THE PRESS MONDAY, APRIL 21, 1986. U.S. farming in crisis

Press, 21 April 1986, Page 12

THE PRESS MONDAY, APRIL 21, 1986. U.S. farming in crisis

Farming is in crisis in the United States as well as in New Zealand and in Australia. The flurry of activity in Congress over beef and casein is an outcome of what is happening down on the American farm. So far it has been the House of Representatives and the Senate which have sought action, not the United States Administration. Nothing has yet been resolved about either beef or casein. If restrictions are imposed on either, New Zealand trade is likely to be harmed, though at the moment it is impossible to say how much it will be damaged.

Both the House of Representatives and the Senate have resolutions before them on beef. What seems to be going on is that efforts are being made to lower the trigger level at which legislation on imports comes into force. The system is that, when there is a certain amount of beef in the market, the United States Department of Agriculture says that countries should restrain their sales to the United States voluntarily. Voluntary restraint is often preferred by exporting countries because, if quotas were imposed, these would be for lower amounts than are sent in under voluntary restraint. The United States prefers countries to exercise voluntary restraint so that quotas are avoided and the letter, as well as the spirit, of free trade is kept alive. The practice is not confined to agricultural products. The trigger level is set each year. The Congress is trying to get the trigger level altered during the course of a year in response to what is described as an “emergency situation.” However, the legislation as it has so far been interpreted does not allow for the trigger level to be altered after it has been set. Various laws affecting agriculture are being.examined to find if there is a way around the problem of altering the trigger level. The President could alter it if new legislation were passed.

However, legislation affecting agriculture is already complex and there is some caution about rushing in to amend legislation already in existence.

The United States Department of Agriculture has been buying cows to avoid having the animals come on to the market and depress prices for stock. The department leaves the cattle on the farms. To distinguwhich cows have been bought, and to stop the exchanging of cattle among farmers to sell the same cattle to the United States Department of Agriculture several times, the cattle have been branded on the head. The Cattlemen’s Association has objected to the purchases by the United States Department of Agriculture, and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has objected to the branding of cattle on their faces.

Casein is the subject of a hearing before a sub-committee of the House of Representatives. Some argue that because the United States imports casein — much of it from New Zealand — this interferes with the sale of skimmed milk powder which could be substituted for casein. Some manufacturers of ice-cream and other products in which casein is used say that, if they were forced to buy skimmed milk powder, this unrefined product would not be as good as casein.' They also argue that the price for skimmed milk powder would be higher and that other substitutes would be sought — probably a soy bean extract.

Some Congressmen would like the United States to manufacture casein, as it used to do. However, the price for American-made casein is likely to be much higher than the price for imported casein. The hearing in the House of Representatives is examining these issues and will eventually come to a conclusion that New Zealand must hope will uphold the traditional American principle of free trade.