050447 Cattle Groups Go Head to Head Over Beef Ban

Washington - The chasm grew wider this week between the nation's two biggest cattlemen's organizations. The National Cattlemen's Beef Association took sides against the Ranchers-Cattlemen's Action Legal Fund USA in a lawsuit between R- CALF and the U.S. Department of Agriculture filed in January.

NCBA sent an amicus brief, or "friend of the court," in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of its members, the American Farm Bureau Federation, 29 state cattle organizations, 18 state farm bureaus, the National Pork Producers Council as well as individual independent cattlemen.

R-CALF sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture claiming the agency's final rule to reopen the U.S. border to live Canadian cattle failed to fully consider the impact the rule would have on the U.S. cattle industry and did not "protect the health and choices of U.S. consumers."

The border has been closed to live cattle since May 2003 when a Canadian cow was diagnosed with bovine spongiform encephalopathy thought to be transmitted to humans if they consume BSE infected meat. U.S. District Judge Richard F. Cebull ruled in R-CALF's favor, thereby putting an injunction in place until a full court hearing can be held.

"When U.S. District Court Judge Richard Cebull concluded the Final Rule called Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, minimal Risk Regions and Importation of Commodities 'presents a genuine risk of death for U.S. consumers,' his opinion was a far cry from sound science," said Mike John, NCBA president-elect.

"We can only assume one of two things happened at the District Court hearing," John said. "Either the plaintiff, R-CALF, provided the court with flawed information, or the defendant, the Department of Justice on behalf of USDA, inadequately defended the science."

The tussle over sound science has been, in part, defining the BSE risk Canadian cattle pose to the United States. Already, in 2004, a Washington state cow was BSE positive, but it was a Canadian import. Though no new BSE cases were found in the United States, Canada subsequently reported several more. Based on that, R-CALF challenged USDA's final rule saying the agency's "decision to relax import restrictions for Canada reflects a belief that imports present only 'low' or 'acceptable' risk of BSE in the U.S."

But R-CALF contended, and Judge Cebull agreed, low risk did not apply to the Canadian herd because "available data collected since 2001 suggest a BSE incidence on the order of that of the most BSE-affected countries in the world."

Further argued was that Canadian investigations found almost 2,000 head of Canadian cattle may have been exposed to BSE-contaminated feed because of the rendering of the BSE-infected animal discovered in 2003. Although a ruminant-to- ruminant feed ban was in place in Canada, it is believed not all livestock owners adhered to the ban.

"We're disappointed that NCBA, the AFBF and other groups have lined up with a handful of multi-national meatpackers against independent cattle producer across the United States," said Leo McDonnell, R-CALF USA president. "Statements from these organizations indicate these groups wholeheartedly support the so- called 'sound science' presented in the earlier litigation by the USDA as the agency tried unsuccessfully to defend its Final Rule to reopen the Canadian border to live cattle and additional beef products."

McDonnell said Canada is not meeting International standards that require BSE countries to remove specified risk materials (brain, eyes, spinal cord and vertebrae thought to harbor the infectious BSE agent) from slaughtered animals.

"In Canada, only the tonsils and the small intestines are removed from animals under 30 months of age," he said. "All other SRMs remain intact and are free to enter the human food supply."

McDonnell also said Canada's BSE status and its failure to enforce a ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban for at least eight years means the country should be removing all SRMs from all animals over 12 months of age.

John said, however, "BSE experts from the World Organization for Animal Health agree that BSE is not a public health or herd-health risk when key fire walls are in place to protect consumers and cattle, even when a case of BSE is found."

Those fire walls according to Joe Schuele, NCBA spokesman from the Denver office, include a ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban, SRM removal and enhanced surveillance testing.

"Both Canada and the United States have increased the numbers of carcasses tested for BSE," Shuele said. "With these safeguards in place, Canadian beef doesn't pose any greater health hazard. Besides," he said, "Canadian boxed beef is already coming into the country at record levels."

John said the goal of the cosigners "is to ensure the science is well represented in the 9th Circuit Court.

"NCBA did not want the only industry voice in the court to be that ft an activist minority group with an isolationist agenda," he said. "R-CALF's legal actions, public statements and paid consumer advertising have consistently strayed from the science and questioned the safety of U.S. beef in order to prevent science-based beef trade."

"Reopening the Canadian border would be dangerously premature," McDonnell said. "The best way to eliminate the ban on imports of Canadian cattle is for Canada to demonstrated it has eradicated BSE from its herd. NCBA and AFBF should also explain to independent producers why it is that the most recent markets to reopen to U.S. beef have done so under the condition that we not commingle Canadian beef in our export shipments to those countries."

RETURN TO HOME PAGE

E-mail: sflanagan@sprintmail.com