R-CALF Urges Vilsack to Immediately Redress 3 USDA BLUNDERS

Help Support CattleToday:

flounder

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
967
Reaction score
0
Location
TEXAS
Group Urges Vilsack to Immediately Redress 3 Rulemaking Blunders by Bush USDA

January 20, 2009 Washington, D.C. – Today, former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack was confirmed to be this nation’s next Agriculture Secretary, and R-CALF USA wasted no time in sending Vilsack a formal letter not only to congratulate him on his confirmation, but also to seek his immediate assistance in redressing three fundamental rulemaking-related blunders made by the previous Administration and the previous U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

R-CALF USA members have literally expended millions of dollars over the past several years to fund our intense, heated fight against the previous Administration’s efforts to: 1) willfully expose U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd to an unnecessary and avoidable risk of BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease); 2) prevent U.S. cattle producers from distinguishing beef produced exclusively from their cattle – born, raised and slaughtered in the United States; and, 3) dismantle historically successful disease prevention and control programs and to substitute them with an unproven, intrusive and ill-conceived National Animal Identification System (NAIS) scheme that constitutes a national premises registration for private property, both personal (i.e., livestock) and real (i.e., land).

Specifically, R-CALF USA urged Vilsack to take the following actions within the first few days of President Barack Obama’s Administration:

* Fully rescind the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service’s (APHIS’) rulemaking in Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041, commonly known as the over-30-month rule (OTM Rule). The agency’s own risk modeling predicts that the OTM Rule will result in the introduction of between 19 and 105 BSE-infected Canadian cattle, resulting in two to 75 BSE infections of U.S. cattle over the next 20 years. R-CALF USA, the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association, five national consumer groups and several individual ranchers won a preliminary injunction in U.S. district court on July 3, 2008, that required the agency to reopen the rulemaking for this docket. The new rulemaking is Docket No. APHIS 2008-0093, and no final agency action is evident in the Federal Register.

* Modify the Agricultural Marketing Service’s (AMS’) final rule for mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL), in Docket No. AMS-LS-07-0081, which is scheduled to take effect March 16, 2009. The final rule defies Congress’ intent to distinguish meat produced from animals exclusively born, raised and slaughtered in the United States with a USA label. Instead, the final rule allows meatpackers to mislabel beef exclusively of U.S. origin with a mixed-origin label (e.g., “Product of the United States, Canada, and Mexico”) if the meatpacker responsible for making an origin declaration commingles any amount of meat derived from imported cattle during the meatpackers’ production day. In addition, the final rule improperly limits commodities subject to labeling requirements if the commodity undergoes minor processing.

* Rescind all actions by APHIS to register the premises of livestock owners under the agency’s proposed NAIS, including the agency’s Veterinary Services Memorandum No. 575.19 dated Dec. 22, 2008, and the agency’s Jan. 13, 2009, proposed rule in Docket No. APHIS 2007-0096. Together, these actions usurp Congress’ authority by effectively mandating NAIS participation, including premises registration, by producers that participate in any number of federal disease programs.

“APHIS is trampling over the rights of U.S. livestock owners and the states in its attempt to compile a national registry of individuals’ premises and their livestock,” wrote R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, a veterinarian who also chairs the group’s animal health committee. “R-CALF USA looks forward to working with you to improve APHIS’ ability to control disease outbreaks in a manner that is more cost-effective than NAIS and that does not intrude on the rights of independent cattle producers.

“Fundamental changes are needed in the agency you now lead, and R-CALF USA looks forward to working with you to accomplish the goal of re-establishing USDA as an agency that furthers U.S. agriculture by properly balancing the interests of agricultural producers, food consumers, and industry agribusinesses,” Thornsberry said.

“The U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers would benefit greatly by the three actions described above,” he added.

“It is our belief that USDA’s severely damaged credibility, which resulted from the agency’s irresponsible pursuits described in each of the forgoing requests, would be substantially restored if these matters were to be expeditiously addressed under your leadership,” Thornsberry concluded. “R-CALF USA has submitted comprehensive comments on each of these issues to the agency. We are available to meet with you and/or your staff at your convenience to further discuss the urgent need for these actions.”

Note: To view/download the letter to Vilsack, please visit www.r-calfusa.com/090120-UrgentPrioriti ... AFinal.pdf.

# # #

R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring the continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. R-CALF USA represents thousands of U.S. cattle producers on trade and marketing issues. Members are located across 47 states and are primarily cow/calf operators, cattle backgrounders, and/or feedlot owners. R-CALF USA directors and committee chairs are extremely active unpaid volunteers. R-CALF USA has dozens of affiliate organizations and various main-street businesses are associate members. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516.



http://www.r-calfusa.com/news_releases/ ... -group.htm



Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0006 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary Sr Views Add Comments How To Comment

snip...

MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???

go figure....

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c ... -0041-0006

From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

To: [email protected]

Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected]

Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 2:59 PM

Subject: Re: TSE advisory committee for the meeting December 15, 2006 [TSS SUBMISSION

snip...

ONE FINAL COMMENT PLEASE, (i know this is long Dr. Freas but please bear with me)

THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted blood from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone.

These are the facts as i have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species. ...

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. P.O. Box 42 Bacliff, Texas USA 77518

snip... 48 pages...

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/C ... tType=msw8

Docket No, 04-047-l Regulatory Identification No. (RIN) 091O-AF46 NEW BSE SAFEGUARDS (comment submission)

these old urls dead here;

https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/regpublic. ... enDocument

http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/dailys ... -vol23.pdf

please see full text submission here ;

Docket No, 04-047-l Regulatory Identification No. (RIN) 091O-AF46 NEW BSE SAFEGUARDS (comment submission)

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/ ... atory.html

Docket APHIS-2007-0033 Docket Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2007-0033-0001 Document Title Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002; Biennial Review and Republication of the Select Agent and Toxin List Public Submission APHIS-2007-0033-0002.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singeltary comment

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c ... 648027c28e

Manuscript Draft Manuscript Number: Title: HUMAN and ANIMAL TSE Classifications i.e. mad cow disease and the UKBSEnvCJD only theory Article Type: Personal View Corresponding Author: Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Corresponding Author's Institution: na First Author: Terry S Singeltary, none Order of Authors: Terry S Singeltary, none; Terry S. Singeltary Abstract: TSEs have been rampant in the USA for decades in many species, and they all have been rendered and fed back to animals for human/animal consumption. I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD only theory in 2007.

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/C ... ntType=pdf

Subject: Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION

Date: August 24, 2005 at 2:47 pm PST

August 24, 2005

Importation of Whole Cuts of Boneless Beef from Japan [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 TSS SUBMISSION

Greetings APHIS ET AL,

My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

I would kindly like to comment on [Docket No. 05-004-1] RIN 0579-AB93 ;

PROPOSED RULES

Exportation and importation of animals and animal products:

Whole cuts of boneless beef from-

Japan,

48494-48500 [05-16422]

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/C ... tType=msw6

Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA

https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/BSEcom.nsf ... AutoFramed

PLEASE SEE FULL TEXT HERE ;

Docket No. 03-080-1 -- USDA ISSUES PROPOSED RULE TO ALLOW LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS FROM CANADA

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/ ... posed.html

Docket APHIS-2006-0026 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Animal Identification and Importation of Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0026-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions, Identification of Ruminants and Processing and Importation of Commodities Public Submission APHIS-2006-0026-0012 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c ... 64801e47e1

Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028 Public Submission Title Comment from Terry S Singletary

Comment 2006-2007 USA AND OIE POISONING GLOBE WITH BSE MRR POLICY

THE USA is in a most unique situation, one of unknown circumstances with human and animal TSE. THE USA has the most documented TSE in different species to date, with substrains growing in those species (BSE/BASE in cattle and CWD in deer and elk, there is evidence here with different strains), and we know that sheep scrapie has over 20 strains of the typical scrapie with atypical scrapie documented and also BSE is very likely to have passed to sheep. all of which have been rendered and fed back to animals for human and animal consumption, a frightening scenario. WE do not know the outcome, and to play with human life around the globe with the very likely TSE tainted products from the USA, in my opinion is like playing Russian roulette, of long duration, with potential long and enduring consequences, of which once done, cannot be undone. These are the facts as I have come to know through daily and extensive research of TSE over 9 years, since 12/14/97. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but i do know to continue to believe in the ukbsenvcjd only theory of transmission to humans of only this one strain from only this one TSE from only this one part of the globe, will only lead to further failures, and needless exposure to humans from all strains of TSE, and possibly many more needless deaths from TSE via a multitude of proven routes and sources via many studies with primates and rodents and other species.

MY personal belief, since you ask, is that not only the Canadian border, but the USA border, and the Mexican border should be sealed up tighter than a drum for exporting there TSE tainted products, until a validated, 100% sensitive test is available, and all animals for human and animal consumption are tested. all we are doing is the exact same thing the UK did with there mad cow poisoning when they exported it all over the globe, all the while knowing what they were doing. this BSE MRR policy is nothing more than a legal tool to do just exactly what the UK did, thanks to the OIE and GW, it's legal now. and they executed Saddam for poisoning ???

go figure. ...

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c ... 64801f8151

Docket APHIS-2006-0041 Docket Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived from Bovines Commodities Docket Type Rulemaking Document APHIS-2006-0041-0001 Document Title Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy; Minimal-Risk Regions; Importation of Live Bovines and Products Derived From Bovines Public Submission APHIS-2006-0041-0028.1 Public Submission Title Attachment to Singletary comment

January 28, 2007

Greetings APHIS,

I would kindly like to submit the following to ;

BSE; MRR; IMPORTATION OF LIVE BOVINES AND PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM BOVINES [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0041] RIN 0579-AC01

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/C ... tType=msw8


Docket Management Docket: 02N-0273 - Substances Prohibited From Use in

Animal Food or Feed; Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed

Comment Number: EC -10

Accepted - Volume 2

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys ... 4be07.html

PART 2

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys ... 4be09.html



Sunday, December 28,


2008 MAD COW DISEASE USA DECEMBER 28, 2008 an 8 year review of a failed and flawed policy


http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/1 ... 008-8.html




Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas USA 77518
 

Oldtimer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
13
Location
Northeast Montana
If I was a betting man- I'd bet the rules on M-COOL will be revised back to the way Congress wrote them- and follow the intent of Congress... President Obama has already shown his hand when he signed onto a letter with about 40 other Senators last month telling Shafer not to write the rules the way he did...

Also during the confirmation hearings- Vilsack assured the Congressmen on the Ag Committee, who were very upset at the Bush administration for going around their intent with the Farm Bill rules, that he would work with them to change them back to follow Congress's intent...

COOL, other laws on hold for Obama review

By Tom Johnston on 1/22/2009


The long, winding and very bumpy road for mandatory country-of-origin labeling law and other legislation could continue as President Barack Obama's administration on Wednesday ordered all federal agencies to freeze new or pending regulations of the Bush administration until the new camp approves them.

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel issued a memorandum to all federal agencies that, among other things, directs them to consider extending for 60 days the effective date of regulations that have been published but have not yet taken effect "for purposes of reviewing questions of law and policy raised by those regulations." In such a case, a notice-and-comment period of 30 days would be reopened.

Published Jan. 15 in the Federal Register, the final COOL law is slated to take effect March 16. However, the memo indicates Obama is asking agency heads to use discretion.

"It appears that there is some discretion given as to whether or not published final rules will be enacted as is or reviewed," American Meat Institute spokesman Dave Ray told Meatingplace. "So it's not certain what will happen with COOL."
 

Alberta farmer

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
I suspect President Obama will let sleeping dogs lie? I think he might be fairly busy trying to get the economy back on track and I really doubt a bunch of Canadian cows are going to keep him up at night?
MCOOL is a big trade problem. I believe it is not defensible under the NAFTA rules. I guess it is okay with the recent changes as Canada has put on hold the WTO challenge? If MCOOL is changed back to the original rule then Canada needs to challenge it again. If US cattlemen are not happy with the NAFTA rules they should work to get the treaty tore up?
Will that happen? Well it might, but that is a two way street, don't forget. You can bet if we change the rules for cattle or trees or whatever...we probably will want something in return?
The USA has treated Canada fairly badly in some trade dealings. I'm not sure why. They seem to have no problem treating China like their best buddy? Maybe it's like"If you can't screw your friends and neighbors who can you screw!"
I think it is time for Canada to stop relying on the USA for our best trading partner. Time to build that pipeline over to Prince Rupert so we can export our oil to Asia. NAFTA doesn't seem to be working.
 

Oldtimer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
13
Location
Northeast Montana
Remember- NAFTA never did work for US cattlemen-- the minute it was signed the Canadian cattle/beef began heading south-- and when the US tried to send cattle north the Canadians came up with new rules and restrictions as an artificial trade barrier- "ALL US CATTLE ARE DISEASED" (even cattle that ran separated only by a barb wire fence from Canuck cows :roll: )...

So Canadian producers/government set the precedent-- and the free trade that was planned in the cattle industry and the proposed North American Herd never took place.. :( I was a supporter of NAFTA and free trade- until the free trade became a one way street....
 
OP
F

flounder

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
967
Reaction score
0
Location
TEXAS
Oldtimer":3bq0clgv said:
If I was a betting man- I'd bet the rules on M-COOL will be revised back to the way Congress wrote them- and follow the intent of Congress... President Obama has already shown his hand when he signed onto a letter with about 40 other Senators last month telling Shafer not to write the rules the way he did...

Also during the confirmation hearings- Vilsack assured the Congressmen on the Ag Committee, who were very upset at the Bush administration for going around their intent with the Farm Bill rules, that he would work with them to change them back to follow Congress's intent...

COOL, other laws on hold for Obama review

By Tom Johnston on 1/22/2009


The long, winding and very bumpy road for mandatory country-of-origin labeling law and other legislation could continue as President Barack Obama's administration on Wednesday ordered all federal agencies to freeze new or pending regulations of the Bush administration until the new camp approves them.

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel issued a memorandum to all federal agencies that, among other things, directs them to consider extending for 60 days the effective date of regulations that have been published but have not yet taken effect "for purposes of reviewing questions of law and policy raised by those regulations." In such a case, a notice-and-comment period of 30 days would be reopened.

Published Jan. 15 in the Federal Register, the final COOL law is slated to take effect March 16. However, the memo indicates Obama is asking agency heads to use discretion.

"It appears that there is some discretion given as to whether or not published final rules will be enacted as is or reviewed," American Meat Institute spokesman Dave Ray told Meatingplace. "So it's not certain what will happen with COOL."


howdy there OT,


OT wrote ;


Oldtimer said:
Bush administration for going around their intent with the Farm Bill rules, that he would work with them to change them back to follow Congress's intent...
YEP, kinda reminds me of the 'end around' by Fong et al. that Texas mad cow would have been where the other Texas mad cow was, i.e. pet food or human food, if NOT for the Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG. but right after that johanns et al pulled another fast one with the infamous 'preservative protocols blunder', one of the many BSE/TSE blunders by USDA et al. ...TSS




BESIDES the Texas mad cow that sat on the shelf for 7+ months before the Honorable Phyllis Fong of the OIG finally did the end around Johanns et al and finally had Weybridge bring that negative cow back from the dead to finally being a confirmed mad cow (hint, hint, getting MRR implemented first), was this simply another bumbling of BSE protocol, or just same old same old;


Jim Rogers (202) 690-4755

USDA Press Office (202) 720-4623

Statement by Chief Veterinary Medical Officer John Clifford Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Regarding Non-Definitive BSE Test ResultsJuly 27, 2005

snip...

Our laboratory ran the IHC test on the sample and received non-definitive results that suggest the need for further testing. As we have previously experienced, it is possible for an IHC test to yield differing results depending on the “slice” of tissue that is tested. Therefore, scientists at our laboratory and at Weybridge will run the IHC test on additional “slices” of tissue from this animal to determine whether or not it was infected with BSE. We will announce results as soon as they are compiled, which we expect to occur by next week.

I would note that the sample was taken in April, at which time the protocols allowed for a preservative to be used (protocols changed in June 2005). The sample was not submitted to us until last week, because the veterinarian set aside the sample after preserving it and simply forgot to send it in. On that point, I would like to emphasize that while that time lag is not optimal, it has no implications in terms of the risk to human health. The carcass of this animal was destroyed, therefore there is absolutely no risk to human or animal health from this animal.

snip...

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/news/2005 ... nt_vs.html

http://usdavskorea.blogspot.com/2008/06 ... us-of.html


Sunday, December 28, 2008
MAD COW DISEASE USA DECEMBER 28, 2008 an 8 year review of a failed and flawed policy
MAD COW DISEASE USA DECEMBER 28, 2008 an 8 year review of a failed and flawed policy


Greetings,

I thought a quick review of the Bush's terribly flawed and failed mad cow disease policy, from the illegal feeding of literally millions and millions of pounds of highly suspect, and banned mad feed, to the failed BSE surveillance program, all of which exposed, needlessly, millions of people to the mad cow agent i.e. Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy. ...

Parentage-based DNA traceback in beef and dairy cattle 2008

http://www.ars.usda.gov/sp2UserFiles/Pl ... k2008o.pdf


48 hour traceback for BSE mad cow disease in the USA ???

NOT in your lifetime !


8 YEARS IN REVIEW OF THE MAD COW DEBACLE IN THE USA ;


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Statement May 4, 2004 Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242 Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA

Statement on Texas Cow With Central Nervous System Symptoms


snip...full text ;


http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2008/1 ... 008-8.html


tss
 

Alberta farmer

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
I think the blue tongue thing was only at certain times of the year? I also believe the northern states also had a policy in place to not accept cattle from states that had these diseases? Not real sure about that but I thought I read that somewhere? Correct me if that is wrong.
Actually quite a bit of US beef does enter eastern Canada as it only makes sense economically due to distance of transport. The reason no US cattle enter Canada for slaughter is very simple: Canadian packing costs are much higher than in the US due to a stricter safety factor, tougher environmental and labor standards, and a stronger feed ban that does not allow any SRMs into the rendering process?
Now some would say US beef should not be entering Canada because their standards are lower but does that make sense? Occasionally I go to the USA and I never worry about the steak I might get.
Maybe we all just should of said "Lets just test the whole darned works and not worry anymore"? I suspect it would have been cheaper in the long run.
Quite often we hear the R-CALF types making most of the noise. What about the feeders who relied on Canadian ranch calves or for that matter the hog barns who needed Canadian weiner pigs? What happens to them? Do they turn to American calves and weiners? How about if the price goes up to the point where they can't operate?
I still think this whole border thing is foolish.
 

hayray

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
1,058
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern Michigan
I was just at the Michigan Cattlemens Conference this weekend and we had some Canadians there also as guest. We had a policy director for JBS Packerland give a talk and he stated that the COOL lableing was only going to hurt our number one and two training partners by kicking them in the teeth and that the COOL lableing that the shell and fish industry implimented earlier has so far never improved any sales at all. Some cattlemen think that limiting trade will make them more money but more often limits on free trade never pan out as expected.
 

Alberta farmer

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
hayray: This is just my own opinion. It seems to me that US and Canada have a pretty similar system in place. To a certain extent I can understand how COOL could be used as a marketing tool, but in reality both of our cattle businesses are pretty much the same? Cattle from both countries have crossed that border for a long time? It makes sense to me anyway to harmonize our rules and standards to allow an open border. We both are trading nations and we both are each others biggest trading partners? Personally I believe we should be trying to enhance that trade and not throw up barriers to impede it.
Yes we have had a problem with BSE. And yes the USA has also had a problem? I do think however it was blown all out of proportion and both countries have done quite a bit to fix the problem?
MCOOL is going to cost someone a lot of money...no ifs, ands, or buts! Who will that be? I think it will be the primary producers and probably the consumers. I think some feedlots and small packers will probably go broke.
I really doubt it will make the American cattleman any money but I might be wrong? I don't think it will really cost Tyson, Cargill, or JBS anything...they will off load the cost to the primary producer and the consumer.
 

hayray

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
1,058
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern Michigan
Yes I agree, to think that there is any real difference between the US and Canadian cattle industrys, I have friends just across the boarder and besides Canada having way more foreigners who can't speak English it is almost like you are in the same Country. As far as JBS is concerned, their speaker who is one of the heads of their policy affairs that talked to us was really against COOL. So is the NCBA president elect, who is one of our members, Gary Voogt.
 

Oldtimer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
13
Location
Northeast Montana
hayray":1q5s3p17 said:
Yes I agree, to think that there is any real difference between the US and Canadian cattle industrys, I have friends just across the boarder and besides Canada having way more foreigners who can't speak English it is almost like you are in the same Country. As far as JBS is concerned, their speaker who is one of the heads of their policy affairs that talked to us was really against COOL. So is the NCBA president elect, who is one of our members, Gary Voogt.

That doesn't surprise me a bit-- as JBS's spokesman is the former CEO of the NCBA- and NCBA has been a Packer/Feeder controlled organization for years- and in the pockets of the big Corporates... They do not represent the majority of cattle producers.....
 

Alberta farmer

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
I went to a meeting last night where they were discussing the cattle crisis in Canada(and the US). It was put on by the NFU and there was a good turnout.
The presentation was good and the picture they painted wasn't complete doom and gloom. The one thing they stressed was the need to end captive supply and the hope that President Obama would move in that direction. Our politicians in Canada are so spineless they won't do anything unless the US does it first!
They also backed COOL for both the USA and Canada and the need for Canada to quit relying on US markets. I guess we are rapidly approaching the point where we will not need to export any cattle but will need to make sure the government only lets imported beef in that meets the same standards that Canadian beef is expected to adhere to.
The other thing they stressed was the need to limit the Cargill/Tysons control of the packing industry so they can't dominate the market. Ranchers Beef near Calgary was basically run out of business by predatory marketing from one of the American packers!
 

Alberta farmer

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
One more thing I forgot to mention in my last post: The presentation had some very good information on cattle prices. Between 1946 and 1989, in Canada, the price adjusted for inflation(in other words put into 2008 dollars) weaned calves averaged $1.85/lb.! Yearling feeders(900-1000lb) averaged $1.67, fats $163 and cull cows averaged $1.17/lb ! Prices in the USA basically followed the same pattern, maybe not quite so extreme! This was the average price over 45 years. Some years fats were as high as $2.50/lb.!
What happened? After 1989 packer concentration rapidly increased and captive supply more than doubled! The consumers price for beef rose slower than the cattlemans price dropped but the facts are the packers and retailers took an increasingly larger share of the profit. Pre-1989 the producer got about 25% of the retail price...today less than 16%!
Go to the site of the NFU in Canada and read the executive summary on the cattle situation. It is a real eye opener!
 

Oldtimer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
13
Location
Northeast Montana
Alberta farmer":1fplilv9 said:
I went to a meeting last night where they were discussing the cattle crisis in Canada(and the US). It was put on by the NFU and there was a good turnout.
The presentation was good and the picture they painted wasn't complete doom and gloom. The one thing they stressed was the need to end captive supply and the hope that President Obama would move in that direction. Our politicians in Canada are so spineless they won't do anything unless the US does it first!
They also backed COOL for both the USA and Canada and the need for Canada to quit relying on US markets. I guess we are rapidly approaching the point where we will not need to export any cattle but will need to make sure the government only lets imported beef in that meets the same standards that Canadian beef is expected to adhere to.
The other thing they stressed was the need to limit the Cargill/Tysons control of the packing industry so they can't dominate the market. Ranchers Beef near Calgary was basically run out of business by predatory marketing from one of the American packers!

Yep--If you read the history of the meatpackers you will find they have controlled/tried to control marketing for 150 years- some of which was broken up by anti trust laws- but with 15 years of non enforcement of anti trust laws they are more integrated than ever ....Thats where they got the name Meat Mafia...They even used the Sicilian mafia techniques of marrying one Packer family to another to gain more control when they couldn't do it any other way....

I agree with your NFU that we need to stop the captive supply- something a Packer Ownership Ban in both countries will do--but to go along with it we need TRUTH IN LABELING- which includes M-COOL- so the Packers can't go out and cheaply source Mexican or S.A. cattle/beef- much of it raised in areas where no enviromental/chemical/cattle pharmaceutical/feed laws are enforced or in some cases even exist--then slap a USDA label on it and pass it off as Domestic product..
As long as they can source cheaper in other areas- without truthfully telling the consumer- pass it off as domestic raised- they will...And they will keep US/Canadian prices depressed..
Just like our monopolized banking/mortgage industries-- Ethics no longer prevail- GREED has taken over...And without regulation/policing they aren't going to change...
 

Alberta farmer

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Oldtimer: They also showed how the export game really has not helped the Canadian cattleman. Pre-1989 Canada only supplied enough beef to meet the domestic market...actually we didn't supply enough, we were a net importer.
In 1994 the Canadian government scrapped the Crow freight rate which was basically a subsidy to the railroads to move grain to export position at below cost. The reason for eliminating it was to comply with NAFTA rules (the Crow rate was to be as long as the grass grows...and the water flows...like an Indian treaty, LOL.) Suddenly the Canadian prairies had a glut of grain that needed to find a home...that home became feedlots and hog barns. The expansion of the cow herd and hog herd was rapid!
Today the chickens come home to roost. The hog industry is ruined and the cow herd is in a hard liquidation phase. I suspect we are approaching domestic beef use only, fairly fast. Now this might sound like the only solution(and probably is) but there has been a lot of devastation to farmers along the way. Many people lost or will lose everything 3 or 4 generations took to build. Not pretty.
Tyson is already looking for a way out by selling to XL. I think Cargill will probably stick it out.
The XL situation is odd. This little company swallowing a giant. Where do they get the financing? I have heard it suggested that they are a front for JBS although don't know if there is any truth in that.
 

Latest posts

Top