Monitoring-
Report Feed 2014
SALMONELLA: MONITORING IN
THE INTERESTS OF CONSUMER
PROTECTION
THE 4 MOST FREQUENT
CONTAMINANTS IN
AGRICULTURE
Salmonella are considered to be the frequent cause of serious gas-
trointestinal illness in humans. A high level of food safety is there-
fore important in order to minimise and wherever possible prevent
the spread of salmonella through slaughtering pigs and poultry. This
is why there are strict hygiene requirements for livestock farmers
stipulated by the legislator and QS. These regulations concern,
among other things, the storage and handling of feed: storage in
closed rooms as well as regular cleaning and disinfection of these
rooms, silos and containers in which feed is stored are a “must” for
farmers and agricultural businesses.
In addition, all poultry and pig farmers should always consider feed
when identifying potential entry pathways for salmonella. To support
them in this process, feed products are subjected to specific tests
for salmonella as part of QS monitoring. This enables farmers to
identify potential risk herds for salmonella contamination at an early
stage and to take appropriate action. This protects the entire value
added chain – from farmer to consumer – by preventing the spread
of contamination. It is worth mentioning that almost 50,000 tests
for salmonella have been carried out to date, and that only 54 sam-
ples were positive – equivalent to just 0.1%. 14 of these samples
came from agricultural businesses.
Although DON and ZEA, two mycotoxins that can directly impact
animal health, were frequently detected, it was rare for the values
to exceed admissible limits: out of more than 11,000 tests in total,
levels exceeding the EU reference values were found in only 21
cases.
Antibiotically active substances are among the most frequently in-
vestigated parameters in agriculture - because if they are detected
in a sample, then the product in question must be removed from
the market. Fortunately, this was only the case in 36 out of 3,154
tests, however.
Parameter
Total
tests
Positive
findings
Type of
business
Antibiotically
active substances 3,154 36 15 cattle farming
21 pig farming
Salmonella 7,194 14 3 cattle farming
11 pig farming
Antibiotically active substances and salmonella
Special effect:
acid as preservative
Parameter
Value
measured
DON 6,332 2,872 17 17 pig farming
ZEA 4,966 2,370 4 3 cattle farming
1 pig farming
DON and ZEA
Type of
business
Value excee-
ding limit
Total
tests
918
687
17
400
1
23
0 1
Measured
value
Number analysis
0-0.25 ng/kg
>0.25-0.5 ng/kg
>0.5-0.75 ng/kg
>0.75 ng/kg
Dioxin dl PCB
130
63
10
1
AGW
4 ng/kg
HG
5 ng/kg
>5 ng/kg
>4-5 ng/kg
>2-4 ng/kg
>0-2 ng/kg
AGW
0.5 ng/kg
HG
0.75 ng/kg
A sample tests positive for
antibiotically active substan-
ces although the sample
does not actually contain
any such substances. How
can this happen? Feed like
silage, in which acid is used
as a preservative, can sup-
ply a “false positive” result.
This is why particular atten-
tion should be paid to the
type of feed used for tes-
ting.
FEED MONITORING
ON FARMS
There are just under 50,000 livestock farmers in the QS scheme, who produce their own feed. These “on-farm mixers” ac-
count for roughly one in four of the tests carried out within the framework of feed monitoring. Sampling on the farms is
organised via the coordinators, generally during the independent inspection by the auditor. In total, just under 40,000
tests have been carried out to date, chiefly on cattle and pig farms. The poultry farmers generally use purchased ready
feed for poultry fattening and therefore participate only seldom in the agricultural feed monitoring process.
■
1,439
17,859
20,662
3.8
46.5
49.7
Sampling at agricultural businesses: cattle farmers lead the way
Distribution of samples in %
No. of analysis by type of business
Analysis results of Dioxins and
dl-PCB in oils and fats
Analysis results of Dioxins in fish oil
AGW: Intervention level (0.5 ng/kg). From value of 0.5 ng/kg
company must search for the cause and initiate measures.
HG (only Dioxines): Maximum level. From value of 0.75 ng/kg
product is not suitable for the market
AGW: Intervention level (4 ng/kg). From value of 4 ng/kg
company must search for the cause and initiate measures..
HG: Maximum level (5 ng/kg). From value of 0.75 ng/ kg
product is not suitable for the market
QS RESPONDS SUCCESSFULLY WITH TIGHTENED CONTROL PLANS FOR FATS AND OILS
An incident with far-reaching consequences shook the sector at the beginning of 2011. Some feeds with sometimes high
dioxin concentrations found their way into the marketplace after technical fatty acids had been mixed with fatty acids for
feeding purposes. Consequently, a large number of businesses had to be suspended. QS responded immediately by tighte-
ning its control plans for products containing oils and fats from particularly risky processes with the so-called release in-
spection. Ever since, traders and producers must subject their final products batch by batch to a release inspection prior
to marketing, which also means 100% monitoring. A glance at the results of the current 2,624 analyses shows that thanks
to the strict intervention of QS, the scheme participants now have the situation under control. Accordingly, the legally
prescribed maximum dioxin level was only exceeded in two instances. Although it was above the action threshold in 33
instances, it was still below the maximum level. A similar pattern was seen with dioxin-like PCB where the action threshold
was exceeded in one instance. Even though the numerous tests did not produce any alarming results, they show that
dioxin and PCB still have to be monitored. A reading was determined with 86 % of the samples examined. Dioxin was de-
tected in 817 samples and dioxin-like PCB in 918 – albeit in small quantities. 480 analyses produced results close to the
action threshold, which is almost 20 % of all tests. Conclusion: there is still good reason for diligence, because dioxins
and PCB remain a risk.
■
FLAWLESS RAW MATERIALS
While only few tests showed levels exceeding limit values for unde-
sirable substances, no such levels at all were found for other sub-
stances, such as heavy metals and dioxins. The satisfying results of
feed monitoring are also due to the fact that the farmers handle
feed with extreme care and receive flawless raw materials from the
feed producers. By controlling the raw materials that leave their pre-
mises, the producers play a key role in ensuring safe feed on the
farm.
■
Dioxin incident in 2011 has a lasting
effect on the industry
