Here is Karen’s well researched response:

OVERVIEW ARTICLE:

http://www.salon.com/food/feature/2010/04/26/usda_testing_end_local_meat/

Personal note: Hi! After reading the above article I started looking around for the letter writing campaign referenced in the last paragraph.  I was disappointed to find nothing easily assessable and nothing really geared toward consumers, it was all for the industry folks.  So I did my homework on the AAMP (American Assoc of Meat Processors – http://aamp.com/Validation.php) and after much reading and talking directly with one of their members, put together a letter for consumers.  My initial strong feelings were to slant the letter toward the evils of large, corporate processers vs. small, local, independent processors…but that’s NOT what this fight is about.  It’s about making sure that our small, local, independent processors are still standing and in business at the end of this!  If not for them, where will we take our local, well-cared for, grass-fed livestock to be processed?!  THANK YOU for your efforts to help save your local processors.

DEADLINE for COMMENTS: June 19, 2010

Definition of terms:

HACCP – (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points) is a management system in which food safety is addressed through the analysis and control of biological, chemical, and physical hazards from raw material production, procurement and handling, to manufacturing, distribution and consumption of the finished product. (SOURCE: ADA.org)

FSIS – Food Safety and Inspection Service

What YOU can do NOW:

OPTION 1:  Contact FSIS via email at:

DraftValidationGuideComments@fsis.usda.gov

Cut and paste the letter (making sure to fill in the highlighted areas and edit as you see/feel fit)

OPTION 2:  Make your changes and send off the hard copy letter to the address at the top

Docket Clerk, FSIS

Room 2-2127

5601 Sunnyside Avenue

Beltsville, MD  20705

Re: Comments – Draft Guidance on HACCP System Validation

Dear Mr. Almanza:

I respectfully submit these comments regarding the Draft Guidance on HACCP System Validation that were publically released on March 19, 2010.

As a consumer of livestock products who depends upon local, small independent meat processors, my concern regarding the process validation in inspected establishments HACCP programs has prompted me to submit these comments.  I am not an industry big-wig; I am only one person who is concerned with the damage that I foresee these new validation requirements causing my local, independent meat processors.  When HACCP was implemented, the meat industry saw a decrease in establishments.  This initiative and new interpretation has the potential to decimate the remaining very small to small establishments, upon which so many Americans, including myself, depend.  There is nothing wrong with the current HACCP system, whereas independent, small processors are concerned – nor is there any reason to believe the extraneous requirements would produce a safer end product.  It has been estimated that the potential cost to validate a processors entire food safety system could easily run upward of $500,000 initially and over $100,000 for ongoing validation.  No food safety problem has been identified to require this shift in agency interpretation of validation; I don’t understand why this is necessary when there is a system in place that is working.  All I see this shift in interpretation accomplishing is:

• Devastating the remaining small meat processors (hinders commerce)
• Large decrease in the variety of products available
• Discouraging the introduction of new products, therefore reducing the number of employees (increased unemployment)
• Increasing the cost of production, therefore increasing what I have to pay

None of these sound like they would be for the good of the American consumer.  I know, believe in and trust my local meat processors; therefore,   I respectfully request that the Draft Guidance on HACCP System Validation be revised to clearly state that no in-plant microbial testing is required when an establishment is following the long-standing, safe processes of HACCP.

I appreciate the chance to comment on the Draft Guidance on HACCP System Validation.  Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

(Name and Address)

cc: [Your State Legislators- Congressmen and Senators]

[The Small Business Administration]

[Your State Farm Bureau]

[Your State Beef and Pork Council]

——————————————————————————————————————-

Find your Representative:

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

Find your Senator:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Find your State Farm Bureau:

http://www.fb.org/index.php?fuseaction=newsroom.statefbs

Find your State Beef Council:

http://www.beefusa.org/affiFederationofStateBeefCouncils.aspx

Find your State Pork Council:

http://www.nppc.org/aboutus/stateassociations.htm

FURTHER ACTION YOU CAN TAKE:

Please also contact the Small Business Administration Ombudsman, which offers the opportunity to submit online comments on regulatory unfairness for small business. The website is:

http://web.sba.gov/nocms/client/dsp_welcome.cfm

Instructions:  (unblock pop-ups)

Organization Type: SELECT “Small Business”

Federal Agency Name: USDA

Agency Contact person:  Mr. Almanza

Agency Office/Division:  FSIS

Click “No”

ENTER:  AAMP

COMMENT:

I am writing re: HACCP System Validation for Meat Processors. When HACCP was implemented, the meat industry saw a decrease in establishments. The current initiative and new interpretation has the potential to decimate the remaining very small to small meat processing establishments. If the interpretation goes through as it is currently structured, it will most definitely be a hindrance to commerce, will decrease the variety of products available and discourage introduction of new products. This will in turn, reduce the number of employees needed and increase unemployment. It will also increase the cost of production, therefore increasing the cost I will have to pay. All of these factors alone represent unfairness toward small processors, when adding the financial burden (initially upwards of $500,000 and $150,000+ for ongoing verification) it surely must be regulatory unfairness for small businesses.  Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter.

OR you can send them a copy of your letter to FSIS/Mr. Almanza via regular mail at:

U.S. Small Business Administration

409 3rd Street, SW

Washington, DC 20416

By When the First Family paced off their kitchen garden last spring, it was an intentionally political act: Michelle Obama was not only preparing to fill her family’s table with homegrown veggies year-round, but taking aim at childhood diabetes and obesity. As spades turned the soil, she said the garden’s primary purpose was to educate the country’s children about the benefits of a healthy diet. But even when the family was still battling for the Democratic Party’s nomination, a campaign to return such a garden to the White House was well under way. As political rivals vied for their respective party’s embrace in 2008, a national coalition of gardeners called “Eat the View” was gathering supporters to demand that whomever the next president was, they would replant the White House lawn with edibles. Others piled on. A call went out for the longed-for garden to be certified organic. Celebrated foodie Michael Pollan urged the imagined produce be sent to D.C. food banks.

In Bexar County, local writer and cultural voyeur Pamela Price was enjoying a front-row seat to the spectacle as a newbie garden blogger soured on the vitriol of campaign-year politics. As the nation became increasingly mired in Red-Blue polarities, Price, a trained historian and former editor, searched her memory for expressions of universal “American” values, a common ground to bridge the widening divide. “There’s got to be really practical solutions to what we’re facing,” she recalled thinking at the time. “And there’s gotta be solutions that can be pretty much palatable to anybody and we can move beyond the rancor.”

To read the full article, click HERE

Putting Michigan Produce on Your Menu: How to Buy and Use Michigan Produce in Your Institution Booklet Now Available

A new booklet is now available, Putting Michigan Produce on Your Menu: How to Buy and Use Michigan Produce in Your Institution, to help food service professionals at Michigan institutions like schools, hospitals, colleges and universities purchase, handle, and use Michigan-grown foods year round.  The booklet provides tools including suggestions for connecting with local farmers, purchase and use equivalencies, and food safety and storage tips to help food service professionals find local food sources, purchase appropriate amounts for larger-quantity recipes, and properly handle and store fresh produce.

You can download the booklet free at several websites including, Michigan Farm to School (www.mifarmtoschool.msu.edu <http://www.mifarmtoschool.msu.edu/> ), C.S.  Mott Group for Sustainable Food Systems (www.mottgroup.msu.edu <http://www.mottgroup.msu.edu/> ) at Michigan State University, Michigan Food and Farming Systems (MIFFS, www.miffs.org <http://www.miffs.org/> ), and the Michigan Department of Agriculture (MDA, www.michigan.gov/mda <http://www.michigan.gov/mda> ).
If you would like to access a searchable archive of the all the previous Mich-Organic listserv postings copy this URL and paste in your browser address field   http://list.msu.edu/archives/mich-organic.html

NAMPA, Idaho — Idaho ag producers made the most of an opportunity to provide input on the next farm bill during a field hearing May 1 conducted by the U.S. House Agriculture Committee.

Representatives from the dairy, beef cattle, sheep, sugar beet, potato, grain, tree fruit, wine grape, forestry and organic sectors all testified during the three-hour hearing in Nampa.

Witnesses provided a long list of likes and dislikes about existing federal farm programs and suggested some changes for the next farm bill, slated for 2012.

Representatives told the panel that federal subsidies for the corn-based ethanol industry are hurting the Idaho cattle and dairy industries.

Several witnesses said immigration reform is badly needed if agriculture is to have a reliable work force in the future.

Kelly Henggeler, a fourth-generation fruit grower from Fruitland, called for enactment of AgJOBS, which would reform the H-2A program.

“Without ( AgJOBS), I fear there will be fewer and fewer American-produced apples and increased imports,” he told the panel. “Failure to act means giving away our industry and our markets to foreign competitors.”

Representatives from the potato, wine grape and tree fruit industries said the next farm bill should retain important provisions for specialty crop grants and market access programs.

Witnesses said some farm programs, while well intentioned, are simply too burdensome and bureaucratic.

Charles Lyons, a rancher from Mountain Home and president-elect of the Idaho Cattle Association, said he opted out of an EQIP contract to install a 10,000-gallon stockwater tank because it would cost more to paint the tank as required than to install the system on his own.

Adrian Boer, a dairyman from Jerome, said the industry is struggling and looking for a more efficient government support program.

Existing dairy support programs fail to adequately protect against low milk prices and low profit margins that occur when input costs, especially feed costs, skyrocket, Boer told committee members.

Discontinuing the existing Dairy Product Price Support Program and shifting toward a new income protection program would provide dairy farmers with a more effective safety net, Boer told the panel.

The 2008 Farm Bill, which carried a $284 billion price tag, expanded many conservation programs while putting less emphasis on direct payments compared with previous bills. But direct payments are still an integral source of support from many farm families, said Scott Brown, an Eastern Idaho farmer and president of the Idaho Grain Producers Association.

“The direct payment has been and is very popular with Idaho’s grain farmers,” Brown told the committee members. “In many cases, the direct payment has meant the difference between producers abandoning the farm or giving producers another chance with their banks to stay in business.”

Members of the ag committee attending the Idaho hearing were Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn.; Rep. Walt Minnick, D-Idaho; Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla.; Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D-S.D.; and Rep. Jim Costa, D-Calif. Also joining the panel was Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, a member of the House Appropriations Committee.

In his opening comments Minnick acknowledged that many of the existing farm programs are too cumbersome for producers.

A new farm bill is needed that allows efficient farmers to “spend less time farming the government and more time farming their land,” Minnick said.

The numbers are used by policy makers, researchers, press, academic and anyone else with a vested interest in understanding the farmers market industry.  Likewise, the USDA numbers are also the basis of important policy and research initiatives that will affect farmers markets and local/regional food systems.

Register your market before the May 14th deadline at http://www.ams.usda.gov/2010farmersmarketdirectory

ONLY market managers and farmers market operators (i.e. associations) can register their markets. However,  any one who shops or loves farmers markets should ask their market manager to get on the Directory.

The FRFA sign-on letter in support of these amendments now has 114 signatories, and  continue adding until the bill goes to the floor.  If your organization wants to sign on, please email Judith McGeary, FARFA, at jmcgeary@att.net or Margie MacDonald, WORC, at mmacdonald@worc.org

State, Federal Officials Seek Insight on Fresh Produce Processing, Handling

HARRISBURG, Pa., April 27 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Pennsylvania produce growers and food processors are invited to share their input on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s new produce handling rule at a May 13 listening session in Harrisburg, Agriculture Secretary Russell C. Redding said today.

The session will be held from 9 a.m. – noon at the Pennsylvania Farm Show Complex & Expo Center.

“As leaders in producing a variety of agricultural products, Pennsylvania produce growers and food processors are in position to offer valuable insight in national food safety discussions,” said Redding. “It is important that our industry take advantage of the opportunity to help shape federal policy regarding production and processing activities.

“By hosting this listening session, Pennsylvania continues to be a leader in the production of a safe, abundant food supply.”

Redding, state Health Secretary Everette James and FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods Michael R. Taylor will attend to hear concerns and answer questions. The listening session will also feature presentations by produce industry professionals.

The listening session is intended to ensure Pennsylvania’s agriculture and food production sectors and public health partners keep pace with changing federal regulations.

“Locally grown produce is an essential component of a healthy diet, but outbreaks have shown it can also be a source for food borne illness,” said James. “It’s important for Pennsylvania farmers to provide the FDA with input to ensure that new food safety regulations protect their businesses and the public health.”

Redding and James co-chair the Governor’s Food Safety Council, a unique group of agriculture, health and emergency management professionals convened by Governor Rendell in 2009. The council advises the Governor on developing and implementing food safety, defense protocols and best practices in the state.

The listening session is open to the public and registration is requested. To register, contact Jared Grissinger at 717-705-9513 or jgrissinge@state.pa.us

Media contacts:

Nicole L. C. Bucher, Agriculture; 717-787-5085; Claudine Battisti, Health; 717-787-1783

http://www.agriculture.state.pa.us

New testing regulations may end small-scale meat production — and keep the market safe for the big boys

By Sara Breselor

That wailing you hear in the distance is the sound of small meat processors begging the USDA for mercy. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety Inspection Service recently proposed a set of new regulations that will require all meat processors to submit their products to a new series of tests, a procedure that can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars for even a modestly scaled operation, enough to cripple many small processors.

What worries fans of small farms and locally produced food is that the closing of small processors will mean the closing of small farms. Slaughter and processing is the biggest challenge for small-scale meat; they’re operations simply too costly and complex for farms to handle themselves. As it is, farmers have few options for meat processing without selling their animals to massive feedlot-meat operations, and without that piece of the puzzle, many farmers may quit. Why is the USDA considering the new testing regime? Some producers wonder if the machinations of Big Food are in play.

“The new testing would just ensure that the current processes, which are based on scientific consensus, are working,” according to Dustin VandeHoer of the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship. But, he adds that it’s not clear why they’re being mandated: “It doesn’t appear that it’s in response to any specific situation. They’re just kind of reinterpreting the existing rules.’” And he’s unsure that the new tests are necessary. “We haven’t had problems with food safety, especially with the smaller plants,” he says. “We should never become complacent, but I think we can reach a point where [small meat processors] can still be allowed to operate and food can be safe. I don’t know that we need to be taking this path that’s going to put small plants out of business.” (Repeated attempts by Salon to solicit comments from the USDA were unsuccessful.)

To read the entire article CLICK HERE

Contact: Office of Communications (202 720-4623

Workshop to be Held at Alabama A&M University in Normal

WASHINGTON, April 26, 2010 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Justice today announced additional details regarding the public workshop that will be held on May 21 at Alabama A&M University in Normal, Ala., to explore competition and regulatory issues in the agriculture industry. The focus of the workshop will be consolidation and contracting practices of the poultry sector. The first joint public workshop was held last month in Ankeny, Iowa.

The workshops, which were first announced by Attorney General Eric Holder and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack on Aug. 5, 2009, are the first joint Department of Justice/USDA workshops ever to be held to discuss competition and regulatory issues in the agriculture industry. The goals of the workshops are to promote dialogue among interested parties and foster learning with respect to the appropriate legal and economic analyses of these issues, as well as to listen to and learn from parties with experience in the agriculture sector. Attendance at the workshops is free and open to the public. The general public and media interested in attending the Alabama workshop should register at http://www.aamu.edu/saes/FAS/DOJ_USDA/ .

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division Christine Varney will participate in the Alabama workshop.

Additionally, USDA and the Department of Justice are adjusting two previously announced dates for the Madison, Wis. and Fort Collins, Colo. workshops. The current schedule for the workshops is as follows:

May 21, 2010: Poultry Industry (Normal, Ala.)

Specific areas of focus may include production contracts in the poultry industry, concentration and buyer power.

Alabama A&M University; Knight Reception Center, 4900 Meridian St., Normal, Ala.

June 25, 2010: Dairy Industry (Madison, Wis.)

Specific areas of focus may include concentration, marketplace transparency and market dynamics in the dairy industry.

University of Wisconsin: Union Theater in Memorial Union, 800 Langdon St. Madison, Wis.

Aug. 27, 2010: Livestock Industry (Fort Collins, Colo.)

This workshop will address beef, hog and other animal sectors. Likely issues for discussion are concentration in livestock markets, buyer power and enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act.

Colorado State University; Fort Collins, Colo., Dec. 8, 2010: Margins (Washington, D.C.)

This workshop will look at the discrepancies between the prices received by farmers and the prices paid by consumers. As a concluding event, discussions from previous workshops will be incorporated into the analysis of agriculture markets nationally.

www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-csa-access-20100424,0,2888014.story

Tollway oases among drop-off sites for expanding community supported agriculture movement

By Monica Eng, Tribune reporter; April 24, 2010