|
|
|
|
|
Pew Commission Report Overlooks Pork Producers Progress On Challenges NPPC Statement On House-Senate Conferees Reaching Funding Agreement Drug User Fee Law Critical To Pork Producers USDA Asked To Address Pork Industry Crisis Korea Lifts Beef Ban, FTA Can Move Forward New Livestock Pollution Rules ‘Monumental Shift’ NPPC Condemns Move To Delay Vote On Colombia Trade Deal NPPC Applauds President For Sending Trade Deal To Congress Australian Productivity Commission Recommends No Restrictions On U.S. Imports |
Pew Commission Report Overlooks Pork Producers Progress On Challenges WASHINGTON, D.C., April 30, 2008 – Recommendations issued yesterday from a commission composed primarily of members opposed to modern livestock production if implemented likely would raise the cost of producing food animals and increase meat prices in the face of a global food crisis, according to the National Pork Producers Council.
Based on a $3.4 million, two-year “study” of the affects of livestock production on the environment, public health and rural economies conducted by the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production, the recommendations include phasing out certain production practices, banning certain animal antibiotics and placing new restrictions on the use of manure.
The commission overlooked the substantial progress made by the nation’s pork producers in addressing all of those issues, said NPPC.
“Pork producers have taken extensive steps over the last decade to meet various industry challenges,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “We constantly are looking for better ways to raise our pigs, including protecting them from diseases, and we always have been good stewards of the land, air and water that we use.”
Data from eight of the top 10 swine-producing states show, for example, that since 2000 less than 1 percent of hog farms have had a manure release. Additionally, NPPC pointed out, a tough new federal water pollution regulation covering CAFOs, which is due out late this summer, will protect water supplies from pollution from all large livestock operations by imposing a zero-discharge policy. Most swine CAFOs already comply with the rule.
“With the discharge issues largely addressed, it is hard to argue that large pork operations threaten human health, but more research is needed,” said Black. “As for our operations’ affects on air, the concentration of emissions outside our buildings is well below the established, available public-health standards.”
NPPC added that the Environmental Protection Agency recently commissioned a first-of-its-kind, livestock industry-supported study to determine the level of air pollution from all types of livestock operations. Findings from the two-year study, which began last summer, will provide the foundation for developing ways to ensure that air emissions from livestock operations don’t harm the environment.
On the issue of animal antibiotics, NPPC noted that a ban on subtherapeutic drugs – which the commission recommended – would lead to more pig deaths from disease and an increase in the use of post-therapeutic drugs. Both would lead to a rise in pork prices.
NPPC disputed the commission’s characterization that large animal feeding operations are bad for the rural economy, pointing out that pork operations alone are major contributors to farm communities, generating more than 550,000 mostly rural jobs and contributing an estimated $20.7 billion of personal income and $34.5 billion of gross national product to the economy.
The organization also questioned the objectivity of the commission, whose work was directed by the Center for a Livable Future, which is part of the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health. Among the center’s projects is “Meatless Mondays.”
“There was a lack of balance among commission members, and the commission’s work was directed by a group unfriendly to animal agriculture,” said Black. “As a result, in its deliberations, the commission did not give adequate weight to the views of the numerous credible voices from within commercial animal agriculture who share the commission’s objectives for a livestock sector that is protective of the environment, food safety, public health and animal welfare.
“Lastly, it’s hard for us to react to the substance of the commission report because it failed to issue all but one of its technical papers,” added Black. “The lack of serious, fact-based findings and apparent reliance on numerous anecdotal, non-peer reviewed allegations only confirms our perception that the report recommendations were largely predetermined.” NPPC Statement On House-Senate Conferees Reaching Funding Agreement On 2008 Farm Bill “On behalf of America’s pork producers, the National Pork Producers Council congratulates members of the House-Senate Farm Bill conference committee on reaching a broad funding agreement.
“The agreement is a significant step toward completing a 2008 Farm Bill. NPPC recognizes that there are important policy issues yet to be resolved and stands ready to work 24/7 to constructively help craft a final bill that maintains the U.S. pork industry’s domestic and international competitiveness.
“Finalizing a 2008 Farm Bill now is paramount to U.S. pork producers given the economic crisis in which the industry finds itself.”
Drug User Fee Law Critical To Pork Producers WASHINGTON, D.C., April 25, 2008 – The National Pork Producers Council today urged Congress to reauthorize the Animal Drug User Fee Act (ADUFA), after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Thursday sent recommendations for the law to Capitol Hill.
Enacted in 2003, ADUFA authorizes FDA to collect fees from the animal health industry to be used for the review and approval of animal health products. The fees supplement the agency’s annual congressionally-approved appropriations and have enabled FDA to dramatically reduce its review time of new animal drugs, bringing medications to the market more quickly while maintaining high standards for safety and effectiveness.
“ADUFA ensures that animal health companies are able to provide in a timely manner products to treat and control the new diseases that our animals will face,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “It’s a critical tool needed by the pork industry and veterinarians to maintain animal health and to provide safe, wholesome and nutritious pork.”
Since ADUFA was signed into law, four new swine health products have come on the market, helping producers fight the increasing challenges that swine respiratory diseases have created for the industry. Additionally, last year alone, veterinarians and pet owners received nine new products to help pets live longer, healthier lives.
Among its recommendations, FDA proposed a new user fee program – the Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act (AGDUFA) – to support the review of generic animal drug applications. Currently, FDA’s review of generic animal drugs is entirely funded through appropriations. The agency also recommended an “end review amendment” process, which would allow it to work with a drug manufacturer at the end of a review to make corrections to an application, resulting in reduced review time. FDA also asked that the reauthorized law include an agreement between the agency and industry to participate in 10 workshops over the next five years to improve communications between regulators and industry.
Lawmakers are expected to take up reauthorization of ADUFA, which expires Sept. 30, in the coming weeks. The law is expected to generate $98 million in user fees over the next five years; AGDUFA is estimated to bring in $27 million.
“NPPC will be very aggressive in lobbying Congress for a quick, clean reauthorization of this important law,” said Black. “ADUFA is a top priority for the U.S. pork industry.” USDA Asked To Address Pork Industry Crisis WASHINGTON, D.C., April 23, 2008 – In the face of rising feed costs and tightening credit markets and in an effort to stem mounting financial losses, the U.S. pork industry has asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture for assistance.
Officers and top staff with the National Pork Producers Council today met with Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer to urge him to take immediate action to address what now is a hog industry economic crisis, which likely will affect the broader U.S. economy.
Over the past seven months, U.S. pork producers have lost more than $2.1 billion. Due almost solely to a doubling of feed costs, producers now are losing $30-$50 on each hog marketed. Lenders are estimating that some producers could lose up to half or more of the equity in their operations by year-end.
Economists have estimated that the industry will need to reduce production by at least 10 percent – meaning a reduction of 600,000 sows – to restore profitability. But that cutback could be costly, with less-efficient packing plants closing; less manure for crop fertilizer and correspondingly a need for more man-made, foreign-produced fertilizer; a hike in pork retail prices because of a smaller supply; and lost pork industry jobs. Other industries that benefit from pork production, such as Main Street businesses, feed mills and trucking companies, also likely would see job losses. Additionally, there likely would be agricultural credit problems as some producers default on loans.
During discussions with Schafer – and in a letter presented to the secretary – NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio, requested that USDA purchase an additional 50.5 million pounds of pork for various federal food programs. This would reduce the U.S. sow herd by nearly 163,600 animals. Black also asked that the secretary implement emergency programs and loan guarantees to help producers purchase feed, consider allowing early release without penalty of non-environmentally sensitive Conservation Reserve Program acres back into crop production and support pork exports through USDA’s Market Access Program and Foreign Market Development Program.
[To read the letter to Secretary Schafer, visit NPPC’s Web site at www.nppc.org.] Korea Lifts Beef Ban, FTA Can Move Forward WASHINGTON, D.C., April 18, 2008 – The National Pork Producers Council welcomed today’s decision by South Korea to lift a ban on U.S. beef, an action that should allow the U.S.-Republic of Korea Free Trade Agreement to move forward.
The beef ban, implemented in 2003 over concerns about so-called mad cow disease, has been one of the main sticking points of the South Korea FTA, on which the Bush administration completed negotiations in March 2007.
The agreement contains tremendous benefits for U.S. pork producers, according to NPPC, which helped secure favorable treatment for U.S. pork and pork products. According to Iowa State University economist Dermot Hayes, when the FTA is fully implemented, total U.S. pork exports to the Asian nation will rise to nearly 600,000 metric tons. That’s about twice as much as the amount currently shipped to Japan, the No. 1 export market for U.S. pork. Hayes also estimates that the agreement will increase U.S. live hog prices by $10.
“This is the single most important trade agreement ever for the U.S. pork industry, and it will generate hundreds of millions of dollars in new export sales,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “U.S. pork producers will aggressively work for congressional passage of the U.S.-South Korea trade agreement.”
NPPC is eager to have Congress vote on the pact. U.S. pork producers currently are losing between $30 and $50 a head due mostly to high feed costs. Exports are softening that blow – although a new problem, lack of shipping containers, is emerging – but the industry needs new markets.
“Prompt congressional passage and implementation of this agreement is absolutely critical to pork producers, who are going through tough economic times,” said NPPC’s Black. “Exports contribute significantly to producer profitability, so it is important to continue expanding sales opportunities through trade agreements.”
Under the terms of the South Korea FTA, tariffs on all frozen and processed pork products will be eliminated by 2014. Fresh chilled pork will be duty free 10 years after implementation. U.S. pork products currently face tariffs as high as 25 percent. Additionally, South Korea has agreed to accept all pork and pork products from USDA-approved facilities.
The trade deal with South Korea was made possible in part because of the effective working relationship between NPPC and the National Pork Checkoff Board and their shared goal of increasing U.S. pork exports. New Livestock Pollution Rules ‘Monumental Shift’ WASHINGTON, D.C., April 10, 2008 – Tough new regulations covering livestock farms represent a major step forward in environmental protection, imposing severe penalties on those who continue to pollute rivers and streams with manure runoff, the National Pork Producers Council said in comments filed Monday.
NPPC added that today’s modern, commercial hog farms, known as concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), have essentially eliminated their water pollution problems and are in general agreement with the new Environmental Protection Agency rules, set to be issued late this summer. The comments were filed in response to EPA’s latest proposed changes in the CAFO water pollution regulations, which have been evolving through rulemaking and a court decision since 2003.
“These changes represent a monumental shift in the federal policy and regulations that govern animal feeding operations,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “They represent substantial improvements in water quality protection, and there is no question that as an entire sector, livestock and poultry agriculture will improve their water quality performance as a result.”
CAFO regulations issued in 2003 imposed a policy of zero discharges from large livestock and poultry farms. Covering approximately 5,000 large hog-feeding operations, they required producers to draw up detailed plans for managing manure and to obtain federal Clean Water Act (CWA) permits.
But a federal court decided in a 2005 case that EPA only had the authority under the CWA to require a permit for a CAFO to discharges not to operate. Since most swine CAFOs are designed, constructed, maintained and operated to meet a zero-discharge standard, few need – or would want – a CWA permit.
In its comments, NPPC cited data showing that, in eight key pork producing states, the average rate of hog-producing facilities discharging is less than 1 percent. “The rarity of these discharges … shows that a presumption that swine CAFOs are commonly discharging … is unwarranted,” said the organization.
EPA’s new rules propose that all CAFOs meet a zero-discharge standard. CAFOs that do not discharge or are not designed to discharge would not be required to obtain CWA permits. Such operations can voluntarily notify EPA that they meet the zero-discharge standard, which will protect them from enforcement actions.
A CAFO that fails to obtain a CWA permit or to notify EPA that it meets the zero-discharge standard and subsequently has a discharge is subject to fines of up to $32,500 a day. These stiff penalties will provide a significant incentive to pork producers to protect water quality, even without a federal permit. Also, most producers without federal permits will still need state water quality permits. State standards generally meet or exceed federal standards.
NPPC took exception to a few points in the final draft of the EPA regulation. For example, it requested several changes to reduce the administrative burden on hog farmers trying to comply with the voluntary certification process. In addition, NPPC joined with other livestock organizations in arguing strongly that, under the Clean Water Act, EPA can fine a CAFO for discharging but has no authority to levy additional fines on it for not obtaining a CWA permit in the first place. NPPC Condemns Move To Delay Vote On Colombia Trade Deal WASHINGTON, D.C., April 9, 2008 – Calling it a move that will severely undermine the credibility of the United States with its trading partners, the National Pork Producers Council strongly condemned an attempt to extend indefinitely the time period during which Congress must vote on a free trade agreement with Colombia.
President Bush Monday sent to Congress implementing legislation for the Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement. Under trade promotion authority granted to the president by Congress, lawmakers have 90 days to approve – without amendments – or reject the trade pact.
Despite that law, House leadership has scheduled a vote for tomorrow to remove the 90-day timetable for taking up the Colombia agreement.
“Should Congress remove the timetable, it will bad for U.S. pork producers, bad for American agriculture and business, bad for Colombia’s economic and political stability, and bad for the prospects of future trade agreements such as Korea and Doha,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “If Congress disregards this trade law, it will undermine the credibility of the United States with its trading partners.”
The Colombia agreement would have significant benefits for U.S. business and agriculture. For the U.S. pork industry, the deal when fully implemented, would add $1.63 to the price producers receive for each hog marketed, generate $63 million in U.S. pork exports and create over 945 new U.S. jobs tied to pork exports.
Under terms of the agreement, the tariffs on some pork and pork products will be eliminated immediately while the tariffs on others will be phased out over a five-year period. Like the Peru deal Congress approved last year, the Colombia agreement resolves sanitary and technical issues. The Colombian government, for example, agreed to recognize the meat inspection system of the United States as equivalent to its own inspection system.
“We urge lawmakers not only to preserve the 90-day timetable but to quickly take up and approve the Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement,” said Black.
In urging congressional approval, NPPC has pointed out that a trade pact with Colombia will benefit all U.S. agriculture and that 99 percent of the food and agriculture products exported by Colombia to the United States already enjoy duty-free access into the United States under the congressionally approved Andean Trade Preferences Act. It’s time to give U.S. products the same treatment, said NPPC.
The trade deal with Colombia was made possible in part because of the effective working relationship between NPPC and the National Pork Checkoff Board and their shared goal of increasing U.S. pork exports.
NPPC Applauds President For Sending Trade Deal To Congress Agreement With Colombia Would Be Beneficial To U.S. Pork Industry WASHINGTON, D.C., April 7, 2008 – The National Pork Producers Council today commended President Bush for sending to Congress a free trade agreement with Colombia that includes significant benefits for the U.S. pork industry.
Senate and House lawmakers now have 90 days to take action on the Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement, which already has been approved by the South American country’s congress.
NPPC is leading a coalition of agricultural organizations in support of the trade agreement, which would open to U.S. pork producers a market of 43 million consumers and, when fully implemented, add $1.63 to the price producers receive for each hog marketed, according to Iowa State University economists.
“We are very excited about this agreement because it will provide significant new export opportunities for U.S. pork producers,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “We urge Congress to approve the deal now.”
Under terms of the agreement, the tariffs on some pork and pork products will be eliminated immediately while the tariffs on others will be phased out over a five-year period. Like the Peru deal Congress approved last year, the Colombia agreement resolves sanitary and technical issues. The Colombian government, for example, agreed to recognize the meat inspection system of the United States as equivalent to its own inspection system.
In urging congressional approval, NPPC has pointed out that a trade pact with Colombia will benefit all U.S. agriculture and that most products from Colombia already enjoy duty-free access into the United States under the congressionally approved Andean Trade Preferences Act. It’s time to give U.S. products the same treatment, said NPPC.
The trade deal with Colombia was made possible in part because of the effective working relationship between NPPC and the National Pork Checkoff Board and their shared goal of increasing U.S. pork exports.
NPPC Applauds ‘No Action’ Against U.S. Pork Australian Productivity Commission Recommends No Restrictions On U.S. Imports WASHINGTON, D.C., April 4, 2008 – The National Pork Producers Council today applauded the recommendation of the Productivity Commission (PC) in Australia to place no restrictions on U.S. pork imports.
The Australian government, under pressure from Australian pork groups, last year began an investigation of the country’s ailing pork industry. Some Australian pork producers were seeking quotas or higher tariffs of up to 62 percent on imported pork as a way to protect the domestic industry.
The World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Safeguards allows WTO member countries to impose for up to four years safeguard measures if “a surge of imports causes or threatens to cause serious material injury to a domestic industry.” This period may be extended to eight years if necessary to allow the domestic industry to adjust to import competition.
The Australian Government’s Productivity Commission found that there was no causal link between U.S. imports and the difficulties being experienced by Australian pork producers The PC report is now before the Rudd government which must make a final decision in the matter. A final decision from the government is believed to be imminent.
“The U.S. pork industry is pleased that the Productivity Commission has decided that there is no basis to take action against U.S. pork imports,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “We urge the Rudd Government to adopt the Productivity Commission’s findings.”
NPPC points out that the economic woes being suffered by the Australian pork industry are being experienced by pork producers around the world. The dynamics of the hog cycle and high feed costs have put downward pressure on pork production, said the organization.
The U.S. pork industry gained access to the Australian market when the U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement became effective. Australia is one of the top destinations for U.S. pork, with exports reaching close to $85 million in 2007.
Keeping the Australian market open to U.S. pork exports was made possible in part because of the effective working relationship between NPPC and the National Pork Checkoff Board and their shared goal of increasing U.S. pork exports. |