ND Department of Agriculture
Testimony

December 9, 1998

Gloria Blue, Executive Secretary
Trade Policy Staff Committee
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
Room 501
600 17^th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20508

Dear Ms. Blue:

The North Dakota Department of Agriculture (NDDA) respectfully submits the following comments on sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) barriers to trade as requested by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) in the Federal Register Vol. 63, No. 216, November 9, 1998.

In the comments, we specifically address the following SPS barriers, which are of concern in North Dakota:

1. Brucellosis Test requirements on cattle exported to Canada.
2. Tuberculosis (TB) Test requirements on cattle exported to Canada.
3. Anaplasmosis Test requirements on cattle exported to Canada.
4. Bluetongue Test requirements on cattle exported to Canada.
5. Pest risk analysis documents.
6. Small Grains (wheat, barley, oats) grain, seed, and screenings to Canada.
7. Mexican fumigation requirements.
8. Dwarf bunt (TCK) and China.
9. Pesticide harmonization between the United States and Canada.

Members of our staff carefully reviewed the questions outlined in the questionnaire developed by USTR. We are limiting the comments on SPS barriers to the issues as they relate to the work of the North Dakota Department of Agriculture – in many instances describing the SPS barrier.

1. Brucellosis Test requirements on cattle exported to Canada.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

Canada requires a negative brucellosis test on all test eligible cattle entering Canada from the United States. The Brucellosis Eradication Program in the United States is nearly complete and some states have maintained their "Free" status for over fifteen years (North Dakota has been Brucellosis Free since 1982).

The USDA recognized Canada’s brucellosis status in 1997 and does not require a brucellosis test on Canadian test eligible cattle coming into the United States. Canada should recognized the credibility of the United States Brucellosis Eradication Program and discontinue their brucellosis test requirement from states that have maintained their "Free" status for five years or more.

NDDA staff estimates that brucelosis testing has a direct producer cost of $15/head.

2. Tuberculosis (TB) Test requirements on cattle exported to Canada.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

Canada requires a negative tuberculosis test on cattle entering Canada from the United States. In the United States, the Tuberculosis Eradication Program is nearly complete, with 45 Accredited Free states. Many states have maintained their "Free" status for many years (North Dakota has been "Free" since 1976).

The province of Manitoba has had two cases of tuberculosis in the last two years and the United States will accept cattle from Manitoba without a tuberculosis test. In fact, USDA has discontinued the TB test requirement on Canadian cattle entering the United States. Currently, the USDA requires a statement on the certificate of veterinary inspection that the animal originated in a tuberculosis-free province.

Canada should recognize the credibility of the Tuberculosis Eradication Program in the United States and discontinue their TB test requirement on cattle from states that have maintained their TB Free status for at least five years.

NDDA staff estimates that TB testing has a direct producer cost of $15/head.

3. Anaplasmosis Test requirements on cattle exported to Canada.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

Canada requires a negative anaplasmosis test on all cattle entering Canada from the United States.

Anaplasmosis is a reportable disease in North Dakota. The North Dakota Veterinary Diagnostic Lab conducts routine testing for anaplasmosis. In the last four years, the Diagnostic Lab has performed approximately 1650 tests for anaplasmosis in North Dakota cattle and none have been positive. A clinical case of anaplasmosis has not been reported in North Dakota since 1988.

Canada should recognize that anaplasmosis is not a disease that occurs with any frequency in some of the northern-tier states of the United States.

NDDA staff estimates that anaplasmosis testing has a direct producer cost of $15/head.

4. Bluetongue Test requirements on cattle exported to North Dakota.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

Canada requires a negative bluetongue test within thirty days on cattle entering Canada from low incidence states in the United States.

Although bluetongue is an OIE List A disease, it has little economic impact on the northern-tier states. Bluetonge is a reportable disease in North Dakota. No clinical cases of bluetongue have been reported in recent memory.

The insect vector that spreads the disease is not normally found in North Dakota except in the very late summer. Therefore, the possibility of spread of the disease is unlikely at best. An animal is only viremic for approximately 90 days after infection. Consequently, a positive test does not indicate that an animal is infectious.

Canada should discontinue their bluetongue test requirement.

NDDA staff estimates that bluetongue testing has a direct cost of $15/head.

5. Pest risk analysis documents.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

States do not generally have access to pest risk analysis documents prepared by foreign governments to substantiate their SPS measures.

(6) Small Grains (wheat, barley, oats) grain, seed, and screenings to Canada.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

Canada requires a phytosanitary sanitary certificate for grain shipments of wheat, barley, and oats. For barley they require freedom from flag smut and dwarf bunt and for wheat they also require laboratory testing for Karnal bunt.

Canada requires laboratory testing of seed for planting of these grains for Karnal bunt.

Canada prohibits the entry of screenings of these grains.

SECTION 2 MARKET IMPACT

The SPS measures create additional costs and logistical nuisances for shippers of these grains and seeds into Canada and for in-transit shipments of grain through Canada. The requirements for phytosanitary certification results in extra costs to shippers in the range of $15 per carload plus the risk of demurrage associated with delays. According to the rail carrier, there has been a substantial decrease in rail traffic for in-transit shipments since the requirement of a phytosanitary certificate has been enforced.

Prohibition of screenings has resulted in loss of business for several marketers. One shipper reported a loss of $50,000 income annually.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is responsible for developing, implementing and enforcing these measures. Karnal bunt testing requirements began in 1996. Phytosanitary certificates have been required for many years although requirements for in-transit shipments were apparently not enforced until 1996.

SECTION 3 HEALTH OBJECTIVE OF MEASURE

It is presumed that the SPS measures are designed to prevent introduction of Karnal bunt, flag smut, and dwarf into uninfected areas of Canada.

Karnal bunt occurs in small, regulated areas in Arizona and a small, regulated area of Texas. It does not occur in North Dakota or other areas of the United States as demonstrated by national survey data.

Flag smut and dwarf bunt are not known to occur in North Dakota as demonstrated by surveys. They do occur in other areas of the United States.

Karnal bunt has not been reported in Canada. No Canadian survey data has been made available.

Flag smut has not been reported in Canada. No Canadian survey data has been made available.

Dwarf bunt occurs in areas in Ontario and British Colombia.

SECTION 4 SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR MEASURE

We are not aware of any risk assessment by the Canadians. USDA APHIS is believed to have commissioned an assessment but this assessment has not been distributed.

SECTION 5 CONSISENTENCY OF THE MEASURE

Canada apparently has internal mechanisms to prevent spread within Canada but to our knowledge there has been no analysis of these measures.

SECTION 6 TRANSPARENCY AND OTHER PROCEDURAL ISSUES

To our knowledge, this issue has not been referred to an SPS committee.

SECTION 7 PREVIOUS OR ONGOING CONSULTATION

The USTR began negotiations with Canadian counterparts in October of 1998 although the scope of these discussions may not include the entire range of SPS issues related to cereal grains and seeds.

Several northern states informally discussed Canadian SPS measures for in-transit shipments with Canadian officials in August of 1998 leading to a proposal that eventually became part of the USTR/Canadian negotiations.

SECTION 8 COMPARABLE MEASURES

The U.S. has a domestic Karnal bunt quarantine but the restrictions only apply to the regulated area.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

Mexico requires the fumigation of numerous grain products from the United States. Fumigation may occur in the United States or may be performed in Mexico upon arrival.

SECTION 2 MARKET IMPACT

It is unknown whether this requirement decreases U.S. exports to Mexico.

SECTION 3 HEALTH OBJECTIVE OF MEASURE

Unknown. Standard phytosanitary inspections have never found stored product pests in commodities such as dry edible beans, yet phytosanitary certificates are required and fumigation, either in the U.S. or Mexico is also required.

SECTION 4 SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR MEASURE

Unknown

SECTION 5 CONSISENTENCY OF THE MEASURE

Unknown

SECTION 6 TRANSPARENCY AND OTHER PROCEDURAL ISSUES

Unknown

SECTION 7 PREVIOUS OR ONGOING CONSULTATION

Unknown

SECTION 8 COMPARABLE MEASURES

SECTION 9 OTHER INFORMATION

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

China uses SPS measures to restrict entry of U.S. wheat because of dwarf bunt (TCK). The USDA has negotiated with China on this issue for many years and many of the details are unknown to state regulatory officials. Others are in a much better position to describe this SPS barrier.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF BARRIER

Several producers met with the North Dakota Department of Agriculture to discuss trade irritants with respect to Canadian grain. They indicated that there are several pesticides available for use of wheat in Canada that cannot be used in the United States. They emphasized that many crops grown in the United States are significantly affected by this situation.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is charged with monitoring imported commodities for illegal residues of pesticides. However, monitoring grains from Canada is not a FDA priority and we are not aware of any testing that has been done by FDA on Canadian commodities. In the meantime, our producers see their grain prices at depressingly low levels and see their Canadian counterparts continue to use pesticides, which are legally inaccessible to US producers.

Harmonization of pesticide registrations between the United States and Canada has to occur in order to eliminate trade irritations resulting from producers being able to use a pesticide in one country, while producers in the other country do not have the ability to use the same pesticide.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments relating to SPS barriers. Please contact me if I can provide further information on these issues.

Sincerely,

Roger Johnson

Commissioner of Agriculture

RJ:pe

Back to the Legislative Testimony