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

may delay feed ban changes

Help Support Ranchers.net:

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Crawford resignation may delay feed ban changes, cloned beef decision

by Pete Hisey on 10/4/2005 for Meatingplace.com


Two issues that were moving toward resolution early this fall may have been sidetracked by the unexpected resignation of Lester Crawford as head of the Food and Drug Administration in late September. FDA had indicated that a new, tougher version of the animal feed ban was nearly ready for release, and some industry reports indicate that the new ban may have been behind Crawford's sudden resignation. If, as FDA indicated in September, the new ban is virtually identical to Canada's feed ban, it will disallow plate waste, poultry litter and bovine blood in the feed supply. These are highly profitable niches for products that otherwise have little or no value, and players in those niches have fought bitterly to hold on to their markets.
FDA is also reportedly ready to approve sale of beef from cloned cows and their offspring, according to a report in The Miami Herald. Suppliers say the meat would most likely come from the offspring, since cloned breeding is an expensive proposition, but there would not likely be differentiation in the rule allowing such sales. If such a recommendation is forthcoming, it will be subject to a lengthy public discussion period and will likely come in for criticism, as well as unfavorable press coverage. FDA had intended to make the announcement within a few weeks, but Crawford's exit may move the issue to the back burner, at least temporarily. Crawford, speaking shortly before he resigned, said FDA is well aware that the move is controversial, but scientific studies indicate that meat and milk from cloned cattle is safe.
 

flounder

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Messages
2,631
Reaction score
0
Location
TEXAS
does this surprise anyone?

protect the industry at all cost, including human health. this seems to be the motto at USDA as well. it was regular practice in the UK ;



>DATA Charmaine's HD:BSE - AUGUST 95-fill in bse position paper spec<

FROM THE DIRECTOR GENERAL

24 August, 1995

STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL


Dear •salutation

UKASTA POLICY ON BSE

At the President's suggestion in the light of recent events, I have
reviewed the history of our policy on BSE so as to ensure that it fully
reflects the needs of our supporters In the feed Industry.

The paper enclosed with this letter is the result. For obvious reasons,
this is being circulated only to an extremely small circle within
UKASTA - basically, the National Executive Council.

If you have any comments on the policy, or the paper, I should be glad
to receive them under Private & Confidential cover.

Yours sincerely,

J.W. REED

JWR/cg

copied to SMT members - IJD; JN; JAS; REW


95/8.24/2.1


STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

UKASTA INTERNAL POSITION STATEMENT
BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY

POLICY AIMS

1. These have been consistent, although unstated except In FEC discussions, since at least 1989:-

• To minimise the risk of farmers' claims for compensation from feed
compounders.

• To minimise the potential damage to compound feed markets
through adverse publicity.

• To maximise freedom of action for feed compounders. notably by
maintaining the availability of meat and bone meal as a raw
material in animal feeds, and ensuring time is available to make
any changes which may be required.


STRATEGY ADOPTED/SUCCESS ACHIEVED

2. Strategy has depended upon the situation at a particular time.
UKASTA has sought to anticipate criticism from other industry sectors
and action by Government/Brussels as the epidemic has developed
and knowledge of the disease increased. Through dose liaison with
MAFF. we have to date avoided public statements seriously damaging
to the feed Industry and the adoption of policies likely to lead to such
damage.

3. Successful examples of this strategy include:

• "Voluntary Ban" on SBO's In all MBM purchase contracts from
November 1989. matching the Government ban on SBO'S in
human food but anticipating the statutory ban on SBO's in feed
which came in only from September 1990;

• Pressing Government for full compensation to farmers, which was
finally conceded in February 1990;

• evidence (not Just on BSE) to the Lamming Committee in 1991/92
resulted in their recommending tighter controls over home
mixers/integrated operations, and over the processing of fallen
animals. Government eventually tightened the fallen animals
legislation in December 1992. Other Lamming recommendations
could yet be useful to us.

continued.....

95/8.24/2.2

2

• UKASTA pressure dissuaded MAFF from publicly linking voluntary
ELISA tests of feed on farms with BAB's to (possibly compulsory)
tests at compounders' premises in June/July 1994:

• in August 1995. while tightening the SBO Order and responding
to the EU Decision requiring introduction of a testing programme.
MAFF has accepted UKASTA proposals for the presentation of the
changes to a wider audience, including farmers, and accepted our
help in preparing for an EU Commission visit to inspect
procedures and controls.


THE FUTURE

4. BSE has for more than seven years posed the greatest single potential
threat to feed compounders' profitability. Although the epidemic is in
sharp decline (275 cases per week compared to 1000 at the peak).
MAFF remains under pressure in Brussels and is not skilled at
handling potentially explosive issues.

5. Tests may show that ruminant feeds have been sold which contain
illegal traces of ruminant protein. More likely, a few positive test
results will turn up but proof that a particular feed mill knowingly
supplied it to a particular farm will be difficult if not impossible.

6. The threat remains real and it will be some years before feed
compounders are free of it. The longer we can avoid any direct
linkage between feed milling practices and actual BSE cases, the more
likely it is that serious damage can be avoided. In issue management
terms, the aims and the strategy remain valid, but must be kept
under review in the light of further events.

JWR/cg/23.8.95

95/8.24/2.3

snip...


http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1995/08/24002001.pdf

> From: TSS ()
> Subject: Re: Stricter cattle feed rules on the way (some time in the next
> millennium, we hope)
> Date: October 4, 2005 at 6:58 am PST
>
> APRIL FOOLS $$$
>
> Crawford resignation may delay feed ban changes, cloned beef decision by
> Pete Hisey on 10/4/2005 for Meatingplace.com


TSS
 

Latest posts

Top