Nobody's COOL

[S.S.A.P.]

If you are incapable of dazzling with brilliance you have to baffle with BS. :wink:

Hey now, I was capable of fooling everyone except for that smarty-pants Oldtimer ... he is to savvy of business man! Hell he is already aware that beef is getting up there and can't even support the added cost of his travelling beyond the 10-15 mins it takes to get past Glasgow's processors. :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

If you are incapable of dazzling with brilliance you have to baffle with BS. :wink:

Hey now, I was capable of fooling everyone except for that smarty-pants Oldtimer ... he is to savvy of business man! Hell he is already aware that beef is getting up there and can't even support the added cost of his travelling beyond the 10-15 mins it takes to get past Glasgow's processors. :wink:

Thing is- a lot of these folks can afford to spend $50-$100- maybe more a week to have beef on their table, if they had the capability where they could just run to the store and pick it up when they needed it - but the thing is they would have to take a loan out to put out the $1000-$2000 needed to purchase a beef/half a beef and have it processed... They just can't do it- so then have no close access to a full line of meats that they know are US produced....
As there are no slaughter houses/processors in the area that I am aware of that are licensed for resale of packaged meat products....
Big cities- yeah I'm sure you can find branded beef products- But again have to go out of your way to do so...

Be much nicer if we were open and honest with our consumers all the way around and tell them where their beef product was Born, where it was Raised, and where it was Slaughtered- instead of being so anxious to help commit the fraud that has been going on...

 

[Soapweed]

If you are incapable of dazzling with brilliance you have to baffle with BS. :wink:

Hey now, I was capable of fooling everyone except for that smarty-pants Oldtimer ... he is to savvy of business man! Hell he is already aware that beef is getting up there and can't even support the added cost of his travelling beyond the 10-15 mins it takes to get past Glasgow's processors. :wink:

Thing is- a lot of these folks can afford to spend $50-$100- maybe more a week to have beef on their table, if they had the capability where they could just run to the store and pick it up when they needed it - but the thing is they would have to take a loan out to put out the $1000-$2000 needed to purchase a beef/half a beef and have it processed... They just can't do it- so then have no close access to a full line of meats that they know are US produced....
As there are no slaughter houses/processors in the area that I am aware of that are licensed for resale of packaged meat products....
Big cities- yeah I'm sure you can find branded beef products- But again have to go out of your way to do so...

Be much nicer if we were open and honest with our consumers all the way around and tell them where their beef product was Born, where it was Raised, and where it was Slaughtered- instead of being so anxious to help commit the fraud that has been going on...

The fraud part is in thinking all beef is created equal. It is not. The best cattle in the world are raised right here in the USA (and also in Canada). The United States covers a mighty big area, with many varieties of cattle and climate. Some of the high quality cattle don't thrive well in the hot southern climate conditions of this nation. The ones that do survive and thrive in these areas don't taste all that good. There is absolutely no advantage for people raising the best cattle to give a one size fits all label to cattle "Born, Raised, and Processed in the USA." Yes, there is an advantage for those raising inferior cattle to ride the band wagon of the great cattle.

Oldtimer, you don't like beef from Mexico. Do you think there is that much difference between cattle raised in Mexico, and those raised in the southern part of our own country? If you do, you are only fooling yourself. The whole issue is a "feel good" thought until you ponder the drawbacks, which far outweigh the benefits.

 

[Mike]

If you are incapable of dazzling with brilliance you have to baffle with BS. :wink:

Hey now, I was capable of fooling everyone except for that smarty-pants Oldtimer ... he is to savvy of business man! Hell he is already aware that beef is getting up there and can't even support the added cost of his travelling beyond the 10-15 mins it takes to get past Glasgow's processors. :wink:

Thing is- a lot of these folks can afford to spend $50-$100- maybe more a week to have beef on their table, if they had the capability where they could just run to the store and pick it up when they needed it - but the thing is they would have to take a loan out to put out the $1000-$2000 needed to purchase a beef/half a beef and have it processed... They just can't do it- so then have no close access to a full line of meats that they know are US produced....
As there are no slaughter houses/processors in the area that I am aware of that are licensed for resale of packaged meat products....
Big cities- yeah I'm sure you can find branded beef products- But again have to go out of your way to do so...

Be much nicer if we were open and honest with our consumers all the way around and tell them where their beef product was Born, where it was Raised, and where it was Slaughtered- instead of being so anxious to help commit the fraud that has been going on...

Begging for mandatory labeling and on the other hand saying people can't afford it is a testament to your stupidity.

If you want to change the world and offer domestic labeled beef to the masses go for it. You might become a $Billionaire$ over night. Or not.

The major university study I read said that people will pay up to $0.11 more for labeled beef but the actual cost addition is $0.24 - $0.25. That is called a conundrum.........................

My God man, use some common sense. :roll:

Heck, I would like to see beef COOL labeling too.

 

[Silver]

Heck, I would like to see beef COOL labeling too.

Wouldn't bother me a bit either if it weren't such a logistical nightmare and it didn't take cash out of all of our pockets.
I don't think OT is being straight with us on his reasoning behind wanting COOL. He is simply looking for any trade barrier possible so he can stand on his neighbors neck in order to grab a little extra cash. But he won't come out and say it.
And he refuses to see how this nonsense won't benefit anyone, let alone himself.

 

[Mike]

Heck, I would like to see beef COOL labeling too.

Wouldn't bother me a bit either if it weren't such a logistical nightmare and it didn't take cash out of all of our pockets.
I don't think OT is being straight with us on his reasoning behind wanting COOL. He is simply looking for any trade barrier possible so he can stand on his neighbors neck in order to grab a little extra cash. But he won't come out and say it.
And he refuses to see how this nonsense won't benefit anyone, let alone himself.

1-Correct

2-Correct

3-Correct

 

[Anonymous]

Hey now, I was capable of fooling everyone except for that smarty-pants Oldtimer ... he is to savvy of business man! Hell he is already aware that beef is getting up there and can't even support the added cost of his travelling beyond the 10-15 mins it takes to get past Glasgow's processors. :wink:

Thing is- a lot of these folks can afford to spend $50-$100- maybe more a week to have beef on their table, if they had the capability where they could just run to the store and pick it up when they needed it - but the thing is they would have to take a loan out to put out the $1000-$2000 needed to purchase a beef/half a beef and have it processed... They just can't do it- so then have no close access to a full line of meats that they know are US produced....
As there are no slaughter houses/processors in the area that I am aware of that are licensed for resale of packaged meat products....
Big cities- yeah I'm sure you can find branded beef products- But again have to go out of your way to do so...

Be much nicer if we were open and honest with our consumers all the way around and tell them where their beef product was Born, where it was Raised, and where it was Slaughtered- instead of being so anxious to help commit the fraud that has been going on...

The fraud part is in thinking all beef is created equal. It is not. The best cattle in the world are raised right here in the USA (and also in Canada). The United States covers a mighty big area, with many varieties of cattle and climate. Some of the high quality cattle don't thrive well in the hot southern climate conditions of this nation. The ones that do survive and thrive in these areas don't taste all that good. There is absolutely no advantage for people raising the best cattle to give a one size fits all label to cattle "Born, Raised, and Processed in the USA." Yes, there is an advantage for those raising inferior cattle to ride the band wagon of the great cattle.

Oldtimer, you don't like beef from Mexico. Do you think there is that much difference between cattle raised in Mexico, and those raised in the southern part of our own country? If you do, you are only fooling yourself. The whole issue is a "feel good" thought until you ponder the drawbacks, which far outweigh the benefits.

Yes I do think there is that much difference in the cattle raised in Mexico... The groups that went to Mexico and Central America reported back uses of drugs that we haven't allowed in years, they reported back on cattle drinking from chemically polluted water supplies... Almost all the cattle slaughtered with TB- originate in Mexico .... Many of the South American countries have a long history with cattle diseases- that they still don't have a handle on...
The t.v. group undercover tape from the Mexican slaughterhouse showed not only totally unsanitary slaughter conditions- but dragging in deadstock(long dead) which included goats and donkeys wheeled in from God knows where in a wheel barrow...
If that is happening in the southern U.S. too then US ranchers/packers have sunk lower than I thought...
Personally I would rather take my chances with U.S. beef... Or even Canadian.... I don't know whey Canadians are so scared of labeling their beef Product of Canada- why they apparently think it won't sell unless it can be fraudulently passed off as a Product of the USA :???: Like I said before- I would go along with a North American label- if that didn't include Mexico.. But apparently the World Powers say we have to include and take care of Mexico...

The easier you make a product to obtain (real US Beef) the better chance you have of selling it... And right now we actually don't even have a product to advertise because everything is sold as USA beef....

Like I said before- maybe its too many years packing the gun and the badge- but to me this is one of the biggest Frauds I've seen that the government has allowed an industry to ploy against American consumers/citizens... Our shirts, our shoes, our steakknives have to be labeled as to their country of origin-- but not our steaks...

 

[bearvalley]

It is interesting to me the different feelings as to M COOL. To me it shows that COOL is a problem when some of the lifetime US cattle producers can see the flaws in it as has been the case in this thread. To me their opinion is a lot more valued on cattle industry matters than that of a " 40 year career Lone Ranger".
Anyone can pull on a cowboy hat and a pair of boots but that doesn't make a cowman. It will be interesting how this COOL issue plays out. The way the cattle market has increased up here and the consistent quality of Canadian beef cattle I'm starting to think a M COOL program isn't such a bad idea. But let's go a step farther and close the gate, both ways. There are countries other than the US willing to take Canadian beef. If the US of A didn't have the Canadian import beef there would be a lot less for them to export.
I can see the advantages. Canadian consumers know they are buying Canadian quality. More stability in the Canadian ranching, feedlot and processing industries instead of just being used as a discounted supply source.
That will at least put an end to some of the northern US cattle brokers sending cattle to be finished on our side of the line and being labelled a "PRODUCT OF CANADA" after living here for 60 days. It doesn't set real well with some of us that the possibility is there that a Canadian consumer might buy a junk steak carved off a Corriete X Brahma steer born in the southern US, raised there, finished for 60 days and processed here and labelled Canadian.
Now I'm starting to sound like Oldtimer.

 

[Mike]

The fraud of "Angus" beef is a huge misrepresentation to the consumer also.

There is nothing in the rules & regs for Certified Angus Beef that certifies it is "100% Angus", yet the consumer thinks it is. Even the Genotypically selected animals must be only 50%.

2.1 Genotype. Cattle eligible for Angus influence beef programs based on genotype must have positive identification (ear tags, tattoos, brands, etc.) and be traceable back to provable (e.g.; registration papers) Angus parentage. Qualifying cattle must be traceable to one registered parent or two registered grandparents. Programs which claim a specified percentage of Angus heritage must use this method.
2.2 Phenotype. Cattle eligible for certification in Angus influence beef programs based on phenotype (appearance) must be predominately (51 percent) solid black. Blue roan, gray, etc., are not considered to be black or a percentage of black. Such variations can qualify only when it occupies 49 percent, or less, of the body area with the remaining 51 percent, or greater, being solid black. 1/ Angus influence cattle may be either horned or polled. Carcasses of certified live animals which display certain non-Angus characteristics (e.g.; dairy conformation, Brahman humps) shall be excluded as specified in the carcass specifications for approved programs.

The whole system is skewed towards marketing programs.................I guess OT gets to pick & choose which "Fraud" he want's to participate in. :lol:

 

[mrj]

OT, your allegations about Mexican packing plants, meat from Mexico, and the rest of that comment raise some questions.

First, when did that 'visit' take place? Why have we not heard of it before your post? Who did the investigation, and why has it not made national news? What was the location in Mexico? What is the incidence of TB originating in US dairy cattle, and with cattle from Mexico? Where did the allegations about the southern US cattle producers originate?

Isn't it true that cattle sold with the "USDA Inspected" label must meet US regulations?

You state that people want to know where the meat comes from. Groups of consumers I have been involved with via BIC have indicated they want to know RANCH of origin. Why was that not allowed in your MCOOL law?

mrj

 

[Mike]

Washington (CNN) -- The U.S. government is not fully guarding against the contamination of meat by traces of antibiotics, pesticides or heavy metals, a new report warns.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's inspector general said federal agencies have failed to set limits on many potentially harmful chemical residues, which "has resulted in meat with these substances being distributed in commerce."

When it comes to pesticide traces, only one type is tested for, according to the report. There are also no set limits for some heavy metals, like copper.

In 2008, Mexican authorities turned away an American shipment of beef, because it did not meet Mexico's limits when tested for copper traces. But the very same rejected meat could be sold in the United States, since no limit has been set, the analysis says.

That example shows "the government has fallen down on the job here," said Tony Corbo of the consumer advocacy group Food and Water Watch.

"Some of the residues that the inspector general cited could be carcinogenic, as they accumulate over a period of time in the body," he said.

The study focused on contamination by chemical residues, rather than bacteria. While bacteria like E. coli and Salmonella can cause an illness that is acute but brief, chemical residues are more like to build up over time, and no amount of cooking will destroy them.

The USDA pledged to "swiftly implement the corrective actions" recommended by the inspector, which including testing for more kinds of residue and setting limits on how much of each substance is allowable. A department spokesman pointed out that this kind of fix, which is expected to require coordination with the FDA and the EPA, was one of the main reasons President Obama created a Food Safety Working Group last year.

The National Cattlemen's Beef Association said in a statement, "We fully support the critical role of the federal government in ensuring beef safety."

"While the U.S. beef supply is extraordinarily safe by any nation's standards," it added, "the beef industry is constantly looking for ways to improve the systems that ensure the safest product possible for our consumers."

The study, first reported by USA Today, also says that when cattle test positive for residue, it is difficult to track back where it came from because it often passes through several buyers and sellers.

The American Meat Institute said that problem "underscores the need to implement comprehensive livestock traceback procedures," with a national animal identification system.

 

[Anonymous]

OT, your allegations about Mexican packing plants, meat from Mexico, and the rest of that comment raise some questions.

First, when did that 'visit' take place? Why have we not heard of it before your post? Who did the investigation, and why has it not made national news? What was the location in Mexico? What is the incidence of TB originating in US dairy cattle, and with cattle from Mexico? Where did the allegations about the southern US cattle producers originate?

mrj- the undercover video and one of the reports was done several years ago by a news station (nbc/abc ?)... I posted it on Bull Sessions when it came out (as we were still arguing COOL back then).... It was about the same time they found out the beef Morocco was sending us contained donkey meat....Other reports have came from rancher groups (R-CALF was one of the latest) travelling to Central America and reporting on the conditions... Their report outlined mainly the use of drugs illegal in the US and chemically polluted water sources..

Isn't it true that cattle sold with the "USDA Inspected" label must meet US regulations?
98% of the imported beef that gets the USDA Inspected label is never looked at by a US inspector... About the same percentage of all US cattle found at slaughter with TB have the Mexican variety- most having been imported from there...

You state that people want to know where the meat comes from. Groups of consumers I have been involved with via BIC have indicated they want to know RANCH of origin. Why was that not allowed in your MCOOL law?

Maybe it should be... Lets get country of origin going first- before we think of moving on to ranch of origin...I'm all in favor of ending this FRAUD and telling folks the truth....

mrj

 

[Mike]

Hey OT. Are you missing Bush yet?

Sending U.S. Department of Agriculture officials overseas to inspect meat and poultry plants whose products are destined for American consumers has long been a bedrock of our modern import safety system, but an investigation by Food Safety News found, the number of countries audited by U.S. officials each year has declined by more than 60 percent since 2008.

The USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service has also become less transparent. The agency has failed to make audit reports public in a timely fashion and only revealed which countries have been audited in the past two years this week following multiple inquiries by Food Safety News and a blog post by former Under Secretary for Food Safety Richard Raymond questioning the lack of online

During the Bush administration, in-country audits generally happened annually, but, according to data provided to Food Safety News by FSIS earlier this month (which were posted online Wednesday), the number of in-country audits has dropped dramatically under the Obama administration.

Online documents show that from 2001 to 2008 FSIS inspectors were routinely evaluating, in-person, the foreign plants processing meat for American consumers. The number of countries audited annually, with only one exception (in 2006 there was a large drop in audits), was between 25 and 32, so FSIS was auditing an average of 26.4 countries per year. From 2009 to 2012, however, the number of countries audited annually dropped to between 3 and 20, so FSIS was auditing an average of 9.8 countries per year.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

It may be time to get your savior to do his job before you keep complaining about Beef, Food Safety, and COOL? :lol: Appears as though his golf is more important? :roll:

 

[Anonymous]

Hey OT. Are you missing Bush yet?

Sending U.S. Department of Agriculture officials overseas to inspect meat and poultry plants whose products are destined for American consumers has long been a bedrock of our modern import safety system, but an investigation by Food Safety News found, the number of countries audited by U.S. officials each year has declined by more than 60 percent since 2008.

The USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service has also become less transparent. The agency has failed to make audit reports public in a timely fashion and only revealed which countries have been audited in the past two years this week following multiple inquiries by Food Safety News and a blog post by former Under Secretary for Food Safety Richard Raymond questioning the lack of online

During the Bush administration, in-country audits generally happened annually, but, according to data provided to Food Safety News by FSIS earlier this month (which were posted online Wednesday), the number of in-country audits has dropped dramatically under the Obama administration.

Online documents show that from 2001 to 2008 FSIS inspectors were routinely evaluating, in-person, the foreign plants processing meat for American consumers. The number of countries audited annually, with only one exception (in 2006 there was a large drop in audits), was between 25 and 32, so FSIS was auditing an average of 26.4 countries per year. From 2009 to 2012, however, the number of countries audited annually dropped to between 3 and 20, so FSIS was auditing an average of 9.8 countries per year.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

It may be time to get your savior to do his job before you keep complaining about Beef, Food Safety, and COOL? :lol:

With M-COOL you could do away with all those audits and inspectors inspecting the foreign inspectors... With truthful labeling, folks could choose if they wanted meat from and inspected by foreign inspectors- or that from the US inspected by US inspectors... Countries like Mexico expect their government employees (like inspectors) to get half their salary from graft and kickbacks...The video showed the Mexican inspector standing outside the front of the slaughterhouse while they drug the deadstock in the back..

We can't afford to have an American inspector watching over the inspection of every piece of meat killed in foreign slaughter houses- the same as we can't afford to have an American inspector inspecting every piece of meat imported (the reason 98% never gets inspected)...

Leave the decision to the consumers... But in order for the consumers to make an informed choice they must be provided with ALL the info- and truthful labeling ... That is the reason the Congress passed the M-COOL law the way they did... To give consumers an opportunity to make an informed choice......

Let the consumer decide if they want to buy beef born in Mexico, raised in Mexico, slaughtered in Mexico
or
if they want to buy beef born in the U.S.A., raised in the U.S.A., slaughtered in the U.S.A. ...

 

[Mike]

If someone could snap their fingers and make it happen for free (or inexpensively) I'm sure they would have done so........................

You're preaching to the choir and diverting.

But until that happens, you approve of lessening the food safety standards? :lol:

:roll:

 

[bearvalley]

OT, your allegations about Mexican packing plants, meat from Mexico, and the rest of that comment raise some questions.

First, when did that 'visit' take place? Why have we not heard of it before your post? Who did the investigation, and why has it not made national news? What was the location in Mexico? What is the incidence of TB originating in US dairy cattle, and with cattle from Mexico? Where did the allegations about the southern US cattle producers originate?

mrj- the undercover video and one of the reports was done several years ago by a news station (nbc/abc ?)... I posted it on Bull Sessions when it came out (as we were still arguing COOL back then).... It was about the same time they found out the beef Morocco was sending us contained donkey meat....Other reports have came from rancher groups (R-CALF was one of the latest) travelling to Central America and reporting on the conditions... Their report outlined mainly the use of drugs illegal in the US and chemically polluted water sources..

Isn't it true that cattle sold with the "USDA Inspected" label must meet US regulations?
98% of the imported beef that gets the USDA Inspected label is never looked at by a US inspector... About the same percentage of all US cattle found at slaughter with TB have the Mexican variety- most having been imported from there...

You state that people want to know where the meat comes from. Groups of consumers I have been involved with via BIC have indicated they want to know RANCH of origin. Why was that not allowed in your MCOOL law?

Maybe it should be... Lets get country of origin going first- before we think of moving on to ranch of origin...I'm all in favor of ending this FRAUD and telling folks the truth....

mrj

As usual more of OT's smoke or biased BS. The credibility of any report by anyone connected to R-CALF is questionable. They could have put out the same report and saved the bus ride. But I guess it's smarter to forget about in house problems of the past and keep pointing fingers. Just a reminder, how about the cow in Chino, California that was headed to the US hot lunch program. Then we can go into the Mexican Roping Cattle strain of Bovine Tuberculosis. The majority of them with that strain in the northern half of the US are bred, born and raised right there. That also applies to all cattle that were found with that strain of TB that originated in western Canada. I would tend to say cheap migrant labourers infected with this strain of TB, contaminated cattle liners and feedlots with co-mingled cattle are the main culprits. One Washington State feedlot comes to mind that was back grounding breeding heifers and feeding out California dairy cattle. TB was found in cattle that were slaughtered out of that lot. Do you really think all the breeding heifers that are now 7 year old cows are TB free. Doubt we will ever know as the US has a habit of looking elsewhere to lay blame and closing their eyes at home. Here's some food for thought OT. Your neighbours, the Cornwells have a fencing crew that goes back home to Mexico every winter. Have these guys had a TB check up? What if it was in an initial, undetectable stage when they left home but 2 months later while fixing pens in the feedlot they are shedding the bacteria. If I was you I'd be nervous. But you will be OK, cause it ain't your problem... It came from somewhere else. You should probably stick with cops & robbers stuff OT.

 

[bearvalley]

Hey OT. Are you missing Bush yet?

It may be time to get your savior to do his job before you keep complaining about Beef, Food Safety, and COOL? :lol: Appears as though his golf is more important? :roll:

Golf or Scandinavian girlfriends. You guys have got another Tiger by the tail.

 

[bearvalley]

Countries like Mexico expect their government employees (like inspectors) to get half their salary from graft and kickbacks...

Don't some northern Montana Sheriffs work on a similar system. Heard some good stories about the one over in Wolf Point. Hope you ran a different shop. Skeletons tend to crawl out of closets.

 

[S.S.A.P.]

.... the same as we can't afford to have an American inspector inspecting every piece of meat imported (the reason 98% never gets inspected)...

.... how are you going to afford the inspectors/audits to make sure "every piece of meat" has the correct 'born, raised, slaughtered label" ? Yesterday you said that many old folks and working folks (that leaves who?) are willing to consume more beef but can't because of today's beef prices. :roll:

Edit : Good thing you didn't get to graze that Canadian land (you know the deal you were bitching about because you weren't allowed) ... you'd be producing that tainted, imported beef.

 

[Anonymous]

.... the same as we can't afford to have an American inspector inspecting every piece of meat imported (the reason 98% never gets inspected)...

.... how are you going to afford the inspectors/audits to make sure "every piece of meat" has the correct 'born, raised, slaughtered label" ? Yesterday you said that many old folks and working folks (that leaves who?) are willing to consume more beef but can't because of today's beef prices. :roll:

ZING- right over your head...We're not talking about inspectors in the US--we're talking about US Inspectors and Auditors Inspecting the foreign slaughter houses and inspectors in these 40+ countries we import meat from to make sure they are doing their job...

If you labeled every piece of meat that was imported as such we wouldn't need those inspectors in those countries... The consumer could make their own decision if they trusted Mexican inspectors and Mexican slaughterhouses... Or Canadian.... Or if they have more faith in US packers and USDA inspectors ...
The US inspectors will always be in the US plants- and they can easily oversee if the packer is slaughtering M or C branded cattle....

I'm not aware of any U.S. or Canadian cattle going to Mexico to be fed out- and as you are aware the Canadian producers barriers have pretty well kept U.S cattle from going north- so there isn't much concern about keeping track of those combinations (and I have a lot more trust in Canadians than in Mexico)...

Even Greg Golden makes mention of the Canuck trade barrier fiasco in his this year Cole Creek Angus sale book:

Canada: Last year we sold four bulls to Canada and found the expense of getting cattle across the border. So, any bull going to Canada that sells over $6500, Cole Creek Angus will split all costs. Under $6,500, buyer assumes all expenses. We will get all work done and even meet close to the border. We will not cross the border into Canada...