WASHINGTON, D.C. – In a letter sent today to President Donald Trump, U.S. food industry groups representing farmers and food manufacturers across several sectors urged the United States to immediately impress upon Japan, Mexico and the Mercosur nations that the lists of geographical indications (GIs) they are considering for approval with the European Union (EU) – or will soon be considering – must not include common food and beverage terms such as “parmesan,” “vintage” and “bologna.”

In its trade discussions with Japan and Mexico, the EU is currently pushing approval for lists of geographical indications (GIs) that include many common food names in an effort to monopolize those terms and block market access for various foods, wines and other beverages, the groups note. Japan and Mexico are closing their comment periods on the lists within the next few days, after which they are expected to finalize their negotiations with the EU. The Mercosur nations are Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay.

“On behalf of American farmers and food manufacturers across this country, we ask for your direct attention to an issue that could have a significant negative impact on U.S. market access with two major trade partners: Mexico and Japan,” the letter states. “If the U.S. government firmly expresses its concerns now to Mexico and Japan regarding the importance of safeguarding common names and terms for all to use, both nations might be more inclined to take the right and just steps in these discussions. For the same reason, we strongly encourage firm and clear communications on these points with the Mercosur bloc of countries, the U.S. trading partner region most likely to next initiate a similar process to the ones currently underway in Mexico and Japan in light of ongoing EU-Mercosur FTA negotiations.”

The letter is signed by the American Farm Bureau Federation, Brewers Association, Consortium for Common Food Names, Grocery Manufacturers Association, International Dairy Foods Association, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Milk Producers Federation, North American Meat Institute, United Fresh, U.S. Dairy Export Council, USA Rice and Wine Institute.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has recognized the severity of EU abuses of GI policies, noting in this year’s intellectual property report that “the EU GI agenda remains highly concerning, especially because of the significant extent to which it undermines the scope of trademarks and other IP [intellectual property] rights held by U.S. producers, and imposes barriers on market access for American-made goods and services that rely on the use of common names, such as parmesan or feta.”

Moreover, it is an agenda that continues to expand and is likely to threaten even more products, such as plant varieties, moving forward, as is evidenced by the EU’s market-share grab of deeming long-standing and widely used grape varieties such as “prosecco” to now be GIs reserved exclusively for Italian use.

“Many U.S. companies – and the farmers who provide them with raw goods – will be harmed if Japan and Mexico fully accept the EU lists as is without pushing back and objecting to the inclusion of common terms,” the industry letter states. “We hope the United States will make its voice heard with Mexico and Japan, and in turn with Mercosur countries, clearly stating that we expect them to respect current trade agreements, including our market access rights under those agreements, and that it is in their best interests to safeguard common terms for all producers.”

Jaime Castaneda, executive director of the Consortium for Common Food Names, which has been coordinating U.S. industry filings on the GI lists in Japan and Mexico, stated: “The EU’s predatory strategy of using its FTA talks to hamper market access for its competitors, including many small- and medium-sized U.S. companies, must not be tolerated. As Japan and Mexico prepare to make their final decisions on lengthy EU GI lists that would impair the use of common names, we call on the administration to send a firm message at the highest levels that we expect our trading partners to abide by their existing trade commitments to us and preserve market competition in these common product categories.”

#  #  #

ARLINGTON, VA – A coalition of dozens of dairy farm organizations, led by the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), is supporting new congressional legislation that would help address one of the most challenging issues affecting America’s milk producers: obtaining a dependable, legal workforce.

A founding member of the Agriculture Workforce Coalition, NMPF was joined by 57 dairy cooperatives and state dairy farmer associations today on a letter backing Rep. Robert Goodlatte’s (R-VA) new Agriculture Guestworker (AG) Act. Goodlatte’s House Judiciary Committee is expected to formally mark up the legislation on Wednesday, Oct. 4.  The AG Act would establish an entirely new visa program, dubbed the H-2C visa, which would allow farm employers to bring in foreign workers on a year-round basis. It would replace the existing H-2A temporary visa program, which dairy farmers cannot use because their labor needs are year-round, not seasonal.

NMPF President and CEO Jim Mulhern said Goodlatte’s bill “is a significant step forward in providing positive, workable solutions for dairy farm employers. It recognizes that we need to move past the status quo and pursue a new approach to matching the supply and demand for workers in U.S. agriculture.”

Mulhern said Goodlatte’s AG Act “reflects many of the key principles that our organization and its members have offered to the Judiciary Committee as the measure was developed.” In addition to establishing the new type of visa for future workers, it would allow current undocumented farm workers to apply for H-2C visas so that they can participate legally in the agricultural workforce. The new H-2C program will be administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, not the Department of Labor.

George Rohrer, a dairy farmer in Dayton, Va., and a member of the NMPF Board of Directors, said that farmers “have waited for years for lawmakers to fix our broken immigration system. The AG Act is evidence that Congressman Goodlatte has listened to many of our concerns, and is willing to try a new approach to the problem. As a farmer, it’s difficult to plan for tomorrow when you don’t know whether you’ll be able to hire qualified people today.”

In addition to legislation addressing the needs of farm employers, the House Judiciary Committee will also consider a measure requiring the use of the E-Verify database program. NMPF has been clear that mandatory E-Verify participation should only be required if farmers first have protections in place for current workers and access to a future labor pool.

###

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well-being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies. For more on NMPF’s activities, visit our website at www.nmpf.org.

If history teaches us anything, it’s that there are few new ideas under the sun since the days of P.T. Barnum when it comes to the strategies employed to grab consumers.  Even in the dairy marketplace, despite all the great qualities of our products, we too often see troubling and misguided appeals to people’s fears and lack of knowledge.

Because this type of marketing is nothing new, when we see its use today we know full well how this plays out:  Individual brands scrapping for sales growth try to scare shoppers into buying their products, which leads consumers to question the integrity of the foods they are eating, creating a receding tide that diminishes the entire category.  These appeals to fear are cheap, corrosive, and not constructive.

This reality is why NMPF has launched a new consumer campaign, called Peel Back the Label, that encourages shoppers to think twice about some of the dubious claims made on product labels.  While overall we are looking at different food products deploying a variety of deceptive claims, our main concern is the many misleading assertions made today about agricultural biotechnology.

Research we conducted at the start of the campaign was sobering. Many people either don’t know or care about GMOs, but there are a significant number of purchasers expressing concerns – despite their admission that they have no idea what GMOs are, how they are used, or that the science is clear that GMOs are completely safe for human and animal consumption.

Our consumer testing also found a small but vocal minority of consumers who understand the science behind food biotechnology, and are troubled by the amount of deceptive, derogatory rhetoric being used to scare people away from some brands, to the favor of others.  And it is this audience we seek to grow: people who will not simply succumb to the siren song of huckster advertising, but who will join our effort to call out disingenuous labeling claims.

What are some examples we are highlighting?  They include products labeled “non-GMO,” even though there are no genetically modified versions of such foods – like oranges, tomatoes or salt.  They include foods touting improved sustainability through sourcing non-GMO animal feed, when the evidence is clear that the opposite is true. They also include brands that suggest GMOs are something to worry about, despite the massive amount of research conducted around the world over the past 20 years that has time and again reaffirmed the safety of biotech crops.

I’ve been asked why National Milk is doing this now, or cares enough about the issue to invest resources in fighting what is regrettably an all-too-common trend in the food industry.  My answer is that we must learn from history to avoid repeating it.  Marketing to people’s worst instincts is a race to the bottom of product categories, and can damage an entire industry.

The best example of this for dairy is what happened with the use of recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST), or what was quickly dubbed bovine growth hormone. When FDA completed its safety assessment and first approved rbST more than 20 years ago, the agency spelled out how absence claims on dairy labels could be worded, since some brands wanted to make it a point of differentiation in the market.  The clear message sent by claims such as “No artificial growth hormones” or “Our farmers pledge not to use BGH” is that there’s something suspicious, even hazardous, about using rbST to produce milk.  Only the required fine print, appended with an asterisk and usually buried on the label, tells the whole truth: that there is no significant compositional variance in the milk from cows treated with rbST.  It is a distinction without a difference.

But that didn’t stop marketers from touting this absence claim.  The vast majority of fluid milk products today are sold as “rBST-free,” yet it hasn’t helped milk sales.  The implied message that the use of rbST is reason for shoppers to be wary has poisoned the entire well.  It’s clearly one reason why some consumers have forsaken the dairy milk category in favor of plant-based imitators.  It’s easy to envision how absence claims about GM animal feed use will chase away even more consumers and achieve a similar result.

The purpose of Peel Back the Label is to help people understand why the cynical use of fear-mongering to sell food is both deceptive and counterproductive.  Sowing the seeds of distrust doesn’t build consumer confidence, nor does it help anchor a successful long-term brand development program.

It’s unfortunate we’ve reached the point where this campaign is needed. But too much is at stake for America’s dairy farmers when their use of safe technological advancements that increase the sustainability of their farms is threatened by weak marketing claims up the food chain. We want to encourage an alternate focus on dairy’s many appealing qualities that will expand the pie for everyone.

Japan’s agriculture officials must respect current market access between Japan and its trading partners, including the United States, when reviewing a list of geographical indications (GIs) proposed by the European Union (EU), or else risk disrupting one of the world’s largest consumer marketplaces, the U.S. dairy industry urged today.

 

In a letter to the Japanese Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, leaders from the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), the U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC) and the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) said it is imperative that Japan “not overlook the enormous significance of the EU food name list for Japanese consumers and producers, and for your lasting relationships with key international trading partners.”

The European Union is in the final stages of negotiating a free trade agreement with Japan, establishing the rules of commerce for hundreds of food products produced in each region. In doing so, the EU is seeking to monopolize a long list of common names under the guise of geographical indications in trade deals with Japan and other nations, including China and Mexico. This campaign attempts to restrict generic product names such as parmesan, feta and asiago to products made only by EU producers, and runs counter to international trade commitments.

 

The Consortium for Common Food Names and U.S. dairy groups have argued that this strategy is intended to deprive U.S. manufacturers of markets that local industries have developed. The EU’s goal of co-opting these terms would limit sales from non-EU companies to benefit European marketers, thereby stifling healthy competition among food producers all over the world.

 

“This is a critical moment for Japan as your nation prepares to review hundreds of food and beverage terms; the decisions Japan makes will have lasting impact for years to come,” the letter said. “We urge you to make sure that the steps you take do not unnecessarily limit healthy trade and competition within your market.”

 

The letter cited Canada’s decision to acquiesce to EU pressure, which has negatively affected its producers, consumers and trade partners The U.S. dairy leaders insisted that Japan can avoid this fate by helping to finalize a list of GIs that does not “encroach on generic names and terms.” For example, “Parmigiano Reggiano” is an acceptable geographical term, but the common name “parmesan” is already used by non-EU producers and widely used in Japan.

 

“For the good of our trade relationship, it is imperative that Japan’s efficient and transparent GI review process ensures that generic names and terms remain accessible to all,” said NMPF President and CEO Jim Mulhern. “We encourage Japanese government officials to continue on this course, and to respect their own laws and international agreements with the United States.”

 

“Wholesale acceptance of the EU’s proposed GI list would not only unfairly limit the ability of U.S. and other nations’ cheesemakers to do business in Japan, it would negatively impact Japanese consumers and cheese producers,” said USDEC President and CEO Tom Vilsack. “We urge Japan to consider the confusion, marketplace disruptions and inflated prices that would ensue by restricting common cheese names as the EU desires.”

 

IDFA President and CEO Michael Dykes, D.V.M., said, “American dairy companies shipped $117 million of cheese products last year to Japan, which is the third-largest market for U.S. cheeses. We believe that trade agreements should break down barriers, not erect new ones, and we urge Japanese government officials to reject the EU’s attempts to block common food names and fair market access for U.S. companies.”

 

The Consortium for Common Food Names (CCFN), of which all three dairy groups are a part, has been instrumental in opposing any attempt to monopolize common food names that have become part of the public domain. It has been coordinating U.S. industry submissions to the Japanese government to defend common food terms that appear on the EU’s GI list. CCFN seeks an appropriate model for protecting both legitimate geographical indications and generic food names.

 

#  #  #

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, Va., develops and carries out policies that advance the well-being of U.S. dairy producers and the cooperatives they collectively own. The members of NMPF’s cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S, milk supply, making NMPF the voice of dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies. For more on NMPF’s activities, visit www.nmpf.org.

 

The U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC) is a non-profit, independent membership organization that represents the global trade interests of U.S. dairy producers, proprietary processors and cooperatives, ingredient suppliers and export traders. Its mission is to enhance U.S. global competitiveness and assist the U.S. industry to increase its global dairy ingredient sales and exports of U.S. dairy products. USDEC accomplishes this through programs in market development that build global demand for U.S. dairy products, resolve market access barriers and advance industry trade policy goals. USDEC is supported by staff across the United States and overseas in Mexico, South America, Asia, Middle East and Europe.

 

The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA), Washington, D.C., represents the nation’s dairy manufacturing and marketing industries and their suppliers with a membership of nearly 525 companies within a $125-billion a year industry. IDFA is composed of three constituent organizations: the Milk Industry Foundation (MIF), the National Cheese Institute (NCI) and the International Ice Cream Association (IICA). IDFA’s nearly 200 dairy processing members operate more than 600 manufacturing facilities and range from large multi-national organizations to single-plant companies. Together they represent more than 85 percent of the milk, cultured products, cheese, ice cream and frozen desserts produced and marketed in the United States. Visit IDFA at www.idfa.org.

 

 

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) today urged federal and state food regulators to take enforcement action against imitation dairy product “Blue Magic Cashew Milk” for continuing to ignore federal standards of identity for dairy products.

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) is calling on federal and state food regulators to take enforcement action against imitation dairy product “Blue Magic Cashew Milk” for continuing to ignore federal standards of identity for dairy products.

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) is calling on federal and state food regulators to take enforcement action against imitation dairy product “Blue Magic Cashew Milk” for continuing to ignore federal standards of identity for dairy products.

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) today urged federal and state food regulators to take enforcement action against imitation dairy product “Blue Magic Cashew Milk” for continuing to ignore federal standards of identity for dairy products.

In a letter sent today to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the California Department of Food and Agriculture, NMPF said that use of the standardized dairy term “milk” on a plant-based imitation made mostly from nuts and water is a violation of government standards defining milk as the product of a dairy animal.

“This ‘Blue Magic’ product completely ignores clearly-defined regulations specifying what milk is, and is deceiving to consumers seeking appropriate levels of milk’s actual nutrition for their families,” said Jim Mulhern, President and CEO of NMPF.  “This beverage is not a nutritional substitute for real milk, regardless of its blatant attempt to co-opt dairy terms.”

NMPF first evaluated Blue Magic Milk, manufactured by California company Urban Remedy, in June 2017 as part of a marketplace survey examining the nutrients in imitation dairy foods. NMPF found that of the 244 beverages it reviewed, Blue Magic’s two-cup serving contained the highest sodium content, grams of fat and calories. Even a half-serving (1 cup) featured the highest calories and fat of all products surveyed, and was second highest in its sodium level.

By contrast, real low-fat milk, per cup, has more than four times the amount of Vitamin A, 3 grams more protein and 285 mg more calcium as Urban Remedy’s imitation version. Additionally, a serving of Blue Magic has 78 more calories, 10 grams more fat and 130 milligrams more sodium. An entire 16-ounce bottle of Blue Magic contains 470 mg of sodium — the equivalent of a fast-food hamburger.

Today’s action is the second time this year that NMPF has raised objections to federal and state authorities regarding Blue Magic Milk. Following its initial review of imitation products, National Milk raised its concerns with the FDA and the California Department of Food and Agriculture in June.  Shortly thereafter, Urban Remedy made minor alterations to the beverage’s label, renaming the product as “Blue Magic Cashew Milk.” But according to NMPF, the beverage is still using the standardized term “milk,” without offering the same nutrition as real milk, triggering today’s follow-up letter to the agencies pointing out the continued violations in the labeling of the product.

This action against Blue Magic Cashew Milk is part of a new campaign by NMPF that will call attention to other imitation products that inappropriately use dairy terminology on their labels.  Calling the effort “Dairy Imitators: Exposed,” it will draw attention to these products’ lack of compliance with federal standards, and their nutritional deficiencies when compared to real milk, yogurt, cheese and other dairy foods.

“The effort will further demonstrate to consumers, FDA and manufacturers of these powder, water and vitamin mixtures that simply calling something ‘milk’ doesn’t give it the natural richness of the real thing with its nine essential nutrients,” Mulhern said. “Despite their desire to steal the halo of real dairy foods, these companies must be forced to end their deceptive labeling tactics.”

###

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well-being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies. For more on NMPF’s activities, visit our website at www.nmpf.org.

ARLINGTON, VA – The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) told the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today that the dairy industry supports a two-step process to roll back the existing Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) regulation and generate a new policy that provides farmers greater certainty in the future.

NMPF has supported efforts by the Trump Administration since January to restart the regulatory process behind the controversial 2015 Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule. NMPF provided comments today to EPA in support of rescinding the 2015 rule so the agency can initiate a new regulatory process defining and regulating groundwater sources. The agency has been soliciting comments on the WOTUS revision process during the past two months.

“A fresh start and a more reasonable approach that complies with past Supreme Court rulings will be in the best interests of the environment and dairy farmers,” said Jamie Jonker, NMPF vice president for sustainability and scientific affairs, in comments to EPA.  “We are committed to working with the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to find effective ways to protect America’s water supplies.”

Rescinding the 2015 policy – which is currently not being enforced because an appeals court suspended it last year, pending the outcome of several lawsuits – is the first step in a two-part process. In the forthcoming second step, EPA will need to propose a new rule that conforms to the various Supreme Court cases impacting definitions for what is considered a water of the U.S.  In NMPF’s letter to EPA, Jonker said that EPA and the Army Corps will need to correct the ambiguity resulting from the 2015 rule’s lack of clarity on key terms and definitions, such as “adjacent,” “floodplain” and “significant nexus.”

“The agencies’ new notice-and-comment rulemaking needs to provide dairy farmers with certainty as to what constitutes navigable waters of the United States by clearly complying with the Supreme Court decisions,” NMPF wrote. “We look forward to working with you in the future for the proper clarity that dairy farmers need on WOTUS to continue to meet our shared commitment to clean water,” NMPF wrote.

###

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well-being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies. For more on NMPF’s activities, visit our website at www.nmpf.org.

In September, the National Dairy FARM Program is joining the National Beef Quality Assurance Program to host a half day of programming at the 2017 annual conference of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners in Omaha, Neb.

The meeting on Sept. 14 features several sessions that will focus on emerging animal care issues within the dairy industry. These include topics like the veterinarian’s role in crisis management and the release of the National Beef Quality Audit results. Speakers will include Dr. Nigel Cook of the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine and Dr. Hans Coetzee of Kansas State University College of Veterinary Medicine. More information can be found on the AABP website.

In addition, FARM’s Animal Care Program will host the final 2017 Train-the-Trainer and Evaluator Training course from November 14-15 in Albuquerque, N.M. The two-day course will review FARM Program goals and explain how to successfully complete a FARM Version 3.0 evaluation under the new program guidelines.

All FARM Program trainers wishing to maintain their certification must attend an in-person training course. Additionally, all FARM Program Evaluators must be certified annually on Version 3.0 of the program to conduct evaluations. The registration deadline is Oct. 30. The link to register for the Train-the-Trainer and Evaluator Training course can be found here.

The National Dairy FARM Program and the Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy cohosted three customer forums this summer that shared the dairy industry’s focus on social responsibility with prominent national and international dairy customers. Representatives from grocery stores, chocolate companies and restaurant chains attended forums in Los Angeles, Minneapolis and Washington, D.C.

Throughout each two-day forum, educational sessions provided a deep dive into the FARM Program. Expert speakers shared insights into the rigorous standards of the program, including animal care and environmental and antibiotic stewardship, as well as updates on emerging issues in the social responsibility arena. On the second day of the event, participants had the opportunity to visit a local dairy farm to see the FARM Program in action.

The FARM Program would like to thank Gordon Hay Dairy #6 in Ontario, Calif., Krause Holsteins in Buffalo, Minn., and Cow Comfort Inn Dairy in Union Bridge, Md., for hosting forum attendees, and all of the dairy customers for making these events a success. A final forum is planned for Jacksonville, Fla., from Oct. 17-18, 2017.