Canadian Horticultural Council to release updated OFFS manuals for 2011

Canadian Horticultural Council to release updated OFFS manuals for 2011

OTTAWA – The Canadian Horticultural Council (CHC)’s CanadaGAP Program has issued updates to its On-Farm Food Safety (OFFS) Manuals for 2011. The 2011 version incorporates previously released updates as approved by the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) in 2010, as well as a few other minor improvements.

How to obtain your copy
CanadaGAP Program participants will receive a CD copy directly by mail. CHC members will have access to the latest manuals at www.canadagap.ca

Implementation Date
The implementation date (effective date for certification purposes) of all updates will be April 1, 2011. A revised version of the audit checklist will be published well before this date.

Review the changes
To familiarize yourself with the changes, please download the Revisions documents, which track the changes that have been made to the manual since the previously released version. These can be found on the website www.canadagap.ca in both English and French.

Vilsack on health care vote

Statement from Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack on Today's Health Care Vote in the U.S. House of Representatives

WASHINGTON, Jan. 19, 2011 – Today, Agriculture Secretary Vilsack issued the following statement on the healthcare vote in the U.S. House of Representatives:

"For far too long, folks living in rural America have suffered from a broken health care system - more so than their urban counterparts - with higher costs and less access to providers and health care facilities.

"The cost of repeal would be great. Approximately 80% of Rural Americans are self-employed or work for a small business. The law is bringing down their health care costs and the tax incentives it provides will help small businesses hire more people and provide health care coverage to employees. To address the shortage of providers in rural America, the law makes an historic investment in the health care workforce by training and supporting thousands of new primary care doctors and nurses and encouraging them to practice in underserved, rural communities. And the new law will help community health centers – which so many rural areas rely on – expand to serve up to 20 million more patients a year.
"President Obama tackled this critical issue and provided millions of Americans with the opportunity to get the quality health care they need and deserve, which makes today's vote in the U.S. House to repeal the Affordable Care Act, very disappointing."

Vilsack on ethanol waiver

Statement from Agriculture Secretary Vilsack on EPA’s E15 Fuel Waiver


WASHINGTON, Jan. 21, 2011 – Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack issued the following statement on EPA's E15 fuel waver announced by the agency today:
"Today's announcement is another important step to get existing ethanol production capacity into the market to support and create jobs in rural America, improve our nation's energy security, protect our environment, and provide the renewable fuels industry with the support it needs to grow and mature," said Vilsack. "Expanding the use of E15 in America's vehicle fleet gives consumers the option of purchasing domestically produced renewable transportation fuels and also support America's farmers and ranchers."

Food Institute: Food safety law a game changer

New Food Safety Law Will Be A "Game Changer"
Speaking at a recent Food Institute webinar, Dr. David Acheson, former Commissioner for Food Protection at FDA, described food safety legislation signed earlier this month into law by President Obama as "unquestionably...a game changer in the context of new food safety legislation and the impact on multiple sectors." The webinar, Understanding the New Food Safety Legislation, also featured John Bode, Principal Attorney at law firm Olsson, Frank Weeda Terman Bode Matz PC.
While the food safety act been covered extensively by the national media, particularly the law's granting of mandatory recall authority to the FDA, many issues most relevant to the food industry have been glossed over. The law will grant a more aggressive FDA with greater regulatory authority, including the responsibility for defining "high risk" foods, which will determine the frequency that facilities or food producers are inspected.
As a result, according to the webinar, a facility that processes or holds an article of food particularly susceptible to one type of contamination may result in that facility, regardless of compliance history, being inspected at a similar rate to a facility with a pattern of regulatory noncompliance. Additionally, when FDA believes that there exists a "reasonable belief" that an article of food may cause severe adverse health consequences, a firm must provide access to all records concerning that article. Any articles of food that may have come into contact with the potentially contaminated food, or that may have been impacted in a similar manner, are also subject to total records access by FDA. Essentially, the bar is lowered from the existence of "credible evidence" required to support FDA's claims to "reasonable belief" in accessing records.
Many of the webinar participants were particularly interested in the overwhelming task of establishing a third-party system of accreditation bodies and auditors that FDA was given responsibility for. To clear the target of 600 inspections of foreign facilities, which represents a six-fold increase over the 100 inspections last year, FDA will need to rely on third-party auditors to shoulder the burden. Despite an uncertain amount of resources to accomplish this task, the number of foreign inspections are to double every year, finally reaching 19,200 inspections in 2016, a goal that Dr. Acheson described as "frankly impossible."
Much uncertainty remains surrounding the legislation, as funding is certainly going to determine how successful the government will be in reaching the ambitious goals set in the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. It is unlikely that the FDA will accomplish its targets for foreign inspections, and the agency will encounter resistance from states and local agencies in accepting a significant portion of the responsibility in domestic inspections. How the agency's budgetary restrictions will affect the initiatives remains to be seen, but many of the fiscal concerns that plagued the bill in its progression through Congress will continue to affect food safety efforts by the government both at home and internationally. Now that the work in passing the bill is concluded, the consequences of the law and its reach over industry remain cloudy, dependent on FDA's ability to accept its new responsibilities while balancing its limited funds.
To purchase of recording of the entire webinar, please visit http://www.foodinstitute.com/foodsafety2011.cfm

Stallman on Obama's executive order on regulatory reform

Statement by Bob Stallman, President,
American Farm Bureau Federation
Regarding President Obama’s
Executive Order on Regulatory Reform


WASHINGTON, D.C., January 19, 2011—“The American Farm Bureau Federation welcomes the President’s focus on reforming the regulatory process. Today, farmers, ranchers, and countless other business owners face a long list of federal requirements that are eroding their bottom line; they come in the form of regulations, “guidance”, and any number of other agency pronouncements. All too often, these agency actions are far from transparent and lack full consideration of economic impact – let alone any effort to minimize that impact. The most recent and notable example is the Chesapeake Bay total maximum daily load (TMDL).

“The President’s Executive Order notes that the regulatory system should promote economic growth, be based on the best available science, allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas, and use the least burdensome tools for accomplishing its ends. EPA’s Chesapeake Bay TMDL rule fails on all these counts. For example, EPA failed to analyze (or at least failed to publicly disclose) the economic impact that would result from its TMDL, even after repeatedly promising to do so. If the new executive order is to have any meaning, we expect it will result in the reconsideration of EPA’s Chesapeake Bay TMDL. Otherwise, we have to wonder whether this Executive Order will bring about any real change.”

GMA Establishes New Industry Affairs and Collaboration Division

GMA Establishes New Industry Affairs and Collaboration Division
New Alignment Will Enhance Efficiency, Effectiveness of GMA Member Services

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) today announced that it has created an Industry Affairs and Collaboration Division, following a restructuring process aimed at enhancing member services and organizational efficiencies. The new division takes the place of three former GMA departments: Industry Affairs, Membership Services and Meetings, with the staff of each group assigned to new roles under the Industry Affairs and Collaboration banner.

“GMA is always looking for innovative ways to provide industry leadership and enhance the value of GMA membership for food and consumer products companies,” said Denny Belcastro, executive vice president, industry affairs and collaboration. “This new division will allow us to do just that by realigning our capabilities to create more efficient work streams that will improve engagement opportunities and comprehensive services for our members.”

The Industry Affairs and Collaboration Division will continue to support GMA’s strategic areas of focus on product safety, health and nutrition, environmental sustainability, and global commerce, with a special emphasis on facilitating industry collaboration and efficiency on these and other matters. The group will also work cross-functionally to identify and execute opportunities for business development and to provide first-rate service to the GMA membership.

The new division’s leadership team is comprised of the following individuals and roles:

• Todd Turner, vice president, operational effectiveness, with responsibility for all elements of planning, project management, administration, and delivery of GMA events and activities. Turner will report to Denny Belcastro.
• Brian Lynch, promoted to senior director, business and industry development, with responsibility for developing new business opportunities, including but not limited to: membership recruitment, development of leadership programs, sponsorships and educational forums. Lynch will report to Denny Belcastro.
• Logan Kastner, promoted to director, member relations and services, with responsibility for member services and engagement opportunities (including joint industry conferences) aimed at optimizing member satisfaction and the GMA value proposition. Kastner will continue to report to Brian Lynch.

“I am pleased to have Todd, Brian and Logan on the new Industry Affairs and Collaboration leadership team,” continued Belcastro. “Each of them possesses tremendous energy and valuable experience that will allow them to excel in their new roles.”

Peterson on biotech approval process

Opening Statement by House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Collin C. Peterson
Full Committee forum to review the biotechnology product regulatory approval process

--As Prepared for Delivery--

Good morning. Thank you Chairman Lucas for holding today’s forum and welcome, Secretary Vilsack and Mr. Conner, to the Committee. I recognize that the Committee has not formally organized and we are jumping into a complex topic, but the Department has some decisions to make very soon and I welcome today’s discussion.

As many people know, USDA’s release of the final Environmental Impact Statement on Roundup Ready alfalfa on December 16 lays out two options, including a partial deregulation option, the so-called Option 3.

It is worth noting that the recently completed EIS on alfalfa is one step in a drawn out process that has taken decisions about alfalfa production largely out of the hands of the agriculture community and moved them into the courtroom, litigated by lawyers and decided by judges who have no connection to agriculture.

I understand the concerns of those who think the restrictions listed under Option 3 could have negative long-term consequences for biotech product development and approval. It is a highly unusual step that arguably creates more questions than answers with respect to the science-based regulatory process, our trade policy with respect to biotechnology, and perhaps even the re-examination of previously approved biotech traits. I look forward to discussing those issues with the Secretary today.

But I don’t think we are completely looking at the big picture unless we recognize that endless litigation is a fact of life under the current biotech approval process. And if the only answer to the alfalfa question is one that leads us right back into the courtroom, where USDA’s track record in recent years is very poor, then I’m not sure how that benefits biotechnology in the long run.

On the sugarbeet issue in particular, the folks I have talked to have just about had it with these lawsuits. And I have talked to the Secretary enough times to know that he has about had it, too.

Along those lines, there has been a lot of discussion about the Secretary’s efforts to bring stakeholders together to discuss agricultural coexistence among those that understand agriculture rather than the courts.

Now whether or not these folks can reach an agreement remains to be seen, and I do recognize that having these discussions while the Department is trying to reach a conclusion on the alfalfa issue is causing problems for a lot of people. I also don’t know if I share the Secretary’s optimism because some folks will use every tool possible to try and shut down biotech crops. But I think that he is genuinely looking for an answer that doesn’t involve endless litigation.

Some have expressed concerns that a partial deregulation is beyond the scope of the Plant Protection Act. I look forward to hearing from the Secretary on this particular question today.

Again, I thank the Chair for calling today’s forum and look forward to hearing from our panelists

Organic industry wants farmers protected in the marketplace

Organic industry wants farmers protected in the marketplace

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Jan. 20, 2011)— The U.S. House of Representatives’ Agriculture Committee today held a member forum spearheaded by Chairman Frank D. Lucas (OK) questioning Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) authority in considering deregulation with conditions (Alternative 3 in the Final Environmental Impact Statement) of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready (RR) Alfalfa.
In response, the Organic Trade Association (OTA) expressed the organic industry’s strong support for the USDA’s recent proposal to consider the broad economic consequences of unrestricted deregulation of Round-up Ready alfalfa, including the impact on organic agriculture and products in the United States—and believes the department has the authority to do so.
“While organic agriculture has been front and center in this debate, it is beyond organic. Large segments of agriculture have a stake in maintaining the purity of seeds and crops to serve markets and consumers sensitive to the inclusion of genetic engineering,” said Christine Bushway, OTA’s Executive Director and CEO. She added, “Preserving market and farmer choice and agricultural diversity are central to USDA’s mission and the future of rural American livelihoods.”
OTA noted that USDA has taken an important first step in acknowledging organic and identity preserved (IP) agriculture’s right to exist within a policy framework of co-existence. Accordingly, OTA points out, a meaningful co-existence policy framework must take into consideration the interests of all parties. USDA’s ongoing regulatory authority is the only way to ensure these conditions of release are met. The organic sector is an important part of a diverse U.S. agricultural economy—a 26.6- billion-dollar-a-year industry that employs tens of thousands around the country, and helps keep at least 14,540 family farms operating in our rural countryside. Except for 2009, the organic industry has experienced double digit growth—often over 20 percent—annually for over a decade.

OTA believes that meaningful co-existence must protect seed purity for organic farmers’ use, provide compensation to organic farmers in the event of losses due to contamination, and require USDA oversight of GE crop commercialization to protect all U.S. agricultural sectors.
Under current USDA policy, the organic sector now bears the burdens created with inadvertent contamination of organic products from the cultivation of GE crops.
A Record of Decision on whether to deregulate GE alfalfa is expected from USDA soon after Jan.24.
The Organic Trade Association (OTA) is the membership-based business association for organic agriculture and products in North America. Its members include growers, shippers, processors, certifiers, farmers' associations, distributors, importers, exporters, consultants, retailers and others. OTA’s Board of Directors is democratically elected by its members. OTA's mission is to promote and protect the growth of organic trade to benefit the environment, farmers, the public and the economy (www.ota.com).

States Earn ‘A’s … and 14 States Get ‘F’s from CSPI

http://cspinet.org/new/201101191.html


States Earn ‘A’s … and 14 States Get ‘F’s from CSPI

January 19, 2011

WASHINGTON—A nationwide report card grading the 50 states and the District of Columbia on how well they detect, investigate, and report outbreaks of foodborne illness finds great variability—indicating that many states are only reporting a small fraction of the number of outbreaks as states with better detection and reporting systems.

Using 10 years of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s Outbreak Alert! database, CSPI assigned a letter grade and created an outbreak profile for each state. CSPI used two states that are widely recognized for having strong investigating and reporting systems as benchmarks. Those states, Oregon and Minnesota, have excellent laboratory facilities and public health departments that are quick to interview individuals who are suspected to have been outbreak “cases.” They report nine and eight outbreaks per million people per year, respectively. Those two states, and five states that reported equally high reporting rates for outbreaks, received ‘A’s: Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, Washington, and Wyoming.

In contrast, 14 states reported only one outbreak of foodborne illness per million people: Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and West Virginia.

“States that aggressively investigate outbreaks and report them to CDC can help nail down the foods that are responsible for making people sick,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “But when states aren’t detecting outbreaks, interviewing victims, identifying suspect food sources, or connecting with federal officials, outbreaks can grow larger and more frequent, putting more people at risk.”

In its report, All Over the Map, CSPI acknowledges that it may seem counter-intuitive to give higher grades to states with more outbreaks. But, in fact, those states are the most likely to have robust detection and reporting systems, according to the group. The report card suggests that states that received ‘D’s or ‘F’s may lack adequate funding for public health services, leading to health departments that are understaffed and overburdened.

CSPI also identified a troubling trend. The percentage of solved outbreaks—those with both an identified food and an identified pathogen—has declined over the 10-year period, from 1998 through 2007. The peak reporting year was 2001 when 44 percent of outbreaks reported to CDC were solved; the lowest year, when only 34 percent were reported, was 2007. But CSPI says that the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, signed into law by President Obama earlier this month, requires the Food and Drug Administration and the CDC to enhance coordination between federal, state, and local surveillance systems and improve epidemiological tools available to the states. And within a year, the law directs the federal government to name five state health departments as regional Centers of Excellence to serve as resources for public health officials in response to outbreaks.

“Hopefully, this report will stimulate discussions among public health officials, food safety policy makers, legislators and the public about the value of surveillance,” said Craig Hedberg, Professor of Environmental Health Sciences at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. “Ensuring that all states benefit from effective foodborne disease surveillance is a long range goal. A network of Regional Centers of Excellence can develop and demonstrate the best practices that have helped Minnesota and Oregon maintain their excellent records of foodborne disease surveillance and outbreak investigation.”

CSPI recommends that consumers and doctors do their parts, too. Consumers should notify their local health department when they suspect they have suffered a foodborne illness, and should seek medical treatment when needed, the group says. Physicians should likewise report suspected cases to health departments, and be more assertive about pursuing laboratory testing to detect and confirm foodborne illnesses.

Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Ohio, and Vermont received ‘B’s, with each state reporting 6 or 7 outbreaks per million people.

Alabama, Alaska, California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Wisconsin received ‘C’s, with each state reporting 4 or 5 outbreaks per million people.

Delaware, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia received ‘D’s. Those states and D.C. each only reported 2 or 3 outbreaks per million people.

In developing this report, CSPI used CDC data from OutbreakNet Foodborne Outbreak Online Database which became available on September 17, 2009. According to CDC, data available via the OutbreakNet Online Database originate from a dynamic outbreak surveillance database. Reporting agencies (state, local, territorial, and tribal health departments, and CDC) can modify their NORS reports at any time, even months or years after an outbreak. Therefore, specific results from Foodborne Outbreak Online Database are subject to change.

UMass Amherst Food Scientist Will Study Anti-Salmonella Strategies for Tomato Safety

http://media-newswire.com/release_1139549.html

UMass Amherst Food Scientist Will Study Anti-Salmonella Strategies for Tomato Safety

(Media-Newswire.com) - AMHERST, Mass. - Assuring the safe handling and cleanliness of commercially grown tomatoes is the goal of a new, two-year grant to food scientist Lynne McLandsborough and colleagues at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Her laboratory is one of 17 receiving grants from the Center for Product Safety, Davis, California, to improve food safety in growing and harvesting fresh produce.

Specifically, McLandsborough, an expert in bacterial growth, biofilm formation and cross-contamination from one surface to another, received $235,787 to begin this month studying the survival, transfer and inactivation of Salmonella bacteria on plastics used in harvesting tomatoes. Her UMass Amherst team includes food chemistry expert Julia Goddard and pomologist, or fruit expert, Wes Autio. Though tomatoes are treated like vegetables by many cooks, they are actually true fruits.

"Bacterial cross-contamination from one surface to another is a more complex problem than we once believed," says McLandsborough. Food scientists would like to better understand how moisture levels affect biofilms and bacteria dispersal, for example. It’s counter-intuitive, but there is some evidence now that less moisture in a biofilm makes it brittle and more easily shattered into tiny flakes that quickly disperse, she adds.

The new studies should yield new basic knowledge about how and under what conditions bacteria form biofilms on different surface types and provide practical, science-based guidelines on how to prevent cross-contamination.

At the UMass Amherst food lab, McLandsborough and colleagues will set up an experimental tomato-handling station modeled on those found in farm fields in California and Florida. But in the lab, the researchers will be able to change parameters, for example, comparing bacterial transfer rates on smooth vs. abraded plastic tubs and ramps and evaluating contamination rates between work gloves made of a variety of materials. In this way, they can determine where and when Salmonella most often hitches a ride onto the tomato’s outer skin and into the food supply.

McLandsborough, who is an expert in the bacterium Listeria, has documented its transfer rates from food handling equipment to cheese, bologna and other cold cuts in many previous experiments. The new work with Salmonella should reveal new knowledge about this process in a different organism. "While we’re not sure about the cross-contamination levels we’ll find with these new experiments in Salmonella and tomatoes, it’s clear that growers need to know the facts and how best to carry out a safe harvest," she summarizes.