Judge May Rule Early-Could Close Border to All Beef

[Oldtimer]

U.S. ranchers' group seeks early judgment in devastating mad cow case
BETH GORHAM



WASHINGTON (CP) - A U.S. ranchers' group blocking the border to Canadian cattle is asking for an early judgment in the mad cow case, even before a court hearing scheduled for July in Montana.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America submitted the request this week to the U.S. District Court judge that sided with the group in March and slapped a temporary ban on the cattle trade just days before it was supposed to resume March 7.

U.S. observers were unsure of the likelihood that Judge Richard Cebull would make a move to decide the long-term fate of the border before the full hearing scheduled for July 27 in Billings, Mont.

"Very rarely does that happen," said a government spokesman who didn't want to be named.

But some experts said there's a chance of an early ruling in the case, which has devastated the Canadian industry and U.S. meat packers who said they're losing an estimated $38 million US a week without enough cows to process.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has until June 8 to respond to the latest legal salvo from R-CALF, which also wants an end to trade in processed-beef products.

"We'll lay out why the court should not move quickly," said U.S. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.

"The court will wait for us to file our response."

Dozens of U.S. cattle and farm groups representing the majority of ranchers are supporting Canada in the legal battle.

But R-CALF has long argued Canadian beef and cattle pose safety risks because there have been three mad cow cases north of the border.

It argues officials failed to properly assess the risk of Canadian imports to U.S. herds and humans and acted too quickly to reopen the border.

The group also criticizes testing levels for mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, on both sides of the border, saying they're too low.

The Agribusiness Freedom Foundation released a rebuttal this week of R-CALF's claims Canada doesn't test enough cattle, saying tests each month of 2004 and 2005 have exceeded what the World Organization for Animal Health recommends for an entire year.

Canada has about seven million cattle over the age of 30 months, thought to be at higher risk than younger cows for contracting BSE.

It completed 23,550 tests in 2004 and have already tested 22,883 so far this year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said.

"R-CALF has grossly misrepresented the situation to the public and in court," said Steve Dittmer, the U.S. foundation's executive vice-president.

"How R-CALF reaches it conclusions and justifies its allegations somehow seems to have nothing to do with the real numbers."

The U.S. beef ban began in May 2003 after Canada's first mad cow case, costing the industry some $7 billion Cdn.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture estimates the U.S. beef industry, hit by its own mad cow case 18 months ago and struggling without Canadian imports, lost up to $4.7 billion US last year.

U.S. officials launched an appeal of the March ruling in Montana granting a temporary extension of the cattle ban. But no date has yet been set in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

 

[frenchie]

U.S. ranchers' group seeks early judgment in devastating mad cow case
BETH GORHAM



WASHINGTON (CP) - A U.S. ranchers' group blocking the border to Canadian cattle is asking for an early judgment in the mad cow case, even before a court hearing scheduled for July in Montana.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America submitted the request this week to the U.S. District Court judge that sided with the group in March and slapped a temporary ban on the cattle trade just days before it was supposed to resume March 7.

U.S. observers were unsure of the likelihood that Judge Richard Cebull would make a move to decide the long-term fate of the border before the full hearing scheduled for July 27 in Billings, Mont.

"Very rarely does that happen," said a government spokesman who didn't want to be named.

But some experts said there's a chance of an early ruling in the case, which has devastated the Canadian industry and U.S. meat packers who said they're losing an estimated $38 million US a week without enough cows to process.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has until June 8 to respond to the latest legal salvo from R-CALF, which also wants an end to trade in processed-beef products.

"We'll lay out why the court should not move quickly," said U.S. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.

"The court will wait for us to file our response."

Dozens of U.S. cattle and farm groups representing the majority of ranchers are supporting Canada in the legal battle.

But R-CALF has long argued Canadian beef and cattle pose safety risks because there have been three mad cow cases north of the border.

It argues officials failed to properly assess the risk of Canadian imports to U.S. herds and humans and acted too quickly to reopen the border.

The group also criticizes testing levels for mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, on both sides of the border, saying they're too low.

The Agribusiness Freedom Foundation released a rebuttal this week of R-CALF's claims Canada doesn't test enough cattle, saying tests each month of 2004 and 2005 have exceeded what the World Organization for Animal Health recommends for an entire year.

Canada has about seven million cattle over the age of 30 months, thought to be at higher risk than younger cows for contracting BSE.

It completed 23,550 tests in 2004 and have already tested 22,883 so far this year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said.

"R-CALF has grossly misrepresented the situation to the public and in court," said Steve Dittmer, the U.S. foundation's executive vice-president.

"How R-CALF reaches it conclusions and justifies its allegations somehow seems to have nothing to do with the real numbers."

The U.S. beef ban began in May 2003 after Canada's first mad cow case, costing the industry some $7 billion Cdn.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture estimates the U.S. beef industry, hit by its own mad cow case 18 months ago and struggling without Canadian imports, lost up to $4.7 billion US last year.

U.S. officials launched an appeal of the March ruling in Montana granting a temporary extension of the cattle ban. But no date has yet been set in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks R-Calf ..I hope you @#@#%%@##,s reap what you sow.

 

[Oldtimer]

U.S. ranchers' group seeks early judgment in devastating mad cow case
BETH GORHAM



WASHINGTON (CP) - A U.S. ranchers' group blocking the border to Canadian cattle is asking for an early judgment in the mad cow case, even before a court hearing scheduled for July in Montana.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America submitted the request this week to the U.S. District Court judge that sided with the group in March and slapped a temporary ban on the cattle trade just days before it was supposed to resume March 7.

U.S. observers were unsure of the likelihood that Judge Richard Cebull would make a move to decide the long-term fate of the border before the full hearing scheduled for July 27 in Billings, Mont.

"Very rarely does that happen," said a government spokesman who didn't want to be named.

But some experts said there's a chance of an early ruling in the case, which has devastated the Canadian industry and U.S. meat packers who said they're losing an estimated $38 million US a week without enough cows to process.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has until June 8 to respond to the latest legal salvo from R-CALF, which also wants an end to trade in processed-beef products.

"We'll lay out why the court should not move quickly," said U.S. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.

"The court will wait for us to file our response."

Dozens of U.S. cattle and farm groups representing the majority of ranchers are supporting Canada in the legal battle.

But R-CALF has long argued Canadian beef and cattle pose safety risks because there have been three mad cow cases north of the border.

It argues officials failed to properly assess the risk of Canadian imports to U.S. herds and humans and acted too quickly to reopen the border.

The group also criticizes testing levels for mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, on both sides of the border, saying they're too low.

The Agribusiness Freedom Foundation released a rebuttal this week of R-CALF's claims Canada doesn't test enough cattle, saying tests each month of 2004 and 2005 have exceeded what the World Organization for Animal Health recommends for an entire year.

Canada has about seven million cattle over the age of 30 months, thought to be at higher risk than younger cows for contracting BSE.

It completed 23,550 tests in 2004 and have already tested 22,883 so far this year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said.

"R-CALF has grossly misrepresented the situation to the public and in court," said Steve Dittmer, the U.S. foundation's executive vice-president.

"How R-CALF reaches it conclusions and justifies its allegations somehow seems to have nothing to do with the real numbers."

The U.S. beef ban began in May 2003 after Canada's first mad cow case, costing the industry some $7 billion Cdn.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture estimates the U.S. beef industry, hit by its own mad cow case 18 months ago and struggling without Canadian imports, lost up to $4.7 billion US last year.

U.S. officials launched an appeal of the March ruling in Montana granting a temporary extension of the cattle ban. But no date has yet been set in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks R-Calf ..I hope you @#@#%%@##,s reap what you sow.

frenchie- You cuss them- while I thank them....By fighting to keep our beef quality and safety standards the highest in the world they will keep our industry strong and hopefully build back up the worldwide confidence that was lost when the Canadian cow was found in Washington......

 

[mwj]

Oldtimer
What about your poor daughter that is a single mom and can't aford all this high priced beef? Won't your high profits from beef force her and many others to switch to turkey, chicken and pork. Should you be gloating about your present good fortune?

 

[Oldtimer]

Oldtimer
What about your poor daughter that is a single mom and can't aford all this high priced beef? Won't your high profits from beef force her and many others to switch to turkey, chicken and pork. Should you be gloating about your present good fortune?

If we pass a few more Free trade agreements she may be living on bacon and beans - and still won't be able to tell what country they come from ;-)

 

[frenchie]

U.S. ranchers' group seeks early judgment in devastating mad cow case
BETH GORHAM



WASHINGTON (CP) - A U.S. ranchers' group blocking the border to Canadian cattle is asking for an early judgment in the mad cow case, even before a court hearing scheduled for July in Montana.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America submitted the request this week to the U.S. District Court judge that sided with the group in March and slapped a temporary ban on the cattle trade just days before it was supposed to resume March 7.

U.S. observers were unsure of the likelihood that Judge Richard Cebull would make a move to decide the long-term fate of the border before the full hearing scheduled for July 27 in Billings, Mont.

"Very rarely does that happen," said a government spokesman who didn't want to be named.

But some experts said there's a chance of an early ruling in the case, which has devastated the Canadian industry and U.S. meat packers who said they're losing an estimated $38 million US a week without enough cows to process.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has until June 8 to respond to the latest legal salvo from R-CALF, which also wants an end to trade in processed-beef products.

"We'll lay out why the court should not move quickly," said U.S. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.

"The court will wait for us to file our response."

Dozens of U.S. cattle and farm groups representing the majority of ranchers are supporting Canada in the legal battle.

But R-CALF has long argued Canadian beef and cattle pose safety risks because there have been three mad cow cases north of the border.

It argues officials failed to properly assess the risk of Canadian imports to U.S. herds and humans and acted too quickly to reopen the border.

The group also criticizes testing levels for mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, on both sides of the border, saying they're too low.

The Agribusiness Freedom Foundation released a rebuttal this week of R-CALF's claims Canada doesn't test enough cattle, saying tests each month of 2004 and 2005 have exceeded what the World Organization for Animal Health recommends for an entire year.

Canada has about seven million cattle over the age of 30 months, thought to be at higher risk than younger cows for contracting BSE.

It completed 23,550 tests in 2004 and have already tested 22,883 so far this year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said.

"R-CALF has grossly misrepresented the situation to the public and in court," said Steve Dittmer, the U.S. foundation's executive vice-president.

"How R-CALF reaches it conclusions and justifies its allegations somehow seems to have nothing to do with the real numbers."

The U.S. beef ban began in May 2003 after Canada's first mad cow case, costing the industry some $7 billion Cdn.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture estimates the U.S. beef industry, hit by its own mad cow case 18 months ago and struggling without Canadian imports, lost up to $4.7 billion US last year.

U.S. officials launched an appeal of the March ruling in Montana granting a temporary extension of the cattle ban. But no date has yet been set in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks R-Calf ..I hope you @#@#%%@##,s reap what you sow.

frenchie- You cuss them- while I thank them....By fighting to keep our beef quality and safety standards the highest in the world they will keep our industry strong and hopefully build back up the worldwide confidence that was lost when the Canadian cow was found in Washington......

If they were really fighting to ensure beef safety, they would have launched slander charges against the u.s.d.a vets .Or lobbied the gov,t to get to the bottom of the alleged b.s.e cover-up in the U.S. This is pure greed.

This latest R-Calf manuveur is simply to get this legal buisness over ,before a ....R- Calf runs out of money

B ...to get the legal dirty deed done to ensure higher prices for the U.S fall run of calves.

 

[Oldtimer]

U.S. ranchers' group seeks early judgment in devastating mad cow case
BETH GORHAM



WASHINGTON (CP) - A U.S. ranchers' group blocking the border to Canadian cattle is asking for an early judgment in the mad cow case, even before a court hearing scheduled for July in Montana.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America submitted the request this week to the U.S. District Court judge that sided with the group in March and slapped a temporary ban on the cattle trade just days before it was supposed to resume March 7.

U.S. observers were unsure of the likelihood that Judge Richard Cebull would make a move to decide the long-term fate of the border before the full hearing scheduled for July 27 in Billings, Mont.

"Very rarely does that happen," said a government spokesman who didn't want to be named.

But some experts said there's a chance of an early ruling in the case, which has devastated the Canadian industry and U.S. meat packers who said they're losing an estimated $38 million US a week without enough cows to process.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has until June 8 to respond to the latest legal salvo from R-CALF, which also wants an end to trade in processed-beef products.

"We'll lay out why the court should not move quickly," said U.S. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.

"The court will wait for us to file our response."

Dozens of U.S. cattle and farm groups representing the majority of ranchers are supporting Canada in the legal battle.

But R-CALF has long argued Canadian beef and cattle pose safety risks because there have been three mad cow cases north of the border.

It argues officials failed to properly assess the risk of Canadian imports to U.S. herds and humans and acted too quickly to reopen the border.

The group also criticizes testing levels for mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, on both sides of the border, saying they're too low.

The Agribusiness Freedom Foundation released a rebuttal this week of R-CALF's claims Canada doesn't test enough cattle, saying tests each month of 2004 and 2005 have exceeded what the World Organization for Animal Health recommends for an entire year.

Canada has about seven million cattle over the age of 30 months, thought to be at higher risk than younger cows for contracting BSE.

It completed 23,550 tests in 2004 and have already tested 22,883 so far this year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said.

"R-CALF has grossly misrepresented the situation to the public and in court," said Steve Dittmer, the U.S. foundation's executive vice-president.

"How R-CALF reaches it conclusions and justifies its allegations somehow seems to have nothing to do with the real numbers."

The U.S. beef ban began in May 2003 after Canada's first mad cow case, costing the industry some $7 billion Cdn.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture estimates the U.S. beef industry, hit by its own mad cow case 18 months ago and struggling without Canadian imports, lost up to $4.7 billion US last year.

U.S. officials launched an appeal of the March ruling in Montana granting a temporary extension of the cattle ban. But no date has yet been set in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks R-Calf ..I hope you @#@#%%@##,s reap what you sow.

frenchie- You cuss them- while I thank them....By fighting to keep our beef quality and safety standards the highest in the world they will keep our industry strong and hopefully build back up the worldwide confidence that was lost when the Canadian cow was found in Washington......

If they were really fighting to ensure beef safety, they would have launched slander charges against the u.s.d.a vets .Or lobbied the gov,t to get to the bottom of the alleged b.s.e cover-up in the U.S. This is pure greed.

This latest R-Calf manuveur is simply to get this legal buisness over ,before a ....R- Calf runs out of money

B ...to get the legal dirty deed done to ensure higher prices for the U.S fall run of calves.

How about C.--to get the border shut off from all Canadian beef so we can get our export markets reopened--USDA has already had to alter its export standards and set up the new US verified product (BEV) program for Egypt and Taiwan-- there could be others (Japan) demanding it also....It may be the only way to keep a constant export market open- especially if several more Canadian positive cows show up- which is what the the world scientists and CFIA theorize because of statistics.......If we're still taking Canadian beef our exports could slam shut everytime one of these cows show up.....

 

[frenchie]

U.S. ranchers' group seeks early judgment in devastating mad cow case
BETH GORHAM



WASHINGTON (CP) - A U.S. ranchers' group blocking the border to Canadian cattle is asking for an early judgment in the mad cow case, even before a court hearing scheduled for July in Montana.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America submitted the request this week to the U.S. District Court judge that sided with the group in March and slapped a temporary ban on the cattle trade just days before it was supposed to resume March 7.

U.S. observers were unsure of the likelihood that Judge Richard Cebull would make a move to decide the long-term fate of the border before the full hearing scheduled for July 27 in Billings, Mont.

"Very rarely does that happen," said a government spokesman who didn't want to be named.

But some experts said there's a chance of an early ruling in the case, which has devastated the Canadian industry and U.S. meat packers who said they're losing an estimated $38 million US a week without enough cows to process.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has until June 8 to respond to the latest legal salvo from R-CALF, which also wants an end to trade in processed-beef products.

"We'll lay out why the court should not move quickly," said U.S. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.

"The court will wait for us to file our response."

Dozens of U.S. cattle and farm groups representing the majority of ranchers are supporting Canada in the legal battle.

But R-CALF has long argued Canadian beef and cattle pose safety risks because there have been three mad cow cases north of the border.

It argues officials failed to properly assess the risk of Canadian imports to U.S. herds and humans and acted too quickly to reopen the border.

The group also criticizes testing levels for mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, on both sides of the border, saying they're too low.

The Agribusiness Freedom Foundation released a rebuttal this week of R-CALF's claims Canada doesn't test enough cattle, saying tests each month of 2004 and 2005 have exceeded what the World Organization for Animal Health recommends for an entire year.

Canada has about seven million cattle over the age of 30 months, thought to be at higher risk than younger cows for contracting BSE.

It completed 23,550 tests in 2004 and have already tested 22,883 so far this year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said.

"R-CALF has grossly misrepresented the situation to the public and in court," said Steve Dittmer, the U.S. foundation's executive vice-president.

"How R-CALF reaches it conclusions and justifies its allegations somehow seems to have nothing to do with the real numbers."

The U.S. beef ban began in May 2003 after Canada's first mad cow case, costing the industry some $7 billion Cdn.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture estimates the U.S. beef industry, hit by its own mad cow case 18 months ago and struggling without Canadian imports, lost up to $4.7 billion US last year.

U.S. officials launched an appeal of the March ruling in Montana granting a temporary extension of the cattle ban. But no date has yet been set in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks R-Calf ..I hope you @#@#%%@##,s reap what you sow.

frenchie- You cuss them- while I thank them....By fighting to keep our beef quality and safety standards the highest in the world they will keep our industry strong and hopefully build back up the worldwide confidence that was lost when the Canadian cow was found in Washington......

If they were really fighting to ensure beef safety, they would have launched slander charges against the u.s.d.a vets .Or lobbied the gov,t to get to the bottom of the alleged b.s.e cover-up in the U.S. This is pure greed.

This latest R-Calf manuveur is simply to get this legal buisness over ,before a ....R- Calf runs out of money

B ...to get the legal dirty deed done to ensure higher prices for the U.S fall run of calves.

If we're still taking Canadian beef our exports could slam shut everytime one of these cows show up.....

Yeah right.. you are.... beef from animals under 30 months of age..?

its all about money OT admit it.

 

[Oldtimer]

U.S. ranchers' group seeks early judgment in devastating mad cow case
BETH GORHAM



WASHINGTON (CP) - A U.S. ranchers' group blocking the border to Canadian cattle is asking for an early judgment in the mad cow case, even before a court hearing scheduled for July in Montana.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America submitted the request this week to the U.S. District Court judge that sided with the group in March and slapped a temporary ban on the cattle trade just days before it was supposed to resume March 7.

U.S. observers were unsure of the likelihood that Judge Richard Cebull would make a move to decide the long-term fate of the border before the full hearing scheduled for July 27 in Billings, Mont.

"Very rarely does that happen," said a government spokesman who didn't want to be named.

But some experts said there's a chance of an early ruling in the case, which has devastated the Canadian industry and U.S. meat packers who said they're losing an estimated $38 million US a week without enough cows to process.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has until June 8 to respond to the latest legal salvo from R-CALF, which also wants an end to trade in processed-beef products.

"We'll lay out why the court should not move quickly," said U.S. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.

"The court will wait for us to file our response."

Dozens of U.S. cattle and farm groups representing the majority of ranchers are supporting Canada in the legal battle.

But R-CALF has long argued Canadian beef and cattle pose safety risks because there have been three mad cow cases north of the border.

It argues officials failed to properly assess the risk of Canadian imports to U.S. herds and humans and acted too quickly to reopen the border.

The group also criticizes testing levels for mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, on both sides of the border, saying they're too low.

The Agribusiness Freedom Foundation released a rebuttal this week of R-CALF's claims Canada doesn't test enough cattle, saying tests each month of 2004 and 2005 have exceeded what the World Organization for Animal Health recommends for an entire year.

Canada has about seven million cattle over the age of 30 months, thought to be at higher risk than younger cows for contracting BSE.

It completed 23,550 tests in 2004 and have already tested 22,883 so far this year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said.

"R-CALF has grossly misrepresented the situation to the public and in court," said Steve Dittmer, the U.S. foundation's executive vice-president.

"How R-CALF reaches it conclusions and justifies its allegations somehow seems to have nothing to do with the real numbers."

The U.S. beef ban began in May 2003 after Canada's first mad cow case, costing the industry some $7 billion Cdn.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture estimates the U.S. beef industry, hit by its own mad cow case 18 months ago and struggling without Canadian imports, lost up to $4.7 billion US last year.

U.S. officials launched an appeal of the March ruling in Montana granting a temporary extension of the cattle ban. But no date has yet been set in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks R-Calf ..I hope you @#@#%%@##,s reap what you sow.

frenchie- You cuss them- while I thank them....By fighting to keep our beef quality and safety standards the highest in the world they will keep our industry strong and hopefully build back up the worldwide confidence that was lost when the Canadian cow was found in Washington......

If they were really fighting to ensure beef safety, they would have launched slander charges against the u.s.d.a vets .Or lobbied the gov,t to get to the bottom of the alleged b.s.e cover-up in the U.S. This is pure greed.

This latest R-Calf manuveur is simply to get this legal buisness over ,before a ....R- Calf runs out of money

B ...to get the legal dirty deed done to ensure higher prices for the U.S fall run of calves.

If we're still taking Canadian beef our exports could slam shut everytime one of these cows show up.....

Yeah right.. you are.... beef from animals under 30 months of age..?

its all about money OT admit it.

You are right frenchie -- It is all about money--But isn't that what the whole industry is about- the reason most people farm and ranch- the reason they import and export and buy and sell--It all comes down to earn money to make a living...

And as far as the 30 month age--It appears as tho the USDA is the only one using that magic age- the Asians are requiring under 20 months- Europes magic "safe age" appears to be 24 months....It will be interesting to hear USDA explain their "sound science" reasoning for the age differences to the Judge- ......

 

[frenchie]

U.S. ranchers' group seeks early judgment in devastating mad cow case
BETH GORHAM



WASHINGTON (CP) - A U.S. ranchers' group blocking the border to Canadian cattle is asking for an early judgment in the mad cow case, even before a court hearing scheduled for July in Montana.

R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America submitted the request this week to the U.S. District Court judge that sided with the group in March and slapped a temporary ban on the cattle trade just days before it was supposed to resume March 7.

U.S. observers were unsure of the likelihood that Judge Richard Cebull would make a move to decide the long-term fate of the border before the full hearing scheduled for July 27 in Billings, Mont.

"Very rarely does that happen," said a government spokesman who didn't want to be named.

But some experts said there's a chance of an early ruling in the case, which has devastated the Canadian industry and U.S. meat packers who said they're losing an estimated $38 million US a week without enough cows to process.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has until June 8 to respond to the latest legal salvo from R-CALF, which also wants an end to trade in processed-beef products.

"We'll lay out why the court should not move quickly," said U.S. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.

"The court will wait for us to file our response."

Dozens of U.S. cattle and farm groups representing the majority of ranchers are supporting Canada in the legal battle.

But R-CALF has long argued Canadian beef and cattle pose safety risks because there have been three mad cow cases north of the border.

It argues officials failed to properly assess the risk of Canadian imports to U.S. herds and humans and acted too quickly to reopen the border.

The group also criticizes testing levels for mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, on both sides of the border, saying they're too low.

The Agribusiness Freedom Foundation released a rebuttal this week of R-CALF's claims Canada doesn't test enough cattle, saying tests each month of 2004 and 2005 have exceeded what the World Organization for Animal Health recommends for an entire year.

Canada has about seven million cattle over the age of 30 months, thought to be at higher risk than younger cows for contracting BSE.

It completed 23,550 tests in 2004 and have already tested 22,883 so far this year, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said.

"R-CALF has grossly misrepresented the situation to the public and in court," said Steve Dittmer, the U.S. foundation's executive vice-president.

"How R-CALF reaches it conclusions and justifies its allegations somehow seems to have nothing to do with the real numbers."

The U.S. beef ban began in May 2003 after Canada's first mad cow case, costing the industry some $7 billion Cdn.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture estimates the U.S. beef industry, hit by its own mad cow case 18 months ago and struggling without Canadian imports, lost up to $4.7 billion US last year.

U.S. officials launched an appeal of the March ruling in Montana granting a temporary extension of the cattle ban. But no date has yet been set in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks R-Calf ..I hope you @#@#%%@##,s reap what you sow.

frenchie- You cuss them- while I thank them....By fighting to keep our beef quality and safety standards the highest in the world they will keep our industry strong and hopefully build back up the worldwide confidence that was lost when the Canadian cow was found in Washington......

If they were really fighting to ensure beef safety, they would have launched slander charges against the u.s.d.a vets .Or lobbied the gov,t to get to the bottom of the alleged b.s.e cover-up in the U.S. This is pure greed.

This latest R-Calf manuveur is simply to get this legal buisness over ,before a ....R- Calf runs out of money

B ...to get the legal dirty deed done to ensure higher prices for the U.S fall run of calves.

If we're still taking Canadian beef our exports could slam shut everytime one of these cows show up.....

Yeah right.. you are.... beef from animals under 30 months of age..?

its all about money OT admit it.

You are right frenchie -- It is all about money--But isn't that what the whole industry is about- the reason most people farm and ranch- the reason they import and export and buy and sell--It all comes down to earn money to make a living.........

Oldtimer.What do you think the Canadians are trying to do .. They just want to make a living as well.

And as far as the 30 month age--It appears as tho the USDA is the only one using that magic age- the Asians are requiring under 20 months- Europes magic "safe age" appears to be 24 months....It will be interesting to hear USDA explain their "sound science" reasoning for the age differences to the Judge- ......

Oldtimer ..seems like no one can make up their mind on an age.

So when can we expect R-Calf to go after those former U.S.D.A vets and their statements.

 

[Bez]

Gents - I step in - if only to cut off those darned great big long quotes that make me scroll forever! :D

OT - you wrote:

How about C.--to get the border shut off from all Canadian beef so we can get our export markets reopened--

I have a few questions that you may be able to answer -

The U.S. of A. does not produce enough beef to supply it's own domestic market AND handle the foreign markets. The U.S. of A. - once upon a time - imported those additional cattle - which in turn were used to supply the additional market needs.

So, how does the U.S. of A. plan to supply their domestic and planned export markets when the national herd levels do not provide enough "walking product?" Mexico, Brazil and Argentina?

I may be wrong on my next comment - but - I believe the average slaughter weight of cattle in the U.S. of A. is now somewhat lighter than prior to the ban.

Is this not indicative of a potential upcoming shortage of cattle - which of course will drive the price of walking product up? Certainly good for the producer in the short term - not too sure what it might mean in the long term - I have a couple of theories, but this is not the place - maybe in another topic of discussion.

And how long before the U.S. of A. is capable of using the national herd to regain foreign markets while supplying domestic markets?

And finally, how do those slaughter facilities that are closed figure into this this? Are they not an indicator that supply of walking product is actually at all time lows?

I will step out and wait for your response.

Regards

Bez

 

[Oldtimer]

Bez- This is some of what I see coming out of the final court ruling-- The Judge will close the Canadian border to all beef coming down until USDA modifies their Final Rule to protect US consumers and the cattle industry...That will then include everything in it now plus--it may be that no cattle over 20 months (since that has now become the magic "sound science" number) be allowed in--that Canada be required to remove the same SRM's for US import as the US is having to for Asian export--That all beef coming in from Canada be marked and sold as a Product of Canada so consumers can choose on their own.. A court ordered COOL...Also I see him setting up a list of Long term conditions that Canada will have to meet before USDA can look at opening up for OTM beef (like continued testing until Canada can go 7 years without a positive) ....

You are right-- It will make the beef supply tight for a while--But the alternative to the cattle industry is much worse--If we keep letting in Canadian beef, and Canadian cows keep testing positive (I believe CFIA has estimated their could be 10-12 more positives showing up), and losing consumers and markets, we could have it stacking up on the shelves of both countries..... The US herd is regrowing-many drought areas have grass again and we will produce enough to supply our market....

I don't buy all the packer whining -- they come out with these stories every few years....They screamed a few years ago that it was impossible to segregate out foreign beef-- but then did it when the Japanese demanded it...You see them come and go--New packing co-ops with big ideas--2 or 3 years later they are closed or sold out...Right now their is rumor circulating of two new large plants being built in the US....Business must not be too bad.........

 

[Bez]

OT

Appreciate your response - agree with you that the judge will likely close the border to all beef.

In my case I hope I am wrong, but am prepping for the worst. In your case you are hoping for the closure and watch the prices soar if he does.

Still cannot see you folks re-building the export market without the import of cattle from somewhere.

With prices rising to historic levels, I also do not see the export market developing as your own internal price for cattle will keep you out of the foreign markets.

I will not get into the argument of diseased cattle or the argument of quality cattle because you and I will disagree - but in the end, the export market will be driven by profit and loss markers.

If the export market price is too high there will be a reluctance to purchase the beef. Last time I was in Europe, domestic grown meat - horse and beef sold in all EEC countries ran around 18 to 25 Euros per meal in a restaurant. Switzerland almost double. Visiting Japan opened many eyes to the cost of a good steak at almost a 100 bucks in a resaurant. A better quality cut running even higher.

There is a top end for any consumer. If your folks cannot procure the product at a profitable price, will the export market be priced out?

I tend to think so - and certainly for the average working man - pick your country - they all have a limit.

Then what?

Heck, you can buy good RA pairs in my area for under $450 at present and the latest is farmers donating animals to food banks. Cheaper to toss them than to feed them.

I am beginning to think it may be our cattle going to your export markets - especially now that the various associations are talking 100% test. Politics and such be darned. And about time in my opinion.

Feds hate it due to political context twixt us and you - but it is coming - and your country is not the target.

Regards

Bez

 

[frenchie]

-That all beef coming in from Canada be marked and sold as a Product of Canada so consumers can choose on their own.. A court ordered COOL...
.........

Canada isn,t the one rubbing off the product of Canada labels OT..
it leaves here as product of Canada

 

[Bez]

frenchie - you said -

Canada isn,t the one rubbing off the product of Canada labels OT..
it leaves here as product of Canada

Interesting comment - that is something that has not come up before - at least I have not heard it, but it very true.

Makes one think.

Bez

 

[Oldtimer]

frenchie - you said -

Canada isn,t the one rubbing off the product of Canada labels OT..
it leaves here as product of Canada

Interesting comment - that is something that has not come up before - at least I have not heard it, but it very true.

Makes one think.

Bez

That is true that it is the US packer and retailer removing the country labels-- slapping on the USDA stamp and passing it off to consumers as a US product...That is why I have said that R-CALF's fight is not with the Canadians--it is with the packers, retailers, and importers who are perpetating this fraud and with the USDA that allows it...Canada just got caught in the middle-- and then this BSE issue came up which USDA again failed to handle honestly....

And the packers will continue to spend millions to fight M-COOL so that they can pass cheaper imported beef off as a US product- especially with all the new free trade agreements (AFTA, CAFTA, FTAA) coming to be-- they will have sources (South America) for cheap cattle and beef that even the Canadians won't be able to compete with......Then even the Canadians will be fighting for M-COOL.....

 

[frenchie]

frenchie - you said -

Canada isn,t the one rubbing off the product of Canada labels OT..
it leaves here as product of Canada

Interesting comment - that is something that has not come up before - at least I have not heard it, but it very true.

Makes one think.

Bez

Canada just got caught in the middle--

Yep we just got caught in the middle ...

You can sing that song to someone else OT..I don,t believe one word of it.

 

[nikevv]

Bez,very well worded. Oldtimer, what comes around goes around. Your country is Positive for BSE and you know it. It is just a matter of time before you get caught; you can only lie for so long.
As for 100% testing in Canada, no one has presented a formal request to CFIA for 100% testing of beef in any new or old slaughter house.
If this formal request is made, CFIA has stated it would further explore the possibility in hopes of opening more martets around the world.
CFIA has NEVER said no to 100% testing

 

[preston39]

nikevv,
What makes you state so positively the US is BSE positive....or any other Country? Just the % of chance? What about other beef producing countries..such as Australia, New Zeland, etc?

Canada should not feel bad so long as it was doing everything reasonable as prevention measures. I would agree that we in US are not doing everything reasonable to prevent an out break. Thus, we could be next. Canada has been a good beef partner producer and will be again.

 

[Cattle Rack Rancher]

Canada should not feel bad so long as it was doing everything reasonable as prevention measures. I would agree that we in US are not doing everything reasonable to prevent an out break. Thus, we could be next. Canada has been a good beef partner producer and will be again.

The only thing that's making us feel bad is that we are going bankrupt over this thing. Good Luck.