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

Written Pre-Texas cow.......Source unknown........

Help Support Ranchers.net:


Well-known member
Feb 13, 2005
Reaction score
Written Pre-Texas cow.......Source unknown........Joel.....

“Let’s take away Japan's excuse by doing what scientists and experts – even
those within the Administration – say the U.S. should do: require Canada to
test more cattle and younger cattle, and enforce and strengthen the feed
bans in both Canada and the United States. In addition, the
Country-of-Origin Labeling (COOL) law already in place should be implemented
at once so U.S. consumers can make informed decisions when purchasing beef

“We have called on USDA to meet with us to find solutions to the BSE problem
in Canada. We have called for a solution that ensures the U.S. does not
adopt BSE standards lower than international standards and lower than the
rest of the world, as this would make the U.S. a dumping ground for products
other countries won’t accept.
"The United States has the safest beef in the world, and we want to keep it
that way. Even with increased testing we have yet to find one single native
case of BSE in U.S. born and raised cattle. For this reason, we are urging
consumers to speak out: ‘Keep U.S. Beef Safe!’" wrote Leo McDonnell, Jr.,
President of R-CALF USA, in a letter to every Member of Congress, Governor,
the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National League of Cities.

In its lawsuit, R-CALF USA argues that USDA has "ignored science." Recent
scientific evidence has revealed that the agent responsible for BSE
contamination has recently been found not just in nerve tissue, but in
muscle tissue as well, raising concerns that standards should be raised, not

"I’m hoping we will be successful in court again. If enough consumers knew
even one or two of these facts, they would stop the decision to lift the ban
cold in its track. Until people are able to make an informed decision about
what meat to buy for their families, the ban should stay in place," said

The Joint Resolution reads as: “Resolved by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That
Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Agriculture
relating to the establishment of minimal risk zones for introduction of
bovine spongiform encephalopathy (published at 70 Fed. Reg. 460 (2005)), and
such rule shave have no force or effect.”
Neither U.S. cattle producers, nor U.S. consumers, should be excluded from
protections afforded by the more rigorous science-based BSE standards
recognized throughout the world as necessary to effectively manage the human
health and animal health risks associated with BSE,” emphasized McDonnell.
“R-CALF is grateful that these senators have chosen to stand up for what
their constituents want, and not cave in to the intense political pressure
of the multi-national processor/packer lobbyists, who are overly eager to
compromise U.S. health and safety standards in return for unrestricted
access to lower-cost cattle and beef.

USDA’s Final Rule, in the following ways, compromises science acknowledged
throughout the rest of the world:
1. It adopts the Specified Risk Materials (SRM) removal practices
recommended by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and practiced
in the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU) for years – except
that USDA only includes some high-risk tissues in its SRM removal plan
(fewer tissues than included in the standard risk-reduction practices in the
UK and the EU). USDA’s Final Rule does not begin removal of SRMs at the age
where OIE, the UK, and the EU consider it necessary. USDA’s Final Rule
requires SRM removal only from cattle over 30 months of age, while European
countries require removal of SRMs in all cattle over 12 months of age. OIE
recommends SRM removal from cattle over 6 months of age for countries with
the same disease characteristics as Canada.
2. It adopts a BSE testing/surveillance program as recommended by OIE and as
practiced by the UK and the EU for years, except that USDA’s Final Rule
fails to target cattle that enter the human food chain, as recommended by
OIE and as practiced by the UK and the EU.
3. It adopts part of a meat-and-bone meal (MBM) feed ban, as has been
recommended by OIE and as practiced by the UK and the EU for years, except
that USDA fails to require Canada to have had its feed ban in place for the
length of time recommended by OIE. USDA’s Final Rule also fails to include
the same products as the feed bans practiced by the UK and the EU, both of
which ban blood and poultry litter from cattle feed
“The BSE standards being incorporated by USDA are inferior to international
standards established by OIE, and far below the science-based practices of
countries that have successfully reduced the incidence of BSE,” Bullard
said. “Canada does not meet the definition of a minimal-risk country, based
on international guidelines, and this is why 33 countries still ban Canadian
beef. It’s not clear why USDA should force U.S. consumers to be exposed to
risks that other countries protect their citizens from.”

“I believe now is the time for NCBA and its affiliates, along with R-CALF
USA and its affiliates, to set aside organizational differences and work
together as a unified industry to cause USDA to withdraw its Final Rule,”
wrote McDonnell, who later said, “If the entire industry stands together, we
can better protect our industry and our consumers from the risk of the
introduction of BSE from Canada.”
R-CALF USA asserts that USDA’s Final Rule on bovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE) endangers public health with neither adequate
scientific, legal, nor risk analysis justification; that it is an arbitrary
and capricious use of Agency power; it is an abuse of discretion; and, it is
not in accordance with law

R-CALF USA’s Complaint states the Final Rule will expose U.S. consumers to
an un-quantified increase in risk from imported beef products of contracting
variant Creutzfeldt Jakob disease (vCJD), an invariably fatal disease
associated with consumption of BSE-contaminated meat; that it will increase
the risk of BSE infection in cattle in the United States by an un-quantified
amount; and, that it will expose U.S. cattle producers to severe and
unnecessary economic hardship

1. USDA assumed very low incidence of BSE in the Canadian herd, while
available data collected since 2001 suggest a BSE incidence on the order of
that of the most BSE-affected countries in the world.
2. USDA assumed virtually no risk that BSE-infected cattle or meat will
enter the United States, yet it is statistically almost certain that
BSE-infected animals or meat will in fact enter the United States under the
Final Rule if recent data on Canadian BSE levels are representative of what
the future is likely to hold.
3. USDA assumed the Canadian feed ban is effective. Yet, a 2004 Canadian
Food Inspection Agency study showed that 71 percent of Canadian-manufactured
feed labeled as vegetable-only contained undeclared animal protein. Canadian
investigations have revealed that almost 2,000 head of Canadian cattle may
have been exposed to BSE-contaminated feed because of the rendering of the
BSE-infected animal discovered in Canada in May 2003. A U.S. Government
Accounting Office study in 2002 showed inadequate enforcement and
significant noncompliance among feed manufacturers in U.S. with a similar
feed ban in the United States. The agency’s own International Review Team
that responded to the discovery of the BSE-infected cow in Washington state
concluded that “…the partial ruminant to ruminant feed ban that is currently
in place [in the U.S.] is insufficient to prevent exposure of cattle to the
BSE agent.”
4. USDA assumed Canada’s feed ban will prevent BSE infection in animals born
after its August 1997 implementation, based on experience in the United
Kingdom (UK) and Europe. Yet, the UK documented over 45,698 cases of BSE
(over one-quarter of all BSE cases detected in the UK) in cattle born during
the 12 years following the implementation of its 1988 feed ban.
5. USDA assumed that neither the discovery of a BSE-infected Canadian-born
cow in Washington state in December 2003, nor the subsequent discovery of an
additional BSE-infected cow in Canada at the end of 2004 should cause USDA
to revise or seriously reconsider its determination that opening the border
to Canadian cattle and meat would present little risk to U.S. animals, human
consumers, and the U.S. livestock industry. This amounts to a refusal to
allow overwhelming statistical evidence of a continuing BSE problem to
affect a policy that will result in a BSE problem being imported into the
6. USDA assumed that blood was not at risk even though the agency
acknowledged the potential of transmission of BSE through blood when it
decided to ban importation of fetal blood serum from Canada. And yet, USDA
ignored the implications of this risk for importing meat and cattle from
7. USDA assumed that the potential contamination of meat with BSE at levels
that are undetectable with current technology presents an unknown risk to
consumers, and yet assumed this unknown risk is acceptably low.
8. USDA assumed that cattle under 30 months of age do not carry significant
accumulations of BSE prions, and that most bovine carcass parts defined as
Specified Risk Materials (SRMs) need only be removed from animals older than
30 months of age, despite more than 20 confirmed cases worldwide of BSE in
cattle younger than 30 months of age, and despite requirements in the
European Union that SRMs be removed from all cattle over 12 months of age.
9. USDA assumed the risk presented by the relaxation of preexisting safety
standards by the Final Rule is low, without attempting a credible
quantitative assessment of the risk – and without describing the level of
risk that the agency considers to be “low,” and without comparing it to what
other countries mean by “low.”
10. USDA assumed the Final Rule will not affect the resumption of exports of
beef from the U.S., when the Final Rule allows co-mingling of U.S. meat with
meat from a country with a demonstrated BSE problem. The Final Rule also
departs from OIE recommendations without any indication that other countries
will accept these departures

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Feb 10, 2005
Reaction score
Big Muddy valley
Haymaker the US is now a country with a known BSE presence. Maybe you guys should catch up with Canada and the rest of the world . Maybe you like being a "Third world country". The wourld changed for R-CALF when that cow was found and everything they have spouted is now their to haunt them. Good Luck :!:


Well-known member
Feb 12, 2005
Reaction score
Source unknown?, it's an RCALF's article. Don't have time to post the link right now, if anybody wants it, I can do it later tonight!

Latest posts