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

yawn

Help Support Ranchers.net:

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
JPN group may boycott US beef

Japan consumer groups threaten U.S. beef boycott

KTIC 840 Rural Radio



TOKYO, Oct 27, 2005 (Reuters) - Japanese consumer groups said on Thursday they would launch a campaign to boycott U.S. beef, banned from Japan for nearly two years on concerns about mad cow disease, if the government decides to resume imports.



The government has said it would ease its ban if Japan's Food Safety Commission declares U.S. beef is as safe as domestic meat.



A commission subcommittee that has been assessing the safety of U.S. beef for five months is expected to reach a conclusion at a meeting on Oct. 31.



Yasuaki Yamaura, vice chairman of Consumers Union of Japan, said subcommittee members should not yield to growing pressure from the U.S. and Japanese governments to approve a resumption of imports, as they have acknowledged that U.S. safety measures against mad cow disease are insufficient.



"If the government presses ahead with the plan to resume U.S. beef imports, we will take various actions, including a campaign to boycott U.S. beef," Yamaura told a news conference. He said his organisation and 10 other consumers' and farmers' groups were campaigning against a resumption of imports.



Japan was the biggest global buyer of U.S. beef before the ban was imposed in December 2003, after the first U.S. case of mad cow disease was found in Washington state in December 2003.



The ban has produced a rising tide of anger and frustration in the United States, where lawmakers have proposed retaliatory tariffs on Japanese products if it is not lifted.





THE TESTING QUESTION



U.S. beef is at higher risk than Japanese beef, Yamaura said, because the U.S. government does not test all cattle for mad cow disease in order to keep infected animals out of food supplies. In Japan, local governments continue to test all cattle, although the Health Ministry dropped the universal testing policy in August.



He said U.S. cattle were also at higher risk than Japanese animals because their feed may be contaminated with materials that could transmit mad cow disease.



In Japan, meat-and-bone meal (MBM) produced from cattle, which is thought to cause mad cow disease, is banned as a feed for all animals.



The United States banned MBM made from cattle as cattle feed in 1997 but did not bar its use as a feed for other animals such as pigs and poultry. The U.S. government said this month it would tighten its rules on feed, but U.S. consumer groups said the proposals were far too weak.



Always fatal, mad cow disease, formally known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), is believed to be caused by malformed proteins and spread through infected feed.



Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, the human version of BSE, is thought to be spread by eating contaminated meat. It has caused more than 150 deaths worldwide, including one in Japan.



In October last year, Japan agreed with the United States to resume imports of beef from cattle aged 20 months or younger, which are considered to be at low risk from BSE.



The countries also agreed that specified risk materials, such as bovine heads and spinal cords, must be removed from cattle of all ages before the meat was shipped to Japan.



Frustrated by Japan's protracted ban, 20 U.S. senators from both political parties have unveiled legislation to impose $3.14 billion in tariffs on Japanese products if the beef ban is not lifted by mid-December.



Before the ban, Japan was the top importer of U.S. beef, with imports valued at $1.4 billion in 2003.

JPN Embassy rips US on tariff talk



Japan Embassy slams Senate bill over beef imports

Kyodo News

October 27, 2005



(Kyodo) _ The Japanese Embassy moved quickly Wednesday to criticize a U.S. Senate bill calling for retaliatory tariffs over Japan's 22-month-old import ban on U.S. beef, and issued an explanation of what Japan was doing to end the impasse.



"We are disappointed," the embassy said in a statement distributed to news organizations soon after 21 senators introduced the bill to impose punitive tariffs worth $3.14 billion annually on Japanese products by the end of the year if Japan fails to end the import restriction.



In a press conference, Japanese Ambassador to the United States Ryozo Kato said, "It's not a productive move."



Kato expressed hope that the sanctions will not be imposed, and said he has explained to U.S. lawmakers that the Japanese government cannot set a timetable for ending the import ban because it has to wait for approval by the independent Food Safety Commission.



While acknowledging the growing frustration on the U.S. side, Kato said he will continue to seek understanding for Japan's situation.



"It's not a trade issue. It's a matter of scientifically certifying food safety," Kato said.



U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Saxby Chambliss told reporters that Kato has asked for a meeting with him next week, and Chambliss said he will make that his "top priority."



Japan was the largest importer of U.S. beef before the ban was imposed in December 2003 when the United States discovered its first case of mad cow disease.



In the statement, the embassy said, "The domestic procedures in Japan necessary to reopen its market to U.S. beef are in the last stage."



Stressing that "tangible progress" was made in the commission's subcommittee meeting on Monday, the embassy said, "A threat of retaliation is not helpful in solving the problem based on science."



The subcommittee's chairman explained after the meeting that the panel will try to finalize a draft document, which will conclude that the difference between the risk of mad cow disease from beef from U.S. cattle aged up to 20 months and that from Japanese beef is "very small," the embassy said.



The panel will meet again next Monday, it said.



Japan agreed with the United States in October last year to work toward resuming imports of U.S. beef, provided it is from cattle aged up to 20 months.



The statement outlined the steps to be taken, such as four weeks of public hearings, toward resuming imports after the subcommittee adopts the draft document, but did not give any timeline.



"The Japanese government is determined to make its best efforts to resolve the issue as promptly as possible, while securing food safety for consumers based on science, so that this issue will not harm the excellent relations between Japan and the United States," the embassy said.





asia.news.yahoo.com
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
So much for the "sound science" and "You open your borders, everyone else will too" B.S. :?
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Oldtimer said:
So much for the "sound science" and "You open your borders, everyone else will too" B.S. :?

How about "Let the free market decide" or "Lets keep the government out of it" Seems to be pick and choose when they want to do that.

NCBA backs JPN tariffs

U.S. CATTLEMEN SUPPORT SENATE ACTION ON JAPAN

Source: National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA)



Washington, D.C. (October 26, 2005) – Senators Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) are introducing bipartisan legislation regarding the 22-month ban on U.S. beef going into Japan in effort to regain this valuable market for America's cattle ranchers. The bill calls for tariffs on Japanese products if Japan does not reopen its important domestic market to U.S. beef.



“U.S. beef is among the safest in the world,” says Sen. Conrad. “There is no scientific basis for Japan to continue blocking our exports. If Japan does not accept our beef, we will impose tariffs to compensate for the damage they have caused our ranchers, who are suffering from Japan’s trade embargo. The time has come for Japan to live up to its commitments and reopen its borders to American-grown beef.”



“Despite the efforts of even the highest office in our nation’s government, Japan continues to keep American beef out of their country,” says Sen. Roberts. “This week, the Japanese Food Safety Commission again failed to reach an agreement to remove the blockade to U.S. beef imports. And to add insult to injury, four of the Commission’s twelve members did not even show up. I am troubled that our negotiations with Japan have deteriorated to this point.”



The Senate legislation will require the U.S. Department of Treasury to implement additional tariffs on goods grown, produced or manufactured in Japan unless the U.S. Trade Representative certifies that Japan has reopened its market to American beef by December 15, 2005.



“Cleary, Senate leaders are detecting the intense level of frustration from cattle producers across the countryside, and like us they are frustrated with the inactivity of the Japanese Food Safety Commission (FSC),” says National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) President and Texas cattle producer Jim McAdams. “We know the possibility of renewed trade with Japan is on the horizon, and we support any efforts from the Senate impelling Japan’s FSC to expedite the process.”



Cosponsors of the legislation include Senators Wayne Allard, (R-Colo.); Max Baucus, (D-Mont.); Kit Bond, (R-Mo.); Sam Brownback, (R-Kan.); Conrad Burns (R-Mont.); Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.); Norm Coleman, (R-Minn.); John Cornyn (R-Texas); Larry Craig, (R-Idaho); Mike Crapo, (R-Idaho); Byron Dorgan, (D-N.D.); Mike Enzi, (R-Wyo.); Tim Johnson, (D-S.D.); Blanche Lincoln, (D-Ark.); Harry Reid, (D-Nev.); Ken Salazar, (D-Colo.); Jim Talent, (R-Mo.); Craig Thomas, (R-Wyo.); and John Thune, (R-S.D.).



“America produces some of the highest quality beef in the world,” says Sen. Thune. “Our standard for excellence is respected by nations worldwide, and Japan should be no exception. Our cattle and ranching industries are a source of pride for America and a key component of U.S. economic growth and global competitiveness. Japanese leaders must follow through with the good-faith commitment they made last year to resume imports.”



“Japan has chosen to ignore internationally recognized science and has instead based its food safety on emotional, politically-driven arguments,” says Roberts. “Free trade is a two-way street. More importantly, in the context of the pending negotiations in the Doha Round of the World Trade Organization, I urge my colleagues to support this bill because it sends the message to American producers that we will stand up for American agriculture in our trade negotiations.”



NCBA is urging members of the Senate to support this legislation and asking members of the House of Representatives to take up Rep. Jerry Moran’s (R-Kan.) House Resolution 137, which calls for the U.S. Trade Representative to immediately impose retaliatory trade sanctions against Japan if it continues to delay meeting its obligations as part of the understanding reached October 2004.



“I think I speak for all cattlemen when I say it's time,” says McAdams. “Through NCBA, cattlemen have continued to loudly express their frustrations with this non-science based trade ban. These Senators' leadership is appreciated."



For more information from NCBA regarding the Japanese embargo, including a timeline of events, go to: http://hill.beef.org/japan.
 

Tommy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Location
South East Kansas
Even if this legislation passed it wouldn't do anything. First the president would have to sign it, which I seriously doubt, and if he vetoed the bill it would take two thirds of the senate and house to override his veto. Not much chance of that happening.

Where are all the people who said when we opened our border to Canadian beef Japan would start taking USA beef? I say call their bluff and let some plants test 100% and put the ball back in their court.
 

PPRM

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,951
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Oregon
Where's miss Tam on this thread, LOL.......

I agree 100% Tommy......What a buch of arrogant guys those Senators are.....Hmmmmm....Lets see, we refuse to listen to what your consumers are saying as far as acceptable safeguards....Ones that match what you demand in your own country.......But let's bully it through.....Great



Pat
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
PPRM said:
Where's miss Tam on this thread, LOL.......

I agree 100% Tommy......What a buch of arrogant guys those Senators are.....Hmmmmm....Lets see, we refuse to listen to what your consumers are saying as far as acceptable safeguards....Ones that match what you demand in your own country.......But let's bully it through.....Great



Pat

Pat can you tell us what the Japanese Government stand is on 100% testing? Aren't they the ones that are moving away from their testing protocal? Aren't they the ones that set the import rules for their counrty? Does it really matter what the US government or Producers says if it is the Japanese Government setting the rules and they are the ones that are looking to get out of 100% testing protocol and are using the ban on North American Beef to do it?
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
Maybe they are trying to get out of their own testing protocal to appease the American Economic War Room.

Meanwhile they have made very little progress because of the fear of their own voting public which is demanding testing.

But then again,Tam is probably right :lol: :roll: :lol:
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
The species barrier thing interests me R2. Most of the time my species and yours are at odds, and again,even so within your post. However I do agree that this testing issue is about the consumer and the media. Let em have it I say.

Can't debate on the issue of genetic CJD R2, I don't know anything about it. Where does this family you talk of live R2? Do they live together, or have they ever?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
rkaiser said:
Maybe they are trying to get out of their own testing protocal to appease the American Economic War Room.

Meanwhile they have made very little progress because of the fear of their own voting public which is demanding testing.

But then again,Tam is probably right :lol: :roll: :lol:

Do you really think the Japanese would have changed their testing if they thought there was a real Food safety issue? :roll:

Gee Randy you say I find fault in the BIG-C Idea because you p***ed me off. Can you tell us why you pull out the sarcasm everytime you post to something I have said? :wink: Could it be because I'm sneaky enough to bring something to the board that you don't? Like the true backed up by a quote from someone that you are not about to claim lied to cover the fact you didn't know what you were talking about. Because he is your HERO. :lol:
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
Yes I think that the Japanese govenment would do anything to save their political ass, just like any other elected government in the world.

BSE has been about economics and politics from day one and will always be.

I'll probably stop posting sarcastically in opposition to your posts Tam, when I have something better to do with my time than play here on ranchers, ------ or ------ when your packer lovin BS stops. :roll: :wink:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
rkaiser said:
Yes I think that the Japanese govenment would do anything to save their political ass, just like any other elected government in the world.

BSE has been about economics and politics from day one and will always be.

I'll probably stop posting sarcastically in opposition to your posts Tam, when I have something better to do with my time than play here on ranchers, ------ or ------ when your packer lovin BS stops. :roll: :wink:

Now Randy aren't the Japanese consumers asking their Government not to change the testing protocol for the US? So how can you say they are doing it to save their political backsides? Wouldn't it be better for them to just demand 100% testing from us to save their political backsides?

Hey Randy why don't you use some of the time you waste posting sarcasticically to me to find something that could back up what you say. :wink:
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
“I think I speak for all cattlemen when I say it's time,” says McAdams. “Through NCBA, cattlemen have continued to loudly express their frustrations

BS, he says he speaks for all Cattlemen ,This comment just added 10.000 new members to R-CALF roles.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
The U.S. government does not test all cattle for mad cow disease in order to keep infected animals out of food supplies. In Japan, local governments continue to test all cattle as the JAPANESE consumer DEMANDS IT!!!!!!!!!

Remember that bse guy from JAPAN ------NO TEST NO SALE .He must have alot of relatives in Japan
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
Tam -
Now Randy aren't the Japanese consumers asking their Government not to change the testing protocol for the US? So how can you say they are doing it to save their political backsides? Wouldn't it be better for them to just demand 100% testing from us to save their political backsides?

By golly Tam, I still don't see any beef going to Japan from either Canada or the USA! :roll:

Sounds like they are listening to their consumers AND saving their political backsides to me.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
rkaiser said:
Tam -
Now Randy aren't the Japanese consumers asking their Government not to change the testing protocol for the US? So how can you say they are doing it to save their political backsides? Wouldn't it be better for them to just demand 100% testing from us to save their political backsides?

By golly Tam, I still don't see any beef going to Japan from either Canada or the USA! :roll:

Sounds like they are listening to their consumers AND saving their political backsides to me.

So tell us Randy why didn't the Japanese GOVERNMENT just demand 100% testing right from the start and Save themselves the political headache of the process of changing their rules against their consumers wishes? Of all our trading partners they, by OIE rules, were one of very few that could have gotten away with demanding 100% testing as they were doing it in JAPAN but they didn't WHY?

Could the reason they didn't be because they were looking for a way out of the expenses of testing cattle they, with their 100% testing, had never found BSE in?
You know Randy the funny thing about Governments, they all have their own process to follow and if there is opposition to the change then it takes a bit longer but does it change the fact that the Government is maybe doing what they think is right, Tradewise and/or fiscally. Look how long it is taking the USDA to change their rules. First the border was delayed because they didn't want to make an annoucment while they were fighting an election. Then it was delayed because R-CALF tied it up in court. But that hasn't stopped the USDA, as they feel they are doing what is right. So they forge ahead even though their political A**es are on the line too. Would Japan like the USDA be changing their rules if they thought their consumers health would be put at risk?

Maybe if I highlight the questions you will answer them :wink:
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
I like the highlight thing Tam, and I like it that you are finally standing up and expressing an opinion. Cheers.

Tam
why didn't the Japanese GOVERNMENT just demand 100% testing right from the start and Save themselves the political headache of the process of changing their rules against their consumers wishes?

By holding their ground against the demands of the USDA and the blind followers in Canada, Japan is demanding 100% testing from countries that the OIE says have BSE. Just because there is no protocal in place, it is your opinion that that is Japans fault. Has the USA or Canada ever asked the Japanese if they would take BSE tested beef? I suspect you will answer my BOLD questions as well.

Tam
I see Japan as demanding BSE testing so our diffenences of opinion make this question and the next hard to deal with.

Tam
Could the reason they didn't be because they were looking for a way out of the expenses of testing cattle they, with their 100% testing, had never found BSE in?

Sorry, I don't understand this question. I'll take a crack at it anyway. Maybe they were looking for a way out of the expense of testing, but what has that got to do with anything. There is no science in play here at all, just like the border with Canada and the USA. Everyone has taken the position of getting whatever they can out of BSEconomics. Every move is either politically of economically motivated and in most cases Both.

Would Japan like the USDA be changing their rules if they thought their consumers health would be put at risk?

They are using the human health issue right now Tam. That is what makes BSE the best economic game in town.

Thank you for your question today, I'm glad to give my unbiased opinion to anyone, and hope you have a great day. Ag --- I mean Randy Kaiser
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
Ever notice how the story gets written and the way its directed like 100% bse testing for the Japanese. Everyone has taken the position of getting whatever they can out of BSEconomics. Every move is either politically of economically motivated and in most cases Both.
LIKE;
www.foodsystemsinsider.com

Greg Henderson
Editorial director
[email protected]
Kristal Arnold
Editor
[email protected]
800-255-5113

Board of Advisers
Charles Ahlem
Founder, Hilmar Cheese Co.
Dennis DiPietre
Pork-industry consultant
Thomas Helscher
Director of global
industry affairs, Monsanto
Daryl Olsen, DVM
Audubon-Manning Veterinary
Clinic Management Services
Mike Robach
VP food safety, Cargill
John Story
Grocery-industry consultant
Warren Weibert
Owner,
Decatur County Feedyard
Brad White, DVM
Mississippi State College
of Veterinary Medicine

Corporate Partners

Food Systems Insider
is produced as a supplement to:
DROVERS
PORK
DAIRY HERD MANAGEMENT
SWINE PRACTITIONER
BOVINE VETERINARIAN
MEAT & SEAFOOD
MERCHANDISING
...and...
MEAT&POULTRY MAGAZINE
(a Sosland publication)
Copyright 2005
Insider on the Web:
www.foodsystemsinsider.com
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
rkaiser"]I like the highlight thing Tam, and I like it that you are finally standing up and expressing an opinion. Cheers.

Tam
why didn't the Japanese GOVERNMENT just demand 100% testing right from the start and Save themselves the political headache of the process of changing their rules against their consumers wishes?

By holding their ground against the demands of the USDA and the blind followers in Canada, Japan is demanding 100% testing from countries that the OIE says have BSE. Just because there is no protocal in place, it is your opinion that that is Japans fault. Has the USA or Canada ever asked the Japanese if they would take BSE tested beef? I suspect you will answer my BOLD questions as well.

Randy why should the US or Canada ask if that is not what they thinks or the OIE thinks is sciencifically neccesary? Why didn't Japan ask if they truly wanted 100% testing? It is their consumer they are suppose to be protecting.

Tam
I see Japan as demanding BSE testing so our diffenences of opinion make this question and the next hard to deal with.

Can you bring anything to back this up as in a request from the Japanese government demanding 100% testing. No because the Japanese government is working on changing their protocol to testing over twenty months aren't they? Why would they demand one thing (100% testing) and then change their rules to match what the US had negotiated (over twenty month testing)?


Tam
Could the reason they didn't be because they were looking for a way out of the expenses of testing cattle they, with their 100% testing, had never found BSE in?

Sorry, I don't understand this question. I'll take a crack at it anyway. Maybe they were looking for a way out of the expense of testing, but what has that got to do with anything. There is no science in play here at all, just like the border with Canada and the USA. Everyone has taken the position of getting whatever they can out of BSEconomics. Every move is either politically of economically motivated and in most cases Both.

So Randy all the testing that Japan did on under twenty month old cattle with not one positive test result is not enough science to prove to them or you that it is not sciencifially neccesary to test those animals? :roll:


Would Japan like the USDA be changing their rules if they thought their consumers health would be put at risk?

They are using the human health issue right now Tam. That is what makes BSE the best economic game in town.

Who is Randy the USDA is trying to follow the best known science and open the border as they see that Canada is not a risk to human health . Japan is changing their rules as their testing has proven there is minimal risk to human health in cattle under twenty months because of the test results they have been coming up with since they started their 100% testing Protocol. So who besides R-CALF and their followers in the US and a bunch of Japanese consumers are using health issues?

Thank you for your question today, I'm glad to give my unbiased opinion to anyone, and hope you have a great day. Ag --- I mean Randy Kaiser
Now Randy would you like to bring something beside your unbiased opinion to prove what you said.
 

Latest posts

Top