Turn-Back Of Aussie Cattle
Strengthens Ties On Border

By David Bowser

What many producers feared was to be the vanguard of hundreds of thousands of Australian cattle imported to the United States through Mexico has been turned back. As significant as that achievement is, the episode may also prove notable for the good will it has engendered between U.S. cattlemen and their counterparts in the Mexican border states.

"I'm hearing that part of the cattle are being slaughtered in Chihuahua," says Caren Cowan, executive secretary of the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association.

"Our fear is we were told that the 5000 were a trial run for tens, if not hundreds of thousands, of cattle that they were going to try to put this way. We're keeping a sharp eye out. We have an attorney on hold, the New Mexico Livestock Board and New Mexico Cattle Growers, New Mexico Farm and Livestock Bureau; at the drop of a hat, we can file an injunction if we need to."

The attempt to bring 5000 Australian cattle into the United States through Mexico failed after the owners of the cattle withdrew their application for an import permit in the face of opposition by Mexican and U.S. cattlemen.

The cattle were reportedly owned by an investor group.

Cattlemen on both sides of the Border united in opposing the movement of the Australian cattle from Mexico to the U.S. Spokesmen for Texas and New Mexico cattlemen say that the head of Mexico's national cattlemen's confederation and the head of the cattlemen's organization in the Mexican state of Chihuahua were instrumental in stopping the importation of the Australian cattle into the U.S.

"I think the concern on the Mexican side was that there might be some potential damage in terms of border relations and the ability of future loads of Mexican cattle to be able to cross the border," says Burt Rutherford with the Texas Cattle Feeders Association.

The Mexican cattlemen's organizations were committed to making sure that those cattle did not have an "M" brand on them when they came across the border, Rutherford says.

The Chihuahua cattle growers own the pens at Santa Teresa, Cowan says, and they said the cattle weren't coming into the U.S.

"Actually, we were successful in getting what I considered to be a landmark statement out of the 10 Border states — six in Mexico and four in the U.S. — saying ‘no way,’" Cowan continues. "That was a pretty phenomenal achievement. That's the first time anything like that had ever come out."

The cattle came to Mexico on a boat from Australia. Their origins aren't clear, but officials think the cattle were from varied backgrounds and put together from herds across the Australian continent. The owners of the cattle apparently attempted to claim that the 21 days they spent on the boat met U.S. health quarantine regulations.

"What they tried to do was ‘naturalize’ them, if you will, as Mexican cattle so that they could bring them over under NAFTA," Cowan says. "They tried to say that the 21 days they spent on the boat qualified as quarantine time, which does not meet with U.S. protocols in any way, shape or form."

The cattle reportedly came into Mexico at a port which is in a part of the country with a tuberculosis problem.

"Whatever TB status they might have had, which is still undetermined, when they got off the boat, they lost by spending time in that state," Cowan says.

There was also a report from Texas animal health officials that questioned both the tuberculosis and brucellosis status of the animals.

"This was just a comedy of errors," Cowan says. There was no way USDA could verify the health records of the cattle.

"There was a lot of unrest on both sides of the border," Cowan says. "The Mexicans knew that if they branded an ‘M’ on those cattle and they came into the U.S. and then there were ensuing health problems, the Mexicans were going to get blamed, not the Australians. It's definitely strengthened the working relationship, I think, among the border states on both sides. We're looking forward to building on that."

One basis for the unification of cattlemen from the different states in two countries was the Border States Consensus Document they only recently had hammered out to deal with health problems of animals crossing the border in both directions.

The 10 states have been working on together over some time to facilitate movement of cattle back and forth, both directions across the border, Cowan explains. USDA was not addressing these problems, so producers and state animal health officials took the lead.

The eventual outcome was recognition of the animal health status of individual Mexican states. Once they met those requirements, they jealously guarded against contamination from other states — and now other countries, as well.

"It's primarily a brucellosis and tuberculosis document," she continues. "The Mexican states were having trouble, so they put together the Border States Consensus Document."

The United States requires Australian cattle to be tested for six diseases, but the owners of the Australian herd had petitioned the U.S. Department of Agriculture for permits to cross the cattle under the same regulations used for Mexican cattle.

In addition to claiming "quarantine" time aboard ship, there was an effort to "naturalize" the cattle by having them reside in Mexico for 60 days, then bring them across, say officials with the New Mexico Livestock Board.

Bob Frost of San Jon, N.M., president of the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association, says his group will continue to monitor the border to ensure that no Australian cattle get across.

"We see this withdrawal as a direct result of the joint efforts of the Mexican and U.S. cattlemen in the 10 border states who took a strong stand against the importation of the cattle via Mexico," Bill Sauble of the New Mexico Livestock Board told the Associated Press.