Rancher awaits appeal decision on feed issues

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Published: April 15, 2010

An Alberta rancher is waiting for a decision from the Alberta Court of Appeals in his nine-year dispute with a feed company.

Tom Seaborn of Rocky Mountain House sued Masterfeeds Inc. in 2003 after he bought a load of cattle feed in 2001 that allegedly caused health problems in his herd of purebred Shorthorns.

The case was heard and dismissed in Red Deer in October 2008 by Court of Queen’s Bench judge Douglas Sirrs.

“It is my view that Tom and Kirk Seaborn have exaggerated the symptoms of their cattle,” Sirrs wrote in his decision.

Read Also

Agriculture ministers have agreed to work on improving AgriStability to help with trade challenges Canadian farmers are currently facing, particularly from China and the United States. Photo: Robin Booker

Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes

federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million

Although he did not rule out that the cattle suffered health problems, the judge said there was insufficient evidence to link all the problems to the feed.

Seaborn’s appeal was heard in Calgary in March, and a tribunal of appeal judges reserved judgment. A decision could take three to six months, said Syd Sabine, Seaborn’s lawyer.

The case began in 2001 when Seaborn ordered 13,000 kilograms of a custom prepared ration for heifers and cows from Masterfeeds Inc. in Red Deer.

He and his son Kirk testified the heifers had diarrhea within a day or two of eating the mixture, and their condition deteriorated over time.

His veterinarians suggested the health issues might be linked to the feed.

The company offered to take the feed away and replace it, but Seaborn refused, saying he was afraid the load would be destroyed and he would have no evidence.

He filed his lawsuit in 2003 and requested $5 million in damages. The case was dismissed following a 50-day trial that ended in 2008.

The appeal focused on past legal precedents and whether the original trial judge made errors.

Sabine argued before the tribunal that the feed contamination charge was not fully proven at the first trial.

Seaborn claimed feed tests showed the presence of mycotoxins and higher than normal levels of copper, iron and selenium. He said the feed also included screenings with stinkweed seeds and contained protein levels higher than what he requested.

Veterinary toxicologist Bob Coppock testified that a number of toxins mixed together can create serious health effects in animals.

However, Sirrs did not accept this theory.

“There is scant scientific evidence before this court to support Dr. Coppock’s theory that complex mixtures of minerals, mycotoxins, and noxious weeds have proven to be a cause of illness in cattle herds, “ he wrote.

Masterfeeds did not return calls from the Western Producer.

About the author

Barbara Duckworth

Barbara Duckworth

Barbara Duckworth has covered many livestock shows and conferences across the continent since 1988. Duckworth had graduated from Lethbridge College’s journalism program in 1974, later earning a degree in communications from the University of Calgary. Duckworth won many awards from the Canadian Farm Writers Association, American Agricultural Editors Association, the North American Agricultural Journalists and the International Agriculture Journalists Association.

explore

Stories from our other publications