A repeal of country-of-origin labelling on imported beef, pork and chicken is making its way through the U.S. Congress, but the sheep sector argues it does not go far enough.
The Canadian Sheep Federation said the entire bill, covering all commodities, should be repealed.
“If the legislation is only partially repealed, it leaves the door open to further sanctions against other agricultural products,” said Corlena Patterson, executive director of the federation.
“Everybody needs to take a closer look at the impact a partial repeal has.”
Read Also
Alberta eases water access for riparian restoration
Alberta government removes requirement for temporary diversion licence to water plants up to 100 cubic metres per day for smaller riparian restoration projects
She said the Canadian sheep sector has seen its growth potential curtailed because of BSE related border closures and now COOL restrictions.
Patterson estimated that the sheep industry has lost $300 million worth of exports since 2003 because of disease restrictions and COOL.
The COOL legislation covers red meat, poultry, produce, seafood and nuts. The U.S. House of Representatives voted 300-131 June 10 in favour of ending mandatory country-of-origin labels on beef, pork and chicken.
“That is damaging to our sector for sure and so it is a major concern we are trying to address as quickly as possible,” she said.
The sheep sector was part of the early discussion on a trade challenge but did not have the resources to participate fully.
“As a small sector and one that had only just started to expand and become a realized force, we did not have the capacity to be there,” she said.
The Canadian lamb industry was in expansion mode in 2002 and exported $18.2 million worth of sheep and lamb to the United Sates. However, last year it shipped only $433,000.
Feeder lambs were allowed in American feedlots in 2007 and went straight to slaughter.
However, many U.S. lamb plants did not have the capacity to segregate imported animals and carcasses when COOL went into effect.
Eliminating COOL in any form is a multi-stage process, said John Masswohl of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association.
“Getting it through the House was probably the easy part,” he said.
“We are going to have a bigger, uphill battle with the Senate.”
Pat Roberts, who chairs the Senate agriculture committee, agrees labelling meat products was ultimately bad policy.
However, in the Senate, 60 of 100 votes are required to pass the bill if any senator does not consent. It also works that way in committees, where 11 votes are needed to pass a motion.
“I don’t think we have 11 in the committee, and I don’t think we have 60 in the full Senate,” he said.
The CCA, the Canadian Meat Council and agriculture minister Gerry Ritz met with key senators last week who were COOL supporters.
They acknowledged the World Trade Organization ruling saying the law is discriminatory against Canadian and Mexican imports and agreed something must be done. Some suggested alternative labels.
Canada asked for permission to retaliate June 17 at a special meeting of the WTO dispute settlement body.
The WTO appoints arbitrators and issues a schedule for a hearing, which means authorization to impose tariffs could come in late summer.
Timing may be everything because the Senate adjourns at the end of July.
barbara.duckworth@producer.com
