ARTICLE FEED & ADDITIVE MAGAZINE June 2023 67 Being recognised as a supplier of consistently safe products can be more important than having the lowest cost ingredients. The ability to prove that feed inputs are safe, and that adequate due diligence protocols are in place to safeguard food safety can differentiate a trustworthy supplier from others in the marketplace. ACHIEVING A FOOD SAFETY CULTURE: ABILITY, CAPABILITY AND WILLINGNESS A company’s commitment to feed safety is reflected in its feed safety culture. For example, employees’ understanding that ingredients must meet quality parameters before being accepted – and their willingness to comply with these standards - is an example of a feed safety culture in action. All team members should demonstrate the ability, capability, and willingness to support a feed safety culture. Achieving buy-in requires knowledge transfer across the organisation, developing employees’ technical skills and ongoing communication. Sadly, there are some people who try to “game” the system to gain financial advantage. A few examples of feed fraud include substitution of ingredients, use of ingredients that arrive in a contaminated condition at the processing plant or are intentionally mislabelled. Fraud can occur at any point in the supply chain and employees should be alert to red flags. Potential signs of feed fraud include products being offered below normal market price, shipping from an atypical location or following a non-logical transportation route, products having a different look or smell, unexpected results in the finished feed analysis, or reduced production. BEYOND CULTURE – PRACTICAL MEASURES TO ASSURE FEED QUALITY A feed safety culture should be paired with mitigation efforts to address non-human risk factors. Early detection and intervention steps are essential to support the safety and quality of grain. The use of Selko's feed additives to protect and preserve grain quality can address challenges that can damage quality or create conditions for contamination. Not only should these measures be in place, but companies should be able to demonstrate that the measures are implemented. Figure 1. The “triangle” of feed safety culture looks at the ability, capability, and willingness to engage with feed safety. Source: GMP+ International. What are the feed fraud signals in my supply chain? Purchasing Logistics/transport Receiving Production Product below normal market price From another origin than normal Name of product or supplier is not in line with contracts Product traversed a nonlogical route within the supply chain Product leoded at another location than expected Other transporting company than contracted Product looks or smells different Documents are missing Changes are made on documents Product is sealed but seal is broken or packaging has been opened Processing is different than normal (smell, capacity, melting point, etc.) Finished product analysis are different than expected Animal production results are reduced unexpectedly . . . . . . . . . . . . . Figure 2. Feed fraud signals along the supply chain. Feed fraud is an intentional practice for financial gain. Source: GMP+ International.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUxNjkxNQ==