AR-News: Some Cattle Groups Seak to Weaken Downer Ban

[Political Animal]

Posted on Sun, May. 16, 2004   


Some cattle groups, states seek to weaken ban on
downer cows

FREDERIC J. FROMMER
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Some states and cattle groups are urging
the Department of Agriculture to weaken a ban on
consumption of "downer" cows imposed after last year's
mad cow case. But public comments are running roughly
10-1 in favor of keeping the ban, an AP review found.
The USDA issued the ban in December after a Holstein
cow tested positive for mad cow disease in Washington
state, the first reported case in the United States.
The department's Food Safety and Inspection Service
maintains that the cow was a downer - one too sick to
stand or walk on its own - although some witnesses
have challenged that.
Under the ban, downer cows may not be slaughtered for
human consumption. Such animals must be condemned.
The USDA just finished a public comment period on
whether to keep, scrap or revise the ban. The
Inspection Service's acting administrator, Barbara
Masters, will make that decision, although there is no
time frame, agency spokesman Steven Cohen said.
The AP review covered written comments currently on
file at the USDA, but the agency has not yet filed all
the comments it has received. Those received by e-mail
are also not on file.
People who eat meat contaminated by mad cow disease -
formally known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or
BSE - can get a fatal variant, Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease.
Supporters of the ban cite health concerns and
compassion as reasons to keep it in place. Cattle
groups, meanwhile, argue the ban should apply to
diseased animals, but not to injured ones, which the
group says pose no health risk to humans.
"If these (injured) animals are condemned, rather than
slaughtered, then producers will suffer an unnecessary
economic loss," the National Milk Producers Federation
wrote. "Condemning animals suffering from a physical
injury such as a broken leg does not seem to be
supported by science with respect to BSE risk."
The group, based in Arlington, Va., acknowledges that
downer cows have a higher risk for mad cow disease.
But it says human health would not be jeopardized if
the USDA allowed injured cattle to be slaughtered for
food, provided they are tested for disease first. Most
"downers" are old dairy cows whose meat can bring
farmers a little extra revenue.
Wisconsin, which is second in the nation in dairy
production, also urged the USDA to allow consumption
of injured cattle. The state's director of meat safety
and inspection, Terry Burkardt, called condemning
animals with broken bones "a waste of wholesome food
and an economic burden" on small farmers and meat
establishments.
Burkardt estimated the rule would preclude 3,000
"otherwise healthy, freshly-injured cattle" from the
Wisconsin food supply, or about 2.4 million pounds of
meat a year.
North Dakota, Oklahoma, Arizona and West Virginia
filed similar comments.
The National Cattlemen's Beef Association, based in
Centennial, Colo., asked the USDA to allow for the
personal (as opposed to commercial) consumption of
downer cattle injured during transport.
Jeffrey Farris of Ellsworth, Wis., who slaughters
livestock on farms, said his business has suffered in
the ban's wake.
"I don't have a problem with the ban on 'sick'
downers, but what about the 'healthy' animal that
slips and falls, and either breaks a leg or 'splits
out?'" wrote Farris. "Those animals don't have
anything to do with BSE, so why the ban on
slaughtering them?"
In an interview, Farris said about 30 percent of his
business comes from downer animals. He's had to lay
off two of his six employees because of the ban.
The Humane Society of the United States argues that
any weakening of the ban would both pose a health risk
and subject cows to suffering. The Washington-based
group says USDA veterinarians would be hard-pressed to
tell if a cow with a broken bone is disease-free.
"It would be impossible for them to determine whether
a physical injury is derivative of a neurological
disorder or other illness," the Humane Society wrote.
"It is well established that illness and injury are
often interrelated."
The group called the use of downer cattle "one of the
ugliest aspects of modern agriculture," noting that
such animals are often dragged in chains or pushed in
bulldozers. It says downers should be euthanized
humanely rather than brought to slaughterhouses.
The Humane Society got many of its members to weigh in
during the public comment period. A typical letter
urged the USDA to keep the ban in place, and to expand
it to other animals such as pigs, sheep and goats.
But some were more personal and emotional.
"All downed animals that are marketed and brought to
slaughter are subjected to horrendous cruelties; often
they are dragged to slaughter by their tails and ears,
or dumped and left to die in agony," wrote Shari Lewis
Thompson of New York City. "Each and every one of them
suffers unimaginable pain and fear."
ON THE NET
USDA: http://www.usda.gov


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! - Internet access at a great low price.
http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/