New Japanese Beef Proposal

[rain]

Japan Proposal To End Beef Ban
09/16 09:04
TOKYO (Nikkei)--The government decided Wednesday to propose to the U.S. new conditions for ending the ban on imports of beef from that nation, including scientific proof of cattle ages, The Nihon Keizai Shimbun reported in its Thursday morning edition.

Japan recently changed its policy and decided to exempt beef cattle up to 20 months old from compulsory screening for mad cow disease, which it has been demanding as a condition for lifting its import ban.

But believing that determinations of cattle age by ranchers on a voluntary basis lack credibility, Japan has decided to ask that the U.S. Department of Agriculture provide proof the animals' ages have been determined in a scientifically valid manner and compensation be paid if problems arise.

The new conditions are expected to be proposed at a meeting of government officials to be held shortly. But it is unclear whether they will be accepted, because some in Washington are said to want more concessions from Tokyo. (DB)

Got this off DTN this morning. Can we do this in Canada?

[whiteface]

I personally have been lobbying all along and would like to know if those I lobby would and are getting off their $@%%%#$ butts and getting Canada's doors open to anyone. We have traceback, we have tests, we have cattle under 20 months ( or any age you want for that matter...!!! ) and NO support from the States that the cattle will EVER be allowed back in. Now is as good a time as any to get this show on the road with Japan peeking cautiously out from under their comfortable testing blanket and possibly taking young untested meat, let's ask, if we could be included. WE CAN PROVE AGE!!!! THEY CAN'T!!! What are our politicians going to do, wait until the states implements a traceback and then beg and plead some more to please allow us to play with big brothers friends? Gimme a @#$#@$% break. WE DON'T NEED PERMISSION!!! We're strong enough on our own two feet! Let's go! Get back our markets that we deserve! Who's our representative with Japan ( or should I say SUPPPOSED to be!! ) Any corporation likely would have fired his butt for not doing his job. The iron is hot, is everyone out there hitting? If not, now is the time. We move before the states or maybe we lose it all together. Knock on your reps doors, phone them middle of the night, whatever it takes, lets be heard and lets get back our lives! Have a good day all! NO FEAR, RP!

[grassfarmer]

Whiteface, while I agree with your thoughts on accessing markets in spite of the US due to our better trace back system etc you make one big error by stating we can prove age - we can't. Much as I hate to see it I think we are going to have to go down the European route of positively recording age of animals to export to countries like Japan. This will mean more work for producers and it will still depend on their honesty to an extent but it's the only way to have a credible ageing system.

[farmers_son]

According to my Merck Manual, a tooth called I1 erupts at 1.5-2 years of age. The next tooth I2 erupts at 2-2.5 years of age. The I2 tooth would likely be what was being used to verify 30 months of age. If the Japanese were to accept the earlier tooth (I1) as sufficient proof that may provide a solution. This would require acceptance of cattle that were possibly 24 months old.

Even if the Japanese were to accept U.S. cattle under certain conditions that does not mean they will accept our cattle unless we can demonstrate an equivalent low risk. At present the OIE considers the U.S. to be a lower risk than Canada as the U.S. is still provisionally free. Still most believe the U.S. needs to open trade with Japan before they will let our live cattle south so there is room for improvement in our markets with these kinds of announcements.

[farmers_son]

I find it hard to imagine that we can tell the age of dinousaurs and prehistoric man, but can't tell the age of a steer.
There must be a simple tissue test of some kind.

[jensend]

i think this was a great negotiating tactic by the japanese. it's a meaningless concession. what portion of the slaughter run is 20 to 24 months old? to have the cutoff at 20 months and then demand credible age verification is essentially saying test all your animals. i would guess there are enough animals slaughtered between 20 and 30 months old that this concession is of no use to the americans. the fact that they are countering with a 24 month cutoff shows the difficulty they have with 20 months and who knows what the japanese will demand for verification of age. the japanese know exactly the nonexistence of the american id system. btw i get really tired of the americans referring to the 'japs'.

[whiteface]

I agree, jensend, awesome deliberation on the part of the Japaneese and I'm in full agreement also that they want 100% and will make it look like they're comeing around when they're really not. My inlaws say it will have to be 100% or an awful lot of years passing before this is solved between the two countries. It entertains me to death watching them go at it and I so smell an opportunity to be the first and be better at pleasing them than the Americans. What I sort of had in mind with being able to verify age was exactly the traceback we have now...let's put colored/labelled tags in the new crops ears every year. Sure some may lose a tag but the bulk of the calf crop would have year/verified tags in the ears. Aren't we moving to electronic/chip tags anyway...you can store upteen millions of amounts of information in those. Thanks for the feedback, but no, I don't see age verification as a stumbling block whatsoever. I'm WAAAAY more concerned that the proper people aren't representing us and we'll lose a market that we should so easily have. Talk to me more you guys about what your reps are saying and how much is actually getting done in this department. Don't give me age verification, bullony, we're so past that. Our reps better have a way better excuse, have any of you been after yours? What are they saying, wait for the border...
They deserve a backhand for that.

[grassfarmer]

Onca again I agree Whiteface with this being an opportunity for us to step in and steal an American market. The longer their stupididy in negotiating with the Japanese holds them up the longer we have to change our representatives here to some that will actually help our cause instead of hinder it.
But we have talked a lot here about seeking new customers by asking them what they want instead of telling them what they need to take. Surely telling them that they will have to accept any half-assed, cooked up system of age verification goes directly against that principle. Remember Europe for one could give them age verified beef now - perhaps we need to consider this some more before dismissing it. If we don't we risk facing a similar roadblock to the Americans once we try to negotiate access to Japan.

[whiteface]

I'm all for giving Japan what they're asking for, after all this is one of the markets that we want and grassfarmer you know like I know as purebred breeders, the customer that we want to sell to is right, always. My concern, for sure, is I'm pretty afraid no one is asking Japan what they want and certainly I worry that even if they (yet once again) asked for tested meat, our representatives won't give it to them. What the hell is wrong with this picture! Why are we still not able to give Japan what they're asking for and get our markets back. You bet, the whole age thing is redundant anyway, Japan really wants 100%, we aren't even prepared to deal with 1%. I ask again, what the #$@$ is wrong with this picture? Hope you all are getting your crops in! Go hug your kids!

[kato]

When thinking about why the Japanese do not want untested beef, our representatives should think about this.

If Japan insisted that the only fish we were allowed to eat were raw, how would we feel? In Japan, sushi is a delicacy. In Canada it is bait. Cultural differences exist, whether the Americans and our representatives like it or not.

We would expect Japan to respect our culture. Why should we not respect theirs?

[kato]

If it is strictly a trade barrier as our innocent American cousins say it is; why is Japan increasing their amount of imported beef from Australia and other countries.

Of course we need packing capacity first, but give the new plants coming on line in Canada a leg up advantage by allowing them to test for that Japanese market, or whatever market asks.

This has been the stand of BIG C from day one. Test - but test only for reasons of trade negotiations.

[jensend]

rpkaiser - is cfia coming around to allow testing for export? if they don't we can have all the extra slaughter capacity to kill all our production but we're still dancing to the american tune.

[farmers_son]

I noted the comment to the effect that customer is always right. Was Japan right when they attacked Pearl Harbour?

This is not business between a customer and a consumer. This is a trade war, for diplomatic reasons called a trade dispute. Japan's insistence on 100% testing is not supported by science, even Europe is not doing it. In effect Japan is trying to unilaterally write the rules on international trade. That is just plain wrong.

If you won't stand up for what is right then you don't stand for anything. The rest of the world has to stand up to Japan's unreasonable demands. Anything else is spineless.

As a middle power Canada must support science based trade. If we followed the advice of those who would give in to Japan's unscientific and unreasonable demands then Canada soon would loose our ability to trade anywhere. Any nation could use the excuse of consumerism to block trade and protect their domestic industry.

[farmers_son]

Farms_son. I wil first say once again that the only reason I believe in testing is for trade agreements. Personally I think we are on the wrong path with BSE from the get go, but that is another story.

As far as comparing to Europe. The amount of testing that was being done in Canada and the USA prior to May 20, 03 was nothing. The 8000 head this year, and 30,000 head next year will show more cases. If the Americans were classified the same as Canada and had to test 4D's to change their OIE status they would find more cases as well, and they may anyway.

This whole issue of testing for BSE is simply about testing for BSE. If you test for it you will find it.

My attitude is, we might as well test for the Japanese if it will open a border, or the next case we find (and we will) will delay the process again and again.

Jensend - as far as CFIA softening.

The lastest I feel from speaking with a number of folks is that the CFIA has never outright said, "If a plant is built and application is made for testing for export markets, WE WILL NOT ALLOW IT". They have never come public with a statement that they would allow either,BUT, there is no plant proposal on their desk at this time either.

One little tidbit to go along with the Peace country proposal to build a testing facility on site is that Sunterra has a similar plan.

I have not spoken with Dr.Gary Little(Head Canadian CFIA BSE Vet) himself but his phone number is (613) 225 - 2342 extension 3862

Our plant proposal is a ways off yet as well, and I suspect that CFIA will only skirt the issue feeling that premature press would just cause a lot of tadoo about nothing since no plant will be running for a good time yet.

[farmers_son]

Now that is an interesting statement, the only reason you believe in testing is for trade agreements. The only reason I see testing should be done is for surveillance, to demonstrate to the world we don’t have any BSE. It would seem we are in agreement that BSE testing not be done for food safety reasons. Better to remove the SRMs as there is no international reaction to that and it provides 100% food safety.
The International Review Committee dictated to the U.S. that they test to a higher degree than Canada because the U.S. was unable to trace back all the progeny from that cow in Washington. However the U.S. knows better than to find a positive and destroy their industry in the process like Canada did.
I don’t see how you can say we will test for Japan but not test for our consumers or for the United States or every other potential customer. If you test for Japan then you test for everyone. Then you no longer stand for science or fair trade or good business. Japan is wrong and if we were to go down that road we would be wrong too. Two wrongs don’t make a right.