The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)  has officially extended the comment period for 90 days on the proposed rule changes on the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) livestock marketing rules. 

 “Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle were very clear about the critical need to extend the comment period to allow stakeholders to thoroughly analyze the potential impacts of the rule,” said National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Vice President of Government Affairs Colin Woodall. “While it’s unfortunate USDA didn’t extend the comment period for a full 120 days as we requested, we’re pleased that stakeholders will have some additional time to further analyze this complex rule and its potential implications on the beef sector, which is the largest segment of the food and fiber industry.

 Woodall said the proposed rule change “has the potential to take the beef industry back 30 years by stifling the innovative efforts of U.S. cattle producers to add value and enhance the quality and safety of their products for consumers in the United States and abroad.”

The National Pork Producers Council also favors the comment period extension, said NPPC President Sam Carney.

He said the proposed rule, as it stands, would be “a disaster for pork producers like me who need options for selling our pigs and for managing risks.”

 According to a review by NPPC, the rule would dictate the terms of contracts, restrict marketing arrangements, require reams of paperwork, create legal uncertainty and limit producers’ ability to negotiate better prices for the animals they sell.

 “That’s a recipe for stifling innovation, driving up costs, forcing simple contract disputes into court and – given those adverse consequences – compelling packers to own their animals rather than to contract with farmers like me to raise them,” Carney said.

 Bob Stallman, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, said his organziation is pleased that the comment period has been extended.

“The rule’s regulatory changes will impact each operation differently,” Stallman said.  ”The impact of this rule on producers will vary depending on the type of animal produced on an operation, the ways the producer markets his or her product, and the location of a producer’s operation relative to slaughter and processing facilities.  Many other portions of the rule go beyond those issues clearly covered in Farm Bureau policy and will require additional analysis.”

 But Roger Johnson, president of the National Farmers Union, said extending the comment period plays into the hands of the nation’s livestock packing industry.

“Extension of this comment period gives leverage for packers to offer lower prices to producers as a fear mechanism, which we have seen in the past with rules such as Country of Origin Labeling,” Johsnon said. “NFU is an organization of producers and opposes the further extension of this comment period.”

 Johnson said the 2008 Farm Bill stated this rule was to be fully completed by June 18, 2010, which is another reason, he said, NFU is displeased with further extension of the comment period.

“This rule is for the protection of the producers and USDA has allowed for a sufficient amount of time to comment,” said Johnson. “Further extending the deadline is proof that USDA is buckling under the pressure of industry. The focus needs to be on the producers. While USDA is taking a step in the right direction with this rule, the process needs to be expedited instead of slowed down.”

According to a coalition of rural and farm interest, including R-CALF USAA,“To delay the comment period is a little more than an effort to delay and ultimately derail the proposed rule itself…(and the proposed rule is an appropriate first step to ensure that competition, not regulation or packer control, is the dominant force that directs the future of the U.S. livestock industries.”

“Unfortunately, GIPSA has never issued the regulations necessary to define these broad prohibitions in order to adequately enforce the protections for livestock and poultry producers, and as a result, the agency has been widely criticized by the Government Accountability Office, USDA’s own Inspector General, and outside stakeholder groups for its lack of enforcement of the PSA,” said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard. “The authors of the 2008 Farm Bill recognized that the PSA has not been properly administered or enforced and instructed GIPSA to use its existing authority to write regulations to define, among other things, the criteria for determining whether the unlawful practice of granting undue preference or advantage has occurred.”