The current foot and mouth outbreak has provided new fuel for the debate on the way in which the meat industry operates and, in particular, about what is and is not allowed in animal feed. The BSE crisis and the recent scares about dioxins and sewage sludge in animal feed have all contributed to a feeling that current EU legislation needs tightening up. Tina Garrity reports on the new proposals.

In 1999, a new directive on undesirable substances and products in animal nutrition was adopted and moves were set in place to revise the 1990 directive on the disposal of animal by-products. A formal proposal for a new regulation on animal by-products was launched last November and published in the Official Journal in March.

EXISTING LEGISLATION
The current animal waste directive (90/667/EEC) lays down requirements for the disposal and processing of animal waste in order to destroy pathogens and to produce feedstuffs in such a manner as to prevent the presence of any pathogens. Animal waste is classified either as high-risk material, if it presents a serious risk of spreading communicable diseases, or as low-risk material, if it does not. All material must be processed in an approved plant under official veterinary surveillance in order to be incorporated into animal feed. In exceptional circumstances, it can also be disposed of by burning or burial. In 1997, the directive was amended to require that most mammalian animal waste be processed according to certain parameters (maximum particle size, temperature, time, pressure etc) in order to ensure inactivation of the agents of scrapie and BSE. Some wastes were exempted, including those destined for pet food produced with low risk material, certain rendered fats, gelatine etc and, in general, products which are guaranteed not to enter any food or feed chain. The directive is implemented in the UK by the Animal By-Products Order 1999 and the Products of Animal Origin (Import and Export) Regulations 1996, as amended. There is a MAFF guidance note (recently revised) to accompany the legislation.

BACKGROUND TO THE REVISION
With the onset of the public debate about the content of animal feedstuffs as a result of concerns arising from the BSE crisis, the Commission organised an international scientific conference on meat and bone meal in July 1997. The conference posed the question of whether it would be possible, or desirable, to have a system whereby only food deemed fit for human consumption should be allowed in animal feedstuffs.

A subsequent Commission consultation paper drew 75 comments from a variety of organisations and individuals. Somewhat predictably, it appeared that the industry, professional organisations, citizens and consumers were mainly in favour of the exclusion of dead animals and all condemned material from the feed chain, but those who would bear the cost of it, such as farmers and some governmental bodies of member states, were opposed in the absence of sufficient scientific justification. The latter were particularly concerned by the economic, environmental and health implications of this exclusion which could result in a higher level of illegal on-farm burial. There was a general call for more research to evaluate the health risk associated with the various means of disposal and for directive 90/667/EEC to be updated.

Subsequently, the Commission requested a number of opinions from its scientific committees on the safety of various animal by-products, such as tallow and gelatine, and on the risk of disease and other hazards entering the human food chain via material from dead animals and condemned material. The main conclusion was that the use of material derived from animals declared not fit for human consumption following health inspection, should not enter into the feed chain. The Commission then asked the Food and Veterinary Office to visit the member states to see how the existing rules were being implemented in practice, the results being fed into the discussions on how to improve the legislation.

THE PROPOSAL
The main change from the existing legislation is that the new regulation (not a directive) would divide waste into three categories:

Category one material: Animal by-products presenting a risk related to a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) or an unknown risk or a risk related to the presence of residues of prohibited substances (ie hormones, B-agonists, etc) or residues of environmental contaminants (ie dioxins, PCBs, etc). These would have to be completely disposed of as waste by incineration, co-incineration or landfill.

Category two material: Animal by-products presenting a risk related to animal diseases other than TSEs or a risk related to the presence of residues of veterinary drugs. Manure, digestive tract contents and slaughterhouse sludge are also included in this category. These would have to either be disposed of as waste or recycled for certain uses other than animal nutrition; ie biogas production, composting, fertilisers or oleochemical products, following appropriate heat treatment. Only manure based fertiliser would be allowed on pasture land. Oleochemical, biogas composting, animal-by-product processing, intermediate and storage plants would all have to be approved. The annexes to the proposal set out the conditions they would have to meet.

Category three material: Animal by-products derived from healthy animals (ie animals slaughtered in a slaughterhouse which passed the health inspection in accordance with community legislation, milk from healthy animals and fish caught in the open sea). Only these animal by-products would be permitted as feed material and then only following appropriate treatment (category three material would also include products such as wool, hides, fur and feathers, intended for purposes other than animal or human consumption).

The use of animal by-products for scientific products, taxidermy and for use in knackers yards would be permitted as well as for use in hunt kennels, maggot farms and similar premises and for the feeding of certain wild animals. These premises would need to comply with the standards currently applicable to knackers yards. Operators would need to stain or sterilise the meat.

Potential health risks from non-EU animal by-product imports would be addressed by establishing a system of approval for third countries and their establishments, together with a Community inspections procedure to ensure that the conditions of such approval were observed. Model health certificates accompanying imported products would be required to satisfy the competent authority of the place of destination that the consignment complied with Community provisions.

In order to address environmental and health concerns about the disposal of animal by-products as waste, and to end the confusion currently arising as to which disposal practices come under the animal waste directive and which under the framework waste directive (75442/EEC), the Commission is proposing that if an animal by-product is consigned to a waste disposal (eg landfill, burial, incineration) or a waste recovery operation (eg co-incineration) it shall be treated as waste and thus disposed of or recovered in a manner compatible with the health and environmental requirements of the framework waste directive.

In order to deal with any risks to human and animal health arising from the use of animal by-products for purposes other than rendering, the proposal would tighten up controls so that animal by-products in any sector could be traced by the competent authority until it was satisfied that there was no danger to health and that such products did not somehow end up in the feed and food chains.

The UK has indicated general approval for the proposal, as have most other member states. Germany and Austria have expressed concerns over its scientific basis and its economic implications.

A MAFF consultation letter on the proposal can be found on the web: www.maff.gov.uk/corps/consexer/default.htm.
COM (2000) 574. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption. OJ C 96 E. 27.03.01 (NB electronic OJ) The proposal can be downloaded from the web: http://europa.eu.int/prelex/apcnet