Let's hope all the controversy surrounding BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) or mad cow disease has died down by the time this article is printed. In the grand scheme of things, the United States weathered the controversy with our beef industry intact considering how it has affected the beef industries in other countries. Still, BSE put a damper on Christmas celebrations in cattle country, hammered what had been excellent beef prices and seriously hurt our beef exports. I would like to personally assure you that all of us here at MFA will continue to monitor the situation closely.

In addition, I would also like to assure our customers that MFA beef and dairy feeds do not contain meat and bone meal of any kind. In terms of BSE, ruminant meat and bone meal is a specified risk material. In August 1997, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned the use of ruminant-derived meat and bone meal in ruminant feeds. MFA complied. In fact, we took it a step further. To remove all doubt and to reinforce our resolve to keep MFA feeds at the highest levels of safety, we do not even allow pork meat and bone meal as an ingredient in beef or dairy feeds even though pork meat and bone meal is not a specified risk material.

Of course, one of the most expensive byproducts of the controversy was the loss of export markets. In 2003, the United States exported nearly $1 billion worth of beef to the Japanese market, which represents about one-third of all our beef exports. We'll get that market back, over time. In fact, I hope the Japanese will relent before this is published. I doubt it, but I hope it. Our beef products are the best in the world. But I'm afraid that many of our trading partners will use this opportunity to require a long period of negotiation.

Still, the American public was prepared for this latest media crisis of the day. A National Cattlemen's poll found that 96 percent of American consumers were aware of BSE. That's a phenomenally high number. In addition, the same poll showed 89 percent of U.S. customers proclaimed a high level of confidence in U.S. beef and in the U.S. regulatory system. In fact, at press time, domestic demand had pushed back to pre-BSE levels.

Many scholars and industry observers have since gone on record speculating as to why the U.S. public seemed to be immune to hysterical reaction to BSE. Maybe that's because as a nation we watched the British in the previous decade as well as the British media's reaction. Remember the scare headlines and the outrageous quotes of just a few years ago? In Britain, where eating habits did expose large numbers of people to risks, alarmists were claiming that deaths would be from hundreds of thousands up to 10 million. In fact, fewer than 150 deaths were attributed to Britain's decades-long practice of eating other than muscle cuts of beef. Surely that remembered embarrassment tempered U.S. media reaction.

In addition, much has been made of our regulatory steps. USDA is making additional changes as I write this in hopes of making a safe system even safer. But critics are quick to point out that Japan tests 100 percent of its animals before slaughter. Keep in mind Japan slaughters 1.2 million cattle a year. By contrast, the United States processes 37 million cattle each year. Sheer volume, however, isn't the most convincing argument. In the United States, 87 percent of our beef cattle are slaughtered at an average age of 18 months. Worldwide, scientists agree that the disease known as mad cow does not manifest itself until at least 30 months of age. In cattle age 30 months and older, the prion (the protein at issue in BSE) can be located in the brain, spinal cord and related tissues. None of these reaches the human food supply.

So what good is 100 percent testing of 18-month-old cattle? The practice is expensive. The cost for 100 percent testing is $50 per head on 37 million animals. What's more, it's ineffective. It's a feel good, double-edged technique employed by the Japanese. It's double-edged because it also functions beautifully as an import tariff. The Japanese, like the Europeans, are masters at thinly disguised tariffs.

One of the unforeseen results of all this is that USDA has stated mandatory animal identification and source verification efforts will be accelerated. For those of you who are already participating in MFA Health Track Beef Alliance, you can take comfort in knowing that as a Health Track participant, you will be qualified no matter which direction the cattle industry takes on this subject. Health Track was developed to allow producers to track and analyze very specific data. An unintended but beneficial consequence is that MFA Health Track fully meets all source verification criteria mentioned by government.

MFA Health Track, as I've said before, was created and structured to help MFA farmer/owners profitably respond to changes in the beef industry. It's doing that very well. Missouri is second only to Texas in cow/calf numbers. These producers represent a huge portion of our customer base. It's this underpinning of providing economic benefit to our owners that highlights MFA's focus on agriculture. That focus has remained on our producers throughout our 90 years of service. It's a focus we won't lose in these next 90 years. I hope you enjoy some of the articles and photographs celebrating our 90 years elsewhere in this issue.