New food-labeling law requires disclosure of country of origin

Laws already in place require country-of-origin labels for seafood.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Starting today, consumers will be learning a lot more about the frozen ground beef, pork tenderloin, fresh tomatoes and raspberries that they put in their grocery carts.

That’s when the Country of Origin Labeling Law goes into effect, requiring that labels for meat, poultry and produce clearly state what country they’ve come from.

Specifically, the law covers ground and whole cuts of beef, lamb, pork, chicken and goat meat; farm-raised fish and shellfish, wild fish and shellfish; fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables; peanuts, pecans, ginseng and macadamia nuts. Country-of-origin labels — as well as labels indicating whether the fish was “farmed” or “wild” — have been required for fish and shellfish since 2005.

Though the new law, part of the 2008 federal farm bill, is technically a marketing provision designed to give U.S. products a leg up in the marketplace, advocates say it will improve overall food safety, especially after a spate of widespread food contaminations over the last two years.

Opponents of the law complain that it unfairly implies that imported foods are less safe than domestic foods and also places an unnecessary financial burden on wholesalers and retailers. They also emphasize that the extra cost of implementing the labeling law would be passed on to consumers already reeling from higher food prices.

Foes have been able to postpone the law’s implementation several times since its initial approval in the 2002 farm bill. But public support for more labeling shifted after a salmonella outbreak in 30 states was linked to tainted tomatoes earlier this year and imported pet food from China containing the industrial chemical melamine was blamed for the deaths of dogs and cats in the United States in March 2007.

“Food safety concerns dominate the headlines almost daily, and it is imperative consumers know where their food comes from,” said Tom Buis, president of the National Farmers Union, in a statement.

There is little consensus, however, about how helpful the labels actually will be in tracing tainted food. There have been outbreaks linked to food grown in the United States, as well as to imported food.

But because the labels don’t connect commodities to a specific farm or ranch, the law’s reach will be limited.

It would have no effect on the current scare regarding contaminated milk products from China, because the law does not regulate dairy products.

Because the labels have been required on seafood and shellfish since 2005, it is possible to examine the effects that such labels have on consumer behavior. It is indisputable that the labels have made it much easier for consumers to find fish harvested by sustainable methods or fish with lower levels of mercury.

There continue to be investigations and complaints regarding the accuracy of these labels, however. Valerie Craig, senior project manager of Seafood Choices Alliance, takes this as evidence that the law has an impact, because “if consumers weren’t paying attention to what they were buying, there would be less incentive to mislabel” farmed fish as wild.

Producers, wholesalers and retailers all must maintain and display the origin of commodities covered by the law, which carries a six-month grace period to add the labels.

Despite the grace period, many stores plan to implement the law immediately.