| V O L U M E 2 1 | N U M B E R 3 | JULY 1 9 9 7 |
HENRY M. ENGSTER
PSA President
In a continuing effort to communicate with our members, I would like to use this issue's column to provide additional information regarding the formation of the proposed Federation of Animal Science Societies (FASS). The information presented herein should help prepare the members for the discussion in the "PSA Open Forum" meeting, planned for the annual PSA meetings in Athens this summer (Monday, August 4th, 8 to 10 am). Previously, we sometimes referred to this as a "Town Meeting," but we are now adopting the name used in the registration booklet for consistency. As stated in Lou Arrington's editorial comments in the last newsletter, the formation of this federation represents a significant change from the past and will affect PSA operations for a long time. It is often said, "Change is always constant but sometimes not easy." I will attempt to explain why change is necessary in PSA operations.
The formation of any new organization involves the consideration of many details. I will not take the time and space to address all of these details in this newsletter article. What I will attempt to do is to address the pertinent points of what we are doing now:
What is PSA Doing Now?
Currently, and for many years in the past, PSA has purchased "management" services from the American Dairy Science Association (ADSA). This has included editorial and composition services for our journal and newsletter, along with membership maintenance. Approximately three years ago, reduced volunteer support (due to increased demands on members' time), led the PSA Board of Directors to approve funding for a half-time marketing specialist (Janet Brown). More recently, PSA decided to support on-line activities for the journal and the society. At the present, PSA has no official control over the business office staff in Savoy, Illinois; however, we have had considerable input on positions in the office, as do the other societies that contract with ADSA for services.
In the past few years, ADSA has put all professional societies under contract with them on notice that they have reached a point where their current management services model has outlived its usefulness. The fact is that the level and cost of services that we have enjoyed in the past will be changing in the future. Previous newsletter articles have emphasized the fact that PSA will no longer be able to conduct "business as usual." The business office will change, with us or without us.
With this need to change in mind, the question came up as to whether there could be some cost efficiencies realized in the home office as a result of a banding together of the professional societies involved. The PSA Board asked Chuck Sapp to develop a financial comparison evaluating:
Throughout the last two years, we have attempted to provide as much information as possible regarding the proposed formation of a new federation through reports in the PSA Newsletter. You might find it helpful to go back and reread those articles. We will also attempt to provide a summary of these articles at the summer annual meeting, prior to the Open Forum session.
The proposed structure of FASS includes an Executive Vice President in charge of daily operations in Savoy, Illinois and an Executive Vice President for scientific liaison located in Washington, DC. The structure was modeled after the Federation of American Societies of Experimental Biology (FASEB). This model was chosen as a structure that would enhance the individual member societies, rather than diminish or detract from them.
|Figure 1| FASS Board of Directors Structure
|Figure 2| FASS Executive committee Structure
|Figure 3| FASS Administration Departments
Proposed Constitution and By-Laws have been drafted, again modeled after those of FASEB. This information will also be available prior to the Open Forum session. It is important to recognize that the proposal incorporates three founding member societies ADSA, American Society of Animal Science (ASAS), and PSA. Although the American Meat Science Association (AMSA) has decided not to pursue being a founding member, they are considering participation in the Federation in some form. Each founding member of FASS will have an equal economic requirement for "buy-in" and equal representation on the board.
Do We Have to Join FASS?
No, we do not have to join the Federation. However, based on the budget projections in Tables 1 and 2, there are significant economic advantages in the Business Office functions (program services, marketing support, production/composition services, editorial support, and membership services) to being a member.
Anyone who has spent time in Washington knows that agriculture is having a tough time getting adequate visibility. Agricultural research, teaching and extension have hardly any visibility, particularly animal agriculture. Joining with organizations that share many of our concerns enhances our ability to be heard. The current Congressional Science Fellow Program is an extremely successful example of how cooperative efforts can increase our stature in Washington.
What Type of Investment is Required?
The proposed concept is for each founding member to assume an equal ownership share in the building, furnishings, and equipment in the Savoy, Illinois office. In addition to having equal ownership in the operation, each founding member is, in effect, making a statement that "we are committed to make this Federation successful and here is our money to prove it." This will be considered to be an investment in the FASS organization and the actual building, furnishings, and equipment would be owned by FASS. In exchange for this commitment, each founding member will have an equal number of voting members on the FASS Board of Directors. An alternative concept of having the buy-in fee for each society be proportional to their membership would create a proportion-based Board, in which larger societies could dominate the decision-making process. That concept would clearly not be in the best interest of PSA. The current estimated fair market value of the facilities and equipment is approximately $950,000.00. Thus, our one-third share is estimated to be about $320,000.00.
Again, let me emphasize that each member group would provide one-third of the total costs, despite the differences in their membership numbers, and each would have equal representation. Investing any less than one-third would result in differences in representation on the Board. PSA has strong financial resources (approximately four times our yearly operating costs, or well in excess of $1.0 million in reserves).
What Will This Investment Mean to Our Current Budget?
I will first attempt to outline the key budget changes that would occur
as a result of becoming a full member of FASS, using our current budget
for comparison (See Table 1). In addition, our investment
income would be reduced by about $22,000, due to using part of our current
reserves for our "buy-in" to FASS. This, plus the increased costs listed
in the table, would result in a reduction in net revenue and support over
expenses of $53,889 for the year, which is about 4% of our total financial
resources. A full explanation of these individual line items will be presented
in the Open Forum session this summer.
How Do the Costs of FASS Membership Compare with the Other Options?
Contracting for management services with FASS as a nonmember or working with another management firm would entail paying rent, as well as differences in administrative and support services. The following estimates were provided by Chuck Sapp (Table 2). Note that they are expressed as differences from the 1997 PSA budget, not total dollar costs. Each option includes support for a Washington Scientific Liaison to support animal agriculture.
It is clear from this information that joining FASS as a full member
is the least costly of the four options explored by PSA.
PSA Needs a Full-Time
Executive Director Position
It is my opinion, and that of the Board, that PSA needs to have a full-time Executive Director. My working relationship with the Business Office has demonstrated that a half-time Marketing Specialist position is inadequate for our current workload. Most volunteers working with the Association have less, not more, free time. Many of the duties that our half-time Marketing Specialist conducts are clearly outside of the original scope of the position. An Executive Director can facilitate more efficient committee activity, enhance volunteer participation, and provide continuity from year to year as one Board succeeds another. More specifically, a PSA Executive Director could be in charge of all our daily operations, be the liaison for all award committees, be more responsible for nondues revenue generation, work on budgets with institutions hosting the annual meetings for year-to-year consistency, do market research for additional member information, and work with the Webmaster to optimize our website utilization.
Summary
Being a full founding member of FASS includes the following responsibilities and rights:
Back to Table of Contents
LOUIS C. ARRINGTON
PSA Newsletter Editor
The annual meeting is coming up soon. The first registration deadline will have passed by the time you get the newsletter, but it's not too late to include this important meeting in your summer plans. I would even use the term "uniquely important" to describe this meeting. I can't recall any meeting (in my nearly 40 years of attendance) that involved reaching decisions with the long-term importance such as we face this year primarily, the potential formation of the Federation of Animal Science Societies (FASS) and the role our members choose for PSA. The reorganization of the business office, related services and future PSA activities will be guided by decisions made at this meeting.
President Engster has done a good job of trying to cite the major issues related to the FASS organization in a relatively short article. There will be a lot of small, but important, details to be decided. We need to look at the broad picture and come up with a decision at the annual meeting, leaving some of the details to our representatives involved in the final planning process. A PSA Open Forum session is scheduled for Monday morning, 8 to 10 am, August 4th, for the purpose of bringing everyone up to date on the proposals. This is the session where your concerns or questions should be addressed. This may be the most important issue on the agenda, and the business meeting just doesn't provide adequate time for full discussion of all the questions.
The "From Your President" item in this newsletter includes some budget projections. These include what appears to be a new expense of $64,367 for the "Washington Scientific Liaison" as a FASS Member or $74,022 for "Public Affairs Support" under the other options. As I understand the operations, part of this is not actually new. Our FASFAS membership (approximately $14,500.00), supporting the FASFAS Congressional Science Fellow program, would fit into this category. I think it was previously included in "Program Services." The additional monies would support an office and staff similar to that served by Bob Zimbelman for the American Society of Animal Sciences. Bob has maintained close contact with the past and current Congressional Science Fellows, but also works directly to keep aware of and respond to Washington issues affecting animal agriculture. He has been heavily involved with CoFARM, FAIR `95, and other joint efforts to maintain a strong science-based voice for animal agriculture in legislative and regulatory matters. Bob has communicated regularly with the PSA Executive Committee, giving us the benefits of a Washington contact, without the expense. We have probably been a bit remiss in not including more reports from his office in our newsletter, even though he does not directly represent PSA. Our Board does feel that this type of effort must be continued, with expanded PSA involvment.
Again, your attendance, your participation and your votes are important at both the PSA Open Forum session Monday morning , August 4th, 8 to 10 am and the annual Business Meeting Wednesday afternoon, August 6th, about 2 pm.
No one asked my opinion, but
It seems to me that the public, or at least the more vocal portion of the public, is quick to accept, as fact, any story that places blame on someone or some group, especially if big business or government is involved. The last Saturday night of May, I watched the "Walker, Texas Ranger" TV program. We don't have cable or satellite access. I've always thought that I had an adequate choice of bad programs without paying for more. I'm not a big fan of programs featuring invincible kick boxers, with or without a Texas Ranger badge especially where the bad guys come toward the ranger in a group, guns drawn, and then each stand around and do nothing until it is their turn to be kicked/boxed. However, I wasn't attracted to the competing programs either, and left the TV on and half watched it while also doing some light reading. It's one of those cases where you don't get much out of the book or the TV program.
The premise of this particular episode was that a company that sold cattle feeds was testing a new supplement that was going to produce super dairy cows and make billions for the company. The supplement supposedly contained vitamins and some unidentified additional magical ingredients. The only problem was, that it also contained some potent unidentified virus (unintentional contamination, I presume). They had previously tested something (the same or another product?) in some third world village, essentially wiping out that village when something went wrong. In this program, their test farm was on an isolated Native American reservation with a relatively small population.
When the cows started dying, the company veterinarian went out into the field, barely glanced at a dead cow, pronounced that something was wrong, and left. A young girl was shown carrying a jug of milk home. The parents poured out a glassful for her breakfast, from which she proceeded to take two quick swallows, set the glass down, and headed out the door to school. As she left, she was exhibiting signs of disorientation and sickness, and she collapsed along the road before reaching school. Now there's a fast-acting virus. Ranger Walker just happened to come along the road at that moment. He took her back to the reservation's clinic. Very soon, other residents were showing similar signs extremely high temperatures and a unique rash. Several died. Ranger Walker, of course, was not affected.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch (actually, the company headquarters), some of the bosses were busily sending out orders to cover up the problem and, if necessary, consider the few Native Americans who lived on the reservtion expendable. Even one of the people on the company team was shot (I wasn't paying enough attention to know whether he was beginning to oppose the project or whether he was silenced "just in case"). This wonder product had to be marketed to assure the company's (and those bosses') financial success. Shortly, company workers at the experimental farm were ordered to carry all the sick people to and herd any other residents into a big wooden building, board up the doors and then douse the outside of the building with canfuls of gasoline. As they prepare to light the inferno, Ranger Walker appears on the roof, throws a can of gasoline in the midst of the bad guys, and shoots the can, causing a tremendous explosion and sending the bad guys hurtling through space. The gasoline-soaked building, just a few yards away from the explosion, is unscathed.
It's not the technical questions how a virus got into and remained viable in the "feed supplement" (it was applied to the feed in a liquid form, although it appeared to be shipped and stored dry), how this virus acted so quickly, or how the gasoline-soaked building failed to catch fire. The disturbing part was that all of the big company stereotypes were played out to the maximum:
See you all in Athens, Georgia, August 37.
Back to Table of Contents
MARY ANN OTTINGER
Immediate Past President and
Chair, PSA Nominating Committee
The following nominees for officers and directors are being presented by the PSA Nominating Committee. The other members of the committee are: F. A. Bradley, J. A. Cherry, W. Guenter, M. S. Lilburn, H. L. Marks and B. C. Wentworth.
Position Nominee(s)
Edwin T. Moran, Jr.
Auburn University
Auburn, AL
Glenn P. Birrenkott, Jr.
Clemson University
Clemson, SC
Sheila E. Scheideler
University of Nebraska
Lincoln, NE
Robert F. Wideman
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR
A biographical sketch will be prepared for each nominee and will be printed in one or more of the newsletters distributed at the PSA Annual Meeting. Additional candidates may be nominated from the floor during the business meeting. It would be desirable to determine the person's willingness to run, and to serve if elected, prior to making nominations from the floor. As directed by the By-Laws, a new member of the Nominating Committee will be nominated from the floor and elected to replace F. A. Bradley, whose term will be completed this year.
The elections will be held during the business meeting, on Wednesday, August 6, 1997, at the PSA meeting.
Back to Table of Contents
| Chair: Amy Waldroup, Center
of Excellence for Poultry Science, University of Arkansas
Sponsor: Food Safety Consortium, University of Arkansas, Iowa State University, Kansas State University |
|
| 10:00 am | Introduction and Welcome
Amy Waldroup, Center of Excellence for Poultry Science, University of Arkansas |
| 10:05 am | Risk Factors Associated with Reported Cases of
Foodborne Illness
Traced to Poultry or Eggs Fred Angulo, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia |
| 10:25 am | Consumer Attitudes About Food Irradiation
Anna Resurreccion, University of Georgia, Griffin |
| 10:45 am | Break |
| 11:00 am | Food Safety in the News: An Issue Taken Out of
Perspective
Mike Doyle, Center for Food Safety and Quality Enhancement, University of Georgia, Griffin |
| 11:20 am | National Restaurant Association's View of Food
Safety
Steven Grover, National Restaurant Association, Washington, DC |
| 11:40 am | S.T.O.P.'s Objectives and Goals
Heather Klinkhammer, Safe Tables Our Priority, Washington, DC |
Back to Table of Contents
Sunday, August 3, 1997
Masters Hall
| 1:00 pm | Precision Nutrition Is A Reality
Mamduh Sifri, ADM Animal Health and Nutrition |
| 1:10 pm | Rapid and Nondestructive Methods for Establishing Accurate Nutrient
Values for Ingredients
Theo Van Kempen, Rhône-Poulenc |
| 1:35 pm | New Methodology to Obtain Precise Nutrient Values of Ingredients
Steven Leeson, University of Guelph |
| 2:00 pm | Precision Phosphorus Nutrition
John D. Summers, University of Guelph |
| 2:25 pm | Break |
| 2:45 pm | Management of Egg Size Through Precise Nutrient Delivery
Ray A. Zimmerman, Purina Mills |
| 3:10 pm | Ideal Protein: A Critical Step Towards Precision Nutrition
Jason Emmert and David H. Baker, University of Illinois |
| 3:35 pm | Modeling and Precision Nutrition Interdependence
Gene M. Pesti, University of Georgia |
| 4:05 pm | Review with Discussion Leaders
What is Next for Ingredients?
Impact of Precision Nutrition on the Environment
|
| 4:30 pm | Open Discussion and Recommendations |
| 5:00 pm | Adjourn with a balanced knowledge of nutrition |
Back to Table of Contents
Four AOCS publications are listed below. To order any of these, call 800/336-AOCS (within Canada and the U S) or 217/359-5401, ext 128; FAX orders to 217/351-8091; mail orders to AOCS Publication Orders, P O Box 3489, Chicago, IL 61826-3489. The Item Number should be referenced when ordering.
The AOCS has published a 1996-97 Additions and Revisions to the Official Methods and Recommended Practices of the American Oil Chemists' Society. The additions and revisions are hole-punched to be incorporated into the AOCS Methods binder. The new set includes 53 revisions and 11 new methods. Item #NRAdd; list price is $100.00 (plus $5.00 postage and handling in the U S, $20.00 elsewhere).
Physical and Chemical Properties of Oils, Fats and Waxes, Section 1 has been published by AOCS as a supplement to the Official Methods and Recommended Practices of the American Oil Chemists' Society. Listed parameters include composition, purity, specific gravity, refractive index, iodine value, saponification value, titer, fatty acid composition, tocopherol composition and sterol composition of 150 oils and fats. This publication is also hole-punched for adding to the AOCS Methods binder. Item #NRSectI; list price is $150.00 (plus $5.00 postage and handling in the U S, $20.00 elsewhere).
Antioxidant Methodology: In vivo and in vitro Concepts is now available from the AOCS Press. The book is edited by O. I. Aruoma, Managing Director of OICA International, and S. L. Cuppett, Department of Food Sciences, University of Nebraska. Item #NR113; hardbound, 256 pages, May 1997, ISBN 0-935315-79-9; list price $85.00, AOCS-member price $72.00.
New Techniques and Applications in Lipid Analyses is an informative and comprehensive reference source covering the latest and most important analytical topics in lipid chemistry. The editors are R. E. McDonald and M. M. Mossoba, both associated with the U. S. Food and Drug Administration. Item #NR116; hardbound, 416 pages, May 1997, ISBN 0-935315-80-2; list price $105.00, AOCS-member price $89.00.
Intervet, Inc. released a new video program, "Proper Vaccination Injection Techniques," demonstrating the correct procedures for successful vaccination of breeder pullets and commercial layers. Six vaccination procedures are demonstrated neck, wing, breast, leg, and tail administration of inactivated vaccines, and the wing web method for pox and other wing web vaccines. The program also covers proper vaccine storage and preparation procedures, needle selection, operation of vaccination devices and field crew applications.
A Spanish edition of the video is also available. Contact an Intervet Technical Account Representative or call Intervet at 800/922-8051, ext 4251.
Hen Eggs: Basic and Applied Science is a new release from CRC Press. The editors are T. Yamamoto, Osaka City University, Japan, and L. R. Juneja, H. Hatta and M. Kim, Taiyo Kagaku Company, Japan. It covers the most cutting edge advancements in egg science, including: structure of the egg; physiology of egg laying; chemical composition and activiy; nutritive evaluation; practical applications of egg lipids for food, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals; and the large scale preparation of antigen specific immunoglobulins (IgY).
Catalog No. 4005, ISBN: 0-8493-4005-5, 224 pages, January, 1997, $135.00 plus $9.95 shipping and handling. Contact CRC Press, 2000 Corporate Blvd, N.W., Boca Raton, FL 33431-9868; phone 800/272-7737 (561-994-0555 from Florida and outside the U S), FAX 800/374-3401.
Poultry of the World, by Loyl Stromberg, has 396 pages and over 410 color pictures. The work of the leading poultry photographers of the world are represented in this book. Research started in 1972. The book features such interesting topics as a translation of Aldrovani's discussion of the first breeds of chickens, the history of cockfighting, the longest crowing chickens, and exclusive pictures of Russian goose fighting. This book is now available from Stromberg Publishing Company, Pine River, MN 56474; phone 800/720-1134; FAX: 218/587-4230.
USPOULTRY Research Projects Now Available on the World Wide Web. Summaries
of more than 100 research projects funded by the U.S. Poultry & Egg
Association and the Poultry By-Products Council can now be accessed via
the association's Web site, located at http://www.poultryegg.org.
Other projects will be added as they are completed. Categories include
disease, food safety, production, further processing, by-products, eggs,
nutrition, and sludge/waste management. To access the projects, go directly
to http://www.poultryegg.org/research/index.html.
When prompted, input the project number, project title, researcher's name,
or a key word that is likely to be contained in the abstract. Excite for
Web Servers will then display a list of projects grouped by confidence.
To view a particular project, select the hypertext link that is underlined
on the page. For more information, contact U.S. Poultry & Egg Association,
1530 Cooledge Road, Tucker, GA 30084-7303; phone, 770/493-9401; FAX: 770/593-9257;
e-mail: ssmall@poultryegg.org
Back to Table of Contents
ROBERT G. ZIMBELMAN
FASFAS Washington Liaison
The following messages came out on the internet from Bob Zimbelman. Bob is the Executive Vice President of the American Society of Animal Science (ASAS), located in Washington, DC. He also serves as the Washington Liaison for the Federation of American Societies of Food Animal Sciences (FASFAS) and is a major contact person for the FASFAS Congressional Science Fellows. The articles are reproduced here because they appeared to be something that would be of general interest among PSA members. They also represent three small examples of a function of the proposed Federation of Animal Science Societies (FASS) Executive Vice President for Scientific Liaison, that would be located in Washington, DC the two-way communication of ideas and concerns between government (legislative and agency branches) and animal agricultural interests. In the first two cases, the information originated with other organizations and was forwarded. Bob also attends many hearings and meetings in Washington and sends his own informative messages out to animal science department heads, FASFAS Board members and others. The final item is one of his own reports to animal agriculture interests.
-The Editor
The Leverage of Federal Research
(from an editorial in the New York Times, Tuesday, May 13, 1997).
An exhaustive study for the National Science Foundation has discovered that the novel ideas conceived by American patent holders depend far more on research paid for by government than on research paid for by private industry. The finding belies the glib assertion, heard often in Congress last year, that as private industry expands its research budget, Washington can scale back its research activities. The implication is that proposed cutbacks in Federal research would damage the economy.
Ten years ago, private industry and the federal Government spent about the same amount on research and development.
Today the Government still spends about $60 billion much less if corrected for the cost of programs like weapons maintenance that do not add to scientific knowledge. Meanwhile, industry-funded research and development has soared to about $120 billion.
Yet the Government's relatively small research budget has produced big results.
Research funded by government and nonprofit agencies accounts for over 70% of the scientific papers cited in the study's sample of recent patent holders.
One explanation for the disparity is that government, more often than business, pays for basic research benefits from which spread throughout the economy, raising productivity.
Industry spends its money on more narrow pursuits, like development of a specific product. Also, Government and nonprofit researchers publish their findings early. Some industry research is suppressed to preserve proprietary advantage.
Spending on research and development contributes perhaps half of the growth in American living standards.
Each dollar spent on basic research permanently adds 50 cents or more each year to national output an impact that is many times larger than the permanent gains from increases in ordinary business investment.
This latest study suggests that government and university-based research pack the biggest wallop. Even so, the Administration and Congress are working on budget plans that would cut Federal research by between 14 and 20% after accounting for inflation.
President Clinton ran for office in 1992 on an agenda of public investment.
It was a good idea then.
It is an even better idea now.
Writing to a Member of Congress
(from a Council of Scientific Society Presidents message).
The American Institute of Physics (AIP) has summarized an important process for ensuring your views are heard by members of Congress whom you cannot personally visit when they are at home (of course, the personal visit is an even more effective contact). The AIP process and website are good models for us all.
Once Congress agrees upon a final Budget Resolution, the next step is to determine funding allocations for the 13 appropriations subcommittees in each chamber. After receiving their allocations, subcommittee chairs, beginning in the House, will begin drafting the legislation that will fund the agencies and programs under their jurisdiction. That is THE TIME to contact appropriators regarding concerns over funding for particular programs.
One of the best ways to communicate with a member of Congress is through a well-reasoned personal letter. Taking the time to write a letter shows sincerity and thoughtfulness. Your correspondence will be more effective if you follow these guidelines:
Timing is important. A letter sent after Congress acts is a missed opportunity, while correspondence sent months before an issue is considered is likely to be forgotten. The House will be acting on appropriations bills in the next few weeks. The Senate will act soon after. Now is the time to write.
(Editor's note: This message was sent out on May 31, 1997. It may or may not be too late for this year, depending on how fast decisions are made, but this information will be equally valid for future years.)
Limit your letter to one page and one subject. Avoid scientific jargon.
In the first paragraph, explain your reason for writing. Briefly note your "credentials," and include other pertinent information.
In the second paragraph, describe the importance of the issue. Cite relevant facts and avoid emotionalism. Frame your discussion from a national, rather than a personal, perspective. In the third, and concluding paragraph, request (not demand) a specific action. Thank the Member for his/her consideration of your views. Offer assistance.
Ensure that your letter is legible, and includes your name, address and phone number.
Traditional correspondence is more easily handled, and is generally thought to be more effective than electronic mail in many congressional offices. Faxes should be avoided unless there are time constraints.
The correct address style is:
The Honorable ____________
U. S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Representative _________:
or:
The Honorable ____________
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator __________:
Information on the Administration's FY 1998 request for each agency, and the latest congressional action, is available from the American Institute of Physics' website at http://webster.aip.org/gov/budginfo.html
The general visiting site for updating issues through a variety of home pages can be found on the current CSSP website at: http://www.msdg.umd.edu/CSSP/
A direct check on who are members of House and Senate Committees can be found either at: http://www.house.gov/appropriations/sub.html or http://www/aaas/org/spp/dspp/cstc/guide/sencoms.html or
from the CSSP Congressional Sourcebook, 105th Congress Edition.
Precision Ag Bills and Earmarking
of NRI Funds
There are two efforts which are trying to nip away at the NRI. The first involves two Precision Ag Bills (HR725 and S485). Some people have become supporters because they were told it was just endorsing the concept of precision ag. I assume we would all be supportive. The problem is that the "concept" of these two bills would require that NRI grants would need to be justified on the basis of precision ag. I think that would be hard to do for most animal systems projectsfor food safety or nutritional research; for market, trade and policy studies; and for many other areas. So if you are asked to be supportive or for your opinion, please consider this as you react and discuss this question.
Secondly, there is an attempt by corn growers to earmark NRI funds for corn genome work. The concept of earmarking is one to be avoided. The book proposing this program says that the corn growers would be willing to give up all other federal research support if they could have the corn genome as they request. The proposals vary somewhat, but one proposal is for $145 million. (Guess who also signed on to the Precision Ag Bill?) Currently [June] there is a meeting going on in Irvine, California concerning genome studies. The effort is becoming called the "food genome project," so as to include animal genome work. Most observers, though, believe it is primarily the corn genome effort that is driving this meeting. How much might be animal is uncertain.
If you hear of either of these two efforts or have insights that you
would like to pass on, please contact me at: RZimbelman@compuserve.com
Back to Table of Contents
July 15-17, 1997
US Poultry & Egg Association Hatchery-Breeder Clinic. Hilton
Hotel Downtown, Atlanta, Georgia. Contact US Poultry & Egg Assn., 1530
Cooledge Road, Tucker, GA 30084-7303; phone 770/493-9401, FAX 770/493-9257,
e-mail: cray@poultryegg.org
July 16-17, 1997
National Broiler Council Broiler Marketing Seminar `97. Nemacolin
Woodlands Resort, Farmington, Pennsylvania. Contact NBC, The Madison Building
- Suite 614, 1155 15th Street NW, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202/296-2622,
FAX 202/293-4005.
July 27 -August 1, 1997
16th International Congress of Nutrition. Montreal, Canada.
Contact 16th Intl. Congress of Nutrition, c/o Conference Science Office,
National Research Council Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1A 0R6; phone 616/993-7271.
August 3-6, 1997
Poultry Science Association Annual Meeting. University of Georgia,
Athens, GA.
August 4-6, 1997
US Poultry & Egg Association Informational Systems Seminar.
Hilton Hotel, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Contact US Poultry & Egg
Assn., 1530 Cooledge Road, Tucker, GA 30084-7303; phone 770/493-9401,
FAX 770/493-9257, e-mail: cray@poultryegg.org
August 18-22, 1997
11th Congress of the World Veterinary Poultry Association. Budapest,
Hungary. Contact Veterinary Medical Research Institute of the Hungarian
Academy of Sciences, Hungary-1581 Budapest, P.O. Box 18; phone +36 1 252-2455,
FAX +36 1 252-1069.
August 21-22, 1997
US Poultry & Egg Association Environmental Management Seminar.
Omni Hotel, Atlanta, Georgia. Contact US Poultry & Egg Assn., 1530
Cooledge Road, Tucker, GA 30084-7303; phone 770/493-9401, FAX 770/493-9257,
e-mail: cray@poultryegg.org
August 24-28, 1997
11th European Symposium on Poultry Nutrition. Faaborg Fjord,
Denmark. Contact Mr Thorkil Ambrosen, The Danish Poultry Council, Trommesalen
5, 4th Floor, DK 1614 Copenhagen V, Denmark; FAX +45 33 25 11 21.
September 7-11, 1997
11th AOAC International Annual Meeting and Exposition. San Diego,
CA. Contact AOAC Meetings Department, 481 North Frederick Avenue, Suite
500, Gaithersburg, MD 20877-2417; phone 301/924-7077; FAX 301-924-7089;
e-mail: meetings@aoac.org.
September 17-19, 1997
25th Poultry Science Symposium: Poultry Meat Science; organized
by the UK Branch of WPSA. University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Contact Ian
Richardson, Division of Food Animal Science, University of Bristol, Langford,
Bristol BS18 7DY, UK; phone +44 (0)117 928 9291, FAX +44 (0)117 928 9324.
September 17-18, 1997
US Poultry & Egg Association Poultry Production and Health
Seminar. Hilton Hotel Downtown, Atlanta, Georgia. Contact US Poultry
& Egg Assn., 1530 Cooledge Road, Tucker, GA 30084-7303; phone
770/493-9401, FAX 770/493-9257, e-mail: cray@poultryegg.org
September 21-25, 1997
International Conference on the Physical Properties of Fats, Oils,
and Emulsifiers with Application to Foods. Swissotel, Chicago, IL.
Contact the American Oil Chemists' Society, Meetings & Exhibits Dept,
P O Box 3489, Champaign, IL 61826-3489; phone 217/359-2344, FAX 217/351-8091,
e-mail: meetings@aocs.org
September 21-26, 1997
13th European Symposium on the Quality of Poultry Meat and the
7th European Symposium on the Quality of Eggs and Egg Products.
Poznan, Poland. Contact: Symposium Sekretariat, Dr Hab, Prof Jacek Kijowski,
Akadameia Rolnicza, ul. Wokska Polskiego 31, 60-624 Poznan, Poland; FAX
+4861 487 512.
October 8-10, 1997
National Broiler Council Annual Conference. Mayflower Hotel,
Washington, DC. Contact NBC, The Madison Building - Suite 614, 1155 15th
Street NW, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202/296-2622, FAX 202/293-4005.
October 20-22, 1997
4th International Symposium on Turkey Reproduction. Jane S McKimmon
Center, NCSU, Raleigh, NC. Contact Jessse Grimes; phone 919/515-5406, FAX
919/515-7070; E-mail:
JGRIMES@poultry.poulsci.ncsu.edu
October 30-November 2, 1997
Worldwide Food Expos incorporating the International Meat
Industry Convention and Exposition. McCormick Place, Chicago, Illinois.
Contact American Meat Institute, P. O. Box 3556, Washington, DC 20007;
phone 703/841-2400, FAX 703/527-0938.
November 9-14, 1997
International Symposium on New Approaches to Functional Oils and
Cereals. China Hall for Science and Technology, Bejing, China. Contact
Ms. Jean M. Wills, AOCS Headquarters, 1608 Broadmoor Drive, Champaign,
IL 61821; phone 217/359-2344, FAX 217/351-8091.
November 18-21, 1997
VIV Europe International Trade Show Intensive Animal production.
Utrecht, Holland. Contact Jaarbeurs Utrecht/Holland Royal Dutch Fairs-Jaarbeursplein,
3521 Al Utrecht, P O Box 8500, 3503 RM Utrecht; phone +31 30 2955 911,
FAX +31 30 294 0379.
June 21-26, 1998
10th European Poultry Conference (organized by the Israel Branch
of the (WPSA). Jerusalem Renaissance Hotel, Jerusalem, Israel. Contact
Conference Secretariat, WPSA - Israel Branch, 10th European Poultry Conference,
P. O. Box 50006, Tel Aviv 61500, Israel; phone (972 3) 5140000, FAX (972
3) 5175674/5140077, e-mail: POULTRY@Kenes.ccmail.compuserve.com
June 28-July 4, 1998
VIII World Conference on Animal Production. Seoul National University,
Seoul, Korea. Contact Dr. Jong K. Ha, Chairman, Organizing Committee, 8th
WCAP, Seoul National University, Suweon, Korea 441-744; phone 82-331-290-2348,
FAX 82-331-292-3801.
