Written in 2003

Perhaps the recent finding of mad cow will be a wake up call to Americans who naïvely believe that the government is protecting the food supply; a supposition that couldn’t be farther from the truth.  It appears that many regulations are not designed for food protection, but instead to save waste generating industries money.  From the recycling of hazardous wastes to make fertilizer to the recycling of animal feces to make animal feed, regulations appear to be written for the convenience of industry.

While the case of “mad cow” in Washington State may have been caused by unintentionally contaminated feed, there is another equally plausible scenario that state and federal agencies are not discussing with the public – the feeding of contaminated poultry feces to cattle.  In 1997 when the FDA banned the feeding of ruminant proteins to cattle — a practice known to cause “mad cow disease” — they did not ban the inclusion of these proteins in feed to other animals.  This allowed ruminant proteins from healthy and 4-D animals (dead, dying, disabled or diseased) to be “recycled” into animal feed and pet foods, rather than being disposed.  Poultry feed is one recipient of these waste proteins.  The problem is that poultry poop has routinely been used as cattle feed, keeping the prohibited cycle of “feeding cattle-to-cattle” intact. (In 1980 the FDA reversed a 1967 prohibition on feeding poultry waste to cattle, leaving the regulation of feeding animal wastes to the individual states.  45 FR 86272-86276).

In August 2002 I attended an American Association of Plant Food Control Officials (AAPFCO) meeting in Kansas City where this topic was discussed in “light of the recent BSE warning.”  Lead by Steve Wong of the California Department of Agriculture, the discussion centered around the large volumes of “potentially contaminated” poultry litter that could no longer be used as cattle feed, nor ever be spread as fertilizer on land that would ever graze cattle.  Since prions cannot be destroyed, this begs the question, where will these “potentially contaminated” poultry litters be disposed?  My guess is as fertilizer for home gardeners.

The bottom line is we have a waste disposal problem in this country.  Whether it’s waste from steel mills and coal fired power plants used in fertilizer and lime, or 4-D proteins and animal feces used in feed and pet food, we are the ultimate recipients of industries’ waste.  The question is what are we going to do about it?

Without pressure from consumers, this will not change.  The safety of our food supply is our responsibility.  Contact your congressman today and tell them that we need one agency overseeing our food safety and that under no circumstance should our food or the environment in which it grows, be used for disposal of industrial wastes.

A Seattle Times investigation found that, across the nation, industrial wastes laden with heavy metals and other dangerous materials are being used in fertilizers and spread over farmland. The process saves dirty industries the high costs of disposing of hazardous wastes.
(July 3 – 4, 1997)

While the Seattle Times claimed the process was legal, only two hazardous wastes had been exempted under federal rule at the time of publication of “Fear in the Fields”.  These wastes were KO61 and K062, i.e., steel mill flue dust and spent pickling liquor from the galvanization of steel.  Because these rules were less stringent than existing state regulations at the time of their adoption, the State of Washington was not required to adopt them and, in fact, had not.  The use of these wastes and others, was illegal in Washington State.

Interestingly at the same time as we are exposing the use of hazardous waste in fertilizer, the FDA had discovered carrots containing high levels of lead grown in Quincy.  This information did not become known until much later.

The State’s response was to legalize the use of hazardous waste in fertilizer by “regulating” it.  As our State Representative Gary Chandler at the time stated, this was done to “avert a people’s initiative.”  The law had nothing to do with protecting the people of the State of Washington, and everything to do with protecting the polluters.

Washington’s fertilizer standards allow the background concentrations of toxic metals to double over 45 years without consideration to the number of products applied.