-------------------------------------------------------- 
    THE BridgeNews FORUM: A series of viewpoints on farming, 
    farm policy and related agricultural issues. 
    -------------------------------------------------------- 
  
  * Paris Maintains Its Illegal Ban On British Beef, 
    Yet France's Cattle May Now Prove The Greater Hazard 
  
  
    By David Walker, agricultural economist 
    Bridge News 
    NORWICH, England--While the French seem keen to benefit from Britain's  
mistakes in handling its mad cow disease crisis, this interest does not  
appear to include learning from them. 
  
    A European Commission veterinary mission's report indicates that France  
is making the very same mistake that extended the epidemic of BSE (bovine  
spongiform encephalopathy) in Britain and resulted in it overlapping with the  
emergence of a new variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (nvCJD). This form of  
the rare, but fatal, human disease is widely perceived, but yet to be  
conclusively proved, to be linked to BSE. 
  
    The mission's report, published in late January, attracted little  
attention, suggesting the BSE issue has been downgraded in France from a  
serious health hazard to simply a convenient pretext for maintaining a ban on  
British beef imports. 
  
    A worldwide ban was imposed on the export of British beef when BSE was  
implicated in the emergence of nvCJD in 1996. This ban was lifted by the  
European Commission on Aug. 1, 1999, but the French have illegally refused to  
lift their ban for food safety reasons. These have been dismissed as  
groundless by the European Commission, which is currently taking legal action  
against France. 
  
    The EU mission, which went to France in June, reported that about 6  
percent of cattle feed analyzed in France over the previous two years was  
contaminated with meat and bone meal and about 1.3 percent contained more  
than 0.1 percent of the contaminants. 
  
    Britain identified the feeding of meat and bone meal as the means of  
transmission of BSE as early as December 1987 and banned its use in cattle  
feed in June 1988. 
  
    British cases of BSE in animals born after 1988 emerged in 1991,  
indicating that this ban was not enough. The use of meat and bone meal in any  
livestock feed was then banned. It seems that cross-contamination of cattle  
feed with feed for other livestock had occurred in feed mills. 
  
    The European Union has banned the use of meat and bone meal in cattle  
feed since 1991 and has regulations to ensure that cross-contamination from  
feed for other livestock does not occur. The recent report suggested that  
French enforcement of these EU regulations was applied ''in a heterogeneous  
way.'' 
  
    These findings were probably not unexpected. Reported cases of BSE are on  
the increase in France, suggesting there is, or at least was, a continuing  
source of infection. 
  
    In the United Kingdom the incidence of BSE has been declining for almost  
10 years. Of the 59 cases of BSE in France between 1991 and May 1999, 31 had  
been in cattle born after the ban was implemented. Since then the total has  
risen to 74. 
  
    What must be more worrying for the French, however, was the conclusion in  
the EU report that ''under-reporting [of BSE] cannot be excluded.'' 
  
    There have been suggestions for some time that the whole-herd slaughter  
policy practiced in France encourages under-reporting. A farmer facing the  
prospect of losing a life's work developing his herd might be inclined to  
dispose of any cow that he suspects has BSE, quickly and quietly. 
  
    The onset of BSE is progressive. A farmer milking dairy cattle twice  
daily could detect early signs far enough in advance of the onset of more  
obvious symptoms to allow him to market a suspect animal. 
  
    In any event, the veterinary mission noted that reporting of suspect BSE  
cases by French farmers occurs ''with a certain hesitation and a considerable  
delay in some cases.'' 
  
    The quickest and easiest way of disposing of suspect cattle is, of  
course, through conventional market channels and, thus, into the human food  
chain. The report also suggested that veterinarians in French packinghouses  
were not well trained in detecting BSE. 
  
    In Britain BSE suspect cattle are handled in a manner that encourages  
farmers to report promptly. Only suspect cattle are slaughtered. Farmers, in  
fact, receive extra compensation for cattle that turn out after slaughter to  
have been incorrectly diagnosed as having BSE. 
  
    Back in October, the French were embarrassed by the revelation that  
sewage sludge was being used in their livestock feed. The latest report,  
however, is much more damning. 
  
    The French had, of course, based their ban on British beef exports on  
food safety concerns. They are now faced with the unpleasant reality that  
French beef may pose a greater food safety hazard than British beef. 
  
    The report does not have any relevance to the safety of British beef and  
the European Commission's case against the French on their illegal ban on  
British beef imports. 
  
    Paradoxically, however, it may help the French with a legal counterclaim  
against the European Commission for not upholding EU law by ignoring French  
concerns about British beef and not protecting consumer health in Europe. 
  
    The French must have been aware of the content of the mission report when  
they filed their counterclaim in early January. And further, they would have  
known that with the counterclaim in progress the commission would be obliged  
to make public its findings. 
  
    It would seem that the French did not regard the report as a potential  
embarrassment about the safety of their domestic food supply. And the lack of  
attention that the report has received indicates that this was a correct  
assessment. 
  
    But, of course, British beef is an entirely different matter. 
  
    DAVID WALKER, an agricultural economist, lives on his family's farm  
outside Norwich, England. He recently served as senior economist in London  
for the Home-Grown Cereals Authority and previously was executive director of  
the Alberta Grain Commission in Canada. His views are not necessarily those  
of Bridge News, whose ventures include the Internet site http://www.bridge.com/. 
  
    OPINION ARTICLES and letters to the editor are welcome. Send submissions  
to Sally Heinemann, editorial director, Bridge News, 3 World Financial  
Center, 200 Vesey St., 28th Floor, New York, N.Y. 10281-1009. You may also  
call (212) 372-7510, fax (212) 372-2707 or send e-mail to opinion@bridge.com. 
  
    EDITORS: A color photo of the author is available from KRT Photo Service. 
  
[Begin BridgeLinks] 
  
    A COMPLETE SUMMARY of recent opinion articles is available on  
BridgeStation. (Story .5400) 
  
[SLUG: FRANCE-MAD-COW-DISEASE:BN _ op-ed] 
  
[End BridgeLinks]