News 
 State News 
 Livestock 
 Cattle 
 Rebel NSW processor trashes MSA 

Rebel NSW processor trashes MSA

15 Feb, 2010 03:00 AM
THE man who is leading a charge to radically overhaul Australia's beef industry has called for the MSA grading system to be "shredded" in a bid to expel "rubbish" meat from the nation's retail shelves.

It's the latest provocative sally from rebel NSW beef processor JR McDonald, whose inflammatory stance has continued to intensify before a rally in Armidale on February 27 when he will spearhead demands from dis-gruntled cattle producers to re-structure the beef industry.

What began as a resolution in the NSW Parliament late last year to overhaul beef labelling in the State now appears to have escalated into full-scale revolution, as Mr McDonald and his allies play to concerns over what they see as decreasing returns to producers.

Lax rules governing imports from BSE-infected countries and recent abattoir closures in Young in NSW and two plants on the Darling Downs add further fuel to an already-volatile mix of high emotion gripping isolated pockets of the sector.

Feelings seem particularly high in the New England region of NSW, home of JR McDonald and his processing plant Bindaree Beef at Inverell and the base of NSW independent MP Richard Torbay, who introduced the Food Amendment Meat Grading Bill in that State in December.

Under the bill, which Mr McDonald has since advocated for national adoption, all table beef (excluding mince and premium tenderloin cuts) from eight-tooth and older animals will be labelled as 'low grade' or 'low quality'.

Mr McDonald concedes low quality meat from eight-tooth cattle will take a hit in price, only to be compensated by the higher prices consumers will pay for the so-called premium product.

However, details on how the plan will work once proclaimed in NSW and how it will translate into higher domestic beef consumption and an overall increase in producer returns remain sketchy.

The thinking behind the proposed model, as Queensland Country Life understands, is that labelling meat from eight-tooth cows as 'low grade' will shift the buying behaviour of consumers towards paying more for better quality beef from younger cattle, in turn encouraging the beef supply chain to produce more beef from 0, 2 and 4 tooth beasts.

The economics of the proposal have sounded alarm bells among those at the industry's peak organisations.

Cattle Council Australia councillor and AgForce director Justin McDonnell said the proposal would take beef marketing back 20 years.

"The sad thing with Torbay is that we're going to have for the first time ever, meat on our shelves that's going to be labelled low grade - I cannot see how having meat labelled low quality is going to advance the cause of Australian cattle producers," Mr McDonnell said.

"If you've got product on the shelf labelled low quality, the concern for our industry is that consumers will drift to com-peting proteins such as chicken and pork, which don't have the same labelling requirements.

"That can't be good for the beef industry."

Mr McDonald was coy when initially contacted by QCL on Monday, at first referring questions about the proposed grading system to his daughter.

When pressed for a response, Mr McDonald said beef pro-ducers' returns would increase once customer satisfaction with beef was improved.

"The consumer doesn't like what we're selling at the mo-ment," he said.

"We have to get rid of the bad rubbish that's on the market and cow beef is having a major effect on it.

"If meat is labelled low quality people know exactly what they're buying."

Underpinning the strategy is Mr McDonald's call to dismantle the industry's decade long Meat Standards Australia (MSA) grading system, which labels beef, lamb and sheep meat with a grade and recommended cooking method to identify eating quality according to consumer perceptions.

When asked how his grading system would differ from MSA, Mr McDonald said he would not release any details prior to the Armidale forum.

"Why would I tell people what we're going to say at the meeting? If I do that no one will come," he said.

"But I can tell you that what you've got there (referring to MSA) you can shred it, because it's no good."

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Yet again, our world class systems, that assist us in retaining markets and meeting consumer satisfaction, are being attacked by a minority who seem hell bent on giving our competitors an advantage. Our beef has steadily improved at retail over the last 15 years, (because of a range of steps we have taken) and yet we have a group wanting to take us backwards. "Low grade" is a required label for beef from older cattle under the passed legislation in NSW - it is a fact, and unless it is changed before the Bill is proclaimed, becomes law. NSW will have a lot to answer for if this is not remedied. Let us hope the Food Authority shows some courage, and makes the Bill useful, rather than the opposite.
Posted by practical farmer, 15/02/2010 9:52:52 AM, on Queensland Country Life
There is no getting around the fact that 8 tooth beef is low quality and should not be on the shelf in the first place. MSA is not a world-class system. Hardly any one in the world has ever heard of it - the world has only one world-class system and that is the USDA grading which has been delivering excellent beef since 1926. Why on earth didn't we just copy it? At this point I doubt whether anything can be salvaged from the MSA fiasco and Mr McDonald should be congratulated for focusing the blame on the beef bureacrats all of whom should be fired.
Posted by john of tamworth, 15/02/2010 12:37:55 PM, on Queensland Country Life
The USDA system works so well becasue they wean into a feedlot feed them and kill them at 15months. Australian cattle don't get treated like that. I can not get my head around why any processor would want to label anything 'low quality' unless he was trying to force the price of that type of cattle down becasue that is what he processes! I just wonder what would have happened to our industry if we didn't have the organisations we have, in place. I for one don't want to have to go and open up a new market or head off to Japan and make sure they still want the beef i produce. I just don't have that much spare time.
Posted by Sam, 16/02/2010 6:13:15 AM, on Queensland Country Life
It is more than just concerning that there are administrators in the guise of Justin McDonnell (CCA & AgForce) who, by their statements appear to resemble a cross between troglodytes and Luddites! Presumably he was one of the industry guru's who signed a confidentiality agreement with Minister Burke which gagged any announcements of the BSE travesty. He also appears to be unaware of the diminishing 'drift' for the consumption of beef over the past 20 years, without labelling 8 tooth cuts as 'rubbish' and an insult to consumers. I agree with McDonnell that no matter what happens to the industry it will be 'back 20 years - coincidently the same period when producers were paid better than subsistence money for their efforts and product and everyone in the supply-chain was satisfactorily rewarded, including the consumers. Today industry parasites, bureaucrats, supermarkets and processors are the exclusive 'elite' in the beef game and the two axis points (producers & consumers) are just pure folly for this elitist class. From the Australian consumers perspective can someone illustrate the 'information' value of MSA - zip! We need to go back to find the future, shred the present totally.
Posted by CRG Manilla, 16/02/2010 6:58:47 AM, on Queensland Country Life
Not sure where John of Tamworth gets his knowledge to make the comments he has made. My MSA experience has been the opposite. I have taken the time to understand the science behind MSA and have had significant numbers of cattle MSA graded. We are also fortunate to have a processor who unlike the others, grades cattle with the full range of dentition from 0 to 8 teeth. This has taught us a lot about the attributes of cattle that produce beef that will eat well. One thing is for absolute sure is that dentition has nothing to do with it. Our 2 teeth and our 6 teeth cattle average exactly the same eating quality. Our 8 teeth cattle regularly grade very well and quite often we have 0 to 2 tooth cattle that won't eat well at all. These poor eating 0 and 2 tooth cattle would sail through JR's schedule 3 proposed grading scheme and disappoint the hell out of consumers. I'm not sure what his motive is. If he gets his way and grades cattle on dentition and uses terms such as low quality and low grade the price of cattle will fall. As a processor he may consider that lower cattle prices will be to his advantage. Producers do need to be in Armidale to look after 'our' investment.
Posted by Ian McCamley, 16/02/2010 7:40:30 AM, on Queensland Country Life
John and CRG - might be worth reading some of the background before jumping up to applaud the NSW system: it is linked to dentition (teeth) which any meat scientist will confirm has a zero correlation to to eating quality. USDA system at least primarily uses mostly ossification so at least has an approx 34% correlation to MSA, but a much higher rate of innacuracy. The basics are here http://meat.tamu.edu/beefgrading.html In terms of the economic value of MSA, apart from 1 million head per year at 10c/kg premium in direct premiums, there was also some work done by CIE and MLA (be skeptical!) and it is here: http://www.mla.com.au/HeaderAndFooter/AboutMLA/Corporate+documents/Evaluation/2.1+Improving+eating+quality.htm Have a read and a think - is a system where producers get paid for genuinely better.
Posted by Skeptic, 16/02/2010 8:47:37 AM, on Queensland Country Life
The greatest single QC system that I use, as a consumer, is my own careful and experienced selection of the appearance of meats on offer. For this reason, I choose the shops where a range is presented on the shelves for my inspection and choice - not the butcher shops where I can be given anything and have no input to the selection. In my long experience, a major factor in beef eating quality is how stressed the animal is just before its slaughtered. Run them around, stir them up, let them see other animals being killed, get them stressed with food and water denial, and you're sure to have tough eating meat after the slaughter. I agree with the people who state that labelling meat "low quality" is suicide. These people in beef labelling and marketing need to do some serious study on NLP techniques, in particular the relationship between certain words and how people respond to them.
Posted by Ron N, 16/02/2010 11:49:31 AM, on Queensland Country Life
ian cmaly...sounds like you have a very unusual mob of cattle.
Posted by john of tamworth, 16/02/2010 12:10:19 PM, on Queensland Country Life
I would like to second Ian McCamley's comment and consider his cattle to be normal. My information on MSA grading comes mainly from my local butcher who tells me since he changed to solely MSA graded product has had 100% predictable quality eating product. john I suggest you try killing one of those fat old cows you may be surprised at how well it eats and tastes provided it is handled and aged correctly even if it has 8 or maybe mine eat well because they have lost all their teeth!
Posted by Christopher Leeds, 16/02/2010 6:37:30 PM, on Queensland Country Life
i've found the same experience as ian mccamley with male cattle however i think female cattle with 8 teeth should be mince. ian john is a mexican you know they think different to us, when did they last win the state of O.
Posted by les, 16/02/2010 8:44:53 PM, on Queensland Country Life
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.



 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...