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

U.S. cattle panel frosty on COOL

Kato

Well-known member
U.S. cattle panel frosty on COOL


The U.S. cattle industry is far from unanimous in its esteem for mandatory country-of-origin labelling (COOL) if a panel assembled Thursday in Phoenix is any indication.

The U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF), in a report released Friday, offered up a selection of opinion from a panel discussion at the U.S.-based Livestock Marketing Council's meeting held during the Cattle Industry Convention and Trade Show.

Among the panelists were Cody Easterday, a Pasco, Wash. feedlot owner who in October 2008 filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) over COOL; USMEF economist Erin Daley; and CEO Barry Carpenter of the meat processors' group, the National Meat Association.

Carpenter said the major drawback of COOL is not with the labeling, but with the segregation of cattle. He said COOL adds significant production costs, "without any recognizable benefits."

USMEF quoted Easterday as saying COOL is causing major problems for cattle producers in the U.S. Northwest -- especially the segregation requirements for cattle at the point of slaughter.

"Sometimes our feedyard might be 30 to 40 per cent Canadian cattle, but sometimes it's zero," he said. "If packers have to set aside certain days for killing Canadian cattle, that kind of seasonality creates major problems."

Speaking on the impact of COOL on live cattle trade, Daley warned of the potential problems the regulation could cause in the U.S. beef trade relationship with Canada and Mexico, which together last year accounted for about 60 per cent (US$2 billion) of U.S. beef exports.

Rounds

"CattleFax estimates that, at the very least, it will cost cattle producers $50 to $60 per head (all figures US$) if we lose the NAFTA export markets," USMEF quoted Daley as saying.

"In addition to the large volume of variety meats that we export to Mexico, rounds are a very popular item in that market. Rounds also make up a large portion of our exports to Eastern Canada. It would be very hard to absorb these products into the domestic market."

Furthermore, she said, the "mixed origin" label required under COOL also creates difficulties for U.S. beef exports because it is not accepted by any major trading partners.

"Mixed origin meat simply can't be exported -- not even back to Canada," she said. "We have enough hurdles and obstacles that already interrupt trade. Why create one more?"

Easterday also warned it was unlikely consumers will find a distinction between U.S. meat and "mixed origin" product -- and just as unlikely that consumers would pay a premium based strictly on country of origin.

"Once a customer buys that (mixed origin) meat at a discount and it tastes the same, how will you ever get them back?" USMEF quoted him as saying.

Nothing new

Carpenter, according to USMEF, said the final COOL rule (set to take effect March 16) is designed to minimize the amount of segregation required at slaughter. But it's still possible that COOL as it now stands could be delayed for further review and revision by President Barack Obama's administration.

However, "of comments on COOL are reopened, USDA is not going to hear anything new," he said. "It's just going to be the same parties making the same arguments about the same issues."

USMEF also quoted Bill Jameson, a cattle feeder and cattle buyer from Moose Jaw, Sask., who while in Phoenix called COOL "the worst thing that's ever happened to the North American cattle industry.

"If our Canadian cattle end up getting sold at a discount, yours will too," he said.

and it goes on and on and on.........................
 

Kato

Well-known member
Here's another one.

Mexico will keep fighting COOL
Staff
1/30/2009 7:41:00 PM
Printer Version
Email Article to a Friend
Comment on this article

Related Items
More News by Topic
Livestock View!


The Mexican government pledged Thursday to continue its complaint against mandatory U.S. country-of-origin labelling (COOL) at the World Trade Organization, even though Canada has put its complaint on hold.

The Reuters news service on Thursday reported that Agriculture Minister Alberto Cardenas has announced Mexico's case will continue.

Cardenas' Canadian counterpart, Gerry Ritz, said earlier this month that Canada's request for formal consultations with the U.S. via the WTO dispute settlement process is now being held "in abeyance."

That means Canada's complaint, filed in December, won't be pursued for now but won't be withdrawn either, in case it needs to be revived as Ottawa monitors how the U.S. government applies its final COOL rule, which Washington released Jan. 12.

U.S. COOL legislation, which dates back to Washington's 2002 Farm Bill, requires country-of-origin labelling for beef, pork and other imported commodities, and was expanded in the 2008 Farm Bill to cover chicken and goat meat.

But the U.S. government in its final rule agreed to allow processors to use a COOL tag showing a "mixed origin" -- for example, saying beef was of "U.S. and Canadian origin." That, in turn, is expected to spare packers and feeders the expense of segregating animals that are designated "Canadian."
 

Tex

Well-known member
If these guys can't tell where the cattle came from and label it as such they need to leave the business. They have no business being in food service in any way.

When Mexican, Canadian, or Chinese or any other nation's products come to the USA, they should all be labeled (even in the ingredient list). If they can not be labeled, just don't let them in the country in the first place.

Kato, as a U.S. citizen, I don't care how much it costs to put those labels on the products nor do I care who else does or doesn't want them labeled. I want them labeled and it is the law of the land. If you don't like it, just leave. MCOOL does not cost what these companies or people say it costs and when you see the numbers you posted, they are just lies. When people lie like this, nothing they say should be trusted and they shouldn't be in the food business when they can't be trusted.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
When people lie like this, nothing they say should be trusted and they shouldn't be in the food business when they can't be trusted. DITTO DITTO
 

Kato

Well-known member
I figured this is the response I'd get. :wink:

I guess there is only one side to the street, and only one opinion in this world. :roll: :roll: :roll: Everyone else is lying.
 

MoGal

Well-known member
Furthermore, she said, the "mixed origin" label required under COOL also creates difficulties for U.S. beef exports because it is not accepted by any major trading partners.


Hahahaha .......... gotta read between the lines Kato.... These major trading partners don't want mixed meat....meaning they don't want Mexican or Canadian meat.......... Two years ago, Japan was insistent they wanted USA beef only and they would open up to beef imports but our wonderful packers wouldn't do that for them. That's why Japan was resistant to getting USA beef.

Every country has built up their economy by EXPORTING to the USA........ with a deep in debt consumer who is not consuming because these free trade agreements exported their job, these other countries are hollering protectionist......... if we don't start protecting American jobs and our own American economy we will be a third world country and in many ways we're already there.

It ticks me off that USA ONLY beef and pork is not offered in the stores and believe me when I say I scream loud and clear to my congressional leaders about it. Americans have sat back for too long and let corporate America run the show.

I'm sick and tired of their global economy and I want no part of it........ we had to have a global economy to bring about a global government and a global currency. The sooner folks realize this and quit buying into the global economy the better off we'll be.
 

Tex

Well-known member
I don't mind trade and indeed like it. What I don't like is a huge balance of trade deficit, much of the time because of subsidized currencies by governments. It undermines our economy and pulls the rubber band back for a huge snap, like the one we are experiencing today.
 

Kato

Well-known member
There is only one reason for a trade deficit. It's called consumer demand. When a country consumes more than it produces, then it imports to fill the demand. This is not the fault of the rest of the world. This is not some global conspiracy to take down the U.S. economy.

This is just the fact that the American economy is consumer based. Your consumers have produced a demand for products of all kinds. This market demand comes from inside the U.S., and you would be the first to say that a good businessman would try and provide what a market demands. This is what is happening in a lot of countries around the world. America wants stuff, and is willing to pay for it, so sell it to them, especially if they're not producing it themselves. You guys buy a lot of stuff, and that's the truth.

The American economy is the biggest in the world, and to think that it does not affect the rest of the world is an understatement to say the least.

And if you want to hear a big snap, just listen to what the rest of the world is calling it's first priority. You don't hear about it in your local news, but it's top headline just about everywhere else. It's the worry that is front and center everywhere but in the center of the universe you live in. It's the very real fear that if the U.S. slips back into protectionist ways, and shuts down trade, that this current recession will very quickly slide directly into a Great Depression like we've never seen. And all the walls on all the American borders will not stop it.

Turn your channel away from the American media, and check out what's going on out there. You guys have no idea what an impact your internal policies have in the rest of the world. What they have done to our small Canadian livestock producers is just the tip of the iceberg. Just a hint of bigger things to come.

You also have no idea that a large portion of the current global meltdown is the direct result of American based derivitaves and unsecured investements that have been traded globally. There are banks in countries halfway around the world that have been brought down by undersecured American mortgages and bad loans.

But of course that's not your problem is it? :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

mrj

Well-known member
Isn't it interesting that it is so rarely mentioned on this site that about 95+% of beef sold in US retail stores AND through Food Service is US bred, born, raised, and processed, yet some insist we must have COOL so we can buy US product????

Sorry but I'm still on vacation and rarely get access to a computer, so won't often be able to correct silliness on this site for a while yet.


mrj
 

Tex

Well-known member
Kato said:
There is only one reason for a trade deficit. It's called consumer demand. When a country consumes more than it produces, then it imports to fill the demand. This is not the fault of the rest of the world. This is not some global conspiracy to take down the U.S. economy.

This is just the fact that the American economy is consumer based. Your consumers have produced a demand for products of all kinds. This market demand comes from inside the U.S., and you would be the first to say that a good businessman would try and provide what a market demands. This is what is happening in a lot of countries around the world. America wants stuff, and is willing to pay for it, so sell it to them, especially if they're not producing it themselves. You guys buy a lot of stuff, and that's the truth.

The American economy is the biggest in the world, and to think that it does not affect the rest of the world is an understatement to say the least.

And if you want to hear a big snap, just listen to what the rest of the world is calling it's first priority. You don't hear about it in your local news, but it's top headline just about everywhere else. It's the worry that is front and center everywhere but in the center of the universe you live in. It's the very real fear that if the U.S. slips back into protectionist ways, and shuts down trade, that this current recession will very quickly slide directly into a Great Depression like we've never seen. And all the walls on all the American borders will not stop it.

Turn your channel away from the American media, and check out what's going on out there. You guys have no idea what an impact your internal policies have in the rest of the world. What they have done to our small Canadian livestock producers is just the tip of the iceberg. Just a hint of bigger things to come.

You also have no idea that a large portion of the current global meltdown is the direct result of American based derivitaves and unsecured investements that have been traded globally. There are banks in countries halfway around the world that have been brought down by undersecured American mortgages and bad loans.

But of course that's not your problem is it? :roll: :roll: :roll:

Kato, the meltdown happened because there were a whole lot of people who didn't understand the risks or want to understand the risks and because of the fact that the U.S. regulatory system did not limit people from taking risk that they couldn't back up with their assets. The global meltdown is largely due to this and there are a lot to blame in that regard.

I don't have anything against the Canadian cattlemen. I am upset that they were totally used by U.S. globalists who used bse as an excuse to give cattlemen there lower prices while shipping that beef to the U.S. and selling it for the same prices as U.S. meat.

That should never have happened.

I do want all products (not just food) to be labeled as to country of origin and I want to make the choice of whether or not I use my dollars to support any country in the world or not by buying their products.

Countries around the world should not just look to the U.S. for profits. They need to develop their own economies and buy as much as they sell. We have had a world economy where countries want to sell to the U.S. and buy Tbills. That totally gives a free ride to an overspending government that hides the effects of its fiscal policies.

Countries, companies, and banks who bought these overpriced risky mortgages took the risk. It didn't pay off. Let them take the hit. Yes, it might make interest rates go up, but so will the savings rate when people can get higher returns from saving than from buying.

I would agree that our govt. dropped the regulatory ball and helped create this huge problem. I have been speaking out against it for quite some time. I wish some of them would go to jail, but until incompetence and corruption's returns are negative instead of positive, they will continue. It is simple economics. Where is that Phil Gramm?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
mrj said:
Isn't it interesting that it is so rarely mentioned on this site that about 95+% of beef sold in US retail stores AND through Food Service is US bred, born, raised, and processed, yet some insist we must have COOL so we can buy US product????

Sorry but I'm still on vacation and rarely get access to a computer, so won't often be able to correct silliness on this site for a while yet.


mrj

Can you compete on a price basis with somebody who's production costs are half of what yours are, MRJ?
 

Tex

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
mrj said:
Isn't it interesting that it is so rarely mentioned on this site that about 95+% of beef sold in US retail stores AND through Food Service is US bred, born, raised, and processed, yet some insist we must have COOL so we can buy US product????

Sorry but I'm still on vacation and rarely get access to a computer, so won't often be able to correct silliness on this site for a while yet.


mrj

Can you compete on a price basis with somebody who's production costs are half of what yours are, MRJ?

Is it really "competition" when currency fluctuations are more important than supply and demand of the product's inputs and the product itself?
 

mrj

Well-known member
Are you boys saying there is no problem with cattle producers in extreme climates in the northern USA competing with cattle producers in our southern states where they can run cows per acre rather than our 25 to 75 acres needed per cow in locations in the north and west, not to mention the higher transportation costs for every necessity for raising cattle?

There is competition no matter where one is. Wages certainly are not the same across the USA for hired help, nor for equipment, rents, feed, you name it.

I still believe we in the USA can compete on quality, for just one thing. Stability of our government used to be a boon for us too, but not sure how much longer that will remain true at the rate the current admin is pushing us into a 'change'!

mrj
 

Trinity man

Well-known member
Here in Texas they were going to try pushing the program on the Texas Animal Health Commission, but they don't have the man power or the money to do it. Then they was going to try pushing it on the department I work under, but its only about 13 of us state wide so we could need do it. Then they don't even know how they were going to even track the livestock. Ear tag would not work around here they get ripped out to easy. The microchip would work they move around too much on Brahman cross cattle. The Bangs number that is already in the ear when you get your heifer Vac. is too hard to read when they are going through a sale barn and it still does not go back to the ranch the calves are from. So I think they are just shooting into the wind about this it will never happen here unless you do it yourself.

The thing that catches my eye the other day is the tax they want to put on livestock. Where the tax you so much per animal you have. I think cattle were $125 per animal. I guess I will just have to hide my cows.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
mrj said:
Are you boys saying there is no problem with cattle producers in extreme climates in the northern USA competing with cattle producers in our southern states where they can run cows per acre rather than our 25 to 75 acres needed per cow in locations in the north and west, not to mention the higher transportation costs for every necessity for raising cattle?

There is competition no matter where one is. Wages certainly are not the same across the USA for hired help, nor for equipment, rents, feed, you name it.

I still believe we in the USA can compete on quality, for just one thing. Stability of our government used to be a boon for us too, but not sure how much longer that will remain true at the rate the current admin is pushing us into a 'change'!

mrj

Can you compete on a price basis with somebody who's production costs are half of what yours are, MRJ?
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Then they don't even know how they were going to even track the livestock. Ear tag would not work around here they get ripped out to easy. The microchip would work they move around too much on Brahman cross cattle. The Bangs number that is already in the ear when you get your heifer Vac. is too hard to read when they are going through a sale barn and it still does not go back to the ranch the calves are from.

The rest of World uses RFID boluses as they are never lost and they are half the price of two ear buttons. No one rustles cattle with boluses.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Tories propose "honest food" labels for imported meat to help consumers choose British
All meat products labelled "British" will have to be from animals born and bred in the UK under Tory plans to be unveiled tomorrow.


By David Harrison
Last Updated: 3:30PM GMT 14 Feb 2009

The Conservatives' "honest labelling" proposals will be launched by Nick Herbert, the new Shadow Environment Secretary, when he addresses the National Farmers' Union (NFU) conference in Birmingham.

Under current rules, meat that is imported and processed in the UK can be labelled as British.

The Tories are launching their "Honest Food" campaign to end "misleading" labels and to allow consumers to "choose British food with confidence" and "raise awareness of the superior quality of genuinely British food".

They plan to introduce a parliamentary Bill requiring all meat products labelled as British or carrying the Union flag to be born and bred in Britain.

The campaign is supported by animal welfare and farming organisations and food campaigners including Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, Clarissa Dickson-Wright, Prue Leith and Antony Worrall Thompson.

Mr Herbert will tell the NFU conference say that a voluntary agreement between big food retailers is inadequate and a compulsory labelling scheme is now essential.

The move would bring Britain into line with countries including the United States and Australia which make it mandatory for retailers to display the country of origin of their meat and meat products.

A survey for Waitrose this month found that 85 per cent of shoppers want to see the country of origin clearly labelled on the pack.

The big supermarkets have given a commitment, in a voluntary code, not to sell imported meat processed in the UK under a British label, but this has failed to solve the problem of "dishonest" labelling, according to the Tories.

Mr Herbert said: "People have a right to know where their food comes from. Meat labelled 'British' should be from animals born and bred in Britain and raised to our high welfare standards. Honest food is not about protectionism – consumers should be free to choose food from any country."
 

Latest posts

Top