• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

7 Easy Steps.........

Mike

Well-known member
USDA can implement COOL in 7 simple steps
Mar 26, 2007 10:20 AM



A joint letter that reactivates the Americans for Country of Origin Labeling (ACOL) coalition was sent recently to the leadership of both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives to request that mandatory Country-of-Origin Labeling (COOL) be implemented by September 2007 and to encourage Congress to affirm its support of implementing COOL since the law has been on the books since the passage of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.

The letter – signed by 213 organizations, including R-CALF USA of Billings, Mont., and 25 of its Affiliates – represents millions of U.S. producers and U.S. consumers.

ACOL is asking Congress to pass Senate Bill 404, bipartisan legislation introduced by Sen. Craig Thomas, R-Wyo., which would change the implementation date for COOL to Sept. 30, 2007. This bill is co-sponsored by: Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.; Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa; Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont.; Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M.; Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D.; Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyo.; and, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D.

ACOL also asks Congress to pass H.R. 357, introduced by Rep. Dennis Rehberg, R-Mont., and which also would change the COOL implementation date to Sept. 30, 2007. Co-sponsors include Rep. Stephanie Herseth, D-S.D., and Rep. Barbara Cubin, R-Wyo.

R-CALF USA filed comments with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that provide steps the agency can take to implement Mandatory COOL immediately.

“R-CALF is recommending seven specific improvements USDA can use to simplify the implementation of COOL rules for beef, based on some of the agency’s own actions when, in 2005, it implemented COOL rules for fish and seafood,” said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard.

USDA can immediately implement COOL for beef by:

· Allowing packers to indicate beef has come from imported animals without having to specify each further production step that may have occurred in the United States.

· Allowing packers to label blended products with a list of the countries of origin that may be contained in the product, rather than a definitive list of each country.

· Allowing retailers to rely on pre-labeled products for origin claims.

· Allowing meat packers to rely on country markings that already are applied to cattle imports in order to determine origin.

· Eliminating unnecessary and duplicative record-keeping requirements regarding chain of custody and separate tracking during the production process to allow packers and retailers to rely on documents they already keep in the ordinary course of business.

· Reducing the record retention requirement from two years to one year.

· Specifying that producers and retailers do not need to demand affidavits or third party verification audits of suppliers in order to adequately substantiate origin claims.

During an afternoon conference call, Thomas told participants he was proud to have been a sponsor of this “very reasonable” bill and that he was optimistic it would pass.

Know origin

“There’s just no reason why, when consumers purchase meat just like they purchase T-shirts, (they) have a right to know where it comes from,” Thomas said. “As we have more and more foreign trade – and there’s going to be more foreign trade as time goes on – I think it makes it even more important.”

Baucus told participants that consumers want to know where their food is coming from.

“COOL is not so expensive that it can’t be included – even under budget resolutions that we’ll be passing in Congress later this year; bottom line, it’s just not that expensive,” Baucus said. “The big thing is to get this legislation passed so it’s implemented, that’s the goal here. USDA has been dragging its feet. The goal is to get it implemented sooner rather than later.”
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
USDA can immediately implement COOL for beef by:

· Allowing packers to indicate beef has come from imported animals without having to specify each further production step that may have occurred in the United States.

· Allowing packers to label blended products with a list of the countries of origin that may be contained in the product, rather than a definitive list of each country.

· Allowing retailers to rely on pre-labeled products for origin claims.

· Allowing meat packers to rely on country markings that already are applied to cattle imports in order to determine origin.

· Eliminating unnecessary and duplicative record-keeping requirements regarding chain of custody and separate tracking during the production process to allow packers and retailers to rely on documents they already keep in the ordinary course of business.

· Reducing the record retention requirement from two years to one year.

· Specifying that producers and retailers do not need to demand affidavits or third party verification audits of suppliers in order to adequately substantiate origin claims.


Its just using common sense and keeping it simple-- but you watch USDA following in goosestep to their Packer Handlers will try to make it as difficult and costly to producers as possible...And good old NCBA in their illicit tryst with USDA/AMI/Tyson etal will snuggle up to them and cheer them on with a "way to go big boy".....
:roll: :wink: :lol:
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Oldtimer - you jumped the gun on this thread. It said 7 easy steps - not the 10 easy steps you used to follow when you were on the A A program.

Cargill and Tyson are enjoying the best times of their lives with the border games. They may look to you like they want the border open, but that is only due to the fact that you quit the A A program and went back to that good Canadian Whiskey. :wink:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
Oldtimer - you jumped the gun on this thread. It said 7 easy steps - not the 10 easy steps you used to follow when you were on the A A program.

Cargill and Tyson are enjoying the best times of their lives with the border games. They may look to you like they want the border open, but that is only due to the fact that you quit the A A program and went back to that good Canadian Whiskey. :wink:

They want the border open - they can play bigger games that way. Seven times more cattle South of the 49th - that means seven times more money. Then also consider that your prices follow ours.... It's not hard to figure out.

Maybe there's something you catch from eating Galloways that slows your deductive reasoning......... Is that why Scotchmen are so beligerant? :wink: :lol:
 

mwj

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
rkaiser said:
Oldtimer - you jumped the gun on this thread. It said 7 easy steps - not the 10 easy steps you used to follow when you were on the A A program.

Cargill and Tyson are enjoying the best times of their lives with the border games. They may look to you like they want the border open, but that is only due to the fact that you quit the A A program and went back to that good Canadian Whiskey. :wink:

They want the border open - they can play bigger games that way. Seven times more cattle South of the 49th - that means seven times more money. Then also consider that your prices follow ours.... It's not hard to figure out.

Maybe there's something you catch from eating Galloways that slows your deductive reasoning......... Is that why Scotchmen are so beligerant? :wink: :lol:


You mean that Canada has 7 times more cattle than the US :shock: I had better check and see if mine are still around when it gets daylight :wink:
 

Ben Roberts

Well-known member
"Allowing packers to label blended products with a list of countries of origin that may be contained in the product, rather than a definitive list of each country."

I thought the whole issue of M-COOL, was so that the American consumers would know the ( country of origin ) of the beef they were buying. Now, the watered down version, is going to allow a list of maybe five or six countries on the label, that dosen't tell the consumers where the beef came from. These countries are not even in the same hemisphere, much less, on the same continent. Like i've said many times before, I just don't see the significance in M-COOL. Now more than ever, M-COOL looks to be only a marketing tool to keep Canadian beef out of the USA. What a waste of time.

Ben Roberts
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Ben, it's not about keeping anybody's beef out of the US - the USDA/AMI will see to it that we'll take beef from any crap hole Tyson can get a good deal from. MCOOL is about giving US producers a fighting chance against the foreign beef that is coming. Consumers can't buy ours and not Argentina's if they can't tell it apart and if thet buy Argentina's, the price of ours just went down.
 

Work Hard and Study Hard

Well-known member
Now more than ever, M-COOL looks to be only a marketing tool to keep Canadian beef out of the USA.


If this is a problem for you then you don't raise calves in the US, and if that is the case then this US cattleman doesn't care. I raise beef in the US, I look out for my own interests foremost.
 

canadian angus

Well-known member
Boy do we know that, interesting thing is the two big players here are for sale. We have a rule coming down in July that will handcuff all, the over 30 month rule. Pick bottles and work when I need to will be happy then, no smarter but the head in the sand works!

Decieve and molest the normal population is the name of the game.

CA
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
If we buy out Tyson Foods Canada Sandhusker - will you drop the Cool idea? :wink:

Why wouldn't you want to claim your beef as a 'Product of Canada'?

Ben, COOL is about competition for market share.
 

Ben Roberts

Well-known member
canadian angus said:
Boy do we know that, interesting thing is the two big players here are for sale. We have a rule coming down in July that will handcuff all, the over 30 month rule. Pick bottles and work when I need to will be happy then, no smarter but the head in the sand works!

Decieve and molest the normal population is the name of the game.

CA

The two big players are for sale, WHY
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Ben Roberts said:
canadian angus said:
Boy do we know that, interesting thing is the two big players here are for sale. We have a rule coming down in July that will handcuff all, the over 30 month rule. Pick bottles and work when I need to will be happy then, no smarter but the head in the sand works!

Decieve and molest the normal population is the name of the game.

CA

The two big players are for sale, WHY

Very good question, Ben. That is the question that needs to be answered before anybody goes any further.
 

Ben Roberts

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Ben, it's not about keeping anybody's beef out of the US - the USDA/AMI will see to it that we'll take beef from any crap hole Tyson can get a good deal from. MCOOL is about giving US producers a fighting chance against the foreign beef that is coming. Consumers can't buy ours and not Argentina's if they can't tell it apart and if thet buy Argentina's, the price of ours just went down.

Sandhusker, 45% of the beef consumed in the USA, is in the form of ground beef. just tell me, where are we going to get the lean beef from, that we blend with the tons and tons of 50/50 trim created in this country, that allows us to market that 50/50 trim, at a much better price, than rendering. If the packers had to render that trim, would they pay as much for fats? NO The price of ours did just go down, with out Argentina.

Ben Roberts
 

Ben Roberts

Well-known member
Work Hard and Study Hard said:
Now more than ever, M-COOL looks to be only a marketing tool to keep Canadian beef out of the USA.


If this is a problem for you then you don't raise calves in the US, and if that is the case then this US cattleman doesn't care. I raise beef in the US, I look out for my own interests foremost.

Work Hard and Study Hard,

You should care who I am, And if you are looking out for your interest, in M-COOL, I'm sorry, you need to study harder.

Ben Roberts
 

Ben Roberts

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
rkaiser said:
If we buy out Tyson Foods Canada Sandhusker - will you drop the Cool idea? :wink:

Why wouldn't you want to claim your beef as a 'Product of Canada'?

Ben, COOL is about competition for market share.


RobertMac,

Question for you, if you would put Canadian beef, along side of US beef in the retail stores in the south and southwest, what market share, would we have then?

Ben Roberts
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Ben Roberts said:
Sandhusker said:
Ben, it's not about keeping anybody's beef out of the US - the USDA/AMI will see to it that we'll take beef from any crap hole Tyson can get a good deal from. MCOOL is about giving US producers a fighting chance against the foreign beef that is coming. Consumers can't buy ours and not Argentina's if they can't tell it apart and if thet buy Argentina's, the price of ours just went down.

Sandhusker, 45% of the beef consumed in the USA, is in the form of ground beef. just tell me, where are we going to get the lean beef from, that we blend with the tons and tons of 50/50 trim created in this country, that allows us to market that 50/50 trim, at a much better price, than rendering. If the packers had to render that trim, would they pay as much for fats? NO The price of ours did just go down, with out Argentina.

Ben Roberts

First things first, Reverend Roberts, it's not just lean that the packers want to bring up here. They want the steaks and roasts from SA as well. They'll pump solution in it if they need do (and sell salt water at steak prices), or if consumers turn their noses, they'll just sell them chicken or pork - either way they move product. It's a simple business plan, and simple usually is best.

Are you the guy that we need to go thru to get a little more rain?
 

Ben Roberts

Well-known member
Sandhusker, I'll do my best to send you some rain, but really, i'm not to sure how much power I have in that field. I've had to ask for alot of forgiveness in the past.

Amen
 
Top