Getting on Board

[cowman]

Well Bob, it very well may come down to that. Who knows where this will go. It is pretty apparent after the Martin/Bush meeting that Canada sure isn't going to go it alone, so I doubt testing on a national or continental scale is going anywhere.
However, with the so-called increase in testing, we should keep getting more infected cows, resulting in more consumer alarm and a drop in demand for beef. Perhaps the only way we will be able to get people to buy beef will to have it tested and labelled.
The need for a reliable and easy bloodtest becomes more important everyday. Because both governments have seemed to have chosen a different route we'll just have to wait and see. I hope our creditors are understanding?

[raymondb]

I think we need to have at least a couple of things done.
1. Test every animal and mark the meat as tested. With hindsight being 20/20, if all of us producers paid $20.00 per animal sold to pay for testing in the past, we would be way ahead today financially and also without these trying times. The tests should continue until we can go 5 years without any animal being tested positive.
2. The government should ensure that the scientific community is up to speed and that we understand the cause and the consequences and reaction required of any disease that animals that we consume have or can have . We should be able to ensure that we are feeding a world with a safe product. Me as a producer and a consumer must demand that right.

We can all keep looking back and keep hoping for things to be as they were, but this is not and will not be a reality. Our Industry will be changing so fast in the next 10 years that the last 50 years are going to feel like a walk in the park.

[ValueChainFX]

Right on ray

[rodb]

Well guys you have to remember the age old adage,"The customer is always right"
So if Japan tests every animal, then if we want to get in there we will have to test everything that goes there as well.

[Horse]

A question every one talks about 20 -30 $ per hd but is that all the cost how about paper work coolers more storage I would like to hear the total cost And if 20 30 $ does it why not .

[ALICIA]

The testing would not cost all that much if it is spread out all along the food chain etc. consumer
Distributer
Packer
Slaughter house
Feed lot
drovers
cow/calf producer
I have come up with 7 buyers at least before the end producted can even be put on the plate as a meal.

[bob-b]

what happens to the owner of the next mad cow? Remember it could be one of us, so think about it.

[cowman]

The Canadian vet on the news last night says the test is $50-$60 right now. Japan and Europe use a quicker test that is more accurate. The Japanese test costs $30. Why do America and Canada use the slower,less accurate, more costly test? I suspect it is like most things over here...someone with some pull owns the patent?
The guy from Colorado suggests he can do it for $7-$8 US if he has the volume! He would obviously be building more labs around the country if this thing flies. The test would be taken on the farm so no cost to the packer. The animal would have an individual ID that he had been tested. I suspect that seeing how all cattle will have an electronic ID it would just be done through a computer?

[ValueChainFX]

Cowman, the systems in use in other countries are better from what I can see from the information I have. The people we have been in discussions with are from the EU and have a very good system for trace back. I suspect that we can speculate all we like, but at the end of the day we need to meet regulations on a global basis and meet our needs here in this country. If the live test happens this would be great, but I still believe we are going to need a lab for our own use (not government) to meet the regulations (requests) from our customer base. This in my mind is just another part of our marketing program and working with people that set these regulations help us stay ahead of the game!

[cakadu]

Grassfarmer may be on to something here. The testing is actually two separate issues. I think to test is the way to go, so long as it isn't downloaded onto the producer. This conversation came up at lunch today at a meeting I was at and I may have to re-think my producer cost statement.

If we are doing the testing so that we can get into export markets i.e. satisfy global customers, then perhaps it should be a producer cost. There is no guarantee that they will start to buy our beef, pay any additional costs due to the testing or anything like that. We seem to be going on the premise that if we test, they will buy and that ain't necessarily so.

If, on the other hand, the powers that be are stepping in and saying we are doing it because Canadian consumers say they want it - then it becomes a social issue and the consumers will pay extra to have the meat tested, with the powers that be perhaps kicking in some money for the testing.

Is this line of thinking on or off the mark? I have to say that in some respects it does make sense. What are your thoughts?