again why are your exports still closed she was proven to be Canadian wasn't she? American prices are high because you have a shortage of cattle and there is an increase in Demand because of the Atkins diet. The shortage has also packing plants to close which has cut the competition on the cattle you do have. The Demand for beef may have peaked as the prices have gotten to high and the consumers are switching to other proteins like Chicken and pork. Canadian prices are low because we have a lack of slaughter capacity but that is changeing now as one of the closed US plants is being dismanteled and moved to Canada isn't it? Canada is also working on export markets other than the US and are having some success.

As soon as there is a manditory COOL you foot will be planted firmly in your mouth. When that happens you see that consumers want high quality, great tasting, DISEASE FREE american beef.

When you get MCOOL how will you prove the label. You have no way of guaranteeing where the cattle in the US are actually from do you? Remember the millions of cattle imported to the US over the years. Also don't forget you have no national ID system working yet.

What happens if you get MCOOL and the US finds a case of BSE, then will the consumers eat your beef or Aussie beef as they haven't found BSE there?

According to Sandhusker a person can't say that Canadian beef is safe if they don't know everything there is to know about BSE. According to R-CALF there are way to many unknowns about BSE to trust Canadian beef. So wouldn't that be the same about the US beef. In light of the fact that BSE was found within your borders and in your food chain you can't deny it exsists in the US altogether. Do we know enough to say that if one BSE cow was imported no others were? Do we know enough that would guarantee that those cows couldn't have caused a US born problem? Do we know enough to say that the cattle and feed imported from the UK did not cause a problem in the US even though it did in most of the other countries that also imported from the UK? You have a very weak case on which you are claiming your beef is "high quality, great tasting, DISEASE FREE american beef" And I hope you will not be chewing on your foot when this is all said and done.
 

frasercattleco

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern Montana
Here's some fuel for the fire:

Number 1. I am an R-CALF member, not radical.

Number 2. I am a rancher in Southern Montana

Number 3. Why has Canada closed its borders to US imports?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
frasercattleco said:
Number 3. Why has Canada closed its borders to US imports?

I would like you to clarify this question. to what extent do you think we closed the border? As Canada has never had a full ban on the US like the US has had on Canada.
 

John in Ontario

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
In repy to the question about Canada not allowing U.S. beef in,
1 We are allowing any product that can go south to go north.
2 Canadian Cattle have been much cheaper than U.S. cattle, and there are more cattle than the Canadian market requires so there is little econmic reason to import.
3 With the many trade disputes we have with the U.S. we shouldn't be importing anything from the U.S. or allowing you to have our energy, or ship our energy from alaska down to the U.S. If you want to be treated well, you only get what you give.
 

Latest posts

Top