stampede steer disqualified the facts and real problem

[cattlecountry]

You guys seem to be a week behind.
  The facts of the matter is not whether the steer had dugs in him or not but the process that failed the individuals.
1. The young individuals did ask the vet for anafin the vet was the one who said to use Banamine. If the vet had said none i am sure none would be given.
2. At the time the blood was drawn the vet was asked again and he said yes he remembered giving permission and they were fine as the slaughter was not for 10 days.
3. The reserve grand champion steer owners were present and witnessed the vet giving permission and have come forward.
4. The steer committee members who in rule 19 state make all the descisions on all rules were never consulted and didn't even know anything about what was going on except the president.
5. The steer was supposed to go to a meat processors for ten days. They processors went to pick up the steer and it was gone it had been took by the competition to there place for 2 weeks then to another vet clinic.
6. Owners were never made aware of where or what was being done to the steer.
7. Stampede board to this date has and will not release the blood tests on drugs to the owner. The owner had to get a lawyer to try and get the results.
8. Vice president of steer committee felt it was so wrong what happened here that he actually resigned
9. Stampede board in front of steer committee member wanted owner to sign a waiver admitting to drug and disqualification but refused to produce the evidence of the blood tests. Owner refused to sign without the evidence presented.

The problem here is the process that took place and some young individuals are being made an example of. The fact is the officials let the individuals down. They individuals were trying to be honest and if the vet had said No there would not have been drugs in the steer. And yes no blood msamples were ever taken before and the Champion junior steers were not tested that day either. It was clear this steer was targeted. What really didn't help was a clear grudge between the stampede committee president and his son with one individual who helped get the steer ready. Is this political? Yes! As adults we mentor and guide our young people. In this case when young individuals come forward with a problem eg. to the vet. We as adults and in this case officials need to take control of the situation to guide and advise as best we can in accordance to the rules and regulations. When we fail as adults and officials we should take responsibilty for our actions. For 3 weeks the owners were not made aware of what was going on and here is the problem, it is his cfia tag in that steer and when the steer is possibly going to be going through a bunch of testing and analysis shouldn't the owner be kept aware. Who knows what is being done to the steer or put into the steer or even if the steer is treated to the same degree the previous owners would have. Like the owner said " We would all look like a bunch of idiots if the steer showed up bse positive or something like that and crippled the cattle industry again for the sake of politics". Its not about winning a steer show. This process put people in harms way and the stampede board felt the owners had no right to know. And yes the stampede board admitted that the steer still and to this date is still onwed by the owners and now the steer 3 weeks later is back at its rightful home. I say cogratulations to Riley Chalack of Carstairs and Ryan jackson of Vermont. You guys raised one hell of a steer. To bring a steer back from an injury and to take the time to care and nurture that injury took guts and dedication. You guys may have  lost the title but you still won the show. Two kids from two countries brought together to win, I think its neat!! 

 

[aj]

Yaaaaaa lets go USA ......lets go USA......lets go USA....lets go USA!

 

[cattlecountry]

Lol Yes Aj it was a usa steer, an Eye Candy in fact.

 

[DL]

You seem to have a lot of "facts" so tell me who gave the Banamine? What route was used? Was it given according to the label? Was the vet the Stampede vet or the owners vet? Why was it given? How many times? When was it given in relationship to the drug test?

And actually cc I think you missed the point - if you are raising cattle, doesn't matter if they are show cattle or not, legally in the US and Canada they are food animals and subject to specific rules, laws and regulations regarding drug use. If you (generic) don't know this and don't think about this every single time you give a bovine a drug, if you don't read and understand and follow the label, if you don't understand the concept of extra label drug use and it's ramifications regarding violative residues then you (generic) are the problem - not the show committee, the veterinarian, the competition, Mother Theresa or Walter Payton - if you raise cattle you and you alone are responsible for safety of the product - in the US when a drug residue is found the FDA doesn't send a letter to the show committee, the veterinarian, the competition, Mother Theresa or Walter Payton - it goes to you. It doesn't matter how hard you worked, how young you are or that you nursed the lame steer back to a modicum of soundness - your steer - you are responsible for drug use and drug residue

 

[cattlecountry]

DL When a police officer tells you to proceed through a stop sign and you do as he says cause he is the official at the time do you do anything different. Yes DL i am glad it is so clear to you. But the point here is the process in the manner it was handled and the lack of comunication from owner of the steer to the board plus lack of comunication with the stampede steer committee who is supposed to make the ruling descisions. I don't care if the steer won or had Banamine. This is simply about process, lack of information and communication. What if your  steer went to the competitors place and the competitor tampered with your steer or did something to it that threatened your livelyhood as a farmer or rancher. Don't be nieve! Anything that is found in that steer whether it is the owners fault or something due to tampering or done in this case at the competitors place goes back to the originating herd in this case the cfia tag holder and the herd in usa. You just don't mess with and risk people in this way. I am sure our USA counterparts appreciate the sloppy and lack of respect for the owners! Remember there is a farm in the U.S that is at risk here too! You just don't let other people do what they want with your cattle without being informed. That is irresponsible and just plain lack of respect. And yes i think as cattle owners we are all very aware of drugs and slaughter rules and regulations. Careful DL i think cattle owners are very smart and are very capable of reading a label.

 

[knabe]

we don't have all the facts.

so let's jump to conclusions.

we should start burning people at the stake.

 

[RyanChandler]

Gotta love the transparency of sanctioned events  (lol)

 

[cattlecountry]

Couldn't agree with knabe more, i just presented the fact that were made public. In the end we will see how thos rolls out!

 

[rmbcows]

You seem to have a lot of "facts" so tell me who gave the Banamine? What route was used? Was it given according to the label? Was the vet the Stampede vet or the owners vet? Why was it given? How many times? When was it given in relationship to the drug test?

And actually cc I think you missed the point - if you are raising cattle, doesn't matter if they are show cattle or not, legally in the US and Canada they are food animals and subject to specific rules, laws and regulations regarding drug use. If you (generic) don't know this and don't think about this every single time you give a bovine a drug, if you don't read and understand and follow the label, if you don't understand the concept of extra label drug use and it's ramifications regarding violative residues then you (generic) are the problem - not the show committee, the veterinarian, the competition, Mother Theresa or Walter Payton - if you raise cattle you and you alone are responsible for safety of the product - in the US when a drug residue is found the FDA doesn't send a letter to the show committee, the veterinarian, the competition, Mother Theresa or Walter Payton - it goes to you. It doesn't matter how hard you worked, how young you are or that you nursed the lame steer back to a modicum of soundness - your steer - you are responsible for drug use and drug residue

So I guess what you are saying here is DON'T TRUST A VET.  When you go to the dr., you don't get handed some drugs and sent on your way.  You get very specific instructions, AND if it needs to be administered by the dr.,  then the dr. administers it... PERIOD.  SO if  this vet recommended a drug that legally had to be administered by a licensed vet, it is their ethical responsibility to administer it and in the proper way.  When I go to a vet, I expect them to follow the rules, I DO NOT feel like it is my responsibility to know the laws, nor to question their every move when it comes to the treatment of my animal. 
I should be able to trust my vet to be ethical and abide by the laws that govern their profession.  Wouldn't it seem totally disrespectful if I went to dr. x, and every time they gave me instructions I questioned if it was legal or being administered in the correct way? 

Bottom line to me is we had people seek help from a vet and from that moment is was the vets responsibility to give the proper and legal treatment.

Yes, it's MY responsibility to take care of my animals in a legal way, but when I seek the help of a vet, I should be able to feel I have taken the proper steps to get my animal treated ethically and legally.  Knowing the rules of treatment and administration ... vets job, not mine. 
Personally, I'm surprised someone with a dvm degree would blame some "young individuals" instead of the vet, be it their personal vet or the Stampede vet.  Guess it's everyone else's responsibility, not the vets to know the rules. 

 

[knabe]

perhaps vets should be required to issue prescriptions and receipts at the time of service rather than through the billing process.

vets should be absolved of any punishment that a client is subject to if their advice was followed.

if they administer any drug, they should require the client to read and acknowledge all of the advice they have given in a written form.

this should be MANDATORY at any sanctioned event.

this should also be logged and reviewed by someone on the board at the end of every day or some other interval not to exceed a day.

perhaps there should be more regulation with respect to vets giving advice and treatment.

perhaps everything should be black and white.

oops, then we would have a discussion about racism.

 

[Tallcool1]

You seem to have a lot of "facts" so tell me who gave the Banamine? What route was used? Was it given according to the label? Was the vet the Stampede vet or the owners vet? Why was it given? How many times? When was it given in relationship to the drug test?

And actually cc I think you missed the point - if you are raising cattle, doesn't matter if they are show cattle or not, legally in the US and Canada they are food animals and subject to specific rules, laws and regulations regarding drug use. If you (generic) don't know this and don't think about this every single time you give a bovine a drug, if you don't read and understand and follow the label, if you don't understand the concept of extra label drug use and it's ramifications regarding violative residues then you (generic) are the problem - not the show committee, the veterinarian, the competition, Mother Theresa or Walter Payton - if you raise cattle you and you alone are responsible for safety of the product - in the US when a drug residue is found the FDA doesn't send a letter to the show committee, the veterinarian, the competition, Mother Theresa or Walter Payton - it goes to you. It doesn't matter how hard you worked, how young you are or that you nursed the lame steer back to a modicum of soundness - your steer - you are responsible for drug use and drug residue

So I guess what you are saying here is DON'T TRUST A VET.  When you go to the dr., you don't get handed some drugs and sent on your way.  You get very specific instructions, AND if it needs to be administered by the dr.,  then the dr. administers it... PERIOD.  SO if  this vet recommended a drug that legally had to be administered by a licensed vet, it is their ethical responsibility to administer it and in the proper way.  When I go to a vet, I expect them to follow the rules, I DO NOT feel like it is my responsibility to know the laws, nor to question their every move when it comes to the treatment of my animal. 
I should be able to trust my vet to be ethical and abide by the laws that govern their profession.  Wouldn't it seem totally disrespectful if I went to dr. x, and every time they gave me instructions I questioned if it was legal or being administered in the correct way? 

Bottom line to me is we had people seek help from a vet and from that moment is was the vets responsibility to give the proper and legal treatment.

Yes, it's MY responsibility to take care of my animals in a legal way, but when I seek the help of a vet, I should be able to feel I have taken the proper steps to get my animal treated ethically and legally.  Knowing the rules of treatment and administration ... vets job, not mine. 
Personally, I'm surprised someone with a dvm degree would blame some "young individuals" instead of the vet, be it their personal vet or the Stampede vet.  Guess it's everyone else's responsibility, not the vets to know the rules.

EXACTLY....DL is saying that Veterinarians are NOT to be trusted!  And also to NEVER under any circumstances allowed to babysit children.  They also kick your puppies at night when you check them into the pound...and don't brush after meals. 

Of course she is not saying to not trust a Vet.  Her point is that this thread has started with a whole lot of detailed information that goes way beyond the article that the originating thread began with.  I agree......where did all of this information come from?

DL-the news article stated that the medication was "given in accordance with the rules and regulations of medicine and slaughter.”  I take that to mean IV, within the withdrawal limitations.

To anyone that chooses to hack on DL over these issues......she's a licensed veterinarian.  This type of thing means something completely different to a licensed veterinarian.  It means loss of livelihood. 

DL-I will never understand why you weigh in on this stuff.  People are going to do what they want to do.  I appreciate your expertise and knowledge, but there is just no way that you will ever influence people to believe in the Veterinarian Oath with the level of passion in which you do.  We are not Veterinarians......

 

[knabe]

It means loss of livelihood. 

somewhat dissimilar than $10,000.

 

[RyanChandler]

Were any other steers "picked up" or was this INDIVIDUAL'S steer the only one.  If his was the only one, I think the conclusion is self-evident. 

And disqualifying him for banamine? How does that give the kid a competitive advantage?  I mean I can understand the finaplex, equipose, stanozolol types but Banamine- you gotta be kidding me?

 

[DSC]

DL talks alot about residue and such but the steer was not sent to slaughter and the exhibitors and vet know they don't get sent to harvest for 10 days after the show I believe. So we can stop talking about it being a food safety issue. It's about the rules of the show. Come on dont make something into something that its not.

 

[rmbcows]

"To anyone that chooses to hack on DL over these issues......she's a licensed veterinarian.  This type of thing means something completely different to a licensed veterinarian.  It means loss of livelihood. 

DL-I will never understand why you weigh in on this stuff.  People are going to do what they want to do.  I appreciate your expertise and knowledge, but there is just no way that you will ever influence people to believe in the Veterinarian Oath with the level of passion in which you do.  We are not Veterinarians......"

Tallcool..  I realize DL holds a dvm degree, that's why I questioned why she doesn't want to place any of the blame for this mess on the vet.  Seems to me if she was that passionate about the VO she would be questioning the ethics of the vet involved.  My sister is a practicing vet so I'm not at all in the dark about all things veterinarian.  It just seems that DL always assumes that if it was a person at a show, there is no answer than it was done on purpose with the most vile of intentions. 

 

[BTDT]

A lot of "facts" have come to the surface of this discussion since it was posted. Things have bring brought to the surface that have changed the situation entirely.
1. The steer went to the competitors farm. Turns out it was the VP of the show committee. Which turns out to be an enemy of the family that had the steer DQ'd.
2. The drug was given in accordance to labeled directions, or was it? Did the VET IV the calf? Did the owners?  Most shows state any meds given at a show MUST be administered by the attending vet. Was it or was it not?
3. It is a terminal show. No? Yes?
4. The show claims ownership to all animals that win. So who pays who? When is ownership transferred?
5. Chain of custody of evidence (steer). Since it hasn't been "controlled" any lawyer worth their picture frame would eat this in one gulp.
6. "Owners" were not aware of situation. So exactly who owned the steer once it won? Stampede? Youth who showed it? Conflicting reports here.
7. DL's "job" is to protect the food supply and the reputation of the livestock industry. Her job is not be judgemental, or see "gray area's". Law is the law. It is common knowledge that many, not all, steer jocks like to win at all cost. Their main job is to win a show and has nothing to do with food safety or the livestock industry. The two are automatically at odds.
8. Has the show vet made a statement? Did they administer the drug IV? Did they write a script with a withdrawl time? Has the vet denied any involvement?
9. The "facts" are not well known. While we can all make judgements, take sides, and "report", all we are doing is muddying the waters until the dust settles. While fun and interesting, it is not productive.
10. Any time you mix humans, money, status, and "winning", you are going to have "politics". Everything from  children's peddle pulls, cute baby contest, to gun rights are influenced by "politics".  Heck, I have even seen neighborhoods that mow their yard due to pressure from the "politics" of their neighbors mowing.
11. The argument about not knowing the rules of the show or of the ELDU has made me think of the issue of genetic defects. Half the people say it is the responsibility of the seller to explain and educate the "prospect buyer" and half say it is the "prospect buyers" responsibility to educate themselves.  You can't have it both ways in different situations.
12. DL is not saying to not trust vets. She is saying you need to be educated on what YOU are doing and if you are not educated in what YOU are doing, then YOU shouldn't be doing it. Seemed pretty clear to me.  If I were to jump out of a plane and not be "educated" enough about what I was doing, and I didn't pull the rip cord is it the pilots fault or is it my fault? Again, if you don't know what you are doing...... (I am reading a book called the "Darwin Awards, Evolution in action."  It is FULL of people who probably should have been a little bit more educated in what they were doing!

 

[cattlecountry]

In defense of everyone on this forum including DL the show was on July 13 the slaughter date was july 24th. So the vet didn't break any laws nor did the young individuals. The drug given was within the withdrawal dates of slaughter. That is why i say this is a political thing. There is no way the vet should loose his/her livelyhood. They were right in there diagnosis if they gave the diagnosis in respect to the laws for food and health. It is strictly the Stampede boards own ruling not anything else. But if the stampede board is to respect the rules then they themselves should have followed their own rules by allowing the steer committee to make the desicions and the ruling instead of the board. There is a difference. Rule 19 gives all power to the steer comittee and yet were never consulted. Phone anyone on the board they will all say they knew nothing about what was going on. No one is a criminal here but alot of good people caught in bad communication and a process that should have never gone the way it did. Obviously there needs to be better protocol in the years to come so there is no confusion on what is and supposed to happen and that includes the officials. Would i want my steer to go to the competition when i am told it is going to a packing house. No way! President or not i would want my steer in neutral territory and knowledge of where it is, where it is going and what is being done with it! After all it is my steer and call me soft hearted but i actually care about what would happen to it! Plus the fact the owners have to get a lawyer to get the Stampede to any up the proof is a red flag as well! If it is so obvious then show the owners the proof and quit making it look like there is something to hide! I believe by law if the steer is still owned by the owners untill the prize is awarded then the blood is still owned by the owner as well!

 

[DL]

All of the "facts" are from a press release - nowhere is it stated by what route the Banamine was given - the withdrawal of 6 days applies ONLY to Banamine given IV - so we are missing some important "facts" and all the conclusions drawn based of the "facts" are suspect. So we don't know if this is a food safety/residue issue because we don't know the facts - and clearly from the discussion there are some who believe that the cavalier use of Banamine is "just something we all do" and that it "is no big deal" and that the 4 day withhold (in the US) and 6 day in Canada is the withhold for any amount, by any route, for any number of doses - and you (generic) are wrong.

To get away from the food safety issue the "facts" as presented in the press release ("The announcement comes due to the Calgary Stampede's disqualification of the original winner after the steer tested positive for drugs - a contravention of the competition's rules"). The boys broke the rules of the Stampede and got caught -again, the responsibility for following the rules falls to the owner of the animal - win at all costs sometimes costs

BTDT - yeah - I just don't know : )

 

[knabe]

Ban all shows. This is pathetic.

 

[aj]

You gotta love the club calf industry......teaching kids...genetic defects are okay.....drugs are ok.....just get a lawyer.....the godd ole 4 h work ethic where calves cost 20,000 $.......hard to beat it.