The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
Tag: u s department of agriculture
USDA Cuts Enforcement Of Animal Welfare Under Trump

USDA Cuts Enforcement Of Animal Welfare Under Trump

Under Trump, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has curtailed its investigations into animal welfare. That means things like puppy mills aren’t getting investigated at all.

Puppy mills are awful. As the Humane Society explained, a puppy mill is “an inhumane high-volume dog breeding facility that churns out puppies for profit, ignoring the needs of the pups and their mothers” and the puppies are often “sick and unsocialized.” They’re precisely the sort of thing that should be regulated out of existence, but the Trump administration is basically turning a blind eye to those and other animal welfare abuses.

ABC News reported that data from the USDA’s animal welfare division shows that investigations have plummeted in the years Trump has been in office. During the last year of Obama’s presidency, the division issued 1,320 warnings. By 2017, that number had dropped to 523; and by 2018, it was down to 193. Similarly, in 2016, the division opened 239 cases, but that dropped to only 15 cases in the first three quarters of 2018. To put this into perspective, there are approximately 10,000 puppy mills currently operating in the U.S.

The USDA gave two reasons for the startling decline in enforcement. First, it says it has fewer inspectors and had to stop doing routine inspections during the government shutdown. Next, it argues this is a specific policy choice — the department decided to focus on assisting facilities with compliance by letting them correct problems before issuing a citation. There’s just one problem with that: The USDA’s own internal watchdog says it doesn’t work.

In theory, helping educate breeders about the laws should result in more compliance with the rules, but it doesn’t. Puppy mills and other pet dealers just go on to violate more laws.

The administration is so uninterested in enforcing animal welfare laws that they even took USDA inspection reports, which documented animal abuse, offline early in 2017. These didn’t just cover puppy mills and other pet dealers; they covered zoos, factory farms, research laboratories, circuses, and more. Without that information, journalists can’t investigate and animal welfare organizations can’t help protect animals. Members of Congress have asked for the inspection reports to be restored, but the USDA has ignored them.

It’s tough to imagine that even an administration as awful as Trump’s would be just fine with puppy mills, but here we are.

Published with permission of The American Independent.

USDA Sued By Advocacy Group Over Handling Of Salmonella In Meat

USDA Sued By Advocacy Group Over Handling Of Salmonella In Meat

By David Pierson, Los Angeles Times

A Washington, D.C., health advocacy group has sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture for not doing enough to prevent the spread of antibiotic resistant strains of salmonella in meat.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest filed a lawsuit Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia asking the USDA to respond to a 3-year-old petition urging the agency to treat antibiotic resistant strains of salmonella as an adulterant.

Doing so could give the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service broader powers to issue recalls and prevent tainted meat from reaching the marketplace _ similar to how some strains of E. coli are handled.

“USDA takes action only after people start becoming ill from these life-threatening antibiotic-resistant superbugs,” said Caroline Smith DeWaal, food safety director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “It is time for USDA to declare these dangerous resistant strains as adulterants and then require industry to conduct aggressive testing to keep meat and poultry contaminated with these strains out of the food supply, as it does with products contaminated with dangerous strains of E. coli.”

The USDA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Calls to tighten rules over salmonella have increased recently because of two outbreaks involving antibiotic resistant strains of the bacteria linked to Foster Farms poultry. Over 700 people have been sickened by the two outbreaks since 2012.

Foster Farms did not issue a voluntary recall for either outbreak. Both the USDA and Foster Farms maintain the company’s poultry is safe to eat if cooked and handled properly.

Health groups say salmonella should be handled more strictly because of the rise of superbugs — potent bacteria produced by the overuse of antibiotics on farms.

Officials representing the $70 billion poultry industry dispute that antibiotics are being abused. They also point out that salmonella is widespread and cannot be completely eliminated. And despite that, producers such as Foster Farms have succeeded in significantly reducing rates of salmonella contamination in their poultry over the years.

The USDA said last December it would develop more stringent testing and sampling for salmonella in chicken plants and implement the first-ever national standards for acceptable levels of salmonella contamination on cut chicken parts. Existing standards apply only to whole chickens.

That same month, the Food and Drug Administration moved to phase out many of the antibiotics administered to animals used as food to promote faster growth, a practice blamed for increasing antibiotic resistance in people.

Photo: Roboppy via Flickr
To stay updated with news across the nation, sign up for our daily email newsletter!

Santa Cleared For Entry To U.S.

Washington (AFP) – Santa Claus was officially cleared for entry into the United States as federal agriculture officials waived stringent livestock checks on his nine reindeer.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced in a light-hearted statement that a “Mr. S.Claus” of the North Pole was free to enter the United States with his reindeer from December 24 to December 25.

“During this season of giving, USDA wants to do everything in its power to help Santa,” said John R. Clifford, USDA’s Chief Veterinary Officer.

“We agreed to waive the normal application fees and entry inspection/overtime costs, provided he winks his eye and wishes port personnel a Merry Christmas at the time of crossing.”

Authorities also waived the normal health checks for Santa’s reindeer — provided they met certain alternative conditions.

“As a condition of entry, the reindeer must be certified by Santa Claus as never having been fed anything other than hay, sugar plums and gingerbread,” the statement said.

“The reindeer must also be individually identified with microchips or official eartag identification, and must respond to the names ‘Dasher’, ‘Dancer’, ‘Prancer’, ‘Vixen’, ‘Comet’, ‘Cupid’, ‘Donner,’ ‘Blitzen’ and ‘Rudolph’ when interacting with port personnel.

“No more than one reindeer in the group may be visibly affected by ‘Rednose Syndrome’, and upon entry, port personnel will visually inspect the reindeer to ensure they are healthy and fit for continued travel.”

The reindeer would also be required to be “pulling a wooden sleigh that has jingling bells attached and is filled with brightly-wrapped gifts.”

“Port personnel will clean and disinfect the runners and underside of the sleigh at the time of entry,” the statement said.

The USDA’s festive statement was in keeping with agencies who acknowledge the existence of Santa Claus, albeit with tongue firmly in cheek.

The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), which polices the skies above Canada and the United States, regularly tracks the progress of Santa Claus and his reindeer in realtime on its NORAD Santa Tracker (www.noradsanta.org).