The real reason's canadian cattle have'nt flooded the market

[HAY MAKER]

I thought I asked you to provide a lil info,that B Bullard or Leo stated that "UTM" cattle would flood the "usa" market when the border opened,to live cattle,not a general quote by Lee................good luck

Haymaker you are so pathetic, You post Lee's rambling on here and think we should all read them but when I bring one of his writing to prove R-CALF has claimed a Canadian flood of cattle will happen if the border opens you claim it just a general quote.

Well Quote this ,

From R-CALF USA Position paper on the USDA final rule.

The United States can not merely implement rules with regards to opening cattle and beef trade with Canada, it also must act to harmonize BSE prevention standards globally. Without such action the US cattle industry might well be swamped under a flood of Canadian beef and Cattle if the USDA's border rule is implimented before foreign markets reopen to US produces.

But foreign markets didn't open did they Haymaker?

And can you deny that R-CALF used the affect importing a flood of 2 million Canadian cattle in 2005 will have on the enviroment in the US, in their law suit? after the USDA and the NCBA told them the numbers of Canadian cattle were over estimated because our slaughter capacity was not takin in to consideration.

Now if these comments were in the documents who do you think told the lawyers to use them? come on Haymaker deny it was Leo and Bill.

Deny Deny Deny Haymaker R-CALF said there would be a flood, you agreed until it didn't happen, now you say everyone knew it was malarkey. So admit it R-CALF put the flood idea out there to scare producer into supporting the border being closed. If you have any integrity at all you will admit it and stop the dancing.

I am gonna have to cut this off Miss Tam,since you started with the insults,as you may go beserk again and feeder will have to call 911 again.....................good luck PS just stick with the facts you said bullard & leo said the "us" market was gonna be flooded with "UTM" cattle.

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, what do the words "might well" mean?

 

[Anonymous]

First, according to sources on both sides of the border, the trucking infrastructure that existed before the border was closed has disappeared.

Second, it's not as if Canadian cattle can move freely across the border. There's a host of new regulations in play that increase the time and effort required to send cattle to the U.S.

As an example, each import animal must be identified individually with an official Canadian ear tag, arrive at the port of entry as a sealed shipment with the requisite health certification papers. The seal can only be broken at the final destination, and then only by USDA personnel, certified veterinarians or designees.

Keep in mind, the border has been opened only to non-breeding cattle younger than 30 months of age, and only to single destinations. Fed cattle coming across must go straight to the slaughter facility. Feeder cattle must move directly to a feedlot, which in turn can be the only feedlot of residence prior to harvest.

There's also a slug of special import forms and protocols that must be followed.

Simply put, the market has changed and the dollars aint there,with the cost of diesel,trucks hard to find and added red tape which adds to costs,add the strenghting canadian dollar and its easy to see why canadian cattle are staying home...................good luck

Hayseed,

Who wrote this?

You sure as hell didn't!


Looks to me like someone is doing damage control for R-CULT's ignorance on the impact of Canadian imports. I guarantee you if the market had fallen due to increased domestic supplys and reduced demand, the R-CULT clones would be blaming Canadian imports or captive supply, or some other blamer's excuse.



~SH~

 

[HAY MAKER]

First, according to sources on both sides of the border, the trucking infrastructure that existed before the border was closed has disappeared.

Second, it's not as if Canadian cattle can move freely across the border. There's a host of new regulations in play that increase the time and effort required to send cattle to the U.S.

As an example, each import animal must be identified individually with an official Canadian ear tag, arrive at the port of entry as a sealed shipment with the requisite health certification papers. The seal can only be broken at the final destination, and then only by USDA personnel, certified veterinarians or designees.

Keep in mind, the border has been opened only to non-breeding cattle younger than 30 months of age, and only to single destinations. Fed cattle coming across must go straight to the slaughter facility. Feeder cattle must move directly to a feedlot, which in turn can be the only feedlot of residence prior to harvest.

There's also a slug of special import forms and protocols that must be followed.

Simply put, the market has changed and the dollars aint there,with the cost of diesel,trucks hard to find and added red tape which adds to costs,add the strenghting canadian dollar and its easy to see why canadian cattle are staying home...................good luck

Hayseed,

Who wrote this?

You sure as hell didn't!


Looks to me like someone is doing damage control for R-CULT's ignorance on the impact of Canadian imports.

I guarantee you if the market had fallen due to increased domestic supplys and reduced demand, the R-CULT clones would be blaming Canadian imports or captive supply, or some other blamer's excuse.

~SH~

You mean just like you are because it has'nt, sh** you are an embarassment to the cattle man,and its easy to see why you are so anti producer,a person like you can't do buisness with cattle men or trade at local sales barns,nobody will do buisness with you except your own kind,packers................good luck

 

[Anonymous]

Who wrote it Hayseed?

You didn't write it so who wrote it?


~SH~

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Tam, what do the words "might well" mean?

NITPICKER :cowboy:

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, what do the words "might well" mean?

Nitpicker? Come on, BMR. There is a huge difference between Tam's interpretation and what the man actually said.

 

[Tam]

There is a huge difference between Tam's interpretation and what the man actually said.

Gee Sandhusker you say my interpretation was a huge difference what about this one

QUOTE from R-CALF document filed to get injunction. Page 32 number 63

Even by USDA estimations, the final rule will result in a flood of 2 million head of cattle from Canada into the U.S. in 2005. APHIS aparenttly made no attempt to assess the enviromental effects of transporting 2 million head of cattle from farms in Canada to feedlots and slaughterhouses in the United States.

From the USDA press release about Canadian imports.

We are estimating that in 2005 -- that is, the 12 months following the resumption of trade -- that we'll import an estimated 2 million head of cattle from Canada.
"Now 2 million compared with zero sounds like a lot, but you have to remember we're moving back toward normalcy in trade with this rule. And in the five years prior to 2003 our average imports from Canada were 1.25 million head a year.

"So we would think even under normal circumstances, had there been no disruption of trade with Canada in 2005 we might import about 950,000 head typically.

"And so we're saying that because of the disruption in trade and a build-up of inventories in Canada that we'll probably import something in the order of 2 million head in the 12 months following resumption of trade.

Now R-CALF took the USDA's estimating and We'll probably import something in the order of 2 million head in 12 months (which means July 2005 to July 2006) and interpretated it into the final rule will result in a flood of 2 million head of cattle from Canada into the U.S. in 2005. Even after the USDA clarified the estimation to be high as they hadn't taken the increase in the Canadian slaughter capacity into consideration.


That is what I call a HUGE DIFFERENCE Sandhusker. :shock: :lol2: :lol2:

 

[Tam]

I thought I asked you to provide a lil info,that B Bullard or Leo stated that "UTM" cattle would flood the "usa" market when the border opened,to live cattle,not a general quote by Lee................good luck

Haymaker you are so pathetic, You post Lee's rambling on here and think we should all read them but when I bring one of his writing to prove R-CALF has claimed a Canadian flood of cattle will happen if the border opens you claim it just a general quote.

Well Quote this ,

From R-CALF USA Position paper on the USDA final rule.

The United States can not merely implement rules with regards to opening cattle and beef trade with Canada, it also must act to harmonize BSE prevention standards globally. Without such action the US cattle industry might well be swamped under a flood of Canadian beef and Cattle if the USDA's border rule is implimented before foreign markets reopen to US produces.

But foreign markets didn't open did they Haymaker?

And can you deny that R-CALF used the affect importing a flood of 2 million Canadian cattle in 2005 will have on the enviroment in the US, in their law suit? after the USDA and the NCBA told them the numbers of Canadian cattle were over estimated because our slaughter capacity was not takin in to consideration.

Now if these comments were in the documents who do you think told the lawyers to use them? come on Haymaker deny it was Leo and Bill.

Deny Deny Deny Haymaker R-CALF said there would be a flood, you agreed until it didn't happen, now you say everyone knew it was malarkey. So admit it R-CALF put the flood idea out there to scare producer into supporting the border being closed. If you have any integrity at all you will admit it and stop the dancing.

I am gonna have to cut this off Miss Tam,since you started with the insults,as you may go beserk again and feeder will have to call 911 again.....................good luck PS just stick with the facts you said bullard & leo said the "us" market was gonna be flooded with "UTM" cattle.

Yes :nod: by all means cut it off my sides can't take any more laughing at you. :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: and let us stick to the facts there is nothing that comes out of R-CALF that isn't run through Leo and Bills mouth first. They are the puppet masters. :roll:

 

[Sandhusker]

Here's the differences that I'm talking about, Tam;

Bullard's comment, "Quote:
The United States can not merely implement rules with regards to opening cattle and beef trade with Canada, it also must act to harmonize BSE prevention standards globally. Without such action the US cattle industry might well be swamped under a flood of Canadian beef and Cattle if the USDA's border rule is implimented before foreign markets reopen to US produces.

Your interpretation, " R-CALF said there would be a flood.

Big difference between "might well be" and "would be." One means "strong chance" and one means "for sure".

I think it's important that if you call a man out, you use his exact words.

 

[Tam]

Here's the differences that I'm talking about, Tam;

Bullard's comment, "Quote:
The United States can not merely implement rules with regards to opening cattle and beef trade with Canada, it also must act to harmonize BSE prevention standards globally. Without such action the US cattle industry might well be swamped under a flood of Canadian beef and Cattle if the USDA's border rule is implimented before foreign markets reopen to US produces.

Your interpretation, " R-CALF said there would be a flood.

Big difference between "might well be" and "would be." One means "strong chance" and one means "for sure".

I think it's important that if you call a man out, you use his exact words.

Tam's

From R-CALF USA Position paper on the USDA final rule.

Quote:
The United States can not merely implement rules with regards to opening cattle and beef trade with Canada, it also must act to harmonize BSE prevention standards globally. Without such action the US cattle industry might well be swamped under a flood of Canadian beef and Cattle if the USDA's border rule is implimented before foreign markets reopen to US produces.

Isn't interpretation a funny thing, I'm to use the exact words to call a man out but the man that is pointing this very thing out is free to use interpretation. :?
Sandhusker do you see the difference in your version of the quote and mine. Where did I say any thing about Bulland's comments? Now I'll give you there isn't a huge difference between Bulland and R-CALF but if you want to call me out don't interpretate me saying these were Bullards comments because they could have come from Leo and that would be a Huge difference. :wink: Or are you telling us they were Bullard's? :shock:

And if you as an R-CALFer wants to get after someone for misinterpretating something, why not try getting after who ever wrote the R-CALF legal document handed into Cebull as the USDA didn't say there would be a FLOOD OF 2 MILLION CATTLE FROM CANADA IN 2005. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Note to Haymaker, Sandhusker says Bullard made the comments above so there is your proof. :wink: :nod: :lol2: :lol2:

 

[HAY MAKER]

Here's the differences that I'm talking about, Tam;

Bullard's comment, "Quote:
The United States can not merely implement rules with regards to opening cattle and beef trade with Canada, it also must act to harmonize BSE prevention standards globally. Without such action the US cattle industry might well be swamped under a flood of Canadian beef and Cattle if the USDA's border rule is implimented before foreign markets reopen to US produces.

Your interpretation, " R-CALF said there would be a flood.

Big difference between "might well be" and "would be." One means "strong chance" and one means "for sure".

I think it's important that if you call a man out, you use his exact words.

Tam's

From R-CALF USA Position paper on the USDA final rule.

Quote:
The United States can not merely implement rules with regards to opening cattle and beef trade with Canada, it also must act to harmonize BSE prevention standards globally. Without such action the US cattle industry might well be swamped under a flood of Canadian beef and Cattle if the USDA's border rule is implimented before foreign markets reopen to US produces.

Isn't interpretation a funny thing, I'm to use the exact words to call a man out but the man that is pointing this very thing out is free to use interpretation. :?
Sandhusker do you see the difference in your version of the quote and mine. Where did I say any thing about Bulland's comments? Now I'll give you there isn't a huge difference between Bulland and R-CALF but if you want to call me out don't interpretate me saying these were Bullards comments because they could have come from Leo and that would be a Huge difference. :wink: Or are you telling us they were Bullard's? :shock:

And if you as an R-CALFer wants to get after someone for misinterpretating something, why not try getting after who ever wrote the R-CALF legal document handed into Cebull as the USDA didn't say there would be a FLOOD OF 2 MILLION CATTLE FROM CANADA IN 2005. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Note to Haymaker Sandhusker says Bullard made the comments above so there is your proof.

Miss Tam I believe you are confused again,no one said you stated B Bullard or Leo said that "UTM" cattle were going to flood the "US" market,I simply implied you were insinuating B Bullard and or Leo said this and you were wrong.Now unless you can provide a direct quote from B bullard or Leo,stating "UTM" cattle would flood the "US" market admitt they did not say this and you are wrong again.............good luck

 

[Tam]

Miss Tam I believe you are confused again,no one said you stated B Bullard or Leo said that "UTM" cattle were going to flood the "US" market,I simply implied you were insinuating B Bullard and or Leo said this and you were wrong. Now unless you can provide a direct quote from B bullard or Leo,stating "UTM" cattle would flood the "US" market admitt they did not say this and you are wrong again.............good luck

Now if no one said I said it(Which I didn't as I said R-CALF said it and proved they did) then how can I be wrong if I didn't say it. :roll: :roll:

SOS Feeder call 911 I think Haymaker has lost it. or he is hitting the bottle a bit early today.
:wink:

 

[HAY MAKER]

Miss Tam I believe you are confused again,no one said you stated B Bullard or Leo said that "UTM" cattle were going to flood the "US" market,I simply implied you were insinuating B Bullard and or Leo said this and you were wrong. Now unless you can provide a direct quote from B bullard or Leo,stating "UTM" cattle would flood the "US" market admitt they did not say this and you are wrong again.............good luck

Now if no one said I said it(Which I didn't as I said R-CALF said it and proved they did) then how can I be wrong if I didn't say it. :roll: :roll:

SOS Feeder call 911 I think Haymaker has lost it. or he is hitting the bottle a bit early today.
:wink:

That's good enough you admit Leo and B Bullard would not say some thing like that,truth be known it was a rumor started by a canuckle head news reporter,and I understand how some one as simple minded as you would like to believe this ,but it is simply not true :wink: ...........good luck

 

[Tam]

Miss Tam I believe you are confused again,no one said you stated B Bullard or Leo said that "UTM" cattle were going to flood the "US" market,I simply implied you were insinuating B Bullard and or Leo said this and you were wrong. Now unless you can provide a direct quote from B bullard or Leo,stating "UTM" cattle would flood the "US" market admitt they did not say this and you are wrong again.............good luck

Now if no one said I said it(Which I didn't as I said R-CALF said it and proved they did) then how can I be wrong if I didn't say it. :roll: :roll:

SOS Feeder call 911 I think Haymaker has lost it. or he is hitting the bottle a bit early today.
:wink:

That's good enough you admit Leo and B Bullard would not say some thing like that,truth be known it was a rumor started by a canuckle head news reporter,and I understand how some one as simple minded as you would like to believe this ,but it is simply not true :wink: ...........good luck

Where did I admit to anything Haymaker? :roll: Didn't Sandhusker admit Bullard said it? :wink: And didn't I prove the R-CALF did say it in the legal document? :? Couldn't those in R-CALF that said it BE BULLARD AND LEO I just can't find a direct quote so I said R-CALF said it. Geez Haymaker you will take anything tiny bit of info and make it look as if R-CALF is what your simple mind thinks they are. What makes the difference who said it? :???: R-CALF as an organization said it, even though you knew it was malarkey. :shock: If you were half a man you would admit they said it instead of trying to confuse everyone by insinuating I said something I didn't and asking me to prove what I never said. Go sleep it off Haymaker. :roll:

 

[HAY MAKER]

Now if no one said I said it(Which I didn't as I said R-CALF said it and proved they did) then how can I be wrong if I didn't say it. :roll: :roll:

SOS Feeder call 911 I think Haymaker has lost it. or he is hitting the bottle a bit early today.
:wink:

That's good enough you admit Leo and B Bullard would not say some thing like that,truth be known it was a rumor started by a canuckle head news reporter,and I understand how some one as simple minded as you would like to believe this ,but it is simply not true :wink: ...........good luck

Where did I admit to anything Haymaker? :roll: Didn't Sandhusker admit Bullard said it? :wink: And didn't I prove the R-CALF did say it in the legal document? :? Couldn't those in R-CALF that said it BE BULLARD AND LEO

I just can't find a direct quote

so I said R-CALF said it. Geez Haymaker you will take anything tiny bit of info and make it look as if R-CALF is what your simple mind thinks they are. What makes the difference who said it? :???: R-CALF as an organization said it, even though you knew it was malarkey. :shock: If you were half a man you would admit they said it instead of trying to confuse everyone by insinuating I said something I didn't and asking me to prove what I never said. Go sleep it off Haymaker. :roll:

well if you cant find a direct quote they did'nt say it,I believe every body realizes the border issuse is a health concern,you keep trying to twist it into dollars but,you are a lil short(pardon the pun)............good luck

 

[Tam]

That's good enough you admit Leo and B Bullard would not say some thing like that,truth be known it was a rumor started by a canuckle head news reporter,and I understand how some one as simple minded as you would like to believe this ,but it is simply not true :wink: ...........good luck

Where did I admit to anything Haymaker? :roll: Didn't Sandhusker admit Bullard said it? :wink: And didn't I prove the R-CALF did say it in the legal document? :? Couldn't those in R-CALF that said it BE BULLARD AND LEO

I just can't find a direct quote

so I said R-CALF said it. Geez Haymaker you will take anything tiny bit of info and make it look as if R-CALF is what your simple mind thinks they are. What makes the difference who said it? :???: R-CALF as an organization said it, even though you knew it was malarkey. :shock: If you were half a man you would admit they said it instead of trying to confuse everyone by insinuating I said something I didn't and asking me to prove what I never said. Go sleep it off Haymaker. :roll:

well if you cant find a direct quote they did'nt say it,I believe every body realizes the border issuse is a health concern,you keep trying to twist it into dollars but,you are a lil short(pardon the pun)............good luck

Mr. Bullard, R-Calf's chief executive, acknowledges that the closed border has been a boon for American ranchers. "There's no question our organization has an interest in higher cattle prices," he said. But, he added, "we're healing from long-term depressed prices."

Mr. McDonnell, the president of R-Calf, said the organization was not just a group of isolationists. "We're trying to prevent a collapse of our industry," he said.

Just maybe comments like these are the reason why people get the idea that this is about the dollars Haymaker. :wink:

 

[feeder]

Tam,I don't have time to call 911. We are knee deep in corn harvest and new bawling calves to care for. You and Haymaker will have to duke it out without me!! lol

 

[HAY MAKER]

Where did I admit to anything Haymaker? :roll: Didn't Sandhusker admit Bullard said it? :wink: And didn't I prove the R-CALF did say it in the legal document? :? Couldn't those in R-CALF that said it BE BULLARD AND LEO so I said R-CALF said it. Geez Haymaker you will take anything tiny bit of info and make it look as if R-CALF is what your simple mind thinks they are. What makes the difference who said it? :???: R-CALF as an organization said it, even though you knew it was malarkey. :shock: If you were half a man you would admit they said it instead of trying to confuse everyone by insinuating I said something I didn't and asking me to prove what I never said. Go sleep it off Haymaker. :roll:

well if you cant find a direct quote they did'nt say it,I believe every body realizes the border issuse is a health concern,you keep trying to twist it into dollars but,you are a lil short(pardon the pun)............good luck

Mr. Bullard, R-Calf's chief executive, acknowledges that the closed border has been a boon for American ranchers. "There's no question our organization has an interest in higher cattle prices," he said. But, he added, "we're healing from long-term depressed prices."

Mr. McDonnell, the president of R-Calf, said the organization was not just a group of isolationists. "We're trying to prevent a collapse of our industry," he said.

Just maybe comments like these are the reason why people get the idea that this is about the dollars Haymaker. :wink:

Miis Tam ,it's about keeping the risk of "BSE" to a minium, that translates into dollars. :wink: ..................good luck PS I hope Mr Tam dont have you shoveling in deep snow this year.

 

[Anonymous]

Haymaker,

WHO WROTE THE ORIGINAL POST ON THIS THREAD?

I know it wasn't you, who wrote it?

Why do you keep diverting the question?

Trying to impress someone by signing your "........good luck" to someone else's statements?



~SH~