Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
NCBA, R-CALF, COOL, USDA (No Politics!)
Texas Postpones Animal ID and Premise ID
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="frenchie" data-source="post: 184326" data-attributes="member: 451"><p>You're talkin yourself in circles here.. First you say you'd like to at least be able to draw a circle around the 'area' where the meat came from, as though each packing plant gets it's meat from a certain place... Then, later on, you talk about how we'll lose the trail after the 2nd state border without NAIS.. Make up your mind, chief. </p><p>: </p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Anyway, what I expect to happen would be for them to draw many, many circles in many different places to represent where the many, many cows came from that were in the thousands of possibly contaminated patties.. As in, dozens of little circles across an entire region of the country.. If there are two dozen clean cattle farms in each circle, how are they being helped by NAIS? THEY'RE NOT. They're made out to be suspects so the government can look like it knows what it's doing.. Where I come from, we call that a scapegoat. . </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> Second, the longer BSE lingers before it's diagnosed, the more people will be infected by a contaminated vat of liquified meat, and the more potential cows there will be to trace back on NAIS, which makes even MORE circles.. In other words, you just strengthened MY argument to test first, trace later.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, you would have no problem ranching for Cargill or Smithfield? Even when they tell you what to feed, when to feed it, when to implant, etc etc.. Even when they tell you that you have to switch to a birth-to-finish operation (like they told swine producers), or you don't get a contract? </p><p></p><p>If so, then fine.. Jump behind NAIS and give it 100%, bucko! Personally, I've never been much of a corporate wh*re, and I suspect that most of the folks here don't consider themselves as such either.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Anyway, if you believe that we need to catch it through testing (as I do), then why are you so buddy-buddy with the same USDA who, at the behest of Tyson, *blocked* the voluntary BSE testing efforts of a packing plant who wanted to ship to Japan? </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>And, as far as what should they tell the consumer when they find a BSE+ cow in the supply BEFORE it hit their tables? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> Well, if I ran the USDA, I'd say "We saved you from mad cow! Aren't we great? And don't worry, because we'll keep testing 100% of your beef before it comes to your table, and we'll find the source of the disease and irradicate it." People would then believe that the USDA was doing the job it should be doing, and that they're safer because of it.. I just don't see a problem there? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>*? If we test at slaughter, we do more to protect the market than by having NAIS and not testing -- or, as I call it, *the current plan*.. </p><p></p><p>[/b]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="frenchie, post: 184326, member: 451"] You're talkin yourself in circles here.. First you say you'd like to at least be able to draw a circle around the 'area' where the meat came from, as though each packing plant gets it's meat from a certain place... Then, later on, you talk about how we'll lose the trail after the 2nd state border without NAIS.. Make up your mind, chief. : Anyway, what I expect to happen would be for them to draw many, many circles in many different places to represent where the many, many cows came from that were in the thousands of possibly contaminated patties.. As in, dozens of little circles across an entire region of the country.. If there are two dozen clean cattle farms in each circle, how are they being helped by NAIS? THEY'RE NOT. They're made out to be suspects so the government can look like it knows what it's doing.. Where I come from, we call that a scapegoat. . Second, the longer BSE lingers before it's diagnosed, the more people will be infected by a contaminated vat of liquified meat, and the more potential cows there will be to trace back on NAIS, which makes even MORE circles.. In other words, you just strengthened MY argument to test first, trace later. So, you would have no problem ranching for Cargill or Smithfield? Even when they tell you what to feed, when to feed it, when to implant, etc etc.. Even when they tell you that you have to switch to a birth-to-finish operation (like they told swine producers), or you don't get a contract? If so, then fine.. Jump behind NAIS and give it 100%, bucko! Personally, I've never been much of a corporate wh*re, and I suspect that most of the folks here don't consider themselves as such either. Anyway, if you believe that we need to catch it through testing (as I do), then why are you so buddy-buddy with the same USDA who, at the behest of Tyson, *blocked* the voluntary BSE testing efforts of a packing plant who wanted to ship to Japan? And, as far as what should they tell the consumer when they find a BSE+ cow in the supply BEFORE it hit their tables? Well, if I ran the USDA, I'd say "We saved you from mad cow! Aren't we great? And don't worry, because we'll keep testing 100% of your beef before it comes to your table, and we'll find the source of the disease and irradicate it." People would then believe that the USDA was doing the job it should be doing, and that they're safer because of it.. I just don't see a problem there? *? If we test at slaughter, we do more to protect the market than by having NAIS and not testing -- or, as I call it, *the current plan*.. [b][/b][/b] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
NCBA, R-CALF, COOL, USDA (No Politics!)
Texas Postpones Animal ID and Premise ID
Top