WASHINGTON, D.C. — The National Cattlemen’s Beef Assoc. (NCBA) and U.S. Cattlemen’s Assoc. (USCA) may disagree on country of origin labeling, but agreed last week on another issue: Fresh beef from cattle raised in Brazil and Argentina should be kept out of the United States, for fear of introducing foot-and-mouth disease (FMD).
The response was to a June 29 final rule announced by USDA’s Agricultural and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), for importation of fresh beef from northern Argentina and Brazil. Though important, the final rule is only a step toward allowing beef imports. Brazil and Argentina will also need to meet U.S. food safety requirements.
"USDA will assess their equivalence with U.S. standards through a review of their regulatory programs, as well as an in-country audit of their food safety systems," stated APHIS, which did not provide a timeline for that audit.
U.S. cattle groups are concerned the virus causing FMD could arrive here with beef imports. While the APHIS ruling requires the regions exporting beef to be FMD-free, FMD is present in other regions of Argentina and Brazil. The U.S. eradicated FMD in 1929.
Danni Beer, a South Dakota rancher and USCA president, said it recognized APHIS is placing strict protocols on potential beef imports from Brazil and Argentina. "However, we simply do not trust Brazil and Argentina to implement the necessary protocol and safe handling practices on a consistent and comprehensive basis across all supply lines to ensure the safety of those fresh beef products shipped to the U.S.," said Beer, who added, "The margin of error when addressing Foot and Mouth Disease is extremely slim."
The NCBA criticized the move loudly. "There is nothing about the process that USDA went through that can help us understand that they have truly measured the risk, that they have proven there are mitigations to the risk and that we can be safe," said Collin Woodall, vice president of Government Affairs.
Much of last week’s criticism focused on Brazil, as the APHIS announcement came just prior to a White House visit by Dilma Rousseff, the nation’s president.
"The whole reason they did it, we believe, is because the president of Brazil is in Washington, D.C., this week, and we feel the administration wanted to hand her a present," said Woodall. The USCA, too, cited political motivations.
In the 46-page announcement about the new rule for Brazil, APHIS cited 870 comments received during the two-month comment period. Most of these focused on two main areas: science behind movement of the virus and the capacity of Brazil and Argentina to mitigate FMD outbreaks, if such outbreaks were to occur.
According to APHIS, beef will be allowed for import only if FMD has not been diagnosed in the exporting region in the past 12 months; no commingling of animals or beef from the region of origin, or commingling of beef from other regions, before export; removal of bones and certain tissues, including lymph nodes; and chilling until the beef reaches a certain pH level.
Despite some minor changes to the rule after comments, APHIS stood by most of its original analysis. "Our findings regarding Brazil’s disease-control capabilities give us confidence that the mitigation methods required under this rulemaking will safely permit the importation of fresh beef from Brazil," said the APHIS statement, signed by Gary Woodward, USDA deputy under secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
Beef will be allowed for import from Patagonia, in northern Argentina, and from 14 states in Brazil: Bahia, Distrito Federal, Espirito Santo, Goias, Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Minas Gerais, Parana, Rio Grande do Sul, Rio de Janeiro, Rondonia, Sao Paulo, Sergipe and Tocantins. The final rules are similar to the rule that allows the United States to import beef from Uruguay.
The U.S. imports, on average since 1999, 900,000 metric tons of beef – equal to about 11 percent of domestic beef production. According to an economic analysis required when changing trade rules, the amount of beef projected for eventual import from the change in the Brazil rule is 20,000-65,000 metric tons.
U.S. consumers would benefit from lower beef prices; U.S. processors and cattle farmers would lose returns to capital and management, and most of the losses would be incurred by cattle farmers. A 40,000-ton import scenario from Brazil, according to USDA’s analysis, would increase beef imports by 2.8 percent. The retail price of beef would drop by about 0.25 percent, while the live cattle price would drop 0.7 percent. The USDA projects this would cause a tiny drop in U.S. beef production (0.03 percent).
The analysis for Argentina assumes 16,000-24,000 metric tons imported. A 20,000-ton import scenario would result in a 1.3 percent rise in U.S. beef imports. That amount would cause a 0.12 percent drop in the retail price of beef and a 0.01 decline in U.S. beef production.
