I know I am a little behind on this one but life sometimes gets in the way of things. The USDA has approved the import of Canadian cattle over 30 months of age into the US. This is, to say the least, a very controversial decision in Cattle producer circles which is why I say I should have commented on this sooner.
Why is this so controversial? It has to do with BSE and trade issues. The Internationally accepted age of cattle where you don't have to worry about BSE, is 30 months of age. As long as a critter is under 30 months of age you don't have to worry about BSE and over 30 months of age, you worry about it. This USDA rule recognizes Canada as a "minimal risk" country which is eligible to import cattle into the US over 30 months of age since they are at "minimal risk" of having BSE.
That's the basis of the controversy in producer circles. According to the NCBA and the meat packers, Canada is at "minimal risk" and should be allowed to import cattle and groups such as R-Calf and USCA think that Canada has a higher risk for BSE than "minimal" and don't want them importing cattle over 30 months of age into the country.
Some more information. (I lost the rest of this the first time around so I am trying to recreate it) As I said, this whole thing has to do with BSE. It is generally accepted that BSE is spread form cow to cow via feed. Use of cattle by products in the slaughter process being fed back to other cows starts and spreads BSE. Both Canad and the US instituted a feed ban a number of years ago that does not allow cattle to be fed back to cattle to prevent the start and spread of BSE, we won't go into my personal theory that there is a naturally occurring form of BSE. The US has had two domestic cases of BSE and Canada has had approximately 10 cases of BSE. Both cases in the US were in cows that were born after the feed ban was instituted. This is not the case with some of the Canadian cases. Some of these cattle were born after the feed ban was put in place. This leads producers in the US to question the effectiveness of the Canadian feed ban and question whether Canada is actually a "minimal risk" country or not.
This is the whole situation that has led USCA to ask the USDA to change the rule calling Canada a "minimal risk" country for BSE and allow them to import cattle into the US. They claim that the importation of Canadian cattle will hurt our export markets since other countries don't want Canadian cattle.
So far I have just laid out the facts. Let me give you my take on the situation. Most people in the greater world stage aren't going to understand or want to know all the facts I have laid out here. They are going to see two things that don't make sense to them. They are going to see that the US wants countries around the world to accept beef from cattle that are over 30 months of age even though they have had BSE found in the country while stopping Canada from importing cattle over 30 months of age into the US because they have had cases of BSE in Canada. This appears to be sheer hypocrisy. They aren't going to care about when the feed ban was instituted and when the cattle were born in which country. They are just going to see the hypocrisy of the US position if the USCA were to prevail and Canada was not allowed to ship cattle over 30 months of age into the US.
Anybody that has read this site very long knows that I almost never defend the governments position on things and NEVER agree with the USDA on things. This time though I am going to have to give the USDA credit, I won't go so far as to defend them but give them credit. I truly believe they have done this with the thought in mind that if we want other countries to take our beef from cattle over 30 months of age, we have to bite the bullet and accept cattle from Canada and show the world that this is the right thing to do.
This is the thought I have had in mind all along with this situation and why you have never heard me ranting about this rule when it was proposed. We can try to explain away the differences in the US and Canadian BSE situation all we want, the perception of the situation is going to rule the day though. If we don't allow Canadian beef in over 30 months of age we will be seen as hypocritical when we try to get other countries to accept US beef over 30 months of age. Perception in this case trumps facts and we have to suck it up. Sorry if you don't like to hear that but that's the way it goes sometimes. We have to do things we don't like to move forward in life and this is one of those cases.
The adjustment of reality to the masses and of the masses to reality is a process of unlimited scope, as much for thinking as for perception. Walter Benjamin
Wednesday, September 19. 2007
Border Ruling
Monday, December 4. 2006
Baucus Stands Up
A little more information on my rant yesterday about South Korea's unofficial, official trade barrier to US beef.
Baucus sets condition to support pact
I stated earlier that it would be interesting to see if the US government will stand up to South Korea on this issue. I will give points to Sen. Baucus that he appears to be doing just that. This is not a surprise since Max has always worked hard for the people of Montana, I am just glad to see it.
Go Max, tell the South Koreans you mean business, The cattle industry (or at least this small segment of it) supports you.
The goal is to normalize trade relations based on sound science and consumer protection. Mike Johanns
Baucus sets condition to support pact
The next chairman of the Senate Finance Committee sliced into a T-bone steak here Sunday and said he cannot support a free-trade agreement between the United States and South Korea, if South Korea does not lift restrictions on imports of U.S. beef.
"I have a beef with Korea," Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., told Korean reporters who came to Montana for the fifth round of negotiations toward a U.S.-South Korea trade agreement. "Our beef is the safest, highest quality in the world and Korea should open its market fully as soon as possible."
I stated earlier that it would be interesting to see if the US government will stand up to South Korea on this issue. I will give points to Sen. Baucus that he appears to be doing just that. This is not a surprise since Max has always worked hard for the people of Montana, I am just glad to see it.
Go Max, tell the South Koreans you mean business, The cattle industry (or at least this small segment of it) supports you.
The goal is to normalize trade relations based on sound science and consumer protection. Mike Johanns
Sunday, December 3. 2006
South Korea's Trade Barrier
I posted a while ago that South Korea had opened up its market to US beef and how the news made me happy. It turns out I was wrong. While technically opening its market to US beef, South Korea has has rejected almost every shipment of beef into its country for one reason or another causing a new furor in the cattle industry,
U.S. meat industry blasts South Korea for beef bar
It would appear that the only reason the South Korean's opened up their beef market was to drive the free trade talks with the US. They want free trade with the US but don't want to allow free trade into their country by our products so they raise a barrier to our beef that is almost unassailable but still claim that trade is opened up. Convenient isn't it.
In a way what is really funny about this situation is that the US and South Korea are holding trade talks in of all places, beef country, Montana starting Monday. The South Koreans have the idea that their treatment of US beef will not be part of the talks. I think they are going to be unpleasantly surprised about that. If the way they are treating US beef is an indication of how they are going to approach free trade, there will be no free trade with South Korea, only more artificial barriers created by South Korea in an effort to open up US markets for their goods.
It will be interesting to see if the US Government will stand up to South Korea on this issue or will they cave to get a free trade agreement signed with South Korea. Only time will tell.
Trade can really be good for American workers and American businesses. Richard Neal
U.S. meat industry blasts South Korea for beef bar
U.S. beef producers and packers excoriated South Korea on Friday for rejecting a second shipment of U.S. beef, accusing Seoul of unjustified stalling just a week before talks on a proposed free trade deal.
"This reiterates ... that the Koreans were never really interested in opening the market," said John Reddington, vice president for trade at the American Meat Institute.
Earlier on Friday, officials in Seoul said they had rejected a shipment of U.S. beef that contained bone fragments. They acted a week after the first shipment from a U.S. plant since 2003 was rejected for the same reason.
Seoul's decision to bar imports from two out of three U.S. plants currently exporting to Korea mark a shaky restart for meat trade with the Asian nation. U.S. imports had been banned since the first U.S. case of mad cow disease in 2003.
It would appear that the only reason the South Korean's opened up their beef market was to drive the free trade talks with the US. They want free trade with the US but don't want to allow free trade into their country by our products so they raise a barrier to our beef that is almost unassailable but still claim that trade is opened up. Convenient isn't it.
In a way what is really funny about this situation is that the US and South Korea are holding trade talks in of all places, beef country, Montana starting Monday. The South Koreans have the idea that their treatment of US beef will not be part of the talks. I think they are going to be unpleasantly surprised about that. If the way they are treating US beef is an indication of how they are going to approach free trade, there will be no free trade with South Korea, only more artificial barriers created by South Korea in an effort to open up US markets for their goods.
It will be interesting to see if the US Government will stand up to South Korea on this issue or will they cave to get a free trade agreement signed with South Korea. Only time will tell.
Trade can really be good for American workers and American businesses. Richard Neal
Friday, June 16. 2006
NCBA Grows A Set
NCBA: Cattlemen Favor Ban On Japanese Beef, Additional Sanctions
Usually the NCBA is very conciliatory and doesn't take a stand like this. I find this very surprising. The big meat packers must really be getting upset with Japan to have their US mouthpiece fire this shot at them.
Don't get me wrong, banning Japanese beef from the US means nothing since very little Japanese beef is imported the way it is but the part that states, "and non-agricultural sanctions against Japan" is kind of a big deal. The NCBA is advocating a trade war with Japan. They've grown an awful big set here recently.
With the Big meat packers sending such a loud message to Japan, maybe they will finally open up their border to US beef and let the consumer's of Japan decide.
Life hits you. It's tough. But you heal yourself. Doris Roberts
In action taken today, the Executive Committee of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) voted unanimously to support retaliatory measures hinging on the immediate resumption of beef trade with Japan.
The NCBA Executive Committee voted to support legislation instructing the Bush Administration to institute agricultural and non-agricultural sanctions against Japan if beef trade is not immediately resumed. The resolution was offered by Bill Zimmerman, a cattleman from Foley, Minn., who serves as NCBA Region III vice president. The committee also voted in unanimous support of S. 3364, introduced by U.S. Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) on June 5, 2006. Nelson’s legislation would ban importation of any beef from Japan into the United States until Japan reopens its border to U.S. beef. The resolution supporting S. 3364 was introduced by Eden, Idaho, cattleman Cevin Jones, NCBA Region V vice president.
Usually the NCBA is very conciliatory and doesn't take a stand like this. I find this very surprising. The big meat packers must really be getting upset with Japan to have their US mouthpiece fire this shot at them.
Don't get me wrong, banning Japanese beef from the US means nothing since very little Japanese beef is imported the way it is but the part that states, "and non-agricultural sanctions against Japan" is kind of a big deal. The NCBA is advocating a trade war with Japan. They've grown an awful big set here recently.
With the Big meat packers sending such a loud message to Japan, maybe they will finally open up their border to US beef and let the consumer's of Japan decide.
Life hits you. It's tough. But you heal yourself. Doris Roberts
Monday, March 13. 2006
Unfair Trade Practices
Bush's beef remarks show rising U.S. ire
Starting to talk a little tough about this issue. Will it help? I doubt it, The President doesn't have much clout anymore overseas. It's nice he's trying though. Does this mean I like him? Fat chance.
Leadership demands that we make tough choices. Alan Autry
U.S. President George W. Bush voiced high expectation Friday of Japan's early resumption of U.S. beef imports in a speech at a conference of media company managers that showed signs of Washington's increasing irritation over the issue.
Japan reimposed the ban in January after spinal column--prohibited under a bilateral accord due to the risk of mad cow disease--was found in a beef shipment.
In his speech, Bush said, "One of the things they [livestock farmers in the United States] constantly talk to me is, 'Get those markets open, work with the Japanese to get the market open again.'"
The speech marks the first time that Bush has publicly urged Japan to resume beef imports since the ban's reimposition.
Bush mentioned the issue as an example of unfair trade practices by U.S. trade partners.
Starting to talk a little tough about this issue. Will it help? I doubt it, The President doesn't have much clout anymore overseas. It's nice he's trying though. Does this mean I like him? Fat chance.
Leadership demands that we make tough choices. Alan Autry
Saturday, January 14. 2006
Yet Another Country Opens
South Korea OKs some U.S. beef imports
I won't complain about opening of another market to US beef. There's a lot of talk in the article about how the US negotiators wanted more particularly where ribs were concerned. South Korea won't accept them citing safety reasons. It has nothing to do with safety, it has to do with domestic politics.
South Korean cattle ranchers want to protect their market just like Americans want to protect their market from foreign beef. Can't blame them, I am just glad to see some movement on the trade front for beef.
Our trade opens to all the world. Ezra Stiles
South Korea and the United States agreed Friday on partially ending a two-year import ban on American beef triggered by mad cow disease, the South Korean government said.
South Korea shut its doors to U.S. beef imports in December 2003 after the first U.S. case of mad cow disease. At the time it was the third-largest foreign market for American beef, after Japan and Mexico.
I won't complain about opening of another market to US beef. There's a lot of talk in the article about how the US negotiators wanted more particularly where ribs were concerned. South Korea won't accept them citing safety reasons. It has nothing to do with safety, it has to do with domestic politics.
Earlier Friday, South Korean cattle ranchers held a peaceful protest near the National Assembly against the move to lift the import ban, chanting "against resumption of U.S. beef imports." Police estimated the number of protesters at about 2,000.
South Korean cattle ranchers want to protect their market just like Americans want to protect their market from foreign beef. Can't blame them, I am just glad to see some movement on the trade front for beef.
Our trade opens to all the world. Ezra Stiles
(Page 1 of 1, totaling 6 entries)
