(MEATPOULTRY.com, June 29, 2007)
by Steve Bjerklie
A case now moving through the Canadian courts casts into serious doubt whether the Canadian government was forthright and transparent in its management of the risk to Canadian cattlemen from bovine spongiform encephalopathy. The issue speaks to the frustration of cattlemen and beef processors on both sides of the border, some of whom believe government mismanagement of B.S.E. in North America led to hasty decisions in 2003 that nearly destroyed the cattle industry in much of Canada and northern-tier states in the U.S.
Already, plaintiffs’ counsel has uncovered the fact that the first confirmed B.S.E.-infected cow in Canada was documented in 1993 – a decade before the Canadian Food Inspection Agency went public with an announcement that a B.S.E.-infected cow had been found in Alberta in May 2003. Just as troubling, C.F.I.A. was charged with tracking and maintaining surveillance of 198 cattle imported from the United Kingdom in the 1980s – and it lost track of 80 of them.
The first confirmed B.S.E. case in the U.S. was announced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service in late December 2003. The infected animal was found in Washington state; it had been born in Alberta, Canada. The fallout, however, closed dozens of beef export markets for both Canada and the U.S. The ramifications of those closures remain in continuing negotiations with Japan and South Korea to fully reopen their markets to North American product.
"We have a number of allegations that the government didn’t act in a prudent way to prevent risk to Canadian cattlemen," commented Gilles Gareau, a lead attorney in the case, to MEAT&POULTRY. "They never told anyone about the first B.S.E. case, for example."
The case comprises four separate class-action suits by Canadian cattlemen against the Canadian government, one each in Quebec, Alberta and Saskatchewan, and one in Ontario covering the other provinces and territories. Earlier this month, Quebec Superior Court certified the suit in that province, which means, said Gareau, "it’s not ‘appealable’ by the government." The suit was filed on behalf of 20,000 cattle producers in Quebec, and it, in conjunction with the other class-action filings, seeks C$9 billion in payment to Canadian cattle producers for lost income, diminution of the value of business and loss of property value. The Ontario portion of the case also moved forward earlier this month when the Ontario Court of Appeals refused to strike down two negligence claims against the government brought by Bill Sauer, a producer who raises cattle near Niagara Falls, Ont.
Cameron Pallet, counsel for the Ontario class action, told M&P he found a reference to the 1993 B.S.E. animal in a footnote buried in a 1994 report written for the government by a risk analysis expert that was never released to the public. "The really bad part is when they realized they had this B.S.E. case, they didn’t do anything." Moreover, in 1994 the Canadian government had negotiated a "one cow and you’re out" agreement with the United States, meaning that if a single B.S.E. case was discovered in either country, the border would close. "They guaranteed that their negligence would kill the Canadian cattle industry," said Pallet.
The attorney is just as angry about the missing 80 cattle. Agriculture Canada agreed to monitor the whereabouts of all British cattle imported into Canada since 1982, a group of 198 animals. (In 1990, the Canadian government banned the import of British cattle in response to the growing B.S.E. crisis.) "If they were supposed to be monitoring these animals, what the hell were they doing? How can you lose track of 40 percent of what you’re supposed to be following?" He was able to learn that 68 of the missing cattle had been routinely slaughtered for food, and 12 were rendered into feed.
"If you look at this statistically, of those 198 cattle, there was a 95-percent chance that at least six of them were B.S.E.-infected," notes Gareau, who adds there’s documentation that Agriculture Canada communicated with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration when the first Canadian B.S.E. case was found in 1993, but the border was not closed and cattle trade remained open between the two countries. "They used the excuse of an integrated market," he said. "And what happened later was the floor fell out from under the cattle industry."
Gareau said he wants to go to back to court for liability damages as soon as possible, but said it would be a year, perhaps two, before the case is brought to trial.
Theresa Keddy, spokeswoman for the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, said her organization won’t be part of the litigation. "We’re looking forward," she commented to M&P.
by Steve Bjerklie
A case now moving through the Canadian courts casts into serious doubt whether the Canadian government was forthright and transparent in its management of the risk to Canadian cattlemen from bovine spongiform encephalopathy. The issue speaks to the frustration of cattlemen and beef processors on both sides of the border, some of whom believe government mismanagement of B.S.E. in North America led to hasty decisions in 2003 that nearly destroyed the cattle industry in much of Canada and northern-tier states in the U.S.
Already, plaintiffs’ counsel has uncovered the fact that the first confirmed B.S.E.-infected cow in Canada was documented in 1993 – a decade before the Canadian Food Inspection Agency went public with an announcement that a B.S.E.-infected cow had been found in Alberta in May 2003. Just as troubling, C.F.I.A. was charged with tracking and maintaining surveillance of 198 cattle imported from the United Kingdom in the 1980s – and it lost track of 80 of them.
The first confirmed B.S.E. case in the U.S. was announced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service in late December 2003. The infected animal was found in Washington state; it had been born in Alberta, Canada. The fallout, however, closed dozens of beef export markets for both Canada and the U.S. The ramifications of those closures remain in continuing negotiations with Japan and South Korea to fully reopen their markets to North American product.
"We have a number of allegations that the government didn’t act in a prudent way to prevent risk to Canadian cattlemen," commented Gilles Gareau, a lead attorney in the case, to MEAT&POULTRY. "They never told anyone about the first B.S.E. case, for example."
The case comprises four separate class-action suits by Canadian cattlemen against the Canadian government, one each in Quebec, Alberta and Saskatchewan, and one in Ontario covering the other provinces and territories. Earlier this month, Quebec Superior Court certified the suit in that province, which means, said Gareau, "it’s not ‘appealable’ by the government." The suit was filed on behalf of 20,000 cattle producers in Quebec, and it, in conjunction with the other class-action filings, seeks C$9 billion in payment to Canadian cattle producers for lost income, diminution of the value of business and loss of property value. The Ontario portion of the case also moved forward earlier this month when the Ontario Court of Appeals refused to strike down two negligence claims against the government brought by Bill Sauer, a producer who raises cattle near Niagara Falls, Ont.
Cameron Pallet, counsel for the Ontario class action, told M&P he found a reference to the 1993 B.S.E. animal in a footnote buried in a 1994 report written for the government by a risk analysis expert that was never released to the public. "The really bad part is when they realized they had this B.S.E. case, they didn’t do anything." Moreover, in 1994 the Canadian government had negotiated a "one cow and you’re out" agreement with the United States, meaning that if a single B.S.E. case was discovered in either country, the border would close. "They guaranteed that their negligence would kill the Canadian cattle industry," said Pallet.
The attorney is just as angry about the missing 80 cattle. Agriculture Canada agreed to monitor the whereabouts of all British cattle imported into Canada since 1982, a group of 198 animals. (In 1990, the Canadian government banned the import of British cattle in response to the growing B.S.E. crisis.) "If they were supposed to be monitoring these animals, what the hell were they doing? How can you lose track of 40 percent of what you’re supposed to be following?" He was able to learn that 68 of the missing cattle had been routinely slaughtered for food, and 12 were rendered into feed.
"If you look at this statistically, of those 198 cattle, there was a 95-percent chance that at least six of them were B.S.E.-infected," notes Gareau, who adds there’s documentation that Agriculture Canada communicated with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration when the first Canadian B.S.E. case was found in 1993, but the border was not closed and cattle trade remained open between the two countries. "They used the excuse of an integrated market," he said. "And what happened later was the floor fell out from under the cattle industry."
Gareau said he wants to go to back to court for liability damages as soon as possible, but said it would be a year, perhaps two, before the case is brought to trial.
Theresa Keddy, spokeswoman for the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, said her organization won’t be part of the litigation. "We’re looking forward," she commented to M&P.
Comment