|
|
|
 |
|
Home / Washington Business - March/April 2004 / Q&A: Valoria Loveland - Washington State Aggressively Tackling Mad Cow Disease Threat |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Q&A: Valoria Loveland - Washington State Aggressively Tackling Mad Cow Disease Threat |
|
|
|
Written On: March/April 2004 |
|
|
|
Editor’s Note: The Washington cattle industry is the fifth largest sector of agriculture in the state. There are a total of 1.1 million cattle in the state, 247,000 of which are dairy production animals. In 2002 the gross income for cash receipts from cattle production in the state totaled $621 million. Approximately 9,500 family farmers and ranchers make their living from the cattle industry in Washington state. Since “Mad Cow” was discovered in one Washington cow last December, the issue has gained international attention. Washington Business asked Washington State Agriculture Director Valoria Loveland to address the issue. Here is her interview.
Q: What have been some of the biggest misconceptions regarding Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) or “Mad Cow” disease?
A: This is a complex, much misunderstood disease, but probably the biggest misconception is that BSE is a contagious disease. It cannot be spread from animal to animal (although there are some concerns about transmission from cow to offspring during the birthing process). The most common method for transmitting the disease is through feed containing ruminant-derived meat and bone meal from BSE-infected cattle. The use of ruminant-derived meat and bone meal as a protein supplement in cattle feed was banned in the United States in 1997.
Q: What measures are being taken at the state level to ensure food safety from “Mad Cow”
or BSE?
A: The primary responsibility for ensuring the safety of the country’s food supply rests with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), through its Food Safety and Inspection Service, and the Food and Drug Administration. These federal agencies have taken steps over the last 14 years to protect against BSE.
In 1990, the United States became the first country without BSE within its borders to test cattle for the disease. In 1997, the U.S. banned the feeding practices that scientists believe spread this disease. Again, the U.S. was the first country without BSE to implement a feed ban. On December 30, in response to the first reported case of BSE, the USDA announced additional measures to ensure the safety of U.S. beef. The new measures include:
• Banning all non-ambulatory cattle from the human food chain.
• Not allowing cattle tested for BSE into the food supply until tests show that it is safe.
• Banning brains, spinal cords and other risk materials from cattle over 30 months of age from entering the human food supply.
The state Department of Agriculture, along with the Washington State Beef Commission and Washington State Dairy Federation, support these additional measures.
Q: In what ways are the state and federal government working together on this issue?
A: Since this one case of BSE was announced, the state Department of Agriculture has worked very closely and cooperatively with the USDA. More than 70 WSDA employees, primarily with animal health, livestock ID, feed and food safety programs, have been working with USDA investigators to identify and locate the other members of the herd that entered the United States in 2001 with the positive cow, trace any potentially contaminated materials, and respond to various related issues.
Equally important has been the close working relationship between WSDA, the governor’s office, the state Department of Health and the state Department of Ecology. Since Christmas we have been in almost daily communication, sharing information and coordinating our response to the incident, making sure that any environmental or health questions were identified and quickly resolved. We also have been working closely with local government officials and commercial operators to assist the USDA in moving its investigation ahead in a timely and responsive manner. We have been repeatedly told that our teamwork is being held up as a positive example for other states and federal agencies.
However, we have been laying the groundwork for this type of emergency response after observing the impacts of the outbreaks of BSE and foot-and-mouth disease in Europe. We also have been working with the cattle and dairy industry on response plans for animal disease control. So in a way, we simply adapted our game plan for this particular incident.
Q: What impact has this issue had on the state’s consumers and businesses?
A: I have been extremely pleased with the response of our citizens to this incident. We have always said that the United States has the safest food supply in the world and this has certainly been borne out by consumer response. People have continued to buy and eat meat. According to an industry survey, awareness of BSE among consumers following the announcement of the one positive case was at 96 percent compared to 61 percent a few months earlier. Yet consumer confidence remained strong, going from 88 percent in September 2003 to 89 percent at the end of 2003.
I think it may be too soon to say what affect this has had on business, but I read a story in the Tri-City Herald the other day that said restaurants and retail meat businesses hadn’t seen any decline in sales whatsoever. I read another news article that quoted the owner of a restaurant in Okanogan as saying she was selling more steaks and hamburgers now than before this happened. The main issue right now is the loss of our international markets and I think everyone is anxious to get those markets opened up again.
Q: What types of action can be taken by the state Legislature, without treading on federal jurisdictions, relating to food safety and BSE?
A: This really is a national and international issue. Until the USDA completes its investigation and we see what further changes in food safety standards, if any, might be recommended, I think it would be premature for us to pass a bunch of laws that might end up just complicating the process.
Consistent standards, state-by-state, are very important for the industry and for the consumers. Again, as I mentioned earlier, the secretary of agriculture has already announced a new set of stricter food safety measures, such as prohibiting “downer” animals from the human food chain. The USDA also announced plans to “test and hold” all animals that are part of its BSE surveillance program. The program will continue to target older animals that are at a higher risk for BSE.
Also, states and the federal government have accelerated the creation and implementation of a national animal identification program. In fact, my agency has submitted a supplemental budget request of $329,000, which would cover hiring an animal identification specialist to take the lead on developing and implementing the national ID program. The additional funds would also be used to hire another food safety officer to inspect dairies, food processors and storage facilities, and an additional person to inspect feed facilities.
Q: I understand that one of your department’s major goals is to “facilitate the movement of Washington agricultural products in domestic and international markets.” What are some of the efforts being taken by the department to help the state’s beef industry?
A: About 90 percent of the nation’s beef is sold and eaten right here in this country. Industry surveys tell us the domestic market for beef is strong. The state’s beef industry has a strong promotion program of its own that’s carried out through the Washington Beef Commission and the national beef promotion program. We will continue to support the Beef Commission’s marketing efforts.
The international market is another story. The discovery of a Washington dairy cow with BSE prompted more than 30 countries to ban imports of U.S. beef products. Overall, about 10 percent of U.S beef is exported, but that percentage is higher for Washington, given our proximity to the major export markets of Japan, Korea and Canada. Restoring the beef export market is a national priority. Gov. Locke and I will do all we can to support USDA as it works to re-open those markets. I met with members of the Japanese technical team that visited our state in early January to observe how the investigation was being conducted. Probably the most important thing we can do at this point is to support the investigation efforts and new protective measures.
Q: In what ways will the state Dept. of Agriculture work with the cattle industry to rebuild its reputation?
A: I don’t think the industry needs to rebuild its reputation. Our producers and others in the industry have cooperated and worked diligently to assist USDA in carrying out its investigation as smoothly and as quickly as possible. And they have been quick to endorse all of the additional safety measures proposed by the USDA and Food and Drug Administration. They are to be congratulated for the open and supportive way they have responded to this issue.
Q: What affect has this issue had on the state’s agricultural workers?
A: Though there are certainly individual businesses and workers that have been affected by this issue, overall, there has not been a major impact on the beef industry as a whole. I think we won’t know what the full effects are for a while. Much depends on the outcome of the investigation and the re-opening of export markets.
Q: What plans do you have to use the state’s existing livestock ID program to improve cattle tracing methods?
A: Washington cattle producers have used brands to identify their cattle since territorial days. Under our livestock identification law, brands are proof of ownership and help protect producers against loss or theft. At the national level, cattle producers and others have been working for almost two years to put together national animal identification standards that will give us the ability to track animal disease to its source within 48 hours. We will be working with our Livestock Identification Advisory Board and others to look at our livestock ID program and the standards being developed at the national level. My goal is to put a program in place that’s cost-efficient, meets requirements of both federal and state law, and works for our industry.
Valoria Loveland was appointed director of the state’s Dept. of Agriculture in June 2002. From 1993 to 2001 she was state senator from the 16th Legislative District, which includes Franklin, Walla Walla, Columbia, Garfield and Asotin counties and served as chairwoman of the Ways and Means Committee and vice-chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Prior to being elected to the Senate, she was Franklin County treasurer.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
