Meeting with Cam Ostercamp

[whiteface]

I liked your comparison, jensend, saying how some guys will say its too dry to seed and then waiting until all you've got is a cheaper crop rather than taking initiative to get the best possible crop. Thanks for the support, too, I took a chance at making some enemies with my comments but I want what everyone wants, a viable market for our product and a reason to stay in business. I will lobby whoever it takes to get us what we need and hopefully encourage some of my new friends here to do the same. :-)

[kato]

Whiteface..your comments are an indication of the frustration that is building in all of us day by day.

This is the kind of emotion we need our politicians to see. I have a feeling that they feel they have thrown us a bone, and we'll curl up in the corner like the good farm dogs we are, and leave the grownups to decide the election.

(Besides a good rant does help relieve the pressure a bit. I've been know to toss one out myself from time to time.)

Speaking of farm dogs, even if we are barking up the wrong tree by demanding testing, at least we can go to bed at night knowing that we at least TRIED.

Maybe we won't get universal testing, but at the very least we need rules that do not stopping individual companies from doing it if they so wish.

Having the ability to test the cattle, and pursue new markets could make a big difference between any new plant being seen as viable or not. In the business climate as it is, the future looks tough for anyone trying to get going, even for an optomist.

rsomer, don't quit saying what you're saying. We need all sides of the argument here. It's in an environment where the debating is lively where the good ideas develop.

Maybe we can egg each other on until we come up with something absolutely brilliant.

[kato]

Hey kato. I just printed off your points that you would like to make at the Beef Initiatives Group meeting but would like to ask if you would put a name and location on this paper.
I don't think kato from (maybe) Manitoba is gonna do it.
rpkaiser@telusplanet.net
Randy Kaiser (403) 946 - 0228
Any body else have any long distance requests?

[grassfarmer]

Good comments whiteface, jensend, kato et all. I think we really have to help ourselves out of this one, we've waited long enough for our illustrious leaders (beef industry and political ones)to do something. It's a bad time to find out you are devoid of leadership! I'll post another thread about something I think we should be doing with regard to ABP/CCA.

[pandiana]

rsomer, I was interested in your comment that because we were a party to the NAFTA we would not be allowed to go to 100% testing. How do you come to understand this? I am not that familiar with the fine print but can't see how this would apply.

[pandiana]

How's the bus seating availability up there in Hardisty Purecountry.
Buses make a nice backdrop for the camera crews that will be there.

[rsomer]

Canadian foreign policy seeks to advance Canadian security, economic, and similar interests by ensuring that, where the conduct of other states may affect Canadians, international rules and regimes provide the basis for that conduct. To advance that goal, the federal government concludes numerous multilateral, regional, and bilateral agreements every year. Canada has become a charter member of virtually all of the international organizations and conventions that have flourished since the second world war. All these agreements constitute limits upon independent decision-making by Canadian governments, in return for stability, predictability, and accountability in the conduct of other governments. To that extent we have given up some of our sovereignty.

As whiteface so eloquently put it "They can shove their science right up their ##@@$" That maybe feels good to say that but we cannot expect other countries to use science based rule making if we do not. 100% testing is not science based. As a medium power and a trading nation we need to stick to the science if we are to continue to trade globally. If we give in to politically motivated protectionism in the guise of consumerism the list of unreasonable trade restrictions will never end. Any country could restrict trade by claiming its consumers have concerns about BSE or growth implants or ingrown toenails. Meanwhile those same countries would expect Canada to contine accepting their imports, for instance Japan.

Canada's Agriculture and Agri-Food Minister Lyle Vanclief, US Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, and Mexican Secretary of Agriculture Javier Usabiaga have jointly called on the Organisation of International Epizootics (OIE) to encourage a more current practical, risk-based approach to BSE. The joint letter requests that the International Animal Health Code Commission of the OIE begin the dialogue necessary to develop more current practical, science-based guidelines relevant to BSE risk management. We cannot take this approach before the OIE as part of NAFTA and then say oh well, Japan wants us to test 100% so lets just forget science based guidelines.

If you stop and think about just how unreasonable Japan is being maybe it would help. Canada has surveillance tested literally tens of thousands of animals and we found one animal that was born before the ban on feeding ruminant protein was put in place. Japan immediately closes the border to all our beef but suggests they might let some in if we test every animal for BSE because that is what they do, even though they did not have a ban on feeding ruminant protein like North America did. All the while Japan knows full well that animals under 24 months of age have never tested positive for BSE so what is the point. Why isn’t Japan allowing in boneless beef under 30 or 24 months of age? Meanwhile they are importing beef without test from Australia, a country that only BSE tests 500 head a year and restricts downer cows from slaughter plants. Something tells me that there is more to this than food safety.

[rsomer]

If I may say something further that seems to have gotten completely overlooked in this discussion. I am very concerned that a call from producers for 100% testing will get misinterpreted by the media to say that there is something wrong with our beef, not that we need to get borders open to trade. We have enjoyed such tremendous support from the Canadian consumers and for that matter the American consumers who have expressed no concerns about eating our product that we take this support for granted. I would be all for a rally in High River if the message was to thank consumers for supporting our industry or to pressure our governments to do more to open our border with the U.S. and certainly if the message was we need government to really get behind the immediate construction of more packing plants in Canada. But the message that producers think their beef is not safe is much more news worthy and that is the message you will see on the 6:00 news if producers gather and call for 100% testing. Things are never so bad they cannot be made worse. That is where this is headed. 100% testing is the wrong message to bring before the media.

[whiteface]

While I appreciate you cool headed rationale as to why the governments have done (seemingley to us) diddly squat about this situation, I fail to see how having simply a "rally" to thank consumers and "encourage" government support for new packing plants is going to get us one step closer to what we need. I'm wondering the same thing as pandiana, how does NAFTA stop us from 100% testing and can we use that same reason to shut off 100% of their energy...of course its unreasonable and now requires some unreasonable retaliation on our part. If I have come across as unreasonable its because this has gone beyond any thing other than that. I like katos comparison also, that we're supposed to behave like the good ol' farm dogs they are used to us being. Can we stop being good dogs finally and do something, anything different because what we have been doing is not working at all. Hows your feed rsomer, can you afford to feed those calves you held over indefinatly, how about this years crop? You may be in better shape than some of us but you too need something to happen and begging and pleading hasn't got you any further than any of us, time for new action. Nothing is so bad it can't be made worse? I seriously ask you what would be worse? Delayed border opening? People changeing their diets to avian flu or pesticide laced or genetically modified vegetables and boycotting beef? I think if this situation were to "get more serious" we could get this whole border issue right off the table and then maybe tackle this problem head on. BSE is out there and needs to be dealt with and now is as good a time as any for CANADA to make some of its own decisions for a change maybe earn back some respect rather than just being the good ol' boys that have a reputaion for not saying @#$%# even if our mouths are full of it.

[kato]

We need to predicate every request for testing with "We believe that according to science, 100% testing is unnecessary, and agree with that...BUT... our industry is about to collapse, and we must do whatever it takes to save it."

This request for testing is a sign of how desperate things have begun, and if that's what it takes to rattle some chains, then so be it.

If we all lived by "science" all the time, and not just when it suits us, the border would never have been closed.

In the Animal Health Code, which is available on the WTO website, it states that according to our situation, where we have had a feed ban and surveillance system in place, the ONLY cattle not eligible for export are cattle born before the feed ban.

How come everything WE do must be based on science, yet the rest of the world picks and chooses which science to live by?

Something stinks here, and it's not just a wet feedlot.