Latest BSE case raises feed issues, may delay border opening ; Pete Hisey on 1/12/05 for Meatingplace.com The Alberta animal announced Tuesday to have tested positive for bovine spongiform encephalopathy appears to have created a level of attention far above that of the case that was revealed on Jan. 2. The most recent case is the first instance of an animal born after the implementation of bans on ruminant material in ruminant feed by both Canada and the United States.

In the wake of the announcement (See Canada discovers another BSE case, Meatingplace.com, Jan. 11, 2005.), the National Cattlemen's Beef Association issued a demand for an immediate investigation of Canada's feed industry.

Earlier, Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota had demanded a congressional hearing about Canadian feed policies and called for a delay of the opening of the border until USDA and FDA can determine that the feed supply is safe. He noted that U.S. regulators have discovered animal material in supposedly all-vegetable feed over the past 15 months and have issued import alerts to bar supplies from 17 companies from crossing the border.

Ron DeHaven, administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, said that APHIS would "expedite sending a technical team to Canada to evaluate the circumstances surrounding these recent finds."

Both the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the American Meat Institute said the latest BSE-positive animal likely was given feed left over from before the ban went into effect. Canada's ban was introduced in August 1997 but became fully implemented in October of that year. The animal was born in March 1998.

James H. Hodges, president of the AMI Foundation, noted that a grace period was included in the dual feed bans. He said the animal could have been eating feed from the previous year, even if it was not weaned until six months of age, which would move the earliest transmission date to September 1998. However, cattle are often given supplemental feed even as they live mainly on milk, so the steer could have been infected within a couple of months of birth.

Hodges said that AMI supports an investigation of feed ban compliance, and if necessary, enhancement of the ban. The United States still allows potentially dangerous products such as food scraps and poultry litter from fowl that may have been fed specified risk materials (SRMs) from cattle into cattle feed. A proposed rule to ban those substances, which are banned in Canada, was pulled back by FDA to allow for more public comment. A final rule is expected in the near-term.

"We would support any measure to enhance compliance with the existing feed ban," Hodges said, suggesting that perhaps something like mills dedicated to only one type of feed to avoid adulteration might be a solution.

Shae Dodson, a spokesman for R-CALF USA, which represents ranchers bitterly opposed to reopening the border, said that USDA has always said "the Canada feed ban was sufficient to break the cycle of infection. That appears not to be true. In the U.K., they were still discovering new cases of BSE 12 years after instituting a feed ban."

AMI's Hodges, however, noted that even though this animal was born after the feed ban, it doesn't change anything in the fact base that USDA used in deciding to term Canada a minimal risk region and reopen the border to Canadian cattle. Removing SRMs from all Canadian cattle and keeping them out of the food supply is the single most important issue, he said: "Those are the only tissues where BSE has ever been found."

Hodges added that it is important to move ahead with the "science-based decision" to reopen the border to maintain consistency and exhibit trust in BSE firewalls. "How we handle the Canadian announcement is being watched by our trading partners on the global stage," he said. "Any decision by USDA regarding a change in Canada's status as a minimal-risk country should be based on sound scientific principles."