• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Thanks CBC-OCM responds

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Thanks CBC-OCM responds

    Organization for Competitive Markets
    P.O. Box 6486
    Lincoln, NE 68506
    www.competitivemarkets.com

    Date: October 5, 2004

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    Contact: Michael Stumo, General Counsel, 860.379.6199

    OCM: Canadian Feed Ban Violations Should Halt Beef Imports

    Lincoln, NE ~ The Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) said today that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) should immediately revoke import permits held by companies that transport Canadian boxed beef and beef products into the U.S. OCM’s position arises from a report by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) that the BSE-infected Canadian cow diagnosed in May 2003 was rendered into animal feed.

    The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) reported last week that a CFIA inspection found several violations of the country’s 1997 law banning the practice of feeding the rendered remains of cattle back to other cattle in animal feed. That feed was sold to as many as 1,800 farms. In fact, the report specifically indicated the May 2003 BSE-infected Canadian cow that caused the first U.S.-Canada border closure last year was rendered into animal feed. Two hundred cattle operations were visited, revealing several cases where cows were exposed to the feed. Three farms were quarantined and 63 cattle were destroyed as a result. Live Canadian cattle are currently not allowed in the U.S.

    “This lack of compliance reveals risks and uncertainties that justify halting further beef imports,” said Keith Mudd, OCM president. “BSE discoveries caused serious harm to markets in Britain, Japan, Canada and the U.S. The USDA should not allow further beef imports until the scope of the Canadian feed ban violations are known.”

    The CBC report stated government inspectors found several cases where cattle were exposed to the feed; the agency learned frequent cross-contamination of chicken and cattle feed occurs; and in one case, a producer admitted feeding chicken feed to cattle. At one farm, inspectors found poultry droppings mixed with feed that had been left available for cattle. Dr. Neil Cashman, professor of neurological disease at the University of Toronto, told the CBC that no cattle should be rendered into feed because feed mix-ups are common.

    USDA currently issues import permits for “Low Risk Canadian Products.” According to documents on the USDA website, certain boneless Canadian beef are allowed into the U.S. through the issuance of USDA import permits. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency must verify that the animals “are not known to have been fed prohibited products during their lifetime.” Beef imports from Canada to the U.S. have increased significantly in 2004 to pre-BSE levels.

    “Canadian officials can no longer honestly verify that beef sold to U.S. outlets was derived from cattle not known to have been fed rendered cattle remains,” continued Mudd. “USDA cannot rely on the assurances relating to import permits that have been issued. All current import permits should be revoked until we know the scope of the problem. It is unfortunate that some producers are harmed by outbreaks of any sort. However, quarantine, isolation and segregation are the methods necessary to prevent the spread of foot and mouth disease, brucellosis and BSE.”

    "USDA continues the practice of placing the ‘USDA inspected’ stamp on Canadian beef. Consumers are misled that the meat originates from the U.S. and that it is proven free of disease,” commented Mudd. "Congress should respond with immediate implementation of Country of Origin Labeling to provide further confidence and information to the U.S. consumer.”

    The Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) is a multidisciplinary, nonprofit group of farmers, ranchers, academics, attorneys and policy makers dedicated to reclaiming the agricultural marketplace for independent farmers, ranchers and rural communities. OCM helps lead the Cattlemen’s Competitive Market Project which is a voluntary contribution program funding the effort to increase demand for U.S. cattle and beef in open and competitive markets.

    #2
    OCM is an even lower on the piss-ant food chain organization than R-calf.No way, no how,it'll be a cold day in hell before shipments of Canadian beef are ever stopped from entering the US.
    What the hell do you think the high end restaurant and hotel chains feed their customers in the US??? Corn fed US or Barley fed CDN passed off as US beef????? Wake the hell up and ignore R-calf,OCM,CCMP,NCBA,USDA,Govt.of Canada etc.etc.etc.
    We have THE premium product out there!!!! REMEMBER THAT!!!!

    Tim.

    Comment


      #3
      I wrote the CBC about that story. They wrote me back basically saying they felt they had done a good job.

      I just sent them a copy of this story. With my thanks.

      Comment


        #4
        kato: I also wrote to CBC, our provincial Wild Rose Forum which has been very suportive over the past 16 months. I can't imagine what CBC was thinking of in rehashing this story that was actually released by CFIA on May 25, 2003 as follows:

        Here is a quote from a BSE Industry Update sent out on May 25, 2003:

        “There are now a total of 17 herds in quarantine – 12 in Alberta, 2 in Saskatchewan and 3 in British Columbia. These include the index herd, 10 traceback herds in which the BSE cow may have spent time, 3 traceforward herds where calves from the index herd have gone, and 3 herds on mixed farms that may have received poultry feed made from the rendered cow.”

        CFIA is currently examining feed ban regulations to determine if further enhancements are necessary (such as the removal of SRMs from all animal feed) to further remove any risk of accidental feeding of ruminant-derived ingredients to cattle. CCA is actively involved in those discussions.

        Comment


          #5
          Joe-2, I agree this is just another piece of blatant protectionism being pushed by another minority interest group. However you are deluding yourself if you think that the US sees Canadian barley fed beef as superior to their corn fed product. It's a case of Canadians thinking theirs is best and the US thinking the same of their product. To my knowledge there has never been any testing done comparing the two in the eyes of the consumer. Maybe we should start doing research like that to find out what customers really want?

          Comment


            #6
            Now R-Calf is at it. Had to send CBC another letter about this one.

            I don't know about you guys, but I'm getting fed up with this b*&^$%*t.

            U.S. Cattle Producers Respond to Concerns about BSE Cow Entering Canadian Feed Supply



            (Billings, Mont.) – R-CALF USA is fielding numerous calls from members and media inquiring about recent news reports that indicate parts of the BSE-positive cow discovered in Canada in May 2003 were turned into feed and may have been mistakenly fed to cattle.



            The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has known of this problem for more than one year. R-CALF USA cited an APHIS report dated Oct. 3, 2003, as the source of this information.



            And in formal comments to APHIS on January 5, 2004, R-CALF USA wrote, “Even more alarming is that the BSE infected cow discovered in Canada on May 20, 2003, was rendered in Canada, and APHIS reported that the rendered cow could have been distributed to approximately 1,800 sites, including 1,200 individual producers or consumers.”



            “We are extremely disappointed that USDA -- charged with protecting the economic interests of the U.S. cattle industry under its congressional mandate to prevent, detect, control, and eradicate animal diseases -- has not addressed this problem in a more serious context, especially in light of its own efforts to liberalize U.S. import standards when dealing with countries like Canada where BSE has been found,” said R-CALF USA President Leo McDonnell.



            R-CALF USA warned APHIS in its January comments that the distribution of the Canadian cow’s infected remains within the Canadian animal-feed system “raises the possibility that a new cycle of BSE may have begun in Canada as a result of rendering this cow in 2003, and APHIS reinforces this concern by stating in its risk analysis that it cannot be assumed there is complete compliance with a [Canadian] feed ban.”



            This risk associated with importing Canadian beef was recognized by U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull, who granted R-CALF USA a preliminary injunction against USDA in May, which blocked APHIS from allowing additional Canadian beef products (other than boneless beef) from being imported into the United States.



            Cebull wrote in his ruling: “Since there are no requirements that imports of Canadian beef products be labeled to indicate the country of origin, once those products cross the border they become virtually impossible to recover or segregate if additional cases of BSE are discovered in the Canadian herd. Moreover, U.S. consumers will not have the option to try to reduce their risk of exposure to BSE by eliminating consumption of Canadian beef products.”



            “These recent reports of BSE problems within Canada’s BSE-firewalls would be harmful to the U.S. cattle industry if USDA does not adequately maintain our import standards,” McDonnellsaid. “This issue within Canada will make it very difficult for USDA to provide scientific supportfor the further liberalization of U.S. import standards. And such problems within Canada clearlyshow this is not a North American cattle-industry problem, but rather a problem confined toCanada’s cattle industry.

            Comment


              #7
              I can't believe the hypocritical attitude of these protectionist groups! Don't they know that their grassroots people are hurting, too? All for the sake of the almighty greenback. I wish the Canadian gov't would just close the border, get on with supporting the domestic slaughter plants, like they are saying they will, locate those other foreign markets (and there's lots out there) and screw the states. (Perhaps screw isn't the right term as generally that is an enjoyable experience and this BSE crap definitely is not enjoyable). I don't understand how these groups can hold entire nations at bay. If they don't want to eat our beef, fine. And where is there country of origin labelling?

              Comment


                #8
                The initial CBC news article played right into R-Calf, OCM and similar group's hands. Weakens our offence, as time, money and other resources are used to defend ourselves and explain this report (yet again). A delay as USDA fields calls and possibly enacts another 'listening period'. I expected this (but had R-Calf first in line)...
                It won't be the last attempt to discredit our industry either. They'll keep at it if their prices remain high or if they drop.
                The CBC report worked on me. I flew off the handle! For that I will admit my stupidity. But there will be those that don't read our industy's response and/or are only caught by the OCM or R-Calf headlines. They'll possibly gain a few more supporters, but may also cause the loss of a few beef eating consumers.
                And if we don't do a rebutal the consumer will think they (R-calf/OCM) are right. Frustrating! Anyone care to guess what "their" next move will be?!

                Comment


                  #9
                  Kato: if you get a response from CBC to your second (R-calf) letter, let us know. I've received no response either time.
                  Even if every producer wrote them - I doubt if a possible 2% (max.) of their audience would have any effect. Wonder how much a top story headline would cost highlighting the positive, progressive moves our industry has undertaken since May 23-03?

                  Comment

                  • Reply to this Thread
                  • Return to Topic List
                  Working...