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

New feed directives on antibiodic useage.

A

Amo

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2014
Messages
117
Location
Chambers NE
So local feed store had an open house yesterday. They had a speaker during lunch talk about the new feed directives in using antibiodics in feed. Bovatec & Rumension are exempt, which I was glad to see. One person there asked if imported beef had to comply with the new rules. The speaker said no, of course. What a suprise!

So the consumer is concerned about antibiodic resistance comming from what they eat, which is a crock of crap. It comes from running to the doctor for the sniffles and using puril too much. Yet the consumer asks for it. Yet half or more of the meat in the case at the supermarket (imported) doesn't have to comply with these regulations! What an awesome law, not.

I realize C.O.O.L. is a hot button issue. Personally I feel if we know where our underware is made, by Gawd we should know where our food comes from. I can understand if there is no consumer demand for buying a labeled product the regulations are annoying. Thing is here is a prime example as to why COOL has a place.
Oh how I love government stupidity and buricoracy!
 
Amo said:
I realize C.O.O.L. is a hot button issue. Personally I feel if we know where our underware is made, by Gawd we should know where our food comes from.
Click to expand...

That argument just won't hold water. All you know about your gonchies is that they were put together in the good ole USA (if that's what the label claims), it doesn't tell you where the cotton was sourced, where the fabric was wove, where the dye came from... the list goes on. But I'm sure if the demand was there for that information there would be a niche market spring up where you could find your specialty ginch with all the information on it's label you could hope for. Of course these undies would cost a lot more, and the manufacturer would make a lot less because of all the cumbersome rules. Which in turn would put pressure on the dye, cotton, and weavers leaving less money in their pockets. In the end it really wouldn't be good for anyone, but you'd have the satisfaction of knowing your tighty whities were red white and blue through and through. I suppose it would also make the protectionists that pushed for this in the first place feel proud of themselves for a little while, until they realize they can't buy domestic skivvies anymore because the manufacturers all went broke.
 
Silver said:
Amo said:
I realize C.O.O.L. is a hot button issue. Personally I feel if we know where our underware is made, by Gawd we should know where our food comes from.
Click to expand...

That argument just won't hold water. All you know about your gonchies is that they were put together in the good ole USA (if that's what the label claims), it doesn't tell you where the cotton was sourced, where the fabric was wove, where the dye came from... the list goes on. But I'm sure if the demand was there for that information there would be a niche market spring up where you could find your specialty ginch with all the information on it's label you could hope for. Of course these undies would cost a lot more, and the manufacturer would make a lot less because of all the cumbersome rules. Which in turn would put pressure on the dye, cotton, and weavers leaving less money in their pockets. In the end it really wouldn't be good for anyone, but you'd have the satisfaction of knowing your tighty whities were red white and blue through and through. I suppose it would also make the protectionists that pushed for this in the first place feel proud of themselves for a little while, until they realize they can't buy domestic skivvies anymore because the manufacturers all went broke.
Click to expand...

Awesome post, Silver! :clap:
 
1. Do we know how much 'antibiotic residue', if any, there is in meat? Particularly beef for this thread. I believe that IF use and withdrawal times are properly observed, there is NONE.

2. How many brands of beef are there currently in the USA?

Those brands have been developed by ranchers and others, so isn't it correct to say that COOL is a government ploy to give the same edge of the efforts by branded beef producers to others at government expense, with NONE of the personal expense or liability?

Guess I just favor the private enterprise methods of business where it is possible. That is, government has a right, probably a need, to regulate medications, etc. but brands of products, not so much, imo.

Considerable research with consumer focus groups learned years ago that consumers who care, want RANCH or FARM or origin, not just nation. WHY was that priority issue denied in the COOL law?

What is the actual cost of government labeling under COOL?

mrj
 
Why not call it what it is? Despite hundreds of consumer groups supporting COOL and research showing huge consumer support, the effort to do away with COOL is nothing more than packers and their flunkies wanting to lump every piece of crap meat in the world together for their own advantage.
 
I would venture that there were more validated consumer focus groups conducted by Beef Checkoff efforts where consumers said they want FARM or RANCH of origin, not just county. COOL promoter prevented that information being included in the law.

Now, why would a business deliberately damage their business by selling bad meat?

And, re. bad meat, does anyone believe all meat produced in the USA is a great product? What will consumers think when they get a piece of beef with that proud little 'Product of USA' label???

Don't you realize the beef market is international, and US producers of cattle of that high quality get some increased income from their sales going into that international trade? AND our (US producers') high quality fat trim adds value to the lean imported, but equally safe beef? We probably would have beef priced out of the reach of too many US consumers if we had no imported beef.

mrj
 
Has anyone tried the highly touted Hardee's/Carl Junior's "all natural" burger? I had to try a couple just out of curiosity. Thought they were really bad. Took a bit of searching to find out the meat came from Australia.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/12/09/carls-jr-hardees-fast-food-restaurants-all-natural-burger/20139287/
 
OK, First off I wasn't trying to start a war over COOL. Ive read pros and conns from both sides. I understand exports. When we have to compete against a whole broasted chicken and your local grocery store or quick shop for $9, exports is the only thing that is keeping the price of beef where its at. You know dang good and well that the good stuff is exported and to meet the american economy most of the stuff thats at Walmart is from Lord only knows. You get $9 chicken when you let captive supply and vertilce intergration take over an industry. Keep paying those dues to NCBA and we will have the same thing as pork and chicken. At the end of the day ya Im pro COOL. My post was about regulations, not COOL. I threw in the label about clothing, and you went crazy on that trying to defend your opinion. Compeletly missed my point.

OK, for the sake of arguement well say that human resistance to antibiodics is comming from it being used too much in food production. I completely disagree with it, but to make my point Im saying its true. Yes if you follow labels and recomendations there should be no residue. I think its safe to say we all know someone who thinks if 3 cc or 30 grams is recomended well 4 or 40 will kick it in the butt.

So the consumer wanting a safe food supply gets legislation passed where US producers have to file paper work and regulations to show we are doing what we are supposed to do. Thus keeping down any type of antibiodic build up. Then consumer feels confident and all is well. Thing is only cattle that have spent their entire life in the US have to comply with this new rule to make the consumer happy. Imported cattle don't have to mess with it.

So Jose Sanchez (I have no clue what John Doe is in Spanish) is raisning captive supplly cattle for JBS Swift. He uses CTC (a drug that is on the new list) from birth to shipment in his mineral will say. So this beef gets processed, shipped to Walmart or who ever, and sits right beside the beef that came from my place where I had to comply with a stupid rule to make the consumer happy. Yet the consumer has no clue as to which package to buy to gaurentee that its been fed properly!

Im pro COOL yes. I know a lot of our success is comming from exports. I don't have the time to sit down and argue all that. My point is why in the sam heck do we have to comply with a bunch of rules and the others don't? One of NCBA's main line of defence against COOL is all the red tape that is involved with it. Where the Fargo were they when this legislation rolled through Congress? Most likely on a ship in the Carrabean having an "internal mid year conference" paid for by JBS and who knows else. Ya they sure represent the "entire beef industry".

If your a member of a lobbyist group...NCBA, RCALF, Farmer Bearu, etc Im not trying to insult you. I will agree with say Farm Bearu on one issue where NCBA is on the opposite side. Then the next issue Ill agree with NCBA and not Farm Bearu. Its a pet peave of mine. I posted this on several sites. I don't pay a single due to any P.A.C. On Facebook cattle forum I got over 40 likes without one negative comment. One guy from Australia said their rules are more strigent than ours. So to other nationalities, Im not bashing you either. In my opening post I said Im not against a burger from somewhere else. Its just a stupid pointless law that our miss guided Congress thought needed passed. Like I its just a stupid, pointless law that has no place.
 
Well, I am up early after 5 hours of sleep. Just enjoying my coffee and warming up my truck before I go out.

I certainly enjoy and learn a lot here. We do direct market our beef. LOL, I have come to the conclusion the "Middle man" earns every penny when I started doing it myself!

I will say, as a direct marketer, i feel Farm of origin has my name and I am held accountable for the beef. I don't know that that means the average rancher cares less than I. I just get direct feedback from my decisions.

Hmmm... THis is a long way of saying I think it's fair to say practices in other countries need to be similar if they want to import here. The EU has long been able to do that. And, I prefer farm of origin to COOL for the same reasons as MRJ has stated so well.
 
Why do we need legislation mandating no feeding of antibiotics? 1) plenty of private label antibiotic free if that's what a consumer wants. 2) beef fed antibiotics don't have a scientifically identifiable trait to indicate so. 3) will competitive meats face the same scrutiny - beef from other countries or alternative species? Pigs and chickens are the real users of sub therapeutic ingestion of antibiotics - must they comply with this royal edict?
 
Brad S said:
Why do we need legislation mandating no feeding of antibiotics? 1) plenty of private label antibiotic free if that's what a consumer wants. 2) beef fed antibiotics don't have a scientifically identifiable trait to indicate so. 3) will competitive meats face the same scrutiny - beef from other countries or alternative species? Pigs and chickens are the real users of sub therapeutic ingestion of antibiotics - must they comply with this royal edict?
Click to expand...

Good question. Its what the consumer wanted. Yet if they have no clue as to where it came from its completely pointless! I don't know, but guessing pork and poultry will have to comply also.

Ive got a couple of questions that Id like answered. It got brought up in this thread that the consumer wants to know what farmer it came from, not what country. Yep, the promoter of COOL was against animal or premis ID. There are various reasons why some groups were against that, and its a whole different topic. For the sake of arguement will say we have premis ID. Miss Suzy Brown from Long Island, NY is at her local Walmart (or your favorite super market) and sees the left roast is from farm # 456987 located in Section 5-25-13. The right roast came from farm # 234876 located in Section 6-25-13. I do crop insurance adjusting. I can tell you most farmers cant read leagle discriptions let alone a consumer. Id bet Suzy Brown wouldn't know the difference between Iowa and Nebraska if she was looking on a map. Yet they want to know what farm it came from? Weather its a big long number, or the farmers name etc. I fail to see how having that information is going to be so vital to creating a premium/consumer demand vs. COOL?

Is something like that a marketing tool? Ya. Just like grass fed and hormone free, which is b.s. Every animal has hormones. I read somewhere that a woman on the pill has more injested hormones per body wt. than an animal with implants! Im pretty sure thats what it was saying or something to that effect. My jist is the way stuff gets twisted is anoying. This feed law goes right along with it.

I don't have an issue with direct marketing or niche marketing. I think in that consumer research where the consumer wants to know what farm it came from because they want to buy from ma & pa, not a corperate farm. Not that Im against big operations, just saying thats why I think the consumer want to know what "producer" (The Waltons not Donald Trump farms) it came from not what country. Thus why farmers markets/direct marketing is becoming more popular. Beef Check Off funds paid for this consumer research. Who is the contractor of funds for the Beef Check Off? Why NCBA of course. You don't suppose some of them questions were worded as to make the consumer want to be more in favor of knowing what farm it came from than what country? How many people can have a dog and cat in the house at the same time? You cant have one PAC (lobbyist group) trying to represent the cow/calf, stocker, fedlot and the packer!

Suzy is in that same Walmart. Sees the one roast is from Sam Browns farm. Has a picture of a nice red barn, kids in a swing set, etc. Gives her a warm & fuzzy feeling. The other roast don't have all that marketing stuff. Sam Brown feeds packer owned calf feds imported from Brazil. John's cattle are all born on the ranch etc. Sure Sam is an American farmer with kids etc. Was Sam's operation accually the way that the marketing was depicted to Suzy? Maybe, maybe not. As I said before, I feel the consumer wants to know it came from a farmer thats a "family" farmer. Would COOL make the consumer know her food was comming from a "family farmer"? No absoluetly not. Animal, permis, or farmers name wouldn't do it either. Its just packers line of defense so they don't have to disclose where their beef is being sourced. So once again, why is knowing what farm it came from so more awesome than what country?

COOL could tell the American consumer where it came from. COOL could be a marketing tool as well if it was properly implemented and enforced. When the super markets can put up a sing that says "potential product of USA, Canada, or Mexico", ya the consumer has absoultly no clue as to what they are getting so they don't care. Just like Silvers comments about underware. If you don't know where its sourced its pointless. Im not against exports. As Ive mentioned, yep we could have beef priced out of the American consumers pockets with out exports. Anybody remember what happened to the beef price when they closed the Canidian border due to BSE? Yep the packers had to pony up the prices because they couldn't bring in the imports. Was beef cheaper back then than now, yes. Im no economist, but Id bet if you figured in inflation....might not be much, if any difference. Now if that deep pocketed American consumer wanted to pay a permium for born, raised, & slaughtered USA beef. Plus competition from export markets, that makes more competition (higher prices) for American beef. You going to complain about that? If the consumer wants to buy from somewhere else so be it. The Atkins diet maybe had a wee bit to do with the price spike when the borders were closed, but I doubt very much.

I posted this on Cattle Today, Facebook, etc. A producer from Austrailia commented that they have tighter restrictions that we do. I have no doubt that other countries aren't trying to raise safe, wholesome food too....nobody wants to die. In my orgional post I said Im not against a Canadian burger. The thing is why do we have to comply with this and others don't. We have some countries wanting to export cattle to us with foot and mouth diease. Ya, we really want that! Would COOL curtail this, maybe. Would COOL create premiums....maybe, maybe not. I fail to see where it would hurt the production sector. Ya, a wee more overhead (regulations) on JBS Swift or Walmart. Maybe you guys own stock in them companies and make money off their profit margins? Then I guess it would cost you. I make mine off ranching. Id bet the packers have spent more money fighting COOL than it would of cost to properly implement!

Honestly I don't think this new rule is going to make for a lot of overhead for me anyway....others IDK. Its just the principal. I didn't intend to start a debate on COOL, but so be it. If we have to have a law, that the American consumer wanted to tell us how to feed our animals... then we should have a way to tell the consumer what they are buying followed their stupid rule?! :???:
 
Well said Amo, as far as I see, you nailed it spot on. I see little good that has come out of DC in years. We would all be better off if they only met every 5th thursday of the month. :clap: :clap: :clap:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top