animalagriculture.org

Animal Production Food Safety

Communications Subcommittee Report, June 5, 2003

Minutes

Participants:                                        Unable to participate:

Gary Marsh                                          Will Hueston

John Ragan                                          Marty Goldberg

Harry Snelson

Introduction

At the request of the committee, a sub-committee was formed to explore the communication needs associated with development of a food safety emphasis among the various food-producing groups in US animal agriculture.  The sub-committee held a conference call on June 5, 2003 resulting in the following discussion delineating a proposed action plan or direction we think the committee should explore.

Objective

To promote the fundamental aspects of food safety to the supply chain and develop a strategy to effectively communicate this program to the appropriate audience.

Discussion

What is the scope of the food safety message at the food animal production level?

• farm level issues

• transport issues

• animal identification = the ability to identify the animal

• traceability = maintenance of a permanent history associated with the animal

• trackability = to know where the animal is located

• making current food safety research available to the target audience (i.e. producers, packers, transporters, consumers, etc.)

Whom do we need to communicate with?

• within species groups

• between species groups

• between species groups and regulators

• directly to producers, truckers, packers, etc.

• consumer groups

Are there examples of previous attempts to do this?

• Nebraska – developed an Animal Production Food Safety Task Force bringing together the public health and animal health sectors

• Northeastern Dairy, Beef and Milk Quality Alliance

• NIAA Food Digest – it was the opinion of the sub-committee that this publication should be reintroduced

• National Pork Board’s PQA program

• Extension agents

• veterinarians

• Food Safety Curriculum – sponsored by FSIS and coordinated by the Research Triangle Institute

Numerous quality assurance programs exist (basically each commodity group has one).  Some place more emphasis on food safety issues than others (the Pork Quality Assurance Program was highly regarded as an example).  It was the opinion of the sub-committee that the NIAA Animal Production Food Safety Committee should give recognition to existing industry Quality Assurance Programs, and should develop a set of minimum guidelines outlining the generic and species specific issues associated with food safety that should be addressed in an effective quality assurance program. 

Action items

1. The Animal Production Food Safety Committee should start developing a package delineating the key food safety issues important in a quality assurance program.

2. Once developed, this package should be presented to the individual commodity groups to identify the specific issues relative to each individual species in order to establish quality control points for development of a species specific quality assurance program that addresses the food safety issues identified. 

• This quality assurance program should be developed by the species groups. 

• If a quality assurance program already exists, it should be evaluated for its effectiveness regarding the key food safety issues identified.

3. NIAA should evaluate the development of an appropriate marketing strategy to promote acceptance and adherence to the programs developed.

We need to make sure that the food safety risk points are identified and everyone involved in the supply chain is aware of the issues and has the tools, the knowledge and the desire to minimize those risks.  I think John Ragan put it best when he said during our conference call that the goal of food safety is to “do the best you can do using the science that’s available and record what you did.”