I have spent alot of time reading the comments sent to the USDA, both during the first and current comment periods. With some of the ignorant comments, there are some that are a shining example of how the US can plan carefully and make the best out of the border opening.
One comment I read explained that the border opening is inevitable, but that American producers can make the best of it by planning ahead. The author suggested that the USDA set a specific date approximately 6 months in advance to the border opening. This would give US cow/calf and feedlot guys a chance to make future marketing decisions on sound information. The author was not concerned about allowing cattle over 30 months across the border, he was only concerned about producers being caught with their pants down. I truly think he has a handle on the situation.
Many guys are just trying to bad mouth Canadian producers and continue blaming us for their first case of BSE. I find it disgraceful some of language that is used in some of the letters sent to the USDA. After reading a few letters from US cow/calf guys, it is refreshing to read a letter from a Canadian producer.
Another thing I noted was that the majority of letters against the border opening came from Montana, the Dakotas and Idaho. I found very few against the opening that came from other parts of the US.
Some guys are concerned that the Northern states will try to keep the borders closed at any expense. This may be true, but some comments were also sent by members of Congress and other levels of government supporting the border opening.
As far as I am concerned, I can't see the border staying closed after the comment period closes based on the fact that the only people REALLY united against openning it are members of R-Calf.
But enough of my ranting, what does everybody else think? Have you read the comments? Which opinion do you think has more punch?
One comment I read explained that the border opening is inevitable, but that American producers can make the best of it by planning ahead. The author suggested that the USDA set a specific date approximately 6 months in advance to the border opening. This would give US cow/calf and feedlot guys a chance to make future marketing decisions on sound information. The author was not concerned about allowing cattle over 30 months across the border, he was only concerned about producers being caught with their pants down. I truly think he has a handle on the situation.
Many guys are just trying to bad mouth Canadian producers and continue blaming us for their first case of BSE. I find it disgraceful some of language that is used in some of the letters sent to the USDA. After reading a few letters from US cow/calf guys, it is refreshing to read a letter from a Canadian producer.
Another thing I noted was that the majority of letters against the border opening came from Montana, the Dakotas and Idaho. I found very few against the opening that came from other parts of the US.
Some guys are concerned that the Northern states will try to keep the borders closed at any expense. This may be true, but some comments were also sent by members of Congress and other levels of government supporting the border opening.
As far as I am concerned, I can't see the border staying closed after the comment period closes based on the fact that the only people REALLY united against openning it are members of R-Calf.
But enough of my ranting, what does everybody else think? Have you read the comments? Which opinion do you think has more punch?
Comment