A
Anonymous
Guest
Those polls are meaningless to what consumers will actually purchase.
Price and quality are the driving factors behind beef purchases, not country of origin. What consumers SAY and what consumers DO are two entirely different things as was proven by the success of sales of New Zealand lamb and Argentina grass fed beef. Consumers saying they want beef labeled does not mean they will prefer U.S. beef. Perhaps they want it labeled so they can purchase foreign beef. Consumer SAYING they will pay more for U.S. beef does not mean they will pay more for it WHEN 95% OF IT WOULD BE U.S. BEEF.
"M"COOL is the classic symbolism over substance law. It's a total joke!
1. Only 5% of the beef would be marked as imported creating a novelty item TO THE BENEFIT OF FOREIGN BEEF at the expense of labeling all beef.
2. If consumers wanted Country of Origin labeling, they could buy source verified branded beef products now.
3. The law, as written, is unenforceable because labeling beef IS NOT LABELING CATTLE. THE CATTLE HAVE TO BE TRACED.
4. Country of origin will require traceback and that will add costs to this industry that is passed down to the producer.
Country of Origin labeling is the biggest "symbolism over substance" law this industry has ever seen and totally unnecessary in the wake of source verified branded beef products.
I wouldn't call them liars, I would just say they didn't know what they were talking about. Remember, before R-CULT the blamers had influence in NCBA.
Of course not! That's why we have source verified branded beef programs rather than some worthless unenforceable government mandate.
I totally disagree with NCBA on this. This notion is ridiculous. If beef is inspected by the USDA it should be labeled "USDA INSPECTED".
All they are doing is caving into the conspiracy theorists like you.
THEY ARE TELLING THE TRUTH!!!
IT'S SPIN MASTERS LIKE YOU THAT ARE CLAIMING THAT "USDA INSPECTED" MEANS SOMETHING OTHER THAN "USDA INSPECTED".
There is a young man from this state that spent time in prison for mislabeling beef. LABELS HAVE TO BE MEAN WHAT THEY SAY.
There is no way in heck, short of DNA, that any government official can identify the origin of a carcass unless there is accountability for every carcass in that plant.
You are such a hypocrite Old Timer. On one hand, you don't trust the packers to label beef correctly because you claim they are hiding foreign beef behind a USDA grade stamp. On the other hand, you claim that traceback is not necessary for the government to prove that a Canadian carcass came from Canada. You don't trust the packers to label beef correctly yet that is exactly what you are doing with this flawed law and no traceback system. I just can't believe you "M"COOL proponents. Can't you remember your postions from one day to the next and see how they conflict?
I have two carcasses in front of me. One is from Canada and one is from Monatana. HOW THE HECK ARE YOU GOING TO KNOW IF THE BEEF FROM THOSE CARCASSES WAS LABELED CORRECTLY UNLESS YOU HAVE A TRACEBACK ON EVERY CRITTER COMING IN AND EVERY PACKAGE OF BEEF GOING OUT?
The only way to HALFWAY enforce it is to have traceback on every carcass going into the plant and every package of beef going out of the plant. The only way to TOTALLY enforce it is to have DNA samples on every carcass to use in case of a packer blaming allegation of false labeling which is a given in this blaming industry.
I fed cattle for the U.S.'s first totally process verified branded beef program, PM beef and the beef was source verified with samples for DNA testing if necessary. Nobody needs this stupid flawed law to accomplish what consumers are asking for. Source verification has a lot more to offer consumers than generic "Country of Origin Labeling".
That's the whole problem with this law is that it was written by cowboys who claim to be in the cattle industry and not the beef industry yet somehow they think they know more about the beef industry than those who are actually in the beef industry.
~SH~
