Bluetongue

[johnboy555]

Kato..... pretty scary when you say exactly what i think.......I think you hit err right on the head

[kato]

Once in a while a rant just makes you feel better. ;-)

As for the border... one place to start is for everyone here, and all of your neighbours to go on the APHIS website and MAKE A COMMENT on the rules. It's fine and dandy to talk to each other..but we need to take some of our ideas and put them out there for the U.S. government to hear. They need to know what they are doing to their supposedly best neighbours.

I was browsing through some comments that were posted by Americans,and I really think we need to get our side of the story out there. If they don't hear from us, they will assume we don't care.

Take a page from the activists handbook. Take your story where it will be heard. I can guarantee you there are people from the news media checking those comments on a regular basis.

I've made my comment...how about everyone else?

MMM...maybe what we really need is a story on Nightline, or maybe 20/20.

[cakadu]

Amazed, I may not be in the cattle business, but make no mistake, my livelihood as a sheep producer has been hard hit by the border closure. I cannot get a kill for my lamb without booking a minimum of 2 months in advance because the abbattoirs are filled with cull cows. Have you taken a look at lamb prices lately - they are probably at the lowest that they've been in the last few months and many of the feedlots have stopped taking them - period. Traditionally, this is a time of the year when spring lamb brings higher prices and the price is continuing to drop.

As a direct marketer, I am also hard hit by the fact that there is all this supposedly "cheap" beef around, not to mention other lamb producers who would normally sell to feedlots selling from the farm gate.

As a sheep producer, my animals are at risk for bluetongue and are highly susceptible to it.

I don't expect a guarantee for much of anything beyond death and taxes, but the powers that be have done this as a show of good faith on the Canadian side and they are hoping for more.

I believe those who have posted on this site that this has been in the works for a good long time and they have their excuse to push it through.

I wonder who is going to ensure that the animals that come across are properly tagged and segregated so as to minimize the spread of the diseases. I wonder who is going to ensure that the animals from high incidence states are kept in low incidence states for the 60 days before they are shipped up here. I wonder what good that will actually do.

I wonder how quickly countries, the U.S. included, will use it against us should we be so unfortunate to have a case of either disease arise here.

I wonder who will buy the calves of the Canadian producers when the feedlots have access to these "cheap" feeders from across the border.

I wonder when we will wake up and smell the coffee and quit doing whatever the U.S. wants for little or nothing in return.

I hope the cattle move again soon, amazed, and I pray that we haven't bitten off far more than we can chew because lord knows we have enough problems already.

[amazed]

Cakadu, I have some friends who are also sheep producers although not full time and I know how it has also affected your industry. My hat goes off to anyone who makes their sole living in the sheep business. It must be difficult.

Blue tongue has been found in the past in Canada and will be again. Do I like that fact? Of course not. Would I make that concession if cattle (and sheep)producers weren't in such dire straits. NO! Do I honestly believe the border would open WITHOUT that concession? No!

If there is a more secure market for Canadian beef that has LESS strings attached with any country other than the U.S. please let us know where it is. The U.S. and Mexico were the first countries to open to Canadian beef. We all would like it wide open but who else has done that? Where would we be if there had not been any boxed product leaving Canada since mid-Sept.?

Many are excited about testing beef for the Japanese. What guarantees have they given that they will take Canadian beef?
They wanted U.S. beef so bad last August that they increased the tariff on it.

Not many Canadians want to give in to any American demands but if you know of a closer market that IS secure, or less demanding and has ten times the consumption of Canada please share it with us!

[boone]

Post: I would ask anyone who is remotely interested to go on USDA web site and check out who is U.S.'s largest ag export market and second and third, as well look how they describe it. And yes that is in billions of dollars. We're No.1! we're No.1! And we have no clout! Give your heads a collective shake.

[cakadu]

There are potential markets, it's just the way that we grow our beef and refuse to change that precludes us from even getting into them.

The EU is a market that we cannot get into because we use hormones in our beef. Get rid of the hormones - grow the beef to the specifications of the customer - and a potentially lucrative market could be there. It is our choice to not go that route and the biggest reason is that many believe that we need hormones in order to competitively , they grow the beef.

We have witnessed first hand for the past 10 months just how difficult it is to have the majority of our eggs in one basket. Sure the U.S. has a lot of money, but the thing I have learned over the years with people with money is they tend to be fairly fickle, they bully and what is given can be quickly taken away - witness the last 10 months.

We - and I mean Canada here - want to sell the beef in boxes, cut our way and we don't particularly want to do it any differently. We don't necessarily want to listen to potential export markets that want things done a particular way because it doesn't suit how we are set up.

There are those of us who have been questioning for some time now where the increase in beef production was going to go, when there were no new markets opening up. We also have to compete with countries like South America who are positioning themselves to sell grass fed beef all over the world. How are we going to compete with that when we have to feed for a minimum of 200 days per year and in the last couple of years in my area, for a lot longer than that?

There is still no answer as to what is going to happen to the Canadian cow/calf producer when the U.S. feeders come in.

I understand where you are coming from when it comes to getting the border open - we all want that to happen, no question.

How we get it open is another story. I would be much happier to see us not giving concessions in order to do it, especially those that could do more harm than good to us in the long run.

As for the new markets, we won't know until we shift our attitudes, think outside the box and explore the potential.

[rsomer]

Although there has been a lot of good comments in this thread about BT and Anaplas, most Canadian producers don’t seem to understand the real issue. Although the CCA website contained inaccurate information concerning the spread of anaplas saying the vectors necessary to spread this disease don’t exist here because of our cold winters, exactly the opposite is true. Mosquitoes, horse flies, and in many areas ticks will spread anaplas to many beef herds. The protections that were previously in place were indeed effective in preventing the spread of BT and Anaplas in Canada and now those protections are gone. Whether the disease is spread to our own herd or not, we will need to take protective measures anyway because we cannot afford to have the abortion storms and death loss if it doesn’t. Yes, anaplas can be prevented and treated with tetracyclines but that is the very point Canadian producers were missing.
Canadian producers had an absolutely huge competitive advantage over U.S beef producers because our herd was previously free of anaplas and we were not treating our cows throughout the summer with tetracyclines like is necessary in the U.S. The issue is not the cost of treatment which might run $25 a cow per summer, the issue is these treatments may very well not be available to beef producers much longer. If that were the case, cattle production in a significant portion of the United States that has Anaplas edemic in its beef herd would no longer be economically feasible.
Although it is too late as the deed is done, in hindsight Canadian beef producers will see just what they gave up in exchange for the hope of getting the U.S. border open to our cattle one month sooner than it would have happened anyway. A disease free herd was Canada’s ace up its sleeve in the very competitive beef marketplace. We have given much of that away for very little in return.
I have included a paste from Animalnet that illustrates the issue on antibiotics in the U.S. Beef producers will not win this war for antibiotic use. This is why we needed to keep our herds disease free, maybe someday we will appreciate that.

Iowa becomes battleground for campaign to reduce antibiotic use in livestock
March 10, 2004
Knight-Ridder Tribune
Dave DeWitte, The Gazette, Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Iowa is, according to this story, a key battleground for supporters of legislation to reduce use of many antibiotics in livestock production.
Dr. David Wallinga of The Campaign to End Antibiotic Overuse, was cited as saying scientists increasingly believe antibiotic resistance spreads as a genetic trait from bacteria found in animals to bacteria that cause human diseases, adding, "The resistant bacteria is worsening and rendering the antibiotics in our toolbox ineffective. There are actually infections that are now untreatable."
The story explains that the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act of 2003 was introduced in August. It is backed by the Campaign to End Antibiotic Overuse, a coalition of 12 organizations ranging from the Union of Concerned Scientists to the National Catholic Rural Life Conference.
The bill would amend the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act to withdraw Food and Drug Administration approvals of eight antibiotics or classes of antibiotics for non-the****utic agricultural uses.
The campaign is courting Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, because of their influence and their farm state backgrounds.
Neither has agreed to endorse the act, Wallinga said, although both have agreed to consider it.
The story says that the effort is modeled in part on Denmark's phase out of the routine use of antibiotics in livestock and poultry, which produced a 54 percent decrease in antibiotic use and reduced dramatically the levels of resistant bacteria in livestock.
Supporters say Denmark's law has had no impact on food safety or cost to consumers and virtually no impact on animal welfare or producer productivity.

[ivbinconned]

I just got a call fom an auction barn in Roblin Manitoba. I was told that the Provincial Ag. Minister stood and told the people there that the border was going to open with in days...both ways...to everything! Culls too!

Truth or rumor?

[bombay_43]

Extortion: The act of exacting an exorbitant price for something.

Canadian Cattlemen gave up something worthwhile in order to restore something we always had. And we did it without getting any promises in writing. Sort of like sleazy back street dealing.

Incidentally, I have heard over and over that antibiotics readily treat anaplasmosis, (mostly from my ABP representative)

Let me copy a paragraph from page 5 of the 12 page discussion paper: Policies on the Importation of Restricted Feeder Cattle from the United States

Early in 2003, the Iowa State University conducted a study on the use of tetracycline to treat anaplasmosis in cattle. In the study, none of three different courses of tetracycline treatment evaluated was successful in eliminating the organism from infected cattle. Publication of the study is pending.

With regards to bluetongue, this discussion states on page 2;

In the mid 1970’s, it was determined that bluetongue had been introduced into the cattle population of British Columbia’s Okanagan Valley. While this introduction was attributed to the importation of bluetongue infected U.S. cattle, it is believed that a subsequent introduction in 1987 was due to wind-borne vectors carrying the virus.

I understand that this has been an ongoing issue, but I also believe that the BSE crisis facilitated the deregulating process! Several controlled studies, that could have supported deregulation, were not completed because of border closures! (mentioned on page 3 and 4 of the discussion paper)

Right is right, and what just went on, was very wrong!


A point about Denmark, and its use of antibiotics. For countless years, producers in Denmark have been bound by law, not to administer medicines, or perform medical procedures on their animals. Veterinarians performed ALL this work. Antibiotics were “controlled” substances! Therefore, I have problems comprehending the 54 percent drop. These were not “producers” who indiscriminately injected antibiotics!

[cakadu]

Rsomer - it reminds me of the analogy about the lobsters in a pot of boiling water. As one of the lobsters was attempting to climb out, the others pulled him back in and asked where he was going.

You are quite correct in that we HAD something good. Funny how the US wants to harmonize when it suits them and wants to continue to blame Canada when it also suits them.

Didn't mom always use to say that with friends like those, you don't need enemies?