LEGAL-yes ETHICAL-?????

[CattleAnnie]

There is in fact a subclause in NAFTA that stipulates that if a health risk is detected in a product, the trade partner does have the right to refuse importation of the aforementioned product.

If anyone is interested in finding out more on that topic, I believe the NAFTA agreement is posted online.

However, I'm certainly interested in learning more about the subsidies that Canadian cattle producers are supposedly receiving. Sounds nice.

I did, however read a post in the recent past on CT boards about all the subsidies available to people involved in agriculture in the US, and how to find out whom is receiving what kinds and which particular state they are located in.

During a drought a few years back, producers in Southern AB were unable to procure enough feed for their stock, because if I remember correctly, they were unable to compete financially with their neighbours in Montana, who were able to buy hay from AB & Sask because they had been subsidised by the US gov't to help them through their feed shortage. Many of the southern AB area ranchers hauled hay all the way from the Peace River area of AB and BC. They were so desperate that they even bought the blackened hay that was going to be burnt. As a matter of fact, my father gave away a liner load of it to one man, as the poor soul was in such dire straits for feed.

They certainly received no Canadian gov't compensation of any sorts for this. This depletion of hay from the AB & BC Peace River area had a chain-reaction on the producers from that area, as the next year they underwent a drought. There were no stockpiles of feed to be found anywhere. Hay prices were through the roof; even straw was prohibitive. The only thing that kept most folks going was the availablity of grain, which when supplemented with the straw was fed to a large number of herds in that area through the winter. Also many people were feeding straw bales with molasses injected into them to intice the cattle to eat them.Again, no gov't aid/subsidy was given.

Then again, none was either expected or asked for.

As to complying to feedbans, Canada and US had fairly identical implementation of feedbans in both countries. If I remember correctly, there was one feedmill found in non-compliance of the feedban, and I think it was incidental...something about insects or mice that may have been ground in the milling process - hence the 'animal' protein content found in the feed sample.


Sorry to be so long winded, but the wounds left from the two years of BSE are still a little too raw for the salt.


Take care.

 

[frenchie]

Cattle Annie this is what I am refering to as illegall
Remember Rick and the boys.

Alberta Cattlemen To Sue U.S. Over Border Closure
This week, a group known as Canadian Cattlemen for Fair Trade (CCFT) announced its filing of "the first of many" Notices of Intent to Submit Claims against the U.S. under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The first of these are for about $150-million in claims for the continued U.S. border closure to Canadian live cattle.

The claimants say the U.S. is acting in "an arbitrary and discriminatory manner" to keep the border closed administratively while the U.S. government has declared Canadian beef as safe.

Rick Paskal, a CCFT founding member, says: "The Americans kept telling us the border closure was a temporary measure. We're well into another year and nobody knows when the border will re-open, if ever. It's time to do something about this problem, before it's too late."

Paskal also notes: "We Canadians have invested a lot of money in this industry on the promise of an open border and a single North American cattle market. There's just no good reason for the border to remain closed, when even the scientists have given the 'all clear'."

Paskal says CCFT members are exercising the rights negotiated under NAFTA Chapter 11 to claim damages when another NAFTA government takes actions that give an unfair advantage to its own investors in the North American Free Trade Area. Find out more about the CCFT action at http://www.ccft.info.

 

[CattleAnnie]

Ah so, Frenchie.

Thanks for clarifying that. I wasn't sure which legal aspect that you were referring to...long day again here.

Is Rick having any luck with his endeavours in the courtroom, or has he lost most of his backing now that the border is conditionally opened?


Take care.

 

[Beef11]

So you Don't like my Chute! you lost me there, i'm not building a chute.

I thought this was about the border rivalry. I am pro FAIR trade and as stated before i am not an RCALF member.
I agree with the cattle cycle being an issue and canada might just have missed the upside and be headed into the downside again. For that i feel sorry for the everyday rancher in canada who probably isn't any differnet from the american rancher other than his flag has a maple leaf on it. Don't think i'm anti canadian i have relatives and friends that are canadians. I just get so tired of people ragging on Rcalf and using them as a scape goat for ALL their problems, which does happen. I thought the border should have opened sooner myself. On the other hand I like Rcalf existing just for the fact that they are in competition with the NCBA for the support of the US cattle producer and therefore they are both kept in check. giving the ranchers a chance to choose affilitation. All while keeping both parties "Honest" so to say. Canada could ship boxed beef into the US almost the whole time the border was closed. If adequate internal infrastructure would have existed the afore mentioned ranchers wouldn't have seen their stock so devalued. So canada's inadequacies become a problem caused by the US.

Frenchie, I do respect your views and knowledge and i probably agree with alot of what you have said. I am playing, somewhat the devils advocate. when i look at an issue it can be hard for me to see it from anothers perspective. I appreciate yours. There are definate flaws in the trade system currently set up, BSE just made them shine so all could see. I think advocating the border being closed for personal gain isn't good. whether or not that happened i don't know.

 

[Oldtimer]

There is in fact a subclause in NAFTA that stipulates that if a health risk is detected in a product, the trade partner does have the right to refuse importation of the aforementioned product.

If anyone is interested in finding out more on that topic, I believe the NAFTA agreement is posted online.

However, I'm certainly interested in learning more about the subsidies that Canadian cattle producers are supposedly receiving. Sounds nice.

I did, however read a post in the recent past on CT boards about all the subsidies available to people involved in agriculture in the US, and how to find out whom is receiving what kinds and which particular state they are located in.

During a drought a few years back, producers in Southern AB were unable to procure enough feed for their stock, because if I remember correctly, they were unable to compete financially with their neighbours in Montana, who were able to buy hay from AB & Sask because they had been subsidised by the US gov't to help them through their feed shortage. Many of the southern AB area ranchers hauled hay all the way from the Peace River area of AB and BC. They were so desperate that they even bought the blackened hay that was going to be burnt. As a matter of fact, my father gave away a liner load of it to one man, as the poor soul was in such dire straits for feed.

They certainly received no Canadian gov't compensation of any sorts for this. This depletion of hay from the AB & BC Peace River area had a chain-reaction on the producers from that area, as the next year they underwent a drought. There were no stockpiles of feed to be found anywhere. Hay prices were through the roof; even straw was prohibitive. The only thing that kept most folks going was the availablity of grain, which when supplemented with the straw was fed to a large number of herds in that area through the winter. Also many people were feeding straw bales with molasses injected into them to intice the cattle to eat them.Again, no gov't aid/subsidy was given.

Then again, none was either expected or asked for.

As to complying to feedbans, Canada and US had fairly identical implementation of feedbans in both countries. If I remember correctly, there was one feedmill found in non-compliance of the feedban, and I think it was incidental...something about insects or mice that may have been ground in the milling process - hence the 'animal' protein content found in the feed sample.


Sorry to be so long winded, but the wounds left from the two years of BSE are still a little too raw for the salt.


Take care.

CattleAnnie- You apparently didn't get into the Prairie Provinces subsidies to seed pasture and hay after they lost the CROW rate....North of me used to be miles and miles of wheat- now a lot of it is pasture and hay...The Canadian ranchers said that they were paid under a prairie province subsidy up to $85 an acre to put their land back into pasture or hay...Adding to the large buildup of cattle in Canada since NAFTA passage....

Many of the local ranchers and feedlots go north of the border to buy their hay- especially when the Canadian dollar is weak- buying hay for as little as $20-25 US Ton... This has also caused a US-Canada friction amongst some of the long time US hay producers that had their markets taken by the subsidized Canadian hay....Many of these producers had previously sold hay to Canada....Nothing in NAFTA is Fair.......

 

[frenchie]

There is in fact a subclause in NAFTA that stipulates that if a health risk is detected in a product, the trade partner does have the right to refuse importation of the aforementioned product.

If anyone is interested in finding out more on that topic, I believe the NAFTA agreement is posted online.

However, I'm certainly interested in learning more about the subsidies that Canadian cattle producers are supposedly receiving. Sounds nice.

I did, however read a post in the recent past on CT boards about all the subsidies available to people involved in agriculture in the US, and how to find out whom is receiving what kinds and which particular state they are located in.

During a drought a few years back, producers in Southern AB were unable to procure enough feed for their stock, because if I remember correctly, they were unable to compete financially with their neighbours in Montana, who were able to buy hay from AB & Sask because they had been subsidised by the US gov't to help them through their feed shortage. Many of the southern AB area ranchers hauled hay all the way from the Peace River area of AB and BC. They were so desperate that they even bought the blackened hay that was going to be burnt. As a matter of fact, my father gave away a liner load of it to one man, as the poor soul was in such dire straits for feed.

They certainly received no Canadian gov't compensation of any sorts for this. This depletion of hay from the AB & BC Peace River area had a chain-reaction on the producers from that area, as the next year they underwent a drought. There were no stockpiles of feed to be found anywhere. Hay prices were through the roof; even straw was prohibitive. The only thing that kept most folks going was the availablity of grain, which when supplemented with the straw was fed to a large number of herds in that area through the winter. Also many people were feeding straw bales with molasses injected into them to intice the cattle to eat them.Again, no gov't aid/subsidy was given.

Then again, none was either expected or asked for.

As to complying to feedbans, Canada and US had fairly identical implementation of feedbans in both countries. If I remember correctly, there was one feedmill found in non-compliance of the feedban, and I think it was incidental...something about insects or mice that may have been ground in the milling process - hence the 'animal' protein content found in the feed sample.


Sorry to be so long winded, but the wounds left from the two years of BSE are still a little too raw for the salt.


Take care.

CattleAnnie- You apparently didn't get into the Prairie Provinces subsidies to seed pasture and hay after they lost the CROW rate....North of me used to be miles and miles of wheat- now a lot of it is pasture and hay.........

To qualify under this program, your land must:

have been used for annual crop production or summerfallow as of July 1, 2002;
be categorized as Canada Land Inventory (CLI) 4, 5, 6 or 7;
have severe limitations for growing annual crops; or
have the potential for severe degradation due to wind or water erosion, salinization, or loss of organic matter

.The Canadian ranchers said that they were paid under a prairie province subsidy up to $85 an acre to put their land back into pasture or hay.........

$20 per acre for seeding or planting tame forage or trees and signing a Contribution and Land-Use Agreement, or $75 per acre for seeding native species and signing a Contribution and Land-Use Agreement; and
$25 per acre after you establish the perennial cover, and after Greencover Canada inspects it and issues a Certificate of Stand Establishment (Greencover Canada will adjust this payment to account for any seeding overpayment).

This is a 10 yr agreement ..real big money :lol: Unlike Montana where you can get paid to grow barley...But don,t have to put any seed in the ground.


.

.Many of the local ranchers and feedlots go north of the border to buy their hay- especially when the Canadian dollar is weak- buying hay for as little as $20-25 US Ton... This has also caused a US-Canada friction amongst some of the long time US hay producers that had their markets taken by the subsidized Canadian hay....

The problem is Oldtimer most of the Hay land in Canada does not even come close to qualifying.

The land that went back into hay was not fit to grow grain.


How does the land-conversion component work?
The land-conversion component will provide you with advice and financial incentives if your application to convert environmentally sensitive land to perennial cover is approved.

Who can participate?
You are eligible to participate in the program if:

you are the registered landowner, or are entitled to become the registered landowner through contract or any other legal instrument, as indicated on the certificate of title, state of title certificate, certificate of possession, title of ownership, or deed (renters or leaseholders are not eligible for financial assistance);
the land you want to convert meets program criteria based on land quality, land use, and an assessment of environmental sensitivity;
you agree to seed your land with approved perennial plants; and
you commit to maintain the land under perennial cover for 10 years once Greencover Canada determines the stand is established.
What kinds of land are eligible?
.
Note: Established forage stands are not eligible under the Greencover Canada program



. Perennial short-term rotational crops, such as alfalfa for dehydration production, are not eligible under the program. In addition, the production of forage seed is not an eligible activity..

What financial assistance is available?
If Greencover Canada approves your application, you will receive two one-time payments:


.

..If you later ask to terminate the Contribution and 10 yr Land-Use Agreement, you will have to repay some or all of the funds ..that you have received under the Greencover Canada Land Conversion component. Repayment calculations are outlined in the Contribution and Land-Use Agreement.


[/b]

 

[frenchie]

.

. I just get so tired of people ragging on Rcalf and using them as a scape goat for ALL their problems, which does happen. I thought the border should have opened sooner myself.

.You better get used to it...As I ain,t never going to stop..As far as I,m concerned ..their actions drove a friend of mine to suicide.[/b]

 

[Oldtimer]

frenchie--"Who can participate?
You are eligible to participate in the program if:"

Not me Frenchie- Saskatchewan won't allow US ranchers to purchase land- even adjoining land- unless they have a Canadian partner that has 51% + of the partnership....

Another example of Canadians wanting to free trade but not fair trade.. :roll: .........

 

[Beef11]

It all goes back to being mad about the U.S. not wanting to buy canadian cattle. Some people do some don't. I am pro COOL if that makes a difference.

 

[CattleAnnie]

Thanks for the information on that subsidy. Of course, we're closer to the Alaskan part of the US border than the 49 one, so don't know anyone up here that's done this (put grainland to hay and received gov't funds for it), so please excuse my ignorance on the subject.

The killing of the Crow rate opened a whole ugly can of worms for Agriculture in Canada...so many folks that raised grain were told to 'diversify' in order make an income on their farms.

What followed were some real 'winner' ideas (many endorsed by the gov't). Hey buddy, go raise some ratite, fallow deer, elk, llamas, bison, reindeer, etc.

Yep. Definately won't be hard to market those products.

Sheesh. I mean, can you really imagine sitting down to a nice Thanksgiving dinner with the family to a beautiful oven-roasted Ostrich or Emu??

Of course, the poor guys & gals that got into those 'exotic' types of animals paid through the nose for the initial breeding stock, and then once it became apparent that the consumers weren't buying what the producers were trying to sell, bottom fell right out of the market.


Take care and thanks again for the information.

 

[frenchie]

It all goes back to being mad about the U.S. not wanting to buy canadian cattle. Some people do some don't. I am pro COOL if that makes a difference.

Whatever.. Who was trying to prevent the U.S.D.A from resuming trade....R-CALF

 

[frenchie]

frenchie--"Who can participate?
You are eligible to participate in the program if:"

Not me Frenchie- Saskatchewan won't allow US ranchers to purchase land- even adjoining land- unless they have a Canadian partner that has 51% + of the partnership....

Another example of Canadians wanting to free trade but not fair trade.. :roll: .........

oldtimer ...you are full of it. You do not need a Canadian partner to purchase land in Sask. You do however have to become a dual citizen .

But do Us a favor stay home with your communist R-Calf b bubbys.

As far as fair trade , your one to talk ..in fact I think you are like a old woman that bitches when the sun comes up and bitches when the sun goes down.

You sign agreements then hire lawyers to find ways to get out of them.

 

[Oldtimer]

You sign agreements then hire lawyers to find ways to get out of them.

frenchie-- I didn't sign any agreement-- Bill Clinton did....I always wondered if Hillaries insider cattle futures info was part of the prepayment from the packer industry- How many of Haymakers "french hussies" did Canada give old Bill? :lol:

 

[Beef11]

isn't socialist just a nice way of saying communist?

 

[Beef11]

Whatever.. Who was trying to prevent the U.S.D.A from resuming trade....R-CALF


R-CALF is 18,000 Producers strong and backed by many consumers.

 

[frenchie]

You sign agreements then hire lawyers to find ways to get out of them.

frenchie-- I didn't sign any agreement-- Bill Clinton did....I always wondered if Hillaries insider cattle futures info was part of the prepayment from the packer industry- How many of Haymakers "french hussies" did Canada give old Bill? :lol:

:lol: I quess you should have taken the time to vote Oldtimer .

 

[frenchie]

isn't socialist just a nice way of saying communist?

Socialist /communist all the same..R_Calf fits that bill..They want more gov,t intervention in the packing industry..Thats headed down the communist road.

 

[frenchie]

Whatever.. Who was trying to prevent the U.S.D.A from resuming trade....R-CALF


R-CALF is 18,000 Producers strong and backed by many consumers.

Wow 3 % of the American producers :lol: Bed buddies with Consumers group that funds the animal Rights groups way to go R-calf :clap: :clap:

 

[Beef11]

What is wrong with animals having rights? I think any group that advocates the ethical treatment of animals is admirable. It seems that our 3% of the US producers has more pull than about all of Canada. 18,000 members and many more supporters. They are growing and it is because they appeal to the rancher ad represent him. I like that in an organization. Whether or not they always do what is right is altogether another issue. The NCBA has the reputation of helping the packers and does little to advocate and or recruit the working class rancher. You ought to lay off of RCALF they are not the spiteful group you make them out to be. Heaven forbid people get together and stand up for what they feel is right. If they have a problem with Canada let them present it. If the Courts deem it valid then good, if they deem it invalid good. All the RCALF producers have a voice and they deserve to be heard.

Frenchie, What is good about RCALF? I ask honestly wanting to know what in your view they do that is worthwhile.

 

[Oldtimer]

isn't socialist just a nice way of saying communist?

Socialist /communist all the same..R_Calf fits that bill..They want more gov,t intervention in the packing industry..Thats headed down the communist road.

Frenchie you should know about socialist coming from a country that won't even allow you to sell your grain to your neighbor- Has to all go thru the government operated subsidy-CWB- Canadian Wheat Board ( or as its known south of the 49th, Communist Wheat Board)...

You guys wanted the US owned multinational packers so bad- you just had to have them so you could over expand your cattle industry and you set up no laws to control them or even check on them or the sub corporations they have formed ( I've heard some estimates where the US packer controlled corporations own 50-75% of the feedlot space in Canada)-- that is why and how they were using Canadian cattle to dump into the US and lower both markets-that is why they shafted you when the border was closed because of BSE and now you try to blame everyone else for your countries failure in letting them get control of your country (Remember where they told Parliament to stick their subpeona?)...Rather than whine and cry and blame everyone else like you- I'd rather put my money with organizations made up of grassroots producers like R-CALF and fight to change the laws that allow these multinational corporations to play both countries against each other.....I'd rather see them have to be honest with consumers and tell them where their meat comes from...

If you are a cattle owner, you will be wishing for a Canadian R-CALF as soon as all the trade agreements get stuck in place and Canada is swamped with South American beef....