41 Sheep vanish from Ontario farm

From the Alberta Farmer Express:

“Ontario Provincial Police and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency are looking for a flock of sheep that has disappeared from a southeastern Ontario farm under quarantine for scrapie.

The CFIA said in a release Monday that the animals in question are “suspected of having scrapie,” a federally reportable nerve disease related to BSE in cattle and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in people.

The sheep were found to be missing the same day 41 of the “apparently healthy” animals, including 20 pregnant ewes, were scheduled to be destroyed by CFIA order. That’s according to an earlier release from Karen Selick, a lawyer for the Calgary-based Canadian Constitution Foundation, representing producer Montana Jones.

Local media show Jones’ farm at Trent Hills, about 50 km east of Peterborough, has attracted a number of protesters urging a reprieve for the sheep.

According to a news report Monday from Peterborough TV station CHEX, an unknown party took a number of the sheep from Jones’ barn sometime between Sunday evening and Monday morning and left a note saying the animals were in “protective custody.”

All of the condemned animals tested by CFIA previously tested negative for scrapie in live biopsies, and none of the animals had shown clinical symptoms of the disease in the 12 years Jones has raised sheep, the foundation previously alleged….”

Read it all in the Alberta Farmer Express.

Another source on the same story: Mark Hoult, of QMI Agency, in the Belleville Intelligencer:

“TRENT HILLS – The Canadian Food Inspection Agency found no sheep to slaughter Monday morning at Montana Jones’ Wholearth Farm Studio near Hastings.

The 41 rare Shropshire sheep were allegedly taken from the barn sometime overnight by an organization identifying itself as the Farmers’ Peace Corps.

Jones’ Belleville lawyer, Canadian Constitution Foundation litigation director Karen Selick, said her client went out first thing in the morning and found an empty barn and a note from the Farmers’ Peace Corps which read: “We have taken the animals into protective custody until an alternative to killing has been found, or conclusive independent proof or clear evidence of disease has been proven. This has been done without the knowledge or participation of the owner.”

The Belleville lawyer and civil libertarian advocate formerly made headlines by representing raw milk producer and seller Michael Schmidt.

Selick said she arrived at Jones’ farm early in the morning dressed in black to mourn the impending destruction of the sheep. “But Montana informed me that she had been the victim of a theft overnight, and that the 41 sheep are gone,” she said, stressing that the disappearance of the sheep “was totally unexpected.”…”

Read it all in the Belleville Intelligencer.

33 Comments

Filed under News

33 responses to “41 Sheep vanish from Ontario farm

  1. Bill Anderson

    This all is very reminiscent of the early-20th century Tuberculosis eradication campaign in the United States. A lot of the same back-and-forth tactics between farmers and public health officials were used.

    I don’t know much about Scrapie, but I do know that one of the major causes for the spread of TB 100 years ago was commercial dairy breed improvement programs. A prized dairy bull, taken from farm to farm, could quickly become a vector for the spread of TB.

  2. BC Food Security

    Question : In a situation where the CFIA confiscates and destroys sheep that probably will turn out to be all healthy, does farmer Montana Jones obtain financial compensation ?

    • John

      As far as I know, there should be compensation based upon ‘market value’. From my recollection of previous cases, the usual settlement could be seen as somewhat generous for regular commercial animals (the CFIA goal is to encourage notification of disease v/v a quick burial). Estimating the value of pedigree breeding stock is much more problematic, and the CFIA maximum is unlikely provide real satisfaction in these cases.

  3. Patric Lyster

    Prior to the sheep disappearing “without her knowledge”, she would have been paid compensation. Now it may be a different case.
    She was given much opportunity to help prove, without destruction, that her flock was not infected. She refused to give information. She was given an option to save genetics, she refused. Why?
    She would rather cry to the public and use only partial truths and in some cases outright lies, to further her cause. Does she tell people that they also had not ordered destruction of another significant portion of her flock? No, because that wouldn’t make it sound as good. Does she tell you that all Shropshire sheep in the world trace back to the United Kingdom? No, that wouldn’t further her cause. Does she tell you that she only registered 1 animal in the 3 years prior to quarantine? No, that would show how little she was doing to preserve and further the breed.
    By her actions, she has potentially jeopardized a much larger portion of the Shropshire breed, in Canada. That really shows how much she cares about her fellow sheep breeders and the breed.

    If you want more facts, try contacting me. I know a whole lot about the situation as I was the one who had the misfortune of having bought a ewe , which subsequently died and tested positive for scrapie,from that flock. If you check, you will find out that the dam and grand-dam both died before they reached an old age. To also note, in a flock which the owner keeps harping lives a long time, how come only 4 of the animals were (according to her own admission) born prior to July, 2007?
    I am not saying her animals have scrapie. I am just saying there is a whole lot more to this story than she would like people to know.

    • Christina Robertson

      You are not saying much, you are just ranting about your “ewe” which by the way may have caught the disease from another one of your flock….that is if you have a flock.
      Sounds to me that you are just taking the importunity to vent….do you feel better now? Good I believe that you missed the whole point about the CFIA, wait till they come to your door……

      • Patric Lyster

        CFIA was already at my door. I am not just ranting. Get the facts. Science, coupled with the results of the investigation indicate the most likely source of infection being the flock in Ontario.
        What I am posting, is a major part of the story that Ms. Jones does not wish to present. She is the one who made this public and in doing so has made it only proper to have the whole story told, not just one side and only a portion of that side of the story.
        If you are thinking that I missed the point, perhaps you should look for the point. The fact of the matter is that Ms. Jones efforts to save her flock, may very well have caused their destruction. If they are not found, then she may even be successful in destroying a large portion of the Canadian sheep industry.
        If Ms. Jones and some of her “friends” wish to drag my name through the mud in their attempt to further their cause, then I will respond with what I know. If what I am saying is all false, then why has Ms. Jones and her lawyer made some corrections to what was listed in a press release. Montana is still using false information, that she has been made fully aware of, on the Shropshiresheep.org site. She has also made a comment to the effect that nothing she has said is entirely false. Well, just so you know, that statement is false. There are things that she has said that are false. Just check the facts and check out her comments on the cached portion of the saveourshropshires facebook page. She said I know nothing about the case, well show me the proof of where I do not know anything about the case.

    • Peter

      The “only share was is conducive to the victim narrative” seems rather common place these days…

    • Patrick:
      As you know from our many conversations over the last few years, I am so sorry that that sheep was found positive for scrapie on your Alberta farm. I tried to rally for you and save them. Was hard to do from here, and then you gave in to them…I understand how you could. It’s a tough fight. I’m surprised I’m still standing. I don’t have much else to lose. You know some of what I am going through with the CFIA. You yourself told me you blocked them every step of the way and still may take them to court.

      What you DON’T know is much else about the actual facts of what is going on with the case here in Ontario at my farm. I’m sorry for your sour grapes…not really certain of why you have them, except you did express anger that some people had commented on the sanitation and management of your farm on the http://ShropshireSheep.org website. You are free to write a rebuttal to them if you disagree. I didn’t make comment—others did.

      And I have offered you several times the opportunity to make a timeline of events as you see them and said I would post on your behalf. I’ve suggested you send me anything you view as a discrepancy and I would address it. You have not.

      You’re going on in your comments about ages of ewes and surveillance etc and it has no relevance to anybody until you put it in a paragraph and make some clear concise statements of fact. Do that, as I have already offered, and I’d be happy you post your thoughts and views on the http://ShropshireSheep.org website.

      Your other points are not based in any actual fact. I’m happy to address any and all, but you need to start with something, not make things up as you go along. For instance, what “other information and options” did you ever offer?

      You say I could have “maintained at least a portion of the genetics of the animals slated for destruction, via matings with RR rams.” but again, do you know that for a fact? No…you don’t know all the facts. First, I don’t have an RR ram, and it may well be impossible to find one with heritage characteristics for the 1929 breed standard of excellence I work to. Of course I could try..and would, except that CFIA offered to do that (then kill the ewes) only if I would LIE and sign a paper saying I had an infected premises. They said they had NO PROOF that I had an infected premises, they only ‘suspected’ I might because the scrapie infected sheep found on your farm was born here. Asked if that sheep could have become infected on your farm they answered a resounding YES. But they couldn’t find the source, so they came back here, and still couldn’t find the source. So I was not about to lie and say my premises was infected just to suit their paperwork, when they have been unable to find any evidence it actually is.

      I have offered various alternatives to work with CFIA to find out without a doubt if there is indeed any scrapie here on this farm.

      Again, you know NOTHING about the facts…nor what the 24S dam died of…you are maliciously spreading very selective mis-information, lies and gossip. Whatever makes you think I’m “refusing to allow trace outs.”? Where did you get that from? As for registrations, the lapsed registrations are all still recorded and filed, and will be brought up to date. But when a government agency knocks you down mid-stride and enforces a quarantine, takes away the sheep income from breeding stock that in turn pays for those very registrations, the registrations have to wait. It’s not like the sheep were going anywhere! I don’t have the animal movement on my farm that a livestock dealer such as yourself had..it’s pretty much a closed flock and has been for years.
      Again, your last dart illustrates you don’t know what you are talking about. I’ve always been an advocate of keeping up the registrations, because without them, we will lose track of the genetics. Even then…that system is still unsupervised and there are breeders that can make up what they want…isn’t that right Patric?

      Why did you ask for registration papers for a ewe that never had a lamb and that you had put down? Some might suggest you intended to falsify..I.’m not suggesting that..but some might.

      You are ranting and supposing and saying you know all about the case here when in fact it’s all pure nonsense. It’s my aim to FIND OUT without a shadow of a doubt if there is scrapie in the flock…the things you posted are absurd and don’t even deserve a response. I have a question for you….why did you even HAVE 9 obexes (brain tissue) in your freezer to submit to CFIA for testing? Why did all those sheep die? What from? Why did you not give CFIA the pink traceability CFIA ear tag number to confirm the identity of the sheep that was allegedly WHE 24S? How would anyone even know it was indeed a Wholearth sheep and not one of the other 8 tested if you didn’t have that ID pink tag available? It was you and you alone that harvested the obexes…and wrote down the supposed ID. Why did CFIA have to contact me to ask for the ID number? Why did you refuse to give it to them? Why have I never had a scrapie symptom or flock health issue from ANY other person who got sheep in 12 years? Seems there are questions that go waaay back…maybe you should be answering a few questions. Why did you refuse help to Save Your Shrops when i tried to rally for you here in Ontario years ago? Why did you give in and take the CFIA’s money if you believe so much in saving rare breeds? On second thought..don’t bother answering. My experience with you is a 100% “chail-tasing exercise” . You are clearly bitter about CFIA (still going to sue them as you say?) and I can understand that after what i’ve been through. What I can’t understand is how and why you turned that around over the last months, when I tried so hard to help you fight your cause. So be it…but you are so clearly missing the point here. I am trying to determine if it is indeed in my flock, and have no proof of it so far. As for the handful of non ARQ sheep they left…they are not the best heritage genetics. Which says a lot for needing to preserve that genotype. I can’t use them, i don t want them, and still they are under quarantine, even though CFIA doesn’t want them either and says they are not at risk.

      There is an ocean of information you know nothing about….but carry on. You will anyway….

      • Patric Lyster

        Montana, to say that I am free to post comments on your website is not true. You still have comments that I made, from quite a long time ago, awaiting moderation. I also emailed you questions, which your site says you will put up. Still not there.
        I have sent you the information in regards to the fact that there has never been 2 offspring of WHE 24S, tested for scrapie. You have not corrected that.
        You ask what the ages of the sheep have to do with it. Sheep tend to not live to a ripe old age when they have scrapie. You try to present that your sheep live to an old age, yet out of 75 head, only 9 were born before July of 2007. Doesn’t appear to be too many old ones. You have 44 head in your CLRC inventory, born in 2004, 2005, 2006 yet there can only be 9 of them still there at the most. What happened to all the others? And please, do not say that you slaughtered or sold any of them for slaughter. That would only show just how important their genetics were, to you. Most of what I am presenting is just the other side of the story. If you wish to use things such as the longevity of your flock to prove that they are scrapie free, then I am free to comment on the facts.
        In regards to the registration papers for aa ewe that was put down and did not lamb, the reason I asked for the papers is because by law, you are to provide the buyer of a registered animal with duly transferred registration papers. Which you have failed to do. Perhaps the question should be, why did you not transfer the registration papers as you are supposed to.
        If you wish to talk about the chance of someone falsifying pedigrees, why did you go through the trouble of importing an American Shropshire ram and then keep him around for a while to not use him? Oh, and while on this subject, where did the R come from in the sheep that CFIA didn’t order destroyed? Woops, I forgot, those aren’t supposed to be mentioned. Everyone is supposed to believe that your whole flock is being destroyed, but what about those other sheep. Especially that one that isn’t doing well since the others left. If as you portray, it is due to her missing her mates, why would you be treating her? Also, 31 head is only a handful, then i would think that 41 aren’t much more than that. You do know that you can slaughter those ones you don’t want. You do not have to keep them, never did.
        You continue to say that i am spreading misinformation, I suggest that you check out what you and your lawyer have put out there. I have told your lawyer and yourself that I am more than willing to correct anything that I have said or posted that is false, but you seem to not be presenting me with these things. Also, sorry that your lawyers veiled threat didn’t accomplish your hope of silencing me.
        In regards to your nort providing trace in and trace out information, you told me that yourself. Your lawyer also asked me if I felt that CFIA would reconsider if you did provide the information. So as you are aware, you had not provided that information when it was requested. It was only, according to your lawyers letters which are posted on the internet, done fairly recently.
        In regards to your registrations, you stopped keeping them up well before you were put into quarantine. Interesting to note, that the latest born sheep you registered is one you sold to me. Perhaps your breeding stock sales weren’t as good as you thought. It doesn’t really matter, the fact is that you claim to be saving a rare breed, but are not registering. You try to give numbers of registered sheep and then tell how many will be left if yours are destroyed. Fact, there are no more than 4 of the sheep in those 41 head, that are registered so therefore the numbers of REGISTERED Shropshires would not go down by more than 4. All I am doing is pointing out the facts. If you wish to use information to further your cause, then why use false information. You can not say that your unregistered sheep are registered. Perhaps they are registerable, but they are not registered. You may wish to get your lawyers advice on that, but I am pretty sure that it would be a case of falsely presenting information.
        In regards to the pink tag thing, well the number was not recorded but the tattoo was, or are you trying to imply that you do not tattoo your sheep? I do believe that if you check into things, a tattoo is considered to be a more permanent means of identification. I also believe that you are misrepresenting that CFIA asked you for the pink tag number, I do believe if you would check your timeline that you asked them for it. From square one, it has never been about you helpong to save my sheep, it was about saving yours. I did not just give in, I actually am the one who convinced CFIA that mating to an RR ram, is scientifically a very minimal risk way to preseve some genetics. I did use an RR ram, a very traditional RR ram from the USA. I got a number of ewe lambs from the ewes that they destroyed. Also to note, I cooperated and realized that this scrapie thing was not just about me. It involved a whole lot more people and could have the potential to harm a lot more sheep if it was left unchecked. I have never said that your flock has scrapie. All I have said, is that based on science and the investigation, that it appears the most likely source of infection was the birth flock. Believe what you wish, but that is the science based on what is known about scrapie transmission.
        My reason for not supporting you is pretty simple. I do not believe that you should be allowed to falsely point accusations at me, even via your wording that other might say (if it is not your stance, why bring it up? or should I point out what others might say about your sheep disappearing? Like how would they know to only take the ones ordered destroyed? Why if you were trying to stop CFIA from destroying them, would you have sorted the ahead of time to make CFIA’s job easier and allow them to get done quicker, when you were havinga protest? These are just things that others might wonder, especially since others might be aware that the list of animals ordered destroyed would have been confidential between CFIA and you.). I also believe that since you wanted to make this public, the public should have the right to the facts and make their own decision based on them, rather than making decisions based on partial facts and some information which is not even factual.
        I was wondering also, how your lawyer could be hinting that your sheep could be resistant to scrapie. Only way that you would know, is if they have been exposed to scrapie. Some might think that perhaps there is more to the story.
        You ask for a timeline, what will that help with. You are not interested in the facts and according to you, I know nothing about the case, so why don’t you do the timeline that you seem to need so desperately, so you are able to understand what false information you are presenting. But please, if you wish to start a timeline, start from when we first met. You know, the deal with you selling a ram with an issue.

      • Lorri Nelson

        “I tried to rally for you and save them.” -How so? How could you possibly have saved them? From what I have been told, you didn’t “rally,” you tried browbeating and bullying Patric and basically lambasted him for “giving in,” as you put it.
        “and then you gave in to them” – He had sold sheep to other people. He did not “give in,” he spared a thought for the other producers who had animals that had possibly been exposed. But before he “gave in,” he negotiated with the CFIA to let him breed those QQ ewes to an RR ram so he could save the genetics. A program you were offered, and for one more year than what he got, and you refused. And you have still never told us why, beyond the point about calling your premises infected, which I will come to.

        “you did express anger that some people had commented on the sanitation and management of your farm on the http://ShropshireSheep.org website. You are free to write a rebuttal to them if you disagree. I didn’t make comment—others did.”- Yes, they did. And I responded to them as well, and you never posted my comment. And Patric responded too, and you held off posting the comment for weeks, and you edited the original comment he was responding to, something I see as very unethical. It would be one thing if it was your comment, but it was a comment from someone else entirely, and you have deleted the part calling his animal husbandry into question. Then you invite him to respond, after you have already posted his response? *Readers please note, we have saved copies of the entire exchange.

        “And I have offered you several times the opportunity to make a timeline of events as you see them and said I would post on your behalf. I’ve suggested you send me anything you view as a discrepancy and I would address it. You have not.” -Now that is outright not true. He has told you time and again which pieces of information on your site are wrong, and you have not corrected them. Period. Full stop.

        “You’re going on in your comments about ages of ewes and surveillance etc and it has no relevance to anybody until you put it in a paragraph and make some clear concise statements of fact. Do that, as I have already offered, and I’d be happy you post your thoughts and views on the http://ShropshireSheep.org website.” Has no relevance!!!??? Do you yet understand how this disease works? Something tells me maybe you do, and that’s why you keep going back to the identification thing, because you know full well that all the points he has made about the age of the animals are extremely relevant. You are very adept at ignoring the stuff that doesn’t suit your cause.

        “You say I could have “maintained at least a portion of the genetics of the animals slated for destruction, via matings with RR rams.” but again, do you know that for ‘you don’t know all the facts. First, I don’t have an RR ram“- but you have had in the past, and all the animals not slated for destruction must have an R in their genotype, and they had to get it from somewhere.

        “, and it may well be impossible to find one with heritage characteristics for the 1929 breed standard of excellence I work to. Of course I could try..and would, except that CFIA offered to do that (then kill the ewes) only if I would LIE and sign a paper saying I had an infected premises.”-Again I am asking you (will you respond this time?)- if you bred for scrapie resistance, and sold QR or RR animals, who except you would give a damn about a piece of paper? You would be selling scrapie resistant sheep! I have said it before and I am saying it again, you want to preserve the genetics but you are letting a principle stand in the way. The only person who would care about that so-called “LIE” is you. If other producers want your animals and they know they are scrapie-resistant, they are not going to care about a document from the CFIA. And the CFIA is not going to hang a neon “INFECTED” sign at the end of your driveway.

        “They said they had NO PROOF that I had an infected premises, they only ‘suspected’ I might because the scrapie infected sheep found on your farm was born here.” -Yes, dear, that’s how it works. That’s how every other scrapie case has worked on trace-in and trace-out, and they will continue to do so. For some reason you think you should get to live by a different set of rules.

        “Asked if that sheep could have become infected on your farm they answered a resounding YES.”- Yes, and here’s the part you’re not letting people know. Patric was doing voluntary scrapie surveillance, and had had no previous positives. And as much as you don’t want to hear it, it could have been infected on yours too, because the science says she most likely got it at birth. The CFIA can only do what they do based on the best likelihood.

        “Again, you know NOTHING about the facts…nor what the 24S dam died of…”- Well, what did she die of? And what did her dam die of?

        “you are maliciously spreading very selective mis-information, lies and gossip.“- Oh is that right? And how would you know that? You have outright misinformation on your website. You have all but accused Patric of deliberately misidentifying the scrapie ewe as yours (even though at the time he saved the sample he had no idea the sheep had scrapie so that was quite a feat). Sounds like gossip. And how about all the producers you have told not to buy from him? I’d be careful if I were you, he who lives in a glass house etc. etc.

        “Whatever makes you think I’m “refusing to allow trace outs.”? Where did you get that from?”-From the e-mail you sent him in 2010. And let’s be perfectly clear here- you have just in the last few weeks provided trace information, over two years after the CFIA asked for it, and after this whole thing had been blown sky-high.

        “As for registrations, the lapsed registrations are all still recorded and filed, and will be brought up to date.”- registrations do not “lapse.” An animal is either registered or it is not. And you haven’t registered since two years before the scrapie diagnosis. And anyone can see that on the CLRC website. And even if you register them all now, the date of registration is right there, for all to see.

        “I’ve always been an advocate of keeping up the registrations, because without them, we will lose track of the genetics. Even then…that system is still unsupervised and there are breeders that can make up what they want…isn’t that right Patric?”- Excuse me? What exactly are you saying there? That you’ve been making up what you want? And if you are such an advocate, why did you stop registering sheep?

        “Why did you ask for registration papers for a ewe that never had a lamb and that you had put down? Some might suggest you intended to falsify..I.’m not suggesting that..but some might.” Oh, you’re not suggesting that, huh? Whatever. Anyway, I think you know full well that the reason he wanted those papers is simply because you refused to give them. And no one knows why.

        “It’s my aim to FIND OUT without a shadow of a doubt if there is scrapie in the flock“- What? Well then, why didn‘t the destruction go ahead? It is the ONLY way to FIND OUT for sure.

        “I have a question for you….why did you even HAVE 9 obexes (brain tissue) in your freezer to submit to CFIA for testing? Why did all those sheep die? What from?” And this from someone who complains about statements we have made being inflammatory. Good grief. Here’s your answer: untimely loss of guardian dog, and subsequent predation. In a word- coyotes. Nice try, dear.

        “Why did you not give CFIA the pink traceability CFIA ear tag number to confirm the identity of the sheep that was allegedly WHE 24S? How would anyone even know it was indeed a Wholearth sheep and not one of the other 8 tested if you didn’t have that ID pink tag available?”- When will you admit the sheep was tattooed? And that a tattoo is considered a better from of ID than a tag? Why do you gloss over this? And why are you trying so hard to turn this into a case of misidentification? Do you think he deliberately traced a sheep back to you before he even knew it was going to test positive? *Readers please note, you identify the sample BEFORE it goes to the lab; you don’t send in a bunch of unidentified samples and then decide later who to attribute them to.

        “Why have I never had a scrapie symptom or flock health issue from ANY other person who got sheep in 12 years?”- All sheep with scrapie do not have obvious symptoms. Most just lose condition despite normal appetite. Would you have been happier if she had suffered horribly? And do you know for a fact that every person you have ever sold a sheep to would recognize the possibility of scrapie? That they wouldn’t just “shoot, shovel, and shut up?” Are they all on voluntary surveillance?

        “Seems there are questions that go waaay back…maybe you should be answering a few questions. Why did you refuse help to Save Your Shrops when i tried to rally for you here in Ontario years ago? Why did you give in and take the CFIA’s money if you believe so much in saving rare breeds?”- Because, Montana, he had other people to think about, other people whose flocks ended up in quarantine, whose lives he was not willing to put on hold while he stonewalled the CFIA. And in all that time, he negotiated with the CFIA and is the reason there is a pilot project to save rare genetics, a pilot project that wasn’t good enough for you.

        “What I can’t understand is how and why you turned that around over the last months, when I tried so hard to help you fight your cause.” And just how exactly did you do that? It looked from this end of things like you were just trying to protect your own flock and make Patric look like the bad guy. Now, what if the shoe was on the other foot? What if you had a scrapie-positive ewe that you had purchased? And the buyer reacted the way you are reacting? And you wonder why we can’t support you?

        “As for the handful of non ARQ sheep they left…they are not the best heritage genetics. Which says a lot for needing to preserve that genotype. I can’t use them, i don t want them, and still they are under quarantine, even though CFIA doesn’t want them either and says they are not at risk.”- So sell them, or ship them for slaughter. Or would that mean losing all your supporters? You know, the ones who feel sorry for your anthropomorphised sheep who are lonely for their buddies. CFIA would not stop you from selling those sheep. You’d have to get a license for removal, but it could be done.

        “There is an ocean of information you know nothing about”- There is an ocean of information that the readers know nothing about because you don’t post it, and if we post it you censor it or remove it. It is well past time that the general public knew the rest of the story, not just your side of it.

    • Patric Lyster … how close is your farm to Suffolk and Wainwright Alberta? It wasn’t that long ago that the Cdn Armed forces used those places for testing biological warfare materials. During the 2nd world war, Canada produced enough anthrax there to wipe out much of the human population of Europe. Is that stuff still around?

      I wonder if you’re aware that scrapie was the starting-point for development of the HIV virus. Point being : oversimplifed, I’ll admit – it seems much more likely that the animal at issue became infected in Alberta, not Ontario. The bigger point being = there is an undeniable pattern by govt. to elimniate the small holder

      • Patric Lyster

        Too bad that you do not underrstand the transmission of scrapie. Most common is via birth fluids and colostrum from an infected ewe to her offspring.

      • Patric Lyster

        Oh and by the way, where in the hell is Suffolk in Alberta? Never heard of any such place in Alberta.
        Point, show me where in the CFIA scrapie protocol, there is any differential treatment based on farm size.
        I am not saying there are not other things that make it much tougher on small farmers, but this is not one of them.
        Also, please direct me to where there is a link between anthrax and scrapie. So if scrapie is the starting point for the HIV virus, then this would mean that there is a much bigger issue and that it is even more important to eradicate scrapie. Are you suggesting that scrapie is a human health risk?
        Scientifically it is much more likely that the sheep was infected on the birth farm. Check out the scientific facts on scrapie. You will find research that indicates that most sheep acquire scrapie before they are one year of age, the positive ewe in question was purchased at about 14 months of age. Science also shows that the incubation period is much longer in a sheep that acquires scrapie later in life. The ewe in question was born in May 2006 and died in December 2009. Despite what some people put out there, the ewe was not on my property for 3 years. She was there from July 2007 to December 2009. Less than 2 1/2 years so if they wish to round off, it would be closer to 2 years. Perhaps you might also like to know, we were on the voluntary scrapie surveillance program for almost 3 years prior to the positive ewe, with no positives. The resulting investigation found no scrapie positive sheep that were born prior to the scrapie positive ewe’s arrival. Nothing before her, what does that indicate?

      • Lorri Nelson

        Wow. That’s quite a stretch. The sheep got scrapie from anthrax and HIV comes from scrapie……..

        Why do you think it is much more likely the sheep became infected in Alberta? You should research a subject before you post on it. The most likley method of contracting scrapie is from birth fluids. They believe a sheep contracts it before reaching one year. This ewe never left her birth farm until the age of 14 months.

  4. Good for them. The only way to stop jack booted thugs in any country is civil disobedience.

  5. Awake

    Who has a claim against Montana and who has suffered damages as a result of this supposed contaminated herd of shhep, the evidence of which seems non existent. Nobody, it seems, except ‘well-intentiond’ bureaucrats. Where have I heard that one before?

    I don’t understand how anyone can fault Montana for failing to prove that something did not exist.

    It is up to the Plaintiff to establish the facts alleged in the case, not up to the Defendant to prove that such facts does not exist.

    Where is the damage? Where is the claim? All I see, is bogus laws and regulations meant to justify the existence of bureaucrats.

  6. sosusan

    I only followed the link to this report, cos I thought alien abduction might be involved…. how mundane is the truth!

  7. thebovine

    Sosusan,

    Sorry to disappoint you on that count. But if aliens are your bent, you could explore the possibility of alien infiltration of government agencies which seem to be taking such apparently anti-human actions and positions. George Adams’ book “Extraterrestrial Friends and Foes” might be a good place to start. And beyond that, you could try the website “Project Camelot”.

  8. Lorri {and Patric}: I’ll repeat…..I’ve reiterated I have no personal issue with either of you…I am exhausted just reading your rambling…though tempting as it is to spend an entire day to answer each and every single mispoint you raise—please remember I already have answered most to you personally and elsewhere online…the rest are new assumptions you’ve conjured up that simply aren’t true. The ram, the papers etc..it’s all nonsensical speculating. You really need to stop assuming you have it all figured out…there is so much more and I can’t possibly address it all now in this forum…its’ also unfair to the Bovine. Sure I can answer all your confusion and misinformation…but here, now? Your erroneous details are tangents, and time is ticking. My priority is the actual issue at hand right now.

    You suggest I wish to conceal flock data and information about this case. I’m the one who went PUBLIC with it, because no farmer ever does go public when CFIA knocks on their door. I did. It’s apparently shushed up, and they move on to the next farm. People care more and more about their food, and what their government is doing to control it. I want those folks that might be interested to know that it’s happening. Nothing against you, me, or anybody. If I wished to hide I wouldn’t be making it public.

    I am just intent on asking that a government body slow down and re-examine their protocol to ensure it is sound and makes sense with a view to preserving Canada’s heritage lines, and with a view to what small producers and small farms really want.

    In other words, careful consideration of every person’s right to individual expression and freedom. I’m just not a fan of government bulldozing over us with outdated policy, especially when it means killing off most of a breed whose genetics they claim they wish to preserve.

    Nor do I believe in bureaucrats deciding for me if I should drink my milk raw or pasteurized; or telling me it’s wrong if I choose to happily pasture my pigs in my own fields because I want a better pork chop; or that I must only consume the stale factory eggs of caged hens that have been inspected, sealed and stored for 6 weeks.

    Though a few souls will digress, this issue had everything to do with taking responsibility,

    • Patric Lyster

      Montana, you are the one who has started with the innuendo about things done and trying to make it appear that I falsified the information on the sheep. Well, perhaps it is time you actually looked at the facts and accept that the ewe DID come from your farm and scientifically, along with the investigation results, your farm is the most likely source of infection.
      Once again you are spouting false information, how does the 41 head (of which only 4 are registered) equate to most of the breed. You have 31 others, we have 27 plus lambs, and there are other breeders, so why do you continue to give false information? Just to sensationalize everything, to try to mislead people, rather than give the facts. Yes it is a shame that they wish to destroy 41 sheep, but it may have been necessary before, and now it is definitely necessary due to the risk that you have created for the entire industry. In all your doings, you are only concerned with Montana, not for other breeders or the industry. To say the policy is outdated, it may be but please present the science which shows what is outdated and present a factual proposal that addresses the risk and it does get looked at. Remember it is not one persons decision and it ultimately is governments. Some of what you proposed makes sense (some of what you proposed is already in their protocol {semen collection}) but some of it doesn’t address risk , and by your lawyers admission, you couldn’t afford a 2 year quarantine (mating to RR rams) so how could you afford a 5 year quarantine?
      I do agree that people should have the choice when it comes to food, but your fight of the scrapie protocol has nothing to do with the food issue. You could slaughter every one of your sheep and sell the meat, so how does it affect the people’s choice for food? You still will have other sheep, are you telling me that you raise them differently and that they will taste differently or something such? Also, you have said that you don’t want them and can’t use them, so why do you still have them? CFIA would have allowed them to be slaughtered and used for food. Besides according to you, you make a proft of $560 for each one you slaughter (at least from your reasoning of why the ewes needed to be allowed to lamb (which, to note, if you had went on the pilot project, they would have anyway), so if you had have sold only 1 or 2, you would have answered your financial issues with being able to afford registrations. Also at that amount of profit, you shouldn’t be needing to ask people to donate so you can afford to feed your sheep, because that is profit (profit equals income less expense).
      I really do not have anything against you. All i would like, is for you to quit with your innuendos about me (remember, not once have I blamed you for my losses and yet where did the positive ewe come from, your farm) and quit continually putting out false information. Simply put, tell the whole story and tell it truthfully.
      In regards to your issue with the 9 samples, I had coyote predation problems, that accounts for the number of head. Also we had DNA work done which verified that there was no lab mix up, or mix up on my behalf, which means the positive result was the ewe WHE 24S, which I had purchased from you. If you would like to pay for the DNa testing we could likely get more proof. We can’t test the dead mother (by the way you are correct, i don’t know why she died, you could always tell us, then we would all know) but at last information the sire (on the pedigree) is still alive. So it should be possible to match to him. Let me know if you wish to proceed with that and i will see about getting the DNA results compared, then you will be able to put your mind at ease over where the ewe came from.

      • “…according to you, you make a profit of $560 for each one you slaughter”.
        haha…If this were true there would be many more people in the sheep biz. what makes you think i can sell the remaining sheep? That is not the case. Your facts are wrong, your numbers are wrong. Once again , you don’t know what you are talking about, no disrespect, but you are speculating again.

      • Patric Lyster

        Quote from Ms. sellick, in letter she published that she sent to CFIA, “If those
        lambs could be reared to weaning [mid-September], they could be sold for meat. Ms. Jones estimates her profit to be $560 per lamb.”
        Ms. Jones, this is a direct quote from your lawyer, so are you implying that your lawyer is speculating or giving out false information? Perhaps you should get together with your lawyer and decide which false information you wish to use as what you consider to be the facts.

      • To clarify a point for any readers wondering about the $560…Mr. Lysters comment is once again out of context. I was responding to the question posed about my remaining non ARQ/ARQ sheep, which CFA will not permit to be sold, nor will they re-imburse for them…even though CFIA claims they are at low risk for scrapie susceptibility. They are still under quarantine…Since they are not the heritage genetics I have bred over the last 12 yrs, they are basically worthless to me as long as CFIA forced me to keep and feed them. I cannot make $560 profit by slaughtering an aged ewe, and I cannot make $560 profit being held under quarantine, it costs me money.

  9. Lorri Nelson

    That’s the whole point, Montana. Our points are not “erroneous.” They just don’t suit your cause. And all you had to do to avoid this was drop the stand you took that accuses Patric of falsifying samples, misidentifying the sheep, and lying about things that are indisputably true. That was just too low to let it go.

  10. jwondering888@gmail.com

    We too had an issue with CFIA and the Scrapie program last year. Here is an excerpt of their response to our question of verification.
    “As you can see from my summary of the Inspection report, our inspectors will do a primary and secondary verification and more until they are confident beyond a reasonable doubt that they have the correct information. Andrew Armstrong CFIA”
    I was also told in a phone conversation with Canadian Sheep Federation that since the loss of animals is possible in this program, the inspectors make every effort to ensure that the exact identification of the animal is correct and verified.
    We had no problems with CFIA since we kept accurate and complete Record of Movement records above and beyond the requirements of the Scrapie program.

  11. Once again (and again and again and again) Patric and Lorri’s diatribe is so full of errors and falsities, I cannot even begin to address them.

    In short—I still have no idea where you come up with all this. Never accused anything…the sheep identity was unknown and the tag was never submitted. Human error is human error. CFIA’s own rules dictate they must be submitted. They weren’t. I have every right to want to know truth. I have merely begun to defend myself against your and Lorri’s false accusations, that is all.

    I have merely asked from the beginning:
    1)That CFIA correctly identify a sheep that tested positive on your farm, and
    2) that CFIA determine if scrapie is in my flock with an alternative to destroying them all, and consider a proposal for all heritage breed flocks in Canada

    Period.

    My last response on Bovine to you both. Best of luck in your future endeavours

    • Patric Lyster

      Ms. Jones, you have used innuendo and continue to use false information. You also have now basically called your lawyer a liar, well done.Bravo. If she did not get the information from you, perhaps you should have her correct it and issue a press release.
      The sheep was dna verified to be the Shropshire ewe, WHE 24S, that I had sampled. Further than that, without your cooperation and the lack of parents available on your farm, it is not possible to further prove where she came from. We both know where that is, your farm. But as I am all too aware, you do not care to use the facts unless you can twist them to your advantage.
      Simply put, the positive ewe was born on your farm and due to science, coupled with the results of the investigation, it is almost 100% that she acquired scrapie from your farm. Check out how scrapie is transmitted, check the science, check the age and you will see why CFIA considers your flock to be a risk. What you have done and allowed to happen has the potential to put a lot more of the Shropshire population at risk, as well as the whole sheep industry, most of whom are small farmers. Interesting, how little concern you have for your fellow small farmers.

      Oh and by the way, you should try to remember what false or misleading information you are putting out there, because when you say that direct information from your lawyer to CFIA is false, then what credibility do you and your lawyer have?

    • Lorri Nelson

      Your last response? I wish that were true. I want very badly to bow out of this debate, but your desire to get in the last word is your undoing and apparently mine too.

      The sheep’s identity was not unknown. The sheep was tattoeed, WHE 24S. You can deny it all you want. If people choose ot believe you, so be it. But the sheep was born on your farm, to one of your sheep, in your flock. Suck it up already.

  12. Andrew Angus

    The farm and the heritage sheep were purchased in or around March 2004 by Linda Jones’ father, Philip Geoffrey Jones. This means that she has had the heritage sheep for 8 years, not the 12 stated on this site and in press releases.[snip]

  13. Andrew Angus….I’m flattered that a non-sheep, non-agricultural related estranged sister’s boyfriend would care so much to follow my every move (albeit a little creepy), however there have been no disparaging comments from me, you must be mistaken…I sent out a Dali Lama quote about life being too short to waste on anger…the one you actually claimed afterwards. I don’t really know enough about you to post much personal information—the good, the bad or the boring. [snip]

    You erred on facts:…in addition to my life as Art Director, photographer and writer {http://montanajones.com}, I have been farming {http://wholearth.com} for over 30 years and have had my flock for 12 years…I bought them in 2000. Though my Dad enjoyed them dearly, they were not his. So what was your….point?

    [snip]

  14. Gordon S Watson

    I know enough about how it goes with the govt., to know that the CFIA is not really concerned with the health of the Canadian sheep herd, nor the health of the humans being, let alone the yeomanry of the nation

    . Apparently, with the kibbitzers, it’s not really about the sheepies, either!

  15. Patric Lyster

    Ms. Jones, the offer still stands to get DNA parentage testing done to prove if the ewe came from yor farm. Do you wish to proceed with it? I will even pay for it so it would be free for you. Or is it a case of you already knowing where the ewe came from and thus prefer not to have the proof, so you can potentially mislead people by questioning the identity?
    I eagerly await the opportunity to help ease your mind, by proving where the ewe came from.
    Patric Lyster

  16. Patric Lyster

    Ms. Jones, if you are so all fired for the facts, how come you have never commented that the story on this page is wrong? How many sheep were “stolen”? Is it 31 or 41? Please point out the errors in the stories when you make coments, otherwise it would appear (in my opinion) that you are trying to mislead people. You can read a story and tell them that the accompanying picture is not a Shropshire, but fail to note errors in the story. Why is that? Why would you not let the writers know that they have errors? Or are you possibly having trouble remembering which of your versions you are trying to get out there? I see that On December 8, 2011 the CFIA was going to issue an order to destroy 44, but then 3 of your “healthy” sheep died. Then according to your lawyer, 3 more of your “healthy sheep died. This is based on the fact that the order was for 41 and your lawyer said that 3, on the order of destruction, had already died. So does that mean 6 of those “healthy” sheep died between December 8, 2011 and the issuing of the order of destruction in late March? I would hate to be a sheep on your farm as there are an awful lot of accidental or “healthy” deaths.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s