BSE trail goes cold

[Oldtimer]

oldtimer
correct me if i am wrong
a BRAND is used to prove ownership? not indentifcation!
are your eartags so unique that no one else could ever have them?

let me give you a possible scenero that FAULTS your claim that
your cattle are traceable back to you, keep in mind that this is only a possible situation!

1: you sell a cow calf pair (branded tagged and inspected to an out of state buyer)

2: out of state buyer crosses 3 state lines (LEAGALLY) and arrives at his/her destination never rebranded

3: said cow/calf pair escapes and wonders into a different county and is found by someone who keeps them for a while and that person sells them to private treaty no inspection

4: the new owner smiles when they notice the brand on the animal is the same as thiers they remove the eartag replace it with ther own at this point traceability is lost is it not?
not saying this happened just saying it could happen so your traceability with brand and eartag is FAULTED

BRANDS are only proof of ownership in a specific local ONLY, not from state to state!!

I guess a coincidence where the animal ended up with the same brand does occur on occasion- probability is probably less than the retention rate loss on the M-ID tags....

The brand system will only work if you use it- same as the ID system will only work if the owner keeps records....In Montana that cow would not have been able to be sold by the person running astray- it would have been tracked down to its previous owner or been seized as property of the State...You can't sell a cow with a brand that is not yours without having ownership paperwork.....But almost everyone up here rebrands immediately- many times before the cattle leave the salebarn...
The feedlots vaccinate and rebrand calves as they come off the truck....Also if the animal had gone to another brand state like Wyo or ND, the owner would have had to show inspection paperwork in order to resell it each time...

I'm not against ID- in fact I've been a 30+ year proponent of it-- but the system we have has worked great in our state and still does-- I don't think the federal government should be pushing a mandatory system down our throats for instate cattle- for these lazy states that have done absolutely nothing on there own- great, make the state set up a system...Cattle going out of state or into interstate transport- great...But let each state use what works best for them to monitor the instate movement.....

I think you and WORANCH need to go look at the "original" USDA proposal developed by the corporate world and the USDA...Now since they have received opposition they are backing off on a lot of this- calling it "voluntary" and saying that cattle won't have to be IDed until sold, etc. etc.-- but their original plan- which they are still trying to implement, just at a slower rate and now piece by piece, state by state, is much more restrictive........

 

[cmjust0]

Yeah lets see 15 does to get 50 head that is about roughly 3.2 kids per doe .. what a joke ..your dreaming..Again Thats also equivalant to about 4 A.U.M..On what 27 acres .Not including cows ...Hope you got irrigation.

At 2 kids/doe: 15 does + 30 kids + 1 buck = 46 animals.
At 3.2 kids/doe: 15 does + 48 kids + 1 buck = 64 animals.

Maybe 46 American is 64 Canadian?? :lol:

All math aside, goats are browsers and not grazers.. There's only about a 20% overlap between what goats eat and what cattle eat. In other words, goats can be added to the lineup with virtually no impact on forage available to cattle.

 

[cmjust0]

ONE MORE TIME .


If the cow does not leave your place you do not have to tag it . A vet can come out and work your cattle they do not have to be tagged.

ONE MORE TIME...

You're wrong. Part of NAIS says that animal 'sightings' must be recorded, which means that vets have to report which animals they work on. If there's no tag, they have to report that too.

So, unless you want APHIS climbing up your ass, you'll need to have your animals tagged if you want a vet's assistance -- even if you never 'carry' them to the vet per se.

 

[cmjust0]

You won,t have a choice If you want sell your cattle..

It's not the individual choice that makes a difference.. It's the collective supply side of the market.. People will get out when they stop making money.. When that happens, shortages occur and prices go up.. Prices go up, and producers get in, and prices come down, and producers get out, and prices come up, and producers get in, and prices go down, and producers get out............ Smaller price swings, and fewer producers getting in/dropping out with each swing.. Getting the point yet?? Hopefully you can see that, eventually, the market stabilizes at a price point where producers make money on their products, and the demand is being met.

Look, do yourself a favor: go find a community college somewhere and sign up for Economics 101.. It's all there, and it's REALLY simple.

 

[cmjust0]

While WORANCH and I don,t like each other much.

I,m willing to bet he has likely forgotten more about treating sick animals ,then you will ever know with an attitude like yours.

And how will my attitude toward my own government prevent me from learning how to treat sick animals?? :roll:

 

[frenchie]

You won,t have a choice If you want sell your cattle..

It's not the individual choice that makes a difference.. It's the collective supply side of the market.. People will get out when they stop making money.. When that happens, shortages occur and prices go up.. Prices go up, and producers get in, and prices come down, and producers get out, and prices come up, and producers get in, and prices go down, and producers get out............ Smaller price swings, and fewer producers getting in/dropping out with each swing.. Getting the point yet?? Hopefully you can see that, eventually, the market stabilizes at a price point where producers make money on their products, and the demand is being met.

Look, do yourself a favor: go find a community college somewhere and sign up for Economics 101.. It's all there, and it's REALLY simple.

Do yourself a favor...realize that increasing or reduceing cattle production..takes time.Its not like turning on a tap.
You can,t repeatedly get in a business on the high side and repeatedly out on the down side.

 

[frenchie]

Yeah lets see 15 does to get 50 head that is about roughly 3.2 kids per doe .. what a joke ..your dreaming..Again Thats also equivalant to about 4 A.U.M..On what 27 acres .Not including cows ...Hope you got irrigation.

At 2 kids/doe: 15 does + 30 kids + 1 buck = 46 animals.
At 3.2 kids/doe: 15 does + 48 kids + 1 buck = 64 animals.

Maybe 46 American is 64 Canadian?? :lol: .

You will not wean 2 kids per doe :lol:

All math aside, goats are browsers and not grazers.. There's only about a 20% overlap between what goats eat and what cattle eat. In other words, goats can be added to the lineup with virtually no impact on forage available to cattle.

My in-laws had 400 does...So I know what goats eat is mostly browse, problem is they tend to eat themselves out of it.

 

[frenchie]

While WORANCH and I don,t like each other much.

I,m willing to bet he has likely forgotten more about treating sick animals ,then you will ever know with an attitude like yours.

And how will my attitude toward my own government prevent me from learning how to treat sick animals?? :roll:

I was refering to your attitude to WORANCH...Not the goverment.

Ever occur to you :idea: , that you may actually learn something from him regardlessly of each others opinons on N.A.I.S. Likely if you ever needed advice about an animal. He would do his best to help you.

 

[WORANCH]

ONE MORE TIME .


If the cow does not leave your place you do not have to tag it . A vet can come out and work your cattle they do not have to be tagged.

ONE MORE TIME...

You're wrong. Part of NAIS says that animal 'sightings' must be recorded, which means that vets have to report which animals they work on. If there's no tag, they have to report that too.

So, unless you want APHIS climbing up your ass, you'll need to have your animals tagged if you want a vet's assistance -- even if you never 'carry' them to the vet per se.

Ok your right . :shock:

But so everyone will know your right PLEASE post the NAIS web link to this infomation.

 

[cmjust0]

Do yourself a favor...realize that increasing or reduceing cattle production..takes time.Its not like turning on a tap.
You can,t repeatedly get in a business on the high side and repeatedly out on the down side.

I never said it was like turning on a tap.. And, again, it's not necessarily that *I* would be getting in and out, or you, or the next individual.. It's a trend. There would be a trend toward higher production on the high side, and a trend toward lower production on the low side.. It's not even necessarily the same people getting in and out..

I'm having a hard time understanding how anyone could be so stubborn as to take their argument all the way to the point of trying to undermine something as proven and reliable as supply and demand.. I mean, is this really your argument?? Are you really suggesting that supply and demand doesn't really apply to the cattle business? :roll:

 

[cmjust0]

You will not wean 2 kids per doe

Ok, let's go back to what I originally wrote:

If I had 15 does and a buck, I could end up with close to 50 animals that need tags..

Best I can tell, 46 is close to 50.. And, though I may not wean 2 kids/doe, the potential exists -- hence the 'could' part.. So, I stick by what I said: I *could* end up with close to 50 animals that need tags.

What am I missing? Where am I wrong? :roll:

My in-laws had 400 does...So I know what goats eat is mostly browse, problem is they tend to eat themselves out of it.

If you stock at too high a rate, anything will eat itself out of whatever it eats... What's your point?

You were the one who was trying to compare cattle to goats, as though they were apples to apples.. They're not. And, as far as AUMs go, 5-6 mature goats = 1 1000lb cow, depending on where you look.. 15 does and a buck = three 1000lb cows.. I dunno about where you are, but 2 acres to cow/calf pair isn't unheard of around here.. Could be more, could be less, as every property is different.. With 25+ acres, that's a potential for 12 AU's and change.. I have more pasture than browse, so 15 does, a buck, and 9 cows would be a 75/25 split between grazers and browsers, at maximum potential..

In any case, those are the levels I'll be building toward -- not starting with.. If it turns out 10 does, a buck, and six cows is the right stocking rate, then that's where I stop.

Getting back to the actual issue, those lesser numbers STILL make for a *potential* of 43 tagged animals at certain times..

10 does + 20 kids + 1 buck + 6 cows + 6 calves = 43 tags.

Again, what am I missing??

 

[cmjust0]

I was refering to your attitude to WORANCH...Not the goverment.

Ever occur to you , that you may actually learn something from him regardlessly of each others opinons on N.A.I.S. Likely if you ever needed advice about an animal. He would do his best to help you.

Of course I've thought about it, but I'm not going to keep my mouth shut about NAIS just because I might want help from somebody someday.. I figure it like this.. If ever you or Bez! or WORANCH or Texan or anybody else I've argued NAIS with ever has a problem that I can help with, I'm there.

Do whatcha gotta do, but I think life's too short to hold grudges.

 

[cmjust0]

Sure thing :cboy:

http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/abo ... _42505.pdf -- The following is on page 15.

Event Code # Description
1 AIN tag distributed – AIN is distributed to a premises or Nonproducer Participant (tags transferred
to another entity in the distribution chain).
2 Tag applied – AIN tag is applied to an animal
3 Moved in – Animal is moved into a premises
4 Moved out – Animal is moved out of a premises
5 Lost Tag – New tag is applied to an animal that lost a tag and previous AIN is unknown
6 Replaced Tag or Re-Tagged – New tag is applied to an animal that lost a tag and previous AIN
is known
7 Imported – Animal is imported into the U.S.
8 Exported – Animal is exported out of the U.S.
9 Sighting – Animal has a confirmed sighting at a location, no movement has occurred. (Ex: veterinarian sighting)

Hows that?

 

[WORANCH]

Sure thing :cboy:

http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/abo ... _42505.pdf -- The following is on page 15.

Event Code # Description
1 AIN tag distributed – AIN is distributed to a premises or Nonproducer Participant (tags transferred
to another entity in the distribution chain).
2 Tag applied – AIN tag is applied to an animal
3 Moved in – Animal is moved into a premises
4 Moved out – Animal is moved out of a premises
5 Lost Tag – New tag is applied to an animal that lost a tag and previous AIN is unknown
6 Replaced Tag or Re-Tagged – New tag is applied to an animal that lost a tag and previous AIN
is known
7 Imported – Animal is imported into the U.S.
8 Exported – Animal is exported out of the U.S.
9 Sighting – Animal has a confirmed sighting at a location, no movement has occurred. (Ex: veterinarian sighting)

Hows that?

Try again, it does'nt say I have to tag animals on my property.
I want to see where it says ever animal on my premise has to be taged.

Go to page 18 bottom of the page .

 

[cmjust0]

Try again, it does'nt say I have to tag animals on my property.
I want to see where it says ever animal on my premise has to be taged.

Go to page 18 bottom of the page .

In searching for whatever it is you're trying to point me toward, I realized that Acrobat's page numbers differ from the document's page numbers.. Acrobat shows 36 pages, as it counts the title page and TOC as pages 1 and 2.. That means my text was pulled from page 13 -- not 15, which was Acrobat's page number.. Just FYI...

Now, I checked acrobat page 18, as well as document page 18, and couldn't find anything remotely related to what we've been discussing.. Maybe you can quote something??

Anyway, read "Event Code 9" again.. Then, try and come up with *one valid reason* why NAIS would stipulate a 'sighting' as an event code that had to be recorded, other than to bust people who weren't in compliance with mandatory tagging???

Just one reason..

 

[frenchie]

I was refering to your attitude to WORANCH...Not the goverment.

Ever occur to you , that you may actually learn something from him regardlessly of each others opinons on N.A.I.S. Likely if you ever needed advice about an animal. He would do his best to help you.

Of course I've thought about it, but I'm not going to keep my mouth shut about NAIS just because I might want help from somebody someday.. I figure it like this.. If ever you or Bez! or WORANCH or Texan or anybody else I've argued NAIS with ever has a problem that I can help with, I'm there.

Do whatcha gotta do, but I think life's too short to hold grudges.

Nobodys asking you to keep your mouth shut about N.A.I.S even if you could.Which is doubtful

There is no need to jump all over WORANCH with this comments.

Good advice.. :roll: Hopefully a lot of newbies look up to you, so we can see more "WHY IS MY COW DYING?" threads around here..

 

[frenchie]

You will not wean 2 kids per doe

Ok, let's go back to what I originally wrote:

If I had 15 does and a buck, I could end up with close to 50 animals that need tags..

Best I can tell, 46 is close to 50.. And, though I may not wean 2 kids/doe, the potential exists -- hence the 'could' part.. So, I stick by what I said: I *could* end up with close to 50 animals that need tags.

What am I missing? Where am I wrong? :roll:

My in-laws had 400 does...So I know what goats eat is mostly browse, problem is they tend to eat themselves out of it.

If you stock at too high a rate, anything will eat itself out of whatever it eats... What's your point?

You were the one who was trying to compare cattle to goats, as though they were apples to apples.. They're not. And, as far as AUMs go, 5-6 mature goats = 1 1000lb cow, depending on where you look.. 15 does and a buck = three 1000lb cows.. I dunno about where you are, but 2 acres to cow/calf pair isn't unheard of around here.. Could be more, could be less, as every property is different.. With 25+ acres, that's a potential for 12 AU's and change.. I have more pasture than browse, so 15 does, a buck, and 9 cows would be a 75/25 split between grazers and browsers, at maximum potential..

In any case, those are the levels I'll be building toward -- not starting with.. If it turns out 10 does, a buck, and six cows is the right stocking rate, then that's where I stop.

Getting back to the actual issue, those lesser numbers STILL make for a *potential* of 43 tagged animals at certain times..

10 does + 20 kids + 1 buck + 6 cows + 6 calves = 43 tags.

Again, what am I missing??

Your overstocked

 

[cmjust0]

Nobodys asking you to keep your mouth shut about N.A.I.S even if you could.Which is doubtful

Yeah, I doubt I could either.. I just can't see myself kicking back "don't worry be happy" style while my Constitutional rights get flushed down the toilet..

I won't apologize for that, either..

There is no need to jump all over WORANCH with this comments.

It was a response, not just a comment.. As I saw it, WORANCH was poking fun at people who call the vet for assistance, which I thought set a bad example..

Still do.

 

[cmjust0]

Your overstocked

You don't know what you're talking about, because you've never laid eyes on my property... :roll:

Besides, think back on what started this whole argument... You couldn't get past thinking ONLY of cattle with regard to NAIS, and criticized me for not being able to tell the difference between the two cows you (incorrectly) assume are the maximum number my land will support... That's what brought up goats..

You also mentioned AUMs.. 5-6 goats = 1 AUM.. A single 1000lb cow = 1 AUM.. So, even if my land would only support 2 cow/calf pairs (which, again, is wrong), it would still support 10 does and a buck easily.. And those 10 could generate 20 kids, which makes 31 animals, and 31 tags.. And that's with *no cows* at all..

Would I be able to visually tell the difference between 20 goat kids, without reading tags?? Nope...

Now, lemme guess.. You could, cause you're just that good, right?? :roll: :roll:

 

[Bez!]

Japan OKs imports of Canadian beef


Canadian Press


Monday, March 20, 2006



CREDIT: AP Photos
A shopper at Hanamasa meat wholesale chain looks at a pack of Canadian beef in Tokyo, Jan. 2006.

TOKYO -- All but one of the eight Canadian meat processing plants that export to Japan have been given a clean bill of health by Japanese inspectors, a government statement said Monday.

All five facilities in Alberta were deemed safe from mad cow disease during the March 12-19 inspections, but one failed to gain export approval because the Canadian government provided inadequate information, the Japanese Health and Agriculture ministries said in a joint statement. There was no elaboration on the missing information.

"Each packer has set down in writing the procedures necessary under the export program, and these procedures are being followed," the statement said.

Tokyo imposed a ban on U.S. and Canadian beef imports in 2003 after the first case of mad cow disease was detected in the two countries, but reopened its market in December to meat from cattle 20 months old or less.

However, Tokyo re-imposed its ban on U.S. beef imports in January after discovering prohibited bone parts in a shipment of American veal.

The deal prohibited the import of spines, brains, bone marrow and other cattle parts thought to be at particularly high risk of containing the disease.

Washington contends the mistaken shipment was an isolated error and did not indicate weaknesses in the American food safety system.

Tokyo, however, has questioned whether the mistake was unique, and whether similar errors might occur in other U.S. facilities certified to export to Japan.

The Canadian plant inspections were routine and unrelated to the illicit U.S. shipment, Health Ministry official Makoto Kanie said.

Japanese officials have now completed their tour of all Canadian facilities that export meat to Japan, according to Kanie.

Eight plants - including the five in Alberta, two in Ontario and one in Saskatchewan - currently have permission to process Tokyo-bound shipments, Kanie said.

Mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, is a degenerative nerve disease in cattle. Eating contaminated meat products has been linked to the rare but fatal variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans.

Canadian beef began reappearing on Tokyo supermarket shelves in December following the two-year ban. However, Canadian officials concede it might take years to rebuild the confidence of Japanese consumers in North American beef.

Entry into Japan is considered key to the long-term recovery plan of Canada's battered beef industry, which had suffered $7 billion in lost exports since 2003. Cattle officials have pinned their hopes on a growing appetite from Pacific Rim countries to help reduce the reliance on the U.S. market, which gobbles up the vast majority of Canadian beef exports.