someone tell me

[jensend]

why cfia has the power to say whether or not anyone can test for bse. obviously there have to be standards for testing. why is it within their power to say even if the same test is used as cfia says will determine a positive or negative it is disallowed. i can see where they could set standards for labs and procedures. should it not be up to the minister of agriculture to permit the testing?

[rusty1]

Tender Beef wins mad cow testing OK


By NEAL TALBOT
Herald-Tribune staff

A fledgling northwestern Alberta meat-packing company says it has been cleared by the federal government to become the first Canadian operation to test cattle for mad cow disease.


Peace Country Tender Beef Co-op officials told the Daily Herald-Tribune on Thursday the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has confirmed it will not oppose the co-op's pending request to test all the 30,000 cattle it intends to process annually for the deadly brain-wasting disease.


The controversial request was expected to be refused by the CFIA over fears non-governmental testing would damage faith in untested beef and anger the United States, which has forbidden identical testing requests.


However, Tender Beef Co-op and CFIA lawyers reportedly discovered Canada has no regulations in place to oppose such a move if the co-op uses CFIA-approved testing methods and facilities.


The CFIA is the only organization in Canada that currently tests for mad cow, also known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE.


Tender Beef Co-op interim chairman Neil Peacock of Sexsmith said the move will finally allow Canadian companies who are willing to shoulder the cost of testing every cow re-entry into dozens of currently-closed multimillion-dollar international markets.


"If Canadian companies agree to privately test all their animals for the disease there is no reason we can't get back into huge beef markets like Japan, Korea and possibly even the United States," said Peacock, whose co-op is spending $350,000 to build an on-site testing laboratory and hire trained staff.


"Allowing companies to do the testing our foreign customers are demanding should open the world to Canadian beef once again."


More than two dozen countries closed their borders to Canadian beef after the May 2003 discovery of a single mad cow near Wanham in the Central Peace.


While some countries like the U.S. have since eased the processed products ban, Japan, Korea and a host of other nations have refused to accept Canadian beef unless it is tested for mad cow. Japan spent $21 million and South Korea $470,000 on Canadian beef annually before the disease's discovery.


Both counties, as well as Germany, have already sent letters indicating they will reopen their borders to co-op products if its proposed $4.2-million slaughterhouse is allowed to do the testing and is built to European Union standards, said Tender Beef Co-op officials.


The federal government has agreed to spend $92.1 million over the next five years to increase the number of slaughtered cattle tested for mad cow annually from the current 5,500 to 30,000, but thus far it has not been enough to convince top international customers to accept Canadian beef.


Facing more than $2-billion in national cattle industry loses and dwindling international markets, Edmonton MP David Kilgour says allowing private companies to test all of their own beef will prevent Canada from permanently losing its top international customers and help revamp the image of Canadian beef.


"Private testing will let Canada reclaim its position as a top international beef exporter before we lose all our long-time markets to counties like Australia, who have not yet faced mad cow problems," said Kilgour, a federal expert on the cattle industry.


"If Canada doesn't meet demands of 100 per cent tested beef from its global customers, we risk them buying from elsewhere else and forgetting Canada still has the best tasting beef in the world."


Kilgour added he saw no reason the CFIA or federal government would take action to prevent such testing from taking place.


CFIA spokesman Darcy Undseth would not comment on whether the CFIA had told the co-op it would not oppose its private testing request until an official request has been made. The CFIA has to approve all testing methods for mad cow before they can be used on Canadian soil.


Comprehensive private testing is not going to be welcomed by the entire nation's cattle industry.


Canadian Cattlemen's Association spokeswoman Cindy McCreath warns allowing companies to test 100 per cent of their beef will actually harm the national cattle industry.


"Allowing (private testing) does not bring any relief to our current situation and could in fact be detrimental," said McCreath, noting it is a lack of slaughter facilities - not a lack of markets - that is hurting the Canadian cattle prices.


McCreath says if North America consumers feel there is a two-tier beef safety level and packing plants are forced to test every cow, it will lower national production by an estimated 30 per cent and actually increase the current problem.


The Canadian Beef Export Federation, Alberta Cattle Feeder's Association, and British Columbia Cattleman's Association have all expressed concerns over allowing private testing.


The Tender Beef Co-op - which will be built in either Beaverlodge or Dawson Creek, B.C. - has been told it will not be allowed to carry the CFIA-certified logo on its products and will have additional labelling restrictions. All co-op products are also expected to include a bar code allowing customers to track down the cow's original ranch on its website.


Tender Beef Co-op officials envisions the nation's packing industry will follow in its footsteps on both the testing and tracking methods.


It already has agreements in place with a major Western Canada supermarket and restaurant chain to buy all of its beef - whether it gets testing approval or not - with products expected to hit store shelves in early 2005.

back




Submit your views on this story
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contact Us | Corporate | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2003 Daily Herald -Tribune, a division of Quebecor Media
All rights reserved. Optimized for browser versions 4.0 and higher.





Grande Prairie, Alberta
Quick Launch Quick Launch - - - - - - - - Breaking News News Sports Editorial Columns Lifestyles Business - - - - - - - - - - Classifieds Careers Obituaries - - - - - - - - - - ClassEfind.com CareerAd.com - - - - - - - - Forestry Wedding Planner Shopping Mall Homes Home Plan Auto Corner Drilling Report Ludwig Files - - - - - - - - Movie Listings Privacy Subscribe Now!


Search

Search our site
Search the web










Subscribe Now!
Quebecor Newspapers across Canada
TV Listings
Ludwig Files

[jensend]

we'll see how this progresses. my point is that we essentially have cfia determining trade policy. they should be facilitating trade not holding a veto over it. the inmates......

[jensend]

It could be that that is what we were being led to beleive. If these lawyers are correct and CFIA has no power to stop Peace Country, what the hell has been going on?

All of the time and money spent could have had testing in mandatory testing in place in all Canadian Plants months ago, and this fear over less flow in the Cargil and Tyson plants would not be an issue.

It looks to me that our government should be held accountable for holding back on the testing issue, and causing beef producers to loose money. OR once again, were we, the producers, to apathetic, and fearful of the American jugernaut to push the testing issue right from the start.

[jensend]

Sorry I can't type----

Meant to say:

All the time and money spent could have had mandatory testing in place in all Canadian Plants months ago....

[BFW]

RPkaiser: I agree with you that CFIA should not have the power to block privately owned packing plants from conducting BSE tests if it will open markets to them. Remember, however that Cargill and Tyson are strongly opposed to BSE testing in their respective plants and it would require legislation to get them to do it. Finally, why would they want to test for BSE? They are running their plants full out and selling their product into markets that do not require the animals to be tested for BSE.

[BFW]

By the way I notice everyone coming out of the closet on other sites. BFW= Jeff Warrack, Bruce Farms Ltd., Strathmore, Alberta.

[BFW]

Randy Kaiser, Crossfield AB
We finish our cattle at J. Howard's feedlot 2 miles south of the Hiway 21, Hiway #1 Jucntion. I imagine you know him Jeff.

I agree that Cargil and Tyson do not and will not want to test, why would they.

Seems that they may have a bit of clout with our governments however, coaching them to not allow testing in any way shape, or form.

Good on these folks up in the Peace country for digging that extra foot, and maybe rooting out the skunks in the process.

[BFW]

Can't believe how much faster my typing has gotten since posting here on Agriville. To bad my fingers don't always do waht my brain tlels thme.
Sorry for all the typo's.

[cakadu]

Actually, Randy, the brain does funny things when we read. So long as the first and last characters are correct, we often fill in the blanks and overlooke the seplling erroors in order to make the sentence comlpete.

[ALICIA]

I'm not deffending the goverment afficials but, Just like every one else we are all stared. What if we find another, What if, What if....
But just like the rest of us, the goverment is now thinking just like us, Things are not getting any better if not worse. The boarders are not opening and the cattle are increasing. So I guess it really donsn't matter if we find another BSE cause because wether we do or do not the boarders are not going to open to our cattle. So we may as well test, and let the chips fall where they may and the goverment can say I told you so and have a clear conches because they really can't do any thing any way.

[cowman]

Somehow I wonder if this whole thing makes much sense?
I mean the CFIA guy doesn't even admit they won't oppose it? And the CFIA will set the standards to what test and how it is done? And yet the plant won't be able to carry the CFIA certified logo?...strange?
Then Kilgour says he can't see why the CFIA or federal government would be opposed to private testing. How about the fact that just about every cattle organization and provincial governments are opposed to it?
I find the Tender Beef statement that they will have product on the shelf in early 2005, very optomistic, for a company that hasn't even made up its mind where to build a plant? If they can build a plant that quick they must be a whole lot more efficient than anyone else in the world!
It all sounds very interesting and hopeful...why to I have this nagging suspicion it will never happen?

[jensend]

don jensen, cupar, sk

Can somebody tell me (pretty sure jeff can) what is abp's stance on giving slaughter plants the option of 100% testing? this ties in to what i said here after the moose jaw meeting. if the wrong guys go to the govt. with an idea it will be rejected almost out of hand. if abp says testing should be allowed it will carry more weight at least with the ab. govt. if we're going to move the product we're going to have to sell it and not wait for the americans to come and buy it. if it takes testing for a period of time it won't be as expensive as the last 15 months have been and it would be a strategy required to set this industry up for the future. we need diverse markets; the americans will be launching trade actions against us the same as they do against other sectors of our economy whenever the opportunity arises. if bush gets back in he may not be that protectionist but with his foreign policy he will be somewhat isolated and we'll be hit whenever a lawyer comes up with an idea. too verbose here, time to go.

[CattleAnnie]

Here's what I've heard from a couple of people actively involved in the Tender Beef Co-op.

Originally slated for Beaverlodge, at the last minute the owner of the land that TenderBeef was dealing on jacked the price. Significantly.

There have also been some difficulties in dealing with the AB gov't. Apparantly the provincial powers that be have been less than encouraging to a new slaughter/packing facility. Draw your own conclusions on why this would be.

If the plant receives a more favourable welcome from the BC gov't,it is extremely feasible to be in full operation by 2005. You see, I'm from the area, and a few years back there was a lot of talk about new job opportunities on the horizon when Louisianna Pacific was going to build a Veneer Plant on the outskirts of Dawson Creek. And they did. And it never was put into operation.

So when you're about two km east of Dawson Creek you'll see a huge tan building standing vacant. And from what I'm told it has more than ample square footage for what they need. They would just have to provide the infrastructure.

Add to this that the city counsellors of Dawson Creek have over the last ten years finally realised that accomadating and encouraging new businesses is far more profitable for the city than driving them away, I think it's very likely that it could end up based there.

Take care.

[CattleAnnie]

Lets hope that politics doesn't stand in the way of getting this plant up and running !
Anyone heard anything about Ranchers Own near Stony Plain or the one at Fort Assiniboine ?