One of the greatest attacks on our industry has occurred in recent days and it has gone unnoticed by most people. It’s subtle, but the long-term impact can be severely damaging to this industry and the motives are insidious. I am referring to a recent ruling by a single federal judge in Minnesota that limits line speeds in pork harvest facilities. On the surface it may seem harmless, but the outcome of this ruling will cause damage to the industry and sets a dangerous precedent for long-term consequences to the food production system in the United States.

Food availability in this country is a matter of national security. Thankfully, most Americans never have to worry about this because of the efficiency of our industry. But sitting where I did a year ago, when facilities were closing, I assure you we should not take food availability for granted.

I am going to share the truth. First of all, line speeds exist for one reason: They were established by FSIS for inspection only. The speed was related to how many birds or carcasses an inspector could inspect in a given amount of time. In pork it was set at 1,106/hr and for poultry it was set at 140 birds/min under traditional inspection. There are no line speed limits in second processing in poultry or in fab of pork; it’s only on the harvest floor because that is where inspection occurs.

With modernized inspection systems, the number of carcasses inspected could be increased and thus the limits were changed or eliminated. Several establishments opted into HIMP (HACCP-based inspection model program) which allowed them to operate at higher line speeds more than 20 years ago, thus generating of data in 20 poultry plants and five pork plants. Data collected over the years in these facilities provided evidence that the increased line speeds did not cause an increase in pathogens. There is also ample OSHA data proving the process was safe to workers and doesn’t create additional risk to the workers compared to traditional inspection systems.

Special interest groups love to use anecdotal examples to make this appear untrue but they have no data to support their claims.

The final rule on modernized pork inspection was published in 2019. Before this was finalized, I spent endless hours studying the data. I had to be convinced it worked before I supported it and wanted to be sure that it was the best choice for food safety and public health. There has been enough collected by FSIS to write a dozen dissertations on the subject. Modernized inspection focuses on food safety to supplement visual observations of the carcass. It is the right thing for food safety and there is ample data to support this.

When the final pork rule was published, there was no line speed limit set because in pork production, the line speed was naturally limited by the facility and cooler space. The FSIS inspectors could handle the speeds from the model programs and thus no line speed was specified in the final rule. Facilities were designed to handle more production and they are producing some of the safest products in the world with the best innovations under the modernized inspection system. However, these facilities that provide a significant portion of pork to our country are now ordered to reduce capacity.

The impacts are serious. First of all, we will face pork availability issues. The prices will increase and our favorite pork products may not be readily available. Secondly, we will have depopulation of thousands of live animals in the short term because there simply isn’t a place for them to be processed. In the long term, farmers will be put out of work and production will be reduced because we will not have the capacity to harvest the animals. Finally, plant workers will lose jobs. Despite what has been written in mainstream media, fewer animals to process means fewer jobs.

The impact on the individual facilities is even greater. Modernized inspection moves beyond the original rules of inspection developed in 1906 and allows for implementation of innovative technologies. Losing a critical component of the modernized system is an indirect threat to progress and innovation and improving the safety of the food supply.

Unfortunately, there are many special interest groups who do not want this industry to exist. They have no data, but they are loud. This decision in Minnesota is a step in the wrong direction, driven by fear and emotion that could become just one of many used to reduce the production capacity and harm animal agriculture.

This industry must stand up and fight these misinformation tactics. Get the word out to mainstream media outlets, call your representatives in Congress, call Secretary Vilsack and fight for this industry. We must stand up and be loud. The truth needs to be told.

The truth about line speeds!

Join for free* to continue reading.