[Jacob-list] COOL legislation

[Neal and Louise Grose]

Whooo. A bunch of stuff came in today on Ag news bulletins on NAIS. Bear with it, there is some important germane information in the last paragraphs of this.
Neal Grose

Gov. Schwarzenegger Vetoes COOL - California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL) bill. The bill would have required retailers to label beef produced outside of the U.S. with the country where the beef was born and raised. In his veto message, Schwarzenegger said the bill would be "unworkable, costly and impossible to enforce while providing no improvement in public health protection or additional benefits to the consumer."

Survey results...according to a poll completed last week by the National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA), 90% of respondents favor a mandatory program. Of these, 61% want the program voluntary during the development stages, then mandatory either "as quickly as possible" or by USDA's NAIS Draft Plan deadline of January 2009. Only 7% of respondents are in favor of a voluntary program. 

This corroborates a survey BEEF magazine conducted of its readers in July, where 63% stated a preference for mandatory. Overall, 76% in that survey (700 total responses) believed a national animal ID and trace-back system is needed for animal health monitoring.

It's worth knowing that 31% of the respondents cited beef cattle as their primary species of interest. Overall, 19% of survey respondents described themselves as producers or as executives of producer organizations. Another 30% are veterinarians and/or state or federal animal health officials. 

In fact, while the public-private database has created such furor within parts of the industry, both the NIAA and BEEF polls indicate this is one of the least concerning aspects of NAIS. In the NIAA poll, funding was the primary concern (22%) and data confidentiality -- one of the primary reasons proponents of a private system opposed a public system -- is of the least concern (3%). 

Likewise, 47% of respondents to the BEEF poll cited cost as their primary concern. Data confidentiality came next at 22%. 

Primarily in response to resuming international beef trade, more buyers are focusing on finding cattle that can be verified for age. The current rule for USDA's Beef Export Verification program (what Japan agreed to a year ago) calls for using production records, tied to individual or group ID, to verify beef is from cattle 20 months old or younger. 

Reports are that some feedlots are asking cow-calf suppliers to sign affidavits that read more like legal manuals. The affidavits basically load up on the producer all the risk related to the age and/or source verification in the event the feedlot is audited. "It's like a rodeo out there right now," says one industry source who deals with boatloads of cattle each year, but who asked to remain anonymous. "All these feed yards have different programs with different paperwork they want producers to sign. Some are even going back to producers after they've bought the calves, asking them to sign papers. And none of them are paying the producer any more money for it."

the decision to go to a private database presents a paradox. On one hand, according to data-service experts, linking existing databases and making them accessible to USDA through a single gateway can be achieved quickly. On the other hand, USDA has instructed the livestock industry to figure out how it will come together in order to construct the database. In other words, all the livestock species, their interest groups and representatives of the market channel serving them must form a legal entity that will essentially speak for the entire livestock industry on NAIS. Given past and recent history, this seems only slightly more difficult than finding a lump of coal in the Grand Canyon at midnight. 

Need For National ID Grows "There's a critical need for a national livestock ID system. We can't continue to debate the issue; we must get on with it," says Bob Hillman, head of the Texas Animal Health Commission. 

Hillman, speaking as president of the Southern Animal Health Association, made the comment in testimony at a USDA listening session last week in Kansas City. He prefaced the urgency for getting the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) in place by noting that Texas has had to respond to five different foreign animal diseases in the past six years. 

"For our members, having a system is more important than who manages it," explained Hillman, referring to the debate surrounding the merits of a government-run animal movement database for NAIS vs. a private one.


Choat shared statistics about international travel; germane to any discussion of FAD risk. There were 46.1 million visitors to the U.S. last year, 11.8% more than 2003. That number is expected to grow to 49.1 million this year. Projections call for 52.3 million by 2007. These visitors represent countries that within the last five years have had avian influenza, foot and mouth disease, classical swine fever, exotic Newcastle Disease and BSE. 

USDA admitted it will have to access some data separately from the private database. Turns out, eight states have laws that prohibit them from sharing producers' data with anyone other than state or federal officials. Consequently, producer data for NAIS can't flow through a private industry database in those states. 

The public meeting featured testimony from 30 individuals representing various livestock and consumer-interest groups. Following the meeting, the crowd milled around wondering about the next step, but no concrete strategy for forming the group USDA requires was forthcoming. And, no future meetings for discussion were set because there's no one in charge. It's a little like the mayor standing up and saying, "Someone in this town needs to do something about this," then catching a plane. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/jacob-list/attachments/20051019/174e93d0/attachment.html