Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman says a major trade conflict may be looming with the European Union over the ban on hormone-treated meat imports, and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association wants broad sanctions sufficient to offset the loss of beef sales in the EU.

The developments yesterday were the latest in the continuing row over the EU's ban against imports of meat from animals that have been treated with hormones.

Glickman told the National Association of Agricultural Journalists that agricultural trade barriers will be at the top of his agenda during the coming round of negotiations at the World Trade Organization.

The EU flap could become a "major conflict," Glickman says.  A major reason is that the EU will not be able to meet a May 13 WTO deadline to get rid of the hormone import ban.

"Our patience is gone," says NCBA chief economist Chuck Lambert.  The EU response to the WTO ruling has been to initiate yet more risk assessments, says Lambert, despite the fact that it has been conducting "futile risk assessments for 10 years."

NCBA has asked that a retaliation list of EU products to the United States remain widely diversified with both agricultural and non-agricultural products and be of sufficient size to offset the loss of beef sales.  The association also wants the list of products changed on an on-going basis to target all EU member states.

Even then, says Lambert, retaliation or compensation "will not benefit the beef industry and should be viewed only as a means to an end -- market access."

In a statement released yesterday, Glickman said U.S. and EU officials realize the EU will not be in compliance with the WTO deadline of May 13.

"For that reason, and until the ban is removed, the United States has proposed to label U.S. beef, and the EU has made a general offer of compensation.  The U.S. is open to either labeling or compensation as an interim solution."