Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
The 11 member panel ruled agaisnt R-CALF.
Is that good enough for the Hangin' Judge from Glasgow?
Is that good enough for the Hangin' Judge from Glasgow?
The Courts have decided.
- Thread starter Big Muddy rancher
- Start date
SASH
Well-known member
U.S. court upholds decision allowing live Canadian cattle across border
EDMONTON, Oct 14, 2005 (The Canadian Press via COMTEX) -- A U.S. court has denied an appeal from protectionist American ranchers that could have reclosed the border to all live exports of Canadian cattle.
Late Thursday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle, Wash., ruled that it would not review a July 14 ruling overturning a two-year ban on young cattle imports due to mad cow disease. The farm lobby group R-CALF, backed by six U.S. states, had asked for the review.
"That certainly closes the loop," said John Masswohl of the Canadian Cattleman's Association.
"We've felt all along that that was a very long shot of R-CALF having that case reheard. It's good to have that nailed down."
Although the ruling has no effect on the status quo for Canadian ranchers, Masswohl said it's one less thing to worry about.
"It certainly is welcome news in that it's one less thing we have to keep our eye on."
Since trade in live cattle resumed July 18, Canadian producers have shipped more than 164,000 animals under 30 months of age to the United States.
Last March, district court Judge Richard Cebull in Montana ruled that U.S. Agriculture Department import regulations did not adequately protect consumers and cattle herds from bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE.
He issued a temporary injunction that stopped the U.S. government's plan to reopen the border. But a three-judge Circuit Court panel overturned that ruling July 14.
The panel said Cebull should have respected the Agriculture Department's expertise about the safety risks of Canadian beef.
R-CALF asked for a review of the July 14 decision, which was rejected this week by the circuit court. R-CALF officials had no immediate comment.
But Thursday's decision returns the issue to Judge Cebull, who has held off making a decision on a permanent injunction until a ruling on the appeal came down.
"We don't know what Judge Cebull is going to do if anything," Masswohl said from Ottawa. "We will continue to wait and hope that that avenue will play out as well."
Darcy Davis of the Alberta Beef Producers said a permanent injunction would probably also be struck down.
Canadian producers are being ultra-cautious in following regulations in the U.S. to avoid giving Cebull a reason to grant one, Davis added.
"We're doing our best to ensure everything's done 110 per cent so that R-CALF doesn't have anything to run to Cebull with."
The Canadian government and industry continue to lobby Washington for trade to resume in older cattle and breeding stock.
That continued ban has cost Canada's beef and dairy breeding industry more than $500 million in lost sales and hurt the industry's ability to improve the genetics of beef herds.
However, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and other groups are warning producers not to expect the border to fully reopen until some time in 2007 - four years after mad cow disease was discovered in an Alberta cow.
It's estimated Canadian beef producers have suffered $7 billion in losses since that cow was found in 2003.
EDMONTON, Oct 14, 2005 (The Canadian Press via COMTEX) -- A U.S. court has denied an appeal from protectionist American ranchers that could have reclosed the border to all live exports of Canadian cattle.
Late Thursday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle, Wash., ruled that it would not review a July 14 ruling overturning a two-year ban on young cattle imports due to mad cow disease. The farm lobby group R-CALF, backed by six U.S. states, had asked for the review.
"That certainly closes the loop," said John Masswohl of the Canadian Cattleman's Association.
"We've felt all along that that was a very long shot of R-CALF having that case reheard. It's good to have that nailed down."
Although the ruling has no effect on the status quo for Canadian ranchers, Masswohl said it's one less thing to worry about.
"It certainly is welcome news in that it's one less thing we have to keep our eye on."
Since trade in live cattle resumed July 18, Canadian producers have shipped more than 164,000 animals under 30 months of age to the United States.
Last March, district court Judge Richard Cebull in Montana ruled that U.S. Agriculture Department import regulations did not adequately protect consumers and cattle herds from bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE.
He issued a temporary injunction that stopped the U.S. government's plan to reopen the border. But a three-judge Circuit Court panel overturned that ruling July 14.
The panel said Cebull should have respected the Agriculture Department's expertise about the safety risks of Canadian beef.
R-CALF asked for a review of the July 14 decision, which was rejected this week by the circuit court. R-CALF officials had no immediate comment.
But Thursday's decision returns the issue to Judge Cebull, who has held off making a decision on a permanent injunction until a ruling on the appeal came down.
"We don't know what Judge Cebull is going to do if anything," Masswohl said from Ottawa. "We will continue to wait and hope that that avenue will play out as well."
Darcy Davis of the Alberta Beef Producers said a permanent injunction would probably also be struck down.
Canadian producers are being ultra-cautious in following regulations in the U.S. to avoid giving Cebull a reason to grant one, Davis added.
"We're doing our best to ensure everything's done 110 per cent so that R-CALF doesn't have anything to run to Cebull with."
The Canadian government and industry continue to lobby Washington for trade to resume in older cattle and breeding stock.
That continued ban has cost Canada's beef and dairy breeding industry more than $500 million in lost sales and hurt the industry's ability to improve the genetics of beef herds.
However, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and other groups are warning producers not to expect the border to fully reopen until some time in 2007 - four years after mad cow disease was discovered in an Alberta cow.
It's estimated Canadian beef producers have suffered $7 billion in losses since that cow was found in 2003.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Big Muddy rancher said:
Actually the 9th Circuits actions and failure to act leave a lot of questions unanswered and open for further court action...Their ruling only said that USDA has the discretionary power to make the rules change decision- did nothing to examine the questionable science and procedures which came to that decision, which will leave them all open to reexamination on any further rule changes.....
It would have been better to go to trial, see the evidence available, and get a ruling on all allegations once and for all......
Is Cebull ready to hear the scientific evidence he didn't listen to the first time. I think he would open himself up to being critizied for "photocopying" RCALF's notes the first time it came to him!
My bet is he will let it die a slow death, and not challenge the science
My bet is he will let it die a slow death, and not challenge the science
A
Anonymous
Guest
Murgen said:
Murgen-"photocopying notes" as you call it is very common in court decisions...Most Judges do not spend time writing their own decisions and opinions- they have both sides submit proposed rulings or findings- and then after going over the briefs/and or evidence and making their decision they use these proposed findings or parts of these proposals to "write" their ruling....
Another Black Helicopter you don't have to worry about circling your house anymore.... :wink: :lol: :lol:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Case Will Go Forward,
Despite 9th Circuit's Decision to Deny Rehearing Request
(Billings, Mont.) – The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday issued an order denying R-CALF USA's petition for a rehearing in the organization's efforts to force the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to withdraw its BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) Minimal-Risk Regions rule (Final Rule), which re-established trade with Canada for live cattle under 30 months of age and additional beef products. USDA's Final Rule weakened the health and safety regulations regarding the importation of certain ruminants, ruminant products and byproducts that pose a risk of introducing additional cases of BSE into the United States.
The following statement should be attributed to R-CALF USA President and Co-Founder Leo McDonnell:
"Obviously, we are disappointed in the 9th Circuit's decision. However, this is merely a decision regarding a preliminary injunction that maintained the ban on Canadian imports while our challenge to the Final Rule is pending, and that challenge is still before the District Court (U.S. District Court for the District of Montana).
"We remain confident that USDA's Final Rule is premature. We will now ask the District Court to schedule a hearing in our case, at which time the court will have a full opportunity to consider all of the facts that demonstrate why USDA's actions concerning Canadian imports are ill-conceived.
"Hopefully, we will prevail in our efforts to protect the U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle."
Despite 9th Circuit's Decision to Deny Rehearing Request
(Billings, Mont.) – The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday issued an order denying R-CALF USA's petition for a rehearing in the organization's efforts to force the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to withdraw its BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) Minimal-Risk Regions rule (Final Rule), which re-established trade with Canada for live cattle under 30 months of age and additional beef products. USDA's Final Rule weakened the health and safety regulations regarding the importation of certain ruminants, ruminant products and byproducts that pose a risk of introducing additional cases of BSE into the United States.
The following statement should be attributed to R-CALF USA President and Co-Founder Leo McDonnell:
"Obviously, we are disappointed in the 9th Circuit's decision. However, this is merely a decision regarding a preliminary injunction that maintained the ban on Canadian imports while our challenge to the Final Rule is pending, and that challenge is still before the District Court (U.S. District Court for the District of Montana).
"We remain confident that USDA's Final Rule is premature. We will now ask the District Court to schedule a hearing in our case, at which time the court will have a full opportunity to consider all of the facts that demonstrate why USDA's actions concerning Canadian imports are ill-conceived.
"Hopefully, we will prevail in our efforts to protect the U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle."
Just what do you think proving our beef is unsafe for US consumers is going to do to the confidence in US beef now that you HAVE BSE IN YOUR NATIVE HERD? :shock: When is R-CALF and their leadership going to realize that you can't go after ours without painting yours with the same damaging brush? :? YOU HAVE BSE it is not just in imported cattle it is in US cattle and if you can't protect the US herd and consumers from Canadian cattle what is protecting them from US BORN AND BRED BSE? :roll: It is time for the cattlemen in the US to stop this bunch of renegade ranchers before there is nothing left but a painful memory. :x
A
Anonymous
Guest
Tam- What you whining about? We're seeing record calf and yearling prices--Big Muddy says prices are great in Canada and Canadians are happy as pigs in sh**......Looks like life is good...
RobertMac
Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Miss Tam has a case of SH-ism...if you can say anything good, then say something bad about R-CALF. :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Tam, the risks of both countries are not the same. When was your first positive, something like 1988? You had that animal, the ones discovered recently that were born before the feed ban, and one born after the feed ban. You are showing two generations and possibly a third of BSE infection. You have also had 4 times as many positives in a herd 1/7th the size of ours. We had 1 case from a cow born years before the ban. We're not in the same boat.
Leo says and you highlighted, "...from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle." RISKS, Tam. There IS a risk with Canadian cattle. There is a risk with US cattle. However, they are obviously not equal risks. The risk lies in the unknown and there are more question marks North of the 49th.
Proponents of an open border still ignore the fact that the USDA told Congress that immediate border closures of BSE positive countries was our first line of defense and followed that policy without any problems for the first 22 countries that came up with BSE. Why was this health policy suddenly abandoned with country #23? Why? That's the single largest gripe I have with this deal.
Leo says and you highlighted, "...from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle." RISKS, Tam. There IS a risk with Canadian cattle. There is a risk with US cattle. However, they are obviously not equal risks. The risk lies in the unknown and there are more question marks North of the 49th.
Proponents of an open border still ignore the fact that the USDA told Congress that immediate border closures of BSE positive countries was our first line of defense and followed that policy without any problems for the first 22 countries that came up with BSE. Why was this health policy suddenly abandoned with country #23? Why? That's the single largest gripe I have with this deal.
Oldtimer said:
Oldtimer if the shoe was on the other foot and you were the one being threaten with even more court action that could possibably destroy those good prices wouldn't you be sick of it too? :roll: Sorry of course you wouldn't, :roll: as that is exactly what R-CALF's court action is going to do to the US too.
Just what do you think your cattle prices will be like if R-CALF prevails in proving our beef and yours is a genuine risk of death to US consumers? :shock: And that your firewalls are inadequate to protect anyone from imported BSE? What is protecting them from US BSE? How much do you think will be eaten domestically and what foreign country will be taking it if the courts decide all beef coming from a country affected by BSE is tainted? After Cebull's last little show are you sure you want your livelyhood in his hands? Remember he is the one that said "Canadian beef represented a genuine risk of death" and that same risk is now associated with US Beef now that BSE HAS BEEN FOUND IN THE US HERD. :xSandhusker can you tell all of us how many cases Canada had when R-CALF started their fight with this statement "All beef coming from a country affected by BSE is tainted and unsafe for human consumption? Was it after Canada had their first Native case? So why does it all of a sudden matter that we have had 4 cases and you have had only one? If Canada was affect by one case and all our beef was tainted why isn't the US beef all tainted because of one case?
According to R-CALF any country affected by one case of BSE is a risk to great to take a chance on. Is Japan to take a risk by importing yours? What happen to the All beef coming from a country affect by BSE is tainted and unsafe from human consumption? Shouldn't R-CALF be telling the US consumer that US beef is tainted and unsafe for them to consume that is what they said about Canadian beef after ONE CASE. But No Leo said he plans on telling them "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". Gee that may have just worked if R-CALF was in court proving your firewalls have loopholes that could spread BSE if a case was imported and what a risk to health imported beef is. What is protecting the US herd and consumer health from a spread of BSE already in the US?
I doubt this very much.
What is your true feed ban compliance rate?
What were the unauthorized animal protiens that were found in the US feed samples found by the CFIA that R-CALF used to claim our feed bans have chronic problems?
When will the USDA and FDA really close up the loopholes the prevent the spread of BSE in the US that Canada closed in 1998?
What cattle is the USDA really testing?
Just how many cattle showing symtoms were slipped by the testing that we don't know about?
Why do we see USDA vets coming forward now that BSE has been found in the US talking about the past testing system?
What is the true prevalence of BSE in the US Cattle herd?
Are the US ranchers still practicing the 3S policy?
If the US was testing the high risk cattle why did the USDA have a contract with the Washington plant for 1000's of test sample when they had a policy not to process downers?
If the US according to R-CALF is not processing downers, why was the Texas cow found dead on arrival at a slaughter plant?
If the other four on the truck were condemned too, were they also tested?
According to R-CALF Canada has a huge problem with BSE if so why isn't the US testing system finding more BSE positives in the millions of cattle that have been imported over the years from Canada?
If the US testing system is not finding the Canadian BSE positives R-CALF claims should be there just how many US BSE postives have they missed in a herd 7 times the size?
If BSE is spread by feeding ruminant to ruminant and Canada has a huge problem with BSE and we have chronic problems with our feed bans according to R-CALF, why have no US cattle shown up with BSE after we exported millions of tons of feeds to the US over the years?
If the firewalls in the US can't prevent the spread of BSE in the US from imported cattle what is stopping the spread of BSE already in the US?
If the Canadian cattle that have been found BSE postive were 7 to 8 years old why was the US cow 12 years old?
Could this mean the US had BSE years before Canada did and they never found it ?
Did the US ever find all the cattle involved with their cases of BSE?
When will the US cattle industry have a system in place that can trace all US cattle back to birthplace? And will that system beable to age vertify by birthdate?
These are just a few of the question I have and I'm sure I have missed a quite a few that other have.
WHY Could it possibably be because the USDA knew it was only a matter of time and the US would find BSE in their own herd and if they stood on the closed border rule the rest of the beef consuming nations that you once exported to would be holding you to the same standards????? I find it funny that US ranchers want to use the new science to force Japan and other into taking your beef but you think that same science is flawed when it comes to imports. Again if the beef from our UTM cattle in not safe to be consumered by US beef eaters if it is processed in the US then why is US beef safe, we both have BSE? And don't say it is because we have more cases as R-CALF started their fight after we had ONE CASE.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Tam- Why your huge worry about the US cattle and beef industries? You live in Canada now-Go sell your Canadian beef to all these nations that you always say want it...Or could it be-no one else but the US will buy it? :???: That you need the US producers shirtails to ride on to sell Canadian cattle and beef :???: - that no one even knows Canada raises beef because its always been passed off as US product :???: ....How much is Canada shipping to Japan? or the E.U?
How much is our (US) premature importing of Canadian beef negatively affecting our ability to open other markets for us?
You and I both know that the only reason the Big Business controlled USDA changed the BSE rule for Canada when it wouldn't for the 22 other countries was so that these Big Business's could obtain access to their Canadian captive supply which they could again use to manipulate and hold down prices....This was a money decision and had nothing to do with sound science....Even our Ag Secretary said we needed to open the border because the prices of beef was getting too high!!!!
How much is our (US) premature importing of Canadian beef negatively affecting our ability to open other markets for us?
You and I both know that the only reason the Big Business controlled USDA changed the BSE rule for Canada when it wouldn't for the 22 other countries was so that these Big Business's could obtain access to their Canadian captive supply which they could again use to manipulate and hold down prices....This was a money decision and had nothing to do with sound science....Even our Ag Secretary said we needed to open the border because the prices of beef was getting too high!!!!
How dumb are you it has been said many times that the Japanese will be openning their imports to both the US and Canada at the same time. And the longer they question anything going on in North America, the longer it will take to open the Asian markets to either of us. The past hundred years of openly trading cattle and feed have tied us to you in the eyes of the rest of the world and as long as we are tied to you, we will be seen as one. What you do effects how people will treat us. So fight to clean up your system and stop using lies to destroy us, as they are working against the goal of openning border to North American Beef. :shock: :xOldtimer said:
You know Oldtimer you said you would like to see what the courts had to say about the issue. Well R-CALF may have won with Cebull, but that ruling was ripped to shreddes by the Court of Appeals. When R-CALF asked for a rehearing over 40 other judges looked at it and said NO to the rehearing but that isn't good enough for you. Just how many judges will have to disagree will Cebull and R-CALF before you will take this as just another waste of time and money started by R-CALF to further their agenda to stop free trade?
As for negative affects should we take a guess at what negative affect taking the USDA to court and trying to prove that your firewalls that were implimented to protect the US from BSE are not strong enough to protect from BSE if it is imported, now that BSE HAS BEEN FOUND in the US herd? And what negative affect having a Federal Court Judge make the statement "Canadian beef represents a GENUINE RISK OF DEATH" only to have BSE FOUND IN THE US HERD? R-CALF has negatively affected the US Beef industry with their lies to a point that is far worse than BSE itself would have ever affected it. Why would any country take your beef when you have a beef organization stopping trade with us. According to the beef consuming public we are in the same risk catagory, so to them if Canadian beef represents a genuine risk of death so does the US beef. :roll:
You keep talking about shirt tails Oldtimer answer me this where will the beef come from if you get your High Priced export market to Japan back???? You can't produce enough for your own domestic need let alone an export market so who is really living off of who here Oldtimer? You need our beef and you know it. I ask you what do you think would happen to the demand for beef in the US if you only had the US beef supplies to rely on? Would people still buy your beef at twice the price or would they switch to a less expensive source of protein?
I don't believe this, Didn't you just say in a post to me We're seeing record calf and yearling prices--Big Muddy says prices are great in Canada and Canadians are happy as pigs in sh**..... Looks like life is good... Now you are saying "Big Business's could obtain access to their Canadian captive supply which they could again use to manipulate and hold down prices.." Tell us how are the packers manipulating prices now that the border is open if you are recieving record calf and yearling prices and prices in Canada are going up? If you have something but your opinion on this issue to back up your later claims I would like to see them as these two statements from you contradict each other. :wink:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Tam said:
Kato
Well-known member
If I may add something to this, the reason most up here feel the prices are good for calves this fall is exactly because of this "I will never give up trying to find a court that will shut the border" attitude of R-Calf.
At the moment, cattle are moving out of here as fast as they can. It's American buyers doing it, and they are pushing the market in order to get as many calves across the border before some other nonsense comes up to close it again. The only thing slowing it down is the trucks. Hey! Wasn't this exact scenario supposed to kill your good prices? :? Looks like that theory was wrong too.
Canadians can't begin to outbid these guys, and the smarter ones aren't even trying. We have bought feeders every fall for the past 25 years, but not this year. We have backgrounded our own calves to short keep size, or finished them, but not this year. We have kept lots of replacement heifers every year to improve the herd, but not this year.
Why on earth would anyone keep a heifer calf worth 700 dollars, when you can buy a bred cow for 650??? Guys are getting out of the cow business fast and furious, and it's a buyers market for bred cows. All at the same time that it's a seller's market for calves.
That said, prices here are going to have to go up a lot higher for a long time so we can dig out of the big deep holes we are sitting in right now. We've lost about 5 years of progress in the past 2 years, and it's going to take time to get it back.
At the moment, cattle are moving out of here as fast as they can. It's American buyers doing it, and they are pushing the market in order to get as many calves across the border before some other nonsense comes up to close it again. The only thing slowing it down is the trucks. Hey! Wasn't this exact scenario supposed to kill your good prices? :? Looks like that theory was wrong too.
Canadians can't begin to outbid these guys, and the smarter ones aren't even trying. We have bought feeders every fall for the past 25 years, but not this year. We have backgrounded our own calves to short keep size, or finished them, but not this year. We have kept lots of replacement heifers every year to improve the herd, but not this year.
Why on earth would anyone keep a heifer calf worth 700 dollars, when you can buy a bred cow for 650??? Guys are getting out of the cow business fast and furious, and it's a buyers market for bred cows. All at the same time that it's a seller's market for calves.
That said, prices here are going to have to go up a lot higher for a long time so we can dig out of the big deep holes we are sitting in right now. We've lost about 5 years of progress in the past 2 years, and it's going to take time to get it back.
Manitoba_Rancher
Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Tam:
I think you should go out and find yourself a stone to tell this too, because OT is brainwashed with R-calfs lies and he will never admit the truth! :roll:
:lol:"not a one", but RCALF said if I give them money they will make sure Canadian cattle never cross the border ever again. They also told me if I give them the money for the court case, that prices will be higher than ever for my calves.
"I can't member calves being higher priced, thanks for closing the border RCALF!"
"I can't member calves being higher priced, thanks for closing the border RCALF!"
I guess you are right MR even 47 judges can't convince the old lawman he's on the loosing team. :wink:Manitoba_Rancher said:
I have a question for Oldtimer if the court of Appeal was to decide on this action wouldn't they be looking at the same evidence Cebull had to make the ruling that was being appealed. How did Cebull come to the conclusion he got hammered for if there wasn't any science brought into evidence to get the primary injunction. I doubt they would hammer Cebull on every point the way they did if they only looked at half the evidence. I also doubt the rest of the 47 judges would have agreed with their ruling without looking at all the evidence. :roll: One more thing I doubt is that the Court of Appeal judges would have included that they think the Final Rule will hold up if they didn't at least look at some of the science.
And I hear the big hold up with the Japanese deal is the fact you have no way of age verifing your beef and that is the one thing Canada has in its favor. I also hear that the Japanese consumer don't trust the US beef because of a certain court action that is trying to prove that all beef coming from a country affect by BSE is a genuine risk of death. But you go right on believing what your Heros at R-CALF tell you Oldtimer. Give more money, donate more calves, as it takes alot of money to keep those R-CALF lawyers in the lifestyle they have come accustom to . :wink: