By Jeff Mafi Beef trade negotiations between the United States and China finalized June 12 after a 14-year absence. Here are a few of the aspects of the agreement according to the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service. China will accept U.S. Fresh, chilled and frozen products, including bone-in, boneless and ground beef. China will not accept synthetic hormones in beef and plans to test beef upon arrival. If traces of naturally occurring hormones are above those naturally occurring in cattle, the beef will be rejected.
The agreement also included “bookend” traceability. Cattle must be traceable to the U.S. Birth farm using a unique identifier, or, if imported, to the first place of residence or port of entry. Beef and beef products must be derived from cattle less than 30 months of age.
So, producers who want their cattle to be eligible will need to have them enrolled in a third-party certification program, such as AngusSource® or Gateway. Both programs are USDA Process Verified Programs (PVP) for age and source. Enrollment of the ranch of origin will need to take place, and tags will need to be in place when cattle arrive at the packing facility. AngusSource- and Gateway-enrolled cattle have their age verified through the program already.
Beef from animals will need to be 30 months or younger, and China has agreed to accept USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) standards, meaning all federally inspected plants will be eligible for export. Obviously, it will take some time for the United States to gain market share and to establish enough supply to meet their potential demand.
According to the USDA, China has emerged as a major beef buyer in recent years, with imports increasing from $275 million in 2012 to $2.5 billion in 2016. The United States is the world’s largest beef producer and was the world’s fourth-largest exporter, with global sales of more than $5.4 billion in 2016.
Until the ban caused by bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) took effect in 2003, the United States was China’s largest supplier of imported beef, providing 70% of their total intake. What does this mean to producers now that this trade agreement is finalized?
Plan ahead and take advantage of opportunities that source-verification programs should provide, and position your calf crop for premiums regardless of whether you sell at weaning or after the finishing period; those calves should naturally be worth more. There are two American Angus Association value-added programs designed to help market calves for source and age premiums. AngusSource is a USDA PVP for Angus-sired calves that documents source, group age and a minimum of 50% Angus genetics (all calves must be sired by registered Angus bulls). A second tier of AngusSource PVP called Gateway verifies source and group age only. Following are five basic steps to enroll a calf crop. Step 1 Download the AngusSource/Gateway producer participant enrollment form/agreement.
Step 2 Complete the AngusSource/Gateway producer participant enrollment form/agreement and send it with copies of your calving records for the group of calves you wish to enroll. If you have questions, please call the AngusSource department at 816-383-5100. Send your enrollment form and records via fax, email or mail — fax: 816-383-5195; email:; or mail: AngusSource; 3201 Frederick; Saint Joseph, MO 64506. Step 3 Once your AngusSource/Gateway producer participant enrollment form/agreement is received, an AngusSource administrator will schedule your phone training.
When training is completed, the AngusSource administrator will guide you through the remainder of the enrollment process. Each enrolled calf will be issued an official program-compliant ear tag in one of three options: visual, radio frequency identification (RFID) or ChoiceSet. AngusSource program-compliant ear tags are white, and Gateway program tags are yellow. Step 4 Tag each enrolled calf before it leaves your operation with an official program tag. Step 5 Complete the Marketing Document online through AAA Login or call AngusSource, 816-383-5100. There is a $50 fee per enrollment group and a $15 shipping fee.
Tag costs are $1.25 per visual tag, $2.25 per RFID and $3.25 per ChoiceSet (includes a visual and an RFID tag for one calf). For more information on export requirements to China, visit the or the. Editor’s Note: Jeff Mafi is regional manager for Kansas and Oklahoma. To find the regional manager for your state.
It seems so simple. A buyer wants you to verify the age and source of the calves you're selling, even says they're worth more money if you do.
They're all wearing your brand and you've got calving records going back to Noah's foundation stock; no problem. But the buyer shakes his head and asks which Quality System Assessment (QSA) or Process Verified Program (PVP) your calves are enrolled in. Welcome to the complicated limbo of documenting and qualifying cattle characteristics in a way that can withstand the scrutiny of domestic and international beef customers.
At their simplest, QSAs and PVPs are audit and verification programs through which your calves can get the government stamp of approval required by current USDA Beef Export Verification programs. Japan requires such documentation for U.S. Beef imports in order to verify that no beef comes from cattle older than 20 months. The EU requires it for U.S. Beef imports to verify compliance with the standards of Non-Hormone Treated Cattle (NHTC). This same kind of USDA-approved, third-party verification is also finding favor with domestic customers wanting verification of age, source, animal-welfare practices and natural-beef standards.
Unfortunately, QSA and PVP — which require animal ID — have come along at the same time USDA is trying to implement its National Animal Identification System (NAIS). “The biggest misunderstanding in the country, and one that's slowed adoption of source- and age-verification, is some mistakenly think QSA and PVP are steps in a national animal ID program,” explains Bill Mies, vice president of national accounts for eMerge Interactive. Chessmaster 10th edition cd31.
“They're amazed to discover QSA and PVP are private-industry programs aimed at getting them more money for their cattle.” eMerge offers source- and age-verification through its own PVP program. Mark Spire, bovine technical services manager for Schering-Plough Animal Health, emphasizes there are lots of folks, including government officials, who continue to wrap NAIS — and its purpose for national animal disease surveillance and animal health monitoring — with animal ID needed for market-driven programs such as QSA and PVP. “This confusion has delayed the widespread adoption of both types of USDA programs,” says Spire.
His group offers age- and source-verification through a PVP provided by its Global Animal Management company. Even when producers understand this basic difference, the picture gets cloudy because QSAs and PVPs are two similar but different routes to a common destination. For the purposes of this article, both are routes to age-verification for government export programs. QSAs and PVPs are alike Both QSA and PVP are supported by quality-management systems that document specific processes in such a way that auditable claims can be made about cattle in accordance with specific, internationally recognized standards.
For age-verification, both provide USDA-approved corroboration that the system used for verifying age is accurate enough to withstand periodic audits by a third-party source. Consequently both programs require records documenting age. Leann Saunders, vice president of IMI Global (IMI), explains these can be calving records for a defined calving season, including when the first and last calf was born, and how you know that. IMI helps others build and maintain QSA programs and also offers its own PVP. “You also have to be willing to share records that support the number you want qualified, such as cow-inventory and bull-turnout records.
Any supporting records you can provide make the process simpler,” Saunders says. In other words, both programs require audits by the company providing QSA or PVP services. “Both programs will receive intense scrutiny and auditing,” says Glenn Smith, U.S. Manager for AgInfoLink, which offers a PVP for source and age.
“If you're verifying a claim for age and source, for example, if it's done correctly, record requirements should be similar between QSA and PVP,” Saunders says. She emphasizes, “The validity of the claim is the same for cattle coming through QSA and PVP.” How they're different “The PVP requires more detail and covers a larger scope of activities than a QSA, such as source and age, in addition to other requirements like feeding management and genetics (Table 1),” explains Cara Gerken, IMI's vice president of quality-control services. “Conversely, the scope of a QSA program is very specific and defined.” More specifically, Saunders explains, “The QSA is a limited-scope PVP where the company that maintains the program has fewer documented procedures and fewer records that must be maintained. For example, a PVP company must control all promotional materials and have those materials approved by USDA, whereas, a QSA does not have to meet that requirement. Also, a PVP-approved company can use the “USDA Process Verified” shield in marketing material, while a QSA program can't.
“But, keep in mind the validity of the claim is the same for cattle coming through QSA and PVP programs.” Generally speaking, USDA officials say program-compliant ID tags installed at the ranch of origin are key to achieving and maintaining the greatest flexibility in marketing age and source claims with either QSA or PVP. According to program standards, these tags are single-use, tamper-evident tags with a unique, non-repeatable ID number. The tags can be visual, electronic or a combination. Again, that's from a general standpoint because no two QSA or PVP programs are exactly alike.
“Cattle can lose their conforming status moving through a QSA or PVP, and cattle can retain their conforming status from the ranch to the packer in a QSA or a PVP,” emphasizes Saunders. “It all depends on the specific program.” (You can find the mountain of detail contained in that single statement at.) Now, throw in the fact that purveyors of programs market information differently in the name of competition, and you should feel no shame in being plumb flummoxed. Marketing opportunity is the key Choosing to participate in any QSA or PVP should begin with deciding whether you want the added responsibility. As Saunders points out, “At the end of the day, you're responsible for claims you make about your cattle through these programs.” That, and the need to show necessary records to any outsider, is more than some producers want to consider. If participating in one of these programs fits your needs though, start the selection process based on how you currently market your cattle and how you could market them. “Do you sell on the open market or to the same buyers each year?” Mies asks.
If you sell into a single branded program, a QSA could be the perfect answer. “How many value-added programs will your cattle qualify for?” Mies wonders. Maybe they're already 51% black-hided (CAB ® eligible).
Perhaps you precondition but don't document and market them as such. Maybe they're eligible for natural programs. If so, then the breadth of a PVP may win the race.
“If you already have a relationship with a program offering premiums for specific verified attributes, I wouldn't burn any bridges,” Saunders says. “If you're not in one, look at whether you have a relationship with the marketer of your cattle; if so, do they have a program?
If not, go to USDA's Web site and call the programs listed. Is the company doing the right thing? Do I feel comfortable with them?” Smith concurs.
“It's important you partner with companies with a high level of integrity; I think most do. Also look at other value-added services they provide and the level of customer service. Who's going to be there for the long haul?” Next, Spire says, “What's the total cost of participation? It varies with each program based on annual service fees, audit costs, animal fees based on certificates generated, tag costs and cost of required products to meet program specifications. Producers need to do their homework to assure a program meets their needs and expectations.” Whatever the pricing model, most estimates put the cost of qualifying cattle for age-verification through a PVP or QSA at less than $5/head, including the tag; many at $1.50-$2.50 without the tag.
In return, premiums are being paid for age — sometimes. According to Mies, age premiums are running $3-4/cwt. On feeders and calves, $2-3/cwt. On fed cattle. That doesn't mean there's always money to be had, though. Spire believes the sources for age premiums are dwindling, as packers are typically able to meet still-paltry Japanese demand by pulling from their regular purchases. More than anything, before signing up with a program, Mies recommends, “Ask them to tell you the rest of the story.
The requirements to participate are fairly easy to understand, but what are the consequences? Does it limit my marketing? Do I have to buy a tag or other products or services from the company? Do I have to document and report deads? Don't wait until you order the trucks.
In a rush and a panic trying to get cattle qualified for this program or that one, is when bad decisions get made.” Table 1.
Jan 20, 2016 USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service strongly supports the nation’s grass-fed beef industry by serving as an independent verifier of various grass-fed beef marketing programs, and by providing timely market reports that help producers better understand the value of grass-fed cattle and beef. Last week, USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) announced that effective January 12, 2016, the agency withdrew two voluntary marketing claim standards – the Grass (Forage) Fed Marketing Claim Standard and the Naturally Raised Marketing Claim Standard.
The Naturally Raised Marketing Claim Standard has never been used by anyone. What does the announcement really mean to grass-fed beef producers and consumers? The honest answer is nothing. Consumers and beef producers alike can be assured, AMS still strongly supports the nation’s grass-fed beef industry by serving as an independent verifier of various grass-fed beef marketing programs, and by providing timely that help producers better understand the value of grass-fed cattle and beef. AMS continually reviews the services it provides and determined that these marketing claim standards did not fit within the agency’s statutory mandate. Without express authority from Congress – as with the National Organic Program – AMS does not have the authority to define labeling standards and determine if marketing claims are truthful and not misleading.
![Program Program](/uploads/1/2/3/7/123738215/108295260.jpg)
Therefore, it is inappropriate for the agency to offer these as AMS-defined marketing claims. Producers/establishments still have many options to label their products as grass-fed.
They can:. continue to use the AMS-defined standard until their current AMS certificate expires;. convert the Grass Fed Marketing Claim Standard into their own standard or develop their own grass-fed standard (which AMS can verify through USDA’s Process Verified Program or another USDA-Certified program); or. operate under another recognized grass-fed standard. The USDA Grass Fed Small and Very Small Producer Program (SVS) administered by AMS will remain intact, and no action is necessary from producers that participate in the program. All grass-fed beef verified by AMS using USDA’s Process Verified Program or another USDA-Certified auditing process will still have the objective industry-defined grass-fed standard detailed on our website.
Producers that want to include grass-fed claims on their packaging must submit their proposed label with supporting documentation for approval to USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) – just as they have always done. FSIS reviews the label’s grass-fed claim and supporting documentation to determine if the producer can support their claim.
FSIS, not AMS, is charged with ensuring that all labeling claims – such as grass-fed – on packages of beef are truthful and not misleading. We understand this is a complicated issue, and that is why AMS hosted a stakeholder call to discuss this in more detail. But, bottom line, there really isn’t anything different with regard to AMS’ commitment to the grass-fed beef industry or the truthfulness behind the various grass-fed beef marketing programs. Producers still have many options to use grass-fed labels on their products, and consumers can still find grass-fed products in the marketplace. If anyone has any additional questions, please feel free to contact AMS. This a GIANT step backward and not in line with what consumers want.
The USDA is supposed to set standards, regulations, and guidelines to HELP consumers, not confuse them. To say that rescinding the grass-fed standard has no effect is simply FALSE! The labeling standard for grass fed meat was developed over the course of four years and finalized, with the support of national farm and consumer organizations including NSAC, in 2006. But what this shows is how clearly the government is not in a role to assist and protect consumers, rather it's role is to enact or rescind legislation that doesn't support the self-interest and obfuscating agendas of big-ag. @Tamsen and @Jan – thanks for your comments. USDA strives to ensure that consumers understand all marketing claims found on meat labels.
The voluntary USDA grass-fed marketing claim standard was simply another option for producers to market their livestock. In order to use a grass-fed claim, producers must apply to and meet USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) requirements for grass-fed meat – this has not changed. When submitting a label for review, producers could identify the voluntary USDA grass-fed standard, an industry or association standard, or attest to their livestock’s production methods. USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service’s (AMS) role is to facilitate the marketing of agricultural products, and AMS can still verify production claims through USDA’s Process Verified Program or another USDA-Certified program.
Grass Fed SVS Program
Producers still have many options to use grass-fed labels on their products, and consumers can still find grass-fed products in the marketplace.