Hearing of the Interstate Commerce, Trade and Tourism
Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation

By Mark Huseth, McLeod, North Dakota
President of the North Dakota Stockmen's Association

Bismarck State College, Bismarck, North Dakota

February 21, 2007

Good morning, Sen. Byron Dorgan and members of the Senate Interstate Commerce, Trade and Tourism Subcommittee.

My name is Mark Huseth. My wife, Eileen, and I ranch in partnership with our adult sons on our third-generation family operation near McLeod, N.D., in the Sheyenne River Valley. I have the privilege of representing cattle producers like myself from across this great state this year as the president of the North Dakota Stockmen's Association. It is on their behalf that I appear before you today.

Those forward-thinking cattlemen and cattlewomen formulated policy back at our 2005 Annual Convention in anticipation of this very proposed rule, which would expand allowable Canadian imports to include live animals 30 months and older. The Stockmen's Association's member resolution opposes any further expansion of Canadian beef trade until the United States receives assurances from Canada and its other trading partners that, if trade is expanded and a problem is detected in a foreign-born import, that the animal's country-of-origin, not the U.S., will suffer any resulting trade sanctions.

The resolution also calls for an orderly market transition plan to be put in place before the border is opened further, so a sudden supply shock doesn't cripple the domestic market.

Nearly two years later, those stipulations have not been satisfied, and so our opposition to the proposed rule holds true still today.

Before I go further, I want to emphasize that we are not opposed to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) proposed rule because of food safety concerns. That's because Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, as you know, is not a contagious disease, and the mode of infection is through the consumption of feed contaminated with abnormal prion protein. The United States' ruminant feed ban and other harvest measures, like the removal of all specified risk materials (the only things capable of carrying the disease), have proven effective in identifying sick animals and keeping them out of the food supply. We're confident in these industry- and government-implemented firewalls to maintain the level of food safety and consumer confidence that we work so hard for and are so proud of.

At the same time, the North Dakota Stockmen's Association views the liberalization of Canadian trade as premature. That's because we are still suffering the consequences of the Canadian-born cow diagnosed with BSE in our country in December 2003. That lone animal, commonly referred to as "the cow that stole Christmas," changed the U.S. beef industry. More than three years later, we are still working to recover important global beef markets and customer confidence that were snatched away that Dec. 23.

Before we open the border wider and possibly exaggerate the problems we already have, we have to make sure that we protect our domestic cattle producers from unintended harm - to ensure that they have the opportunity to make an honest living without the threat of another country's cattle collapsing their market and driving them out of business.

Our members ask that USDA's proposed rule not be adopted until the following conditions have been met:

 

1) The United States receives, in writing, guarantees from Canada and all its other beef trading partners that any disease problem identified in a foreign-born, imported animal in the United States be considered the problem of its country of origin. In addition, any trade sanctions those countries impose because of the disease situation be on that country of origin. The United States, on the other hand, would not suffer the kind of trade backlash it still is recovering from since the first case of BSE in 2003. Likewise, the World Organization of Animal Health, or OIE, recognizes the United States with its same low-risk health status if the disease occurs in an imported animal.

2) USDA develops and implements an orderly market transition plan before expanding the scope of cattle and beef imports from Canada. This would involve gradually accepting in such imports so as not to overload our country's supply and crash those markets. We think this is especially critical to preserve our already-overloaded slaughter cow and slaughter bull processing facilities, particularly in the Northern tier, where many Canadian cattle would likely be sent. You can imagine the impact when you add the estimated 545,000 cull cows and 66,000 cull bulls and stags that would enter this country each year over a five-year period if the proposed rule is adopted. That would lead to an annual decrease in beef prices of $4 per hundredweight, or $50 per 1,250-pound cow. Multiply that by an average of 140,000 cull cows sold by North Dakota producers each year and you arrive at a $7 million impact per year to cattlemen and women from our state alone. We can't afford to do that.

 

3) Before entering the United States, all Canadian cattle are permanently identified with a universal hot-iron brand that designates them as Canadian cattle. The brand would preserve the cattle's identify through slaughter and make it crystal clear where they originated. Tattoos, on the other hand, cannot be read at a glance and can fade over time. Consequently, we do not support tattoos as an identification means for these imported animals.

4) A further evaluation of the Canadian feed ban be conducted in light of the most recent BSE cases detected there. While USDA has determined that Canada has a robust inspection program, that overall compliance with the feed ban is good and that the feed ban is reducing the risk of transmission of BSE in the Canadian cattle population, they did identify a "possible exception" in the ban with mineral mixes produced with ruminal meat and bone meal before the feed ban took effect. Maybe a mandatory recall of such mixes could help curtail the number of cases there.

We empathize with our Canadian neighbors and the situation they are in. We know what they are going through, because we're in a similar situation ourselves.

The North Dakota Stockmen's Association has always supported fair trade and maintained that our producers can compete and win in the global beef market, because of the superior cattle and beef we raise in this country. We look forward to expanding our trade with Canada in the future. However, now is not yet the time, and, in order for our beef trade with Canada to be fair, the steps we outlined today must be taken before USDA's rule is implemented.

We appreciate the chance to share our perspective with you today and the fact that you have recognized this issue as the important one it is. Thank you.

I would be happy to address any questions that you may
have.