MRJ - COOL law & Bill agreeing with R-CALF

[Sandhusker]

Thought I'd start a new thread since we're tangenting here.

MRJ, "Sandhusker, are you sure about that? I thought the COOL law required essentially that products be labeled "IMPORTED" or "DOMESTIC" . Even if the domestic beef is labeled "USA"......what happens when a consumer buys either a poor quality, or spoiled, or Listeria, E Coli or other 'bug' contaminated piece of the "USA" labeled beef? I know that happens very rarely, but believe there will be consequences even if it is caught before it gets sold because the media will report the source of the beef if they are honest, or believe it will garner more attention. BTW, I'm not saying these things to be meanspirited, but because we have to face the realities of the consequences and figure out how to deal with them."

I'm not exactly sure how the current law will require labeling. Regardless, if it is all "IMPORTED" or "DOMESTIC", then Bill's "cut above" Canadian beef would be in the same bin as Hondouras beef, which was my point.

What happens if somebody gets poor quality, spoiled, etc... beef now? Since all beef only has the USDA label, isn't it really all labeled US? We're already exposed to the problems you described and any reprecussions of consumers.

 

[Mike]

Good points. USDA labeled gets all of the repercussions from tainted beef as it is now.

 

[Tommy]

Thought I'd re-post this so mj might find it.

mj...Sandhusker, are you sure about that? I thought the COOL law required essentially that products be labeled "IMPORTED" or "DOMESTIC"

MJ I proved to you once before that the law states "Country of Origin" not just imported or domestic. You forget easily.

Quote from MCOOL law..."Any person engaged in the business of supplying a covered commodity to a retailer shall provide information to the retailer indicating the country of origin of the covered commodity."
Another quote...), a retailer of a covered commodity shall inform consumers, at the final point of sale of the covered commodity to consumers, of the country of origin of the covered commodity

 

[mrj]

Thought I'd re-post this so mj might find it.

mj...Sandhusker, are you sure about that? I thought the COOL law required essentially that products be labeled "IMPORTED" or "DOMESTIC"

MJ I proved to you once before that the law states "Country of Origin" not just imported or domestic. You forget easily.

Quote from MCOOL law..."Any person engaged in the business of supplying a covered commodity to a retailer shall provide information to the retailer indicating the country of origin of the covered commodity."
Another quote...), a retailer of a covered commodity shall inform consumers, at the final point of sale of the covered commodity to consumers, of the country of origin of the covered commodity

Tommy, I never claimed to have prefect recall. I also never attempt to deceive anyone.

So, according to your post, Canadian beef should be labeled as "Product of Canada" in our retail stores? I strongly suspect that will come back to bite some of us if we are not producing beef of at least as high quality as they most likely will be exporting to the USA.

And I believe it IS deceptive to IMPLY that the labeling under those conditions makes for a safer product is misleading at best. IF the US beef were ID'ed as to ranch of origin, you might have something......but this way, no, you do not increase the safety by simply noting country of origin.

MRJ

 

[Econ101]

Thought I'd re-post this so mj might find it.

mj...Sandhusker, are you sure about that? I thought the COOL law required essentially that products be labeled "IMPORTED" or "DOMESTIC"

MJ I proved to you once before that the law states "Country of Origin" not just imported or domestic. You forget easily.

Quote from MCOOL law..."Any person engaged in the business of supplying a covered commodity to a retailer shall provide information to the retailer indicating the country of origin of the covered commodity."
Another quote...), a retailer of a covered commodity shall inform consumers, at the final point of sale of the covered commodity to consumers, of the country of origin of the covered commodity

Tommy, I never claimed to have prefect recall. I also never attempt to deceive anyone.

So, according to your post, Canadian beef should be labeled as "Product of Canada" in our retail stores? I strongly suspect that will come back to bite some of us if we are not producing beef of at least as high quality as they most likely will be exporting to the USA.

And I believe it IS deceptive to IMPLY that the labeling under those conditions makes for a safer product is misleading at best. IF the US beef were ID'ed as to ranch of origin, you might have something......but this way, no, you do not increase the safety by simply noting country of origin.

MRJ

With the food recalls in the business, it might be better if we lable clearly which packing plant produced the product instead of which ranch it came from. The date of slaughter might also be important. It would have probably prevented my obviously repackaged pork loin with fly larvae in it.

 

[Sandhusker]

Thought I'd re-post this so mj might find it.

mj...Sandhusker, are you sure about that? I thought the COOL law required essentially that products be labeled "IMPORTED" or "DOMESTIC"

MJ I proved to you once before that the law states "Country of Origin" not just imported or domestic. You forget easily.

Quote from MCOOL law..."Any person engaged in the business of supplying a covered commodity to a retailer shall provide information to the retailer indicating the country of origin of the covered commodity."
Another quote...), a retailer of a covered commodity shall inform consumers, at the final point of sale of the covered commodity to consumers, of the country of origin of the covered commodity

Tommy, I never claimed to have prefect recall. I also never attempt to deceive anyone.

So, according to your post, Canadian beef should be labeled as "Product of Canada" in our retail stores? I strongly suspect that will come back to bite some of us if we are not producing beef of at least as high quality as they most likely will be exporting to the USA.

And I believe it IS deceptive to IMPLY that the labeling under those conditions makes for a safer product is misleading at best. IF the US beef were ID'ed as to ranch of origin, you might have something......but this way, no, you do not increase the safety by simply noting country of origin.

MRJ

What about beef from countries such as those that we just opened up to more via CAFTA who use drugs that our authorities have deemed too dangerous for us to use? In that case, safety IS increased.

 

[Mike]

MRJ:IF the US beef were ID'ed as to ranch of origin, you might have something....

If COOL had been implemented at the first target date all beef could be labeled with ranch of origin long ago. The framework and suggestions on how to track were supplied and adequate.

 

[ranch hand]

Thought I'd re-post this so mj might find it.

mj...Sandhusker, are you sure about that? I thought the COOL law required essentially that products be labeled "IMPORTED" or "DOMESTIC"

MJ I proved to you once before that the law states "Country of Origin" not just imported or domestic. You forget easily.

Quote from MCOOL law..."Any person engaged in the business of supplying a covered commodity to a retailer shall provide information to the retailer indicating the country of origin of the covered commodity."
Another quote...), a retailer of a covered commodity shall inform consumers, at the final point of sale of the covered commodity to consumers, of the country of origin of the covered commodity

Tommy, I never claimed to have prefect recall. I also never attempt to deceive anyone.

So, according to your post, Canadian beef should be labeled as "Product of Canada" in our retail stores? I strongly suspect that will come back to bite some of us if we are not producing beef of at least as high quality as they most likely will be exporting to the USA.

And I believe it IS deceptive to IMPLY that the labeling under those conditions makes for a safer product is misleading at best. IF the US beef were ID'ed as to ranch of origin, you might have something......but this way, no, you do not increase the safety by simply noting country of origin.

MRJ

Am I reading you wrong mrj? Are you saying we don't have safe and high quality beef? Guess I should sell then.

 

[Tommy]

mj...So, according to your post, Canadian beef should be labeled as "Product of Canada" in our retail stores? I strongly suspect that will come back to bite some of us if we are not producing beef of at least as high quality as they most likely will be exporting to the USA.


Yes, along with Mexican, Dominican, Costo Rican, El Salvadoran, Guatemalan, Nicaraqan, Honduaran, Australian, New Zealand, ect.

Are you saying the cattle you raise are not up to Canadian standards??

 

[Bill]

mj...So, according to your post, Canadian beef should be labeled as "Product of Canada" in our retail stores? I strongly suspect that will come back to bite some of us if we are not producing beef of at least as high quality as they most likely will be exporting to the USA.


Yes, along with Mexican, Dominican, Costo Rican, El Salvadoran, Guatemalan, Nicaraqan, Honduaran, Australian, New Zealand, ect.

Are you saying the cattle you raise are not up to Canadian standards??

Don't forget to label all that US eared beef as American.

 

[Bill]

Good points. USDA labeled gets all of the repercussions from tainted beef as it is now.

Are you then saying that Texas beef should be labeled seperately from the rest of American so as not to mix it with the "safe" beef or is that a call to be made when case #2 shows up there?

 

[Tommy]

Bill...Don't forget to label all that US eared beef as American.

You mean like Nolan Ryan's?

 

[Mike]

Good points. USDA labeled gets all of the repercussions from tainted beef as it is now.

Are you then saying that Texas beef should be labeled seperately from the rest of American so as not to mix it with the "safe" beef or is that a call to be made when case #2 shows up there?

Do you see the word "Texas" in my post?

Furthurmore......"USDA" labeled could be from almost anywhere.

I believe that all beef/food should be labled as to "Country of Origin". Period.

Take what you want from that. You always do.

 

[Bill]

Good points. USDA labeled gets all of the repercussions from tainted beef as it is now.

Are you then saying that Texas beef should be labeled seperately from the rest of American so as not to mix it with the "safe" beef or is that a call to be made when case #2 shows up there?

Do you see the word "Texas" in my post?

Furthurmore......"USDA" labeled could be from almost anywhere.

I believe that all beef/food should be labled as to "Country of Origin". Period.

Take what you want from that. You always do.

Nope but you mentioned tainted beef so I thought it was an honest question. Sorry but I forgot about Washington State and that meat making it inot the human food supply.

I also don't have the market cornered on taking what I want from certain posts. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Mike]

Are you then saying that Texas beef should be labeled seperately from the rest of American so as not to mix it with the "safe" beef or is that a call to be made when case #2 shows up there?

Do you see the word "Texas" in my post?

Furthurmore......"USDA" labeled could be from almost anywhere.

I believe that all beef/food should be labled as to "Country of Origin". Period.

Take what you want from that. You always do.

Nope but you mentioned tainted beef so I thought it was an honest question. Sorry but I forgot about Washington State and that meat making it inot the human food supply.

I also don't have the market cornered on taking what I want from certain posts. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, I did mention "tainted beef". But unless you can argue the statement when taking the whole sentence in context you simply have no arguement.

ALL BEEF (retail) in the U.S. is USDA inspected, correct? If there is beef from Timbuktu, and sold on the shelf without a country of origin label that is tainted, does ALL USDA labeled beef take a hit? Sure it does. You knew that too. But you just wanted to get your little jab in about the Texas and Wash cows that have nothing to do with the statement that I made.

Feeling insecure these days? :???: :???:

 

[fedup2]

Bill: You write"Sorry but I forgot about Washington State and that meat making it inot the human food supply."

I stay away from alot of these posts, but I see that statement again about making it into the food supply. Is there any proof the meat made it into the food supply? The only thing that I have ever seen was another twisted version of one of Tam's posts taking maybe-coulda- there was a slim chance yada yada as proof! Tam may be a very nice person but I believe one could find more facts in a supermarket tabloid than in one of her posts!
The bse cover ups in the US, the ranchers are burying them, statements are pure bull$hit! You are demanding proof all the time. How about providing some when you make statements like this. No need to spew your r-calf bs on me as I am not a member. Sorry, but I get just as fedup as you when I read crap like this. :x

 

[Bill]

Do you see the word "Texas" in my post?

Furthurmore......"USDA" labeled could be from almost anywhere.

I believe that all beef/food should be labled as to "Country of Origin". Period.

Take what you want from that. You always do.

Nope but you mentioned tainted beef so I thought it was an honest question. Sorry but I forgot about Washington State and that meat making it inot the human food supply.

I also don't have the market cornered on taking what I want from certain posts. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, I did mention "tainted beef". But unless you can argue the statement when taking the whole sentence in context you simply have no arguement.

ALL BEEF (retail) in the U.S. is USDA inspected, correct? If there is beef from Timbuktu, and sold on the shelf without a country of origin label that is tainted, does ALL USDA labeled beef take a hit? Sure it does. You knew that too. But you just wanted to get your little jab in about the Texas and Wash cows that have nothing to do with the statement that I made.

Feeling insecure these days? :???: :???:

Not at all are you? :lol: :lol: :lol: Markets are much better than a year ago, piles of feed with lot's of moisture and bull sales are up this year in Canada. Seems to be lots of optimism.

When you mention tainted beef it applies to all countries and the only BSE tainted beef that unfortunately made it to consumers was American. You can't pick and choose although I do wish it was labeled in instances of e-coli especially. I can't figure out why you have so many more re-calls for that than us. Not opposed to COOL as long as American is labeled as American as well, especially if you guys keep fighting MID.

 

[Bill]

Bill: You write"Sorry but I forgot about Washington State and that meat making it inot the human food supply."

I stay away from alot of these posts, but I see that statement again about making it into the food supply. Is there any proof the meat made it into the food supply? The only thing that I have ever seen was another twisted version of one of Tam's posts taking maybe-coulda- there was a slim chance yada yada as proof! Tam may be a very nice person but I believe one could find more facts in a supermarket tabloid than in one of her posts!
The bse cover ups in the US, the ranchers are burying them, statements are pure bull$hit! You are demanding proof all the time. How about providing some when you make statements like this. No need to spew your r-calf bs on me as I am not a member. Sorry, but I get just as fedup as you when I read crap like this. :x

Sorry not crap. I guess you never checked the archives here for the end of Dec. 2003 as did and it was thoroughly discussed then.

Do a google on Washington BSE meat recall you will find articles such as this.

http://www.nationalgrocers.org/Alerts/Alert38-BSE..html

ACTION ALERT
December 29, 2003

BSE Meat Recall Update

The United States Department of Agriculture yesterday expanded the number of states where recalled meat, from Verns Moses Lake Meats in Washington State may have been distributed to include Oregon, Washington, Nevada, California, Alaska, Montana, Hawaii, Idaho and Guam. USDA once again said, "the recall was initiated out of an abundance of caution and we remain confident in the safety of these beef products."

USDA announced a Class II recall on December 23 for Verns Moses Lake Meats in Moses Lake, Washington based on a presumptive positive test for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) on a single dairy cow, that has since been confirmed by the BSE world reference lab in Waybridge, England.

Approximately twenty carcasses were processed December 9, 2003 on the day the cow was tested. The quantity recalled is approximately 10,410 pounds of meat that was produced on December 9, 2003, shipped to Midway Meats in Centralia Washington for deboning on December 12 and then distributed by two federally inspected plants- Willamette Valley Meats in Portland, and Interstate Meat Distributors on Clackamas, Oregon. [If you are a customer, the contact at Verns Moses Lakes Meats is Tom Ellestad, Secretary, 509-765-4184. If you have questions about recall procedures call USDA FSIS Recall Management, 202-690-6389.]

You can inform and reassure associates, customers and the media in a number of ways: 1) your source of supply is not from one of the affected companies; 2) if it is, determine whether or not you received the recalled product; 3) If you have, ask for return of any recalled products; 4) It is important to stress that USDA classified the recall a Class II (low health risk) because the tissues known to contain the BSE agent (meaning the brains, spinal cord, and distal ileum) were all removed at the Verns facility during the slaughter that occurred December 9. According to Dr. Ken Peterson of USDA, "Because the meat leaving Verns did not contain these high risk material, the recalled beef represents an essentially zero risk to consumers." Consumers can also call the USDA hotline at 1-888-674-6854. Consumer Question and Answers about BSE are available from the Food and Drug Administration: www.cfsan.fda.gov/~comm/bsefaq.html.

USDA is continuing its investigation and is focusing on tracing the other 73 head of cattle that came into the United States or appear to have come into the United States with the indexed or positive cow. At this time there is no indication of any BSE related problems with the other cattle. Additional BSE Information and Updates are being posted daily on the USDA website: www.usda.gov. The recall notice is www.fsis.usda.gov/OA/recalls/rnrfiles/rnr067-2003.htm

If you have questions or need additional information contact Tom Wenning, N.G.A., Senior Vice President and General Counsel at (703) 516-0700.

USDA Expands Mad Cow Beef Recall
From Robert Longley,
Your Guide to U.S. Gov Info / Resources.
FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!
Now reaches 8 states and Guam
On Dec. 28, 2003, the USDA has expanded to eight U.S. states and the territory of Guam the recall of beef related to the recent discovery of one case of mad cow disease in Washington State on Dec. 23. The recall now extends to stores in Washington State, Oregon, California, Nevada, Alaska, Montana, Hawaii, Idaho and Guam. The following is the complete transcript of the USDA announcement:
DR. KEN PETERSEN, Food Safety and Inspection Service: Yesterday we discussed that the beef products related to the December 23 BSE-related recall were distributed from the Verns Moses Lake facility to Midway Meats on December 11, 2003. All of the CNS-related tissue, meaning the brains, spinal cord and distal ileum, were removed at the Verns facility during the slaughter that occurred on December 9.

Sponsored Links
Mad Cow Disease
Get a Canadian perspective with up-to-the-minute reports.
cbc.ca

Food Safety Summit & Expo
March 22-24, 2006, Las Vegas Nation's Largest Food Safety Event
www.foodsafetysummit.com

Mad Cow Disease
Entertaining & Inspiring Articles & Reviews on Canada's Health Issues
www.macleans.ca
Those are the tissues that are known to contain the BSE agent.
Because the meat leaving Verns did not contain these high-risk material, the recalled beef represents an essentially zero risk to consumers.

On December 12, after removing or what we call "deboning" the meat from the carcasses, Midway Meats which is located in Centralia, Washington, distributed the product to two federally inspected plants in Oregon -- the Willamette Valley Meats in Portland, and Interstate Meat Distributors in Clackamas, Oregon.

These last two facilities are considered secondary consignees of the recalled beef.

Last Friday December 26 and into yesterday December 27 we began following up on the distribution of the tertiary consignees -- that is, those customers of Willamette and Interstate. I reported that products have been distributed primarily in Oregon and Washington, but also in the states of Nevada and California. These remain the locations with most of the recalled product.

We now know that the tertiary consignees have had some limited further distribution into four other states -- Alaska, Montana, Hawaii and Idaho -- as well as the US territory of Guam. Therefore, eight states and one territory are currently involved with the recall.

Several of these locations reflect further distribution from locations that originated elsewhere in Oregon or Washington.

Again, the recall was initiated out of an abundance of caution following the report of one cow testing presumptive positive for BSE. Even though we remain confident in the safety of these beef products we are and we will continue to verify distribution and control of all products related to the recall.

USDA Technical Briefing, Dec. 28, 2003

Wednesday, March 10, 2004
The first BSE lawsuit

News of a family filing a lawsuit against a grocery chain over the December BSE recall case.
A Bellevue, Washington family last week filed a proposed class-action lawsuit against Quality Food Centers (QFC), a subsidiary of Kroger, saying the grocery store chain should have used information gathered through its customer loyalty program to warn people who bought beef potentially tainted with bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

The suit seeks to represent all Washington residents who purchased potentially tainted meat after a case of BSE was found in a dairy cow in Washington state on December 23, 2003. The suit also asks the court to establish a medical monitoring fund.

On December 23, USDA ordered the recall of approximately 10,410 pounds of raw beef that may have been infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), which if consumed by humans might lead to a new varient of Cruetzfeldt-Jakobs Disease (vCJD).

Jill Crowson purchased potentially tainted beef from a Bellevue QFC on December 22 and 23, and used her Advantage Card, QFC's customer loyalty program. She served the meat to her husband later that week, and later heard of the recall of the beef in the newspaper.

Steve Berman, the attorney representing the Crowsons, asserts that since the company tracks purchases, it should have warned the Crowsons and many other customers who purchased the beef at approximately 40 stores across Washington.

QFC, like many grocery chains, tracks customer purchases through loyalty cards like the Advantage Card. Once a customer shares contact information -- including name, address and phone number -- they are given discounts on certain items. The loyalty cards track customers' purchases and stores them in a central database, the complaint states.

"We contend that QFC knew which Advantage Card customers purchased the suspect meat, and could have easily called to warn them," said Berman.

According to the complaint, QFC at first mistakenly believed it did not have any of the affected beef and took no action to remove the product from its shelves. The store removed the beef on Christmas eve, but then did little to warn those who earlier purchased the meat - posting small signs with recall information on December 27, the complaint says.

The proposed class-action claims QFC violated provisions of the Washington Product Liability Act by failing to give adequate warning to consumers about the potentially dangerous meat.
Maybe this will spur the Department of Agriculture to think more seriously about keeping the food supply safer rather than worrying about the expense of doing so. In the end, when more cases of BSE are discovered, the cost to agribusiness will be even greater, not to mention the problems associated with exposing more people to BSE tainted meat.

Give Jill Crowson a call and ask her or I am sure founder and R2 have other information about this unfortunate happening.

 

[fedup2]

Sorry Bill, but all I see is 'may' have been tainted' and "
"'may' have been distributed" :???: I don't see proof of anything!

 

[Bill]

Sorry Bill, but all I see is 'may' have been tainted' and "
"'may' have been distributed" :???: I don't see proof of anything!

OK you're right. No one actually saw any one eat any of the 10,000 lbs. of meat that was recalled but never all returned and I am sure no one actually ate any of it in the months that followed. :roll:

I think it's safe to say USDA did the recall because they knew that cow was in the 10,000 lbs. No other reason to risk consumer confidence and lawsuits down the road.