Why we need COOL and why R-Calf is helping you

[PORKER]

Since I can officially sell their product line I see that they sell to every aspect of business.Heck ,I can now sell to the packing houses and the little locker plants and to the state of Michigan's vet dept. for tracking the movement of TB animals.I can sell location recordkeeping to the local tax accessor.

 

[Soapweed]

Which would you rather eat, beef from high quality Canadian cattle finished on grain in a feed lot or beef from southern "okie" type cattle that have eaten chicken litter, but by golly are a product of our own good old United States?

COOL doesn't mean much in my book, but beef that has a paper trail of good pasture-to-plate handling does. If mandatory COOL goes into effect, all USA producers will bear additional costs of production without gaining any financial benefit. USA beef will then become just commodity beef. Without mandatory COOL, the producers who do go the "extra mile" and furnish a source-verified premium product will be compensated accordingly.

 

[PORKER]

YOU got that right Soapweed,the producers who do go the "extra mile" and furnish a source-verified premium product with records will be compensated accordingly.

 

[Bill]

Which would you rather eat, beef from high quality Canadian cattle finished on grain in a feed lot or beef from southern "okie" type cattle that have eaten chicken litter, but by golly are a product of our own good old United States?

COOL doesn't mean much in my book, but beef that has a paper trail of good pasture-to-plate handling does. If mandatory COOL goes into effect, all USA producers will bear additional costs of production without gaining any financial benefit. USA beef will then become just commodity beef. Without mandatory COOL, the producers who do go the "extra mile" and furnish a source-verified premium product will be compensated accordingly.

Exactly right Soapweed! Good post as usual.

 

[Tommy]

Soapweed...Which would you rather eat, beef from high quality Canadian cattle finished on grain in a feed lot or beef from southern "okie" type cattle that have eaten chicken litter, but by golly are a product of our own good old United States?


How would you know where it came from Soapweed if we don't have something on the label differentiating our product from those somewhere else? Your statement makes the point that without some kind of label saying it is Canadian or USA beef, no one would know where it came from.

 

[Jason]

Soapweed...Which would you rather eat, beef from high quality Canadian cattle finished on grain in a feed lot or beef from southern "okie" type cattle that have eaten chicken litter, but by golly are a product of our own good old United States?


How would you know where it came from Soapweed if we don't have something on the label differentiating our product from those somewhere else? Your statement makes the point that without some kind of label saying it is Canadian or USA beef, no one would know where it came from.

Exactly his point Tommy, Labled USA wouldn't tell you anything about the beef. It could be that Okie beef or the Northern grain fed.


Companies spend millions differentiating THEIR product. No different in beef. CAB, CHB, Cargill Sterling Silver, Laura's Lean, etc etc etc.

 

[Soapweed]

How would you know where it came from Soapweed if we don't have something on the label differentiating our product from those somewhere else? Your statement makes the point that without some kind of label saying it is Canadian or USA beef, no one would know where it came from.

My point, Tommy, is that labels of "Canadian Beef" or "USA Beef" are such broad spectrum generalities that they really don't mean a thing. The new "South Dakota Certified Beef" program does mean something, because it is a source verified product with certain hoops to jump through for anyone producing this special branded product. A consumer buying South Dakota Certified Beef knows they are getting high quality, excellent tasting product.

A consumer buying plain old "USA Beef" has no idea whether or not it is grain fed high quality cattle or chicken litter fed number four okies. All the consumer knows is that it came from the USA.

 

[Anonymous]

How would you know where it came from Soapweed if we don't have something on the label differentiating our product from those somewhere else? Your statement makes the point that without some kind of label saying it is Canadian or USA beef, no one would know where it came from.

My point, Tommy, is that labels of "Canadian Beef" or "USA Beef" are such broad spectrum generalities that they really don't mean a thing. The new "South Dakota Certified Beef" program does mean something, because it is a source verified product with certain hoops to jump through for anyone producing this special branded product. A consumer buying South Dakota Certified Beef knows they are getting high quality, excellent tasting product.

A consumer buying plain old "USA Beef" has no idea whether or not it is grain fed high quality cattle or chicken litter fed number four okies. All the consumer knows is that it came from the USA.

But its important enough for USDA to set up a program to do it now for our export customers- just not important enough to do it for the US consumer :???: :?

 

[Sandhusker]

Nice point, OT. Another question is why then does the checkoff put a red, white, and blue US label on their foreign ads? Clearly they have some benefit in mind.

I think this is all pretty basic. You can't stay in business if nobody buys your product, and they can't buy your product if they can't pick it out from your competitor's.

Make no mistake about it, we ARE competing against foreign product now, and that competition is only going to get more intense. Every beef producing country in the world is eying our market, and the multi-national packers will be using NAFTA, CAFTA and any other flippin XXXTA that is coming to buy foriegn cheaper beef and sell it here. I challenge anybody to prove me wrong there, as I certainly hope I am wrong, but doubt it. Now is the time to prepare for what is coming by building brand loyalty via a pointed checkoff and MCOOL.

Soapweed, you bring up a very good point concerning the US label not differentating between a purple-ribbon Spearhead steak and a long-eared rodeo beef from Oklahoma. I would answer that by saying the USA label would not be the only label for "the good stuff". We will still have the private labels for the premium brands. Will a tough Okie steak turn off consumers (no offense, Sooners)? Perhaps, but I don't think a Brazilian steak would be much better. At least Oklahoma producers pay US taxes. I've noticed we could use a few more tax payers in this country - the bills are getting kind of high!

Finally, I would think MCOOL would be a necessity to protect our consumers. There are a number of vaccines, sprays, and other chemicals that can't be used here in the US because it has been determined not to be healthy for consumers. With the wording in these new trade agreements, we can't hold foreign beef to the same standards as ours - it is "detrimental to free trade". Is it wise for us to lump our product with product that would be illegal here? Would that be beneficial to demand?

 

[Mike]

COOL would have started a new trend in the beef business, i.e. "A FLOW OF INFORMATION" from the producer to the processor, then on to the customer. This information would ultimately be used to discriminate against those who raise less than desireable beef. (Okie's) These cattle would either improve or they couldn't compete, therefore raising the bar for a better piece of beef, in turn making those "bad beef eating experiences" less likely for the consumer.

 

[Murgen]

Finally, I would think MCOOL would be a necessity to protect our consumers. There are a number of vaccines, sprays, and other chemicals that can't be used here in the US because it has been determined not to be healthy for consumers. With the wording in these new trade agreements, we can't hold foreign beef to the same standards as ours - it is "detrimental to free trade". Is it wise for us to lump our product with product that would be illegal here? Would that be beneficial to demand?

Do you really believe that foriegn product can not be held to US standards? What a crock!

That's why the US sits on organizations like OIE, WHO, to have an impact on World health standards. But being a meber of an organization that uses false health concerns as a trade barrier, I wouldn't expect you Sandhusker to understand this.

Import restrictions due to health concerns will continue to be in place, trade barriers will be less likely to be in place.

 

[Murgen]

COOL would have started a new trend in the beef business, i.e. "A FLOW OF INFORMATION" from the producer to the processor, then on to the customer. This information would ultimately be used to discriminate against those who raise less than desireable beef. (Okie's) These cattle would either improve or they couldn't compete, therefore raising the bar for a better piece of beef, in turn making those "bad beef eating experiences" less likely for the consumer.

Good point Mike, but for this to work, you would also need an audit system etc.

When it comes to a branded beef product like Laura's lean, that has not fulfilled their supply or demand with US cattle, and are now buying in Canada, are you going to make them label the Canadian product as not US. Or better yet, label the 99% that is grown in the US. The beef is produced under a high level of control and auditting system. I would say that the safety and quality is far superior to a high percentage of US animals. That's what the consumer is buying. A guarantee of certain quality and production practises, not COOL.

That's the way it should work, a private company should be able to search for product that meets theirs and the USDA's standards and market it as such. Is their a premium paid for Laura's lean, you bet. Ask them how many concerns they get from the consumer on where the raw product comes from. None I would bet.

 

[Mike]

Ask them how many concerns they get from the consumer on where the raw product comes from. None I would bet.

I disagree. If you gave a beef customer a choice between beef from the U.S./Canada or beef from Guatemala/Nigeria. I think you see my point.

By the way, COOL "DID" require an audit system.

 

[Sandhusker]

Murgen, "Do you really believe that foriegn product can not be held to US standards? What a crock!"

It's true, Murgen. It's rediculous, assinine, whatever you want to call it, but it's true. And guess what, the same applies to you via NAFTA. I don't expect you to believe me on something that defies common sense, so I invite you to do some of your own research.

 

[Murgen]

Quick question? If a consumer has a "bad experience" with a COOL labeled steak, will they buy from that source again? I know that if I have a bad experience in a restarant/grocery store, I don't ask where it's from, I just don't buy there again.

So if 95% of commodity beef is labeled "US" and I have a bad experience, where would I go to buy from another source?

I would not want my beef to be labeled as a commodity, that's for sure. differientiation is a powerful marketing tool, COOL, does nothing for differientiation.

Why has there been so much growth in Branded Beef product lines in the last little while?

I don't understand producers that are willing to call their product superior, just because it comes from a certain country and not have the courage to produce it under a certain criteria to qualify it for a niche or targeted market.

 

[Murgen]

It's true, Murgen. It's rediculous, assinine, whatever you want to call it, but it's true. And guess what, the same applies to you via NAFTA. I don't expect you to believe me on something that defies common sense, so I invite you to do some of your own research.

I don't need to do any further research Sandhusker, Canadian producers have just lived 2+ years, where a Free trade agreement did not mean anything.

The US standards, were enforced, rightly or wrongly and a court injunction further showed that a Free Trade agreement can be further abused.

 

[Sandhusker]

It's true, Murgen. It's rediculous, assinine, whatever you want to call it, but it's true. And guess what, the same applies to you via NAFTA. I don't expect you to believe me on something that defies common sense, so I invite you to do some of your own research.

I don't need to do any further research Sandhusker, Canadian producers have just lived 2+ years, where a Free trade agreement did not mean anything.

The US standards, were enforced, rightly or wrongly and a court injunction further showed that a Free Trade agreement can be further abused.

If you want the agreement enforced, you have to take it to the "NAFTA Judges." Canada didn't do that, so why would you expect any NAFTA agreements enforced?

 

[Soapweed]

Quick question? If a consumer has a "bad experience" with a COOL labeled steak, will they buy from that source again? I know that if I have a bad experience in a restarant/grocery store, I don't ask where it's from, I just don't buy there again.

So if 95% of commodity beef is labeled "US" and I have a bad experience, where would I go to buy from another source?

I would not want my beef to be labeled as a commodity, that's for sure. differientiation is a powerful marketing tool, COOL, does nothing for differientiation.

Why has there been so much growth in Branded Beef product lines in the last little while?

I don't understand producers that are willing to call their product superior, just because it comes from a certain country and not have the courage to produce it under a certain criteria to qualify it for a niche or targeted market.

Good points, Murgen. It pretty much sums up the whole arguement, as far as I am concerned.

All I can speak from is personal experience, but back in 1993 our family visited in Alabama and Florida. I'm quite sure we ate nothing but beef that was born, raised, fed out and harvested right here in the good ol' United States. It was terrible, and we ended up shunning beef and eating chicken because it tasted better and the consistency could be depended upon.

Last week we spent several days in Alaska. We had beef mostly, and we never had any that wasn't good. I'd almost bet that some of it was produced on foreign soil. My point is, even though I raise cattle as an occupation, when I dine out I'd much rather purchase good tasting "foreign" beef and have a pleasant eating experience than be completely loyal and suffer trying to eat home-grown okie-style USA junk beef.

Pounce on me if you want to. :? :wink:

 

[Murgen]

If you want the agreement enforced, you have to take it to the "NAFTA Judges." Canada didn't do that, so why would you expect any NAFTA agreements enforced?

My point exactly Sandhusker, the US can sign these agreements all they want, but they still beat to the same drum. To argue with them is to waste huge amounts of money, and then have a court in Montana, rule against the USDA anyway.

And you say you don't have the power to control the standards of imported beef. What a crock!

 

[Bill]

It's true, Murgen. It's rediculous, assinine, whatever you want to call it, but it's true. And guess what, the same applies to you via NAFTA. I don't expect you to believe me on something that defies common sense, so I invite you to do some of your own research.

I don't need to do any further research Sandhusker, Canadian producers have just lived 2+ years, where a Free trade agreement did not mean anything.

The US standards, were enforced, rightly or wrongly and a court injunction further showed that a Free Trade agreement can be further abused.

If you want the agreement enforced, you have to take it to the "NAFTA Judges." Canada didn't do that, so why would you expect any NAFTA agreements enforced?

Would that be the same NAFTA panel that just ruled against the level of tariffs the US imposes on Canadian softwood? The panel ruled unanimously in favor of Canada and the US is ignoring their ruling.