Search

The article reports on the conflict between the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) and the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund (R-CALF) in the U.S. The main conflicts include differences in trade policy, value-based marketing and mandatory country-of-origin labeling. It is noted that the rift has caused a losses in unity in the beef industry.

The article cites comments released by the American Meat Institute (AMI) advising against the plan of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to label mechanically tenderized (MT) beef because existing labeling for MT products could confuse customers.

The article reports that several meat and livestock organizations filed an appeal against the September 2013 U.S. District Court for Washington, D.C. decision which concerns the final rule on country-of-origin labeling (COOL) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Aside from the American Meat Institute, the Canadian Pork Council and Southwest Meat Association also filed an appeal. The appellants expressed opposition to the Agricultural Marketing Service's argument involving COOL.

The article reports that a U.S. district court judge ruling refusing to stop the government from requiring more specific country-of-origin labeling (COOL) for meat products sold in stores has renewed debates on the benefits vs costs of the mandatory policy.

The article reports on the decision of family-owned grocery store chain Bashas to settle federal charges that it mislabeled meat at certain of its AJ's stores between 2010 and 2012. The company has agreed to undertake a variety of remedial measures including disciplining or terminating culpable employees and launching a comprehensive compliance program to be overseen by a chief compliance officer, as stated under a non-prosecution agreement.

The article discusses the concerns of the author regarding the changes in pork and beef cut names on meat labels. Several industry experts provided their opinion on the changes, including Cattlemen's Beef Board secretary Jimmy Maxey. The top findings of a research study by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association on the current nomenclature are provided. It was found that simplifying cut names and improving on-pack labeling are needed to help customers understand meat products better.

The article reports that a group of 8 meat and livestock groups led by the American Meat Institute (AMI) filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to block the mandatory implementation of country-of-origin labeling (COOL) rule finalized by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in May 2013. The organizations claimed that the final rule violates the U.S. Constitution by compelling speech in the form of costly and detailed labels and exceeds the scope of statutory mandate.

The article reports on a lawsuit filed by the American Meat Institute (AMI) to block the implementation of a county-of-origin labeling (COOL) rule by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in May 2013. The lawsuit explained that the final rule fails to promote the search labels on meat products manufactured in the country. According to the author, the organization argued that the law violates the U.S. constitution.

The article presents the author's view that the more than 350 new meat names in product labels for beef and pork cuts is advantageous to the pork industry but not advantageous to the beef industry. The author mentions that beef names such as rib eye and porterhouse, can now be applied to pork cuts. She claims that pork rib eye cannot equal the deliciousness of beef rib eye, that naming a pork chop a porterhouse is ridiculous, and that an overcooked porterhouse pork chop becomes dry and white.

The article reports the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service's (FSIS) approval of third-party certification label for genetically modified organisms (GMO)-free meat products, the Non-GMO Project.

The article reports that the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service proposed adding labels to mechanically tenderized meat which includes new instructions for cooking as meat that is mechanically tenderized has been linked to pathogens that can lead to outbreaks.

The article reports that the Canadian Pork Council views the U.S. country-of-origin labeling (COOL) regulations as discriminating against Canadian feeder pigs and slaughter hogs, saying that the regulation removes flexibility to commingle Canadian and U.S. live swine at processing plants.

The article discusses the findings of the National Farmers Union (NFU) survey on Country-of-origin labeling (COOL) indicating that 90% of 1,000 American respondents say they are in favor of COOL for fresh meat as well as information on where animals were born and processed on meat labels.

The article reports on the approval by the Industry-Wide Cooperative Meat Identification Standards Committee (ICMISC) of the Uniform Retail Meat Identification Standards (URMIS) common names in the U.S. for consumer-facing labels on beef and pork.

The article focuses on the controversy concerning the country-of-origin labeling (COOL) and its effects on the beef industry. American Meat Institute president J. Patrick Boyle stated that the U.S. Department of Agriculture drafted a proposed rule that would alter the COOL provisions for muscle cuts of applied meats. The proposed rule sparked criticism due to discrimination towards Canadian and Mexican meat imports as it would enable U.S. to comply to World Trade Organization standards.

The article explores the changes proposed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to mandatory country of origin labeling (MCOOL). The author claims the proposed changes only addressed the problems that many had with the original rule. The new proposed rule would allegedly demand labels on muscle cuts of beef and other meats to specify where the animal was born, raised and slaughtered. It would likewise abolish the allowance for commingling of muscle cuts.

The article offers information on the proposed rule for muscle cuts announced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) under the Country of Origin Labeling program (COOL) which requires producers to give information about where the animal was born, raised and slaughtered on the label.

The article reports that the Beef Checkoff program and the National Pork Board have issued a roster of new, proposed common Uniform Retail Meat Identity Standards (URMIS) names for consumer-facing labels at the Annual Meat Conference on February 25, 2013. The protein boards have joined forces to simplify labels, eradicate unappealing names, and to reformat the layout. The common names are now displayed in a bigger font on the first line of a label and characteristics appear on a second line.

The article reports on the readiness of U.S. supermarket retailers for the implementation of the mandatory nutrition labeling for ground, chopped and popular cuts of meat and poultry products on March 1, 2012. Some retailers have on-pack labels for ground and chopped meat, and point-of-sale (POS) materials for meat cuts designated by the Department of Agriculture. Fitzgerald's Foods co-owner Bryan Devoe said it created a brand new meat department and purchased new scales.

The article reports that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has implemented new meat labeling rules, requiring nutrition facts labels on certain meats.

The article focuses on the implementation of country of origin labeling (COOL). A few year after its 2009 implementation, the Word Trade Organization (WTO) took issue with the measure, particularly on the enforced segregation of imported livestock and meat. Canada is lobbying for the removal of segregation of both livestock and meat that are processed and additionally processed in the U.S., essentially labeling all meat as Product of the U.S.