Author: Alan Bjerga

Version 5 Furthers FARM Animal Care Standards

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

By Beverly Hampton Pfifer, Senior Director, FARM Animal Care

The National Dairy FARM Program has evolved over the years to become a rigorous on-farm quality assurance program and trusted industry risk mitigation tool that gives the supply chain the confidence it needs to enthusiastically support dairy despite activist pressure and misinformation. Soon-to-come updates to FARM Animal Care are designed to strengthen that assurance, spotlighting dairy farmers’ stewardship of their herds and leadership in best practices.

The return on investment the FARM Program offers dairy comes from the value dairy wholesalers and retailers find in it, proving the great work dairy farmers are doing while identifying those in need of mild to major corrective action. From January 1, 2020, to July 1, 2023, 72% of the U.S. dairy industry was evaluated under FARM Animal Care Version 4. FARM captures farmers’ excellence within cow Animal Care evaluation questions, which illustrate high standards and continuous improvement. Examples include 96% compliance with body condition standards, 94% compliance with locomotion scores, and 94% and above compliance on focus areas of calf care, non-ambulatory animals, euthanasia, and fitness to transport decisions.

These results give the dairy industry verifiable data to elevate supply chain confidence. That’s also why it’s important for program expectations to remain current and relevant. Over the past two and a half years, the FARM Program has worked closely with more than 85 individual farmers serving on governing committees as well as numerous veterinarians, cooperative and processor staff, and animal scientists to review more than 300 comments submitted during a six-week public comment period to ensure that the Animal Care standards are supported by the latest dairy industry science and offer appropriate and useful best management practices for producers on all types of dairies. The resulting Animal Care Version 5 standards, approved by the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) board of directors in June, make small refinements that aid in the industry’s commitment to continuous improvement.

 

 

Changes captured in FARM Animal Care Version 5, which goes into effect July 1, 2024, include:

Locomotion

Current standard: At least 95% of the lactating herd scores 2 or less on the FARM locomotion scorecard.

Version 5 standard: Maintain the above standard and add that 85% or more of the lactating herd scores 1 or less on the FARM locomotion scorecard.

Pain mitigation for disbudding

Current standard: Pain mitigation for disbudding is provided.

Version 5 standard: Maintain the above standard, but the timeline for correction, if the standard is not met, has been shortened from three years to a maximum of nine months.

Disbudding method

Current standard: *None specified*

Version 5 standard: Calves should be disbudded with caustic paste or cautery.

Colostrum feeding

Current standard: Preweaned calf protocols and practices must demonstrate that preweaned calves are provided sufficient quality and quantity of colostrum or a colostrum replacer within six hours after birth, even if immediately transported off the farm.

Version 5 standard: Maintain the above standard with more clearly defined expectations. Preweaned calf protocols and practices must demonstrate that preweaned calves are provided sufficient quality (such as by visual observation or a colostrometer), and quantity of colostrum or a colostrum replacer (10% of birth weight) or there must be evidence of successful transfer of passive immunity within six hours after birth, even if immediately transported off the farm.

Continuing education

Current standard: There is job-specific continuing education for nonfamily employees with animal care responsibilities in stockmanship/handling, preweaned calf care, nonambulatory animals, euthanasia, and determining animals that are fit for transport.

Version 5 standard: Maintain the above standard, but the timeline for correction if the standard is not met has been shortened from three years to a maximum of nine months.

Euthanasia

Current standard: Euthanasia protocols and practices identify a primary and secondary individual for euthanasia implementation.

New standard in Version 5: Euthanasia protocols and practices demonstrate the method of confirmation of death.

For more details about the National Dairy FARM Program or the upcoming Animal Care Version 5 standards, visit nationaldairyfarm.com.

This column originally appeared in Hoard’s Dairyman Intel on August 21, 2023.

NMPF’s Cain on USDA’s FMMO Hearing

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

 

USDA’s Federal Milk Marketing Order modernization hearing begins Wednesday and dairy farmers are eager to be part of the process. National Milk Producers Federation Director of Economic Research and Analysis, Stephen Cain, says there is a lot of ground to cover. “We’ve developed a big package that we think is going to help the U.S. dairy farmer,” Cain told the National Association of Farm Broadcasters.

NMPF’s Bjerga on Why Milk’s Widening Its Lead Over Plant-Based Beverages

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

NMPF Senior Vice President of Communications discusses the shifting consumer preference toward milk over plant-based beverages, plus NMPF’s latest efforts toward labeling integrity, on RFD-TV. Consumer data shows consumption of plant-based drinks falling this year, while milk sales are remaining more stable. Meanwhile, NMPF has submitted comments to FDA urging it to enforce its Standard of Identity that clearly state that milk is an animal product.

 

The SAVE Act Stands Up for American Dairy

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

Tony Rice Headshot

By Tony Rice, Trade Policy Manager, NMPF

Parmesan. Feta. These are among the common cheese names that have been around for generations — and until the past 20 years, were uncontested in their use by U.S. dairy producers selling high-quality, commonly understood varieties in America and the world.

But an aggressive European Union (EU) campaign to use free trade agreement negotiations to confiscate common names through the misuse of geographical indication (GI) rules has seen American producers of cheeses like “parmesan” and “feta” forced in the past decade to withdraw from certain markets and have their products taken from store shelves.

A solution to this problem is making its way through Congress.

The bipartisan Safeguarding American Value-Added Exports (SAVE) Act was introduced in May. The legislation would spur greater action from U.S. administrations to prioritize the protection of common names. The SAVE Act would direct the secretary of agriculture to determine a list of common names frequently subject to GI restrictions around the world and deem restrictions on them by our trading partners an unfair trade practice. Currently, no such list exists, which gives the European Union and other foreign governments a free hand in claiming common names as GIs, despite them long being a part of the public domain.

The bill also directs the U.S. government to proactively negotiate the defense of generic name rights with foreign trade partners through all available avenues. It’s co-sponsored in the Senate by Senators John Thune (R-SD), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Roger Marshall (R-KS), and Tina Smith (D-MN). In the House, sponsors include Representatives Dusty Johnson (R-SD), Jim Costa (D-CA), Michelle Fischbach (R-MN), and Jimmy Panetta (D-CA). The congressional leads are likely to try to incorporate the SAVE Act into the upcoming farm bill text.

This effort wouldn’t be taking place without the hard work and advocacy of the dairy community. The Consortium for Common Food Names, in partnership with National Milk Producers Federation and U.S. Dairy Export Council, has been at the forefront of opposing bad-faith GI recognitions that restrict generic terms, including winning a landmark court case in March that preserves free use of “gruyere” in the United States. As important as the defense strategy has been, growing aggressiveness by the EU on GIs and persistent lack of action by previous U.S. administrations has made the Capitol Hill effort necessary.

The benefits of tackling illegitimate GIs would extend up and down the dairy supply chain. Farmers’ and manufacturers’ international markets access would be preserved, consumers would have more choices at the grocery store, and retailers would benefit from the competition of more options and greater sales. Without adequate protection for generic terms, lost export opportunities due to GI misuse and rebranding to alter the name of a product translate to lower demand for fluid milk to make those products.

The SAVE Act is not a silver bullet. The EU will continue to push for illegitimate GIs in markets around the world. But after years of losing ground as American dairy farmers and producers had their rights violated and market opportunities lost, Congress has demonstrated that they are ready to take on this fight. NMPF has a call to action here for dairy advocates who wish to contact their lawmakers to support this important legislation. America’s dairy industry deserves nothing less than a fair playing field to compete in, and the SAVE Act is a key step to securing international market access for U.S. dairy farmers for generations to come.

This column originally appeared in Hoard’s Dairyman Intel on Aug. 3, 2023.

Lab-based ‘milk’ Labeling Fight Is Here

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

By Clay Detlefsen, Chief Counsel, NMPF

One would think that four decades’ worth of lessons would lead to some truths being learned. But as laboratory-based dairy imitators enter the marketplace, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) seems poised to repeat the same mistakes it has made with plant-based beverages, in which their labels mislead consumers into confusing one thing with something very different.

At issue is a product called “Bored Cow,” which markets itself as “milk.” While the product does include a whey protein that’s the product of fermentation in a laboratory setting, other elements on its long list of exotic ingredients show what should be obvious to every consumer: This isn’t milk as nature has ever known it.

NMPF has been fighting with FDA over its lack of enforcement of dairy standards of identity for decades. What Bored Cow is doing is taking one whey protein that’s synthetically made by precision fermentation, blending that with a myriad of other food ingredients that are quite disgusting-sounding in many cases, and calling the product “dairy milk.”

That’s the wrong description for what they’re selling.

Milk has 13 essential nutrients. It contains 400 different fatty acids. It has got two categories of proteins, casein and whey, numerous micronutrients, and it’s an incredibly complex matrix that delivers an enormous nutritional package for consumers. You cannot replicate that in a laboratory. Milk is natural and it’s good for you. And you can’t duplicate what comes from a cow in a stainless steel vat.

But so far, FDA is allowing this violation of its standards of identity to persist, though finally after decades of inaction, FDA has gotten the message that consumers are confused and misled about the nutritional inferiority of most if not all plant-based milk alternatives. We are still hopeful FDA will step up and enforce its rules. Earlier this year, FDA proposed a voluntary labeling guidance in which they ask marketers of plant-based milk alternatives to voluntarily disclose their products’ nutritional offerings and, in most cases, those products’ nutritional inferiorities.

While NMPF appreciates the more explicit side-by-side comparison, the overall FDA guidance is flawed and we want it withdrawn. When it comes to Bored Cow and its one synthesized dairy protein, we are concerned that this, too, is a nutritionally inferior imitator that will mislead consumers and deliver a mediocre product that could harm human health.

One caveat that lab-based companies are using to distinguish themselves from plant-based imitators is that their products include one component of dairy milk. While that’s the case, it doesn’t change how very different in overall composition these products actually are — the same fundamental challenge that is also at the root of concerns over plant-based labeling. In both cases, processors are largely ignoring existing rules and regulations and doing whatever they want — not in the consumer’s interest but in their own. It’s sloppy, lazy marketing and it needs to stop.

As with plant-based foods, FDA needs to enforce its rules and regulations and send a clear message to the plant-based folks, and now the synthetic “milk” processors, that the dairy rules are on the books, and they, like everyone else, have to follow them. Otherwise, the integrity of the marketplace — and the FDA’s role as the protector of consumer interests — will continue to erode. That’s not what consumers deserve. And it’s completely preventable — if only, after four decades, FDA finally learns.

This column originally appeared in Hoard’s Dairyman Intel on July 31, 2023.

NMPF’s Galen on Farm Bill Progress

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

NMPF Senior Vice President Chris Galen discusses the state of play in the upcoming farm bill on Dairy Radio Now.  Current spending debates are slowing progress on the five-year reauthorization of USDA programs, which include nutrition assistance and commodity payments. The current law expires Sept. 30 — because many commodity programs, including dairy, run on a calendar-year basis, any threat of near-term disruption is limited, Galen said.

NMPF’s Detlefsen on the Scourge of Lab-Based Milk Imposters

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

 

NMPF Chief Counsel Clay Detlefsen discusses the even more urgent need for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to enforce beverage standards of identity as lab-based milk imposters try to use dairy terms in the marketplace. “Milk has got 13 essential nutrients. It’s got 400 different fatty acids. It’s got two categories of proteins, casein and whey, numerous micronutrients,” he said. “You cannot replicate that in a laboratory or elsewhere. I mean milk is milk. It’s natural, and it’s good for you. And you can’t duplicate that in the lab.” Detlefsen spoke in an interview with the National Association of Farm Broadcasters.

Whole Milk Law Can Improve Child Nutrition

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

By Claudia Larson, Senior Director of Government Relations, NMPF

A bipartisan measure to expand the healthy milk varieties schools can choose to serve has a chance to pass Congress.

The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act, which would return whole and 2% milk to school lunch menus, has been introduced in the past. But with a growing tide of science to back up its benefits, this year the legislation has advanced farther than ever before, with a possible House floor vote as early as this month. House Agriculture Committee Chair GT Thompson, R-PA, Representative Kim Schrier, D-WA, and Senators Roger Marshall, R-KS, and Peter Welch, D-VA, are leading the effort.

Allowing schools to serve 2% and whole milk is a commonsense solution to a national child nutrition problem. No other food delivers the same rich and unique nutrition package as milk, which provides 13 essential nutrients, including three of the four public health concerns. Milk plays an especially significant role in providing the nutrition critical for childhood health and development. Milk is the number one source of protein for kids 2 to 11, serves as the top source of calcium, potassium, phosphorus, and vitamin D for children ages 2 to 18, and provides seven of the 14 nutrients the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends for optimal brain development.

But the benefits continue throughout a child’s education. Most kids and adolescents do not meet daily dairy intake recommendations, according to the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. That’s a problem. When kids don’t drink milk, they don’t consume the nutrients they need to grow and thrive.

The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act provides an answer. We know that school meals are an important source of milk for kids and adolescents — they provide 77% of total daily dairy milk consumption for low-income children ages 5 to 18. We also know that 2% and whole milk are the most popular milk varieties sold in stores, and we know that kids are more likely to drink milk when we provide choices they prefer. The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act expands the milk options available for schools to serve in the school meal nutrition programs to also include the most popular milk varieties, 2% and whole milk. This legislation would not require schools to serve 2% and whole milk, but it gives them the choice. And many would undoubtedly take it since kids will prefer the same milk they drink at home.

A growing body of science shows that dairy foods at all fat levels have a neutral or positive effect on health outcomes, ranging from heart disease to obesity and diabetes. More specific to children’s health, several recent studies (including systematic reviews and meta-analyses) found that high milkfat consumption was associated with lower childhood obesity, concluding that recommending lower-fat milk versions might not lower the risk of childhood obesity.

The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act is picking up momentum in both congressional chambers. NMPF has been working to build bipartisan support for the measure, including launching an advocacy campaign to connect individuals with their elected officials to voice their opinion. If you’d like your voice to be heard, our call-to-action found at https://www.nmpf.org/take-action/ offers a way to let your representative in Congress know this bill needs to become law.

Given the broad and growing support for the legislation, we are hopeful it will continue to advance, so we can see real progress toward improving children’s nutritional intake by increasing the healthy milk options available to schools.

This column originally appeared in Hoard’s Dairyman Intel on July 10, 2023.

IDF World Dairy Summit Comes at a Great Time

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

 

The International Dairy Federation’s World Dairy Summit will be in the United States this year. Shawna Morris, senior vice president of trade policy for the National Milk Producers Federation and the U.S. Dairy Export Council, says the summit is coming to the U.S. at a good time. “We had a record year in exports last year, we’re very well-poised to continue to grow in the years to come, and we’re leading on so many of the sustainability fronts that are such an increasing focus for international markets,” she said.

Price and Margin Outlook Challenge Farmers

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

By Peter Vitaliano, Chief Economist, NMPF

The price and margin outlook continues to challenge the nation’s dairy farmers, with little sign of immediate relief.

CME futures markets, which I use to project prices, indicate a 2023 calendar year U.S. average All-Milk price within a penny or two of $20.45 per hundredweight (cwt.); combined with an annual average Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) feed cost of $14.20 per cwt., prices and costs at these levels would result in an annual average DMC margin of $6.25.

The USDA’s DMC Decision Tool has a different take on the CME futures, but it too shows roughly the same three average numbers for this year. Meanwhile, USDA’s World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report from June 8 was even more dour, with a $19.95 per cwt. milk price forecast for this year.

The worst of the trough

And those are just the averages — the worst of the trough may be happening right now. Both the CME futures markets and the USDA tool indicate DMC margins well below $5 per cwt. for the three months during the May to August period, which for the first time would trigger Tier 2 payments. Tier 2 coverage at that level costs only a half cent a hundredweight, the same as equivalent Tier 1 coverage. Neither forecast expects the margin to top $9.50 per cwt. before the year is out.

Milk production isn’t usually cited as the root cause of this gloom – but it deserves a closer look. Production growth has been experiencing an unusually short and mild expansion cycle following its extended period last year below year-earlier levels. Production growth maxed out this year at 1.4% in January and was headed down since, hitting just 0.4% over a year ago in April, but annual growth ticked back up to 0.6% in May and has averaged 0.8% for the first five months of 2023.

But assessing the role of milk production with respect to milk prices can’t be done only with reference to historic patterns but rather with respect to current available demand. USDA reports of plentiful supplies for manufacturing, milk selling well below class prices, and busy production schedules suggests that milk production is definitely part of the problem. And production itself needs to be understood, because milk solids production is a more reliable indicator of the aggregate supply of dairy products available in the markets. And that’s up by 1.1% during the first third of the year.

A top-level look at the supply-demand situation for key products and total milk use during the first third of 2023 provides further insights. American cheese production has been an important outlet for recent additional milk production, which isn’t surprising given the recent expansion of U.S. cheese production capacity. Production has grown by 2.6% during the first four months of this year while total commercial use, domestic consumption, and exports are up by 1.6%. Even with these increases, stocks are still below last year’s peak levels.

Total commercial use of other than American-type cheese is up by just 0.8%, as food service use is weak following more than a year of retail price inflation that has forced consumers to tighten up on spending. But production of this type of cheese is down by half a percent. Total fluid milk sales are 2.7% lower than last year, which is in line with long-term trends that were broken in recent years only during the first pandemic year when fluid sales experienced modest growth. Butter consumption suffered last year from its extreme price inflation but has showed improved consumption in recent months. Total exports are on par with last year’s record levels so far in 2023 but have recently slowed in pace. During March and April last year, exports sent 18.4% of domestic milk solids production overseas. This year, this was just 17%.

The current weak price and margin situation isn’t attributable to one single factor; rather, it’s an accumulation of many small weaknesses in many areas, with some further deterioration in just the last couple of months. The futures markets’ projected improvement during the second half of the year will need to be driven by consumers returning to bolder spending behavior as inflation continues to ebb, and for the current low prices to perform their proverbial supply-side function of curing themselves.

This column originally appeared in Hoard’s Dairyman Intel on June 26, 2023.