Canadian Food Inspection Agency Seizes Remaining Animals From Vanderhoof Ranch

Monday, February 04, 2008 02:09 PM

Vanderhoof, B.C. - A Vanderhoof area rancher says she is devastated that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency would not allow her to bury her pet llama on their ranch near Vanderhoof and instead loaded the animal into a trailer and removed it from the ranch today.

The llama known as,” Monty “, came to the farm abused and suffering from various bruises, an injured eye, plus other wounds from being badly treated. “We nursed that animal back to health, he was part of this family and all we wanted to do is to have him buried on our farm”, said Lynn Weinhardt.

The llama was seized after Weinhardt was handed a court order last Friday from the Federal Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

The CFIA earlier had seized and destroyed 46 cows, 2 bulls, and 17 calves taken from the farm after a bull tested positive in a Quebec slaughter house for Bovine TB. The CFIA had said that the bull had come from the Weinhardt ranch, to a feed lot in Innisfail, Alberta, then to Ponoka Alberta and then to a slaughter house in Quebec. Weinhardt says she believes that the CFIA got the wrong bull, and there had been a mix up.

Today, as the RCMP stood guard, the CFIA loaded 35 sheep, 2 goats and the llama into a trailer and the animals were removed from the farm. On hand was Dr. Lynn Holt, representing the CFIA.

Lynn Weinhardt says her family is facing a financial disaster." They took all of our livestock last fall and we have only received a total of $ 1,262.76 compensation. That is all the money we have been handed over that period time to run this ranch and to live on." The check she says was from the slaughter house for payment for her livestock. " We never received a single cent for the 42 pigs, just $19.13 cents for each of the cows. "

"We have not had a cent of income since September 27^th-2007" Weinhardt says.

Pat Bell Minister of Agriculture says there is nothing the Proivince can do "Our hands are tied when it comes to the CFIA they are not our jurisdiction. The federal government has responsibility over the matter." Bell says he can work towards some financial assistance "We will step in to ensure that this rancher receives appropriate compensation for her livestock. We already have extended loans to other ranchers in the area who were affected by the seizure of the cattle from Weinhardt. "

Weinhardt stands firm that this is a case of mistaken identity "There has not been one additional case of bovine TB from any of the other 1,000 animals that were tested from this area or those that came in contact with our bull. I have maintained from the beginning that this was not our bull."

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Monday, February 04, 2008 02:09 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: justamom on February 4 2008 3:01 PM

My heart goes out to these people and thier animals. This has got to be just so devestating. Knowing you aren't responsible for this infected animal makes matter worse. Its just another case of the 'little guy, getting stompted on' ..and left out in the cold!..I wonder if any of the other people that came in contact with the bull have had thier animals seized and distroyed..? ..funny we have only heard of this incident..how many times has that animal changed locations since leaving Vanderhoof?..what about the other animals in the stockyard..where are they..?..

and now we arent allowed to butcher our own animals and sell to the neighbor for human consumption. That is now against the law too. They have to be inspected by a federally approved facility...how is a person supposed to make an honest living in this day and age?..at least I know what my neighbor fed thier cow for crying out loud!

My grandfather would be rolling in the grave if he knew how things had changed here..he was an avid cattleman and lived off the land..I am honestly glad he isnt here to see this mess we are in! is this what they call a free country..huhh..I think I have missed something..land of oppurtunity..for whom?

Posted by: ammonra on February 4 2008 4:28 PM

The other side of the coin is that if it turns out it was their bull, despite their insistence it was not, then the CFIA has saved a possible outbreak of TB in the area.

Of course the farmers should be properly compensated at realistic levels, but that is an issue that has to be taken up with the two MPs for the area. The CIFA merely works within the law protecting the food supply and making sure we don't all get killed from disease or toxins. Personally, I think food safety should come before snybody's animals.

Posted by: thereasonableman on February 5 2008 4:30 AM

Our food supply is in danger of becoming tainted. Do you understand the ramifications of that ? Nothing is tantamount to protecting the quality of our food supply.

I do feel for this rancher, and compensation should be in order. That animal went clear across the country and could have picked up the disease anywhere.

However, you need to understand that the need to protect the public necessitates removal of the animals to keep the disease from making it's way back into the food chain.

A large number of the diseased chickens, for instance, were incinerated.

Lastly, is there a vaccine for Bovine TB ? Is this a result of the rancher's negligence, or failure to follow a proper vaccine regimen ? Is this something that should have been prevented ?

I'm not a farmer, and I'd like to know.

Posted by: justamom on February 5 2008 7:01 AM

I think what some dont understand is this disease can be contracted even from wild animals. Badgers and other burrowing animals can cause contamination.

It does not mean that this farmers responsible and certainly does not mean that this animal contracted the disease in VH.

If they tested 1000+ other animals that may have come in contact with the 'contaminated animal' and they tested negative. Perhaps it could very well be a case of wrong identity?

Posted by: metalman on February 5 2008 1:31 PM

Gee whiz reasonable man, thanks for explaining all that to us. How about explaining the total lack of common sense in how the feds handled this for us too? This is another example of the government white collars reading from their bible, there is no room for interpretation, no recourse but to destroy every living animal on the ranch. Heres a thought, why don't they burn the buildings and quarantine the people too? Or, how about weekly testing on the suspect ranch, to see if there is even any T.B. there in the first place. And how kind of gutless Pat to "extend loans to the family" what a hero and first class politician. Now that the family has no income, thanks to bureaucrats, the government will LEND them money. How nice. I wonder what the terms will be? I know one thing, when the government wants the money back, they will collect it back at all costs. Am I:
Bitter? maybe.
Experienced? definitely.
metalman.

Posted by: thereasonableman on February 6 2008 4:17 AM

"Heres a thought, why don't they burn the buildings and quarantine the people too?"

Be careful what you wish for. The CFIA came under harsh criticism for their handling of the bird flu outbreak. Expect them to over-react or take measures that seem exceedingly harsh. They are primarily responsible for prevention of disease entering the food chain, and really, they have their hands full these days.

I don't feel their actions were out of line. I don't feel it would be the right idea to waste the suspect animal and test and monitor (take a chance) with the rest.

I do feel that unless it can be shown that the rancher was negligent (i.e. the rancher brought about the situation through their actions or lack of actions, and should have known better) they should be entitled to compensation out of fairness, not loans. If it is not their fault that the animal became diseased, then the disease could have been manifested at any of many waypoints in it's movements, or may be a false positive or the wrong animal.

Their actions in removing and destroying the remaining animals were not unjust or uncalled for. It is the prescribed remedy.

Posted by: metalman on February 6 2008 8:41 AM

Yeah, you are right, Rman, and I over reacted in my comment/rant yesterday.
I firmly believe though, that the feds appear to be acting somewhat heavy handedly on this case. I am very familiar with all aspects of producing meat on a small scale for human consumption, but admit to a lack of experience in the ramifications of actions taken or not taken in the case of potential communication of diseases in the food chain. For the CFIA to adequately protect the nation, I suppose that harsh measures may need to be taken at times. Bottom line is, I do not have all the facts in the Vanderhoof case, and am reacting to what the media reports to us.
metalman.