BSE testing.

[nine420]

Hate to point it out to all you want to test every critter for BSE types but. Doesn't the total removal of all srm's make even the cull cow doing funky chicken because of bse, still safe to eat? The prions are not in the meat but in the Srms, so if all the srms are removed why even bother testing at all?

[rkaiser]

BSE testing for export marketing purposes sir.

If they want it we supply it.

[jensend]

or look at the flip side. test the animals and the srm's, if managed properly, can be salvaged for some value. testing would also definitively tell us how much bse there is. right now abp/cca/packers want us to live in this shadowy world of fear that the canadian herd might be riddled with bse and it's best if we don't know. the effect is that our markets and equity have declined as if bse was rampant in canada. we also need to differentiate our product from the american product in order to bring its value back into line. not testing is just a great way for the canadian herd to be held captive by the two big american transnational packers. they don't want somebody going out and finding alternative markets for bse tested beef.

[nine420]

Another question for all you supporters of more testing. Who's going to verify all the test results? The CFIA can't even keep up with the current demands and you want to add another layer of regulation.

[rkaiser]

I would like to answer that question like I answered a question from a very bright old girl at one of our ABP meetings who asked me (the BSE expert --- her words) how much this testing is going to cost us.

We will have to find people nine420 and that will cost money but likely not 10 billion dollars over the next four years. Why 10 billion dollars you ask? Because that is the cost to you and your beef producing neighbors for ignoring the potential of testing to stop the bleeding.

Why not ask the folks at ranchers beef how they planned to test and administer the testing program. They were pretty much ready to go if they could have had support from industry leadership and the government that they direct.

Any more questions are welcome nine420?


Maybe I could ask you one. Are you happy with the current industry situation or are you caught up in farmer-sons fear that things could be a lot worse?

[smcgrath76]

I am of two minds (or a half mind) on this one. I don't think we should force BSE testing, but I do think we should allow it. At this point it becomes an option and a processor can decide whether or not to assume to business risk.
If the processing costs are higher with BSE testing then in a competitive market they will have to bid that into the cattle. I do agree with Farmer's Son about competition in the processing sector for live cattle, and I can see that if BSE testing is adopted as the standard by processing or forced through legislation then it just becomes another cost of doing business for cow/calf producers.
Age verification is no different. When it is legislated, any premium to secure supply will disappear, but if there is market opportunity there may be some premiums.

[nine420]

But everybody bse testing is totaly moot when the SRM's are removed. Why add another cost for something that is irrealevent with the SRMS gone. You talk about losing 10 billion, perhaps the correction in pricing is because of market forces. High dollar, high feed costs, high basis and low demand. So adding another level of cost will make beef even more expensive. Japan also imports beef from Mexico, point being it is the cheapest there. We should be instead concentrating on reducing our costs, not adding to them through more regulations.

[jensend]

you talk about market forces but canadian producers missed out on the high side of the cattle cycle. why don't we find all the infected animals, remopve them from the food and feed chain and know that the food supply is safe? other than testing you have no way of being absolutely sure. i think in the end consumers will tell us what has to be done. we'd be much further ahead to offer them the extra margin of safety than to have them demand it of us and take a chance on further reducing beef demand because of a health scare. i don't know why you feel so compelled to be the apologist for a failed policy. we had a chance to get an advantage in world markets and it was rejected by interests that want the canadian beef herd held captive.

[rkaiser]

I guess you will have to work on the Americans (still BSE rules in place) and consumers all over the world with your moot point nine420. BSE is real old buddy and is disrupting trade all over the world. Every country that has identified BSE in their herd, with the exception of the packer led USA and Canada, have used BSE testing in an attempt to correct marketing problems.

[jensend]

if removing srm's was widely accepted as taking care of the problem we would have market access all over the world. farmers_son likes to point out that japan is scaling back testing but this has been met by resistance on the part of consumers. it should be the consumer we worry about pleasing, not the two large packers.

[rkaiser]

I would like to say that I appreciate Sean's post and feel strongly that his opinion would be supported by a vast majority of producers in this country should ABP/CCA decide to use a direct democracy approach and ask those who sent them where they are today.

[grassfarmer]

9420,
I feel sorry for you, you still believe the old ABP/CCA propaganda. You say "perhaps the correction in pricing is because of market forces. High dollar, high feed costs, high basis and low demand....we should be instead concentrating on reducing our costs, not adding to them through more regulations."
This tired old crap about it just being bad luck, producers deserve it etc, while serving to deflect attention from the real issues does producers no favors. There is good and rising demand for beef around the world, there is plenty value in the production chain to allow profitability at all levels if the proceeds were more equitably distributed. As producers we have lowered our costs more than enough - it is time for the processors and retailers to take their price cut and allow producers to get a fair return for their work and investment. We are entitled to it so lets fight for our share instead of believing the propaganda of the packer backers.

[nicolaas]

Just being the devils's advocate, but here is a scenerio that may occur if tesing of every animal is allowed for export purposes. Say we start finding a dozen cases a year (Sorry, a guess on my part- maybe we would be similar to the number of cases France finds every year whatever that is), what would happen to our live cattle export market to the States? Would they shut the border to UTM cattle again? It definitley is a complex issue with many "what if" senarios, but something has to change. Reliance on one market is craziness. Here is another point. If we have such good beef that everyone wants if only we test, and it is impossible to start up our own packing plant due to predatory tactics, would it be possible to involve a foreign company (from china, korea..etc) to get involved in a packing plant. Deeper pockets and a guaranteed " in" into an offshore country may increase the chances of success and increase competition for out cattle.

[kato]

If MCOOL works the way the protectionists in the U.S. are hoping, we won't have a market for live cattle in the States anyway. Watch the spread on cattle that will be finished before next September and those that will finish after. That should give fair warning as to what will happen.

We will have nothing to lose.

[InAHurry]

At the risk of thinking a$$ backwards – are the governing bodies of the importing country going to allow Canadian BSE tested beef to be labeled and marketed as such?