• 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 says SRMs OK in animal feed

Help Support Ranchers.net:

SASH

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
567
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern Manitoba
U.S. packers warn against ban on SRMs
this document web posted: Wednesday, February 9, 2005 20050210p82

By Barry Wilson
Ottawa bureau

GATINEAU, Que. - The chair of the American Meat Institute is warning Canada against banning specified risk materials from all animal feed, predicting trade implications and a decrease in Canadian packer competitiveness.

William Buckner, who is also a senior Cargill executive from Minneapolis, said Canada should not move faster than the U.S. in setting feed rules. He was responding to a Canadian Food Inspection Agency proposal to ban suspected BSE transmitter brain and spinal cord material from all animal feed. A public consultation period on the proposal will end soon.

Buckner said the idea should be dropped because it is not being considered in the U.S. Instead, only SRM material from animals older than 30 months should be destroyed.

"We believe SRMs is an area we need to harmonize as much as possible in North America because we believe the global trading partners we have will hold us to a relatively similar standard," he said in an interview after a Feb. 4 speech to the annual meeting of the Canadian Meat Council.

"Our perspective on a full SRM ban is that it would be very costly, it would take a long time to implement and would have serious environmental concerns that haven't been addressed yet. We haven't seen plans that would address the huge volume of waste that would be created by a complete SRM ban."

He said the AMI proposal to destroy SRM material only from older animals is a proper "systems management scientific approach" that would reduce risk almost as much as a total ban. The AMI represents the packing industry in the U.S.

"We come back to the idea of having harmonization to the greatest extent possible so we don't have differences going to the world marketplace."

He said a Canadian decision to create SRM restrictions that were tougher than those in the U.S. would create problems.

"We believe it creates problems for a number of trading situations," he said.

"You have this integrated marketplace for livestock and meat in North America and yet we have different standards in how we deal with specified risk materials and so we do think lack of harmonization in this area makes it more complex, more costly, more inefficient, more difficult."

As well, he said it would affect the competitiveness of Canadian packers compared to their American rivals. Cargill's plant in High River, Alta., would suffer.

"Yes, there are (implications for the Alberta plant)," he said.

"Hopefully it is obvious that business models in Canada would bear a little extra complexity, cost and inefficiency versus plants in the United States, Australia, New Zealand or other beef producing places in the world."

Canadian agriculture minister Andy Mitchell said the CFIA will consider the comments received during the SRM-ban consultation. He also said it is important to work with the Americans.

However, he suggested the government remains committed to the idea of a total SRM ban from animal feed, including pet feed.

"We believe there's importance in having an SRM ban in terms of animal feed," he said.

"We want to work towards ensuring that the small possibility of cross-contamination is minimized to the greatest extent possible. That's our public policy objective."

He said it is a balancing act between creating compatible regulations throughout North America while taking the most effective measures for Canadian animal health.
 

SMS

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta
I find it interesting that when we (canada) suggest raising the standards it is too expensive, to costly or creates ineffiency's in the :twisted: US.

Now we know why mandatory BSE testing isnt possible.
 

don

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,564
Reaction score
0
Location
saskatchewan
so when is bullard gonna say, 'we have seen the enemy and he is us.'? you guys think canada is the problem to getting back into export markets?????
 

Broke Cowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,364
Reaction score
6
Location
With The Herd
What a bunch of horse pucky!

Once that stuff is in the feed - the control is lost. Is there a way to test for the age of the added SRM?

Seems to me there were comments about minute amounts of "stuff" in Canuck feed from the last set of visiting U.S "inspectors". Now it's ok if it is under 30 months? How in the he ll is anyone going to verify the age?

Get it out - all of it!!! Let those south of the border do what they want - including feeding chicken litter which is still common. In Canada - let's get squeaky clean - then no one can point their fingers at us.

BC
 

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
I dont believe in feeding cattle parts back to cattle so why not just take it out of the feed alltogether? If the US doesnt want to then so be it.. we will use our own protocol. What about people in the pork industry grinding up massive amounts of dead hogs and feeding them back to other hogs?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Globeandmail.com
CFIA confirms contaminated feed the source of last BSE caseFriday, February 11, 2005 Updated at 8:57 PM EST

Canadian Press

The investigation into the latest case of mad cow disease in Canada has concluded that feeds manufactured after a national feed ban likely spread the disease.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency said Friday that it's possible some cattle feed was contaminated with prohibited ruminant material as feed manufacturers moved to comply to the ban.

"This investigation identified that certain feed materials, likely manufactured a short time after the implementation of Canada's feed ban, may have been contaminated," it says in a report released Friday.

The investigation probed the Jan. 11 discovery of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in a nearly seven-year-old beef cow near Innisfail, Alta.

The cow was born just seven months after the ban was implemented in August 1997.

The rules banned cattle meat-and-bone meal from animal feed but allowed the continued use of meat and parts from other animals such as pigs.

The investigation determined the Innisfail cow was exposed to four commercial feed sources during its early development, but couldn't pinpoint the one that might have caused the infection.

Dr. Gary Little, the CFIA's acting senior staff veterinarian, said Friday that the finding didn't come as a surprise given the age of the cow.

"We were expecting this might be the kind of thing we might find," he said. "As unwelcome as it may be it is not inconsistent with our understanding of BSE exposure."

The conclusion that the last cow discovered was likely infected by contaminated feed after the ban hasn't stopped American officials from going ahead with plans to re-open the border to live Canadian cattle March 7.

Little said that's because it's known that feed bans aren't 100 per cent effective.

"It's not like you are just throwing a switch," Little said. "Certainly every country that has introduced a feed ban has been faced with the reality that it is phased in."

The report says it is clear that Canada's feed ban has been effective enough to limit the occurrence of BSE to an extremely low level and lead to elimination of the disease over time.

Alberta Agriculture spokeswoman Terry Willock said the conclusion of the report is not seen as a setback.

"We know that after the feed ban there was a time when producers could still use some of the feed that was manufactured and manufacturers could move that product through their systems," she said. "We knew there was a distinct possibility that could happen."
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
If we want to set a higher standard, someone in the US is mad.

If we don't set higher standards, someone in the US is mad .

I say we do what we feel we must as an industry and if they don't like it that is just to bad.
 

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
I agree someone has to take the fore front on this and I think Canada should. If we can get our packing plants up and get things rolling then we will not have to bow to the US. IF countries like Japan see us taking this stand it will show them we care about the safety of our product.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
William Buckner, who is also a senior Cargill executive from Minneapolis, said Canada should not move faster than the U.S. in setting feed rules. He was responding to a Canadian Food Inspection Agency proposal to ban suspected BSE transmitter brain and spinal cord material from all animal feed.
THIS is the REASON COOL didn't happen and THIS is the REASON Cattle Sold so dam CHEAP in CANADA.He lines his pockets with Dollars while we as Cattlemen and Cattlewomen an says OH NO! WE DON"T test for BSE as We cut out all infected BSE cattle parts an besides it costs money to TEST.
Well their won't be any sales without TESTS as THE EU found out TOO.All Buckner is doing is protecting his STATUS QUO.NOW SH ,SPIN this.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
I've said many times on here that the packers are the cause of many of our problems. I hate to toot my own horn (too much), but I seem to get proven right every time the packers open their mouths.
 

Latest posts

Top