Can you spot the lies?
U.S. Beef BSE Testing Programs
The only way to diagnose BSE is by testing. Therefore, testing is the only tool to determine the prevalence of BSE in a country's cattle herd. The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) recommends that when BSE is found, more testing should be done to monitor the evolution of the disease and the effectiveness of BSE mitigation measures. To accomplish this, the OIE recommends testing both high-risk animals and healthy animals. R-CALF USA believes the older cow diagnosed with BSE in Texas was an isolated case. However, the only way to prove this is to continue testing more cattle. We, therefore, support expanded BSE testing as a means of maintaining continued consumer confidence in our BSE mitigation measures.
The USDA was wrong to prohibit private meatpackers (Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, for example) from voluntarily testing for BSE. We believe our export markets could have been restored long ago if the U.S. had not refused to allow testing for BSE as Japan does within its domestic market. Both Japan and Europe have been able to remove BSE-infected cattle from the food chain that would not have been detected without BSE testing.
U.S Beef Export Situation
Fifty-eight countries shut their markets to U.S. beef following the detection of a Canadian cow with BSE in the U.S. at the end of 2003. These markets have largely remained closed after the U.S. reported a native BSE case in the U.S. this year. Currently, 54 countries prohibit some or all imports of U.S. beef. The value of U.S. exports of cattle and beef fell by more than 83 percent from 2003 to 2004, representing a loss of nearly $2.6 billion to our industry. While we believe these import bans are unjustified, we also believe the USDA must do more to improve its own controls on cattle and beef imports from countries with BSE. The U.S. erred in giving market access to Canada before we regained our own export markets. It is a real irony but Canada now has a much larger share of the world export market for beef than does the U.S. This is because the U.S. has willingly accepted Canadian beef while our own export customers view Canadian beef unacceptable. When Egypt resumed U.S. imports, for example, it required stricter conditions for U.S. beef than we impose on Canada and it prohibits any beef products from Canada.
Specific Canadian Considerations
Scientific evidence shows that Canada has a greater BSE risk than the U.S. >From January 2004 through October 2005, Canada tested fewer than 70,000 cattle and identified four native BSE cases. During the same period, the U.S. tested over 516,000 cattle and identified one native BSE case. The U.S. case was approximately 12 years old, born well before the U.S. feed ban, indicating the disease may have been circulating in the early '90s. The Canadian cases were much younger, ranging in age from only 5 years and 10 months to 8 years and two months, with one case born well after Canada's feed ban. These cases suggest BSE has been circulating in Canada as recently as 1998. Given the long incubation period for BSE (2-8 years) we believe it is imprudent to accept Canada's risk unless Canada increases testing to reveal the true prevalence of BSE in its herd. Our export customers are aware of this and they know we are requiring Canada to conduct fewer BSE tests, to maintain a weaker feed ban, and to practice less stringent SRM removal policies than are practiced everywhere else in the world where multiple cases of BSE have been detected.
Country-of-Origin Labeling
R-CALF USA helped pass country-of-origin labeling (COOL) in the 2002 Farm Bill. COOL is a critical, pro-competitive tool. Without COOL, U.S. producers cannot compete in the marketplace because their product remains undifferentiated from their competitors' products. Meatpackers do not want COOL because they want to source cheaper, imported beef and pass it off to unsuspecting consumers who believe the USDA grade stamp and USDA inspection sticker denotes domestic beef. This is not true and consumers are being misled. According to the USDA, approximately 50,000 imported carcasses were graded with a USDA grade stamp in 2000. This means over 36 million pounds of imported beef was sold to U.S. consumers with the U.S. producers' seal of excellence. Moreover, all imported beef is eligible for the USDA inspection sticker. Consumers don't know they are not already buying U.S. beef even though 17-19 percent of all beef available for consumption in the U.S. is imported beef. Despite what opponents say, COOL can be implemented at no cost to producers. All that is needed is to mark all imported live cattle with a mark of origin. Once imported cattle are marked, all unmarked cattle can be presumed, accurately, to be domestic.
Ag Appropriations
R-CALF USA is disappointed that certain members of Congress have used the agriculture appropriations process to undermine the will of the American people. Both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House voted for and passed country-of-origin labeling in the 2002 Farm Bill and the President signed it into law. It was scheduled to take effect on Sept. 30, 2004. However, the leadership in Congress helped the meatpackers delay COOL for everything but fish and seafood in the 2004 agriculture appropriations bill. As everyone knows, fish and seafood have been effectively labeled with COOL since this spring and none of catastrophic predictions of the meatpackers have come to pass. Everything except fish and seafood was then delayed until Sept. 30, 2006. Just recently, however, the meatpackers won another delay by again convincing key congressional leaders to delay COOL for beef in the 2006 agriculture appropriations bill. Thus, COOL for beef has now been delayed until 2008. R-CALF USA encourages producers and consumers to call their congressional representatives to urge them to restore the Sept. 30, 2006, implementation date for Mandatory COOL.
Other issues
R-CALF USA believes that higher cattle prices can be sustained if U.S. cattle producers stand together to effectively compete for the available profits within the very profitable beef supply chain. Because the profits that must be shared by producers, packers, processors, importers, exporters, wholesalers, and retailers are ultimately all generated by consumers who buy beef, only if producers have a strong, national voice that exclusively represents their interests can they expect to receive their fair share of the available profits. As is generally the case in a competitive industry, an increase in profits to producers likely results in a decrease in profits to other segments of the industry. And, it should be no surprise that these other segments will fight to maximize their profits. R-CALF USA has a plan to strengthen the competitiveness of the independent U.S. cattle producer. It includes putting in the hands of producers the tools they need to compete; taking from the hands of the meatpackers the tools they've used to gain an unfair pricing advantage; imparting safeguards in trade agreements that eliminate the distortions in the global marketplace; and, maintaining the highest health and safety standards for U.S. beef.
U.S. Beef BSE Testing Programs
The only way to diagnose BSE is by testing. Therefore, testing is the only tool to determine the prevalence of BSE in a country's cattle herd. The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) recommends that when BSE is found, more testing should be done to monitor the evolution of the disease and the effectiveness of BSE mitigation measures. To accomplish this, the OIE recommends testing both high-risk animals and healthy animals. R-CALF USA believes the older cow diagnosed with BSE in Texas was an isolated case. However, the only way to prove this is to continue testing more cattle. We, therefore, support expanded BSE testing as a means of maintaining continued consumer confidence in our BSE mitigation measures.
The USDA was wrong to prohibit private meatpackers (Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, for example) from voluntarily testing for BSE. We believe our export markets could have been restored long ago if the U.S. had not refused to allow testing for BSE as Japan does within its domestic market. Both Japan and Europe have been able to remove BSE-infected cattle from the food chain that would not have been detected without BSE testing.
U.S Beef Export Situation
Fifty-eight countries shut their markets to U.S. beef following the detection of a Canadian cow with BSE in the U.S. at the end of 2003. These markets have largely remained closed after the U.S. reported a native BSE case in the U.S. this year. Currently, 54 countries prohibit some or all imports of U.S. beef. The value of U.S. exports of cattle and beef fell by more than 83 percent from 2003 to 2004, representing a loss of nearly $2.6 billion to our industry. While we believe these import bans are unjustified, we also believe the USDA must do more to improve its own controls on cattle and beef imports from countries with BSE. The U.S. erred in giving market access to Canada before we regained our own export markets. It is a real irony but Canada now has a much larger share of the world export market for beef than does the U.S. This is because the U.S. has willingly accepted Canadian beef while our own export customers view Canadian beef unacceptable. When Egypt resumed U.S. imports, for example, it required stricter conditions for U.S. beef than we impose on Canada and it prohibits any beef products from Canada.
Specific Canadian Considerations
Scientific evidence shows that Canada has a greater BSE risk than the U.S. >From January 2004 through October 2005, Canada tested fewer than 70,000 cattle and identified four native BSE cases. During the same period, the U.S. tested over 516,000 cattle and identified one native BSE case. The U.S. case was approximately 12 years old, born well before the U.S. feed ban, indicating the disease may have been circulating in the early '90s. The Canadian cases were much younger, ranging in age from only 5 years and 10 months to 8 years and two months, with one case born well after Canada's feed ban. These cases suggest BSE has been circulating in Canada as recently as 1998. Given the long incubation period for BSE (2-8 years) we believe it is imprudent to accept Canada's risk unless Canada increases testing to reveal the true prevalence of BSE in its herd. Our export customers are aware of this and they know we are requiring Canada to conduct fewer BSE tests, to maintain a weaker feed ban, and to practice less stringent SRM removal policies than are practiced everywhere else in the world where multiple cases of BSE have been detected.
Country-of-Origin Labeling
R-CALF USA helped pass country-of-origin labeling (COOL) in the 2002 Farm Bill. COOL is a critical, pro-competitive tool. Without COOL, U.S. producers cannot compete in the marketplace because their product remains undifferentiated from their competitors' products. Meatpackers do not want COOL because they want to source cheaper, imported beef and pass it off to unsuspecting consumers who believe the USDA grade stamp and USDA inspection sticker denotes domestic beef. This is not true and consumers are being misled. According to the USDA, approximately 50,000 imported carcasses were graded with a USDA grade stamp in 2000. This means over 36 million pounds of imported beef was sold to U.S. consumers with the U.S. producers' seal of excellence. Moreover, all imported beef is eligible for the USDA inspection sticker. Consumers don't know they are not already buying U.S. beef even though 17-19 percent of all beef available for consumption in the U.S. is imported beef. Despite what opponents say, COOL can be implemented at no cost to producers. All that is needed is to mark all imported live cattle with a mark of origin. Once imported cattle are marked, all unmarked cattle can be presumed, accurately, to be domestic.
Ag Appropriations
R-CALF USA is disappointed that certain members of Congress have used the agriculture appropriations process to undermine the will of the American people. Both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House voted for and passed country-of-origin labeling in the 2002 Farm Bill and the President signed it into law. It was scheduled to take effect on Sept. 30, 2004. However, the leadership in Congress helped the meatpackers delay COOL for everything but fish and seafood in the 2004 agriculture appropriations bill. As everyone knows, fish and seafood have been effectively labeled with COOL since this spring and none of catastrophic predictions of the meatpackers have come to pass. Everything except fish and seafood was then delayed until Sept. 30, 2006. Just recently, however, the meatpackers won another delay by again convincing key congressional leaders to delay COOL for beef in the 2006 agriculture appropriations bill. Thus, COOL for beef has now been delayed until 2008. R-CALF USA encourages producers and consumers to call their congressional representatives to urge them to restore the Sept. 30, 2006, implementation date for Mandatory COOL.
Other issues
R-CALF USA believes that higher cattle prices can be sustained if U.S. cattle producers stand together to effectively compete for the available profits within the very profitable beef supply chain. Because the profits that must be shared by producers, packers, processors, importers, exporters, wholesalers, and retailers are ultimately all generated by consumers who buy beef, only if producers have a strong, national voice that exclusively represents their interests can they expect to receive their fair share of the available profits. As is generally the case in a competitive industry, an increase in profits to producers likely results in a decrease in profits to other segments of the industry. And, it should be no surprise that these other segments will fight to maximize their profits. R-CALF USA has a plan to strengthen the competitiveness of the independent U.S. cattle producer. It includes putting in the hands of producers the tools they need to compete; taking from the hands of the meatpackers the tools they've used to gain an unfair pricing advantage; imparting safeguards in trade agreements that eliminate the distortions in the global marketplace; and, maintaining the highest health and safety standards for U.S. beef.