• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lets just let them do it for us

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Lets just let them do it for us

    Traceability gives Canada an advantage in export markets, says U.S. meat exporter
Posted Jan. 27th, 2012 by Barbara Duckworth
    No Comments
    DENVER, Colo. — The head of international trade for one of the world’s largest meat processing companies predicts Japan might relax its age requirements on cattle by this summer. 


    Mark Gustafson of JBS Inc. at Greeley, Colorado, said Japan’s food safety committee is considering raising the age limit for beef from cattle younger than 21 months to less than 30 months. 


    Public hearings and studies are underway that could make it possible to find more age appropriate cattle for that market, he told the recent International Livestock Congress in Denver. 


    However, Canadian exporters are encouraged to continue building the maple leaf brand rather than waiting for a change in age rules. 


    “Canada Beef is focused on marketing and promotions and brand building in the Japan market value chain through to consumers. As for changes to the regulations, it is not for us to expend energy,” agency president Rob Meijer wrote in an e-mail. 


    “The existing rules do create some challenges, but together with our market partners we have been able to manage.” 


    Even if Japan agrees to accept older cattle, it will continue to demand its suppliers provide age and source verification. 


    “The Japanese want traceability within the whole context of all products coming into the country,” Gustafson said.


    That gives Canada an advantage with its mandatory traceability system, he added, even though it is not perfect. He also said the United States will never get a beef agreement with China without full traceability. Canada has an agreement in place, but no exports have been made. 


    Gustafson questions why trading partners ask for traceability. 


    “In all the countries that I deal with and all the people I discuss this with, I don’t think anybody can define traceability and I don’t think they can tell you why they want traceability and I don’t think they know what traceability is,” he said. 


    He argued that beef buyers do not need the ability to trace an animal back to the farm because it may not been there for a year or more. However, the U.S. cannot be the only hold out in the world, he added.


    “We should have an identification system and it should be part of our animal health system,” he said. 


    Even without full traceability, the U.S. has had a stellar export year because its grading system defines quality and age attributes.


    “The one thing we have an advantage over any other competing country … is we produce the highest quality grain fed beef in the world.”


    Worldwide acceptance of U.S. beef was gained with little government support, Gustafson said. 


    “We don’t really put a strong priority or emphasis on export markets. Because of that, some of our systems and policies have moved away from international policies,” he said. 


    “I don’t think there is one agency in Washington that has trade in their file,” he said. “We are at a disadvantage to a lot of countries.”


    The U.S. Meat Export Federation predicted that beef export values from last year should eclipse the $5 billion mark for the first time when the final figures from December become available. 


    The January-November export total was 1.179 million tonnes, up 22 percent from 2010. 


    #2
    "In all the countries that I deal with and all the people I discuss this with, I don’t think anybody can define traceability and I don’t think they can tell you why they want traceability and I don’t think they know what traceability is,” he said. 


    He argued that beef buyers do not need the ability to trace an animal back to the farm because it may not been there for a year or more."

    So, that being said, what's the logic behind MCOOL? Gee, I wonder......

    Comment


      #3
      Good point kato.

      Another point is that we are still spending millions of dollars on opening markets and even though China is open to muscle cuts, nothing is entering the country.

      Some may argue that it is a price issue but I believe it has two other reasons. Cargill and NB are doing fine domestically and have no need for export markets. And opening up much export marketing would screw with the North American captive supply issue that is keeping them well above the financial black line in Canada and the USA where Canadian Fats are discounted to US cattle.

      Ironically, a true Canadian value chain packer could make use of the work done by the CCA who have spent about 150 million dollars over the last few years trying to open new export markets.

      150 million dollars is almost ten times the cost of the Balzac Beef packing plant.

      This fund called the Legacy fund where the 150 million came from still has some money in it. More than enough to "FINANCE" and not fund the plant.

      Where do you think this Legacy fund would be better spent?

      More parties with the NCBA in Nashville or making even more money by borrowing some of it to a group that is ready to start exporting beef to Asia?

      Comment


        #4
        The reason the big plants in Alberta are not "directly" sending beef to China is down to 4 things.. China wants assurances of beef is raised with no Ractopine (Zilmax / Betagnists), they want the plant workers not using cotton gloves (plants are refusing), they want 100% assurance that no American cattle enter into the Canadian chain. Finally China wants boneless.... its down to that

        Comment


          #5
          Interesting - why no cotton gloves?

          Comment


            #6
            Plants don't want latex because they are too worried that the gloves could wind up into their trim... also one of the other restrictions there were but china has since backed off on was that they wanted assurances that no livestock from the BSE positive herds (identified positive animals) would be shipped into the Canadian beef chain.... they have since backed off on thsi requirement.

            Comment


              #7
              No, I meant why didn't the Chinese want the cotton gloves?

              Comment


                #8
                Bacterial contamination?? That's the only thing I can think of.

                Comment


                  #9
                  "they want 100% assurance that no American cattle enter into the Canadian chain."

                  What the Hell?? LOL

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Kato... no idea why the glove issue but that is what these negotiations come down to... Furthermore when China came to inspect plants last year they inspected a select group of plants... the idea and what we were told was they we would get a systems approach to accessing the market... needless to say when the Chinese went back they gave access to only those that they saw. Hesse why no other plants are shipping. By the way to all the CBEF nay Sayers... CBEF argued tooth and nail for all plants to be inspected... CFIA declined the request

                    Comment

                    • Reply to this Thread
                    • Return to Topic List
                    Working...