Volume 6: Human Health, 1989-96
Annex 1 to Chapter 4: Unfit meat and human food
The animal SBO ban

4.888 The Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (No. 2) Amendment Order 1990 introduced the animal SBO ban. ¹ This Order amended the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (No. 2) Order 1988 ² which had, among other provisions, introduced the prohibition on the sale or supply for feeding to animals of any feedstuff which incorporated animal protein- the ruminant feed ban. ³

4.889 The animal SBO ban was introduced by a simple amendment to this provision. By article 2 of the BSE (No. 2) Amendment Order 1990, article 8(3) of the BSE (No. 2) Order was amended to read as follows:

No person shall knowingly sell or supply for feeding to animals or poultry any specified bovine offal or any feedingstuff which he knows or has reason to suspect contains specified bovine offal or animal protein which is derived from specified bovine offal. ⁴

4.890 At the same time the definition of 'animals' in the ruminant feed ban was extended from meaning only ruminants to including all mammals except man, and any kind of non-mammalian four-footed beast. 'Specified bovine offal' was given the same meaning in the animal SBO ban as it was in the human SBO ban. ⁵ Consequently, the effect of this provision was to prohibit the sale or supply of feedstuff containing SBO for any mammal or four-footed beast.

4.891 The objective of the animal SBO ban was to keep SBO out of the animal feed chain. In legislative terms an effort was made to achieve this objective purely by means of this simple amendment to the ruminant feed ban. No separate legislation was introduced to regulate activity at any point prior to the point of sale of animal feedstuff by the feed manufacturer.

4.892 This was in contrast to the approach taken to the introduction of the human SBO ban. The Bovine Offal (Prohibition) Regulations 1989, which introduced the human SBO ban, are discussed in vol. 6: Human Health, 1989-96. The approach adopted in those Regulations was to legislate in the slaughterhouse in order to ensure that SBO was taken out of the human food chain at the earliest opportunity (the time of slaughter) and kept separate from material which was otherwise fit for human consumption.

4.893 One result of introducing the animal SBO ban by means of an amendment to the ruminant feed ban was that no new measures were introduced in order to augment the existing provisions for the separation of SBO from other material whether at the slaughterhouse or later in the feed production process. Rather, for all intents and purposes, the animal SBO ban relied upon the existing regime for the separation of SBO from non-SBO that was contained in the Bovine Offal (Prohibition) Regulations 1989. This regime was, in turn, based upon that established under the 1982 MSSR for the separation of unfit meat from meat fit for human consumption.

4.894 In comparing the existing regime for SBO separation under the human SBO ban with the requirements of the objective that SBO be kept out of the animal food chain, two central points emerge.

4.895 First, the existing regime for the separation of SBO was of limited scope in its application. That regime focused closely upon the slaughterhouse as the source of meat intended for human consumption. The separation provisions of the SBO Regulations applied neither to knacker's yards and hunt kennels, nor to renderers and collection centres. These were under an obligation either to sterilise or stain all the material they handled under the 1982 MSSR. ⁶

4.896 Unsterilised material was subject to the system of movement permits imposed by the 1982 MSSR. Equally, whilst renderers were encompassed within the scope of the movement permit system as premises to which consignments of stained SBO might be delivered, the process of rendering the SBO constituted sterilisation of the SBO within the meaning of the Regulations and so the rendered SBO material could thereafter be moved without the authority of any permit.

4.897 In the context of the human SBO ban and its objectives, this limited scope was sufficient to meet the objective of keeping SBO out of the human food chain. However, all these variously exempted premises were potentially part of the animal feed chain by reason of the fact that they assisted in the production and processing of material for inclusion in animal feed.

4.898 Second, the provisions for separation under the human SBO ban did not provide for the separation of SBO from material which, whilst unfit for human consumption, was still fit for animal consumption.

4.899 'Staining' was defined in the 1989 Regulations by reference to the same definition as in the 1982 MSSR. ⁷ No separate and distinct stain was to be used in order to identify SBO. Rather, it would be stained using the same two agents as were used to identify other unfit meat, namely Black PN or Brilliant Black BN.

4.900 The provisions governing storage of SBO at the slaughterhouse merely stipulated that SBO should be stored separately from meat which was fit for human consumption. ⁸ The 1989 Regulations made no provision for the method of storage of SBO vis-à-vis other unfit meat.

4.901 This material was required by the 1989 Regulations to be labelled 'to the effect that the specified bovine offal held therein is not for human consumption'. ⁹ However, the Regulations did not require the material to be identified expressly on the label as 'SBO' rather than simply as 'not for human consumption'. An identical labelling requirement was stipulated in respect of SBO being transported from the slaughterhouse to a processor for sterilisation or to premises for preparation or storage prior to further removal. ¹⁰

4.902 In the context of the human SBO ban the distinction between SBO and other meat unfit for human consumption was irrelevant. The objective of that ban was to ensure that SBO was kept out of the human food chain in the same way as other meat which was unfit for human consumption.