Perspective: BSE Update

[pandiana]

******
> [1] International BSE cases update, 29 Sep 2004
> Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004
> From: ProMED-mail<promed@promedmail.org>
> Source: EU and OIE data (see comment)
>
>
> BSE confirmed cases update, 29 Sep 2004
> ---------------------------------------
> Country / 2001 / 02 / 03 / 04 / total since 87
>
> UK / 1202 / 1144 / 612 / 202 / 184 005
> Austria / 1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1
> Belgium / 46 /38 / 15 / 8 / 125
> Canada / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 1
> Czech Republic / 2 / 2 / 4 / 6 / 14
> Denmark / 6 / 3 / 2 / 1 / 13
> Finland / 1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1
> France / 274 / 239 / 137 / 42 / 934
> Germany / 125 / 106 / 54 / 48/ 346
> Greece / 1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1
> Ireland / 246 / 333 / 183 / 94 / 1447
> Israel / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 1
> Italy / 48 / 38 / 29 / 4 / 121
> Japan / 3 / 2 / 4 / 4 / 13
> Liechtenstein / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 2
> Luxembourg / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 2
> Netherlands / 20 / 24 / 19 / 5 / 76
> Poland / 0 / 4 / 5 / 9 / 18
> Portugal / 110 / 86 / 133 / 65 / 923
> Slovakia / 5 / 6 / 2 / 6 / 19
> Slovenia / 1 / 1 / 1 / 2* / 4
> Spain / 82 / 127 / 167 / 90 / 485
> Switzerland / 42 / 24 / 21 / 2** / 455
> United States / 0 / 0 / 1*** / 0 / 1
>
> * Including an animal born in Germany
> ** Including a case in a zoo zebu
> *** An imported case (from Canada)
>
> [These data have been derived from 2 sources:
>
> 1. Table 11 (Situation countries/diseases) of EU's weekly report
> "Animal Disease Notification System" for the period 1 Jan - 24 Sep
> 2004
> <http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/animal/diseases/adns/adns_2004.pdf>
>
> 2. OIE's BSE tables, updated 29 Sep
> 2004 <http://oie.int/eng/info/en_esbmonde.htm>
>
> Compared to 184 005 BSE cases recorded in the UK so far, 5003 cases
> have been recorded in the 23 other -- mostly European -- countries.
> The updated numbers so far, and the OIE data on 2003 annual incidence
> rates (number of indigenous cases per million bovines aged over 24
> months) from the 5 (ex-UK) countries with highest numbers of
> confirmed cases, are the
> following:
>
> Ireland (1447; 57.81), France (934; 12.01), Portugal (923; 137.19),
> Spain (455; 46.31) and Switzerland (455; 24.86). During 2004, an
> increase in the number of recorded BSE cases is being observed in
> Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and probably in Slovenia and
> Japan. In other countries the previously observed decrease has been
> continuing during the current year; Germany might be an exception. The
> decrease in Portugal deserves special attention; see item 2. - Mod.AS]
>
> --

[pandiana]

ProMED-mail
> <promed@promedmail.org>
>
> [Japan's comprehensive testing policy, covering all bovines sent for
> slaughter -- irrespective of age (in EU terminology, "Healthy
> slaughtered
> cattle") -- is impressive, if not extreme. Initially, the testing policy
> did not seem to adequately cover the most vulnerable group, namely "Risk
> animals" (fallen stock, bovine animals with clinical signs at ante-mortem
> and emergency slaughter). As experienced in Europe, the detection-rate of
> BSE in such animals is more than 30-fold higher compared to that
> observed
> in healthy slaughtered cattle. It will be interesting to see figures
> pertaining to the number of such animals tested annually in Japan. A new
> Japanese law which went into effect 1 Apr 2003 states that all the cattle
> over 24 months found dead on farms should be checked for BSE (see
> 20030426.1019). However, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry
> (MAFF), responsible for this segment, said that they could not check all
> the dead animals in 17 prefectures, and that total test numbers would be
> only about half of the expected 80 000. - Mod.AS]
BSE inspection policy
> ---------------------
> An expert panel of the Food Safety Commission reviewing Japan's mad
> cow controls has given a virtual green light to a proposal to exclude
> young cattle aged 20 months or less from mandatory testing for bovine
> spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). The panel's recommendation will
> probably pave the way for an easing of tough anti-BSE standards now in
> place that require tests on all cattle for the brain-wasting disease.
> This testing regime was introduced soon after Japan's 1st mad cow case
> was revealed in 2001.
>
> BSE is caused by the accumulation of misshapen proteins called prions
> in body tissue, especially the brain. Since prion accumulation occurs
> gradually, it is difficult to detect BSE infection in young cattle
> using current testing techniques. This is why the European Union tests
> only cattle over 30 months old.
>
> In Japan, 11 of the roughly 3.5 million animals tested to date were
> infected with the disease. 2 were aged 21 months and 23 months [Since
> this publication date, the total number of cases has become 13. -
> Mod.AS]. But the amount of abnormal prions in their bodies was very
> small, somewhere between 1/500th and 1/1000th of the quantity
> typically found in infected adult animals. The fact that these amounts
> are close to the minimum that can be detected through testing
> apparently led the panel to reason that the risk of human infection
> would not rise if cattle below 20 months old were excluded from
> testing.
>
> The government originally planned to adopt the EU's testing standards.
> But it eventually decided to screen all cattle out of concern that
> distributing beef from both tested and untested animals could cause
> market and consumer confusion and anxiety.
>
> In the 3 years since rigorous testing was introduced, there has been
> no rise in the number of new BSE cases. Meanwhile, more anti-BSE
> measures have been implemented. The time is probably ripe for a review
> of the test-all policy, and the case for that is also supported by the
> experience in EU, which does not test young cattle.
>
> Obviously, a comprehensive approach is essential for securing beef
> safety. First of all, brain, spinal cord and other body parts in
> danger of containing large amounts of prions must be eliminated from
> the beef made available to consumers. But in separating such parts,
> infected tissue could come into contact with uninfected meat.
>
> That is why all beef must be tested for BSE infection before being put
> into
> the food chain. It is vital that all these steps be taken assiduously to
> prevent any error.
>
> The proposed testing review echoes growing calls within the government
> to lift the ban on U.S. beef imports. Some policy makers clearly hope
> the panel's recommendation will help break the impasse in bilateral
> talks over the import ban. There are, however, several problems that
> must be sorted out before resuming beef imports from the United
> States.
>
> It is possible to trace the place of origin and the age of every
> animal raised in Japan. But that is not easy in the United States,
> where cattle are typically managed in herds. So accurately identifying
> beef cattle younger than 20 months to exclude them from testing would
> be a big challenge in the United States.
>
> Another problem concerns the elimination of risky body parts. While
> all cattle are subject to this requirement in Japan, only those aged
> 30 months or older are handled this way in the United States. Although
> the United States stresses it has dramatically increased the number of
> cows tested, the fact is that U.S. testing failed to detect animals
> showing possible BSE symptoms this spring.
>
> A review of Japan's test-all approach would not sharply narrow the
> wide
> gap
> that exists between the 2 countries. The step would not allay Japanese
> consumer fears about the safety of American beef. Japan should urge the
> United States to adopt beef safety standards similar to those in this
> country. That should be our bottom-line demand in talks over resuming
> imports of U.S. beef.

[kato]

According to agcenter.com market report today....

Japan will decide by the end of this week to exclude animals aged 20 months or younger from its policy of blanket-testing all cattle for the deadly mad cow disease, Japanese media reported on Wednesday. This announcement rallied futures prices in the cattle pits because of the implications for U.S. beef exports. Officials believe the export markets may open by years end. The debate between 20 months [Japanese] or 30 months [U.S.] is still an open issue.

What I would like to know is, does this apply to Canada?

[pandiana]

I guess we could speculate that there could be at least two effects. If Japan has an appetite for more beef than can be supplied by the US and considering it is hard to differentiate between Canada and US herds, they may open the door to us. This would be the logical and fair situation.

However, if the US can supply all they need, they may keep us dangling for another year.

Or possibly the US will open the border to live cattle under 20 months in order to increase their supply and thereby sc*&@ us out of the value added dollars and jobs we need to keep at home. In the short term, this could have a positive effect on our calf prices I think. We will soon see if anyone care about the long term?

Maybe our government is holding off on the pink RFID's thinking their might be some movement on the border issue. It would save them a few bucks. Anyone heard of their availability yet?

[pandiana]

I would have to say yes to your question Kato. Canada will be treated the same as the Americans by the Japanese. At least that was the idea put forward by Japanese officials at the CBEF conference. However, this means little as our current packing capacity is still the problem. Beef to Japan will be priced similar to the American price, and the packers in Canada are selling all they can process with very little effort. The only thing an open border to UTM beef in Japan may help would be products that Americans and Canadians don't like to eat.

Haven't heard anything down at this end about set aside calf tags pandiana. All my heifers are sitting waiting for their pretty pink earings though.

[grassfarmer]

Regarding pink eartags, still no availability that i've found - tomorrow I will phone Edmonton for a list of stockests of them. Reading the WP today further confuses the issue as they say there is still a bit of a dispute between Alberta and the Feds over a scheme ending date - the Feds wanting it to end Jan 1st 2006 instead of October 1st. Stan Eby says that it will "hopefully be decided by October 6th and the scheme running by mid October." Looks to me like we have been conned as an industry - CCA/ABP went to Ottawa and negotiated a deal that promised big bucks and it looks like it isn't going to materialise. Few will be able to qualify as it is without backing the end date off until 1st Jan 06. A good cheap scheme for the government meantime ranchers are selling calves at desperate prices thinking they have been helped. Seems to me that any perceived "strength" in the calf market is being led by packer and US money - just dangling enough of a carrot in front of producers to get them to keep their cows another year -versus cashing them in at $250 each. The packers thereby ensuring plenty of cheap fats for the years ahead.

[frustrated1]

What? A govt program run amuck? Shirley not. I'm still waiting for the rest of the "up to" $80head they promised. I was old and cynical when i questioned that but don't seem to have anyone brow beating me on it now. When I'd inquired as to the pretty pink tag scam at the local co-op they didn't seem to even know of the program or the special tags. Think we've soon earned the right to be cynical of some of the "help" we recieve. But it all sounds pretty when the cameras grind.

[farmers_son]

If trade were to resume between the U.S. and Japan it is significant for Canada in as much as the U.S. is obviously delaying any announcement of the proposed rules until they have a export market for their producers beef. Whether Japan accepts Canadian beef is more of symbolic importance than of practical importance as we do not sufficient packer capacity. Still Japan is the key that is needed to unlock the border for our live cattle to go South.

I frankly do not understand the frustration over the tags. So what if they are not available right now? Sure you can’t fill out the forms until you have the tags but that is not to say the government was going to pay you right away anyway. Really makes no difference if the tags are not here today or next month, does it?

If there is a real problem with the program it is that the cow calf guy has to keep his animals until year end 2005 to qualify for $80 a calf ($200 * 40%). That is an unreasonably long time to make that kind of commitment. The feedlot guys only have to hold their animals 90 days to qualify for their government support with no restrictions on the number of eligible animals they decide to include in their set aside. The feedlot guys can just use their CCIA barcode number, no expensive fancy pink radio tag for them. Obviously the real intention of the calf program is to ensure a guaranteed source of cheap calves for the feedlots. The availability of the pink tags is an insignificant side issue.

Rest assured, the government wasn’t going to issue any cheques for this program until the last week of December anyway whether you had the pink tags this week or next month.

Pandiana: I think the most significant number in your list of BSE positives is the U.S. has one. Obviously they haven't convinced everyone that they are BSE free even though they want to give that impression.

[pandiana]

farmers_son, the original press release (AB) said that October 1st would be the start and payment would be expected in 'three weeks' from receipt of tag numbers. You could apply under this program starting October 1st to the end of the year 'or' until the border opened.

The problem associated with the delay is that the clock is running...our calves are continuing to grow and will be expected to become a liability to whoever owns them if they finish before the 1 year hold-back. They would quickly eat more than $200.00 in lost price opportunity, let alone rations.

In addition, many have farmers have bills to pay and must sell calves whether their pink or not.

What originally looked like a workable program which could be of benefit to primary producers is beginning to look more like the typical government boondogle. And yes...where is that other $24.00? I heard rumours it was supposed to arrive early October.

[pandiana]

I agree, farmers_son, that the border opening to Japan is somewhat symbolic. Nonetheless it would provide that much needed signal that we were back in business and provide fuel to drive towards increasing Canadian packing facilities. I think many other markets are waiting for a sign that borders are open to our major trading partners.

From the perspective above, it is clear that there is a major difference between those countries with a severe BSE problem compared to those countries that have had 1 or 2 cases in greater than four years. For me, it reinforces the fact that under the current rules we should not be excluded from trade in live cattle from any country.

Even Portugal, a country with the highest increase in BSE cases up until last year with a total of 924 cases is showing a decline and trade barriers have been relaxed to allow the export of cattle between EU countries.

[pandiana]

I re read the above post on Japan trade and was left with a question. Do we remove SRM's from all our beef that is exported, both otm and utm?
"Another problem concerns the elimination of risky body parts. While
> all cattle are subject to this requirement in Japan, only those aged
> 30 months or older are handled this way in the United States. Although
> the United States stresses it has dramatically increased the number of
> cows tested, the fact is that U.S. testing failed to detect animals
> showing possible BSE symptoms this spring."

[grassfarmer]

farmers_son, the frustration with the tags is partly as shown by Pandiana above - the fact that we are well into the Fall run and producers are not having the full information to make the decisions on.
My personal frustration is that I am trying to play the best business hand I can. I want to tag as early as possible to collect the $200 as soon as possible because I could use the money. Also the sooner the money is claimed the less risk there is that we tag and then find by some miracle the US border opening and the scheme cancelled. Call me greedy if you like but I want the $200 and enhanced prices if the border were to open - it's the best possible scenario financially and that's what I'm targeting - to aim for less is a possible missed opportunity.