Update: COOL turns out to be a non-event.

[Ranchero]

I was wrong, looks like the usual cattle buyers are lining up at the border again. Ready and willing to contract Mexican feeder cattle. Turns out COOL will not have it's intended result after all. It has been decided by the MAJOR PACKERS to apply the Rule 2 interpretation of COOL which is box Labels to Read: Product of the United States, Mexico and/or Canada. So I guess the consumer will now know his meat comes from one of thee countries or all three. Yawn. :lol:

 

[Sandhusker]

That's not the only thing you're wrong about.

 

[PPRM]

I think country of origin really means little...When I sell to Tyson, I get my meat mixed with the other guys doing a good job as well as those who do not...Then, I get the results of Tyson processing as well...

I am so glad I decided to Market my meat based on Ranch of Orgin...MINE... People say they have not had meat like this since they were kids. People eat my beef and say they cannot stand the smell or taste of the stuff passed off at the grocery store....

The art and science of selling great eef has been replace by the econimics of marketing beef as cheaply as possible.... I have chosen to go with the art....

I only occasioanlly sell to Tyson now. We are selling three times the cattle we did last year direct. It is scary, fun and challenging...

PPRM

 

[PORKER]

Wisconsin Ag News Headlines

WFU Calls for COOL to be Properly Implemented
Wisconsin Ag Connection - 09/18/2008

The Wisconsin Farmers Union said USDA's interpretation of the 2008 Farm Bill's country of origin labeling provision leaves a loophole that will circumvent the intent of the labeling law. WFU President Sue Beitlich says the measure explicitly states that 'animals exclusively born, raised and processed in the United States cannot be labeled under the multiple country category.' But USDA said they will allow packers, who do not wish to segregate their animals based on origin, to label exclusively American products under the multiple country category.

"Farmers Union has long awaited COOL implementation. We have worked to create provisions that would please farmers and consumers, and accommodate packer concerns," Beitlich said. "USDA has chosen to ignore the clear intent of the law."

The group, along with its national organization, say the agreement creates four labeling categories, including products exclusively born, raised and processed in the United States will be labeled as a U.S. product; products from animals that were not exclusively born, raised and processed in the United States and not imported for immediate slaughter will be labeled with all countries in which the animal may have been born, raised or processed; an animal that was imported for immediate processing may be labeled as a product of the importing country and the United States; and animals that were born, raised and processed in a foreign country will be labeled as a product of the country of origin.

"Consumers have a right to know where their food comes from, especially whether it originates from U.S. producers. Farmers Union is asking the USDA to clarify its ruling on this matter," Beitlich said.

Despite COOL's inclusion in the 2002 Farm Bill, the provision was never implemented. COOL is scheduled to go into effect October 1.

 

[PORKER]

WASHINGTON, Sept. 17, 2008 -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) will hold three informational sessions about country of origin labeling (COOL) for covered commodities sold at retail. These sessions will provide detailed information about the COOL program to growers, packers, suppliers, handlers, retailers, consumers and other interested parties.



Effective Sept. 30, 2008, the 2002 and 2008 Farm Bills require country of origin labeling for all beef, pork, lamb, goat, chicken, fresh and frozen fruit and vegetable, peanut, pecan, ginseng and macadamia nut covered commodities sold by designated retailers. Since April 2005, country of origin labeling and the method of production have been required for fish and shellfish covered commodities sold at retail.



In Aug. 2008, AMS issued an interim final rule which requested comments on setting the requirements for retailers and their suppliers for the mandatory COOL program starting Sept. 30. The comment period closes Sept. 30.



Specifically, the sessions will be held:



September 26 -- College Station, TX
9a.m. - 12:00p.m. CT
Texas A&M University
Rudder Tower Complex - Room 601
College Station, Texas 77843



October 7 -- Minneapolis-Lakeville, MN
1:30p.m. - 4:30p.m. CT
Holiday Inn Hotel and Suites, Minneapolis-Lakeville
20800 Kenrick Avenue
Lakeville, Minnesota 55044



October 9 -- Los Angeles, CA
1:30p.m. - 4:30p.m. PT
Marriott Renaissance Montura Hotel Los Angeles Airport
9620 Airport Blvd.
Los Angeles, California 90045

 

[Ben Roberts]

WASHINGTON, Sept. 17, 2008 -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) will hold three informational sessions about country of origin labeling (COOL) for covered commodities sold at retail.

Effective Sept. 30, 2008, the 2002 and 2008 Farm Bills require country of origin labeling for all beef, pork, lamb, goat, chicken, fresh and frozen fruit and vegetable, peanut, pecan, ginseng and macadamia nut covered commodities sold by designated retailers.


In Aug. 2008, AMS issued an interim final rule which requested comments on setting the requirements for retailers and their suppliers for the mandatory COOL program starting Sept. 30. The comment period closes Sept. 30.



Specifically, the sessions will be held:



September 26 -- College Station, TX
9a.m. - 12:00p.m. CT
Texas A&M University
Rudder Tower Complex - Room 601
College Station, Texas 77843



October 7 -- Minneapolis-Lakeville, MN
1:30p.m. - 4:30p.m. CT
Holiday Inn Hotel and Suites, Minneapolis-Lakeville
20800 Kenrick Avenue
Lakeville, Minnesota 55044



October 9 -- Los Angeles, CA
1:30p.m. - 4:30p.m. PT
Marriott Renaissance Montura Hotel Los Angeles Airport
9620 Airport Blvd.
Los Angeles, California 90045

Porker, how can this be, two of these sessions are in October!

Also look at where they are being held, i'm sure the outcome would be different if the sessions were held in the Sandhills of Nebraska or the Big Sky country of Montana.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

But USDA said they will allow packers, who do not wish to segregate their animals based on origin, to label exclusively American products under the multiple country category.

Ahhhh, the WFU. Yet another protectionist outfit. I can see them getting their knickers in a knot if the packer found some loophole to label non-US beef as US, but if the packer wants to save a buck and not segregate their animals, risking losing money on those animals, isn't that up to the packer?

Rod

 

[PORKER]

Ben R . These meetings are for retailers and packers and everybody in the middle of the COOL law for covered commodities sold by designated retailers that are big enough for the PACA rule of 1930.

 

[Ranchero]

Why don't you pro-coolies just go out and start your own packing company. So you can put your own label on it and quit whining for the government to legislate a mandate for everybody elses business. What's the matter, ain't got the savvy. Apparenently you got enough money to buy the COOl bill recently passed. I think you would be better off managing your own businesses instead of letting the government do it for you. Then, whining that that they didn't do it the way you wanted. Haven't you figured it out the government isn't the best man for the job of running Rancher's businesses. If you don't. just take a look at everything else they manage.

 

[RobertMac]

But USDA said they will allow packers, who do not wish to segregate their animals based on origin, to label exclusively American products under the multiple country category.

Ahhhh, the WFU. Yet another protectionist outfit. I can see them getting their knickers in a knot if the packer found some loophole to label non-US beef as US, but if the packer wants to save a buck and not segregate their animals, risking losing money on those animals, isn't that up to the packer?

Rod

Rod, your protectionist crap is pure BS. Most of the countries in the world have COOL...come on into the twenty first century and put a Canadian Leaf on your beef.
I'm not really worried about the multi-country label. I wonder what the consumer will think when they look at this multi-country label on a Tyson steak and then look down the counter to a steak with "Product of USA" or Randy's and PC's steak with "Product of Canada"??????

 

[Bill]

Published Monday September 22, 2008
Single meat label, multiple countries
BY LESLIE REED
WORLD-HERALD BUREAU



LINCOLN — Would you buy a New York strip steak labeled as a product of the U.S. and Canada and Mexico?

After years of wrangling to get country-of-origin labels on meat and other agricultural products, several U.S. farm groups now worry that U.S. Department of Agriculture regulations will sabotage their efforts.

In the works for more than six years, the labeling requirement takes effect Sept. 30. The farm groups had hoped that it would steer consumers toward purchasing meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the United States.

Instead, the groups are hearing that several major meatpackers plan to take advantage of a USDA regulation that allows them to label their steaks and roasts as products of multiple countries — even if the slaughtered animals spent their entire lives in the United States.

That would defeat the purpose of labeling, said John Hansen, president of the Nebraska Farmers Union. "We're trying to get rid of the mystery meat here."

Meatpackers say they're trying to comply with the law without unduly increasing costs to consumers.

"We fully intend to abide by the new labeling rules, while also making sure we continue to meet the wishes of our customers," said Gary Mickelson, a spokesman for Tyson Foods, which intends to list multiple countries of origin on its cuts of beef and pork, but not on its chicken.

All of Tyson's chickens are domestically produced and will be labeled as U.S. chicken. Most of its hogs and cows, but not all, are born and raised in the United States.

"Rather than go to the significant added expense of segregating livestock and finished product, we believe our customers and consumers will be best-served if we simply label most of our affected retail products as coming from multiple countries of origin," Mickelson said.

The USDA regulations are intended to give meatpackers flexibility in managing the costs of complying with the new regulations, said Mark Dopp, senior vice president of regulatory affairs and general counsel for the American Meat Institute in Washington, D.C.

Dopp responded to phone messages left last week with several meatpacking companies.

In packinghouses where thousands of animals are slaughtered each day, some animals have never been outside the United States; others were born in Canada or Mexico but were fattened in a U.S. feedlot; and still others were imported to be slaughtered. The USDA estimates that up to 2.5 million cattle and 10 million hogs slaughtered by the U.S. meat industry each year originated in Canada or Mexico.

"Essentially," Dopp said, "the regulation allows companies to use the same label day in, day out, without having to change it."

The Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation has joined the National Farmers Union, the U.S. Cattlemen's Association and R-CALF USA in objecting to the USDA policy.

"If packers use the 'multiple country' designation unnecessarily, it will give consumers a false perception that there is little to no beef available to them that is entirely produced and processed in this country," said Nebraska Farm Bureau President Keith Olsen.

The farm groups have conceded that ground meat — which is derived from multiple animals — could be labeled with multiple countries of origin. But they say the packinghouses ought to be able to keep track of the origins of the better cuts of meat.

The Farm Bureau believes that consumers are willing to pay a premium for beef produced entirely in the United States, much like they're willing to pay extra for Angus beef or organic beef, said Rob Robertson, government liaison for the Nebraska group.

Dopp strongly disagreed: "We've seen no evidence that consumers are willing to pay more for beef or pork that's a product of the U.S."

National Farmers Union President Tom Buis has lambasted the USDA regulation, saying it violated "good-faith" negotiations between farm groups and food processors.

"USDA has created a loophole big enough to drive a truck through," Buis said, "violating the spirit, letter and intent of the law and deceiving consumers who have consistently shown support for buying U.S. products."


• Contact the writer: 402-473-9581, leslie.reed@owh.com.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Rod, your protectionist crap is pure BS.

RM, if you look back on my previous posts from the last year or so, you'll plainly see that the only thing that I've really got against COOL is that it will increase costs which the producer ALWAYS ends up paying for. Otherwise, I'm happy and proud to see Product of Canada stamped all over anything under the sun. Hell, this year I'll be supplying Made In Canada backgrounders to Randy.

But not allowing the multi-country label is pure and simple protectionist crap, whether you want to admit it or not.

Rod

 

[RobertMac]

Rod, your protectionist crap is pure BS.

RM, if you look back on my previous posts from the last year or so, you'll plainly see that the only thing that I've really got against COOL is that it will increase costs which the producer ALWAYS ends up paying for. Otherwise, I'm happy and proud to see Product of Canada stamped all over anything under the sun. Hell, this year I'll be supplying Made In Canada backgrounders to Randy.

But not allowing the multi-country label is pure and simple protectionist crap, whether you want to admit it or not.

Rod

Cost or opportunity...it's a matter of attitude.

I have little problem with the multi-country label because before, consumers assumed all the meat they bought was a USA product. With the multi-country label, it becomes a fact they can't assume that. They will wonder why this company doesn't tell them where a steak comes from and another company is proud to tell them...from which company would you buy your steaks?

Dopp strongly disagreed: "We've seen no evidence that consumers are willing to pay more for beef or pork that's a product of the U.S."

Note to Dopp...get head out of boss's a$$! Every survey done disputes this statement...history will prove what is right.