|
| Author |
Message |
Sandhusker
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 18076
Location: Nebraska
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:49 pm Post subject: COOL discounting Canadian cattle? |
 |
|
Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA has provided the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) with information to show that the American Meat Institute’s (AMI’s) claim that the U.S. country-of-origin labeling (COOL) law discourages U.S. meatpackers from purchasing foreign cattle is unsupported by actual market information. AMI made this unsupported claim in comments it submitted to USTR on Jan. 8, 2010.
Importantly, data collected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), however, show that the 5,157 head of Canadian cattle purchased by U.S. meatpackers during the week of January 4-10, 2010, were purchased at prices much closer in relation to domestic cattle prices than were the prices paid for the Canadian cattle purchased two years ago during the same period (January 7-13, 2008), which was prior to the implementation of COOL.
“We provided USTR with a chart that shows in January 2008, prior to COOL, the U.S. meatpackers were discounting Canadian cattle purchased under forward contracts on a dressed basis $13.17 per cwt below the price they were paying for comparable domestic cattle,” said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard. “But today, after the implementation of COOL, these same Canadian cattle are now being priced much closer to domestic cattle, with only a $7.84 per cwt difference in prices.
“These facts show that contrary to AMI’s claim, U.S. meatpackers today are assigning a higher value to foreign cattle relative to domestic cattle after the implementation of COOL than they assigned to these same cattle before COOL went into effect,” he continued. “These facts also further demonstrate that Canada’s and Mexico’s complaints against our COOL law filed at the World Trade Organization (WTO) are baseless, just as we have explained in our formal comments to USTR.”
Bullard said R-CALF USA is not surprised by AMI’s recent attack on COOL.
“AMI has been fighting for nearly a decade against the public’s right to know where their food is produced, but what AMI really is fighting over is control over the cattle and beef markets,” Bullard pointed out. “Prior to COOL, meatpackers could source cattle anywhere they could obtain them cheaper.
“Today, however, even though USDA has not yet implemented COOL as Congress intended, it still gives the consumer more power to decide from what country they want their food produced, and it is this loss of market control that motivates AMI to side with foreign governments in a direct attack against our sovereign right to have a domestic food labeling law,” he emphasized.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Kato
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 2519
Location: Manitoba - At the end of the road
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ya, compare the discount applied because of COOL to the discount that was applied two years ago due to BSE. Apples and oranges. There is much more to this than one simple comparison. The discounts applied at our end are much higher than that. There is the extra freight to get to the select number of packers that process Canadian cattle. There is the extra shrink that comes from those extra miles. There is the extra cost of holding the cattle because they are only processed on certain days.
These costs are all pushed back onto us.
On the other hand, our packers are doing quite well thank you. They have a win win situation. They can buy cheap cattle from us, quoting MCOOL as a reason to discount, and they can get a premium in your grocery stores. MCOOL only discriminates against one type of person in this country, and that is the cattle producer who sells live cattle, which would be us.
Maybe someday a little bit of the extra money they are starting to make will work it's way back to us.  Ya, and someday RCALF will decide that Canadian and American cattlemen should work together for their common good too.
| Quote: |
U.S. retailers build up Canadian beef under COOL
Staff
1/15/2010 7:18:00 PM
The mandatory country-of-origin labelling (COOL) requirements that now hang over Canadian beef in U.S. retail meat cases are being leveraged in some regional-level stores to build "unique" store brands.
That's according to the Beef Information Centre, a marketing and communications arm of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, which said in a release Friday that it's been working with U.S. customers to build branded beef programs.
"Retailers recognize that development of private label and branded beef programs are key to profitability and that Canadian beef can deliver on the consistency and quality attributes required for a successful branded program," the centre said.
"The target is regional retailers who, in order to stay competitive, are looking to develop a brand -- a brand that can deliver specific desirable attributes for their market, every time, and at the volumes required," BIC chairman and Ontario feedlot operator John Gillespie said in the release.
As an example, BIC cited Pennsylvania-based Stauffers of Kissel Hill, which operates eight supermarkets in and around Harrisburg and Lancaster.
"SKH wished to develop a brand that would be widely recognized and accepted in its market area, with attributes that could not be easily matched by the competition," BIC said.
SKH, the centre said, has now been paired with a Canadian packer to source a "certified corn-fed, AAA grade Canadian beef program" labeled "Stauffer's Choice Beef. The on-pack labels identify the beef as Product of Canada, BIC said.
SKH shoppers have accepted the brand and its Canadian sourcing because the eating experience has consistently met or exceeded their expectations, BIC quoted SKH meat manager John Gerlach as saying.
"The program has been extremely successful, with SKH reporting a strong double digit increase in meat department sales over the past two years," Gillespie said.
Bright red
BIC also cited Maryland-based Panam Supermarkets, which sell primarily to the Hispanic market and are working with Cargill's Ontario-based beef packing facility, Better Beef.
Panam is selling product under its own brand, associated with Better Beef's brand, BIC said. "The Hispanic consumer prefers bright red meat colour and white fat, two attributes that Canadian beef delivers consistently.
"Under the Canadian grading system, only carcasses with white fat and bright red meat are selected for the top grades: Canada Prime, AAA, AA or A," which are colour requirements unique to the Canadian grading system, BIC said.
COOL legislation, passed by the U.S. government in June 2008, requires country-of-origin labelling for beef, pork, lamb, chicken and goat meat, and certain perishable commodities sold at retail outlets in the U.S.
The Canadian government in October launched a challenge of COOL at the World Trade Organization, contending that "in the context of the integrated North American beef and pork supply chains, U.S. COOL has resulted in additional and unnecessary costs being imposed on Canadian cattle and hog exports.
"U.S. processors, for instance, have to segregate Canadian animals and the meat from these animals at their facilities, which generates additional costs. Because of these additional costs, some processors no longer buy Canadian animals, buy them only on certain days, or buy them at a discounted price."
But Canada remains the largest supplier of grain-fedbeef to the U.S., exporting over 300,000 tonnes per year, BIC said Friday.
Citing a study of U.S. consumers last fall, BIC said product identified as Canadian beef drew a "strong response" with over 76 per cent agreeing when consumers were asked if Canadian beef is a premium product.
The study also found Canadian beef has a "positive position in consumers' minds," as 59 per cent of participants agreed Canadian beef "came from a wholesome, natural environment," BIC said. |
Is this what the boys at RCALF had in mind when they decided that Canadian cattlemen were the enemy?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
burnt
Rancher
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 4249
Location: Mid-western Ontario
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kato wrote: |
Is this what the boys at RCALF had in mind when they decided that Canadian cattlemen were the enemy? |
Your question assumes that rcalfers actually have a mind. Or at least gives them the benefit of the doubt.
That is considerably more generous than many would be.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Kato
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 2519
Location: Manitoba - At the end of the road
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sandhusker
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 18076
Location: Nebraska
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kato, "Is this what the boys at RCALF had in mind when they decided that Canadian cattlemen were the enemy?"
No. Primarily because R-CALF has NEVER considered Canadian cattlemen their enemy. R-CALF's position is that Canadian cattlemen are more a tool that the multi-nationals use against us, and visa versa.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Kato
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 2519
Location: Manitoba - At the end of the road
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Big Muddy rancher
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 15240
Location: Big Muddy valley
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sandhusker
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 18076
Location: Nebraska
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sandhusker
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 18076
Location: Nebraska
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Big Muddy rancher
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 15240
Location: Big Muddy valley
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Kato
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 2519
Location: Manitoba - At the end of the road
|
|
| Back to top |
|
burnt
Rancher
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 4249
Location: Mid-western Ontario
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
