Thoughts from the Middle of Nowhere

Karen has finally talked about her thoughts on losing her cattle to the Federal Government. Most of the points she brings up I raised here in my posts on this issue but I did miss a couple that she brings up.

You might remember when the State of Montana was going to slaughter some wandering buffalo and the activists made a hue and cry over the "slaughter of the bison moms and babies." They managed to get the bison cull stopped because of this. How is this slaughter different than the one happening to Karen's and the Morgan's cattle? The Government is slaughtering cattle moms and babies here instead of bison but it's still moms and babies. What makes the moms and babies of bison so special to be saved over cattle moms and babies? Pretty large double standard here is you ask me.

What I really couldn't believe was this:

We heard from folks crying about “what we were doing to the industry”. My father-in-law was yelled at by a “neighbor” complaining about what I was doing. He didn’t call me.

What a way for a “neighbor” to act. I really wonder about people. As if Karen and the Morgans were really trying to destroy the Montana cattle industry. They were just caught in a meat grinder that they had no control over.

I still can't figure out why it is necessary to destroy the whole herd. When they were cleaning up Brucellosis in the country they didn't do that to a herd, they just slaughtered the ones that tested positive. Why the whole herd now? What makes this right when the government lets wildlife run around with brucellosis willy nilly and don't do a thing about it. Isn't this a double standard?

People always wonder why I am so leery of the Government, this just shows us why. It was Reagan that said something to the effect of “the scariest thing to hear in the world is, I’m form the Government and I’m here to help." Karen and the Morgans got help all right. Not the kind they needed though, but it's the only kind of help the government knows how to "give." Take away hard working people's money, time and property for their own use and their own reason. As long as the majority of the people think such things are okay, things like this, the government helping you, will continue to happen.

Don't you just love how this ends for Karen and the Morgan's then? After forcibly liquidation of their cattle, they have to pay capital gains taxes on the money the Government payed them for the cattle so that they can't buy back the number of cattle they were forced to slaughter. What a helping Hand.

Go on over and give Karen your support. It's little enough in this time of crisis for her, but I'm sure every bit helps.

My first thoughts are that I should not let people down, that I should support them and love them. Princess Diana

You might, or might not, remember when a Federal Judge ruled that Creekstone Farms Premium Beef could test the cattle they slaughter for BSE at the end of March. The Judge also stayed his ruling to give the Government the chance to appeal his verdict.

No surprise, the USDA has decided to appeal the ruling. The Feds obviously don't like the idea of a company doing any self regulation and doing the right thing to open up their export market.

The argument I really love is the one about cost.

One argument is that the cost to Creekstone for testing all of the roughly 300,000 cattle it slaughters each year would be much less than that of large meat packers, some of which slaughter millions of cattle a year. That, critics say, would give Creekstone an unfair competitive advantage in international markets.

Okay, maybe I am missing something here but if a BSE test costs say $10 per head (Theoretical number, I have no idea how much they cost) isn't the cost of the test going to be $10 per head whether you test 300,00 cattle or a million cattle? In gross numbers the company that slaughters millions of cattle would pay more in for the test but they also sell more product so there profit or loss per head change will be the same as the smaller company so it will not affect there overall profitability. In fact the larger company could probably cut a better deal for test kits and do it in a larger, more efficient manner so there cost per head would actually be less than Creekstones' due to efficiency of size. This reason is the biggest bunch of bullshit I have heard in a long time.

If Creekstone wishes to test for BSE they should be allowed to, pure and simple. Let the company that wants to be more safe in this matter than the USDA alone. This really make the USDA look like they are trying to hide something.

Law is a formless mass of isolated decisions. Morris Raphael Cohen

I see the EPA is weighing in on the CBM issue here in Montana. They are telling our fair haired Governor that the proposed law, SB 407, that would allow the CBM water to be stored in unlined stock ponds might violate the Federal Clean Water Act.

Boy, what a way to put me on the spot here. If anybody has any doubts about how I feel about CBM development, they can just look here. In short it scares me spitless. I've even talked about SB 407 and my feelings on it. Pumping the precious water out of the ground here in Eastern Montana and dumping it out is short sighted and wrong. The water will evaporate away and then there will be no water for cattle, wildlife, or humans around here and it will just become the "Big Dry." Surface water is a very short commodity in Eastern Montana and more and more ranchers are relying on wells to water their cattle. Pumping the water out for short term profit will damage the long term potential to raise livestock in this country. That's my position, short, sweet and to the point.

What puts me on the spot though is the Feds stepping in and saying something about the issue. This whole CBM issue has put me in league with the NPRC, a radical environmental group who I never thought I would see eye to eye with, and now I find the Feds stepping in and also supporting my side. Radical environmental groups bother me, but the Feds sticking their nose in State business really torques me off. What a a spot I'm in.

They say politics makes strange bedfellows and I guess this just proves it. I am aligned with some of the things I despise but the importance of water in this arid part of the State is very important to me so I'm stuck. Am I happy that the EPA is sticking its nose in on this issue? No, but anything to stop this bad piece of legislation will have to do I guess. I think I had better go gargle now. I sure have a bad taste in my mouth.

There is no man, however wise, who has not at some period of his youth said things, or lived in a way the consciousness of which is so unpleasant to him in later life that he would gladly, if he could, expunge it from his memory. Marcel Proust

Governor's bison ideas irk ranchers"

If Montana continues its current approach to bison that leave Yellowstone National Park, eventually Brucellosis will be transmitted to cattle, according to Gov. Brian Schweitzer.

"I don't want to be the governor of Montana when we lose our Brucellosis-free status," Schweitzer said.

So, Schweitzer doesn't want to be the Governor that loses Montana's Brucellosis-free status. His solution so that it doesn't happen? Let more Brucellosis infected bison wander around in the state potentially spreading the disease. How is this going to accomplish anything but infect Montana cattle with Brucellosis. IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE BRIAN. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth as usual.

I see a new proposal in this article that I have never seen before.

He has also suggested that a quarantine area could be set up for cattle outside Gardiner where cows would have to be tested for the disease as they enter and as they leave and would not be used for breeding in Montana or any other state.

So, set up a Brucellosis check station and confirm to all the world that Montana believes there is Brucellosis in the state. All this will accomplish is other states not accepting Montana cattle without being tested for Brucellosis. We will be Brucellosis-free state while at the same time, spending all the money for testing as if we weren't Brucellosis-free state. This accomplishes nothing and hurts the whole cattle industry in the state.

Another question, how is he going to make sure these cows aren't going to be used for breeding? Who made Schweitzer God and able to tell people with perfectly healthy cattle what they cannot do with them. I thought our government was supposed to protect private property, not confiscate it and tell us what we can and cannot do with it if there is no health risk associated with it.

The solution for this problem is for the Federal Government to acknowledge that they have a problem with their animals and to do something about it. That's not going to happen though. They require us private citizens to maintain a Brucellosis-free herd under penalty of law, but they don't have to follow that same requirement. Typical Government hypocrisy. Responsibility is the solution, to bad the government isn't responsible.

Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other. Ronald Reagan

Personal Data of 26.5M Veterans Stolen

Personal data, including Social Security numbers of 26.5 million U.S. veterans, was stolen from a Veterans Affairs employee this month after he took the information home without authorization, the department said Monday.

What the hell did this asshole need with this information at home!!I though this as I read the story then I got really mad when I read this.

The material represents personal data of all living veterans who served and have been discharged since 1976, according to the department. The information was included in the veterans' discharge summary that goes into a government database.

Yea, that be me, I fall in this range. Maybe the Government should provide us with free credit reports every quarter for 5 years to allow us to monitor the situation. Yea, take responsibility for the situation, the Government would never stoop to that. Now to figure out what to do to check out how badly I've been violated. It sure doesn't feel good.

Time after time, we are finding incidents where common sense and good practices of democracies are being violated. Jay Inslee

Schweitzer explains bison ideas to ranchers

Gov. Brian Schweitzer is proposing an expanded bison hunt and payments to ranchers who remove their cattle from the Yellowstone National Park area, saying he won't "roll over for the federal government" and let Montana be put at risk of losing its prized brucellosis-free status.

I think letting Brucellosis infected bison wander around the state of Montana is a mistake. I'm in the minority here, I know, but the precedence involved by doing it could be bad. To protect the cattle industry the Governor wants to pay ranchers who run cattle near Yellowstone park to move their cattle. Where is the money for this to come from?

Schweitzer made clear that he wasn't talking about Montana "reaching into our pockets" to pay. He suggested the federal government take the money it would be spending on hazing and slaughtering and use it on annual payments to ranchers.

Since when does Schweitzer speak for the Federal Government and set policy for them? We can't get the Feds to do anything about the brucellosis problem and he thinks they are going to pay ranchers to move their cattle? Fat chance of that happening. The Feds don't care about people, just whatever policy they feel like following whether it hurts people or not.

Of course ask a rancher who is being asked to move his cattle and what response do you get?

Mike Manship, owner of Red Creek Ranch on Hebgen Lake, said bison should be placed in their natural environment in Eastern Montana or at least moved to public land somewhere.

Basically, "not in my backyard, put them somewhere else, anywhere else, where they won't bother me." I can't say that I blame him. So what's our Gov going to do if a rancher doesn't want to move his cattle so his "plan"might work? Seize the cattle through eminent domain and make him move them or just let the bison roam free and possible infect the cattle and cause the whole cattle industry in the state to be quarantined by the Federal Government? If the producers in the area aren't willing to do this the whole "scheme" that Schweitzer has dreamed up fails.

I will give the Governor that he is trying on this issue, this at least sounds a little better than his idea to kill all the bison in the park to eradicate the problem, but speaking for the ranchers in the area and the Federal Government when he has no authority to do so isn't real smart. By saying these things certain people will take them as gospel and think it's a done deal when it isn't. Oh well, that's our Gov for you, speak first and consider the consequences later.

Nothing dies harder than a bad idea. Julia Cameron

Wyoming is the state who has told the Feds to keep out of it's business when it comes to wolves, they will manage them on their own and they don't care how any other state or the Feds want them to do it. They have even taken the Feds to court over this.

Now Wyoming is crying to the same Feds that those evil people in Montana are demanding clean water in their streams (how horrible that is) and it will affect their Coal Bed Methane industry and it just isn't fair.

Wyoming asks EPA to discard Montana rules

Gov. Dave Freudenthal has asked the Environmental Protection Agency to reject Montana water quality rules that he says would severely limit natural gas production in Wyoming.

Ahhhh, poor babies. Want the Feds out of their business until it's convenient for them. Don't you feel sorry for them? They don't care about water quality so why should anybody else.

This sounds just like a spoiled child running to it's parents for protection. Suck it up Wyoming and do the right thing. Water quality affects us all and maybe you need to pay more attention to it instead of polluting this vital resource we all consume.

I haven't turned into some rich monster. I've kept my perspective. But I am a bit spoiled. It's hard not to be a little spoiled by having a lot of money. Christine McVie

Japan says unclear if U.S. beef actions would work

Japan's vice farm minister said on Monday it is unclear if actions proposed by Washington would help prevent shipments of banned U.S. beef to Japan.

More stonewalling from Japan on the beef issue. Not surprising but it would be nice to get this issue resolved. I will note this story comes out after U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said on Saturday that U.S. beef exports to Japan would resume "very, very quickly." Somebodies living in a different universe from the rest of us who know Japan is being difficult about this. The beef industry will just have to march on and see what happens.

I note nowhere in Japan's opposition to US beef is the statement that is has to be source identified like the backers of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) tell us Japan wants and will bring us enormous profits. Japan's just concerned the USDA, the agency foisting NAIS on us and the agency to administer the program, is not doing their job on watching the big meat packers and how they prepare meat. So is the USDA foisting their problems off on producers instead of living up to their problems? Yes and their answer is more government intrusion. Typical big government solution.

Injustice, cruelty, restraint of conscience, oppression, falsity, dishonour, deceit, violation of law and equity?