First Thing Monday Morning

[cowman]

Without a doubt testing is not going to happen...I'm sorry but thats just how it is? Our masters have stated that very clearly?
And make no mistake here...America owns us body and soul!
Of course we've lost so much money that we could have bought every packing plant in north American many times over! And I would suggest the test would have been cheaper than all the expense of removing SRMs, segregated kills, establishing ages of cattle etc.?
I often wonder why? Why is there so much resistance to testing? In my darker moments I wonder if they are afraid of what they really might find?
Perhaps a larger problem than what they estimated? And who would be liable for that???
The deer/elk population in Colorado is apparently heavily infected with CWD. Now how can that be? I doubt that anyone was out feeding them cows brains or sheeps spinal cords? So how in the hell did they get it, how did they pass it around so freely?
The "science" says BSE/CWD/scrapie/ CJD
can't be passed in the blood. The science says it can't be passed to offspring. So how come they killed those 450 dairy calves in Washington? How come they won't let you donate blood if you lived in England during the epidemic? One of the screening questions, when you donate blood, is has anyone in your immediate family had CJD! If yes...they don't want your blood!
What would ever happen if the North American consumer percieved his meat was not safe at all...in fact might be a death sentence? Would it basically be the end of the entire industry?
Now I'll probably be knocked as a fearmonger and get a lot of quotes on how safe the beef supply is, but the simple fact is nobody knows unless we test every darned animal we slaughter? And the sad part is it will cost us nothing in comparison to what we've lost already? And furthermore it just might be the pro-active thing that might save our industry if this thing is bigger than we suspect. And save untold human suffering.

[whiteface]

Good points raised here about testing granted say tommorrow we would still need more slaughter capacity. I agree with that. More slaughter capacity and less monopoly, but if any one is going to put out the cash to increase slaughter capacity, they would have to have a market for the meat to go, that's where permission to test comes in. Nobody wants to pay fo a multi-million doallar plant with nowhere to sell the meat!!! This is exactly the spot that Creekstone is in. At the very least doing more of what isn't working will not make it work any better! Some of you may be financially able to wait but then why wait...what are you going to do, spend your whole life waiting for something that they don't plan to make happen. Hows that for passive-aggressive. No business has ever succeded just sitting around waiting, besides we tried that one, where did it get us? I like these ideas comeing to the forefront now I would like us to "Have a fit!" as Joe said and do something about it. You've got a lot of drive Joe, I sure can identify with, sometimes it takes a young guy to make some much needed changes. We need BSE to be dealt with much more aggressively if raising beef cattle globally will survive. The disease is there and must be tackled and not feared and not covered up. We raise, we build facilities, we test, we market, we own our own problem and stop depending on the States to "love or save us."

[Muttley]

The perception that we need 100% testing will only send a negative message that we have a unsafe product. We need to send the message that because of our safety measures allready in effect we have a safe food supply.

Sending messages and phoning is good only if it is done in a positve way. Ranting for the sake of ranting only sends a message of frustration. If you are going to do this make sure you have some figures and answers to give. Telling coffee shop gossip will not open the border.

I spend a good deal of time working with farmers in the states. It is my feeling from them that many especially the cow calf guys and purebred breeders are having a better than average year do to the border being closeed. Less animals from here is meaning more money for them!!!!

And those that feel the border will open soon are fooling them selves. It's election time in the states and George will do nothing that will loose votes. I predict another year before we see alot of movement. Just look at that judges decision,it's election time for him to.

[Muttley]

Yes we will find more cases of BSE if we test everything. BSE is caused by a severe chemical imbalance in a cows system. This chemical imbalance may be brought on by changes in her diet, chemicals in her environment, or a combination of many other phenotypical factors. I don't beleive that anyone has proven inconclusively that BSE is passed from cow to cow through feed, and I am certain that no one has proven without a doubt that BSE or any other spongiform problem can pass from one species to another in any way. We have decided to follow one mans theory (Prusiner the American) and ignore all other science. You should read what this wacho, who began the theory we follow, is saying now.

Yes testing is unecessary and we will find more chemically imbalanced cattle if we test.

The whole world will no longer change it's mind over the standing theory of BSE, so we need to deal with this the best we can. Future generations may see a dismantleing of this whole concept of "transmisible" spongiform encephalpathy which will reduce or eliminate the "transmisible" aspect, but we have to deal with it now.

Cargil and Tyson will not test in Canada unless the Canadadian goverment foots the bill "AGAIN". So we must go after the government.

Yes testing will solve a portion of our problem, and we may well see our product accepted so well by the huge and ever more lucrative Asian market that Cargill and Tyson will grab the bucks like good little capitalists and start to show their own American owners that money can be made by doing things other than the American way.

Our Canadian industry is too large and too special to go back to simply producing what we need at home. I know that it is an almost impossible task, but if we could all get together on this and realise that an open US border, however money related tempting it may be, will not solve any long term problems related to BSE. What do you think rsomer? And some of them have now shown their true colors as to who they are going to kick the next time there is a problem in our industry.

Have a wonderful day, and yes I to am glad to hear new voices here on Agri-vation dot com.

[Willowcreek]

Muttley- I think you are right about the US cow/calf man and prices. They are experiencing record high cull cattle prices (I have seen large old bulls sell for $79) and have buyers falling over each other trying to contract calves for this fall. I have heard of offers of $1.15 for 575lb steers. Been offered $1.02 for 600 weights. And this is way early in the year. Usually you have to call the buyer- but not this year. Makes everyone down here wonder what the price may be in Nov.

Whether this is because of or tied to the closed border, I don't know- but a lot of US producers sure think it is.

[kato]

Agri-vation . com. That's about it lately! LOL

I think what everyone is getting at is that we've been pounding the "based on science" aspect for almost a year now,and gotten absolutley nowhere.

Even though we know the beef is safe, and the protocols are working, the fact of the matter is our market is not functioning. Not at all.

We need change and we need it soon. Now, what to do? Waiting for the Americans to welcome us with open arms is a waste of good time we could be spending finding ways to live without relying on only one market.

There are a lot of creative minds in our industry, and it's time to get together and come up with a plan. The producer owned plants that are starting up are a really good start. But they need market access. If it means testing for export, then so be it. If it means testing everything over 30 months and/or under 30 months, so be it.

The biggest danger with random testing is the horrific swings in the market when one is found. Just look at last Friday's futures in the States with a "rumour" of a cow that may or may not even have existed, being sent for BSE testing.

It's fine for the government to say, "Random testing is just to assess the level of infection in the herd, it doesn't really mean much in the big picture" That's all very true, and we all know it. Tell that to the guys who have cattle sitting at the auction mart the day they find another one. We all know what will happen to the price that day and for a month or two after!

Anything has got to be better than what we are going throught now.

[cakadu]

Do we have the guarantee of a market if we test 100%? The Japanese have said that they want 100% testing, but that does not in any way shape or form infer that they will buy the product.

Let's find the markets BEFORE we start onto the additional slaughter capacity. Everyone seems to be focusing on the cattle that have to get to market - what about the resulting meat that will have to be moved? Otherwise what will happen is we will have all this meat with no place for it to go. It's not like wheat or canola that can sit in the bin until prices come up - once it's slaughtered, it has a finite shelf life.

I think that starting up these plants for competition, better service, working within a value chain so that producers can get their fair share of a return are all worthwhile endeavours. What I wonder about is the fact that we seem to have several proposed plants that are wanting to do the same type of beef i.e. hormone free, natural, organic - what have you. Each are going to have enormous start-up costs and will end up competing with each other over the long run. What would happen if we focused all the energy and resources into establishing one plant that could become the successful working model for others to start? From what I can see in the plans, none will be up to full capacity right away. Wouldn't it make more sense to make a go of one and then branch out?

In the spirit of cooperation and collaboration, I would like to see the competition out of it right from the get-go. Work together as one collective entity instead of several smaller ones that the big boys could take out with little problem. How could you see that working?

[whiteface]

I love those ideas cakadu. I've been talking and writing until my tongue and fingers were ready to fall off and my goal was to inspire, anger, frusterate, motivate as many people into action as I can. Several bunches seem to ageee or sympathize but does anyone know out there what it will take to put some of these thoughts into action. I will certainly be in the game because I believe in all of us and our business...I don't know where to turn now after barking and barking and although people all around me seem to agree at least in part, how do we spring to action? Bark some more? Any further ideas than harrassing the crap out of the politicians. I have definatly done a fair amount of that and will continue to do so.

[whiteface]

Cooperation and colaberation right from the get go, cakadu. If you are anything like the rest of us Canadian or American ranchers, I bet you are an independent cuss. If I don't remember who I am, some mornings I can hardly take orders from myself.

Competition is good. Look beyond the frustration that all of us voice from time to time,(and cowman voices constantly) and you will find a group of people (including cowman) who have survived and will survive because their industry has always been competitive.

I see no harm in smaller groups with vision starting value chains etc. The ones that make it and grow will force the pirates to take notice.

Oh and by the way science shmience. We have used this BS for a year and it has gotten us nowhere. When I mentioned Mark Purdey to a communication expert at our provincial Ag Ministers office the other day, he said," that's the guy who talks of cows geting BSE from eating dirt". That's the scientific explanation our Ag office gives for a theory that revolves around chemical imbalance. One that makes as much, or more scientific sense, as the current Prusiner crap. But Prusiner won the nobel prize, or something, for his work, that he stole from someone else anyway. Prusiner is a quack, and we all suffer for it.

Yes we may need to find markets for our BSE tested beef. We have wasted a whole year already so lets get to it.

The Texas cow is a perfect example of the progress we have made in our integrated North American effort. Shook the hell out of the markets. Positive result, and we are right back to square one.

[cakadu]

RP - yes, to a great extent what we do around here is independent and we haven't played in the "normal" marketplace and likely have been the better for it over the years i.e. stable price while the price fluctuates all around us - steady customers with word of mouth selling more - putting the majority of the money in our jeans instead of someone else's.

Having said that though, we need to become interdependent, which isn't to say that our independence goes by the wayside in favor of working that way. Smaller groups working together can collectively go after bigger and more varied markets, responde to customer demands more quickly and keep on top of the changing tides of consumerism.

Why do you think it is that the monopolies are able to control what they can - they divide and conquer. If we all have to do it our own way, then how far can we get when things take off?

We cannot be all things to all people, so we need to find those that can assist us into becoming that well functioning whole. Not all of us are marketers, so find the people that can market; find those that can read the marketplace and be proactive when it comes to getting the next thing going. Believe me, when you've got a good idea, then the competitors start to come out of the wordwork, so you need someone who can stay one step ahead of the competition in that regard.

Yes, we need to start doing something - of that I have no doubt. We need to be able to focus the energy and resources into making the first one a success, so that others will believe in it enough to risk getting involved. As you can probably tell, there are a number of skeptics out there. What better way to quell the skepticism than to have a plant that is a resounding success and forms the basis and the mechanism to replicate that success. Not that they all need to be cookie cutters but the formula can be used to create other similar successes.

Nothing will kill the optimism for this idea of producer owned plants faster than if several start up and they aren't successes. When I think about how much capital has to be raised to build and operate each plant, wouldn't it be better to ensure some modicum of success before spending all of that money. For example, if you need $4 million just to build the plant, you need double that or another $8 million to operate it. That is a huge amount of money to be raised in this cash strapped, low optimism environment that seems to be prevailing. Show people it can be done and help to sway the attitude that it will never work, or will only work in a very limited way.