The Real Issue Facing Canadian Cattle Producers

[rkaiser]

Cool could be dealt with by offering American consumers a BSE tested product.

Your post makes it sound like ABP/CCA were the ones who got the border open to boxed beef farmers_son. What a joke. Cargill, Tyson, and the USDA opened the border to boxed beef and created the most lucrative captive market in history. If our industry leadership that you want to pat on the back had embraced testing for export marketing purposes at that time - our world would not look the same as it does now. Dollar - Cool - grain prices whatever.

[DiamondSCattleCo]

One question farmers_son: If COOL is so important, why is the ABP/CCA wasting time and resources STANDING IN THE WAY OF TESTING? Seems to me if all these other things are way more important, then you should simply get the hell out of the way of those who want to test.

By the way, nice deflection in your post. Anyone ever tell you that you make a great politician? Not much of a representative to the people, but a great politician none-the-less.

And since you mention it, the live cattle prices haven't been "fixed" by tying us to the US market. Take that to your ABP/CCA powers. If you didn't catch the sarcasm in my earlier post, maybe I'll spell it out: Only a fool ties themselves to a single customer. By standing against BSE testing, you're tying us EVEN CLOSER to a single customer for our beef, costing us millions of dollars each year. I hope Hugh and the rest of you realize just how much money you've cost the Canadian cattle producer.

Rod

[per]

I wonder if someone could enlighten me in regards to this BSE issue.

Why are we afraid of allowing testing? Is it because it is going to be cumbersome? Expensive? What about revealing? If we had an epidemic should we hide it? Is this the legacy we want to leave? Is it a food safety issue or a trade issue or both?

Farmers_Son, you come across as an intelligent man. Lets hear the answer to these questions again. Is putting our heads in the sand the best option?

BSE free Canadian Beef would make a nice COOL label as rkaiser pointed out. Wow, deal with those pesky testy guys and COOL at the same time.

[rkaiser]

I've asked for the document that ABP/CCA has put out regarding their policy on BSE testing. Supposed to get it out to me right after the new year.

Maybe if we talked nice to loric she would simply post it for us on a new thread.

I read it a few times this fall as it was available at all of the fall zone meetings. Full of opinion with no more facts than the tabloid that features Brittney Spears each week. But then again some folks consider that gospel too......

[pandiana]

Alberta Beef Producers Position on Voluntary BSE testing
ABP does not favor Voluntary BSE testing for three main reasons:
1. Science
a) Our policy on BSE testing is based on internationally accepted science-based guidelines
(OIE).
(i) Following OIE guidelines is the only road to legitimate trade discussions.
(ii) UK and EU testing policies follow OIE guidelines. They do not test everything,
and they do not demand that all imported beef be from tested animals.
b) There is no justification for testing everything.
(i) Cattle do not develop BSE symptoms in the brain before 30 months of age, and
most of our cattle are slaughtered well before that.
(ii) Only Japan tests under 30 month slaughter cattle. Japanese BSE testing is funded
by the federal government, but government funding will ends June 30, 2008. At
that point the Japanese provinces (prefectures) will have to decide whether to pick
up the tab. Consequently, the policy is under review internally, in addition to
external pressure based on WTO / OIE guidelines. This is a non-tariff trade
barrier.
c) BSE is not a food safety issue, and we do not need to confuse consumers by suggesting
that it is a food safety issue.
(i) Prions have not been found in beef, only in Specified Risk Material.
(ii) SRM have been removed from the human food chain since 2003.
(iii) The Enhanced Feed Ban prevents SRM from entering the livestock feed, pet food
or fertilizer chains. This will prevent accidental recycling and re-feeding of prions
back to cattle.
2. Economics
a) Voluntary BSE Testing will add costs
(i) BSE tests (including labor) cost about $60 / head. Alberta government costs for
lab tests for BSE surveillance ~$75/head. Voluntary testing would cost
considerably more than the actual costs of the enhanced feed ban.
-2-
(ii) BSE tests would require “test and hold” of the carcass; the rapid tests take ~1 ½
days (6 hours, plus prep. work, etc.). Carcasses are typically cut and gone within
24 in high throughput plants. Test and hold would escalate packer costs.
b) There is no evidence that BSE testing would add value – customers may not pay more
(either in Canada or internationally), and may avoid beef if they are reminded of BSE
every time they look at the labels in the meat case.
c) BSE testing would not have made the enhanced feed ban unnecessary; prions are in the
distal ileum before symptoms are seen in the brain, so we’d still need to segregate and
dispose of the SRM. So we’d have BSE testing costs PLUS enhanced feed ban costs. The
actual costs of the Enhanced Feed Ban (depending on the plant) vary from ($2.83 to
$6.82 on UTM), ($10.16 to $14.80 on OTM) for large packers, ~$34.00 per head in
smaller plants (Ontario). This is considerably more than expected. Note that Canada had
no choice. OIE controlled risk status was largely dependent on Canada improving its feed
ban. Maintaining this Controlled Risk status in the future will depend on us implementing
it successfully.
3. Trade
a) Routine BSE testing will not improve consumer confidence
Beef consumption in both Canada and the US increased when BSE was first diagnosed,
and is still around pre-BSE levels in Canada and the US. Also, previous point that
reminding consumers of a non-existent food safety issue every time they look at the
labels in the meat case may not boost consumer confidence.
b) 40% of Canada’s beef production ends up in the U.S.
If BSE testing jeopardizes that market (by making our packing industry non-competitive,
or by provoking trade action), 40% of our cattle would not be necessary. That’s half of
our producers, or more than half if it’s the smaller producers who are going out of
business. We have already seen how difficult it is to regain access to other markets.
For more information, contact
Alberta Beef Producers at (403) 275-4400

[rkaiser]

Well here it is folks. The document; the manifesto as farmers_son would put it. The hill that ABP/CCA chooses to stand on and possibly die on rather than listen to the producers in a democratic fashion. Their "perception" of what I will give up to be "some" factual material that ABP/CCA will not even allow a public opinion poll on. Arrogantly ignoring outside polls and even their own resolution process to show us how smart they think that they are.

1 - Science - Even though ABP/CCA clamors on about the science of BSE, they forget to mention that any potential test would have to also be accepted by the OIE. Pretty much makes all of the clamoring mute.

2 - Economics - What kind of a company would take on an issue like testing if they had not considered the economics involved. If the money made (because no company with any credibility would not make money doing it) by the first company forced others to follow suit - my God we may actually have found a way to increase the profits of all Canadian beef without cutting expenses or trickling down red ink to the primary producer.

3 - Trade - After a whole manifesto filled with opinion this one starts off with less fact than the first two. Complete and utter unsubstantiated opinion. Trade could very well increase, and consumption of Canadian product could increase should testing be allowed. Ad that is as much a fact as all of the third point in the document.

BSE testing for export marketing purposes may very well be the silver bullet to solve our market demand problems, but ABP/CCA has chosen to not even let it near a gun. I don't care how many times I am told to get over it and move on. How many times farmer_son says to us that BSE is old news. How many times this issue is squashed by the good old boys club at the ABP/CCA AGM. I will not stop.

If ABP/CCA chooses to make their stand on this issue and cause themselves to loose their checkoff lifeline, so be it. This battle will not end. The producers of this country need to be listened to. These opinions raised by the current ABP/CCA directors in this manifesto undermine the ability of industry to dig itself out of this BSEconomic hole. ABP/CCA has worked against the producers of this country and will eventually pay the price. This is, and will be the most important issue facing our industry in this BSE era until it is dealt with seriously. All other issues that are blamed for the current state of affairs can be linked to this very important issue of testing. I have said it before and will say it one more time. Testing is moral, honest and financially viable, and ABP/CCA has taken the wrong approach.

[DiamondSCattleCo]

So there you go farmers_son. Not only did the ABP/CCA NOT support the majority of producers, they went AGAINST their wishes. How exactly is that listening to producers, as you said they were doing earlier?

Rod

[farmers_son]

Where is this majority of producers thing coming from? Granted there are some producers who favor BSE testing but a majority, no not so. Not in Alberta, not in Ontario, not anywhere. Maybe in Rkaisers dreams.

[PureCountry]

And do you have any proof that there is a majority AGAINST testing? There's a few old boys against, granted, but don't try telling anyone there's a majority.

I'm going to make a statement F_S, and I'd like you to try and argue it. Here goes:

If we had adopted testing 3 years ago, we would probably already have BSE-tested Canadian beef in Asian markets. And please keep in mind that Asia and India are the 2 fastestgrowing economies in the world. So please don't deflect from the question and tell me that Asian markets aren't worth pursuing.

[rkaiser]

A show of hands at every BIG C meeting in western Canada held four years ago, where we were in front of thousands of checkoff paying producers showed well over 90% every time. Another poll by the Alberta Beef Magazine showed similar results.

Three of four meetings zone meetings that I attended where the resolution was brought forward passed with major majority and despite the misinformation of one delegate at the AGM the fourth was lost by a vote of 8 to 7 and the scrutineers, myself included were not asked for our numbers. I had it tied. My zone director asked me afterward if I wanted to challenge the issue. The vote in the zone where the CCA chair and ABP vice chair spoke against the resolution was still passed with an overwhelming majority. But I've said all of this before and old farmer_son was obviously not reading those posts.

Guess those were all dreams hay farmers_son.

ABP runs scared every time a poll or plebiscite is brought up.

Why not take a poll in your zone farmers_son. Maybe you could win in your dreams too.

[farmers_son]

The Asian markets are worth pursuing. They buy our offal products and add value to parts of the animal we refuse to eat.

And I was to Big C meetings and did see the votes at those meetings. A big part of the package Big C was putting forward was producer packing plants which I would still like to see happen at some point. I am not sure the time is now given the high labour costs in this province and 60% packing plant capacity utilization. There was more interest in BSE testing four years ago then there is now. That issue has pretty well died down (except here at Agriville) as we have resumed exporting live cattle to the U.S and trade with Asia is expected to get back on stream in 2008 although it will be age verified not BSE tested.

[per]

Died down, are you living in your own dreams? I just came in from a drive through my cattle with a large buyer. He brought up the testing issue without any prompting. The conversation came around to the Fort Macloed meeting and how testing was on the minds of the Majority at that meeting. I never sold him any cattle today but certainly did discuss that so called Dead 2004 issue.