Alabama said:
To the lovely MRJ for whom I have the utmost respect in your integrity and dedication to promoting the increase in market shear for beef. I am sorry that I was not able to make it to Deadwood and spend some time getting to know you and learn more about your operation. I would consider a face-to-face conservation with you a pleasure indeed. Although I am not so sure that, you could understand my spoken words considering my strong slow accent. For that matter, I am not convinced that you understood some of the commits in my previous post.
I never intended to state that the check off was in bed with the packers (Although I am sure that packer influence is strong) I merely stated that by not promoting COOL it gave me the impression that it looked suspicious. Am I wrong in thinking that promotion of US beef by check off dollars would be more difficult on packers who sell both imported and domestic beef? I fail to understand why a US producer would not want the largest percentage of check off dollars promoting his product specifically. Without COOL, we have no way to nor does the consumer have a way to segregate beef based on where it is produced. I for one buy made in the US products every chance I get. If for no other reason than to try and keep my money at home where it can be spent back into the US economy. It is called patriotism. I don't think I am alone.
I further fail to understand how check off dollars are collected on boxed beef shipped into the US. In addition, I don't think that cattle bought outside the US and trucked into this country have paid a check off dollar when the packer owns them when the cross the border.
You have asked about COOL as a promotion in safer beef. In my mind, I at least know that the USDA has been the authority over all aspects of the production of US beef. Even down to the types of herbicides applied to pastures. I am not saying that we advertise US beef as safer merely that it was borne raised and processed in and under the laws of the US.
As for food service: I assume you mean food that is purchase already prepared like a McDonald's burger. COOL would offer the opportunity for restaurants to promote US support by selling only US produced. Much in the same way, they promote Angus Beef. COOL may even put pressure on restaurants to sell US beef.
I only see COOL as a plus for the US cow calf producer.
AL, doubt there would be a linguistic problem. My son-in-law is from northern AL, various of my cousins grew up in MO, MS, TN and FL, and one has lived most of her adult life in GA after growing up in MO.
Maybe I typed that first comment on linguistics too soon. In this post, you say you never meant to say the checkoff is in bed with the packers, yet in your previous post, you say "It looks like the check off is in bed with the packers...." And, why are you so sure the producers on the CBB and the committees working with checkoff programs are wimps that will not stand up to any attempted "packer influence" when it might harm cattle producers? Does one have to hate packers to be honest in your eyes?
However, when I post an answer to a specific post, it seems like a good idea to expand on the points because some who are not familiar with the checkoff may read it as well as the person being answered. I don't want to leave mis-information to cause more problems for the checkoff. It has enough people attacking it to serve their own agenda.
Why/how would promotion of US beef with checkoff dollars be worse for packers.......when the majority of the beef is USA beef. BTW, under COOL, the domestic beef would not be labeled, BUT the imported beef WOULD. If importers decide to promote some of that novelty item, it just may backfire on US producers. That is if the consumers can find any imported product. How much actually is sold at retail, virtually the only place it has to be labeled under COOL.
So, are you saying that because you do not understand how checkoff dollars are collected on imported boxed beef, it cannot be happening? If the packer trucking in cattle owns them more than ten days, he must pay the checkoff. Isn't it reasonable to think that a BIG packer is much more visible in his movement of cattle/boxed beef, therefore is more likely to be monitored more easily than an smaller individual operator that may be doing the same thing? Many means are used to monitor compliance with paying the checkoff, and there are not many that slip through without paying.
Food Service is restaurants, hotels, hospitals, school lunches (which I believe must use domestic beef under another rule/law, not sure) and maybe I'm missing some others. All beef that is further processed, such as pre-cooked, specialty meats, sandwich meats, and more are also exempted. I've read it is possible that ALL imported beef could be put through these exempted categories and we would have the costs of administering the law with none of that beef having to be labeled.
Re. McDonalds and other hamburgers, don't forget that the imported lean beef they add to our fatty trim beef brings up the value of the chuck and other cuts that would be ground for hamburger at a lower price than the modern cuts now being sold for more money from those primal cuts.
Benefits of M-ID in some form will far outweigh the benefits of COOL in its present form. Pete Crow has an excellent editorial in this weeks paper and he says M-ID already is being implemented by a MARKET DRIVEN push for it. Particularly for the age verification aspect. He believes the mandatory part will not even be necessary because the marketplace will require it before the government can get around to making it mandatory. What use will there be for COOL if that happens?
MRJ
