CountryByNet.com Forums :: Canadian Beef Ban Should be Extended

Doc, I'm heartened to hear you say, "I do know in the US all of the major mfg. of protein for ANY animal do not use animal protein under any circumstances." I was under the misapprehension that poultry and hog feed could still contain animal protien products. For that matter, I was under the misapprehension that cattle feed could contain animal protien from hogs and horses. I am aware that the FDA, in their effort to bolster firewalls against BSE has made some changes to feed. I'll just quote directly from the memo issued on January 26, 2004:

"This interim final rule will implement four specific changes in FDA’s present animal feed rule. First, the rule will eliminate the present exemption in the feed rule that allows mammalian blood and blood products to be fed to other ruminants as a protein source. Recent scientific evidence suggests that blood can carry some infectivity for BSE.

Second, the rule will also ban the use of “poultry litter” as a feed ingredient for ruminant animals. Poultry litter consists of bedding, spilled feed, feathers, and fecal matter that are collected from living quarters where poultry is raised. This material is then used in cattle feed in some areas of the country where cattle and large poultry raising operations are located near each other. Poultry feed may legally contain protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed, such as bovine meat and bone meal. The concern is that spillage of poultry feed in the chicken house occurs and that poultry feed (which may contain protein prohibited in ruminant feed) is then collected as part of the “poultry litter” and added to ruminant feed.

Third, the rule will ban the use of “plate waste” as a feed ingredient for ruminants. Plate waste consists of uneaten meat and other meat scraps that are currently collected from some large restaurant operations and rendered into meat and bone meal for animal feed. The use of "plate waste" confounds FDA's ability to analyze ruminant feeds for the presence of prohibited proteins, compromising the Agency's ability to fully enforce the animal feed rule.

Fourth, the rule will further minimize the possibility of cross-contamination of ruminant and non-ruminant animal feed by requiring equipment, facilities or production lines to be dedicated to non-ruminant animal feeds if they use protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed. Currently, some equipment, facilities and production lines process or handle prohibited and non-prohibited materials and make both ruminant and non-ruminant feed -- a practice which could lead to cross-contamination."

Of course, their reference to the fact that: "Recent scientific evidence suggests that blood can carry some infectivity for BSE." kind of blows the argument that it's safe to eat downers and their direct reference to the fact that: "Poultry feed may legally contain protein that is prohibited in ruminant feed, such as bovine meat and bone meal." makes me wonder why all the feed producers who were legally using animal protiens suddenly stopped. If the FDA passed some legislation since the publication of this memo that I missed prohibiting this type of feed, I'd really appreciate a reference to it so I can study up. It's exactly the kind of law that's needed.

I don't know if there are any whistle blowers that will expose BSE, Doc. After all, there are creditable reports that I noted in a previous post that, "The U.S. Department of Agriculture has pressured its veterinarians into falsifying official documents for as long as 20 years,..." This doesn't instill me with the confidence to believe a cover up couldn't happen.

You also say that, "Most of the feedlots are doing their own checking and testing. The govt. here can't keep you from doing that." Once again, things have apparantly changed. I was under the impression that the USDA was not allowing people to do their own testing as evidenced by a letter that John Stewart, C.E.O. of Creekstone Farms Premium Beef sent
to Undersecretary J.B. Penn United States Department of Agriculture dated April 13,2004. In the letter, Mr. Stewart says, "On behalf of Creekstone Farms I want to thank you for the opportunity to have met with you in Washington, D.C. last Thursday, April 8. We had hoped for a different outcome to the meeting, however, and are very disappointed with USDA’s decision not to allow Creekstone Farms to voluntarily test all of the cattle we process for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). As we have discussed in the various meetings held with the USDA over the past several weeks, BSE testing of our cattle is something our export customers and consumers are asking for, and we feel we should be able to provide it to them."

It surprises me that you would say Canadian ranchers and farmers don't feel enough is being done to combat BSE. Given the proportionate size of our respective herds, I think we've instituted an excellent testing regime that exceeded our target by over 7,000 head in 2004. I would also point out that unlike the US, we're testing ALL 4D cattle. I'm assuming this is based on the theory that if you're looking for a fire, the best place to start is where there's smoke.

It surprises me as well, Doc, to hear that Tyson Foods, Cargil, Farmland National and others have filed a suit to stop the border opening. I was under the impression that they were laying people off and closing plants in an effort to force the US Government to open the border. The argument, I believe, was that they didn't have enough volume to sustain these plants/jobs without Canadian beef.

I'm also concerned about what kind of perception people might have of this "united front" you mention. I believe on May 28, 2004, 'Beef Magazine' took strong exeption to some of R-Calf's strategies when they said, "While the industry reaction to R-CALF's earlier attacks on the safety of U.S. beef were widely condemned, most critics considered them unfortunate lapses in judgment that some organizations make in the heat of the battle. R-CALF made it clear this week, however, that the organization believes that the end does justify any means.

The group held a press conference on Thursday, hand in hand with radical anti-beef activist groups, to denounce USDA's handling of the BSE situation. The press event in Washington, D.C., questioned the safety of beef, and called for government hearings on the matter.

The decision to align with such radical anti-beef groups seems all the more surprising considering that many within R-CALF hope to make the organization mainstream and represent producers on a wide spectrum of issues. Instead, this latest R-CALF blunder seems to push them more in the direction of radical activism than mainstream representation.

As could be expected, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and other groups issued blistering press releases questioning R-CALF's decision and motives. It's shocking, following the disastrous statements regarding beef safety just a few weeks ago, that rather than issue an apology, the organization confirms to all that it is willing to destroy beef demand in order to further its isolationist, protectionist, anti-trade policies.

For a moment, consider the caliber of groups R-CALF publicly aligned itself with this week:

The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) is famous for opposing irradiation, and pushing for the reduction of beef in the school lunch program among other things. CFA's leader, Carol Tucker Foreman, is famous for her anti-beef rhetoric and efforts to stir up the hysteria about the safety of our product.

The Consumer Union (CU), along with CFA, have been two of the leading groups pushing since Dec. 23, 2003, the message that beef is unsafe. You've probably read the multitude of inaccurate statements by CU "leader" Michael Hansen in the popular press. Hansen and the CU have also led the crusade against biotechnology and GMOs.

The following is a quote from former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop in regard to Hansen's rhetoric: "Unfortunately, a few fringe groups are using misleading statements and blatant falsehoods as part of a long-running campaign to scare consumers about a perfectly safe food ... it is necessary to condemn these attacks ... for what they are: baseless, manipulative and completely irresponsible."

Then there's Public Citizen (PC), which gains its supposed credibility through founder Ralph Nader. But PC is best known for its membership in the Global Safe Food Alliance, formed by such animal rights organizations as Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, the Western Organization of Resource Councils, Farm Sanctuary, etc., to put out anti-meat messages. "

I don't know aobut you, Doc, but these aren't exactly the kinds of people I want to stand shoulder to shoulder with in my fight to save the beef industry.

I note with some interest a report published in the East Texa News on August 05, 2004. Again, I'll just quote directly and let the article speak for itself:

"August 5, 2004 - In mid-July, Canadian feedyards reported to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that R-CALF USA members have cattle in their feedyards - a situation the feedyard owners opposed.

"On one hand, they (R-CALF) are saying to the American public that our beef is unsafe and unfit for the American public to consume," said Mike Sears with Chinook Feeders, one of the feedyards where R-CALF members have cattle.

"And, on the other hand, they're up here buying cattle, trying to profit from that same situation. They're being fairly hypocritical, as far as we're concerned."

Sears' comments were reported in the July 23 Texas Cattle Feeders Association (TCFA) newsletter, which also reported Canadians are threatening to prevent shipment of fed cattle, owned by an R-CALF USA director, from going to slaughter.

Imports of cattle from Canada were suspended following the determination a cow with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), found in the United States in December 2003, came from a Canadian herd.

Bill Bullard, R-CALF CEO, said the organization has "no membership criteria" that delves in the members' personal business matters.

He also pointed out the current focus should be on the BSE testing protocol, rather than who owns cattle in Canadian feedyards.

"Several recent reports from Canada suggest that members of R-CALF USA have thousands of cattle in Canadian feedlots," Bullard said on July 28. "Supposedly, these R-CALF members bought Canadian cattle cheap, in a market depressed by export restrictions imposed by the U.S. and other nations, seeking to realize inflated profits when prices are expected to jump once exports to the U.S. resume.

"It is possible that some individual R-CALF members have cattle in Canadian feedlots. They could lose money if exports to the U.S. don't resume quickly enough," Bullard said."

We do agree completely on the issue of animal tracing, Doc. And while the US system is still voluntary, I am pleased to tell you that Canada has had a mandatory system in place since January 01, 2001.

And yes, I realize there haven't been a lot of cattle coming across the border to us from the US, Doc. Not much point if you can't fatten 'em up on the cheap and then ship 'em back across the boarder.

Dave

Edited by Tallnthesaddle (01/10/05 10:38 PM)

Post Extras: