• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Ranchers.net

NOTE the lead article!!NOTE the lead article!!

I have been asked:

1. are these videos that expose industry errors "set-ups"?;

2. if not a "set-up", why do industry members permit this type of
behavior?;

3. why are there apparently no training, monitoring, and re-training
programs in all animal processing plants?;

4. What was the reason HSUS waited this long to air the video? If this
was an actual and persistent problem, would not the delay have allowed
the abuse to continue for an additional 3+ months?
And, if so, does not that delay make HSUS culpable for all
animal abuse since their discovery of these events?

I did not have a good answer for any of these questions.



-----Original Message-----
From: Feedstuffs FoodLink
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 9:27 AM
To: Reynnells, Richard
Subject: [BULK] Feedstuffs FoodLink - February 4, 2008


<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK->
Connecting Farm to Fork Febuary 4, 2008


USDA begins investigation of cattle plant



An undercover investigation by the Humane Society of the United States
(HSUS) at a California cattle plant last fall caused a firestorm of
reaction when it was made public last week - from the floor of the plant
where employees were fired or suspended to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture where the company was immediately suspended as a supplier to
USDA food programs.



The investigation took place at the Westland/Hallmark Meat Co. in Chino,
Cal., where an HSUS investigator, who had obtained employment at the
plant and worked undercover for two months last fall, secretly
videotaped abuse of injured and sick cattle, according to HSUS.



The video purportedly shows two workers jabbing cattle in the eyes,
shocking them with electric prods, dragging and attempting to lift them
with forklifts and tormenting one by flushing water into its nose.



The activity apparently was intended to get non-ambulatory cattle on
their feet so they could go to slaughter, as federal policy prohibits
such cattle from being slaughtered and, thus, their beef from entering
the food supply, a number of observers who viewed the video said. The
brains and spinal cords of non-ambulatory cattle (not the meat per se)
may harbor bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), and the policy is
part of the U.S. BSE mitigation strategy.



In a teleconference last week, Dr. Kenneth Petersen, assistant
administrator in the office of field operations at the Food Safety &
Inspection Service (FSIS), said while the video "depicts egregious and
unacceptable animal handling practices," they are, for now, only
allegations, and FSIS must respect the company's right to due process.



He said FSIS must establish evidence that what the video depicts is what
happened before it can take additional enforcement steps, and "a team"
was already at the facility and conducting the USDA investigation. FSIS
has enforcement responsibility for the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act,
which governs how livestock are handled in processing plants.



Petersen said he plans to meet with HSUS and its investigator and sees
no reason why the organization won't cooperate, noting that other animal
activist groups have cooperated with USDA in their investigations.
Reports late last week were that the organization had turned over 96
minutes of the "hundreds of hours of video" it claims to have.



USDA said it would have been preferable and "more constructive" if HSUS
had contacted the department before going public.



HSUS said it already had notified California enforcement officials, who
had requested "extra time" to review the video before its release to the
public, but it did not say why it hadn't notified USDA.



The incident occurred last fall and HSUS just took it public last week.
The organization said the delay was necessary to prepare the video and
determine the link between the plant and the national school lunch
program.



HSUS advocates vegetarianism.


Special Audio Feature

<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXN2mIgT4f2P18CucMQGxcp6CPCdxb6YlOV
z33HPbRNGO8DnEpe3UivvVvdph2w9s9ZrQZu-Dm8xrNUkHiaAI2z-hxqhLHrauDCeec5AAFG
-V62kH6WRdq8UCigSgoH3TR3MUW7ezyljGV-faeUJ4egAmrKBpIfwrrPDmbxdTUSUsww1RBG
qW4s>

<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/678.jpg?a=
1101967542583> There is no excuse

In this special audio segment, broadcaster Trent Loos discusses the
troubling events surrounding animal abuse at a California cattle plant.

He talks about how, if as the video depicts, the plant employees were
indeed abusing the cows, they had no right to exhibit such disrespect
for life.

Further, though, he questions the motivate of the Humane Society of the
United States in its decision not to immediate release the video to
authorities. If HSUS truely had the best interest of the animals in
mind, why did it wait months before releasing the evidence to
authorities...to maximize fund raising potential perhaps, he asks.

Click here to listen
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXN2mIgT4f2P18CucMQGxcp6CPCdxb6YlOV
z33HPbRNGO8DnEpe3UivvVvdph2w9s9ZrQZu-Dm8xrNUkHiaAI2z-hxqhLHrauDCeec5AAFG
-V62kH6WRdq8UCigSgoH3TR3MUW7ezyljGV-faeUJ4egAmrKBpIfwrrPDmbxdTUSUsww1RBG
qW4s> .


Tyson revamps advertising claims



Tyson Foods Inc. has agreed in federal district court to revamp its
advertising claim of "Raised Without Antibiotics" on its chicken
products.



The move came after three competitors legally challenged the company on
the grounds of false and misleading advertising.



Tyson and the U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed in mid-December to
new and more informative labeling for the company's Raised Without
Antibiotics chicken program, and Tyson said in court filings that it was
indeed in the process of transitioning its marketing campaign to reflect
the new claim when the legal challenge from its competitors surfaced.



That challenge was brought by Sanderson Farms, Foster Farms and Perdue
Farms seeking to temporarily restrain Tyson from continuing its Raised
Without Antibiotics program.



In court filings, Tyson dismissed the allegations, saying that even
though claims in advertising are not covered by its agreement with USDA,
it had proactively been working to change the advertising following the
Dec. 19, 2007, agreement with USDA.



Jenna Johnston of Tyson's legal team said no advertisement containing
the Raised Without Antibiotics claim was approved to run after Jan. 20
and that advertising scheduled to run from Dec. 31, 2007, through Jan.
20, 2008, had already been purchased on Sept. 27, 2007, so the creative
content could not be changed.



The plaintiffs said media campaigns continued to run after the Jan. 20
deadline, and it wasn't until Tyson was notified that the matter was
being taken to court that it pulled the advertisements. The plaintiffs
filed their motion Jan. 25 in the U.S. District Court in Baltimore, Md.



Both Tyson and its competitors claimed victory on Blake's ruling.



A spokesman for the plaintiffs said while the ruling was not necessarily
in their favor, the companies felt they had been successful in getting
Tyson to pull its "misleading" advertising.



Tyson said it expects to start using its new advertising and promotional
materials in February.


Click here
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWX0i64rb8Ov8FrZbQXpnucE6yDmn2R8mLlc
_VSzrVnPTjAxfkJ4W2OxapYrfwQnbjrp6nGpQbyr5ND12LJZpMmLLkJYBna07B6UKuVGe65B
w1S1qRZRkT4AlunWRb6U6XBuy02qKKUnprcVoNT6mJl2oCamo7dolIwVonGKV00VO6e7odq4
f182z4gmVbm7OnLObm-WVro2dgXdi8RbcuGl5ld_Q_Wn7sVdhZ66XvQCyXb16TOuVjRzOKAV
JtLuyIFkD-_y1TCsWwOHKiroj46QdDtY1JE2wazu2Vq2IKP-R1ETmkHzrd9FhI8fzJoozdr9
4H1TY3xf67_LqztGGE-0_kLU3YD1TWTlr1UhUfMisdA7yvSYorvh4Leg0FBUuGHEMAfrnjUa
NiBlsZ07KrXDoyi-23jXwW0gzH6bEDhN0A==> for the complete story.



And let's consider this....



In mid-December, Tyson and USDA agreed to a modified label claim of:



"Chicken Raised Without Antibiotics that impact antibiotic resistance in
humans."



Since NO concrete evidence exists that antibiotics used in animal
agriculture lead to resistance in humans, couldn't this new label claim
could legally be applied to all meat products produced with the use of
approved antibiotics.



Back to the drawing board USDA?




Our Commentary


Pew antibiotic report misses mark



Make no mistake, the livestock industry is aware of the concern
surrounding antimicrobial resistance.



Prudent use of antibiotics and detailed efforts to determine exactly
what that means for compassionate care of sick animals, production
efficiency and food safety are ongoing.



There are no shortcuts in the scientific complexity of the issue, but
there is a growing urgency for sound answers to the growing concerns
about links between antibiotic use in livestock and resistance problems
in human health.



The report last week by the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal
Production did little to add to the debate.



Two credentialed scientists, Dr. Michael Blackwell, a consultant and
former Food & Drug Administration scientist as well as a former dean of
the University of Tennessee's College of Veterinary Medicine, and Dr.
Mary Wilson, associate professor at Harvard Medical School and an
infectious disease expert, briefed congressional staffers and the press
on the Pew report.



Both expressed grave concerns about livestock antibiotic usage. They
cited concerns about the ability of bacteria to transfer genes for
resistance among themselves, including to non-pathogenic bacteria - a
phenomenon that is well documented and worthy of concern.



It is going to take more than speculation of theoretical harm to make
changes in livestock disease management and production systems. It is
going to take a factual risk assessment on individual antimicrobials and
the conditions of use that favor the development of resistance.



That information is missing from the Pew report.



Bob Martin, director of the Pew Commission, noted that conducting a risk
assessment "went beyond our charter."



Nonetheless, Keep Antibiotics Working and the Union of Concerned
Scientists are using the Pew report to push congressional legislation
that would phase out those classes of antibiotics used in animal feed,
if they are also used in human treatments, over a two-year period.



They lack evidence of harm.

Loos Tales for Feedstuffs

Research is indicating that there may indeed be a link between human
health and one's exposure to animal agriculture. In this segment, Trent
Loos talks about some new findings that show dairy farmers are five
times less likely to develop disease because of their regular exposure
to low levels of bacteria in the manure and their environment.

Manure is good for you?
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWUdfue58BFdgNNPYS5Fi2RRldJ2H39N0JbW
YrC7PgQj3xS7A3yUcz7oLdOfVt77dLyQsbnjyo3h42bZK6Vn85r8q1a1x-bY9AZEUZwTpZgx
DSF0XEqTWgRZ5P8x7j-GAdR5cdgmbqBguTvgvCkBOrmI05AgZWwSu9KkcDhKFk0A8y_oSNJx
12J-UrIto_AgJuJMNpVRwzgVcIxlkD8_HWefcqOzjShg9-Q=>

<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/7.gif?a=11
01967542583>




Brought to you by the United Egg Producers



GAO releases food safety oversight report



The Government Accountability Office has released a report reviewing
federal oversight for food safety. It found that the Food & Drug
Administration needs to utilize its resources more efficiently because
while the workload regarding food safety in the past 10 years has
increased, staff and funding have not increased at the same pace.



Overlapping inspections by FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture
were another finding of the GAO report. The agency recommended the FDA
commission USDA inspectors at certain facilities to reduce overlap.



FDA's Food Protection Plan released in November 2007 makes some positive
first steps toward enhancing food safety, according to the GAO. However,
additional funding will be needed to carry them out. Without a clear
description of resources and strategies, it will be difficult for
Congress to assess the likelihood of the plan's success in achieving its
intended results.



For a complete look at the GAO Food Oversight Report, Click here
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWW2NKsFXPFYDcmEes9igX52ylOf7mMltP-b
OyFqmyqHfMyF5oLAMzCeTm-66jECEUP7U5dFrMpHBtHXjfb0P4yb36mcgv309NVyL1kNyhPF
pS_lkrsc99-FARpB2Ruk6pM=> .


Featured article


<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/639.jpg?a=
1101967542583>


Country of origin labeling will be costly



The country-of-origin-labeling (COOL) law becomes effective in
September, and despite recent improvements, it's still an example of
poorly thought-out policy that will have negative, unintended
consequences - a lose-lose-lose for Canadian pork producers, U.S. pork
producers and consumers on both sides of the border, according to three
panelists at the Minnesota Pork Congress.



COOL, which was written into the 2002 farm bill, requires that all fresh
beef, pork, lamb, seafood and now chicken merchandised at retail be
labeled as to the country or countries of origin of the animal or
animals from which the product was produced. It also covers fresh fruits
and vegetables and peanuts but does not cover food sold through
foodservice.



It has nothing to do with food safety, and some suggest that it has
everything to do with protectionism and trade barriers, as the panel
implied. "COOL is a political trade barrier," said Andrew Dickson,
general manager of the Manitoba Pork Council.



He said U.S. retailers have told U.S. packers that they don't want
labels with multi-origin sources, that "they only want one label: U.S."



In turn, he said, at least two U.S. packer/processors have already
stated that they will not buy hogs as of September that were born in
Canada, regardless of the fact that they may have been raised in the
U.S.



This cuts off an important market for Canadian pork producers, both
those who sell feeder pigs to U.S. producers and those who sell market
hogs to U.S. packers, Dickson said.



University of Minnesota economist Brian Buhr said COOL will disrupt
trade in hogs and pork between Canada and the U.S. "Trade always
benefits both parties," he said, and by extension, disruption in trade
hurts both parties.



Canadian producers have "a comparative advantage" in that they can
produce feeder pigs at less of a cost than U.S. producers, and U.S.
producers have a comparative advantage in that they can finish pigs more
efficiently than Canadian producers, he said.



Accordingly, if U.S. plants are going to stop buying Canadian-born hogs,
then Canadian producers will lose an important market for feeder pigs
and will need to finish pigs at home, which will be more costly and
increase pork prices for Canadian consumers, Buhr said.



Likewise, U.S. producers will lose an import source of feeder pigs and
will need to produce or source feeder pigs at home, which will be more
costly and increase pork prices for U.S. consumers, he said.



COOL will be "a net drag" on producers in both countries unless
consumers in both countries are willing to offset higher costs of
production by paying increased prices for pork, he said.



Click here for the
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXmh-K04m5TPiuHGZwCgYiBVcj5kasJaMLb
fmtLOT0VwiyWqR-BtHxixvgk73i72l8sVhNcHYg3tuWjRB3LxZ4f9BqPanGTWrDLbfxbSG4b
ILZUn-_BjhL7i7RW4sXVBtHXv_Ewy3nLMIGdVvyOD8GLwqpIdLvDrlRr_pP-kqcBDac_mSUy
inrZ58d46clCZ7vRsDI9jGO2amrLth_39CqAjXArI5Afjn6hHHlGsP3L8SZaX9RlIMxgyMaJ
nPVrrPbJjNL2E67qpuDj3zcrJDK7R6aKmpcJNRu0kSA-o9Q1KIBcv1p8CFLBcdkGQI3fdYaY
rs2WSJsu1W6ab0U2FDPGCay4-HA2iipDu8eg5zMcMg==>
complete article


<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/204.jpg?a=
1101967542583>


Ban creating inhumane killing of horses



Another example of unintended consequences is the decision by the U.S.
district court in New Orleans, La., last year that upheld a Texas law
prohibiting the processing of horses for human consumption and the law
the Illinois legislature passed last year prohibiting the processing of
horses in Illinois for human consumption.



This closed down the only three horse plants in the U.S. - two in Texas
and one in Illinois - although the Illinois plant, Cavel International
Inc., is appealing the Illinois law to the U.S. Supreme Court.



The laws, ostensibly in the humane interests of horses, have made
horses' lives terrible because horse owners have limited options for
humanely putting down their horses when they no longer want to own them,
according to the American Veterinary Medical Assn. (AVMA).



There are about 100,000 horses that become unwanted every year,
according to Dr. Mark Lutschaunig, director of government relations for
AVMA.



The best option would be euthanasia by a veterinarian, but euthanasia
and carcass disposal in an environmentally safe way costs about $400 and
is too expensive for many horse owners, according to Dr. Tom Lenz, chair
of the animal welfare committee of the American Association of Equine
Practitioners. Moreover, many states ban burying horses due to concerns
of pollution.



Consequently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that there was
a 41% increase in horses shipped to Canada for processing last year and
a 312% increase in horses shipped to Mexico, and while Canadian handling
of horses is humane - as it was in the U.S. plants - the process in
Mexico is gruesome in which horses may actually be stabbed to death.



Otherwise, horses are being turned loose in the countryside and are
dying from attacks and injuries in the wild and from starvation,
according to equine and veterinary sources.



No one thought about these unintended consequences, AVMA executive
director Dr. Ron DeHaven told Feedstuffs, and now, the horses are paying
for it.


Our Partners
The following organizations and companies are our partners in Feedstuffs
FoodLink
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK-> and are committed to the production of safe, high-quality
and affordable meat, milk and eggs.





<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXITns7-SiobMZ4wIYK-UcBIOgmRkTDAtb9
Parqen5SBlVMlxXi_YceGSJvW2yqqQJcgrPZRh8ZzNycAGh7-V_LMj8_9gcz5kF9rTfNQpgS
iQ==>


<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWX_M4psiODtK2sEuvPKrRCBLE1BxsqnXTy0
ancpM0-1qupV7t01gxUE0PujuAbZomxKYC-xc2CvqrLXNXKPe6aeNKJmKJkQ7hM=>


Faces of Ag
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXBDVO9C_hvVcN61AvLeRf3KX553xlYXAwv
GpqsWxAy-neFJ56WFvqYmPaCs869Pel1W552Vocq1jIMEVfsYhLvMWhYT-ss-tDS8PxmvmZe
EQ==>


For information on becoming a Feedstuffs FoodLink Partner contact us at
[email protected] <mailto:p[email protected]>
or call (800)333-8261 or (952)930-4349.

____________________
<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/email.jsp?m=1101427560201>

Join Our Mailing
List<http://img.constantcontact.com/letters/images/1101093164665/joml.gi
f>

Please feel free to pass this newsletter on to others that you feel may
find it of interest.

For information on food production and U.S. animal agriculture, visit
FeedstuffsFoodLink.com
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK->




<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/120.jpg?a=
1101967542583>


About Feedstuffs FoodLink

Feedstuffs FoodLink
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK-> is a product of Feedstuffs
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWUaBid7ZHegGtesuzA-8u6P781DIjBU6xMv
FeSQbnxPmB1ChRWDV_JhKfzrd1GAWFkRvvz7UilZeo25zlTYtt8cTCxPPDi5uFjSi_6pmwzZ
-x5Bo6ojJ0-YJD3piEAQAC3wRj1pq6aOCErplH02GaLgJjCkDTSSiCq7hStxOj5JPkwQqf5d
OvLVBuyawdKC7eBMxYdjQn2qvIrSbw5xuxRu2SJtEnTdaDO712-MBk0mkDA6UrkxJRks3Wn8
kB9Wp2bp8xRdW8O8REBM2Lfj-L2Ez2qz7usqsxQDNF-uboMgbA==> and is focused on
providing expert-based information related to the production of safe,
high-quality and affordable meat, milk and eggs.

At www.FeedstuffsFoodLink.com
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK-> you will find an extensive online multi-media library of
information gathered directly from scientists, researchers and analysts
as related to specific key food production topics as well as a newly
added section profiling various food producers across the country.

Check out the new Feedstuffs FoodLink blog
http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWVzAThVhBkiU-OTgRtQd2Y4uscHSTEZgwhFLSyFQIZNfpcFdZ8X4lvTAEjYKDWhTqw6iIFDa07NtioLWqPPIGt2-7es7R7C_pvc45tA2CBjCz0AokK8Z_--O9ZeqJRLlvberS6kwChqgTfTG6H35UDJVtsO1yl4QMN9ZEyKQZasWpWOh7X5l_e6BTKl_PLJUZnNvplDY3Zz4zwGFTz0r2rgkZnwPrB8y8dznzuzdpan1oSezWzlxEXEXdFdKTAb6g8DIgdI3QUSd5yOdEI4c58zqtAzHA9w1_ekeGLhdZyd0kgkn3iUIXCqZ15FXcRtHTr6aor_2mabEzC9pDCj4daVXiXxVWp32prA3ExkjZIiBCrDaoOVwgaUFJtrfuhiZJY= and
our weekly Feedstuffs FoodLink page in each weekly issue of Feedstuffs.

Feedstuffs FoodLink segments air at 7:30 and 10:30 p.m. on Dish Network
9411.



Forward email
<http://ui.constantcontact.com/sa/fwtf.jsp?m=1101427560201&ea=rreynnells
%40csrees.usda.gov&a=1101967542583>

<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?v=001Ii8Y_QGk40rTcyRoBoMkt1I6r
hp8vPadsnrxBlXfyoREXLF6lowO9pV7ujHgCfDRn05qmr9uw2Q%3D&p=un>
This email was sent to [email protected]usda.gov, by
[email protected]
Update Profile/Email Address
<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?v=001Ii8Y_QGk40rTcyRoBoMkt1I6r
hp8vPadsnrxBlXfyoREXLF6lowO9pV7ujHgCfDRn05qmr9uw2Q%3D&p=oo> | Instant
removal with SafeUnsubscribe
http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?v=001Ii8Y_QGk40rTcyRoBoMkt1I6rhp8vPadsnrxBlXfyoREXLF6lowO9pV7ujHgCfDRn05qmr9uw2Q%3D&p=un (tm) |
Privacy Policy
http://ui.constantcontact.com/roving/CCPrivacyPolicy.jsp
Email Marketing
http://www.constantcontact.com/index.jsp?cc=newsVE02
by
http://www.constantcontact.com/index.jsp?cc=newsVE02
Miller Publishing | 12400 Whitewater Dr. | Suite 160 | Minnetonka | MN |
55343

http://rs6.net/on.jsp?t=1101967542583.0.1101427560201.4809&ts=S0315&o=http://ui.constantcontact.com/images1/s.gif


I have been asked:

1. are these videos that expose industry errors "set-ups"?;

2. if not a "set-up", why do industry members permit this type of
behavior?;

3. why are there apparently no training, monitoring, and re-training
programs in all animal processing plants?;

4. What was the reason HSUS waited this long to air the video? If this
was an actual and persistent problem, would not the delay have allowed
the abuse to continue for an additional 3+ months?
And, if so, does not that delay make HSUS culpable for all
animal abuse since their discovery of these events?

I did not have a good answer for any of these questions.



-----Original Message-----
From: Feedstuffs FoodLink

Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 9:27 AM
To: Reynnells, Richard USDA
Subject: [BULK] Feedstuffs FoodLink - February 4, 2008


http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHabOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw38jqarKm3gK-
Connecting Farm to Fork Febuary 4, 2008


USDA begins investigation of cattle plant



An undercover investigation by the Humane Society of the United States
(HSUS) at a California cattle plant last fall caused a firestorm of
reaction when it was made public last week - from the floor of the plant
where employees were fired or suspended to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture where the company was immediately suspended as a supplier to
USDA food programs.



The investigation took place at the Westland/Hallmark Meat Co. in Chino,
Cal., where an HSUS investigator, who had obtained employment at the
plant and worked undercover for two months last fall, secretly
videotaped abuse of injured and sick cattle, according to HSUS.



The video purportedly shows two workers jabbing cattle in the eyes,
shocking them with electric prods, dragging and attempting to lift them
with forklifts and tormenting one by flushing water into its nose.



The activity apparently was intended to get non-ambulatory cattle on
their feet so they could go to slaughter, as federal policy prohibits
such cattle from being slaughtered and, thus, their beef from entering
the food supply, a number of observers who viewed the video said. The
brains and spinal cords of non-ambulatory cattle (not the meat per se)
may harbor bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), and the policy is
part of the U.S. BSE mitigation strategy.



In a teleconference last week, Dr. Kenneth Petersen, assistant
administrator in the office of field operations at the Food Safety &
Inspection Service (FSIS), said while the video "depicts egregious and
unacceptable animal handling practices," they are, for now, only
allegations, and FSIS must respect the company's right to due process.



He said FSIS must establish evidence that what the video depicts is what
happened before it can take additional enforcement steps, and "a team"
was already at the facility and conducting the USDA investigation. FSIS
has enforcement responsibility for the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act,
which governs how livestock are handled in processing plants.



Petersen said he plans to meet with HSUS and its investigator and sees
no reason why the organization won't cooperate, noting that other animal
activist groups have cooperated with USDA in their investigations.
Reports late last week were that the organization had turned over 96
minutes of the "hundreds of hours of video" it claims to have.



USDA said it would have been preferable and "more constructive" if HSUS
had contacted the department before going public.



HSUS said it already had notified California enforcement officials, who
had requested "extra time" to review the video before its release to the
public, but it did not say why it hadn't notified USDA.



The incident occurred last fall and HSUS just took it public last week.
The organization said the delay was necessary to prepare the video and
determine the link between the plant and the national school lunch
program.



HSUS advocates vegetarianism.


Special Audio Feature

http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXN2mIgT4f2P18CucMQGxcp6CPCdxb6YlOV
z33HPbRNGO8DnEpe3UivvVvdph2w9s9ZrQZu-Dm8xrNUkHiaAI2z-hxqhLHrauDCeec5AAFG
-V62kH6WRdq8UCigSgoH3TR3MUW7ezyljGV-faeUJ4egAmrKBpIfwrrPDmbxdTUSUsww1RBG
qW4s

http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/678.jpg?a=
1101967542583 There is no excuse

In this special audio segment, broadcaster Trent Loos discusses the
troubling events surrounding animal abuse at a California cattle plant.

He talks about how, if as the video depicts, the plant employees were
indeed abusing the cows, they had no right to exhibit such disrespect
for life.

Further, though, he questions the motivate of the Humane Society of the
United States in its decision not to immediate release the video to
authorities. If HSUS truely had the best interest of the animals in
mind, why did it wait months before releasing the evidence to
authorities...to maximize fund raising potential perhaps, he asks.

Click here to listen
http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXN2mIgT4f2P18CucMQGxcp6CPCdxb6YlOV
z33HPbRNGO8DnEpe3UivvVvdph2w9s9ZrQZu-Dm8xrNUkHiaAI2z-hxqhLHrauDCeec5AAFG
-V62kH6WRdq8UCigSgoH3TR3MUW7ezyljGV-faeUJ4egAmrKBpIfwrrPDmbxdTUSUsww1RBG
qW4s



Tyson revamps advertising claims



Tyson Foods Inc. has agreed in federal district court to revamp its
advertising claim of "Raised Without Antibiotics" on its chicken
products.



The move came after three competitors legally challenged the company on
the grounds of false and misleading advertising.



Tyson and the U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed in mid-December to
new and more informative labeling for the company's Raised Without
Antibiotics chicken program, and Tyson said in court filings that it was
indeed in the process of transitioning its marketing campaign to reflect
the new claim when the legal challenge from its competitors surfaced.



That challenge was brought by Sanderson Farms, Foster Farms and Perdue
Farms seeking to temporarily restrain Tyson from continuing its Raised
Without Antibiotics program.



In court filings, Tyson dismissed the allegations, saying that even
though claims in advertising are not covered by its agreement with USDA,
it had proactively been working to change the advertising following the
Dec. 19, 2007, agreement with USDA.



Jenna Johnston of Tyson's legal team said no advertisement containing
the Raised Without Antibiotics claim was approved to run after Jan. 20
and that advertising scheduled to run from Dec. 31, 2007, through Jan.
20, 2008, had already been purchased on Sept. 27, 2007, so the creative
content could not be changed.



The plaintiffs said media campaigns continued to run after the Jan. 20
deadline, and it wasn't until Tyson was notified that the matter was
being taken to court that it pulled the advertisements. The plaintiffs
filed their motion Jan. 25 in the U.S. District Court in Baltimore, Md.



Both Tyson and its competitors claimed victory on Blake's ruling.



A spokesman for the plaintiffs said while the ruling was not necessarily
in their favor, the companies felt they had been successful in getting
Tyson to pull its "misleading" advertising.



Tyson said it expects to start using its new advertising and promotional
materials in February.


Click here
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWX0i64rb8Ov8FrZbQXpnucE6yDmn2R8mLlc
_VSzrVnPTjAxfkJ4W2OxapYrfwQnbjrp6nGpQbyr5ND12LJZpMmLLkJYBna07B6UKuVGe65B
w1S1qRZRkT4AlunWRb6U6XBuy02qKKUnprcVoNT6mJl2oCamo7dolIwVonGKV00VO6e7odq4
f182z4gmVbm7OnLObm-WVro2dgXdi8RbcuGl5ld_Q_Wn7sVdhZ66XvQCyXb16TOuVjRzOKAV
JtLuyIFkD-_y1TCsWwOHKiroj46QdDtY1JE2wazu2Vq2IKP-R1ETmkHzrd9FhI8fzJoozdr9
4H1TY3xf67_LqztGGE-0_kLU3YD1TWTlr1UhUfMisdA7yvSYorvh4Leg0FBUuGHEMAfrnjUa
NiBlsZ07KrXDoyi-23jXwW0gzH6bEDhN0A==> for the complete story.



And let's consider this....



In mid-December, Tyson and USDA agreed to a modified label claim of:



"Chicken Raised Without Antibiotics that impact antibiotic resistance in
humans."



Since NO concrete evidence exists that antibiotics used in animal
agriculture lead to resistance in humans, couldn't this new label claim
could legally be applied to all meat products produced with the use of
approved antibiotics.



Back to the drawing board USDA?




Our Commentary


Pew antibiotic report misses mark



Make no mistake, the livestock industry is aware of the concern
surrounding antimicrobial resistance.



Prudent use of antibiotics and detailed efforts to determine exactly
what that means for compassionate care of sick animals, production
efficiency and food safety are ongoing.



There are no shortcuts in the scientific complexity of the issue, but
there is a growing urgency for sound answers to the growing concerns
about links between antibiotic use in livestock and resistance problems
in human health.



The report last week by the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal
Production did little to add to the debate.



Two credentialed scientists, Dr. Michael Blackwell, a consultant and
former Food & Drug Administration scientist as well as a former dean of
the University of Tennessee's College of Veterinary Medicine, and Dr.
Mary Wilson, associate professor at Harvard Medical School and an
infectious disease expert, briefed congressional staffers and the press
on the Pew report.



Both expressed grave concerns about livestock antibiotic usage. They
cited concerns about the ability of bacteria to transfer genes for
resistance among themselves, including to non-pathogenic bacteria - a
phenomenon that is well documented and worthy of concern.



It is going to take more than speculation of theoretical harm to make
changes in livestock disease management and production systems. It is
going to take a factual risk assessment on individual antimicrobials and
the conditions of use that favor the development of resistance.



That information is missing from the Pew report.



Bob Martin, director of the Pew Commission, noted that conducting a risk
assessment "went beyond our charter."



Nonetheless, Keep Antibiotics Working and the Union of Concerned
Scientists are using the Pew report to push congressional legislation
that would phase out those classes of antibiotics used in animal feed,
if they are also used in human treatments, over a two-year period.



They lack evidence of harm.

Loos Tales for Feedstuffs

Research is indicating that there may indeed be a link between human
health and one's exposure to animal agriculture. In this segment, Trent
Loos talks about some new findings that show dairy farmers are five
times less likely to develop disease because of their regular exposure
to low levels of bacteria in the manure and their environment.

Manure is good for you?
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWUdfue58BFdgNNPYS5Fi2RRldJ2H39N0JbW
YrC7PgQj3xS7A3yUcz7oLdOfVt77dLyQsbnjyo3h42bZK6Vn85r8q1a1x-bY9AZEUZwTpZgx
DSF0XEqTWgRZ5P8x7j-GAdR5cdgmbqBguTvgvCkBOrmI05AgZWwSu9KkcDhKFk0A8y_oSNJx
12J-UrIto_AgJuJMNpVRwzgVcIxlkD8_HWefcqOzjShg9-Q=>

<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/7.gif?a=11
01967542583>




Brought to you by the United Egg Producers



GAO releases food safety oversight report



The Government Accountability Office has released a report reviewing
federal oversight for food safety. It found that the Food & Drug
Administration needs to utilize its resources more efficiently because
while the workload regarding food safety in the past 10 years has
increased, staff and funding have not increased at the same pace.



Overlapping inspections by FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture
were another finding of the GAO report. The agency recommended the FDA
commission USDA inspectors at certain facilities to reduce overlap.



FDA's Food Protection Plan released in November 2007 makes some positive
first steps toward enhancing food safety, according to the GAO. However,
additional funding will be needed to carry them out. Without a clear
description of resources and strategies, it will be difficult for
Congress to assess the likelihood of the plan's success in achieving its
intended results.



For a complete look at the GAO Food Oversight Report, Click here
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWW2NKsFXPFYDcmEes9igX52ylOf7mMltP-b
OyFqmyqHfMyF5oLAMzCeTm-66jECEUP7U5dFrMpHBtHXjfb0P4yb36mcgv309NVyL1kNyhPF
pS_lkrsc99-FARpB2Ruk6pM=> .


Featured article


<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/639.jpg?a=
1101967542583>


Country of origin labeling will be costly



The country-of-origin-labeling (COOL) law becomes effective in
September, and despite recent improvements, it's still an example of
poorly thought-out policy that will have negative, unintended
consequences - a lose-lose-lose for Canadian pork producers, U.S. pork
producers and consumers on both sides of the border, according to three
panelists at the Minnesota Pork Congress.



COOL, which was written into the 2002 farm bill, requires that all fresh
beef, pork, lamb, seafood and now chicken merchandised at retail be
labeled as to the country or countries of origin of the animal or
animals from which the product was produced. It also covers fresh fruits
and vegetables and peanuts but does not cover food sold through
foodservice.



It has nothing to do with food safety, and some suggest that it has
everything to do with protectionism and trade barriers, as the panel
implied. "COOL is a political trade barrier," said Andrew Dickson,
general manager of the Manitoba Pork Council.



He said U.S. retailers have told U.S. packers that they don't want
labels with multi-origin sources, that "they only want one label: U.S."



In turn, he said, at least two U.S. packer/processors have already
stated that they will not buy hogs as of September that were born in
Canada, regardless of the fact that they may have been raised in the
U.S.



This cuts off an important market for Canadian pork producers, both
those who sell feeder pigs to U.S. producers and those who sell market
hogs to U.S. packers, Dickson said.



University of Minnesota economist Brian Buhr said COOL will disrupt
trade in hogs and pork between Canada and the U.S. "Trade always
benefits both parties," he said, and by extension, disruption in trade
hurts both parties.



Canadian producers have "a comparative advantage" in that they can
produce feeder pigs at less of a cost than U.S. producers, and U.S.
producers have a comparative advantage in that they can finish pigs more
efficiently than Canadian producers, he said.



Accordingly, if U.S. plants are going to stop buying Canadian-born hogs,
then Canadian producers will lose an important market for feeder pigs
and will need to finish pigs at home, which will be more costly and
increase pork prices for Canadian consumers, Buhr said.



Likewise, U.S. producers will lose an import source of feeder pigs and
will need to produce or source feeder pigs at home, which will be more
costly and increase pork prices for U.S. consumers, he said.



COOL will be "a net drag" on producers in both countries unless
consumers in both countries are willing to offset higher costs of
production by paying increased prices for pork, he said.



Click here for the
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXmh-K04m5TPiuHGZwCgYiBVcj5kasJaMLb
fmtLOT0VwiyWqR-BtHxixvgk73i72l8sVhNcHYg3tuWjRB3LxZ4f9BqPanGTWrDLbfxbSG4b
ILZUn-_BjhL7i7RW4sXVBtHXv_Ewy3nLMIGdVvyOD8GLwqpIdLvDrlRr_pP-kqcBDac_mSUy
inrZ58d46clCZ7vRsDI9jGO2amrLth_39CqAjXArI5Afjn6hHHlGsP3L8SZaX9RlIMxgyMaJ
nPVrrPbJjNL2E67qpuDj3zcrJDK7R6aKmpcJNRu0kSA-o9Q1KIBcv1p8CFLBcdkGQI3fdYaY
rs2WSJsu1W6ab0U2FDPGCay4-HA2iipDu8eg5zMcMg==>
complete article


<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/204.jpg?a=
1101967542583>


Ban creating inhumane killing of horses



Another example of unintended consequences is the decision by the U.S.
district court in New Orleans, La., last year that upheld a Texas law
prohibiting the processing of horses for human consumption and the law
the Illinois legislature passed last year prohibiting the processing of
horses in Illinois for human consumption.



This closed down the only three horse plants in the U.S. - two in Texas
and one in Illinois - although the Illinois plant, Cavel International
Inc., is appealing the Illinois law to the U.S. Supreme Court.



The laws, ostensibly in the humane interests of horses, have made
horses' lives terrible because horse owners have limited options for
humanely putting down their horses when they no longer want to own them,
according to the American Veterinary Medical Assn. (AVMA).



There are about 100,000 horses that become unwanted every year,
according to Dr. Mark Lutschaunig, director of government relations for
AVMA.



The best option would be euthanasia by a veterinarian, but euthanasia
and carcass disposal in an environmentally safe way costs about $400 and
is too expensive for many horse owners, according to Dr. Tom Lenz, chair
of the animal welfare committee of the American Association of Equine
Practitioners. Moreover, many states ban burying horses due to concerns
of pollution.



Consequently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that there was
a 41% increase in horses shipped to Canada for processing last year and
a 312% increase in horses shipped to Mexico, and while Canadian handling
of horses is humane - as it was in the U.S. plants - the process in
Mexico is gruesome in which horses may actually be stabbed to death.



Otherwise, horses are being turned loose in the countryside and are
dying from attacks and injuries in the wild and from starvation,
according to equine and veterinary sources.



No one thought about these unintended consequences, AVMA executive
director Dr. Ron DeHaven told Feedstuffs, and now, the horses are paying
for it.


Our Partners
The following organizations and companies are our partners in Feedstuffs
FoodLink
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK-> and are committed to the production of safe, high-quality
and affordable meat, milk and eggs.





<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXITns7-SiobMZ4wIYK-UcBIOgmRkTDAtb9
Parqen5SBlVMlxXi_YceGSJvW2yqqQJcgrPZRh8ZzNycAGh7-V_LMj8_9gcz5kF9rTfNQpgS
iQ==>


<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWX_M4psiODtK2sEuvPKrRCBLE1BxsqnXTy0
ancpM0-1qupV7t01gxUE0PujuAbZomxKYC-xc2CvqrLXNXKPe6aeNKJmKJkQ7hM=>


Faces of Ag
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWXBDVO9C_hvVcN61AvLeRf3KX553xlYXAwv
GpqsWxAy-neFJ56WFvqYmPaCs869Pel1W552Vocq1jIMEVfsYhLvMWhYT-ss-tDS8PxmvmZe
EQ==>


For information on becoming a Feedstuffs FoodLink Partner contact us at
[email protected] <mailto:p[email protected]>
or call (800)333-8261 or (952)930-4349.

____________________
<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/email.jsp?m=1101427560201>

Join Our Mailing
List<http://img.constantcontact.com/letters/images/1101093164665/joml.gi
f>

Please feel free to pass this newsletter on to others that you feel may
find it of interest.

For information on food production and U.S. animal agriculture, visit
FeedstuffsFoodLink.com
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK->




<http://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs015/1101427560201/img/120.jpg?a=
1101967542583>


About Feedstuffs FoodLink

Feedstuffs FoodLink
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK-> is a product of Feedstuffs
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWUaBid7ZHegGtesuzA-8u6P781DIjBU6xMv
FeSQbnxPmB1ChRWDV_JhKfzrd1GAWFkRvvz7UilZeo25zlTYtt8cTCxPPDi5uFjSi_6pmwzZ
-x5Bo6ojJ0-YJD3piEAQAC3wRj1pq6aOCErplH02GaLgJjCkDTSSiCq7hStxOj5JPkwQqf5d
OvLVBuyawdKC7eBMxYdjQn2qvIrSbw5xuxRu2SJtEnTdaDO712-MBk0mkDA6UrkxJRks3Wn8
kB9Wp2bp8xRdW8O8REBM2Lfj-L2Ez2qz7usqsxQDNF-uboMgbA==> and is focused on
providing expert-based information related to the production of safe,
high-quality and affordable meat, milk and eggs.

At www.FeedstuffsFoodLink.com
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWWyUu1asjgCT82q0JzLr-eE03TmuoFUXaHa
bOPpqv0ESRx4yMxHWsxqCg8h4J1zcZnJkeyThcj_25xFTM4f2audpormCcPUjSHG99DwwKpw
38jqarKm3gK-> you will find an extensive online multi-media library of
information gathered directly from scientists, researchers and analysts
as related to specific key food production topics as well as a newly
added section profiling various food producers across the country.

Check out the new Feedstuffs FoodLink blog
<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Rz-bi6NouWVzAThVhBkiU-OTgRtQd2Y4uscHSTEZgwhF
LSyFQIZNfpcFdZ8X4lvTAEjYKDWhTqw6iIFDa07NtioLWqPPIGt2-7es7R7C_pvc45tA2CBj
Cz0AokK8Z_--O9ZeqJRLlvberS6kwChqgTfTG6H35UDJVtsO1yl4QMN9ZEyKQZasWpWOh7X5
l_e6BTKl_PLJUZnNvplDY3Zz4zwGFTz0r2rgkZnwPrB8y8dznzuzdpan1oSezWzlxEXEXdFd
KTAb6g8DIgdI3QUSd5yOdEI4c58zqtAzHA9w1_ekeGLhdZyd0kgkn3iUIXCqZ15FXcRtHTr6
aor_2mabEzC9pDCj4daVXiXxVWp32prA3ExkjZIiBCrDaoOVwgaUFJtrfuhiZJY=> and
our weekly Feedstuffs FoodLink page in each weekly issue of Feedstuffs.

Feedstuffs FoodLink segments air at 7:30 and 10:30 p.m. on Dish Network
9411.



Forward email
<http://ui.constantcontact.com/sa/fwtf.jsp?m=1101427560201&ea=rreynnells
%40csrees.usda.gov&a=1101967542583>

<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?v=001Ii8Y_QGk40rTcyRoBoMkt1I6r
hp8vPadsnrxBlXfyoREXLF6lowO9pV7ujHgCfDRn05qmr9uw2Q%3D&p=un>
This email was sent to [email protected], by
[email protected]
Update Profile/Email Address
<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?v=001Ii8Y_QGk40rTcyRoBoMkt1I6r
hp8vPadsnrxBlXfyoREXLF6lowO9pV7ujHgCfDRn05qmr9uw2Q%3D&p=oo> | Instant
removal with SafeUnsubscribe
<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?v=001Ii8Y_QGk40rTcyRoBoMkt1I6r
hp8vPadsnrxBlXfyoREXLF6lowO9pV7ujHgCfDRn05qmr9uw2Q%3D&p=un> (tm) |
Privacy Policy
<http://ui.constantcontact.com/roving/CCPrivacyPolicy.jsp> .
Email Marketing <http://www.constantcontact.com/index.jsp?cc=newsVE02>
by
<http://www.constantcontact.com/index.jsp?cc=newsVE02>
Miller Publishing | 12400 Whitewater Dr. | Suite 160 | Minnetonka | MN |
55343

<http://rs6.net/on.jsp?t=1101967542583.0.1101427560201.4809&ts=S0315&o=h
ttp://ui.constantcontact.com/images1/s.gif>
Top