Agricultural News
R-Calf Cattle Group Tells White House to Leave Foot-And-Mouth Restrictions for Brazil
Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:48:56 CDT
In a meeting last week with officials from the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Executive Office of the President, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), R-CALF USA urged the rejection of the proposed rule by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) to lift foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) restrictions for 14 Brazilian states. APHIS delivered the proposed rule to OMB on June 13, 2011. Before the proposed rule can be officially published in the Federal Register for public comment, it must receive clearance from the White House's OMB.
"Our goal at the meeting was to urge the White House to deny clearance of APHIS' proposed rule on the basis that it would significantly increase the risk of FMD introduction into the United States," said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard.
The proposed rule would allow the importation into the United States of fresh (chilled or frozen) beef from 14 states in Brazil, even though Brazil is not considered free of FMD.
R-CALF USA provided OMB and USTR with written evidence showing the 11-step process APHIS uses to evaluate a foreign country's risk of FMD spread is woefully deficient and incapable of predicting the occurrence of major FMD outbreaks, particularly in countries where the disease is known to exist.
"APHIS already put the United States at risk for FMD introduction on five separate occasions since 1997 when it began to declare regions in Argentina, Uruguay, South Africa, and the countries of Japan and South Korea free of FMD. But, APHIS was forced to take emergency action after each of those countries experienced widespread FMD outbreaks," Bullard said.
Most recently, APHIS completed its evaluation of South Korea and declared it free of FMD and eligible to export fresh (chilled or frozen) beef in a final rule that was to take effect Jan. 12, 2010. However, just days before the effective date of the final rule, on January 6, South Korea experienced a FMD outbreak that subsequently devastated South Korea's livestock industry.
"This and the other four examples of near misses we provided the White House demonstrate that APHIS is all too eager to unnecessarily expose the United States to a heightened risk of FMD introduction," Bullard said.
R-CALF USA's written evidence further demonstrate the proposed rule is not intended to strengthen United States' protections against disease introduction as APHIS is required to do under the U.S. Animal Protection Act. Instead, the evidence shows the proposed rule is intended to satisfy global interests as expressed by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). The evidence includes admissions by APHIS that it is relaxing disease regulations to comply with international standards.
"The fundamental purpose of the changes we are making to the regulations . . . is to fulfill U.S. commitments under international trade agreements." And, ". . . our overriding goals in implementing regionalization are to facilitate trade in accordance with international agreements. . ." APHIS wrote in its previous rulemakings to relax U.S. disease regulations.
R-CALF USA also provided White House officials with a chart comparing the Brazilian cattle industry with the U.S. cattle industry. "Our chart shows Brazil has about twice the number of cattle than are in the United States and yet it produces only about three-fourths the volume of beef. What is Brazil doing with all its cattle if not producing beef? Does Brazil have a large number of "wild" cattle? Is the apparent inefficiency of Brazil's cattle industry suggestive of poor management? If so, shouldn't that raise significant concerns regarding Brazil's ability to identify and control diseases like FMD?" Bullard asked White House officials.
A July 28, 2011, news article posted on Meatingplace.com titled "Brazil begins crackdown on illegal cattle slaughter" states, "It is estimated that 50 percent of all meat in Brazil has not undergone proper inspection nor supervision by the proper health authorities."
"Today we forwarded this article to White House officials explaining that if the article is accurate, it raises the serious question of whether a country incapable of properly performing such fundamental tasks as slaughter inspection and slaughter oversight could possibly be capable of accurately identifying and controlling disease outbreaks like FMD. This article substantiates our concern that USDA's proposed rule would considerably increase the risk of introducing FMD into the United States." Bullard concluded.
WebReadyTM Powered by WireReady® NSI
Top Agricultural News
More Headlines...
