Editorial: Food safety net still has holes
Published: Wednesday, Nov. 25, 2009 - 12:00 am | Page 14A

California, the great cornucopia of the United States, has much to be thankful for when it comes to food production.

From dairy products, citrus nuts and grapes to more specialized products, such as wine and dried persimmons, California puts food and drink on tables around the world.

The state is a pacesetter in U.S. and world markets on a number of fronts. California drives innovation in introducing new plant varieties, new ways of fending off pests and diseases and new ways of packaging to retain freshness.

Overall, our food supply is very safe. The University of California, Davis, with the Western Institute for Food Safety and Security, is a leader in research and outreach – helping to bring about new practices to improve food safety. State laboratories were instrumental in detecting the contamination of pet food with melamine in 2007.

But even with the strength of the state's safety net, there are still some holes to be mended. In recent years, deadly E. coli and salmonella outbreaks originating here have killed and sickened consumers.

As state Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter (Kern County), chairman of the Senate Food and Agriculture Committee, has said, "With each new outbreak – almonds in 2004, spinach in 2006, peppers in 2008 (and now beef this past summer) – we find cracks in our food safety and regulatory systems."

If California wants to maintain a global reputation for having the safest food grown anywhere, the state must take more of a leadership role in ensuring food safety.

Currently, the state has only 35 inspectors to monitor more than 5,500 food processing plants. As Florez points out, most California food processors can go two or three years without a state inspection. Worse, if a food is found to be tainted, the state's role is limited to a voluntary recall.

The agriculture industry seems content to rely on voluntary food safety programs, while awaiting further actions that may or may not come from the federal government. That's one reason bills aimed at tightening the safety net were watered down, vetoed by the governor or held in the Assembly:

These bills would have:

• Required food processors and growers to immediately notify the state when their own private testing reveals a contaminated food product.

• Given the state the power to force a recall.

• Provided penalties for processors and growers who choose not to do their own testing and are then subject to a food recall.

• Required grocery stores to stop a recalled food product when it is scanned at the checkout counter.

There's a predictable pattern here. Immediately after a rare but serious incident of food contamination, lawmakers demand action. But then the lobbyists gang up and the public loses interest. Legislation dies, only to resurface after the next outbreak.

No doubt, consumer safety depends on more than just legislation. Food preparers and household cooks must be diligent in storing and preparing items such as eggs and meat.

Yet you can't just blame a lack of "personal responsibility" for the food scares of recent years. The reality is California, with the scale and diversity of its food industry, has unresolved issues related to safety. They need to be resolved.

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/2348430.html