Many small farmers feared-and still fear-that the new regulations and high costs of complying with the law could squeeze them out of business.
As evidence, they point to the giant farms and food producers who supported the law.
While FSMA contains several provisions, one key facet of the law requires the FDA to "Establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production and harvesting of fruits and vegetables."
The relative compliance costs for small and large farms are stark.
As I've noted previously, the FDA estimates FSMA will cost America's small farms about $13,000 each per year and its larger farms about $30,000 per year.
For larger farms, compliance costs will amount to less than one percent of revenue.
As I detail in my book, Biting the Hands that Feed Us: How Fewer, Smarter Laws Would Make Our Food System More Sustainable, small farmers' concerns about that part of the law have been legion.
This week, one Maine farmer shared his concerns about the law.
Farmer Goran Johanson, while embracing some of what FSMA requires, says the law will place "a huge financial burden on us as farmers." He worries "There could potentially be a lot of infrastructure needs necessary" at his farm, including that he'll have to scrape together funds "To build a new produce packing house that will have washable surfaces on everything, which is an expensive investment."
Why such little impact? As I detailed in 2015, FDA regulations are only capable of preventing, at most, "Only one out of every five cases... of foodborne illness." That's because four of every five cases of foodborne illness can be traced to causes that have nothing to do with foods regulated by the FDA. Congress never should have passed a law with such high costs and such little return.
Around the country, state agriculture departments and agricultural extension agents are working feverishly to help local farmers prepare to comply with the regulations.
http://reason.com/archives/2018/02/03/fda-begins-implementing-awful-food-safet
As evidence, they point to the giant farms and food producers who supported the law.
While FSMA contains several provisions, one key facet of the law requires the FDA to "Establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production and harvesting of fruits and vegetables."
The relative compliance costs for small and large farms are stark.
As I've noted previously, the FDA estimates FSMA will cost America's small farms about $13,000 each per year and its larger farms about $30,000 per year.
For larger farms, compliance costs will amount to less than one percent of revenue.
As I detail in my book, Biting the Hands that Feed Us: How Fewer, Smarter Laws Would Make Our Food System More Sustainable, small farmers' concerns about that part of the law have been legion.
This week, one Maine farmer shared his concerns about the law.
Farmer Goran Johanson, while embracing some of what FSMA requires, says the law will place "a huge financial burden on us as farmers." He worries "There could potentially be a lot of infrastructure needs necessary" at his farm, including that he'll have to scrape together funds "To build a new produce packing house that will have washable surfaces on everything, which is an expensive investment."
Why such little impact? As I detailed in 2015, FDA regulations are only capable of preventing, at most, "Only one out of every five cases... of foodborne illness." That's because four of every five cases of foodborne illness can be traced to causes that have nothing to do with foods regulated by the FDA. Congress never should have passed a law with such high costs and such little return.
Around the country, state agriculture departments and agricultural extension agents are working feverishly to help local farmers prepare to comply with the regulations.
http://reason.com/archives/2018/02/03/fda-begins-implementing-awful-food-safet
No comments:
Post a Comment