Revealing Animal Health Act Regulations

[coppertop]

There are some pieces of provincial legislation that may be amended by Ministerial Order which does not involve opening up the Legislation.
It is important that the Government review all legislation on an ongoing basis, EG: The Municipal Government Act, The Agricultural Service Boards Act. The Agricultural Operations Practices Act has been amended several times since coming into effect January 1/02, mainly due to pressure from the livestock industry.

I do agree with Grassfarmer, premises ID won't change the way we do business, it merely indicates where our livestock operations are carried out.
Feedlots and other confined feeding operations have been required to provide location of their operations under AOPA for several years, so this is nothing new, with the exception of the fact it applies to all of us.

[wilagro]

coppertop: Give government an inch and they will take a yard (or the metric equivalent), I don't trust them.

Once they have compliance with their regulations we will not be farming or ranching, but merely dancing to their tune no matter what USED to be. Filling out more forms and punching in more codes will be routine for EVERYTHING connected with cattle raisng AND the raising of the two dozen OTHER animals that are covered by the regulations. Buy some bunnies for the kids and cough up your ID, sell your neighbour a calf, another form to submit in triplicate. Its all BS and we are about to ACCEPT it without a whimper.

[coppertop]

i am not saying I agree with all the regulations, but the agricultural industry isn't the only one that is regulated. My main concern is whether those who are monitoring the conditions we must adhere to have any knowledge of our industry !

[Kathy]

The government cannot, through regulation, restrict our activities. The Premise ID reg. is a restriction on our activities and I am shocked that ranchers will willfully go along with this suppression.

Do you own your land? Why? Does common law and history of this country mean anything?

We, as primary producers, do not farm in an "intensive" manner which is contrary to the 'zoning' of our land.

In essence, the government just rezoned all the agriculture land (used to raise mat) in Alberta to "intensive" agriculture

[grassfarmer]

"The government cannot, through regulation, restrict our activities" - Er, yes they can,that is one of the powers Governments have. And lets face it no-one in the ranching community can complain too much because I'm guessing 90% of them voted for the current PC Government. You get what you wish for.

[coppertop]

Kathy, if the vast majority of the 30,000 beef producers in the province would have strongly resisted this initiative I am guessing it would have been given a sober second thought. Most producers took the money and didn't put up much of a battle. Now we have 30 new staff at Alberta Ag to help implement this strategy in company with 30 from LIS...
If, in the long run, our cattle are worth more, George will look like a genious, if not, then we will have done a lot of work for naught, and the government will have put a whole bunch of new people to work.

[grassfarmer]

Fair comment coppertop, at least George has an idea and is attempting to achieve something. If we didn't have such a vacuum of leadership or ideas in our "commodity organisations" perhaps George wouldn't have been taking this risk either (and I think, politically, it is a huge risk he is taking)

[perfecho]

I would guess that we are probably closing in on 20,000 producers or will this year; due to the current economics and ALMS......some (in my area anyway) have rebuked the system with their "ultimate" vote and are exiting the industry. (And unfortunately what the industry needs.)
But, it is like a leaf falling in the forest, with no one to see.
I doubt George will pay the ultimate price...they should have during the BSE fiasco and the "inventory loss claw back" that was virtually unnoticed to the general public and as usual, we farmers did little about it.
It is also sad that 30 people have to be hired to "help" the industry to fill in paperwork, that really adds little value in the big scheme. These 30 people will make a living at what they do.....and will not have to get a second job to support their "contibution to society". These dollars will come right from the top of the allocated ag budgets that are "headlined" as going to help farmers and labeled as extension specialists.
At this time, I am in favor of the tracking and verifying, however only if, within a year or so, I have the choice to purchase a meat product that is labeled with a birth date and region of production in my local supermarket. Not all products need to be labeled, but the ones that can, should be. Why else would I support such an initiative? I will be enquiring the minister’s office as to the time line for such, as it goes hand in hand with what producers are forced to do. Will post the reply.
Keep warm ;-)

[Kathy]

Firstly, lets get one thing straight.

George Groenveld and Alberta Agriculture did NOT come up with this marketing concept (livestock and meat strategy). It is the very same agenda that has been implemented in Australia (for decades), UK, etc. and is attempting to be implemented in other countries, such as the USA (with little support there - thank God).

The agenda and initiatives are the directives of the OIE - the World Organisation for Animal Health; http://www.oie.int/eng/OIE/PM/en_PM.htm?e1d1#CANADA

This is the very same organisation that all the countries, including Canada, go to for instructions on how to deal with BSE (and other animal diseases - relating to trade).

Danny Matthews of the OIE, is one of the BSE so-called experts. He stated himself, at a meeting in Calgary in 2006, that he is only a manager.

Since the beginning of the BSE fiasco in the UK, the brain tissues found to contain prions or amyloids in cattle have NEVER been ANALYZED for metals.

In a study by Alberta and Canadian researchers in 2007, these people designed "polypeptides" for examining the Beta-roll (sheet) formation. In their study, the normal design of these polypeptide chains would bind with 4 calcium 2 ions. They used various metals to alter the protien chains. Lanthanum 3 ions were the main element used to misfold the polypeptides.

In this experiment - 75 Lanthanum 3 ions bound to the proteins were "normally" they only bound to 4 calcium 2 ions. The ratio for metals per peptide "produced a minimum of 33 to 1 and amaximum of 50 to 1 La3 ions to BRD (Beta-roll designed) polypeptide.

Metal ion-dependent, reversible, protein filament formation by designed beta-roll polypeptides" Dr. AJ Scotter et al. Queens Univ. and Univ. Alberta

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=2174480&blobtype=pdf

When researchers in prion science homogenate and inject directly into the brains (or guts) spongiform brain tissue from TSE diseased animals, they are inadvertantly injecting massive amounts of rogue metals - and NOBODY at the OIE has "openly" attempted in 25 years to find out what metals, and what form these metals are in.

OIE expert Danny Matthews stated in Calgary, that they might get around to this sometime in the future. [Don't hold your breath.]

Please remember if you go to the wolf for help to watch over the flock, as grassfarmer states, we will get what we deserve.

On the other hand, I am not asking the wolf for help - but like flocks of sheep, or wild buffalo running scared, we will, be victims of reliance upon leaders with no independent vision, only an ability to follow.

[perfecho]

Actually I view this strategy more of helping identify where the meat comes from, and how old for our own consumers....and if we were serious we could add to the list such protocols as no implants, no medicated feed, etc.
This would truly make our beef a sought commodity, however that push will not come from government. If we could get our "sh*t" together, COOL would be a blessing, not a deterrent.