Getting hold of HACCP

BY TOM BUTTON

Like most other Canadians, few farmers have more than a fuzzy notion what the acronym HACCP stands for. Even spelling it out - Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points - doesn't help a lot.

They aren't alone. Governments, industry and even marketing boards are touting HACCP as the key to prosperity for Ontario farmers, even though they're acting more on faith than hard fact.

Meanwhile, more grain, oilseed and horticulture buyers are suiting up with HACCP labels. W.G. Thompsons has registered three of its elevators with HACCP. Hensall Co-op's edible bean and food-grade soybean plants will be on line by the end of the month. Next, it will enroll its feed mills.

Worried about food safety, Ottawa is close to forcing apple processors either to adopt HACCP or close their doors, and talks are underway to set up HACCP plans for every fruit and vegetable processor in the country.

These processors in turn are passing the HACCP buck onto the farmers who supply them, saying food safety regulations must begin in the field.

For farmers, HACCP means more paperwork, more labour, more expense - and probably a brighter future, with more sales for growers who can make the grade.

"The entire food chain from field to fork is going HACCP," says Dan Wilson, who spent four years as quality manager helping Strathroy Foods move into HACCP, and who is now helping Hensall Co-op make the same transition. "Over the next year we'll be starting to take a program to our growers."

Hensall, which was named by Heinz in the U.K. as its top supplier for navy bean quality this year, says HACCP can't be stopped. "Processors such as Heinz want to know every last little thing that happens at the farm with their beans," Wilson says. "We aren't the end of the agriculture industry; we're the beginning of the food industry...that philosophy is going to move to the field level."

For growers, HACCP starts with the simple questions: "What could go wrong on my farm that could endanger the people who eat my crops?" and "What can I do to prevent it?"

Answers could involve walking fields before harvest to ensure there aren't any stray beer bottles that could be ground up by the combine. It may also mean that pesticides, fertilizers and fuels are stored on the other side of the farmstead from crop machinery, and that detailed spray records are kept.

"We haven't got to the point of talking to growers yet," Wilson says. But the "whole industry is on this path, not just bean growers, everybody."

HACCP, pronounced "hassip," was born in the 1960s when the U.S. space agency NASA insisted that Pillsbury find ways to ensure the safety of the foods they were producing for astronauts. The solution was to make a list of every bad thing that could happen to food during processing, figure out where inside the processing plant each of those things might happen (critical control points) and then design safeguards to make sure they didn't. Backing up the whole system are detailed records and a series of random audits and inspections.

Since the first John Glenn flight, there have been sky-high predictions for HACCP. In the late 1980s, for instance, the federal agriculture department set a goal that all food would be controlled by HACCP by 1996.

That didn't happen. To date, the only statutory HACCP systems in Canada are for federally inspected fish plants, says Vance McEachern, director of inspection strategies for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

But momentum is building. HACCP is a big step forward from current government food safety programs based on final-product inspections, McEachern says. Those programs are statistically valid when spread over the whole industry, but hit and miss on individual sales. For instance, McEachern says, with current programs you may need a 20-per cent failure rate in a lot to be caught 60 per cent of the time. "It doesn't give you a lot of confidence."

HACCP, by contrast, gives two lines of defence. First, in order to qualify, processors must prove they've carefully evaluated plants for food safety concerns. Second, they must set out ways to ensure food isn't being put at risk, and keep an extensive paper trail to prove it isn't.

Typically, any time Ottawa tries to impose a new set of regulations, it's met by a chorus of groans from industry, together with intensive lobby efforts to prove that industry can't possibly bear the costs. HACCP, however, is breaking the rules. Instead of wailing about the threat of HACCP being imposed, processors are voluntarily moving to set up their own HACCP systems.

The Canadian Meat Council, representing the country's largest meat processors, has come out in favour of HACCP. So has the Canadian Horticulture Council and Ontario's white bean marketing board.

"There's no doubt it's going to require increased management expertise to comply with the demands of today's customer," says Martin Huzevka, bean board manager. "Farmers more and more are up to the challenge. It's mostly a matter of understanding what's required of them."

Yet in most commodities, it's hard to make long-range plans to gear up for HACCP. For instance, while Thompsons has enrolled its three edible bean plants in HACCP, and is looking at extending HACCP to its soybean lines, spokesman John O'Brien says it will be three to five years before HACCP moves to field level.

If HACCP is an opportunity, it's also a potential hurdle, O'Brien says. "A lot of things have to be figured out...If there isn't a return to the grower, it isn't going to fly."

The Ontario processing vegetable board wants to make sure its growers don't pay too much for HACCP. Board manager John Mumford points out that many growers have already agreed to changes in contract terms, largely driven by the fact that many vegetable processors have adopted HACCP. Changes focus on rigid spray scheduling and record keeping, coupled with field inspections for possible food hazards.

The board has hired University of Guelph food safety expert Doug Powell to report by the end of the year on food safety risks on vegetable farms.

The veg board believes, for instance, that since most vegetables are cooked during processing, a lot of microbial and fungal disease concerns aren't relevant at the farm level. Mumford says that while it's crucial to satisfy realistic food safety concerns, there's a danger of food safety becoming "the flavour of the month. That's part of the reason why we want to take this on as an organization."

No one else appears to be grabbing the lead. Governments talk about the momentum behind HACCP, but they're giving it little priority. While there's been progress on national dairy and meat codes, a new HACCP agreement for horticulture appears years away. Bob Forrest of the Ontario agriculture ministry's food inspection branch is chairing the talks, but says "it's a very big job; horticulture is such a diverse industry."

Specific talks are underway on non-pasteurized apple cider, largely due to a similar high-profile move in the U.S. Canada is also proceeding on salad sprouts and on semi-processed vegetables, basically "salad in a bag" products that aren't heat-treated.

CFIA's McEachern sees farmers heading toward so-called HACCP-like programs that meet overall food safety objectives without adding so many record-keeping and monitoring demands. Without federal guidelines, however, it's up to individual farmers to negotiate with their buyers.

Most market watchers, however, see mounting pressure on industries that export to food-conscious Europe. The Pacific Rim is catching up, reports Thompsons' O'Brien. On a sales trip to Japan this fall, O'Brien was asked whether he could supply HACCP guarantees on Ontario soybeans.

The white bean board's Huzevka says HACCP will give Ontario a competitive edge: "It's going to help us stand out as a quality supplier. It's our price of admission to the marketplace of the future."

What's in a name?

HACCP
Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) requires participants to formally identify danger points in a production system and then on an ongoing basis meticulously document steps taken to avoid the dangers. A strictly food safety system, HACCP was pioneered by Pillsbury, to eliminate contaminants in astronauts' food.

It was reasoned salmonella or certain E. coli organisms could be disastrous in orbiting spacecraft. Pork industry studies in the U.S. and several Canadian provinces suggest the extensive paperwork and standardization required with HACCP aren't compatible with smaller farms where workload varies by season and from day to day.

ISO
ISO 9000 is a quality-control system originally established to ensure uniformity in manufacture. More recently ISO 14000 was created to reflect an enterprise's environmental sustainability.

ISO is the Swiss-based International Organization for Standardization founded in 1947 to develop common international standards. Prominent in recent years as a result of banners on industrial buildings proclaiming the occupant's compliance with categories like 9000, the concept is attracting interest from large agri-businesses.

ISO 14000, the sustainability program, has attracted interest from a few farmers being harassed by neighbours over odour and manure problems. However, retired University of Guelph professor Dr. Neil Stoskops predicts operations that aren't vertically integrated have little chance of acceptance because they can't control the entire production process.

Quality Assurance
Sometimes referred to as QA, eliminates much of the documentation but uses HACCP-like principles to enhance a product's wholesomeness. QA concepts are being embraced by commodity groups and large processors as a marketing tool. - Robert Irwin

Opting for ISO

Pioneer Hi-Bred quality assurance expert Greg Franck says his company's move to ISO 9000 standards is equally good for the company and its customers.

ISO 9000 is similar to HACCP with its philosophy of "Say what you do, do what you say, and prove it." ISO 9000, however, stems from international efforts to standardize weights, measures and quality standards, so a widget part produced anywhere in the world could be used in any widget factory.

ISO 9000 adds cost and complexity, Franck agrees. The system generates mountains of paper work. On the other hand, by making the company think through the quality implications of every step of its process, including seed purity and integrity, it has helped Pioneer adapt to the new era of varieties with special traits.

In the past, if a few seeds from hybrid A got mixed with hybrid B, the field might look a bit ragged and yield might be slightly off. Today, the hybrid A plants might be killed by the spray used for herbicide-tolerant hybrid B fields.

"We understand our production and inventory systems better because of ISO," Franck says. "We had always focussed on high quality, but ISO has helped us become more flexible." Pioneer has registered all its seed plants, and now is moving ISO registration to its research centres.

Franck compares ISO to farmers who buy satellite systems for their farms. Precision farming isn't cheap. Farmers must buy yield monitors and devote time to analyzing yield maps. The payback, however, comes from more efficient crop production.

Franck adds that ISO has helped open markets, especially for international sales. "Our customers' needs for purity and quality are increasing," he says. "ISO builds their confidence that we will deliver what we say."

Quality costs
How much cost would HACCP add to farmers? There aren't any easy answers. Ellen Wall at the University of Guelph has studied the potential of an ISO system called ISO 14000 to bolster Ontario's current voluntary farm environmental certification program.

Wall and the Guelph team found that costs for auditing alone may be $3,000 per farm, in part for on-farm documentation of everything from fuel storage to pesticide sprays and in part to pay professional auditors.

Costs to bring farms up to ISO 14000 standards, however, might be about $12,000 per farm, although it's impossible to be precise until program details are known. If widescale upgrading of manure facilities is needed, costs would be many times higher.

More insight on cost should be shed by a pilot project being run by the Ontario Federation of Agriculture.

Later this month, the OFA will announce the names of two or three farms that will be brought up to ISO 14000 standards.

The project is being funded by a $100,000 grant from the National Soil and Water Conservation Program.

Livestock HACCP lags cash crops

The province's livestock and dairy industries are still at the baby-steps stage when it comes to HACCP. Early November, a scant 240 of Ontario's 6,000 odd pork producers had signed up for the qaulity assurance program launched by the Canadian Pork Council last summer.

Only a handful of producers had turned out for orientation meetings across the province since the launch, but Dr. Tom Sanderson, who heads the Ontario initiative, predicts things will improve: "We're really just getting off the ground. The timing has been all wrong. You just don't expect to get people involved in the summer and the fall."

Sanderson is putting the finishing touches on a program for veal modeled on the swine protocol. Jennifer Haley, projects manager for the Ontario Veal Association, says it's unknown how many of the province's 500 to 1,500 producers will participate once the final version is unveiled at the group's Jan. 30, 1999 annual meeting.

Haley says the program centres on a 30-page manual "with lots of spacing," that may not require any more record keeping than good operators are already doing. "We've seen some other commodity manuals and decided that they are way too much for us," she says.

In December Sanderson begins working with the Ontario Sheep Producers Association to ready a QA program for that industry by spring.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has provided Sanderson with requirements it believes will meet export buyer expectations. "Aside from boosting domestic consumer confidence we have to be aware of what our markets in other countries want," Sanderson asserts.

Originally pork producers considered a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) program. However, they found in early trials the concept was too regimented for family-type farms and involved too much paperwork.

"We use almost all of the HACCP principles in the on-farm Quality Assurance program. It's just that we require a producer to identify his own good production practices, because they vary farm to farm," Sanderson explains. "We ask a number of questions like how do you ensure that the medication from your starter ration doesn't get into your finisher ration?"

A HACCP-like plan for the beef industry is still at the discussion stage, says Peter Doris, special projects manager at the Ontario Cattlemen's Association.

"There are a few hoops to jump through to get to it," says Doris. He says the central questions for the beef industry are:

1) What are you checking for? Livestock medicine use and record keeping seem to be a priority.

2) Who is able to do the audit? Who will sign off on the audit and verify that the promised work has been done?

3) Why do it? Doris asks. "If we go down this path, what do we get out of it?"

Ontario Cattlemen's efforts may be aided by the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, which is expected to host a quality assurance workshop next year. "Anything we do, we will keep a close eye on the national scene," Doris promises.

The dairy industry is moving toward a "best management practices" manual, says Peter Gould, director of marketing and production at Dairy Farmers of Ontario. Development of the national manual has been contracted out to the Ontario Federation of Agriculture.

How thick that manual will be is part of the debate right now, he says. "I am of the camp that it has to be user friendly," Gould says. "It's sap versus syrup."

There's also a question of how and when the program, expected by 1999, will be delivered to producers. "You can't just mail it out." Dairy Farmers of Ontario will certainly deliver to producers in this province," predicts Gould who pledges it won't be during planting or harvest. - Robert Irwin

Taking the QA plunge

Here's one farmer's experience

BY DAVID MORRIS

Agricultural quality assurance (QA) programs are rapidly being introduced in other countries, and they could well become the norm here.

If the reaction of farmers overseas is any guide, producers here are likely to resist the adoption on-farm QA programs. They tend to be perceived as yet another scheme that the farmer has to implement to benefit someone else.

Brendon Smart, from Australia, is one farmer who takes just the opposite view. Brendon visited Canada in mid-July to address the Canadian Seed Growers' Association and to attend the International Conference of the Nuffield Agricultural Scholarship Association.

"Farmers shouldn't be afraid of QA programs," he says, "since they will be the first ones to benefit. Developing a QA program was the most significant thing I've ever done on my farm. Our net returns have doubled from the improvement in the efficiency of our operation."

Smart owns a 5,000-acre farm in South Australia, roughly halfway between Adelaide and Melbourne. His primary enterprise is producing pedigreed seed of alfalfa and Brassica crops, although about half the farm is planted to barley, wheat, oilseed rape and lentils. He also keeps a flock of 7,000 sheep to graze on the crop stubble.

Maintaining product quality in a diverse operation demands close management and attention to detail. A few years ago, Brendon realized that he could not continue to be the only one making decisions. He needed a way to share this responsibility with his three employees. With the help of a management consultant, Brendon and his employees systematically developed what amounts to an operating manual for the farm. By reviewing this every six months, they continue to improve it and are now close to achieving ISO 9000 accreditation.

Their program contains specifications for every task on the farm. It clearly spells out what is to be done and who is primarily responsible for doing it. Everyone shares in implementation. The person who assumes the lead for any given job varies depending on the task. Regardless of who this is, this person has the responsibility and the authority to make decisions about how a job is to be done. The program also defines the limits to that authority and who is next in the chain of decision-making.

Having clear job descriptions reduces the risk of mistakes and helps ensure that any are caught before the product is shipped. If something does go wrong, it is very easy to find where the mistake happened, and to identify who didn't make a decision when they should have or who exceeded their authority. In the three years since the plan was introduced, this has not been necessary - there has been no serious mistake.

Brendon sees his main role as ensuring that things are in place so his employees can do their jobs. He does the marketing and sets long-range plans but has little input into the day-to-day operation of the farm. Because his employees know their responsibilities, they go ahead and get the job done. The farm runs more efficiently than before, and employee satisfaction has increased.

Smart has yet to capitalize on any marketing advantage that might yet accrue from his QA program. As a minimum, he expects that ISO 9000 accreditation will save him inspection costs related to pedigreed seed production in the future. With other commodities, it could give him an edge in markets where consistent quality is a requirement.

© copyright 1998 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.


back