Two Things We Needn't Worry Over
 

2% of domestic beef is exported. Japan won't buy our beef... big deal.

Mad cow is not caught by being exposed to other cattle.

How do prions infect cows?
The most common mode of infection is via feeding cows contaminated feed -- feed that contains animal proteins (from sheep or cows). Researchers are still studying modes of transmission and if heredity/genetics plays a role in an individual animals susceptibility to, or protection from, acquiring this disease.

Can humans catch Mad Cow disease?
Technically, no, since this is a bovine disease. However, there is a human version, and it is called Creutzfeld-Jacob Disease, that has been linked to eating infected cow meat. This is an area of intense research at the present time, searching for clues about diagnosis, transmission and risk factors.

Check out this site:
http://www.mad-cow.org/99feb_cwd_special.html

Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD): a spongiform encephalopathy (prion disease) in deer or elk that is closely related to mad cow disease, scrapie in sheep, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans. CWD has been reported in mule deer, black-tailed deer, white-tailed deer, Rocky Mountain elk, and possibly one pronghorn antelope [9, 4]. CWD transmits efficiently to mink and then to hamster experimentally [6, 9]. Tens of thousands of hunters in the Ft. Collins area have eaten tainted game from game processing facility pools [10]; efficiency of transmission to humans is unknown. The incubation period for kuru is 40 years (dated from cessation of exposure) and counting [9].

Origins of CWD: The first case of CWD was seen in 1967 in a captive mule deer at the Foothills Wildlife Research Station (operated by the Colorado Dept. of Wildlife) in Ft. Collins and was attributed then by station employees [10] to close confinement of deer to former (scrapie) sheep pasture or to horizontal transmission from sheep allowed [9] into the pens. The shortest known incubation time in deer is 17 months, dating the exposure back to 1965-66 or earlier. Surplus does were released back into the wild after fawning in the facility; the first case in free-ranging wild deer was seen in 1981. Other infected animals were shipped to zoos (Denver, Toronto, Laramie), game farms (see below), and similar research facilities in Colorado and Wyoming.

Alternate theories of CWD origin: These posit a naturally occurring prion genetic disease; possible but not supported by recent genotyping studies by O'Rourke [1]) or transmission at winter feeding stations via rendered downer cow protein (ie, a non-UK strain of bovine spongiform encephalopathy) or CWD deer or elk recycled as rendered road kill. CWD deer are commonly observed at a feeding station on Lexington Lane in Estes Park, Colorado [10].

Trace-back: A game farm, zoo, or research facility that sold an elk or deer to a second facility where CWD was later positively diagnosed for the first time. The trace-back farm is presumed to be contaminated even if it has never reported CWD. Examples: Colorado has numerous trace-back game farms among the 11 in the Ft. Collins disease epicenter; improbably, none of these have ever reported CWD. Ear tags had been discarded in the Oklahoma CWD elk case, causing uncertainty in trace-back (limited to Montana, Idaho, or Utah).

Trace-forward: A game farm, zoo, or research facility that bought an elk or deer from a contaminated facility (possibly in another state) where CWD was later positively diagnosed. Sometimes broadened to include animals imported from a state or region known to have CWD because under-reporting is rampant [the economic impacts are devastating]. Animals at the trace-forward facility must be closely monitored and not be allowed to furnish animals to still other game farms. Examples: Vermont has trace-forward elk from Colorado but does not require autopsy of adult elk deaths as recommended [1]. Trace-forward could not be conducted [1] on Nebraska elk sold at auction in Missouri and Colorado because records are not kept.

Exposed herds consist of trace-back plus trace-forward herds.
Ingress or egress: Deer and elk can escape or be released from game farm facilities and introduce the disease into wild cervids of that state.

Alternately, deer or elk attracted to plentiful feed or captive members of their own species and enter the large fenced pastures, sometimes fawning there and contracting disease. [1,4, 9] Typical initiating events are a tree falling on a fenceline during a storm or erosion at a stream or gully crossing. Fenceline contact of wild animals with captive animals (possibly nose rubbing, urine, faeces,or hay mites) in facilities that are not double-fenced may also suffice to transmit CWD [1,9]. Example: wild deer on the same premises as a captive elk herd acquired CWD in South Dakota (see A, B).

Conflict of interest: A state fish and game department that derives most or all of its salary and program revenue from the sale of game tags jeopardizes this revenue by disclosure of CWD or by safety warnings to hunters. This revenue model is applicable to all 11 western states. Also includes departments of agriculture for different reasons. Conflicts of interest can affect the design of monitoring programs, choice of sampling techniques and pathology method, disclosure of results, and non-adherence to the precautionary principle. Diagnosis: public relation releases from the agency equate absence of evidence to evidence of absence. Example: Colorado fish and game officials held a news conference in 1998 stating they would continue to enjoy eating venison from untested deer and elk from epidemic strongholds because it had not been proven to transmit to human [10], a vacuous reassurance as no study has ever been conducted.

There are ongoing studies on Mad Cow and the related disease, chronic wasting disease, in deer and Elk. There may be genetic factors and CWD is highly communicable. It often takes years for an exposure to show you have contracted the disease. Scientists continue to study Mad Cow.

21 Dec 99 Reuters World Report By Lyndsay Griffiths
Hundreds of thousands of British meat eaters might eventually die from the human form of mad cow disease but the scale of the epidemic will not be known for years, the government's chief medical officer said on Tuesday.
"There are still a lot of uncertainties about this disease," Professor Liam Donaldson told BBC radio. "We're not going to know for several years whether the size of the epidemic will be a small one, in other words in the hundreds, or a very large one, in the hundreds of thousands."

So far 48 Britons have died from the disease, which is always fatal, and the scare has crippled the British beef trade. Donaldson spoke after British and U.S. scientists said they had come up with very strong evidence that bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, or mad cow disease) and a new form of its human cousin, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), are the same.

BSE swept British herds in the 1980s, killing more than 175,000 cows. Officials were unconcerned until humans started coming down with a new variant of CJD, a brain-destroying disease normally seen in only one in a million people.

BSE and the new CJD have been strongly linked, but there had been little experimental evidence that the two are the same. Now the new research has shown such a link -- mice helped bolster the case that victims' families had been pleading for years -- but the actual scale of the epidemic remains unclear.

The European Commission this month started legal proceedings against France over its continued refusal to import British beef, despite an all-clear from European Union scientists. The executive Commission is also studying Germany's position after some regional governments voiced renewed doubts about Britain's beef.

Britain says it has cleaned up its act and its beef is now safe for export. But past damage is far harder to gauge. A long-running British inquiry into the crisis ended this month with a big question mark when it concluded that it was too soon to say if the 48 victims seen so far were "the tip of an iceberg of infection" yet to spread.

Relatives of the dead are not surprised by the huge numbers being bandied around. "It's a potential time bomb waiting to go off," said Malcolm Tibbert, whose wife Margaret died of CJD. Experts say the disease has such a long incubation period in humans that an epidemic could be seen among people who ate infected British beef decades from now.

"The possibility that a large section of the population is at high risk must be seriously entertained," said the U.S. and British researchers in their report, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

We (the US) don't consider Japan a major importer of US Beef. South Korea imports twice as much, at least four million pounds. Mexico buys 25 million pounds, Europe gets 6 million pounds. We export significant amounts of beef to nine countries, totally over 40,000,000 pounds of beef, annually.

Does that have an impact on the supply of beef in this country? ---- straight.

Does that increase the value of cattle sold by small farmers all across this country? ---- straight.

Does that help maintain or increase the value of dairy cows? Absolutely. Does the guy that sells registered Holsteins benefit from the reduction of 40 million pounds of beef in this country? Yes, any reduction in supply increases demand effecting the price.

Does the guy with a few range cattle get more for his cows when the US supply is reduced by 40 million? Yes, the little guy and the Agrabusinessman both benifit from a reduction in supply.

Haypoint your trying to explain away the reasons for NAIS. Yet any of your reasons do not make it seem any better. The beef market is controled by supply and demand, NOT whether NAIS is in place or not. The beef price will not change, when NAIS is in place.

Again NAIS is designed so it appeases foreign markets. They have said they will not buy unless we have something in place. Big ag's lightbulb went on, as well as the USDA, and wamo NAIS. Yet IMO NAIS should be more for the markets overseas. If a producer sells overseas, he has to comply to strict testing procedures.


The registered dairy industry will not benefit off of NAIS. Prices will not change, and there will be the same amount of buyers now and then. I dont think you understand, people buy buy buy, and simply dont care in some cases what they are getting. If this were the case, people wouldn't buy untested animals from auction barns, even with NAIS. Because NAIS doesn't test animals, which is what needs to be done to isolate disease. If an animal is tested BVD-PI, they are not allowed to any show whatsoever, they are also not allowed to any sale. You have to ship the animal..


Again. NAIS will not stop the spread of disease, thats a lie, downright lie. It will only allow them to trace it back, but not track disease. Because the ONLY diseases of great concern is both TB AND Hoof and Mouth. Yet the government is moving the lab to within the states (kansas). Seems odd they are making it mandatory next year, around the same time they are moving the lab, wonder if its their safe guard.

If Hoof and Mouth breaks out, NAIS wont make it any better. Tens of thousands will be slaughtered, with or without NAIS. You think it will make a difference, but dont be too sure about a program that hasn't even been used. You think it will reduce the amount of animals involved. Sorry but if a TB or H&M outbreak happens, NAIS wont matter at all.


Jeff

You also prove my point. BIG ag sells overseas, they sell the large quantities. I know plenty of people who sell their beef privately, and set their own price. The beef market does not effect them. The BIG guy is who it effects, and frankly I can give a rats $*@ about the big guy.


Jeff

How wonderful for you and others you know to be able to set the price for your livestock without regard to the established current value of those animals.

Me and others I know sell privately or at established markets with the price established by the market.

Your class envy makes it seem that you cannot be competitive with the big guy.

If you can set your own price, why not set it double what you currently charge? It is my contention that what you and I get at private sales is effected by the current market price. We cannot sell for far above what the products sells for on the open market.

The market price is the result of supply and demand. Export reduces supply and causes the value to increase. This happens all across the land, not just on the docks on the west coast. Big picture, Jeff, big picture.

You are making this a comparison of what country does the most for it's people. That's not the subject.

You think it's unAmerican to resent gov intrusion in our lives? Maybe you should go to one of the countries where the gov controls the people since you seem to be so in favor of that idea. Some of us like living in a free country and want to keep it that way. I for one resent anyone telling me I have to count my animals and report to them on how many of what I have. It's really none of their business.

Well, I guess we know at least one person who likes the "share the wealth" idea. Did you ever stop to think where that money you sucked up came from? It was taken from the pockets of your friends, neighbors, and other good people across this country. That's one of the reasons many of us can't afford to buy health insurance... our money is taken from us so it can be redistributed to "those in need".

If they want to know how many animals I have, they can set out on the road and count them, not start up a program that requires me to do it for them, and CHARGE me for doing it.

We shouldn't have to pay a tax on how many animals we raise. We raise them, we care for them, we loose money if they get sick, we pay to feed them, we take the gains or losses, but THEY collect the money from us for the work we do. How fair is that?

Exactly what benefit do you see in NAIS? Who will benefit? Who will pay the costs of it? I'm interested in the answers you have to these questions.

I dont sell beef, so I cant set my own price. When I did sell beef, we sold it at our price, not per lb per market. But what the people got was high quality beef, they knew where it was coming from, so they did not care. The supermarket, you have no idea where its coming from, and actually we dont buy from there. The meat tastes old, doesn't taste good at all. The local shop, gets all their meat mostly local. They too set their own price per lb, pay accordingly etc.



Thats a myth, back before the border was closed, back when things were being exported. The market was not as good as it was since Japan stopped buying and the border closed with Canada. People were receiving excellent prices for even dairy bull calves (holstein) at the market place. Once the border opened, the dealers tend to go to canada instead, and it floods the market. Show me where beef prices were higher when we were exporting more... Because I've seen over time meat prices increase in the stores, and that seems to be related more to what it costs to feed them. Its why tyson raised their prices, as their grain bill went up. It wasn't supply/demand..

The problem with this country, is we over produce. It happens in the milk market. Back when milk went to 24.00/cwt, all these BIG farms added on another 200-300 cows. The market is now 1.5% over produced. If we had a quota system like Canada, the price would stay consistent. If farmers only controlled the market better. More or less, under produce with milk, and stimulate price increases. Same can be done with beef.

You should be able to ask as much as you want for your product. If its a surperior product, and people want to buy it from you, because they know where its coming from, then good. Thats called Free Market Capitalism.


But it seems your against someone who wants to price their product, based on what they want to make. I priced my hay at the price I wanted, I didn't price it at 2.00 for 1st, and 2.50 for second for squares. I priced it at 3.50 for 1st and 4.50 for 2nd.. People bought it, because I sold a good product. But are you against that?


Jeff

What is funny are those who say its unamerican to resent the government. Its very much american to be for small government. Its UNamerican to be for big government. The founding fathers were true americans, they wanted small government. Since then, those who have made for bigger government, are not the true americans that once existed.


Jeff

If they want to know how many animals I have, they can set out on the road and count them, not start up a program that requires me to do it for them, and CHARGE me for doing it.
You’ve got that right, if they wanted to know how many animals you have they could do just that. So, it is clear that their push for NAIS isn’t so they can know how many animals you have. They don’t CHARGE you for doing it.

We shouldn't have to pay a tax on how many animals we raise. We raise them, we care for them, we loose money if they get sick, we pay to feed them, we take the gains or losses, but THEY collect the money from us for the work we do. How fair is that?
Where do you get the idea that anyone it taxing your animals? Clearly NAIS isn’t. Who is the THEY you think are collecting money from you?

Exactly what benefit do you see in NAIS? Who will benefit? Who will pay the costs of it? I'm interested in the answers you have to these questions.

NAIS is a data base, fairly cheap to maintain. Ear tags or implanted chips are cheap. Producers of livestock benefit thru increased demand thru consumer confidence in our products. Being able to track down diseased animals fast, limits the spread of diseases, limiting a widespread quarantine. The cost of maintaining a data base is a lot cheaper than wide spread quarintines and testing entire sections of the country. Tax payers pay for it, just as tax payers pay for the more costly “quarantine the state and test everything” plan we now have. So, taxpayers benefit, too.

I dont sell beef, so I cant set my own price. When I did sell beef, we sold it at our price, not per lb per market. But what the people got was high quality beef, they knew where it was coming from, so they did not care. The supermarket, you have no idea where its coming from, and actually we dont buy from there. The meat tastes old, doesn't taste good at all. The local shop, gets all their meat mostly local. They too set their own price per lb, pay accordingly etc.

When you sold at “our price” was it based on the size of the cow? Selling high quality beef should bring more than run of the mill cattle. However your prices still have to be realistic and when you move far above market prices, demand drops. Notice in the Supermarkets that sell “regular” and organic fruits and vegetables. When the organic price exceeds the regular produce, demand diminishes.

The local shop has to watch market trends and pay market prices for their meat. They cannot maintain a steady market for their meat if it becomes too costly, no matter how good it tastes.

Thats a myth, back before the border was closed, back when things were being exported. The market was not as good as it was since Japan stopped buying and the border closed with Canada. People were receiving excellent prices for even dairy bull calves (holstein) at the market place. Once the border opened, the dealers tend to go to canada instead, and it floods the market. Show me where beef prices were higher when we were exporting more... Because I've seen over time meat prices increase in the stores, and that seems to be related more to what it costs to feed them. Its why tyson raised their prices, as their grain bill went up. It wasn't supply/demand..

As I said earlier, Japan isn’t a major importer of our beef. The loss of Canadian beef reduced our supply, driving up prices. The opening of their border added beef to our supply, reducing prices. That is how it works.

The problem with this country, is we over produce. It happens in the milk market. Back when milk went to 24.00/cwt, all these BIG farms added on another 200-300 cows. The market is now 1.5% over produced. If we had a quota system like Canada, the price would stay consistent. If farmers only controlled the market better. More or less, under produce with milk, and stimulate price increases. Same can be done with beef.

Yes, we do tend to over produce. Then the price we get for our products drops below what it cost to produce and we move away from that product towards a product that has a better profit margin. Then that creates a glut in that product. When milk is high, most dairy farmers tend to add cows to cash in on that profit.
WE don’t have a quota system, we have freedom. You aren’t suggesting a move towards more government control are you? If we could get people to drink more milk or create a market for our milk in another country, using up that over production, the price would stay at 24.00/cwt. Reduce production to stimulate prices as you suggest has never worked in the farming community. Our only hope in keeping prices up is to increase the demand for our products. That is why an export market is so important, even when it is small. Every bit helps.

You should be able to ask as much as you want for your product. If its a surperior product, and people want to buy it from you, because they know where its coming from, then good. Thats called Free Market Capitalism.

You can ask as much for it as you want. Getting it is a whole different thing. If you can find a steady market for cattle priced far above the going price, you are in a rare situation. Most of the rest of us small farmers have to rely on pricing close to the market prices.

But it seems your against someone who wants to price their product, based on what they want to make. I priced my hay at the price I wanted, I didn't price it at 2.00 for 1st, and 2.50 for second for squares. I priced it at 3.50 for 1st and 4.50 for 2nd.. People bought it, because I sold a good product. But are you against that?

If you can get a priemum for some baled hay, I’m fine with that. You are to be commended. I sold my hay above the going rate. Mostly it was because I was willing to sell my high quality hay a few bales at a time. Many farmers are unwilling to run out to the barn and load up the back of a pickup or SUV. That is a market that is open to small producers. Same for eggs. I can sell a couple dozen eggs per day for well above the market price. But if I want to make a living at it, I have to depend on market pricing.