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

US may retaliate against Japan

Help Support Ranchers.net:

S

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=46&u_sid=1345015

Wouldn't it have been just a whole lot easier (and more profitable) to just of allowed testing when Creekstone brought it up last year? We've already left over 2 Billion on the table, let the competition establish relationships, and who knows whats going to happen now - and for what reason? :x :???:
 
This retaliation business will REALLY make 'em gobble up our beef now!

I am actually ashamed of this. You're right, this could have been settled long ago with both sides the winner.
 
The question still stands for both of you, where is your proof that the Japanese government would take our cattle with testing?

If they want testing, why are they negotiating age verification?



~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
The question still stands for both of you, where is your proof that the Japanese government would take our cattle with testing?

If they want testing, why are they negotiating age verification?



~SH~
Click to expand...

SH, Creekstone actually had a contract in hand with the Japanese to provide tested beef. After negotiating DIRECTLY with the Japanese, they spent a couple million on a testing facility. Now, what do you think? I suppose you need to see a notarized copy of the contract?

If they really want age verification, why aren't they taking age-verified beef LIKE THEY AGREED TO MONTHS AGO? If they really want age verification, WHY ARE WE THREATENING SANCTIONS?
 
Sandhusker: "SH, Creekstone actually had a contract in hand with the Japanese to provide tested beef. After negotiating DIRECTLY with the Japanese, they spent a couple million on a testing facility. Now, what do you think?"

I think Creekstone should have been assured of their market before they made their investment, that's what I think.

Your "CLAIM" that Creekstone had a contract is not proof of a contract SIGNED BY JAPAN.

You brought nothing but a statement, IMAGINE THAT!


~SH~ (previous): "If they want testing, why are they negotiating age verification?"

Sandhusker (diverting my question with his questions): "If they really want age verification, why aren't they taking age-verified beef LIKE THEY AGREED TO MONTHS AGO? If they really want age verification, WHY ARE WE THREATENING SANCTIONS?"

Why would I answer your questions when you failed to answer mine?



~SH~
 
SH,
Japan is sandbagging. 85% of the "Jap" people do not want our BEEF. What part of this is not sinkingin??? We have LOST this market, or a huge amount of it. Unfortunately most folks have not figured out their is a lot more to testing a Creekstone Cow than "testing a Creekstone Cow"!! I't TRADE ISSUES, POLITICS, and EGO"S!!! NCBA must be taking lessons from R-Calf because they are now stepping on their "penis" on a regular basis. On a lighter note.....how is the QUarter Horse brood mare market in Western SD???
Have a good one!!
 
Wether Creekstone had a contract signed and made public does not matter one way or the other. The prob. I see is thinking you can ''force'' a customer to buy what they do not want. If memory serves me, we didn't do to good of a job, forcing europe to buy beef under our terms!
 
Cattle Co: "Japan is sandbagging."

That's what I tend to think too. A lot of this is nothing more than "political posturing" by Japan for numerous reasons.

Don't know anything about the brood mare market.


~SH~
 
Cattle Co: "Japan is sandbagging."

That's what I tend to think too. A lot of this is nothing more than "political posturing" by Japan for numerous reasons.


and it goes round and round. canada gets sandbagged by the states who gets sandbagged by the japanese who are (likely) doing this for some other trade related reason.
 
~SH~ said:
The question still stands for both of you, where is your proof that the Japanese government would take our cattle with testing?

If they want testing, why are they negotiating age verification?

Response:
The Japanese Parliament would/will have to vote on any procedure to import beef from the US. The Ag Minister was/is for testing. The Prime Minister was/is for testing and felt that the measure would pass overwhelmingly.

Now, the Ag Minister is NOT for age verification. The Prime Minister is NOT for age verification and if/when the vote comes before Parliament who KNOWS if it will pass. But I wouldn't think so without support of the PM.

There is no one document that says they will take tested beef because it never came to a vote in Parliament. There are numerous documents on the web showing Jap support for accepting tested beef but NONE showing support for acceptance of age verification.

If both proposals came before the Jap Parliament (testing vs. age verification) which do you believe would get the most votes? Be honest now. I would bet you a good 2 yr. old bull against a dead coyote that testing would get more.

The fact that Creekstone spent over $500,000.00 on a new lab specifically for testing should be convincing enough.

BTW, who's negotiating age verification? Us or them?
And now we're threatening them with trade tariffs?
Yea buddy! That will get our $175.00 per head back!
Click to expand...
 
~SH~ said:
Sandhusker: "SH, Creekstone actually had a contract in hand with the Japanese to provide tested beef. After negotiating DIRECTLY with the Japanese, they spent a couple million on a testing facility. Now, what do you think?"

SH,"I think Creekstone should have been assured of their market before they made their investment, that's what I think."

When you have a CONTRACT, I would say you have assured your market!

SH, "Your "CLAIM" that Creekstone had a contract is not proof of a contract SIGNED BY JAPAN."

SH, in light of my post stating that Creekstone had a contract with Japen (want to bet $100 on this one, too? I'll put my money where my mouth is), your statement is totally rediculous. THEY HAD A CONTRACT WITH JAPAN. That is not proof Japan signed it?

SH, "You brought nothing but a statement, IMAGINE THAT! "

Why do I even bother?


~SH~ (previous): "If they want testing, why are they negotiating age verification?"

Sandhusker (diverting my question with his questions): "If they really want age verification, why aren't they taking age-verified beef LIKE THEY AGREED TO MONTHS AGO? If they really want age verification, WHY ARE WE THREATENING SANCTIONS?"

SH "Why would I answer your questions when you failed to answer mine?"

I'll answer yours, not that it will sink in. JAPAN ALREADY NEGOTIATED AGE VERIFICATION. THEY AGREED TO IT. THEY AREN'T DOING IT.



~SH~
Click to expand...
 
Sandhusker: "When you have a CONTRACT, I would say you have assured your market!"

Mike: "The Japanese Parliament would/will have to vote on any procedure to import beef from the US."

Sandhusker: "THEY HAD A CONTRACT WITH JAPAN. That is not proof Japan signed it?"

Mike: "There is no one document that says they will take tested beef because it never came to a vote in Parliament."

OH, I SEE, Creekstone had a contract without the approval of the Japanese Parliament when the Japanese Parliament would hae to vote on any procedure to import beef from the U.S.

Sandhusker, perhaps you should get your stories straight with Mike before, as you say, rattling your lips?


Mike, what is your source of information on the position of Japan's prime minister and ag minister?



Sandhusker: "Why do I even bother?"

Considering your inability to back your position with factual information, that's a damn good question.



~SH~
 
Mike, what is your source of information on the position of Japan's prime minister and ag minister?

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040820-053939-7307r

This should do it.
 
More than 85 animals worldwide ages 20 months to 30 months have tested positive for the disease,
 
Now correct me if I'm reading this wrong--USDA has said all along that they would follow sound science in the opening of the Japanese trade--that is the reason they would not let Creekstone test under thirty month cattle... USDA in this article acknowledges to BSE being found in under 30 month cattle-as low as 20 month... And now they are agreeing to go along with Japans "sound science" and age verify to make sure nothing is shipped to the Japanese consumer that is over 20 months old- another apparent acknowledgement.....

But in the Canadian border issue, they agree to take beef from over 20 month animals, but younger than 30 months old....They say anything under thirty months is safe from infection so send them to the US consumer.... This appears to be hypocrisy.......

And I thought the US consumer was who the USDA was supposed to be protecting......Now we've went thru "sound science" and "best science available" -They must have some new "secret science" that shows the Japanese are more susceptible to infection than Americans.....
 
Very good observation OT.

Just got an idea!
There is a DNA test that can be done on humans that shows their susceptibility to being infected with BSE.
We could test everyone and if the suseptibility is high, then that person could only eat "Under 20 months Beef".
If the susceptibility is low, then they could eat "Over 20 month Beef".

Would solve all the questions of OTM's and UTM's.

But then, that would require COOL and age verification. Oh Well!
 
Oldtimer said:
Now correct me if I'm reading this wrong--USDA has said all along that they would follow sound science in the opening of the Japanese trade--that is the reason they would not let Creekstone test under thirty month cattle... USDA in this article acknowledges to BSE being found in under 30 month cattle-as low as 20 month... And now they are agreeing to go along with Japans "sound science" and age verify to make sure nothing is shipped to the Japanese consumer that is over 20 months old- another apparent acknowledgement.....

But in the Canadian border issue, they agree to take beef from over 20 month animals, but younger than 30 months old....They say anything under thirty months is safe from infection so send them to the US consumer.... This appears to be hypocrisy.......

And I thought the US consumer was who the USDA was supposed to be protecting......Now we've went thru "sound science" and "best science available" -They must have some new "secret science" that shows the Japanese are more susceptible to infection than Americans.....
Click to expand...

Isn't that a double standard? At least the USDA is being consistently inconsistent.
 

Latest posts

Top