International Review Panel U.S.

[farmers_son]

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/issues/bse/US_BSE_Report.pdf

Given the tendency of the United States in general and R-Calf in particular to deny they have a BSE problem within their borders I thought it would be useful to revisit the recommendations and observations made by the International Review Panel that investigated the U.S. index case of BSE in December 2003. The panel was made up of the same scientists that investigated the Canadian case in May 2003 with the addition of one member.

Some key points and recommendations:

• The U.S. does not have an effective animal traceability system. Only 50% of the birth cohort were successfully identified.
• …it is probable that other infected animals have been imported from Canada and possibly from Europe. These animals have not been detected and therefore infective material has likely been rendered, fed to cattle, and amplified within the cattle population, so that cattle in the USA have also been indigenously infected.
• Having examined the information provided on trade in live cattle and livestock feed ingredients within the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the subcommittee firmly believes that the first case of BSE in the United States can not be considered in isolation from the whole cattle production system in North America. The significance of this BSE case cannot be dismissed by considering it “an imported case”. The first BSE case detected in the USA, and the first “indigenous case” reported in Canada in 2003, must be recognized as both being BSE cases indigenous to North American.
• Unless aggressive surveillance proves the BSE risk in the USA to be minimal according to OIE standards, the subcommittee recommends that the SRM identified below be excluded from both the human food and animal feed chains.
• Brain and spinal cord of all cattle over 12 months of age
• Stull and vertebral column of cattle over 12 months of age
• Intestine-from pylorus to anus-from all cattle
• …that non-ambulatory cattle are more likely to be BSE infected than are healthy slaughter cattle and therefore may pose a greater risk to public and animal heatlh. The goals for measures related to these cattle must to (1) test them for surveillance purposes (2) prevent potentially infective tissues from entering the food and feed chains. Given their exclusion from supervise slaughter at inspected slaughterhouses, this important population may no longer be available for the BSE surveillance programme at these locations. Therefore it is imperative that the USDA take additional steps to assure that facilitated pathways exist for dead and non-ambulatory cattle to allow for collection of samples and proper disposal of carcasses.

Therefore the subcommittee recommends that the US should demonstrate leadership in trade matters by adopting import/export policy in accordance with international standards, and thus encourage the discontinuation of irrational trade barriers when countries identify their first case of BSE.

[wd40]

I'm impressed farmerson with the time spent researching so much stuff. I wish you well. I for one have completely given up on any rational objective progress from either side of the border. Charge on, I'm way too busy to help you.

[farmers_son]

Actually, it only took a few minutes to find this info and paste it here.

The point that needs to be made however is the U.S. had BSE too.

But if you read the filings in the R-Calf vs. USDA suit you would never know it. R-Calf is saying if you let in Canadian live cattle and continue to let in Canadian beef into the U.S., the U.S. will get BSE. The USDA is saying the risk is small. But no one is saying the U.S. already has BSE.

Well according to this International committee put together at the request of the USDA, the U.S. does indeed have BSE and more so they do not have the same level of risk protection in place equal to Canada, for instance traceback. The risk of BSE is actually greater in the U.S. than in Canada and this International body recommended signficantly more stringent measures in the U.S. than for Canada as Canada caught its BSE before entering the food chain and were able to traceback the birth cohorts of each BSE positive case, unlike the U.S.

So where do the Americans get off putting Canadian producers through the wringer?

Canada is making it clear that either we are part of a North American beef market or we will become aggressive competitors. Up to this point we have been playing along with the Yanks. Pretty darn soon we are going to have to take some strategic steps to start becoming aggressive competitors.

And the first part of that is pointing out to the world that U.S. has BSE, their testing is substandard, they are not meeting the recommendations of the International Review Panel. Far from the 21 months the Japanese are asking for, this Panel is suggesting 12 months as the cutoff point for safety for U.S. beef. The same people recommended 30 months for Canadian beef.

There is going to be more to an aggressive independent Canadian industry than just packing capacity. We will be competing on the basis of our beef is better than American beef, that American beef is not safe to eat anywhere in the world and the Americans are liers and cheats. And I think there are lots of people in the world that would buy into that message.

[grassfarmer]

Now you are agreeing with the points I was making two days ago on another thread - that our future may be in looking for foreign markets which could be accessed by pointing out the inadequecies of the American BSE testing / animal tracking standards.

Of course we still have the major problem of US packer domination in Canada which rather complicates the issue. This afterall is the real cause of our industries financial struggles currently rather than the convenient excuse of a "disease" called BSE.

I couldn't believe you were seriously arguing that we lower our standards to those of the US in a misguided attempt to be allowed back into their market.
The US are in the wrong here on many fronts and they will pay the price for it eventually. Thank you for again pointing out the low regard with which the American BSE problem is viewed in the eyes of the OIE and other important international bodies.

[intr3est]

• In addition, the subcommittee hopes that the US will continue to act responsibly when considering export of potentially contaminated materials such as live cattle, MBM and feed. Risk materials must be destroyed or safely utilized to protect human health, animal health, and the environment in the USA and worldwide.

Farmers_Son I think this is an important addition to this document also. When the CFIA states that they do not have juristicition to inspect feed plants that were involved with the cases of BSE in Canada, and you take this statement into account, I wonder where the contaminated feed came from, who knows it, and what is being kept quiet?

[farmers_son]

intr3est: Yes, that is an important point.

Grassfarmer: We need to keep in mind that the U.S. has BSE too. I think the world needs to be reminded as well because world opinion will affect how the U.S treats Canada regarding reopening borders.

I certainly agree that the U.S. is wrong on many fronts but aren’t we the ones paying the price? It is difficult to know what Canada should be doing. Further harmonization with the U.S. who may be using BSE as a political tool on other issues. If this is the case nothing we do will help reopen borders with the U.S. until action is taken on those other fronts that have nothing to do with cattle. We could search out niche foreign markets but doing so may jeopardize 80% of our beef exports which go to the U.S.

What was the last time you heard a politician on either side of the border call BSE a North American problem? Especially since those two BSE cows in January BSE has stopped being a North American problem and is only a Canadian problem any more. We need to do what we can to drive home the point that BSE is a North American problem. Part of that is reminding the world of the International Review Panel’s recommendations, part of that is going a long time without finding anymore BSE positives in this country.

Certainly the next BSE positive should be found in the United States.

[grassfarmer]

Why relegate the potential of our beef exports to niche markets and at the risk of jeapordizing 80% of our market with the US? If you believe the statement you made "We will be competing on the basis of our beef is better than American beef, that American beef is not safe to eat anywhere in the world and the Americans are liers and cheats. And I think there are lots of people in the world that would buy into that message."
I agree with your statement and would hope that we could someday pick up, by default, US markets for beef all over the world. They are playing fast and loose with their potential future beef exports due to their stupid BSE policies - I hope this will work in our favour. They could lose markets to such an extent that Canada could export virtually all it's production - but no I'm dreaming now, Cargill and Tyson's Canadian plants will be slaughtering @87% of the UTM kill this fall and they will be answerable to the US first and foremost. I've said it a million times - We have got to break that monopoly or all our other dreams of alternative markets or being an aggressive competitor will die.

[farmers_son]

There is a list of the worlds top ten beef exports in 2004 at:

http://www.canfax.ca/general/StatBrf.PDF

The U.S. and Canada are on that list, in fact Canada is ahead of the U.S. with 9% of world trade compared to the U.S. with 3%. However almost all of that Canada and U.S. trade was within NAFTA.

Canada did have exports to Hong Kong and Macau, EU, Carribean, Central Europe, Central and South American, South East Asia, Cental Europe. I believe some of those markets have been lost as a result of the two BSE positives in January 2005. In any event, our non-NAFTA exports were not enough to save our industry.

No one should underestimate the difficulties associated with becoming a true global competitor in beef when your industry is burdened with BSE. If it wasn't for Canada and the U.S. trading beef back and forth, North America would not be even on the radar screen when it comes to beef exports. Both countries are net importers of non-NAFTA beef.

The fact that the U.S. is trying to paint BSE as a Canadian problem is not helping.

[grassfarmer]

The one thing that strikes me about those Canfax figures is the strength of Australia - by far the second largest exporter of beef in the world with a 21% share as opposed to Canada's 9%. Why can't we capture some of their markets given they are a lot smaller country geographically and population wise? We have climatic disadvantages with our long winters but they have far worse problems than us with drought and heat.
Perhaps if we were to concentrate on quality beef production and marketing instead of snickering at them for some "kangaroo in the box" incident that alledgedly happened some time in the past. Truth is we are way to focused on being a slave to our American masters and unless we change that our outlook won't improve.

[farmers_son]

Australia only tests about 500 head annually for BSE. I am not aware that Brazil tests any and they are number 1.

I would question what would happen to their export numbers if they tested 30,000 per year. Would exports increase or decrease.

Yes we appear to be slaves to our American masters. Australia has recently signed a FTA with the U.S. that will make them slaves to the Yanks too, only they don't know it yet.

It is signficant that Brazil has surpassed the mighty Australia to become number one beef exporter. So much for quality and marketing.

If you notice 3 or the top ten exporting nations are NAFTA partners, 3 of the top ten importing nations are NAFTA partners. Just shuffling beef back and forth between Tom, Dick and Harry. Only one of the NAFTA partners is kind of getting a raw deal, even though 2 NAFTA partners have BSE.

[grassfarmer]

BSE isn't the only game in town though - Brazilian exports are currently shut down with foot and mouth disease I believe.
I don't necessarily agree that there is BSE in the Southern Hemisphere even if they did test more aggresively. Whether you believe the official contaminated feed theory or the Purdey cause due to environmental factors I feel there is every chance that these guys don't have it - yet. From my limited understanding:
1. They tend to produce off grass only so don't use MBM.
2. They don't have the heavily industrialised areas to produce the environmental contamination.

So why can't we go after these markets?
Because our industry apart from the cow/calf sector is owned by the Americans. This is one big hole we are in.