Asleep At the Wheel

[grassfarmer]

I agree with you f_s that we are now getting a very poor deal on the OTM cattle. When we first had a BSE case I thought it would probably be 7 years before we exported OTM cattle again but with the US finally admitting to having BSE that should be a level playing field. This is the point that the Canadian Government should develop a backbone and stand up and say "we insist that you now allow trading of OTM beef and cattle as our BSE status is the same" Seems both the Government and industry groups are content for Canadian producers to be allowed to crawl back to the their lowly place in the supply chain and that we definately shouldn't upset the Americans who are being really generous to us.

[rkaiser]

Am I dreaming, or did the new rule that was blocked and now overturned not include Boxed OTM beef?

In other words, did the new rule not allow boxed OTM beef and UTM live cattle for slaughter?

[farmers_son]

Rkaiser, you were not dreaming. The final rule as announced in December 2004 did include a provision to ship OTM beef into the U.S. That provision was removed with this announcement in February 2005. The excuse was the two Canadian BSE positives last January. However others point out that the real reason was the rule as proposed would have given Canadian packers an advantage by allowing them to sell OTM beef into the U.S. The rule was quickly changed to take that advantage away. Of course the investigation mentioned was long ago completed and now the U.S. has BSE too but still no OTM beef, much less live cows are entering the U.S. across that “open” border.


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."

[farmers_son]

I reread this USDA release from Johanns and noted the first sentence:

"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."

To me that says it all. These rules were intended to prevent the introduction of BSE into the United States. Now that the U.S. has BSE too why are we still jumping through these hoops.

[farmers_son]

because we are smart enough to figure it out but the powers that 'be' aren't !!!

[cowman]

I believe if they can head off that idiot Cebull, all these things will fall into place fairly fast. I suspect cow meat will be crossing before fall and live cows before the end of the year?
I personally believe that all of us in Canada should realize that we have a strong enemy in the US? It is not PETA or Earth First...but R-CALF! They have proven that they can be very dangerous, not just to the Canadian cattleman but to the US one as well? Any group that tries to cut its own throat to spite its neighbors is not exactly sane...in my opinion!
I also believe the CCA and ABP should spend some checkoff dollars pursuing a lawsuit against these economic terrorists? Maybe if they had to pay back the $7 billion dollars they ripped us off for they might think twice about trying to screw their neighbors?
I sort of sympathized with some of their ideas until the outright lying and smearing of our product took place! And the fact that they fully understood that they were lying, just so they could gather a few more sheckels, is really disgusting? They are so damned ignorant they still bluster and posture like they are something special?
Break them in the courts and get this blight out of the cattle industry!

[grassfarmer]

That's a sudden change of tack Cowman, I thought you were enamoured by the good ole boys of R-CALF and were telling us how they were just like us?
I don't believe for a minute that this group have single handedly inflicted all the pain on the Canadian producer. They've done a damn sight less harm than Cargill and Tyson in my opinion. Remember also Cebull was appointed directly by Bush and if the US had wanted the border open it would have been open long ago. I believe they have been used by the US administration as a convenient scapegoat to further the overall US aim of aggressively expanding their protectionist policies in agriculture.
R-CALF are a protectionist group but I think they are also a lot smarter than people give them credit for - for their size and finances they have played their hand a damn sight better than ABP, CCA or the Canadian Government in this fiasco.
I wouldn't dream of trusting ABP/CCA with yet more producer's levy money to try and extract financial retaliation on R-CALF. Chances are they would piddle the money away and lose the case.