February 25, 2009 - In a victory for U.S. pork producers, the Philippine government indicated this week that it will maintain current rules for the administration of its tariff rate quota (TRQ) for pork, preserving U.S. access to a fast-growing market for U.S. pork exports.
The Philippine government had threatened in recent months to severely restrict pork imports by denying to legitimate Philippine importers the licenses they need to import pork within the country’s 54,210 metric ton pork TRQ. (Amounts of imported pork below the TRQ are subject to a lower, or in-quota, tariff rate. Once imports reach the TRQ threshold a higher tariff rate kicks in.)
In response to that threat, the National Pork Producers Council filed a petition with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative in December 2008, requesting removal of the Philippines from the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP). In filing the petition, NPPC noted that the Philippine action would have violated World Trade Organization rules and a 1999 Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and the Philippines.
GSP is a program designed to provide developing countries such as the Philippines with preferential duty access to the U.S. market. In 2007, the Philippines exported $1.1 billion worth of products to the United States under the GSP program.
“We are delighted the Philippine government has lived up to its international obligations and given Philippine importers full access to the pork TRQ,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “In light of that, we have withdrawn our GSP petition. However, we will remain vigilant to ensure the Philippine government continues to give the U.S. pork industry full access to its pork market.”
The Philippine decision to maintain its current TRQ administration rules preserves a growing market for U.S. pork exports. U.S. pork sales to the Philippines in 2008 surged by 360 percent to 25,300 metric tons valued at $46 million.
to top
February 25, 2009 - Citing an increasing vulnerability to foreign animal disease, the National Pork Producers Council today urged the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to lend his support to a mandatory National Animal Identification System (NAIS).
The animal ID system would be used to help animal health officials trace diseased or exposed animals to their farm of origin within 48 hours, making control and eradication of any disease easier. The key component of such a system is registration of premises, which requires the collection of publicly available data, including the physical location of an operation, telephone number and contact information.
In a letter sent to Sec. Tom Vilsack, NPPC noted that USDA has struggled since 2004 to implement a viable NAIS that serves the needs of animal agriculture. It pointed out that the agency’s past efforts to establish an animal ID system have been fraught with indecision in the department over whether it should be mandatory or voluntary, hampered by inadequate funding to advance implementation and opposed by extremist groups that do not understand the importance of premises identification and pre-harvest traceability for disease management.
“The U.S. livestock industry is increasingly vulnerable to foreign animal disease because of the potential spread through increased international travel and trade,” said NPPC in its letter to Vilsack. “Even more frightening is the threat of deliberate introduction of disease by terrorists.”
Should the United States’ trading partners close their markets to U.S. meat exports, the U.S. pork industry alone would lose billions of dollars, according to NPPC. In 2008, U.S. pork exports totaled nearly $5 billion.
The U.S. swine industry has long supported a mandatory NAIS for all relevant species of animal agriculture and has asked pork packers to require premises identification numbers as a condition of sale. Over the past three years, NPPC and the National Pork Board have worked with USDA to implement a swine ID system and have registered more than 80 percent of the approximately 67,300 swine premises.
“The NAIS is critical to protecting our national swine herd and, thus, our domestic and international markets,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio. “Without such a system, the increased cost to USDA and animal agriculture in the event of a foreign animal disease will be staggering.”
to top
February 24 2009 - The National Pork Producers Council expressed disappointment with today’s ruling by a federal court to uphold a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency decision to regulate farms for dust.
NPPC had asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Washington to review EPA’s decision to regulate emissions of coarse particulate matter (PM), or dust, in rural areas. The organization had argued that while EPA identified problems with coarse PM in urban areas – where it is mostly the byproduct of engine combustion – it failed to show any health effects associated with rural dust, which comes mostly from naturally occurring organic materials such as plants, sand and soil. While recognizing the distinctions between urban and rural PM sources, EPA nonetheless decided to regulate agricultural operations for coarse PM. A 2002 National Academy of Sciences report found that there were no scientifically credible methodologies for estimating emissions from animal feeding operations.
The appeals court accepted EPA’s decision as “reasonable.” In rejecting arguments from NPPC and other livestock organizations, the court adopted the so-called precautionary principle, placing the burden on the livestock industry to prove that its operations are not harming the public or the environment. Said the court: “In assessing the scientific evidence, the [livestock organizations] have mistakenly equated an absence of certainty about dangerousness with the existence of certainty about safety.”
Prior to this decision, EPA had the burden of showing there was harm to human health and the environment that needed to be addressed and of explaining why its proposed regulation was necessary to address that harm.
“EPA issued the revised air-quality regulations despite acknowledging that it lacks any science to support imposing them on livestock production operations, and that apparently was okay with the court,” said NPPC Environment Committee Chairman Randy Spronk, a pork producer from Edgerton, Minn. “More troubling, the court is requiring that we prove a negative.
“We still believe,” Spronk added, “that it simply is inappropriate to treat the naturally occurring emissions from an animal agricultural operation in the same manner as emissions from power plants or refineries.”
EPA issued the particulate matter rule in 2006, before a two-year emissions monitoring study of animal feeding operations got underway. The study, which is expected to be completed by January 2010, was part of a 2005 agreement between EPA and the livestock industry. Data from the study is to be used by EPA to develop scientifically credible methodologies for estimating emissions from livestock operations and to promulgate new compliance standards and guidelines. More than 2,700 animal feeding operations, including 1,900 pork farms, signed the so-called air consent agreement.
“Applying this new particulate matter standard to agriculture mandates a solution before deciding if a problem exists,” Spronk said.
Under the regulations, livestock operations could be treated as stationary air emissions sources and be required to obtain emissions permits under federal and state laws. As a result, pork production operations could face monitoring for particulate matter such as dust from dirt roads and fields and for chemicals, including ammonia, that can form particulate matter. They also may be subject to Clean Air Act “new source review” requirements any time a modification or improvement to their operations is made.
“This is a bad decision that will have a profound and long-lasting impact on the struggling American economy,” said Michael Formica, NPPC’s chief environmental counsel. “Farmers, business owners, workers and consumers struggling to put food on the table will be harmed by the court’s imprudent decision to use the ‘precautionary principle’ in determining the need for a particular government regulation.”
to top
February 24, 2009 - The National Pork Producers Council is pleased to announce that Tommy Sevier has joined its Washington, D.C., team. Sevier will serve as director of government relations, working with Audrey Adamson, NPPC assistant vice president for public policy.
“Tommy will be a great addition to our policy team,” said Kirk Ferrell, NPPC vice president for public policy. “He brings a wealth of Capitol Hill experience and knowledge of agriculture issues.”
Sevier most recently served as deputy chief of staff for Rep. Robin Hayes, R-N.C., managing a congressional office and staff of 15. He also advised the congressman on economic development, small business, energy, telecom, trade and agricultural issues. Prior to working for Hayes, Sevier worked in the personal offices of Sens. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., and Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas, and Rep. Cass Ballenger, R-N.C.
Sevier is a 1999 graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
to top |
