|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DTN – Monday – January 12, 2009 – 4:50 p.m. CST (quotes R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard) Schafer: COOL Not Trade Issue Advocates, Opponents Pan Final COOL Rules SAN ANTONIO (DTN) -- Secretary of Agriculture Ed Schafer took in stride criticism of USDA's final rule for the mandatory country of origin labeling law, saying he thought USDA was able to "strike a good balance" with all of the competing industry interests over meat labeling. The COOL rule, nearly seven years in the making, will be finalized with posting in the Federal Register this week. Details of the final rule were released on Monday, and both advocates and traditional opponents of the labeling law found some fault in the final rule. "I think we worked out a pretty good compromise," Schafer told reporters at the American Farm Bureau Federation convention in San Antonio. Schafer also tried to diffuse expected complaints from Canada and Mexico, both of which have already cited declines in live animal exports. Canada and Mexico have filed papers with the World Trade Organization asking for consultation with the United States about the rule. "I would remind our trading partners around the world this is a marketing program, not a trade issue, and we hope as it gets in place it will unfold well." Schafer added that as governor of North Dakota he signed the first country of origin labeling law for food in the nation in 1997. Schafer noted that while countries are often proud to label certain items as being made in their countries, they are resistant to labeling the origin of livestock or meat. "Importantly, these are marketing efforts," Schafer said. "These aren't exclusionary trade practices." Schafer said he was confident the legislation and rules for COOL are WTO compliant. The COOL rule drew criticism, however, from some of the biggest advocates of the legislation. Tom Buis, president of the National Farmers Union, expressed his disappointment, saying the final rule still contains a loophole that would allow meatpackers to use a multiple countries on a label, such as "may contain product of the U.S., Canada or Mexico," which Buis called a "NAFTA label." "This is misleading to consumers," Buis said. "The intent was to provide country of origin labeling, not trade agreement origin of labeling. If a product is exclusively born, raised and processed in the United States, it should be labeled as such." Bill Bullard, CEO of the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA), stated that the loophole allows packers to commingle one foreign animal in each day's slaughter and processing and then use the mixed-country label for the entire day's production even though hundreds of thousands of animals may have come exclusively from the U.S. Schafer said such an allowance for mixed-country labeling was needed for shift changes in packing plants and the conclusion of meat lines for processing different products. Further, for ground beef, a processor will be allowed to use a country on a ground-beef label for up to 60 days after the processor has received beef from that country. If a processor, for instance, grinds hamburger almost exclusively with beef from Canada or Mexico, the processor could continue to add the U.S. to the label as long as they use one U.S.-origin animal at least once a month. Buis stated USDA also "takes great liberty" with the definition of processed products that effectively excludes an extensive group of food products from having labels. Curing, smoking or adding even minor substances would exclude the meat from a country of origin label. Buis stated he was pleased that USDA will allow producers to self verify their compliance with COOL through affidavits. Bullard stated the rule allows producers to look at an animal and determine if it has any foreign markings, and if it doesn't, the producer can sign an affidavit declaring the animal is exclusively of U.S. origin. Bullard also noted that USDA took out provisions in the bill that referenced the use of the National Animal Identification System as a "safe harbor" for COOL. A spokeswoman for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, which opposed the labeling program, said NCBA was glad the President George W. Bush administration had published the rule before leaving office. The uncertainty of the interim rule was bad for the market, the spokeswoman said. Publication of the rule at this time will permit the cattlemen's group to inform producers and retailers of their responsibilities before a six-month implementation period ends in April, she added. The National Pork Producers Council praised USDA for allowing flexibility in labeling, but also stated the law would increase costs for pork producers because some packing plants will process only U.S.-origin pigs, and packers are directing Canadian-born pigs to other plants. Food and Water Watch, a consumer group, said the rule is "unacceptable" because it has an overly broad definition of processed foods, which are exempt from labeling. "This definition exempts from labeling over 60 percent of pork, the majority of frozen vegetables, an estimated 95 percent of peanuts, pecans and macadamia nuts, and multi-ingredient fresh produce items such as fruit salads and salad mixes," the group said. "It is inexcusable to exempt so much food from this basic labeling requirement just because one ingredient has been added or because something has been roasted or cooked." DTN Political Correspondent Jerry Hagstrom contributed to this report. ©2002-2009 DTN. All Rights Reserved. NOTE: In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is
distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational
purposes only. For more information go to:
|
|
Interested in advertising on this
website? Contact
Laurel for more information. This page was last updated on Wednesday, October 12, 2011. |
