USDA Terrified of Finding More Mad Cows

No one in the USDA or the meat industry will admit it, but there is only one
real reason for banning private testing: more mad cows will be found. All
the other excuses are just rationalizations.

John Stauber, author, Mad Cow USA

U.S. Won't Let Company Test All Its Cattle for Mad Cow

April 10, 2004
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.

The Department of Agriculture refused yesterday to allow a
Kansas beef producer to test all of its cattle for mad cow
disease, saying such sweeping tests were not scientifically
warranted.

The producer, Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, wanted to use
recently approved rapid tests so it could resume selling
its fat-marbled black Angus beef to Japan, which banned
American beef after a cow slaughtered in Washington State
last December tested positive for mad cow. The company has
complained that the ban is costing it $40,000 a day and
forced it to lay off 50 employees.

The department's under secretary for marketing and
regulation, Bill Hawks, said in a statement yesterday that
the rapid tests, which are used in Japan and Europe, were
licensed for surveillance of animal health, while
Creekstone's use would have "implied a consumer safety
aspect that is not scientifically warranted."

Lobbying groups for cattle ranchers and slaughterhouses
applauded the decision, but consumer advocates denounced
it, saying the department was preventing Creekstone from
taking extra steps to prove its product was safe.

Under the Virus Serum Toxin Act of 1913, the department
decides where cattle can be tested and for what.

Consumer groups accused the department of bending to the
will of the beef lobby, saying producers do not want the
expense of proving that all cattle are safe or the damage
to meat sales that would result if more cases of mad cow
are found.

Creekstone said it was extremely disappointed and
frustrated that the department had taken six weeks to
decide and added that it might go to court to fight the
decision.

Since December, Japan has demanded that producers who want
to export there test each animal, as Japanese ranchers do.
The American beef industry and the Bush administration have
resisted, and negotiations have become increasingly tense.

Consumer groups were critical of the department's
decision.

"It is ironic in the extreme that an administration that's
so interested in letting industry come up with its own
solutions would come down with a heavy government hand on a
company that's being creative," said Dr. Peter Lurie,
deputy director of the health research group at Public
Citizen, a frequent food industry critic.

Dr. Lurie said, however, the Japanese demand for 100
percent testing was irrational because it included animals
younger than 20 months. "But there is no shortage of
irrational consumer demands - like cosmetic surgery or
S.U.V's - that industry is only too happy to cater to," he
said. "That's what capitalism does."

Andrew Kimbrell, director of the Center for Food Safety,
another group often critical of the industry, said: "We're
the ones who've been irrational on mad cow because of the
foot-dragging and refusals to test, our head-in-the-sand
attitude. And now that it's brought us to a crisis,
American farmers have no way of protecting their market."

A spokesman for the Agriculture Department, Ed Lloyd,
defended yesterday's decision, saying, "We're working very
diligently to re-establish our markets."

The department recently changed its testing regimen to make
a one-time effort, beginning in June, to test 201,000 cows
with symptoms of nervous disease or that are too sick or
injured to walk, and 20,000 healthy older ones. The regimen
assumes that cattle born before 1997, when a ban was
imposed on feeding bovine tissue to cattle, are most at
risk.

The president of the American Meat Institute, which
represents slaughterhouses, and the director of regulatory
affairs at the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, which
represents ranchers, praised the decision.

Gary Weber of the cattlemen's association called 100
percent testing misleading to consumers because it would
create a false impression that untested beef was not safe.
He compared it to demanding that all cars be crash tested
to prove they are safe.

Asked if American beef producers were content to give up
the $1.5 billion Japanese market, Mr. Weber said: "We're
not going to give in to their demands. If that means in the
short-to-medium term that we don't have that market, that's
the price we'll pay. But in the long run, it means there's
testing that's science based and that creates a level
playing field."

Asked if beef producers did not want to be pressured to
imitate Creekstone and pay for more tests, Mr. Weber said
it was "absolutely not about the money."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/10/national/nationalspecial2/10COW.html

--------

Creekstone says court fight with USDA possible

by Daniel Yovich <mailto:dyovich@meatingplace.com> on 4/9/04 for
Meatingplace.com

One day after being denied permission by the Agriculture Department to
voluntarily test for BSE all of the cattle it slaughters, Creekstone Farms
officials say they may file a lawsuit against the agency for restricting its
ability to operate.

"We are extremely disappointed but glad to finally have a response from the
USDA," said Creekstone Farms CEO John Stewart. "We now know where USDA
stands but are surprised it took them six weeks to respond with a 'no' to
our request when it's probably what they were going to tell us all along."

Stewart declined to elaborate on the possibility that the company will
challenge USDA in court on the issue, but told Meatingplace.com he is
"certainly not ruling that option out." Stewart said the company recently
hired a Washington, D.C.-based lawfirm with a "proven track record" in
winning litigation against the government involving regulatory issues.

"We have a back-up strategy in place and over the weekend we will be
finalizing our plans which we will unveil early next week," Stewart said.

The USDA decision
On Thursday, J.B. Penn, USDA's under secretary of agriculture for farm and
foreign agricultural services, Dale Moore, chief of staff to Secretary Ann
M. Veneman, and Bill Hawks, undersecretary for marketing and regulatory
programs, met with Stewart and Creekstone Vice President Kevin Pentz,
informing them the agency would not approve the Arkansas City, Kan.-based
processor's request. Hawks said the agency denied the approval because it
"would have implied a consumer safety aspect that is not scientifically
warranted."

In a prepared statement released to the media Friday morning, Hawks referred
to the agency's increased BSE surveillance program announced March 15, which
established a goal of testing 210,000 animals for the brain wasting disease
this year versus the 21,000 tested in 2003.

"The United States has taken aggressive measures in response to BSE to both
protect consumer health and the animal herd," Hawks said. "These measures
include an enhanced surveillance system which will test a significant
proportion of the population of high risk animals."

Hawks noted USDA's recent approval of four separate BSE rapid tests to be
used with the increased surveillance program, but said the approval of these
rapid tests was based on the recommendations of an international panel of
experts appointed by the agency to review the agency's BSE policy in the
wake of the Dec. 23 discovery of a lone case of BSE found in a Washington
state cow.

"That panel also explicitly noted that there is no scientific justification
for 100 percent testing because the disease does not appear in younger
animals," Hawks said. "We are continuing our discussions with all of our
trading partners so that trade can resume based on international scientific
standards set by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE)."

The trade impasse
During his weekend visit to Japan, U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney is set to
meet with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and Japanese Emperor Akihito, as
well as Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda and Foreign Minister Yoriko
Kawaguchi. Bilateral issues on the agenda include the Japanese ban on U.S.
beef.

USDA and the industry are hopeful Cheney's trip could invigorate the beef
trade negotiations, which are stagnant after a series of increasingly
undiplomatic letters between Agriculture Secretary Veneman and her Japanese
counterpart, Yoshiyuki Kamei.

"I think it is impossible to conclude this issue by the end of April unless
the United States implements the same measures as we do," Kamei wrote in an
April 6 letter to Veneman, referring to Japan's protocol of 100 percent
testing for BSE.

Stewart said he does not believe Cheney's visit will open any new doors
toward resolving the impasse.

"The Japanese government, as well as Japanese consumers, are standing firm
in that they want all beef imported from the United States to be tested for
BSE," Stewart said.

Creekstone tells employees it will prevail
In a letter to Creekstone employees distributed Friday, Stewart, Pentz and
Executive Vice President Bill Fielding said the company is not in danger of
going under. Stewart estimates the company has been losing about $40,000 per
day because of the Japanese and South Korean import ban on U.S. beef.

"We are moving into the time of year where demand for our product is growing
and profit margins are increasing," the letter said. "Creekstone Farms is
introducing new programs and products in the coming months and will increase
production at our plant over the next several weeks in order to meet this
increased demand. You will see and hear much in the media about the BSE
testing issue in the coming days.

"We will make every attempt to keep you updated on our progress. Rest
assured we will survive and fight this decision in order to provide what our
customers want and maintain the viability of our plant."

The letter informed Creekstone employees that management "will challenge
USDA's decision and are confident we will prevail," noting the company's
testing proposal "has growing congressional, senatorial, scientific,
customer and consumer support" to conduct private BSE testing at
Creekstone's plant.

"In fact, former Assistant Secretary of Science and Education for USDA, Dr.
Duane Aker, has voiced his support for our proposal," the letter said.

Since Creekstone proposed its plan to test all of its cattle for the brain
wasting disease proposal has been the subject of hundreds of news stories and broadcasts. On
March 26, USA Today, the nation's largest newspaper, endorsed Creekstone's
testing plan in an editorial, noting that USDA and trade association
opposition to the proposal "is as confounding as government foot-dragging
over approving private testing. And it ill-serves confused customers who are
looking for stronger assurances that the meat they buy is safe."

In its letter to employees, Creekstone's management said they believe that
those news stories have given the company the added support in its efforts
to win the testing battle with USDA.

"Creekstone Farms has heard from hundreds of U.S. consumers, customers and
cattle producers that what we are proposing is the right thing to do," the
letter said. "Creekstone Farms believes our customers are correctS.USDA's
stance now gives us direction to pursue proving they are wrong with their
efforts to continue negotiating a BSE surveillance program that does not
meet our customer's requirements."

Creekstone's lab already in place
Earlier in the week Creekstone officials said they have been training their
staff on the proper sampling of cattle brain and stem tissue in anticipation
of being allowed to conduct in-plant BSE testing. Creekstone also recently
sent a contingent to France to learn how they conduct testing for BSE and to
also gain insight into the testing procedures already approved for use in
that country. Creekstone plans on utilizing the same rapid-result BSE test
as the French. BioRad, a Hercules, California-based company, manufactures
the test.

When questioned whether or not USDA's decision will prove to be a financial
blow from which they will not be able to recover, Stewart said that although
they have been forced to lay off about 50 of their employees as a direct
impact of the trade embargo, they are not anticipating any additional
layoffs and have no intention of scaling back production. "We are moving
into a time of year when demand for our product is growing and profit
margins are increasing," Stewart said.