2011

If you missed last week’s webinar on the new nutritional labeling rules for meat and poultry, you can now access the slides and recording on line.  Thanks to NMPAN and the people from FSIS for sharing the information.  It’s worth checking out if you’re a producer or processor. http://www.extension.org/pages/60582/nutritional-labeling-of-meat-and-poultry:-the-new-rules

This is an older study, but still contains some valid points for anyone considering the transition from traditional beef production to grassfed.  Read the study here.

By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI

Capital Press

The USDA has not imposed any penalties on retailers who have failed to comply with country-of-origin labeling requirements, according to an agency audit. The agency’s Agricultural Marketing Service, which oversees the COOL program, has also developed backlogs in notifying retailers that they’re out of compliance with the law, the audit said. In roughly 30 percent of non-compliance cases identified by USDA last year, the agency notified retailers of the problem more than two months after the review, the audit said.

Auditors from the USDA’s Office of Inspector General found that “AMS officials did not identify and investigate repeat violators of the COOL requirements or assess monetary penalties where appropriate.” In several cases, the USDA should have further investigated whether the violations were willful but did not do so during follow-up reviews, the audit said. 

The audit also said the agency needs to improve its procedures for conducting reviews and better communicate with retailers, among other findings. In a response letter, an official from AMS said the audit had begun less than a year after COOL had become effective in March 2009 — a time when the agency was still focusing on outreach to the food industry. The agency is now taking steps to beef up its enforcement of the statute and expects to fully comply with the audit’s recommendations, the letter said.

The Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America — a major proponent of COOL — is troubled by the audit’s findings. “It confirms our concern that USDA has not taken its responsibility seriously,” said Bill Bullard, R-CALF’s CEO. After 2 1/2 years, the lack of enforcement actions by USDA sends a signal to the industry that the agency isn’t intent on strict implementation, he said.

Bullard said he’s also afraid the USDA’s enforcement of the program will undermine consumer confidence in country-of-origin labeling. “It really reduces the value of the COOL label itself,” he said. R-CALF opposes the industry practice of labeling beef as a product of multiple countries — such as U.S., Canada and Mexico — on a single label, since this confuses consumers, he said.

When the program first went into effect, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack sent a letter to industry representatives asking for more transparency in labeling. Vilsack recommended labels that labels be more specific, for example: “Born and Raised in Country X and Slaughtered in Country Y,” the letter said. So far, however, the agency has not stood up to retailers and meat packers who opposed COOL, Bullard said. “It exemplifies there really have been no changes in USDA despite the rhetoric espoused by this administration in 2009.”

The USDA has not been signaling that COOL is unimportant, but the program likely is a lower priority than food safety, said Jeremy Russell, communications director for the National Meat Association, which represents packers. “It’s more of a nice-to-know program for consumers,” he said. “It doesn’t add any value for producers, including those in R-CALF.”

For packers, the primary effect of the COOL program has been to increase operational complications by requiring them to segregate livestock from different countries, Russell said. It’s possible that retailers make labeling mistakes based on information supplied by packers, but such errors would be unintentional, he said. “I think, by and large, there’s been large-scale compliance,” said Russell. “Nobody is motivated not to comply.”

The hallmark of a truly sustainable system is its ability to regenerate itself. When it comes to farming, the key to sustainable agriculture is healthy soil, since this is the foundation for present and future growth.

Organic farming is far superior to conventional systems when it comes to building, maintaining and replenishing the health of the soil. For soil health alone, organic agriculture is more sustainable than conventional. When one also considers yields, economic viability, energy usage, and human health, it’s clear that organic farming is sustainable, while current conventional practices are not.

As we face uncertain and extreme weather patterns, growing scarcity and expense of oil, lack of water, and a growing population, we will require farming systems that can adapt, withstand or even mitigate these problems while producing healthy, nourishing food. After 30 years of side-by-side research in our Farming Systems Trial (FST)®, Rodale Institute has demonstrated that organic farming is better equipped to feed us now and well into the ever changing future. [read more.]

On January 1, 2012, the USDA rules for meat labeling will change. The new rule requires nutrition labeling of the major muscle cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry products, as well as all ground or chopped meat and poultry products, with or without added seasonings.

The rules are slightly different for each category of meat.

Chopped and Ground

Products required to be labeled include single ingredient raw hamburger, ground beef patties, ground chicken, ground turkey, ground chicken patties, ground pork and ground lamb. The labeling must appear on the package and will include the number of calories and the grams of total fat and saturated fat a product contains.

The new rule permits ground or chopped meat and poultry products that do not qualify for a low-fat claim to bear a lean percentage claim as long as it is accompanied by a percentage of fat statement.

Some exemptions apply. For example, packages with less than 12 square inches in total surface area and products that are ground at a customer’s request at retail and contain no nutrition claims or information are exempt.

In addition, small businesses such as producers and retailers who employ 500 or fewer employees and produce no more than 100,000 pounds of a particular ground product annually in a single facility or multi-plant or store company are exempt; provided no nutrition claim or information is made on the product label.

Major Cuts

The USDA defines the major muscle cuts that require labeling. They include most beef roasts and steaks; pork roasts, chops and ribs; lamb chops, roasts and legs; veal steaks, roasts, chops and cutlets; and most chicken and turkey cuts. Examples of non-major cuts would include beef flank steaks and ribs, as well as chicken tenders.

Labeling for major cuts can appear either on the label or at point of sale. The labels must include:

• Calories
• Calories from fat
• Total fat
• Saturated fat
• Cholesterol
• Sodium
• Total carbohydrate
• Protein
• Iron

Because meat and poultry are not generally a source of fiber, sugar, vitamins A and C and calcium, these nutrients do not have to be featured in the labeling so long as they are included in a “not a significant source of . . .” statement.

Exemptions include:

• Products intended for further processing, provided that the labels for these products bear no nutrition claims or nutrition information.
• Products that are not for sale to consumers, provided that the labels for these products bear no nutrition claims or nutrition information.
• Products in small packages that are individually wrapped packages of less than ½ ounce net weight, provided that the labels for these products bear no nutrition claims or nutrition information.
• Products that are custom slaughtered or prepared.
• Products intended for export.

The rule does not provide a small business exemption for major cuts.

The nutrition information for the labels may be obtained from the USDA’s National Nutrient Data Bank or the USDA’s National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference. At this point, the USDA makes no allowances for the difference in nutritional measurements between grainfed and grassfed meats.

To read the rule in its entirety, visit the USDA web site.

Consumers with questions about the new labels should call the toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline at 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854). The hotline is available in English and Spanish and can be reached from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET Monday through Friday.

Producers or retailers seeking further information should contact: Rosalyn Murphy-Jenkins, Director, Labeling and Program Delivery Division, Office of Policy and Program Development, Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, MD 20705, or by phone at (301) 504-0878.

AGA will keep you updated as more information becomes available.