• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So much for flowery speeches

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    So much for flowery speeches

    I don't know exactly what this means -- maybe some of you can help shed some light. Set-back or more reality, flowery speeches aside?!?

    Major victory for food safety as USDA agrees to continue ban on most Canadian beef products USDA agrees to extend judge's order maintaining ban on most Canadian beef due to risk of mad cow disease
    May 5, 2004
    From a press release
    BILLINGS, Mont. -- U.S. consumers won a huge victory for food safety today when the U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed without a fight to extend a federal judge's order to prevent the import of certain "high risk" cuts of beef from Canada. Under pressure from Canada and large multi- national meat packing corporations, USDA had sought to circumvent its own rulemaking by quietly allowing shipments of Canadian beef that are at higher risk of carrying Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, than boneless cuts of beef. Instead, USDA agreed to extend a restraining order that had been granted in a suit filed by Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA).
    "USDA was playing fast and loose with the safety and health of U.S. consumers, and the judge put a stop to it," said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard. "We think the Government's decision not to fight an extension of the judge's order shows that USDA recognized it would have been hard to defend its position in court. We will continue to insist that USDA meet or exceed the minimally accepted international safety standards for protection against mad cow disease."
    On April 26, Federal District Judge Richard Cebull granted R-CALF USA's request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to immediately halt the expansion of beef imports from Canada. The expansion of such imports would have reduced the U.S. standard for protection against mad cow disease to below the minimum standard used around the world.
    The Judge's order was based not only on the risks that beef from Canada could pose to U.S. consumers but also on USDA's failure to complete its own rulemaking process on the issue and on the Department's admission that it had allowed imports of beef from Canada in contravention of its own announced policy. According to import data maintained by USDA as well as similar data from the U.S. Department of Commerce USDA allowed the import of as much as 3.5 million pounds of "bone-in" cuts of Canadian beef from September 2003 to February 2004, directly contradicting the policy it had announced in August. The judge's order blocks imports of Canadian bone-in beef, ground beef, as well as, beef tongues, hearts, kidneys, tripe, and lips. These products have a higher risk of carrying mad cow disease than boneless cuts of beef.
    "This is a huge victory for food safety for U.S. consumers, and that's what this fight is all about," said Bullard. "The bottom line is that U.S. consumers must be confident that the beef they purchase in their neighborhood grocery store or restaurant is safe from mad cow disease."
    No nation in the world, except Barbados, has completely resumed imports of Canadian beef. Nonetheless, USDA has been working on a rule to allow resumption of beef and cattle imports despite the presence of mad cow disease in Canada. The rule is expected to be completed this summer.
    "Canada must at least meet internationally accepted science and safety standards before exporting their beef and cattle to the U.S.," Bullard said. "We don't understand why Canada expects, and USDA insists, that U.S. consumers should be subjected to increased health risks by disregarding our current science-based disease prevention standards."
    The agreement reached between R-CALF USA and USDA minimizes trade impacts with non-BSE countries by allowing beef products originating in a BSE-free region or from the United States that are processed in Canada to be exported to the United States.
    R-CALF USA, the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America, represents thousands of U.S. cattle producers on domestic and international trade and marketing issues. R-CALF USA, a national non-profit organization, is dedicated to ensuring the continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. R-CALF USA's membership consists primarily of cow-calf operators, cattle backgrounders, and feedlot owners. Its members -- over 8,000 strong -- are located in 46 states, and the organization has over 55 local and state association affiliates, from both cattle and farm organizations. Various main street businesses are associate members of R-CALF USA. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com

    #2
    According to the ABP email today it is not a big set back - basically they have decided not to try and move the new products until they decide on the border opening when they can free up both at once. Could be a sign that a decision will come soon - or it could mean that neither will happen soon, who knows?

    Comment


      #3
      Part of a letter to rcalf. I would like to ask you folks how we have become your enemy. How is it that decisions to keep this border closed are seen as victories? Aren't victories meant for wars? I am simply a cattleman trying to feed the world, just like your own producers who, by the way, I have done a good deal of business with over the years. Both buying and selling stock. A lot of the issues that you folks lobby your government for are things that I beleive in. Your people have called the big packing plants "multinationals". Are these folks you speak of named Cargil, and Tyson foods. These two pirates have been taking advantage of the stife of Canadian beef producers ever since the border slammed shut, and even figured out a way to set the prices so that they received the lions share of our own governments bail out programs. We see these companies as American owned, am I wrong?

      Somehow, I wish that the grassroots producers, like the ones you say you represent, on both side of the border could work together to find solutions to these problems. This is not about Canada being a diseased country, nor should it be about victories being celebrated over lost producers on either side of the border. If this is about an elephant and mouse syndrom, and the Pacific North West states feel threatened by a strong cattle industry in Western Canada, don't forget that the people making money from that Canadian industry are Americans. Sure we scratch out a bit of a living tending to our cattle, just like your producers, but we are not out to destroy your livelihood, or gain from your misfortune.

      Comment


        #4
        Cliff Edwards, an attorney for R-CALF USA, said Wednesday's [today's]agreement does not mean that the case is dismissed. He said the complaint could be amended if the group has concerns with the eventual rule.

        Comment


          #5
          How come tongues and hearts have a higher BSE risk than boneless beef? I mean aren't they boneless too?
          Once again we are hearing the "junk" science of BSE?
          Still...why did the USDA try to slip this one in? Why didn't they follow all the rules? I'm starting to really question just who they are working for?
          I mean just look at the Texas cow...is that sophisticated Shoot, Shovel and Shutup or what? An Ayrst vet once told me this sort of garbage has been happening in America for quite awhile! I guess they probably need an investigation into who opened their big mouth this time? Probably some dumb little inspector who thought their job was to insure the food supply was safe?

          Comment

          • Reply to this Thread
          • Return to Topic List
          Working...