Carol Miller

Carol Miller

How Dixondale Farms Is Aiming To Protect Its Legacy

David Eddy

David Eddy

Pistachio Power: Where Growing and Research Mesh for Success

Bob West

Bob West

Data Dig: California Farmers Working Hard To Protect Their Assets

Richard VanVranken

Richard VanVranken

Why Veggie Growers Should Get to Know Their Customers Better

USDA Seeks Feedback On Food Safety

Growing Produce Staff By Growing Produce Staff|March 29, 2010

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced that it is seeking comment on proposed measures to enhance food safety. The proposed rule would implement a provision of the 2008 Farm Bill and is a priority for the Food Safety Working Group (FSWG).

"One year ago the President called on government to do more to ensure our food is safe, and we are working aggressively every day to improve the food safety system in the United States," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "The steps we are announcing will help prevent foodborne illness as well as speed our response when illnesses occur – two goals of the Food Safety Working Group."

The new proposed rule would require that regulated establishments: 1) Promptly notify FSIS if any unsafe, unwholesome or misbranded meat or poultry product has entered commerce; 2) Prepare and maintain current procedures for the recall of meat and poultry products produced and shipped by the establishment; and 3) Document each reassessment of the establishment’s process control plans or Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) plans.

The new proposed rule supports the Food Safety Working Group Key Findings announced on July 7, 2009. President Obama created the Food Safety Working Group on March 14, 2009 and charged Vilsack and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, the co-chairs of the group, with working to upgrade our food safety laws for the 21st century; foster coordination throughout government; and ensure that we enforce these laws to keep the American people safe. Representatives from all federal food safety related agencies, including FSIS, the FDA, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention meet regularly to discuss how producers, processors, retailers, consumers, and all levels of government can work collaboratively to make the food Americans eat as safe as possible.

Comments regarding the adopted regulations must be received on or before May 24, 2010, through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov, or by mail to: Docket Clerk, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, Room 2-2127, George Washington Carver Center, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Mailstop 5474, Beltsville, MD 20705-5474.

Top Articles
Pistachio Power: Where Growing and Research Mesh for Success

All submissions received through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or by mail must reference the Food Safety and Inspection Service and include the docket number "FSIS-2008-0025."
 

Source: USDA news release

0

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

The food safety issue affects all of us. We take many cautions picking and handling sweet cherries with our crew. We have hand washing stations in the field and monitor every workers habits. We are one of the lucky ones as we only have 30-40 harvest workers and make personal contact with each one. Being farmers we have no way to pass the cost of what ever regulations the USDA puts out for us. We had air conditioners in our labor housing but Federal Regulations said buy a fan, heater and self closing door with an opening screened window. They were never used, the workers broke the self closers off. So more of our meager sums are out the window! Please go after the violators not the good farmers that do a good job and take care of their people and crops or livestock. We can’t afford for the bad apples to spoil it for all of us.
Respectfully,
Jerrene McAllister
2515 Threemile Rd.
The Dalles, Oregon 97058

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

FSIS-2008-0025
Please don’t make regulations that effect the good farmers and ranchers because we are at the bottom of the food chain and can’t add it to our costs. Our system does not work that way. We are at the mercy of the packers and shippers sometimes at the supermarkets, if the product is left too long and spoils, we take the hit. If the product is cross contaminated by a trucking company with a hygiene problem, we take the hit. If a fast food worker has a uniform that goes home and the dog and cat use it for a bed before it is put back on and worn back to work, we take the hit. If a butcher wears his too long slacks under his apron and drags the blood out to the dumpster and back we still get blamed. Please loosen up on the Regulations for the Farm, we are doing the best and cannot afford more regulation.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

I think it is is ridiculous to lay blame on a grower for a problem with bacteria etc. when something comes out of the field or farmlot. More resposibility is in the hands of the end user. I avoid going to inside the city restaurants anymore as I almost always end up with gut issues. I think it has more to do with the cleanliness of the people working in handling the food during preparation. Let’s have some common sense. Hard to expect from the government tho.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

Bureaucracy increases consumer cost double fold. Once to the tax payer and then again through the producers increased cost of satisfying worthless regulations administered by the clueless. Looking for something that cannot be seen by the naked eye. I would feel safer eating the dirt out of my field than an apple from China. I would rather consume vegetables produced by a local farmer with pride, than heavily regulated and inspected produce from Mexico.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

AMEN to the comments by Vern, Keith, and Jerrene.

The intent of the legislation is good–which is to better ensure that healthy food reaches the consumer. However, the legislation is counterproductive in many ways.

Whatever happened to buyer beware? The consumer MUST take responsibility for himself. Overlegislation can create a belief and practice by consumers that all of our food is safe, so we don’t have to be as cautious. Wrong! No matter how many laws are passed and how much money is spent for enforcement, it will never be 100% safe. There are just way too many ways for the food to be contaminated AFTER it leaves the farmer. Jerrene innumerated only a FEW of those ways. How many sneezes, dirty hands, etc. make contact with the food just on grocery shelves! I agree with Keith that safety has more to do with the cleanliness of the situation and the people handling the food during preparation in the processing plant, in the restaurant, and in the home.

This proposed legislation works in reverse by focusing undue constraints and expenses on the farmer, and as a result will put many small farmers out of business. It will among other things ultimately reduce the production of food grown in the US forcing more imports (if there are any) and will create, therefore, more unemployment, much higher food costs, and more inflation and recession.

For example, we are encouraged to go “green” to help the environment. Yet the legislation says not to recycle manure for fertilizer and to keep all animals away from the crops. How do you keep deer, groundhogs, coyotes, etc. from running through? How do you keep birds from flying over or into the field? Bees are on the decline, yet some birds pollinate which is desirable, yet they are banned. All workers on the farm must have toileting and handwashing facilities, etc. The small farmer with 200 tomato plants or 200 fruit trees will have to put in these facilities which may cost more than his crop will generate. In this time of increased unemployment, many are trying to support their families by growing a small amount of produce to sell. There are many small farmers who sell their produce at the local farmers market or at their homes like the Mennonites. All of these folks help greatly to provide needed fresh quality produce to their own communities, yet this legislation will make the continuance of all of these small farms financially prohibitive. The government should set safety guidelines, but the industry can and should self-govern. If you produce a contaminated product, your business will be hurt; if you produce continued problems, you will have no business. The media will make sure of that.

We all have to eat, and our population continues to increase. Where will we get our food when our farmland continues to diminish and be consumed by subdivisions, shopping malls, and businesses? Who will produce our food and where will we get our food when those folks skilled in farming are no longer in the business of producing our food? We do ourselves and our country a great disservice by not focusing our legislation on supporting our farmland, our farmers, and our ability to be self-sufficient BOTH nationally and locally in our food production.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

I think I speak for the public in general when I say that I would rather take my chances with local produce than with totally unregulated imports. If the public would be made fully aware of what is about to take place with the small farmers and the financial impact to their businesses and eventually to this country, there would be much unrest. We food producers are at a great disadvantage when it comes to pleading our “regulation problems” to the public. Who can argue against safe food? The truth is, we as a people have never had safer food. We all eat our own products and live to tell about it so lets have a little common sense.
This whole certification process is a costly method of fixing a problem that simply, isn’t there! Education is the answer. Have us attend “classes” and even take a test of some sort on the major sources of potential contamination. After acheiving that level of education, run the program much like a private applicator’s(spray) license with a set requirement for continuing education in the form of accumulating credits to keep your “Producer Status.” Cooperation would be much greater and it would be a much more manageable program.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

All of these responses are right on point but you are “preaching to the choir” in this forum. Your comments need to be sent to your local news media and your congressperson. That is the way to fight this idiocy.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

What is the point of all the food safety regulations and inspections on the farm, when people can touch or sneeze on every piece of fruit in the grocery stores.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 27, 2011 at 3:23 am

I am tired of having to spend my time and money training workers on what the government wants them to know. The government should spend their time and effort to train all these workers so when they arrive at a farm they know what the government wants them to know – then I’ll teach them what I want them to know about my operation and how we do things to get the crop grown and harvested. These trainings create a monetary burden should not be borne by the farmer – but by the morons in Washington that think these programs up that the workers can care less about. It should not be a burden on the farm for both time and money for something we already do.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

The food safety issue affects all of us. We take many cautions picking and handling sweet cherries with our crew. We have hand washing stations in the field and monitor every workers habits. We are one of the lucky ones as we only have 30-40 harvest workers and make personal contact with each one. Being farmers we have no way to pass the cost of what ever regulations the USDA puts out for us. We had air conditioners in our labor housing but Federal Regulations said buy a fan, heater and self closing door with an opening screened window. They were never used, the workers broke the self closers off. So more of our meager sums are out the window! Please go after the violators not the good farmers that do a good job and take care of their people and crops or livestock. We can’t afford for the bad apples to spoil it for all of us.
Respectfully,
Jerrene McAllister
2515 Threemile Rd.
The Dalles, Oregon 97058

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

FSIS-2008-0025
Please don’t make regulations that effect the good farmers and ranchers because we are at the bottom of the food chain and can’t add it to our costs. Our system does not work that way. We are at the mercy of the packers and shippers sometimes at the supermarkets, if the product is left too long and spoils, we take the hit. If the product is cross contaminated by a trucking company with a hygiene problem, we take the hit. If a fast food worker has a uniform that goes home and the dog and cat use it for a bed before it is put back on and worn back to work, we take the hit. If a butcher wears his too long slacks under his apron and drags the blood out to the dumpster and back we still get blamed. Please loosen up on the Regulations for the Farm, we are doing the best and cannot afford more regulation.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

I think it is is ridiculous to lay blame on a grower for a problem with bacteria etc. when something comes out of the field or farmlot. More resposibility is in the hands of the end user. I avoid going to inside the city restaurants anymore as I almost always end up with gut issues. I think it has more to do with the cleanliness of the people working in handling the food during preparation. Let’s have some common sense. Hard to expect from the government tho.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

Bureaucracy increases consumer cost double fold. Once to the tax payer and then again through the producers increased cost of satisfying worthless regulations administered by the clueless. Looking for something that cannot be seen by the naked eye. I would feel safer eating the dirt out of my field than an apple from China. I would rather consume vegetables produced by a local farmer with pride, than heavily regulated and inspected produce from Mexico.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

AMEN to the comments by Vern, Keith, and Jerrene.

The intent of the legislation is good–which is to better ensure that healthy food reaches the consumer. However, the legislation is counterproductive in many ways.

Whatever happened to buyer beware? The consumer MUST take responsibility for himself. Overlegislation can create a belief and practice by consumers that all of our food is safe, so we don’t have to be as cautious. Wrong! No matter how many laws are passed and how much money is spent for enforcement, it will never be 100% safe. There are just way too many ways for the food to be contaminated AFTER it leaves the farmer. Jerrene innumerated only a FEW of those ways. How many sneezes, dirty hands, etc. make contact with the food just on grocery shelves! I agree with Keith that safety has more to do with the cleanliness of the situation and the people handling the food during preparation in the processing plant, in the restaurant, and in the home.

This proposed legislation works in reverse by focusing undue constraints and expenses on the farmer, and as a result will put many small farmers out of business. It will among other things ultimately reduce the production of food grown in the US forcing more imports (if there are any) and will create, therefore, more unemployment, much higher food costs, and more inflation and recession.

For example, we are encouraged to go “green” to help the environment. Yet the legislation says not to recycle manure for fertilizer and to keep all animals away from the crops. How do you keep deer, groundhogs, coyotes, etc. from running through? How do you keep birds from flying over or into the field? Bees are on the decline, yet some birds pollinate which is desirable, yet they are banned. All workers on the farm must have toileting and handwashing facilities, etc. The small farmer with 200 tomato plants or 200 fruit trees will have to put in these facilities which may cost more than his crop will generate. In this time of increased unemployment, many are trying to support their families by growing a small amount of produce to sell. There are many small farmers who sell their produce at the local farmers market or at their homes like the Mennonites. All of these folks help greatly to provide needed fresh quality produce to their own communities, yet this legislation will make the continuance of all of these small farms financially prohibitive. The government should set safety guidelines, but the industry can and should self-govern. If you produce a contaminated product, your business will be hurt; if you produce continued problems, you will have no business. The media will make sure of that.

We all have to eat, and our population continues to increase. Where will we get our food when our farmland continues to diminish and be consumed by subdivisions, shopping malls, and businesses? Who will produce our food and where will we get our food when those folks skilled in farming are no longer in the business of producing our food? We do ourselves and our country a great disservice by not focusing our legislation on supporting our farmland, our farmers, and our ability to be self-sufficient BOTH nationally and locally in our food production.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

I think I speak for the public in general when I say that I would rather take my chances with local produce than with totally unregulated imports. If the public would be made fully aware of what is about to take place with the small farmers and the financial impact to their businesses and eventually to this country, there would be much unrest. We food producers are at a great disadvantage when it comes to pleading our “regulation problems” to the public. Who can argue against safe food? The truth is, we as a people have never had safer food. We all eat our own products and live to tell about it so lets have a little common sense.
This whole certification process is a costly method of fixing a problem that simply, isn’t there! Education is the answer. Have us attend “classes” and even take a test of some sort on the major sources of potential contamination. After acheiving that level of education, run the program much like a private applicator’s(spray) license with a set requirement for continuing education in the form of accumulating credits to keep your “Producer Status.” Cooperation would be much greater and it would be a much more manageable program.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

All of these responses are right on point but you are “preaching to the choir” in this forum. Your comments need to be sent to your local news media and your congressperson. That is the way to fight this idiocy.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

What is the point of all the food safety regulations and inspections on the farm, when people can touch or sneeze on every piece of fruit in the grocery stores.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:23 am

I am tired of having to spend my time and money training workers on what the government wants them to know. The government should spend their time and effort to train all these workers so when they arrive at a farm they know what the government wants them to know – then I’ll teach them what I want them to know about my operation and how we do things to get the crop grown and harvested. These trainings create a monetary burden should not be borne by the farmer – but by the morons in Washington that think these programs up that the workers can care less about. It should not be a burden on the farm for both time and money for something we already do.

Reply

Related posts