Industry Backpedals on Mad Cow but Public Support for Downer Ban Is Clear

When an emergency ban on the use of "downer" cattle in human food was announced after the discovery of the first case of mad cow disease in the United States—in Washington State in December 2003—both watchdog groups and trade organizations approved.

Now, nearly six months later, industry is backpedaling and animal and consumer protection groups are fighting to keep the ban from being weakened, while still pressing to extend it to cover other animals raised for food, like pigs, goats, and sheep.

The dust has settled for now on mad cow disease, formally known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), the likely cause of new variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) in humans. However, problems lurk. This April, a downer cow in Texas apparently suffering from a central nervous system disorder was condemned and not slaughtered for human food. But the cow was rendered for swine feed and, astonishingly, brain samples were not taken to test for BSE.

The order not to test came down from upper-level Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) management over 200 miles away in Austin, overruling the veterinarian onsite. Shortly after this incident, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) veterinarians will be taking over the task of collecting samples from suspect cows, instead of APHIS.

Industry Does an About-Face

With the media spotlight off, some trade groups are backing away from earlier statements that were made just after the USDA ban was announced. In December, the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) released a statement claiming it "discourages the marketing or commercial sale of all non-ambulatory 'downer' animals at the production level, regardless of the cause or disease status of the animal," noting that "the effect of the new rules on farmers will be fairly minor."

But in May the NMPF changed its tune, claiming in comments to the USDA that the ban could have "a severe economic impact on producers." NMPF asked the agency to "permit a dairy producer to humanely market animals that become non-ambulatory, provided the injury is physical and the animal is not found to be diseased" while alive.

"We wonder how they plan to 'humanely' move these animals," questions Michael Appleby, HSUS vice president for Farm Animals and Sustainable Agriculture. "Certainly the typical ways that downers are dragged by chains, shoved, shocked with electric prods, and pushed by bulldozer could never be considered humane."

Now the pressure from U.S. agricultural trade groups to undermine the USDA downer ban is spilling over into Congress. Enter the "Consumer and Producer Protection Act" (H.R. 4121), introduced by Reps. Dennis Rehberg (R-MT) and Collin Peterson (D-MN) on April 1. If adopted, the bill would permit animals unable to walk because of broken bones, dislocated joints, nerve paralysis, fatigue and other reasons to be slaughtered for human food. In a press release announcing the bill, Rep. Rehberg indicated that he is pressing USDA to adopt this definition in the agency's final guidelines and boasts that his bill "refines the downer cattle definition in a comprehensive, producer and consumer friendly manner."

But national consumer groups and others strongly challenge that view. "This bill would gut the common sense definition of 'downer' that was established at the end of 2003 by the USDA," notes Wayne Pacelle, chief executive officer of The HSUS.

In a letter sent to each member of Congress and submitted to the USDA two weeks after the bill's introduction, The HSUS, Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America, and 16 other organizations called the bill "reckless in the extreme," and urged Congress and the USDA "to oppose H.R. 4121—and any other attempts to weaken the USDA downer ban—for the sake of consumers, animal welfare, and the long-term interests of producers."

"The chief flaw in their argument is that it is nearly impossible for USDA inspectors to correctly determine why an animal is unable to walk—illness and injury are often interrelated, and an injury may simply be the observable result of an underlying disease," Pacelle explains. "Those pressing to allow certain downers to be marketed for human food would have us return to the days when USDA played Russian roulette with the meat supply."

Moreover, Pacelle points out, "regardless of the reason an animal can't walk, dragging or hauling that animal to slaughter is terribly cruel. To those who say, 'It's just a broken leg so there's no problem,' I would say, 'have you ever broken your leg?' Treating an animal with a fracture this way is unconscionably cruel."

"It is precisely the cases that involve broken bones and other injuries that are the most preventable with improved animal husbandry and handling practices," says Mimi Brody, HSUS director of Federal Affairs. "Banning use of these animals for human food will encourage greater care to keep them from becoming downers in the first place."

Nevertheless, trade groups such as the Illinois Farm Bureau and the Pennsylvania Association of Meat Processors submitted comments to the USDA urging the agency to distinguish between animals that are downed because of injury and those that are downed because of disease, and to allow the former to return to the human food supply. The agricultural departments of Arizona, Kansas, North Dakota, Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Wisconsin submitted similar comments.

Constant Comments

But those industry views are in stark contrast to 99% of the approximately 22,000 comments USDA received—including comments submitted by The HSUS—which express strong support for the regulations banning downed cattle from the human food chain, and call on USDA to extend the ban to cover other species of farm animals used for food. Many of the public comments urge ending the use of downed animals for human food, farm animal feed, and pet food.

And not everyone in industry is taking an extreme stance, as demonstrated by the comments of the two major beef cattle groups. The National Cattlemen's Beef Association seeks an exemption of meat from downed cattle only for personal consumption, not for sale to the public, and R-CALF (Ranchers-Cattlemen Legal Action Fund–United Stockgrowers of America) indicated its support for the USDA ban as is. Comments of major retailers McDonald's and Wendy's also strongly support the ban.

HSUS staff reviewed over 5,200 of the comments that were available for public perusal, and saw firsthand evidence of the striking dichotomy between the consensus view of the public and the extreme views of some in industry. The HSUS has issued a report assessing the comments received by the USDA.

More Reasons for Concern

Meanwhile, industry pressure on the USDA to weaken regulations is growing. When Kansas-based Creekstone Farms asked the agency for permission to test every animal they process for BSE, the USDA succumbed to intense pressure from large-scale producers and processors, and flatly denied their plans. In a decision strongly criticized by consumer groups, the USDA claimed that approving Creekstone Farms' proposal would set a dangerous precedent for industry, and "would have implied a consumer safety aspect that is not scientifically warranted."

The need for increased testing and a comprehensive ban on use of high-risk downed animals became even more apparent with the May publication of a scientific study showing scrapie prions in sheep muscle. Scrapie, a prion disease that affects sheep, causes the animals to scrape their bodies against surfaces in addition to trembling and walking unsteadily. The study marks the first time the misshapen proteins that cause BSE and related diseases have been found in muscle meat that humans consume, albeit at lower levels than are found in the brain tissue of "mad cows."

Researchers partly credit the discovery to more sensitive testing techniques. Dr. Paul Brown, a prion expert at the National Institutes of Health, predicted in a May 24, 2004 New York Times article, "Within the next year, somebody will make a big splash by finding it in the muscles of cattle," he said, "and the beef industry will go crazy."

"While the possibility of people becoming sick from Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease is still remote," notes Appleby, "this research illustrates why all downed animals should be banned from the food supply."

"Industry should keep in mind that consumers unequivocally, resoundingly favor a strong ban on downers," Appleby adds. "From a public relations and a humane standpoint, those in industry who are backpedaling now should remember their initial press releases praising USDA for the ban and return to that position."

Karen Graham is an HSUS program associate and campaigner.

E-MAIL THIS PAGE

PRINTER FRIENDLY

See the Video

Downed Animals

Related Links

The HSUS Applauds USDA Ban on Processing Downed Cattle

The HSUS Demands Ban on Processing Downed Animals for Human Consumption