Meat

Investing in the Future: Cargill Announces $90-Million Investment in Automation and Technology

Mon, 09 Jun 2025 15:33:19 GMT

Cargill plans to invest nearly $90 million in automation and technology at its Fort Morgan, Colo., beef plant over the next several years as part of its broader Factory of the Future initiative aimed at improving operational efficiency, yield and worker safety, the company announced Thursday.

“We’re at an extremely challenging point in the cattle cycle for packers with tight supplies and margins,” says Jarrod Gillig, senior vice president of Cargill’s North American beef business. “But now is the time we need to step up and make investments in our facilities to make sure they are working efficiently.”

The company has already put $24 million into technology upgrades at the plant since 2021. One of the newest tools to be deployed will be CarVe, Cargill’s proprietary, patent-pending computer vision system that measures red meat yield in real time. The technology gives managers instant feedback to help workers refine cutting techniques and reduce waste.

“I grew up on a farm/ranch and am blessed to still be active in our family’s cattle operation today, so I understand the importance of honoring the whole animal and doing right by the hard work of the ranchers and farmers who raise them. With tools like our new CarVe computer vision technology, we’re able to keep more high-quality protein in the food system, cut down on food waste, and make each animal count. That matters more than ever today.”

— Jarrod Gillig, senior vice president of Cargill’s North American beef business

“Before CarVe, yield data was always yesterday’s news,” Gillig says. “Now, we’re making decisions in the moment and saving product that would’ve been lost.”

Even a 1% improvement in yields could save hundreds of millions of pounds of beef annually, a meaningful gain at a time when U.S. cattle supplies are at their lowest levels in years.

“With CarVe, we are not replacing employees, it is empowering them to work more efficiently and effectively and helping us maximize the carcass,” Gillig summarizes.

The company has also invested in the Fort Morgan community, backing a $40 million workforce housing initiative that includes new townhomes and an 81-unit apartment complex scheduled to open this fall. Cargill has provided more than $500,000 in grants to local nonprofits for childcare access and housing-related support.

“Fort Morgan plays an important part in Cargill’s critical role as a food company to the nation and the world,” Gillig adds. “By partnering with local ranchers and farmers in Colorado and the region, we’re working hard to produce more food with less impact there so we can move it to store shelves and ultimately family dinner tables across the country.”

Your Next Read: Four Key Takeaways from the CattleFax Cow-Calf Survey

Hidden Hazards: Now is the Time to Rethink Gun Use in Cattle Handling

Tue, 13 May 2025 16:59:17 GMT

With the smallest cattle herd size on record, the impact of every pound of beef and every head lost due to foreign material contamination is even more significant today than it has ever been.

Pat Mies, Tyson Fresh Meats vice president food safety and quality assurance and beef industry food safety council chair, shares alarming math regarding foreign material contamination.

There is an economic loss due to cattle contaminated with foreign materials. Mies explains regulatory rules consider any foreign material, regardless of size, to be an adulterant and unfit for human consumption.

There’s more than 50 griding/further processing facilities across the U.S.

(NCBA)

The issue is industry-wide and not just state or region specific. Processors from across the U.S. have frequently reported challenges with foreign material in beef cattle.

“It’s not a Texas issue or New Mexico issue or a South Dakota issue,” Mies says. “It’s an entire U.S. issue.”

Trey Patterson, Padlock Ranch president and CEO, says “Food safety in our industry is non-negotiable; it’s now an expectation.”

(Schwartz, West Texas A&M)

Patterson says the 2022 National Beef Quality Audit revealed a significant problem: 100% of non-fed plants reported finding foreign objects in beef, with half experiencing customer complaints about items like shotgun pellets. And in the audit, 50% of fed plants are having the same issue.

Trent Schwartz, West Texas A&M University assistant professor, explains, “This is not a fed versus non-fed issue. This is all cattle being sold for meat consumption, and we believe highly that all of this is happening in the production phase, whether it be cattle gathering techniques or treating cattle.”

Mies acknowledges plants have access to resources and technology to catch foreign material but it is not 100% accurate.

“We have metal detectors, defect eliminators, X-ray systems and vision systems,” he admits. “We’re using artificial intelligence to train these systems to do a better job, to get rid of these foreign objects. And then we also have the human element — people watching product and pulling product that may have foreign objects in it. We have all these things in our plants, yet we still have problems. It’s not 100% foolproof. It’s not 100% fail-safe.”

Economic Impacts

Patrick Linnell, CattleFax analyst, provided an economic perspective regarding cull cows and the financial loss due to foreign material contamination.

“Cull cows is one area in particular where there’s an especially strong connection between animal welfare and husbandry and value to the producer,” Linnell says.

With cow inventory at its lowest since the 1950s, and as the beef and dairy industries try to stabilize and rebuild, Linnell says cull cow supplies will remain tight for the foreseeable future. Cull cows on average represent 20% of total marketing and management for an individual operation and the industry as a whole, he adds.

“The consumer wants all the beef through the system that we can provide them,” Linnell says. “That’s why making sure we don’t have to dispose of this high-value product because of foreign material contamination is important.”

The economic and reputational implications of foreign contamination are severe. With current beef prices, each contaminated animal represents a significant financial loss. Moreover, these incidents can damage domestic as well as international market confidence.

Linnell says that 50% of U.S. beef consumption is in the form of ground beef.

“If you do the simple math and look at what ground beef costs today in retail stores, it’s on average, about $5 per lb. across the U.S. That is a lot of money that we’re pulling out of the system because people decided to use a shotgun and bird shot to move stubborn cattle,” Mies says.

Starts With the Live Animal

Schwartz is the lead researcher working on a checkoff-funded study in partnership with NCBA regarding foreign material detection techniques in live animals before the animal enters the processing facility.

He says a wide range of foreign objects have been found in live animals, with metal shot being the most common. He points out that most of the foreign material found relates back to metal objects coming from the live side, not something that’s added to the product post-harvest.

His team is cataloging pictures and materials received from plants and individuals for future use and educational purposes. The primary source of these foreign objects appears to be cattle handling practices.

“Cattle get in rough country and won’t come out,” he says. “The first instinct is to use a shotgun or rat shot, and to move those cattle with some metal shot.”

Hunters are another concern for the shot residue.

“We don’t feel like this is a hunting issue,” he says. “This is direct contact, point-blank type issue. Criminal mischief has also been brought up. Criminal mischief or criminal acts is certainly a possibility.”

He also says unintended exposure or living conditions can lead to the foreign material such as cattle ingesting wire and it protrudes through the stomach and into the skirt or other organs.

Darts are also becoming an increasing concern, with some found deeply embedded in muscle tissue and even lungs.

“We need to start looking at the production side and how we can limit some of these items that are making their way into the plant,” Schwartz summarizes.

His ongoing research project is focusing on developing methods to detect objects in live animals under the hide using ultrasound, X-ray and metal detection techniques.

“The goal of the research is to determine efficacy. Does it work?” Schwartz explains. This work will allow for technology advancements to potentially identify foreign material throughout the supply chain in the live animal.

How You Can Help

Patterson suggests a voluntary, industry-wide effort to address the problem before it reaches processing facilities.

“I need your help,” Mies says in a plea to all beef producers. “I need you to talk to your friends, your family, your neighbors, anybody that you can about moving cattle with shotguns, and that it should never happen in our industry.”

To learn more about foreign materials found during beef processing watch this NCBA webinar:

Your Next Read: Streamline Spring Cattle Processing with These 3 Stress-Reducing Steps

Trump Plans to Ease Trade Tensions by Reducing Tariffs On Chinese Goods

Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:38:45 GMT

Comments President Donald Trump made at a White House press briefing on Tuesday have signaled the U.S. trade war with China is about to de-escalate.

The 145% import tax rate imposed on Chinese goods will “come down substantially, but it won’t be a zero,” Trump said.

“I don’t know if we can call what President Trump did on China a U-turn, but some people are calling it that,” AgriTalk Host Chip Flory said on Wednesday. He asked guests what their level of support is for what the Trump administration is doing on trade currently.

“I think he’s doing what needed to be done,” said Scott McGregor a cattleman and grain producer from northeast Iowa, near Nashua.

McGregor said he wants to see a level playing field for the U.S. in its trade efforts and negotiations with China.

“China needs to be a trade partner, not just a trading destination. That’s a lot of it,” McGregor said. Get the complete AgriTalk discussion here .

Financial Losses In The U.S. Beef Industry

Beef producers are reported to be “losing up to $165 per head on cattle currently, due to the absence of Chinese competition for high-value cuts like short rib and chuck. That’s a $4 billion annual blow to the U.S. beef sector…,” reported The Scottish Farmer last week.

McGregor said he would like to see the U.S. open up new markets for its beef and grain products to increase opportunities and minimize potential risks from future tariffs.

“China is not our only destination for our ag products, right? We need to expand our horizons as much as we can,” McGregor said.

When U.S. cattlemen start talking about market opportunities, Flory said they often turn their focus on Australia. The U.S. imports about $3-billion worth of beef from Australia a year.

“Australia doesn’t import any beef from the U.S., and there’s cattlemen here that would like to see that fixed,” Flory said. “But the issue is, there’s only, what, 30 million people in Australia?”

Furthermore, Australia has a lot of beef to export that the U.S. needs for use in hamburger, McGregor said.

“I know people don’t want us to import it, but Nellie bar the door if we couldn’t import beef from Australia for grinding,” he said. “Our demand is so huge here in the United States that we have got to import it. It has to meet all the specs that our beef does for importation, and it isn’t like we’re just willy-nilly importing some beef. We need it bad. And yes, it’d be great if they took some of our beef, but they don’t have the population.”

China has turned its attention and dollars to accessing more Australian beef, as well. According to Meat and Livestock Australia, Australian grain-fed beef exports to China surged almost 40% in February and March year-on-year, according to The Scottish Farmer article.

“Australian beef finds itself in a rare sweet spot – a prime cut of opportunity in a world of lean margins,” the article said.

Your next read: CAB Insider: Market Update April 23

Enhancing Meat Quality Through Management Decisions Pre-Calving

Tue, 08 Apr 2025 18:41:17 GMT

Meat quality is influenced by various factors that affect the consumer’s eating experience, including tenderness, marbling, and fat composition . While many factors contribute to the final product, beef producers play a key role in shaping meat quality through their management and nutritional decisions, even before an animal is born.

Production systems vary widely based on climate and economics, but management choices made before birth can significantly impact meat quality. Key decisions include breed selection and maternal nutrition .

Breed type affects meat quality. Bos taurus breeds, such as Angus and Hereford, tend to have higher marbling scores than Bos indicus breeds. Crossbreeding beef and dairy genetics can optimize efficiency and carcass quality, with research ongoing to determine the best breed combinations for superior meat characteristics.

A dam’s uterine capacity and diet during pregnancy directly impact the offspring’s muscle development, fat composition, and overall meat quality. Intrauterine growth restriction can limit muscle fiber development and reduce marbling. Proper maternal nutrition helps mitigate these effects. Studies show that protein supplementation during gestation improves marbling and meat tenderness, while both undernutrition and overnutrition of the beef cow during gestation can negatively impact carcass traits of their calves.

Feeding antioxidant-rich diets to pregnant cattle can enhance the offspring’s meat quality by improving shelf life and flavor stability. Research suggests that plant-based antioxidants, such as rosemary and thyme, can reduce fat oxidation, preserving meat tenderness and taste.

Beef producers have a significant influence on meat quality through breeding choices and nutrition management. Understanding these factors and implementing best practices from conception through finishing can lead to higher-quality beef, improving both consumer satisfaction and market value.

Your next read: Beef Profit Tracker: Breakeven Prices For Current Placements Hover Around $200

Beef Industry Sees Some Silver Linings As Reciprocal Tariffs Go Into Effect

Thu, 03 Apr 2025 15:07:02 GMT

President Donald Trump unveiled a series of tariffs on Wednesday afternoon during his “Make America Wealthy Again” event in the White House Rose Garden.

Using his International Emergency Economic Powers Act authority, he announced the U.S. will impose a 10% tariff on all countries that will take effect April 5, 2025, at 12:01 a.m. EDT.

Trump will also impose an individualized reciprocal higher tariff on the countries with which the U.S. has the largest trade deficits to take effect April 9, 2025, at 12:01 a.m. EDT. All other countries will continue to be subject to the original 10% tariff baseline.

Livestock Industry Weighs In On Announcement

During the event, which was broadcast live across the U.S. and abroad, Trump held up a chart showing specific countries in line for what he described as reciprocal tariffs.

“ We will charge them approximately half of what they are — and have been — charging us,” he said. “So, the tariffs will not be a full reciprocal. I could have done that, I guess, but it would have been tough for a lot of countries.”

Joe Schuele, U.S. Meat Export Federation senior vice president of communications, responding to the announcement in a prepared statement, said the president’s executive order provides more clarity on the administration’s approach to reciprocal tariffs.

“USMEF’s main concern is obviously how our trading partners will react,” Schuele said. “We are hopeful that they will focus on eliminating barriers to trade rather than imposing restrictive countermeasures.”

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) Senior Vice President of Government Affairs Ethan Lane also issued a statement after attending President Donald J. Trump’s announcement at the White House.

“For too long, America’s family farmers and ranchers have been mistreated by certain trading partners around the world,” Lane said. “President Trump is taking action to address numerous trade barriers that prevent consumers overseas from enjoying high-quality, wholesome American beef.

“NCBA will continue engaging with the White House to ensure fair treatment for America’s cattle producers around the world and optimize opportunities for exports abroad,” Lane added.

A partial list of the countries Trump called out and specific tariff percentages to be imposed include:

China - 34%
European Union - 20%
Vietnam - 46%
Taiwan - 32%
Japan - 24%
India - 26%
South Korea - 25%
Thailand - 36%
Switzerland - 31%
Indonesia - 32%

Reciprocal tariffs laid out by President Trump.
(The White House )

Some Trade Partners Inhibit U.S. Opportunity

A recent article in Drovers, Cattle and Hog Markets See Opposite Impact of Tariffs, shows that tariffs on U.S. beef and cattle imports can have a net effect of tightening supplies, and that’s price positive.

Numerous countries are imposing tariff and non-tariff trade barriers on American beef that inhibit opportunities to export product, added NCBA’s Lane who offered five examples:

Australia has sold roughly $29 billion of beef to American consumers. Meanwhile, the U.S. has not been able to sell $1 of fresh U.S. beef in Australia due to non-scientific barriers, Lane said.
Vietnam places a 30% tariff on U.S. beef while Australian beef faces no such tariff.
Thailand places a 50% tariff on U.S. beef.
Brazil and Paraguay have a history of dangerous foot-and-mouth disease, but despite overwhelming evidence of their animal health risk, the Biden administration continued to allow U.S. market access to Brazil and Paraguay.
The European Union places numerous non-scientific “Green Deal” restrictions on American beef, limiting market opportunities.

Grain Growers Brace For More Financial Pain

Potentially caught in the middle of the new tariff battles are those farmers who produce cattle and grain. That describes Chase Dewitz, who shared his perspective on AgriTalk. His family operation includes more than 34,000 acres of pasture, row crops, 1,500 head of beef cows and a feedlot. His current concerns revolve around grain exports.

“I think there’s going to be some pain here for a while, and the biggest thing is these export markets. We have handed China to Brazil, and we’re just pushing them away more and more, and we’ve allowed this to happen,” said Dewitz, who is based in central North Dakota, near Steele.

During the 2018 trade war with China, U.S. agriculture experienced more than $27 billion in losses, according to the American Soybean Association. The association says the U.S. has yet to fully recover its former market share of soybean exports to China, the world’s No. 1 buyer of the commodity .

“The policies of the last 30, 40, 50 years have just pushed this thing so far,” Dewitz said. “And without some major pain, I don’t know how you reset that.”

Other grain growers expressed similar nervousness about tariffs and declining optimism in the Purdue University-CME Group Ag Economy Barometer for March. Forty-three percent of the farmers surveyed cited shifting trade policy as the No. 1 driver of their negative outlook.

In addition, farmers were pessimistic about the outlook for the future of ag export markets, particularly for grain. Five-year expectations for U.S. exports reached an all-time low for the survey, according to James Mintert, the barometer’s principal investigator and director of Purdue University’s Center for Commercial Agriculture.

A recent AgWeb poll that found more than half of farmers don’t support Trump’s use of tariffs .

Dewitz said U.S. farmers want changes that will bring about fairer trade agreements but no one likes financial pain.

“Everyone says, ‘this needs to be fixed,’ and then on the backside they say, ‘as long as it doesn’t affect me,’” he said. “Well, it’s going to affect everybody.”

Listen to the full conversation with farmers and producers, including Dewitz, on “AgriTalk” here: Farmer Forum - AgriTalk

Your next read: Mexico’s President Says the Country Won’t Retaliate with More Reciprocal Tariffs on U.S. Products

Economists Fear the U.S. Will See a Recession in 2025, And That Could Eat Into Consumers' Demand for Meat

Tue, 01 Apr 2025 22:41:43 GMT

Consumer meat sales hit record-breaking levels last year. The craze for protein-filled diets has been a storyline that’s helped drive meat demand, which is good news for meat producers. Ag economists warn, however, the major limiting factor for meat demand, and meat prices, in 2025 just may be what happens in the overall economy.

The March Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor asked economists if they think the U.S. general economy will see a recession in 2025, and 62% said yes.

Recent reports agree with that sentiment, as the Federal Reserve’s key inflation index rose more than expected in February and consumer spending posted a smaller-than-projected increase, according to the Commerce Department. Both could be warning signs of what’s ahead.

As a follow up question, The Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor survey asked, “In what ways does the U.S. economy impact meat demand in 2025?” Respondents had no shortage of opinions on that.

Here’s a rundown of some of their reactions:

“If real wages fall, there will be a substitution toward other protein/cheaper meat cuts.”
“Slower growth (even if the U.S. does not endure a recession) will reduce consumer willingness to spend, especially at a time when beef prices, in particular, are high.”
“A downturn in economic growth impacts disposable income and should slow animal protein demand.”
“There is a positive correlation between GDP and meat demand, particularly between GDP and higher end cuts.”
“When the U.S. economy is strong and incomes increase, consumers have more disposable income to spend on meat and higher quality cuts of meat. When the U.S. economy is weak and disposable income tightens, consumers may reduce meat in their diet or turn to less expensive meat options.”

Not all economists expect U.S. consumer demand to fall off though, even if the U.S. officially enters into a recession.

“Labor income is growing faster than inflation. Most U.S. firms are profitable - at least as of current earnings reports,” said one economist.

Another shared, “I do think consumer demand will be lower in 2025 than it was in 2024. That being said - 2024 consumer expenditures and demand were a lot higher than I anticipated at the beginning of the year. Two indicators that are showing up, and are unsustainable right now, are reducing savings accounts and increasing credit card debt. I think it leads to slower meat demand in 2025, partially due to lower meat availability and partially due to slowing consumer demand. Notice I said ‘slowing’ consumer demand and not ‘declining/negative’. Demand does not have to decline year-over-year to impact meat prices. Slowing can do the same thing.”

The GLP-1 Effect
What could have an even bigger impact on meat demand, and even more so than inflation and a recession, is the use of GLP-1 drugs for weight loss. GLP-1 drugs not only moderate users’ blood sugar levels, but also affect their appetites by suppressing hunger cravings.

“U.S. consumer preference for meat demand is strong, though I would be paying attention to the growing use of GLP-1s as it relates to all agricultural product demand,” one economist responded.

The good news is studies have shown those who use GLP-1 drugs often crave healthier items and often consume more protein versus unhealthy foods.

Starting From a Place of Strength
Forecasting meat demand in 2025 relies on a number of factors. But a positive trend is how consumers, especially the millennial generation, are buying more meat. As PorkBusiness.com reported this week, consumers are buying more meat than ever. In 2024, meat sales hit a record high of $104.6 billion and total pounds sold increased by 2.3%, which was cited in the latest Power of Meat.

More people want meat today, but economists are concerned any economic pain could eat into overall meat demand.

Kansas State University Meat Judging Team Claims National Champion Honors

Wed, 20 Nov 2024 13:33:15 GMT

The Kansas State University Meat Judging Team won National Champion honors at the International Intercollegiate Meat Judging Contest hosted in Dakota City, Nebraska. The team was recognized Sunday, Nov. 10. The last time K-State won the title was 1992.

The team was the high team in beef judging, pork judging, placings, reasons and overall beef. Individually four students placed in the top 10 overall. Placing in the top 10 were Reece Geer, Clay Center, Kan., third; Hailey Wurtz, Seneca, Kan., fourth; Madison Bruna, Barnes, Kan., fifth; and Hayden Lott, Minneapolis, Kan., 10th.

In addition, four students placed in the top 10 of the alternates contest, including Jordan Sylvester, Wamego, Kan., first; Emma Balisky, Alberta, Canada, second; August Hulse, Culver, Kan., third; and Riley Youngers, Wylie, Texas, sixth.

Three students were recognized as All-Americans for a combination of their contest and academic performance. Receiving All-American honors were: Reece Geer, 1st Team; Hailey Wurtz, 2nd Team; and Hayden Lott, 2nd Team.

The team is coached by Dr. Travis O’Quinn and K-State graduate student Steph Witberler.

Members of the team included:

Emma Balisky, Alberta, Canada
Madison Bruna, Barnes, Kan.
Elaine Cockroft, Esbon, Kan.
Allison Davis, Shelbyville, Tenn.
Reece Geer, Clay Center, Kan.
Makenna Graney, Fennimore, Wis.
August Hulse, Culver, Kan.
Hayden Lott, Minneapolis, Kan.
Jordan Sylvester, Wamego, Kan.
Bailey Thornton, Wamego, Kan.
Katrina Turner, Derby, Kan.
Hailey Wurtz, Seneca, Kan.
Riley Youngers, Wylie, Texas

Purdue University Researches Benefits of Fatty Acids Found in Meat

Wed, 16 Oct 2024 18:12:41 GMT

The impact of arachidonic acid, an omega-6 polyunsaturated fat found only in animal products, upon human health remains mostly misunderstood, according to an article released by Purdue University. Researchers aim to study the subject further.

Led by James Markworth , assistant professor of animal sciences , the team will carefully test the health effects of omega-6 in laboratory experiments. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture , will fund the research and the experiments will clarify which omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oil and seafood are responsible for yielding their health benefits.

“These polyunsaturated fatty acids are essential because you need to acquire them through the diet,” Markworth says. “They can’t be made in the body. And in particular it’s the long-chain versions, which are found in products of animal or marine origin, that are thought to potentially influence human health.”

Both omega-3 and omega-6 are long-chain, polyunsaturated fatty acids, and some of these fatty acids are also essential fatty acids.

The long-chain omega-6 fat arachidonic acid is found only in meat, poultry and eggs. “You can’t get it from vegetable sources, and you can’t get it from fish. We think that these nutrients found in meat and poultry products might have similar benefits as, say, fish oil or fish products. And that’s something you don’t hear very often,” Markworth says.

Previous research has well established that fish oil fatty acids have metabolic benefits. But which fatty acids convey those benefits and how remains unclear. The major ones are eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA).

Collaborating with Markworth on the project are: Tzu-Wen Cross in the College of Health and Human Sciences , along with Tim Johnson and Kolapo Ajuwon , both in the College of Agriculture ’s Department of Animal Sciences .

“What we’re suggesting is when you eat these lipids in the diet or dietary supplements, the systemic response your body has might depend on the resident microbes first encountered in the gastrointestinal tract,” Markworth says. “And we’re proposing that the systemic response is largely mediated by the effect on the skeletal muscle.”

Markworth notes the skeletal muscle determines metabolic health, obesity and diabetes as it is the largest site of glucose disposal and insulin sensitivity.

Read more here .

Lab Cultivated Meat Making News in Florida and Other States

Wed, 16 Oct 2024 18:11:38 GMT

A federal judge has rejected the request of a California-based company for an injunction against the new law banning the sale and manufacturing of cultivated meat in Florida, according to a news source.

A 21-page decision denying the preliminary injunction motion was made on Friday, Oct. 11, by Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker, citing the “ban imposes an inconsistent ‘ingredient requirement’ by prohibiting the sale or distribution of food products that contain cultivated chicken meat as an ingredient.” He wrote UPSIDE Foods could not identify a law or regulation “that creates a federal ‘ingredient requirement’ with respect to ‘cultivated meat.’”

The law makes it a second-degree misdemeanor to sell or manufacture cultivated meat, often known as lab-grown meat, a. The manufacturing process includes taking a small number of cultured cells from animals and growing them in controlled settings to make food.

Florida made news in May for becoming the first state to ban the sale of lab grown meat.

Michigan farmer introduces cultivated meat ban legislation
In June Michigan lawmaker and state cattle association member Jim DeSana introduced legislation to ban lab-grown meat from being sold in Michigan. His legislation defines “cultivated meat” as “a meat or meat product that was produced from cultured animal tissue produced from in vitro animal cell cultures outside of the animal from which the cells were derived.”

“Eating real meat is healthy,” DeSana said.

DeSana, who is currently serving his first term as a lawmaker, decided to run for office after his son was prevented from competing on a rowing team during his senior year due to covid.

He also introduced a resolution to enshrine the right to hunt in Michigan’s constitution.

“This is about protecting our ranchers and about protecting the integrity of our food supply,” said DeSana, R-Carleton. “This is also about protecting your right to provide food for yourself and your family.”

Ohio legislation introduced to regulate imitation protein products

In Ohio, House Bill 661 was legislation introduced earlier this summer that regulates imitation meat and egg products. It was introduced by State Representative Roy Klopfenstein (R- Haviland) and State Representative Jack Daniels (R- New Franklin).

“Addressing this false perception that the manufactured protein products have begun to create in the agricultural industry will ensure that Ohioans can safely purchase agricultural food animal products without having to decipher a label,” Klopfenstein said in a release.

The measure will also prevent school boards from purchasing misbranded meat and egg products and alternatives to protect students.

“This bill will not only protect farmers from losing business to lab-grown, manufactured products, but it will also help customers not be misled by false advertising,” Daniels said.

The bill would classify imitation meat or egg products as “misbranded” if the label includes an “identifying meat term,” such as beef, wing or cold cut. A product would not be considered misbranded if it had a word such as imitation, fake or vegan in a uniform size directly by the meat term.

House Bill 661 awaits committee assignment.

Nebraska could become the next U.S. state to ban cultivated meat

In September, Nebraska’s Governor Jim Pillen signed an executive order to limit the sales of cultivated meat.

Pillen agreed to create “strict guidelines when it comes to state agencies and its contractors from obtaining lab-grown meat”, according to a statement.

He has also directed the Nebraska Department of Agriculture (NDA) to initiate a rulemaking process to make sure that any lab-grown meat products sold in stores are “properly labelled” and are not marketed next to natural meat on the same shelves.

Iowa became the third state in the country to pass legislation regarding lab-grown meat
Beginning July 1, lab-grown meat and plant-based imitation meat and egg products had to be labeled with words such as fake, lab-grown, meatless, imitation or vegan, if sold in Iowa stores. The labeling requirements also apply to meat alternatives made with insect protein.

Alabama also passed a law banning the sale of the cell cultured alternative meat product in May 2024.

Investments Made to Strengthen Food Supply Chain, Increase Competition, and Lower Food Costs

Thu, 12 Sep 2024 15:42:18 GMT

“The Biden-Harris Administration and USDA are advancing a sustainable vision of agriculture that prioritizes the needs of hardworking producers and small businesses and keeps rural communities strong,” announced Secretary Vilsack in a USDA release. “Thanks to historic resources from President Biden’s American Rescue Plan, USDA is working to give farmers and ranchers a fairer chance to compete in the marketplace, which will increase local food options and lower costs for American families.”

The investments are part of USDA’s efforts to create a more competitive agricultural system, advance President Biden’s Investing in America Agenda, and support the Administration’s Action Plan for a Fairer, More Competitive, and More Resilient Meat and Poultry Supply Chain, which dedicates resources to expand independent processing capacity. Together these actions help to lower food costs by spurring competition and strengthening supply chains.

Meat and Poultry Processing Expansion Program

USDA is partnering with the New Hampshire Community Loan Fund to provide more than $83 million in grants to 24 independent processors in 15 states under the Meat and Poultry Processing Expansion Program (MPPEP). The funding, made available through President Biden’s American Rescue Plan, will help build new processing plants, create hundreds of jobs, give local producers and entrepreneurs better business opportunities, and give consumers more options at the grocery store. For example:

Simla Frozen Food Locker Co. LLC is receiving a $450,000 grant to build a new facility across the street from their existing facility in rural Colorado to expand their processing capacity. The company processes, beef, hogs, chicken, turkeys, lamb, goats, and wild game. This project will allow the family-run business to receive USDA inspection and sell locally-produced proteins into wholesale markets such as restaurants and grocery stores. The company expects to serve 160 additional producers and create four full-time jobs through this project.

McRez Packing International LLC is receiving a $390,000 grant to refurbish a previously mothballed industrial facility in New York to expand processing capacity. The company is a new small processor of cattle, hogs, chicken, turkey, sheep, and goats. Their target customers are local, underserved farmers and dairy and beef producers. The project is expected to serve up to 2,500 new producers and create 110 full-time jobs.

North State Processing LLC is receiving a $10 million grant to build a new facility in Hamlet, N.C., to process cattle, ostrich, emu, water buffalo and alpaca. A new processing company created by local and experienced North Carolina producers, the company anticipates serving 37 producers and creating 54 full-time jobs through this project.

NF Packing Inc. is receiving a $1.4 million grant to build and equip a new processing facility for its start-up business in Walworth County, Wis. The company anticipates serving 75 producers and creating 20 full-time jobs as a result of this project.

USDA’s Rural Development has provided 59 awards totaling over $291.4 million through MPPEP to expand processing capacity and strengthen the food supply chain. MPPEP is funded by President Biden’s American Rescue Plan.

Local Meat Capacity Grant Program

USDA is awarding $26.9 million to 33 projects in 23 states through the Local Meat Capacity (Local MCap) grant program to expand processing within the meat and poultry industry. This announcement builds on the first round of $9.5 million awarded to 42 projects announced in March 2024.

This second set of awards through Local MCap is for both Equipment Only and Processing Expansion project types. Simplified equipment only projects fund projects from $10,000 to $250,000 to purchase processing equipment such as meat grinders, stuffers, and smokers. Processing expansion projects are eligible to receive between $100,000 and $5 million to increase processing or rendering capacity through activities such as facility upgrades, equipment purchases, and training.

White Oak Pastures in Bluffton, Ga., is a family-owned meat company that will use a Local Meat Capacity grant to support the cost of converting its poultry processing facility into a dual use facility that can also process lambs, goats, and hogs. It is anticipated this will expand their livestock processing capacity by 30%.

Nordik Meats is a small, independently owned meat processing facility in Southwest Wisconsin. The business will use a Local Meat Capacity grant to purchase a grinder, a meatball maker, and packaging equipment to expand processing capacity and serve an additional 50 local producers. The equipment will provide local producers with the ability to create new value-added products for local consumers, maximize the value of their animals, utilize byproducts, and increase animal harvest. Nordik Meats will increase the number of livestock processed annually by 100% over two years, implement new processing technologies, train 12 existing staff, hire four new employees, and benefit 350 local small family farms.

Seven Hills Food Co. in Lynchburg, Va., is a full-service meat packaging company and a wholesaler of premium meat products sourced from small local family farms. The company will use a Local Meat Capacity grant to make plant enhancements to address bottlenecks currently hindering plant capacity while adding rendering capacity, new value-added products, and a farmer liaison for coordinating expanded production. This will support producers and meat companies in achieving the necessary scale, product quality, and efficiencies to access institutional and wholesale accounts.

In April 2023, USDA announced up to $75 million available for Local MCap to fund innovative projects designed to build resilience in the meat and poultry supply chain by providing producers with more local processing options and strengthening their market potential. This grant program is targeted to support meat and poultry processors with smaller-scale projects, with a goal to increase processing availability and variety for local and regional livestock producers. The program is administered by the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) and is authorized by the American Rescue Plan.

To date, the Biden-Harris Administration has invested a total of over $700 million in 48 states and Puerto Rico for projects that help to expand the nation’s independent meat and poultry processing capacity.

The Impact of Beef x Dairy Calves

Mon, 09 Sep 2024 15:49:36 GMT

The most common question I get at market outlook presentations is “What is the market impact of all these beef on dairy calves?” There seems to be a perception that these calves represent an additional number of cattle beyond the traditionally available cattle inventory data.

Historically the dairy industry bred all cows to dairy genetics, using the 50 percent heifer calf crop to ensure sufficient heifers from which to select the best genetics for the milking herd. The male calves and culled females became part of the beef industry. The growing production of beef x dairy crossbred calves in recent years is the result of increased commercial feasibility of sexed-semen technology. With sexed-semen, dairy producers can target the production of dairy replacement heifers in a subset of genetically superior cows. This frees up the remaining dairy cows to utilize beef genetics and produce crossbred calves.

Straightbred dairy steers and heifers are heavily discounted in beef markets because the light muscled animals produce carcasses with less desirable muscle conformation. Beef x dairy crossbred calves are significantly more valuable because the resulting carcasses have improved muscling and carcass conformation. Straightbred dairy calves not used for milk replacements previously entered the beef market simply as a residual, with limited or, sometimes no, value in the beef industry. In contrast, beef x dairy cross calves are a significant source of revenue for dairy producers and are subject to management choices regarding genetics and production. Numbers are uncertain but a significant percentage of potential non-replacement dairy calf production today are beef x dairy crosses.

USDA-NASS estimated the Jan. 1, 2024 inventory of dairy cows at 9.36 million head. The dairy herd is relatively stable and has only varied by 130 thousand head, or 1.4 percent, from maximum to minimum in the last ten years. The dairy industry contributes an average of roughly 26 percent of the total U.S. calf crop each year. The contribution of the dairy industry to beef production does not change significantly year to year although the relative share of dairy in beef production increases slightly when the beef industry declines cyclically. Growth in production of beef x dairy crossbred calves does not represent any net additional production of cattle but rather a change in the genetic composition of dairy calf production.

Dairy production, including beef x dairy calves, are included in the cattle inventory and production data that are routinely available. Calf crop, cattle on feed, and slaughter data and other data include beef and dairy sectors and therefore already account for the beef x dairy calves now being produced in the dairy sector. Beef x dairy calf production is not having much impact on total beef production and market prices beyond what is already considered in market analysis. There are some impacts in specific meat markets because the beef cuts from beef x dairy carcasses may have access to markets previously closed to dairy beef. Arguably, the biggest impact of beef x dairy production is the blurring of the historical demarcation between beef and dairy sectors in the U.S.

Meat Industry Urges Harris to Stop Using Meat As a Scapegoat And Distraction For Root Cause of Inflation

Mon, 19 Aug 2024 15:15:22 GMT

Today in Raleigh, North Carolina, Vice President Kamala Harris is expected to propose several economic measures aimed at addressing key voter concerns such as housing and grocery costs. Her proposals include:

• Federal ban on price gouging: Harris plans to introduce a federal ban on price gouging in the food and grocery sectors, particularly targeting the meat processing industry, which she claims is highly consolidated and contributes to rising grocery prices. Harris has declined to detail what her administration would consider “excessive” price gouging and how they would go about targeting companies, appearing to leave much of those decisions to FTC discretion. Calling out companies for running up the price of some food products polls well with swing-state voters and is supported by progressive groups. Several factors have made grocery prices volatile since the pandemic, including supply chain disruptions and a big shift in consumer buying patterns.
• Price controls: The vice president also envisions new price controls on groceries, and expanding limits on out-of-pocket prescription drug prices to all Americans. Harris says she would push the government to negotiate additional drug savings faster, and cap the monthly cost of insulin at $35 for all Americans. Jason Furman, a Harvard economist who worked in the Obama administration, warned about potential market disruptions that such pricing policies could unleash. If prices don’t rise as demand grows, companies might be less inclined to increase supplies. “This not sensible policy and I think the biggest hope is that it ends up being a lot of rhetoric and no reality,” he told the New York Times.
• Housing initiatives: She will propose tax incentives to facilitate the creation of 3 million new housing units over four years, surpassing previous initiatives. This includes unspecified tax advantages for builders focusing on entry-level buyers and affordable rental properties, as well as a $40 billion fund to assist local governments in financing housing developments.
• Down payment assistance: Harris is set to propose providing up to $25,000 in down payment support for first-time homebuyers, a plan that her campaign suggests could benefit over 4 million buyers.
• Tax relief on tips: Harris will advocate for eliminating federal taxes on tips, a proposal also supported by former President Donald Trump.
• Tax credits: Harris’ plan would expand the child tax credit to $3,600 from $2,000 per dependent, with a $6,000 credit for newborns. She also proposes expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit for childless low-wage workers and increasing subsidies for those who purchase insurance on federal health exchanges.

These proposals are part of her broader economic agenda aimed at reducing costs for consumers and addressing inflationary pressures, which remain a significant concern for voters despite a generally strong economic performance.

Of note: Harris’ price-gouging initiatives are unlikely to pass in Congress due to insufficient support. Her plan mirrors stalled legislation from Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), which has faced strong opposition from Republicans.

Meat Industry Speaks Out

The meat industry has strongly rejected Harris’ pointing to meat prices at the center of food inflation.

“It’s time for this administration to stop using the meat and poultry industry as a scapegoat and a distraction for the root causes of inflation and the significant challenges facing our economy,” National Chicken Council Interim President Gary Kushner said in a statement.

The Meat Institute issued the following statement from Meat Institute President and CEO, Julie Anna Potts, in response to news reporting of a Harris Campaign proposal to place a federal ban on price gouging:

“Consumers have been impacted by high prices due to inflation on everything from services to rent to automobiles, not just at the grocery store. A federal ban on price gouging does not address the real causes of inflation.

“The Harris campaign rhetoric unfairly targets the meat and poultry industry and does not match the facts. Food prices continue to come down from the highs of the pandemic. Prices for meat are based on supply and demand. Avian Influenza, a shortage of beef cattle and high input prices like energy and labor are all factors that determine prices at the meat case.

“Prices that livestock producers receive for their animals are also heavily influenced by supply and demand. Prices for cattle producers especially are at record highs, surpassing the 2014-2015 previous record highs. Today, well into 2024, cattle prices remain at record levels because the US has the lowest cattle inventory since Harry Truman was President.

“Major meat companies have reported losses during the Biden-Harris Administration, with some closing facilities and laying off workers.”

— Donald Trump held a press conference yesterday where he labeled Harris’ plan as “communist” and warned efforts to control grocery prices would lead to “food shortages, rationing, hunger, dramatically more inflation.”

— Do food price controls work?
While food price controls can offer short-term benefits in specific situations, such as during acute supply disruptions, they are generally seen as economically unsound in the long term. They tend to create more problems than they solve by distorting market mechanisms and leading to shortages. Most economists recommend targeted income support and structural economic policies as more effective alternatives for addressing food price inflation.

— The Biden administration has previously raised concerns about potential price gouging in the food industry, particularly in the context of rising grocery prices. However, these charges have not been proven. Vice President Kamala Harris has been vocal about the issue, emphasizing the role of corporate price gouging in driving up grocery costs, particularly in the meat industry, which she claims has seen significant price increases. The administration has proposed measures to address these concerns, including advocating for a federal ban on corporate price gouging. This proposal aims to hold large corporations accountable for maintaining high prices on essential goods. Despite these claims, the economic community remains divided on the issue. Many economists argue that the primary drivers of recent price increases are supply chain disruptions, changes in consumer behavior, and increased demand due to government stimulus measures, rather than corporate practices. Some economists have criticized the administration’s focus on price gouging as a political maneuver rather than a substantive economic policy.

— Fed study: Corporate price gouging not a significant factor in U.S. inflation surge. Earlier this year, a study published by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco concluded that corporate price gouging has not been a significant factor in the recent surge of U.S. inflation. The study, led by researchers Sylvain Leduc, Huiyu Li, and Zheng Liu, found that while there were spikes in markups for specific sectors like motor vehicles and petroleum products, the overall markups for U.S. goods and services have remained relatively stable. This suggests that rising corporate profits and price increases were not the primary drivers of inflation during the post-pandemic recovery.

The study contradicts the narrative that corporate greed, often referred to as “greedflation,” is a major cause of inflation. Instead, it attributes the inflationary pressures to supply chain disruptions, a decrease in labor supply, and a surge in consumer demand during the recovery period. The easing of inflation is credited to improvements in supply chains, increased immigration, and reduced demand due to higher borrowing costs as the Federal Reserve raised interest rates.

— Several recent U.S. presidents have attempted to implement price controls, with varying degrees of success and consequences.

• Richard Nixon: Wage and Price Controls (1971-1973): President Richard Nixon is perhaps the most famous for implementing wage and price controls in the early 1970s. In August 1971, Nixon imposed a 90-day freeze on wages and prices to combat inflation, which was part of a broader economic strategy that included taking the U.S. off the gold standard. These controls were initially popular and appeared to be effective in curbing inflation temporarily. However, once the controls were lifted, inflation surged again, leading to economic distortions and shortages. The controls were largely seen as a failure in the long term, as they did not address the underlying causes of inflation and led to economic inefficiencies.

• Gerald Ford: President Gerald Ford did not implement new price controls during his administration. Instead, he focused on ending existing controls. In response to the economic issues of the mid-1970s, Ford proposed ending price controls on domestic oil as part of his broader energy policy. This was part of a compromise with Congress, which allowed for a gradual phasing out of these controls over a forty-month period. Ford believed that removing price controls would stimulate domestic oil production and align with his free-market philosophy. However, this decision was contentious, with Democrats worried about potential long-term price increases and conservative Republicans dissatisfied with the compromise. Ultimately, Ford’s administration focused more on tax and spending policies, such as the “Whip Inflation Now” (WIN) campaign, which aimed to combat inflation through voluntary measures rather than mandatory controls.

• Jimmy Carter: President Jimmy Carter, facing high inflation, introduced a program of voluntary wage and price controls in 1978. This approach was part of a broader anti-inflation strategy that included government restraint and efforts to reduce the federal deficit. The voluntary nature of the controls, however, led to skepticism about their effectiveness. Critics argued that voluntary controls were insufficient to curb inflation, which continued to rise during Carter’s presidency. In addition to voluntary controls, Carter also dealt with energy price controls. In response to the energy crisis and rising oil prices, he gradually deregulated oil prices starting in 1979, while also proposing a windfall profits tax to address public concerns about oil company profits. Despite these efforts, inflation remained a significant issue throughout Carter’s term, contributing to economic instability and public dissatisfaction.

McDonald’s Says No More Meatless Burger in U.S. and Hints That McRib Will Return

Wed, 03 Jul 2024 18:47:00 GMT

Looks like McDonald’s has given up trying to sell meatless beef burgers in the U.S. The fast-food giant recently announced it has no plans to continue promoting its plant-based burger option, the McPlant.

McDonald’s president Joe Erlinger spoke at the Wall Street Journal Global Food Forum in Chicago at the end of June, saying the brand would discontinue the McPlant after it performed poorly in U.S. test markets. The chain had tested the McPlant in California and Texas since it had developed the meatless alternative with Beyond Meat in 2021. Peas, rice and potatoes were the ingredients in the patty, which included the standard fixings of a sesame seed bun and toppings of tomato, lettuce, pickes, onions and American cheese.

Initial testing had shown some success in Texas, Iowa, California and Louisiana, but after expanding to 600 locations in San Francisco and Dallas, sales dropped from 500 burgers per week to 20 burgers a day, according to analyst Peter Saleh.

While McDonald’s has seen overseas sales better, the U.S. market doesn’t support meatless options at the popular chain.

“I don’t think the U.S. consumer is coming to McDonald’s or looking for McPlant or other plant-based proteins from McDonald’s now,” Erlinger said at the conference. Furthermore, salads, which were removed from the menu during the pandemic, will not be reintroduced to the menu because customers aren’t showing a demand for them either.

In terms of protein, the company will look at more chicken options as they are popular and cost less for them and the consumer.

According to Business Insider, the company revealed in February its chicken category represents $25 billion in annual systemwide sales, which is on par with its beef business.

Erlinger hinted that another protein option would be back on the menu again in 2024—the boneless pork dipped in tangy barbecue sauce, better known as the McRib.

It first appeared on the menu in 1982, and has been off and on the menu several times.

Additionally, bagels were added back to the breakfast menu in April in about 1,200 stores and may be available nationwide again later this year.

Bagels were first introduced to McDonald’s in late 2019, but were cut when the menu was simplified during the pandemic.

Customers in California, Pennsylvania, Nashville, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Florida, Tennessee, Iowa, West Virginia, California, North Carolina, Ohio, Alabama and New York have seen them return.

There are four varieties, which all feature egg and cheese. Three of them also include meat—bacon, sausage or steak—and the steak bagel also adds grilled onions.

Can You Smell How Meat Tastes?

Mon, 17 Jun 2024 17:54:42 GMT

The aroma of grilled meat wafting across the backyard can make your mouth water as you seem to almost taste the steak from the grill.

(Farm Journal)

But did you know there is an actual science behind why that happens?

Chris Kerth, Ph.D., associate professor of meat science and muscle biology in the Texas A&M College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Department of Animal Science, has spent more than 12 years researching flavor aromas and how good and bad odors correlate with our perception of flavors.

For example, when you smell a steak cooking, Kerth explains how you are smelling the volatile chemical compounds that it emits in reaction to the heat. It is those chemical compounds he detects and quantitates in his scientific research.

Some of those smells and odors, like grilled flavor, result in positive responses like “I am hungry, and I want to eat this.” There are also odors like soured milk that result in negative responses. If you smell those odors, then you likely will not want to eat the product as they tend to be indicators of poor quality.

The science behind the smell

Kerth’s research interests are primarily animal nutrition, management and genetic factors related to flavor chemistry and the development of aromas that impact the sensory and quality traits in meat, food and beverage products.

By sticking a specialized needle into a container with a food or beverage and allowing it to absorb the aromas before putting it into a gas chromatograph, he can capture the aroma compounds or chemicals from the meat or beverage to be separated, identified and quantified.

When it is done, Kerth knows what chemical is responsible for what aroma.

“Often when we talk about food and how it tastes, we mostly talk about tenderness or texture,” he said. “But about 12 years ago, I became interested in determining how to objectively measure flavor.”

A computer screen with about 50 descriptors of tastes such as banana, beefy, beer, caramel, ethanol, grassy, etc. in a variety of colors.

The concept of measuring the flavor of food is extraordinarily more complex than simply measuring tenderness or juiciness and requires very specialized equipment.

Being able to characterize the differences is important, Kerth said. For instance, chemicals containing sulfur compounds can be associated with a bad smell like rotten eggs. But, in really small quantities, sulfur actually has a pleasant odor to it, contributing to the meat flavor.

“Once we were able to identify and quantify the different chemicals, we started working with the meat itself to find ways to increase the good aromas and decrease the bad aromas,” he said.

Kerth began working with Rhonda Miller, Ph.D., Texas A&M AgriLife Research Faculty Fellow and meat science professor in the department, on the sensory side of food tastes. She would conduct expert, trained sensory panels and consumer panels to identify factors that influence their evaluations of taste based on mouth feel.

Then, after evaluating those results, they could both specifically tell the volatile aroma chemicals that consumers did and didn’t like.

A little fat reverse engineering

From a chemistry standpoint, Kerth said much of the aroma comes from either the breakdown of fat or the surface browning, which requires protein and sugars naturally found in meat. And that is determined by the cooking method and how much heat is involved.

“The more heat we apply, the more those flavors will be generated,” he said. “Bacon out of the package doesn’t smell like much, but once it starts cooking, the whole house smells like bacon. So, cookery is hugely important in generating the aromas and flavors we want.”

Kerth went a step further, concentrating on the grill temperature.

“When you put that piece of meat on the grill, whether it is a gas grill or charcoal grill or flat top in a commercial kitchen, the temperature of that grill is very important because we want that sear on the outside,” he said. “Imagine the difference in flavor between a pot roast from a Crock-Pot with no browning and a steak with a nice sear from a hot grill.”

While it is important the meat be cooked to the internal doneness level the consumer is seeking, controlling how much browning is on the outside is also important — and challenging. Getting that nice sear without overcooking is both an art and a science.

“Whenever we’ve done these studies where we’ve changed the grill temperature, the more char we get, the better – up to a certain point,” Kerth said. “If you have really thick steaks, you can actually overdo it and get too much browning, which can turn consumers off. So, there’s a window in there you want to hit.”

In the end, he said, it’s the combination of our senses — taste, texture and aroma — that when brought together in the right combination help you have an even greater eating experience.

Florida Becomes First State to Ban the Sale of Lab-Grown Meat

Thu, 26 Sep 2024 16:26:14 GMT

The first bill banning lab-grown meat was signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida on May 1. According to SB 1084, the bill prohibits the manufacture for sale, sale, holding or offering for sale, or distribution of cultivated meat in the state.

In a press conference in Hardee County, which is one of the top five cattle-producing counties in the state, the Governor spoke about the importance of supporting rural economies and agriculture.

“We’re fighting back against an ideology that ultimately wants to eliminate meat production in the U.S. and around the globe,” DeSantis said. “In the state of Florida we’ve put down the marker very clearly; we stand with agriculture. We stand with the cattle ranchers. We stand with our farmers because we understand it’s important for the backbone of the state. It’s important for our culture. It’s important for our heritage so the bill that I’m going to sign today is going to say basically take your fake, lab-grown meat elsewhere. We’re not doing that in the state of Florida.”

Joining the Governor during the conference were Wilton Simpson, commissioner of agriculture; Dale Carlton, president-elect of the Florida Cattlemen’s Association; Pat Durden, president of the Florida Cattlemen’s Association; and Sen. Jay Collins who worked on the bill.

In his remarks, Simpson said that food security is national security.

“It doesn’t always rise to the height of national security, but think about if there were no groceries just for one week in the grocery store, you would have total chaos in this country, and if that’s not national security, I don’t know what it is,” he said. “We get up every day thinking how can we have the most safe, affordable, abundant food anywhere in the world, and Florida is going to do its share of growing that product. We work hard every day to give our farmers the tools they need to accomplish these things.”

Both cattlemen expressed appreciation for the Governor and the legislature for protecting Florida’s cattle industry by signing this bill.

There has been an ongoing debate across the country in regard to cultivated meat products. Currently, lab-grown meat is only approved to be sold in the U.S. and Singapore. Italy was the first country in the EU to ban lab-grown meat, a decision made in February 2024.

Pork and Beef Industries Advocate for Clear Labels for ‘Fake Meat’

Mon, 05 Feb 2024 17:09:38 GMT

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) and Rep. Mark Alford (R-MO) recently introduced the “Fair and Accurate Ingredient Representation on Labels Act of 2024.” The legislation aims to boost transparency and clarify labeling requirements for plant-protein and cell-cultured protein products so consumers have the full picture when buying groceries for themselves and their families, according to a release .

“Consumers deserve to be able to easily understand what products they are putting in their grocery cart,” Marshall said in a release. “It’s pretty simple: if food is represented as meat or poultry but is either lab-grown or made from a plant protein, it should be prominently displayed on the label. Distinguishing between a ‘black bean burger’ and an actual beef burger shouldn’t be hard. But, as other meat alternatives with misleading names continue to appear on shelves, we need to do more to ensure the transparency of imitation meats versus the real farm-raised meats.”

Backed by the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and other livestock and poultry organizations, the legislation would define “imitation” and “cell-cultured” meat and poultry. The USDA would oversee the labeling of such products and work with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to maintain inspection standards, NPPC explained in Capital Update.

The labels must include terms like “imitation” or similar language, accompanied by a clear disclaimer for products not containing meat or poultry. In the case of cell-cultured meat and poultry, they would require labeling representing lab-grown food sources.

“America’s farmers and ranchers work hard every day to bring a high-quality, wholesome product to market. We’re not afraid of a little competition, but it is unfair for lab grown or plant-based fake meat products to trade on beef’s good name,” National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) President Todd Wilkinson, a South Dakota cattle producer, said in a release. “This bill is especially important for ensuring that consumers recognize lab grown products that may be coming to market in the future. Consumers deserve to know how their food is made and to understand that lab-grown products made in a bioreactor are not the same as the high-quality beef raised by farmers and ranchers.”

NPPC said it wants consumers to have the ability to make informed decisions about the products they choose, especially with protein products.

“Accurate meat labeling at the grocery store benefits all consumers, regardless of dietary preferences,” NPPC President Scott Hays, a pork producer from Missouri, said in a release. “Labeling an imitation product as pork undermines the hard work that pork producers, like me, put in every day to deliver a reliable and affordable protein source.”

This bill is co-sponsored by Representatives Don Davis, Roger Williams, and Jonathan Jackson.

Read More:

Is There Room at the Table for Meat and Alternative Proteins?

USMEF Strategic Planning Conference Wraps Up with New Leadership and Logistics Insight

Mon, 20 Nov 2023 15:42:36 GMT

The U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) successfully concluded its Strategic Planning Conference on Friday, Nov. 10, in New Orleans, La.. marking the occasion with the election of a dynamic new officer team. Randy Spronk, an esteemed pork and grain producer hailing from Edgerton, Minn., has assumed the role of USMEF Chair, succeeding outgoing Chair Dean Meyer, a grain and livestock producer from Rock Rapids, Iowa.

Spronk, recognized for his leadership roles at the National Pork Producers Council and Minnesota Pork Producers Association, as well as being the president and managing partner of Spronk Brothers Holding, is set to steer USMEF towards new horizons. His extensive background includes participation in various trade missions, underlining the importance of collaboration within USMEF to facilitate the global export of U.S. beef, pork, and lamb.

Expressing his enthusiasm, Spronk said, “It’s phenomenal to see how different organizations work together through USMEF to export U.S. beef, pork, and lamb worldwide. We bring all the sectors together into one room and discuss trade. What are the obstacles? What are the things we’ve done right?”

Spronk emphasized the “Three Ds” in his address to USMEF members: diversification of export markets, differentiation of high-quality U.S. red meat, and the need to expand global demand. Stressing the significance of market diversification, Spronk highlighted its role in maximizing export value and ensuring the U.S. meat industry’s resilience against dependence on a few major destinations.

Market diversification, Spronk explained, is the key to maximizing export value and ensuring the long-term growth of U.S. meat markets. Spronk also underscored the importance of differentiation, particularly in terms of sustainability, noting, “I think we have a strong story to tell on sustainability, and it can help differentiate us because of how responsibly we produce our feed and livestock. It’s a story that nobody else in the world can replicate.”

In addition to Spronk’s appointment, the new USMEF officer team includes Steve Hanson, a cattle rancher from southwestern Nebraska, as Chair-Elect; Jay Theiler, executive vice president of corporate affairs for Agri Beef based in Boise, Idaho, as Vice Chair; and David Bruntz, a farmer and cattle feeder from Friend, Neb., as Secretary/Treasurer.

The conference also provided valuable insights into transportation and logistics affecting U.S. pork, beef, and lamb exports. Mark Szakonyi, executive editor for the Journal of Commerce, highlighted the Federal Maritime Commission’s progress in implementing the Ocean Shipping Reform Act, while Greg Shimonek, director of key accounts for Americold Logistics, shared information on expanded rail transportation options for refrigerated food products.

The USMEF Spring Conference is scheduled for May 22-24 in Kansas City, where members will reconvene to continue discussions on advancing the U.S. meat industry’s global presence.

The Forecast Looks Good for Grilling, And That's Great News for Meat Demand

Tue, 13 Jun 2023 18:41:37 GMT

Memorial Day weekend marks the unofficial start to grilling season, and there are many sunny and warm weather days ahead.

“From what I’ve seen the weather forecast, it looks like we’re going to have clear sailing for firing up a lot of grills,” says Don Close, chief research and analytics officer with Terrain.

Favorable weather could help entice more cookouts even as inflation is dampening some of that demand.

“The first thing I’m going to say is demand is still very good,” says Close. “Now, with that said, are we clearly seeing signs of softening demand across all species? We absolutely are.”

And with the federal reserve weighing the possibility of more rate hikes this year, the impact on meat demand is something economists are watching.

“We have some things we need to be watching and certainly as inflationary pressures and recessionary threats impact consumer spending, we’re seeing it in the meat case,” Close adds.

Impacts of Inflation on Demand

There’s no denying that inflation has put pressure on many Americans. Glynn Tonsor, agriculture economist professor and livestock economist at Kansas State University, watches demand closely each month through the Meat Demand Monitor .

“Meat protein demand in the U.S. is still higher today than it was before the pandemic, so, this is not doomsday, per se,” says Tonsor. “It’s comparing to a fairly high peak that we had roughly a year ago and many of these metrics. So, yes, demand has eased. But some context is important.”

(Farm Journal)

He says his data shows meat demand peaked last year.

“Specifically about the middle of 2022, depends on the cut and the species and the product of what month, I’d say it peaked. It was somewhere between April and July of 2022,” Tonsor explains.

Tonsor says what is key to know is while demand may have peaked, it was at historically high levels. But today, domestic demand is softening.

“My opinion is that the broader macro-economic situation, and even more narrowly personal finances for many households, are put in a pinch on wallets,” he says.

Post Pandemic Meat Demand

The surge in meat demand- despite higher prices- happened longer than many economists thought. One reason may be the number of Americans who built up their savings during the pandemic, from less travel and staying at home more. Add to that all the pandemic payments from the federal government.

According to the IRS data, three rounds of stimulus money created more than 476 million payments. And the grand total? More than $814 billion dollars. And Tonsor says that further boosted those household savings numbers.

“That allowed a bigger cushion to absorb higher meat prices. And households, remained willing to do that for some time, as long as they had those built up savings,” he says.

(Farm Journal)

Now that many households have chewed through those extra savings, while also paying more for many items, Tonsor says the demand monitor shows financial sentiments are waning.

“We ask how your financial situation for household is now compared to one year ago. And there’s more people that say it’s worse. And there’s fewer people that say it’s better, both compared to April of ’22 and April of ’21,” says Tonsor.

Different Stories Brewing in Pork and Beef

Close says at the retail level, the current price spread on retail pork versus pork cutouts is creating a very unusual situation.

“Retail port prices are softer than they were but still right at their highs. But the price spread between retail pork prices and pork cutout values is incredibly wide,” says Close.

With cash hogs under intense pressure, he thinks it could also cause pork prices at the meat counter to retract, beef is seeing the opposite story play out. He says even with the current drop in cow slaughter, the percentage of heifers in the fed slaughter mix is still incredibly high, and according to Close, that’s a sign liquidation will continue.

“Because of the weather influences, particularly across the northern feeding states, this market is performed as if it is a sprint, and this market is a marathon. We haven’t got to our tightest numbers yet. So this market will continue, by all rights should continue ’23, ‘24 and even in ‘25,” he says.

The test may come when retail beef prices continue to climb, and if Americans are willing to dish out more for certain cuts of meat. Close thinks some shoppers may be forced to trade down to less expensive cuts of meat.

But today, Americans are still hungry for protein, and more specifically, they’re hungry for meat.

“The public wants meat in their diet. I think their ability to pay for it is going to improve in the next 24 months. Specifically on pork and chicken,” says Tonsor.

Close’s request this holiday weekend to help that demand? It’s short and sweet.

“I just encourage consumers to go out there and fire up those grills,” he says.

It’s a big weekend for driving meat demand as peak summer demand heats up.

Related Stories:

Top 5 Trends and Tips For the Barbeque Pit from ‘The Meat Guy’

The Humble Hot Dog: What Your Mom Didn’t Tell You

It’s Time to Put Some Pork on the Grill

Americans Love Meat and Say It's a Healthy Choice

Wed, 24 May 2023 20:30:22 GMT

A majority of Americans regularly eat meat and believe that it’s a healthy choice, according to an exclusive Newsweek poll of 1,500 U.S. voters conducted by Redfield and Wilton Strategies. They also don’t think the meat industry is bad for the climate.

The poll showed 35% of people strongly agreed with the statement that it’s healthy to eat meat, with 41% selecting “agree” and 17% selecting “neither agree nor disagree.” Only 4% said that they disagreed, and a further 1% said that they strongly disagreed.
In addition, 81% of people eat meat at least once a week, and 10% said that they ate it only once or twice a month. Only 4% and 3% of the respondents said that they rarely or never ate meat, respectively.
The poll showed 55% would not feel safe eating lab-grown meat and 57% would not eat it. Although 30% of people said that they believed lab-grown meat provides a realistic alternative to meat produced from animals, 51% said they did not and 19% said they didn’t know.

“Despite the great strides made by the vegetarian and vegan movements over the past few decades, most Americans aren’t going to give up their meat-based diets anytime soon,” the Newsweek article said.

A World Without Livestock Doesn’t Work

Anna Dilger, professor of meat science at the University of Illinois, responded to the article’s biased slant on meat.

“A world without livestock is simply a world that doesn’t work,” Dilger says. “People would have a hard time meeting their nutritional needs. To lament that Americans ‘refuse to quit eating meat’ is misguided and doesn’t recognize the scientific support for meat as part of a healthy diet.”

The Dublin Declaration of Scientists on the Societal Role of Livestock reaffirms that livestock and meat consumption are instrumental for dietary health, play a key role in the overall sustainability of our food system and is a key pillar of economic prosperity around the world, she points out.

“Farming systems would be unsustainable as livestock play a key role in using marginal lands to produce food and in recycling by-products from other parts of the food system. In many places around the world, livestock forms the basis of healthy financial systems. As one of the few assets that women can own in some societies, livestock are a means towards gender equality and economic development,” Dilger adds.

A nutritious diet consists of eating a variety of foods, including meat, says Kara Behlke-Ungerman, vice president of nutrition, health and wellness transformation at the National Pork Board.

“If we look at proteins globally, pork is at the center of human nutrition as the most culturally applicable protein, delivering a sustainable source of nutritional value across life stages, across meal occasions, to the widest range of cultures and socio-economic levels,” Behlke-Ungerman says. “Pork makes it easy to eat a plant-forward diet as it is the perfect “carrier” of under-consumed vegetables and nutrients that help us eat better. This means when pork is on the plate, it brings with it the nutrients and food groups we sometimes struggle to eat enough of.”

A recent article in a peer-reviewed edition of the scientific journal Animal Frontiers pointed out meat’s critical role in society.

“Animal-source foods are superior to plant-source foods at simultaneously supplying several bioavailable micronutrients and high quality macronutrients that are critical for growth and cognitive development. Dietary recommendations to eliminate animal-source foods from diets ignore their importance, particularly the great need for these foods in diets of the undernourished in the Global South,” Adegbola Adesogan, director of the University of Florida’s Global Food Systems Institute, said in a release.

The peer-reviewed evidence reaffirms that the most prominent global study which claimed that consumption of even tiny amounts of red meat harms health (the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Risk Factors Report) is fatally scientifically flawed and should be retracted, added Alice Stanton of the Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland in a release.

“In fact, removing fresh meat and dairy from diets would harm human health. Women, children, the elderly and those of low income would be particularly negatively impacted,” Stanton said.

What Meat Product is Your State Most Hungry For? Data Shows Top Meat Volume Growth

Wed, 03 May 2023 16:44:19 GMT

When it comes to meat, what is your state most hungry for?

In a recent CoBank webinar featuring experts from Circana, Inc., data shows meat eaters across the nation are looking for variety and are open to trying new things, whether that’s experimenting with different cuts on the grill or air frying something typically cooked in other ways.

From chicken wings and thighs to pork shoulder to beef chuck and brisket, Melissa Rodriguez, principal in client insights at Circana, Inc., notes that the trends have a geographic component, creating “pockets” of consumer preferences.

According to data ending in March of this year, Rodriguez shares the following map, highlighting the top meat volume growth across the U.S. by state.

(Farm Journal)

Rodriguez notes that consumers are looking for variety, including different meat sources and cuts of meat. Unfortunately, when looking at the meat department as a whole in the start of 2023, consumers have been found to buy less fresh meat by volume.

Specifically, 91% of shoppers said the cost of groceries is much higher than one year ago, with 24% also claiming to buy less meat and poultry.

(Farm Journal)

While all meat options show a decrease in volume to start 2023, chicken has declined the least and has actually increased in total dollars of growth.

In the first quarter of 2023, Rodriguez suggests chicken reaped the benefits of retailers showcasing chicken breast as the “go-to” meat.

Circana estimates the net volume change, as a result of consumers switching protein choices, led to an increase in chicken purchases, pulling some market share from beef, pork and turkey. However, Rodriguez explains the volume increase in chicken is minimal.

Overall, shoppers continue to purchase across all proteins, she notes, but it’s more concerning that consumers are purchasing less.

So, how will the meat case re-attract consumers?

Along with decreased prices and inflationary pressures, Rodriguez says there are many opportunities in protein for the remainder of the year.

She believes relating to the consumer and connecting the various generations, including Boomers, Millennials and Generation Z, back to the meat case will be key. This includes education on how to prepare the different meats available, whether it be on the grill, the smoker or other cooking appliance, Rodriguez suggests.

Social media, especially through video content, may be a great driver to get consumers back to the meat case, she says, and the industry needs to be part of the conversation.

Convenience will also be a driver in 2023, helping consumers make mealtime easier and quicker in their homes.

As a whole, Rodriguez explains that there will likely be shifts and changes within the grocery stores in the coming months, where some aisles and departments “win” and others “lose.”

As a producer, what can you do to help be part of the conversation and encourage consumers to favor the meat case?

How Rendering Works: Boiling Down the 'Invisible Industry'

Mon, 01 May 2023 13:19:35 GMT

While everyone looks forward to the main course, there’s an entire industry focused on the “leftovers.”

Known as the “invisible industry” and the “original recycling,” rendering serves as an invaluable piece of the animal agriculture industry and provides a wide range of products.

According to the North American Renderers Association (NARA), nearly 50% of every meat animal is considered waste, including bones, fat, blood, feathers and some internal organs. However, through the process of rendering, animal byproducts take on new life to be used as ingredients in pet and livestock feed, biofuels, fertilizers and many household products, including soap, paints, glue and rubber.

With the inaugural National Rendering Day on April 21, Anna Wilkinson, vice president of communications for NARA, joined AgriTalk host, Chip Flory, to further explain the importance of rendering, especially when it comes to the environmental footprint.

“Not everybody understands rendering,” Wilkinson explains. “So, when a consumer buys a product that uses rendered material, we want them to know that they can feel confident that they’re making an environmentally responsible choice.”

While the national day of celebration was created with the hope of bringing awareness to rendering, Wilkinson says it’s also a great way to show appreciation for those in the rendering industry, recognizing the important work they do.

According to NARA, renderers collect 56 billion pounds of raw materials every year in the U.S. and Canada, which are then recycled into 10 billion pounds of fat and oil products and 9 billion pounds of protein products annually.

“Rendering really deserves to be a part of the reduced food waste and sustainability conversation,” Wilkinson notes. “It really is a circular process, and we feel we can help educate on why that is.”

(Farm Journal)

The rendering process returns 3.7 billion gallons of clean water to rivers and streams, and reduces greenhouse gases, according to NARA, by avoiding carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gas emissions from natural decomposition like in a compost pile or landfill. Specifically, the process of rendering sequesters five times the amount of GHGs than what is produced, and rendered biofuel products produce 80% less carbon emissions than the alternative petroleum diesel, NARA says.

(Farm Journal)

While the environment and sustainability are key benefactors of rendering, it’s also important to note that the industry is financially stable and economically provides $10 billion annually, helping contribute to food security through the production of livestock feed and fertilizers, as well as supporting thousands of full-time jobs with benefits, many in rural areas.

For more information on rendering, visit NARA’s website .

Cattle Health Impacts Carcass Traits

Mon, 09 Jan 2023 19:31:40 GMT

It is important for everyone involved in beef cattle production, including seedstock producers, cow-calf producers, backgrounders and stocker operators, feedlot managers, packers, retailers, feed suppliers and veterinarians to remember that all the money distributed among the many participants is generated by the sale of beef to consumers.

While it is true that carcass traits and beef product attributes are largely influenced by the genetic decisions of seedstock and commercial cow-calf producers and the feeding decisions of feedlot managers and nutritionists, the animal health decisions made by producers and veterinarians throughout the production chain also play a role. A number of studies have indicated that muscling, marbling and tenderness all can be negatively impacted by cattle health problems.

Studies of consumer preferences have indicated that attributes such as flavor, tenderness, marbling and texture are important when evaluating the eating experience when consuming beef cuts. These consumer expectations are important when considering the impact of animal health because pneumonia and other common cattle diseases have the potential to affect not only carcass weight, but also the amount, location, and ratio of muscle, fat and water.

Cattle Health and Effects on Carcass Traits

Bovine respiratory disease (pneumonia) is the most important cause of illness and death in feedlot cattle with digestive diseases such as acidosis and bloat also being important. Several studies have shown that cattle that experienced respiratory disease had lighter hot carcass weight, lower dressing percent, less internal fat and lower marbling scores, as well as less external fat and smaller ribeye area than cattle without respiratory disease.

Scientists don’t have a clear picture of how disease impacts carcass traits, but probably a combination of changes in hormones such as insulin, growth hormone and other signals that direct the growth of muscle and the deposition of fat are involved. In addition, just the fact that cattle are off-feed while they are sick may impact the pattern of muscle growth and fat deposition.

The negative effects of disease on carcass traits may not be confined to the time cattle are in a feed yard. As we learn more about muscle growth and fat deposition, it appears that stress, disease or poor nutrition even early in life can have consequences on feedlot and carcass performance. This understanding makes a life-long health and nutrition plan to minimize disease risk and ensure optimum growth from birth to slaughter important for efficient production of a desirable beef product. Beef producers should work with veterinarians to optimize sanitation, nutrition, immunization and biosecurity to reduce the risk of disease.

In addition, because the negative effects on growth and carcass traits appear to be more severe in animals with prolonged or multiple episodes of sickness compared to animals that become sick for a short period of time and then recover, knowledge and ability to accurately identify sick animals and to treat them in a timely manner also becomes increasingly important.

Life-long cattle health starts with the cow being in good body condition and receiving all necessary nutrients throughout pregnancy and then giving birth without calving difficultly in a clean environment. If the calf is born healthy and able to quickly stand and suckle and that calf is not exposed to mud and manure, it is likely to avoid the risk of scours and pneumonia during the time period from birth to weaning. Adequate forage availability for both the cow and calf until weaning is essential to maintain optimum health and to ensure that the calf has good post-weaning growth and health.

Effective vaccines are available for a number of important disease-causing germs including the bacteria that cause blackleg and related diseases, and the viruses and bacteria that contribute to bovine respiratory disease. Both internal parasites (worms) and external parasites (flies, ticks and lice) can cause significant disease in calves; and proper use and timing of deworming and external parasite treatments greatly aids in cattle health and well-being.

The time period around weaning is a period of high risk for respiratory disease and other diseases. Implementation of well-designed preconditioning programs that utilize low-stress weaning, vaccinations, parasite control and acclimation to post-weaning diets and feeding and watering equipment is an excellent disease control strategy.

The Cost of Cattle Disease

Carcass premiums and pricing on carcass merit grids has caused the veterinary profession to re-evaluate the cost of cattle diseases. Historically, veterinarians and beef producers have considered the cost of disease to be confined to death loss, treatment cost, decreased feed efficiency and reduced live weight. However, because many cattle are now sold on a carcass merit basis, disease has the potential to affect profitability not only through treatment costs, death loss, and reduced weight, but also the amount, location, and ratio of muscle, fat, and water and the ultimate desirability of the final beef product.

Ensuring that consumers have a satisfying experience every time they eat beef requires that all the participants in the beef production chain do their part to improve and protect the attributes of flavor, tenderness, marbling and texture. In addition to the significant impacts that genetics and nutrition play on carcass and product traits, cattle health also has an important role; and a plan to optimize health from birth to slaughter is an important component of providing a high-quality beef product.

‘Moo’ Intelligence: Google’s New Sustainability Initiative Misrepresents U.S. Beef

Wed, 12 Oct 2022 22:09:37 GMT

Among America’s great success stories, Google is up there with the best of them: Henry Ford’s cars, Sam Walton’s general stores, Steve Jobs’ minicomputer/phone/flashlights.

Google’s search engine technology, e-commerce and artificial intelligence have fueled the company’s rapid ascent – it’s not yet 25 years old – to annual revenues that top $250 billion. Some even call Google the “most powerful company in the world” and certainly one of the most valuable brands.

The company hires engineers and computer scientists by the busload. Yet, despite all of those nerds on the payroll Google is short-handed on “moo” intelligence and it just insulted America’s cowboys with its new sustainability feature.

Unveiled this week, Google now offers the ability to view information about the environmental impact of certain choices – “from buying a new car or pre-owned clothing to planning a driving route or weekday meal.” That includes information about how Google evaluates beef, which is to say, Google’s metrics are heavily slanted against beef.

That quickly drew the ire of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, which denounced Google’s initiative as an attempt to bias consumers against beef through their new sustainability search feature that provides inaccurate climate information on cattle production.

“Google is using its billions of dollars of resources to target cattle producers and ignore the science that demonstrates beef’s sustainability and value to the environment,” said NCBA President Don Schiefelbein, a Minnesota cattle producer. “Cattle producers have a demonstrated record of continuous improvement, which has led to the United States recording the lowest global greenhouse gas emissions from beef while contributing to food security for the world. Additionally, cattle production protects green space, upcycles grass and forages, and provides consumers with a lean protein source packed with essential nutrients. Google should seriously reconsider this feature.”

Google apparently relied on some U.N. emissions data on beef globally, which doesn’t take into account how much more sustainably American beef is produced.

Hmmm…. You would think the company could have Googled that information!

NCBA says livestock play an important role in protecting open spaces and account for only a very small portion of greenhouse gas emissions. Eliminating all livestock in the U.S. and removing beef from the diet would only reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 0.36% globally. NCBA is urging Google to consider the science of beef production before making this new feature widely available.

Munching on Mealworms: The Next Meat-Alternative Snack?

Wed, 05 Oct 2022 18:44:12 GMT

While plant-based meat alternatives seem to have lost their hype, scientists are working to develop another protein alternative—mealworms.

Over 2 billion people across the globe consume insects as part of their diet, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, while the thought of eating mealworms, grasshoppers and beetles sounds rather unappealing to most people in the U.S.

A recent Science Daily article claims, “insects are edible and could be a healthful alternative to traditional meat protein sources.”

With the rising cost of animal proteins such as beef , pork and lamb, as well as environmental concerns, the project’s principle investigator, In Hee Cho, Ph.D., explains there has been an increased interest in eating insects.

Containing high amounts of fatty acids, vitamins, minerals, fiber and high-quality protein, insects can be considered both a nutritious and healthy food source, the article claims.

Yet, the idea of munching on a mealworm remains unappetizing for a majority of meat-eaters.

Meat-like Mealworms

Scientists have set out to understand the insect’s flavor profile, comparing aromas of its lifecycle in egg, larva, pupa and adult stages.

Through a variety of cooking techniques, the mealworms gave off a diverse range of aromas. For instance, raw larvae had wet soil-like, shrimp-like and sweet corn-like aromas, while roasted or fried larvae had shrimp-like and fried oil-like attributes and created flavor compounds similar to those formed when meat and seafood are cooked.

Additionally, the mealworms were cooked with sugar to create caramelization reactions, producing meat-like and savory flavors.

Though mealworms will not likely take down the livestock industry any time soon, Cho is hopeful that the study’s results “will contribute to the commercial development of meat-like and savory flavorings and seasonings, and will encourage the convenience food industry to include edible insects in their products.”

Beef jerky, pork rinds or mealworm mix? Someday that could be up to you to decide.

NCBA Kicks Off Campaign to Generate Dietary Guidelines Comments

Thu, 22 Sep 2022 05:28:54 GMT

Last week the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) launched a nationwide campaign to encourage cattlemen to submit public comments supporting beef’s role in updated dietary guidelines.

The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) last week released its Scientific Report, laying the groundwork for five years of federal nutrition guidance. Americans now have until Aug. 13 to submit official comments as the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) work to finalize the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs).

NCBA has engaged for the past two years to ensure the Dietary Guidelines are focused on nutrition and based on sound science. NCBA applauded the DGAC’s recommendations released last week, but anti-meat advocates are already working to downplay the important role meat plays in these guidelines.

“Study after study shows that beef plays an important role in a balanced, healthy diet across the lifespan,” said NCBA President Marty Smith. “NCBA has made it a priority to protect the scientific credibility of Dietary Guidelines and promote accurate information about the nutritional advantages of beef as part of a balanced diet.”

No process is perfect and NCBA believes there is room for improvement when the final guidelines are released later this year.

“The science is on our side when it comes to the #BenefitsofBeef. We’re now in the home stretch of this process. NCBA is calling on cattle producers to submit public comments to ensure the strong science reinforcing beef as a food for health is adequately reflected in the final 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans,” Smith said.

NCBA will generate public comments by reaching out to cattle producers via e-mail blast, text messages, social media, and earned media between now and Aug. 13. Producers can also file comments by clicking here.

The ‘Beagle Brigade’ Receives Industry-Wide Support in Protection of U.S. Agriculture

Thu, 22 Sep 2022 05:28:31 GMT

Today, over 116 agricultural canine teams provide screening at border crossings, airports, cruise terminals, cargo warehouses and mail facilities, according to the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

To protect the U.S. agriculture industry, natural resources and food supply, canines are used at U.S. ports of entry to detect and prevent foreign animal diseases, such as foot and mouth disease and African swine fever, as well as invasive species, plant diseases and pests from entering the U.S.

Industry groups, including the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the National Pork Producers Council, have submitted a letter to U.S. Congress leaders in favor of passing the Beagle Brigade Act of 2022 (S. 3678/H.R. 8432), congressionally authorizing and funding the National Detector Dog Training Center.

The Center in Newnan, Ga., is the primary training facility for the so-called “Beagle Brigade,” where canines and the Agriculture Canine Teams of the CBP handlers are trained to sniff out contraband fruits, vegetables and meat products in international passenger baggage, mailed packages and vehicles entering the U.S.

“Healthy animals ensure consumers have safe food and allow American producers, their communities and the U.S. economy to thrive. That is why NPPC joined over 50 organizations spanning the entire agriculture sector in support of the Beagle Brigade Act of 2022,” says Terry Wolters, NPPC president and owner of Stoney Creek Farms in Pipestone, Minn.

See the full letter and list of supporting groups here .

Canines have been successful at several border detections in 2022, including:

• 230 pounds of prohibited pork bologna seized at Bridge of the Americas and Santa Teresa border crossings

• 120 pounds of prohibited fresh pork and poultry meat at the Laredo Port of Entry

CBP seizes more than 4,600 plants, meat and animal byproducts per day on average , NPPC reported in its Capital Update.

How to Boost Lab-Grown Meat? Issue an Executive Order

Wed, 14 Sep 2022 22:37:03 GMT

Is the Biden Administration using a decoy?

While grants and funding continue to be announced for small packing plants and legislation to support small producers is a priority to some congressmen, Biden recently announced his “Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe and Secure American Bioeconomy.”

What does this mean?

The overarching idea to “advance biotechnology and biomanufacturing towards innovative solutions in health, climate change, energy, food security, agriculture, supply chain resilience, and national and economic security,” sounds novel in the grand scheme of things; however, livestock producers must be wary.

The push towards lab-grown meat might have just gotten stronger.

Though the White House Brief does not call out specific technologies, it’s important to read the fine print.

The brief says the U.S. needs to develop genetic engineering technologies, writing circuitry for cells and predictably program biology in the same way we write software and program computers. In addition, the advancement of science allows production to scale up while reducing obstacles of commercialization, helping innovative technologies and products reach markets faster.

While this information could be interpreted differently, it’s worth noting how the statement can directly point to lab-grown meat.

Let’s use lab-grown meat as the example and rephrase that paragraph.

The U.S. needs to focus on genetic engineered, lab-grown meat technologies, scale-up production and help the “producers” commercialize and get product in consumers’ hands faster.

See the resemblance?

Biden claims Federal investment in key research and development of biotechnology and biomanufacturing will help further society goals.

The action plan for this focus includes a report submitted by the Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with the heads of appropriate agencies, “assessing how to use biotechnology and biomanufacturing for food and agriculture innovation, including by improving sustainability and land conservation; increasing food quality and nutrition; increasing and protecting agricultural yields; protecting against plant and animal pests and diseases; and cultivating alternative food sources.

Now, I find other parts of that statement valuable, however the addition of “cultivating alternative food sources” makes my eye twitch.

As an Executive Order, the ball is rolling and no one can stop it. It will be interesting to see what federal funding is announced in the coming months.

As a livestock producer, I feel it’s increasingly important to share what you do and how you do it.

As more information becomes available, be sure to stay connected to the industry groups you trust and reach out to your state’s legislators on The Hill.

As I mentioned, it’s always a good idea to read the fine print. Rather than getting blindsided, be ready for the wave. Be prepared to defend the industry we love.