Download Locations:
Summary:
Most countries banned U.S. beef after the December 2003 U.S. report of BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease) in a Canadian-born cow. Several of these markets have partially reopened. However, Japan and Korea, which together had purchased 57% (by value) of all U.S. beef exports in 2003, remain closed. Japan says it is moving to ease its domestic rule that requires BSE testing of all cattle, and to finalize another to admit U.S. beef, in order to implement an October 2004 framework agreement to restart trade. However, U.S. officials and some Members of Congress say that rulemaking is proceeding too slowly. In Canada, the first native BSE case was reported in May 2003. Two more Canadian cases were confirmed in early January 2005. The first three North American cases were in cattle born before both countries banned, in 1997, the practice of feeding most ruminant material back to ruminants, including cattle. The fourth (third Canadian) case was in a cow born in March 1998. In all four cases, BSEcontaminated feed is considered the most likely cause of infection. USDA said that total U.S. beef exports in 2004 reached only 17% of their 2003 level of about 2.5 billion pounds. However, strong domestic demand and tight cattle supplies have kept U.S. cattle prices relatively high. Lower-risk Canadian beef has been permitted into the United States since August 2003. As the two new BSE cases were emerging, USDA published a final rule, on January 4, 2005, to also allow younger live cattle and additional Canadian ruminant products to enter. However, a federal judge on March 2, 2005, issued a preliminary injunction blocking the rule; USDA is appealing the decision. In Congress, the Senate on March 3, 2005, passed a joint resolution (S.J.Res. 4) to overturn the Canada rule. However, a resolution must pass the House (where similar H.J.Res. 23 was introduced) and be signed by the President, which most observers believe is unlikely. Several other BSE-related measures have been introduced recently, such as a House resolution (H.Res. 137) urging economic sanctions against Japan if it does not begin to accept U.S. beef. Others include H.R. 187, H.R. 384, H.R. 1254, H.R. 1256, H.R. 2068, S. 73, S. 108, and S. 294. USDA and other experts contend that the risk to human health from one or a few U.S. BSE cases is minimal. Nonetheless, USDA has intensified efforts to improve BSE safeg u a r d s , including banning downer (nonambulatory) cattle from human food; keeping from the food supply additional higher-risk animal parts; accelerating work on a national animal identification system for disease purposes; and increasing funds for BSE-related activities. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is still weighing possible rules to tighten its feed controls. Further action is pending. From June 2004 to June 10, 2005, some 375,000 higher-risk U.S. cattle had been tested for BSE, all negative, under an expanded surveillance program. However, one sample that had tested negative in November 2004 has since tested positive using a different testing method. USDA on June 13 was seeking clarification of the conflicting results with help from an international reference laboratory in England. This event has renewed interest in BSE testing methods here and abroad.
