So Ot

[frenchie]

Today 11/22/2005 7:53:00 AM


NCBA Balks At Canadian Cattle Over 30 Months



The National Cattlemen's Beef Association, irritated by slow rule-making in Canada that has blocked U.S. breeding cattle from heading north, has said it will not support a USDA rule, to be issued in 2006, that would allow the import from Canada of live cattle over 30 months of age.

"NCBA's commitment to free trade is well documented, and we speak with great credibility on this issue," said Terry Stokes, NCBA chief executive. "Normalization of trade is our goal, but normalization is a two-way street."

Stokes and NCBA's animal health expert Dr. Gary Weber met with Canadian Food Inspection Agency personnel, as well as representatives of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Canadian Cattlemen's Association late last week to discuss access to the Canadian market of U.S. feeder and breeding cattle. The feeder cattle issues seem to be moving toward resolution, Stokes said, but restrictions on breeding stock, especially related to bluetongue and anaplasmosis, remain burdensome.

"Earlier this year, NCBA was instrumental in convincing USDA to limit both live cattle and boxed beef imports from Canada to 30 months of age or younger," Stokes said. "Our producer-members adopted this policy based on sound science and in the interest of free trade

So it safe to say you agree with N.C.B.A. and their stand On Canadian cattle.

 

[Oldtimer]

Today 11/22/2005 7:53:00 AM


NCBA Balks At Canadian Cattle Over 30 Months



The National Cattlemen's Beef Association, irritated by slow rule-making in Canada that has blocked U.S. breeding cattle from heading north, has said it will not support a USDA rule, to be issued in 2006, that would allow the import from Canada of live cattle over 30 months of age.

"NCBA's commitment to free trade is well documented, and we speak with great credibility on this issue," said Terry Stokes, NCBA chief executive. "Normalization of trade is our goal, but normalization is a two-way street."

Stokes and NCBA's animal health expert Dr. Gary Weber met with Canadian Food Inspection Agency personnel, as well as representatives of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Canadian Cattlemen's Association late last week to discuss access to the Canadian market of U.S. feeder and breeding cattle. The feeder cattle issues seem to be moving toward resolution, Stokes said, but restrictions on breeding stock, especially related to bluetongue and anaplasmosis, remain burdensome.

"Earlier this year, NCBA was instrumental in convincing USDA to limit both live cattle and boxed beef imports from Canada to 30 months of age or younger," Stokes said. "Our producer-members adopted this policy based on sound science and in the interest of free trade

So it safe to say you agree with N.C.B.A. and their stand On Canadian cattle.

Not entirely-- but what I think is interesting is that always before they said their border decisions were made on sound science-but now their releases say sound science and in the interest of fair trade...Are their members finally realizing that we did not have fair trade before with Canada concerning beef? Or is it just words to keep from losing so many more members to R-CALF?

 

[frenchie]

Today 11/22/2005 7:53:00 AM


NCBA Balks At Canadian Cattle Over 30 Months



The National Cattlemen's Beef Association, irritated by slow rule-making in Canada that has blocked U.S. breeding cattle from heading north, has said it will not support a USDA rule, to be issued in 2006, that would allow the import from Canada of live cattle over 30 months of age.

"NCBA's commitment to free trade is well documented, and we speak with great credibility on this issue," said Terry Stokes, NCBA chief executive. "Normalization of trade is our goal, but normalization is a two-way street."

Stokes and NCBA's animal health expert Dr. Gary Weber met with Canadian Food Inspection Agency personnel, as well as representatives of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Canadian Cattlemen's Association late last week to discuss access to the Canadian market of U.S. feeder and breeding cattle. The feeder cattle issues seem to be moving toward resolution, Stokes said, but restrictions on breeding stock, especially related to bluetongue and anaplasmosis, remain burdensome.

"Earlier this year, NCBA was instrumental in convincing USDA to limit both live cattle and boxed beef imports from Canada to 30 months of age or younger," Stokes said. "Our producer-members adopted this policy based on sound science and in the interest of free trade

So it safe to say you agree with N.C.B.A. and their stand On Canadian cattle.

Not entirely-- but what I think is interesting is that always before they said their border decisions were made on sound science-but now their releases say sound science and in the interest of fair trade...Are their members finally realizing that we did not have fair trade before with Canada concerning beef? Or is it just words to keep from losing so many more members to R-CALF?

And just what % of The U.s cattle-men does R-Calf represent Ot 3% or 4%

NCBA Statement On Cattle Trade With Canada



“NCBA will continue to encourage the USDA to make science-based decisions relative to trade of beef and cattle. NCBA will never favor any change in trade policy that threatens our herd health or the safety of our food supply. We do not feel that Canadian cattle pose any such threat, and it is irresponsible to suggest otherwise.


[/b]

 

[Oldtimer]

And just what % of The U.s cattle-men does R-Calf represent Ot 3% or 4%




[/b][/b]

About the same percentage of cattle producers as NCBA does now.... I predict that by this time next year R-CALF will outnumber NCBA...They gained 9000 members last year alone...

 

[frenchie]

And just what % of The U.s cattle-men does R-Calf represent Ot 3% or 4%




[/b][/b]

About the same percentage of cattle producers as NCBA does now.... I predict that by this time next year R-CALF will outnumber NCBA...They gained 9000 members last year alone...

That was not the question Ot

Just what % of The U.s cattle-men does R-Calf represent Ot 3% or 4%

 

[Oldtimer]

And just what % of The U.s cattle-men does R-Calf represent Ot 3% or 4%




[/b][/b]

About the same percentage of cattle producers as NCBA does now.... I predict that by this time next year R-CALF will outnumber NCBA...They gained 9000 members last year alone...

That was not the question Ot

Just what % of The U.s cattle-men does R-Calf represent Ot 3% or 4%

I have know idea how many cattlemen there are so couldn't tell you--just like in Canada, many sit back and belong to no groups or do nothing- but b*tch...

 

[frenchie]

And just what % of The U.s cattle-men does R-Calf represent Ot 3% or 4%




[/b][/b]

About the same percentage of cattle producers as NCBA does now.... I predict that by this time next year R-CALF will outnumber NCBA...They gained 9000 members last year alone...

That was not the question Ot

Just what % of The U.s cattle-men does R-Calf represent Ot 3% or 4%

I have know idea how many cattlemen there are so couldn't tell you--

i thought so

 

[Dusty Britches]

About the same percentage of cattle producers as NCBA does now.... I predict that by this time next year R-CALF will outnumber NCBA...They gained 9000 members last year alone...

Man, talk about delusional....

are those 9,000 new members actually cattlemen or LAG's (liberal activist groupies)?

 

[J]

About the same percentage of cattle producers as NCBA does now.... I predict that by this time next year R-CALF will outnumber NCBA...They gained 9000 members last year alone...

Man, talk about delusional....

are those 9,000 new members actually cattlemen or LAG's (liberal activist groupies)?

Sure glad to :clap: see someone willing to speak the :clap: truth! :nod:

 

[Oldtimer]

About the same percentage of cattle producers as NCBA does now.... I predict that by this time next year R-CALF will outnumber NCBA...They gained 9000 members last year alone...

Man, talk about delusional....

are those 9,000 new members actually cattlemen or LAG's (liberal activist groupies)?

Those 9,000 new members are cattle owning voting members-There are also thousands of Business and noncattle members that have associate memberships- which are not allowed to vote, but support R-CALF because they see the positive direction they are moving the cattle industry and the positive effect this direction is having on the local economies......

 

[2centsworth]

Those 9,000 new members are cattle owning voting members-There are also thousands of Business and noncattle members that have associate memberships- which are not allowed to vote, but support R-CALF because they see the positive direction they are moving the cattle industry and the positive effect this direction is having on the local economies......

I think it is interesting that R-CALF is willing to take all the credit for the current state of the beef industry and the economy when the group has really not accomplished anything other than alienating the consumer. An increase in the number of radical people supporting R-CALF does not equate to having a positive impact on the industry or the country.

The only thing they can take credit for is keeping the border closed for a couple of months while Cebull's ruling held up. That is not long enough to significantly impact the state of the cattle business.

Could it have been NCBA's tireless work on consumer education, beef promotion and research development that is to thank for the current prices? Or cattle producers' committment to better carcass quality? Quite possibly, I would say.

 

[Oldtimer]

Those 9,000 new members are cattle owning voting members-There are also thousands of Business and noncattle members that have associate memberships- which are not allowed to vote, but support R-CALF because they see the positive direction they are moving the cattle industry and the positive effect this direction is having on the local economies......

I think it is interesting that R-CALF is willing to take all the credit for the current state of the beef industry and the economy when the group has really not accomplished anything other than alienating the consumer. An increase in the number of radical people supporting R-CALF does not equate to having a positive impact on the industry or the country.

The only thing they can take credit for is keeping the border closed for a couple of months while Cebull's ruling held up. That is not long enough to significantly impact the state of the cattle business.

Could it have been NCBA's tireless work on consumer education, beef promotion and research development that is to thank for the current prices? Or cattle producers' committment to better carcass quality? Quite possibly, I would say.

2centsworth--I'm sure as a Canadian you have a differing view than I do... I was a faithful backer of NCBA- but after 20 years of unfullfilled promises of better prices and seeing only 2 or 3 years in 20 with what you could call good prices I lost faith- And after the passage of NAFTA, living next to the 49th, it was hard to watch semi after semi of cattle and beef being trucked in from Canada while neighbors were going broke because of the depressed prices...And while all this was happening the Canadians would not allow unrestricted access to US cattle, calling all US cattle "diseased".

The final straw between NCBA and myself was when NCBA decided to back the packers and retailers in promoting the fraudulent practice of removing country of origin labels off imported meat, subsituting the USDA inspection stamp, and passing it all off to consumers as US product...Do you really believe that is being open and honest with consumers?

I will also argue with you on whether the border is actually open to cattle...Appears to me that all the restrictions still on shipping live cattle ( feedlot segregation, branding, preg testing, heifer quarantine, feedlot registration and inspection, sealed trucks, segregated slaughter, etc.) has kept the cost high enough to avoid a large rush of Canadian UTM cattle- which in turn has helped keep the US feeder prices up...And as we know- the border still is not open to OTM cattle or beef which has been shown with the over 2 years of high cull cattle prices- which is what R-CALF has always said is most affected by Canadian imports...I don't want to go back to the day of the $15-$20 cwt. cull cows....So far, in NCBA's credit, even they are still opposed to opening the border to OTM's--especially since Canada hasn't dropped their trade barriers against US cattle.....

As far as your comments about NCBA's tireless work on consumer education, beef promotion, and research development- are you getting the CBB's beef checkoff confused with NCBA? The checkoff has done this- but it was with our checkoff (tax) dollars paid every time cattle change ownership--Not by the NCBA dollars....NCBA who contracts the checkoff and gets paid to operate it, many times take the credit- but it is not NCBA money doing this- it is the Beef Boards checkoff funds......

 

[frenchie]

Those 9,000 new members are cattle owning voting members-There are also thousands of Business and noncattle members that have associate memberships- which are not allowed to vote, but support R-CALF because they see the positive direction they are moving the cattle industry and the positive effect this direction is having on the local economies......

I think it is interesting that R-CALF is willing to take all the credit for the current state of the beef industry and the economy when the group has really not accomplished anything other than alienating the consumer. An increase in the number of radical people supporting R-CALF does not equate to having a positive impact on the industry or the country.

The only thing they can take credit for is keeping the border closed for a couple of months while Cebull's ruling held up. That is not long enough to significantly impact the state of the cattle business.

Could it have been NCBA's tireless work on consumer education, beef promotion and research development that is to thank for the current prices? Or cattle producers' committment to better carcass quality? Quite possibly, I would say.

2centsworth--I'm sure as a Canadian you have a differing view than I do... I was a faithful backer of NCBA- but after 20 years of unfullfilled promises of better prices and seeing only 2 or 3 years in 20 with what you could call good prices I lost faith- And after the passage of NAFTA, living next to the 49th, it was hard to watch semi after semi of cattle and beef being trucked in from Canada .........

Its called trade Oldtimer ..

And while all this was happening the Canadians would not allow unrestricted access to US cattle, calling all US cattle "diseased". .........

Now you know thats not a true statement ..There was over 200,ooo montana calves headed north across the line under the Northwest feeder agreement..without one test being done.

I will also argue with you on whether the border is actually open to cattle...Appears to me that all the restrictions still on shipping live cattle ( feedlot segregation, branding, preg testing, heifer quarantine, feedlot registration and inspection, sealed trucks, etc.) has kept the cost high enough to avoid a large rush of Canadian UTM cattle- which in turn has helped keep the US feeder prices up...And as we know- the border still is not open to OTM cattle or beef which has been shown with the over 2 years of high cull cattle prices- which is what R-CALF has always said is most affected by Canadian imports...I don't want to go back to the day of the $15-$20 cwt. cull cows....So far, in NCBA's credit, even they are still opposed to opening the border to OTM's--especially since Canada hasn't dropped their trade barriers against US cattle..............

Its the same trade barriar that The U.S currently has on certain Canadian cattle from a b.s.e country


[/b]

 

[Oldtimer]

Frenchie- You are WRONG-- There has been for the last 10+ years restrictions on US cattle going north-- because Canadians said they were all "diseased"...Feeders were restricted to "when, where, and how" they could cross-and how they could be handled in Canada- breeding stock was required to be quarantined and tested....And still are....NAFTA was never a fair trade deal concerning cattle....

I don't call that unrestricted movement...Even after numerous scientific studies said that Canada had little or nothing to fear- Canada still has refused to drop these "trade barriers"...But, on the other hand, we're supposed to allow in old cows from a country that has a much higher rate of BSE ( a much more serious disease ) than our own- a country that has post feedban born infected cattle.....

And then after calling US cattle diseased for 10 years- Canadian ranchers had the gall, after finding BSE in Canada, to call it a "North American herd" in an attempt to reopen the border...What hypocrisy.... :lol:

 

[frenchie]

Frenchie- You are WRONG-- There has been for the last 10+ years restrictions on US cattle going north-- because Canadians said they were all "diseased"...Feeders were restricted to "when, where, and how" they could cross-and how they could be handled in Canada- breeding stock was required to be quarantined and tested....And still are....NAFTA was never a fair trade deal concerning cattle....:

And once again you only tell half the story..These restrictions that you are crying about...Are the same restrictions that are present within the U.S between certain statesAlso remember anything over 30 months will be prohibited cause of B.S.E into Canada

I don't call that unrestricted movement...Even after numerous scientific studies said that Canada had little or nothing to fear- Canada still has refused to drop these "trade barriers".....:

..

Do you remember the cow elk imported from U.S to Canada that turned up wIth blue tonque and decimated the export market for Canadian elk velvet and horns to Asia

But, on the other hand, we're supposed to allow in old cows from a country that has a much higher rate of BSE ( a much more serious disease ) than our own- a country that has post feedban born infected cattle.....".....:

..

How would you know what rate of B.S.E the U.S has Oldtimer ohh right you tested ...Oh wait a minute sometimes the test works sometimes it does not Hmmm.. Lets see she,s positive no negative oh wait a minute boys shes positive

Good luck OT

 

[Oldtimer]

frenchie- I'll buy the argument of the elk being part of a "North American herd" long before that joke idea that they were trying to pass off of a "North American cattle herd"...

 

[frenchie]

Allowed Animals into Canada
Live animals and genetic material

Bucks, bulls and rams that are destined for animal semen production centres.*
Cattle imported for immediate slaughter.
Feeder calves (bob calves)*.
Animals for temporary stay (maximum of 30 days).*
In vivo derived embryos.*
Animals and things derived from them imported for medical use, scientific research or zoological collections.*
Sheep and goats under 12 months of age imported for immediate slaughter or feeding for slaughter.*
Cattle under 30 months of age imported for feeding for slaughter (restricted feeder cattle*No breeding stock).

 

[frenchie]

frenchie- I'll buy the argument of the elk being part of a "North American herd" long before that joke idea that they were trying to pass off of a "North American cattle herd"...

Oldtimer you missed the point as usual.

Reality is that cattle have trailed from The U.s To Canada and vice-versa since the 1880,s.

Reality is the the meat packing industy in the states is the same as in Canada.Same players a northern american packing industry.