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

RCALF-Hypocrits

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
[/b]Registering a premises could result in greater legal exposure of cattle producers for events that occur after the registrant’s cattle leave the farm or ranch.

http://www.r-calfusa.com/Animal%20ID/08020710Reasons2OpposeNAISPremises%20Registration.pdf

In fact, it is easier for consumers to find out where their toys and clothes are manufactured than to learn the origin of the food they eat.

Origin labeling for meat has consistently received strong support in opinion polls. In addition, a
number of studies indicate that there is a consumer preference for beef labeled with U.S. origin,
and thus such labels may create a premium for U.S. product.

http://www.r-calfusa.com/COOL/20070206%20R-CALF%20Stampede%20Factsheet%20COOL.pdf

If passed, The Traceback Bill proposal would require USDA to trace back to the plant of pathogen contamination, and force noncompliant plants to change production practices to reduce the likelihood of shipping contaminated meat into commerce. R-CALF USA firmly believes that USDA
enforcement actions must be directed toward plants that are the source of contamination, not at downstream facilities, which are merely the destination of previously contaminated meat.

http://www.r-calfusa.com/Animal_Health/080227LetterBaucusTracebackBill.pdf

[/quote]
 

Cinch

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
[/b]Registering a premises could result in greater legal exposure of cattle producers for events that occur after the registrant’s cattle leave the farm or ranch.

http://www.r-calfusa.com/Animal%20ID/08020710Reasons2OpposeNAISPremises%20Registration.pdf

In fact, it is easier for consumers to find out where their toys and clothes are manufactured than to learn the origin of the food they eat.

Origin labeling for meat has consistently received strong support in opinion polls. In addition, a
number of studies indicate that there is a consumer preference for beef labeled with U.S. origin,
and thus such labels may create a premium for U.S. product.

http://www.r-calfusa.com/COOL/20070206%20R-CALF%20Stampede%20Factsheet%20COOL.pdf

If passed, The Traceback Bill proposal would require USDA to trace back to the plant of pathogen contamination, and force noncompliant plants to change production practices to reduce the likelihood of shipping contaminated meat into commerce. R-CALF USA firmly believes that USDA
enforcement actions must be directed toward plants that are the source of contamination, not at downstream facilities, which are merely the destination of previously contaminated meat.

http://www.r-calfusa.com/Animal_Health/080227LetterBaucusTracebackBill.pdf



I don't get it. Where is the hypocrisy. I think you must not know the substance of what is being talked about here if you think their is any inconsistency.
 

Cinch

Well-known member
Just to clarify, the Traceback Bill would require the USDA to "traceback" an ecoli contamination that they find at a place (like John Munsell's grinding plant, where ecoli cannot originate) back to the meat plant that he bought the meat from, where cattle slaughter actually takes place and beef can get contaminated.

This is the sole purpose of the Traceback Bill. It goes only between the consumer back to the slaughter plant and requires contaminations to be traced all the way back to their origin, not just to the first place they find it.

If you know how ecoli works, you would know why this is a very logical thing to do. The current practice actually protects the contaminator.
 
Top