R-CALF USA Seeks Correction to OIG’s Beef Checkoff Audit Report

Billings, Mont. – In a supplemental complaint and request for correction filed last week, R-CALF USA formally requested a correction to the March 2013 audit report by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) entitled "Agricultural Marketing Service Oversight of the Beef Research and Promotion Board’s Activities" (beef checkoff report).

Audit reports issued by the OIG are subject to the 2001 Data Quality Act (Act) implemented by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 2002. Congress passed the Act to ensure that information disseminated by federal agencies meets at least minimal standards for quality, objectivity, utility and integrity and is not corrupted or falsified. In addition, the Act provides a mechanism for affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information.

In its request for correction, R-CALF USA makes the case that the OIG’s beef checkoff report fails to meet even the most lenient interpretation of the terms objectivity and integrity. The group asserts the report is biased in favor of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) because it concluded that all beef checkoff expenditures from 2008 through 2010 were in accordance with all applicable legislation while an independent audit report disclosed that the NCBA had misappropriated over $216,000 in beef checkoff funds during the same time period.

"It cannot both be true that Beef Checkoff Program funds assessed in fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010 were distributed and expended in accordance with legislation and that the NCBA was required to reimburse the Beef Checkoff Program $216,944 for expenses it had charged to the Beef Checkoff Program in contradiction to the legislation in fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010," the group wrote.

R-CALF USA provides evidence that it said shows "the NCBA was known to have charged the Beef Checkoff Program for hundreds of thousands of dollars in unauthorized expenses and the only reason they were not allowed to keep their ill-gotten and unlawful gains was because they were caught red-handed by Clifton Gunderson, LLP (the independent auditing firm that disclosed the $216,944 in misappropriated funds)."

The group also asserts that the OIG audit was "a shameful waste of taxpayer money" because it attempted to conduct a random audit over the same time period that a much more targeted audit had already been conducted by an independent auditor:

"There simply is no logical reason that the OIG would choose to conduct its random hunt over the same terrain and during the same period where and when, respectively, a much more targeted hunt had already extinguished all the game. Unless, of course, it was the OIG’s intention all along to ensure that it came up empty-handed, which is the only plausible explanation for conducting such an incomplete report," wrote the group.

R-CALF USA also takes issue with the OIG’s claim that it had only received three complaints directed toward the beef checkoff during the course of its audit. "The OIG’s outrageous claim is demonstrably false," the group wrote and then proceeded to provide documented evidence that the OIG had received no less than 16 separate complaints from R-CALF USA alone during the course of the OIG audit.

The complaint contends the OIG’s beef checkoff report is corrupted, resulting in the OIG’s disseminated of false information to Congress, the public and to cattlemen that are required to pay into the checkoff.

Though the group makes several requests for the specific corrections it wants made to the OIG’s beef checkoff report, it ultimately concluded:

"Though R-CALF USA has made recommendations for correction, the egregious nature of the OIG Audit Report simply does not lend itself to correction. Therefore, R-CALF USA restates its original request that the OIG Audit Report be officially denounced as a colossal political sham and whitewash."

# # #

R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) is the largest producer-only cattle trade association in the United States. It is a national, nonprofit organization dedicated to ensuring the continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516.

OIG report says FSIS does not deter swine slaughter plants from repeat violations

Facebook Tweet LinkedIn Email ShareThis

Print

Image from Shutterstock

By Rita Jane Gabbett on 5/17/2013

The Food Safety and Inspection Service’s (FSIS) enforcement policies do not deter swine slaughter plants from becoming repeat violators of the Federal Meat Inspection Act, according to a new report by the Office of the Inspector General.

As a result, plants have repeatedly violated the same regulations with little or no consequence. The OIG report found that in 8 of the 30 plants visited, inspectors did not always examine the internal organs of carcasses in accordance with FSIS inspection requirements or did not take enforcement actions against plants that violated food safety regulations.

“As a result, there is reduced assurance of FSIS inspectors effectively identifying pork that should not enter the food supply,” the report asserted.

OIG also found that FSIS could not determine whether the goals of a pilot program called the "Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP)-based Inspection Models Project," or HIMP, were met because FSIS did not adequately oversee the program.

“In the 15 years since the program’s inception, FSIS did not critically assess whether the new inspection process had measurably improved food safety at each HIMP plant, a key goal of the program,” according to the report.

Finally, OIG found that FSIS inspectors did not take appropriate enforcement actions at 8 of the 30 swine slaughter plants visited for violations of the Humane Method of Slaughter Act (HMSA).

OIG reviewed 158 humane handling noncompliance records (violations) issued to the 30 plants and found 10 instances of egregious violations where inspectors did not issue suspensions.

“As a result, the plants did not improve their slaughter practices, and FSIS could not ensure humane handling of swine. FSIS concurred with all of our recommendations,” the report said.

To download the full report, including 11 specific OIG recommendations and FSIS responses, click here.

Tyson forms animal wellbeing advisory board

By Dani Friedland on 5/17/2013

Tyson Foods has created an independent Farm Animal Well-Being Advisory Panel for its FarmCheck program, the company announced Thursday.

The panel will help set research priorities and suggest ways to improve Tyson’s FarmCheck audit program.

Members of the panel include:

• Ryan Best, 2011-2012 president, Future Farmers of America
• Anne Burkholder, cattle feedlot owner
• Ed Cooney, executive director of the Congressional Hunger Center
• Gail Golab, Ph.D., DVM, director of American Veterinary Medical Association’s Animal Welfare Division
• Temple Grandin, Ph.D., professor of animal science, Colorado State University
• Karl Guggenmos, dean of culinary education, Johnson & Wales University
• Tim Loula, DVM, co-founder and co-owner of Swine Vet Center in St. Peter, Minnesota
• Miyun Park, executive director, Global Animal Partnership
• Ashley Peterson, Ph.D., vice president of scientific and regulatory affairs, National Chicken Council
• Richard Raymond, M.D., former U.S. Department of Agriculture Undersecretary for Food Safety
• Janeen Salak-Johnson, Ph.D., associate professor in Animal Sciences, University of Illinois
• Janice Swanson, Ph.D., chair and professor, Animal Behavior and Welfare, Michigan State University
• Bruce Webster, Ph.D., professor of poultry science, University of Georgia

Tyson noted that participation in the advisory board does not constitute not a public endorsement of the FarmCheck program, Tyson Foods or any specific animal well-being program.

AlterNet / By Ronnie Cummins

How Monsanto Is Using Cronies in Congress to Take Away States’ Rights to Label Genetically Modified Foods

Sources report that Monsanto has begun secretly lobbying its Congressional allies to attach amendments to the Farm Bill that would preempt or prohibit states from requiring labels on GE foods.

Photo Credit: Lightspring/Shuttersock.com

May 16, 2013

Reliable sources in Washington D.C. have informed the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) that Monsanto has begun secretly lobbying its Congressional allies to attach one or more “Monsanto Riders” or amendments to the 2013 Farm Bill that would preempt or prohibit states from requiring labels on genetically engineered (GE) foods.

In response to this blatant violation of states’ rights to legislate, and consumers’ right to know, the OCA and a nationwide alliance have launched a petition to put every member of Congress on notice: If you support any Farm Bill amendment that would nullify states’ rights to label genetically modified organisms (GMOs), we’ll vote – or throw – you out of office.

On Wednesday, May 15, an amendment (the King Amendment) to the House version of the Farm Bill, inserted under the guise of protecting interstate commerce, passed out of the House Agricultural Committee. If the King Amendment makes it into the final Farm Bill, it would take away states’ rights to pass laws governing the production or manufacture of any agricultural product, including food and animals raised for food, that is involved in interstate commerce. The amendment was proposed by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), largely in response to a California law stating that by 2015, California will allow only eggs to be sold from hens housed in cages specified by California. But policy analysts emphasize that the amendment, broadly and ambiguously written, could be used to prohibit or preempt any state GMO labeling or food safety law.

Will the King Amendment survive the Senate? No one can be sure, say analysts. However few doubt that Monsanto will give up. We can expect that more amendments and riders will be introduced into the Farm Bill–even if the King Amendment fails—over the next month in an attempt to stop the wave of state GMO labeling laws and initiatives moving forward in states like Washington, Vermont, Maine, Connecticut and others. (MORE)

Australian ranchers shoot cattle due to lack of feed

Cattle ranchers in Northern Australia have had to resort to shooting their cattle because they just can’t feed or sell them.

The drought and the smaller live export trade has been blamed for the current conditions that cattle ranchers find themselves in. One of Australia’s largest beef producers was quoted as saying that the industry has little choice but to shoot cattle.

Beef industry leaders have been warning this would happen. Over summer, much of northern Australia didn’t receive traditional monsoonal rain. That meant grass didn’t grow, so in parts, there’s nothing for cattle to eat.
North west Queensland grazier Malcolm McClymont says conditions are worse than the 1974 world beef price collapse.

Sisters Chanelle and Debra run a cattle station in northern Australia and say they’ve shot weak and sick cattle that don’t have food to eat. "It’s very hard when you’re counting down to the last cent and you’re looking at it and saying ‘I can’t feed that cow because I can’t afford it’," Chanelle said.

"If they haven’t got any food or no quality of water, are you just going to let it die a slow death of three or four days in a paddock, with the crows and the eagles picking their eyes out?" Debra said. "Or, do you take the bullet, put it in your gun, pull the trigger?"

There are hundreds of northern Australian cattle producers who say their pain was avoidable. They blame the Federal Government’s 2011 live cattle export suspension with Indonesia, a trade that’s plunged into decline since that decision.

THE GIFT OF SPRING

By Tom Giessel

The season of spring not only brings about a sense of renewal, but also underscores our responsibility as stewards of the Earth. Liturgically, we have moved through the season of Lent. We celebrated Easter the first Sunday, following the first full moon after equinox, as the days lengthen. Living on the High Plains, we observe firsthand Nature’s cycles, in a rural environment that affords us the gift of observation on a grand scale. You do not have to be a farmer to take in the miracle of the great resurrection of life on the terra firma. Plants emerge as if by magic. The sounds of birds chirping and insects buzzing fill the air. Newborn calves kicking up their heels in the green pastures bring smiles to our faces. The scent of a spring shower and fragrance of blooming flowers are all gifts on which we cannot place an economic value. It is the time for us to till the soil, and plant seeds in anticipation of a bountiful harvest. The energy and spirit that makes us human, in turn, creates this gift of life. Yes, the Earth has come alive after the long, cold winter.

We need to pause during this time of renewal, and take inventory of the responsibility we share, and the role we play, in passing this gift on to those who will follow us. Science and technology must be the tools we utilize for the betterment of all involved. Our challenge is to balance these instruments and not have the land and its creatures exploited for excessive individual gain or outrageous profit at the expense of the environment. It is our obligation to consume resources wisely, and reduce excess consumption of, and conserve what is many times, limited. We must always strive to leave more behind, than we take with us on our journey. Stewardship must be reflected in our daily endeavors.

The gifts we hold in our hands, we also carry on our shoulders. The inheritance we have received is not ours to give, but must be surrendered to those who come after us.