Source: Tom Johnston, MEATINGPLACE, 10/14/16


The USDA will move forward with rulemaking on the proposed Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Act (GIPSA) rules proposed in 2010, despite that effort being defunded by Congress at the time, the agency told industry groups in a letter.

The National Cattleman’s Beef Association and North American Meat Institute were quick to note that Congress defunded the initial effort because it recognized they would limit producers’ marketing options, add layers of bureaucracy and facilitate litigation. The move also circumvents eight federal appeals court rulings, they said.

“The GIPSA rules, as they pertain to cattle producers, are extremely troubling to our industry at a time when we are already grappling with volatile futures markets and a fragile cash market,” said NCBA President Tracy Brunner in a news release.

“Rather than working to help ensure producers have accurate price information in a productive way, like ensuring Mandatory Price Reporting is a critical government function, unaffected by future government shutdowns; USDA is expending time and resources to push forward outdated rules to regulate an industry that never requested their assistance. These rules were flatly rejected by cattle producers six years ago and a strong bi-partisan majority in Congress expressed their continual disapproval through a half-decade of defunding.”

USDA has announced the GIPSA rules include an interim final rule on competitive injury and two proposed rules to address undue preference and the poultry grower ranking system. The agency has said they will provide additional opportunity for public comment on all the rules and will announce if any amendments will be made.

NAMI voiced its displeasure as well, noting the rules were originally published six years ago and in that time significant changes have occurred in the livestock, meat and poultry sector. New markets have emerged and there is enhanced competition for sourcing livestock for slaughter, the group said.

Similarly, demands from retail and foodservice customers for very specific animal handling and production requirements such as organic, grass fed, raised without an antibiotics and others have created new marketing and business opportunities for poultry and livestock producers and their packer customers. If consistent with what was proposed in 2010, the interim rule undermines these marketing agreements and impacts the availability of these products for consumers, NAMI noted.

“It is irresponsible for USDA to advance this stale six-year-old rulemaking,” said Meat Institute President and CEO Barry Carpenter. “The interim final rule as described will open a floodgate of litigation, up-end the established system for marketing cattle, pork, and poultry in the U.S., and add costs at every step along the process from producers to consumers.”

While USDA notes they will exclude marketing arrangements from these rules, these provisions are outweighed by the competitive injury provisions of the GIPSA rule that do not require a showing of injury in order to claim a violation of the Packers and Stockyards Act, NCBA said.

The groups want USDA to immediately withdraw the GIPSA rules and work with the industry to address the administration’s concerns with livestock marketing.

For more stories, goto www.meatingplace.com.