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

USDA requires COOL for imports

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
FSIS Director before Congress


snip
FSIS ensures that imported meat is every bit as safe as domestically produced meat. FSIS requires imported meat to be inspected under a system that FSIS has determined – through a rigorous and comprehensive process – to be equivalent to the U.S. system. Then, upon arrival at a U.S. port of entry, FSIS reinspects all meat shipments. Almost all imported products, about 85 percent, then proceed to a U.S. plant for further processing into value-added products – all under FSIS inspection. So, approximately 85 percent of imported product undergoes inspection three times.

FSIS has certified only 37 countries as meeting U.S. inspection standards. This is out of the 190 countries recognized by the United States. In general, inspection under an equivalent system means meeting U.S. standards for microbiological pathogens and chemical residues; it also means meeting all sanitation standards and ante-mortem and post-mortem inspection requirements applicable to U.S. meat processing plants. Perhaps most importantly, all plants exporting meat to the United States must meet the requirements of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) inspection system, implemented in all U.S. plants over the past four years.

In any event, not one pound of imported product is permitted entry into the United States unless it has undergone inspection under a system certified by FSIS as equivalent to the FSIS inspection system. And, as I stated earlier, once imported product enters the United States, it undergoes reinspection.

FSIS does require country of origin labeling on all meat carcasses, parts of carcasses, and retail packages entering the United States. They must also be labeled with the foreign establishment number, either as part of the country’s mark of inspection or on the product’s packaging at the time of import. The container must bear, in English, in a prominent and legible manner: the country of origin, the foreign establishment number, and the name or descriptive designation of the meat product. How this information is displayed depends on whether it is on carcasses or on individual retail packages.
snip
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
Mike, isn't this what we have been saying for quite awhile now?

It's not Canadians who resell this meat as USDA inspected, it is sold as USDA inspected, because it is!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Murgen said:
Mike, isn't this what we have been saying for quite awhile now?

It's not Canadians who resell this meat as USDA inspected, it is sold as USDA inspected, because it is!

And who is the primary beneficiary of this policy? Hint: It's the same bunch who are the primary beneficiaries of CAFTA, VCOOL, no private BSE testing, Canada border, no price reporting, etc.....
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Murgen said:
Mike, isn't this what we have been saying for quite awhile now?

It's not Canadians who resell this meat as USDA inspected, it is sold as USDA inspected, because it is!

You missed my point. I'm not putting down Canada at all. The importers here are removing the labels. We all know that. Why are they?

But it's NOT inspected by USDA Inspectors. The Canadians are given a USDA stamp because they meet the "Equivalency" standards. Now I trust you guys up there (except for redriver) but to give the stamp to some in the world today is questionable.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
I wonder if all these plants worldwide that are allowed to ship beef to us with the USDA label are subject to surprise inspections and if so, if they ever are looked at on a regular basis. Without that, those assurances don't mean a dang thing.
 

Jason

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,994
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta Canada
Sandhusker said:
I wonder if all these plants worldwide that are allowed to ship beef to us with the USDA label are subject to surprise inspections and if so, if they ever are looked at on a regular basis. Without that, those assurances don't mean a dang thing.

I am sure all product is subject to inspections. It is the same as income tax. Not every tax form is audited, but enough are that catches the blatent abusers.

The exception might be fully processed products, but then they carry the label they were processed under ie Brazillian canned corned beef.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Jason said:
Sandhusker said:
I wonder if all these plants worldwide that are allowed to ship beef to us with the USDA label are subject to surprise inspections and if so, if they ever are looked at on a regular basis. Without that, those assurances don't mean a dang thing.

I am sure all product is subject to inspections. It is the same as income tax. Not every tax form is audited, but enough are that catches the blatent abusers.

The exception might be fully processed products, but then they carry the label they were processed under ie Brazillian canned corned beef.

I'm not real concerned about Canadian plants. I truly wonder about everybody else. We take product from a lot of places with pretty shaky reputations and historys - some places where you're advised to not even drink the water!

I wonder if the USDA has information posted that lists eligible plants and inspection history?
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
I can just imagine how one of these surprise inspections would go over in mexico,all I can say is you better be ready to shoot yourself in and shoot your way out.And if you think IM joking go take a look for yourself I am very careful crossing the river just to visit old friends,much less poke around where gringos have no buisness.And the farther you go south the worst it gets as I type this the federales and Neveuo Leon police have a gun fight raging ,they killed a commisioner and his lieutenant yesterday............good luck
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Sandhusker said:
Jason said:
Sandhusker said:
I wonder if all these plants worldwide that are allowed to ship beef to us with the USDA label are subject to surprise inspections and if so, if they ever are looked at on a regular basis. Without that, those assurances don't mean a dang thing.

I am sure all product is subject to inspections. It is the same as income tax. Not every tax form is audited, but enough are that catches the blatent abusers.

The exception might be fully processed products, but then they carry the label they were processed under ie Brazillian canned corned beef.

I'm not real concerned about Canadian plants. I truly wonder about everybody else. We take product from a lot of places with pretty shaky reputations and historys - some places where you're advised to not even drink the water!

I wonder if the USDA has information posted that lists eligible plants and inspection history?

Here you go Newt!

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/index_of_certified_countries/index.asp
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Mike said:
Murgen said:
Mike, isn't this what we have been saying for quite awhile now?

It's not Canadians who resell this meat as USDA inspected, it is sold as USDA inspected, because it is!

You missed my point. I'm not putting down Canada at all. The importers here are removing the labels. We all know that. Why are they?

But it's NOT inspected by USDA Inspectors. The Canadians are given a USDA stamp because they meet the "Equivalency" standards. Now I trust you guys up there (except for redriver) but to give the stamp to some in the world today is questionable.

They are not removing labels Mike. The bulk of imports are trim that are blended with U.S. 50/50 trim. Do you really think they should label each ounce of trim and grid? That product arrives in bulk containers and is labeled as to origin. Then it is blended with our surplus production of 50/50 trim to add value. FULLY PROCESSED imported product is labeled by origin per package and is displayed that way to consumers. The key word is "fully processed". Why are are you so concerned if consumers are not that concerned?
 

pointrider

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
218
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Hi agman,

I know I have your info somewhere, but I can't find it. If you can, please send me an email and just say hello. I need to send you an email and ask you a couple of questions. Thanks!
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Sandhusker said:
Jason said:
Sandhusker said:
I wonder if all these plants worldwide that are allowed to ship beef to us with the USDA label are subject to surprise inspections and if so, if they ever are looked at on a regular basis. Without that, those assurances don't mean a dang thing.

I am sure all product is subject to inspections. It is the same as income tax. Not every tax form is audited, but enough are that catches the blatent abusers.

The exception might be fully processed products, but then they carry the label they were processed under ie Brazillian canned corned beef.

I'm not real concerned about Canadian plants. I truly wonder about everybody else. We take product from a lot of places with pretty shaky reputations and historys - some places where you're advised to not even drink the water!

I wonder if the USDA has information posted that lists eligible plants and inspection history?

In stead of listening to R-Half and their phony verbiage regarding the safety of foreign beef why don't you talk to people who actually use the product who conduct their own independent tests. Oh, I am sorry, you have no contacts therefore no knowledge of these facts. Go back to you to the confines of your sandbox and play your R-Laugh recordings.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Agman, "In stead of listening to R-Half and their phony verbiage regarding the safety of foreign beef why don't you talk to people who actually use the product who conduct their own independent tests. Oh, I am sorry, you have no contacts therefore no knowledge of these facts. Go back to you to the confines of your sandbox and play your R-Laugh recordings."

I did some quick research and since I don't have contacts like you, I had to use the USDA. Yeah, I know they have some serious credibility problems, but the Ninth Court believes in them and just because they get overturned more than any other court doesn't mean they don't know a good source when they see one.

Anyhoooo, the USDA posted the results of their inspections of Mexican plants eligible for exporting to the U.S. during their inspection of May - June 2003. They inspected 11 establishments and 1 lab. Guess what? Four plants were delisted (they can't ship that quality stuff up here anymore) and four more were served with notices of intent to delist. But hey, the bright side is 1 in 3 passed! That's not bad considering word undoubtedly got out the Gringos were in country looking around and some had time to clean up their act.

I wonder what gems of information I would of found had I looked at any other inspection reports.
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Sandhusker said:
Agman, "In stead of listening to R-Half and their phony verbiage regarding the safety of foreign beef why don't you talk to people who actually use the product who conduct their own independent tests. Oh, I am sorry, you have no contacts therefore no knowledge of these facts. Go back to you to the confines of your sandbox and play your R-Laugh recordings."

I did some quick research and since I don't have contacts like you, I had to use the USDA. Yeah, I know they have some serious credibility problems, but the Ninth Court believes in them and just because they get overturned more than any other court doesn't mean they don't know a good source when they see one.

Anyhoooo, the USDA posted the results of their inspections of Mexican plants eligible for exporting to the U.S. during their inspection of May - June 2003. They inspected 11 establishments and 1 lab. Guess what? Four plants were delisted (they can't ship that quality stuff up here anymore) and four more were served with notices of intent to delist. But hey, the bright side is 1 in 3 passed! That's not bad considering word undoubtedly got out the Gringos were in country looking around and some had time to clean up their act.

I wonder what gems of information I would of found had I looked at any other inspection reports.

Have you ever noticed they have delisted U.S. plants also. Politics does get in the way. BTW, Russia has also delisted some of our plants at various times- just politics.

The Ninth Circuit believed in the truth. How many times do you have to be on the losing side to admit you are on the wrong side? Truth will win out over fiction everytime. One thing about you R-Laughers, you may be ignorant as a brick about the facts but you remain passionate about those fallacies none the less. What is that called?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Only 1 out of 3 passed. 1 out of 3. 2 out of 3 were delisted. They just didn't get written up, didn't get their wrist slapped, they got delisted. 66.6% failure rate, Agman. Tell us some more. :roll:
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,037
Reaction score
255
Location
Big Muddy valley
Sandhusker said:
Only 1 out of 3 passed. 1 out of 3. 2 out of 3 were delisted. They just didn't get written up, didn't get their wrist slapped, they got delisted. 66.6% failure rate, Agman. Tell us some more. :roll:

As a R-CALFer you should be happy that those plants got delisted. First the USDA was doing it's job and second that is fewer plants that can ship meat to the US. You sure are hard to please. :x
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Sandhusker said:
Only 1 out of 3 passed. 1 out of 3. 2 out of 3 were delisted. They just didn't get written up, didn't get their wrist slapped, they got delisted. 66.6% failure rate, Agman. Tell us some more. :roll:

Did you read my entire rebuttal or do you just want to pick one little part as you most often do and harp on that forever? My concern is the product that gets into this country. Show me where imported product has a higher incidence of contamination and bacterial count than domestic product. You will miss your sandbox time while you waste your time looking for something that does not exist. Yes, that does get down to "results".
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
67% failure rate (when some were even forwarned about inspections) and I'm concentrating on little things? Whatever...
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Sandhusker said:
67% failure rate (when some were even forwarned about inspections) and I'm concentrating on little things? Whatever...

You evaded my question once again. That appears to be the only thing you know how to do.
 

Latest posts

Top