- PDF Version (121K) - Print Friendly - Help

AgVetLink February 2005

Feed commodities: fit for purpose standards

The amendment to the ACVM Regulations 2001 (see page 2) will impose a condition that feed commodities must comply with the fit for purpose standards in Schedule 4 of those Regulations.

Before the amendment, Schedule 4 related to oral nutritional preparations such as commercially compounded (manufactured) animal feeds and animal products/byproducts to be fed to animals. The amendment will place an obligation on any person who offers for sale any plant material (i.e. plant origin feed commodity) as a feed for animals to comply with the same fit for purpose criteria that apply to compounded feeds or animal products/byproducts.

Plant material feed commodities include standing grass, edible food crops or other forage crops, hay, silage, grain or other arable or horticultural products that are offered for sale or supplied for use as a feed for animals. To be fit for purpose for the species, type and class of animal to be fed the feed commodities must not:

• produce residues in products harvested from the animal(s) fed that fail to comply with applicable food residue standards set in or under any enactment;

• result in toxic reactions causing pain or distress in the animal(s);

• result in malnutrition causing pain or distress in the animal(s); or

• contain pathogenic micro-organisms at levels that could cause disease resulting in pain or distress in the animal(s).

The amendment will also add a criterion that the feed must not result in physical harm causing pain or distress in the animal(s).

Reasons

There were two main reasons for imposing this obligation. The first was to establish a level playing field for all parties selling animal feeds so that they all have to take due care to ensure their products are fit for purpose.

The second reason was to give effect to the recently endorsed Codex Code of Practice for Good Animal Feeding. The Code highlights an international expectation that all classes of animal feeds (compounded feeds and feed commodities) should be managed to bring the level of food safety risks down to an acceptable level.

New Zealand is a firm supporter of internationally recognised standards and codes of practice because they provide a common measure to judge appropriate trading practices. The New Zealand Food Safety Authority participated in the development of the Code of Practice for Good Animal Feeding to ensure that it was no more restrictive than was technically justifiable. The amendment to the ACVM Regulations 2001 was a necessary prerequisite to aligning New Zealand animal feeding practices to the Codex Code.

Fair Trading Act or ACVM Act?

During consultation on the amendment to the Regulations some parties suggested that obligations imposed under the Fair Trading Act 1986 were already sufficient to ensure that feed commodities would be fit for purpose. However, the Fair Trading Act does not provide guidance on what would constitute animal feed that is fit for the purpose. While the Fair Trading Act was relevant, fit for purpose standards would have to be prescribed.

The appropriate standards already existed in Schedule 4 of the ACVM Regulations for all other animal feeds. By measuring all feed commodities with the ACVM standard, the first objective of a level playing field governing quality and safety of animal feeds would be achieved. Providing the fit for purpose standards in the ACVM Regulations meant the regulated parties were more likely to be aware of them through the proactive communications of the ACVM Group such as this AgVetLink article.

The offence and penalty provision of the two Acts were similar but the wording in the ACVM Act more closely reflects current practices, particularly in regard to knowingly committing an offence. With these advantages it was decided that the appropriate course of action was to amend the ACVM Regulations.

Practical implications

As stated above, the wording of the offence and penalty provisions of the ACVM Act reflects current practices in relation to the manufacture and sale of agricultural compounds. There has to be an element of foreknowledge before an offence is committed. This is relevant to the practical implications of the new obligation.

Presently in New Zealand the risks posed by feed commodities are relatively well managed by common production practices. Feed quality from a nutritional perspective may vary significantly and still not produce any of the negative effects specified in fit for purpose criteria, so selling surplus feed that is less than first grade is not going to result in an offence.

The amendment introduces an obligation to confirm fitness for purpose for feed commodities only in those cases where existing knowledge and common practice would make a producer conclude that the commodity is likely to cause one of the prescribed negative effects (i.e. the feed commodity grown and processed in the usual manner is likely to be contaminated or damaged to the point that residues would result, or animals would be poisoned or physically harmed, or become malnurished or infected with pathogens). Examples would be intentionally selling hay that has deteriorated to such an extent that common practice would exclude it as an acceptable animal feed, or selling grain that has been stored in damp conditions.

The purpose of the obligation is to make it an offence for a person to sell feed commodities that are known not to be fit (or are very likely not to be fit) to feed to animals, and to make it clear what constitutes feed commodities that are fit for purpose.

Producers will not have to introduce any additional practices to comply with the standards. In the vast majority of cases, no additional production or testing practices will be required and no regulatory approvals or audits will be imposed.