Blackpower,
As much as this particular pot does not need stirring, I'd like to respond to two things you posted.
1. My feelings of goodwill towards my US ranching neighbours has nothing to do with "The only reason that your happy for our good fortune is that you hope that when the border opens you can take advantage of the markets the American rancher has created", as you put it. Sorry if you can't understand the difference between sincere congratulations and envy.
It is my hope that we can turn away completely from supplying the US demand for our beef and in turn open new markets overseas. I would however like to see the border open to breeding stock, as many breeders have shopped cross border for bloodlines for years. But, if shipping embryos and semen become the norm, so be it.
2. In response to "I honestly hope so to, but it's your countries lax laws that allowed the bone meal to be fed to your cattle that caused this whole mess. No one asked for it, we dealt with it and now your looking to us to sell your cattle. ".
We Canadians have a feed ban regarding SRMs in place. After reading the attached news release, it would appear that you sir, should perhaps not be so hastily throwing stones, because apparantly the superior house you believe that you reside in is constructed of glass.
* Please read the following news release: *
FDA Feed Proposal Worries Renderers
Omaha World-Herald, September 01, 2004
by Chris Clayton WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER
Meatpackers and feedlots in Nebraska, one of the nation's top states for slaughtering cattle, produce a lot of refuse that goes into feed for pets, poultry and other livestock.
Each year, rendering and feed companies in Nebraska dispose of about 300 million pounds of such materials, which could end up being put in landfills or illegally dumped if new federal rules are enacted.
"I think they are just jumping the gun a little bit," Tom Johnson, general manager of Nebraska By-Products in Lexington, said of the Food and Drug Administration.
Nebraska By-Products, which employs about 120 people, is one of the companies that disposes of materials people don't like to think about. The company collects dead animals from feedlots and farms, along with inedible byproducts from small slaughterhouses and meat lockers, It then converts them into protein supplements for other livestock, pets and fish.
But if the federal government prohibits the feeding of any animal parts to other animals, companies like Nebraska By-Products, which now pick up animals for free, could charge for their services.
"Now, you are talking about charging $150 to $300 to get rid of a dead cow," Johnson said.
That's why major beef, meatpacking and animal feed trade groups are pushing the FDA to delay proposed rules, announced last month, that would prohibit all animal feed from containing cattle brains, skulls, eye, spinal cords, intestines and other materials, which are collectively called specified risk materials by the industry.
Since issuance of the proposed rules, industry groups have campaigned hard, calling the proposals draconian and unscientific. The American Meat Institute maintains there is no scientific basis for the decision.
"There's reams of scientific information that this is a safe, wholesome product," said Jim Hodges, president of AMI. "What's forgotten in all of this debate is it isn't guts we are feeding to these animals, it's a processed protein product."
The AMI also points out that inspections in the feed industry show 99 percent compliance with the current feed ban.
The Nebraska Cattlemen supports better controls on how feed mills separate machinery and facilities for livestock feeds. The group also supports banning poultry litter as an ingredient for cattle feed.
But the cattlemen agree with AMI and other trade groups that there isn't enough proof to ban rendered material as a feed ingredient.
The FDA's proposal comes after last December's case of mad-cow disease. It tightens a 1997 feed ban that has prevented cattle meat and bone meal from being turned into cattle feed.
Government officials said the proposal is another step in controlling further incidents of mad cow disease.
"With these additional measures, we will make a strong system even stronger," said Lester Crawford, acting director of the FDA.
If enacted, the new ban would prohibit converting into livestock feed any specified risk materials from cattle older than 30 months. Intestines and a few other parts would be banned in even younger animals. All dead livestock from farms would be banned.
"Removing SRMs is a very costly option in and of itself, and, second, finding an environmentally safe way to dispose of them would be costly," said Johnson of Nebraska By-Products.
From meatpackers alone, there is a projected 1.4 billion pounds of product that would have to be disposed of, according to the National Renderers Association. Then there are the risk materials from more than 4.2 million animals that die before they make it to the slaughterhouse.
Such materials now used as pig, poultry or fish feed have a value ranging from about $180 to more than $330 a ton.
"It's not only going to affect us, it's going to affect the livestock producers, and it's going to trickle down and affect everybody," Johnson said.
Johnson said the new rule will translate into high costs to incinerate and dispose of the materials. Rather than paying a collection fee to Nebraska ByProducts and other companies, some producers may dispose of the animals themselves.
"That's our greatest fear. . . . Some people are going to just dump them."
Interesting?
