|
|
 COUNTRY OF ORGIN LABELING |
|
|
Livestock producers should be able to self-verify the country of origin (COOL) for meat animals using normal production records, the Iowa Farm Bureau said June 24.
“A producer should be able to fill out a COOL form for each lot or load, sign it stating that the information is true and then be subject to verification by authorized audit,” said David Miller, IFBF director of Commodity Services.
Miller told Agriculture Marketing Service (AMS) staff at a field hearing in St. Paul, Minn. that extensive identification and tracking systems are not needed to comply with COOL for muscle cuts and ground meat. The hearing was the 11th of 12 held by the AMS, with nearly 500 producers and food service industry representatives present.
“There is no specific legal recordkeeping requirement,” Miller said. The USDA, he added, cannot mandate that producers have such records. However, many producers already retain production, transaction and inventory records for tax purposes for three years.
“The USDA should make it perfectly clear to packers, processors, purveyors and retailers that their responsibility is to accurately and correctly transmit the country of origin as presented to them, not to build elaborate systems to certify compliance of producers,” Miller emphasized.
The concept of labeling U.S. food products so that consumers can distinguish their country of origin was adopted in the 2002 farm bill. Domestic producers wanted a way to distinguish the higher-quality U.S. meat cuts from cattle, hogs, sheep, fish and vegetables from imports at retail outlets.
Mandatory labeling to distinguish meat born, raised and slaughtered in the United States starts Sept. 30, 2004.
Farm Bureau supports COOL and wants it implemented with the least amount of burden and cost to producers.
The agriculture department held the listening sessions to get public input on COOL, which it estimates will cost $2 billion to implement. Specifically, comment was sought on proposals to label U.S.-origin and mixed origin products as well as blended products.
Miller urged the AMS to simplify labeling requirements for non-blended products.
“Since an animal can only originate from one country, we believe only one country should be listed as to the origin,” he explained. Labels could read either U.S. or country of import.
“Labeling should not be ‘status of product at various stages of production labeling.' A product that originates in the United States and maintains that status through the production process, because it has not left the country, is eligible to be labeled as a product with U.S. origin,” he said.
The label for animals born in Canada, but processed in the United States, should not list irrelevant processing steps. The label should read country of origin: Canada, Miller said. An animal born in the United States, raised in Canada and then imported into the United States to be processed would have Canada as its country of origin.
According to the law, blended meat products, such as hamburger, must list, in order, the country of origin of each blended part by percentage of the total blend.
Current rules for importing animals from both Canada and Mexico are being lost in the debate over COOL.
Miller said these animals are easily identified because fed cattle from Canada shipped to the United States for processing must arrive in sealed trucks. Canadian feeder pigs imported must have ear tattoos and health papers.
Mexican feeder cattle are permanently marked when imported.
“COOL is not a product traceability system. Blending and mixing of multiple sources of products should not be a problem,” he said.
The AMS was asked to clarify potential $10,000 fines for violating COOL. He said inadvertent violations should be handled through education.
Retailers and processors should not be able to shift liability from “willful” violations down to suppliers, he said. Fines should only to be assessed for willful violations.
The AMS hopes to issue proposed rules this fall for a 90-day public comment period.
Posted 6/30/2003 |
