Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF) is working to get a new version of mCOOL (mandatory country-of-origin labeling) they think could work around the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling the old law illegal.
In answer to a Kansas congressmen’s query in a House Ag Committee hearing about “misleading” labels on imported beef, USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue said a kind of “middle ground” country-of-origin labeling proposal was being considered within USDA. The congressman said USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) policy allowed imported meat to be given only “minor processing” or “repackaging” and labeled as American-produced product. Perdue said USDA was considering a “slaughtered and processed in USA” label that would provide more transparency.
Most live cattle imported into the U.S. come from Canada and require harvesting and processing, not “minor processing.” Those cattle are similarly managed as U.S. fed cattle, have similar genetics and meet necessary quality levels. The same safety and sanitary standards are applied, so they are sold as American beef.
Canada has historically provided 5-7 percent of the U.S. live cattle harvest, some in border packing plants that need fed cattle from both sides of the border. That benefits both American and Canadian feedyards, as well as local feeder cattle producers.
Most of the remaining imports come as 100-lb. blocks of frozen lean beef. Grinding those blocks of lean with U.S. 50/50 trim from Choice carcasses for ground beef is not “minor processing” or “repackaging.”
Our cull cow slaughter is roughly half—5-6 million fewer—than our 1976 peak. Imported lean beef, mostly from Australia and New Zealand, produced under USDA or USDA-equivalent inspection, helps provide the ground beef consumers want. It also supports our 50/50 trim price.
R-CALF claims reinstating mCOOL would “allow consumers to selectively avoid beef from countries that may have food safety problems.”
The WTO rulings involved requirements of imports that disadvantage them compared to domestic beef and cattle.
R-CALF has a lengthy proposal for getting around the WTO’s rejections.
One component is to help imports, but would be problematic for domestic processors. R-CALF contends that because live imported cattle are branded at the border, origin records aren’t necessary.
But that brand is on the hide, not each piece of meat. The group disagrees that in order to guarantee the origin of all the beef from those cattle, the processing must be segregated from domestic production. For the small percentage of Canadian cattle for the big plants, that requires designating certain days or shifts at certain plants for Canadian cattle. It’s more complicated for Mexican cattle that came into the country as feeders and went into feedyards, often commingled with American feeder cattle.
R-CALF claims that if packers can track Certified Angus Beef (CAB), they could do it for imported live cattle. However, the CAB designation is made at the carcass stage. There is no origin determination involved.
They also note packers handle organic and natural designations. But there are increased logistical costs that contribute to its 25-50 percent higher retail cost. The old mCOOL law proved, for regular beef, consumers liked the origin information but wouldn’t pay for it.
Another component calls for “providing importers with the opportunity to improve the accuracy of labels” by “allowing” foreign exporters to volunteer origin label information. They feel making it voluntary instead of mandatory would “mollify” the WTO. Similar logistical problems apply.
The final stipulations: R-CALF would require all beef suppliers to provide origin information to foodservice establishments so that they could provide it to consumers. Processed foods that might contain imported beef, like stews or soups or casseroles would also be required to be origin labeled.
R-CALF claims “lower cost imports” push U.S. beef prices down, yet beef is imported only when it meets quality and safety standards and is cost competitive after shipping. If this happened often, volumes would be much higher.
The mCOOL law was in effect from 2009-2015. R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard claims the mCOOL law caused the higher prices in 2014 and part of 2015. The real cause was a drought-induced lower cattle supply.
R-CALF attracts activists and politicians to their “mislabeling” cause by accusing packers of disregarding quality and safety and ignoring customer wishes.
R-CALF is recruiting politicians and activist groups to help consumers “know” where their beef “comes from.” That 85-90 percent of it comes from America is truth it doesn’t want consumers to know. — Steve Dittmer,WLJ columnist
(Steve Dittmer is the author of the Agribusiness Freedom Foundation newsletter.)
