USDA Finds Pork Board, Grower
Group Too Close For Comfort

(Editor's note: Herein may be found a cautionary tale for cattlemen, given criticism of the close relationship between the checkoff-collecting Cattlemen's Beef Board and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.)

WASHINGTON —(AP)— A government audit raises questions about the close ties between a quasi-governmental board created to promote pork and the industry's trade association.

But the audit by the Agriculture Department's inspector general found no evidence the National Pork Board misused dollars collected from farmers.

``Our evaluation showed that the board basically used checkoff funds to finance pork promotion, research and consumer education projects,'' inspector general Roger Viadero wrote in an audit released last week.

Hog farmers contribute 45 cents of every $100 of animal value for a federally mandated checkoff fund. The money goes to the board, which later contracts promotion services through the National Pork Producers Council, the trade group.

While the audit did not find ``misuse or loss of checkoff funds,'' the report concluded the board ``has relinquished too much authority to its primary contractor,'' the council, and ``has placed the NPPC in a position to exert undue influence over board budgets and grant proposals.''

``The board has awarded all program grants to the NPPC since 1996,'' Viadero wrote, recommending the board take actions to ``accomplish appropriate separation.''

Council officials said the inspector general's concerns were unwarranted.

``What really stands out about this report is that it shows we did nothing wrong,'' NPPC President John McNutt said during a teleconference with the board.

He said Viadero ``wants to dramatically change a well established and well functioning organization.''

``An arm's length relationship does exist between the National Pork Board and the NPPC,'' said Greg Boerboom, a producer from Marshall, Minn., who is chairman of the board's budget committee.

The audit comes amid a movement by some pork producers for a referendum on whether the checkoff should be voluntary.

``There's nothing separating the NPPC from the pork board except a couple of inches of Sheetrock. It says we're justified,'' Rhonda Perry, a Missouri organizer of the anti-checkoff effort, said about the audit.

The board rents space in the council's Des Moines, Iowa, headquarters.

Perry said the group would announce next week it has enough signatures to force a vote on the issue.

The board, made up of 15 producers appointed by the agriculture secretary, was created by Congress 12 years ago to strengthen pork industry promotion. Last year, the program collected $47.2 million.

Similar programs are in place for other products such as beef, almonds and cotton.

One of the problems cited in the audit is that the board, with its staff of two, is understaffed and too reliant on the council to handle its duties.

``The board's dependence on the NPPC to administer subcontracts and carry out much of the board's work resulted in a weakened accountability over contributed funds,'' the audit said.

The inspector general recommended that USDA officials work with the board to develop a plan to ``accomplish appropriate separation'' from NPPC, including providing sufficient staff and accountability checks.