Thoughts from the Middle of Nowhere

Harkin won't rule out mandatory national animal ID

The farm bill may not be done yet, but that isn't stopping the Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin from looking ahead. And he's looking ahead at a program that's proven controversial in the past.

During a teleconference with reporters Thursday, Harkin said, even though much work remains to be done on the current farm bill, he's looking beyond that legislation to the issue of national animal identification. According to Harkin, the Westland/Hallmark beef recall, the largest in the nation’s history, shows the importance of having what he calls a "comprehensive" animal ID system that covers all animals and provides 48 hour traceback to the farm or ranch.

And while that statement likely wouldn't raise too many eyebrows, Harkin didn't stop there. When pressed by reporters on the issue, Harkin wouldn't rule out Congressional action to make national animal ID mandatory.

HOW IN THE HELL WOULD MANDATORY ID HAVE HELPED IN THE WESTLAND/HALLMARK BEEF RECALL SENATOR HARKIN? Some plant employees abuse downer cattle and slaughter them and you want to track the critters back to the farmer? How would this have helped?

Maybe the Senator doesn't realize the tracking capability of NAIS ends on the kill room floor. All Animal ID is removed at this point and the meat becomes a generic product that is not tracked IN ANY WAY. NAIS is not a farm to meat counter idea. It ends at the slaughter house. So can anyone tell me how mandatory animal ID would have helped in this situation? No ideas? I didn't think so, BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T HAVE HELPED.

By the Way, I do think farmers should be a little more careful and not ship cows to slaughter that are downers or appear to be sick enough they will become downers. This opinion does not excuse what happened at the Westland/Hallmark plant. It's a matter of personal ethics for me, but in no way can this situation be used to promote animal ID. It wouldn't have helped one bit.

Nylon living with the heifers. I swear he is sticking his tongue out at me. Taken 2/19/2008.

[sarcasm]What a surprise, I never expected this to happen. Who knew?[/sarcasm]

Blue sky, warm temperatures, baby calves running around, it don't get much better than this. I hope it doesn't mean it is going to turn nasty come March. I don't need that. Taken 2/19/2008.

Canada Says Alberta Dairy Cow Is 12th Mad-Cow Case

Canada confirmed its 12th case of mad-cow disease in an animal born about five years after the nation banned some feed ingredients to halt the spread of the brain-wasting illness.

The sick animal was a six-year-old dairy cow from Alberta, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said today in a statement on its Web site. Canada and the U.S. in 1997 banned the use of cattle feed containing ground-up cattle tissue, which scientists say is the way most animals contract the disease.

What can I say. Yet another case in Canada. I still keep wondering why they have this continued problem. I believe this is the 5th one that was born after the feed ban was initiated. Since the feed ban is supposed to stop this why do they keep having cases? Is the feed ban ban not working or is it being intentionally violated or accidentally violated? I would sure like to know.

The CFIA said it expects to detect ``a small number of cases'' as Canada moves toward eliminating BSE from its herds.

I find this news interesting. Yes, I would expect to find "a small number of cases'' from cattle born before the feed ban, but why do we keep seeing it from animals born after the feed ban? This is something American Cattlemen would really like to understand. I am sure no answers to that question will be forthcoming from the USDA. The meat packers don't allow such things.

A correct answer is like an affectionate kiss. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

.

The chickens are very happy with the heifers being around home. Lots of stuff to scratch up and peck at. Between the scratch feed and warmer temperatures their egg production is really taking off. Taken 2/16/2008.

Well, the new hired hand is here and working. He is Internet savvy enough that I am not going to say any thing above and beyond that. I hope it works out for both of us.

I've been conned a couple of times, but now I'm a little more savvy. Maggie Gyllenhaal

Taking shelter from the wind. Even my working right nearby would not spook him out of this shelter. Taken 2/13/2008.

Fuel-maker offers more for camelina

Competition from surging grain prices prompted a Bigfork biofuels developer to announce Friday it will boost its contract price for the oilseed crop camelina.

Great Plains - The Camelina Co. is one of two groups with plans to produce a combined 200 million gallons of biofuels annually from camelina within the next two to three years.

It will be interesting to see if they get many takers raising price to $9 a bushel while wheat is greater than $15 a bushel. Here is an interesting comment.

To compete, Great Plains said Friday that it is increasing its camelina contract price to $9 per bushel. Company founder Sam Huttenbauer said the remaining gap with wheat prices would be covered by camelina's low "input" costs - meaning it needs fewer fertilizers and herbicides.

Camelian needs less fertilizers and herbicides. Interesting. I can't speak to the fertilizer situation but i have been informed that herbicide costs are less for camelina. That's because THERE ARE NO HERBICIDES LISTED FOR USE IN CAMELINA. So if you get a weed infestation, there isn't a damn thing you can do for it except watch the weeds take over the field. This "low input" cost doesn't do much good if you don't have a crop to sell.

I think they are going to have to offer more money than $9 a bushel to get this going. With wheat prices the way they are most people are going to grow crops they are comfortable with and can mange. Not some crop that you can't even spray the weeds on. You have to give the company kudos for trying though.

The status quo is the only solution that cannot be vetoed. Clark Kerr

Just another cute calf. I have to do my part to raise food for the wolves you know. Taken 2/20/2008.

Government hails wolf recovery as success

Calling it a "remarkable conservation success story," the federal government said Thursday that it plans to remove gray wolves in the Northern Rockies from the endangered-species list, 13 years after the animals were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees wolf recovery, said there are more than 1,500 wolves in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, far exceeding initial goals to restore them to the Northern Rockies.

Despite the fact that roughly one in four wolves dies - legally or illegally - at the hands of people every year, the population has grown by 24 percent a year and consistently expanded its range. With all three states agreeing to manage at least a minimum population, the next logical step is removing wolves from the endangered-species list, federal officials said Thursday.

Success for whom? Success at putting ranchers livestock and businesses at risk? Success at decimating the elk herds in Montana? I don't see a whole lot of success here.

I definitely am not excited about the prospect of de-listing he wolves. Don't get me wrong, they need de-listed, but you know the wolf loving/rancher hating groups out there are going to go to court to contest this action so there will be a prolonged court battle before there is the slightest possibility that wolves will be de-listed.

What can I say. This whole wolf thing is bull shit. Just another way to drive ranchers out of business. I'm killing myself right now calving my heifers, up all hours of the day and night, so I am a little upset by all of this right now. I work so hard to save these cattle so some wolf can come along and kill them? This is the what we term success in America? You can have it then.

Funding questions abound as feds change wolf's status

Returning gray wolves to the Northern Rockies has already cost more than $27 million. Keeping them here will mean spending millions of dollars more.

But with federal officials poised today to announce the removal of wolves from the endangered-species list, there are unresolved questions about how state-run wolf programs - expected next year to cost around $3.3 million to manage more than 1,500 wolves - will be funded in the coming years.

In simple words, the Feds will tell the states how to manage the wolves, but will not pay any money to do it. The states will have to fund it themselves.

Shouldn't the states get to choose how they manage the wolves if they have to pay for it themselves instead of having the Feds breathe down their necks? Seems to me like they should.

This is all moot anyway, some pro wolf group/groups will get a restraining order to keep the Feds from taking them off the endangered species list and there will be years of court battles before it is ever resolved. I guess worrying about funding is like putting the cart before the horse. Lets get them off the endangered species list first.

I don't know whether I'm, like, jumping the gun but it's possible that in the future we may be able to use the information that we can't receive at the moment. Sean Booth

Navy scores direct hit on spy satellite

A U.S. Navy cruiser blasted a disabled spy satellite with a pinpoint missile strike that achieved the main mission of exploding a tank of toxic fuel 130 miles above the Pacific Ocean, defense officials said.

Excuse me for being a cynic, but this was nothing more than a exercise in practical anti-satellite warfare. Think about this, being able to hit and disable a satellite that is traveling 17,000 mph is a major accomplishment and quite a signal to the world about our capabilities. Now if we could just do the same thing with terrorist we would have it made.

Even for practical purposes theory generally turns out the most important thing in the end. Oliver Wendell Holmes

I tell My Darling Wife I'm out seeing a good looking red head every day. I thought I should share a picture of her. Damn fine looking, isn't she. Taken 2/14/2008.

I used to think better of people who lived in Montana but Over the past years my opinion has really gone down hill. The covert hostility you get when you have the gall to marry somebody who isn't lily white from friends and family and the general public is unbelievable. It is really making me lose faith in people in general. Why can't we look at who the person is and not focus so much on the skin color? I learned to look past skin color many years ago after I got away from the prejudices of my family.

The damn thing is, they do it so covertly that when confronted, they deny it and if anything, things get worse. It would actually be nice once if they would up front and admit it to my or my families face. No, they can't do that, they have to do it covertly. Try to point it out and they get hostile. The hostility this generates is amazing. Damn people, I'm tired of their lying, prejudice asses.

Prejudice is the child of ignorance. William Hazlitt