Canadian Meat Business - May/June Issue

May/June 2017

TRUMP AND NAFTA:

IF THE UNITED STATES PULLS OUT, IT WILL BE CHAOS

Canadian Publications Mail Product Sales Agreement 41689029

Return undeliverable copies to: 106-530 Kenaston Boulevard, WPG, MB, R3N 1Z4

FINDING THE EXTRAORDINARY IN THE ORDINARY CETA – BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR! THE ISSUE OF WATER IN BEEF PRODUCTION 2ND ANNUAL CANADIAN BEEF INDUSTRY CONFERENCE OPENS REGISTRATION m e a t b u s i n e s s .c a

$ 7.99

d oo s, h pprove Pa CC

N,

L3R

X e t i pl

|8 1C2

E t s

,O ham

e w.y

w 6|w

53

5-3

46 00-

p.ca

u sgro

thEr

e ibl x e fl Don Park Road Unit 1, Markham, Ontario, L3R 1C2 201 and t h 1-800-465-3536 Fax: 905-470-8417 g Lig Phone: 905-470-1135 tin a l su www.yesgroup.ca email: sales@yesgroup.ca Website: -in o rm The

mol i t e 0 -40 Remco and The YesCGroup e

D

3X

bl ura

Protecting your Customers

Remco products are colour-coded to help X040

divide the production cycle into different zones.

By identifying these zones as different cleaning areas, the movement of bacteria around the production area can be blocked.

X030

Our products were developed with the Hazard Analysis Critical Z040 Control Point (HACCP) in mind.

1-800-465-3536 No matter what colour-coding plan is e-mail sales@yesgroup.ca implemented, Remco Products from The Yes

Group provides significant added value at no additional cost. From scoops to squeegees, from One Pair of BEKINAÂŽ + brushes to shovels, we+have the products and BOOTS Lasts 3X Longer than PVC Bootsthe colours to enhance any professional quality assurance program.

2 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

meatbusiness.ca

IN THIS ISSUE May/June 2017

5 6 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 20

Social License?

By Kevin Grier

Trump and NAFTA: If the United States pulls out, it will be chaos

By Scott Taylor

CCA brings beef industry position on NAFTA renegotiation to Ottawa Trump Takes a Deep Dive on World Trade

By Chuck Jolley

Finding the Extraordinary in the Ordinary

By Gina Teel

Good times for bison producers

By Neil Billinger

CETA – Be Careful What You Wish For!

By Angus Burger

Stats Can: Highlights from 2016 Agriculture Census

The Issue of Water

By Tom Lynch-Staunton

IAFP Announces 2017 Award Recipients

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 32 34

NAMI Welcomes Delay of GIPSA Rule

VBP+ Announces New Online Collaboration Spring Cattle Prices Set Table for Stronger Industry

By Craig Lester

A Look Back at the Art of Shrouding

By Angus Burger

2nd Annual Canadian Beef Industry Conference Opens Registration Beef Advocacy Canada Finds a New Home with Issues Management Businesses Go Green for Personal Beliefs

By Dan Kelly

Public Research Universities Unite to address Food Security Calls for chicken irradiation following approval for ground beef

By Rob Drinkwater

Olfafactory Marketing in the Meat Department

By Ronnie P. Cons

“Superior case-ready stretch packaging systems begin and end with Reiser and Fabbri.”

www.reiser.com Reiser Canada Burlington, ON • (905) 631-6611 Reiser Canton, MA • (781) 821-1290 2014

(L) Alex Halterman, Plant Engineer (R) Lenny Lombardi, Vice President

“At AVA, we are a major supplier of case ready meats to supermarkets and other retailers throughout the Northeast. We help our customers with just-in-time case ready beef and pork programs.

The advantage we provide is that all of our products look as if they were produced at store-level.

“We achieve that ‘wrapped in-store’ “Fabbri Stretch look using Fabbri Stretch Wrappers Wrappers make a from Reiser. Our high-speed Fabbri superior package machines consistently produce superior that retailers love packages that ‘scream’ fresh. And because it appears when we combine Reiser’s Vemag to be wrapped MMP ground beef portioner and tray in-store.” handling equipment with the Fabbri system, we have a fast and efficient case-ready solution.

“The bottom line is that Reiser is one of our most valuable and trusted partners with nearly 80% of the machines in our plant from them. Reiser equipment is perfectly suited to our mission of producing products that appear to be wrapped in-store. Plus, Reiser service and support is second to none – we feel they are just as committed to our success as we are!”

Lenny Lombardi, Vice President

GUEST EDITORIAL

SOCIAL LICENSE?

By Kevin Grier

May/June 2017 Volume 16 Number 3 PUBLISHER Ray Blumenfeld ray@meatbusiness.ca MANAGING EDITOR Scott Taylor publishing@meatbusiness.ca DIGITAL MEDIA EDITOR Cam Patterson cam@meatbusiness.ca CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Chuck Jolley, Scott Taylor, Dan Kelly, Andy Hoffman, Chris Elliott, Angus Burger, Gina Teel, Neil Billinger, Craig Lester, Rob Drinkwater, Ronnie P. Cons, Kevin Grier CREATIVE DIRECTOR Christian Kent Canadian Meat Business is published six times a year by We Communications West Inc.

Social License is a term that has gained currency for application to the food industry and particularly the livestock industry. The oracles of wisdom in academia, consulting, industry associations and government assert that the livestock industry must achieve “Social License.” The now defunct ALMA espoused the term and the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute also gives it credence. In July 2016 federal, provincial and territorial agriculture ministers were to discuss the issue of trust from the standpoint of maintaining the agri-food sector’s social license to operate.

What is Social License?

The following are some of Rex Murphy’s thoughts on the topic from a recent editorial in the National Post: Social licence is one of those phrases... that just seem to pop into lexical existence, almost out of nowhere, and instantly take on the authority of unchallenged and long accepted concepts. They are mouthed in every parliamentary speech, are munched over by the solons of the afternoon panel shows, and crowd the editorial and opinion pieces of all the finest newspapers.

Yesterday they were unheard and unseen. Today they are presumed to be the boundary stones of argument and discussion. It is all so fast. One other note on usage: these terms and their semantic kin usually emerge from the fertile lexicography of the social justice camp, which is only appropriate since “social justice” is itself a term from the same fertile semantic factory.

Speaking before the high council of the Sanhedrin at the Calgary Petroleum Club, before he was prime minister, Trudeau (as is his way with nebulous but high sounding concepts) gave the vague, trendy formulation full authority: “Social licence is more important than ever. Governments may be able to issue permits but only communities can grant permission.”

A quick note here on the prime minister’s peculiar play on words. What is a permit? Why, it is an official declaration, in writing, with the force of law, usually from an order of government, that a person or a company has legal permission to do something. It is Permission with a capital P.

We Communications West Inc. 106-530 Kenaston Boulevard Winnipeg, MB, Canada R3N 1Z4 Phone: 204.985.9502 Fax: 204.582.9800 Toll Free: 1.800.344.7055 E-mail: publishing@meatbusiness.ca Website: www.meatbusiness.ca Canadian Meat Business subscriptions are available for $28.00/year or $46.00/two years and includes the annual Buyers Guide issue. ©2015 We Communications West Inc. All rights reserved.

The contents of this publication may not be reproduced by any means in whole or in part, without prior written consent from the publisher.

Printed in Canada. ISSN 1715-6726

But, insofar as Trudeau’s statement can be understood to mean anything at all, the official government permission — the one that counts — under the elastic rules of social licence really has no force at all. Governments “may” issue permits (permission) he says, but only communities can grant “permission.” A very odd understanding from a prime minister: that “communities” are the final authority, and that government permits function very much like tarted-up suggestion boxes.

The most intrinsic characteristic of social licence. Its application is infinitely flexible. It is an inexhaustible demand. It will expand its conditions wantonly whenever an original set of conditions has been met.

The central point of social licence: its preconditions can never be met, and are not meant to be. It is an obstructionist tactic, designed to forestall and delay, till whatever its target has been become so worn down by process and protest and delay that it is simply taken off the policy table.

They would have had more success chasing a moonbeam than satisfying social licence.

It is impossible to describe issues better than Rex Murphy, a Canadian treasure for sure, and thus I will not try to add. Within the framework described by Rex however, the Canadian hog industry, particularly in Manitoba, has had more experience than any other, with the exception of the oil industry, in chasing those social license moonbeams. Unfortunately, as long as the ag academics and industry leaders continue to give it acceptance, rather than call it for what it is, then the industry will continue to fall behind as a result. That is, industry leaders who support this social license concept are hurting, not helping the livestock industry. They are giving credibility to forces that simply want to drag the industry down.

Kevin Grier is an agriculture and food market analyst who provides consulting services to private companies, producer groups, financial service organizations and governments on economic research and market analysis. Visit http://www.kevingrier.com/

meatbusiness.ca

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 5

TRUMP AND NAFTA: IF THE UNITED STATES PULLS OUT, IT WILL BE CHAOS

By Scott Taylor

Ryder Lee is the Chief Executive Officer of Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association (SCA). Lee, from Fir Mountain, Sask., is a University of Saskatchewan Animal Science graduate. These days, Lee’s brother runs the family ranch while Ryder leads the SCA staff as they work on behalf of the province’s beef cattle producers. His job is to “strategically address the policy, production, communication, promotion, legal, and financial issues that will help to strengthen the beef industry in Saskatchewan.”

He does his best not to think much about United States President Donald Trump and the President’s desire to “renegotiate” the North American Free Trade Agreement, a renegotiation that could begin as early as August of this year. He tries to think even less about Trump’s threat to pull the United States right out of the agreement.

“What happens if the U.S. pulls out of NAFTA?” Lee responded when asked about the hypothetical death of the tri-nation agreement signed by Canada, the United States and Mexico in 1993.

“That’s a great question. Maybe the question of the day.

Must say, I don’t know. Do we go back to CUSFTA, which was the agreement before NAFTA? Who knows? I will say this, though, uncertainty is a terrible thing. It’s not good for any business. But then again, fretting about ‘maybe something is going to happen’ isn’t a good use of anyone’s time, either.

“We just need to keep reminding our American friends how good NAFTA has been for them. Although there is a $12 billion trade deficit in the United States, when you consider Canada’s population and the population of the U.S. we’re buying $714 of goods and services per person from the United States while they’re buying $69 per person from us.

NAFTA is a good deal for the United States, despite what some politicians might want you to believe.”

We are living in a strange new world. Real Estate Investor and Reality TV star Donald J. Trump – a man who paid out $25 million in a fraud settlement on a scheme for a fake “university” and is currently under investigation for colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 U.S. election - has been elected President of the United States. He has been called many things in the nearly four months since he’s become the leader of the Free World. It is, however, disconcerting that many of those descriptions are unflattering: From loud and obnoxious to fabricator and outright liar to inconsistent and even unhinged, the new President has brought a governing style that has the entire world on edge. And the world is on edge because the President of the United States might be emotionally and mentally unstable.

6 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

He rose to power for many reasons -- too many for us to analyze here. However, as part of his many campaign promises, he was either going to pull out of the NAFTA or, depending on the day, was going to “renegotiate” it.

Naturally, that has left business people in the United States, Mexico and Canada, in an almost constant state of uncertainty. And not a good uncertainty. After all, according to the United States Department of Commerce and even the Office of the United States Trade Representative (recently confirmed 70-year-old lawyer Robert Lighthizer, who has, in the past, been more hostile toward China than Canada and Mexico), free trade in North America has been good for all three countries.

It has been especially good for Canada and the United States.

According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, American exports of goods and services to Canada supported an estimated 1.6 million jobs in 2015 (latest data available) in the United States. Although Canada has the world’s 10th-largest economy, it represents the largest market for U.S. goods and services, thanks to a shared border and a longstanding alliance.

Last year, total trade in goods and services between the U.S. and Canada came to more than $663 billion - $575 billion worth of goods and some $88 billion in services.

That amounted to a merchandise trade deficit in the United States of some $11 billion, one of America’s smallest deficits with any trading partner. By contrast, U.S. merchandise trade with China last year — roughly the same total value as with Canada — left the U.S. with a trade deficit of $366 billion, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

However, while the numbers suggest trade between Canada and the United States has been good for people on both sides of the border, many Americans still believe that the North American Free Trade Agreement has been bad for the United States.

meatbusiness.ca

beverages. (ex. juices) ($1.2 billion).

So bad, in fact, that early in the month of April, President Trump stated that he was going to pull the United States out of NAFTA immediately. Fortunately, according to recent reports in The National Post and Metro Toronto, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, intervened and halted the United States’ exit.

“U.S. imports of agricultural products from Canada totaled $22 billion in 2016, our second largest supplier of agricultural imports. Leading categories included: snack foods ($4.0 billion), red meats ($2.2 billion), other vegetable oils ($1.8 billion), live animals ($1.5 billion), and processed fruit & vegetables ($1.4 billion).

Although initial reports in the American media, just days after Trump decided against walking away from NAFTA, suggested that Trump was persuaded by his aides and impromptu “pleas” from the leaders of Canada and Mexico, nothing could have been further from the truth.

“U.S. total exports of agricultural products to Mexico totaled $18 billion in 2016, our third largest agricultural export market. Leading domestic export categories include: corn ($2.6 billion), soybeans ($1.5 billion), pork & pork products ($1.4 billion), dairy products ($1.2 billion), and beef & beef products ($975 million).

According to the Post and Metro, Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, “served as a conduit between Canada and the U.S.” The National Post reported in May that White House aides reached out to Trudeau’s office to ask the Prime Minister to persuade Trump to stick with NAFTA, citing Canadian government sources. The plea from White House aides prompted a call between Trudeau and Trump, as well The Rome Reclaim System* (RRS) as with the Mexican president.

TWO IN ONE. SECOND TO NONE.

Still, Trump has many Americans convinced that trade is bad. In fact, a recent survey found majority support for NAFTA in all three countries involved, but that support was weakest in the United States. The Pew Research survey found that of those who took part in the poll, 76 per cent of Canadian respondents, 60 per cent of Mexicans and 51 per cent of Americans supported NAFTA. Only 30 per cent of respondents who voted Republican supported NAFTA compared with 68 per cent of Democrats. Renegotiations are expected to start later this year, likely in late summer or fall.

And that’s why there is uncertainty across all manufacturing, energy and agricultural sectors. After all, for the most part, NAFTA has been good for U.S and Canadian business, especially agriculture and it’s been extremely good for the meat industry in both countries.

According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, “U.S. exports of agricultural products to Canada totaled $23 billion in 2016, making Canada our No. 1 largest agricultural export market. Leading categories included: prepared food ($1.9 billion), fresh vegetables ($1.8 billion), fresh fruit ($1.6 billion), snack foods ($1.3 billion), and non-alcoholic meatbusiness.ca

is the premiere two-in-one waste elimination system that maximizes yields and minimizes waste.

You can rely on RRS for: • Product safety • Easy sanitation & maintenance • Product quality • Reduced labor costs

RRS is the latest innovation in our 40 years of delivering epic grinding solutions.

Our full line of high capacity Mega Grinders feature feed screws and barrels machined from one piece of solid stainless steel – ensuring dependable performance and long equipment life.

And just like our high volume grinders – Maximus, Titan and Brutus – Rome’s dedicated sales and service specialists work hard for our customers.

Contact us today.

Start grinding out more profits.

800.443.0557

FortyYears of Epic

romegrindingsolutions.com * Patent Pending

© 2016 Rome

Grinding Solutions May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 7

“U.S. total imports of agricultural products from Mexico totaled $23 billion in 2016, our No. 1 largest supplier of agricultural imports. Leading categories include: fresh vegetables ($5.6 billion), other fresh fruit ($4.9 billion), wine and beer ($3.1 billion), snack foods ($2.0 billion), and processed fruit & vegetables ($1.5 billion).”

According to Andrew Dickson, the General Manager of Manitoba Pork, the province’s pork producers are “very concerned” about what could happen if the United States decided to pull out of NAFTA. “Friends in the industry that we talk to in the United States are just as concerned as we are,” said Dickson. “And it’s not just Trump. You have economic nationalists like Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, an 80-year-old with some strange ideas about trade, who can make things difficult for everyone.

“Pork producers in Manitoba and across Canada are aligned with pork producers in the United States. Frankly, pork should be left out of any NAFTA renegotiations. Pork is working just fine. But everyone is apprehensive because the political goal is to do something. The politics of trade in the United States is ‘something must be done’ even though nobody really knows what that should be. I simply believe that we have to be very careful to properly manage our expectations.”

According to USDA data, Canada has been either the No. 1 or No. 2 market for U.S. agri-food exports. Mexico is third, usually about $3 billion a year behind Canada. Canada has also been the No. 1 source of agri-food imports into the U.S. for some time now (certainly for the past five years according to USDA data).

As the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, Sonny Perdue, has pointed out, the United States depends on export markets for the prosperity of its farmers. The U.S. exports roughly $20 billion more than it imports in agri-food products, and for many sectors, including the meat sector, it is not a matter of exporting entire products like a whole side of beef, but rather about making money off of specific subproducts (say, offal or chicken feet) for which the market in the U.S. either pays less or doesn’t want. So it is at the U.S. farmer’s peril if President Trump starts shutting the borders to imports, as other countries will start doing the same.

In fact, if the United States pulled out of NAFTA, it would send the entire continent, the U.S. included, into economic chaos. Companies - and there are many - which exist in multiple countries (in agriculture, for example, beef producers often raise cattle in Mexico and slaughter them in the U.S.), would be forced to pick up and move at their own expense. That could well put them out of business.

If companies decide to deal with the inevitable tariffs that would result, they would very likely pass their rising costs onto consumers, raising prices on food in all three countries by a significant amount. If you think beef is expensive now, imagine what it will be like without NAFTA. Andrew Leslie, the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs for Canada-U.S. relations perhaps described 8 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

the situation best when he told a crowd at Baltimore’s Johns Hopkins University: “You have a hamburger in front of you. Now give that hamburger some thought. How does a cow raised in Alberta get processed in the United States, and end up in a bun baked in California with wheat from Saskatchewan, topped with lettuce from Arizona and a tomato from Ontario?

“And you get that burger for what? Five bucks? Think of the complexity of that. Think of the decades it took for the various elements to reach their peak efficiency in what they were doing best, into an integrated supply chain.”

It is amazing and yet it would appear that the Trump Administration wants to kill that, or at least change it.

NAFTA reduced tariffs within the three countries to zero.

Without the agreement, tariffs would likely return to levels under the World Trade Organization. That’s an average 7.5 per cent tariff on all American goods moving into Mexico, and as much as 150 per cent for certain products such as meat and poultry. Mexican products, in turn, would have to pay an average 3.5 per cent to enter the U.S. Since Canada and the US had CUSFTA, exchanges between the two countries would likely remain tariff-free. However, losing NAFTA would still put a huge dent on North American trade.

According to the USDA, so far this year, the U.S. has sold Mexico and Canada $80 billion worth of goods, or a third of all its exports.

NAFTA is good for America – especially for American farmers - and yet the President believes it’s bad for the country and is prepared to put American farmers, many of whom voted for him, out of business by dumping NAFTA. Not surprisingly, Mexico has already cut its dependence on Iowa feed corn, by purchasing half of its feed corn from Brazil this year – or since the election of Donald Trump.

“This is a U.S. issue, not a Canadian issue,” said Dickson.

“The agreement has been very good for the United States and Canada and Canada is definitely not the issue here.

Still, we’re very concerned. The United States is our largest customer for live pigs and for pork products.”

Dickson has noted that before NAFTA can be torn up, the United States Congress has to weigh in. Ultimately, Trump won’t have the final decision. Still, when the President of the United States is paranoid, delusional, inconsistent (at best) and ignorant of the benefits of trade deals, there is always a chance that chaos could ensue.

And make no mistake, since the signing of the NAFTA Agreement, the relationship between the United States and Mexico has actually improved.

According to the Globe and Mail, “The economic partnership made both countries more willing to cooperate on other fronts, such as immigration and border security.

Mexico, for example, has been intercepting U.S.-bound immigrants from Central America and returning them home before they reach the US border. Mexico might not be so eager to perform that kind of work in the absence of NAFTA.

meatbusiness.ca

“Trump should also brace himself for a spike in immigration from Mexico, which has actually been in steady decline.

Killing NAFTA would hurt the Mexican economy, which is heavily dependent on exports to the U.S. That would prompt jobless Mexicans to resume the tradition of going north.”

“ NAFTA IS GOOD FOR AMERICA – ESPECIALLY FOR AMERICAN FARMERS - AND YET THE PRESIDENT BELIEVES IT’S BAD FOR THE COUNTRY AND IS PREPARED TO PUT AMERICAN FARMERS, MANY OF WHOM VOTED FOR HIM, OUT OF BUSINESS BY DUMPING NAFTA. NOT SURPRISINGLY, MEXICO HAS ALREADY CUT ITS DEPENDENCE ON IOWA FEED CORN,

BY PURCHASING HALF OF ITS FEED CORN FROM BRAZIL THIS YEAR – OR SINCE THE ELECTION OF DONALD TRUMP.”

If clear heads and simple intelligence reigns, Donald Trump will not abandon NAFTA. That’s not to say Trump won’t try to re-negotiate certain aspects of the agreement because as Dickson points out, the political end game is to show that the President did something. While Canada

meatbusiness.ca

will ask for greater access to U.S. procurement and deeper regulatory co-operation along with some disputemechanism adjustments, it’s become quite clear that the Trump administration won’t look to improve trade flows, but to have Canada and Mexico pay for access to the U.S. market. It has been, after all, Trump’s promise from the start: “We will make them pay.”

Granted, with the Mexican election soon and with 2018 mid-term elections in the United States, there is currently no workable timeline to get the “re-negotiations” done.

According to Canadian Press Washington Correspondent Alexander Panetta, “Privately, some officials in Ottawa wonder whether that’ll be the ultimate fate of NAFTA renegotiations - lots of talking, speculating, haggling, only to see the project die from the paper cuts of passing calendar pages.”

Still, in Saskatchewan, Ryder Lee – like Andrew Dickson in Manitoba -- has faith in his American counterparts. Whether its beef or pork, producers in Canada and the United States believe that open borders and free trade are good for both countries.

“When it comes to overall trade, we’re America’s No. 1 customer,” said Lee. “We buy more from the United States than China, Japan and the UK combined. We just need to keep reminding the Americans that NAFTA has meant a lot of business and lot of jobs in the United States. We can’t allow them to forget about that.”

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 9

CCA BRINGS BEEF INDUSTRY POSITION ON NAFTA RENEGOTIATION TO OTTAWA Canadian Cattlemen’s Association (CCA) President Dan Darling and staff John Masswohl appeared before the Standing Committee on International Trade in Ottawa in mid-May to discuss preserving market access for Canadian beef in the context of the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as U.S. President Donald Trump has stated he intends to initiate.

The CCA told the committee that Canadian beef producers strongly support keeping the existing NAFTA provisions on beef trade intact. NAFTA’s ability to provide market access without tariffs or quotas for either beef or live cattle trade is an example of how free trade should work and such access should be preserved, CCA advised.

Moreover, the unlimited duty free beef trade that NAFTA enables between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico reflects the true integrated nature of the North American beef cattle industry. The U.S. is Canada’s top export market, accounting for 70 per cent of Canadian beef exports and nearly all our live cattle exports. In 2016, Canada exported 270,000 tonnes of beef and 764,000 head of live cattle to the U.S. valued at more than $3 billion ($1.7 billion as beef and $1.4 billion live cattle). A further 16,000 tonnes of Canadian beef went to Mexico for $109 million, making Mexico Canada’s fourth largest beef export market.

typically under the World Trade Organization (WTO), and strengthening the NAFTA option would provide a meaningful alternative to the WTO. CCA then shared a list of actions that could improve Canada-U.S. beef trade by eliminating redundancies and modernizing and streamlining regulations. Developed in coordination with CCA’s U.S. counterparts, the actions are largely of a regulatory nature, and while not likely to fit as “NAFTA negotiation,” are consistent with the spirit of NAFTA. Specifically, CCA said Canada should: • Eliminate the re-inspection of meat at the border.

Since Canada and the U.S. deem each other’s meat inspection systems to be equivalent, inspection at the point of production should be sufficient.

•

Enable Canadian beef exported to the U.S. to receive a U.S. beef grade.

On the import side, Canadians purchased $978 million of U.S. beef and $19 million of Mexican beef in 2016.

•

NAFTA’s “rules of origin” determine which products are eligible to be traded duty free amongst the NAFTA countries. Under these rules, either beef that is “wholly produced” in the NAFTA territory or transformed from a live animal into beef in a NAFTA country is eligible for NAFTA treatment. It also means that importing beef from a nonNAFTA country and shipping it to another NAFTA country does not provide a back door. The CCA wants the existing rules of origin for beef to remain as they are.

•

Eliminate the requirement for Canadian cattle to bear a permanent identification in the U.S. while there is no such requirement for U.S. cattle.

Eliminate the requirement to prove that live cattle exported to the U.S. are born after March 1999.

CCA also recommended maintaining dispute settlement provisions in the NAFTA and seeking to improve enforceability of NAFTA panel decisions. The Canadian beef sector has from time to time relied on dispute settlement,

10 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

Finally, Darling noted that CCA understands that a U.S. protectionist group is advising the Trump Administration that the renegotiation of NAFTA is the ideal forum to reinstate the repealed country of origin labeling (COOL) legislation for beef and pork. In addition to being counter to Canada’s interest, such a move would jeopardize American jobs. Should the Trump Administration formally include such a demand in its NAFTA position, CCA advised that Canada reject it unequivocally and work with U.S. allies to demonstrate how U.S. jobs depend on livestock trade with Canada.

meatbusiness.ca

JARVIS

BUSTER SERIES

CARCASS SPLITTING BANDSAWS

Buster IV for Beef

Buster V for Beef

Buster VI and VI-ST for Pork

Buster IX for Beef

Used worldwide for splitting cattle, bulls, oxen, horses and hogs in large and medium sized plants.

Jarvis Industries Canada Ltd.

World Leader in Meat Processing Equipment

View additional equipment information on our website! meatbusiness.ca

3915A-78th Ave. S.E. Calgary, Alberta T2C 2J6 Tel: 800 661-8493 / 403 236-5350 Fax: 403 279-8005 E-mail: info@jarviscanada.com Website: www.jarviscanada.com

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 11

TRUMP TAKES A DEEP DIVE ON WORLD TRADE

By Chuck Jolley

Following up on a campaign promise, Trump single-handedly ended several years of careful negotiation when he removed the U. S. as a participant in the planned Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Executive fiat was all he needed to proclaim a death sentence to the largest trade agreement in the world, a 12 nation behemoth that would have dwarfed even the European Union. His next target? The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

An executive order was prepared by Peter Navarro, head of Trump’s National Trade Council, with oversight by chief White House strategist Steve Bannon. Neither of them seemed to understand how the U. S. government really works.

It was pressure from both trading partners that forced Trump to stop the Navarro/Bannon plan to withdraw the U.S. from NAFTA, too. Instead, a White House spokesman indicated that after phone conversations with Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto he had “agreed not to terminate NAFTA at this time.”

Trump said, ”Two people that I like very much, the president of Mexico, prime minister of Canada, they called up, they said, can we negotiate? I said, ‘yes, we can renegotiate,’ “ While an executive order might get the legislative ball rolling, it cannot quash the agreement. NAFTA is an almost quarter of a century old agreement signed, sealed and delivered by the governments of all three participants. It would require approval from his usually rubber-stamp equipped House before it could be ended.

“NAFTA’s been very, very bad for our country,” Trump said in a speech in Kenosha, Wisconsin. “It’s been very, very bad for our companies and for our workers, and we’re going to make some very big changes or we are going to get rid of NAFTA once and for all.”

But sometimes hometown politics over ride national concerns. Suggesting it might be time to slow down and end the pre-election rhetoric, Senate Majority Whip John Cronyn (R-Texas) said, “I think we’d better be careful about unintended consequences.”

Saving Maquiladoras Cronyn was probably keeping his eye on retaining the ‘very, very’ financially rewarding habit of establishing maquiladoras just south of the Texas border. Maquiladoras are a Mexican

tax abatement program that entitles the company to foreign investment participation in capital - and in management - of up to 100% without need of any special authorization. It entitles the company to special customs treatment, allowing duty free temporary import of machinery, equipment, parts and materials, and administrative equipment such as computers, and communications devices, subject only to posting a bond guaranteeing that such goods will not remain in Mexico permanently.

In practice, it allows U. S. businesses to establish lowcost production facilities south of the border and place top management positions in Texas. Border cities on both sides of the Rio Grande have benefitted. It’s a market advantage many major corporations would turn on all the firepower their Washington lobbyists could muster to keep. Trump wisely stepped back from that dangerous political precipice.

Ending TPP, Renegotiating NAFTA Still, after killing TPP, Trump wants to renegotiate NAFTA’s terms with Canada and Mexico instead of attempting to kill the agreement by executive fiat. He stepped up his verbal assault against those two important trading partners using his bully pulpit and his overworked Twitter account to apply pressure on Mexico City and Ottawa. The reason for his reversal? Newly installed Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross talked him out of trying to immediately withdraw. Combined with the pressure exerted by those two calls with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Peña Neto, Trump was convinced to soften his stance, if not his world-renowned electronic bluster.

Business Insider reported that Lee Branstetter, a Carnegie Mellon University professor who served on President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers from 2011 through 2012, was relatively unconcerned about Trump’s nationalistic tendencies. “What we’ve encountered so far is, I think aptly, is somewhat satirically characterized as ‘speak loudly and carry a small stick.’”

That small stick, though, could be wielded as an economically devastating cudgel. His sudden withdrawal from TPP infuriated many economists including Branstetter, who called it a “huge mistake.” It did open a wide door for China to become an even more dominant trading partner in the critical Pacific Basin trading area. It proved that Trump is more than willing to take drastic steps without worrying about the laws of unintended consequences or the backlash created by ignoring everyone outside of his small group of fans.

Chuck Jolley is the President of Jolley & Associates and is a respected writer, editor, publisher and public relations expert with more than 25 years experience in the meat and poultry industry.

12 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

meatbusiness.ca

FINDING THE EXTRAORDINARY IN THE ORDINARY

By Gina Teel, Communications Manager, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association

Authenticity is a lost art, particularly in these days of fake news, misguided soft drink campaigns and negative inference passed off as differentiation. When an authentic moment does occur, it is recognized instinctively by the way it touches one’s emotions and makes one feel.

For me, few experiences are as authentic as witnessing an ordinarily tough as rawhide producer become incredibly humbled and lost for words as he and his family take to the stage to receive an environmental stewardship award. These awards recognize Canadian beef producers for making their mark by leaving no mark at all, through applying innovative approaches to stewardship and conservation that ensure a sustainable future.

Like most Canadian beef producers, recipients of environmental stewardship awards understand that sound management of resources comes with the territory, one cannot exist and thrive without the other. No wonder then that recipients are often emotional when recognized for utilizing management practices to preserve and maintain the land base and waterways that allow them to raise healthy cattle and earn a living. Being recognized for what is to them essentially another day at the office is humbling, and that much is telegraphed when the few comments recipients manage to muster have the power to move everyone in the room. Authenticity is a powerful thing; used wisely it can help consumers understand that the care of land and animals is the drum beat that producers march to each day, creating opportunity to change perspectives and render misinformation about modern beef production null and void.

CCA’s TESA. The national recipient is announced during the CCA’s semi-annual meeting in August during the Canadian Beef Industry Conference, and to a largely industry crowd.

Moving that message beyond the industry echo chamber and making it meaningful to consumers will require industry to provide the context to everyday stewardship practices on farm. When they see cows on a pasture, we need to tell them about the relationship between rotational grazing, natural nutrient disbursement and soil health to ensure a healthy land base. We need to show what managing land to preserve habitat for endangered and at-risk wildlife species looks like, what riparian management and wetland preservation looks like and the importance of solar powered watering sites and environmental farm plans to these efforts.

The concept of beef producers as responsible stewards of the land has been promoted by CCA’s The Environmental Stewardship Award (TESA) since 1996. TESA was introduced long before sustainability and stewardship and climate change caught the attention of the mainstream.

Today, we can point to the recent National Beef Sustainability Assessment conducted by the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, which quantifies the environmental footprint of the Canadian beef industry, to further substantiate that long-held statement.

CCA’s TESA recognizes producers who go above and beyond standard industry conservation practices and set positive examples for other cattle producers and the public.

Environmental stewardship is acknowledged and awarded at the provincial level as well, with those recipients moving forward as nominees for national recognition from the meatbusiness.ca

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 13

If ‘stewardship’ and all it encompasses in sustainable beef production were better communicated to the public it is conceivable that there would be little need for differentiation through labels like ‘free from…’, ‘raised without…,’ ‘grass fed’ and ‘certified humane’ - and the negative inferences and perceptions that often accompany them – because a deeper appreciation of ‘stewardship’ would act as guardrails for consumers.

Which brings us back to the environmental stewardship awards and the opportunity they present to transcend this gap in a meaningful way. Efforts are underway at CCA and Canada Beef this year to raise awareness of these awards, the good practices they represent and the producers who deploy them, as consumers want to know where their food comes from in addition to how it is produced.

Producers can do their part by applying for the award at the local level through their provincial association or nominating someone with demonstrated outstanding stewardship.

Increased participation from all provinces would be a great way to showcase the innovation and practices being deployed by beef producers across the country.

As a generally humble people, producers may not consider the strategies and innovations that enable them to work with challenging terrain or soils while simultaneously preserving and enhancing them, or strategies to co-exist with wildlife, as stewardship worthy of an application form.

Yet at its core, TESA is all about finding the extraordinary in the ordinary; about the authenticity in how a producer tailors innovation and practices to suit the challenges of their specific land to raise beef in the most sustainable manner possible.

There is a tremendous sense of pride when looking at a well-managed and healthy rangeland. Producers are encouraged to recognize these moments as opportunity and capture the practices behind a job well done on an environmental stewardship application form.

GOOD TIMES FOR BISON PRODUCERS

By Neil Billinger, Farm Credit Canada

The bison sector is thriving in Western Canada, buoyed by strong prices and growing markets.

Health conscious consumers, particularly in the United States, like the low fat meat that is high in vitamins and iron.

Bison meat is popular with runners, mountain bikers, fitness enthusiasts and high end diners.

goes back to producers,” says marketing manager Roger Provencher, who is also Gilbert’s cousin. “In the last three years, we’ve had anywhere from 15 cents up to 22 cents a pound.”

Prices increase Canadian bison producers are receiving $6.50 a pound hot, hanging weight for Grade A bison bulls, an increase of about 50 cents over the past year. Prices are also impacted by U.S. buyers - and their strong currency - coming to Canada for bison calves to raise south of the border.

Only 10 per cent of the bison meat is sold domestically. The vast majority goes to the United States with a small amount of prime cuts sold to European buyers.

“Every time I think we have hit our limit, then prices go up another 10 cents,” says Gilbert Provencher, a bison producer from Shellbrook, Sask.

Provencher is a member of Canadian Prairie Bison, a cooperative with approximately 150 members in the four western provinces. It was established in 2001 to improve the producer price for bison.

At the beginning of the year, each operator commits the number of bison to be sold and the co-op arranges the sales.

Price strength “At the end of the year, if there is any money left over, it 14 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

Value-added markets Canadian Prairie Bison is also looking to expand into the value-added market with a new pemmican jerky. Four flavors, including Saskatoon berry and cranberry, are being made at the Food Centre in Saskatoon. The 40 gram sticks will be sold at various gas stations, convenience stores and First Nation retails later this month.

The bison pemmican is more expensive than beef jerky, but distributor Steve Schultz with P.A. Fine Foods says most people buy smaller amounts as a snack for the road.

“I think the product is fantastic,” Schultz says. “If (consumers) try it and see how good it is, the price won’t be a big deal. It will be that first time purchase that makes or breaks this brand.” meatbusiness.ca

CETA – BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR!

By Angus Burger

I have been following the historic signing of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between the European Union and Canada. On paper it sure looks good, however paper never refuses ink! Unfortunately it’s always when the ink dries that the devil is seen in the details. On paper it sure sounds like a win/win situation for all because when tariffs are reduced between trading partners everybody wins especially the little guy, the EU and Canadian consumers.

However, for Canadian cattlemen it’s another story. In order to get in on the “win” cattlemen will have to give in order to get! That “give” means increased production cost due to EU demand for hormone free beef. Some cattle feeders believe that the “give” is worth up to $250 per head. Now even though I am an old “meat head” I can still figure. That could equate to fifty cents per pound using a carcass weight of 650 pounds and that’s a heck of a premium charge just to get back to even, let alone make a profit for both cattle producers and packers. But who am I to say that the EU won’t pay those kind of premiums for Canadian beef.

I believe that there is a heifer in the wood pile! If it’s all about the numbers then let’s look at some numbers. The approximate population of all 28 member states of the EU totals about 540 million people but their per capita consumption of beef is only about 10 kg annually or about 22 pounds person. In Canada, per capita consumption runs about 24 kg annually or about 53 pounds per person including hormones. In the U.S. it runs about 56 pounds per person annually, including hormones and the trend is for upward mobility. However, the per capita consumption of pig meat in the EU is twice that of beef! Now, why is that?

Between the years of 2007 and 2014, the number of EU live non-dairy cows decreased by 4% from 12.5 million head to

Continued on page 16 meatbusiness.ca

12 million head. The bulk of this type cattle lay in 4 member states - France, Spain, U.K., and Ireland in descending order. Likewise between 2009 and 2014, production of meat from heifers, bulls, bullock, cows and heifers fell by 7%.

Looking at 2014-15, EU states produced somewhere around 7.5 million tons of bovine meat from around 25 million head slaughtered. With the diminishing cattle numbers I doubt if these 2014-15 numbers have went up in 2016-17. However, if you look at the same time frame of 2014-15, they rang the bell with a whopping 23 million tons of pig meat produced.

Man am I confused, “either somebody was talking to fast or I wasn’t listening”. In my humble opinion I say that if EU cattle are superior to Canadian cattle then why the heck aren’t they eating more beef?

The EU has been dictating beef food safety to potential non-EU countries for decades. In 2016 the Obama Administration announced that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative would be taking action against the EU for unfair trade practices that discriminate against U.S. beef imports. EU domestic market protection mechanisms that skew agricultural imports by heavily discouraging imports of processed agricultural products. Stating that the EU’s ban on U.S. beef is not based on sound science and discriminates against American beef farmers, ranchers and producers. That “action”, would be to impose additional

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 15

tariffs on EU products with a total annual trade value of over $100 million along with ith additional duties on products from certain EU member states.

Back in the 1990s when I was still working as a “meat head”, I ran a plant that killed between 7,000-10,000 cattle per week and we were a EU certified plant. We had a successful HACCP program, a top notch QA department, a well-staffed Lab with a Bacteriologist and a top-notch Inspector in Charge (IIC) that used our plant as a training centre for FSIS employees. Our cattle handling was outstanding and we had a waste water system second to none in the industry.

We also had a very successful School Lunch program, we operated separate value-added endeavours that included producing products for pharmaceutical companies.

Every year EU inspectors would come in a do their audit and every year we passed and everybody was happy. We passed because we invested great sums of time and money to meet their demands but it did pay off for every sector in the cattle-food-chain. Then on the last audit of the 1990s, the EU sent in a team of inspectors with unfamiliar faces.

In our pre-operational meeting before the group started their plant tour, we noticed something was different, there was a flair of arrogance that we never experienced before.

However, we were still optimistic because like every year before, we had months to prepare, and we were ready like always. If you never had an EU audit as an operations guy I can tell you, “you just don’t tag along”. You depend on department superintendents to contact you as to how it’s going. However, if you know your plant well, there are vantage points where you can see but not be seen, if you know what I mean. Well I happened to be in one of those vantage points. The team comprised five people and of the two women in the group, one was a veterinarian and nobody was smiling. All were focused on the kill floor, hardly any time was spent in coolers or fabrication. They were going down the list item by item and everything looked normal.

We were used to their remarks about our cattle per man hour being much too fast for European standards. Yeah, I thought to myself, that’s because they fall in love with every cattle slaughtered. However, when the women asked for step ladders to get up into the overheads, I got this sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach as that was “out of normal protocol”.

And as they say, the rest is history. We were delisted and lost our EU certification. Trust me when I tell you that this was one of the worst days of my life. I just can’t explain to you in words what a crushing blow this was to our entire company and the bad news spread like wild fire. When you are in charge, regardless of whether it was a political move or not, the blame falls on you, and you go from a winner to a bum in a matter of hours. The loss of the EU business amounted to a solid $35 plus dollar per head loss across the board and created several issues, none of them good. Of course they assured us they would purchase what was on the books and in freezer storage but the party was over. Only a seasoned operations guy can tell you the dirty looks and mumbling that was going on behind the scenes and behind our backs.

The sales guys especially because they had to scramble to find new markets for products that we sold away from U.S. customers, so groveling was commonplace. Manpower reduction, including billing office staff hours cut, packaging and supplies cost destined for EU products had to be eaten, forward booked supplies had to be canceled and so on.

Worst of all we lost our competitive edge in the live cattle market, a whole other story.

When the smoked cleared and news began to filter in, we realized the EU pulled certifications from all plants doing business with them. However for me, it wasn’t any consolation. As time went on we did survive and today that plant is still thriving albeit under a new name. So my meagre advice for cattle producers and meat plants in Canada is to “be careful out what you wish for”!

STATS CAN: HIGHLIGHTS FROM 2016 AGRICULTURE CENSUS Here are some of the highlights from Statistics Canada which has released its 2016 Agriculture Census: • There are 193,492 farms in Canada, down 5.9 per cent from 2011.

• Crops make up 37.8 million hectares, up 6.9 per cent.

• Total farm area sits at 64.2 million hectares, down 0.9 per cent.

• The average age of the Canadian farmer is 55, up from 54 in 2011.

• Gross farm receipts totalled $69.4 billion in 2015, while operating expenses reached $57.5 billion.

• Oilseed and grain-type farms continue to be the most common, increasing from 30 per cent in 2011 to 32 per cent in 2016 • The size of the beef cattle herd decreased 2.4 per cent, while the number of operations reporting beef cattle declined 12.3 per cent. Prairie provinces accounted for 16 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

just over 80 per cent of beef cattle.

• Fruits, berries, and nuts acreage rose 6.7 per cent from 2011, mainly due to blueberries and cranberries.

• Apple orchard area continued to decline, with the largest decreases in Nova Scotia and Quebec. Overall, total land dedicated to apple production fell 3.2 per cent from 2016.

• Ontario saw a 29.8 per cent increase in the area dedicated to greenhouse vegetables.

• Lentils are now the third-largest crop in Saskatchewan behind canola and spring wheat.

• Soybean area in Manitoba more than doubled between 2011 and 2016 to 665,868 hectares.

• In Central Canada, corn and soybeans remained the largest field crops.

• Fodder crops and potatoes were the largest crop areas in Atlantic Canada.

meatbusiness.ca

THE ISSUE OF WATER

By Tom Lynch-Staunton, Issues Manager, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association

March 22 was World Water Day, an annual event which highlights the importance of having a clean, secure, and fresh water supply to sustain life on this planet. It was a perfect opportunity to talk about water use in the beef industry including some of the great things we do to ensure secure clean water for both cattle and humans.

Unfortunately, however, the conversation in the media will tend to focus solely on water usage with respect to producing 1 kg of food. Depending on the author or the intention of the article, we have seen the range of water use stated from as low as 200 litres per kg of beef produced to 15,000 litres of water per kg of beef produced. Although this figure is important, it doesn’t always tell the whole story.

Often these figures are used in the argument to not eat meat because there is a perception that it takes enormous amounts of water to produce 1kg of product, and that this water is lost or it disappears and will never be used again.

The National Beef Sustainability Assessment commissioned by the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (CRSB) determined that in Canada it takes 631 litres of water to produce 1 kg of packed boneless beef (delivered and consumed).

it back on the land.

Many people compare water usage in beef to other foods, especially vegetables on a per kg of food basis. However, if we can change the conversation to start talking on a per calorie, or even better, per nutrient basis, beef may be perceived differently. Growing green peppers for example may take less water (depending on where/how they are grown), but 1kg of green peppers simply don’t contain the equivalent calories or nutrients that are stored in 1 kg of beef.

Reynold Bergen, Science Director at the Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC) recently wrote an interesting blog article comparing the water use impact of certain diets, and that a recommended diet in reduced meat consumption resulted in more energy and water use, concluding that “per calorie meat, especially beef, produces more GHGs than other foods, but uses less water or energy per calorie than many other foods.”

If we consider this number on a live weight, it drops to 231 litres per kg of live weight. As we all know, cattle are not drinking and storing this much, in fact they consume about 45 litres per day, which, of course is eventually recycled back onto the FOOD ground, or through us when we eat beef. So where does all the water in PROCESSING EQUIPMENT these figures come from? Most of it is www.birosaw.com the irrigated water needed to grow the feed for the cattle, but it also includes Slice whole muscle boneless product water needed for processing, packaging, clean, accurate, consistently and efficiently. transport, general on farm water use, and even includes water in beef that is wasted or thrown away (about 10% of all beef produced).

RELIABLE

Our water use is relatively low in Canada because we don’t irrigate many feed crops. Many times, the very high water usage figures will also include “green” water, which accounts for all the rainfall on the crop or pasture that cattle are grazing. This is how a figure can get up to the 15,000 litre level. Unfortunately, many people don’t understand the rain that falls on this land does so regardless of whether a cow is there to eat the grass or not. If cows are there, they are simply moving the water contained in the grass through their body, storing a small amount in their tissue, and putting meatbusiness.ca

Md. 109 PC-M Mechanical horizontal slicer

The Biro Manufacturing Company Marblehead, OH 43440-2099 USA 419-798-4451 Fax 419-798-9106

www.birosaw.com

210RB-11-12

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 17

When we talk about water with the public, we shouldn’t necessarily avoid talking about usage figures because they are important, but reiterate the simple truth that water cycles and doesn’t simply disappear. It moves through our animals, the feed our animals eat, through us, and back into the environment to be naturally filtered and used again.

We can also talk about the great things we are doing to ensure our water sources remain clean, through tools like off stream watering systems and riparian fencing, and our filtering systems (such as grasslands and pasture lands) are healthy and functioning.

All the above being said, we still need to do our best to conserve clean water and use it as best we can. We are lucky in Canada in that we have abundant supplies of clean water, however we can also be restricted due to drought 18 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

and other conditions. Because water cycles, it is not destroyed, just moved around our environment, ourselves, and our animals. The conversation should really be about the energy needed to move water through the cycle - some of that energy happens through the ecosystem (plants, soils, evaporation, rain, etc.) and some of that energy is used by us (electricity, fossil fuels, etc.) to ensure water can be used again.

Lastly, one of the best things our consumers can do, to ensure water (and thus energy) is used as efficiently as possible, is to reduce meat waste. If we can plan and consume everything we buy, we can ensure that the energy to get that food (and water) to our plate wasn’t wasted, and used as efficiently as possible.

meatbusiness.ca

meatbusiness.ca

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 19

IAFP ANNOUNCES 2017 AWARD RECIPIENTS The International Association for Food Protection (IAFP) will present awards recognizing excellence in food safety to the following organizations and individuals at IAFP 2017, July 9–12 in Tampa, Florida.

The IAFP Fellow Award is awarded to professionals who have contributed to IAFP and its affiliates with distinction over an extended period of time. This year, five recipients will receive this honor: Judy D. Greig, Public Health Agency of Canada, Guelph, Ontario; Dale Grinstead, Sealed Air Core Research & Development, Racine, Wisconsin; Vijay K. Juneja, U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Center, Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania; Jeffrey L. Kornacki, Kornacki Microbiology Solutions, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin; and Donald W. Schaffner, Rutgers University – The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

Christine M. Bruhn, University of California – Davis (retired), Davis, California will be awarded the President’s Lifetime Achievement Award. This award, given at the discretion of the IAFP President, recognizes an individual who has made a lasting impact on Advancing Food Safety Worldwide® through a lifetime of professional achievements in food protection.

The Honorary Life Membership Award will be presented to David Blomquist, Ecolab (retired), Hastings, Minnesota; Maria Teresa Destro, bioMérieux, São Paulo, Brazil; Marilyn Lee, Ryerson University (retired), Toronto, Canada; John Sofos, Colorado State University (University Distinguished Professor Emeritus), Ft. Collins, Colorado; and Katherine M.J. Swanson, Consultant, Mendota Heights, Minnesota.

This award recognizes IAFP Members for their dedication to the high ideals and objectives of IAFP and for their service to the Association.

The Harry Haverland Citation Award will be awarded to J. Santos Garcia A., Universidad Autonoma de Neuvo Leon, Mexico, for his years of devotion to the ideals and objectives of the Association.

Novolyze, Orliénas, France, will receive the Food Safety Innovation Award, given for its SurroNovTM products.

The International Leadership Award will be presented to George-John Nychas, Agricultural University, Athens, Greece, for his dedication to the high ideals and objectives of IAFP and for promotion of the mission of the Association in countries outside of the United States and Canada.

The Center for Food Safety Engineering and the Department of Food Science, Purdue University, West

20 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

Lafayette, Indiana, will receive the GMA Food Safety Award in recognition of a long history of outstanding contributions to food safety research and education.

The Frozen Food Foundation Freezing Research Award will be presented to Mark Harrison, University of Georgia, `Athens. This award honors an individual, group, or organization for preeminence and outstanding contributions in research that impacts food safety attributes of freezing.

The Maurice Weber Laboratorian Award will be presented to Arun K. Bhunia, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, to recognize his service for outstanding contributions in the laboratory and recognizing a commitment to the development of innovative and practical analytical approaches in support of food safety.

Xiaonan Lu, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, will be presented the Larry Beuchat Young Researcher Award.

This award is presented to a young researcher who has shown outstanding ability and professional promise in the early years of his or her career.

Frank Bryan, Food Safety Consultation and Training (retired), Lithonia, Georgia, is the recipient of the Ewen C.D. Todd Control of Foodborne Illness Award. New this year, this award recognizes an individual for dedicated and exceptional contributions to the reduction of risks of foodborne illness.

Candace A. Jacobs, Washington Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington, will receive the Sanitarian Award to recognize her dedication and exceptional service to the profession of sanitarian, serving the public and the food industry.

The Elmer Marth Educator Award will be presented to Judy Harrison, University of Georgia, Athens, to recognize her dedication and exceptional contributions to the profession of the educator.

Michael Roberson, Publix Super Markets, Inc., Lakeland, Florida, is the recipient of the Harold Barnum Industry Award. This award recognizes his outstanding service to IAFP, the public and the food industry.

For more information, visit www.foodprotection.org

meatbusiness.ca

NEW FROM JARVIS

AST 106 PAS STUNNER TESTER Jarvis Products Corporation is introducing the Model AST 106 PAS Stunner Tester as a fast, accurate device for measuring bolt speeds on Jarvis’ Type C and Type P PAS (Power Actuated Stunner) Stunners.

For operators, the AST 106 is easy to use and automatically logs test results.

Operators can freely select stunner type and cartridge to be tested. A control box screen clearly displays bolt velocity after stunner is fired. Velocity is displayed in green when bolt velocity reading falls within an expected range. Red is displayed when the bolt velocity reading is low, and not acceptable.

meatbusiness.ca

Economical and simple to operate, the AST 106 is durable, quick to assemble and stores easily.

Module and Tester with Type C

Jarvis equipment is sold and serviced worldwide through 18 branch locations, and Jarvis’ J26 Exclusive Distributors.

For more information, contact Sean Dougherty at 403 236-5350, email to info@jarviscanada.com or visit www.jarviscanada.com

Module and Tester with Type P

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 21

NAMI WELCOMES DELAY OF GIPSA RULE North American Meat Institute (NAMI) President and CEO Barry Carpenter expressed appreciation to the Administration in a statement following the announcement delaying by 180 days the effective date of the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration’s (GIPSA or the agency) Interim Final Rule (IFR) regarding the scope of the Packers and Stockyards Act. Delaying the IFR, which was set to become effective April 22, allows the new Agriculture Secretary to review the rule and comments submitted in late March.

The agency also will publish tomorrow a proposed rule seeking comment regarding whether the IFR should be permanently withdrawn, among other options.

“The delay is imperative to ensure this damaging rule does not take effect without a careful review by the new Administration,” said Carpenter. “We are confident that once the new Secretary of Agriculture takes office, he will recognize what a disaster this rule is for producers, meat packers and processors, retailers and consumers.”

The Meat Institute previously submitted comments on the IFR, as well as two earlier proposed rules, calling for the agency to abandon all of them.

“Allowing the IFR to become effective would simply line the pockets of trial lawyers, while making our industry less competitive and our livestock producerpartners less profitable,” Carpenter said. The IFR also is inconsistent with a Presidential Executive Order on reducing regulations and controlling costs, which requires that two regulations must be identified for repeal before a new regulation may move forward.

“Quite simply, neither the IFR nor the previously proposed rules should see the light of day,” said Carpenter. “They violate the intent of Congress, numerous court rulings and the Administration’s desire to reduce regulations and control costs, and they will undermine the meat industry’s ability to meet consumer demand.

The Administration’s action delaying the IFR is prudent and warranted.”

22 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

meatbusiness.ca

VBP+ ANNOUNCES NEW ONLINE COLLABORATION

At Your Fingertips:

AgriClear, North America’s premier online transaction and payment platform for cattle buyers and sellers, has announced it is entering into a collaborative marketing agreement with Verified Beef Production Plus (VBP+), the industry-led program providing verification of Canadian beef production practices at the farm, ranch and feedlot.

Formerly Verified Beef Production or VBP, VBP+ is delivered nationally under the umbrella of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association (CCA) and the Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC). Validating production practices for animal care, biosecurity, the environment and food safety at the primary production level enables registered VBP+ operations to publicly demonstrate their commitment to responsible stewardship of both cattle and resources. Under the terms of this agreement, AgriClear will include VBP+ registered users on its online platform and VBP+ will promote the AgriClear livestock platform and settlement services to beef cattle producers across Canada. AgriClear and VBP+ have also agreed to work together on marketing initiatives.

“This new agreement connects us to a progressive, innovative industry leader as we continue our efforts to enhance the profile of AgriClear’s brand and value proposition throughout the Canadian cattle industry,” said David Moss, Vice President and Co-Founder, AgriClear.

“We are proud to join forces with VBP+ and to play a role in advancing their important program for advocating sustainable beef production, while also delivering the benefits of our unique transactional platform to their membership.”

Small biz support & counseling

Cost-saving partnerships & programs

Lobbying & Research

“By collaborating with AgriClear we are finding new ways to help VBP+ registered operations enhance their market efforts and extend the reach of their cattle marketing programs,” said Cecilie Fleming, Alberta rancher and Chair, VBP+ Management Committee. “Adding an AgriClear cattle listing link to our new, national website enhances our registered operations by showcasing VBP+ attributes of marketed cattle in Canada.”

VBP+ has committed to aligning with the indicator and verification work of the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, a multi-stakeholder initiative focused on advancing sustainability in the Canadian beef industry, of which AgriClear is a member. VBP+ was also involved in the McDonald’s Sustainable Beef Pilot Project.

For more information about VBP+, visit www.verifiedbeefproductionplus.com or www.agriclear.com meatbusiness.ca

Join Today! www.cfib.ca/agri May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 23

SPRING CATTLE PRICES SET TABLE FOR STRONGER INDUSTRY

By Craig Lester, Farm Credit Canada

A spring cattle price rally has turned prices around on the market, setting up for a good summer and fall for producers.

Since the lows of last fall, the industry has seen prices jump as much as 35 per cent in some animal categories, creating some of the best margins in years, according to Brian Perillat, CanFax manager and senior analyst.

“We do have more cattle numbers coming forward, but the supply has been priced in and the demand domestically and internationally has been strong in supporting this market,” Perillat says.

Friendly feed costs He says the Canadian dollar and feed costs have also been friendly, adding the market is now well supported and demand is strong, which is good news for producers.

He says a strong spring, means ranchers can now insure a 600-pound steer for about $2 a pound with the Western Canadian Livestock Insurance Price Program.

Camrose, Alta. area rancher Dave Solverson is eyeing the insurance program more than he was a few months ago.

“We can insure for a lot better price than we could just a

couple of months ago,” Solverson says.

The past president of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association says the strong rally gives producers, who may be kicking themselves for not selling more of their breeding stock in 2014 when prices were strong, justification for keeping them around.

Strong fall feeder market South Slope Feeders co-owner George Graham says so far this year, market prices point to a strong feeder market for the fall.

“That’s pretty encouraging for sellers of feeder cattle and cow-calf for the fall,” Graham says. “It looks like the profitability in the feeding sector will probably get transferred back to relevant higher costing feeder cattle come fall time.”

The Ranier, Alberta-based feeder says while he is optimistic about what is to come this fall, he will be watching the dollar and factoring that into his pricing strategy.

MALABAR ANNOUNCES NEW INVESTORS TO ADD TO STRATEGIC GROWTH Malabar Super Spice President Doris Valade has announced the onboarding of new Canadian investors as part of the company’s long-term strategic growth plan. The transaction, which closed earlier this year, is designed to ensure a bright future for the Malabar team and its many long-time customers.

“Business will continue as usual and I will continue to lead Malabar as President”, stated Valade. “All of our valued team members will remain in their current roles. We will, however, add to our team of technical specialists in the areas of food process technology and food safety so that we can further enhance tMalhe innovation and strong support our customers expect. At Malabar, it has never been about ‘just selling our products’; innovative product development backed by superior customer service have long been a point of pride with us”.

processing industry in Canada with high quality spices and seasoning blends since 1982. The company has kept pace with Canada’s changing demographics and consumer tastes. Along with product development, Malabar also provides technical and regulatory support. Its long-standing involvement in trade associations, including the Canadian Meat Council, Food and Beverage Ontario and OIMP, ensure that Malabar remains a strong and vibrant voice within the industry, which translates to customers well served.

Malabar has been servicing the meat/poultry/food

Visit http://www.malabarsuperspice.com/

24 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

meatbusiness.ca

A LOOK BACK AT THE ART OF SHROUDING

By Angus Burger

There was a time in our industry when meat buyers didn’t work behind a desk with a computer on it. They would have to get up off their ‘hindquarters’ and get out and into the ‘trade’. That trade was represented by either Swift, Amour, Wilson or Cudahy. That was way before IBP, Cargill, JBS or ConAgra.

It was the age of savvy male meat buyers and sellers, men who could look at a carcass of beef and know that it would make money for his company. This was my era.

Back then carcass beef was simply graded for quality, and conformation was a grading factor. Yield grading did not exist. If you didn’t know what you were doing, a supermarket chain buyer could end up with a coolers filled with “barky” carcasses (over fats). Today we know them as yield grade #4s and # 5s. So how did the packer of that era blend these over-weight-fat-carcasses into the mix? Simple, they had savvy meat sales reps! Actually meat packers had the upper-hand, they “shrouded” beef carcasses along with using dollar-cost-averaging.

distance so he didn’t have to get his suit soiled by crawling between the rails of beef carcasses looking for the best yielding ones. Thus the over-weight-fat-carcasses got sold.

During that era, ‘eye appeal’ of carcass beef was just about as important as quality grades especially since conformation was a grading factor. However, good looking carcass beef to the not-so-savvy supermarket meat buyer was a blessing. He could buy his beef requirements from a

Obviously there were costs associated with shrouding cost of the shrouds and pins, labor to apply and remove them from the carcasses and rewashing. Taking off the shrouds was much more labor intensive than putting them on. Care was exercised to remove the shroud prior to its

meatbusiness.ca

Packers used the highly absorbent shrouds and applied them to fresh slaughter beef carcasses right before the chilling process. Shrouds were soaked with chlorinated water, the shroud served multiple purposes, one of which was for aesthetic reasons as mentioned above and the other, monetary. The shroud also reduced further bruising, smoothed the fat surface and increased the whiteness of the outer fat surface. The monetary reasoning was to reduce moisture loss and minimize carcass weight loss during the chilling process.

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 25

being fully dried in order to eliminate the possibility for shroud-damage to the smooth and bleached surface of the outside fat. It was imperative not to remove the ‘fell’ fat.

There were a few disadvantages of shrouding other than the costs. They had to be washed daily and shroud pins were a major concern if accidentally left in the carcass as they were being broken down for additional processing which caused a safety issue. If left in the shroud during

the washing, this was a problem as well. You could find a shroud pin anywhere in the packing plant.

The beef industry like any other major industry is constantly changing due to innovations however, it was the development of spray Chill Systems and Boxed Beef that all but eliminated the need for shrouding beef carcasses.

Today if you can find one a shrouding-pin would be classified a collectible item.

2ND ANNUAL CANADIAN BEEF INDUSTRY CONFERENCE OPENS REGISTRATION Canada’s beef cattle industry will be ‘Sharing Common Ground’ at the 2nd Annual Canadian Beef Industry Conference (CBIC). Registration is now open for this one-of-a-kind industry event will be held August 15–17, 2017 at the BMO Centre on Stampede Park in Calgary, Alberta.

The CBIC is the first of its kind in Canada to bring together participants from across all regions and sectors of the national value chain. The conference is hosted as a joint collaboration by the Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC), Canada Beef, the Canadian Beef Breeds Council (CBBC) and the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association (CCA).

Early bird registration is available for $450 plus GST until June 15, after which registration will be $550 plus GST. “This year we are focused on building off the success of last year and establishing the conference as the forum for industry to come together and share common ground,” said beef producer and 2017 CBIC Chair Virgil Lowe, also newlyappointed Business Manager, Verified Beef Production Plus. “We also hope to highlight the importance of the beef industry sharing common ground with the public.”

This conference will combine semi-annual and annual meetings of several stakeholder groups, along with learning and networking opportunities to create a one-of-a-kind experience for participants from across all the various regions and sectors of the Canadian beef industry.

Keeping with the precedent established in its inaugural year, the CBIC 2017 program will feature an engaging speaker lineup, headlined by keynote speaker Jon Montgomery.

Since his 2010 Olympic gold medal win in skeleton, Jon’s life has been a whirlwind. Today, as the host of The Amazing Race Canada, he’s been across the country and all over the world sharing his insights on what makes Canada great on the top television show in the country.

Other program highlights include: • Topics related to the pillars of the National Beef Strategy with a focus on connectivity; 26 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

• Bov-Innovation: Educational presentations for producers and interactive workshops on applicable production innovations; • Networking with stakeholders in all stages of the beef supply chain, including the Canadian Cattlemen’s Foundation Golf Tournament; • Pre-conference farm tour hosted by Alberta Beef Producers; • Canadian, U.S. and international market outlooks; • Canadian Beef Check-Off Agency, CCA, Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (CRSB) and Young Cattlemen’s Council board meetings; • BCRC open house; • Cattlemen’s Young Leaders selections and graduation.

Organizers are planning a unique lineup of entertainment and events to draw industry stakeholders from across Canada. “We are excited to host our second conference at Stampede Park. After the overwhelming attendance in 2016, it was clear we needed more space and the connection to agricultural heritage seemed like a natural fit,” said Lowe. Arrangements for parking and plans for seamless navigation of Calgary’s downtown will be in place.

Additional details, including specific session topics, will be available closer to the event date.

Those interested are encouraged to watch www.canadianbeefindustryconference.com and to follow the CBIC on Twitter and Facebook for updates.

For more information contact: Allana Minchau Director, Canadian Beef Industry Conference, Email: aminchau@canadianbeefindustryconference.com

meatbusiness.ca

BEEF ADVOCACY CANADA FINDS A NEW HOME WITH ISSUES MANAGEMENT The Canadian beef industry has made great strides in the last few years, bringing the entire country together on the creation of the National Beef Strategy. As a part of the National Beef Strategy, it was identified that Issues Management continues to be an area of focus for the industry, and that increased funding and attention needs to be given to ensure that the general public has a positive relationship with our industry.

The Beef Advocacy Canada program, which originated as a partnership program between Canada Beef and the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association (CCA) has recently been moved into the Issues Management plan, which engages the five national beef organization partners and is a very positive move for the program. It ensures continued focus, funding and management of the Beef Advocacy program, which educates industry advocates and provides advocacy opportunities for producers to tell their story in public forums.

The program currently has a total of 531 registered advocates. Course One of the program includes a very high level overview of the Canadian beef industry, production and beef itself. This level is open to anyone interested in learning more, including the general public, consumers, students, educators and more. It also helps beef producers to confidently speak about not only their own area of the value chain, but other areas as well.

Course Two covers material that is often considered “hot topics” in the industry, such as more in depth discussions and key messaging around hormones and antibiotics, sustainability, beef and human health, and how to be a responsible advocate. Those who complete Course Two, generally producers and industry influencers, are then encouraged to actively advocate in their communities, and are often called upon for opportunities across the country such as interviews, presentations, or hosting farm-to-fork tours on their operation.

To learn more about the program visit www.beefadvocacy.ca, or visit the Facebook or Twitter pages to access resources to help you tell your #cdnbeef story. meatbusiness.ca

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 27

BUSINESSES GO GREEN FOR PERSONAL BELIEFS

PUNITIVE GOVERNMENT POLICIES LEAST EFFECTIVE

By Dan Kelly

An Ontario dairy farm built a robot barn for 200 milking cows, with energy-efficient lighting. A Saskatchewan trucking company minimized fuel costs by ensuring all new trucks meet stringent emissions controls, monitors idling and uses energy efficient configurations to minimize wind drag and conserve fuel, oh, and they also recycle and use the cloud for financial reporting to minimize paper usage. A British Columbia manufacturer recycles batteries and cardboard, updates machinery, minimizes waste in the manufacturing process, and put in efficient lights in their manufacturing plant. A British Columbia processor purchased more efficient processing machinery and sources a recycling facility for waste.

This is just a small sample of the environmentally friendly measures small business owners are implementing every day across Canada. These unprompted, unsolicited and mostly unheralded measures may seem insignificant compared with the undertakings of an Elon Musk, but taken together they add up to something pretty big.

While many suggest that Canada’s business community is not doing enough to protect the environment, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business’s new report, Green Growth, shows that going green is a priority for a majority of small businesses. Rather than needing government to force environmental change, the data show small firms are on board because they believe it is the right thing to do. Over 80 per cent of entrepreneurs are motivated to make change because of their personal views, 50 per cent because it helps reduce their costs and one-third because they believe action is important to their customers and employees. Only 22 per cent said they were motivated by government policy.

This is an important finding for governments. Too often, governments immediately turn to increased regulations, taxes and fees to solve a problem. Climate change, it seems, is no exception. Starting next year (and even earlier in some provinces), Canadians are in store for five years of escalating carbon taxes or pricing strategies. This is on top of an Employment Insurance tax hike for all Canadians and their employers, followed by five years of Canada Pension Plan premium increases.

Small firms oppose these tax hikes, which may serve to harm their ability to afford the environmentally friendly investments governments are hoping they’ll make.

Many businesses simply can’t afford to go green, even when owners personally wish they could. Our members tell me that one of the highest barriers to environmental action is cost. Actions such as purchasing lower emissions 28 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

equipment or retrofitting buildings can be expensive, and can often be limited where the business owner does not own the property in question.

Many owners have already taken significant steps to reduce their carbon footprint, such as investing in more energyefficient equipment. Imposing new taxes and fees hinders their ability to take further action. It is also important to note that small businesses have many environmental priorities.

While climate change takes all the headlines, small firms rank the importance of clean water, energy conservation and eliminating toxic waste as even more important concerns.

With so many small business owners across the country prepared to do their part for the environment, the best way for governments to ensure they commit to going green in the long run is to provide them with the information, tools and the resources necessary to ensure they can continue investing in their business while doing so. This could be aided by the reintroduction of 100 per cent Capital Cost Allowance for clean technology purchases or even renovation tax credits to encourage property owners to become more energy efficient.

One business owner shared with me the difficulties in striking the right balance between retaining our competitive advantages with our neighbours to the south and fulfilling our desire to leave a viable planet to our grandchildren.

What she said exemplifies the pragmatic optimism of Canadians: “We can have our cake and eat it, too,” she said. “There is no reason we cannot develop natural resources and run efficient, profitable businesses while protecting or enhancing the environment. But it must be done with sensible oversight and measurable goals and impacts, and not driven by mindless ideology.” meatbusiness.ca

CFIB’s new research shows a full 85 per cent of small business owners believe Canada can develop its natural resources while ensuring appropriate environmental safeguards. What entrepreneurs want is measurable outcomes that are accountable to the public. And they want their governments to look at potential policies carefully, particularly given the changing landscape in the United States.

This column was first published in the National Post on April 24, 2017.

Dan Kelly is President of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB). In this capacity, Dan is the lead spokesman and advocate for the views of CFIB’s 109,000 small-and medium-sized member businesses across Canada, including 7,200 agribusiness members. Follow Dan on Twitter @CFIB and learn more about CFIB at www.cfib.ca.

PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES UNITE TO ADDRESS FOOD SECURITY Challenge of Change Commission reveals coordinated effort to solve complex U.S. and global food and nutrition security challenges.

Facing a vast array of food and nutrition security problems in the U.S. and abroad that pose significant humanitarian, environmental and national security risks, a commission of prominent researchers and leaders from public universities, government, nongovernmental organizations and the private sector announced a comprehensive, coordinated effort to solve these challenges.

public research universities are uniquely positioned to help solve this complex challenge through our vast expertise of faculty and research, our role as collaborators with government and industry and our global reach.”

While many important efforts are being undertaken to address the vast array of problems that comprise food and nutrition insecurity, a truly comprehensive, holistic approach that fully engages arguably the world’s greatest scientific and educational resource in food and nutrition security – public research universities – has been lacking before now.

The Challenge of Change Commission, which the Association of Public & Land-grant Universities (APLU) convened with support from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, began with the understanding that public research universities – with their broad academic, research and community expertise and experience – are uniquely positioned to address the complex and diverse challenges of food and nutrition insecurity.

“The world’s food system is broken, yet demand is increasing at a record pace,” said North Carolina State University chancellor Randy Woodson, who served as chair of the the Challenge of Change Commission. “We can’t just grow our way out of this global crisis. Issues of infrastructure, food safety, distribution and more must be addressed as part of a long term, sustainable solution if we are to effectively address global hunger. We believe meatbusiness.ca

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 29

The Challenge of Change Commission is comprised of 34 members who include university leaders, subject matter experts and current and former private and public-sector officials from the U.S., Canada and Mexico. In addition to the commission members, more than 100 individuals from universities, the public and private sectors and nongovernmental organizations were engaged in the project as members of interdisciplinary working groups or expert advisors. Similarly, more than 75 organizations were invited to provide comment and feedback throughout the process.

“Public research universities represent the world’s most powerful resource to address food and nutrition security,” said APLU president Peter McPherson, who is a former administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development. “The problems of food and nutrition insecurity are so complex and cut across so many areas of expertise. That vast array of expertise already exists at our institutions. The challenge is helping to bring public research universities together in a coordinated way, with support from the government and others, to make it a reality.

“Many view this as a problem of feeding a growing population by 2050, but the challenge is already upon us, with far too many people suffering from food and nutrition insecurity. If we do not address these problems now, the solutions will become more intractable, the costs greater and the human, social, economic and environmental damage irreparable,” McPherson added.

Nearly one in nine people were food insecure in 2014-16, including 42.2 million people in the U.S. Food security problems – including hunger, obesity, malnutrition, low crop yields, inadequate food storage, poor sanitation and the political instability they create – are poised to intensify unless there is a deliberate effort to create true global food and nutrition security. The search for sustainable solutions becomes even more complicated in the face of a rapidly growing world population, limited natural resources, changing climates and evolving diets that demand more high value food products.

At a recent event in Washington, D.C., members of the Challenge of Change Commission unveiled their much anticipated report and action plan, which centers on harnessing the vast academic, research and leadership capabilities of public research universities to address the interdisciplinary challenges of food and nutrition security.

The commission report defines seven challenges for solving global food and nutrition insecurity and details the steps that public research universities, along with partners, must take to address them: • Challenge 1 Increase yields, profitability and environmental sustainability simultaneously.

• Challenge 2 Develop the varieties and breeds needed 30 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

for sustainable food systems.

• Challenge 3 Decrease food loss and waste through more efficient distribution systems.

• Challenge 4 Create and share resources that serve all populations.

• Challenge 5 Ensure inclusive and equitable food systems.

• Challenge 6 Address the dual burdens of undernutrition and obesity to ensure full human potential.

• Challenge 7 Ensure a safe and secure food supply that protects and improves public health.

After spending a year identifying these challenges and pathways to achieving them, the commission detailed its findings and recommendations, which are centered on the need for a transdisciplinary approach to break down silos that have too often prevented the issues surrounding food security to be fully addressed.

In order to achieve food and nutrition security, the commission urged that specific attention must be paid to the following areas: Broaden the focus beyond yields. More food must be produced, but there must be greater efficiencies in food storage and distribution, particularly in the context of limited natural resources.

Change the food system’s incentive structure. Changing systems to meet future demands requires designing new incentive structures, including market forces affected by research on outcomes, regulations or guidelines that promote food and nutrition security.

Develop the capacity of universities in low income countries. Helping low income countries better address their own challenges will be critical in the global food security picture.

Leverage technology, big data and information science information. The use of new sensor technologies, geographic information systems and the rapidly increasing power of information storage and processing can be powerful contributors to sustainable production. Likewise, data from social media, purchasing patterns and other online sources hold potential to help understand the structure, behavior and function of food systems.

With complex systems, the need for transdisciplinary science and community engagement in mind, the commission report lays a new foundation for action and recommends the following four steps: APLU action – The association must play an important role in fostering discovery, engagement and learning activities among its membership of more than 230 public research universities and university systems in the U.S., meatbusiness.ca

Canada and Mexico. This will require a major, sustained effort by APLU. The commission recommends that APLU, in close coordination with its members, further develop recommendations for reducing institutional barriers to transdisciplinary research and then develop and undertake advocacy efforts in support of this report, including making funding recommendations, as appropriate.

“ PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES

REPRESENT THE WORLD’S MOST POWERFUL RESOURCE TO ADDRESS FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY. THE PROBLEMS OF FOOD AND NUTRITION INSECURITY ARE SO COMPLEX AND CUT ACROSS SO MANY AREAS OF EXPERTISE. THAT VAST ARRAY OF EXPERTISE ALREADY EXISTS AT OUR INSTITUTIONS. THE CHALLENGE IS HELPING TO BRING PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES TOGETHER IN A COORDINATED WAY, WITH SUPPORT FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS, TO MAKE IT A REALITY.”

trilaterally funded competitive grants, which would require involvement from universities in each of the three countries, would provide even greater impact.

4. Public research university action – In addition to work already being undertaken, public universities and their partners are encouraged to identify challenges and related activities in the report that they might undertake. As noted in the first recommendation, APLU has an important role to play in fostering this work. Undoubtedly, in that process, universities will further define or focus the challenges and activities set forth in this report. The commission also recognizes that public research universities alone will not solve the global food and nutrition security crisis. As universities work on the challenges, it will be important to partner with public and private entities in agriculture, public health, nutrition, health care and beyond. http://www.feedstuffs.com/news/public-researchuniversities-unite-address-food-security

YesGroup_CanadianMeatBusiness-Qtr-pg.pdf 1 2014-05-16 1:20:17 PM

2. U.S. “whole-of-government” action – A whole-ofgovernment effort would encourage multiple federal departments and public agencies to work across their portfolios to achieve a significant goal. Such an approach would help focus existing resources and should allocate new resources, given the critical importance of domestic and global food security. An explicit goal of the whole-ofgovernment approach – in collaboration with the university community and stakeholders, including the private sector – must be to mobilize private sector and foundation resources to address the challenges. Given current federal budget constraints, it is important to make the case for resources to tackle these consequential issues. The report does not quantify the amount of those resources, but it is clear that the need will be substantial for this complex set of challenges.

3. Mexican, Canadian and U.S. government joint action – The governments of the U.S., Mexico and Canada should together sponsor collaborative research partnerships with universities and their partners to advance the recommendations of this report. The commission recommends that the Canadian and Mexican governments work, as appropriate, with their universities and research entities to advance the recommendations of this report in their respective countries. A substantial amount of current research in the region is bilateral, but more meatbusiness.ca

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 31

CALLS FOR CHICKEN IRRADIATION FOLLOWING APPROVAL FOR GROUND BEEF

By Rob Drinkwater, The Canadian Press

A consumer advocate is pushing Ottawa to promote the irradiation of chicken to kill illness-causing bugs and to do a better job of getting buyers on board.

Bruce Cran of the Consumers Association of Canada said the federal government has done “an incompetent job” informing Canadians that irradiation is safe and he worries that a lack of action could lead to a deadly outbreak.

“They need to promote an understanding so Canadians can make an informed choice, and they’re not doing that for whatever reason,” Cran said. “This is not only a safe practice, it’s one that many of us would like to be able to use.”

Earlier this year, the federal government approved the sale of ground beef treated with radiant energy similar to X-rays to reduce the risk of illnesses caused by E. coli and salmonella. The products must be labelled to include an international symbol on packaging — usually a green plant inside a circle.

The U.S. has allowed meat to be treated for years, but that country’s Food and Drug Administration has noted that consumers’ acceptance has been slowed by confusion over how irradiation works and what it does. It notes some people believe it makes food radioactive.

“Our members would absolutely support it,” said Robin Horel, president of the Canadian Poultry and Egg Processors Council.

“But we haven’t pushed hard because … the companies that produce chicken and turkey are concerned about what the consumer response would be.”

Anna Madison, a spokeswoman for Health Canada, said in an email the federal government would not promote irradiation since it does not engage in promotional activities.

The federal department last examined irradiation for poultry in the early 2000s, but it did not amend regulations to allow it because of concerns from some stakeholders.

Karen Graham, who chaired a panel of Canadian dietitians in the 1980s that considered the issue, said irradiated foods lose vitamin B and fats such as healthy omega-3 are broken down. It can also kill healthy bacteria.

Critics also claim irradiation produces toxins, such as benzene, and changes the taste of meat.

“There aren’t consumers with placards saying give us 32 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

irradiation. This is very much industry driven,” Graham said in an interview from Kelowna, B.C. Rick Holley, professor emeritus of food microbiology and food safety at University of Manitoba, said irradiation is safe and is even more important for chicken than for ground beef. Chicken causes more illness in Canada, he said.

Holley said salmonella is naturally present on a lot of chicken and the gastro-intestinal bacteria campylobactor is present on all of it, regardless of whether a bird is freerange or factory.

“Both of these organisms occasionally kill, but because they make more people ill who recover, then the emphasis is not placed on them to the same extent as E. coli O157 in hamburger,” said Holley, who suggested that irradiating chicken could cut food-related illness in Canada by 25 per cent.

“The political will is certainly there, but it will only move forward in this regard when consumers are made aware of the extent of the problem and the fact that irradiation is such a suitable solution.”

The Health Canada review noted an unpleasant odour with doses of irradiation higher than the one that was being considered for fresh chicken, but the smell was more likely to be noticed by experienced judges than average consumers. It also said the smell disappeared after a few days or after cooking.

Monique Lacroix, a researcher at the Canadian Irradiation Centre and at INRS-Institute Armand Frappier in Laval, Que., said in an interview last year that irradiation done at the low levels proposed by the meat industry, doesn’t increase benzene or free radicals in an amount to be of concern. She noted that barbecuing meat produces billions of free radicals.

Graham, however, said irradiation is one more added process that negatively affects food.

“You still have storage. You still have refrigeration. You still have freezing. You still have all those things which are going to cause some nutrient loss — and then you’re adding irradiation on top of it which also is going to create some losses.” meatbusiness.ca

Download the MyMeatUp app, the only free app available with a full guide to beef, pork, lamb, and veal cuts found in grocery stores. It also features cooking tips and recipes.

meatbusiness.ca

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 33

OLFACTORY MARKETING IN THE MEAT DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING YOUR NOSE TO GREATER SALES

By Ronnie P. Cons

Ah! That wonderful smell of freshly barbequed meat on a warm summer day. Or maybe you prefer the fragrant smell of chicken slowly roasting in the home oven that will elevate the mood of the entire family. Research has also shown that smell is more quickly associated with one’s memories than visual and auditory cues. Actually, it is only smell that directly connects to the brain’s limbic system where emotions and memories are stored. Being so powerful it is no surprise that smell has been shown to enhance consumer behaviour, willingness to purchase and store loyalty.

With this information in hand - can meat department managers employ olfactory marketing to drive greater sales of their products? The answer is yes. Hotel chains have long been pumping bacon smell into their elevator shafts to drive restaurant breakfast sales. Cinemas have been using popcorn smell to drive sales of their food items while some restaurant chains have even added special ingredients on already precooked hamburger patties that when heated will give off a distinct scent of freshly grilled meat. Even some luxury car dealerships have used ‘scent consultants’ to create a certain ‘olfactory atmosphere’, which will give their showroom the distinct smell or sense of luxury and prestige.

As for meats, the only part of the meat department that usually gives off a strong scent is the rotisserie that roasts the chickens. It has been proven that this scent actually drives chicken sales. Meanwhile, raw meats and chicken are to be found in the refrigerated sections in order to preserve them, while prepared ready to eat hams and deli meats are kept behind windows on display. Lastly, the freshly cooked meats for takeout are placed behind windows in mostly sealed areas that allow one to only enjoy their site but not their full aromas.

As such, the following steps are recommended to maximize the olfactory marketing potential of the department’s meat products: 1. The counter section which displays the freshly cooked take-out meats should be organized in a way that the scent of these just prepared warm foods waft in the area of the take-out area so that people walking within a few metres of it will smell them. A simple method to do that is to firstly place some of the just prepared and still warm meats on top of the display counter.

34 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

They should be uncovered so that the smell travels.

Once they cool down and the scent declines they are then to be placed into the display cabinet. Doing this guanrantees there is a continuous role out of warm and good smelling meats into this section. Another idea is to place a fan in the kitchen in order to send the smells out into the meat department.

2. As barbecue season is here it would also be useful to produce the smell of freshly grilled steaks and hamburgers. Of course we can’t set up a full barbecue in the meat department, but using a small grill with a ventilation system is feasible indoors. The meat department can set one up where the clients can see, hear and smell the steaks and burgers being grilled right before their eyes. This will help drive steak and hamburger sales.

3. Lastly, the meat staff can encourage clients to come and smell the warm products and tell them what they think. This will engage the client with the products and the staff which will create that social aspect that goes so well with memorable smells of past family and friendly barbeque events.

Implementing the above olfactory marketing strategies should lead to a more emotional and engaging meat department atmosphere which in turn will help drive the emotionally awakened clients to purchase more meat and chicken products.

Olfactory marketing – following your nose to greater sales.

Ronnie P. Cons is CEO of C&C Packing Inc. and can be reached at Rcons@CCPacking.com.

meatbusiness.ca

201 Don Park Road Unit 1, Markham, Ontario, L3R 1C2 Phone: 905-470-1135 1-800-465-3536 Fax: 905-470-8417 Website: www.yesgroup.ca email: sales@yesgroup.ca

Remco and The Yes Group Protecting your Customers

Remco products are colour-coded to help divide the production cycle into different zones.

By identifying these zones as different cleaning areas, the movement of bacteria around the production area can be blocked.

Our products were developed with the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) in mind.

No matter what colour-coding plan is implemented, Remco Products from The Yes Group provides significant added value at no additional cost. From scoops to squeegees, from brushes to shovels, we have the products and the colours to enhance any professional quality assurance program.

meatbusiness.ca

May/June 2017 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS 35

36 CANADIAN MEAT BUSINESS May/June 2017

meatbusiness.ca