The meeting with the USDA in Washington was a great success. In fact Dr. Clifford made it very clear that if we had tried to eliminate the standards that they would have went to public comment as written. Dr. Clifford made it very clear that USDA stands with industry and granted the CWD working group an additional 60 days to work on the standards to get them more agreeable to industry and made it very clear to everyone in the room that he expected progress. I wish all of the people who complain about NADeFA could have participated. I will always fight to have the best rules possible in my state and the rest of the nation. For anyone to act like Shawn Schafer would not do the same only embarasses themselves. Shawn and myself have argued and shouted at each other in meetings before when we disagreed but we both knew we were fighting for what we believed to be right. I feel thats what is going on here as well but everyone gets personal or takes it personal. The reality is we came together and made the right decision. To quote Laurie Seale to the USDA folks at the meeting "you have made me very happy here today". Now lets let the working group, work.
Agreed Tim and thank you for the update....I know there are lots working very hard on our behalf and I am grateful for it!! I am grateful for NADefa and ACA as I know there are a lot of hours going into this issue from both of these groups as well as many others!! Thanks again for all the hard work!!
Tim,
I never heard Dr. Clifford state that if we had tried to eliminate the standards they would have went to public comment anyway....what he said was if the standards working group runs into a brick wall prior to the 60 day extention, the document is going to public comment anyway. (we have it audio taped just for the record) He also let it be known that this working group is not a consensus working group, but rather for input only....one can read that however you want, but I still say we will not know how the final document will read until it may be too late....he made it perfectly clear that he knew the industry was divided on the issue (a spy was sending him our emails) and because of this, he was going forward with the process.
As for me stating I was happy, that is a true statement....when Dr. Clifford stated this document is only a suggested guidance document and state vets can throw it in the garbage, that made me very happy! I know some of your state vets will use this document as a bible, but for those of us with state vets that have been through the CWD fiasco for more than a decade and because of their experience dealing with the political disease, this document is something states like MN, WI, SD, etc. can get by without....we are doing what we can to make the needed changes to the standards, but if all else fails in the process it will be every state for themselves because the document is no longer going to go away. We had the opportunity and had state vets supporting us scrapping it, but that opportunity is gone so we have to make the best of it.
Laurie
I never heard Dr. Clifford state that if we had tried to eliminate the standards they would have went to public comment anyway....what he said was if the standards working group runs into a brick wall prior to the 60 day extention, the document is going to public comment anyway. (we have it audio taped just for the record) He also let it be known that this working group is not a consensus working group, but rather for input only....one can read that however you want, but I still say we will not know how the final document will read until it may be too late....he made it perfectly clear that he knew the industry was divided on the issue (a spy was sending him our emails) and because of this, he was going forward with the process.
As for me stating I was happy, that is a true statement....when Dr. Clifford stated this document is only a suggested guidance document and state vets can throw it in the garbage, that made me very happy! I know some of your state vets will use this document as a bible, but for those of us with state vets that have been through the CWD fiasco for more than a decade and because of their experience dealing with the political disease, this document is something states like MN, WI, SD, etc. can get by without....we are doing what we can to make the needed changes to the standards, but if all else fails in the process it will be every state for themselves because the document is no longer going to go away. We had the opportunity and had state vets supporting us scrapping it, but that opportunity is gone so we have to make the best of it.
Laurie
I would sure like to know how we lost the opportunity to have the whole thing scrapped and who was the cause of us losing that opportunity......because I am NOT supporting someone or an organization that is not working for our best interests!! This is very disturbing to read.....something just doesn't feel right after reading this!!
Wow Laurie, Sitting in that room you knew exactly what he meant. Who recorded the meeting? If so, I would think that you would make that recording available for all the deer farmers across the country to listen to. I see why there is so much disagreement out there. We sat in the same meeting and heard 2 totally different things. To say you are not sure what he meant about the working group not having to be a consensus is laughable. The fact is to have came home and said it went great would have been positive and that seems to be impossible. Maybe it doen't fit everyones agenda. I don't have one except to make sure and fight to protect the industry the best way I know. Every person sitting in that room knew that the right decision had been made. This is why nobody wants to come here to explain things in a truthful manner
Joined Oct 2009
3,165 Posts | 1+
upstate ny
Tim Condict said:
Maybe we could hear it in the next ACA phone meeting. I sure would like to hear it as we just got off of our Ny phone meeting and i heard from our state president that was in Washington pretty much the same thing Tim said. Have no doubt you guys will get it figured out for the best of the industry, Maybe even all states. Kudos Tim!
Tim,
I am listening to the tape once again and the statement you made about Dr. Clifford stating if we had tried to eliminate the standards that they would have published them anyway is just not true. Dr. Clifford stated almost word for word what I said with the exception of the standards going to public comment prior to the 60 days if they hit a road block...I did hear that part wrong...he stated that after 60 days the document is going to public comment even if we "hit a log jamb". I will try to post the link for all to listen to what was said so that everyone can hear what was really said. You did hear it different than me, but the tape tells the true story.
I do agree with what you stated in regards to it being a good meeting....I walked out of that room very happy with what was said, especially when Dr. Clifford stated this is a guidance document only and state vets can throw it in the garbage if they want to. I also was very happy that Dr. Clifford stated this was going to be a control program and not an eradication program. He also stated he did not want to put us out of business....this was huge step in the right direction. He also came on the working group's last conference call to set the record straight with the working group. I have high hopes we can straighten this document out. I know the state vets and the cervid industry will be in consensus in regards to this document....if APHIS and the wildlife agencies follow Dr. Clifford's direction, we will be in good shape. Time will tell how it all ends up.
Laurie
I am listening to the tape once again and the statement you made about Dr. Clifford stating if we had tried to eliminate the standards that they would have published them anyway is just not true. Dr. Clifford stated almost word for word what I said with the exception of the standards going to public comment prior to the 60 days if they hit a road block...I did hear that part wrong...he stated that after 60 days the document is going to public comment even if we "hit a log jamb". I will try to post the link for all to listen to what was said so that everyone can hear what was really said. You did hear it different than me, but the tape tells the true story.
I do agree with what you stated in regards to it being a good meeting....I walked out of that room very happy with what was said, especially when Dr. Clifford stated this is a guidance document only and state vets can throw it in the garbage if they want to. I also was very happy that Dr. Clifford stated this was going to be a control program and not an eradication program. He also stated he did not want to put us out of business....this was huge step in the right direction. He also came on the working group's last conference call to set the record straight with the working group. I have high hopes we can straighten this document out. I know the state vets and the cervid industry will be in consensus in regards to this document....if APHIS and the wildlife agencies follow Dr. Clifford's direction, we will be in good shape. Time will tell how it all ends up.
Laurie
Not sure this is going to work, but if it doesn't and you want to listen to the whole meeting with Dr. Clifford and Dr. Klein, let me know and I will forward the email to you to download Dropbox....the audio is just as good as being right there in the meeting....all of you can hear exactly what was said and no one has to take anyone's word for what was said.
Laurie
Laurie used Dropbox to share a file with you!
Click here to view.
© 2013 Dropbox
Laurie
Laurie used Dropbox to share a file with you!
Click here to view.
© 2013 Dropbox
Laurie,
Please email me a link I would like to listen to the meeting. My email is [email protected] you for having this available for us to review.
Please email me a link I would like to listen to the meeting. My email is [email protected] you for having this available for us to review.
Laurie,
Thanks so much for sending me the audio of the meeting.........I Highly recommend that any of you interested in where things stand regarding the federal rules / and standards are concerned for our industry....... to get this link from Laurie as it is very informative in regards to these issues.....thanks again Laurie for the link.......
Thanks so much for sending me the audio of the meeting.........I Highly recommend that any of you interested in where things stand regarding the federal rules / and standards are concerned for our industry....... to get this link from Laurie as it is very informative in regards to these issues.....thanks again Laurie for the link.......
Joined Oct 2009
3,165 Posts | 1+
upstate ny
ddwhitetails said:
D,I really would like to hear what you thought of this meeting and what in your mind you took away from listening to the meeting!
Mike,
I listened to ot last night at 1:00 in the morning and I only got half way through before it shut off on me.......so I will be happy to let you know my thoughts after I get the chance to hear the whole thing........but what I did hear was very informative and there were parts I liked and parts I did not like........one of the big things I did not like is they still feel it is beneficial to have the wildlife agencies involved in these processes.......they hate our industry and everything about it.....so I do not feel they are any kind of benefit for us At all......I will be listening to the meeting again sometime today when I am more alert and will be happy to post my thoughts.......definitely a good audio to listen too though!
I listened to ot last night at 1:00 in the morning and I only got half way through before it shut off on me.......so I will be happy to let you know my thoughts after I get the chance to hear the whole thing........but what I did hear was very informative and there were parts I liked and parts I did not like........one of the big things I did not like is they still feel it is beneficial to have the wildlife agencies involved in these processes.......they hate our industry and everything about it.....so I do not feel they are any kind of benefit for us At all......I will be listening to the meeting again sometime today when I am more alert and will be happy to post my thoughts.......definitely a good audio to listen too though!
Joined Oct 2009
3,165 Posts | 1+
upstate ny
He also stated he did not want to put us out of business....this was huge step in the right direction. Quote
So you did not get the above words that Laurie wrote in post #87 out of what you heard so far?
So you did not get the above words that Laurie wrote in post #87 out of what you heard so far?
Spring has finally come in Minnesota, so we are busy in the fields. I want to thank all those that went with us to Washington. We had a great time, and spent some good time with some great deer people. Last Friday we also had our day at the Capital with our state legislatures. So I am sick of meetings with both Washington and St. Paul in less than 2 weeks. One thing I saw was so different was the level of security. At the state capital the only security was a state trooper at the door of the House chamber and one at the Senate chamber. I felt better when walking into the Republican center when there was a sign posted "Guns welcome here".
I haven't read all the posts lately, because we are really busy outside now, but I was asked to give my take on Washington.
One thing I will bring up is, after meeting with our state ag committees on friday. You need to explain to your state legislatures that your BAH is being forced to implement an "unfunded federal mandate" that our state vet neither needs or wants. Your state legislatures will go through the roof on this one. If the rule is not satisfactory to us, this may be a good recourse for us. Let several key Agri. states call up the Sec. Of Ag. [Clifford's boss] and talk to him about an unfunded mandate. Let Patty Kline and Dr. Clifford explain to a Republican run house Ag. Committee why they are forcing a rule on the states, with no funding to go with it. Remember Clifford said funding was a matter of priority. Apparently CWD is not important to enough to get funding. He also said that funding was going to programs that would be a success. I will let you read into that what you want.
I see Keith Warren has a video out. I haven't had time to watch it but I am sure it is good. Maybe we need to send these videos out in a mass mailing to key legislatures. After meeting with both state in federal legislatures in the last two weeks, I know there is great support for industry and jobs. These people do not want to anything to hinder economic progress.
The best thing I heard from Clifford at the meeting was when he said the Standards where optional, not mandatory. Patty then said correct. Clifford said it was up to the states whether they wanted to implement or follow the standards. The states still had to follow the rules and the certification process, but didn't have to use the standards.
The problem I see with the standards are on page 3. The Introduction page.
Part A. Herd Certification Program
These Program Standards are the minimum standards adopted and approved by the Deputy Administrator.
Part B. Guidance on Response to CWD-Affected Herds.
The CWD regulations at 9 CFR part 55 describe minimum requirements in response to finding of a CWD-affected herd in accordance with the national CWD HCP.
Do any of you see the words optional or suggested? Or that these standards don't have to be followed. If you are a state vet., I would say that these read like law. They have to make it more clear in the wording of the first line of each paragraph. That sets the tone for the whole paragraph.
Even though the states aren't required to follow the Standards, the problem I see with it , it gives the states vets. the justification to do the severe actions that some of the states that are imposing on their breeders, like N.Y. and Iowa. Also, It will make it less likely for states to "relax" their policies, as THEY seem fit.
Another thing that I think all of us were shocked to here, was that it would go to public comment without industries blessing. We were lead to believe if we went forward with "the process", we would have to give the standards our "blessing", before it went to public comment. This is not true. It will go to public comment, even though we don't like it , or even object to it. Remember Clifford said that members were placed on the committee for input, not consensus.
The biggest thing I see is that we all need to come together on this. We all want all deer breeders, whatever state they live in, to be able to do the thing they love, to raise deer.
Gary Olson
I haven't read all the posts lately, because we are really busy outside now, but I was asked to give my take on Washington.
One thing I will bring up is, after meeting with our state ag committees on friday. You need to explain to your state legislatures that your BAH is being forced to implement an "unfunded federal mandate" that our state vet neither needs or wants. Your state legislatures will go through the roof on this one. If the rule is not satisfactory to us, this may be a good recourse for us. Let several key Agri. states call up the Sec. Of Ag. [Clifford's boss] and talk to him about an unfunded mandate. Let Patty Kline and Dr. Clifford explain to a Republican run house Ag. Committee why they are forcing a rule on the states, with no funding to go with it. Remember Clifford said funding was a matter of priority. Apparently CWD is not important to enough to get funding. He also said that funding was going to programs that would be a success. I will let you read into that what you want.
I see Keith Warren has a video out. I haven't had time to watch it but I am sure it is good. Maybe we need to send these videos out in a mass mailing to key legislatures. After meeting with both state in federal legislatures in the last two weeks, I know there is great support for industry and jobs. These people do not want to anything to hinder economic progress.
The best thing I heard from Clifford at the meeting was when he said the Standards where optional, not mandatory. Patty then said correct. Clifford said it was up to the states whether they wanted to implement or follow the standards. The states still had to follow the rules and the certification process, but didn't have to use the standards.
The problem I see with the standards are on page 3. The Introduction page.
Part A. Herd Certification Program
These Program Standards are the minimum standards adopted and approved by the Deputy Administrator.
Part B. Guidance on Response to CWD-Affected Herds.
The CWD regulations at 9 CFR part 55 describe minimum requirements in response to finding of a CWD-affected herd in accordance with the national CWD HCP.
Do any of you see the words optional or suggested? Or that these standards don't have to be followed. If you are a state vet., I would say that these read like law. They have to make it more clear in the wording of the first line of each paragraph. That sets the tone for the whole paragraph.
Even though the states aren't required to follow the Standards, the problem I see with it , it gives the states vets. the justification to do the severe actions that some of the states that are imposing on their breeders, like N.Y. and Iowa. Also, It will make it less likely for states to "relax" their policies, as THEY seem fit.
Another thing that I think all of us were shocked to here, was that it would go to public comment without industries blessing. We were lead to believe if we went forward with "the process", we would have to give the standards our "blessing", before it went to public comment. This is not true. It will go to public comment, even though we don't like it , or even object to it. Remember Clifford said that members were placed on the committee for input, not consensus.
The biggest thing I see is that we all need to come together on this. We all want all deer breeders, whatever state they live in, to be able to do the thing they love, to raise deer.
Gary Olson
Mike, I did not hear those actual words per say......And I only got half way through before losing the feed.......However, I do need to listen to it again as it was late and it shut off on me half way through.....but I am very grateful to have this to listen too that is for sure....I am also grateful to all those who took the time to be present on our behalf at Washington.......I do like the fact that the Standards once finalized are still a work in progress and can be tweaked / changed as we move forward with new research or technology that may support more favorable language and regulations for us in the future...it does seem that they are however trying to be pushed through without the industries true blessings.......also, I am not listening to all of this to try and find out who is right or wrong with what they may or may not have said on these threads.........I am listening to it to better educate myself on where things stand with the Federal rules and standards going forward for our Industry......looking forward to listen to it again (in full) later when I get home......Gary I was writing the same time as you.....and I agree with what you said about the Standards being put out to the public whether the Industry gave it it's blessings or not.......seems they are under the gun to get this through within a certain time frame and are not going to allow it to be held up by us or anyone for that matter.......again.....the only good thing I heard from it so far is the Standards even once be put out to the public are still a work in progress........I too agree it is disturbing that our BAH is being forced to implement a NON FUNDED Mandate that the state vet neither needs or wants......we need to be reimbursed for any losses incurred due to CWD which I do believe is more of a political disease (as stated in Keith Warrens video) more so than anything else!
Dennis,
The problem I have with the way this process has gone so far is if they aren't willing to fix the serious issues now, there is no way there are going to come back in and fix them a year from now...industry reps and state vets have stood firm saying let's fix it now, not later. If there were to be new research or a vaccine made available, then I could see them coming back to make those changes
Anyone who has listened in to the working group's calls can tell you how difficult APHIS has been in regards to industry's requested changes. With Dr. Clifford's assistance, we are hopeful that is going to change.
As for Dr. Clifford's comment about not wanting to put us out of business, that comment is only stated by him one time in the meeting and it is about 3/4 of the way through the tape. He also stated it numerous times to Charly and Rhonda in their meeting with him (Rhonda can verify to that). That meeting is where he also stated some of the other things I posted such as who the person is who is sending him the emails letting him know that industry was divided on the issue. Rhonda can also verify that for you non believers who aren't trusting what I am saying.
Laurie
The problem I have with the way this process has gone so far is if they aren't willing to fix the serious issues now, there is no way there are going to come back in and fix them a year from now...industry reps and state vets have stood firm saying let's fix it now, not later. If there were to be new research or a vaccine made available, then I could see them coming back to make those changes
Anyone who has listened in to the working group's calls can tell you how difficult APHIS has been in regards to industry's requested changes. With Dr. Clifford's assistance, we are hopeful that is going to change.
As for Dr. Clifford's comment about not wanting to put us out of business, that comment is only stated by him one time in the meeting and it is about 3/4 of the way through the tape. He also stated it numerous times to Charly and Rhonda in their meeting with him (Rhonda can verify to that). That meeting is where he also stated some of the other things I posted such as who the person is who is sending him the emails letting him know that industry was divided on the issue. Rhonda can also verify that for you non believers who aren't trusting what I am saying.
Laurie
Something interesting, on a comment Clifford made about the wild deer herd. He said, "Wild deer have adapted to urban life, some states feed them, they are no longer wildlife in the true sense. Many of these cases are treated like captive herds. They have the same risks as the captive herds. He agreed that the states need to do a better job of population control."
This would be good ammo to use against QDMA and some of these hunting associations, that are always slamming our preserves.
Gary
This would be good ammo to use against QDMA and some of these hunting associations, that are always slamming our preserves.
Gary
Laurie,
I agree.......I do not like that it seems they are trying to get things pushed through with or without the Industries blessings......kind of seems like they are under the gun to get something passed by a certain time frame. We are the ones that have to live with these Standards and Rules and our voice needs to be heard and respected. It is encouraging to hear Dr. Cliffords supportive comments.....but there are a lot of things that still need to be addressed.....there are things that we just can not except as an Industry in these standards........Laurie I am certainly not listening to this to try and see who may or may not have stated something correctly on these forums......I am grateful for everything ALL of you are doing on our behalf as an industry.......we have a long ways to go but it does seem that there Is some headway being made.........My question is why don't we use the cattle industry and the mad cow disease as leverage towards our cause more often??. That disease is a much more serious Disease than CWD and they do not have near the regulations we face and they have funding........makes no sense!!
I agree.......I do not like that it seems they are trying to get things pushed through with or without the Industries blessings......kind of seems like they are under the gun to get something passed by a certain time frame. We are the ones that have to live with these Standards and Rules and our voice needs to be heard and respected. It is encouraging to hear Dr. Cliffords supportive comments.....but there are a lot of things that still need to be addressed.....there are things that we just can not except as an Industry in these standards........Laurie I am certainly not listening to this to try and see who may or may not have stated something correctly on these forums......I am grateful for everything ALL of you are doing on our behalf as an industry.......we have a long ways to go but it does seem that there Is some headway being made.........My question is why don't we use the cattle industry and the mad cow disease as leverage towards our cause more often??. That disease is a much more serious Disease than CWD and they do not have near the regulations we face and they have funding........makes no sense!!
ddwhitetails said:
Government Wildlife Agencies are in competition with our industry plain and simple. If someone purchases a deer or elk from me or you, that person may not purchase a hunting license from the Wildlife Agency.
No good input, for our industry, will come from the Government Wildlife Agencies. They themselves are unwilling to follow the laws and regulations that are being forced on our industry yet these Wildlife Agencies will do everything they can to influence laws and regulations that will destroy our industry in an attempt to eliminate the competition.
With these Government Wildlife Agencies, this is not an issue about controlling a disease. It's about eliminating the competition.
Similar threads
