Oldtimer
Well-known member
BSE test – listen to the customer
John Munsell
President, Montana Quality Foods & Processing
Manager, Foundation for Accountability in Regulatory Enforcement (FARE)
July 14, 2006
Miles City, MT
The discovery of BSE in a 50-month old Canadian animal again reveals the efficacy of a high degree of BSE testing. Previous USDA and CFIA thinking was based on the false assumption that the incubation period was much longer than 50 months, so why regularly test 50-month old animals? Much has yet to be learned about BSE, its cause, length of incubation, potential ability to spread in a heard, and methods of detection. We DO know how it negatively impacts foreign trade. Until more evidence is compiled, the best way to maintain or increase consumer confidence is a high level of testing.
The cattle industry desires to increase consumer consumption of its delectable product. That laudable goal is not aided by diminished BSE testing, which recently had been USDA's goal. If our domestic herd is indeed close to being "BSE free", we have nothing to hide because of the effectiveness of our multiple feed ban firewalls. But then, Canada had been making the same claim one week ago, especially realizing its feed ban is supposedly more restrictive than ours.
Our unfortunate experience with hesitant Japanese consumers continues to point out the fact that marketers must provide what the purchaser wants to buy, not what the seller desires to produce. USDA demands that Japan, South Korea et al purchase USA meat which has diminished BSE testing, and is commingled with Canadian beef in the total absence of source verification evidence. COOL implementation would go a long way to reopen our markets.
America does have some meat processing plants which are willing to provide increased BSE testing and segregate USA beef from Canadian beef. USDA however is unwilling to allow these plants to provide customized services to willing consumers because of allegedly "scientific" justifications. As history continues to unfold, Canada and USA will undoubtedly detect more BSE positives (if USDA allows the testing), guaranteeing more pressure from our increasingly doubtful international trading partners. If we EVER want to reopen our export beef markets, USDA needs to comply with basic marketing principles which demand we produce what the consumer demands.
USDA should not be basing its policies merely to protect the interests of a handful of packers who demand the right to export their products in the absence of safeguards demanded by potential customers. We should be reaching critical mass in which the USDA assigns more credibility to the demands of our potentially lucrative foreign markets than to a handful of domestic packers.
We shouldn't have to reinvent this wheel for another five years.
Source: John Munsell, President, Montana Quality Foods & Processing
Manager, Foundation for Accountability in Regulatory Enforcement (FARE)
John Munsell
President, Montana Quality Foods & Processing
Manager, Foundation for Accountability in Regulatory Enforcement (FARE)
July 14, 2006
Miles City, MT
The discovery of BSE in a 50-month old Canadian animal again reveals the efficacy of a high degree of BSE testing. Previous USDA and CFIA thinking was based on the false assumption that the incubation period was much longer than 50 months, so why regularly test 50-month old animals? Much has yet to be learned about BSE, its cause, length of incubation, potential ability to spread in a heard, and methods of detection. We DO know how it negatively impacts foreign trade. Until more evidence is compiled, the best way to maintain or increase consumer confidence is a high level of testing.
The cattle industry desires to increase consumer consumption of its delectable product. That laudable goal is not aided by diminished BSE testing, which recently had been USDA's goal. If our domestic herd is indeed close to being "BSE free", we have nothing to hide because of the effectiveness of our multiple feed ban firewalls. But then, Canada had been making the same claim one week ago, especially realizing its feed ban is supposedly more restrictive than ours.
Our unfortunate experience with hesitant Japanese consumers continues to point out the fact that marketers must provide what the purchaser wants to buy, not what the seller desires to produce. USDA demands that Japan, South Korea et al purchase USA meat which has diminished BSE testing, and is commingled with Canadian beef in the total absence of source verification evidence. COOL implementation would go a long way to reopen our markets.
America does have some meat processing plants which are willing to provide increased BSE testing and segregate USA beef from Canadian beef. USDA however is unwilling to allow these plants to provide customized services to willing consumers because of allegedly "scientific" justifications. As history continues to unfold, Canada and USA will undoubtedly detect more BSE positives (if USDA allows the testing), guaranteeing more pressure from our increasingly doubtful international trading partners. If we EVER want to reopen our export beef markets, USDA needs to comply with basic marketing principles which demand we produce what the consumer demands.
USDA should not be basing its policies merely to protect the interests of a handful of packers who demand the right to export their products in the absence of safeguards demanded by potential customers. We should be reaching critical mass in which the USDA assigns more credibility to the demands of our potentially lucrative foreign markets than to a handful of domestic packers.
We shouldn't have to reinvent this wheel for another five years.
Source: John Munsell, President, Montana Quality Foods & Processing
Manager, Foundation for Accountability in Regulatory Enforcement (FARE)
