Double Standards and The Press

[pandiana]

I agree Farmers_son that there has been a change in that we feel there is more justification for our belief that BSE is on both sides of the border and that R-calf can no longer make the claims they have been making.

On the other hand, my concerns are that, with regard to the lawsuits, they can only rule on what is before the court. The issue is USDA's rule only and whether this rule represents due diligence in protecting their consumers and producers. They could continue to argue that Canada has a higher incidence of BSE and therefore their imports should be restricted.

[farmers_son]

Pandiana: Anything is possible. The courts will only consider what is before them but it will be considered in light of the fact that the U.S. has BSE too. Yes the issue is the USDA rule but the result is American consumer confidence in their beef or lack thereof.

Willowcreek: Then it would be fraud for GM to pass its cars and trucks off as American made when they contain parts from all over the world, a lot from Canada. There would be no such thing as an American car or truck. I agree that beef imports into the U.S. from Australia or a South American country could find its way into Canada or Mexico too. The fact that it was stamped USDA would not be taken as proof that it was grown in any particular country but that the USDA certified the product met certain standards just like GM warrants their cars even though the parts may not be GM.

You need to realize that the cost of production of that imported beef is a non issue. The packers will sell it for all the market will bear irregardless of what they had to pay for it. Trust me, Canadian producers know from first hand experience. Packing plants only pay producers enough to keep them producing more. They keep all the difference between what they pay for live cattle and what they sell the beef for as profits for themselves. They pass neither profits back to producers or savings along to customers.

If there was a message I would like to pass along to R-Calf it is that producers will not be successful in raising the price of their live cattle if those efforts drive down the price of live cattle in another country. Doing so only creates a pool of cheap cattle that packers can then use to drive down the domestic live cattle price. Given that the packers are global in scope it then follows that producers will need to form alliances with producers in other countries to raise the price of live cattle over the widest possible geographic area thereby forcing packers to pay fair prices to all.

[Willowcreek]

pandiana- You are right- the court has to decide on whats before them- and that is the current USDA's border proposal, which includes the USDA's credibility which R-CALF raised when it was filed...Before they can change the issue and/or before USDA changes the border proposal they need to go back thru the complete review process which also probably means the comment period- which then has to be approved by Congress- which half of (the Senate) previously voted against....

Ms. Vennaman, in her stumbling bumbling undying support of the open border committed error after error- her whole program was/is still flawed- starting with her overriding her TSE committees recomendations that were made only months before BSE was found, to getting caught allowing banned beef to come in, then being overruled on the OTM rule by her successor Johanns because he could see it had no chance of flying, to a now unknown credibility in testing procedure, etc. etc....

farmers_son- bringing in products from another country and letting them pass as a US product may not be fraud--- But bringing in products that are already marked to the country they came from (COOL) and then removing that labeling and relabeling as a US product is FRAUD...Except in the case of beef with the multinational packers owning the USDA and many of the politicians it is now a government accepted and supported fraud...

[rkaiser]

It's just not going to help to fight the multinationals over globalization Oltimer. It is here, and we have to find a way to deal with it.

Asking Canadian ranchers to see your point of view after the BS Rcalf has helped to cause the Canadian producer is a lot to ask.

Yes I said helped. I also beleive that the border closure is about a lot more than Judge Cebull, but the rhetoric coming from the Rcalf heirarchy has been horrendous.

The treatment that the producers of Canada have received from the packers for the last two years has proven the theroy of an integrated beef industry is a bunch of bull. We are in this by ourselves, and it's too bad that "ourselves" could not be American and Canadian producers together.

I'm not suggesting a war on the packers, but I am suggesting that Rcalf may have a place protecting the rights of producers, IF THEY DROPPED THE PROTECTIONIST CRAP, that will get you guys nowhere.

I think you Rcalf guys will be lucky to have much credibility left after the packer driven USDA gets through with you. Drop the protectionist crap NOW, and focus on truth when it comes to BSE and maybe even your COOL agenda. Cool will not really hurt either country as far as I am concerned, and may even sell more Canadian beef in America and around the world.

Rcalf could make a lot more headway as well if they took a look at BIG C's producer owned packing proposal. Take the packers on with your 18000 members. Use the rules they are using to filter some post slaughter profits back to your membership.

OR stay the course until the course is overrun with beef from every country in the world that Cargill and Tyson invade. Your hot climate Brahman beef in the south 1/2 of the States has no better quality than Australian or South American product, especially when Cargill sets up their corn and barley operation in those countries. Globalization is here Oldtimer, and before you get much older your short term victory over Canada will look pretty small.

[greybeard]

Save your breath F_S. R-calfers don't want to hear reasonable arguments.

[Willowcreek]

rkaiser- I agree with a lot of what you say- and have thought that BIG C is maybe the only Canadian cattlemens group that really sees the big picture..They are definitely the only group that appears to have not been bought out by the big corporate packers- like CCA and ABP, who as an outside observer, look to be like NCBA and nod "yessa mastah" when ever AMI or a corporate packer speaks.....

I've said before, I truly think the border would be open if the M-COOL law was in effect- many of the arguments that the Judge cited would have been null and void...That said the multinationals are spending unheard of amounts of lobbying $ now to again postpone or kill M-COOL and derail R-CALF...I talked with a legislative aide the other day that said he's never seen the money being spent by the meat industry to kill M-COOL and pass CAFTA...He says the lobbyists are sleeping on the Capitol steps- that scares me, because I recognize they are doing this to help out the corporate interests which are not always in the best interest of the cattleman.. They got Australian beef opened up- now they want South American..And they don't want it to have to be labeled so anyone knows where it comes from...

This is a much larger battle and Canada just provided the opportunity and/or got caught in the middle...

[farmers_son]

MCOOL, even if it was successful in increasing demand for American beef, would not raise the price of live cattle in the United States.

The producers will continue to receive only just enough for their calves to keep them raising more. Benefits, if any, from MCOOL would be captured by the value chain from the retailers down to the packers.

MCOOL is not a food safety or animal health measure. COOL is a retail labeling program and as such does not address food safety or animal health concerns for example BSE as Judge Cebull mistakenly believes. Food products, both imported and domestic, presently must meet the food safety
standards of FSIS and/or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as
applicable. In addition, all food products must also meet FDA labeling
standards as well as all other applicable FDA regulations and
standards.

I could go on, pointing out that the foodservice/restaurant trade is exempt from MCOOL and so on. But bottom line, any benefits from MCOOL will not make it to the producer. However MCOOL will discriminate against American producers who could otherwise have received higher prices for their calves if finished in Canada as well as discriminate against American producers who for whatever reason could not meet the stringent requirements for proving their livestock were born, raised, and slaughtered in the United States.

The real problem facing producers in the United States as well as Canada and Mexico remains how to get paid a fair price for their live cattle.

[farmers_son]

Greybeard: While R-Calfers may have chosen the dark side and gone down the road of protectionism it is important to keep putting the truth out there.

R-Calf may say their target is South American beef, their history which includes launching countervails against Canadian producers clearly illustrates that R-Calf is focused on keeping out Canadian imports of beef and live cattle in an attempt to short the supply of beef in their country. However supply and demand fundamentals do not explain why the packers and retailers enjoy returns on investment in the range of 20% plus while producers only would see returns in the range of 2-5% if they are lucky. What R-Calf does not realize is their efforts only work to increase the packer profits while not addressing the fundamental problems around pricing of live cattle which originate at home.

[pandiana]

farmers_son I think your statement "What R-Calf does not realize is their efforts only work to increase the packer profits while not addressing the fundamental problems around pricing of live cattle which originate at home." is bang on.


Primary producers on both sides of the border are struggling to maintain profitabilty in a so-call 'free enterprise' economy where there are winners and losers. Those that hold the power to set prices are always the winners as long as there is a market for the product. The only sector with more power is the consumer.