U.S. red meat product is not a staple food item in the United States, nor is it a staple food product anywhere else in the world. To put things in perspective, we’re talking about a very high-quality, high-value product that is extremely perishable.

Consider for a moment that the United States exports only 1.2 percent of the world’s total beef supply in a given year and less than one-third of one percent of the world’s pork supply. Together, the red meat industry in this country exports about one-half of one percent of the red meat products consumed by the world.

My point is this - our foreign customers have many choices. Without the right reasons and incentives, there are any number of alternatives to U.S. beef, pork and lamb. For U.S. red meat exports, food safety is not a luxury; it is an essential ingredient. Our export customers do not have to tolerate food safety violations, nor have we seen any indication that they will.

The United States Meat Export Federation completed the industry’s first ever International Meat Quality Audit late last year. We visited 20 different countries and surveyed trade representatives from every market sector—importers, food service personnel from the hotel and restaurant sector, retailers and food manufacturing companies.

We asked them what they liked and didn’t like about U.S. beef and pork products. For both beef and pork, food safety ranked among the top five reasons they buy from the U.S. For pork, food safety was the top reason worldwide. Food safety was also mentioned as a factor in three of the top five reasons why they buy beef from the United States.

Is it important? YOU BET IT IS!

Food safety and the systems (government and private) that make it possible in the U.S. are an integral part of our message to the foreign trade and their customers.

a. Food Safety and Inspection Service

Live animal testing (120 million live animals per year) and random residue testing (50,000 samples per year). FSIS also examines approximately 450,000 tissue samples and receives 1.5 million test results annually for residues, microbiological contaminants and possible adulteration. Annual investment of about $500 million to assure a safe meat supply.

 

b. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Works to eradicate pests and diseases in animals and plants. On the beef side alone, APHIS has successfully led efforts to control and/or eradicate bovine tuberculosis, Southern hookworm, brucellosis, foot and mouth disease, tick fever, vibriosis and screw worms.

 

c. Food and Drug Administration

Protects human and animal health by regulating foods, feeds and medicines. Oversees all animal health substances, feed additives and feeds. Responsible for approving all animal health products and setting legal limits for animal health residues in food. FDA has the authority to ban any of the 130 approved animal health products and pesticides. Monitors for drug residue, pesticides and other potential contaminants. Annual investment of $500 million in regulatory activities. Producer programs (PQA and BQA programs) driven by FDA/APHIS regulations for safe product approvals and usage, plus plant inspections (FSIS).

 

d. Environmental Protection Agency

Makes certain no volatile residues enter the human food chain. EPA routinely monitors grass, feed and animals themselves to assure no unacceptable substances accidentally enter the food chain. EPA conducts a national survey of 127 pesticides and nitrates in drinking water wells each year to assure the water consumed by animals and humans is safe.

 

a. National Beef Quality Assurance Program

Adopted in more than 41 states, which represent 99 percent of the cattle produced.

b. National Pork Quality Assurance Program

Approximately 60 percent of the hogs produced in the United States come under the program.

 

In addition to educating the foreign trade and consumers with regard to what makes U.S. red meat products the safest in the world, USMEF also works very closely with U.S. government agencies and their counterparts in foreign countries to ensure they fully understand and recognize the measures being taken to assure food safety and consumer health.

Education in the food safety area is never ending and is reinforced in everything we do. We were very pleased to see the evidence of this outstanding effort in the International Meat Quality Audit.

We must stay ahead of these issues. We saw no reaction to the E. coli issue in foreign markets, despite widespread coverage in the U.S. The groundwork laid by USMEF with foreign government officials, the trade and even the foreign media was most evident in preventing this domestic crisis from spilling over into the export market.

1. Residue testing in Japan and procedures for handling violations Sulfamethazine. USMEF was instrumental in working out a system to isolate the violations and resolve the problem without disrupting overall industry trade. And to do so efficiently, effectively and quietly.

2. Shelf-life issues in Korea for U.S. beef and pork—team of Korean government officials in the country now, studying U.S. plants and procedures first hand. (Market opened for chilled pork in 1994, but shelf life issues have effectively barred chilled pork sales to Korea.)

3. Russian Veterinary certification program for U. S. pork sales to Russian Federation.

4. Recent announcement in Mexico regarding zero tolerance for Salmonella. Strong industry and U. S. government response averted a disaster, but what will go in its place will need to be worked out and sound.

 

The U.S. industry is not alone in stressing food safety in its marketing campaigns. Australia, for example, is piloting a special "Clean Food" campaign in Taiwan, its sixth largest export market overall and fifth largest export market for beef.

Initiated in 1994 with a government-funded budget of $3.0 million for the year, the campaign is being expanded to $5 million in 1995, 1996 and 1997. The thrust of the campaign is to promote Australian food as a better product because it’s produced in a "pure environment—wide-open spaces, pure water, green grass—that is natural and unpolluted."

Participation in the program is very strict. Minimum standards require meat companies to satisfy export requirements as established by the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service. A special "Clean Food" logo or mark has been developed and is being promoted in Taiwan. If successful, the campaign will be extended to other South East Asian countries.

The Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation is incorporating the theme into its merchandising and product support programs. The focus is on chilled beef at the retail level, with advertising to enhance the safe-food image of Australian meat products in Taiwan.

It is not good enough for the U.S. red meat industry to be better than our competition, or to have the best, most effective crisis communications strategies in place. The food supply must be safe. And the standards for that safety must be universal to protect the world’s market for meat products for us all and to prevent food safety and public health concerns.

Product distinctions by country are not clear enough in most markets to allow for some countries to tow the line and others to ignore the rules. In the end, we all lose when another country does not assure that the meat it produces is safe.

The impact can be immediate and dramatic: we feel very fortunate that the chlorflauzuron scare in Australian beef did not linger and that Australia responded quickly and responsibly to alert the world and correct the problem.

Once the problem was known, products were pulled off the shelf in Japan, Korea, Taiwan and other important markets in the lucrative Asia Pacific; purchase orders were canceled; and 100 percent hold and test went into effect in the United States and elsewhere. As you can appreciate, a 100 percent hold and test program effectively kills any trade in fresh, chilled meat products which is the fastest growing and most profitable area in many Asian markets.

Wholesale purchasing patterns shifted immediately to the U.S. In this heightened state of consumer concern for the safety of imported beef, retailers scrambled to make sure U.S. beef was properly labeled, which was yet more evidence that our food safety programs are working. Foreign governments also moved quickly to prevent the some elements in the trade from mislabeling imported product as having come from the United States, when it in fact had come from somewhere else.

Public debate and rancor over the U.S. inspection system is a very risky business in that it serves to discredit the U.S. system in the eyes of our foreign customers. We are asking them to remember that the U.S. system is still the best, most effective system in the world. It is absolutely essential that we get this debate behind us and move ahead with the changes we need to remain number one in world markets.

Traceback mechanisms are needed to reward those producers who do it right and eliminate those who do it wrong. There’s no room for compromise.

1. Harmonization of international standards and criterion for food safety based on sound science, not politics or economic considerations. Dispute resolution.

2. Regionalization provides for countries to obtain regional approvals for export. Argentina, for example, will come on line for beef exports to countries requiring FMD-free status sooner due to regionalization. May be as early as this summer. Argentina will become a significant competitor in Asia Pacific with grain-fed Argentine beef.

 

One of the principal planks of the 1995 World Meat Congress in Denver deals with the harmonization of international standards. This will be an excellent venue for the U.S. industry to play a significant role in encouraging the international community to take meaningful steps to establish common standards in the areas of meat inspection, plant certification, residue and microbial testing, shelf life issues, and so forth.

The goal, of course, is to facilitate trade and minimize the opportunity for countries to fabricate false claims of food safety to restrict access. The Korean shelf life issue is a classic example.