09 Summer Conference Logo

2010 Cattle Industry Annual Convention & NCBA Trade Show in San Antonio, Texas

- January 27-30, 2010
Click Here to Learn About the Cattle Learning Center – Practical solutions for Cattle Producers


Home > News > Publications Archive > Cattlemen's Capitol Concerns > Cattlemen's Capitol Concerns Archive Printer-Friendly Version      
Cattlemen's Capitol Concerns Archive

Cattlemen's Capitol Concerns
Contact:
Bethany Shively,
202-347-0228, or bshively@beef.org.
 
The Cattlemen's Capitol Concerns (CCC) is a weekly report from Washington, D.C., giving an up-to-date summary of top policy initiatives concerning the cattle industry; direct from the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA). Please feel free to reprint in full or in part. If you would like to include NCBA's logo, contact us at 303-694-0305.
IN THIS ISSUE
U.S.-EU Take First Step in Resolving Twenty-Year Beef Trade Dispute
NCBA Urges Administration to Uphold Fair and Science-Based Trade Policies
USDA Announces Public Listening Sessions on Animal ID
Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act Takes Public Lands out of Public Use
NCBA Submits Comments on Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Rule
Don't Miss NCBA's Cattlemen to Cattlemen!
U.S.-EU Take First Step in Resolving Twenty-Year Beef Trade Dispute
 
The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday announced a meaningful first step in the longstanding trade dispute between the U.S. and European Union (EU) over the use of growth promotants in cattle. The National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) has been working closely with industry and USTR on this issue for several years.
 
"We appreciate the leadership and persistence of Ambassador Kirk and his USTR team in getting this process moving in the right direction after 20 years of unsuccessful efforts," said Gregg Doud, NCBA chief economist. "Once approved, this will be a positive step forward in our goal of expanding U.S. beef market access, but we still have a long way to go before this issue is resolved to our satisfaction."
 
Under the current tariff-rate quota, the EU allows 11,500 metric tons (MT) of hormone-free, high-quality, grain-fed ("Hilton") beef imports each year from the U.S. Upon approval, this new accommodation provides for an additional 20,000 MT at zero duty. After three years, it will allow an extra 25,000 MT, for a total of 45,000 MT at zero duty. USTR and industry will closely monitor the terms of the agreement, and should it not be carried out satisfactorily, the U.S. reserves the authority to reinstate carousel duties on EU exports to the United States. 
 
The EU has cited the use of growth-promoting hormones in U.S. cattle as the reason for imposing a trade barrier on U.S. beef for the past 20 years ago-despite the fact that these growth promotants have all been scientifically proven safe through rigorous Food and Drug Administration (FDA) testing.
 
In response to the EU's unjustified trade barrier, the U.S. has been imposing $116.8 million in retaliatory sanctions on various European goods since 1999. As recently as October 16, 2008, the World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body confirmed that the U.S. has the right to continue imposing these sanctions until the dispute is resolved.  In January of this year, USTR announced plans to modify-or "carousel"-the list of goods subject to increased tariffs in order to step up pressure on the EU. On April 22, the day before the carousel rotation was set to take effect, USTR announced it would delay the rotation until May 9 in order to provide more time to negotiate a settlement.
 
"This accommodation conceded nothing in terms of the science; it is simply changing the terms of the payment plan," explained Doud. "This gives the U.S. beef industry an opportunity to gain duty-free access to one of the most valuable markets in the world. But this does not resolve the hormone dispute."

NCBA Urges Administration to Uphold Fair and Science-Based Trade Policies
 
The National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) joined with a coalition of more than 50 national agriculture and business groups to urge President Obama to support open markets and level playing fields for international trade by upholding U.S. obligations under World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements. In a May 1st letter, the coalition expressed opposition to a provision (Section 727) in the 2009 Appropriations Act that effectively bans imports of some Chinese chicken products, without allowing the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) to conduct a necessary and appropriate risk assessment on whether these imports pose any risk to American consumers. Because the provision specifically targets imports from only one country, it conflicts with the U.S. obligation to treat trading partners equally, and has prompted China to request a WTO consultation.
 
"Trade supports millions of U.S. jobs," said Jill Davidsaver, NCBA manager legislative affairs. "This trade-distorting appropriations language sets a bad example for our international trading partners; if the U.S. doesn't hold itself accountable to the highest standards of fair and science-based trade, how can we expect other countries to do the same?"
 
China is the only market completely closed to U.S. beef exports, and represents one of the largest potential growth markets for U.S. beef-worth in excess of $100 million. The chicken dispute is likely to impede ongoing efforts to open up China to U.S. beef.
 
With 1.3 billion consumers, rising income levels, and rapid urbanization, growth in China's per capita beef consumption outpaced all major beef-consuming countries during the last decade (USITC Publication 4033, September 2008). In addition, China demonstrates a niche demand for certain beef cuts, such as offal, that are underutilized in the U.S. and can be marketed in China as premium products. China officially banned U.S. beef and variety cuts after the discovery of a single case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in the U.S. cattle herd in December 2003. Prior to the ban, the U.S. was China's leading foreign beef supplier by value and China was the 10th largest U.S. beef export market.
 
The following is an excerpt from the coalition letter to President Obama:
 
"We agree that the U.S. Government must effectively regulate the safety and quality of food products sold in this country. However, to maintain the effectiveness and integrity of the food safety system, such regulations must be based on sound science and an appropriate risk assessment. Laws and regulations must also be crafted such that the U.S. does not ignore its international trade obligations -- obligations that the U.S. Government has helped to develop and in particular, to prevent other countries from adopting protectionist, non-science based measures against U.S. food and agriculture exports under the guise of food safety. At a time when U.S. producers are seeking to sell their goods and services abroad during a difficult global economic crisis, it is vital that we uphold our trade obligations, lest we find access to vital overseas markets cut off to American products.
  
"If there are concerns about the safety of cooked chicken imports from China -- and we should note that this includes poultry that originates in the U.S. -- they should be addressed through sound science in the regulatory channels, not through ad hoc legislation or appropriations bills. Section 727, however, precludes scientific analysis from being conducted, therefore adversely affecting U.S. credibility and potentially hindering U.S. market access overseas.
 
"If the U.S. cannot uphold the basic rules of international trade, our trading partners may take similar actions against U.S. exports, which will ultimately harm American workers, farmers, businesses and the U.S. economy as a whole."
 
NCBA is continuing to work to create open markets and level playing fields for U.S. trade by expanding market access for U.S. beef and ensuring science-based standards for international trade. NCBA is also working to expedite the passage of pending Free Trade Agreements with Korea, Colombia, and Panama which could save U.S. exporters millions of dollars each year in unnecessary tariffs. 
 
USDA Announces Public Listening Sessions on Animal ID
 
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has announced a schedule for public listening sessions in regards to the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). 
 
APHIS Listening Session Schedule:
 
May 14 - Harrisburg, PA
May 18 - Pasco, WA
May 20 - Austin, TX
May 21 - Birmingham, AL
May 22 - Louisville, KY
May 27 - Storrs, CT
June 01 - Greeley, CO
 
As the first in these series of listening sessions to engage stakeholders and producers in a dialogue about NAIS, in April, USDA Secretary Vilsack hosted a meeting with 28 livestock and producer groups, including NCBA and the Public Lands Council (PLC).
 
NCBA recognizes and supports the need for a National Animal Identification System for the purpose of enabling state and federal animal health officials to respond rapidly and effectively to animal health emergencies, such as foreign animal disease outbreaks or emerging domestic diseases. Many of NCBA's members already participate voluntarily in numerous animal identification programs as one of many tools to improve their herds, monitor disease, and better market their cattle. However, NCBA members continue to have concerns with NAIS, which is why NCBA's policy supports a voluntary -- rather than a mandatory -- system.
 
NCBA members are particularly concerned about the protection of producers' confidential information, which would be housed in a USDA-maintained database. The federal government has not demonstrated a strong track-record when it comes to preventing the leak of private information, and USDA has not been able to guarantee that the information in a mandatory system would be protected from release under a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request. USDA's own Office of General Counsel has indicated that protection is different between a voluntary and mandatory system. 
 
NCBA is also concerned about the system's ability to move at the speed of commerce. The working, processing, and marketing of cattle cannot slow down in order to be scanned and entered into the system. 
 
It is also important to note that animal ID will not serve to enhance food safety, nor was it intended for this purpose. 
 
NCBA and PLC are committed to working with USDA in recommending continued refinements to NAIS, and we look forward to these discussions in the further development of a workable system.
 
USDA is encouraging producers to submit comments and suggested solutions for NAIS. To submit comments or to register for the public meetings, visit: www.usda.gov/nais/feedback.shtml
 
Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act Takes Public Lands out of Public Use
 
The Public Lands Council (PLC) sent a letter to the House Committee on Natural Resources on Tuesday opposing H.R. 980; also known as the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act (NREPA).
 
NREPA would set aside 19 million acres as wilderness areas in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington and create a new category of land-use designations, called "Biological Connecting Corridors," which would be off-limits for livestock grazing. Nearly 8 million acres would be set aside as these corridors which connect the wilderness areas. It also designates approximately 2000 miles of river corridors for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic River system.  
 
"This bill would make an area nearly the size of South Carolina essentially off-limits for public use," explains Skye Krebs, President of PLC and rancher from Ione, Ore. "It is a complete departure from the multiple-use tradition of our country's shared federal lands."  
 
Joel Bousman, a member of the Public Lands Council and County Commissioner of Sublette County, Wyo. was invited to testify today before the House Committee on Natural Resources. In his testimony, he explained why multiple use of public lands is so important.  "In a western county consisting of 80 percent federal land, we thrive on multiple use of our natural resources, with the end result being a sustainable and diverse economy," Bousman says.  "Forcing more people into a smaller area available for multiple use will result in overcrowding and more resource management problems, as well as damages to the natural community."
 
"Many western ranchers depend on public lands for livestock grazing," explains Krebs. "This bill would make it difficult for them to continue their operations."  
 
Bouseman elaborated on that point.  "Most, if not all of the lands located in Wyoming and proposed for wilderness under this bill are already used for permitted livestock grazing," he says. "Invariably, when conflicts arise, agency decisions are weighted in favor of wilderness values and against grazing, harming local families and communities."
 
The text of the letter PLC sent to the House Committee on Natural Resources follows:
 
"Dear Chairman Grijalva and Ranking Member Bishop,
 
"The Public Lands Council (PLC) has represented public land ranchers for over forty years.  Public land ranchers own nearly 120 million acres of the most productive private land in the West and manage vast areas of public land, accounting for critical wildlife habitat and natural resources.  PLC works to conserve a stable business environment in which livestock producers conserve the unique heritage of the West and feed the Nation and world.  
 
"H.R. 980, the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act (NREPA) would lock up more than 19 million additional acres in wilderness areas in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.  It creates a new category of land-use designations, "Biological Connecting Corridors", and designates nearly 8 million acres for inclusion in the corridors which connect the wilderness areas.  Title III of NREPA designates approximately 2000 miles of river corridors for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic River system.  
 
"Additionally, PLC is concerned over the language contained in Title I, Sec. 110 of NREPA which states 'water sufficient to fulfill the purposes for which the lands are designated as wilderness.'  Specifically, water rights of states or property owners cannot be infringed upon for wilderness designations.  
 
"The vast amount of land that would be designated under H.R. 980 would severely restrict grazing and other multiple uses of our public lands, for this reason PLC is adamantly opposed to the legislation.  
 
"We thank you for your consideration of Western Ranchers and of a balanced multiple use management approach to our Nation's public lands."  

NCBA Submits Comments on Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Rule
 
On Friday, May 1, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) and its partners in the Agriculture Coalition on the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule submitted comments in response to the U.S. Environmental Agency's (EPA) delay of the effective date of the December 5, 2008 final rule amending the SPCC regulations. According to the Federal Register notice, EPA has delayed the rule in order to allow additional time for "assessment of policy and legal issues." 
 
Under the Clean Water Act, farms and ranches are required to prevent discharges of oil into waters of the United States, and to contain those discharges should they occur.  In 2002, the EPA amended these regulations; since that time, NCBA has been working with EPA to ensure the rule makes sense for farms and ranches. 
 
The coalition has worked closely with EPA on a number of key reforms that we hope will be included in the final rule. In the comments, the Coalition reiterated its pending concerns and offered a number of recommendations to improve the rulemaking.
 
In general, the Coalition asks that before any rule is applied to farms/farming operations, EPA in consultation with USDA should evaluate the threat (if any) the industry presents and establish rules applicable to the industry. It also urges the Agency to make its intent clear in guidance provided to inspectors to ensure the fewest contrary incidences (i.e., disagreements) during implementation; make clear to the agricultural industry and inspectors the process and timeline for which any disagreements resulting from this proposed flexibility will be addressed; and in consultation with USDA and the industry, accurately calculate the costs of this rule to the agricultural sector in order to fully appreciate the impact upon the rural economy.
 
Specifically, the Coalition offered recommendations with regards to:
 
-Self-certification proposals: If SPCC is applied to all farms, agriculture should be given the option of self-certification. EPA should also make clear its intent in guidance provided to inspectors to ensure the fewest contrary incidences (i.e. disagreements) during implementation. 
 
-Threshold triggers: The current 10,000-gallon aggregate trigger should not be applied to the agriculture industry, and the EPA has yet to produce the data needed to determine a meaningful trigger for all sectors of agriculture. Given its unique characteristics and lack of any significant spill history, the agriculture industry should not be regulated in the same way as huge oil tankers. 
 
-Tank size and usage: The volatility in fuel prices makes it financially necessary for growers to seek tanks of a size that can accept bulk orders from their local supplier. The Agency's action on a 10,000-gallon aggregate threshold limits the ability of these growers to move to bulk orders and save money because the loss of a self-certification plan would require the hiring of PE's at substantial cost. By limiting choices among growers, EPA will increase costs on a segment of the U.S. economy that has the least power to pass costs along to their customers. EPA should allow tanks the ability to be removed from service and then placed back in service with minimal operational effort, thus giving farmers and agribusiness more storage flexibility
 
-Plan development and implementation: EPA should issue a compliance deadline that provides adequate time for producers to develop SPCC plans, secure budgets, and make necessary capital expenditures to comply with the final rule once it has been published. Farms operate on loans and funds are often dedicated several years in advance to other crucial elements of the operation.
 
Finally, the Coalition strongly affirms that members of the agricultural sector, who grow this nation's food and rely on well water from their property for their families' needs, are highly motivated to ensure that their environmental practices are sound. These producers strive daily to ensure a safe environment for their children and the communities in which they live.
Don't miss NCBA's Cattlemen to Cattlemen!
 
Don't miss NCBA's Cattlemen to Cattlemen, May 12 - 16, as we sit down with the experts from Fort Dodge Animal Health to learn more about adding value to calves, and what that can mean for an operation's bottom line.
 
NCBA'S Cattlemen to Cattlemen is now an hour long! The show debuts Tuesdays at 8:30 p.m. and airs again Wednesdays at 10:30 a.m. and Saturdays at 9 a.m. (All times are Eastern). Don't forget, you can watch NCBA's Cattlemen to Cattlemen online anytime by visiting www.CattlemenToCattlemen.org.
 
NATIONAL CATTLEMEN'S BEEF ASSOCIATION
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20004



NCBA... working to increase profit opportunities for cattle and beef producers by enhancing the business climate and building consumer demand.

© Copyright 2009 National Cattlemen's Beef Association -- Web Site Policy