USDA says No to OTM beef and cattle

[Willowcreek]

Release No. 0047.05

Statement By Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns

February 9, 2005

"On Dec. 29, 2004, USDA released a final rule that establishes criteria for geographic regions to be recognized as presenting minimal risk of introducing BSE into the United States. It places Canada in the minimal-risk category, and defines the requirements that must be met for the import of certain ruminants and ruminant products from Canada. A minimal-risk region can include a region in which BSE-infected animals have been diagnosed, but where sufficient risk-mitigation measures have been put in place to make the introduction of BSE into the United States unlikely.

"Our ongoing investigations into the recent finds of BSE in Canada in animals over 30 months are not complete. Therefore, I feel it is prudent to delay the effective date for allowing imports of meat from animals 30 months and over.

"This action also addresses concerns over the portion of the minimal-risk rule that would reopen the Canadian border for beef from animals 30 months and over, while keeping it closed for imports of older live cattle for processing in the United States. Some have suggested that this part of the rule does not reflect the evidence that beef from animals 30 months and over processed in Canada has the same risk profile as beef from Canadian animals 30 months and over processed in the United States.

"At the same time, I am asking U.S. officials to move forward in consideration and development of a plan to allow imports of animals 30 months and older for slaughter as well as beef from over 30-month animals as the next step in resuming full trade with Canada. As always, decisions will be made based on the latest scientific information and with the protection of public and animal health the highest priority.

"We remain very confident that the combination of the rule's requirements, in addition to the animal and public health measures that Canada has in place to prevent the spread of BSE, along with the extensive U.S. regulatory food-safety and animal-health systems, provide the protection to U.S. consumers and livestock. The removal of Specified Risk Materials is the most effective barrier to protect consumers, and therefore the rest of the rule will proceed as announced."


#
USDA News

[Willowcreek]

Release No. 0048.05

Joint Statement by Secretary Mike Johanns, United States Department of Agriculture and Minister Andrew Mitchell, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

February 9, 2005


"We were pleased today to have had an opportunity for our first meeting to get better acquainted personally and to discuss matters of mutual importance to agriculture in our two countries.

"Each country is the largest customer for the other's food and agriculture products. In addition, our farm economies and our markets are significantly integrated. Thus, it is important that we stay keenly aware of developments and issues that affect us both and be able to deal with them effectively.

"We enjoyed a candid discussion today. We discussed expanded cooperation in pursuit of a successful conclusion to the Doha negotiations, now entering a crucial phase. And, of course, we discussed BSE broadly and the path forward following the March 7 implementation of the Minimal Risk Rule to return to normal beef and cattle trade, while fully protecting our consuming public and our livestock herds. We agreed that cooperation between the United States and Canada to harmonize border and risk mitigation measures related to BSE will provide a model for the world on how to safely trade in animal and animal products while at the same time protecting both public and animal health.

"We discussed Secretary Johanns' decision to delay the effective date for allowing import of meat from animals 30 months of age and older. We discussed moving forward in an expeditious manner in the consideration and development of a plan to allow imports of animals 30 months of age and older for slaughter and meat from those animals as the next step in resuming full trade with Canada. We agreed that decisions will be made on the latest scientific information to assure that the protection of public and animal health remains the highest priority for both of our countries.

"We also discussed other issues affecting trade between our two countries and we both agree that a strong working relationship between us is critical to our farmers and ranchers and the economic health of our food industries. We see this first meeting as an important beginning, and we look forward to close cooperation in the future to further strengthen this beginning."

#
USDA News
oc.news@usda.gov

[rkaiser]

The question is, Oldtimer, is this enough to satisfy you Rcalf boys, or are you gonna spend a whole bunch of money on lawyers to keep fighting.

Looks like the certification program should be enough to keep our packing plant proposals rolling along, as red tape will keep any flood gates (not much flood anyway) from opening. The renewed competition for fat cattle will stop the theft by Cargil and Tyson and our price should creep up to a more reasonable basis within months.

Funny how the UTM issue became scientific again hay. Looks like and NCBA concession to me, how about you?

[rkaiser]

sorry I meant OTM. All this new language we have had to learn hay!

[grassfarmer]

Yes it's a tough decision for R-CALF members - spend their money on lawyers to keep the border shut or spend it on more Canadian cattle to custom feed up here. Hypocrites.

[Willowcreek]

rpkaiser- Personally I'm pretty well satisfied with this altho I would like the courts or Congress to keep the border the way it is until we get COOL up and running....Once COOL is operating and people have a choice-Fling it Open....

[kato]

My suspicion is that they are slowing the OTM beef down for a reason. My thought is that when the border opens for UTM, and the sky actually does not fall in the American market, then very quietly, after everyone has settled down, they will open the border to live cows at the same time as OTM beef.

The packers down there do NOT want us setting up our own plants, and opening the border to boxed cow beef without opening it to live cows will give us an advantage. It will make our plants more viable. They do not want that. The best way to stop our new producer owned cow slaughter plants is to open the border to live cows.

I think that's the real reason for the delay. They need time to make arrangements to handle our live cows.

[farmers_son]

Willowcreek: Re your comments to fling the border open. It is my impression that if MCOOL was implemented and Canadian beef continued to enter the USA R-Calf would simply seek another excuse to keep competing Canadian stocks out. If you think hard you could probably come up with a few yourself. The Americans have difficulty accepting the simple fact that Canada can produce beef more competitively. But stopping trade is like trying to stop the tide, the water will keep on coming in no matter what you do.

[farmers_son]

Kato: Your analysis could well be right. I would suggest there was concern about the difference in price between our cows and U.S. cows plus the backlog of cows in our system. It is economics, not science that keeps our cow beef out.

I believe our industry made a lot of concessions to see the USDA rule come about. I am left wondering what are we going to have to bargain away to see cow beef go south, much less live cows. We don't have much left to offer.

The Americans are better poker players than we are.

I am wondering, is any U.S. cow beef coming into Canada or are we still blocking their OTM beef even with SRMs removed.

[rkaiser]

Is that a question farmer_son?
I would say that no American cow beef would be coming north simply because of price.

[farmers_son]

I was just wondering what we are doing. I checked the CFIA website and found a news release dated January 31, 2005 stating that Canada is allowing in all U.S. live cattle born after 1998 (don't know how that would be verified) and all beef from animals of any age that have had the SRMs removed. Excuse me for being a little sarcastic but there was no mention of the imported U.S. live cattle having to be branded USA.

I think the key word in Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns' statement is the opening of the border to cow beef has been delayed, and that we should take this to mean that we will see cow beef going south sooner rather than later. Although not mentioned in this latest news release I believe that Canadian packers will be able to kill UTM and OTM beef in the same plant which will help.

Still I think we are being punished for finding those last two BSE positives and it is disappointing that any international trading partner chooses to block trade because we were doing honest tests. Perhaps our industry's honesty will gain all Canadian cattle producers markets in the long term but short term the cow calf operator is going to continue to bear the financial burden of BSE.

[JD4ME]

Back in the fall what seems now a thousand years ago at the APB meeting in our area I made the comment to a couple of the reps there that wouldn't it be an interesting resolution for the annual meeting that stated that ABP is asking that Canada not export any beef in any form to the U.S unless full and unobstructed trade is allowed to resume.
I know it was unworkable and it's been the boxed beef sales that have allowed us to have the poor prices we've at least had on fats but I sure wish we we're in the position to say thanks but no thanks.
Theres a lesson in this but I don't think it's a good one.

[cowman]

I suspect Johannes played this pretty smart? Took the wind out of R-CALFs sails by doing this in stages? How much money did R-CALF waste on this last little adventure? How many more bake sales will they have to hold to pay off their lawyers?
My guess is we'll see cows moving across the border before fall! I wonder if this will put an end to all the proposed cow plants up here? I would be very sceptical of investing any money in a cow plant right now?

[farmers_son]

Re: the timing of when we see cows moving across the border. Won’t it depend upon whether we find more BSE positives offset by if the USA has a BSE positive? Given that testing is to increase in 2005 and that there are still cows around that were born before the feed ban it would seem reasonable that more needles in the haystack will be found. Science is one thing but these positives do give those protectionist forces in the U.S. excuses to keep our competing beef and cattle out of their country, as we have just witnessed.

Any packing plant venture should have been considered with an open border in mind. Surely the hard lessons learned since May 20 will not be forgotten as soon as the border opens. The need for increased packing plant capacity is just as real after March 7 (and if Cowman’s forecasts are accurate, this fall) as it is today. Granted the unfair profits the packing plants were making will be gone or at least reduced but there is no reason I am aware of that Canada cannot be just as competitive in the packing plant industry as the U.S.

And it is just as unfair tomorrow as it is today that producers do not have the opportunity to market their own live cattle in the form of beef across provincial and international borders if they so choose. Presently that is denied them as they are forced to sell their live cattle to this country’s 13 federally inspected packing plants.