The Big Lie

[farmers_son]

I note the Americans are sending a team to Canada to verify our ruminant ban. I can’t help thinking we should be sending a team down there to verify their BSE testing. Given the level of trade in live cattle including breeding cattle and dairy cattle between Canada and the U.S over the last 20 years since BSE came a problem in the UK it is absolutely beyond belief that the U.S. has not found a single case of BSE that they are willing to call their own.

Canada and the U.S. were completely harmonized in their respective BSE strategies from the very beginning. If we consider the size of the U.S. cow herd versus the Canadian cow herd a reasonable person would expect that the U.S. should have had at least 32-40 BSE positives if Canada has 3 not to mention the Washington Holstein and its questionable Canadian citizenship.

It is extremely unlikely that there is any significant difference between the prevalence of BSE in Canada when compared to the U.S. However it seems to me that Canada and the U.S. are not harmonized in one aspect of their BSE strategies and that aspect would be a different attitude toward BSE testing in the U.S.

[grassfarmer]

Quite so, It really annoys me to see the way the Canadian media is hounding this issue and damaging our interests but is unwilling to point out the inadequacy of US testing. What about speaking to the ex- employee at the Washington beef plant again or reading up on the plants that slaughter purely 4D cattle yet don't test - all information that is widely available on the internet.

[kato]

Or how about this one? I notice the CBC didn't pick this one up.

Union: Meat plants violate mad cow rules
Banned brains, spinal cords may still enter food supplyBy Jon Bonné
MSNBC
Updated: 6:21 p.m. ET Dec. 20, 2004

Parts of cattle supposedly banned under rules enacted after the nation's first case of mad cow disease are making it into the human food chain, according to the union that represents federal inspectors in meat plants.

The National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals, which represents meat and poultry inspectors in federally regulated plants nationwide, told the U.S. Department of Agriculture in a letter earlier this month that body parts known as "specified risk materials" were being allowed into the production chain.

The parts include the brains, skulls, spinal cords and lower intestines of cattle older than 30 months. These body parts, thought to be most likely to transmit the malformed proteins that cause bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease, were banned from the human food supply by USDA officials last January.

The union based its Dec. 8 complaint on reports from inspectors in several states, though it declined to say which ones.

It said that the inspectors found heads and carcasses of some cows on slaughter and processing lines that were not always correctly marked as being older than 30 months. That age is the cutoff for rules governing the use of higher-risk materials in human food; any animal older than 30 months must have any such parts removed before it can be cut up into meat.

But plant employees responsible for checking the age of cattle were not always marking each older carcass. In the course of their regular work, inspectors on the processing lines checked cattle heads themselves and found some from older animals that had been passed through unmarked.

"We couldn't determine that every part out of there was from a cow under 30 months," Stan Painter, the union's chairman, told MSNBC.com. "There was no way to determine which one was which."

The government and the beef industry frequently point to the SRM ban, as it is known, as the single best measure to ensure that any meat possibly infected by mad cow disease is kept out of the human food supply. The ban was enacted this year after the first U.S. case of the disease was detected in a Washington state dairy cow in December 2003.

Research has shown that most of the risk from infected animals lies in neural tissue, such as the brain, not muscle meat. Mad cow disease has been linked to a related human disease; both are always fatal.

USDA spokesman Steven Cohen said the ban was working, as were age checks on cattle. "We feel very strongly that this is being done," Cohen said. "It's being done correctly, and it's being verified by the people whose job it is to do that."



Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, or mad cow disease, belongs to a family of diseases called Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies or TSE’s.
Encephalopathies are diseases of the brain. Spongiform comes from the fact that the brain takes on the structure of a sponge and transmissible means the disease can be spread.



TSEs are diseases of the central nervous system and slowly cause its failure. All have long incubation periods lasting from months to years. There is no cure and they are always fatal.


TSEs occur somewhat randomly, and the cause is unidentified.
TSEs are familial or inherited, which means they are passed on genetically from parents to offspring.

The source of TSEs are from outside the animal.




• Print this

Federal oversight for the age checks is usually performed by offline inspectors — usually a more senior inspector at a plant who handles larger issues such as food safety plans. They are directed to perform spot checks on plant employees who perform the age checks using paperwork as well as indicators such as the growth of the animals' teeth.

But current oversight would cover a small fraction of the total animals that pass through any given plant — just 2 percent to 3 percent, by the union's estimate.

In its letter, sent to the head of the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service, the union also reported that some inspectors were "told not to intervene" when they saw body parts of some older animals, sent for packing with those of younger animals. This is despite export requirements for certain parts that have been set by U.S. trading partners.

Specifically, the union said, kidneys from older animals were sent down the line to be packed for the Mexican market, which prohibits them from cows over 30 months. When the inspectors complained, Painter said, "The agency basically told the inspectors, 'Don't worry about it.'"

Cohen said the age checks, which are usually performed before slaughter, are meant to be handled by supervisors and veterinary medical officers. "It is not the online inspectors whose role it is to determine" an animal's age, Cohen said.

"The inspector on the line's role is to look for disease," he said. "If an online inspector feels as though something is not being done they should talk to their supervisors."

The online inspectors performed the checks on their own amid concerns that older animals were not being marked as such, according to the union and to an attorney familiar with the matter.

The cases referenced in the letter were apparently reported to supervisors and to USDA district offices, Painter said, but the inspectors were told, "Don't worry about it. That's the plant's responsibility."

The union has not yet received a response, he added. Cohen said the agency would have a response soon, and noted that the department's inspector general is auditing how well plants comply with the ban.

[Horse]

I agree tell them we are puting atarrif on all live cattle leaving the province what the hell they can only ruin us once.

[kpb]

It's fine to say we don't need the U.S. market but unless you have an alternate source for all the beef produced in this country, you're bound to find prices trending lower over time. In 2002, prior to BSE, 45% of the beef and/or cattle produced in this country went to the U.S. Where do you guys think this oversupply, which given the growth of our herd is even larger now, is going to go?
Unless you're in favor of a mass cull and then working to fill our domestic market alone (with a few small foreign markets thrown in)I just think you're whistling past the graveyard. Purebred prices may have been strong in 2004 but they sure won't stay that way if the commercial guy isn't getting a decent price for his calves. And with the current over-supply in this country, there is no way the commercial guy can continue to get a decent price without our largest market opening up.
Calf prices have held up remarkably well recently because of hopes that the U.S. border will open. But if all hope of that is dashed you can count on feeders this fall being worth half what they are now. Remember, without U.S. buyers bidding on our cattle, there's really only a couple of buyers domestically--do you guys think they're going to bid your calves up? I don't think so.

[kpb]

All three of your posts are correct in fact but have no bearing on the current situation. The bottom line is that the U.S. really does not need us, does not care about our woes and has no interest in doing things in a fair way. The sooner we get over the fact that they don't play fair, the better off we'll be.
The plain fact is that the U.S. like all powerful people or companies or countries, acts in its own best interests. Period. Full stop. They don't care what our interests are. They will always act in a way that benefits them the most. They don't care that we don't like it or think it's unfair.
We really need to get a grip on this. They are the big dog, we are the little dog, we need them to take our beef, they don't need to take it. They are not going to change regardless of how much we want them to.
Cam Ostercamp has a pretty firm understanding of this I think and he points out that our real problem is not BSE but the fact that our market is dominated by one player that could care less about our interests. Regardless of BSE that is a recipe for disaster and we should have seen it coming a long time ago.

[cakadu]

Canada has had a problem with dependency on the US market, from what I understand, but it hasn't been a false one. For far too long we have been dependent on one market, which has proven to be to our significant detriment. KPB is right - if we don't find new markets - and large ones at that - then who knows what the future is going to bring.

Are we really sure of what this open border is really going to be costing us? Are we willing to pay that price only to once again be so dependent on one market?
Sometimes the price of poker just gets too high to stay in the game.

[pr_fire]

You have to remeber that Canadian beef imports exceed that 45% surplus from our own herd. If we cut our imports of beef by only 30%, that surplus is taken care of. We do not need the US bidders. Our gaining price is not in anticipation of the border opening but because of a domestic demand. Its all False perception.

[cakadu]

Maybe we should have seen it coming, but that really isn't too relevant right now. What IS relevant however, is how we are going to deal with this situation from this point on. What is the leadership going to do? As has been pointed out in other posts, the leadership has mainly been poised for the border to reopen and relatively little else.

I am very curious to know what keeps them looking in one direction with blinders on? Maybe some of you who have been in the business for a long time have an answer to that one? Who is really pulling the strings here?

Whether or not what the US is doing is fair or unfair also doesn't really matter, because that IS what is going on; what is important is how we are going to deal with it.

[pr_fire]

Part of this comment is true and yet part is false. The US does need our beef at the present time. Its made quite public in the us that they can't fill their own dosmestic markets let alone their exports. Right now they need us, its the perfect time for Canada to stand up for our selves and say no, you can't have it. If the US can't fill export demands, where will those customers come knocking?? All other major world beef producers have stressed markets and cannot handle anymore exports since North American BSE. The markets are there for us we just can't let the US take them first. Opening the US border to Canadina cattle only increases the US exportable poundage. We don't need them, they need us.

[kpb]

pr_fire, It's true that the U.S. needs us in a small way right now but to think that they need us more than we need them is patently ridiculous. Our industry is in a state of crisis and has been for two years because we lost our biggest customer. Do you seriously think that we will bring the U.S. industry to its knees by what?--keeping the border closed?
If we do not have access to our biggest customer we will continue to suffer, continue to grow our domestic herd and ultimately get low prices for our commodity. It's an absolute red herring to say the U.S. needs us--I've been hearing this from all the cattle groups for almost two years and it makes me sick. The U.S. will get along just fine without us, just as they have for the last two years. Oh sure there's the odd time they'd like our cattle but they'll get it from somewhere else or do without and just take the higher prices (supply-demand) if need be. We've got a vastly inflated view of our own importance in the scheme of things. We need them a heck of a lot more than they need us. Haven't you learned that from the last two years? And if you think closing the border when they want to open it is going to benefit us, you live in a different reality than I do. We've got a heck of a lot of cattle here with no where to go.

[cakadu]

It's important to remember that the US signed an agreement with Australia with respect to beef imports from that country not that long ago. If the US is looking to fill a bit of a hole right now, they probably don't have to go too far to find what they need.