Fri, July 23, 2004
Political border beef
Harvard researcher says science suggests our cattle should be headin' south
By KEITH BRADFORD, EDMONTON SUN
A risk assessment study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Agriculture supports reopening the border to live Canadian cattle, the Sun has learned - but one of the authors says politics is getting in the way of science. Josh Cohen, a senior research associate at the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, said the study shows that even in worst-case scenarios, there's a low risk of mad cow disease spreading in the U.S. if and when the border reopens.
But Cohen said the problem for Alberta and the rest of the Canadian industry is that - despite renewed calls yesterday for the border to reopen - it's not just a question of science.
"I don't think it's become a political issue - I think it's been a political issue all along," said Cohen, who submitted the study to the USDA in mid-June.
"It's something that happens across a lot of (areas). We crunch the numbers and it seems to suggest that one course of action is what makes sense and yet it doesn't happen.
"I'm not a policy-maker, but just sitting here, looking at it, I don't see why the border remains closed.
"I think the science is reasonably clear."
Harvard has been studying the risks associated with bovine spongiform encephalopathy since 1998, when the USDA asked it to investigate the potential spread of the disease.
And in April of this year, Harvard was commissioned to calculate the risks related to the border reopening after the USDA's proposals - which included reopening the border - were criticized for not considering worst-case scenarios.
"It turns out that, at worst, BSE would spread very slowly and it's most likely, even under these worst-case assumptions, to tend to die out over time rather than spread at all," said Cohen. "It wouldn't blow up in prevalence and therefore the risk is low. Our science supports opening the border."
Ted Haney, president of the Canada Beef Export Federation, said the results of the study are "significant."
"This removes any further debate or discussion about the scientific merits of delaying access to all edible Canadian beef products and all classes of Canadian cattle. Any further delays are either process delays or political delays."
The USDA introduced a ban on imports of live cattle on May 29 last year after BSE was detected in an Alberta cow. A second case was discovered Dec. 23 in a Washington State cow, born in Alberta. On April 7 of this year, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman closed a "comment period" on a proposed rule to reopen the border.
USDA spokesman JimRogers said the rule-making process is underway, but no timeline has been set.
"It's not a matter of politics, it's more a matter of bureaucracy," he said. "What you have to look at is the legal and bureaucratic process by which you actually change regulation. (It) can take a while. The status would be ongoing."
Haney said the USDA can only blame the delay on process for so long. "At some point a process delay is in fact obstructionist in nature. I think they've run out of time to give us purely process arguments (for the) delay."
The U.S. ban on Canadian beef has devastated the Canadian industry, costing it more than $2 billion in exports alone.
Rod Scarlett, executive director of Wild Rose Agricultural Producers, said the industry could be crippled if the border isn't open before the calf run begins in September.
"We are just going to have a whole bunch of cattle and no market for them," he said. "That's on top of a huge number of older cows and bulls that are really worthless right now.
"We could have situations where rather than trying to feed animals, farmers may have to shoot them."
Former federal agriculture minister Bob Speller previously suggested the border could reopen by mid-August.
But Scarlett said he'll be surprised if it happens within six months because of the U.S. presidential election.
Andy Mitchell, the new federal agriculture minister, said yesterday he won't make any promises about when the border will open.
"I have no intention of making guesstimates. I'll talk about a border opening when I know the border is going to open."
Rancher Stan Walterhouse had to rebuild his operation near Tulliby Lake, 285 km east of Edmonton, after last May's case of mad cow disease was linked to his farm.
After seeing his herd slaughtered, he said he's not particularly comforted by the Harvard study.
"We shouldn't be worried about BSE. Canadian beef is 100% safe."
Meanwhile, Alberta's agriculture minister said the job of cranking out steaks and burgers in Alberta will be left where it belongs - in the hands of the private sector.
"The government of Alberta will not be going into the packing business," Shirley McClellan said yesterday after a meeting in Calgary with Mitchell.
"I don't believe it's a role for government - we don't have the expertise."
Notice that this was submitted to the USDA in June. They certainly kept it quiet didn't they?
Political border beef
Harvard researcher says science suggests our cattle should be headin' south
By KEITH BRADFORD, EDMONTON SUN
A risk assessment study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Agriculture supports reopening the border to live Canadian cattle, the Sun has learned - but one of the authors says politics is getting in the way of science. Josh Cohen, a senior research associate at the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, said the study shows that even in worst-case scenarios, there's a low risk of mad cow disease spreading in the U.S. if and when the border reopens.
But Cohen said the problem for Alberta and the rest of the Canadian industry is that - despite renewed calls yesterday for the border to reopen - it's not just a question of science.
"I don't think it's become a political issue - I think it's been a political issue all along," said Cohen, who submitted the study to the USDA in mid-June.
"It's something that happens across a lot of (areas). We crunch the numbers and it seems to suggest that one course of action is what makes sense and yet it doesn't happen.
"I'm not a policy-maker, but just sitting here, looking at it, I don't see why the border remains closed.
"I think the science is reasonably clear."
Harvard has been studying the risks associated with bovine spongiform encephalopathy since 1998, when the USDA asked it to investigate the potential spread of the disease.
And in April of this year, Harvard was commissioned to calculate the risks related to the border reopening after the USDA's proposals - which included reopening the border - were criticized for not considering worst-case scenarios.
"It turns out that, at worst, BSE would spread very slowly and it's most likely, even under these worst-case assumptions, to tend to die out over time rather than spread at all," said Cohen. "It wouldn't blow up in prevalence and therefore the risk is low. Our science supports opening the border."
Ted Haney, president of the Canada Beef Export Federation, said the results of the study are "significant."
"This removes any further debate or discussion about the scientific merits of delaying access to all edible Canadian beef products and all classes of Canadian cattle. Any further delays are either process delays or political delays."
The USDA introduced a ban on imports of live cattle on May 29 last year after BSE was detected in an Alberta cow. A second case was discovered Dec. 23 in a Washington State cow, born in Alberta. On April 7 of this year, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman closed a "comment period" on a proposed rule to reopen the border.
USDA spokesman JimRogers said the rule-making process is underway, but no timeline has been set.
"It's not a matter of politics, it's more a matter of bureaucracy," he said. "What you have to look at is the legal and bureaucratic process by which you actually change regulation. (It) can take a while. The status would be ongoing."
Haney said the USDA can only blame the delay on process for so long. "At some point a process delay is in fact obstructionist in nature. I think they've run out of time to give us purely process arguments (for the) delay."
The U.S. ban on Canadian beef has devastated the Canadian industry, costing it more than $2 billion in exports alone.
Rod Scarlett, executive director of Wild Rose Agricultural Producers, said the industry could be crippled if the border isn't open before the calf run begins in September.
"We are just going to have a whole bunch of cattle and no market for them," he said. "That's on top of a huge number of older cows and bulls that are really worthless right now.
"We could have situations where rather than trying to feed animals, farmers may have to shoot them."
Former federal agriculture minister Bob Speller previously suggested the border could reopen by mid-August.
But Scarlett said he'll be surprised if it happens within six months because of the U.S. presidential election.
Andy Mitchell, the new federal agriculture minister, said yesterday he won't make any promises about when the border will open.
"I have no intention of making guesstimates. I'll talk about a border opening when I know the border is going to open."
Rancher Stan Walterhouse had to rebuild his operation near Tulliby Lake, 285 km east of Edmonton, after last May's case of mad cow disease was linked to his farm.
After seeing his herd slaughtered, he said he's not particularly comforted by the Harvard study.
"We shouldn't be worried about BSE. Canadian beef is 100% safe."
Meanwhile, Alberta's agriculture minister said the job of cranking out steaks and burgers in Alberta will be left where it belongs - in the hands of the private sector.
"The government of Alberta will not be going into the packing business," Shirley McClellan said yesterday after a meeting in Calgary with Mitchell.
"I don't believe it's a role for government - we don't have the expertise."
Notice that this was submitted to the USDA in June. They certainly kept it quiet didn't they?
Comment